What were the Founding Fathers Thinking?

Today there is much debate over the meaning of the separation of Church and State and part should religion should play in the government. What were the Founding Father’s view about religion especially Christianity in America. For me to understand the Founding Fathers and the views of separation of Church and State and to what extent religion should play in government, one must understand the politics and religious concepts of Europe in the 1700’s going back to the 1200’s.

The U.S. Constitution has it’s root with the Magna Carta. The original Magna Carta written in the 1215 and original had 63 clauses. This document was between the lowest level of nobility called Barons/Freeman and the King but really had little to do with the majority of the population (about 90% to 95%) known as peasants who were not considered free so this document didn’t apply to them. King John signed under duress, but as soon as rebel forces left London King John renounced it because of a clause (clause 61), which basically made him King in name only. This started a civil war in England. The Pope stepped in and backed King John. The Pope declared the Magna Carta as shameful document to be forced on a King with the threat of violence. The Pope saw this as an attack on the Church’s authority over the King and Church territory. The King was supposed to answer to the Pope and the Pope was God representative on earth.

King John died during the civil war in 1216 his young son became King Henry III. Representatives for young King Henry III sign a new version with the clause that upset King John taken out and more clauses taken out in 1217. Henry III in 1225 at the age 18 signed an even shorter version and the final version was signed by Henry’s son Edward 1st in 1297. Edward 1st was best known as Longshankes who re-imposed royal authority over his people including the Jews in England known as the “Statute of the Jewry”.
The only reason Edward signed the most recent version of the Magna Carta was not because he believed God gave men rights but because he need English Freemen and Nobles to support him and his fight with the Scots and William Wallace and Robert the Bruce.

Now before the 1517 pretty much everyone in Europe was Catholic and the Pope and the Catholic Church had a lot of say even with the Royal houses of Europe. It wasn’t until the mid 1600’s did groups in England begun to assert the belief that the Magna Carta should represent all without distinction of class or status. But after that there were other documents enacting the will of God. In Britain the King or Queen of Britain was Supreme Governor of the Church of England. Elizabeth 1st who was a Protestant started this.

“Being by God's Ordinance, according to Our just Title, Defender of the Faith and Supreme Governour [sic.] of the Church, within these Our Dominions, We hold it most agreeable to this Our Kingly Office, and Our own religious Zeal, to conserve and maintain the Church committed to Our Charge, in the Unity of true Religion, and in the Bond of Peace;”

Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion of 1563
Article XXXVII
Of the Civil Magistrates

“Where we attribute to the Queen's Majesty the chief government, by which titles we understand the minds of some slanderous folks to be offended, we give not to our princes the ministering either of God's word or of sacraments, the which thing the Injunctions also lately set forth by Elizabeth our Queen doth most plainly testify: but only that prerogative which we see to have been given always to all godly princes in Holy Scriptures by God himself, that is, that they should rule all estates and degrees committed to their charge by God, whether they be temporal, and restrain with the civil sword the stubborn and evil-doers.

The Bishop of Rome hath no jurisdiction in this realm of England.

The laws of the realm may punish Christian men with death for heinous and grievous offences.

It is lawful for Christian men at the commandment of the Magistrate to wear weapons and serve in the wars.”

James the 1st of England (aka James the VI of Scotland) was a Protestant and for whom the King James Bible was commissioned by and is named after. King James 1st also wrote the Divine Right of Kings, which states that a king only has to answer to God and God detest rebellion.

True Law of Free Monarchies by King James in 1598,

“ As there is not a thing so necessary to be known by the people of any land, next the knowledge of their God, as the right knowledge of their allegiance according to the form of government established among them, especially in a monarchy (which form of government, as resembling the divinity, approacheth nearest to perfection, as all the learned and wise men from the beginning have agreed upon, unity being the perfection of all things), so hath the ignorance and (which is worse) the seduced opinion of the multitude, blinded by them who think themselves able to teach and instruct the ignorants, procured the wrack and overthrow of sundry flourishing commonwealths and heaped heavy calamities threatening utter destruction upon others.”

