Evolution of the Spirit

What if Darwin and later modifications have been right? That is to say, nothing became something, some of the something was able to become electrically charged, amino acids were formed … and here we are. Of course, all of this required billions of years to develop.

Natural conditions and the course of events on the planet have been very unfriendly to the progress of life. Meteor impacts, solar flares, earth crust displacement, volcanoes, ice ages, gigantic floods, droughts, tornadoes, hurricanes, diseases, famines, wars and mankind’s seemingly underlying predisposition for cruelty and violent behavior have all served as some of the hurdles and pitfalls in the path of advancement of life on Earth…

As Darwin’s premise of “natural selection” would have it, only organisms that developed characteristics necessary to persevere through all the hazards would continue to survive and improve. The ability of our ancestors to navigate through such hazards has allowed us to reach the pinnacle of evolution we now occupy…

If the evolutionary premises be correct, there seems to be no Darwinian basis to assume anything other than the expectation of an even more advanced stage of development yet to appear… unless we are arrogant enough to insist that we are the ones we have been waiting for and therefore beyond improvement over the next million years.

Leaving the intelligentsia to deal with that thought, perhaps they have hit upon a theory that has validity in another area of “life”.

There are folks who believe there will someday be some kind of eternal union between some people and a supernatural, superintending entity. Let’s call that supernatural thing ”God”.

Now let’s think about who a “person” is. The individual person who might one day come into the presence of the aforementioned entity will quite probably not appear in the form now seen as his or her current physical body.

The real person would be whatever that untouchable thing is that directs every conscious action of the body and houses every belief of the mind. Let’s call it the human spirit. The essence of every person would then be the spirit that inhabits that tent of human flesh.

Just maybe God is in the process of developing a more perfect spiritual being. A characteristic necessary for advancement to that next level appears to be the ability and willingness to believe in certain specified things that cannot be seen, any and all natural events not withstanding. We call that characteristic, “faith”… the evidence of things not seen.

In the beginning of the gospel of John, we read that all things were created by Jesus. Those things created would obviously have to include the human spirit. Later in that book, Jesus tells his disciples, “I go to prepare a place for you…”. This would at least suggest that the Word of God that began the creation had not, at that time, completed the project.

Further, the Bible records that there is yet to be a “new heavens and a new earth”. Even Steven Hawking, arguably the world’s most brilliant atheistic mind, has determined that the existence of multiple universes is probable. He continues to go so far as to accept that these other universes may not be subject to the same laws of physics as is ours.

At this point we posit a similarity between the book of Darwin and the book of God. The former notes the necessity for the species to navigate and persevere through the aforementioned experiences of hurdles and pitfalls of planetary history. The major requirement for the evolution or advancement of the spirit in the latter book seems to be unshakable faith. That faith must be maintained while also experiencing the same difficulties as are the Darwinian subjects plus the buffeting of a spiritual adversary.

Some Darwinian species made it to this stage… humans, for example. Others did not… the dinosaurs.

Some human spirits will make it. Others will not.

Here one might raise a point of curiosity.

Did God envelop all these human spirits (since Creation) in fallible and deteriorating flesh and bone in order to refine multitudes of spirits who would spend eternity praising Him?

Praise be to Yahweh if that indeed be the sole purpose…. But he had already made it clear that he could cause even the rocks to do that.

Therefore, it is likely that the mind of man can not yet imagine the activity of the spirit at the next level of consciousness.

It should be with a bit of excited anticipation that the answer is to be apprehended.

A “parable” from a Fellowship of Christian Athletes publication long, long ago:

Jesus was coaching a football team in the Game of Life. This was a continuing game with each player given an amount of playing time. A certain player was nearing the end of his fourth quarter. He had experienced many successful plays, but he had also been knocked down many times and had suffered many physical and emotional losses. Through all of this, good times and bad, the player had clung to the promises of Jesus. Once more the player had been knocked down and, from the fatigue of the experiences, did not think he could pull himself up again. Suddenly, The Coach was there beside him and said,

“Son, look. Look at the scoreboard. The final score is there, and you have won. Just get up and finish your game.”

