restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

No Tactics of Accommodation

 David Alan Black

We are living in a day when a coalition of clergy and laypersons are mobilizing against the statism endemic in American society. It is a “Confessing Church” movement similar to that which arose during the Nazi era in Germany. Its mission is distinctly theological and ecclesiastical, not political.

The Confessing Church movement in Germany was, of course, a failure. It reached its zenith in the fall of 1934, profiting from popular hostility toward the Nazi treatment of pastors. Fragmentation soon set in, however, and the movement failed to obtain what it most wanted: Hitler’s recognition of its control over the Protestant Church in Germany.

Perhaps the ineffectiveness of the conservative resistance to Hitler has some lessons for Americans today. It is my own belief (and here I will not feel slighted if no one follows me) that American conservatism has been defeated by the spirit of accommodation. In our desire for acceptance from the world we exalt ourselves instead of God and the curse naturally follows. If we truly want to experience the mercy of God upon our nation we must seek to be other-worldly.

The world is perishing for lack of knowledge of God, and the church is famishing for want of His guidance. Consider the vitriolic attack that those who despise “losers” like Michael Peroutka and Chuck Baldwin will resort to. They see fit to lambaste on the basis of the most absurd arguments all those who preach against the cult of Americanism. They specialize in one thing: fear. Fear of losing the general election, fear of being called radical, fear of men. They forget that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. They forget that when we accept the myth of neutrality we fall into the trap of incrementalism and pragmatism.

It is time to shed the naïve notion that the evangelical church in America exists to engage real problems in society. We have replaced truth for evangelistic pop-crusades. We are more interested in decisions than disciples, and the result is that the whims of men mean more to us than the Word of God.

What must we do? We must expose the lies of the elites who tell us to support our pagan leaders. We must obey Christ in the face of arrogant judges and others who would take the place of God. We must undermine the secularism in our churches even as we oppose those who would silence the Christian political voice and prevent the real issues from even being discussed.

Christian leader, let your heart be moved toward weary, confused people. Tell them “the full message of this new life” (Acts 5:20). Let us live every aspect of our lives in the light of the pure Word of God. Clear direction comes from a total acknowledgement of Him “in all our ways” (Prov. 3:5-6). “Be wise in the way you act toward outsiders; make the most of every opportunity” (Col. 4:5). “Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have” (1 Pet. 3:15).

Let our chief concerns be harmonized with God’s concerns. Let His burdens be our burdens. For I know this to be true: in committing our lives to the absolute Lordship of Christ, there can be no tactics of accommodation.  

September 25, 2004

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com. His latest book is Why I Stopped Listening to Rush: Confessions of a Recovering Neocon.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

No Slack for Bush

 David Alan Black 

One of my readers, Mr. E. E. Roberts of Amelia, Virginia, sent me this response to my essay, “Dark Days for America.” I publish it here with his permission.

You wrote:  “All these things will tend to embitter the contest in 2004, which will be a death-grapple between imperialism and constitutionalism.”

That simply isn’t so. 2004 will see another orchestrated presidential race from which constitutionalism will be absolutely excluded as it has been for both our lifetimes. Political campaigns aren’t about anything remotely resembling constitutionalism. The constitution is a dead letter to the political class, and they’re the only ones allowed access to the electoral process.

You also seem to be convinced that Bush is well meaning and that he made mistakes. That’s absurd. By their fruits shall ye know them. Bush’s fruits are unmitigated evil, unjustified war, lies and layers of secrecy amounting to an absolute contempt for the truth, blatant betrayal of his oath of office, and the thinnest, most patently false pretense to Christianity we’ve seen in any president since Lincoln.

Bush is obviously doing what he set out to do from the first. I don’t cut him any slack.  He’s been a disaster from the first. None of it is well meaning blunder or a mistake. His family has a long history of treason and he’s advancing his family agenda just as his daddy did.

Watch his campaign, if he even bothers to mount one. He doesn’t want a second term.  Neither did his daddy. He intends to hand off the presidency to a democrat after one disastrous term. It wouldn’t surprise me if he hands it off to a Clinton just to keep with family tradition.

October 31, 2003

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com. He is currently finishing his latest book, Why I Stopped Listening to Rush: Confessions of a Recovering Neocon.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

No Place for Idleness

 David Alan Black 

Our job as Christians is to be about our Father’s business. We ask God to bless our efforts but are we willing to work? This is what we are here for. In body and in spirit, by life or by death, by what we do and by what we do not do, whether we eat or drink, our business is to glorify God.

The average Christian today is flabby for lack of effort. We do not hear much about the Protestant Work Ethic these days. For one thing, we have been conditioned to think that anyone who works more than 8 hours a day is “over-worked” and requires “over-time pay.” A sense of diligence is fast disappearing from us.

It is hard work to serve the Lord. The ancient Hebrews had little time for leisure. Their’s was a culture that put a premium on industry. “Six days shalt thou work,” their Book said. Jesus employed an agricultural metaphor when He said, “Work for the night is coming,” implying that working from dawn to setting sun is normal.

Paul says we are to love and esteem our leaders in the church “because of their work” (1 Thess. 5:13). In the same passage he describes church leaders as those who “diligently labor among you.” These men (yes, a team of laborers is in view, not a single pastor) toil and strain together to the point of weariness and exhaustion. The apostle Paul himself tells us that his normal practice was to provide his own food, clothing, and lodging through his own manual labor (1 Thess. 2:9; 1 Cor. 9:4-6). He labored “both night and day.” Like His Lord (see Mark 3:20-21), Paul was an arduous laborer.

The tragedy of these times is that we lack an adequate work ethic. Laziness – pure, unadulterated laziness – often characterizes the evangelical church. If nothing else, our preachers’ pouches provide sufficient testimony to our gluttonous, slothful lifestyles. But laziness is incompatible with the way of the cross. We need only recall Paul’s exhortations in Philippians to “work,” “run,” and “labor” (Phil. 2:12, 16). Paul himself “pressed on,” straining forward with every fiber of his being, to attain the prize (Phil. 3:14). Like a runner in a race, he concentrates on one, and only one, objective. There was no place for idleness in Paul’s life.

We were created in Christ Jesus for good works (Eph. 2:10). Why, then, do we make a Santa Claus of God when it is we who should give Him our very best gifts? At our farm we have no time for TV or the hectic bustle of Christmas. Our work for the Lord lasts from sunup to sundown. Indeed, we find our leisure in the rhythm of serving Jesus together (Matt. 11:28). Whether it is tending to His herds, or erecting fencing, or sowing crops, or cutting out flannelgraph, or producing materials for our missions trips, or preparing biblical messages, we are learning to adopt a sacrificial lifestyle that has little place for private leisure. I believe the “rest” of which Christ speaks could not possibly have been closer to the true nature of leisure. It is being co-yoked with Him. This is not work for work’s sake. It is work for the kingdom of God. Such work, our Lord said, is easy.

Our Lord was always about His Father’s business. He told His disciples, “I must work the works of the One who sent Me” (John 9:4). Today, His business is our business as Christians. By God’s grace, let us not be infiltrated by the values of our leisure-crazed society. Let us use the abilities and energies God has given us in such a way that when we come into the presence of the Holy Judge our works shall abide (1 Cor. 3:10-15).

November 29, 2005

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

No More Excuses!

Why a Vote for Michael Peroutka over George  Bush Is Not a Wasted Vote

Michael Harrison

It never ceases to amaze me how so many good people can be naive or deceived.  Numerous times during our involvement with the Constitution Party over the past 2½ years, people—well-meaning, conservative, Christian people—have told us for one reason or another that they don’t care to vote for Principle over Politics, they don’t want constitutional government, they don’t want to end abortion in America, they don’t want their liberties reclaimed.

How can that be?  How can someone who is a Christian possibly be alright with continuing the child-killing in America?  Does it seem incredible to you that Christian people would make such statements?

Well, we’ve not actually heard any Christian make such statements.  But by the statements that they have made, they might as well have made those statements.

Following are the statements I hear often concerning the CP and its presidential candidate, Mr. Peroutka.  In reality, they are no better than excuses.  My pastor in Cincinnati always said that an excuse is “the skin of a reason stuffed with a lie.”  Along with these excuses are the responses I often make to this mistaken thinking.

Following the answering of these statements, there is a list of positions, policies, and practices of the Bush Administration that give us a glimpse of what we’ve had over the past 3½ years and what we are in for if we have another 4 years of him.

Statements (Excuses)

Mr. Peroutka doesn’t stand a chance.

This is a defeatist attitude.  Mr. Peroutka doesn’t believe in chance.  And, from what I understand of biblical principles, chance has no part in determining the leader of a nation, nor in a Christian’s outlook.  In our case, God has granted that we have the liberty to choose our own leaders.  As a nation, we get the kind of government we deserve.  We are the ones who vote (or abstain from voting).  We are the ones who stand up (or not) for what’s right.  And if we want a good man to win, it’s up to us, not up to chance.

A vote for Mr. Peroutka is a wasted vote.

As Mr. Peroutka says, a truly wasted vote is a vote for a candidate who tells you up front, before even taking his oath of office, that he intends to violate the Constitution – which is exactly what both Mr. Kerry and Mr. Bush have done.  Both propose grand programs that are unconstitutional, both propose to continue US involvement in the UN and other international alliances that are robbing us of our sovereignty and liberty.

A vote for Mr. Peroutka is a vote for John Kerry.

Wrong.  A vote for John Kerry is a vote for John Kerry.  A vote for Michael Peroutka is a vote for Michael Peroutka.

The strategists have reasoned that someone who would vote for Mr. Peroutka (a very conservative candidate) would have voted for Mr. Bush if he had not voted for Peroutka, and it is thus a vote taken away from Mr. Bush, and in effect a vote for Mr. Kerry.  This is an unjustified stretch of logic.

This is also a scare tactic to whip into line those who have wandered away from the GOP fold.  It is a statement that is designed to generate fear in your heart that you may actually be helping a really bad candidate to win.  It is designed to send you on a guilt trip so that you will vote for the lesser of two evils rather than the greatest of multiple choices.  Your vote, if made out of fear, is a flawed vote.

All of these first three statements are really saying the same thing: vote for what’s convenient, not for what’s right.  It’s a twist on situation ethics.  It’s an admission that whereas you believe in the principles of the Constitution Party and Mr. Peroutka, you’re going to vote for Mr. Bush because of the situation.  My friend, if that’s your philosophy, then you don’t genuinely believe in what the CP stands for.  Principles are not valid just when the circumstances are right or when it is convenient.  Principles are always valid and right.  And if you will abandon them out of fear or convenience, then you are no better than the politicians you despise.

A third party can’t possibly win in America.

No it can’t, as long as Americans keep believing lies such as this one.  What would happen if everyone who objects to the GOP on principle would vote their conscience?  People would be sending a clear message to the GOP that they want Principle Over Politics, not politics as usual.  The CP would be a force to be reckoned with.  But, sad to say, people continue to listen to the lies, and thus ensure that a third party never makes an impact on the political scene.  In effect, if you believe this you are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

It is interesting that this argument is made by Republicans, whose party at one time was a third party.  Have Republicans forgotten their meager beginnings?  Ultimately this statement admits two fallacies: first, that the two parties are the only valid avenues to public office; and second, that winning is the only thing that really matters.  Remember, Adolph Hitler won, but that didn’t mean he was right.

It is a standard GOP goal to win at all cost.  The GOP does not operate by principle.  This is why a perceived conservative Christian President Bush can promote a GOP senator like Arlen Specter who is as liberal as they come in the GOP.  Specter is pro-choice, pro-UN, anti-Second Amendment, etc.  The president was not acting on principle when he threw his support behind Specter; he was trying to keep GOP control of the Senate by insuring that Specter was the GOP candidate for senator over his lesser-known, but more conservative GOP challenger.

