Publius-Huldah's Blog

Understanding the Constitution

The Biblical Foundation of Our Constitution.

By Publius Huldah.

The English Puritans who came here in the 1630s knew that the Old Testament has a great deal to say about civil government. And they came to build that shining city on a hill.

They did not come here to escape from the World, to wait for the end of the World, and to surrender it to evil.

And so – we became a shining city on a hill. The fundamental act of our Founding, the Declaration of Independence, recognizes the Creator God as the Source of Rights;1 and acknowledges that the purpose of civil government is simply to “secure” the Rights God gave us. The Constitution we subsequently ratified was based on God’s model of civil government as set forth in the Bible.

That is why our Country was so much better than what the rest of the World has been.  For the most part, we followed God’s model for civil government; other countries didn’t.

The blessing which flows from God’s model is limited civil government which is under The Law. That is why our Liberty Bell quotes Lev. 25:10 – “Proclaim LIBERTY throughout all the Land unto all the Inhabitants thereof.”

In this paper, I will show you Six Principles which come from the Bible and how our Framers applied them. In a future paper, I will show you Six Biblical Principles Thomas Jefferson listed in the Declaration of Independence, and how those Principles are also incorporated into our Constitution.

1. The Civil Authorities are under the Law.

The Bible: God is The Lawmaker – the kings are to apply God’s Law. 2

  • Deut. 17:18-20: The king is to write out a copy of God’s Law. He is to have it by him and read from it all his life so that he may keep, observe, and apply it.
  • 1 Kings 2:1-4:  King David on his deathbed tells Solomon he must conform to God’s ways, and observe his statutes, commandments and judgments, as written in the Law of Moses.

The parallel in our Constitution is that the Constitution is the Supreme Law which the civil authorities are to obey.

Noah Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary defines “constitution”:

“…In free states, the constitution is paramount to the statutes or laws enacted by the legislature, limiting and controlling its power; and in the United States, the legislature is created, and its powers designated, by the constitution.” [boldface added]

Our Constitution is the Standard by which the validity of all Acts of Congress, all acts of the Executive Branch, all judicial opinions, and all Treaties is measured and judged (Art. VI, cl. 2).

Do you see?  Law comes from a higher source than the civil authorities. The “Rule of Law” prevails when the civil authorities obey that higher Law – be it God’s Law or our Constitution.

Tyrants, on the other hand, claim that they are the source of law.  The Roman Caesars, Stalin, Hitler, the dictator of N. Korea and Obama all claim that their  will is “law”. Consider Obama’s usurpatious executive orders and rules made by his executive agencies. This is the “Rule of Man” – when the civil authorities deny they are subject to a higher law (be it God’s Law or the Constitution), and hold that their will is “law”.

2. Civil Government has only limited and defined Powers:

The Bible: When you read through the Old Testament, you see that civil government is limited to:

  • Military matters
  • Enforcement of only a few of God’s Laws – the laws to which a penalty for violation is attached (laws against murder, theft, bearing false witness, negligence, etc.).
  • Judges are available to decide disputes between the people.

Most of God’s Laws are a matter of individual and family self-government (e.g., charity, family welfare, education, don’t drink too much, work hard).

The parallel in our Constitution is that it is one of enumerated powers only:

All other powers (except those listed at Art. I, §10) are retained by the States or the People. Self-government” means that as individuals, we govern ourselves in accordance with the laws of God [or the “Natural Law”].  It doesn’t mean that we elect representatives to manage our lives for us!

Tyrants claim the power to do whatever they want.

3. Civil Government is divided into Three Parts:

The Bible: Isaiah 33:22 says The Lord is our “judge”, “lawgiver”, and “king”!

The parallel in our Constitution is that the federal government is divided into three branches: Judicial, legislative, and executive.

No human can be trusted with all three functions, so our Constitution separates them into three branches, with each branch having checks on the powers of the other branches.

Tyrants seek to exercise all three functions. Obama is making Congress irrelevant: When they refuse to pass a law he wants, he implements it by “executive order” or “agency regulation”.  He’s making the judicial branch irrelevant by ignoring their decisions which go against his will.

4. The Civil Authorities promise to obey the Higher Law.

The Bible: The king promises to obey God’s Laws and to apply God’s Laws in the kingdom; and the people pledge themselves to this promise:

  • King Josiah’s covenant at 2 Kings 23:1-3:  King Josiah called all the people together and in their presence, read aloud to them the Book of the Law which had been found in the temple. Then King Josiah entered into a covenant with God that he would obey him and keep his commandments and statutes as written in the Book of the Law.  And all the People pledged themselves to this covenant.
  • Joash’s (via the priest Jehoiada) covenant at 2 Kings 11:17 and 2 Chron 23:16.
  • David’s covenant at 2 Sam 5:1-4 and 1 Chron 11:1-3.

Our Constitutional Oaths of Office:

  • Art. II, Sec. 1, last clause: The President promises to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution”.
  • Art. VI, last clause: All other federal and State officers and judges promise to “support” the Constitution.

5.  When the Civil Authorities violate the Higher Law, We must Rebuke them!

The Bible: The prophets rebuke the kings when they forsake God’s Law:

  • Samuel rebuked King Saul (1 Samuel 13:10-14)
  • Nathan rebuked King David (2 Samuel 12)
  • A Man of God rebuked King Jeroboam (1 Kings 13)
  • Elijah rebuked King Ahab (1 Kings 16:29 – 1 Kings 17:2; 1 Kings 18:16-20; 1 Kings 21:17-29)
  • Elijah rebuked King Ahaziah (2 Kings 1:1-18)
  • Elisha rebuked Jehoram, King of Israel (2 Kings 3:1-14)
  • The prophets warned of the pending destruction of Jerusalem because of the sins of King Manasseh (2 Kings 21:10-16)
  • The book of Micah.

The Black Robed Regiment of Our Revolution: Some 237 years ago, our pastors were leaders in bringing about our Revolution.  They understood that the English king and Parliament were imposing tyranny on us in violation of God’s Law.

