The Church & Believers: True Economic Freedom

The Church & Believers: True Economic Freedom article @ Society of St. Stephen forum

Update…

Hello everyone! As of Sunday, I am now in Providence, RI – everything is going great. I was able to join Ruthanne and her family for her mother’s side family reunion in North Carolina, then drove up here with them over the weekend.

Ruthanne went to the doctor today for a checkup – Katherine is doing great and is due on Oct. 2.

I am still working on some posts and as soon as I am able to get my laptop charger, I will begin posting here and on the Society of St. Stephen blog as well… in the mean time, comment on Gary Feister’s post on there if you can.

Did the Founding Fathers (USA) Found the Nation as a Christian Nation?

Recently, due to the Christian (mostly right, some moderate) statements concerning President Obama, his policies, current liberal policies, and former liberal policies, I have decided to list some statistics and quotes concerning the Founding Fathers, especially those who are considered the “great fathers” of the Unites States.

Religious Affliliation:

Religious Affiliation of U.S. Founding Fathers	# of Founding Fathers	% of Founding Fathers
Episcopalian/Anglican	88	54.7%
Presbyterian	30	18.6%
Congregationalist	27	16.8%
Quaker	7	4.3%
Dutch Reformed/German Reformed	6	3.7%
Lutheran	5	3.1%
Catholic	3	1.9%
Huguenot	3	1.9%
Unitarian	3	1.9%
Methodist	2	1.2%
Calvinist	1	0.6%
unknown	43	%
TOTAL	204

*http://www.adherents.com/gov/Founding_Fathers_Religion.html

Keep in mind, many of these numbers were really Deists – most notably Thomas Jefferson (Episcopal/Anglican) and/Freemasons – most notably George Washington

Quotes:

Thomas Jefferson -

3rd president, Drafted Declaration of Independence, Signer of Constitution, influential on 1st Amendment

“I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature.”

“Religions are all alike – founded upon fables and mythologies.”

“Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burned, tortured, fined, and imprisoned, yet we have not advanced one inch toward uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half of the world fools and the other half hypocrites.” [Notes on Virginia]

“History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes” [Letter to von Humboldt, 1813].

“The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as His father, in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter.” [Letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823]

“In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own” [Letter to H. Spafford, 1814].

“Where the preamble [of the Statute of Virginia for Religious Freedom] declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting the words “Jesus Christ,” so that it should read, “A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;” the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.” [Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography; from George Seldes, ed., The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 363]

James Madison

4th president, influential in the Constitutional Convention, Proposed the 1st Amendment

“During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution.”

“In no instance have . . . the churches been guardians of the liberties of the people.”

“Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise.” [April 1, 1774]

Benjamin Franklin

Signer of Declaration of Independence, signer of Constitution

“The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason.”
[Poor Richard's Almanack, 1758]

“Lighthouses are more helpful than churches.”

“He (the Rev. Mr. Whitefield) used, indeed, sometimes to pray for my conversion, but never had the satisfaction of believing that his prayers were heard.” [Franklin's Autobiography]

George Washington

1st president

After Washington’s death, Dr. Abercrombie, a friend of his, replied to a Dr. Wilson, who had interrogated him about Washington’s religion replied, “Sir, Washington was a Deist.”

In a sermon of October 1831, Episcopalian minister Bird Wilson said, “Among all of our Presidents, from Washington downward, not one was a professor of religion, at least not of more than Unitarianism.”

John Adams

2nd president, Proposed and signed the Treaty of Tripoli

“Have you considered that system of holy lies and pious frauds that has raged and triumphed for 1500 years.”
letter to John Taylor, 1814, quoted by Norman Cousins in In God We Trust: The Religious Beliefs and Ideas of the American Founding Fathers (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1958), p. 106-7, from James A. Haught, ed., 2000 Years of Disbelief

“The question before the human race is, whether the God of nature shall govern the world by his own laws, or whether priests and kings shall rule it by fictitious miracles.”
letter to Thomas Jefferson, June 20, 1815

Documents:

Declaration of Independence

(transcript) There are no specific reference to Christianity or Jesus in the Declaration of independence. There are a few references to a ‘Nature’s God’ who is the creator of life, giver of rights and ’supreme Judge of the world’ but that is rather vague..

