Category Archives: Commentary

Mercy Otis Warren – “Conscience of the American Revolution”

Mercy Otis Warren – “Conscience of the American Revolution”

Mercy Otis WarrenAmerican Minute with Bill Federer

Mercy Otis Warren was called “The Conscience of the American Revolution.”

She was wife of Massachusetts House Speaker James Warren, sister of patriot James Otis, and she corresponded with Franklin, Jefferson, Hamilton and John Adams.

In 1805, Mercy Otis Warren published a 3 volume History of the Rise, Progress and Termination of the American Revolution.

In Observations on the new Constitution, and on the Federal and State Conventions, 1788, Mercy Otis Warren wrote:

“The immediate gift of the Creator obliges every one…to resist the first approaches of tyranny, which at this day threaten to sweep away the rights for which the brave Sons of America have fought…

“Behold the insidious efforts of the partisans of arbitrary power…to lock the strong chains of domestic despotism on a country…”

“Save us from anarchy on the one hand, and the jaws of tyranny on the other…”

“It has been observed…that ‘the virtues and vices of a people’ when a revolution happens in their government, are the measure of the liberty or slavery they ought to expect.”

Mercy Otis Warren continued:

“And when asked, what is become of the rich produce of their farms – they may answer in the hapless style of the Man of La Mancha, ‘The steward of my Lord has seized and sent it to Madrid.’

Or, in the more literal language…Government requires that the collectors of the revenue should transmit it to the Federal City.”

In Observations on the new Constitution, 1788, Mercy Otis Warren stated:

“Monarchy is a species of government fit only for a people too much corrupted by luxury, avarice, and a passion for pleasure, to have any love for their country…

Monarchy is…by no means calculated for a nation that is…tenacious of their liberty — animated with a disgust to tyranny — and inspired with the generous feeling of patriotism.”

Mercy Otis Warren concluded:

“The origin of all power is in the people, and they have an incontestable right to check the creatures of their own creation.”

Mercy Otis Warren and Abigail Adams were two of the most influential women of the Revolutionary War era.

Abigail Adams, wife of the 2nd President and mother of the 6th President, wrote to Mercy Otis Warren on NOVEMBER 5, 1775:

“A patriot without religion in my estimation is as great a paradox as an honest Man without the fear of God. Is it possible that he whom no moral obligations bind, can have any real Good Will towards Men?”

Abigail Adams continued in her letter to Mercy Otis Warren:

“Can he be a patriot who, by an openly vicious conduct, is undermining the very bonds of Society, corrupting the Morals of Youth, and by his bad example injuring the very Country he professes to patronize more than he can possibly compensate by intrepidity, generosity and honour?…

Scriptures tell us ‘righteousness exalteth a Nation.’”

Bill FedererThe Moral Liberal contributing editor, William J. Federer, is the bestselling author of “Backfired: A Nation Born for Religious Tolerance no Longer Tolerates Religion,” and numerous other books. A frequent radio and television guest, his daily American Minute is broadcast nationally via radio, television, and Internet. Check out all of Bill’s bookshere.

Leave a comment

Filed under Commentary

John Adams – first U.S. President in the White House

John Adams – first U.S. President in the White House

White House 1846American Minute with Bill Federer

On NOVEMBER 1, 1800, John Adams became the first U.S. President to move into the White House.

The following day he wrote a letter to his wife, Abigail, in which he composed a beautiful prayer.

A portion of John Adams’ prayer was inscribed on the mantlepiece in the State Dining Room by President Franklin D. Roosevelt:

“I pray Heaven to bestow the best of blessings on this house and all that shall hereafter inhabit it. May none but honest and wise men ever rule under this roof.”

Beginning with Thomas Jefferson and continuing till after the Civil War, church services, attended by sitting Presidents, where held each Sunday in the U.S. Capitol House Chamber, with attendance reaching over 2,000, making it the largest Protestant Sabbath audience in the nation.

After the White House was finished being built, the next building constructed on Lafayette Square was St. John’s Episcopal Church.

Nearly every President since James Madison worshiped there at least once, resulting in Pew 54 being designated for the First Family.

Other historic Washington, D.C. area churches include:

Christ Church in Alexandria, where President Washington attended;

National Presbyterian Church, where Truman attended;

New York Avenue Presbyterian Church, where attended Presidents:

William Henry Harrison, James K. Polk, Franklin Pierce, James Buchanan, Abraham Lincoln, Andrew Johnson, Benjamin Harrison, Dwight Eisenhower, and Richard Nixon, and where Senate Chaplain Peter Marshall was pastor from 1937-1949;

James Monroe donated toward the church bell of All Souls Church, which was attended by John Quincy Adams, and later William Howard Taft;

Metropolitan Memorial United Methodist Church was attended by William McKinley;

Holy Trinity Catholic Church, where John F. Kennedy attended.

In 1909, President Theodore Roosevelt, who was a member of the Dutch Reformed Church, stated:

“After a week on perplexing problems…it does so rest my soul to come into the house of The Lord and to sing and mean it, ‘Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God Almighty’…

(My) great joy and glory that, in occupying an exalted position in the nation, I am enabled, to preach the practical moralities of The Bible to my fellow-countrymen and to hold up Christ as the hope and Savior of the world.”

Bill FedererThe Moral Liberal contributing editor, William J. Federer, is the bestselling author of “Backfired: A Nation Born for Religious Tolerance no Longer Tolerates Religion,” and numerous other books. A frequent radio and television guest, his daily American Minute is broadcast nationally via radio, television, and Internet. Check out all of Bill’s bookshere.

