The American Revolution was not a revolt in the sense that most revolutions are an act of lawlessness or anarchy.  The Declaration of Independence was actually a legal document enacted by independent and duly elected governments.  The Colonies were all independent nations with their own governments, and those nations and governments were created by Colonial Charters issued by the King of England and English government.  In short, those Charters were Social Contracts.   And it was the King of England – not the Colonies – who violated those contracts, thus severing the relationship between England and the Colonies and leaving the Colonies to invoke the Natural Right to self-defense.  Read the Declaration of Independence again and you will see that it starts by stating this notion of Natural Rights and the Social Contract; then states the Colonies’ case against the King of England to demonstrate that the Crown was the party responsible for breaking that contract; and, finally, the Declaration ends by declaring the Colonies to be free from any further relations with England as a result of these violations.  Finally, and most importantly, these notions of Natural Rights, Natural Law and the Social Contract – which gave birth to the notion of the ‘just war’ — were and remain rooted in the Judea/Christian ethic.

In Europe, the movement was toward a more secular, libertarian notion of constitutional government.  However, in America, the founders realized that liberty can only be secured in conjunction with a firm belief in God and of a judgment day in the next life.  They said this forcibly and repeatedly, and in agreement with this belief, they appealed to God repeatedly for approval and success in their endeavors.  If we look to the historic record, we will find the founders calling for national days of fasting and prayer, praying for God’s guidance and approval of their actions in their government bodies and deliberations and thanking God for His Providence when they succeeded.  Many of our most prevalent and influential founders boldly asserted that no reasonable man could look back on the American Revolution – through the ratification of the Constitution – and not see the hand of God at work.

 Today, we can deny this religious aspect to the founding of America, but that does not change the fact that the men and women who actually lived these events firmly believed they were acting in obedience to God and His Natural Laws.  And the evidence that they were can be found in the differences between the path Europe took as opposed to America.  Until just recently – when the secular forces started to gain prominence in America – that history has been one of violence and instability in Europe as opposed to a less violent and much more stable nation in America.  While it is true, America has had boughts with the same secular-driven horrors as Europe (genocide of Native Americans, internment of the Japanese, slavery, etc), the religious foundation of this nation remained strong, and in place until the 1960’s when God was kicked out of the public arena.  Since that time, our nation has been on a steady and predictable path paralleling that taken by Europe in the 1920’s and 30’s.

The implications should be obvious to those who know and understand history.  But then, this is one of the reasons our schools do not teach history or – when they do – they intentionally distort and re-write it.  The lesson here is simple: if we would save individual rights and liberty and the constitutional rule of law, we must return to the source of these things.  The founders knew the source: God.  But today, we keep trying to justify all of this without God, and that is why the ‘Libertarian’ ideal we are currently chasing will be no more successful than the ‘Conservative’ movement before it.  In the end, liberty can only exist when society conforms to Natural Law, and that means society must acknowledge the source of that Law.  However, if and when we turn back to God and repent and seek His guidance once more, then and only then can we hope to repeat what our founders’ did.  Because then and only then will we again understand the meaning – and power – behind these words:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, 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.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

[NOTE: if you understand these words and the power behind the principles and ideals they assert, then you should easily be able to see the path to correcting what is happening in America today.  It is the same our founders took.  Just replace the King of England with Washington D.C.]

[NOTE TO CHRISTIANS: you may want to read this link for an explanation of why Romans 13 does not apply to the American Revolution.]

Stop talking about the Constitution.  The Constitution is nothing more than a piece of legal clay: it can be and has been made into something totally estranged from what it was intended to be.  When you were in school, did you bother to learn the principles behind all those math equations they taught you, or did you just memorize the equations long enough to take the test and then forget them?  If you had learned the principles, then you didn’t need to memorize the equations.  You could have derived them for yourself whenever you needed them.  But I bet you didn’t learn the principles, so now, if you were told to work those equations, you wouldn’t know what to do without someone telling you how to do it – would you?  So, what if they told you 2+2=5?  Would you know enough to reject what they told you, are do you remember enough to be able to know they were wrong.  Better yet, would you be able to explain why they were wrong?  Well, if we are talking about math, you might remember enough to keep from being fooled.  But if we’re talking about the Constitution, I’d wager money that most of us could easily be fooled.  That’s because – in part — we think the Constitution is our founding document.  It is not!

The Constitution is just the ‘how’ of America (the equation).  The ‘what’ and the’ why’ (the principles) behind America are found in the Declaration of Independence.  If all you know of our system of government is what you remember about the Constitution, then I am telling you that you can easily be led to believe the Constitution can actually support a Marxist/Socialist society.  However, if you understand the principles and ideals asserted in the Declaration, then I would never be able to convince you of such an absurdity.  What’s more, if it were necessary, you would be able derive a whole new Constitution and it might even be better than the one our founders wrote.  The simple truth is that the Constitution is nothing more than a map without a compass rose.  To find the ‘North’ of America, you must have the Declaration of Independence.

You cannot properly execute the Constitution without understanding the Declaration of Independence – period.  You might think you can, but look around.  The evidence is everywhere you look.  It cannot be done.  And this is precisely why the Constitution was intentionally divorced from the Declaration.  Here is one of the most important reasons.  Do you think the Constitution is ‘secular, or that the founders wanted our government to be ‘secular?’  It isn’t, and they didn’t, but you could easily miss this – unless you joined the Constitution back to the Declaration.  Once you do that, you cannot miss the religious foundation of our nation and our government.  But please, don’t take my word for it, take theirs:

First, from the man who wrote the Declaration of Independence:

“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 of the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath?”

–Thomas Jefferson

“From the day of the Declaration…they (the American people) were bound by the laws of God, which they all, and by the laws of The Gospel, which they nearly all, acknowledge as the rules of their conduct.”

–John Quincy Adams

And when our founders had forgotten the role God was playing in building this nation, and the Second Constitutional Convention was just about to collapse in failure, this man stood and said these words:

“The longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth: ‘that God governs in the affairs of men.’ And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?”

–Benjamin Franklin

A sentiment affirmed by the man whose hand penned the Constitution:

“It is impossible for the man of pious reflection not to perceive in it [the Constitution] a finger of that Almighty hand which has been so frequently and signally extended to our relief in the critical stages of the revolution.”

–James Madison

You see, the Declaration of Independence is a religious document.  The ideals and principles it asserts are derived from Biblical teachings.  Again, do not take my word for it, take theirs:

“Is it not that the Declaration of Independence first organized the social compact on the foundation of the Redeemer’s mission upon earth? That it laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity”?

–John Quincy Adams, [–1837, at the age of 69, when he delivered a Fourth of July speech at Newburyport, Massachusetts.]

“The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity. I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.”

–John Adams

The ‘pursuit of happiness’ was also a Christian notion, and it had nothing to do with chasing the things that bring material enjoyment.  It had to do with the freedom to pursue the virtuous life.  It was even a legal principle at the time of our founding and can be found in the Commentaries of Sir William Blackstone.  You see, the founders considered virtue essential to the maintenance of the government they had built; a government built to operate according to those Christian principles asserted in the Declaration of Independence:

“Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

–John Adams, October 11, 1798

“A general dissolution of the principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy…. While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but once they lose their virtue, they will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader…. If virtue and knowledge are diffused among the people, they will never be enslaved. This will be their great security.”

–Samuel Adams

“It is the manners and spirit of a people which preserve a republic in vigor. A degeneracy in these is a canker which soon eats to the heart of its laws and constitution.”

–Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia Query 19, 1781          

These are among the many reasons our Constitution was divorced from the Declaration.  And because we no longer understand the role religion plays in maintaining a free and self-governing society, we no longer understand how the Constitution was intended to work.  Sadly, we don’t even understand that it is not our founding document.  One more time, do not take my word for it, take his:

“Before the formation of this Constitution. … [t]his Declaration of Independence was received and ratified by all the States in the Union and has never been disannulled.” –

– Samuel Adams, United States Founding Father, Signer of the Declaration of Independence, “Father of the American Revolution”, Governor of Massachusetts, “The Writings of Samuel Adams”, Harry Alonzo Cushing, editor (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1908), Vol. IV, p. 357, to the Legislature of Massachusetts on January 17, 1794.

Unless and until this nation remembers the principles and ideals asserted in the Declaration of Independence, or more importantly, the source of those ideals and principles, there is no hope of ever restoring the Constitutional rule of law in this country.  That belongs only to a religious and moral people, and these things do not exist outside of God.  So, as long as we continue to ignore and reject Him, we will continue to be left to our own depravity and the work our founders did will be lost to the world.

[NOTE: this is the second of two posts on this subject.  You can find the first post here.]

[NOTE TO CHRISTIANS: you may want to read this link for an explanation of why Romans 13 does not apply to the American Revolution.]

Do not count Rep. Steve King as ‘one of the good guys.’  He is actively helping Obama violate the U.S. Constitution.  I know this will be difficult for my Conservative and Libertarian friends to swallow, but not only is it the truth, Rep. King has officially admitted to it during an interview with CNN.  This is why you do not place your trust in men, or in political Parties: because they tend to serve themselves first and foremost, the People second and seldom – if ever – do they actually do the job they were sent to do.  Here’s the story:

Tea Party Favorite Lays Into Obama’s Newest Executive Order in CNN Interview: ‘Unconstitutional,’ ‘Contempt,’ a ‘Violation’

“I think it’s a constitutional violation,” King said during a CNN interview. “We have a minimum wage. Congress has set it. For the president to simply declare ‘I’m going to change this law that Congress has passed,’ is unconstitutional. He’s outside the bounds of his Article II limitations.”

“This threat that the president is going to run the government with an ink pen and executive orders, we’ve never had a president with that level of audacity and that level of contempt for his own oath of office,” King added.

So, Rep. King clearly states that he believes Obama is in violation of the Constitution.  In fact, he stopped just short of calling Obama a dictator.  Now, if the rule of law governed this nation – not to mention Rep. King’s heart — that would make the actions King mentions impeachable offenses.  But when he was asked about impeachment, King said this:

CNN host Chris Cuomo interjected to note that former President Bill Clinton signed far more executive orders than Obama, adding “if you want to stay with your line of reasoning, it could be a little bit of a dangerous game.”

“How invested are you in this, representative, because if he really is abusing his constitutional powers, some might say that’s ground for action against the president, maybe even an impeachable offense. Is that what you’re saying?” Cuomo continued.

“You know, I’ve stayed away from that word, although it does come to me on the streets of America consistently,” King said. “I think instead, this Congress should lay out the violations that the president has had. And there are many.”

Chris Cuomo is correct: Rep. King’s line of reasoning leads to the conclusion that Obama should be impeached – and he should be.  He has consistently shown contempt for the Constitution and, thus, violated his oath of office, as well.  He is the type of person from whom our founders fought to free us.  But what does King do?  Rather than file articles of impeachment – his Constitutional duty – he calls for more grand-standing political theater:

 “It’s Congress’s job to pass the laws. He knows that. And we need to take our oath seriously and defend the Constitution,” he said [King]

Unfortunately for Rep. King, there is nothing in the Constitution about “laying out the President’s Constitutional violations,” so this claim of taking his oath seriously is theater.  It is all for show.  He does not mean it.  If he did, he would file the articles of impeachment tomorrow morning.  But he won’t, and by not doing so, he is fighting on the side of Barack Obama and tyranny!

Let me explain it this way; by sharing a story about a real American hero.  His name does not matter, all that matters is that he was real, and this story is real.

It was 1943.  This American was a fighter pilot defending our bombers over NAZI Germany.  He flew a P-47.  On an escort mission, he got separated from the rest of his flight.  Suddenly, he saw sixteen German FW-190 fighters getting ready to attack our defenseless bombers.  The FW-190 was called the butcher bird – and for good reason.  It was a bomber killer and – at this time in the war – the German pilots were better than ours.  They were flat out deadly.  So what did our hero do?  Did he call for help and circle until he had a ‘majority’ before he attacked?  Did he call a ‘press conference’ to warn the bombers they were about to be attacked?  No!  He dove into the sixteen German fighters by himself – without any regard for his own safety.  When his buddies heard him call tally-ho, the code word for ‘enemy spotted,’ they asked him where he was so they could come help.  All our hero said was “These are mine.  Go find your own.”  He ended up shooting down several of the German fighters and broke up the attack.  He was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor for this engagement.

So, what is the point of this story?  You do your duty – period!  You do not worry about yourself or about failing.  You do what your job demands and do your best.  The rest takes care of itself.  If you fail, you fail.  But you do your duty.  Rep, King has accused Obama of violating the Constitution.  This means he has a duty to file articles of impeachment.  But he hasn’t.  And by not doing so, it would be the same as if that American pilot had let the Germans attack our bombers and made the excuse that he couldn’t do anything by himself.  Had that Pilot actually done that, and it had been found out, he would have been charged with cowardice in the face of the enemy.  That is the least of which King is guilty of; the worst is – whether on by purpose or default – he is actively helping Obama get away with the subversion of our Constitution and the rule of law.

King needs to go, too.  He is no better than the man he is accusing.

We need to have a discussion about something too many speak about but too few understand: the rule of law.  Of necessity, this will be a long post – and even then, it will still be too short to touch on everything that needs to be said.  But still, we must address this issue, if only to assert that there is such a thing, that it has clear characteristics and that this definition does not change with time or culture.  Else we lose the very idea of justice all together.  We start with the words of the Roman statesman – and one of our founders’ favorite pagans — Marcus Tillius Cicero:

“True law is right reasonin agreement with nature;  it is of universal application, unchanging and everlasting;  it summons to duty by its commands, and averts from wrongdoing by its prohibitions…It is a sin to try to alter this law, nor is it allowable to repeal any part of it, and it is impossible to abolish it entirely.  We cannot be freed from its obligations by senate or people, and we need not look outside ourselves for an expounder or interpreter of it.  And there will not be different laws at Rome and at Athens, or different laws now and in the future, but one eternal and unchangeable law will be valid for all nations and at all times, and there will be one master and ruler, that is God, over us all, for he is the author of this law, its promulgator and its enforcing judge. Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature, and by reason of this very fact he will suffer the worst punishment.”

Cicero is important because he knew nothing of the Bible or the God of Abraham, Isaac and Moses, yet – by do nothing more than observing and applying right reason to the world around him – he arrived at much the same conclusions as Job: that there is a God; that He has ordained eternal laws; and that those laws cannot be violated by any act of man.  He also said we know this to be true and that the evidence is within each of us (i.e. we just feel it).  Coincidentally, this is exactly what the Apostle Paul tells us in the book of Romans.  And this all comes together in the words:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, 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….”

Sadly, too few of us understand what the term ‘pursuit of happiness’ actually meant to our founders, or to those from whom they adopted the idea.  It has nothing to do with pursuing carnal or material pleasures.  It is about the liberty to pursue the virtuous life, which is inherently bound to Natural Law.  It is the pursuit of virtue that separates us from the animals – and nothing more.  And it is in virtue that morality is found.  And it is in morality that all law is based.  And, as Cicero said, that law must be in agreement with Natural law and the laws of Nature’s God – or it is no law at all.

We have forgotten this eternal truth and replaced it with the law of men – which is no law at all.  Instead of holding up the ideal of Natural Law and seeking to achieve that goal by pursuing a virtuous life, we have sought countless ways to justify the perversions of Natural Law.  We call these perversions by many names, but they all amount to the same thing: justification of self-serving people who seek their own gratification.  And in the process, they have destroyed the understanding of the proper role of government and the law – especially in relation to society, liberty and justice.  The French philosopher, Frederic Bastiat, said it very well when he said:

“Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.”

The result of this perversion is an explosion of laws and regulations deemed necessary to force men to live correctly.  But these laws and regulations are nothing more than a trap.  They have become so numerous as to make un-indicted and un-convicted criminals of us all.  Don’t you understand: we have so many laws and regulations on the books today that each of us breaks enough laws every day that we could all be put in jail at any time the government wishes?  Thus the tap: we either do as the State commands, or they seize your liberty.  And this is why Cicero said this is a sin.

HEAR THIS PART CLEARLY, AND HEAR IT WELL!

While it is an imperfect comparison – mostly because one is eternal and the other fleeting – it is a valuable comparison none the less.  What we should all see here is that sin – like too many laws – makes a prisoner of us all.  We can no more escape sin than we can escape breaking the laws that have been built around us like a prison cell waiting to be slammed shut.  The only hope we have to redeem us from sin is God’s Redeemer.  And the only hope we have to protect us from the law is the Constitution.  The founders knew that, because we are all sinners, and because the law is an instrument of morality based in God’s eternal law, we would all break the law.  We cannot help it; it is in our nature.  So they wrote the Constitution in a way that was intended to provide us some measure of protection from the government.  And this is because, while God’s Redeemer is perfect and therefore He judges perfectly, the government is nothing more than men, and men are imperfect and, therefore, will judge imperfectly.  So to provide some measure of mercy and security from our sinful nature, the founders wrote the Constitution such that the government was so constrained that it could not claim ‘probable cause’ until our transgressions had reached a level that the well being of others was threatened by our actions.  And even then, the founders wrote in procedural restraints to restrain the government in its zeal to punish.

In short, while Christ is our eternal protector and Redeemer, the law is meant to be our protector here on earth.  When it operates according to Natural Law, and is run by virtuous, God-fearing people, it can do this reasonably well.  Bastiat wrote a famous booklet defining this proper role of government.  It can be read over a cup of coffee.  I urge you to read it.  It has a simple title and you can find it here: “The Law.”

However, when the law is corrupted and becomes the instrument of corrupt and designing men who seek their own purposes, then the law ceases to be the law and becomes the essence of tyranny itself.  This is what we have in America today.  The rule of law has been lost.  If it were not, the majority of those calling themselves our ‘leaders’ would either be in jail or on trial.  But they are not because they have appropriated the law for themselves and in doing so, they have violated Nature’s Law.  To those men and women, I remind them once more of Cicero’s warning:

“…there will be one master and ruler, that is God, over us all, for he is the author of this law, its promulgator and its enforcing judge. Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature, and by reason of this very fact he will suffer the worst punishment.”

I moved this post to my other blog, where it should have been in the first place.  I apologize for the mistake.  You can find it here.