Posted in Christianity, God, opinion, religion | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

“Good Friday” Was Not The Day

Not that it is of any great concern, but most folks don’t know that Jesus was crucified on a Wednesday, not Friday. The important thing is that we recognize the significance of His sacrifice and resurrection. That significance is, I trust, expounded from the pulpits of all Christendom and will not be addressed here.

If you are interested in the Wednesday thing, you have to begin with the understanding of how the Jews (Hebrews or Israelites) have counted their days for thousands of years. As described in Genesis, evening was first and then morning. Therefore, their days begin and end at sunset. They still retain that tradition.

The Passover itself is a one day memorial feast to be observed throughout all generations symbolizing the final plague that freed the children of Israel from their bondage in Egypt. The obedience of marking their homes with the blood of a sacrificial lamb had delivered them from the death plague that punished the Egyptians.

Next, you need to go to Leviticus to look at the descriptions of the feast days that were given to Moses. Those special feasts to God were given names like the feast of unleavened bread, the feast of first fruits and the feast of trumpets.

In that 23rd chapter of Leviticus, the Passover is to be observed on the fourteenth day of a certain month with no regard as to what day of the week that may be.

The very next day is to be the first day of a seven day feast of unleavened bread…. That day and the last day of the feast are to be special sabbaths in which no servile work is to be done. With the fifteenth day being a sabbath, the Passover day must also be the day for preparation of food.

Here we have a time line.

Tuesday at sunset (our terminology, but the beginning of the fourteenth day of that particular Passover month for the children of Israel)

Since this began the fourteenth day of that particular month for Jesus and the disciples, they participated in the Passover meal after dark.

Following the meal and a time of sharing, they went to the garden from whence Jesus was eventually carried away to be interrogated by the religious leaders.

The course of events through the night and into the morning hours led to the beating of Jesus and a Roman death sentence.

The waning hours of that fourteenth day of the month for the Jews (Wednesday afternoon for us)

Jesus died on the cross, and Joseph of Arimathaea placed the body in the tomb at sunset.

Jesus had participated in the Passover meal and had become the ultimate Passover sacrifice in one twenty four period of time.

Thursday, daylight hours for us…

The women would be unable to obtain and prepare spices for Jesus’ body because that day would be a day of no servile work. Only the gospel of John makes note of that day being a special sabbath. This is probably because the other writers knew it would have been common knowledge among the Jews for centuries.

The daylight hours of our Friday….

It was permissible for the women to obtain and prepare the spices, but apparently they did not have time to visit the tomb and return before sunset. At that time the regular sabbath of the seventh day of the week would begin.

The daylight hours of our Saturday….

The women were restricted from their task of anointing Jesus’ body.

Sunset on our Saturday….

Jesus left the tomb….

So:

Wednesday sunset… Jesus was placed in the tomb.

Thursday sunset…… Day One

Friday sunset……….. Day Two

Saturday sunset……. Day Three… He Is Alive

One thing is certain……… Since John made a point to emphasize the day following the crucifixion was not the regular seventh day sabbath……… “Good Friday” could not have been the day.

Posted in God, opinion, religion | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Trump Is Doing What?… With Russia?

The “I promise I won’t make you angry…Please don’t hurt me!” mind set of those who inhabit the Republican Party is really getting to be annoying. There have always been so many possible retorts at their disposal… It’s like a football team that elects to kickoff following every point the opponent scores.

The Dems & media have been quite exercised over the president’s alleged relationship with our communistic geopolitical rival, Russia. The R’s just lined up to play defense, but they could have taken the offense.

Examples:

Following is a small portion of easily verifiable information related to our former president, Barack Obama. All of this has been public knowledge, but the polite Repubs have declined to put it together in hopes that the Dems will not call them racist… There is not one syllable here that has anything to do with race.