Kings are called gods by the prophetical King David because they sit upon God his throne in the earth and have the count of their administration to give unto him. Their office is "to minister justice and judgment to the people," as the same David saith; "to advance the good and punish the evil," as he likewise saith; "to establish good laws to his people and procure obedience to the same,"as divers good kings of Judah did; "to procure the peace of the people," as the same David saith.”

He goes on about a Kings position in society. King and the law and explaining that a King is like a father and his subjects are his children and so on. Then ends with the following.

“I grant, indeed, that a wicked king is sent by God for a curse to his people and a plague for their sins; but that it is lawful to them to shake off that curse at their own hand, which God hath laid on them, that I deny and may do so justly. Will any deny that the king of Babel was a curse to the people of God, as was plainly forespoken and threatened unto them in the prophesy of their captivity? And what was Nero to the Christian church in his time? And yet Jeremiah and Paul (as ye have else heard) commanded them not only to obey them but heartily to pray for their welfare.

It is certain, then (as I have already by the law of God sufficiently proved), that patience, earnest prayers to God, and amendment of their lives are the only lawful means to move God to relieve them of their heavy curse.”

“Next, in place of relieving the commonwealth out of distress (which is their only excuse and color), they shall heap double distress and desolation upon it; and so their rebellion shall procure the contrary effects that they pretend it for. For a king cannot be imagined to be so unruly and tyrannous but the commonwealth will be kept in better order, notwithstanding thereof, by him than it can be by his way-taking. * * *

I grant, indeed, that a wicked king is sent by God for a curse to his people and a plague for their sins; but that it is lawful to them to shake off that curse at their own hand, which God hath laid on them, that I deny and may do so justly. Will any deny that the king of Babel was a curse to the people of God, as was plainly forespoken and threatened unto them in the prophesy of their captivity? And what was Nero to the Christian church in his time? And yet Jeremiah and Paul (as ye have else heard) commanded them not only to obey them but heartily to pray for their welfare.

It is certain, then (as I have already by the law of God sufficiently proved), that patience, earnest prayers to God, and amendment of their lives are the only lawful means to move God to relieve them of their heavy curse”

In 1611 the King James Bible was finished. King James had a man the name of Thomas Helwys imprisoned for petitioning the King for separation of Church and state. Thomas died in prison in 1616.

In Europe you had Kingdoms that accepted certain religions as their official religion. France, Spain and the Holy Roman Empire were Catholics and Britain was Protestant. At this time in history it was common for countries to have an official religion. This was the history the Founding Fathers knew. This was the mixture of God and politics they knew. Until the influence of Enlightenment Movement.

The Age of Reason was in the 17th century which the sciences were on the rise and political debates were being made about the existence of God. Then the Age of Enlightenment that began in Europe somewhere 1680 1700 and ended around 1800. Both these periods were pushing religious theocracy out as well as Monarchy powers. The basic idea of the Enlightenment Movement is to humanize religion. Enlightenment philosophies rejected the idea of original sin. It rejects revealed religion principals. Philosophers introducing the idea that God maybe the creator of all thing but God does not interfere in mans life. Mans relationship with God is a private one.

Thomas Paine’s “Age of Reason” written 1792 and published 1794,

“I believe in one God, and no more; and I hope for happiness beyond this life.

I believe in the equality of man; and I believe that religious duties consist in doing justice, loving mercy, and endeavouring to make our fellow-creatures happy.

But, lest it should be supposed that I believe many other things in addition to these, I shall, in the progress of this work, declare the things I do not believe, and my reasons for not believing them.

I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish Church, by the Roman Church, by the Greek Church, by the Turkish Church, by the Protestant Church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church.

All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.”

Even though this was written about a year or two after the Constitution this was a view point that was circulating amongst some of the Founding Fathers as well as some of the people of the time.

The Founding Fathers were men of different beliefs and different understanding of God. They didn’t agree with each other on issues of politics and religion. The ideas of the Age of Enlightenment that began in Europe were in America and the Founding Fathers not only having knowledge of European history and but also were learning the ideas and philosophies of the Enlightenment period. Thomas Jefferson went as far as creating his own Bible which is known has the Jefferson Bible. Jefferson edited the New Testament, which he removed portions such as angels, Jesus’ miracles, Jesus’ genealogy, the trinity, prophesies and most importantly the resurrection.