In the Declaration of Independence, we rebuked the British Crown when we itemized our grievances and recited how we had petitioned for redress and had warned that if they didn’t stop the usurpations, we would separate from them.

But today, we don’t have enough clergy with the knowledge and the spine to rebuke the federal government. Many don’t know what the Bible says about civil government,3 and they don’t know our Founding Principles and documents. Too many of our clergy just want to escape or withdraw from the World, avoid controversy, and preserve their 501 (c) (3) tax exemption.

The Catholic Priests are speaking out about being forced to provide contraception and abortion pills as violations of their religious freedom. But they should be denouncing the HHS rules as unconstitutional exercises of undelegated powers. 

Their goal should not be to carve out an exemption for themselves from rules they don’t agree with; but to enforce The Constitution for everyone.

“Rebuke” does not consist in saying, “I don’t agree” or “It violates my beliefs.”

A proper rebuke points out the Higher Law being violated, and demands compliance with that Higher Law – not with one’s personal views. 

Because the Priests have focused on their religious beliefs, instead of on biblical/constitutional principles; the discussion in the media has been about the percentage of Catholics who use birth control – the implication being that since most Catholics use it, the Priests are out of touch.

But if the Priests would say:

  • Obamacare is unconstitutional as outside the scope of the powers delegated to Congress – the medical care of the People not being one of the enumerated powers; and
  • The HHS rules are unconstitutional as outside the scope of the powers granted to the Executive Branch, and as in violation of Art. I, § 1 which provides that only Congress  may make laws; 4

Then, they would make a proper Rebuke.  And the discussion would be where it should be: on the enumerated powers of Congress and the unconstitutionality of rule-making by executive agencies.

So! The purposes of Rebuke are to Warn and Teach:

  • To warn the civil authorities of their violations of the Higher Law, and
  • To educate the civil authorities and The People about the Higher Law.

The Constitution is a theological document! It is the job of our clergy – Catholic, Protestant and Jewish – to know this. And to defend God’s Word as expressed in our Constitution. God requires our clergy to take an active role in protecting the People from a civil government which violates the Higher Law – be it God’s Law or our Constitution which is based on God’s Law.

We The People must also rebuke the federal government when they violate our Constitution. We do it by posting on line, talking to friends, family, and everyone else within our spheres of influence. Stick to Principles – avoid personal opinions. Cite the provision of our Constitution they violated; or as is usually the case, show that what they have done is not an enumerated power. When they have town hall meetings, rebuke them there. Watch this magnificent woman and see how it is done!

6.  The Peoples’ Obligation to obey the Civil Authorities is conditional upon the Civil Authorities obeying the Higher Law.

The Bible: As shown by the Scripture at Principle 4, civil government is a covenant between God, the king, and the People.  God makes the Laws; the king promises to obey and apply those Laws; and the people pledge themselves to the Covenant.

Out of this relationship between God, the king and the people, arises the peoples’ obligation to protest lawlessness on the part of the king.  If they don’t protest, God punishes the people because of the misdeeds of their kings – the people will suffer if they go along with the unlawful acts:

  • God sent a 3 year famine because Saul put the Gibeonites to death (2 Sam 21).
  • God sent a pestilence which killed 70,000 Israelites because David took the census (1 Chron 21 & 2 Sam 24).
  • God (via Elijah) sent a famine because Ahab & his house forsook the commandments of the Lord (1 Kings 16:29-33, 17:1, 18:1, 18:17-19).
  • God struck a heavy blow at Joram’s people because of Joram’s wickedness (2 Chron 21:1-14).
  • God visited 4 dooms upon Jerusalem & the Southern Kingdom because of the sins of Manasseh (2 Kings 21:10-17 & Jer 15:3-4).

The parallel in our Constitution is this: When Congress makes a law which is outside the scope of its enumerated powers, it is no “law” at all, but is void; and we have no obligation to comply.  Alexander Hamilton says this over and over in The Federalist Papers.  Here are a few examples:

“…If the federal government should overpass the just bounds of its authority and make a tyrannical use of its powers, the people, whose creature it is, must appeal to the standard they have formed, and take such measures to redress the injury done to the Constitution as the exigency may suggest and prudence justify…” (Federalist No. 33, 5th para). [boldface added]

“…acts of … [the federal government] which are NOT PURSUANT to its constitutional powers … will [not] become the supreme law of the land. These will be merely acts of usurpation, and will deserve to be treated as such…” (Federalist No. 33, 6th para). [boldface added]

“…every act of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative act …contrary to the Constitution can be valid. To deny this, would be to affirm … that men … may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.” (Federalist No. 78, 10th para). [boldface added]

Hamilton also tells us that Congress can’t usurp powers unless the People go along with it! In Federalist No.16 (next to last para), he points out that because judges may be “embarked in a conspiracy with the legislature”, the People, who are “the natural guardians of the Constitution”, must be “enlightened enough to distinguish between a legal exercise and an illegal usurpation of authority.

So!  Hamilton applies the Biblical model of what WE are supposed to do when the federal government acts outside of the Constitution. We are to recognize that their acts are “void”, and We are to take whatever prudent measures are necessary to enforce the Constitution.

What can We do?

Hamilton tells you to LEARN the Constitution; demand that federal and State officials obey it; and don’t go along with them when they violate it!

READ our Declaration of Independence and Constitution until you become familiar with them.  Stick to original sources (e.g., The Federalist Papers) and beware of the ignorant know-it-alls with their crazy theories.

REBUKE officials and judges who violate the Constitution! Specify the violation.  Usually, the violation is that what they did is not an enumerated power.

ELECT State & County officials who will nullify unconstitutional acts of Congress, executive orders, & judicial opinions.  Here are Model Nullification Resolutions for State Legislatures.

TALK to your pastor, priest or rabbi – we all share the Old Testament. We must dust off our copies and read them; renounce escapism & defeat; renounce the unbiblical doctrine of socialism (listen to Fr. Andrew!); renounce the unbiblical doctrine of divine right of kings – the false doctrine that God granted autonomy to the civil authorities; declare independence from the federal government and throw off the chains of the 501 (c) (3) tax exemption!  Start being the Salt & Light we are called to be – the Watchmen on the Wall. PH.

