-Caveat Lector-
from:
http://www.npl.com/~tkrell/writings/bible/american-heritage.html
<A HREF="http://www.npl.com/~tkrell/writings/bible/american-heritage.html">The
Roots of American Government</A>
-----
I, personally, am more deist than theist, MHO. FYI.
Om
K
-----
The Roots of American Government
A survey of the religious foundations of our democracy
Tim A. Krell
Humanities 215
March 3, 1993
Copyright © 1993-1997 Tim A. Krell. All rights reserved.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introduction
"A nation which does not remember what it was yesterday, does not know
what it is today, nor what it is trying to do. We are trying to do a
futile thing if we do not know where we came from or what we have been
about." --Woodrow Wilson
Americans, as a whole, know embarrassingly little about their own
heritage. In these modern times, history is considered boring by many, a
waste of time. Most see it as something one must endure while in school,
but quickly forget as they get on with "real life." Americans would far
rather make history than read about it--besides, what happened back in
colonial times doesn't really apply to what is happening in the world
today. Or does it?
Most of us can name the "founding fathers," but few of us can give more
than sketchy details as to their lives, their beliefs, and their
feelings toward what America should be. These fathers of democracy would
probably be shocked to see the apathy of Americans toward their heritage
and culture. And they would likely have much to say about the direction
our country is proceeding.
Our forefathers may not be living with us today, but their words are
still alive and well. By examining their ideas, thoughts, and
philosophies, we can get a better picture about our own heritage. To do
so is not a matter of trivial importance; for as we discover the roots
of our country, therein we find the soul of our nation.
Let us then look to our past and examine the religious foundations of
our democracy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In God We Trust
"The only assurance of our nation's safety is to lay our foundation in
morality and religion." --Abraham Lincoln
How many of us have actually taken the time to look closely at the back
side of a dollar bill. Most of us are too busy spending them to ever
stop and examine the great symbolism imprinted upon every dollar bill.
Beneath the majestic "THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" and sandwiched
between two symbols lie the words "IN GOD WE TRUST." To the left and
right of these words lie the Great Seal of the United States. On the
seal are inscribed the words "Annuit Cœptis" ("God has favored the
undertaking") and "Novus Ordo Seclorum" ("a new order of nation was thus
launched.") The Great Seal also includes a pyramid, which represents the
thirteen original colonies topped by the all-seeing eye of God
surrounded by a cloud of glory, symbolizing the protecting Divine
Presence.
Though it was the last half-century that brought the words "in God we
trust" to U.S. currency, its presence serves as a reminder of the
uniqueness of our nation's founding. America is one of the only
societies in the history of the world based upon the God of the Bible.
The Pilgrims who came to America in 1620 did not come merely because
they wanted freedom of worship. They were far from religious refugees
who just wanted a place where they could be themselves. The Pilgrims'
own words from the famous "Mayflower Compact" tell it all: "Having
undertaken for the glory of God, and advancement of the Christian Faith,
and the honour of our King and Country, a voyage to plant the first
colony in the northern Part of Virginia; do by these Presents, solemnly
and mutually in the Presence of God and one of another, covenant and
combine ourselves together into a civil Body Politick, for our better
Ordering and Preservation, and Furtherance of the Ends aforesaid; And by
Virtue hereof to enact, constitute, and frame, such just and equal Laws,
Ordinances, Acts, Constitutions 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."(1)
These words told not just of their reasons for coming to America, but
also outlined a form of government which would be a precursor to the
eventual government of the United States.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
One Nation Under God
"God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be
thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction
in the minds of the people, that these liberties are the gift of God?"
--Thomas Jefferson
Our nation, from the beginning, was steeped in its belief in the God of
the Bible. We know that our founding fathers themselves had strong
religious beliefs which guided their actions and decisions. And even
today, remnants of this belief can still be seen. In Washington, D.C.,
the monuments and buildings are littered with scripture and references
to God. Above the head of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court are the
Ten Commandments; the crier who opens each session of the court closes
with the words, "God save the United States and the Honorable Court."