From the “The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth” aka the Jefferson Bible

60: And there came also Nicodemus, which at the first came to Jesus by night, and brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about an hundred pound weight.

61: Then took they the body of Jesus, and wound it in linen clothes with the spices, as the manner of the Jews is to bury.

62: Now in the place where he was crucified there was a garden; and in the garden a new sepulchre, wherein was never man yet laid.

63: There laid they Jesus,

64: And rolled a great stone to the door of the sepulchre, and departed.

Jefferson ends it there with no resurrection. Much of what Jefferson edited is considered the foundation of Christianity. Jefferson wanted to eliminate what he considered religious dogma and the supernatural aspects. He basically wanted just the ethical teachings of Jesus to be important. Some of his contemporaries agreed with him but many disagreed him and yet tolerated his right to such views.

Founding Fathers understood the potential danger of a government or a leader who claims the will of God as reason for control the will of the people. This is why religion is separate from government and the Founding Fathers did not want to take any chances of allowing the government or leadership to fall under the concept of divine right of kings.

“As our president bears no resemblance to a king so we shall see the Senate has no similitude to nobles. First, not being hereditary, their collective knowledge, wisdom, and virtue are not precarious. For by these qualities alone are they to obtain their offices, and they will have none of the peculiar qualities and vices of those men who possess power merely because their father held it before them.” - Tench Coxe, September 28, 1787

UR

I'm a Zombie

Well, I thought I would have time to blog but as always life throws curves.

I am burned out thanks to work. I can’t seem to get any thoughts together. I’m a zombie.

I’m really tired but I just seem to go on. I seem to have no enthusiasm or passion for anything. Anger use to fuel me but I seem to have no energy for anger. Depression? Maybe but I’ve been through work burn out before and I get through it. In my younger days I would just quit my job and find another job but not anymore. I’m getting to old, have to many responsibilities and the economy is not good to take chances. I need to be thankful I still have a job.

Hopefully this zombisim will break soon. Good news is that there is some work for my company is on the horizon. Bad news it won’t start until late summer. We still need more work between then and now.

UR

Still Alive

Well I’ve been fighting a head cold so I haven’t well or felt like writing. Plus I’m buried at work. I also need to learn how to use things here a blogspot like putting links into my post.

I’ve had things I wanted to address in posts but just feeling to tired. Such as the Mojave Desert War Memorial Cross being stolen. President Obama saying that information is a distraction. Understanding the world that Gen X grew up in and formed us.

Oh well maybe soon.

UR

A Couple Thoughts

First I was watching the Senate Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Investigations hearings on Goldman Sachs. The Senators particularly Sen. Levin (D-MI) were grilling members of Goldman Sachs and their part in the financial crisis. It was amazing how little these Senators understood how Wall Street works or they were covering their own asses. The Senate committee that Wall Street should be like a savings account and everyone’s investment should be safe. But the reality is as it was explained by those testifying it’s more like gambling. Believe it or not there are people who are looking for risky investments because the payoff is better. In other words you can play it safe and bet on the sure thing but the return will be small or you can take a risk and bet on the long shot which will make you more money sooner. Now I’m not a financial person so I won’t try explaining. But basically people wanted risk and they got it and they lost. People were warning that the housing bubble was going to burst but no one knew when but people kept betting on it and they lost. Of course our government doesn't want to take any responsibility in all this even though they have blood on their hands.

Side thought one time a house was considered a home but during the housing bubble a house was an investment.

Now let’s go to immigration. Arizona has passed the first State immigration law. Now of course this is causing a lot of commotion. Arizona has tried to reach out to the federal government but to no avail. So Arizona had to take matter into their own hands. All this law does is give State and local police the right to ask for proof of legal status i.e. Green Card or equivalent proof. Now the confusion is whether the law allows them to just walk up and ask or if it’s just during a criminal investigation.