There’s too much money in the two major parties for the CP to make any headway.

Sure enough, there’s a lot of money in the workings of these two parties.  But, money is not arbiter of elections.

Those who fought and died for our liberties during the formative days of our Republic were not well financed, yet they took on the world’s most formidable navy—and won!  It was by the grace of God, though.  And they poured out the hearts and begged God for his help.

Likewise, if we would recapture our liberties and restore the Republic, we will have to call upon God, even beg him to help.  And, we’ll have to elect men of the character of our Founders—someone unlike either of the two major candidates.

I’m afraid of what will happen if John Kerry gets elected.

Fear is controlling your voting.  And if you vote based upon fear, you will later on regret your choice.  Instead of making a positive, confident choice for the best candidate, you are minded instead to cast a vote based upon your fear of another candidate, voting for a candidate who is not as bad as so-and-so.

People fear that Mr. Kerry in the White House would translate into a total trashing of morals and the American life as we know it.  But keep one thing in mind: there is a game, a deception, that Washington has to maintain, no matter what.  And it is this game that would keep Mr. Kerry in check if he is elected.

If Mr. Kerry does win, and the GOP keeps control of the House and Senate, we are no worse off than we were during the Clinton years.  The two major parties will control the different branches of government.  While Clinton was president, for example, his administration (and Janet Reno) tried to push the USA Patriot Act (known by another name and in slightly different form) through the GOP-controlled Congress.  It failed to pass on three different occasions, owing to the staged opposition that Republicans and Democrats maintain in Washington.  But with Bush as president and a Republican Congress, it sailed through, and our liberties were further eroded.  We have been worse off when both the executive and legislative branches are controlled by the same party than when they are controlled by different parties.

The Bible says one-world government is coming anyway.  You can’t stop it.  So why bother?

Well, let’s just throw up our hands and give up, then.  Don’t go to the polls.  Don’t get involved.  Don’t bother living for God, either.  That way, we can hasten the inevitable and be all the sooner on our way out of here.

Really, that’s a very poor attitude.  Is that what our Founders fought to give us?  The Founders had the same Bible with the same prophecies in it, yet, they found cause enough to stand for their liberties and fight for them, some of them even dying for them.  Where has the spirit of the American revolution gone?

If the excuse not to help the CP and not to vote for Peroutka is that one-world government is unstoppable, then don’t vote for Bush, either.  Vote for Kerry so it will come all the faster.

Mr. Bush has a lot better morals than Mr. Kerry.

This is debatable.  Mr. Bush has been held up as a conservative Christian man, a moral man, who champions our values.  Once you read the record on it (below), you’ll conclude otherwise.  We are being deceived.  And the sooner you and I recognize that, the sooner we will be free to exercise an unfettered vote in confidence for a truly moral candidate who does champion the values for which we thought the GOP stood.

Mr. Bush is God’s man.  He’s a Christian man.  We shouldn’t question what he’s doing.

It would be foolish of me to deny his profession of faith.  I do not know his heart; only God knows his heart.  However, I can examine his statements and the fruit of his political career and make a judgment as to whether they translate into a Christian testimony and whether he is worthy of my Christian vote.

Examine his words and deeds relative to several moral and constitutional issues given below.  After reading through the list, a Christian would be going contrary to his own faith to cast a vote for Mr. Bush.  The real question is whether or not Christians, after learning the facts, would rather go on ignoring them and vote for Bush in spite of them.

We have a responsibility as citizens to know who we are electing and to hold their feet to the fire so they will do right.  If they won’t stand right morally, we need to act.  If they trample our liberties, we need to act.  He who has rights must assert them.  If not, they will be trampled—repeatedly.  God gave us our liberties, but the keeping of them is our responsibility.  And if we allow our leaders to repeatedly trample them, we get the government we deserve.

Mr. Kerry is so anti-gun, I have to vote for Bush.

Under the “Liberties” section below, see how Mr. Bush has worked against our Second Amendment rights.  The fact is, both Mr. Kerry and Mr. Bush will work against our Second Amendment rights.  The difference is merely in how much.  On the other hand, Mr. Peroutka is 100- in favor of your right to own and operate a firearm, and will enact policies and promote legislation that will secure those rights, and will push for the repeal of damaging legislation that has already been passed.

Bush Positions, Policies, and Practices

Gay Rights

• While governor of Texas, Bush appointed a supporter of the Houston Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus and also of Planned Parenthood, Martha Hill Jamison, to the 164th District Court in Houston.

• Early in 2000, President Bush attempted to purge the Republican platform of planks against homosexual marriage and homosexuals in the military.

• President Bush insisted that openly homosexual Congressman Jim Kolbe of Arizona be given a prominent speaking role at the Republican National Convention.

• The Bush Administration has conducted White House meetings with gay groups.

• Bush signed a District of Columbia appropriations bill that funded benefits for unmarried domestic partners.

• He refused to nullify a 1998 Clinton executive order prohibiting discrimination against sodomites in the federal workforce.

• He signed a bill allowing death benefits to be paid to the “domestic partners” of firefighters and police officers who die in the line of duty.

• He has increased funding for homosexual propaganda campaigns under the guise of health education programs.

• He allowed the Office of Personnel Management, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Transportation, and the Department of Justice, to openly celebrate “gay pride.”

• Mr. Bush has appointed over 40 openly gay individuals to posts in his administration, including the Romanian ambassador, a homosexual activist, who lives at taxpayer expense with his live-in lover in the US Embassy in Romania.

• On April 18, 2002, at the annual meeting of the Log Cabin Republicans, the White House hosted a first-ever policy briefing for gay Republicans, featuring senior administration advisors.

• President Bush authorized a Clinton policy that allows an “unmarried partner” of a foreign aid worker to be given the same status as a married spouse.

• The Bush administration posted a job for a “gay and lesbian program specialist” at the Department of Agriculture.

• President Bush publicly praised the Metropolitan Community Church of Los Angeles on occasion of its 35th anniversary, a church that performs 6,000 “gay marriages” annually.

• George Bush’s home church in Texas is Highland Park United Methodist Church in Dallas.  This church welcomes impenitent homosexuals as members.

• In an interview with Diane Sawyer on gay unions, President Bush said, “The position of this administration is that whatever legal arrangements people want to make, they’re allowed to make, so long as it’s embraced by the state or at the state level.”

Abortion

• Mr. Bush professes to be pro-life with the exceptions of rape and incest, claiming that good people can disagree on this issue.

• He does not believe that Roe v. Wade should be overturned.

• During the presidential debates of 2000, Mr. Bush admitted abortion played no part in choosing judicial nominees were he to become president.

• As governor of Texas, Mr. Bush did appoint pro-choice judges to the bench.

• President Bush decided to allow social service agencies in Africa and the Caribbean to receive funds from the U.S. treasury under his $15 billion emergency AIDS relief plan even if they promote family planning and provide abortions.

• Mr. Bush lobbied for and signed the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban, hailed by many as a great stride forward for the pro-life movement.  However, the bill redefines the procedure, thus leaving untouched the procedure that is actually being practiced in America.  The very language of the ban encourages the killing of the baby before extraction.  The end result is that abortion continues unaffected in America while the president points to signing of it as one of the conservative Christian trophies of his administration.

• Thanks to Medicaid disbursements and President Bush’s Title X of the Public Health Service Act in 2001, companies such as Planned Parenthood, the largest baby-killing conglomerate in the world, continue to get taxpayer funding.  Under Bush, this baby-killing organization has received more tax-funds than under Clinton!  Planned Parenthood was responsible for the deaths of 227,375 Americans in 2002.

Liberties

• Mr. Bush and Attorney General John Ashcroft crafted and pushed through Congress the USA Patriot Act after 9-11, telling legislators they were unpatriotic if they don’t vote for it.  The act grants broad new police powers, negatively affecting Americans’ freedom of association, freedom of information, free speech, the right to legal representation, freedom from unreasonable searches, and the right to a speedy and public trial.  It grants to the president the privilege of determining who is an “enemy combatant,” a term so ill-defined that many Americans can now be classified by it.

• USA Patriot Act II was snuck through the Congress as part of another bill on the very day Saddam Hussein was captured, when Americans’ attention was focused on him.

• His support of Clinton’s 1995 “assault weapons ban” which outlawed a host of semi-automatic guns.  The gun ban was due to expire in 2005, but according to Presidential spokesman Scott McClellan, “The president supports the current law (the Clinton gun ban), and he supports reauthorization of the current law.”

• His support of Clinton’s National Monuments Declaration, in which millions of acres of western land was seized by the executive branch.

• In spite of the fact that he campaigned on the promise to veto any campaign finance reform legislation that limited Americans’ freedom of speech, he signed into law the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform Bill that effectively eviscerated the first amendment.

Spending

• Mr. Bush encouraged the increase in the size and spending of the federal government with a record deficit.  With his $2.23 trillion budget, his administration completed the biggest increase in government spending since the Lyndon Johnson’s “Great Society.”  The budget deficit predicted by the House Budget Office will hit a record $306 billion.  Spending on government programs increased 22 – from 1999 to 2003.  A Washington Post report said, “The era of big government, if it ever went away, has returned full-throttle under President Bush.”  Former house majority leader Dick Armey commented that under President Bush, the federal government is “out of control.”  Our president, in cooperation with international bankers, is literally bankrupting our nation.

• He proposed to increase the budget and the power of the Internal Revenue Service: “Bush would give the IRS a 5.3 percent boost to $10.4 billion for the budget year that begins Oct. 1.  That will include $133 million dollars for added audits of businesses and high-income taxpayers.”

• He signed into law a massive expansion of Medicare that, according to Ron Paul (R-Texas), resulted in “the single largest expansion of the federal welfare state since the Great Society programs of the 1960s.”

US Sovereignty

• Bush has endorsed and promoted the globalist, sovereignty-threatening aims of the United Nations.  His demand of Iraq was that it conform to UN resolutions, resolutions that the US may some day be called to conform to, as long as we remain members.

• He has continued the Clintonian policy of sending our soldiers to serve under U.N. commanders on U.N. missions.

• He is promoting the formation and adoption of FTAA (Free Trade Area of the Americas) which will bind our nation in a union with 34 other nations in our hemisphere for economic purposes, but will also grant an international counsel the authority to override our Constitution to resolve disputes among the member nations.

Borders and Immigration

• Mr. Bush has expanded government welfare programs to illegal aliens and his proposals to grant amnesty to illegal aliens.

• In January 2004, Bush proposed a full amnesty program for up to 12 million illegals already in this country.  Since that time, the number of attempts to cross the border has increased by over 25- in some areas as Mexicans (and others) rush to the US to be able to take advantage of the benefits being offered by the president.

Christianity

• President Bush said he reads the Bible daily, but he confessed to The New York Times, “I don’t necessarily believe every single word is literally true.” About the evolution-creation debate, he said, “The verdict is still out on how God created the earth. I don’t use the Bible as necessarily a way to predict the findings of science.”  In other words, Darwinism may be true according to President Bush.

• One of his first acts as president, in February 2001, was to follow through with the Clinton administration’s campaign to shut down the Indianapolis Baptist Temple over a tax dispute.  Despite the fact that churches are automatically tax-exempt according to IRS regulations, John Ashcroft and company took the church property with the approval of Mr. Bush.

• He demoralized Korean and Japanese Christians by bowing down at a pagan Shinto shrine in Japan.

• He has made public statement that Muslims and Christians worship the same God, contrary to the plain teaching of Scripture.

• He has endorsed Ramadan, a Muslim fast, at a White House celebration.