Endnotes:

1 Here are express references to God in our Declaration of Independence:

  • …The Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God…
  • …endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights…
  • …appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions…
  • …with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence

Our Constitution at Art. VII, last clause:

  • …in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven…

2 “Lex, Rex” – the Law is above the king!  Not “Rex, Lex”.

3 Romans13 must be read in pari materia with everything the Bible says about civil government! The false doctrine of “divine right of kings” is based on ignoring the numerous Old Testament provisions addressing civil government. Romans13 actually says that the civil authorities are God’s ministers and agents, and if we are “good” we have no cause to fear them; but if we do “evil” we do have cause to fear them.

So! When reading Romans 13, Titus 3:1 & 1 Peter 2:13-14, we must keep in mind that it is God who decides what is “good” and what is “evil”. God never gave civil authorities the power to define “good” and “evil”; and God never gave them autonomy. Bad theology is, and has long been, the cause of much evil.  And Pride keeps it going.

4 Article I, §1 says:

“All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”

Only elected Senators (Art. I, §3, cl. 1) & popularly elected Representatives (Art. I, §2, cl. 1) may exercise legislative powers. Our Constitution doesn’t permit unelected bureaucrats to make laws. Federal judges have disgraced the Bench by permitting rule-making by executive agencies. PH.

June 23, 2012

Add to DeliciousAdd to DiggAdd to FaceBookAdd to Google BookmarkAdd to MySpaceAdd to NewsvineAdd to RedditAdd to StumbleUponAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Twitter

June 23, 2012 - Posted by | 501 (c) (3) tax exemption, Bible and civil government, Isaiah 33:22, Resistance to tyranny, Rule of Law, shining city on a hill, Supreme Law of the Land, under the law | , ,

55 Comments »

  1. Reblogged this on True Forms.

    Comment by pat | April 9, 2014 | Reply

  2. PH, here is an updated link to Fr Andrews homily: http://www.stthomasmore.org/homily/key-christian-principles-personal-choice-and-private-property

    Comment by Nelson | March 6, 2014 | Reply

    • Thank you, Nelson! That was wonderful – I heard Fr. Andrews before. It is a joy to finally see the Clergy beginning to speak out. They need to go full speed ahead.

      Comment by Publius Huldah | March 6, 2014 | Reply

  3. […] P/H’s The Biblical Foundation of Our Constitution!  It is time to ‘rebuke’ such authoritarians, as we have been instructed by THE Law […]

    Pingback by Time For Rebuking , An Ol' Broad's Ramblings | January 28, 2014 | Reply

  4. You are absolutely correct in the establishment of our nation by the use of the Bible! Our generation is being brainwashed with lies of how our founding fathers were atheists when it has been theoretically proven that 50/55 delegates were indeed Christians! The principle issue in our nation is that we reject the truth that we are held accountable to Gods authority! So many people worship themselves! I reccommend that people watch the movie “Monumental” because it supports the truth that our nation was founded on biblical principles and that it prospered because we followed Gods guidelines for a sound government.

    Comment by Fleagle | September 11, 2013 | Reply

    • I have meaning to see Monumental – thank you for the reminder!

      Oh yes, people do worship themselves.

      Comment by Publius Huldah | September 12, 2013 | Reply

    • Not atheists, deists, no one believes the founding fathers were atheists. Way to not make your point by making a very uneducated assumption.

      Comment by Elsa Glembotzki | July 30, 2014 | Reply

      • Elsa, I have heard it said that our Founders were “atheists” or “deists”. I am old and attended the government schools – we were not taught that our Framers were Christians. Thomas Paine seems to have been agnostic or atheist; the impression created in the government schools was that he was typical of the time. We were also told that Ben Franklin was secular; again, the impression created was that he was typical.

        So I was amazed when I finally read the Bible and saw that our Constitution was patterned on God’s Model for civil government as set forth in the Bible. Sadly, “christians” don’t know this b/c they no longer read the Hebrew Scripture. They just want to hear “feel good” stuff – particularly when it involves them being “raptured” out of here when the going gets really tough. And most of the Jews I know are secular and don’t read the Torah. So sad. And of course, the Christian pastors don’t read it – it seems that all they read are commentaries – and about what they can’t do if they want to maintain their 501 (c) (3) tax exemption.

        Comment by Publius Huldah | July 30, 2014 | Reply

  5. God bless you for your courage to stand. How refreshing to find someone who truly understands why this Constitutional Republic is in such periil.Thank you for giving me courage to stand up to my legislators and how to do it effectively. It is so uplifting to read your papers. Thank you!! Lee

    Comment by Jane Lee | April 17, 2013 | Reply

  6. “The Constitution is a theological document!”

    This is incorrect. The Constitution is a profoundly secular document. Article VI prohibits religious tests for federal office, and the First Amendment allows people to profess any religion (including polytheism) or none at all, thereby violating several Biblical precepts.

    True, the date the Constitution was signed was expressed in terms of the “Year of our Lord”, but that was simply the style for indicating years in the eighteenth century. Would you seriously suggest that if someone told you he’d meet you on Thursday, January 10 that he believed in Thor and Janus?

    Comment by Mertensv16 | March 4, 2013 | Reply

    • Mertens,

      You have much to learn. Set aside what you have been told – b/c it is not true – and read the paper with an open mind. If you have a Bible, read the cited passages (and the surrounding texts). See the parallels in the Constitution. My paper shows how our Constitution was based on God’s Model of civil government as set forth in the Bible. The Bible has a whole lot to say about civil government. Our Framers followed that model.

      I’m not saying you must believe that the Bible is the Word of God. I am merely saying that it is a fact that a model of civil government is set forth in the Bible, and that our Constitution is based on that model.

      The phrase you reference has to do with not requiring office holders to be “congregationalists”, or “Episcopalian”, or “Baptist” or “Presbyterian; and not banning Quakers, Roman Catholics, etc. In the early days of our Country, both when we were colonies and up until 1833, various of the colonies and then the States, had “established religions”. The paper which you can find under the category, “separation of church and state?” tells all about “established religions” in this Country.