See immigration is strictly falls under the Federal Government. It’s the Federal Governments job to deal with legal and illegal immigrants. But the States are the ones that have to deal with the cost and most problems created by illegal immigrants. Here is the strange thing in most States if an illegal immigrant is arrested and even they go through the court system and even if they go through the prison system, they are not deported. They are simply released back into the community. Why? Because the States can’t hold them or afford to transport them and the Feds don’t have the resources to pick them up. Just imagine if the worst illegals were sent back after they served their sentences instead of being simply released back into society. But this will not mean much if the Feds don’t secure our southern boarders. Or we can convince Mexico to become our 51st State which I think would be easier.

What’s surprising is that many other countries in the world have a lot stricter laws about being in their country illegally than we do.

UR

Why Scottish Independence Will Never Die

“It's not death if you refuse it... It is if you accept it.” James O’Barr

Scotland hasn’t been an independent country for at least 300 years. Many would say it’s been a lot longer. Regardless, today Scotland is not an independent country. It is still part of a union under the control of a foreign government and monarchy. The union is known as the United Kingdom of Great Britain and North Ireland i.e. the UK or Britain. It is made up of North Ireland, Wales, Scotland and England.

At one time this also included the whole of Ireland but in 1919 Ireland waged a war for independence. In 1922 Ireland became a Free State but North Ireland remained under British control and by 1937 it was a sovereign state. By 1949 Ireland completely left the British Commonwealth and became the Republic of Ireland and a true independent nation. North Ireland is still part of the UK.

Today Scotland may have a devolved government and many freedoms but they are not a sovereign body and the Parliament of the United Kingdom located at the Palace of Westminster in London, England has last say over any decisions made by the Scottish Parliament. The British can even abolish the Scottish Parliament regardless of public opinion.

Many have heard of William Wallace the great Scottish patriot who waged a war for Scottish independence from England from 1297 to his execution by the English in 1305. From the times before and after Wallace the Scots have desired nationhood. For over 700 years Scots have fought to be their own people. Through the years English Monarchs would invade Scotland and even though they won many battles they never broke the spirit of the Scot. In 1745 after the Jacobite Uprising, King George II and the Parliament of Great Britain passed the Act of Proscription which was created to destroy the clan system, ban Highland dress (i.e. the kilts), tartans, bagpipes, teaching Gaelic and even public gatherings. Punishments for violating the Act could range from a fine to imprisonment and even being sent off to a penal colony. The Act was repealed in 1782. During the 18th and 19th centuries the Lowland and Highland Clearances were taking place, in which Scots at many times were forcibly removed from their lands. Many ended up in Australia, Canada and America.

But today Scots have it better that their ancestors. Many of those in Scotland may fear Scottish Independence because they are unsure what kind of future they may have or what kind of government they will end up with. But I ask them to think about when America won its independence or when Ireland won its independence. Many had the same fears and concerns. No one, not even the leaders, was sure what would happen but they both made it. And there is no reason why the Scots would not as well.

So do Scots really want to be called British or do they want to be called Scots and Scots only? Do they want a country that has the right to self determination and that answers to no one? Do they want Scottish Independence to die? Do they want all those who went before them that lived through oppression and died to have died for nothing? I believe deep inside every Scot is a desire to be Scottish and a country they can call their own.

Now is the time for Scots to stand and call for Independence. Now is the time for all to stand and say they want Scotland to be Independent. It is time for one united Scottish choir to raise their voices so that they can be heard even in the highest points of heaven. Governments will never hear the voice of one but they cannot ignore the single voice of the many.

Scots may have been oppressed. Scots may have been sent into exiled. Scots may have been killed. But Scots and Scottish culture have survived and the idea of Scottish Independence with them.

After all these centuries I ask myself, why have the Scots not died away and just become known as British or why have their desire for Independence has not died? This is when the quote from the graphic novel “The Crow” by James O’Barr pops into my head “It's not death if you refuse it... It is if you accept it”.