Teenage Years of Barack Obama

In Dreams From My Father, Barack Obama shared his admiration for, and words of wisdom from, “old Frank” who was actually Frank Marshall Davis. Davis was one of the founders of a group that was designated a subversive communist organization. He subsequently moved to Hawaii before it became a state, and in later years, Barack’s grandfather included young Barack when the two adults shared time and drinks.

College Years

In the same book, BHO disclosed that he consciously sought Marxist professors.

Post Graduation

Obama also told that he had a brief employment in the free market private sector (opposite of socialist/communist). He considered that as “working behind enemy lines”.

2009

Upon becoming POTUS, Obama chose an adviser who had been a member of what was called a radical communist organization. As this became public knowledge the adviser resigned the position.

Later that year, the new US administration touted the restoration of relations with Russia.

2012

During the presidential campaign, Mitt Romney noted that he considered Russia to be the number one geopolitical threat to the US….. President Obama ridiculed him for expressing such lack of knowledge.

During that same campaign, BHO was caught on a “hot mike” sending a message to Vladimir Putin that he would have “more flexibility” after he was reelected.

January 2013

Russia obtained controlling interest in a Canadian uranium company which had somehow gained approval to obtain 20% of America’s uranium deposits. By law, there was only one person who could have exercised a veto power over the original deal …the President of the United States of America.

2014

Russia invaded and annexed Crimea… The President of the USA said, “Naughty – Naughty” and issued some sanctions. These caused Vladimir to become so fearful of America that Russia proceeded to perform military “exercises” along the border of Ukraine, a friend of the US. This was in “support” of the “rebels” who were seeking the violent overthrow of that government. Republicans wanted to offer Ukraine the aid of military weapons. The commander in chief “saw things through a different lens” and nixed the suggestion.

January 2017 (Immediately Prior to the inauguration of Donald Trump)

The Obama administration approved the agreement that sent 130 tons of uranium (possibly ours) from Russia to Iran (you know, the “death to America” people).

OK, NOW…. Tell me again about the dangers of Donald Trump playing footsie with the Russkie Commies…

… And, for that matter, clue me as to how the Russians, or anyone else, may have threatened our free and fair elections by exposing those two realities of the current controversy…

(1) The Democrat Party elites thwarted Bernie Sanders’ presidential primary bid vs Hillary C…

&

(2) The DNC chairperson was provided the questions prior to a Clinton/Trump debate.

Do you suppose there might be another person who has more in common with (and is more favorable to) Russia than Donald Trump?

Posted in controversy, government, history, opinion, politics, Presidential Priorities | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

That’s Not Who We Are!… Really?

The destruction of the US Constitution has been going on with the eyes of the people wide open and their minds happily in a state of ignorance. Our public school system has guaranteed that state of ignorance, which, simply put, only means the absence of information. Full understanding of truth, for whatever the reasons, has been seriously lacking. I repeat from other commentaries … stupidity is an entirely different matter.

The support of these ugly statements beg a few exigent examples. However, due to the amount of information that has been omitted and obfuscated by our institutions of learning for many decades, the necessary documentation precludes the address of more than one area of concern per posting.

We begin. Hang with the thoughts here, and they will all tie together by and by.

Many will cheerfully demonstrate their level of educational achievement by declaring that the definition of the word, “invasion”, means something like an attack by an army, complete with guns, tanks and planes, etc. That’s well and good if you are content with the complete definition of “beautiful” as being like a shiny new Lexus.

Webster’s 3rd New International Dictionary provides a bit more information about “invasion” which may amaze those who have bet on the perfection of our public education. Webster’s indeed notes that “invasion” does include, “a hostile entrance or armed attack on the property or territory of another…”. If that is where you place your place your chips, I refer you to the Lexus.

Continuing in Webster’s 3rd NID, we expand our understanding of “invasion” with information such as, “an inroad of any kind”, “an entry into or an establishment in an area not previously occupied” and “the penetration and gradual occupation of an area by a population group of different socioeconomic status or racial or cultural origin…”.

