💾 Archived View for gemini.spam.works › mirrors › textfiles › occult › CHRISTIAN › churchst.txt captured on 2022-07-17 at 09:33:18.
⬅️ Previous capture (2022-06-12)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
From: REXLEX@linac.fnal.gov
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: America & Xianity
Message-ID: <Jan.19.01.02.05.1993.2237@farside.rutgers.edu>
Sender: hedrick@farside.rutgers.edu
Date: 19 Jan 93 06:02:06 GMT
Organization: FNAL.GOV
Lines: 497
On 1/12, Brian Kendig put forth the liberal notion of separtaion of
church/state with such quotes as:
"Leave the matter of religion to the family altar, the church, and the
private schools, supported entirely by private contributions. Keep
the church and the state forever separated."- Ulysses S. Grant
I have put together (mostly w/o references attached) a statement against that
position. I think that it is a myth that the founding fathers of this great
nation thought of separation of c/s as some now propose, including some supreme
court justices, and the far left liberals. In my word processor, it shows me
that I have typed out 13 pages of material, but I do not want to edit anything
out so I'm leaving it as is. Most of the material is verbatum of original
documents with some commentaries of that period. It is my hope that this will
help those who wish also to take the stand that the US was established as a
Christian nation, yet allowing the freedom of the worship of individuals of
others faiths. (many lib's quote Jeferson, but read toward the end of this
article what Jeff really said) --Rex
From Christopher Columbus' Book of Propheces:
"It was the Lord who put into my mind-I could feel His hand upon me . . ..All
who heard of my project rejected it with laughter, ridiculing me...There is no
question that the inspiration was from the Holy Spirit, because he comforted me
with rays of marvelous illumination from the Holy Scriptures...For the
execution of the journey. . . did not make use of intelligence, mathematics,
or maps. It is simply the fulfillment of what Isaiah had prophesied.. .No one
should fear to undertake any task in the name of our Savior, if it is just and
if the intention is purely for His Holy service. ..the fact that the Gospel
must Stin be preached to so many lands in such a short time-this is what
convinces me."
From William Bradford's "History of Plymouth Plantation":
"A great hope and inward zeal they had of laying some good foundation, or at
least to make some way thereunto, for the propagating and advancing the Gospel
of the Kingdom of Christ in those remote parts of the world; yea, though they
should be but even as stepping-stones unto others for the per~ forming of so
great a work."
The Mayflower Compact, from William Bradford's "History of Plymouth
Plantation":
"In the name of God, Amen. We, whose names are underwritten, the loyal subjects
of our dread sovereign lord King James, by the grace of Gocl, of Great Britain,
France, and keland, king, defender of the faith, etc., having undertaken for
the glory of God and advancement of the Christian faith, and the honor of our
king and country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts of
Virginia; do by these presents, solemnly and mutually in the presence of God
and one another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil body
politic, for our better ordering and preservation and furtherance of the ends
aforesaid; and by virtue hereof do enact, constitute and frame such just and
eclual laws, ordinances, acts, constitu~ tions and offices, from time to time,
as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the general good of the
colony; unto which we promise all due submission and obedience. In witness
whereof we have hereunto subscribed our names at Cape Cod the eleventh of
November, in the reign of our sovereign lord KingJames of England, France and
Ireland, the eighteenth and of Scotland, the fifty-fourth. Anno Domini, 1620."
From the "First Charter of Virginia:"
"We, greatly commending and graciously accepting of their desires for the
furtherance of so noble a work, which may, by the providence of Almighty God,
hereafter tend to the glory of His Divine Majesty, in propagating of Christian
religion to such people, as yet live in darkness and miserable
ignorance of the true knowledge and worship of God, and may in time...."
