William Andrew Dillard
Parson to Person
The founding documents of the United States of America would have us to believe all men are created equal. Rather than take issue with equality in creation, let the reader consider that the very moment one comes into this world he/she is both equal and unequal. One’s parental status, environment, socio-economic level, and I.Q. does not provide for equality but for inequality.
Though flawed as all governmental systems of men are, that inequality has, with the help of God, produced the greatest nation on earth. Capitalism’s principles are based on the Judeo/Christian ethic of theology, morals, and individual initiatives. It is a nation that evil works relentlessly to undo.
Now, there are those who labor to enrich themselves by pandering to those who will not work, will not pursue an education, but will demand in violent destructiveness that those who do have initiative, and who do work should support them. Government folks in high places push this agenda for their own obvious purpose of staying in power through “votes by pandering,” and seem determined to deprive the nation of capitalistic enterprise. One wonders: do they believe the government printing presses can keep the economy afloat forever?
As an aside, many years ago, this writer was placed on a legislative ad hoc committee to draft childcare legislation. In some of the discussions with more liberal committee members over the issue of assurance of preventing failure, it was my premise then as now, if there is not freedom to fail, there is no freedom: if there is not freedom for all, then there is no freedom at all.
Obviously, it was the Creator’s holy will that men have free moral agency: the freedom to win; the freedom to lose, the freedom to live; the freedom to die. Men who reject God and pursue the premise of evolution are determined to change that, but it is a determination destined to fail. Still, there is a sense in which all men are equal: all are sinners, and all are condemned by virtue of sin. The good news is that God provides for all men the freedom to partake of His marvelous grace, and thereby escape the destiny of sin while gaining the wealth and joys of heaven. But that freedom exercised makes men unequal.
Thus does 2 Cor. 6:14 admonish believers to not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. Let there be rejoicing in heaven and earth that the lovely Lord Jesus: the Creator/Christ, has by His own blood purchased for all who love Him the freedom to be unequal.
Tag Archives: America
FREEDOM TO BE UNEQUAL
Filed under dillard
MORALITY KNOWS NO MIDDLE GROUND!
William Andrew Dillard
Twenty-first
century America is a land of self-exaltation. To many folks, laws,
rules, guidelines reek with negative denotations. They cramp the
individual style, and the most important thing to them is doing or
being whatever one wants. So, one by one rules and guidelines are
discarded and laws are changed to eliminate guilt. Wrongdoing is made
justifiable and acceptable to the majority by making it legal. The
Judeo-Christian ethic and morality that made this country a great
nation is being summarily discarded in favor of personal desires long
recognized as immoral.
Enter the debate on morality. What is
moral? Is it not the high standard of living, and judgments
graciously given to us by the Creator? But morality has become a
negative to a godless generation. The same generation does not want
to be classified as immoral either. So, is there a middle ground?
That mindset employs a different term heard in public educational
institutions and in other places as well. It is “amoral.” Codes
of life; identification of what is good and evil; separation of
sexes, etc., are all addressed in what is perceived to be the neutral
ground of amorality. But does that vacuum exist? May civilization
exist without clear guidelines of right and wrong?
By word
definition, the prefix “a” is a negative as is the prefix “im.”
Thus, the definition of “amoral” is “not moral.” The
definition of “immoral” is “not moral.” They mean the same
thing. “Amoral” is just another way of saying “immoral.”
There is no moral vacuum! There is no middle ground!
Still, the
world persists in the madness of depraved human nature. It is an
indicator of the last days of the age. This is not happening in
America alone, but is a worldwide ecumenical movement to exalt sinful
humanity as indicated in the prophetic second Psalm. The few times it
is mentioned in the Bible that God laughs, is in the same
condemnatory context of Psalm 2:2-4. One day the “amorality” of
the world will give way to screams for rocks and mountains to fall on
them to hide them from the face of Him Who is coming. So, cut it
clean! It is either moral or it is immoral! There is no moral vacuum!
Such is only the figment of imagination in the mind of depraved
humanity.