“…the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them”

Notice that it specifically describes ‘Natures God’, this is a more generic idea of God, this is god as nature.

“…that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights”

This does describes God as a creator of life and giver of rights but goes no further.

“…appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions”

Here God is the ‘Supreme Judge’.

All three of these examples would fit into nearly any organized religion or idea of god but especially that of Deism and Pantheism due to the lack of specificity.

It is expected that people of the time would speak of a god, there was little to no doubt at that time of God’s existence, but there was plenty of doubt about Christianity among the framers. In order to justify their defiance of the King they had to invoke a higher authority and make the case that they were endowed with the higher power’s blessing.

Articles of Confederation

The Articles of Confederation were the first constitution of the United States. During 1776–1777. In a sentance stating the date it speaks of ‘our Lord’.

“on the fifteenth day of November in the Year of our Lord…”

This is the only mention of God or Jesus in the Articles and although clearly a Christian practice, it was a common way of writing the date. On March 4, 1789, the new U.S. Constitution took effect, superseding the Articles of Confederation and giving them no legal standing.

The Constitution

(transcript)

The 1787 constitution is a nearly godless document. It mentions neither God, nor Christianity outside of a reference to the date using the Christian calandar. It does however have a provision against requiring specific religious ideas as a qualification for office.

Article VI, Section 3, US Constitution

“…no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”

Article. VII, US Constitution

“Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven”

It certainly can be argued that this sentence sets up The United States under ‘our Lord’ Jesus Christ, but when viewed in context it takes on a much lesser importance. The sentence is in the last section of the fourth and final page of the Constitution and was a common way of referencing the Christian calendar. ‘In the year of our Lord’ translated to latin is ‘Anno Domini’ which is commonly abbreviated ‘A.D.’ and is still used to this day by most of the western world when stating the year. It is merely a tradition and holds no religious significance. (more)

First Amendment to the Constitution

If the United States were set up as a Christian Nation would it grant equal rights to all religions?

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…”

Treaty of Tripoli, article 11

A 1797 treaty between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli of Barbary, ratified by the US Congress and signed by President John Adams. (more)

“As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen…”

Article VI, Section 3 of the Constitution

“…no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”

First Amendment to the Constitution

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…”

Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, Section 1

“… No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

Thomas Jefferson’s interpretation of the first amendment

‘Seperation of Church and State’: a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association (January 1, 1802)

“Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between church and State.”

In a letter to the Rev. Samuel Miller (Jan. 23, 1808)

“I consider the government of the U.S. as interdicted [forbid] by the Constitution from intermeddling with religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline, or exercises….”

James Madison’s summary of the First Amendment:

“Congress should not establish a religion and enforce the legal observation of it by law, nor compel men to worship God in any manner contrary to their conscience, or that one sect might obtain a pre-eminence, or two combined together, and establish a religion to which they would compel others to conform” (Annals of Congress, Sat Aug. 15th, 1789 pages 730 – 731)

More thoughts from Madison:
“…the number, the industry, and the morality of the priesthood, and the devotion of the people, have been manifestly increased by the total separation of the church from the State” [Letter to Robert Walsh, Mar. 2, 1819]

“Every new and successful example, therefore, of a perfect separation between the ecclesiastical and civil matters, is of importance; and I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in showing that religion and Government will both exist in greater purity the less they are mixed together” [Letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822].

U.S. Supreme Court

Hugo Black U.S. Supreme Court Justice
“The establishment of religion clause of the First Amendment means at least this: neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion.”
[Majority opinion Emerson v. Board of Education 330 U.S. 1 (1947)]

“The First Amendment has erected a wall between church and state. That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach.”
[Emerson v. Board of Education 330 U.S. 1 (1947)]

“We repeat and again reaffirm that neither a state nor the federal government can constitutionally force a person “to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion.” Neither can constitutionally pass laws nor impose requirements which aid all religions as against non-believers, and neither can aid those religions based on a belief in the existence of a God as against those religions founded on different beliefs.”
[Torcaso v. Watkins (1961)]

Warren Burger, Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court:
‘The Lemon Test’, in the majority opinion in Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971). It Determines if a law is permissible under the establishment clause of the First Amendment.