• He proposed to increase funding of the National Endowment for the Arts by 15 percent, the highest percentage increase in two decades.  That’s a total of 139 million dollars in 2005 to finance art, much of which is blasphemous.  (Recall the taxpayer-financed painting of a crucifix in a jar of urine.)

• Not only did President Bush publicly condemn Judge Roy Moore’s actions, his chief political consultant Karl Rove spearheaded the attack against him.  When Roy Moore was before Bill Pryor’s inquisition about to lose his job for his public stand for God, President Bush was in California campaigning for a pro-abortion, pro-sodomite Republican, Arnold Schwarzenegger.

If you can stand reading more of the Bush record, visit www.BushRevealed.com.  There is also an interesting article at our state party website entitled, “Why Christians Should Not Vote for George W. Bush.”

Conclusion

After reviewing the Bush record, and knowing the possibilities of Kerry, why would anyone want to vote for either one?  Why would someone who loves liberty want to vote for a man who is an internationalist?  Why would a Christian want to vote for a man who has by his actions operated contrary to his profession of faith?  Why would a fiscal conservative want to vote for a man who has given us the largest deficits in history?

Face it—the two major parties have nothing to offer the conservative or Christian voter in America today.  Not if you want a return to liberty.  Not if you want abortion to end in America.  Not if you want to restore your Second Amendment rights.  Not if you want fiscal responsibility.  Not if you want a constitutional America.

A vote for Mr. Bush, after knowing his record, is like saying, “I don’t care if we stop abortion in America.  I don’t want to return to the Constitution.  It doesn’t matter if we have our liberties restored.”

God does not operation on convenience or the lesser of two evils.  Why should his children operate that way?  His truth is not dependent upon the situation.  Why should his children operate with that mindset?

Remember this: the major media do not even consider third party candidates as viable choices.  And as long as you listen to their message, you’ll believe their lies and deceptions.  Is it any oversight or accident that the presidential debate commission will not allow a third party into the debate?  Not at all.  The commission recognizes that the message of the third parties many times resonates with the American people better than the message by the major parties.  And to keep Americans voting for the two major parties, the message of the third parties has to be suppressed.  Hence, they are largely ignored by the media, and the debate commission refuses to work with them.

Your best strategy this election cycle is to guard your mind from the lies and deceptions foisted on us by the major media (ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, and even FOX).  I recommend WorldNetDaily.com on the web, and other web resources linked from our state party website.

Keep biblical principles and the Constitution at the forefront of your decision-making.  Don’t allow yourself to be placed on a guilt trip about helping the other side win.  Do what’s right, not what’s convenient.

You can help America by first making sure of your own standing before God, and living your life to please Him.  Help others to see the folly of abandoning biblical principles.  By helping them, you help America.

June 4, 2004

Mr. Michael Harrison is State Chairman of the Constitution Party of North Carolina. He may be reached for comment here.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

No More Excuses: Pastors Must Get Serious About Teaching Their Flocks

 David Alan Black 

Perhaps our minds are jarred when we read these words about the role of the New Testament pastor/overseer: “an overseer must be…able to teach” (1 Timothy 3:2). What is jarring about this statement is the conjunction of “overseer” and “teach.” We are accustomed to referring to our pastors as preachers, not teachers. Did the apostle Paul make a mistake in describing the pastor as, essentially, a person who has the ability and responsibility to teach?

By no means. What we think, what we believe, what we understand to be true determines what we become. Therefore, what we are taught is crucial to life itself.

My friend Gary Burge, professor of New Testament at Wheaton College, has said, “If it is true that biblical illiteracy is commonplace in secular culture at large, there is ample evidence that points to similar trends in our churches.” Burge points to research done at Wheaton in which the biblical literacy of incoming freshmen was monitored. These students represented every state in the nation and almost every Protestant denomination. They turned in some “amazing results”:

• One third could not put the following in correct order: Abraham, the Old Testament prophets, the death of Christ, and Pentecost.

• Half could not sequence the following events: Moses in Egypt, Isaac’s birth, Saul’s death, and Judah’s exile.

• One third could not identify Matthew as an apostle from a list of New Testament names.

• Half did not know that the Christmas story was in Matthew or that the Passover story was in Exodus.

In his book No Place for Truth, David Wells has likewise commented on the lack of biblical knowledge among American evangelicals. “I have watched with growing disbelief as the evangelical church has cheerfully plunged into astounding theological illiteracy,” he said.

If learning is ever again to inspire our church members, we must solve the current crisis. Evangelical Christians already hold the key to the solution to the church’s educational crisis: it is God’s Word itself. Evangelicals suffer significantly from putting tradition over the Scriptures. We tend to disparage logical reasoning. We fail to give proper attention to such things as theology and philosophy. The combination of superficiality and superspirituality has been lethal.

We forget that church is more than “meeting and eating.” We are involved in a war—a war for the hearts, souls, and minds of our children and our families. As Burge has noted, the church has failed to transmit its religious heritage to the next generation. This includes an overemphasis on personal experience to the exclusion of serious theological engagement. Sermons are now more therapeutic than instructional; our worship services are grounded more in what we feel than in what we think. Biblical teaching has become a lost art. Serious study of the Bible and theology are “studiously” avoided.

What is the solution to this problem? It is the systematic teaching of biblical truth, and it must start in the pulpit. The time has come for pastors to fulfill their role as those who feed the flock of God a healthy diet of biblical meat as exemplified by the Swiss Reformer Ulrich Zwingli, who systematically taught his congregation verse-by-verse, chapter-by-chapter, and book-by-book. Pastors can also teach basic courses in Old and New Testament survey, basic Christian doctrines, and principles of Bible study. They should, in addition, be willing to address the unbiblical worldviews that have crept into our churches. In particular, I believe pastors must constantly be at war against the messianic state and “salvation by legislation.” This means, among other things, that they must teach parents that they cannot morally transfer their responsibility to educate their children. The child who has been placed into the care of a God-hating, secular humanist school system is being asked to do what the Bible explicitly forbids: serve two masters—the God of the Bible and the god of the state. The paternal state then assumes the parents’ responsibilities; it not only feeds “its” children, but nurtures, educates, comforts, and disciplines them. Once we sink that low, as C. S. Lewis once put it, there is no point in telling state officials to mind their own business, since “our lives are their business.”

In Ephesians 4:11 the apostle Paul makes it clear that pastors are to be teachers, first and foremost. In 1 Timothy 3:2 and Titus 1:9 it is stipulated that “an overseer must be …able to teach, …able to give instruction in sound doctrine.” Note that this responsibility of teaching is related directly to the risen Christ’s rule over the church. Thus, failure to consistently teach the Word of God from the pulpit is an egregious act of disobedience to the Lord Himself.

October 22, 2003

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com. He is currently finishing his latest book, Why I Stopped Listening to Rush: Confessions of a Recovering Neocon.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

No Mistakes?

 David Alan Black

At a recent press conference the president was asked whether he could think of any mistakes he had made during his term in office. He paused, trying to conjure up an answer. In the end, he couldn’t manage to name a single mistake he had made.

Most of my friends seem to agree with the president. They feel he continues to deserve their undivided loyalty and support.

With all due respect, their actions and attitudes remind me of the professing Christians in Germany during the years of the Third Reich. It is a fact of history that only a few Lutherans offered any semblance of meaningful resistance to Nazi lying and heavy-handedness. David Priestly, in an article entitled “The Baptist Response in Germany to the Third Reich” (in God and Caesar, ed. R. Linder [1971] pp. 102-23), has shown that one of the most orthodox of all the German Christian groups, the Baptists, also loyally supported the regime and even welcomed Hitler’s accession to power.

One can perhaps understand the passivity of German Baptists once the Nazi Party’s totalitarian control had been extended throughout the country. The real problem began when Hitler first seized power in 1933 and before 1936, when he finally consolidated his death grip on German society. What had the German Baptists done to take advantage of this window of opportunity? Nothing, it appears. As one German historian, Hannah Vogt, puts it: “The first sin of omission gave rise to all the later crimes” (The Burden of Guilty [1964] p. 234).

Will American Christians fall into the same pattern of willful ignorance and apathy? Christians cannot escape their obligation to become involved on the side of justice and truth in their country’s public affairs. Simply because a particular candidate for office professes to be a Christian is not in itself an adequate reason to vote for him. His stand on the issues must always be the decisive considerations, not party loyalty or even religious connections.

Author David Corn, at his website bushlies.com, has documented the top ten lies of George W. Bush. For example, Corn reminds us of the president’s (false) rational for going to war with Iraq:

“Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.” And, “[Saddam Hussein is] a threat because he is dealing with al Qaeda.” These two Bush remarks go hand in hand, even though the first was said on March 17, 2003, two days before Bush launched the invasion of Iraq, and the other came during a November 7, 2002, press conference. Together they represented his argument for war: Hussein possessed actual weapons of mass destruction and at any moment could hand them to his supposed partners in al Qaeda. That is why Hussein was an immediate threat to the United States and had to be taken out quickly. But neither of these assertions were truthful. There has been much media debate over all this. But the postwar statements of Richard Kerr, a former deputy director of the CIA, provide the most compelling proof. He has been conducting a review of the prewar intelligence, and he has told reporters that the intelligence on Hussein’s WMDs was full of caveats and qualifiers and based mostly on inferential or circumstantial evidence. In other words, it was not no-doubt material. He also has said that prewar intelligence reports did not contain evidence of links between Hussein and al Qaeda. The best information to date indicates that the prewar intelligence did not leave “no doubt” about WMDs and did not support Bush’s claim that Hussein was in cahoots with al Qaeda. Bush’s primary reason for war was founded on falsehoods.

More recently, the Center for American Progress has assembled a list of 100 mistakes the president has made since assuming office. Here’s a sampling from this well-documented report:

Iraq

1. Failing to build a real international coalition prior to the Iraq invasion, forcing the US to shoulder the full cost and consequences of the war.

2. Approving the demobilization of the Iraqi Army in May, 2003 – bypassing the Joint Chiefs of Staff and reversing an earlier position, the President left hundreds of thousands of armed Iraqis disgruntled and unemployed, contributing significantly to the massive security problems American troops have faced during occupation.

3. Not equipping troops in Iraq with adequate body armor or armored HUMVEES.

4. Ignoring the advice Gen. Eric Shinseki regarding the need for more troops in Iraq – now Bush is belatedly adding troops, having allowed the security situation to deteriorate in exactly the way Shinseki said it would if there were not enough troops.

5. Ignoring plans drawn up by the Army War College and other war-planning agencies, which predicted most of the worst security and infrastructure problems America faced in the early days of the Iraq occupation.

6. Making a case for war which ignored intelligence that there were no Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq.

7. Deriding “nation-building“ during the 2000 debates, then engaging American troops in one of the most explicit instances of nation building in American history.

8. Predicting along with others in his administration that US troops would be greeted as liberators in Iraq.

9. Predicting Iraq would pay for its own reconstruction.

10. Wildly underestimating the cost of the war.

11. Trusting Ahmed Chalabi, who has dismissed faulty intelligence he provided the President as necessary for getting the Americans to topple Saddam.

12. Disbanding the Sunni Baathist managers responsible for Iraq’s water, electricity, sewer system and all the other critical parts of that country’s infrastructure.

13. Failing to give UN weapons inspectors enough time to certify if weapons existed in Iraq.

14. Including discredited intelligence concerning Nigerian Yellow Cake in his 2003 State of the Union.

15. Announcing that “major combat operations in Iraq have ended” aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln on May 1, 2003, below a “Mission Accomplished” banner – more U.S. soldiers have died in combat since Bush’s announcement than before it.