Filed under dillard
America founded with Divine Help
American Minute with Bill Federer
The 55 writers of the U.S. Constitution were:
26 Episcopalian
11 Presbyterian
7 Congregationalist
2 Lutheran
2 Dutch Reformed
2 Methodist
2 Quaker
2 Roman Catholic
and Dr. Franklin, who called for prayer at the Constitutional Convention, June 28, 1787, stating:
“In the beginning of the contest with Great Britain, when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayer in this room for the divine protection.
Our prayers, Sir, were heard and they were graciously answered.
All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of a superintending providence in our favor…
I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth – that God Governs in the affairs of men.
And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?…”
Franklin continued:
“We have been assured, Sir, in the Sacred Writings, that ‘except the Lord build the House, they labor in vain that build it.’…
I also believe that without his concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better than the Builders of Babel…
I therefore beg leave to move – that henceforth prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessing on our deliberations, be held in this Assembly every morning before we proceed to business.”
New Hampshire Governor John Langdon called for a Day of Fasting, February 21, 1786, to pray for the new government:
“That He would be pleased to bless the great Council of the United States of America and direct their deliberations…
that he would rain down righteousness upon the earth, revive religion, and spread abroad the knowledge of the true God, the Saviour of man.”
New Hampshire became the 9th State to ratify the U.S. Constitution on JUNE 21, 1788. Now, with 2/3’s of the States having ratified it, the Constitution went into effect.
Were the “United” States originally established Christian – ON THE STATE LEVEL?
The answer can be seen by examining the acknowledgements of religion in the State Constitutions at the time those States ratified the U.S. Constitution.
DELAWARE, the first State to ratify the U.S. Constitution, stated in its 1776 State Constitution:
“Every person…appointed to any office…shall…subscribe…
‘I…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.’”
PENNSYLVANIA, the 2nd State to ratify the U.S. Constitution, stated in its 1776 State Constitution, signed by Ben Franklin:
“Each member, before he takes his seat, shall…subscribe…
‘I do believe in one GOD, the Creator and Governor of the Universe, the Rewarder of the good and the Punisher of the wicked. And I do acknowledge the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be given by Divine Inspiration.’”
NEW JERSEY, the 3rd State to ratify the U.S. Constitution, stated in its 1776 State Constitution:
“All persons, professing a belief in the faith of any PROTESTANT sect, who shall demean themselves peaceably under the government…shall be capable of being elected.”
GEORGIA, the 4th State to ratify the U.S. Constitution, stated in its 1777 State Constitution:
“Representatives shall be chosen out of the residents in each county…and they shall be of the PROTESTANT religion.”
CONNECTICUT, the 5th State to ratify the U.S. Constitution, retained its 1662 Colonial Constitution, which was established PROTESTANT CONGREGATIONAL, till 1818:
“By the Providence of GOD…having from their ancestors derived a free and excellent Constitution…whereby the legislature depends on the free and annual election…The free fruition of such liberties and privileges as humanity, civility and CHRISTIANITY call for.”
MASSACHUSETTS, the 6th State to ratify the U.S. Constitution, stated in its 1780 State Constitution, written by John Adams:
“Any person…before he…execute the duties of his…office…[shall] subscribe…’I…declare, that I believe the CHRISTIAN religion, and have a firm persuasion of its truth’…
The legislature shall…authorize the support and maintenance of public PROTESTANT teachers of piety, religion and morality.”
MARYLAND, the 7th State to ratify the U.S. Constitution, stated in its 1776 State Constitution:
“No other test…ought to be required, on admission to any office…than such oath of support and fidelity to this State…and a declaration of a belief in the CHRISTIAN religion.”
SOUTH CAROLINA, the 8th State to ratify the U.S. Constitution, stated in its 1778 State Constitution:
“No person shall be eligible to a seat…unless he be of the PROTESTANT religion…The CHRISTIAN PROTESTANT religion shall be deemed…the established religion of this State.”