• A law must have a secular purpose.
• It must have a primary effect which neither advances nor inhibits religion.
• It must avoid excessive entanglement of church and state.

More

“Christianity is not established by law, and the genius of our institutions requires that the Church and the State should be kept separate….The state confesses its incompetency to judge spiritual matters between men or between man and his maker … spiritual matters are exclusively in the hands of teachers of religion.”
[Melvin v. Easley (1860)]

“First, this Court has decisively settled that the First Amendment’s mandate that ‘Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof’ has been made wholly applicable to the States by the Fourteenth Amendment…. Second, this Court has rejected unequivocally the contention that the Establishment Clause forbids only governmental preference of one religion over another.”
[Justice Tom C. Clark, School District of Abington Township v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203 (1963)]

“Government in our democracy, state and national, must be neutral in matters of religious theory, doctrine and practice. It may not be hostile to any religion or to the advocacy of nonreligion; and it may not aid, foster, or promote one religion or religious theory against another or even against the militant opposite. The First Amendment mandates governmental neutrality between religion and religion, and between religion and nonreligion.”
[Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97, 103 (1968)]

*http://bmccreations.com/one_nation/nation.html

So, what do you think?

JZ Holloway

To Boycott or not to Boycott…

Should Christians boycott businesses that support non- or anti-Christian viewpoints or groups? For instance, when the Southern Baptist Convention called for a boycott on all Disney products due to the fact that they supported Gay Rights… or recently, Home Depot and Pepsi Co. who publicly support Gay Rights organizations. On the surface, one might say yes, however, first, what does it accomplish, and more importantly, who does it truly affect?

First, unless every Christian completely boycotted the business, nothing really happens. Disney still exists, for example, and secondly, they still support Gay Rights – having a Gay Day every year and so forth. Did Disney suffer? Did Disney change their view and stance? The answer, quite simply, is no. First, not every Christian, or Baptist for that matter, boycotted Disney. Would a boycott work today? Again, the answer is no. Second, every Christian would never boycott a company – first, not every Christian goes to church, not every Christian cares. Also, in today’s postmodern society, not every Christian is “socially conservative,” – we even have openly gay ministers in pastoral and church leadership roles – most notably in The Episcopal Church (aka ECUSA). Next, all the boycott does – especially if it receives attention – is garner more press and exposure for the company to be boycotted. Thus giving adage to the term that even “bad press” is press, and therefore “good.” Keep in mind, the boycott of Disney garnered more support for Disney from the homosexual community plus the more socially liberal minded Americans and those throughout the world – especially from the more progressive European countries.

Now, who, if successful, would a boycott truly affect? Granted, if successful, it would have a great chance of negatively affecting the company, however, in this, the effect goes much deeper. All companies – i.e. Disney, Home Depot, Pepsi Co., Coca-Cola, etc, employ both believers and non-believers. If the boycott were to work, both believers and non-believers could quite possibly lose jobs. First, jobs, especially today, are hard to come by – the believers are sure to have families which they have to support – a successful boycott would put these people and their families in a potentially precarious position – not a very good witness to our fellow believers. Next, if the company was affected by a successful boycott, it would be obvious – through media coverage plus the propaganda that always circulates with such things – why the company was effected and why people lost their jobs. This is not the way to witness to non-believers – especially the ones who lost their job because of “righteous” protest. In fact, the non-believers, and quite possibly even the believers, would no doubt blame both the Church and the God they believe in. This, ultimately, could easily drive the non-believers even further away, and could even have the same effect on the believers, and their families, who lost their jobs. In addition, many of the believers who would lose their jobs, more than likely, support their local churches and parishes in some fashion – with the loss of their jobs, this support dries up – in the end also causing the houses of worship to suffer as well.

Now, I understand the desire to take a stand against companies and organizations that follow a belief system that is different then ones own – especially if it goes against the fundamental belief structure – i.e. homosexuality, abortion, etc, however, here is some food for though that I also mentioned on a friend of mines Facebook question about this  very topic. Do we boycott fast food restaurants because the promote gluttony? Do we boycott “nice” dinner restaurants (i.e. Outback, Olive Garden, Mexican restaurants, etc) because the have drink specials – thus promoting drunkenness? Do we boycott stores like Walmart because its possible that some of the products were produced in Third-World countries under extreme and lousy conditions – thus promoting human suffering? Do we boycott doctors because they trust medicine over God? Do we boycott our own (USA) government because they support abortion, gay rights, etc (thanks Scott Swanson). They answer for most of us is no… we love our McDonalds, our steak from Outback (and our martini), our cheaper clothes (especially in today’s economy), our medical care, and the fact that our government, for the most part, protects us. So then… why boycott simply because a company supports gay interests groups? Home Depot, for example, also greatly supports the United States Marine Corps – as well as all military services – and practically guarantees jobs to veterans. Home Depot (for those NASCAR fans out there) is also the central sponsor for the NASCAR’s pre-eminent Christian owner – Joe Gibbs, I do not see him boycotting Home Depot, and he is a very (extremely) devout and conservative Christian. The truth is, most mainstream companies support interests groups of all kinds – gay, women’s rights, military, religious charities, non-religious charities, humanitarian, etc, etc. No company is perfect, and the majority are not “Christian” companies – why should we expect them to behave then in a Christian manner? To that, if Christians decide to boycott a company, is that truly showing God’s love, mercy, and grace towards that companies leadership and employees? For me, the answer is no.

My last point is this, Christians in the United States need to grow up. First, this country is not a Christian nation – never has been. The majority of the Founding Fathers were either Deists or Unitarians. They saw Christ as a “moral” figure, but not as God. Thomas Jefferson “wrote” his own bible – taking away the miracles and divine references, and just putting in Christ’s words. He was also an avowed Deist. John Adams – and Samuel Adams – Unitarians. George Washington, and many others, were European Humanists and Freemasons. The list goes on. If memory serves correctly, only one Catholic signed the Declaration of Independence. Even the “Anglican” South wanted the government free from religious influence – if you recall, this nation was founded on religious freedom, not religious belief. One could say, “well, the Founding Fathers used Christian morality as their guide,” sadly, that person would be wrong. The Founding Fathers used Enlightenment morality, and philosophy, to not only justify their rebellion against England, but also as their framework for the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights. Based upon this, is it any surprise that the United States – though far behind Europe – is beginning to walk in a more postmodern, progressive line.

So, what do we do? Well, we pray… only God can change the hearts of men – see Moses and the Pharaoh… we, in our own action, unless ordained by God, can change nothing, in fact, we would probably make it worse – for God’s ways are not our ways. Next, we trust in God – this is true in all things, from our daily lives to national issues to world problems – only God is big enough. We must place ourselves – through the help and grace of God – as an example to all around us, walking in love and forgiveness. I almost wonder if homosexuals should boycott churches – no wonder The Episcopal Church is fully opening their arms. A lot of churches seem to not only condemn the sin, but also the sinner – even going as far as using them as examples in sermons and teachings. Whats even worse, other sins, i.e. gluttony, pride, etc, seem to be ignored. We must refuse to walk in condemnation – for we all have sinned and fallen short of the Glory of God – for if we had not, Jesus Christ would not have needed to be sent to earth, nor would He have needed to die on the Cross. Lastly, we must stop passing judgment on the world – whether it be nations, companies, or whatever – and bless the world – nations, companies, government, and both our friends and enemies.

So, to boycott or not to boycott… I say no.

JZ Holloway

Apologies & Treatises: Populist Christianity, 2nd Edition

Apologies & Treatises: Populist Christianity, 2nd Edition

Now on Amazon.com – For more books and articles, visit:

Alicea: Books and Articles by Jared Holloway