UR

And The Controversy Still Continues

It’s been 145 years since the American Civil War and the controversy still continues. Gov. Bob McDonnell of Virginia while declaring April as Confederate History Month in Virginia made a speech, which he failed to mention slavery as the main issue for the war. This of course is a big mistake to make. McDonnell apologized and stated that slavery was the main reason for the Civil War. But for some it seem the real issue is that Confederate soldier are being remembered. I’ve recently read an article called “Were Confederate soldiers terrorists?” by Roland Martin, a CNN political analyst who stated,

“And I will never, under any circumstances, cast Confederates as heroic figures who should be honored and revered. No -- they were, and forever will be, domestic terrorists.”

But is it fair to lable all Confederate soldiers as "domestic terrorist"? Now I could bring up the fact there were the tariffs that were imposed on the Southern States by the Federal Government. Or the fact that even though Abraham Lincoln opposed slavery when he became President he wasn’t going to interfere with it. In fact when the Civil War broke out in 1861 President Lincoln ordered that Union Generals were not to free slaves even in captured area under Union control. In 1862 in a letter to New York Tribune Lincoln said,

“My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.”

Then a month later he issues the Emancipation Proclamation. But in 1863 Lincoln wrote a letter to James Conkling who was have a meeting of loyal Northern Unionist in Illinois, which at the time Lincoln could not come to the meeting and in his letter he addressed the frustration and anger about the length of the war and the Emancipation Proclamation that many Unionists had. Lincoln said,

“You say you will not fight to free negroes. Some of them seem willing to fight for you; but, no matter. Fight you, then, exclusively to save the Union. I issued the proclamation on purpose to aid you in saving the Union. Whenever you shall have conquered all resistance to the Union, if I shall urge you to continue fighting, it will be an apt time, then, for you to declare you will not fight to free negroes.”

This shows that even Northerners had issues about fighting to free slaves. Many Union soldiers went AWOL when Lincoln issued Emancipation Proclamation.

What’s my point? Well, the fact is that when we look at history we always make the mistake to put our views, values and morals of today on those of history yesteryears. Yes today we know slavery is evil and wrong and with strong convictions, even though it continues in many countries in the world today, but in the 1800’s it was a different mind set. Many Northern States took up to 50 + years after abolishing slavery in their State to actually eliminating it from their State and the elimination of slavery for several States was only 15 years before the war and I believe New Jersey still had slaves into the war.

First, back in those days cheap labor was important and a worker rights wasn’t. In the South slavery was the norm but in the North child labor was a norm. Children worked in factories and mines. Today we would say it was wrong. During the time before and after the Civil War the Government was in the West forcing Indians on reservations and those who refused were hunted down like animals. Today we say that is wrong. Plus during the Civil War Indians on reservations were shorted on supplies and money promised to them because the Government need to use it to fight the Civil War. Was that right?

Just to understand the majority of Southern Confederate soldiers did not have slaves. Slaves were a rich mans luxury. Yes many Officers in the Confederacy did have slaves and many Officers did not. Wealthy slave owners did not have to fight because they had slaves so they were exempt from fighting. Wealthy Northerners were able to pay to get out of the War. So this is why the Civil War was known as the poor man’s war. Many in boarder states had to chose sides and sometimes this divided families.

Why would poor Southerners fight in a war about slavery when they don’t own slaves? See whether you like it or not the culture of slavery was the norm for many of these men even though they didn’t own slaves, it was just the way it was to them. They didn’t know any better. The times were different then. For them they were fighting for what they saw as a States Rights issues and yes slavery was part of that States Right at the time. Another reason was conscription and draft. Even though many may have originally volunteered but their enlistments was extended. Then many were eventually drafted. In the beginning both sides thought it would be a short war, about a yearlong was the general view. But by 1962 both sides knew this was not going to be the case.

Another reason was out of State loyalty. We must remember in those days loyalty to ones State trumps the loyalty to the Federal Government. Most people of those days identified themselves with great pride by the State they came from. Your State was your home. Even Union Troops units were identified by their States. This was a custom that went back before the Revolution War with State militias. But after the end of the Civil War this custom people once had has became less and less the case.

We have to remember that in those days there was no radios, TV, Internet, Twitter, Blogging or any form of instant mass communication accept maybe telegraph. News from other parts of the country could take days to reach most people. Newspapers of those days were typically local and probably written by a local journalist who came from the same culture as the reader, that’s of course if you could read. Most information was word of mouth or it came from local politician or your local minister and typically their views reflect the normal cultural understanding of that community.