NEW HAMPSHIRE, the 9th State to ratify the U.S. Constitution, stated in its 1784 State Constitution:
“No person shall be capable of being elected…who is not of the PROTESTANT religion.”
VIRGINIA, the 10th State to ratify the U.S. Constitution, stated in its 1776 State Constitution, Bill of Rights, written with the help of James Madison and George Mason:
“It is the mutual duty of all to practice CHRISTIAN forbearance, love, and charity towards each other.”
NEW YORK, the 11th State to ratify the U.S. Constitution, stated in its 1777 State Constitution:
“The United American States…declare…
‘Laws of nature and of NATURE’S GOD…All men are created equal; that they are endowed by their CREATOR with certain unalienable rights…Appealing to the SUPREME JUDGE of the world…A firm reliance on the protection of DIVINE PROVIDENCE’…
People of this State, ordain…the free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination…
Provided, That the liberty of conscience, hereby granted, shall not be so construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness.”
NORTH CAROLINA, the 12fth State to ratify the U.S. Constitution, stated in its 1776 State Constitution:
“No person, who shall deny the being of GOD or the truth of the PROTESTANT religion, or the Divine authority either 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…office.”
RHODE ISLAND, the 13th State to ratify the U.S. Constitution, retained its 1663 Colonial Constitution till 1843, which stated:
“By the blessing of God…a full liberty in religious concernements…rightly grounded upon GOSPEL principles, will give the best and greatest security…in the true CHRISTIAN faith and worship of God…They may…defend themselves, in their just rights and liberties against all the enemies of the CHRISTIAN faith.”
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Hugo Lafayette Black wrote in Engel v. Vitale, 1962:
“As late as the time of the Revolutionary War, there were established Churches in at least 8 of the 13 former colonies and established religions in at least 4 of the other 5.”
John K. Wilson wrote in ‘Religion Under the State Constitutions 1776-1800’ (Journal of Church and State, Volume 32, Autumn 1990, Number 4, pp. 754):
“An establishment of religion, in terms of direct tax aid to Churches, was the situation in 9 of the 13 colonies on the eve of the American revolution.”
The Journal of the U.S. House recorded that on March 27, 1854, the 33rd Congress voted unanimously to print Rep. James Meacham’s report, which stated:
“At the adoption of the Constitution, we believe every State – certainly 10 of the 13 – provided as regularly for the support of the Church as for the support of the Government…
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.”
Filed under Commentary, Uncategorized
A SOLUTION FOR THE SAME-SEX MARRIAGE PROBLEM
A SOLUTION FOR THE SAME-SEX MARRIAGE PROBLEM
Posted: 17 Sep 2015 11:28 PM PDT
By Chuck Baldwin
September 17, 2015
NewsWithViews.com
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
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
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:
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:
[1] Nicholas Pederson, “The Lost Founder: James Wilson in American
Memory,” 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.
|
James Wilson had a great influence during the American Founding but has been called “
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. Filed under Commentary
James Wilson’s Lectures on Law
James Wilson’s Lectures on Law
American Minute with Bill Federer
He was one of six founding fathers to sign both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
President Washington appointed him to be a Justice on the Supreme Court.
His name was James Wilson.
Born in Scotland, James Wilson was one of the first to argue against British dominance.
In 1774, James Wilson wrote “Considerations on the Nature and Extent of the Legislative Authority of the British Parliament,” reasoning that since the colonies had no representation in Parliament, the Parliament had no authority over the colonies.
In 1775, James Wilson was commissioned as a Colonel and by the end of the Revolution he was promoted to the rank of Brigadier General of the Pennsylvania State Militia.
One of the most educated and prominent lawyers in America, James Wilson was chosen as a delegate to the Constitutional Convention, where he spoke 168 times.
After the Federalist Papers, James Wilson’s speech in the statehouse yard, October 6, 1787, was the most influential in convincing the States of ratify the U.S. Constitution.