16. Awarding a multi-billion dollar contract to Halliburton in Iraq, which then repeatedly overcharged the government and served troops dirty food.

17. Refusing to cede any control of Post-invasion Iraq to the international community, meaning reconstruction has received limited aid from European allies or the U.N.

18. Failing to convince NATO allies why invading Iraq was important.

19. Having no real plan for the occupation of Iraq.

20. Limiting bidding on Iraq construction projects to “coalition partners,” unnecessarily alienating important allies France, Germany and Russia.

21. Diverting $700 million into Iraq invasion planning without informing Congress.

22. Shutting down an Iraqi newspaper for “inciting violence” – the move, which led in short order to street fighting in Fallujah, incited more violence than the newspaper ever had.

23. Telling Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan about plans to go to war with Iraq before Secretary of State Colin Powell.

And the list goes on and on.

Dear friends, Bush’s public policy decisions are on the record. There is no reason for liberty-loving Christians to ignore them any longer.

Are evangelical believers, in their concern for doctrinal purity, guilty of neglecting the supreme obscenities of unjust war, government mendacity, the fabrication of evidence, as well as a multitude of lesser social and political evils? Did our president make any mistakes? Does he deserve to be reelected?

You be the judge.

June 11, 2004

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com. His latest book, Why I Stopped Listening to Rush: Confessions of a Recovering Neocon, will be released later this month.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

No King But King Jesus!

Declarations and Evidences of Christian Faith in America’s Colonial Charters, State Constitutions, and Other Historical Documents over 375 Years of American History: 1606 to 1982

Steve Lefemine

Let any man that will, who foolishly claims that America’s historical record is not replete with evidence that the constituting of civil government in America was founded principally upon the Rock of Jesus Christ, take the time to read the excerpts below, and thereby become convinced of the errancy of his former historically unsustainable prejudice.

It has oft been said, almost at times like some vacuous incantation, “Politics is the art of compromise.”  Perhaps so for the worldly pursuit of “Politics.”  However, “Christian statesmanship” on the other hand, is the God-ordained ministry and holy undertaking, of establishing justice in the gate.”

“Justice and judgment are the habitation [foundation] of Thy throne:  mercy and truth shall go before Thy face.”  Psalm 89:14

“… there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained [commissioned] of God.” 
“For he [the civil ruler] is the minister of God to thee for good.  But if thou do that which is evil,
be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.”  Romans 13:1,4  [God’s intention for proper role of government]

“… governors,… sent by Him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that
do well.”  1 Peter 2:14  [God’s intended purpose for properly functioning civil government]

“… righteousness and judgment are the habitation of His throne.”  Psalm 97:2

“The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me, He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God.”  2 Samuel 23:2   [true for all men, for all nations, for all time]

“Righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people.”  Proverb 14:34

“The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God.”  Psalm 9:17

“Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD [Yahweh];…”  Psalm 33:12

__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________

All excerpts below are taken from America’s God and Country Encyclopedia Of Quotations,
by William J. Federer, 1994 (page numbers listed in brackets at end of excerpt), except as noted.
 
The excerpts from Colonial Charters, State Constitutions, and other Historical Documents
are presented below in four periods of American History:

1.     Pre-Revolutionary War (1606 to 1775)
2.      Revolutionary War to signing of U.S. Constitution (1775 to1787)
3.      U.S. Constitution to War Between the States (1787 to 1865)
4.      Post-War Between the States (1865 to 1982)

_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

Declarations and Evidences of Christian Faith in America’s
Colonial Charters, State Constitutions, and other Historical Documents during over 375 years of American History:
1606 to 1982

                                                  CONTENTS

1.      Pre-Revolutionary War (1606 to 1775)

First Charter of Virginia (April 10, 1606)

Second Charter of Virginia (May 23, 1609)

Mayflower Compact (November 11,1620)

First Charter of Massachusetts (March 4, 1629)

Fundamental Orders (Constitution) of Connecticut (January 14, 1639)

Exeter, New Hampshire (August 4, 1639)

Constitution of the New England Confederation (May 19, 1643)

New Haven Colony Charter (April 3, 1644)

Charter of Carolina (1663)

Charter of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations (July 8, 1663)

Charter of Pennsylvania (1681)

Fundamental Constitutions of Pennsylvania (1682)

Great Law of Pennsylvania (April 25, 1682)

Charter of Privileges of Pennsylvania (1701)

The Committees of Correspondence… began sounding the cry across the Colonies (ca. 1774):
 
Continental Congress (September 1774), passed the Articles of Association

2.      Revolutionary War to signing of U.S. Constitution
        (1775 to 1787)

North Carolina:  Mecklenburg County Resolutions (May 20, 1775)

The Declaration of Independence (July 2, 1776), approved in wording by Continental Congress;  July 4, 1776, delegates voted to accept it, declare America’s independence from Great Britain

Constitution of the State of North Carolina (1776)

Constitution of the State of Maryland (August 14, 1776)

Articles of Confederation (November 15, 1777)

Constitution of the State of South Carolina (1778)

The Constitution of the State of Massachusetts (1780)

Continental Congress (September 10, 1782)

Continental Congress (1783), ratified a peace treaty with Great Britain at the close of the
Revolutionary War

Constitution of the State of New Hampshire (1784,1792)

Constitution of the State of Vermont (1786)
 
The Constitution of the United States(September 17, 1787)

3.      U.S. Constitution to War Between the States (1787 to 1865)

Constitution of the State of New Hampshire (1784,1792)

The Constitution of the State of Delaware (until 1792)

Constitution of the State of Tennessee (1796)

John Jay (1745-1829),  quote October 12, 1816

Constitution of the State of Mississippi (1817)

The Constitution of the State of Connecticut (until 1818)

Congress of the United States of America (1822)

Definition of RELIGION.  [Webster’s 1828 Dictionary]

Constitution of the State of North Carolina (1776)

Congress of the United States of America (January 19, 1853)
 
Congress of the United States of America (March 27, 1854)

Congress of the United States of America (May 1854)

The Constitution of the State of Massachusetts (through 1862)
 
Congress of the United States of America (March 3, 1863)

Congress of the United States of America (October 3, 1863)

Congress of the United States of America (March 3, 1865)

4.      Post-War Between the States (1865 to 1982)

Constitution of the State of North Carolina (1776)

Constitution of the State of New Hampshire (1784,1792)
 
United States Supreme Court (February 29, 1892), Church of the Holy Trinity v.
United States

Arkansas Supreme Court (1905), was quoted by Supreme Court Justice
David J. Brewer in his lecture, entitled, “The United States a Christian Nation.”

Congress of the United States of America (March 3, 1931), adopted The Star Spangled Banner as our National Anthem

Congress of the United States of America (July 20, 1956), official national motto of the U.S.

Congress of the United States of America (October 4, 1982), declared 1983 the
Year of the Bible

Date Unknown – Constitution of the State of Pennsylvania

_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________

1.      Pre-Revolutionary War (1606 to 1775)

First Charter of Virginia (April 10, 1606), was granted by King James I to those who would endeavor to settle “Jamestown Colony” in Virginia:

     We, greatly commending and graciously accepting of their Desires for the Furtherance of so noble a Work, which may, by the Providence of Almighty God, hereafter tend to the Glory of His Divine Majesty, in propagating of Christian Religion to such People, as yet live in Darkness and miserable Ignorance of the true Knowledge and Worship of God, and may in time bring the Infidels and Savages, living in those Parts, to human Civility, and to a settled and quiet Government…  [p.624]

Second Charter of Virginia (May 23, 1609), granted by King James I, stated:

     Because the principal Effect which we can expect or desire of this Action is the Conversion and reduction of the people in those parts unto the true worship of God and the Christian Religion.  [pp.625-626]

Mayflower Compact (November 11,1620), was America’s first great governmental document, signed by the Pilgrims before they disembarked their ship, the Mayflower.  This covenant was so revolutionary, that it has influenced all other constitutional instruments in America since.  It reads:

     In ye name of God, Amen.  We whose names are underwritten,… having undertaken, for ye glorie of God, and advancemente of ye Christian faith, and honour of our king, & countrie, a voyage to plant ye first colonie in ye Northerne parts of Virginia,
     doe by these presents solemnly & mutually in ye presence of God, and one of another, covenant & combine our selves togeather into a civill body politick, for our better ordering & preservation & furtherance of ye ends aforesaid;
     and by vertue hearof to enacte, constitute, and frame such just & equall lawes, ordinances, acts, constitutions & offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meete & convenient for ye generall goodof ye Colonie, unto which we promise all due submission and obedience.
     In witness wherof we have hereunder subscribed our names at Cap-Codd ye 11. of
November, in ye year of ye raigne of our soveraigne lord, King James, of England, France,
& Ireland ye eighteenth, and by Scotland ye fiftie fourth, Ano:Dom. 1620.  [pp.435-436]

First Charter of Massachusetts (March 4, 1629) granted by King Charles I, stated:

     For the directing, ruling, and disposeing of all other Matters and Things, whereby our said People… maie be soe religiously, peaceable, and civilly governed, as their good life and orderlie Conversation, maie wynn and incite the Natives of the Country to the Knowledg and Obedience
of the onlie true God and Savior of Mankinde, and the Christian Fayth, which, in our Royall Intention, and the Adventurers free profession, is the principall Ende of this Plantation…” 
[p.424]

Fundamental Orders (Constitution) of Connecticut (January 14, 1639), was the first constitution written in America, instituting a provisional government and later serving as the model for the United States Constitution.  It was penned by Roger Ludlow in 1638, after hearing a sermon by Thomas Hooker, the famous Puritan minister, who, along with his congregation, help to found Connecticut.  So important was this work that Connecticut became known as “The Constitution State.”

     The committee convened to frame the orders was charged to make the laws:

     As near the law of God as they can be.

     The Connecticut towns of Hartford, Wethersfield, and Windsor adopted the constitution,
January 14, 1639, which stated in its Preamble:

     Forasmuch as it has pleased the Almighty God by the wise disposition of His divine providence so to order and dispose of things that we the inhabitants and residents of Windsor, Hartford and Wethersfield and now cohabiting and dwelling in and upon the River Connecticut
and the lands thereunto adjoining;
     and well knowing when a people are gathered together the Word of God requires, that to
meinteine the peace and union of such a people, there should bee an orderly and decent government established according to God, to order and dispose of the affairs of all the people
at all seasons as occasion shall require;
     do therefore associate and conjoin ourselves to be as one public State or Commonwealth, and do, for ourselves and our successors and such as shall be adjoined to us at any time hereafter, enter into Combination and Confederation together, to meinteine and presearve the libberty and purity of the Gospell of our Lord Jesus which we now professe…
     Which, according to the truth of the said Gospell, is now practised amongst us; as allso, in our civill affaires to be guided and governed according to such laws, rules, orders, and decrees.

Articles of the Constitution of Connecticut:

     Article I  That the Scriptures hold forth a perfect rule for the direction and government of all men in all duties which they are to perform to God and men, as well in families and commonwealths as in matters of the church.

     Article II  That as in matters which concern the gathering and ordering of a church, so likewise in all public offices which concern civil order, — as the choice of magistrates and
officers, making and repealing laws, dividing allotments of inheritance, and all things of like nature, — they would all be governed by those rules which the Scripture held forth to them.

     Article III   That all those who had desired to be received free planters had settled in the plantation with a purpose, resolution, and desire that they might be admitted into church fellowship according to Christ.