Across the street at the Capitol building can be found a small room just
off the rotunda for the private prayer and meditation of members of
Congress. This room though it is closed to the public, is always open
whenever Congress is in session. Inside is a glass window showing George
Washington kneeling in prayer. Surrounding him are the words from Psalm
16:1: "Preserve me, O God, for in Thee do I put my trust." Inside the
rotunda is a picture of the Pilgrims about to depart Holland on the ship
Speedwell, which was the sister ship of the Mayflower. In this picture
one can see the ship's chaplin with an open Bible in his lap; on the
sails of the ship are the words, "In God we Trust, God With Us." And
every session of the House and the Senate begins with prayer. A short
ways away the Washington Monument stands majestically overlooking the
Capitol. And on the metal cap atop the Monument can be found the words
"Praise be to God." And these are just a few examples. Other buildings
like the Library of Congress, the Lincoln and Jefferson Memorials, and
many others give further testament to this nation's unequivocal and
fundamental belief in God.
In its day, the American experiment in democracy attracted the attention
of many other nations. In the early 19th century, the French government
had many questions as to how United States was able to function. Up
until then, it had always been thought that if people were allowed to
rule themselves, anarchy would inevitably follow. It was felt by most
that people were simply incapable of ruling themselves. And yet here we
were in America, flourishing under our newly established system of
democracy. The French were perplexed, so they commissioned Alexis de
Tocqueville, a political philosopher of the day, to go to the United
States and discover the "secret" to American success. After traveling
throughout the United States, here's what Tocqueville reported back to
France: "I do not know whether all Americans have a sincere faith in
their religion--for who can know the human heart?--but I am certain that
they hold it to be indispensable for the maintenance of republican
institutions. This opinion is not peculiar to a class of citizens or to
a party, but it belongs to the whole rank of society." Tocqueville went
on to add, "America is the place where the Christian religion has kept
the greatest power over men's souls; and nothing better demonstrates how
useful and natural it is to man, since the country where it now has the
wisest sway is both the most enlightened and the freest."(2)
The great British writer G.K. Chesterton, in his essay "What I Saw in
America," noted that, "America is the only nation in the world that is
founded on a creed. That creed is set forth with dogmatic and even
theological lucidity in the Declaration of Independence."(3)
This is obviously a reference to the second paragraph of this great
document which boldly proclaims that: "all men are created equal, that
they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that
among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." This
reference to a "Creator" is said to be "self-evident," underscoring the
writer's undeniable belief in God.
Even the "Deists" of the day did not waver in their belief in God.
Benjamin Franklin, on June 28, 1787, told his fellow delegates at the
Constitutional Convention of the need for each day's session to be
opened with prayer. His words came at a crucial time--the Convention was
on the verge of breaking up because of sharp differences over how this
new government would be structured. The issue was representation of the
states, and the battle lines were drawn. Small states sided with William
Patterson's "New Jersey Plan," while the large states were firmly for
James Madison's "Virginia Plan." The tension was unbearable, and the
differences seemed irreconcilable. It was in this context that Benjamin
Franklin gave his famous speech:
"In the beginning of the contest with Great Britain, when we were
sensible of danger," said Franklin, "we had daily prayers in this room
for 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 . . . and have we now forgotten this powerful friend? Or do we no
longer need His assistance? I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the
longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth: 'that God
governs the affairs of man.' And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground
without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His
aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the Sacred Writings that except the
Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it. I firmly believe
this. I also believe that, without His concurring aid, we shall succeed
in this political building no better than the builders of Babel; we
shall be divided by our little, partial local interests; our projects
will be confounded; and we ourselves shall become a reproach and a
byword down to future ages. And what is worse, mankind may hereafter,
from this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing government by
human wisdom and leave it to chance, war or conquest. I therefore beg
leave to move that, henceforth, prayers imploring the assistance of
Heaven and its blessings on our deliberations be held in this assembly
every morning before we proceed with our business."(4)
Franklin, along with many others, believed strongly in the "providence"
of God. They believed that God would intervene on their behalf because
they were following his commands, and living according to his precepts.