The first law professor of the University of Pennsylvania, James Wilson wrote in his Lectures on Law, 1789-91, that all law comes from God, being divided into four categories:
“Law Eternal,”
“Law Celestial,”
“Laws of Nature,”
and:
“Law…communicated to us by reason and conscience…has been called natural; as promulgated by the Holy Scriptures, it has been called revealed…”
James Wilson continued:
“But it should always be remembered, that this law, natural or revealed…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.”
James Wilson concluded:
“Far from being rivals or enemies, religion and law are twin sisters, friends, and mutual assistants. Indeed, these two sciences run into each other.”
To interpret statutes, James Wilson wrote:
“The first and governing maxim in the interpretation of a statute is to discover the meaning of those who made it.”
James Wilson described the “Will of God” as the:
“…efficient cause of moral obligation – of the eminent distinction between right and wrong…(and therefore the) supreme law…
(It is revealed) by our conscience, by our reason, and by the Holy Scriptures.”
At the age of 55, James Wilson died AUGUST 21, 1798.
The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania recorded in 1824:
“The late Judge James Wilson, of the Supreme Court of the United States, Professor of Law in the College in Philadelphia…for our present form of government we are greatly indebted to his exertions…
In his Course of Lectures (3d Vol. of his Works, 122), he states that…’Christianity is part of the common-law.’”
James Wilson remarked at Pennsylvania’s ratifying convention, November 26, 1787:
“Governments, in general, have been the result of force, of fraud, and accident.
After a period of 6,000 years has elapsed since the creation, the United States exhibit to the world the first instance…of a nation… assembling voluntarily… and deciding calmly concerning that system of government under which they would wish that they and their posterity should live.”
Daniel Webster made a similar statement in 1802:
“We live under the only government that ever existed which was framed by the unrestrained and deliberate consultations of the people.
Miracles do not cluster. That which has happened but once in 6,000 years cannot be expected to happen often.”
Yale President Ezra Stile had stated May 8, 1783:
“Most of the States of all ages…have been founded in rapacity, usurpation and injustice…
The military history of all nations, being but a description of the wars and invasions of the mutual robbers and devastators of the human race…
All the forms of civil polity have been tried by mankind, except one: and that seems to have been referred in Providence to be realized in America.”
John Adams wrote in his notes of A Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law, February 1765:
“I always consider the settlement of America with reverence and wonder, as the opening of a grand scene and design in Providence for the illumination of the ignorant, and the emancipation of the slavish part of mankind all over the earth.”
John Jay, the First Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, stated September 8, 1777:
“The Americans are the first people whom Heaven has favored with an opportunity of…choosing the forms of government under which they should live.
All other constitutions have derived their existence from violence or accidental circumstances.”
Poet Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote:
“America…appears like a last effort of divine Providence in behalf of the human race.”
President Calvin Coolidge stated in 1924:
“The history of government on this earth has been almost entirely…rule of force held in the hands of a few.
Under our Constitution, America committed itself to power in the hands of the people.”
President Millard Fillmore stated in 1852:
“Our free institutions…were planted in the free charters of self-government under which the English colonies grew up…
European nations have had no such training for self-government, and every effort to establish it by bloody revolutions has been, and must without that preparation continue to be, a failure.”
Theodore Roosevelt stated October 24, 1903:
“In no other place and at no other time has the experiment of government of the people, by the people, for the people, been tried on so vast a scale as here in our own country.”
President Ronald Reagan stated in 1961:
“In this country of ours took place the greatest revolution that has ever taken place in the world’s history.
Every other revolution simply exchanged one set of rulers for another.
Here for the first time in all the thousands of years of man’s relation to man…the founding fathers established the idea that you and I had within ourselves the God-given right and ability to determine our own destiny.”
If you haven’t yet, invest in one or Bill Federer’s
Filed under Commentary
America – the Great Experiment in Self Governance
America – the Great Experiment in Self Governance
American Minute with Bill Federer
He sat next to George Washington in the pew at St. Paul’s Chapel in New York during the religious service following Washington’s Presidential Inauguration.
He helped ratify the U.S. Constitution.