      Our Country is in dire peril. YOU need to set aside the indoctrination which has been pushed on you, learn how to open your mind, learn how to distinguish Truth from Lies; and then embrace the Truth. We will not survive without such a fundamental moral and intellectual regeneration. You were taught to sneer; but you can lay it aside.

      If you and a great many others do not, we will fall. And you have no idea what is ahead for this Country if we do not turn around.

      My paper on progressive education explains the conditioning which went on in the public schools to corrupt Our People and turn them away from our Founding Principles. Don’t let your conditioners count you as one of their victories.

      Comment by Publius Huldah | March 4, 2013 | Reply

      • If the Constitution was based on on a Biblical model we’d probably have a monarchy. I know of no constitutional republics anywhere in Scripture.

        I find it incredibly ironic that one who was raised in the traditions of the Roman Catholic Church criticizes someone else for allegedly being indoctrinated and conditioned While there is much in the Church that is admirable, it its exceedingly doctrinaire and stiff-necked.

        Comment by Mertensv16 | March 5, 2013 | Reply

        • Merternsv16,

          You are regurgitating what you have been told – and it is all lies. Read my paper on the biblical foundation of our Constitution. If you are not willing to read it, then stop wasting our time. This site is for intelligent discussion only.

          Shallowness is not tolerated.

          Good heavens, man! You have no facts on which to base an assumption that I am RC. My ancestors were Puritans before the Reformation; and my own Puritan theology is obvious to those who are knowledgeable of Puritan theology and who have read what I have written.

          Comment by Publius Huldah | March 5, 2013 | Reply

  7. [...] of the Declaration of Independence says we have the duty to overthrow tyrannical government. See: The Biblical Foundation of our Constitution. • Nullification is required by Oath of Office: Article VI, cl. 3 requires all State officers and [...]

    Pingback by NULLIFICATION DENIERS: WHAT JAMES MADISON REALLY SAID PART 1 & 2 | Jericho777's Blog | February 6, 2013 | Reply

  8. [...] God requires us to disobey civil authorities when they violate God’s Law. That’s why the 2nd para of the Declaration of Independence says we have the duty to overthrow tyrannical government. See: The Biblical Foundation of our Constitution. [...]

    Pingback by Nullification Deniers! This Is What James Madison Really Said | American Conservative News Politics & Opinion - The Land of the Free | February 4, 2013 | Reply

  9. The only sad thing here is that most of the people in this country who consider themselves “in the know” and vote really are just sheep following the clicks and whistles of the latest wolf at the microphone. We NEED this truth to be known. How can something so clear and foundationally strong and LIBERATING be considered “out of touch” in this LIBERAL society?

    Comment by Jason Edinborough | February 1, 2013 | Reply

    • Well, we have to teach The People, Jason!

      They have been brainwashed. Now it us up to US to turn the lights on for them. So use my paper as a teaching tool.

      Comment by Publius Huldah | February 1, 2013 | Reply

  10. [...] God requires us to disobey civil authorities when they violate God’s Law. That’s why the 2nd para of the Declaration of Independence says we have the duty to overthrow tyrannical government. See: The Biblical Foundation of our Constitution. [...]

    Pingback by Liberty 02/01/2013 (p.m.) « Liberty in the Breach | February 1, 2013 | Reply

  11. [...] God requires us to disobey civil authorities when they violate God’s Law. That’s why the 2nd para of the Declaration of Independence says we have the duty to overthrow tyrannical government. See: The Biblical Foundation of our Constitution. [...]

    Pingback by Nullification Deniers! This Is What James Madison Really Said | Unified Patriots | January 31, 2013 | Reply

  12. [...] God requires us to disobey civil authorities when they violate God’s Law. That’s why the 2nd para of the Declaration of Independence says we have the duty to overthrow tyrannical government. See: The Biblical Foundation of our Constitution. [...]

    Pingback by Publius Huldah: "James Madison Rebukes Nullification Deniers" | USA NEWS FIRST | January 31, 2013 | Reply

  13. [...] God requires us to disobey civil authorities when they violate God’s Law. That’s why the 2nd para of the Declaration of Independence says we have the duty to overthrow tyrannical government. See: The Biblical Foundation of our Constitution. [...]

    Pingback by James Madison Rebukes Nullification Deniers. « Publius-Huldah's Blog | January 31, 2013 | Reply

  14. [...] God requires us to disobey civil authorities when they violate God’s Law. That’s why the 2nd para of the Declaration of Independence says we have the duty to overthrow tyrannical government. See: The Biblical Foundation of our Constitution. [...]

    Pingback by Nullification Deniers! This Is What James Madison Really Said | Grumpy Opinions | January 31, 2013 | Reply

  15. [...] of the Declaration of Independence says we have the duty to overthrow tyrannical government. See: The Biblical Foundation of our Constitution. • Nullification is required by Oath of Office: Article VI, cl. 3 requires all State officers and [...]

    Pingback by Nullification Deniers! This Is What James Madison Really Said | Illinois Conservative Beacon | January 28, 2013 | Reply

  16. [...] God requires us to disobey civil authorities when they violate God’s Law. That’s why the 2nd para of the Declaration of Independence says we have the duty to overthrow tyrannical government. See: The Biblical Foundation of our Constitution. [...]

    Pingback by Nullification Deniers! This Is What James Madison Really Said « Veteran Patriot | January 28, 2013 | Reply

  17. [...] God requires us to disobey civil authorities when they violate God’s Law. That’s why the 2nd para of the Declaration of Independence says we have the duty to overthrow tyrannical government. See: The Biblical Foundation of our Constitution. [...]

    Pingback by Nullification Deniers! This Is What James Madison Really Said | American Clarion | January 28, 2013 | Reply

  18. [...] of the Declaration of Independence says we have the duty to overthrow tyrannical government. See: The Biblical Foundation of our Constitution. • Nullification is required by Oath of Office: Article VI, cl. 3 requires all State officers and [...]