Several events throughout the revolutionary period helped to shape this
view. Among the more notable was a remarkable event that occurred on
August 27, 1776 in Brooklyn Heights, New York. The Continental Army was
backed into a corner by some 32,000 British troops--the largest force
ever assembled by the British in the 18th Century. Among them were 9,000
German mercenaries; the rest were highly trained and skilled British
soldiers. The 18,000 American troops were terribly outnumbered with no
place to go. They had never really had a chance from the start, however.
Not only were they outnumbered two to one, but some 5,000 of our men
were raw recruits from Connecticut who had been hastily thrown together
by patriot governor John Trumble following an urgent appeal by General
Washington. These "soldiers" had not been given so much as one hour of
drill! To make matters worse, Major General John Sullivan, who was
acting for George Washington, foolishly moved his troops out into the
open plain to the south. The battle which ensued inflicted heavy losses
on the beleaguered Continental Army. When it was all said and done, some
8,000 troops were left trapped on the Brooklyn shores--little more than
sitting ducks. All the British had to do was launch one final offensive
and it would have all been over. Washington and his troops would have
been forced to surrender and America as we know it today, would have
never been. But thankfully for those who prefer to drive on the right
side of the road, the British never launched that final assault. There
is only speculation as to why--some have thought that the commander of
the British troops, General William Howe, wanted to wait for
reinforcements, but he certainly had more than enough to conquer the
Americans. The reason will remain a mystery--for now, both armies
disengaged, and posted sentries while the Americans awaited the
inevitable.(5)
Night fell, but few were likely sleeping soundly. The next morning the
sound of rain was heard throughout the camp. It was a cold, hard rain,
driven by a strong northeasterly wind. This put somewhat of a crimp in
the British plan. Their fleet lay at anchor two miles southwest. The
plan was for the fleet to travel upstream and complete the encirclement.
Then, the American troops would be completely encircled. But the storm
kept the fleet at anchor downstream. General Washington and his officers
began to plot their strategy. Most of his advisors, sensing the end was
near, felt they should stand firm in the trenches and take as many
British as they could. General Washington, however, had a different
idea. They would row themselves one mile across the river to present-day
Manhattan. His advisors felt the plan was impossible, but Washington was
adamant--he ordered his officers to draw up the plans, with the
evacuation to begin immediately thereafter.
It just so happened that the last regiment of men who were sent to join
the troops two days prior were minutemen from the north shore of
Massachusetts Bay--from Salem and Marblehead. These men had been raised
in small boats--they were expert oarsmen who were so skilled they could
dip the oars in and out of the water without making a sound. This would
become crucial because two hours in to the evacuation, the storm
subsided. The winds which had been blowing fiercely died down and the
moon illuminated the night sky on this hot, still, August night. The
mood in the boats was no doubt one of great tension for the British
marines lay only two miles downstream. Sound carries very well over
still water--if the British marines had heard the sound of rowing they
would have immediately launched the longboats and captured the entire
army--but they never heard a thing. All throughout the night, fishing
boats, row boats, life rafts, and anything else that would float slipped
across the East River carrying troops, artillery, wagons, and yes, even
horses!
Dawn came quickly it seemed--all too quickly, indeed. For there were
still several thousand troops left on the Brooklyn shore. As the sky
slowly became more and more light, the hopes of the soldiers still
trapped on the Brooklyn shore became more and more dismal. Once it was
light, the British would see what was happening and proceed to capture
the remaining troops. What happened next was recorded in the diaries of
officers from both sides. Major Ben Tallmadge of the Continental Army
says it best: "As the eastern sky began to lighten from black to purple,
streaks of red and orange--just as the light began to rise, every
American eye was anxiously on the eastern horizon . . . Just as the
light rose, a dense fog rose out of the earth. I recall this peculiar
intervention of divine providence perfectly well, and so dense was the
atmosphere that I could scarcely discern a man six yards distant. The
fog hung like a blanket upon the area of the British lines, the American
lines, the Brooklyn shore, and a corridor of fog across the eastern
river to the tip of Manhattan. We tarried until late morning . . ."