From George Washington's "Inaugural Speech to Both Houses of Congress," April
30, 1789:
"Such being the impressions under which I have, in obedience to the public
summons, repaired to the present station, it would be peculiarly improper to
omit, in this first official act, my fervent supplications to that Almighty
Being who rules over the universe, who presides in the councils of nations and
whose providential aids can supply every human defect, that His benediction may
consecrate to the liberties and happiness of the people of the United States a
government instituted by themselves for these essential purposes....No people
can be bound to acknowledge and adore the Invisible Hand which conducts the
affairs of men more than the people of the United States. Every step by which
they have advanced to the character of an independent nation seems to have been
distinguished by some token of providential agency. . . . We ought to be no
less persuaded that the propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a
nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right which Heaven itself
has ordainedJ and since the preservation of the sacred fire of liberty and the
destiny of the republican model of government are justly considered as deeply,
perhaps finally, staked on the experiment...."
From Abraham Lincoln's "Proclamation Appointing a National Fast Day," March 30,
1863:
"Whereas, the Senate of the United States devoutly recognizing the Supreme
Authority and just Government of Almighty God in all the affairs of men and of
nations, has, by a resolution, requested the President to designate and set
apart a day for national prayer and humiliation:
And whereas, it is the duty of nations as well as of men to own their
dependence upon the overruling power of God, to confess their sins and
transgressions in humble sorrow yet with assured hope that genuine repentance
will lead to mercy and pardon, and to recognize the sublime truth, announced in
the Holy Scriptures and proven by all history: that those nations only are
blessed whose God is the Lord:
And, insomuch as we know that, by His divine law, nations like individuals are
subjected to punishments and chastisements in this world~may we not justly fear
that the awful calamity of civil war, which now desolates the land may be but a
punishment inflicted upon us for our presumptuous sins to the needful end of
our national reformation as a whole people; We have been the recipients of the
choicest bounties of Heaven. We have been preserved these many years in peace
and prosperity. We have grown in numbers, wealth and power as no other nation
has ever grown. But we have forgotten God. We have forgotten the gracious Hand
which preserved us in peace, and multiplied and enriched and strengthened us;
and we have vainly imagined,, in the deceitfulness of our hearts, that all
these blessings were produced by some superior wisdom and virtue of our own.
Intoxicated with unbroken success, we have become too self-sufficient to feel
the necessity of redeeming and preserving grace, too proud to pray to the God
that made us!
It behooves us then to humble ourselves before the offended Power, to confess
our national sins and to pray for clemency and forgiveness. [. . . ]
All this being done, in sincerity and truth, let us then rest humbly in the
hope authorized by the Divine teachings, that the united cry of the nation will
be heard on high and answered with blessings no less than the pardon of our
national sins and the restoration of our now divided and suffering country to
its former happy condition of unity and peace.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the
United States to be affixed. By the President: Abraham Lincoln.
Various Colony Declarations
New England
"The synod of the New England churches met at Cambridge, Mass, Sept 30, 1648,
and defined the nature of civil government, the functions of the civil
magistrate, adn the duties of the citizens, as follows:
I. God, the Supreme Lord and King of all the world, hath ordained civil
magistrates to be under him, over the people, and for his own glory and the
public good; and to this end hath armed them with the power of the sword for
the defense and encouragement of them that do well, and for the punishment of
evil-doers.
II. It is lawful for Christians to accept and execute the office of magistrate
when called thereunto. In the management whereof, as they ought especially to
maintain piety, justice, and peace, according to the wholesome laws of the
Commonwealth, so for that end they may lawfully now, under the New Testa~ ment,
wage war upon just and necessary occasions.
III. They who, upon pretence of Christian liberty, shall oppose any lawful
power, or the lawful exercises of it, resist the ordinances of God,. . .may be
called to account and proceeded against by the censure of the church and by the
power of the civil magistrate.
IV. It is the duty of the people to pray for magistrates, to honor their
persons, to pay them tribute and other dues, to obey their lawful commands, and
to be subject to their authority for conscience's sake."
"Civil government on the basis of the Bible and free principles of a pure
Christianity was not the only object th~t the Puritans had in view in coming to
the New World. They had also the great and good end of extending and
establishing the kingdom of Christ, and of bringing the whole continent under
the reign of Christianity and filling it with its saving blessings" .