    Pingback by Nullification Deniers! This Is What James Madison Really Said | January 27, 2013 | Reply

  19. [...] and Teddy Roosevelt was the first Progressive President – who initiated our abandonment of God’s Model for Civil Government, our abandonment of our Constitution, and our descent into the cesspool of Envy, Coercion, Theft, [...]

    Pingback by What Now? You Ask, Political Insurgency! « A NATION BEGUILED | November 15, 2012 | Reply

  20. [...] and Teddy Roosevelt was the first Progressive President – who initiated our abandonment of God’s Model for Civil Government, our abandonment of our Constitution, and our descent into the cesspool of Envy, Coercion, Theft, [...]

    Pingback by God-given Rights, Man-made Anti-rights, and why “Safety Nets” are Immoral « Publius-Huldah's Blog | August 29, 2012 | Reply

  21. [...] – and Teddy Roosevelt was the first Progressive President – who initiated our abandonment of God’s Model for Civil Government, our abandonment of our Constitution, and our descent into the cesspool of Envy, Coercion, Theft, [...]

    Pingback by God-Given Rights, Man-Made Anti-Rights, and Why ‘Safety Nets’ are Immoral « Veteran Patriot | August 28, 2012 | Reply

  22. [...] – and Teddy Roosevelt was the first Progressive President – who initiated our abandonment of God’s Model for Civil Government, our abandonment of our Constitution, and our descent into the cesspool of Envy, Coercion, Theft, [...]

    Pingback by God-Given Rights, Man-Made Anti-Rights, and Why ‘Safety Nets’ are Immoral | The Constitution Sentinel | August 27, 2012 | Reply

  23. [...] – and Teddy Roosevelt was the first Progressive President – who initiated our abandonment of God’s Model for Civil Government, our abandonment of our Constitution, and our descent into the cesspool of Envy, Coercion, Theft, [...]

    Pingback by God-Given Rights, Man-Made Anti-Rights, and Why ‘Safety Nets’ are Immoral | Christian Patriots USA | August 27, 2012 | Reply

  24. [...] – and Teddy Roosevelt was the first Progressive President – who initiated our abandonment of God’s Model for Civil Government, our abandonment of our Constitution, and our descent into the cesspool of Envy, Coercion, Theft, [...]

    Pingback by God-Given Rights, Man-Made Anti-Rights, and Why ‘Safety Nets’ are Immoral | Illinois Conservative Beacon | August 27, 2012 | Reply

  25. “The Catholic Priests are speaking out about being forced to provide contraception and abortion pills as violations of their religious freedom. But they should be denouncing the HHS rules as unconstitutional exercises of undelegated powers.

    Their goal should not be to carve out an exemption for themselves from rules they don’t agree with; but to enforce The Constitution for everyone.

    “Rebuke” does not consist in saying, “I don’t agree” or “It violates my beliefs.”

    A proper rebuke points out the Higher Law being violated, and demands compliance with that Higher Law – not with one’s personal views.”

    Hehehe. You might as well wish you won the lottery. The Catholic Church does NOT want freedom for anyone, or the Constitution to be obeyed.

    The Catholic Church (AKA the Prostitute of Babylon) wants to impose ITS OWN dictatorship on the world’s population. It wants to enforce ITS OWN beliefs on other people – even those who are not Catholics. It wants to make its subjective beliefs the law of the land in every country of the world. They couldn’t care less about freedom and the Constitution of the United States (or any other country for that matter). They care only about power over other people. Just like Obama.

    And when Paul Ryan, himself a Catholic, drafted a masterful budget plan proposing to (gradually) free the American people from the federal government and from enslavement to federal programs, the RCC condemned him.

    Therefore, when someone, e.g. Obama, does something running contrary to their beliefs, they don’t say “It’s unconstitutional”, they say “It violates my beliefs, so I will not obey it.”

    Trust me on that one. I’ve lived in a Catholic-dominated country that BASES its state laws on the RCC’s diktats for over 23 years. In this country, what the RCC wants overrules what is objectively good.

    It is no coincidence that the freest countries in the world are Protestant-dominated ones, while freedom is greatly restricted in countries dominated by Catholics. It’s no coincidence that the US, Australia, Britain, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and Finland offer their citizens much greater freedoms than Portugal, Spain, Italy, or Poland.

    So don’t count on the RCC to do the right thing. They never will.

    Comment by zbigniewmazurak | July 9, 2012 | Reply

    • Of course I don’t count on the RC Establishment to do the right thing! I was trying to make the point which you have seen. I hope you are not the only one who saw it.

      And yes, I am well aware that it is primarily the PURITAN Christians who have understood God’s Model for civil Government – the PURITANS who settled this Land in the early 1630s, and the Scots Presbyterians who came around 1718, and the earlier Scottish conventioneers who came here. The Puritan Rev. Samuel B. Rutherford who wrote Lex, Rex (1644), Algernon Sidney, and a handful of others. I must also give credit to our Anglican Founders & Framers – but they were more influenced by John Locke and Algernon Sidney and the Bible than by Anglican theology. It was the Anglican Kings who drove the English Puritans to come here.

      These Puritans & Presbyterians have been jeered and mocked all my life in the public schools and popular culture here. Yes, yes, they hung some witches in the 1690s – but that was what was done in Christendom at the time. Yes, yes, they were intolerant of other religions, especially RCs and Quakers. But that’s what was done at the time.

      I am well aware that Countries dominated by the Catholic Church have always been hotbeds of crime, misery, & tyranny. I am so Protestant [Puritan, not Lutheran] that my blood is Orange; and do not know what it is about Catholic theology which always brings about misery, tyranny and crime in the countries they dominate. If I knew nothing about the Catholic Church, I would be appalled by their coverup up for the homosexual pedophile priests who preyed on young boys here.

      But they may be helpful in awakening Americans to the evils of obamacare.

      John Jay wrote in Federalist Paper No. 2 (around the 5th para) that we were blessed with having a population of one people with the same Language, Culture, & Religion. Jay meant Protestant Christian – we already had Anglicans, Congregationalists, Presbyterians, & Baptists by Jay’s Time.