Under the cover of the fog, the remaining soldiers were rowed to safety.
And as Major Tallmadge recalls, "The fog rose at precisely the moment
the last boatload of American soldiers left the Brooklyn shore." The
British sentries saw what was happening and realized they'd been had.
They ran down to the shore and fired there muskets at that last boat,
but it was too late--the rounds fell short--the boat was just out of
range.
It's not surprising that many of the American soldiers involved in this
incident viewed these most unlikely of events as providential. Indeed,
so did the British, some of whom even wrote in their diaries, "The hand
of God is against us."(6)
General Washington, in a letter written to Brigadier General Nelson
said, "He must be worse than an infidel who lacks faith to express his
obligations, but time will suffice later for me to become preacher when
my present appointment ceases, therefore I shall add no more on the
doctrine of providence."(7)
This was just one of many events that our founding fathers looked to and
saw the hand of God protecting and providing for them. There were many
other events such as when British reinforcements were delayed by three
months at a critical point in the war due to contrary winds that
indicated to people that God was silently working "behind the scenes" to
assist their righteous cause.
It is difficult to characterize God as having "chosen sides" in the
Revolutionary War. One can hardly imagine God "rooting" for the
Americans and "booing" the British. But there was indeed something
special about America in the eyes of the founding fathers--this was one
of the only countries that had been founded on the God of the Bible.
This was a nation that was seeking to establish itself under the
democratic principles of the Bible. Many of the time felt America to be
a "divine experiment" in democracy. By following God's precepts for the
democratic rule of a country, as explained in the Bible, they felt
guaranteed of eventual success, regardless of what obstacles confronted
them. Indeed, for those who witnessed the events surrounding the
founding of the United States it is not difficult to understand how they
might agree with Katharine Lee Bates' later conclusion: "America!
America! God shed His grace on thee . . ."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Higher Law
"We have staked the whole of our political institutions on the capacity
of mankind to govern themselves according to the ten commandments of
God." --James Madison
Many of the people in Colonial times had a strong belief in the God of
the Bible. This belief, as we have seen, carried over into their
feelings about government and democracy. But even for those who did not
believe in Jesus Christ, few could argue against the success of a system
of democratic government based on biblical principles. The founding
fathers felt such moral and ethical values to be essential for the
preservation of their fragile democracy. Not surprisingly, our entire
legal system is based on the principles of right and wrong, good and
bad-that is, of a "higher law." Thomas Jefferson articulated this
ideology in the Declaration of Independence when he wrote the King of
England had "violated the laws of nature and of nature's God."
The Declaration of Independence asserted that we all have "certain
unalienable rights." Without some higher lawgiver, no right can be
"unalienable." They instead become subject to the whims of the King,
President, Congress, and the people. Nothing is definite, nothing is
absolute. Our principle of Higher Law goes back to the Common Law of
England. And the Common Law, of course, dates back to the Magna Carta,
which states in one part: "The King himself ought not to be under a man
but under God and under the law, because the law makes the king . . .
for there is no king where will governs and not law." Ultimately, the
origins of Higher Law can be traced back to Moses and the Ten
Commandments. According to the Bible, these Ten Commandments were given
by God through Moses, to the Israelites. These commandments laid out the
requirements for living an upright, peaceful, pleasing life with one
another and with God. Regardless of whether a person believes in God it
would seem clear that principles such as "Honor your father and your
mother," "You must not murder anyone," "You must not steal," or "You
must not tell lies about your neighbor in court." are essential to the
preservation of a free society.(8) It is indeed ironic that such
fundamental principles for living peacefully with one another have today
become the grounds for civil action against those who would proclaim
them in public schools.
