I thought I should allow my readers to take a walk with me through my days. My next few posts will follow my steps throughout the normal week. Unless I find that this is too overtly boring, in which case I won't post Wed-Fri.
Monday:
Up @ 6:45
Breakfast @ 7:20
Work from 8:00-10:00 (includes tutoring, professor assistance, studying, etc.)
French Through Popular Culture class @ 10:00
Lunch @ 11:00
Christian Worship class @ 12:00
Work from 1:00-4:00
Study/Break @ 4:00
Dinner @ 4:45
French Club or French Bible Study (alternating each week) @ 6:00
Homework for Tuesday classes 8:00-10:00
Bed @ 10:30
Average Amount of Free Time on Mondays: .75 hrs.
Tuesday (This is my exciting day!)
Up @ 6:45
Breakfast @ 7:20
Work from 8:00-9:30
French Civilization class @ 9:30
International Economics class @ 11:00
Break (I don't bother to go to the cafeteria) @ 12:30
Management Information Systems class @ 1:00
Break/Study/Campus Errands 2:30-4:45
Dinner @ 4:45
Free Enterprise Studies class form 6:00-9:00
Finish homework for Wednesday @ 9:00
Bed @ 10:30/11:00
Average Amount of Free Time on Tuesdays: 1 hr.
So my Mondays really aren't that bad, but my Tuesdays are a killer. Fortunately, it is my worst day (could it get much busier?), so everything is downhill from there.
Today we finished filming a class project for Free Enterprise Studies. We did a presentation of "20 Minutes" with Jeter Pennings and Bobby Walker. I was Jeter Pennings. I also played the roles of a trendy English CEO, a computer geek from New York, and an old Southern gentleman. It was all very fun. I never knew I could talk as slow as I did when I was the Southern gentleman. On playback I was listening to myself going "could you just speed up an itsy-witsy?", but the group liked it, so we didn't do another take.
Before that, I helped a friends family move their business from an old warehouse to a new warehouse. It's a manufacturing business where they make... actually I don't know. There were lots of wires and cables and things, and it's called "Positive Connections", so it must be some sort of electrical connection manufacturing business. That was fun. This evening I was supposed to meet a couple of people and go to a Rotary Club chili feed. At the last minute (actually 3 minutes before we were supposed to leave), I got a phone call saying that we weren't going after all because someone had lost our tickets. I don't think any of us were too crushed, but I was sort of looking forward to it. So my evening became suddenly open again...
Except that another friend had already asked me to dinner with a few others, so I called her and told her that I could join them. So I had just enough time to get on the Internet, check the news, read my emails, and write this blog entry. I hope you've enjoyed it. I'm off to Panera Bread for a lovely evening of homemade soups, freshly baked breads, and, of course, tea!
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Henry IV and Random Thoughts
We learned about Henry IV of France this morning in French Civilization. Henry was born a Huguenot during the Wars of Religion in France shortly after the beginning of the Reformation. He became leader of the French Protestant movement (the political arm anyway) but converted to Catholicism to marry the princess of France. When the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre occurred, he converted back to Protestantism (possibly out of horror at French Catholics?). In 1589 he was invited to become King of France, but the Parisian area objected since he was not Catholic, so he converted once again back to Catholicism saying "Paris is worth a Mass".
As king, Henry IV issued the Edict of Nantes suspending violence against Protestants and brought relative peace to the country. He was wildly popular with the French people and ushered in a short time of prosperity for the beleaguered country. As popular as he was, he found enemies on both sides of the religious questions: Catholics distrusted him because of his liberal policies toward the Huguenots while the Huguenots distrusted him because he was Catholic. He eventually overcame most of these problems (partly because of the Edict) and presided over several years of peace. He was assassinated in 1610 by a Catholic extremist. His Catholic wife, Marie de Médicis, reigned as regent until his son Louis XIII was old enough to assume control. Marie squandered the wealth and prosperity of her husband and later caused a civil war between her sons.
Henry IV's grandson, the infamous Louis XIV ("Je suis L'État") later over-turned his grandfather's famous Edict and Protestants were once again murdered in the streets of France and successfully driven from any subsequent influence on that country (they currently make up less than 3% of the population).
While Henry IV is generally accepted as one of the best kings in French history, his reign really seemed to have little permanent affect on his country. Worse, he seems to have been a man of little real conviction, only drive for political power. This caused countless deaths on both sides of the religious fight. In my mind, that really makes him a failure.
I couldn't help but compare him to his contemporary, Elizabeth of England, who found herself in many similar situations. She was born Protestant but later found her life being threatened when Catholicism made its brief return to English politics. While Elizabeth made it clear that she was loyal to her Catholic queen, she refused to compromise her beliefs. For years she lived under house arrest in constant danger of being burned as a heretic or traitor. When she came to the throne, she made it clear to her Catholic subjects that she would most certainly not sacrifice her Protestant beliefs just to have a "successful" reign. But she also made it clear that she wanted peace. She, like Henry, brought peace, tranquility, and general prosperity to her country. She survived dozens of assassination attempts by Catholic extremists and credited God with this protection as well as military victories. When she died, the country had permanently adopted her Protestant beliefs. One could argue that Elizabeth I single-handedly laid the foundations of the Victorian British Empire, both politically and religiously.
How sad that Henry IV missed his opportunity to do the same for his own country.
As king, Henry IV issued the Edict of Nantes suspending violence against Protestants and brought relative peace to the country. He was wildly popular with the French people and ushered in a short time of prosperity for the beleaguered country. As popular as he was, he found enemies on both sides of the religious questions: Catholics distrusted him because of his liberal policies toward the Huguenots while the Huguenots distrusted him because he was Catholic. He eventually overcame most of these problems (partly because of the Edict) and presided over several years of peace. He was assassinated in 1610 by a Catholic extremist. His Catholic wife, Marie de Médicis, reigned as regent until his son Louis XIII was old enough to assume control. Marie squandered the wealth and prosperity of her husband and later caused a civil war between her sons.
Henry IV's grandson, the infamous Louis XIV ("Je suis L'État") later over-turned his grandfather's famous Edict and Protestants were once again murdered in the streets of France and successfully driven from any subsequent influence on that country (they currently make up less than 3% of the population).
While Henry IV is generally accepted as one of the best kings in French history, his reign really seemed to have little permanent affect on his country. Worse, he seems to have been a man of little real conviction, only drive for political power. This caused countless deaths on both sides of the religious fight. In my mind, that really makes him a failure.
I couldn't help but compare him to his contemporary, Elizabeth of England, who found herself in many similar situations. She was born Protestant but later found her life being threatened when Catholicism made its brief return to English politics. While Elizabeth made it clear that she was loyal to her Catholic queen, she refused to compromise her beliefs. For years she lived under house arrest in constant danger of being burned as a heretic or traitor. When she came to the throne, she made it clear to her Catholic subjects that she would most certainly not sacrifice her Protestant beliefs just to have a "successful" reign. But she also made it clear that she wanted peace. She, like Henry, brought peace, tranquility, and general prosperity to her country. She survived dozens of assassination attempts by Catholic extremists and credited God with this protection as well as military victories. When she died, the country had permanently adopted her Protestant beliefs. One could argue that Elizabeth I single-handedly laid the foundations of the Victorian British Empire, both politically and religiously.
How sad that Henry IV missed his opportunity to do the same for his own country.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)