His name was Fisher Ames.
Fisher Ames was a Congressman from Massachusetts where, on August 20, 1789, he proposed as the wording of the First Amendment (Annals of Congress, 1:766):
“Congress shall make no law establishing religion, or to prevent the free exercise thereof, or to infringe the rights of conscience.”
Fisher Ames compared monarchy to a republic, as recorded by Ralph Waldo Emerson in Essays, Second Series, (chapter 7, “Politics,” p. 97, 1844; Library of America, 1983):
“Monarchy is a merchantman, which sails well, but will sometimes strike on a rock, and go to the bottom; whilst a republic is a raft, which would never sink, but then your feet are always in water.”
Of America’s Republic, Fisher Ames wrote in an article titled “Monitor,” published in The New England Palladium of Boston, 1804, (Works of Fisher Ames, compiled by a number of his friends, Boston: T.B. Wait & Co., 1809, p. 272):
“We now set out with our experimental project, exactly where Rome failed with hers. We now begin, where she ended.”
Warning against the temptation to increase government, Fisher Ames stated in “Speeches on Mr. Madison’s Resolutions” (Works of Fisher Ames, compiled by a number of his friends, Boston: T.B. Wait & Co., 1809, p. 48):
“To control trade by law, instead of leaving it to the better management of the merchants…(is) to play the tyrant in the counting house, and in directing the private expenses of our citizens, are employments equally unworthy of discussion.”
At the Massachusetts Convention, January 15, 1788, Fisher Ames warned that democracy without morals would eventually reduce the nation to the basest of human passions, swallowing freedom:
“A democracy is a volcano which conceals the fiery materials of its own destruction.”
Fisher Ames commented in “The Dangers of American Liberty,” 1805 (published in Works of Fisher Ames: with a selection from his speeches and correspondence, Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1854, pp. 349):
“The known propensity of a democracy is to licentiousness, which the ambitious call, and the ignorant believe to be, liberty.”
Russell Kirk described Fisher Ames in The Conservative Mind: From Burke to Eliot (Washington D.C.: Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2001, chapter 3, p. 81-85):
“As time runs on, Ames grows more intense. Democracy cannot last…When property is snatched from hand to hand…then society submits cravenly to the immorality of rule by the sword…
Of all the terrors of democracy, the worst is its destruction of moral habits. ‘A democratic society will soon find its morals…the surly companion of its licentious joys’…
Is there no check upon these excesses?…The press supplies an endless stimulus to popular imagination and passion; the press lives upon heat and coarse drama and incessant restlessness. ‘It has inspired ignorance with presumption’…
‘Constitutions,’ says Ames, ‘are but paper; society is the substratum of government’…
Like Samuel Johnson, (Ames) finds the key to political decency in private morality.”
Aaron McLeod wrote in “Great Conservative Minds: A Condensation of Russell Kirk’s The Conservative Mind” (October 2005, Alabama Policy Institute, Birmingham, AL, chp. 3, p. 9-10}:
“Ames was pessimistic about the American experiment because he doubted there were sufficient numbers of men with the moral courage and charisma to preserve the country from the passions of the multitudes and the demagogues who master them.
He was convinced that the people as a body cannot reason and are easily swayed by clever speakers and political agents. In his words, ‘few can reason, all can feel’…
Democracy could not last, Ames thundered, ‘for despotism lies at the door; when the tyranny of the majority leads to chaos, society will submit to rule by the sword.’”
Aaron McLeod continued:
“To Ames, what doomed the American experiment was the democratic destruction of morals…
Ames believed that justice and morality in America would fail, and popular rule cannot support justice, without which moral habits fall away.
Neither the free press nor paper constitutions could safe-guard order from these excesses, for the first is merely a stimulus to popular passion and imagination, while the other is a thin bulwark against corruption.
When old prescription and tradition are dismissed, only naked force matters.”
George Washington died December 14, 1799.