Our nation was founded on this principle of Higher Law. Were it not for
Higher Law, there would be no basis for the Declaration of Independence.
Our entire system of democratic government rests on this very principle.
John Adams put it very clearly: "Our constitution was designed only for
a moral and religious people; it is wholly inadequate for the government
of any other."(9)
That sentiment lasted well into the 19th Century. In 1892, as part of
the decision of Church of the Holy Trinity v. United States, the Supreme
Court said: "Our laws and our institutions must necessarily be based
upon and embody the teachings of The Redeemer of mankind. It is
impossible that it should be otherwise; and in this sense and to this
extent our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian
. . . This is a religious people. This is historically true. From the
discovery of this continent to the present hour, there is a single voice
making this affirmation . . . we find everywhere a clear recognition of
the same truth . . . These, and many other matters which might be
noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic
utterances that this is a Christian nation." My how things have changed
in the last 101 years!
It is interesting to note that it has only been in the last 50 years or
so that America has strayed from its roots. As we move farther and
farther away from the principles of Higher Law which have guided this
country since its founding, we may soon find ourselves standing on very
shaky ground as we begin to ask who decides what is right and what is
wrong.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Myth of Modern-Day Pluralism
"America was not founded by religionists nor on any religion, but on the
gospel of Jesus Christ." --Patrick Henry
In a truly pluralistic society, many diverse beliefs and values can be
embraced amongst a civilization holding to certain common, fundamental
values. Sadly, however, our modern-day society has strayed far from the
pluralism espoused by the founding fathers. Today, an Agnostic is often
seen as being tolerant, whereas a Christian is viewed as intolerant. One
reason for this radical change stems from the fact that the modern-day
agnostic view of pluralism has largely excluded the moral absolutes to
which our founding fathers held. Such moral absolutes represent the
foundation of Christianity. Hence, in today's society, such positive
moral values are squelched from the public sector simply because they
happen to coincide with religious ones.
The myth of modern-day pluralism is that society can function
indefinitely apart from any kind of basis in common, fundamental moral
values. Apart from such, plurality can only exist as a temporary state
of being while multiple value structures compete for the minds and
hearts of the people. Sadly, those espousing "pluralism" today often
attempt to use it as a manipulative tool for imposing their own values
on others. In their zeal to strip religious values from public schools
and rewrite history to exclude religious beliefs, it has become clear
that the vision of the founding fathers has been derailed.
Indeed, just as Christianity is a "religious belief," so is Agnosticism,
Atheism, and Secular Humanism. Under the guise of the "Separation of
Church and State," modern-day society has endeavored to part with its
Christian roots. But in so doing, haven't we merely traded one set of
values for another? In a truly pluralistic society, values held by
competing segments of the population must be fully integrated or kept
fully separate. The failure of modern-day society to realize the
pluralistic intentions of our forefathers can clearly be seen today in
public schools that instill values and beliefs into students contrary to
their upbringing. In a truly pluralistic society, public schools would
either educate children all values (including those of a Judeo-Christian
origin) or would ensure that no values of any type are conveyed.
Indeed, if the State and the Church are to be kept separate, then the
schools have no business whatsoever teaching any kind of morality,
whether directly or indirectly. This has prompted a backlash amongst
many who object to the teaching of values contrary to their own. In a
recent article, syndicated columnist Dr. Thomas Sowell writes that many
American public schools today are attempting to "brainwash children with
the latest ideological fashions." While our foreign counterparts are
busy teaching math, science, and other academic subjects, Dr. Sowell
notes that we in America are wasting time trying to indoctrinate
students on "homosexuality, environmentalism, cultural, or a thousand
other non-academic distractions." Such distractions may account in part
for the educational deficit found amongst American students in contrast
to many of their student counterparts in other countries. Dr. Sowell's
article was prompted by a recent flap in New York City by a school
district who objected to first-grade textbooks about "daddy's roommate"
and a girl with "two mommies," designed to accustom first-graders to the
idea of homosexual parents. Dr. Sowell writes: "Few parents or citizens
realize the pervasiveness of classroom brainwashing, or the utter
dishonesty with which it is smuggled into the schools under misleading
labels. Does anyone ask himself why it should take years and years to
teach school children so-called 'sex-education'? Obviously it does not.