     Article IV  That all the free planters held themselves bound to establish such civil order as might best conduce to the securing of the purity and peace of the ordinance to themselves, and their posterity according to God.  [pp. 177-178]

Exeter, New Hampshire (August 4, 1639), the colonists defined the purpose of government, stating:

     Considering with ourselves the holy will of God and our own necessity, that we should not
live without wholesome laws and civil government among us, of which we are altogether
destitute, do, in the name of Christ and in the sight of God, combine ourselves together to
erect and set up among us such governments as shall be, to our best discerning, agreeable
to the will of God…  [p.468]

Constitution of the New England Confederation (May 19, 1643), as covenanted together by the colonists of New Plymouth, New Haven, Massachusetts & Connecticut, stated:

 The Articles of Confederation between the plantations under the government of Massachusetts, the plantations under the government of New Plymouth, the plantations under the government
of Connecticut, and the government of New Haven with the plantations in combination therewith:
     Whereas we all came to these parts of America with the same end and aim, namely, to advance the Kingdome of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to injoy the liberties of the Gospell thereof with purities and peace, and for preserving and propagating the truth and liberties of the gospell.”  [p.466]

New Haven Colony Charter (April 3, 1644), adopted the rules for governing the courts of the New Haven Colony, stating:

    The judicial laws of God, as they were delivered by Moses… [are to] be a rule to all the courts in this jurisdiction…  [p.472]

Charter of Carolina (1663), was granted by King Charles II to Sir William Berkeley and the seven other lord proprietors, (initially granted by King Charles I to Sir Robert Heath in 1629).  The Charter stated:

     Being excited with a laudable and pious zeal for the propagation of the Christian faith… [they] have humbly besought leave of us… to transport and make an ample colony… unto a certain country… in the parts of America not yet cultivated or planted, and only inhabited by some barbarous people, who have no knowledge of Almighty God.  [p.481]

Charter of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations (July 8, 1663), was granted by King Charles II to Roger Williams.  In 1636, Williams left Massachusetts with his followers, for the purpose of religious freedom, and founded Providence Plantation.  It was there they established the First Baptist Church in America in 1639.  The colonial patent of 1644 was confirmed by the Royal Charter of 1663, which read:

     We submit our persons, lives, and estates unto our Lord Jesus Christ, the King of kings and Lord of lords and to all those perfect and most absolute laws of His given us in His Holy Word.

     That they, pursueing, with peaceable and loyall mindes, sober, serious and religious intentions, of godlie edifieing themselves, and one another, in the holie Christian ffaith and worshipp… together with the gaineing over and conversione of the poore ignorant Indian natives… a most flourishing civill state may stand and best bee maintained… grounded upon gospell principles.  [p.532]

Charter of Pennsylvania (1681), granted to William Penn by King Charles II of England, consisted of all the land between Maryland and New York.  Added to this the following year was the area of Delaware, which was given by the Duke of York.  William Penn had named it “Sylvania” meaning “woodland,” but King Cahrles changed it to “Pennsylvania.”  The goal of the plantation, as stated in the Charter, was:

     To reduce the savage natives by gentle and just manners to the Love of Civil Societe and Christian Religion.  [p.502]

Fundamental Constitutions of Pennsylvania (1682), written by William Penn, formulated the government of the colony, stating:

I Constitution.
     Considering that it is impossible that any People or Government should ever prosper, where men render not unto God, that which is God’s, as well as to Caesar, that which is Caesar’s;
   and also perceiving that disorders and Mischiefs that attend those places where force is
used in matters of faith and worship, and seriously reflecting upon the tenure of the new and Spiritual Government, and that both Christ did not use force and that he did expressly forbid it
in his holy Religion, as also that the Testimony of his blessed Messengers was, that the weapons of the Christian warfare were not Carnall but Spiritual…
     Therefore, in reverence to God the Father of lights and spirits, the Author as well as object
of all divine knowledge, faith and worship, I do hereby declare for me and myn and establish it
for the first fundamental of the Government of my Country;
     that every Person that does or shall reside therein shall have and enjoy the Free Possession of his or her faith and exercise of worship towards God; in such way and manner as every
Person shall in Conscience believe is most acceptable to God and so long as every such
Person useth not this Christian liberty to Licentiousness, that is to say to speak loosely and prophainly of God, Christ or Religion, or to Committ any evil in their Conversation [lifestyle], he
or she shall be protected in the enjoyment of the aforesaid Christian liberty by the civill Magistrate…  [pp.502-503]

Great Law of Pennsylvania (April 25, 1682), was the first legislative act of Pennsylvania.  It proclaimed:

     Whereas the glory of Almighty God and the good of mankind is the reason and the end of government, and, therefore government itself is a venerable ordinance of God… [there shall be established] laws as shall best preserve true Christian and civil liberty, in opposition to all unchristian, licentious, and unjust practices, whereby God may have his due, and Caesar his due, and the people their due, from tyranny and oppression.  [p.503]

Charter of Privileges of Pennsylvania (1701), granted by William Penn to the province
of Pennsylvania, stated:

     Almighty God being the only Lord of Conscience… and Author as well as object of all Divine Knowledge, faith and worship, who only doth enlighten the minds and persuade and convince the understandings of people, I do hereby grant and declare: that no person or persons, inhabiting in this province or territory who shall confess and acknowledge our Almighty God and Creator, Upholder and Ruler of the world; and profess him or themselves obliged to live quietly under civil government, shall in any case molested or prejudiced in his or her person or estate…
     And that all persons who also profess to believe in Jesus Christ, the Savior of the World, shall be capable to serve this government in any capacity, both legislatively or executively. 

     No people can be truly happy, though under the greatest enjoyment of civil liberties, if abridged of… their religious profession and worship…  [p.503]

The Committees of Correspondence… began sounding the cry across the Colonies
(ca. 1774):

No King but King Jesus.  [pp.58-59]

Continental Congress (September 1774), passed the Articles of Association, as recorded by the Secretary of Congress, Charles Thomson, in the Journals of Congress.  It stated:

     Article X.  That the late Act of Parliament for establishing… the French Laws in that
extensive country now called Quebec, is dangerous in an extreme degree to the Protestant Religion and to the civil rights and liberties of all America; and therefore as men and protestant Christians, we are indispensably obliged to take all proper measures for our security.  [p.139]

2.      Revolutionary War to signing of U.S. Constitution (1775 to 1787)

North Carolina:  Mecklenburg County Resolutions (May 20, 1775), reads:

     We hereby declare ourselves a free and independent people; are, and of a right ought to be,
a sovereign and self-governing association, under control of no power other than that of our God and the general government of Congress.  [p.482]

The Declaration of Independence (July 2, 1776), was approved in wording by the Continental Congress.  On July 4, 1776, the delegates voted to accept it and declare America’s independence from Great Britain.  On July 8, 1776, the Declaration was read in public for the first time, outside Independence Hall, Philadelphia, accompanied by the ringing of the Liberty Bell.  Only July 19, Congress ordered it engrossed in script on parchment, and on August 2, 1776, the members of Congress signed the parchment copy:

     When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitles them…
     We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.  That they are endowed by their Creator with certain [u]nalienable Rights, that among these are Life…
     We, Therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions…
     And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of [d]ivine
Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

     As the parchment copy of the Declaration of Independence was being signed by the members of the Continental Congress, August 2, 1776, Samuel Adams declared:

     We have this day restored the Sovereign to Whom all men ought to be obedient.  He reigns in heaven and from the rising to the setting of the sun, let His kingdom come.  [pp.200-1]

     The 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence paid a tremendous price for our freedoms:
5 were arrested by the British as traitors, 12 had their homes looted and burned by the enemy,
17 lost their fortunes, 2 lost sons in the Continental Army and 9 fought and died during the Revolutionary War.  [p.144]  

Note:  The Declaration of Independence is part of the organic law of the United States of America,
           United States Code Annotated  
           http://uscode.house.gov/usc.htm (search “Declaration of Independence”)

Constitution of the State of North Carolina (1776), stated:

     There shall be no establishment of any one religious church or denomination in this State in preference to any other.

     Article XXXII  That no person who shall deny the being of God, or the truth of the Protestant religion, or the divine authority of the Old or New Testaments, or who shall hold religious principles incompatible with the freedom and safety of the State, shall be capable of holding any office or place of trust or profit in the civil department within this State.  (until 1876)

In 1835 the word “Protestant” was changed to “Christian.”  [p.482]

Constitution of the State of Maryland (August 14, 1776), stated:

    Article XXXV  That no other test or qualification ought to be required, on admission to any office of trust or profit, than such oath of support and fidelity to this State and such oath of office, as shall be directed by this Convention, or the Legislature of this State, and a declaration of a belief in the Christian religion.”

     That, as it is the duty of every man to worship God is such a manner as he thinks most acceptable to him; all persons professing the Christian religion, are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty;
     wherefore no person ought by any law to be molested… on account of his religious practice; unless, under the color [pretense] of religion, any man shall disturb the good order, peace or safety of the State, or shall infringe the laws of morality… yet the Legislature may, in their discretion, lay a general and equal tax, for the support of the Christian religion. (until 1851)  [pp.420-421]

Articles of Confederation (November 15, 1777), were proposed and signed.  They constituted the government in America during the period between the end of the Revolutionary War and the writing of the Constitution.  The Articles were finally ratified by the states on March 1, 1781:

     … on the fifteenth day of November in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and seventy seven.

     And whereas it has pleased the Great Governor of the world to incline the hearts of the Legislatures we respectively represent in Congress, to approve of, and to authorize us to ratify the said articles of confederation and perpetual union.  [p.29]

Constitution of the State of South Carolina (1778), stated:

     Article XXXVIII.  That all persons and religious societies who acknowledge that there is one God, and a future state of rewards and punishments, and that God is publicly to be worshipped, shall be freely tolerated… That all denominations of Christian[s]… in this State, demeaning themselves peaceably and faithfully, shall enjoy equal religious and civil privileges.  [p.568]

The Constitution of the State of Massachusetts (1780) stated:

     The Governor shall be chosen annually; and no person shall be eligible to this office, unless, at the time of his election… he shall declare himself to be of the Christian religion.

     Chapter VI, Article I  [All persons elected to State office or to the Legislature must] make
and subscribe the following declaration, viz. “I, _______, do declare, that I believe the Christian religion, and have firm persuasion of its truth.”

     Part I, Article III  And every denomination of Christians, demeaning themselves peaceably, and as good subjects of the commonwealth, shall be equally under the protection of the law:
and no subordination of any sect or denomination to another shall ever be established by law.”  [p.429]

Continental Congress (September 10, 1782), in response to the need for Bibles which again arose, granted universal approval to print “a neat edition of the Holy Scriptures for the use of schools.”  … This edition has come to be known as the Bible of the Revolution.  The following Endorsement of Congress was printed on its front page.

     Whereupon, Resolved, That the United States in Congress assembled… recommended this edition of the Bible to the inhabitants of the United States, and hereby authorize [Robert Aitken] to publish this recommendation in the manner he shall think proper.  [pp.148-149]

Continental Congress (1783), ratified a peace treaty with Great Britain at the close of
the Revolutionary War.  The treaty began:

     In the name of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity.  It having pleased the Divine Providence
to dispose the hearts of the most serene and most potent Prince George the Third, by the
Grace of God, King of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, Defender of the Faith… and of the United States of America, to forget all past misunderstandings and differences…  [p.149]

Constitution of the State of New Hampshire (1784,1792), required senators and representatives to be of the:

     Protestant religion.  (in force until 1877)

The Constitution stipulated:

     Article I, Section VI.  And every denomination of Christians demeaning themselves quietly, and as good citizens of the state, shall be equally under the protection of the laws.  And no subordination
of any one sect of denomination to another, shall ever be established by law.  [p.469]

Constitution of the State of Vermont (1786), stated:

     Frame of Government,  Section 9.  And each member [of the Legislature], before he takes
his seat, shall make and subscribe the following declaration, viz: “I do believe in one God, the Creator and Governor of the universe, the rewarder of the good and punisher of the wicked. 
And I do acknowledge the Scripture of the Old and New Testament to be given by divine inspiration, and own and profess the [Christian] religion. And no further or other religious test shall ever, hereafter, be required of any civil officer or magistrate in this State.”  [p.623]

The Constitution of the United States(September 17, 1787), reads:

     Article I, Section 7, Paragraph 2:  If any bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted)…

     Done in Convention, by the unanimous consent of the States present, the seventeenth day
of September, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty seven.