Fisher Ames delivered a eulogy “An Oration on the Sublime Virtues of General George Washington,” February 8, 1800, at Boston’s Old South Meeting-House, before the Lieutenant Governor, the Council, and both branches of the Massachusetts Legislature (Boston: Young & Minns, 1800, p. 23):
“Our liberty depends on our education, our laws, and habits…
It is founded on morals and religion, whose authority reigns in the heart, and on the influence all these produce on public opinion before that opinion governs rulers.”
Fisher Ames wrote in The Mercury and New-England Palladium of Boston (Vol. XVII, No. 2,8, Tuesday, January 27, 1801, p. 1; John Thornton Kirkland, Works of Fisher Ames, 1809, p. 134-35; The Works of Fisher Ames, compiled by a number of his friends, T.B. Wait & Co., Boston, 1809, p. 134-135; Seth Ames, ed., Works of Fisher Ames, Vol. II, New York: Birt Franklin, 1971, pp. 405-406; Frederick C. Kubicek, Evolution-Guilty As Charged, Shippensburg, PA; Treasure House, 1993, p. 125):
“It has been the custom of late years to put a number of little books into the hands of children, containing fables and moral lessons…
Many books for children are…injudiciously compiled…the moral is drawn from the fable they know not why…
Some of the most admired works of this kind abound with a frothy sort of sentiment…the chief merit of which consists in shedding tears and giving away money…
Why then, if these books for children must be retained…should not the Bible regain the place it once held as a school book? Its morals are pure, its examples captivating and noble.
The reverence for the Sacred Book, that is thus early impressed, lasts long – and probably, if not impressed in infancy never takes firm hold of the mind.
One consideration more is important: In no book is there so good English, so pure and so elegant – and by teaching all the same book they will speak alike, and the Bible will justly remain the standard of language as well as of faith.”
D. James Kennedy summarized Fisher Ames words in “The Great Deception” (Fort Lauderdale, FL: Coral Ridge Ministries, 1989; 1993, p. 3; The Great Deception-a speech delivered December 1, 1992, Ottawa, IL):
“We have a dangerous trend beginning to take place in our education. We’re starting to put more and more textbooks into our schools. We’ve become accustomed of late of putting little books into the hands of children, containing fables and moral lessons.
We’re spending less time in the classroom on the Bible, which should be the principal text in our schools. The Bible states these great moral lessons better than any other man-made book.”
At age 46, Fisher Ames was elected Harvard’s president, but he declined due to an illness which eventually led to his death.
On July 4, 1808, exactly 32 years to the day after America declared its Independence, Fisher Ames died at the age of 50.
One of the most famous orators in Congress, Fisher Ames was quoted in the Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge (Bela Bates Edward, editor of Quarterly Observer, Brattleboro, VT: Joseph Steen & Co.; Philadelphia: Lippincott, Grambo & Co.; New York: Lewis Colby, 1851, p. 78):
“No man ever did or ever will become truly eloquent without being a constant reader of the Bible, and an admirer of the purity and sublimity of its language.”
The 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 books here.
Filed under History
Our father’s God, to Thee, Author of Liberty…
American Minute with Bill Federer
“My country, ’tis of thee,
Sweet land of liberty,
Of thee I sing;
Land where my fathers died,
Land of the pilgrims’ pride,
From every mountainside,
Let freedom ring!”
This hymn was written by Samuel Francis Smith, who died NOVEMBER 16, 1895.
A Harvard classmate of poet Oliver Wendell Holmes, Smith went to Andover Theological Seminary and became a Baptist minister.
While a student in 1832, Samuel Francis Smith admired a tune while translating a German Hymnal – the same tune was used for British, Canadian, Russian, Danish, Swedish and Swiss National anthems.
Smith stated:
“I instantly felt the impulse to write a patriotic hymn of my own, adapted to the tune.
Picking up a scrap of waste paper which lay near me, I wrote at once.”