Not only is it important to remember the horrors that Blacks had to endure has slaves in the south but also as free men in the north. History should never be simplified, it needs be kept honest and kept in it’s proper context of time. History should be complex because it’s about people and people are complex.

The Civil War is one of the most important wars in American history. My solution to all this is simple instead of April being Confederate History Month it should be declared Civil War History Month and all aspect should be reviewed honestly whether it be good and bad for all this is an important part of American History.

UR

Please let them keep it

Thanks to New Agers, Native Americans are becoming more guarded about their culture, spirituality and religions, which I believe is a good thing.

When it comes to Native American cultures professional New Agers steal it; they corrupt it and change it to fit the New Agers ways. Professional New Agers always want something to sell and they like to sell spirituality. You can have spirituality but you don’t own spirituality and you cannot sell what you do not own.

Native Americans are just people like anyone, same strengths and weaknesses with many of the same worries and concerns and problems like family, health, economics, jobs, alcoholism/drug addiction and many others things that we are worried about. The biggest concerns they have that we don’t, is survival of a tribal culture and having to walk between two worlds/cultures. I heard an Indian woman explain her daily difficulty she had going from her life on the Rez to her job off the Rez in the city and at the end of her work day going back to Rez life. The difficulty of going from Indian time to non-Indian time and then back. She described it as being a very difficult transition on a daily bases and having to learn to walk in two worlds.

American Indians are not a mystical people they just people, but people of a different culture. Their spirituality is what gets them through things. But many American Indians do lose their way just like non-Indians. They get lost in drugs and alcohol just like non-Indians and yes some lose their spirituality just like non-Indians.

Some Indians practice a traditional Indian spirituality, some practice a Christian based spirituality and some mix the two. Spirituality is about your relationship with God. Everyone can have a Spirituality without religion it make no difference whether it be Christian or Indian. Truth is there is no one “Indian spirituality” it varies from tribe to tribe. As Natives Americans vary from tribe to tribe so does their spirituality and rituals. It’s a culture thing, a tribe thing. It’s what makes them who they are. It’s sacred and must be kept that way. It’s their heritage.

The non-Indians who want to embrace Native American spirituality tend to reject Christianity for some reason, perhaps it’s the praying or rituals or maybe the rules or the bible. Well Indians do pray. Indians tend to pray for others or their people. Typically rituals are used for specific purposes to gain understanding of themselves. In some cases to discover what purpose the Creator has for the individual and they have to fulfill that purpose if they don’t bad things can happen to the individual. Even Indians and their God have rules. These are not things to be taken lightly. I would never recommend doing it under a New Ager it can harm or even kill you. Even though a New Ager would be easier because you just have to pay to do it. It’s different with Indians.

I’ve met New Agers who claim to practice a Native American culture or should I say lifestyle but yet they were vegetarians, against hunting, against guns, are pacifists and have anti-military tendencies. But the Indians I’ve met seem to love meat, many like to hunt, many have guns, not afraid to fight and not anti-military, either they were in the military or had a relative in the military. Indians did fight over territory, food and even for revenge. Most tribes had its allies and enemies. Even before the Europeans arrival war was part of American Indian lives. Indians had a very complex culture. New Agers try to simplify it, which is dishonest and degrading. New Agers like to try to make people believe America was one big peaceful commune and all Indians got along. Indians did war with each other but from what I can tell they did not have religious wars. Win or lose it was what was meant to be. If one tribe beat another tribe it was because they had better warriors or it just was their day. Sometimes you eat the bear and sometimes the bear eats you. It’s the way of nature.

If you learn a way of spirituality you should treat it like a gift and either keep it or give it away. But no worries, professional New Agers are very good at changing and charging. It’s all about what feels good and providing others at a price to feel good. I remember one Indian referred to New Agers as the “Doe Nation” which was a play on words for “Donation” because they almost always want finical “donation”. But for Indians it’s all about life, culture and heritage. Please let them keep it and if they want to share it they will.

UR