      Yes, I think it was a serious mistake to “diversify”. We could have made proficiency in the English Language and adherence to the Protestant Christian Faith among the conditions to obtaining citizenship.

      Comment by Publius/Huldah | July 9, 2012 | Reply

      • I have to say, as a Catholic, I am vastly disappointed by these couple comments and the generalizations on the RCC contained in them (including be called the Prostitute of Babylon). All denominations have had “bad’ in its history. I feel these comments are uncalled for and offense. I would sure hate to stop visiting this site and spreading it to others, but I cannot continue to do so any longer in good conscience with comments like these.

        Johnny Dollar

        Comment by JohnnyDollar74 | July 28, 2012 | Reply

        • Western Civilization has collapsed. Why? To answer that question, nothing is exempt from scrutiny. With obamacare, we are in a totalitarian dictatorship. But the American Catholic Bishops were all for obamacare. They said health care was a “right”. [That one can not have a "right" to other peoples' money escaped their notice.]

          The Protestant clergy too has failed. They teach passivity in the face of evil, and escape from the world with their idiotic “rapture” theories, or that we must just wait while things get worse & worse until Jesus finally returns to rescue us.

          All of them, Catholic & Protestant, teach their own doctrines – man made theories about divine facts – instead of the Word of God.

          That is the cause of our collapse. FALSE theology.

          You have to look at world history, however, to see the comparative effects of Catholicism & Protestantism. Look at the history of the Catholic Countries. Look at the history of the Protestant countries.

          Furthermore, it was the Puritan Protestants who showed that God’s model of civil government is a civil government of limited powers which is subject to the Law. It was not mere chance that “Lex, Rex” was written by a Puritan theologian (the Rev. Samuel B. Rutherford); and not by a Lutheran; and not by a Catholic.

          It was in the Protestant Countries that the blessings of peace, prosperity, & civil liberties were for a time enjoyed. The Catholic clergy never seemed to understand the concept of limited civil government under the Law – which is God’s Model as set forth in the Bible. The support of the American Catholic Clergy for obamacare is a prime example – the most massive increase in government power over the people in the history of our Country. The American Catholic Clergy were all for it!

          We have no hope if the American People refuse to open their eyes.

          Comment by Publius/Huldah | July 29, 2012 | Reply

          • If by opening our eyes is meant to be disparaging and intolerant of other religions, then yes, we have no hope. You talk of FALSE theologies and adherence to the Word of God, but lest we forget, the New Testament was canonized by the RCC at the Council of Nicaea 325 ad.
            I will not disparage my Brother’s and Sisters in Christ, as I don’t believe that disagreeing with them or their teachings is just cause for such. One can believe in Liberty and Freedom without being just a ‘Puritan Protestant’.
            Diffisencies in thoughts can be pointed out without being divisive or offensive. We do not need to continue to persecute each other, we have more than enough non-believers to do that for us.

            Johnny Dollar

            Comment by JohnnyDollar74 | July 29, 2012

          • You also mention Lex, Rex (1644) by Rutherford a Puritan, but make no mention of teachings of Saint Thomas Aquinas or even The City Of God by Saint Augustine, which predates Lex,Rex and which both speak out against abuses of civil authority, especially when in violation of God’s laws. Maybe it was just my mistake by expecting better from you.

            Johnny Dollar

            Comment by JohnnyDollar74 | July 29, 2012

          • Speaking the truth is never disparaging of anybody or anything. The only thing which matters is Truth. Not persons. Not institutions. Only Truth matters. No human institution is properly immune from examination. All of them fall short.

            Of course, I am intolerant of wrong doctrines & unconstitutional acts!

            You refer to Augustine and Aquinas as advocates of limited civil government. Even if that were true (which I dispute), why have the Catholic Countries never been places of peace, prosperity, limited civil government, and liberty under Law? Why are Catholic South & Central America and Mexico places of poverty, corruption, totalitarian civil governments, crime, and misery?

            God’s Law is clear that charity is an individual, family or church matter. God is clear that we may choose the objects of our charity. God’s Law never requires us to subsidize vice, irresponsibility, sloth, and parasitism. God’s Law is clear that people are to take responsibility for their own lives, adult children are to take care of their parents; families are to take care of each other. Civil government NEVER has any role in “welfare” or charity in God’s Model.

            So how could the Catholic Bishops support obamacare, a program which violates God’s Law, as well as the U.S. Constitution?

            And why didn’t they purge their clergy of the homosexual pedophiles? Why did they cover it up and protect the errant priests? Under God’s Law, that is a capital offense. The Priests just got transferred.

            I understand – it’s your religion and you believe what they say, and you don’t want to hear anyone criticize the Catholic Church.

            But I criticize all who violate God’s Law and The Constitution, and I don’t care who they are or who gets upset. I care for nothing but Truth.

            Comment by Publius/Huldah | July 29, 2012

          • Just because a people is majority Catholic does not make its government Catholic. And while have had peace here in our land, we sure have been making wars in other lands, especially over the past 10 years. And yes, the Catholic Church has made mistakes, has taking some wrong positions politically, and has been as it should be, taking to task over these things. By Catholics and non-Catholics.

            Pointing out things that ‘human institutions’ have done wrong is not disparaging, but name calling and calling them false doctrines is. I disagree with other Christian’s biblical interpretations, but would never call them false. Do we really want to think that God’s Truth and Inspiration stopped at the Bible or in the biblical times? Reason dictates otherwise.

            Augustus and Thomas Aquinas both discussed civil authority and it being wrong and invalid when it violated God’s Law. Here is a nice write up I found, which not only talks about Augustine, Aquinas, and Rutherford, but also discusses many more: http://creation.mobi/the-christian-foundations-of-the-rule-of-law-in-the-west-a-legacy-of-liberty-and-resistance-against-tyranny

            Since you are a ‘seeker of the Truth’ as am I, you should enjoy that read. I truthfully do not know the denomination of the writer, as it really doesn’t matter. Truth is truth, whether you ‘dispute’ it or not.

            Johnny Dollar

            Comment by JohnnyDollar74 | July 29, 2012

          • Since you “disputed” some things I referenced, here are a few things for your reading pleasure on Thomas Aquinas, Augustine, Natural law, and truths about the Church’s involvement in such things as Crusades and Spanish Inquisition, which I am including to show that while “Catholic countries” being the way they are is not solely blame of the RCC. Read them and research them. Find the Truth! I do not mind “criticisms” of my faith, especially when it is justly deserved. But being call a “false” doctrine, the Prostitute of Babylon, and practically having the Church being accused of wanting to establish a Catholic version of a Caliphate is beyond just critism. “You can’t count on the RCC to do the right thing, they never do” Yeah, that isn’t disparaging. The RCC never does the right thing?

            http://www.crf-usa.org/bill-of-rights-in-action/bria-22-4-c-st-thomas-aquinas-natural-law-and-the-common-good

            http://www.nlnrac.org/classical/aquinas

            http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=5236

            http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=4461&repos=1&subrepos=0&searchid=892156

            Also, in your paper you talk about the Old Testament “limits” on civil government. You also stated that charity, welfare and such done by a civil government is against God’s Law. Where? I would like to read exactly where biblically such limits are written, where such things are prohibited? I’m not talking the constitutionality of such, we are in agreement there. I’m talking strictly biblically.

            Johnny Dollar

            Comment by JohnnyDollar74 | July 30, 2012

          • Johnny,
            You must read the Bible for yourself. cover to cover. And see what it actually says. I will not go thru and make a list of cites for you. You will reject them because they come from me. Just read the Bible cover to cover and see for yourself. The greatest failing of our modern day christians is that they REFUSE to read the Bible. They want someone else to tell them what it means so they don’t have to make the effort, and take the time, to read it themselves. Get a good modern translation. I use the REB Oxford University Press.

            Re your links to articles about Augustine & Aquinas: My undergraduate degree is in philosophy. I don’t read other peoples’ opinions about philosophers – those are secondary sources. I read the actual works – well, translations of the philosophers. Those are primary sources. I won’t take the time to tell you about Augustine’s Manichean and neo-Platonic bifurcation of the universe into the Realm of God and the Realm of the Devil, b/c you will reject whatever I say.

            Re the other fellow’s reference to the Catholic Church as the whore of Babylon: He is wrong – the Bible does not identify the Catholic Church as that whore.

            Comment by Publius/Huldah | July 30, 2012

          • PH

            First off, let me say, I AM NOT picking a fight with you. I actually hold you, your essays, and your opinions in very high regard. I WILL NOT reject something just because it comes from you. If that was the case I wouldn’t be writing this comment or viewing your site. I WILL research it and read it for myself, as one should. I do this with everything. I take nothing at face value. I do my own homework, as that is the only way to learn.

            I have read the Bible, cover to cover, on multiple occasions. King James version and as a Catholic, the New American Bible. Infact, my family (Wife, I, our 3rd and 5th graders) are working our way through it again. We read it together weekly and discuss it.

            As for the links, isn’t it kind of close minded to not read others opinions and such, if for nothing else than else to get a different perspective. Of course, ALWAYS go back to the source itself. But if everyone took this same opinion, who then would be there to READ YOUR ESSAYS?

            I have read The Confessions and The City of God by Augustine. I have read the works of Thomas Aquinas. It is easy to see the correlation of Aquinas’s works and those of the Enlightenment. How Aquinas combined Aristotle and Christianity was beautiful, and was a big inspiration of John Locke and the Founding Fathers. One does not need a degree to see this.

            And finally, thank you for rebuking the whore comment. It was offensive and yes, I was offended by the fact that rather than rebuke such a comment, instead, the RCC was ‘piled on.’ The RCC has also done a great deal of good in the world. Does it’s position sometimes go against the popular stance, the modern rage? Yes. Does it sometimes not fall in the line with the US Constitution? Of course. Mainly because the RCC is concerned for ALL Catholics, not just American ones.

            Again, not picking a fight, only standing up to misconceptions about my faith. I do love your essays and do value your opinion. Would never have asked you questions if I didn’t. I don’t play ‘gotcha’. And you of all people should know that just because you learn something in school, doesn’t make it the Truth, or even right. Just look at our founding. Revisionist history happens all the time, and has happened to the Church also. And hopefully you don’t just REJECT this because it is coming from me.

            Johnny Dollar

            Comment by JohnnyDollar74 | July 30, 2012

          • I am a political philosopher & lawyer. Hence, when I read the Bible, the passages on polity, civil government & Law are the ones which jump out at me. As you read thru, note what it says about these matters. What was the function of the Judges? Note that of God’s Laws, a penalty was attached to only a few of them. Those are the ones which were enforced by the Judges. The other laws were a matter of SELF-government (e.g., charity, diet, drink, etc.). What functions does God have civil government carry out? Remember, God’s preferred method of civil government was via Judges. Whose responsibility is education? care of the aged? charity?

            My writings are unique in that I do not presume to impose my own “opinions”, “thoughts” or “ideas” on my readers. ALL I do is explain our Constitution using quotes from our Framers.

            So, I am properly NOT interested in anyone’s “opinion” about this philosopher or that philosopher. That’s why I don’t read commentaries about philosophers. I skip the opinions of some other person about the philosopher and go straight to the philosopher’s own words.

            It is the sickness of humanism that we are so obsessed with our own precious selves and our own precious “opinions” and other peoples’ “opinions”. A pox on all these “opinions”!

            So, if I were to write on Augustine, I wouldn’t spew out MY thoughts about it. Instead, I would show how what he said comes from the pagans (the Platonists and the Manicheans), and I would show how it is INCONSISTENT with what the Bible actually says. The influence of pagan Greek & eastern philosophy on “christian” doctrine has been a 2000 year old disaster, and it is laid at the feet of Augustine and the Church which incorporated Augustine (hence Platonic & Manichean dualism) into “christian” doctrine.

            Western Civilization is collapsing b/c of the dualistic mindset of 99.999999% of modern Christians!