Leave a comment

Filed under Commentary


William Andrew Dillard


It is an ironic, but interesting turn of events deserving considerable thought and appreciation. I write about coming to grips with one’s elevated relationship with God in New Covenant discipleship. It is elevation by another that humbles man. Please think with me for a moment.
Natural man, in his hereditarily, sinful condition is most often prideful, in denial of his condemned state, and resistant toward repentance from sin to exercise faith in God. But when he is saved by the grace of God, and embarks on a life of discipleship, he rejoices in his new position as a child of the King, even though he may continue to see himself as low, largely worthless, still plagued by sin, and sometimes rebellious. He may feel this is the proper viewpoint that honors the God of his salvation. Perhaps there is a need to re-examine a couple of things: self imposed humility may not be humility at all, and the highest honor man bestows upon God is to live within the perimeters of His calling while understanding and accepting the position in life that His unspeakable gift brings.
Colossians 2:18 speaks of a voluntary humility while verse 23 speaks of fleshly, will worship and humility. There is such a thing as being proud to be humble, but that is all pride rather than humility. True humility comes through reconciliation of oneself to God. Moreover, if God exalts His obedient children to heights not often considered, then He is honored most by their understanding, acceptance, and proper handling of that exalted state, which excludes fleshly pride.
Just what is this godly exaltation that God’s children may know? First, it is the privilege of being admitted to His Bride through baptism and fellowship in a New Testament church. Secondly, it is occupying the position of mature sons of God who are destined to rule the world with King Jesus at His coming. Thirdly it is being a viable part of the present “Israel of God,” Gal. 6: 16, which is His body, the pillar and ground of the truth, I Timothy 3:15. Additionally, one is exalted to being a god, John 10: 31-36; I Cor. 8:5. Jesus used this very terminology to confound the know-it-all Pharisees about those unto whom the Word of God came, Psalm 82:6. Certainly, the Lord’s church is the recipient of His Word: the faith once delivered to the saints. As gods (little g), they constitute His body, His Bride, His Israel, His representatives and the designated supporters of the truth. Who is it then who could not be humbled by such lofty exaltation? Moreover, who then would not be totally sobered by that responsibility? But more, to the point, who would deny these God-given designations and still claim to honor Him? He is honored in truth, and in our acceptance and obedience of Heaven’s provisions and placements.

Leave a comment

Filed under Commentary

Be Still My Soul

Little is known of this hymn writer with the impressive name, Katharina Amalia Dorothea von Schlegel. She was attached to a small ducal court at Cothen, Germany. (One source says she headed an evangelical Lutheran nunnery there.) Before she died in 1768, she apparently wrote 29 hymns, but only one of Graphic Jesus on the Sea them has been translated (by Jane Borthwick) and remains in common use. That is the beautiful Be Still, My Soul, which likely draws its inspiration in part from Ps. 46:10-11.

Be still, and know that I am God; I will be exalted among the nations, I will be exalted in the earth! The LORD of hosts is with us; The God of Jacob is our refuge. Selah [Think of that!]

As the Lord came to the disciples walking on the stormy sea, so He has proven Himself abundantly able to meet the needs of so many in the storms of life. Be Still, My Soul was the favourite hymn of Eric Liddell, the gold medalist in the 1924 Olympics, who later went to China as a missionary, and ended his life in a Japanese prison camp during the Second World War. It also proved a personal blessing to me at the time of a long stay in the hospital for a double surgery. Have you found it a blessing too? Post a comment and let us know.

Be still, my soul: the Lord is on thy side.
Bear patiently the cross of grief or pain.
Leave to thy God to order and provide;
In every change, He faithful will remain.
Be still, my soul: thy best, thy heavenly Friend
Through thorny ways leads to a joyful end.

Be still, my soul: thy God doth undertake
To guide the future, as He has the past.
Thy hope, thy confidence let nothing shake;
All now mysterious shall be bright at last.
Be still, my soul: the waves and winds still know
His voice who ruled them while He dwelt below.

Be still, my soul: the hour is hastening on
When we shall be forever with the Lord.
When disappointment, grief and fear are gone,
Sorrow forgot, love’s purest joys restored.
Be still, my soul: when change and tears are past
All safe and blessèd we shall meet at last.

The boys’ choir Libera, of St. Philip’s Church in South London, has produced a haunting video of this hymn. It juxtaposes the audio with images of British servicemen from the Second World War, making the point of the song in a powerful way. I encourage you to take a few moments to listen to this memorable performance on YouTube.

Leave a comment

Filed under Commentary

God and Washington

God and Washington


George Washington, perhaps more than any other Founder, saw the hand of God everywhere.

It never fails. Write a column in defense of the religious foundations of the United States (my article “Paine’s Prophetic Dream Interpreted“) and out of the woodwork come all manner of denunciations.

One letter, typical of many others, told a whopper of a fib regarding George Washington. The writer sent me a quote from the Father of Our Country that was published online at an “Inspirational Quote Site” (I found the site). The publisher failed to reveal the source — he had good cause — nevertheless, he sent it out to his subscribers as the “inspirational quote of the day” and directed its recipients to circulate the quote far and wide across the Internet.

I suppose nonbelievers have no problem engaging in the same kind of missionary labors they find so appalling in Christians — And they do a good job — Their efforts reached right into this writer’s home, in mass!

According to this unidentified source, George Washington once said: “The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.”

The problem is, Washington never said it; and not only are these not Washington’s words, but never was there a statement more out of character for a man than these ascribed to Washington. George Washington, perhaps more than any other Founder, saw the hand of God everywhere: early on in his life, in the French and Indian War, in the American Revolution, and in the establishment of the American Government under the US Constitution. And, judging by the volume of quotes he made on this subject, George Washington was not afraid to make his feelings known.

From Washington’s “Farewell Address,” we read:

Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labour to subvert these great Pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of Men & citizens. The mere Politician, equally with the pious man ought to respect & to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private & public felicity. Let it simply be asked where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the Oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in Courts of Justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure — reason & experience both forbid us to expect that National morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.’Tis substantially true, that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule indeed extends with more or less force to every species of Free Government. Who that is a sincere friend to it, can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric. “Promote then as an object of primary importance, Institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge. In proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public opinion, it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened. [1]

This is the real George Washington. Religion, said he, is a critical factor, both in the establishment and perpetuation of our laws. The connections between private and public felicity, and morality and religion are numberless. Religion is a necessary spring from which popular government sprang; it is the foundation of the fabric.

Thus, government — in Washington’s view — should not stand neutral as regards religion, nor embrace a secular approach (as did the French; his comment was directed against the French), nor a communist approach (which would abolish religion in private affairs as well); no, rather, he felt a proper understanding of the nature of self-government requires that government ought to “promote,” religious and moral principle as “an object of primary importance,” especially in institutions of learning, that public opinion in future generations might continue to be enlightened.

Yes, “the Enlightenment” that Washington was firmly attached to was not the European secularist model — And note this: promoting religion was not about force, not about creating a national church, but about protecting free religious expression in the schools for the sake of securing an enlightened electorate. Without this security, free government would fall under the weight of its own folly.

This was typical Washington.

Besides, the magnificent Farewell Address, at every turn, Washington fearlessly spoke his mind about God’s hand in securing our liberties and the need to humble ourselves before him.

In a letter dated, September 28, 1789, he wrote:

The man must be bad indeed who can look upon the events of the American Revolution without feeling the warmest gratitude towards the great Author of the Universe whose divine interposition was so frequently manifested in our behalf. And it is my earnest prayer that we may so conduct ourselves as to merit a continuance of those blessings with which we have hitherto been favored. [2]

Again he wrote:

The hand of Providence has been so conspicuous in all this, that he must be worse than an infidel that lacks faith, and more than wicked, that has not gratitude enough to acknowledge his obligations. [3]

That God’s protecting hand was on the side of the American soldier, was no doubt in part, because their leader was ever encouraging his soldiers to act like Christians.

In a general order dated, July 9, 1776, General Washington writes:

The blessing and protection of Heaven are at all times necessary but especially so in times of public distress and danger — The General hopes and trusts, that every officer and man, will endeavour so to live, and act, as becomes a Christian Soldier defending the dearest Rights and Liberties of his country.

To help encourage such faith and fidelity to Christianity among the troops, General Washington procured Chaplains “of good character and exemplary lives” over every regiment.

It was in the same order that he referred to “his Country” as being “under God.” [4]

On a number of occasions, Washington requested that the troops refrain from gambling and profanity. His reasons for these requests are noteworthy:

On, February 26, 1776, he writes:

All Officers, non-commissioned Officers and Soldiers are positively forbidden playing at Cards, and other Games of Chance. At this time of public distress, men may find enough to do in the service of their God, and their Country, without abandoning themselves to vice and immorality. [5]

And again on August 03, 1776 we read:

The General is sorry to be informed that the foolish and wicked practice of profane cursing and swearing, a vice heretofore little known in an American army, is growing into fashion. He hopes the officers will, by example as well as influence, endeavor to check it, and that both they and the men will reflect that we can have little hope of the blessings of Heaven on our arms if we insult it by our impiety and folly; added to this, it is a vice so mean and low, without any temptation, that every man of sense, and character, detests and despises it. [6]

Washington understood that men must meet God half way; that prayer was not enough, that actions proved faith, that righteousness exalts a nation.

After the war was over and Independence won, Washington reflected on June 11, 1783, in a letter to John Hancock that America seemed “peculiarly designated by Providence” for “a display of human greatness and success” and “a fairer opportunity for political happiness than any other nation has ever been favored with.”

He then listed the blessings of Heaven that combined in a manner never seen since the world was:

The Foundation of our Empire was not laid in the gloomy age of Ignorance and Superstition, but at an Epocha when the rights of Mankind were better understood and more clearly defined, than at any former period, the researches of the human mind after social happiness have been carried to a great extent, the Treasures of knowledge, acquired by the labours of Philosophers, Sages, and Legislators, through a long succession [of] years, are laid open for our use, and their collected wisdom may be happily applied in the Establishment of our Forms of Government, the free cultivation of Letters, the unbounded extension of Commerce, the progressive refinement of Manners, the growing liberality of sentiment, and above all, the pure and benign light of Revelation, have had a meliorating influence on Mankind and increased the blessings of Society; At this auspicious period, the United States came into existence as a Nation, and if their Citizens should not be completely Free and Happy, the fa[u]lt will be entirely their own. [my emphasis]

There are many things which can be said about George Washington. To claim that he saw no connection between the establishment of our free government and the Christian religion is not one of them. These few examples, among so many others, establish the point.

Author’s Note: This article was honored to be included in CERC: Catholic Education Resource Center.

Get your copy of the author’s highly praised inspirational novel: Dark Rose

Steve Farrell is the Founder and Editor-In-Chief of The Moral Liberal, one of the original pundits at (1999-2007), and the author of the inspirational novel Dark Rose


  1. Washington, George. “Farewell Address.”
  2. Fitzpatrick, John C., editor. “The Writings of George Washington from the
    Original Manuscript Sources, 1745-1799,” New York, Sept. 28, 1789.
  3. Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of George Washington, 12:343.
  4. Fitzpatrick, “The Writing of George Washington from the Original Manuscript
    Sources, 1745-1799,” Headquarters, July 9, 1776.
  5. Ibid. Headquarters, Cambridge, February 26, 1776.
  6. Washington’s Order on Profanity 3 August 1776.
  7. The Papers of George Washington, Washington to John Hancock, 11 June

Leave a comment

Filed under Commentary


September 22
“He that will love life, and see good days, let him refrain his tongue from evil, and his lips that they speak no guile.”– 1Pe_3:10.
“Let your speech be alway with grace, seasoned with salt.” — Col_4:6.

THE IDEAL of Christian speech is given in the Apostle’s words to the Colossians. Our speech should be always gracious; and grace stands for mercifulness, charity, the willingness to put the best constructions upon the words and actions of another. It is a great help in dealing with envy, jealousy, or unkind feeling to compel our lips to speak as Christ would have them. If you are jealous of another, the temptation is to say unkind or depreciating things, but if we live in the power of the Holy Spirit, He will enable us to check such words and replace them by those that suggest kindly consideration on the part of ourselves and others. Endeavour to say all the good that can be said, and none of the evil. It is remarkable that when we make the effort to speak kindly on behalf of those against whom we feel exasperated, the whole inward temper changes and takes on the tone of our voice.
There should be salt in our speech–purity, antiseptic, and sparkling like the Book of Proverbs. A playful wit, a bright repartee, are not inconsistent with the Apostle’s standard, but whenever we mix in conversation with people, they should be aware of an element in us which makes it impossible for them to indulge in ill-natured gossip or coarse jokes.
We must continue in prayer that God would open to us doors of utterance, so that we may speak of the hidden beauty and glory of our Saviour. Sometimes, also, when we are hard pressed to know how to answer difficult questions, it is given to us in that same hour how we ought to speak, and we find that the Holy Spirit has found an utterance by our lips (Luk_12:12; 1Pe_3:15).
It is recorded of our Lord that during His trial He spoke not a word to Pilate or Herod, but as soon as He reached the Cross, He poured out His heart as their Intercessor, saying: “Father, forgive them: for they know not what they do!” Speak more to God than to men who may be reviling and threatening you. It is blessed to realize that He is able to guard the door of our lips, for probably there is no part of our nature that stands more in need of His keeping power.

Live in us, Blessed Lord, by Thy Holy Spirit, that our lives may be gospels of helpfulness and blessedness. May all foolish talking and covetousness, bitterness, wrath, and anger be put away from us, with all malice. AMEN.

Leave a comment

Filed under Commentary

Great Pillars of American Liberty


Not long ago, I watched a noted atheist – an ACLU member – venomously attacked American Christians for daring to stand up for what they called the right of their children to have access to the truth in the classroom about America’s unique founding, a founding centered not just on the triumph of reason, as some wrongfully claim, but on the triumph of reason coupled with faith, particularly the Christian faith.

Coming to this atheists’ defense, one of the interviewers cited as “proof” that America was not founded by Christians – nor upon the principles of Christianity – the 1796 Treaty of Tripoli, which declared in Article XI, “the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.” Here we have it, he declared, legal proof under the supremacy clause that this must be and still is the case – but more than that, with key founder President John Adams’ signature on it, a personal, in-your-face testimony against Christians and their incessant claims about God’s hand in founding this nation.

Now hold on there…

Notwithstanding that such a claim contradicts everything in John Adams’ writings to the contrary (we’ll get to that in a minute) – and the rest of the key founders as well – and notwithstanding the contradictory testimony of two centuries before the American founding and the nearly two centuries’ old testimony after the American founding, both of which embracing America’s Christian tradition in Congress, in the courts, in presidential speeches, in private and public classrooms, and in state and local governments, without question—notwithstanding that little sidestep—here’s yet another: The U.S. does not have and has not had the original copy of this treaty for at least two centuries (it was and is lost); while the two originals that do exist (in Italian and Arabic) have no such phrase nor any such clause in the treaty, period.

So what do we have then? A ‘certified copy’ written by a man, Joel Barlow, who brought to publication Thomas Paine’s diatribe against Christianity, “The Age of Reason,” and whose motives might be described as suspect.

The Avalon Project at Yale University, without assigning any motives to Mr. Barlow, notes of the blatant discrepancy:

As even a casual examination of the annotated translation of 1930 shows, the Barlow translation is at best a poor attempt at a paraphrase or summary of the sense of the Arabic; and even as such its defects throughout are obvious and glaring. Most extraordinary (and wholly unexplained) is the fact that Article 11 of the Barlow translation, with its famous phrase, “the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,” does not exist at all. There is no Article 11. The Arabic text which is between Articles 10 and 12 is in form a letter, crude and flamboyant and withal quite unimportant. . How that script came to be written and to be regarded, as in the Barlow translation, as Article 11 of the treaty as there written, is a mystery and seemingly must remain so. Nothing in the diplomatic correspondence of the time throws any light whatever on the point (1)

These Yale researchers note next:

[E]vidence of the erroneous character of the Barlow translation has been in the archives of the Department of State since perhaps 1800 or thereabouts; for in the handwriting of James Leander Cathcart [the American Consul to Tripoli, at the time] is the statement . that the Barlow translation is “extremely erroneous.” (2)

A “poor attempt at a paraphrase,” “defects throughout,” “obvious and glaring,” “extremely erroneous,” a “famous phrase [that] does not exist at all”; of these I have little doubt. But returning to Mr. Barlow’s motives in penning such a copy upon provisions that did not exist: his connection to the doctrines of the fallen angel Thomas Paine, and his own descent from his former involvement in the ministry into what was then dubbed “liberal Christianity” looms large, and helps unravel “the mystery.” So do a couple of other possible character flaws. A little over a decade after the signing of the Treaty of Tripoli, in an April 24, 1812 letter from James Madison to Thomas Jefferson, we read of Madison’s concerns about Barlow’s fidelity to representing America in yet another land, France:

A letter from Barlow to Granger fills us with serious apprehensions that he is burning his fingers with matters which will work great embarrassment and mischief here, and which his instructions could not have suggested. (3)

Madison was concerned about the man’s fidelity to his American commission and common sense. John Adams had similar concerns. After denouncing the recent works of Tom Paine as “the Ravings and Rantings of Bedlam,” in a July 15, 1813 letter to Jefferson, Adams moved to the subject of Tom Paine’s publisher, Joel Barlow, who was “about to record Tom Paine as the great author of the American Revolution!”—to which Adams retorted, “If he was; I desire that my name may be blotted out forever, from its records.” (4) For Barlow to even consider repeating this outrageous fallacy for the reading of future generations demonstrated his willingness to be the pawn of a man who had turned not only on his faith, but on all of Christianity (including on America’s Founders, many of whom he came to despise, and who would revoke his citizenship over his newfound “Enemy of the Faith” status), and if not that or that alone, then Barlow’s tendency toward delusion or rank dishonesty and fraud – and to what end?, to what end?

Finally, the original Treaty of Tripoli of 1805 that IS in our possession and IS signed by a Founding President has no such Barlow inspired, anti-Christian clause. (5)

The bottom line: If this is the best Founding Era ‘proof’ these historical revisionists can come up with against Christianity (and John Adams) it is pathetic. – An original treaty signed by Adams that is not the original, and in fact is not signed by Adams (on the copy he cites), and is at odds with both of the originals that we do have, and was declared by the then American Consul to Tripoli, Leander Cathcart, to be an “extremely erroneous” copy, one at odds with the follow-on treaty that was signed but a few years later (yet another proof against this lie), and all of this based on a copy written by a man whose motives and judgment were highly suspect. Pathetic indeed.

Equally pathetic is any attempt to attach the noble name of John Adams to a denunciation of America’s godly beginnings.

A small sample of the real John Adams reveals just how deep the fraud of this revisionist account. When Adam’s was asked by an educational group of youth to identify America’s founding pillars, here is what he answered in a document that CAN be authenticated:

Science [the science of government] and Morals are the great Pillars on which this Country has been raised to its present population, opulence and prosperity, and these alone, can advance, support and preserve it.

He then added:

Without wishing to damp the ardor of curiosity, or influence the freedom of inquiry, I will hazard a prediction, that after the most industrious and impartial researches, the longest liver of you all will find no Principles, Institutions, or Systems of Education, more fit, IN GENERAL to be transmitted to your posterity, than those you have received from your Ancestors. (6)

Years later in a letter to Jefferson, Mr. Adams further elaborated on what he meant that day:

Could my Answer be understood, by any candid reader or hearer, to recommend, to all others[:] The general principles, on which the Fathers achieved Independence were the only principles in which that beautiful assembly . could unite. And what were these general principles? I answer, the general Principles of Christianity, in which all these Sects were United: And the general principles of English and American liberty which had united all parties in America, in majorities sufficient to assert and maintain her Independence. Now I will avow, that I then believed, and now believe, that those general Principles of Christianity, are as eternal and immutable, as the Existence and Attributes of God; and that those Principles of Liberty, are as unalterable as human Nature and our terrestrial, mundane System. I could therefore safely say, consistently with all my then and present information, that I believed they would never make discoveries in contradiction to these General Principles.” (7)

This is typical John Adams, the same man who laid it on the line quite clearly that “Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people,” that it was “wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” (8)

And again from Adams:

Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone, which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. (9)

And again:

The Christian religion is, above all the religions that ever prevailed or existed in ancient or modern times, the religion of wisdom, virtue, equity, and humanity.(10)

And, once more, even eleven years before Jefferson penned the Declaration of Independence declares John Adams:

[our rights preceded government], rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws – Rights derived from the great Legislator of the Universe. (11)

Well, these are the roots, the Great Pillars that past and future generations of youth ought to frequently refer back to as learning and science move forward, these “eternal and immutable” principles that lay at the foundation of everything good, lest in the name of progress we pass down to posterity nothing more than a high-brow, high-tech house of cards.

But here’s one more vital point: Adams would have nothing to do with the lie that passes around the university and public school system today as so-called solid granite truth, that America’s roots go deep into another soil, that of the amoral, libertine, European ‘Enlightenment, they tell us.  Here is what Adam’s said of that ‘illustrious’ founding group:

[They appear] to me like young scholars from a college of sailors flushed with recent pay or prize money, mounted on wild horses, lashing and spearing, till they would kill the horses and break their own necks. (12)

He wasn’t kidding. And the French Revolution, the Napoleonic Wars, two world wars, the invention and perpetuation of mass murdering, liberty destroying communism and fascism, and now the socialist, world government promoting, secularist European Union on that continent referred to by Adams, proved him prophetic. License is not liberty. The European Enlightenment with all of its anti-God, anti-private property, anti-limited government rhetoric is not the legacy this country’s ancestors passed down to our children. Yet it is to these latter so-called fellow ‘founders’, these atheists who spawned the greatest bloodletting tyranny in history, are they who the ACLU and the revisionist ‘scholars’ young and old (yes, they who have hijacked America’s educational system, and rewritten America’s story to fit their Godless, socialist paradigm) and the very goons they would have you and your kids look back to – look back like Lot’s wife to the polluted, prideful, despotic people and political philosophies our progenitors barely escaped, back to the land where the battle cry ‘Liberty! Equality! Fraternity!” hid a more absolute, more thorough ‘Tyranny!’ Robbery! and Mass Murder!

Adams had it right. One pillar of salt is enough. We don’t need 300 million more. Not on our watch.

Steve Farrell is the Founder and Editor-In-Chief of The Moral Liberal, one of the original pundits at (1999-2007), and the author of the highly praised inspirational novel Dark Rose


1. Miller, Hunter. “The Avalon Project at Yale Law School: The Barbary Treaties: Tripoli 1796. Found online at:

2. Ibid.

3. Madison, James. “Writings of James Madison, Volume 2, 1794-1815,” p. 533.

4. Cappon, Lester J. “The Adams-Jefferson Letters: The Complete Correspondence between Thomas Jefferson & Abigail and John Adams,” University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill and London, 1959, renewed 1987, p. 358.

5. “Treaty of Peace and Amity, Signed at Tripoli June 4, 1805, online at

6. Cappon, Lester J. Quoted from Adams’ answer to “the Address of the Young Men of the City of Philadelphia, the District of South Wark, and the Northern Liberties,” p. 339.

7. Ibid., pgs. 339-340.

8. Adams, John; Adams, Charles Francis, ed.. “The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States, Volume IX,” Boston: Little Brown, 1854, p. 229.

9. Ibid. p. 401

10. Adams, John; Butterfield, L.H.. “Diary and Autobiography of John Adams, Volume III” Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1961, p. 234, from diary entry for June 21, 1776.

11. Adams, John; Taylor. Robert J., editor. “Papers of John Adams, Volume 1,” Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1977- p. 109, as quoted in Grant, James. “John Adams: Party of One,” Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York, 2005, p. 62.

12. Cannon, Lester. J. Pgs. 357-358.

Author’s Additional note:

There were other factors at play that may have influenced Joel Barlow to insert such ideas in his “extremely erroneous” copy of the original. Read this insightful article by David Barton at

Leave a comment

Filed under Commentary



Posted: 17 Sep 2015 11:28 PM PDT

By Chuck Baldwin
September 17, 2015

Right now, the liberty movement is divided almost in half between those favoring the SCOTUS ruling legalizing same-sex marriage and those opposed (count me in the opposed camp). So, right now, the liberty movement is completely stymied over this issue. The only ones who win in such a case are big-government Orwellians.

To be sure, the SCOTUS decision to legalize same-sex “marriage” was the result of decades of relentless propaganda from the national news media, liberal politicians, and college professors throughout America.

Think about it: what do Anthony Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan, Stephen Breyer, and Sonia Sotomayor know that John Locke, Thomas More, Emer de Vattel, Algernon Sidney, William Rawle, Hugo Grotius, William Blackstone, William Penn, James Wilson, John Marshall, Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, John Adams, John Jay, Daniel Webster, Francis Scott Key, Hugo Black, Rutherford B. Hayes, and William O. Douglas didn’t know?

In other words, just as in the Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion-on-demand, the Obergefell decision legalizing same-sex “marriage” was judicial activism pure and simple. There were no precedents for either decision. Think of the brilliant minds in law, philosophy, and religion over two thousand years of Western Civilization that somehow missed the “right” of homosexuals to “marry.”

What I’m saying is, I realize that militant homosexuals, ultra-leftists, and judicial activists have been waging war on America’s historic Christian values for decades–and they won a huge victory with the Obergefell decision. I also understand that these people will never be satisfied until they have totally and thoroughly expunged these values from America’s public life. There is no question they will resort to any tactic–no matter how morally unjust or constitutionally corrupt–to achieve their radical, amoral agenda. Kim Davis will not be the last Christian to be persecuted for her faith in this country.

That said, the Obergefell decision has successfully divided the liberty movement almost in half, between those who agree with the decision (on whatever grounds) and those who disagree. But, instead of arguing over the SCOTUS decision, here is what ALL OF US in the liberty movement should be doing: we should be using whatever influence we have to promote the idea of taking marriage OUT OF THE HANDS OF THE STATE ALTOGETHER.

Most of us realize that marriage is sacred; that it’s much more than just a civil contract. (Only the state itself reinvented marriage as being merely a civil contract.) One doesn’t have to be a Christian to acknowledge this distinction. Throughout the history of Western Civilization, the state seldom had authority over marriage. Think of it: for over 1,800 years of Western Civilization, the state had little–if anything–to do with marriage. (In America, only the colony of Massachusetts is recorded as requiring state marriage licenses before the mid-nineteenth century.)

So, why do we even look to the state for a license to marry? The fact is, WE SHOULDN’T. All of the bickering over Obergefell only serves to ensconce the notion that the state has legitimate authority over marriage. IT DOESN’T.

In Pilgrim America and in Colonial America–and until only recently in modern America–Common Law (Natural Law) marriage was universally recognized as being, not only lawful, but sacrosanct. The idea of asking the state for permission to marry was as absurd as asking the state for permission to take communion or to be baptized.

For example, the State of Pennsylvania didn’t outlaw Common Law marriage until 2005. And the only reason the vast majority of states do not recognize Common Law marriage today is because the Church has completely surrendered the Scriptural teaching on the subject and has willingly (even happily) turned what is uniquely a divine institution over to the state.

In other words, ladies and gentlemen, the only one to blame for the decision of the Supreme Court to legalize same-sex marriage is THE CHURCH. The ultra-leftists and militant homosexuals would have had NO CHANCE of achieving victory at the Supreme Court had the churches of America been doing their job over the last half-century or more to educate people on the historic Natural Law principles governing marriage and the state. (Virtually ALL of the major problems we are dealing with today are the result of the absence of sound instruction from the pulpits of America.)

But since the Church’s surrender of the sanctity of marriage, here is the current reality: 40 states do not legally recognize Common Law marriage. That means, those 40 states see only the state as having authority over marriage. But the state has NO AUTHORITY over marriage and cannot legally sanction ANY marriage. I remind you Jesus said, “What therefore God hath joined together . . . .” Only GOD can join couples in marriage.

The best that I can determine, these are the 10 states that still recognize Common Law marriage: Alabama, Colorado, Kansas, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Iowa, Montana, Texas, Utah, and Oklahoma. And Utah only seems to recognize Common Law marriage after the fact. In addition, Oklahoma is currently in the process of banning all State marriage licenses. This is exactly what all 50 states should do. (New Hampshire recognizes Common Law marriage for inheritance purposes only; so it should not be included as a Common Law State.)

So, including Utah, the people in ten states are free to marry WITHOUT a State license. And that’s exactly what every freedomist in those states should start promoting–and promoting LOUDLY. And freedomists in the other 40 states should start demanding that their State legislatures once again recognize Common Law marriage. Maybe people in those states should even consider civil disobedience and marry outside the licensing authority of the State. After all, if God has joined a man and woman together, what difference does it make if the State–or anyone else–recognizes it or not? If enough pastors and churches would do this, it wouldn’t take long for State legislatures to enact appropriate legislation.

Let the state recognize or not recognize to its heart’s content; let it embrace all of the perversion it wants. You can bet polygamy will be legalized next. And then what? Pedophilia? Bestiality? At some point, the sacred institutions of marriage and the Church will be forced to separate themselves from a suicidal society just as they did when the Roman Empire was collapsing. In Rome–as in oppressed nations today–Christians and churches mostly took their worship and sacred ceremonies underground. And, if history teaches anything, it teaches us that no civilization has long survived after socially embracing aberrant sexual behaviors. And America won’t either.

Let’s face it: the federal government in D.C. is leading America over an economic, political, moral, and cultural cliff. So, why do we keep looking to D.C. to fix the problem? THEY WON’T DO IT. As Ronald Reagan famously said, “Government is not the solution to our problem; government IS the problem.”

And the two institutions we should IMMEDIATELY extract from government–the two institutions that should have NEVER been allowed to be placed under the authority of government to begin with–are the institutions of marriage and the Church.

How in the name of common sense can pastors and churches take a Scriptural stand on the sanctity of marriage when they have allowed the Church itself to be bastardized by accepting the 501c3 tax-exempt organization status from Washington, D.C., and incorporation status from the states?

Think of it: our spiritual “leaders” have allowed the two most sacred institutions on earth (marriage and the Church) to be prostituted on the altar of state recognition. Think of it another way: our 501c3 pastors have become little more than pimps for the IRS and, now, a radical, activist Supreme Court. Do pastors really want Caesar’s blessing that badly?

Regarding marriage: we should marry under Natural Law (Common Law) ONLY.

Regarding the Church: it should be removed from 501c3 non-profit organization and State incorporation status–and if the pastor and church refuse to extract themselves, we should extract ourselves from THEM.

We either “come out” from this leviathan or we will be swallowed by it.

Yes, the radical left and militant homosexuals will continue to press their anti-Christian agenda with every means possible. Yes, those of us who have Christian, traditional and moralist convictions are going to be forced to defend these historic principles tooth and nail. But there can be no victory whatsoever by willfully surrendering the Natural Law principles upon which our convictions are predicated. Neither can there be victory by pretending that Caesar’s law is Supreme Law, because it’s not! There is a Court above the court. There is a King above kings. There is a Law above law.

Our founders gave their lives in order to bequeath to us a country in which we didn’t have to decide between obeying God and obeying government, as this constitutional republic was designed to protect our duty to God. Current national leaders–facilitated by America’s spiritual leaders–are taking that wonderful bequeathment away from us.

Therefore, say it anyway you want, “Don’t tread on me,” or “We must obey God rather than men,” but say it we must. And if Christian men and women cannot say it in defense of the sanctity and autonomy of marriage and the Church, they cannot say it at all.

P.S. I have a four-message DVD that I believe is absolutely essential for Christian people–and others who believe in our founding principles–to help them understand Natural Law. The title of the DVD series is “Liberty And Law.” Here are the message titles:

 Biblical Evidence for Natural Law (I show you the Scriptural evidence for Natural Law in this message.)

 Christ’s Law of The Sword (This message explains what Christ meant when He told Peter in the Garden of Gethsemane, “Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.” (Matt. 26:52, KJV) Believe me, He did NOT mean that Christians are supposed to lay down their means of self-defense and never use the sword. I show from the Scriptures exactly what Jesus was saying to Peter. And, trust me, it will probably surprise you, as I doubt you have been taught this truth in church. And it will also help you to better understand a whole host of other scriptural principles as a result.)

 Liberty in Law (There is true liberty only in Law; but this Law does not ALWAYS mean the laws of men.)

 The Law of Necessity (This is a basic Natural Law principle that was demonstrated repeatedly throughout the Bible, including by our Lord Jesus Christ Himself.)

This is one of the most important message-series I have ever delivered. And its truths are needed as much NOW as they were when our pastors thundered them forth in the churches of Colonial America–maybe more so.

To order my DVD, “Liberty And Law,” click here.

 If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link.

Donate to Pastor Chuck Baldwin’s Ministry.

© 2015 Chuck Baldwin – All Rights Reserved

Leave a comment

Filed under Commentary

Theodore Roosevelt born October 27, 1858

Theodore Roosevelt born October 27, 1858

theodore-rooseveltAmerican Minute with Bill Federer

Theodore Roosevelt was born OCTOBER 27, 1858.

His wife and mother died on Valentine’s Day, 1884.

Depressed, he left to ranch in the Dakotas.

Returning to New York, he entered politics and rose to Assistant Secretary of the Navy.

He resigned during the Spanish-American War, organized the first Volunteer Cavalry, “the Rough Riders,” and captured Cuba’s San Juan Hill.

Elected Vice-President under William McKinley, he became America’s youngest President in 1901.

In 1909, Roosevelt warned:

“The thought of modern industry in the hands of Christian charity is a dream worth dreaming.

The thought of industry in the hands of paganism is a nightmare beyond imagining.

The choice between the two is upon us.”

In his book Fear God and Take Your Part, 1916, Theodore Roosevelt wrote:

“Christianity is not the creed of Asia and Africa at this moment solely because the seventh century Christians of Asia and Africa
had trained themselves not to fight, whereas the Moslems were trained to fight.

Christianity was saved in Europe solely because the peoples of Europe fought.

If the peoples of Europe in the 7th and 8th centuries, and on up to and including the 17th century, had not possessed a military equality with, and gradually a growing superiority over the Mohammedans who invaded Europe, Europe would at this moment be Mohammedan and the Christian religion would be exterminated.”

Theodore Roosevelt continued:

“Wherever the Mohammedans have had complete sway, wherever the Christians have been unable to resist them by the sword, Christianity has ultimately disappeared.

From the hammer of Charles Martel to the sword of Jan Sobieski, Christianity owed its safety in Europe to the fact that it was able to show that it could and would fight as well as the Mohammedan aggressor.”

Bill FedererThe Moral Liberal contributing editor, William J. Federer, is the bestselling author of “Backfired: A Nation Born for Religious Tolerance no Longer Tolerates Religion,” and numerous other books. A frequent radio and television guest, his daily American Minute is broadcast nationally via radio, television, and Internet. Check out all of Bill’s bookshere.

Leave a comment

Filed under Commentary

James Wilson

David Barton – 09/10/2015
James Wilson
Signer of the Declaration of Independence, Signer of the Constitution
Original Justice of the United States Supreme Court

James Wilson had a great influence during the American Founding but has been called “the lost Founder” because of his relative modern obscurity.

He was born to a poor family in Scotland 273 years ago today (on September 14, 1742), but managed to attend universities in Glasgow, St. Andrews, and Edinburgh. [1]At the age of 21, he immigrated to America and soon began tutoring at Philadelphia College. He studied law under John Dickinson, a fellow member of the Constitutional Convention.  [2]

In 1768, he wrote a pamphlet arguing for American independence but it considered too radical for the times. When public opinion later shifted, it was finally published. Thomas Jefferson copied portions of it for his own use, and it is conceivable that parts of Wilson’s essay even influenced the language of the Declaration. Compare the similarity of Wilson’s writing with the wording of the Declaration:


“All men are by nature equal and free. No one has a right to any authority over another without his consent. All lawful government is founded on the consent of those who are subject to it. Such consent was given with a view to ensure and to increase the happiness of the governed above what they could enjoy in an independent and unconnected state of nature. The consequence is that the happiness of the society is the first law of every government.”  ~ James Wilson “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, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, …” ~Declaration of Independence


Wilson served as a Pennsylvania delegate to the Continental Congress, where he voted for and signed the Declaration of Independence. He later was a member of the Constitutional Convention, where he signed the Constitution. [3]

Under the new federal government, President George Washington appointed Wilson as an original justice on the U. S. Supreme Court, where he served for 9 years until his death on August 28, 1798. He was buried at Christ Church in Philadelphia. [4]

Over recent years, the federal courts have become particularly unfriendly to Christianity and religious faith, but it was not that way under Justice Wilson. In fact, Wilson started America’s first organized legal training while he served on the Court, and he told students:

“Far from being rivals or enemies, religion and law are twin sisters, friends, and mutual assistants. Indeed these two sciences run into each other. . . . All [laws], however, may be arranged in two different classes. 1) Divine. 2) Human. . . . But it should always be remembered that this law, natural or revealed, made for men or for nations, flows from the same Divine source: it is the law of God. . . . Human law must rest its authority ultimately upon the authority of that law which is Divine.” [5]

[1] Nicholas Pederson, “The Lost Founder: James Wilson in American
,”  Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities, Vol. 22, Is. 2, Art. 3, (May 8, 2013).  See also, Robert K. Wright, Jr. and Morris J. MacGregor, Jr., “James Wilson: Pennsylvania,” Soldier-Statesmen of the Constitution (Center of Military History, Washington, D.C., 1987).
[2]James Wilson,” Signers of the Declaration of Independence (2014).
[3]James Wilson, Pennsylvania,” Charters of Freedom: America’s Founding Fathers(accessed September 8, 2015).
[4] L. Carroll Judson, A Biography of the Signers of the Declaration of Independence(Philadelphia : J. Dobson, and Thomas, Cowperthwait & Co., 1839), p. 130-131. See also, James Wilson, Pennsylvania,” Charters of Freedom: America’s Founding Fathers(accessed September 8, 2015).
[5] James Wilson, The Works of the Honourable James Wilson (Philadelphia: Bronson and Chauncey, 1804), Vol. I, pp. 106 & 103-105.

Leave a comment

Filed under Commentary