"In 1643, a confederation between the colonies of Massachusetts, New
Plymouth, Connecticut, and New Haven was formed, in which it is affirmed that
'we all came into these parts of America with the same end and aim, namely, to
advance the kingdom of our Lord ]esus Christ, and to enjoy the liberties
thereof with purity and peace, and for preserving and propagating the truth and
liberties of the gospel"' (p. 56).
Massachusetts
"In the charter granted to Massachusetts, in 1640, by Charles I., the Colonies
are enjoined by 'their good life and orderly conversation to win and invite the
natives of the country to a knowledge of the only true God and Savior of
mankind, and the Christian &ith which, in our royal intention and adventurer's
free possession, is the principal end of this plantation"'
Connecticut
"In Connecticut the first organization of civil society and government was
made, in 1639, at Quinipiack, now the beautiful city of New Haven...A
constitution was formed, which was characterized as 'the first example of a
written constitution; as a distinct organic act, constituting a government and
defining its powers."' Listed below are some of the articles which made up the
constitution of Connecticut:
I. That the Scriptures hold forth a perfect rule for the direction and
government of all men in all duties which they are to perform to God and men,
as well in families and commonwealths as in matters of the church.
II. That as in matters which concerned the gathering and ordering of a church,
so likewise in all public offices which concern civil order,-as the choice of
magistrates and officers, making and repealing laws, dividing allotments of
inheritance, and all things of like nature,-they would all be governed by those
rules which the Scripture held forth to them.
III. That all those who had desired to be received free planters had settled in
the plantation with a purpose, resolution, and desire that they might be
admitted into church fellowship according to Christ.
IV. That all the free planters held themselves bound to establish such civil
order as might best conduce to the securing of the purity and peace of the
ordinance to themselves, and their posterity according to God.'
"The governor was then charged by the Rev. Mr. Davenport, in the most
solemn manner, as to his duties, from Deut. i. 16, 17:-'And I charged your
judges at that time, saying, Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge
righteously between every man and his brother, and the stranger that is with
him. Ye shall not respect persons in judgment, but ye shall hear the small as
well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment
is God's: and the cause that is too hard for you, bring it unto me, and I will
hear it'. The General Court, established under this constitution,
ordered,-'That God's word should be the only rule for ordering the affairs of
government in this commonwealth"'.
New Hampshire
"In 1679, NEW HAMPSHIRE, was separated from Massachusetts and organized as an
independent province. The colonists, having been so long a part of the
Christian commonwealth of Massachusetts, constituted their institutions on the
same Christian basis. Its legislature was Christian, and the colony greatly
prospered and increased in population".
Pennsylvania
"The settlement of the province of Pennsylvania by William Penn formed a new
era in the liberties of mankind. It afforded a resting-place where the
conscientious and oppressed people of Europe might repose, and enjoy the rights
of civil and religious freedom which mankind had derived as an inheritance from
the Creator. He [Penn] obtained from Charles II. a grant of territory that now
embraces the States of Pennsylvania, New ]ersey, and Delaware. He was legally
inducted to the governorship of this immense domain, in England, by the
officers of the crown, and in 1682 arrived in the New World and assumed the
civil government of the colony. He avowed his purpose to be to institute a
civil government on the basis of the Bible and to administer it in the fear of
the Lord. The acquisition and government of the colony, he said, was 'so to
serve the truth and the people of the Lord, that an example may be set to the
nations.'
"The frame of government which Penn completed in 1682 for the government
of Pennsylvania was derived from the Bible. He deduced from various passages
'the origination and descent of all human power from God; the divine right of
government, and that for two ends,-first to terrify evil doers; secondly, to
cherish those who do well;' so that government, he said, 'seems to me to be a
part of religion itself.'-'a thing sacred in its institutions and ends.' Let
men be good, and the government cannot be bad.' 'That, therefore, which makes a
good constitution must keep it,-namely men of wisdom and virtue,-qualities
that, because they descend not with worldly inheritance, must be carefully
propagated by a virtuous education of youth'.