Leaving our review of that difficult English language, let us take a peek at that document that has resulted in the greatest personal freedom in the history of the world… The US Constitution… I know that some want to energize negative emotions about a certain topic at this point, but the founders had prescribed a solution to that and any other constitutional concern, and it was subsequently employed.

In Article II, Section 1 we find:

Before entering office, the president must declare, “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

In Article II, Section 3, as our teachers always emphasized (satire intended), we discover a specific requirement, not suggestion, of the office of the presidency. To wit, “… he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed…”. Thus we have the double accentuation of this presidential duty in the oath of office and the explicit expression thereof in the body of the constitution.

As far as the authority to make laws, the very first sentence of the very first Article states, “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.” A side note… Sad it is that we now bow to requirements called executive orders and bureaucratic regulations as though they had constitutional standing as laws over the people…. We really just don’t know any better.

Now we may tie a requisite responsibility of presidents and clear definition of “invasion” to a direct action that is the constitutional responsibility of the US government. For that purpose we go to Article IV, Section 4:

“The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion …”.  That “shall” tends to limit the number of interpretive options for the government to consider.

Also, nowhere in the foregoing information is there any mention of legitimizing invaders who “dream” or any other category based on sympathetic emotions or “fairness”.

We have taken the opportunity to understand a more complete meaning of the word “invasion”, and have made the effort to reveal that the executive branch of the government is responsible for the execution of all laws whatever as well as that specific constitutional requirement. There is no wiggle room for the executive to modify, postpone or ignore any constitutional assignment or law that is pursuant to the constitution.

For those who would usurp power for themselves and shred our constitution without exercising the mode of alteration provided in Article V, our collective ignorance lays a red carpet before their feet. Those folks ostentatiously pride themselves as champions of the “living constitution”. That means we are free to exercise our own values without so much as a tip of the hat to the amendment process. This, of course, appeals to quite a few “intellectuals”. Problem for our country is… those folks don’t get around to defining exactly who the “we” and “our” are.

Posted in constitution, education, government, history, opinion, politics, Presidential Priorities | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Federal SchoolVouchers

 

The following  emanates from having experienced a walk of forty four plus four years through the halls of public education.

It is the nature of many who occupy positions in the walled towers of government and the ivory towers of intelligentsia to claim for themselves the mantel of superior problem solvers for all other people. Well meaning as some may be, their approaches ofttimes create more problems than they solve. As it is viewed here, the school choice/voucher idea runs a great risk of falling into that category.

These are a few of the problems that must be resolved, either before or after the passage of such federal legislation. State plans of the same nature face most of the same issues, but that could be the topic of a slightly more specific discussion. Of a certainty, anyone of a mature and open mind would not feign alarm if the responses to most of the questions happened to arouse a vigorous exercise of the litigious nature of today’s society.

To wit:

Foremost, is it even within the enumerated powers of the federal government to directly provide taxpayer funds to selected individuals?

Will any student in any school be eligible for the choice and voucher?

If not, what will be the criteria for individual student qualification?

What if the receiving schools reach maximum enrollment, and there are still other students who qualify?

What if there are no receiving schools within reasonable accessibility?

Will the plan be applicable and practicable only in urban areas?

If that is the resolution, where is the equal protection under the law?

Will receiving public schools be responsible for equal rights of transportation?

If students have established records of disruptive behavior, must receiving schools be compelled to enroll them?

Will receiving schools be permitted to dismiss incorrigible students?

Considerations specific to private school enrollment:

What if the amount of the voucher is insufficient to cover tuition?

  • If some can provide the remainder and others cannot, will the law be discriminatory?
  • If the law provides increased payments for the less fortunate, who decides who is less fortunate?
  • And where will that line be drawn?
  • If the private school does not furnish transportation, who will furnish it for the less fortunate?…  And if it is not furnished, how can those students avail themselves of the school choice?

Will private schools be allowed to:

Set standards of admission? Determine curriculum? Display religious symbols? Engage in daily prayer? Require classes in religious doctrine? Teach biblical moral standards?