     [Of note is the fact that virtually every one of the 55 writers and signers of the United States Constitution of 1787, were members of Christian denominations:  29 were Anglicans, 16 to 18 were Calvinists, 2 were Methodists, 2 were Lutherans, … [and] 1 lapsed Quaker and sometimes Anglican.]  [p. 180]

Note:  There were also two who were Roman Catholic, and one was an open Deist  Dr. Benjamin Franklin who attended every kind of Christian worship, called for public prayer, and contributed to
all denominations.

What did the Constitution mean in 1787 by “no religious test” ?   (Steve Lefemine)

     The very last sentence of the last substantive article (Article VI.) of the Constitution states:

     The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial
Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

1)  The US Constitution went into effect June 21, 1788 as New Hampshire became the ninth
    State to ratify, as required by Article VII.
2) The first ten Amendments (the Bill of Rights) were ratified effective December 15, 1791.
3)  As can be seen by study of the numerous state constitutions which contained statements
    requiring governors, legislators, and others appointed or elected to public office to make
    declarations as to their belief in Protestant Christianity, the divine inspiration of both the
    Old and New Testaments, and / or a future state of rewards and punishments, some after
    1791 and into the 1800’s, the last sentence of Article VI. of the US Constitution did not   
    preclude such required declarations of belief in general Christianity by officials of civil
    government in the states.
4)   The term “religion” in 1787 meant “the Duty which we owe our Creator, and the Manner of
    discharging it,..”  It was to “be directed only by Reason and Convictions, not by Force or
    Violence; and therefore all Men [were] equally entitled to the free exercise of Religion,  
    according to the Dictates of Conscience; and [it was] “the mutual Duty of all to practice
   Christian Forbearance, Love, and Charity towards each other.”  (Virginia Bill of Rights,
    June 12, 1776) [pp.627-628]). 
5)   The Virginia Statute of Religious Liberty (January 16, 1786) stated:  “Well aware that
     Almighty God hath created the mind free; that all attempts to influence it by temporal
     punishments or burdens, or by civil incapacitations… are a departure from the plan of the
     Holy Author of our religion.” [emphasis added]  [p.628]
6)   In 1787, the term “religion” included the various forms of Christianity expressed by the
     different Christian denominations.  The phrase, “no religious test” in 1787 meant there
     would be “no denominational test,” as we would understand it today in 2004; no test as
    to whether a man was a Presbyterian, Baptist, or Anglican; however, “no religious test”
     did not mean any exclusion of a required declaration of Christian beliefs for men aspiring
    to office in civil government, as can be seen by examination of the early state constitutions.
7)   David Barton states, “Our current understanding of what constitutes a religious test was
    considerably different from that of early Americans, as demonstrated by this excerpt from
    the 1796 Tennessee constitution:”

           Article VIII, Section II. No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of
           rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this State.

           Article XI, Section IV. That no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification
           to any office or public trust under this state.

           “A fixed set of religious beliefs for an office holder is prescribed in Article VIII, and then
           a religious test is prohibited in Article XI.  Obviously, in their view, requiring a belief in
           God and in future rewards and punishments was not a religious test.

             “… Prescribing a requirement professing ‘I, ________, do profess faith in God the
             Father, and in Jesus Christ His only Son, and in the Holy Ghost, one God, blessed
            for evermore; and I do acknowledge the holy scriptures of the Old and New Testament
          to be given by divine inspiration [DELAWARE, 1776]’ was not considered a religious
           test.”

             [The Myth of Separation, David Barton, Wallbuilder Press, 1991]

3.      U.S. Constitution to War Between the States (1787 to 1865)

Constitution of the State of New Hampshire (1784,1792), required senators and representatives to be of the:

     Protestant religion.  (in force until 1877)

The Constitution stipulated:

     Article I, Section VI.  And every denomination of Christians demeaning themselves quietly, and as good citizens of the state, shall be equally under the protection of the laws.  And no subordination of any one sect of denomination to another, shall ever be established by law.  [p.469]

The Constitution of the State of Delaware (until 1792) stated:

     Article XXII  Every person who shall be chosen a member of either house, or appointed to any office or place of trust… shall… make and subscribe the following declaration, to wit:
“I, _______, do profess faith in God the Father, and in Jesus Christ His only Son, and in the
Holy Ghost, one God, blessed forevermore; I do acknowledge the holy scriptures of the Old
and New Testament to be given by divine inspiration.”  [p.203]

Constitution of the State of Tennessee (1796), stated:

     Article VIII, Section II.  No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this State.  [pp.580-581]

John Jay (1745-1829), was the first Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, having been appointed by President George Washington.  He was a Founding Father,
a member of the First and Second Continental Congresses… He was very instrumental in causing the Constitution to be ratified by writing the Federalist Papers, along with James Madison and Alexander Hamilton.

On October 12, 1816, John Jay admonished:

     Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as
the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.  [p.318]  [emphasis added]
         

Constitution of the State of Mississippi (1817), stated:

     No person who denies the being of God or a future state of rewards and punishments shall hold any office in the civil department of the State.  [p.451]

The Constitution of the State of Connecticut (until 1818), contained the wording:

    The People of this State… by the Providence of God… hath the sole and exclusive right of governing themselves as a free, sovereign, and independent State… and forasmuch as the free fruition of such liberties and privileges as humanity, civility, and Christianity call for, as is due to every man in his place and proportion… hath ever been, and will be the tranquility and stability
of Churches and Commonwealth; and the denial thereof, the disturbances, if not the ruin of both.  [p.179]

Congress of the United States of America (1822), ratified in both the House and Senate of the United States, along with Great Britain and Ireland, the Convention for Indemnity under Award of Emperor of Russia as to the True Construction of the First Article of the Treaty of December 24, 1814.  It begins with these words:

     In the name of the Most Holy and Indivisible Trinity.  [pp.167-168]

Definition of RELIGION. 

RELIGION.  Includes a belief in the being and perfections of God, in the revelation of his will to man, and in man’s obligation to obey his commands, in a state of reward and punishment, and in man’s accountableness to God; and also true godliness or piety of life, with the practice of all moral duties… the practice of moral duties without a belief in a divine lawgiver, and without reference to his will or commands, is not religion.  [Webster’s 1828 Dictionary]

Note:  David Barton states, “Our current understanding of what constitutes a religious test was
           considerably different from that of early Americans, as demonstrated by this excerpt from
           the 1796 Tennessee constitution:”

                Article VIII, Section II. No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of
                rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this State.

                Article XI, Section IV. That no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification
                to any office or public trust under this state.

           “A fixed set of religious beliefs for an office holder is prescribed in Article VIII, and then a
            religious test is prohibited in Article XI.  Obviously, in their view, requiring a belief in God
            and in future rewards and punishments was not a religious test.

           “… Prescribing a requirement professing ‘I, ________, do profess faith in God the Father,
           and in Jesus Christ His only Son, and in the Holy Ghost, one God, blessed for evermore;
           and I do acknowledge the holy scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be given by
           divine inspiration [DELAWARE, 1776]’ was not considered a religious test.”

           [The Myth of Separation, David Barton, Wallbuilder Press, 1991]

Constitution of the State of North Carolina (1776), stated:

     There shall be no establishment of any one religious church or denomination in this State in preference to any other.

     Article XXXII  That no person who shall deny the being of God, or the truth of the Protestant religion, or the divine authority of the Old or New Testaments, or who shall hold religious principles incompatible with the freedom and safety of the State, shall be capable of holding any office or place of trust or profit in the civil department within this State.  (until 1876)

In 1835 the word “Protestant” was changed to “Christian.”  [p.482]

Congress of the United States of America (January 19, 1853), as part of a Congressional investigation, records the report of Mr. Badger of the Senate Judiciary Committee:

     The [First Amendment] clause speaks of “an establishment of religion.” What is meant by that expression? It referred, without doubt, to that establishment which existed in the mother-country… endowment at the public expense, peculiar privileges to its members, or
disadvantages or penalties upon those who should reject its doctrines or belong to other communities,– such law would be a “law respecting an establishment of religion…”
     They intended, by this amendment, to prohibit “an establishment of religion” such as the English Church presented, or any thing like it. But they had no fear or jealousy of religion itself, nor did they wish to see us an irreligious people…
     They did not intend to spread over all the public authorities and the whole public action of the nation the dead and revolting spectacle of atheistic apathy. Not so had the battles of the Revolution been fought and the deliberations of the Revolutionary Congress been conducted.

     In the law, Sunday is a “dies non,”… The executive departments, the public establishments, are all closed on Sundays; on that day neither House of Congress sits…
     Sunday, the Christian Sabbath [sic], recognized and respected by all the departments of the
Government…

     Here is a recognition by law, and by universal usage, not only of a Sabbath, but of the Christian Sabbath [sic], in exclusion of the Jewish or Mohammedan Sabbath… the recognition
of the Christian Sabbath [sic] [by the Constitution] is complete and perfect.

     We are a Christian people… not because the law demands it, not to gain exclusive benefits
or to avoid legal disabilities, but from choice and education; and in a land thus universally Christian, what is to be expected, what desired, but that we shall pay due regard to Christianity.  [pp.168-169]

Congress of the United States of America (March 27, 1854), receives the report of
Mr. Meacham of the House Committee on the Judiciary:

     What is an establishment of religion? It must have a creed, defining what a man must believe; it must have rites and ordinances, which believers must observe; it must have ministers of defined qualification, to teach the doctrines and administer the rites; it must have tests for the submissive and penalties for the non-conformist.  There never was as established religion without all these…
     At the adoption of the Constitution… every State… provided as regularly for the support of the Church as for the support of the Government… [emphasis added]
     Down to the Revolution, every colony did sustain religion in some form. It was deemed peculiarly proper that the religion of liberty should be upheld by a free people.
     Had the people, during the Revolution, had a suspicion of any attempt to war against Christianity, that Revolution would have been strangled in its cradle.  [emphasis added]
     At the time of the adoption of the Constitution and the amendments, the universal sentiment was that Christianity should be encouraged, not any one sect [denomination]. Any attempt to level and discard all religion would have been viewed with universal indignation. The object was not to substitute Judaism or Mohammedism, or infidelity, but to prevent rivalry among the [Christian] sects to the exclusion of others.  [emphasis added]
     It [Christianity] must be considered as the foundation on which the whole structure rests. Laws will not have permanence or power without the sanction of religious sentiment, —  without a firm belief that there is a Power above us that will reward our virtues and punish our vices.  [emphasis added]
     In this age there can be no substitute for Christianity; that, in its general principles, is the great conservative element on which we must rely for the purity and permanence of free institutions.  That was the religion of the founders of the republic, and they expected it to remain the religion of their descendants.  There is a great and very prevalent error on this subject in the opinion that those who organized this Government did not legislate on religion. [emphasis added]  [pp.169-170]

Congress of the United States of America (May 1854), passed a resolution in the House which declared:

     The great vital and conservative element in our system is the belief of our people in the pure doctrines and divine truths of the gospel of Jesus Christ.  [emphasis added]  [p.170]

The Constitution of the State of Massachusetts (through 1862) included:

     The right of the people of this commonwealth to… invest their Legislature with power to authorize and require, the several towns, parishes, precincts, and other bodies-politic or
religious societies to make suitable provision, at their own expense, for the institution of the public worship of God and for the support and maintenance of public Protestant teachers of
piety, religion, and morality in all cases where such provision shall not be made voluntary.  [pp.429-430]

Congress of the United States of America (March 3, 1863), passed this resolution in the United States Senate:

     Resolved, That devoutly recognizing the supreme authority and just government of Almighty God in all the affairs of men and nations, and sincerely believing that no people, however great
in numbers and resources, or however strong in the justness of their cause, can prosper without His favor, and at the same time deploring the national offenses which have provoked His reighteous judgment, yet encouraged in this day of trouble by the assurance of His Word, to seek Him for succor according to His appointed way, through Jesus Christ, the Senate of the United States does hereby request the President of the United States, by his proclamation, to designate and set apart a day for national prayer and humiliation. 