"The first legislative act, December, 1682, "announced the ends of a true
civil government. 'Whereas the glory of Almighty God and the good of mankind is
the reason and end of government, and, therefore, government in itself is a
venerable ordinance of God..."' And it is the purpose of civil government to
establish "laws as shall best preserve true Christian and civil liberty, in
opposition to all unchristian, licentious, and unjust practices, whereby God
may have his due, Caesar his due, and the people their due, from tyranny and
oppression".
". . . . . But religion, as a life, as an inward principle, though specially
developed and fostered by the Church, extends its domain beyond the sphere of
technical worship, touches all the relations of man, and constitutes the
inspiration of every duty. The service of the Commonwealth becomes an act of
piety to God. The State realizes its religious character through the religious
character of its subjects; and a State is and ought to be Christian, because
all its subjects are and ought to be determined by the principles of the
Gospel. As every legislator is bound to be a Christian man, he has no right to
vote for any laws which are inconsistent with the teachings of Scriptures. He
must carry his Christian conscience into the halls of legislation" (The
Collected Writings of James Henley Thomwell, Vol. IV, p. 517).
_______________________________________________________
Separation of Church & State
_______________________________________________________
Myth #1: The system of law and its principles are religiously or morally
neutral.
It must be remembered that neutrality is impossible. Some authority,
whether it be God or man, is used as the reference point for all enacted laws.
If a political system rejects one authority, it adopts another. If a biblical
moral system is not being legislated, then an immoral system is being
legislated. Any moral system that does not put Jesus Christ at its center,
denies Christ: "No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one
and love the other, or he will hold to one and despise the other..." (Matthew
6:24); and, "He who is not with Me is against Me; and he who does not gather
with Me scatters" (12:30). "Our standard of right is that eternal law which God
proclaimed from Sinai, and which Jesus expounded on the Mount. We recogni2e our
responsibility to Jesus Christ. He is Head over all things to the Church, and
the nation that will not serve Him is doomed to perish" (James Henley
Thornwell, The Collected Writings of ]ames Henley Thomwell, Vol. IV, p. 517f.
).
Myth #2: The First Amendment calls for a "separation of Church and State."
When an individual is questioned as to whether a Christian should involve
himself in the political realm, a protest is made by an appeal to the
"separation of Church and State" found in the First Amendment to the
Constitution. Many Christians usually do not have an answer when they are
confronted with this standard argument. Most people do not realize that the
First Amendment says nothing about Church and State or a separation between the
two. It simply states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an
establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...." In the
Constitution of the Soviet Union, however, the doctrine of the separation of
Church and State is found: "In order to ensure to citizens freedom of
conscience, the church in the U.S.S.R. is separated from the State, and the
school from the church. Freedom of religious worship and freedom of
antireligious propaganda is recognized for all citizens" (Article 124). The
Constitution of the United States of America has the First Amendment as a
safe-guard so that the State can have no jurisdiction over the Church. Its
purpose was to protect the Church, not to disestablish it.
Myth # 3: The silence of the Constitution regarding Christianity.
It is assumed that the United States was never Christian in its basic
ideals and values because the Constitution does not specifically mention
Christianity. The myth is shattered when one realizes that it was never the
purpose of the Constitution to give religious content to the nation. Rather,
the Constitution was an instrument whereby already existing religious values of
the nation could be protected and perpetuated. The Constitution is not devoid
of Christian references, however. It is interesting to note that the
Constitution acknowledges Sunday as a day of rest: "If any bill shall not be
returned by the President within ten days (Sundays excepted) after it shall
have been presented to him, the same shall be a law. . ." (Article I, section
7). Moreover, there is a direct reference to the Lord Jesus Christ in the
Constitution: "DONE in convention by the unanimous consent of the States
present, the seventeenth of September, in the year of our Lord one thousand
seven hundred and eighty seven and of the independence of the United States of
America the twelfth. In witness whereof we have hereunto subscribed our Names."