In proclaiming “Let Freedom Ring Day,” July 3, 1986, President Ronald Reagan recalled the hymn’s 4th stanza, stating:
“As the golden glow of the Statue of Liberty’s rekindled torch calls forth…throughout our land, let every American take it as a summons to rededication, recalling those words we sang as children:
‘Our father’s God, to Thee,
Author of Liberty,
To Thee we sing,
Long may our land be bright
With Freedom’s Holy Light.
Protect us by Thy might,
Great God, Our King.’”
If you are interested in quotes on
“My Country” see below:
“If it be the pleasure of Heaven that my country shall require the poor offering of my life, the victim shall be ready, at the appointed hour of sacrifice…But while I do live, let me have a country, and that a free country!” – John Adams
“While my country calls for the exertion of that little share of abilities, which it has pleased God to bestow on me, I hold it my indispensable duty to give myself to her.” – Gouverneur Morris
“I only regret that I have but one life to lose for my country.” – Nathan Hale
“I shall anticipate…the place to be assigned me in the history of my country, and die contented with the belief that I have contributed… to…prolong the duration of American liberty.” – Andrew Jackson
“I implore the Spirit from whom every good and perfect gift descends to enable me to render essential service to my country.” – John Quincy Adams
“The ends I aim at shall be my country’s, my God’s, and Truth’s. I was born an American; I will live an American; I shall die an American.” – Daniel Webster
“I will never forget that I am an American fighting man, responsible for my actions, and dedicated to the principles which made my country free. I will trust in my God and in the United States of America.” – President Eisenhower, Code of Conduct for Military
“No, this is a service for my country, and it doesn’t matter whether I do it as an officer or as a plainsman. The big thing is to do it.” – Kit Carson
“No personal consideration shall induce me to abandon the righteous cause of my country. Tell Governor Gage it is the advise of Samuel Adams to him no longer to insult the feelings of an exasperated people.” – Samuel Adams
“Our national policy will be laid in the pure and immutable principles of private morality…I dwell on this prospect with every satisfaction which an ardent love for my country can inspire.” – George Washington
“I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that His justice cannot sleep forever.” – Thomas Jefferson
The 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 books here.
Filed under Inspirational
In Spirit and In Truth The Word 
BALANCE? WHAT BALANCE?
William Andrew Dillard
I do not propose to be a constitutional lawyer, but I feel deeply that I understand more about that foundational document of the United States of America than a lot of “so-called” lawyers do, and much of what now makes up congress. If possible, I want to present some thoughts on balance of power in government without digressing too much on so many tempting thoughts.
Our republic is the expression of tremendous wisdom on the part of our founding fathers. The three branches of government: Executive, Judicial, Legislative are so designed to create a balance of power offering good governing actions, licenses, restrictions, etc. on the part of the governed: the citizens of the nation, most certainly including those who make up and staff those branches. In the simplist of terms, the legislative branch has the responsibility to make laws, and fund their implementation. The judicial branch has the responsibility of determining whether the laws the legislative branch makes are constitutional (not contrary to the meaning of the constitution as originally written). The executive branch has the responsibility of executing those laws, and of protecting by the power of his actions the citizens of the nation. Excuse me, but I am searching in vain for balance in the way the branches of government are operating today.
Congress refuses to make necessary laws for the good of the country. Judicial courts issue edicts blocking the actions of the executive branch. The process seems to be a designed program to bring the function of government to a halt, and swinging the doors wide open to lawlessness and chaos in other matters as well.
When will the judicial branch discipline itself? The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is obviously staffed with left wing liberals whose decisions are overturned most of the time. Yet, they have the power to stop the actions of the executive branch? It should be dissolved! The legislative branch revels in its own quagmire of do nothing but feather their own bed. What will happen to our beloved country when it becomes largely dysfunctional? Where are the statesmen? Revolution will undoubtedly occur, but the ensuing form will not be pleasing to those clamoring for its present demise, nor friendly toward freedom loving people. God’s people should be much in prayer for heavenly help to thwart the designs of the socialistic communists who are doing their dead level best to take the republic down. GOD BLESS AMERICA!
Leave a comment
Filed under Commentary
Tagged as America, judicial, legislative, power, president