     On March 30, 1863, President Abraham Lincoln issued a historic Proclamation Appointing a National Fast Day:

     Whereas, the Senate of the United States devoutly recognizing the Supreme Authority and just Government of Almighty God in all the affairs of men and of nations, has, by a resolution, requested the President to designate and set apart a day for national prayer and humiliation:
     And whereas, it is the duty of nations as well as of men to own their dependence upon the
overruling power of God, to confess their sins and transgressions in humble sorrow yet with assured
hope that genuine repentance will lead to mercy and pardon, and to recognize the sublime truth, announced in the Holy Scriptures and proven by all history: that those nations only are blessed whose God is the Lord:  [emphasis added]
     And, insomuch as we know that, by His divine law, nations like individuals are subjected to punishments and chastisement in this world, may we not justly fear that the awful calamity of civil war, which now desolates the land may be but a punishment inflicted upon us for our presumptuous sins to the needful end of our national reformation as a whole people? [emp. add.]
     We have been the recipients of the choicest bounties of Heaven.  We have been preserved these many years in peace and prosperity.  We have grown in numbers, wealth and power as no other nation has ever grown.
     But we have forgotten God. [emp. add.] We have forgotten the gracious Hand which preserved us in peace, and multiplied and enriched and strengthened us; and we have vainly imagined, in the deceitfulness of our hearts, that all these blessings were produced by some superior wisdom and virtue of our own.
     Intoxicated by unbroken success, we have become too self-sufficient to feel the necessity of redeeming and preserving grace, too proud to pray to the God that made us!
     It behooves us then to humble ourselves before the offended Power, to confess our national sins and to pray for clemency and forgiveness.

     Now, therefore, in compliance with the request and fully concurring in the view of the Senate,
I do, by this my proclamation, designate and set apart Thursday, the 30thday of April, 1863, as a day of national humiliation, fasting and prayer.
     And I do hereby request all the people to abstain on that day from their ordinary secular pursuits, and to unite, at their several places of public worship and their respective homes,
in keeping the day holy to the Lord and devoted to the humble discharge of the religious duties proper to that solemn occasion.  [emphasis added]
     All this being done, in sincerity and truth, let us then rest humbly in the hope authorized by the Divine teachings, that the united cry of the nation will be heard on high and answered with blessing no less than the pardon of our national sins and the restoration of our now divided and suffering country to its former happy condition of unity and peace.  [emphasis added]
     In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed. By the President: Abraham Lincoln.  [pp.170-172]

Congress of the United States of America (October 3, 1863), as proclaimed by President Abraham Lincoln, passed an Act of Congress designating an annual National Day of Thanksgiving:

     I do, therefore, invite my fellow citizens in every part of the United States… to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November next as a day of Thanksgiving and Praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the heavens… [it is] announced in the Holy Scriptures and proven by all history, that those nations are blessed whose God is the Lord… [emphasis added]  It has seemed to me fit and proper that God should be solemnly, reverently and gratefully acknowledged, as with one heart and one voice, by the whole American people.  [p.172]

Congress of the United States of America (March 3, 1865), approved Salmon Portland Chase’s instruction to the U.S. mint.  As the Secretary of the Treasury under Abraham Lincoln, Chase instructed the mint to prepare a “device” to inscribe U.S. coins with
the motto:

     In God We Trust  [p.172]

4.      Post-War Between the States (1865 to 1982)

Constitution of the State of North Carolina (1776), stated:

     There shall be no establishment of any one religious church or denomination in this State in preference to any other.

     Article XXXII  That no person who shall deny the being of God, or the truth of the Protestant religion, or the divine authority of the Old or New Testaments, or who shall hold religious principles incompatible with the freedom and safety of the State, shall be capable of holding any office or place of trust or profit in the civil department within this State.  (until 1876)

In 1835 the word “Protestant” was changed to “Christian.”  [p.482]

Constitution of the State of New Hampshire (1784,1792), required senators and representatives to be of the:

     Protestant religion.  (in force until 1877)

The Constitution stipulated:

     Article I, Section VI.  And every denomination of Christians demeaning themselves quietly, and as good citizens of the state, shall be equally under the protection of the laws.  And no subordination of any one sect of denomination to another, shall ever be established by law.  [p.469]

United States Supreme Court (February 29, 1892), in the case of Church of the Holy Trinity v. United States, 143 US 457-458, 465-471, 36 L ed 226, Justice Josiah Brewer rendered the high court’s decision:

     Our laws and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of mankind.  It is impossible that it should be otherwise; and in this sense and to this extent our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian.
     No purpose of action against religion can be imputed to any legislation, state or national, because this is a religious people.  This is historically true.  From the discovery of this continent to the present hour, there is a single voice making this affirmation.
     The commission to Christopher Columbus… [recited] that “it is hoped that by God’s assistance some of the continents and islands in the ocean will be discovered…”
     The first colonial grant made to Sir Walter Raleigh in 1584… and the grant authorizing him to enact statutes for the government of the proposed colony provided that they “be not against the true Christian faith…”
     The first charter of Virginia, granted by King James I in 1606… commenced the grant in these words: “… in propagating of Christian Religion to such People as yet live in Darkness…”
     Language of similar import may be found in the subsequent charters of that colony… in 1609 and 1611; and the same is true of the various charters granted to the other colonies. In language more or less emphatic is the establishment of the Christian religion declared to be one of the purposes of the grant.  The celebrated compact made by the Pilgrims in the Mayflower, 1620, recites: “Having undertaken for the Glory of God, and advancement of the Christian faith… a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts of Virginia…”
     The fundamental orders of Connecticut, under which a provisional government was instituted in 1638-1639, commence with this declaration: “… And well knowing where a people are gathered together the word of God requires that to maintain the peace and union… there should be an orderly and decent government established according to God… to maintain and preserve the liberty and purity of the gospel of our Lord Jesus which we now profess… of the said gospel [which] is now practiced amongst us.”
     In the charter of privileges granted by William Penn to the province of Pennsylvania, in 1701, it is recited: “… no people can be truly happy, though under the greatest enjoyment of civil liberties, if abridged of… their religious profession and worship…”
     Coming nearer to the present time, the Declaration of Independence recognizes the presence of the Divine in human affairs in these words: 
     “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights… appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions… And for the support of this Declaration, with firm reliance on the Protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.”
     … We find everywhere a clear recognition of the same truth… because of a general recognition of this truth [that we are a Christian nation], the question has seldom been presented to the courts…
     There is no dissonance in these declarations.  There is a universal language pervading them all, having one meaning; they affirm and reaffirm that this is a religious nation. These are not individual sayings, declarations of private persons: they are organic utterances; they speak the voice of the entire people.
     While because of a general recognition of this truth the question has seldom been presented to the courts, yet we find that in Updegraph v. The Commonwealth, it was decided that, Christianity, general Christianity, is, and always has been, a part of the common law… not Christianity with an established church… but Christianity with liberty of conscience to all men.
     And in The People v. Ruggles, Chancellor Kent, the great commentator on American law, speaking as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of New York, said:
     “The people of this State, in common with the people of this country, profess the general doctrines of Christianity, as the rule of their faith and practice… We are a Christian people, and the morality of the country is deeply engrafted upon Christianity, and not upon the doctrines or worship of those imposters [other religions].”
     And in the famous case of Vidal v. Girard’s Executors, this Court… observed:
     “It is also said, and truly, that the Christian religion is a part of the common law…”
     If we pass beyond these matters to a view of American life as expressed by its laws, its business, its customs and its society, we find everywhere a clear recognition of the same truth.  Among other matters note the following: The form of oath universally prevailing, concluding with an appeal to the Almighty; the customs of opening sessions of all deliberative bodies and most conventions with prayer; the prefatory words of all wills, “In the name of God, amen”; the laws respecting the observance of the Sabbath, with the general cessation of all secular business, and the closing of courts, legislatures, and other similar public assemblies on that day; the churches and church organizations which abound in every city, town and hamlet; the multitude of charitable organizations existing everywhere under Christian auspices; the gigantic missionary associations, with general support, and aiming to establish Christian missions in every quarter of the globe.
     These, and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a Christian nation… we find everywhere a clear recognition of the same truth.

     The happiness of a people and the good order and preservation of civil government essentially depend upon piety, religion and morality.

     Religion, morality, and knowledge [are] necessary to good government, the preservation of liberty, and the happiness of mankind.  [pp.599-601]

Arkansas Supreme Court (1905), was quoted by Supreme Court Justice David J. Brewer in his lecture, entitled, “The United States a Christian Nation.”  The opinion they rendered in the case of Shover v. The State, 10 English, 263, included:

     This system of religion (Christianity) is recognized as constituting a part and parcel of the common law.  [p.28]

Congress of the United States of America (March 3, 1931), adopted The Star Spangled Banner as our National Anthem (36 U.S.C. Sec. 170).  Written by Francis Scott Key, September 14, 1814, at the Battle of Fort McHenry during the War of 1812.  The fourth verse is as follows:

     O! thus be it ever when free men shall stand
     Between their loved home and the war’s desolation;
     Blest with vict’ry and peace, may the Heav’n-rescued land
     Praise the Pow’r that hath made and preserved us a nation!
     Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just;
     And this be our motto, “In God is our trust!”
     And the star spangled banner in triumph shall wave
     O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

Congress of the United States of America (July 20, 1956), by Joint Resolution, adopted Rep. Charles E. Bennett’s (FL) bill providing that the official national motto of the United States of America be:

     In God We Trust  [p.175]

Congress of the United States of America (October 4, 1982), by a Joint Resolution of
both the Senate and House of Representatives of the 97th Congress, declared 1983
the Year of the Bible:

     Public Law 97-280.  Whereas that renewing our knowledge of and faith in God through Holy Scripture can strengthen us as a nation and a people… The Bible, the Word of God, has made a unique contribution in shaping the United States as a distinctive and blessed nation… Deeply held religious convictions springing from the Holy Scriptures led to the early settlement of our Nation… Biblical teaching inspired concepts of civil government that are contained in our Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States.  [p.175]

Date Unknown

Constitution of the State of Pennsylvania stated:

     Frame of Government,  Section 10.  And each member [of the legislature], before he takes his seat, shall make and subscribe the following declaration, viz: “I do believe in one God, the Creator and Governour of the universe, the rewarder of the good and punisher of the wicked,
and I do acknowledge the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be given by Divine inspiration.”  [p.504]

___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________

America’s God and Country Encyclopedia Of Quotations, by William J. Federer, 1994
FAME Publishing, Inc.
820 S. MacArthur Blvd., Suite 105-220
Coppell, Texas  75019-4214
1 (800) 404-FAME

June 16, 2004

Steve Lefemine is a pro-life missionary and the director of Columbia Christians for Life in Columbia, SC. He may be reached for comment here.
 