Myth #4 The states were to be religiously neutral and that the federal
government had an obligation to ensure that the states remained religiously
neutral.
By studying the State Constitutions, one begins to realize that they were
not religiously "neutral" but were, in fact, explicitly Christian. After the
adoption of the First Amendment, several states even had established Churches.
Here are some examples:
The Connecticut Constitution (until 1818): "The People of this State...by the
Providence of God. . .hath the sole and exclusive right of governing themselves
as a free, sovereign, and independent State. . . and forasmuch as the free
fruition of such liberties and privileges as humanity, civility, and
Christianity call for, as is due to every man in his place and
proportion...hath ever been, and will be the tranquility and stability of
Churches and Commonwealth; and the denial thereof, the disturbances, if not the
ruin of both."
The Delaware Constitution (1831): "...no man ought to be compelled to attend
any religious worship..." but it recognized "the duty of all men frequently to
assemble together for the public worship of the Author of the Universe." The
following oath of office was in force until 1792: "I. ..do profess faith in God
the Father, and in Jesus Christ His only son, and in the Holy Ghost, one God,
blessed for evermore; I do acknowledge the holy scriptures of the Old and New
Testaments to be given by divine inspiration."
The Maryland Constitution (until 1851): "That, as it is the duty of every man
to worship God in such a manner as he thinks most acceptable to him; all
persons professing the Christian religion, are equally entitled to protection
in their religious liberty; wherefore no person ought by any law to be
molested...on account of his religious practice; unless, under the color
[pretense] of religion~ any man shall disturb the good order, peace or safety
of the State, or shall infringe the laws of morality. . .yet the Legislature
may, in their discretion, lay a general and equal tax, for the support of the
Christian religion." The Constitu~ tion of 1864 required "a declaration of a
belief in the Christian religion" for all State officers.
The Massachusetts Constitution (until 1863): This state Constitution included
the "right" of "the people of this commonwealth to. . . invest their
Legislature with power to authorize and require, the several towns, parishes,
precincts, and other bodies-politic or religious societies to make suitable
provision, at their own expense, for the institution of the public worship of
God and for the support and maintenance of public Protestant teachers of piety,
religion, and morality in all cases where such provision shall not be made
voluntary."
The North Carolina Constitution (until 1876): "That no person who shall deny
the being of God, or the truth of the Protestant religion, or the divine
authority of the Old or New Testaments, or who shall hold religious principles
incompatible with the freedom and safety of the State, shall be capable of
holding any office or place of trust or profit in the civil department within
this State."
These State Constitutions provide ample evidence that the First Amendment
was not originally intended to remove all Christian influence from our civil
government. "And yet, the Supreme Court and some Constitutional authorities ask
us to believe that the founding fathers would have forbidden even a voluntary
prayer in a school supported by a State....Paul Eidelberg "The Philosophy of
the American Constitution", p. 271), having cited these provisions of the State
constitutions, remarks that the various decisions of the Supreme Court
regarding the First Amendment and the 'establishment of religion' clause should
be reviewed in the light of this information" (James M. Bulman, It Is Their
Right, pp. 111-112, 119).
Myth #5 Historically the concept of the separation of Church and State has
been part of official governmental policy.
"If the American people have ever adopted the principle of complete
separation of church and state, we would find the evidence of it in the federal
Constitution, in the acts of Congress, or in the constitutions or laws of the
several states. There is no such evidence in existence. In its absence, the
mere opinion of private individuals or groups that there should be absolute
separation of church and state (a condition that has not existed in recent
centuries in any civilized nation on earth) does not create a 'great American
principle"' (J.M. O'Neill, Religion and Education Under the Constitution, p.
4). The origin of the phrase "separation of church and state" is found in a
letter from Thomas Jefferson to a group of Baptist clergymen January 1, 1802).