Will private schools be held accountable for dropouts?

Will private school students be required to master federally mandated tests? If not, how can there be “accountability”?

Overall, if voucher students regress or show scant improvement:

Can the law and expense be justified?

Will the receiving school then suffer some degree of condemnation?

And, most heavily, will the final results justify the enormous cost of another large and probably “perpetual” bureaucracy?

Posted in education, government, opinion, politics | Leave a comment

Beloved Child of Congress: Dept. of Ed.

This is being offered as food for thought. There are no opinions expressed herein. Opinions formed are the prerogative of the viewer.

A timeline of true events:

  • [1789] The very first sentence of the very first article of the US Constitution states, “All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives”. Article I continues to enumerate the areas to which those legislative powers may extend.  There is no mention whatsoever of any federal authority regarding public education. James Madison declared the intention of the Constitution was that the powers of the federal government were specifically enumerated, and the states had authority over “the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties and properties of the people”.  This was reemphasized by Amendment X. Remember this as you continue.
  • [1847] The Principles of Communism call for “Education of all children, from the moment they can leave their mothers’ care, in national establishments at national cost”.
  • [1864] The first Communist International convened for the long range purpose of promoting world wide spread of communistic philosophy.
  • [1867] Earliest Department of Education was created, but was quickly demoted to “office” status and languished in the Department of Interior for decades.
  • [1920] The second Communist International convened.
  • [1939] The Office of Education was moved to a more prominent position in the Federal Security Agency.
  • [1953] The Federal Security Agency was upgraded to cabinet level status as the Department of Health, Education and Welfare.
  • [1963] Goal 41 of the Communist Party USA emphasized the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents.
  • [1979] The Department of Education was given its own cabinet level position. There were constitutional objections raised due to the absence of any such enumerated power, but “plausibility” for justification was found somewhere in the Commerce Clause and the Taxing and Spending Clause.
  • [Today] The Department of Education itself consists of more than forty different bureaucratic entities with a total budget approaching (as best I can find) eighty billion dollars. This bureaucracy and others such as the Department of Agriculture, which controls school lunch programs(???), are free to exercise their discretion in dictates to the American people. Any edict emanating from these unelected sources effectively carries the force of law by simply suggesting that federal distribution of funds may be influenced by the degree of state compliance. No Congressional representatives of the people need be consulted. Further, various politicians are advocating “free” federal education from age 3 or 4 through college.

Again, conclusions drawn and efforts exercised in further personal inquiry reside with the reader.

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in opinion | Leave a comment

For Teachers and Students of US History

 

Followers of this blog have seen some of this earlier, but this is a copy of information that is being placed in the hands of as many history teachers as possible…

American culture and the U. S. Constitution have been under attack for many decades. As Thomas Jefferson warned, the courts have twisted words and squeezed meanings to fit their own prejudices in these attacks. One reason the opponents have achieved so much success lies at the feet of the US public school systems. Whether unknowingly or insidiously, there have been omissions and obfuscations of historical records for generations.  Sadly, when shown the truth, some educators timidly cover their eyes, ears and mouths. There are only three alternatives to this reaction.  They fear consequences, refuse to believe it because of their own training, or they are participants in the attacks.

To illustrate the point, a brief display of omitted records should suffice. Two areas of the above mentioned attack are the denial of the significance of spiritual influence in the founding of our country and the obfuscated constitutional interpretation of the “wall of separation between church and state”. It may be bold to opine, but a very miniscule number of American history teachers have ever exposed their students to the following records:

One real time and unbiased opinion of spiritual influence in our country’s founding was recorded by the Frenchman, Alexis de Tocqueville.   Tocqueville was a political scientist, historian and diplomat who spent nine months during 1831 on an analytical tour of the United States. From that experience he later completed an extensive literary work titled, Democracy in America. Following is a condensation of his analysis of spiritual influence in a country that had so quickly taken its place among the long established nations:

“On my arrival in the United States, the religious aspect of the country was the first thing that struck my attention; and the longer I stayed there, the more I perceived the great political consequences resulting from this new state of things… The sects which exist in the United States are innumerable… Each sect adores the Deity in its own peculiar manner; but all sects preach the same moral law in the name of God…. Moreover, all the sects of the United States are comprised within the great unity of Christianity, and Christian morality is everywhere the same… I do not know whether all the Americans have a sincere faith in their religion…  But am certain that they hold it to be indispensable to the maintenance of republican institutions. This opinion is not peculiar to a class of citizens, or a party, but to the whole nation and to every rank of society.”

Some forty four years prior to the arrival of Tocqueville, eighty one year old Benjamin Franklin stood to speak to the Constitutional Convention that had convened in an attempt to prevent the collapse of their union which had been floundering under an agreement called the Articles of Confederation. The men had believed that the task would require an effort of two weeks or so, but the Articles were beyond adjustment and a different system of government was the only solution. They eventually labored six days a week for more than three months.  At one point, as contentions arose and debates were heated, the respected Franklin addressed the president of the convention to bring a motion to the floor:

   “Mr. President
The small progress we have made after 4 or five weeks close attendance & continual reasonings with each other-our different sentiments on almost every question, several of the last producing as many noes as ays, is methinks a melancholy proof of the imperfection of the Human Understanding. We indeed seem to feel our own want of political wisdom, since we have been running about in search of it. We have gone back to ancient history for models of Government, and examined the different forms of those Republics which having been formed with the seeds of their own dissolution now no longer exist. And we have viewed Modern States all round Europe, but find none of their Constitutions suitable to our circumstances.

In this situation of this Assembly, groping as it were in the dark to find political truth, and scarce able to distinguish it when presented to us, how has it happened, Sir, that we have not hitherto once thought of humbly applying to the Father of lights to illuminate our understandings? In the beginning of the Contest with G. Britain, when we were sensible of danger we had daily prayer in this room for the divine protection.- Our prayers, Sir, were heard, & they were graciously answered. All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of a superintending providence in our favor. To that kind providence we owe this happy opportunity of consulting in peace on the means of establishing our future national felicity. And have we now forgotten that powerful friend? or do we imagine that we no longer need his assistance? I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth- that God Governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the sacred writings, that ‘except the Lord build the House they labour in vain that build it’. I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without his concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better, than the Builders of Babel: We shall be divided by our little partial local interests; our projects will be confounded, and we ourselves shall become a reproach and bye word down to future ages. And what is worse, mankind may hereafter from this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing Governments by Human wisdom and leave it to chance, war and conquest.

I therefore beg leave to move-that henceforth prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations, be held in this Assembly every morning before we proceed to business, and that one or more of the Clergy of this City be requested to officiate in that Service-“ (The Avalon Project, Lillian Goldman Library, Yale Law School)

About two months later the world’s first written constitution was completed. After ratification by the states, George Washington was elected president, and his first inaugural address included these words (underscoring added):

“… it would be peculiarly improper to omit in this first official act my fervent supplications to that Almighty Being who rules over the universe, who presides in the councils of nations, and whose providential aids can supply every human defect, that His benediction may consecrate to the liberties and happiness of the people of the United States a Government instituted by themselves for these essential purposes, and may enable every instrument employed in its administration to execute with success the functions allotted to his charge. In tendering this homage to the Great Author of every public and private good, I assure myself that it expresses your sentiments not less than my own, nor those of my fellow- citizens at large less than either. No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the Invisible Hand which conducts the affairs of men more than those of the United States. Every step by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency… “ (The Avalon Project)

In Thomas Jefferson’s first inaugural address we see his opinion:

(Our country is) “… enlightened by a benign religion, professed, indeed, and practiced in various forms, yet all of them inculcating honesty, truth, temperance, gratitude, and the love of man; acknowledging and adoring an overruling Providence, which by all its dispensations proves that it delights in the happiness of man here and his greater happiness hereafter…” (The Avalon Project)