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

“No King But Jesus!”

 David Alan Black

We are going to war. Our war machine is in place. The only thing lacking is a nod from the White House. The 222,000 American, British, and Australian troops massed in the Gulf are considered ample for combat. Yes, we are going to war, despite the fact that serious moral, legal, political, and strategic questions about the war remain.

You can forget the “unification efforts” of the U.S. and Britain as they prepare for a final effort at the United Nations to win international support through a second resolution. “The day of freedom is drawing near,” said Mr. Bush on Thursday. It is the will of the Almighty to liberate the people of Iraq, he proclaimed.

Opponents of the war are now being called wimps. Patriotism, as usual, is being defined as “My country, Right or Wrong.” Even war heroes are being called cowards, including General Anthony Zinni, retired Marine commander Joseph P. Hoar, and the most decorated soldier of the Vietnam War era, Colonel David Hackworth.

The will of the Almighty?

Protesters as cowards?

Patriotism = Nationalism?

If you think you’ve got nothing to worry about, you’d better think again. I love my country, but I am deeply concerned for her future.

As I have said elsewhere, I will support a war with Iraq if the President asks for and gets a congressional declaration of war, as he is required to do (note: this is not a recommendation) by the U.S. Constitution, which he swore to preserve, protect, and defend. Lacking such a declaration, Bush’s war will be an illegal and unconstitutional usurpation of power. As long as Americans remain intent on ignoring the bedrock document of American political history, Chuck Baldwin’s words will ring true: “Patriotism is more than waving a flag and beating war drums. Patriotism involves reverence and submission to the laws and principles contained in our Constitution and in our heritage. It does not mean blindly following a politician—any politician! Patriotism also demands that the American people hold their elected leaders accountable to the Constitution.”

As we contemplate the arrogation of power taking place in Washington today, I am wondering whether we need to revive the watchword of the American Revolution:

“No King But Jesus!”

February 24, 2003

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

No ID For Me!

 David Alan Black 

The mighty propaganda choir is at it again, this time singing the praises of our beloved government’s latest “security” measure, the national ID card. When I heard this, all I could think of was, “Will they never learn?”

This latest affront to the Constitution (a document which, by the way, I hold very dear) is clearly pathological. “Pathological” because it is based less on ideology than on a virulent anti-republicanism that has its roots deep in the psyche. And they think we’re crazy?

Don’t expect a hue and cry from the media. The major news outlets will do nothing more than parrot the official U.S. line. Only on the margins of the media – and especially on the good ol’ Internet (a medium which, by the way, I hold very dear) – will journalists dare speak the obvious. A delightful case in point is Devvy Kidd.

Dissent clearly threatens Bush & Co.’s propaganda parade. It reminds me of what O’Brien of the Inner Party told the hapless Winston Smith in Orwell’s 1984: “Whatever the Party holds to be truth, is truth. It is impossible to see reality except by looking through the eyes of the Party.”

Well, I don’t buy it. Say what you will, but I’m with Devvy on this one. Why should I allow the government to bind me with the chains of an unconstitutional, Nazi-inspired tactic? My message to George W. Bush? “Mr. President, we have a Constitution, which says we will abide by the rule of law. When I see my government moving decisively away from this I have no other choice as an American citizen than to stand up and speak out. And I’m being patriotic in doing so!”

Folks, isn’t it time we did just that and took a real stand – the kind of stand that the apostles took in Acts 5? I mean, too many of us are Christian in name only. The noun needs to become an adjective. So let’s stop pretending. Let’s be Christian Christians – men and women who boldly proclaim No King But King Jesus! God never intended His people to be sheeple. He wants us to be stalwarts.

It is a cheap Christianity that refuses to pay the price of obedience to Christ when Caesar beckons us to take the easy way out. Are we going to wait until all the horses are running down the street before we close the barn doors? Yes, I realize that true discipleship may cost us everything we have. But – good grief! – there comes a time when we have to cry out, “Enough is enough already!”

December 15, 2004

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com. He is the author of Why I Stopped Listening to Rush and numerous other books.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

Nigusse

 Becky Lynn Black  

As you know, the work God has given to us in Ethiopia is not organized by polity, boards of directors, or government forms (e.g., 501c3). We have tried hard to keep first things first. And one of the first things is to allow the work to flow according to the leading of the Holy Spirit. We have had many tornadoes across our land in recent weeks. One thing about tornadoes…they are massive wind that is unpredictable. When Jesus was speaking with Nicodemus, He compared the action of wind to the movement of the Spirit. Specifically, we cannot tell where it is coming from, nor where it is going, but we can see the results of it. Given this nature of the Spirit, we have not felt a peace about locking the Ethiopia work into a set of rules.

From time to time someone will ask us, “What is your 5-year and 10-year plan?” Our answer is simple: “To be obedient.” And so regular prayer and constant listening, coupled with reasonableness, has been the manner in which the work has been done. This seems, as best we can understand it, the pattern demonstrated by our Lord Jesus and the apostle Paul in their ministries, even though it is very contrary to our Western way of organizing the Holy Spirit right out of the work.

Over the past 7 years, if you have been following the work since 2004, you know that God has appointed Bible distribution, clinic establishment and operation, sponsoring of evangelists, facilitating personal crisis situations, erecting buildings for Christians to gather, taking teams from the U.S., distributing eyeglasses, sponsoring for education, and many other works. None of these works is “sacred.” Some have continued since their inauguration; some have had their season. In all things we have tried to follow the leading of the Spirit, both to our hearts and to the church elders in Ethiopia and those involved in leadership this side of the Atlantic.

The message of Scripture is clear. Kingdom work is under the headship of the Lord of the Harvest. In the Kingdom, some plant, others water, and others gather in the harvest. The focus for the servant in the Kingdom is obedience; the focus is not results.

By the grace of God, many times He has allowed us to witness a great spiritual harvest. Sometimes this harvest is resistant, hardened people coming to Christ. Sometimes this harvest issues in more dedicated Christians who are following our example of sacrifice. Sometimes this harvest is increased knowledge of the Way. At other times, God has withheld the harvest of our work for a later time; someone else will harvest what we have sown and watered. And, of course, some of what we have done has not borne fruit at all; it has fallen on stony soil, or thistles have choked it. All of this is in the hands of the Lord of the Harvest. Our role is simply obedience to do the work He has appointed, in the field He has appointed, at the time He has appointed.

With regards to helping the Church in Ethiopia to grow understanding the Lord’s Way, we have sponsored 3 men for “advanced” and “formal” Bible education. Also, we have done much on-site teaching of the church elders and evangelists; this teaching was done by ourselves and our team members. Finally, we have initiated a Rural Bible Teaching program, where Bible teaching in the Ethiopian language is taught semi-weekly over loudspeakers and via hand-players in the rural villages.

Beginning last summer, we began to sense that God wanted us to bring one of the church leaders to the USA to study under Dave in a form of intense discipleship and formal education. This young man is Nigusse. If you are on our email prayer list, you are familiar with Nigusse already. He has assisted us in our work in many ways. Here he translates for Becky:

And here he accompanies Dave into a rural Muslim village:

Nigusse was born and raised in Alaba. His father died about 10 years ago, and his mother died a few months ago of cerebral malaria.

He has several sisters and a couple of brothers who also live in Alaba. From a young age Nigusse has followed the Lord, and he has always wanted to help God’s church through teaching. He attended the rural Bible school and then we sponsored him (along with others) to attend the Evangelical Theological College (ETC) in Addis Ababa, the capital of Ethiopia. This is a fully-accredited college in English. Nigusse graduated in 2006 with the Academic Excellence Award.

Unlike many Ethiopians, Nigusse kept his commitment to his sponsors and returned to minister in Alaba. Many times he was invited to a place of ministry that was easier and contained more perks, but for the past 5 years Nigusse has worked hard and been faithful in the difficult work of the Alaba church. Currently he oversees the entire work, including the Bible School, the evangelists in the rural churches, and the work of the mother church in Alaba Town. The past 6 months have brought renewed persecution of the believers in the rural Alaba towns, and Nigusse has been on the forefront of dealing with the court and the Muslim leaders who perpetrated the violence. For many weeks he has been hunted and has needed to pay attention to his own personal safety by always staying in the company of fellow Christians. Here he is with one of the Alaba evangelists he rescued from the men who tried to kill him.

Since July, 2010, Dave and I have been praying about investing more in Nigusse’s education. In December we sensed that this was the will of the Lord Jesus, so in early February we began the process of application to attend SEBTS (Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, where Dave teaches). During the whole process we have told the Lord, “If this is not Your will, please close the door.” Instead of closing the door, He has opened it very wide. The seminary has offered Nigusse a full-tuition scholarship, and all the necessary hurdles have been overcome. The last remaining item is obtaining the Student Visa from the American Embassy in Ethiopia. Nigusse will have this interview in a couple weeks and, Lord willing, he arrives here in North Carolina on July 29th to begin the Fall Semester.

As I have been working and facilitating all the details of his coming to SEBTS these past months, I have felt that I was giving birth. It has been a time of great stress, wonder, praise, petition, grace, and amazement. And it is with great joy that we anticipate the fulfillment of this work.

Nigusse’s focus over the next 3 years will be 2-fold: intensive discipleship by us, and obtaining the M.Div degree in Advanced Biblical Studies. The first item (discipleship) is the model of Jesus and Paul, both of whom took others with them as they ministered. He will live in our home, eat with us, go with us for ministry, etc. The second item will give him the piece of paper (diploma) that opens a wider door to help the Lord’s church in Ethiopia. The widest door, of course, is opened with the paper that says “Ph.D.,” and perhaps that is in the future. But for now, we will focus on the Masters degree.

Some additional facts: 

·        The financial outlay for living expenses, travel, etc., will be funded by Dave and me; these expenses will not be taken from the gifts of God’s people to the Ethiopia work, unless specifically designated as such. So this sponsorship does not diminish the help we are currently giving to the rural churches in Alaba and Burji.

·        Prior to beginning the admissions procedure, we discussed the matter fully and openly with the Alaba church elders. They have unanimously given their full and unconditional consent and support to this work.

·        Nigusse is now preparing others to fill his shoes in the Alaba work. And while he is here, he will communicate by phone to assist them from here as he is able. So his involvement in the Alaba church continues.

·        Nigusse has committed himself to return to Ethiopia to work in strengthening the church there upon his graduation. In the past, he has proven his faithfulness, and we trust the Lord to bring about a good result from this work.

·        It is possible that after he gets his Masters degree, we will continue on with his Doctorate, but that issue is not settled at this point.

Will you pray with us for Nigusse? All ministry has danger. And the primary danger of this work is that the Evil One will entice Nigusse with the materialism and comfort of the American lifestyle. While recognizing this danger, we are trusting the Lord to complete the work of grace that He has begun in the life of Nigusse, and we thank Him for allowing us to have a small place in that work.

Rejoicing,

BeckyLynn

Nigusse rubs Papa B’s feet after a grueling day of ministry.  

In 2008 Becky spent 10 weeks in Ethiopiaassisting a woman named Aberesh with her pregnancy. Aberesh had already lost 5 babies, four in utero, when Becky moved her to the capital, rented an apartment for her, found her a doctor, and monitored her blood pressure, sodium intake, and diet. Here Nigusse helps in the kitchen.

 Aberesh gave birth to a healthy baby boy, naming him after our son Nathan. Here Becky and Nigusse rejoice over the news of Nathan’s birth.

Celebrating with Tilahun, Nathan’s father, in a restaurant in Addis.

Nigusse with Becky’s mother Betty Lapsley at his graduation from ETC.  

Nigusse translating for Becky in the Alaba Town Church.  

May 15, 2011

Back to daveblackonline