What takes years and years is to wear down the values they were taught
at home and lead them toward wholly different attitudes and wholly
different conceptions of the world. Brainwashing takes time--and it
takes this time away from academic subjects. First-grade textbooks
promoting homosexual lifestyles are only the opening salvo in the year
after of assaulting children's values. The issue is not homosexuality or
the relative merits of traditional versus avant-garde beliefs. The issue
is: Whose children are these? By what right do other people usurp the
responsibility of parents and use the schools to carry on guerrilla
warfare against the values that parents have taught their children?"(10)
Clearly, what Dr. Sowell and other conservatives object to is not the
existence of values different from their own, but rather, the fact that
such values are being foisted on them through the public sector. By
definition, pluralism allows for multiple belief systems to exist in
autonomously; hence, the public sector should either reinforce these
values or avoid any influence on them whatsoever. To do otherwise is
indeed cause for questioning, "whose children are these?"
The framers of our Constitution would likely be disturbed if they saw
our present day "interpretation" of their words and expressions. The
Constitution, in the eyes of its authors, was designed to perpetuate a
Christian order, not to promote its demise. The First Amendment states:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . ." Clearly, the authors would
have never intended for this statement to be used to keep religion out
of the schools. On the contrary, by interpreting it as such, the
opposite goal is achieved. It is interesting to note the similarities
between the modern-day interpretation of "separation of church and
state" and that of the former Soviet Union. The now-defunct U.S.S.R.
article 124 of the Soviet Constitution stated: "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 anti-religious propaganda is recognized for all
citizens." While this sounds reasonable, and even appropriate, a careful
analysis reveals the ambiguity of this kind of an interpretation of the
First Amendment. What good does religious "freedom" in the private spher
e do you when the private sphere no longer exists? As with the U.S.S.R.,
religious faith was outlawed everywhere, because the private sphere had
been systematically absorbed into the public sphere. This is
unquestionably not what the framers of our Constitution had in mind--our
forefathers wanted freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.
On the other hand however, they by no means ever had the idea of a
theocracy in which the state is run by the church. This has proven
disastrous where it has been tried, and is contrary to the biblical
principles of self-government which our forefathers so strongly believed
in. A church-run government is certainly not the answer; but neither is
this modern-day re-interpretation of what the First Amendment said. The
First Amendment was never intended to protect Americans from religion;
rather, it was intended to protect Americans from government.
Were our founding fathers alive to see our modern-day attempts to
eliminate religion in favor of a humanist philosophy, they would likely
object to those who would describe it as a triumph of "pluralism,"
"freedom," and "liberty." Indeed, such "freedom" and "liberty" is a far
cry from what they expressed in their day. But perhaps even more
disturbing is the thought that the opinions of these great statesmen,
were they able to comment on today's society, might well fall on deaf
ears.
"A too literal quest for the advice of the founding fathers seems to me
futile and misdirected."
--Supreme Court Justice William Brennan, 1963
"I do not believe that the meaning of the Constitution was forever fixed
at the Philadelphia convention. Nor do I find the wisdom, foresight and
sense of justice exhibited by the framers particularly profound. To the
contrary, the government they devised was defective from the start."
--Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, May 1987
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conclusion
"To destroy a people, you must first sever their roots" --Alexander
Solzhenitsyn
Americans as a whole, have lost touch with their roots. Few have any
interest at all as to how this country came to be. And those who do are
often satisfied with the explanation given in a class, or by reading a
book, or by watching a documentary. This lethargy of Americans towards
their heritage is a danger to our society, for it makes us vulnerable to
anyone who wishes to rewrite history to their liking. Slowly and
methodically, the courses of entire civilizations can be changed by
those who wish to manipulate opinion, values, and history.
Other countries have been brought to ruin because they allowed a person
or group of people to slowly overtake them. How can we be so confident
that we are exempt from this possibility? We may not be overtaken by a
Hitler or a Stalin, but what about special-interest groups, or those who
disagree with our values or religious views, whatever they may be? We
must not allow our freedoms to be compromised.
America cannot afford to allow its roots to be severed. We must
understand our roots lest we risk losing touch with the principles and
realities that have made this country what it is today. As a society, we
must hold officials in the public sector accountable for ensuring the
freedoms that our founding fathers sought after. The responsibility
rests on our shoulders, and ours alone--our forefathers ensured us of
that by creating the system of government we now possess.
Indeed, our roots cannot be severed apart from our consent.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bibliography
DeMoss, Arthur S. Foundation, The Rebirth of America, Arthur S. DeMoss
Foundation, © 1986
Dunn, Charles W. Religion in American Politics. Washington, D.C.: CQ
Press, © 1989.
Hall, Clarance Wilbur. Protestant Panorama: A Story of the Faith that
Made America Free. New York, Farrar, Straus and Young, © 1951.
Hart, Benjamin Faith and Freedom: The Christian Roots of American
Liberty. San Bernardino, CA: Here's Life Publishers, © 1988.
Hudson, Winthrop Still. Religion in America: A historical account of the
development of American Religions. New York: Macmillan, © 1987.
Hutchenson, Richard G. Jr. God in the White House: How Religion Has
Changed the Modern Presidency. New York, Macmillan, © 1988.
Knollenberg, Bernhard. Origin of the American Revolution: 1759-1766. New
York: Macmillan, © 1960.
Maddox, Robert L. Separation of Church and State. New York: Crossroad, ©
1987.
Miller, William Lee The First Liberty: Religion and the American
Republic. New York: Knopf: Distributed by Random House, © 1986.
Nehaus, Richard John The Naked Public Square: Religion and Democracy in
America. Grand Rapids, Michigan: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., © 1984.
Tindall, George Brown, America: A Narrative History, W.W. Norton &
Company, New York, © 1992.
Wright, Louis B. The American Heritage History of the Thirteen Colonies.
New York: American Heritage Pub. Co., © 1967.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Endnotes
1. Information Please Almanac, 1980, p. 576, "The Mayflower Compact" ©
1980, Simon & Schuster, New York.
2. Tocqueville, Alexis de. Democracy in America. Many editions,
originally written 1835 (De la democratie en Amerique)
3. Benjamin Hart, Faith & Freedom, © 1988, Here's Life Publishers, San
Bernardino, p. 13.
4. Ibid, p. 324.
5. Tindall, George Brown, America: A Narrative History, © 1992, W.W.
Norton & Company, New York, p. 216-218.
6. Marshall, Peter The Truth About Our Heritage, © 1993 Focus on the
Family, Colorado Springs, CO.
7. Ibid.
8. Scripture quoted from The Everyday Bible, New Century Version,
copyright © 1987 by Worthy Publishing, Fort Worth, Texas 76137. Used by
permission.
9. Marshall, Peter The Truth About Our Heritage, © 1993 Focus on the
Family, Colorado Springs, CO.
10. Sowell, Dr. Thomas, The Fraud of Sex Education, syndicated column,
taken from the Bremerton Sun, 1992, exact date unknown.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your thoughts, comments, and questions are always appreciated. Click
here to find out how to contact me!
Back to Tim's Writing Page
-----
Aloha, He'Ping,
Om, Shalom, Salaam.
Em Hotep, Peace Be,
Omnia Bona Bonis,
All My Relations.
Adieu, Adios, Aloha.
Amen.
Roads End
Kris
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