Jefferson was assuring the Danbury Baptist Association that the First Amendment
guaranteed that there would be no establishment of any one denomination over
another. The Baptists feared that the Congregationalists would be the preferred
denomination. The Supreme Court has taken Jefferson's "separation" clause
(divorced from Jefferson's own explanation of the phrase) and used it to create
a new, and completely arbitrary, interpretation of the First Amendment. (cf.
Robert Borks' books/lectures on contitutional and the Supreme Court)
Since Jefferson is the best interpreter of Jefferson, his own words
concerning the issue of the national government's authority over individual
states and churches should be considered. In Jefferson's Second Inaugural
Address of March 4, 1805, he made the following comment: "In matters of
religion, I have considered that its free exercise is placed by the
Constitution independent of the powers of the General Government. I have
therefore undertaken, on no occasion, to prescribe the religious exercise
suited to it; but have left them, as the Constitution found them, under the
direction and discipline of state and church authorities acknowledged by the
several religious societies" (Saul K. Padover, ed., The Complete Jefferson, p.
412).
Jefferson also feared the Supreme Court. He believed that the Court by its
exercise of the power of judicial review was in the process of usurping the
authority of the national and state governments. In 1820 he wrote: "To consider
the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions is a very
dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of
an oligarch [rule by a few]....The Constitution has erected no such single
tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time
and party, its members would become despots" (Letter to Jarvis, 1820).
(Jefferson also wrote about the need for the Bible to be taught to society at
large -as a utilitarian ethic- and so enacted such legislation as the head of
education. He put forth the principle that it was to be the standard from
which school teachers were to teach. He also encouraged prayer in the class
room!!!)
[I've seen these arguments in other groups, and there are just as long
sets of quotations (sometimes from the same people) indicating the
reverse. My conclusion from this is that people in the 18th Cent.
were no more unanimous in their intentions than people are now. I am
certainly convinced that many people saw the U.S. as in some sense a
Christian enterprise. Thus I think the complete and radical
disassociation between Christianity and the State that is sometimes
advocated now is not what they had in mind. On the other hand, it's
also clear that they had seen entirely too many religious wars and
religious tyrannies in Europe, and thus that they did want to make
sure that no specific church or creed had authority over the State.
In the current debates, the choices presented seem to me generally too
extreme on both sides. It is clear that some Christians want to use
the State as a vehicle to enforce their Christian ideas on everyone.
This seems to me exactly the sort of thing that the Bill of Rights was
intended to prevent. On the other side, it is also hard to envision
that the Founding Fathers would have wanted a situation where one
can't mention God in any publicly sponsored forum, for fear of having
the State appear to support religion, which seems to be the goal of
others. Somehow, between alternating volleys of quotations from
devout Founding Fathers and anti-clerical quotatios from Tom Paine,
we've got to find a better approach.
One complicating issue is that there is one basic situation that is no
longer true. I just looked through the Federalist Papers, and found
no very explicit discussion of the relationship between Church and
State. What I did find was the following interesting statement.
(This is taken from the Project Gutenberg on-line edition.)
FEDERALIST No. 2
Concerning Dangers from Foreign Force and Influence
For the Independent Journal.
JAY
To the People of the State of New York:
...
With equal pleasure I have as often taken notice that Providence
has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united
people--a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same
language, professing the same religion, attached to the same
principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs,
and who, by their joint counsels, arms, and efforts, fighting side
by side throughout a long and bloody war, have nobly established
general liberty and independence.
This country and this people seem to have been made for each
other, and it appears as if it was the design of Providence, that an
inheritance so proper and convenient for a band of brethren, united
to each other by the strongest ties, should never be split into a
number of unsocial, jealous, and alien sovereignties.
For better or worse, this is no longer true. (Of course it wasn't
really true then either, but non-Christians were in a position that
one could conveniently ignore them.) I don't have a real solution to
this problem, and as moderator it probably isn't my job to supply one
in any case. How I do think it's appropriate to ask people to try to
avoid oversimplified answers. --clh]