In the close of Jefferson’s second inaugural address he professes:

“I shall need, too, the favor of that Being in whose hands we are, who led our forefathers, as Israel of old, from their native land, and planted them in a country flowing with all the necessaries and comforts of life; who has covered our infancy with his providence, and our riper years with his wisdom and power; and to whose goodness I ask you to join with me in supplications, that he will so enlighten the minds of your servants, guide their councils, and prosper their measures, that whatsoever they do, shall result in your good, and shall secure to you the peace, friendship, and approbation of all nations.” (The Avalon Project)

Having addressed the spiritual influence in our founding, consider now the fallacy of the current interpretation of that “wall of separation between church and state”. Because of the current worship of that expression, some folks believe it is found in the US Constitution. It is not. The only mention of religion in the original document is that no religious test can be required to hold federal office.

Subsequent to ratification of the original constitution, Amendment I specifically denied Congress the power to establish a national religion. The term “national religion” was universally understood by those who wrote and ratified the original US Constitution. The people of those days were aware that various central governments (kings and parliaments) had historically required all people to support specific religions by financial contributions and participation. Because this and other information has been withheld from students for many generations, when challenged in a court of law, we now meekly acquiesce to the claim that a nativity scene in a public place is tantamount to a law passed by the US Congress.

That “separation” thing actually came from a letter Pres. Jefferson wrote in response to the Baptist Association of Danbury, Conn. When pressed on the subject, the attackers will claim Jefferson’s intellectual stature in constitutional comprehension validates their position. However, they never offer a more complete examination of the exchange of letters. The Baptists, who were under religious oppression by their state legislature, had written to Jefferson (underscoring added):

“Sir, we are sensible that the President of the United States is not the National Legislator and also sensible that the national government cannot destroy the laws of each State, but our hopes are strong that the sentiment of our beloved President, which have had such genial effect already, like the radiant beams of the sun, will shine and prevail through all these States…” (Wall Builders)

To which Jefferson replied (parenthetical expressions added):

“I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act (Amendment I) of the whole American people which declared that their legislature (Congress) would ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof’ thus building a wall of separation between Church and State (the federal government). Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights… I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessing of the common Father and Creator of man…” (The Avalon Project)

It must be emphasized that the Baptists did not appeal for constitutional enforcement by the president, the attorney general or the SCOTUS. Nor did any of those entities consider it to be within their constitutional authority. At that time, everyone knew the First Amendment restriction applied, as plain English clearly states, only to acts of the US Congress.

About a decade later, as intended by the framers of the US Constitution, the people of Connecticut were able to correct the matter through their votes for state legislators.

For further confirmation of Jefferson’s opinion that any form of religious expression is beyond federal control, we note his second inaugural address (underscoring added):

“In matters of religion, I have considered that its free exercise is placed by the constitution independent of the powers of the general government. I have therefore undertaken, on no occasion, to prescribe the religious exercises suited to it; but have left them, as the constitution found them, under the direction and discipline of state or church authorities.” (The Avalon Project)

President Jefferson not only made specific the denial of federal authority expressed in Amendment I, he reaffirmed the restrictions which are placed upon the federal government by Amendments IX and X regarding the rights of the people.

Over 150 years were required for the SCOTUS to invent the current “separation” interpretation. If we are to accept and proclaim that view as the “law of the land”, we have a problem. We are forced to accuse Presidents Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison and Monroe, as well as the Congresses and SCOTUS of their day, of being incapable of understanding the document they had ratified and exercised.

If this information, and much more that is available, had been presented to history students over the last two hundred years, our current understanding of the relationship between church and state would probably be quite different.

Two prescient statements:

“A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong gives it a superficial appearance of being right.”  Thomas Paine

“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of society, it expects what never was and never will be.” Thomas Jefferson

 

Questions?…. billhunter@windstream.net

 

Posted in constitution, education, God, government, history, liberty, opinion, politics, religion | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment