Eight days later, on January 18, 2012, a Catholic priest, named Father Claude Burns posted a video response titled, “Why I Love Religion.” In his video, Father Burns defends religion and appears to refute the arguments laid out in Jeffrey Bethke’s message.

Here are the two messages that appear to contradict one another:

Jeffrey Bethke – Why I Hate Religion

Fr. Claude (Dusty) Burns – Why I Love Religion

The arguments and debates I have already seen being waged online bring to mind a recent documentary that has helped me to change some of my own opinions on this discussion. The video documentary is titled “Lord, Save us From Your Followers,” and here is the trailer:

1. Satan’s goal is both to deceive and to divide
2. Words do have meanings, but different people do define some ambiguous words differently

The point here is to realize overall that this is the essence of spiritual warfare. As long as Satan can use the different ways people define the same words as a weapon to be used against each other, his work is pretty much done. Many of us tend to think that the father of lies (“You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it.” John 8:44) is hard at work, every minute of every day trying to find ways to cause division and disobedience. The fact is, while he is always busy, he doesn’t work at his task quite as hard as we may think. We, the human race, are so easily duped into being his pawns, that Satan really isn’t “in the trenches” minute-by-minute. He is a master at propaganda and we are too easily caught up in his plans.

So, how do we stop being the active player in this particular brand and instance of spiritual warfare? We should probably start by identifying the lie that is already fueling up the missiles of hatred. As I boil down the disagreements between the two camps that are lining up on the battlefield, the root of the conflict is the definition of the word “religion.”

There are four entries in the Mirriam-Webster dictionary for the term religion:

1. The state of a religious
1. : the service and worship of God or the supernatural
2. : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2. A personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3. Archaic : scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness
4. A cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

Now, armed with this official definition, I believe we can untangle some of the misconceptions that are dividing the two messages. The first video message, in my understanding, speaks negatively about religion in regards to what is commonly referred to as “works-based-faith.” I believe that his intention was to address the fallacy that occurs in adherence to definition 2 of religion.

When people call themselves Christ followers, but trust only in their own actions to justify their faith, they are relying on this definition of religion for salvation. I truly believe, and agree with Jeffrey Bethke on this point. When any person believes that they are a believer in Christ simply because they go to Church, say particular prayers and minister to the poor and needy, they are justifying their religion on works, not upon faith.

The lyrics of his poem point this out when he talks about “behavior modification.” Jesus did spend much of his earthly ministry condemning and chastising the works-based religion of the Pharisees. This religious group undeniably created a man-made set of rules and to-do lists that had little to nothing to do with faith. The actions of these people became the basis for their beliefs and that by not doing them, somehow their faith would come into question.

This is the point upon which I believe that Father Claud and those who are lining up behind his message are missing the point. It is very clear that Catholicism teaches specific rituals and actions, rules if you will, that mark the spiritual life of the faithful.

I believe that what Father Claud is referring to is the 4th definition of religion. Yes, there are certain expectations that Jesus Christ has for those who call him their savior. But I don’t think that is what the first video is refuting as Father Claud’s video seems to imply. His “Why I Love Religion” addresses the claims against religion causing wars and inquisitions, but you see, just because those blots against historic Christianity originated with the Catholic Church, does not target that institution as the cause of them. Father Claud’s own words in his response indicate that very thing when he says that through religion, “broken men and women to participate in his mission.”

While there is plenty more that can be broken down and discussed about these two videos that appear on the surface as contradictory, the very essence that should erase the battle lines between them center upon this very point. Jesus is calling upon all of us who call him savior to a life of faith AND works.

James 2:14-26 (ESV)

“What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good2 is that? So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder! Do you want to be shown, you foolish person, that faith apart from works is useless? Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up his son Isaac on the altar? You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works; 23 and the Scripture was fulfilled that says, y“Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness”—and he was called a friend of God. You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. And in the same way was not also Rahab the prostitute justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way? For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead.”

So you see, both videos have some truth in them, but both of them also fall short of the full truth. While you can have works without faith, that leads to death, a saving faith includes works. In the end it is the personal motivation leading to one’s works that Jesus calls into question. Above all, Jesus Christ wants our hearts. Without it, anything else we do is for ourselves, not for him.

So, let us get back to the works of faith, stop being so easily offended (and thus becoming a tool for the Devil), and welcome one another as equals just as Paul asked of his brother in Christ, Philemon, in regards to Onesimus:

“So if you consider me a partner, welcome him as you would welcome me.”

Jeffrey Bethke – Why I Hate Religion
What if I told you, Jesus came to abolish religion?
What if I told you getting you to vote republican, really wasn’t his mission?
Because republican doesn’t automatically mean Christian,
And just because you call some people blind, doesn’t automatically give you vision.
If religion is so great, why has it started so many wars?
Why does it build huge churches, but fails to feed the poor?
Tells single moms God doesn’t love them if they’ve ever been divorced
Yet God in the Old Testament actually calls the religious people whores
Religion preaches grace, but another thing they practice,
Tend to ridicule Gods people, they did it to John the Baptist,
Cant fix their problems, so they try to mask it,
Not realizing that’s just like sprayin’ perfume on a casket
Because the problem with religion is that it never gets to the core,
It’s just behavior modification, like a long list of chores.
Let’s dress up the outside, make things look nice and neat,
Its funny that’s what they do to mummies, while the corpse rots underneath,
Now I ain’t judging I’m just saying be careful of putting on a fake look,
Because there’s a problem if people only know that you’re a Christian by that little section on your facebook
In every other aspect of life you know that logic’s unworthy
Its like saying you play for the Lakers just because you bought a jersey
But see I played this game too; no one seemed to be on to me,
I was acting like church kid, while addicted to pornography.
I’d go to church on Sunday, but on Saturday getting faded,
Acting as if I was simply created to have sex and get wasted.
Spend my whole life putting on this facade of neatness,
But now that I know Jesus, I boast in my weakness.
If grace is water, then the church should be an ocean,
Cuz its not a museum for good people, it’s a hospital for the broken
I no longer have to hide my failures I don’t have to hide my sin,
Because my salvation doesn’t depend on me, it depends on him.
because when I was Gods enemy and certainly not a fan,
God looked down on me and said, “I want that man!”
Which is so different from religious people, and why Jesus called em fools
Don’t you see hes so much better than just following some rules?
Now let me clarify, I love the church, I love the bible, and I believe in sin
But my question, is if Jesus were here today, would your church let Him in?
Remember He was called a drunkard and a glutton by “religious men”
The Son of God not supported self-righteousness, not now, not then.

Now back to the topic, one thing I think is vital to mention,
How Jesus and religion are on opposite spectrums,
One is the work of God one is a man made invention,
One is the cure and one is the infection.
Because Religion says do, Jesus says done.
Religion says slave, Jesus says son,
Religion puts you in shackles but Jesus sets you free.
Religion makes you blind, but Jesus lets you see.

This is what makes religion and Jesus two different clans,
Religion is man searching for God, but Christianity is God searching for man.
Which is why salvation is freely mine, forgiveness is my own,
Not based on my efforts, but Christ’s obedience alone.
Because he took the crown of thorns, and blood that dripped down his face
He took what we all deserved, that’s why we call it grace.
While being murdered he yelled “father forgive them, they know not what they do”,
Because when he was dangling on that cross, he was thinking of you
He paid for all your sin, and then buried it in the tomb,
Which is why I’m kneeling at the cross now saying come on there’s room
So know I hate religion, in fact I literally resent it,
Because when Jesus cried It is finished, I believe He meant it.

Fr. Claude (Dusty) Burns – Why I Love Religion
Aka Pontifex
1/14/12
What if I told you that Jesus loves religion
And that by his coming as man he brought his religion to fruition
See this had to be addressed, the use of illogical terms and definitions
You clearly have a heart for Jesus but its fueling atheistic opinions
See what makes his religion great is not errors of wars and inquisitions
It’s that broken men and women to participate in his mission
Clearly Jesus says I have not come to abolish
I came to fulfill the law and I came to fulfill the prophets (Matthew 5:17)
And lines about building big churches and tending to the poor
Sounds a bit like Judas when the perfume was being poured (John 12:5)
See His religion is the largest worldwide source of relief
For the poor, the hungry, the sick and repentant thief
Oceans of compassion, opening wide the doors
For single mothers, widows and orphans, married and divorced (James 1:27)
We all detest hypocrisy, and empty show is just the worst
But blaming religion for contradiction
Is like staring at death, and blaming the hearse.
See the teacher will teach when the students are ready to listen
But those that choose to sit in the pews and refuse the good news
Is not the fault of religion.
And If I have the Jersey and I’m playing for the Bulls
There’s going to be some boundaries, regulations and some rules.
You can’t have Christ without his Church; you can’t have the King without his Kingdom
Sins of the Body and internal treason will never ever make me leave him
And that Jesus said it is done, is absolutely true
But he also gave us a mission with many things to DO.
Jesus says if you love me, you will Do what I command. (JN 15:14)
Go and Baptize in the name of the Father, Son & Spirit in Every Land. (MT 28:19)
And on the night he was betrayed he took his men in the Upper Room
Take at eat this is my body take and drink my blood for you.
A New covenant you see, an act connected to the tree,
Do this time and time again in Memory of Me. (Mt 26:26-28)
And at last with crown of thorns beaten beyond comprehension
His eyes were looking for yours and mine; it was divine, no human invention.
So as for religion I love it, I have one because Jesus rose from the dead and won.
I believe When Jesus said IT IS FINISHED, His religion had just begun.

As someone who can never remember a time when I did not enjoy writing, this question stopped me in my mental tracks. I am not usually a person without an answer, even if it takes me some time to fully articulate one, but this was different.

As I read through the various answers given by other writers, I didn’t find myself in complete agreement with any of them. Perhaps the closest answer that agreed with me at that moment was, “I have things to say to enrich others.” Although that was close to my initial reaction, saying it to myself brought up within me, a spirit of arrogance.

It is true that every time I write, I feel a sense of wanting to imbue some higher meaning, to call attention to a nobler sense of purpose. However, as I continued searching my own thoughts I began to ask myself the question, “What is it that you, Patrick, have to give?” The nature of the question did expose many of the failings I have experienced over the years and although each failure is washed in the blood of Christ, as a man I often revisit those things.

I have learned over time to forgive myself for the things that God forgave long ago and will continue to forgive, but the question remained as a ringing in my ears, “What do you have to give?”

The answer to this question, which slowly revealed itself to me over the course of the afternoon, exposed perhaps the greatest reason behind the ebbing motivation I experience in my writing. I have long prayed a single scripture each time I sit down to write, “Commit your work to the Lord, and your plans will be established.” – Proverbs 16:3 (ESV).

Before becoming a child of God, I would write all manner of stories, some good, some bad, but never really intended to share them with anyone. When I began to develop a desire to write for God, it was His message that I wanted to convey, not my own. Thus, when I begin to feel like I am sending out a message of my own making, I feel less motivated to write. In comparison, when I truly feel that the words my fingers compose come from outside of me, I am increasingly energized.

To take this thought further, which God did with me yesterday, when I have neglected reading His word or acting as His servant, the less I have of His to give. The end result is a dead and lifeless document, which in the end is what I would be without my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

As I concluded my mental and emotion wrestling match that resulted from a simple question, I realized that I write in order to give to others what God has given to me. If I am not sharing in His blessings, the whole act of writing feels like some laborious process that has no need to be shared.

This is not to say that God grants me more than He does to anyone else, but what He shares with me is not meant for me to keep to myself. The Greek word for this, as I discovered in my time of contemplation is, “didomi.” which simply means, “to give.”

This realization has opened a whole new world to me as I realized that I cannot give what I do not have. If my child wants an ice cream and I have neither ice cream nor money with which to purchase it, I cannot give it away. In the same way, if I am not receiving the things God wants to give me, I cannot give them away.

The old saying, “One must give in order to receive,” falls flat in the light of God’s unlimited grace. The truth of the matter is that, “one must receive in order to give.” This is the ultimate picture of relationship and the true nature of how God wants to interact with us. He shares with us not to make us greedy, God gives to us in order that we may share with others.

God, to this day, has not sent me material wealth, although we do much better than most of the world, but what God does share with me is a love for sharing words. Not my words as I am not really all that full of wisdom, but His Word which will never return void.

I have always found the basic premise behind the bucket list to be intriguing and could be a fun way to experience life. However, yesterday this idea was challenged with me in a seemingly simple post. The new idea would be to replace the bucket list with a blessings list.

When I first read the idea, I was instantly taken aback in my own spirit and realized there is a vast difference between the two ideas. In the first place, a bucket list looks inward while the blessings list looks outward. Secondly, the bucket list truly is short sighted and may touch the lives of only a few outside your immediate acquaintances while the blessing list touches the lives of many more people.

Now, understand that I don’t say this in a spirit of legalism, but I believe that if you compare the two ideas to scripture, the bucket list should be absolutely thrown out. All Christians should replace their own bucket list with a blessings list. Work together with those you love to find new ways to be a blessing to others.

Look at it this way: Did Jesus come to fulfill a bucket list or a blessings list. There is simply no doubt that He came to fulfill the latter. The words Jesus spoke and the letters written by his disciples and apostles spoke towards the idea of a blessings list. I know from past experience that while fulfilling our own dreams can be entertaining, but being a blessing to others and a conduit for the love of Christ results in a fulfillment that goes beyond words.

I believe if you will prayerfully consider kicking your bucket list and replace it with a blessings list, you will find ample evidence that this is what God is calling His children to do.

Martin Luther

As many millions of parents and children prepare any number of costumes, from angels to zombies, a highly significant part of history is being forgotten. While October 31 has become widely accepted as a day and night to illicit questionable behavior, it was in the year 1517 that one man went knocking on the door of the Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany.

On October 31, 1517, a man named Martin Luther attached a document to the doors of this church in the purpose of rebelling against his perceived distortions of the teachings of Jesus Christ.

It is an interesting comparison to the traditions practiced on this day in modern times. Children wanting to satisfy their sweet tooth go from door-to-door seeking generous neighbors willing to part with some amount of sugar confection. Martin Luther too sought to satisfy a particular part of himself, but rather than a selfish desire of material satisfaction, Luther sought to bring to himself, and others, a spiritual satisfaction.

Without going into great detail, Martin Luther had experienced the teachings of the church first-hand, but these rituals and rights seemed to have little-to-nothing to do with the actions and sayings of the savior and apostles in the bible. What followed was a revolution in religious thought and paved the way to a new future throughout the entire world.

The following is the translated text of the controversial points that Luther nailed to the door:

95 Theses

Out of love for the truth and the desire to bring it to light, the following propositions will be discussed at Wittenberg, under the presidency of the Reverend Father Martin Luther, Master of Arts and of Sacred Theology, and Lecturer in Ordinary on the same at that place. Wherefore he requests that those who are unable to be present and debate orally with us, may do so by letter.

In the Name our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

1. Our Lord and Master Jesus Christ, when He said Poenitentiam agite, willed that the whole life of believers should be repentance.

2. This word cannot be understood to mean sacramental penance, i.e., confession and satisfaction, which is administered by the priests.

3. Yet it means not inward repentance only; nay, there is no inward repentance which does not outwardly work divers mortifications of the flesh.

4. The penalty [of sin], therefore, continues so long as hatred of self continues; for this is the true inward repentance, and continues until our entrance into the kingdom of heaven.

5. The pope does not intend to remit, and cannot remit any penalties other than those which he has imposed either by his own authority or by that of the Canons.

6. The pope cannot remit any guilt, except by declaring that it has been remitted by God and by assenting to God’s remission; though, to be sure, he may grant remission in cases reserved to his judgment. If his right to grant remission in such cases were despised, the guilt would remain entirely unforgiven.

7. God remits guilt to no one whom He does not, at the same time, humble in all things and bring into subjection to His vicar, the priest.

8. The penitential canons are imposed only on the living, and, according to them, nothing should be imposed on the dying.

9. Therefore the Holy Spirit in the pope is kind to us, because in his decrees he always makes exception of the article of death and of necessity.

10. Ignorant and wicked are the doings of those priests who, in the case of the dying, reserve canonical penances for purgatory.

11. This changing of the canonical penalty to the penalty of purgatory is quite evidently one of the tares that were sown while the bishops slept.

12. In former times the canonical penalties were imposed not after, but before absolution, as tests of true contrition.

13. The dying are freed by death from all penalties; they are already dead to canonical rules, and have a right to be released from them.

14. The imperfect health [of soul], that is to say, the imperfect love, of the dying brings with it, of necessity, great fear; and the smaller the love, the greater is the fear.

15. This fear and horror is sufficient of itself alone (to say nothing of other things) to constitute the penalty of purgatory, since it is very near to the horror of despair.

16. Hell, purgatory, and heaven seem to differ as do despair, almost-despair, and the assurance of safety.

17. With souls in purgatory it seems necessary that horror should grow less and love increase.

18. It seems unproved, either by reason or Scripture, that they are outside the state of merit, that is to say, of increasing love.

19. Again, it seems unproved that they, or at least that all of them, are certain or assured of their own blessedness, though we may be quite certain of it.

20. Therefore by “full remission of all penalties” the pope means not actually “of all,” but only of those imposed by himself.

21. Therefore those preachers of indulgences are in error, who say that by the pope’s indulgences a man is freed from every penalty, and saved;

22. Whereas he remits to souls in purgatory no penalty which, according to the canons, they would have had to pay in this life.

23. If it is at all possible to grant to any one the remission of all penalties whatsoever, it is certain that this remission can be granted only to the most perfect, that is, to the very fewest.

24. It must needs be, therefore, that the greater part of the people are deceived by that indiscriminate and highsounding promise of release from penalty.

25. The power which the pope has, in a general way, over purgatory, is just like the power which any bishop or curate has, in a special way, within his own diocese or parish.

26. The pope does well when he grants remission to souls [in purgatory], not by the power of the keys (which he does not possess), but by way of intercession.

27. They preach man who say that so soon as the penny jingles into the money-box, the soul flies out [of purgatory].

28. It is certain that when the penny jingles into the money-box, gain and avarice can be increased, but the result of the intercession of the Church is in the power of God alone.

29. Who knows whether all the souls in purgatory wish to be bought out of it, as in the legend of Sts. Severinus and Paschal.

30. No one is sure that his own contrition is sincere; much less that he has attained full remission.

31. Rare as is the man that is truly penitent, so rare is also the man who truly buys indulgences, i.e., such men are most rare.

32. They will be condemned eternally, together with their teachers, who believe themselves sure of their salvation because they have letters of pardon.

33. Men must be on their guard against those who say that the pope’s pardons are that inestimable gift of God by which man is reconciled to Him;

34. For these “graces of pardon” concern only the penalties of sacramental satisfaction, and these are appointed by man.

35. They preach no Christian doctrine who teach that contrition is not necessary in those who intend to buy souls out of purgatory or to buy confessionalia.

36. Every truly repentant Christian has a right to full remission of penalty and guilt, even without letters of pardon.

37. Every true Christian, whether living or dead, has part in all the blessings of Christ and the Church; and this is granted him by God, even without letters of pardon.

38. Nevertheless, the remission and participation [in the blessings of the Church] which are granted by the pope are in no way to be despised, for they are, as I have said, the declaration of divine remission.

39. It is most difficult, even for the very keenest theologians, at one and the same time to commend to the people the abundance of pardons and [the need of] true contrition.

40. True contrition seeks and loves penalties, but liberal pardons only relax penalties and cause them to be hated, or at least, furnish an occasion [for hating them].

41. Apostolic pardons are to be preached with caution, lest the people may falsely think them preferable to other good works of love.

42. Christians are to be taught that the pope does not intend the buying of pardons to be compared in any way to works of mercy.

43. Christians are to be taught that he who gives to the poor or lends to the needy does a better work than buying pardons;

44. Because love grows by works of love, and man becomes better; but by pardons man does not grow better, only more free from penalty.

45. 45. Christians are to be taught that he who sees a man in need, and passes him by, and gives [his money] for pardons, purchases not the indulgences of the pope, but the indignation of God.

46. Christians are to be taught that unless they have more than they need, they are bound to keep back what is necessary for their own families, and by no means to squander it on pardons.

47. Christians are to be taught that the buying of pardons is a matter of free will, and not of commandment.

48. Christians are to be taught that the pope, in granting pardons, needs, and therefore desires, their devout prayer for him more than the money they bring.

49. Christians are to be taught that the pope’s pardons are useful, if they do not put their trust in them; but altogether harmful, if through them they lose their fear of God.

50. Christians are to be taught that if the pope knew the exactions of the pardon-preachers, he would rather that St. Peter’s church should go to ashes, than that it should be built up with the skin, flesh and bones of his sheep.

51. Christians are to be taught that it would be the pope’s wish, as it is his duty, to give of his own money to very many of those from whom certain hawkers of pardons cajole money, even though the church of St. Peter might have to be sold.

52. The assurance of salvation by letters of pardon is vain, even though the commissary, nay, even though the pope himself, were to stake his soul upon it.

53. They are enemies of Christ and of the pope, who bid the Word of God be altogether silent in some Churches, in order that pardons may be preached in others.

54. Injury is done the Word of God when, in the same sermon, an equal or a longer time is spent on pardons than on this Word.

55. It must be the intention of the pope that if pardons, which are a very small thing, are celebrated with one bell, with single processions and ceremonies, then the Gospel, which is the very greatest thing, should be preached with a hundred bells, a hundred processions, a hundred ceremonies.

56. The “treasures of the Church,” out of which the pope. grants indulgences, are not sufficiently named or known among the people of Christ.

57. That they are not temporal treasures is certainly evident, for many of the vendors do not pour out such treasures so easily, but only gather them.

58. Nor are they the merits of Christ and the Saints, for even without the pope, these always work grace for the inner man, and the cross, death, and hell for the outward man.

59. St. Lawrence said that the treasures of the Church were the Church’s poor, but he spoke according to the usage of the word in his own time.

60. Without rashness we say that the keys of the Church, given by Christ’s merit, are that treasure;

61. For it is clear that for the remission of penalties and of reserved cases, the power of the pope is of itself sufficient.

62. The true treasure of the Church is the Most Holy Gospel of the glory and the grace of God.

63. But this treasure is naturally most odious, for it makes the first to be last.

64. On the other hand, the treasure of indulgences is naturally most acceptable, for it makes the last to be first.

65. Therefore the treasures of the Gospel are nets with which they formerly were wont to fish for men of riches.

66. The treasures of the indulgences are nets with which they now fish for the riches of men.

67. The indulgences which the preachers cry as the “greatest graces” are known to be truly such, in so far as they promote gain.

68. Yet they are in truth the very smallest graces compared with the grace of God and the piety of the Cross.

69. Bishops and curates are bound to admit the commissaries of apostolic pardons, with all reverence.

70. But still more are they bound to strain all their eyes and attend with all their ears, lest these men preach their own dreams instead of the commission of the pope.

71. He who speaks against the truth of apostolic pardons, let him be anathema and accursed!

72. But he who guards against the lust and license of the pardon-preachers, let him be blessed!

73. The pope justly thunders against those who, by any art, contrive the injury of the traffic in pardons.

74. But much more does he intend to thunder against those who use the pretext of pardons to contrive the injury of holy love and truth.

75. To think the papal pardons so great that they could absolve a man even if he had committed an impossible sin and violated the Mother of God — this is madness.

76. We say, on the contrary, that the papal pardons are not able to remove the very least of venial sins, so far as its guilt is concerned.

77. It is said that even St. Peter, if he were now Pope, could not bestow greater graces; this is blasphemy against St. Peter and against the pope.

78. We say, on the contrary, that even the present pope, and any pope at all, has greater graces at his disposal; to wit, the Gospel, powers, gifts of healing, etc., as it is written in I. Corinthians xii.

79. To say that the cross, emblazoned with the papal arms, which is set up [by the preachers of indulgences], is of equal worth with the Cross of Christ, is blasphemy.

80. The bishops, curates and theologians who allow such talk to be spread among the people, will have an account to render.

81. This unbridled preaching of pardons makes it no easy matter, even for learned men, to rescue the reverence due to the pope from slander, or even from the shrewd questionings of the laity.

82. To wit: — “Why does not the pope empty purgatory, for the sake of holy love and of the dire need of the souls that are there, if he redeems an infinite number of souls for the sake of miserable money with which to build a Church? The former reasons would be most just; the latter is most trivial.”

83. Again: — “Why are mortuary and anniversary masses for the dead continued, and why does he not return or permit the withdrawal of the endowments founded on their behalf, since it is wrong to pray for the redeemed?”

84. Again: — “What is this new piety of God and the pope, that for money they allow a man who is impious and their enemy to buy out of purgatory the pious soul of a friend of God, and do not rather, because of that pious and beloved soul’s own need, free it for pure love’s sake?”

85. Again: — “Why are the penitential canons long since in actual fact and through disuse abrogated and dead, now satisfied by the granting of indulgences, as though they were still alive and in force?”

86. Again: — “Why does not the pope, whose wealth is to-day greater than the riches of the richest, build just this one church of St. Peter with his own money, rather than with the money of poor believers?”

87. Again: — “What is it that the pope remits, and what participation does he grant to those who, by perfect contrition, have a right to full remission and participation?”

88. Again: — “What greater blessing could come to the Church than if the pope were to do a hundred times a day what he now does once, and bestow on every believer these remissions and participations?”

89. “Since the pope, by his pardons, seeks the salvation of souls rather than money, why does he suspend the indulgences and pardons granted heretofore, since these have equal efficacy?”

90. To repress these arguments and scruples of the laity by force alone, and not to resolve them by giving reasons, is to expose the Church and the pope to the ridicule of their enemies, and to make Christians unhappy.

91. If, therefore, pardons were preached according to the spirit and mind of the pope, all these doubts would be readily resolved; nay, they would not exist.

92. Away, then, with all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, “Peace, peace,” and there is no peace!

93. Blessed be all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, “Cross, cross,” and there is no cross!

94. Christians are to be exhorted that they be diligent in following Christ, their Head, through penalties, deaths, and hell;

95. And thus be confident of entering into heaven rather through many tribulations, than through the assurance of peace.

• Separation of Church and State – Overview
• Separation of Church and State – Part 1

In relation to my study of the issue of Separation of Church and State, much more should be said. Both for the purpose of clarifying my own views as well as bringing to light some uncommonly known historic facts of the issue itself.

Mankind in general has always been inclined to either join into the religious, intellectual and political endeavors of others, or to bring others into line with their own. This is neither proper or improper, it just is a fact of the human condition. We are created beings of want for community and justice with varied degrees of participation and philosophy. It is just this sense of motivation and selfish desire for common ground at any cost that has driven the governments and economies of the nations since the beginning of time.

No less affected has been the democratic government of the United States of America. Our government was designed to be shaped over the centuries by opinion, persuasion and debate. It is no great suprise that since the ratification of the US Constitution that our citizenry has been engaged in the perpetual swing of fluctuating thought.

The first great swing of this pendulum hinged on the subject of African Slavery in the United States and was led primarily by religious, moral philosophers, preachers and teachers. When the issue was ultimately resolved at the end of the US Civil War, these same thinkers continued their combined drive to bring equality to the new population of freedmen.

Politics had always been a welcome place for groups and individuals to debate their concerns and interests. Up to that point however, religion remained a largely separate venue; not that men of religion were not given to political service, but specific issues of religious and moral debate were not commonplace in the new government. Most issues centered on foreign relations, economic concerns and territorial ambition.

As the nineteenth century drew to a close, the political landscape became the new home for religious activism and promotion of what would become known as the “social gospel.” This social gospel took the moral tenets of the bible and applied them to common societal woes such as assisting the poor as well as increased pressure upon the population at large to accept the teachings of the church and in doing so to promote social righteousness.

In a sense, the initial leaders of this movement were driven with good intentions, but it seems that somewhere along the way they lost an integral part of the very message they were trying to promote. Their methods focused on educating government officials of the laws, commandments and rituals of holy scripture rather than understanding the separate roles laid out by the very savior they wanted to emulate.

This blog format is limited in its ability to maintain a reader’s attention for a lengthy discourse and deep research. Because of this, I implore anyone interested in this subject to search out these facts and implications for themselves in the Word of God and derive their own interpretation based wholly therein.

With that said, I believe what anyone willing to look with due diligence, will find that Jesus Christ did not go to the temples of government in order to induce the leadership to accept and endorse his teachings. Instead, Jesus was found teaching in the religious centers of the day imploring those leaders to rescind their grasp on political power and instead hold tightly to the teachings of liberty, grace and compassion. Over the three year course of his ministry, Jesus came in contact with many individuals involved in varying degrees of the political and governmental processes. Jesus did not instruct these men to go back to their respective caucuses and implore them to accept his ways. Instead, Jesus drew these men to Him, taught them his ways and they themselves, by their own convictions and instincts allowed his teachings to inform their decisions. This, in a sense, was the activism of Jesus Christ. It was not intended to instruct political leaders to enforce and protect grace. It was intended to lead mankind into His grace and protection and from there spread to the masses from which leaders emerged with their own ability to discern the Christian precepts of leadership.

So when did this radical shift in civic-religious activism really kick into high gear? I believe the best place to start is with the Men and Religion Forward Movement that began around 1912.

One such example of this rise in political activism can be found in Volume 2 of “The Messages of the Men and Religious Forward Movement” (1912)

Messages of The Men and Religion Forward Movement – Volume 2 (Social Service):

The subject was the rising issue of prostitution in Chicago, but the call to action was unlike any recorded in Holy Scripture. The following is the preacher’s call to action:

” The new publicity in regard to prostitution in itself forces the church into radical action; understanding of the sinner has ever been essential to his forgiveness, knowledge of conditions has ever preceded social reforms. If it is discovered that the brothels are filled with over-fatigued and underpaid girls, procured by young men ‘too poor to marry,’ then it is obviously the business of the church to secure legal enactment which shall limit the hours of labor, fix a minimum wage, and prescribe the conditions under which young people may be permitted to work.”

The sermon delivered goes on to say:

“If it is found that degenerate children born of diseased and viscious parents, become and easy prey for the brothel, it is clearly the obligation of the church to challenge all applicants for marriage and to work out through modern eugenics the admonitions of the Hebrew teachers as to the responsibility unto the third and fourth generation.”

The plight of the exploitation of children, that continues even today, is without a doubt a travesty, but I believe this message approaches the problem with incorrect theology.

In the beginning of this message, the love and forgiveness of Christ for sinners is pronounced and most evident, but by the end of the sermon, the legalistic practices of the Hebrew nation are invoked. These are the very entanglements that Jesus Christ came to reverse the Children of God from. It comes as no surprise to the scholar of this movement to realize that it put into high gear, the manipulation of politics, moral codes and methods of business designed for capitalistic success in order to bring about a religious segment’s social views into fruition through legislation.

It is my view that it is beyond for Christians to embrace the founding father’s view of Separation of Church and State and set about doing the Lord’s work in the harvest fields and not in the halls of government bureaucracy.

• Separation of Church and State – Part 1
• Political Activism and the Social Gospel
  

My research and paper are not yet complete, but already I am coming to my own conclusions in this area.

The abridged version of my opinion is simply this: The founders of the United States set up a civic democracy, not a religious theocracy. Most of these men practiced differing degrees of the Christian faith, but they were very worldly wise.

This civic democracy was not void of religious Christian thought, but it was not designed as a way to ensure the longevity of Christianity itself. Many of the founders did believe that without the tenets of the Christian faith indwelled among the citizens, that this form of government could not endure.

However, they believe heavily upon acts of faith and devotion of the people to remain devout to their spiritual calling. Without this devotion they knew faith would flounder and eventually the government they designed would fall with it.

Liberty can only be exercised when it is free to be performed and exercised. When a government entity begins to dictate actions, beliefs and morals, liberty is extinguished. The founding fathers surely hoped that liberty would expand and religious freedom would endure.

It is evident throughout our history that the more citizens that fought to entwine the laws of this nation with religious rhetoric, the hands of power sought to control it. This spiral of laws and litigation has continued and is proof that the more religious dogma that placed in the hands of a civic government, the less liberty exists in the exercise of religion.

Jesus himself spoke upon this very principal when the Pharisees attempted to drag him into politics. His answer was brief and simple:

Mark 12: 13-17

13 And they sent to him some of the Pharisees and some of the Herodians, to trap him in his talk. 14 And they came and said to him, “Teacher, we know that you are true and do not care about anyone’s opinion. For you are not swayed by appearances, but truly teach the way of God. Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not? Should we pay them, or should we not?” 15 But, knowing their hypocrisy, he said to them, “Why put me to the test? Bring me a denarius and let me look at it.” 16 And they brought one. And he said to them, “Whose likeness and inscription is this?” They said to him, “Caesar’s.” 17 Jesus said to them, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” And they marveled at him.

It is my growing conclusion that if anyone of religious and spiritual character desires to see those around them filled with the same spirit, it is not bills, laws, regulations and legislation through which this will be acheived.

There are indeed moral issues at stake in our land, but grace is given as a gift of the Father, not of the Congress. In order to establish Christian grace, love and purity, the followers of Jesus Christ must take up His cross daily and teach about His love and liberty to their neighbors.

The heart of God cannot come from the top down, it must come from the bottom to the top.

• Separation of Church and State Overview
• Political Activism and the Social Gospel
  

Recently I began reading about the topic of Separation of Church and State for a US Government research paper. I have come to no firm conclusions as of yet as I am still in the middle of my study on this most interesting topic.

There are probably few people out there that are actually not interested in this subject in some way or another and for good reason. This essential tenet to the United States Constitution is shrouded in controversy almost as old as the country itself.

In fact, I came across this very subject years ago while researching different aspects of spirituality and faith before, during and after the US Civil War. It is most interesting to me that the first political figure to seriously contend for a more liberal religious tolerance was none other than Geroge Washington. General Washington, at the time, strongly pressed for the incorporation of Christian Chaplains into his Continental Army. While this practice was soon adopted and little challenged at first, it became a hot-button item for debate upon ratification of the United States Constitution and the subsequent Bill of Rights.

I also encountered the topic while researching different Christian seminaries being established in Illinois. There were several Constitutional challenges to initial charters based on this establishement and free excercise of religion in the newly formed country.

The Constitution was ratified and adopted on September 17, 1787 and the original 10 amendments, known as the Bill of Rights, were ratified on December 15, 1791.  By 1830 however, the First amendment religious rights began to experience their first legal challenges in the United States Supreme Court.

I won’t go into detail here and now, as that is the central point of my research paper, but over time I will discuss several areas of the challenges, victories and defeat of the rights proclaimed in the First Ammendment to the United States Constitution.

Page 39

Even then the proposition that has just been successfully carried would have been rejected with abhorrence. Great and little politicians declare’s that these concessions were made only because the Constitution demanded it. Their sacrifice was Jephtha’s, but so was their necessity, and their lamentation. But any attempt to remove an ancient landmark, any disturbance of ancient settlements, will never be allowed. No concessions to slavery. 0, no! Onily a painful fulfillment of agreements which our fathers made, only a declining to exasperate our brethren of the South by a useless proviso; and so, by soft words and a flattering tongue, by a heart that deceived itself; the governmnent became the bloodhound of the slaveholder, to track and catch his God-like property. So our vast possessiolns, acquired by our blood and treasure, became an Aceldama, a field of blood unto this day. And great men and good men shouted loud hlosannas over these peaceful measures, and declared that Ie who lioldeth the winds in Ilis fists would bind these contending breezes, and that there should be a great calm. Ah! the anaconda was only resting from his bloody feasts. Now and then he opes his ponderous jaws, and swallows dow-n, as a sweet morsel, the body and the soul of a Long, or a Sims, some poor Christian free man or free -Noman. But its fell hunIger does not yet gliaw within. And we only said, ” It is the price of the Uiiion, this precious Union. It is the condition of our couitry’s existence. Throw the slave Daniel into the Southern den of lions. Our farms, our stores, our schlools, must flourish even if a few negroes suffer slightly. They arc half brutes. They cannot feel tire chains, the whip, the auctionblock, the breaking of heart-strings, thle fiery stake of a death. What are they compared with our great and glorious Union?’Off with thleir heads! “‘ And on we marclhed, and boasted, and declared ourselves the standard-bearers of the race, and called onl Europe to witness our glory, to fall at our feet, and follow our illustrious leadership to universal democracy. But that great serpent awoke; nay, rather, lie never slept. IIe bided his time; and when our boasts were loudest, and political calm thle deepest, he said, ” Give up that useless Missouri Compromise. It aggravates the South. It does you no good. It will make no difference in thle end. Slavery can never flourish in those territories. Don’t woulid our feClings by adhlering to its punctilios. You very generously abandoned the WAVilmot Proviso, because of our sensitiveness. Do thle gelnerous thing once more.” We were struck aghast. “‘Give up the Compromise’? Open the gates of the Eden of the continent to this river of’ death, that has burned and blackened so many fair fields? Never! The Thirteen States fought eight years rather than submit to foreign tyranny. We will fight as long rather than surrender a domain twice as large as the Colonies embraced to a domestic tyralnny imimeasurably worse.” Loud rose the cry: “It is ours. It shall remain ours.” And behold, while we cry, our represeuItatives hold it out to the greedy clutch of the slaveliolder. It is grasped. It is swallowed, and to-day the arch tempter is the sole ruler in that Paradise. Freedom, intelligence, and enterprise, art, civilization, and Christianity, every grace and strength of humanity, have fled, as the angels that frequented the holy Eden, and Satan, sin, and death revel in its desecrated forests and prairies, their unquestioned possession. Thus these things are. Not by one step, nor two, have we reached this goal,Obut by a practical inmbruting of the conscience, by yieldi.ng to the demands of this awful iniquity, by violently opposing and abusing its earnest enemies. Had not these members of Congress fought against the anti-slavery movement with fiurious passion, they would not be found to-day enacting this bill. The lilght that was in them is darkness; and how great is that darkness! What an awful depth upon depth of darkness! Great men in the pulpit and the forum set the bad example of mocking at the higher law, and now their bayers on deride the very law which they so idolatrously worship. So comes Pandemonium, no law, but Chaos and old Night. ” Nor public flame, nor private, dares to shline; Nor human spark is left, nor glimpse divine! Lo, thy dread empire, Chlaos, is restored; Light dies before thy uncreating word: Thy hand, great Anarcib, lets the curtain fall, And universal darkness buries all.” Verily as we have sown, so do we reap this day. Saul is conseliting to the martyr of this first-born of Christianity. Saul, the Pharisee of Pharisees, we, who titlie mint and aniiise and cummin, and neglect the weightier matters of the law, judgment and mercy and truth, we stand by while the murderous rocks are being hurled at its head; we share in the robber’s spoils -its sacred lands, with all their hidden but real wealth of happiness and prosperity. You and I, my brethren, have too much to do with this dire act. Have you not said, “Party first, liberty afterward”? Have you not cried, “Union, Union, Union, now and forever,” carefully omitting the word “Liberty,” which alone makes that Union an honor or a blessing? Have you not filled your ears with the shouts, “Our Nation, however bounded, and however ruled,” so that you could not and would not hear the wail of your oppressed fellow-citizens, that heart-broken entreaty fi’om the depths of that vast dungeon, covering a half million of square miles – ” Am I not a man and a brother?” Have you not said, “The slave belongs to his master; how can I interfere?” Hlave you not acknowledged the right of man to say to his brother, his sister, “Thou art my property, to be worked, whipped, starved, sold, ravished, killed, as I will?” IIave you not forgotten often in your daily prayers to pray for those in bonds as bound with them? Iin insolence of heart have you not despised “God’s image cut in ebony; ” ay, cut in ivory too, if that seems to you the more precious? for the blueeyed, yellowv-haired Saxon, no less than his swarthier brother, groans to-day inii that prison-liouse. lIave you not joined in jeers and slanders against the abolitionists, and given ground for the remark of a senator from Georgia, MIr. Toombs, but last Thursday, that “the governmenlt has but little to fear from thle abolitionists. Their greatest achievements have beenI to raise mobs of fugitives and free negroes, and to incite them to murder and other crimes, and their exploits generally end in subornation of perjury, to escape the criminal courts. The whole concern is not worth anI ounce of powder.” lIave you not apologized for, defended, and even applauded the system of slavery, commendilng the graces of the masters, the submission, contentrnent, and even happiness of the slave? IIave you not cherished a pride of caste, declared complexion a IIeaven-appoiiited barrier of separation between the children of Adam, a great gulf, across which no white and wealthy Dives could pass to mingle in perfect unity of feeling and life with a black or tawny Lazarus, barbarous, beggarly, and sore-smitten, as you saw and said, albeit he was even then lying in Abrahlam’s bosom, the best beloved of all his children? Have you not thus declared the diversity of the human race, and given yotr sinful aversion the authority of a divine decree?’ Let him that is without sin among us cast the first stone at those lofty in position and power, who but give the logical and inevitable conclusion to these feelings; who say, ” The negro has no identity of rights with the white,” as you say hlie has none of blood; ” the abolitionist is a madnmaii, scatterinug firebrands, arrows, and death. Money is everything. Alake money. Extend slavery. Crush out abolitionism! ” Anrd it is done. In their grand if gloomy palace of hell sit these slave masters of the people, all of whom are their slaves, and most of whom, if of white faces, hug their chains and kiss their conquerors’ feet. They exult, as did the Pandemonium chiefs over their mragnificent structure. They exclaim witlh the Babylonian monarch, “Is not this great Babylon that I have builded? ” “Surely a

ll the principalities and powers, all the offices and honor of the American continent, shall be ours, and ours forever.” They heed not the footstep of the descending God; they hear not that avenging voice whispering in their heart of hearts, “Tlhou fool, this night thy soul shall be required of thee; ” then what becomes of thy stores of power, pomp, and pride? “An answer sweeps through the troubled night With a shout for the slave and a shout for the right. Hear ye not, hear ye not, through your marble arch, The iron tramp of the millions marlch? The earthquake awakes in a giant start, And breaks the clhain whichl has bound his heart.” By such slow and steady approaches the citadel of liberty has been enclosed, undermined, taken. America is no loinger a free nation. No longer can she boast that in ller borders the rights of man are inviolable. Icrlec may the oppressed find liberty, and the heavy laden rest. Not in obedience to constitutional scruples, not by a sudden surprise, temptation, or fall,tas this destruction come upon her. This act is against all constitutional statements or suggestions. She gives her hand, if not her heart, to the vote. So far from being the first triumph of the Tempter, it is the autumnal fruit of seeds sown by our fathers’ hands, and nurtured and enriched by the assiduous culture of three genlerations. From the ordinance of 1787, which admitted slavery to all our country south of the Ohio, by forbidding it north of that line, and which built up the enormous power of this crime in four of the largest and most influential of our Slave States, Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabamna, and Mississippi, we have descended to tlhe ordinance of 1854, which prohibits freedom in all tlhe territory that had been pledged sacredly to liberty, which practically and intentionally forbids any restrictions on the march of this demon over any part of tlhe national domain. Thlere is no national life in us. Beftore the world, before God, wve stand to-day in a bl)acker infamy than rests upon any other power. We have become the basest of kin,gdoms. The lowest of tlhe nations of the earth look down upon us. France has liberated its slaves in Algiers and thle WAVest Indies. Russia has emancipated its serfs, Mexico its citizens. Brazil discourages slavery and encourages its extirpation. Turkey represses this accursed trade. AWe alone, of all Christian, of all heathen lands, avow the div-inc origin of slavery, and accord it unlimnited life. WQ alone tear down thle wvall of separation our fathers had built, and say to tlhe sea of unspeakable crime and agony, “N o longer sh-all it be said to thee, by man or God,’ iere shlall thy proud \waves be stayed;’ but dash, roar, roll onward and onward, engulfing all those vast and blessed regions with an arkless deluge of death.” If Jefferson could say, in his day, ” I tremble for my country when I remember that God is just,” what must we say, \who have seen that country descend from one point of baseness to another, until now African cruelty, Egyptian degradation, or Romanii corruption, in the heig,hts of their excesses, were hardly more vile, were far less guilty? There should be no more Fourth of July, its celebration is a mockery; no more reading of the Declaration of Indepen dence, – we are independent no longer: the slave’s collar and manacles burden our neck and arms; no more boast of our Christianity as a nation, wlhen our President and Con gress exceed Nero and his selate in pagan edicts and crimes; no more vaunts of our greatnless among the nations of the earth. They have heard of our sliameni, they have seeI it, and they rejoice in it. We, raised to heaven by free institutions and all the culture that has ever yet been giveln to man, have voluntarily cast ourselves dowjn to hell. Before God and all the world, America stands to-day the propagandist of slavery, the advocate and practicler of the dogma that man can, and should, and shall own his fellow lman; that we are endowed by the Creator, not with iualien able rights of life, liberty, and thel-c pursuit of happiiess, but of murder, bondage, and the destruction of haplpiness; that there is no sacredness in the miarriage tie, nlo duty to believe in or regard the affections of father or mother, husbaid or wife, brother or sister; thlat the “peculitar ” and very domestic ” institution ” of home life and love is coIifined exclusively to those who have not a drop of Afieican blood in their veiis; that the lhuman auction-block, the wNlhipping-post, the branding-iron, the bloodhound, the gallows-tree, and the stake —in a w-ord, every barbarisnmare the true elements of a nation’s grovwth and glory. Thlese are the doctrines enacted by tlhe prescot CoIigress of thle United States, approved by our present President, atld published to the w-orld as tlhe coinsummate flower of Christian civilization in this land of the Puritan, Ilugucieot, alnd Qualker, in the year of our Lord and Savior Jesus Cllrist, the cighteen hundred and fifty-fourthl. The pei that put tlhe figlures of that date of c redemption upon this satanic bill must have sllrunk Trol.the profianity, if the heart and hand that it served were so depraved as to be unconscious of the horrible sin. The deepest depth is reached. There may be a tableland of darkness upon which future legislators and executives shall erect other trophies of their wickedness, the abolition of all laws which tow prevent the bringing or keeping and trading of slaves in the Free States; the reinstatement of the African slave trade- a trade far less cruel than that which is regularly carried on under the protection of our government between Baltinmore and New Orleans; tile enslaving of white laborers as well as those of tie darker hue, who now pine in chains; the acquisition of Cuba by robbery or by open war with Spainl, as we fought with Mexico, to win a new region for this crime; and, at last, and not improbably, a war’ith Great Britain, to prevent Canada’s harborilngl the fugitives from our oppression. Then cometh the end – a return to violence, ignorance, idleness, and bestiality surpassed only by those in that “outer darkness,” the “dogs, sorcerers, whoremonigers, murderers, idolaters, and whosoever lovetli and maketh a lie.” Is this our filture? M\ust our star be hurled from the heavens up whose steeps it was marching with such a rapid, vigorous, and lustrous step? Shall our fiine gold become dimr, our name, long the terror of tyrants, become their byword, our strength for thlie oppressed of all lands change to a rotten reed whichl pierceth the hand that leans upon it, and snaps while it stings? This we are! It is no shall be. The eclipse is on the sun. Darkness is now over all the land. The glow is faded from the heavens, and all isles and continents, even to distant most Asia and Africa, gaze with awe and sadness at the pale, cold light which we shed upon their dreary realms. But yesterday the nation  “Stood against the world; now lies she here, And none so poor to do her reverence.

Though the letter of the Constitution does not use the word ” slave,” yet in its representative basis, if not in its fugitive clause, there is a recognition of its existence, a bowing to its behests, Two small States, by their firmness and vehemence, brought the other eleven to their feet, made them surrender their convictions, and obey the soft voice, but nailed arm, of Belial. AlViat though Franklin and Jay organize abolition societies, and Washington and Jefferson favor emancipation, and Madison gets the word ” slavery excluded from the Constitution? What though every cliinen-t tnan of the age is hostile to the iniquity? Still they let it find entrance into their Constitution. It is there, entrenched in the national fortress; it knocks at all objections and objectors, and commences its march to universal dominion.

When the sons of God came together for their sublime deliberations, Satan came also; and though, as in the days of Job, he gained not every point, yet, more than with him, he gained the chief, and, with the gleefulness of perdition, he snatched at his success, and plotted and waited, waited and plotted, year and year, for larger prizes. He won them.

A law to execute more perfectly the Fugitive Slave clause followed within six years. A law which never could have passed the First Congress passed the Third. A law which would have been pronounced unconstitutional by the founders of the Constitution triumphed under the very eyes of those founders. And the hand of Washington signed his name as president to an edict which five years before he would have abhorred himself for approving.

New territory is sought. Louisiana is purchased. She seeks erection into States. The strife commences afresh. Again the slave power gains all it wants by asking for more; and Missouiri, Louisiana, Arkansas wheel into line under its pirate flag, while the desert lands, which will not be needed for a generation, are professedly abandoned to freedom, then, as of old, driven into the wilderness thence, also as of old, to be driven out when its enemy would make this desert his dwelling-place. In that controversy slavery triumphed. Many then saw that when those remoter regions became the seat of population, it would claim them as its own, would make them its owni. But then it could not have been done. The spirit of the fathers was not yet utterly lost. One half only of the fair acres was given up to this ravenous beast. One half alone of its pure soil was to be wet with the blood of God’s persecuted saints. One half of its air was to be filled with shrieks under the scourge, with moans over sold and stolen children, with the unutterable agony of that prison-house of humanity. The anaconda rested content with its gorged appetite, which two hundred thousand square miles had momentarily satisfied, assured that thlose who had granted him so much would bestow the balance when his appetite returned. His assurance was well grounded.

But before that hour came, the old religious and philanthropic anti-slavery sentiment, which had glowed in the souls that burned with the revolutionary fires, was kindled afresh. A little, despised sect, their name a stench in the nostrils of the country and the Church, cast out of men as evil, lifted up their voice like a trumpet, and told the house of Israel its transgressions, and the house of Judah its sins. They started from the only Christian, the only true basis – sympathy with the slave as a son of man and a son of God, an heir of heaven, a joint heir with Jesus Christ. This was new doctrine to our degenerate fears – a doctrine no Church in this land had ever fully and faithfully preached. We mocked at and reviled them. We drove them from our churches, halls, and homes. We hauled them before our judgment-seats. We issued edicts against them from State and National Congresses, and executive speeches from the chairs of governors and presidents. What the Madisons and Jeffersons, the Hancocks and Storys, would have approved was denounced and proscribed by the Van Burens and Everetts of this generation.

Still they fought for the right. It may be with lack of discretion, yet how shall you and I in our idleness dare to take up a railing accusation against them? How dare you say that William Lloyd Garrison, George Thompson, Orange Scott, and their compeers were not the wisest of their generation in action, as they certainly were in their fears, their prophecies, and their entreaties? Their errors will yet be lost in the splendor of their daring, sincerity, and zeal. If ever freedom becomes the possession, as it is the birthright, of every man in this land, he who will be honored with the loftiest monument a monument built by every hand that has been raised against him – will be that yet hated and proscribed, that somewhat error-led, but for more truth-led, man, William Lloyd Garrison.

This stone, cut out of the mountain without hands, rolled by few but tireless arms, grew, and grew, until, when the slave power set up its claim to national domain, a new voice mingled in the tumults of the hour, and made its triumphs Bunker Hill victories, that betokened an ultimate destruction.

Again the anaconda stirs. It demands Texas – Texas with a war; and it wins. It claims that the new regions acquired by war should be his, and they are given it. Maddened with lust and success, it says, ” Return to me my fugitives hiding in your own Free States; give me that nurse and playmate of your children; that industrious citizen whose family looks up to him for protection; the minister from the altar. They are mine.” And all the people hasten to give them up. No, not all. Among the faithless, faithful stood a few. Seven thousand were found who bent not the knee to this Baal of America. May they soon become seventy times seven, and deliver the land from this idolatry and the Jezreel abominations which so fiercely flourish under its dominion.

PART THREE (COMING SOON)

————
Source: University of Michigan, Making of America, National Sermons, The Death of Freedom

Further Reading

[amtap amazon:asin=B0018RYBMM]
[amtap amazon:asin=1425557228]
[amtap amazon:asin=1429755873]
[amtap amazon:asin=019516895X]