            Right, one does not need a degree in philosophy to read Augustine’s works. However, a degree in philosophy is what enables one to recognize the pagan Platonic and Manichean dualism in Augustine’s works.

            I never criticized the Catholic Church for “going against what is popular” – e.g., I never criticized it’s positions on celibacy of priests and birth control (even though I don’t think the Bible supports their positions). What I criticize the Catholic Church for is violating the Word of God (protecting homosexual pedophile priests); and urging violations of God’s Law AND the U.S. Constitution in supporting obamacare.

            The scandal at Penn State: They did nothing worse there than what the Catholic Church did. At Penn State, their damned football program was more important than the lives of the little boys who got anally raped. In the Catholic Church …. well, I am beside myself with horror that the Church would protect the priests.

            The Catholic Church’s support of obamacare violated God’s Law as well as the U.S. Constitution:

            (1) Under God’s Law, charity is ALWAYS an individual, family or church matter. The Bible has much to say about this! God never requires us to subsidize others, to pay their living expenses, to subsidize the irresponsibility, sloth, and vice of others.

            (2) As you read thru, notice the repeated references to the sanctity of PRIVATE PROPERTY. Notice what it says about taxation: how limited and precisely defined are the allowed taxes under God’s Model of Polity!

            (3) Under God’s Law, it is the responsibility of family members to take care of their own. Then friends. Or the church of which one is a member if one is deserving.

            (4) Under God’s model of polity, the powers of civil government are strictly limited to enforcing some of God’s Laws (those to which a penalty for violation is attached), and military matters. It has no role in “welfare”. The Catholic Church wrongly wanted to convert what GOD says is a private & individual duty into a function of civil government where coercion against the People is applied to force them to participate and to pay. This is the legalized plunder.

            And yes, the Protestant Denominations are just as bad with their man-made doctrines.

            Comment by Publius/Huldah | July 31, 2012

          • PH

            I am just a lowly layman, freethinker. I am no lawyer or political philosopher. I have no degree in either. But I love logic, reason, debate, discussion, varied and differentiating viewpoints, opinions, thoughts and ideas. This isn’t a sickness of humanism. I don’t value my opinion above others. You say your writings are unique because you don’t impose your opinions on the reader. But is not your writings an interpretation to the meaning of what you are quoting. You are explaining the Constitution, the Federalist Papers, the Bible, whatever, by your view and interpretation of the meaning of. Like you said, as a political philosopher & lawyer, certain things “jump” out at you. Your interpretation is through this lens. It is easy to “pox” all opinions when you view your own as not an opinion, but as an undeniable truth. This train of thought is where the “pox” is needed, in my opinion.

            Yes, I see how certain things in the God’s Law were left to the Judges, while others were left to the individual, or to the family, or to the Church. But I have yet to read where it was “limited” or “forbade”? I mean, if we are to follow only the things lined out in the Bible, how did we end up with a Constitutional Republic, and not a form of government actually find in the Bible, if that is the “limit” we are to go by. Why are we not under a Monarchy (Kings), a Divine Dictatorship (Moses), or a Military Dictatorship? Yes I know some view the picking of Judges under Moses as democratic, but they were really “divine appointments”, not dully elected. Thomas Aquinas elegantly explains God’s Law and how it is applied, which reason and the Bible: The Eternal Law, the Natural Law, the Human Law, and the Divine Law. But as a philosopher, I am sure you have read and studied the Summa Theologica.

            If you were to write about Augustine, it would be from your view and how you interpret his writing. Like how you believe that he let pagan Greek and eastern philosophy influence Christianity, while I view it as the exact opposite. He refuted the Manicheans. He also used Plato’s foundations of philosophy to explain that Christianity was superior to their philosophy. He called for the abolition of superstitions and idolatry. He exposed the pagan gods and their authors, i.e. Varro, whose salvation could not be explained by nature, but using their argument, explained salvation through Christ Jesus. Yes, he did talk a lot of mysticism, but this was also around 400 AD, so it can be explained by the times also. You must also know that he did not differentiate between the Light and Dark by nature (by creation, as all creation is good), but by wills and desires.

            You believe this way of thinking is causing the collapse of Western Civilization. I believe this mindset “gave” us Western Civilization. It shows the Christianity and Reason not only co-exist, but go hand in hand. How even with the Biblical foundations of our government, which your paper beautifully demonstrates, the fact we have a Constitutional Republic is yet another mixture of Christianity and the Age of Reason, as the “republic” comes from Roman and Greek political philosophy. It is this “dualism” that allows you to love the Bible, and also love Thomas Paine, Ayn Rand, etc. Also, what about things like the Magna Carta? Or enumerated powers contained in the Constitution that is not discussed in the Bible as a function of government (promotion of the science and arts, Writ of Habeas Corpus, the no granting of Titles of Nobility when God himself ordained Kings in the Bible, the guarantee of a republican form of government?) How else but by reason are they to be reconciled? If such things are not in the biblical God’s Law, and civil authority is limited only to certain things that are found, then how can this be? Would this not be in violation of God’s Law?

            Johnny Dollar

            Comment by JohnnyDollar74 | August 1, 2012

  26. Oh, PH, I hardly know where to begin! Thanks to having been, for some time now, a reader of your columns, and now a possessor of the Federalist Papers, I am able to write so specifically, refutations to the myriads of people/groups sending questionnaires, petitions, and surveys ALL of whom display their ignorance of our constitution! I do not check a box – I write a rebuke. I do not send money “for ignorance.” I now get many MORE surveys, etc., since I am “one of THE most active conservatives; in the top 3% of those we can depend on to support our country.” Now how do you account for that?! My much-used phrase – “read till you UNDERSTAND, and then OBEY!” accompanied by no $$$. I am so very grateful to you for the hard work and brilliant treatises you prepare for us; and in such clear and succinct language. With patience and desire, any young person could not fail to understand.

    Comment by Carol Boggs | July 7, 2012 | Reply

  27. Publius-Huldah:
    I wish you were in charge.
    Sigh.

    Comment by pa | June 27, 2012 | Reply

    • Well, thanks, Pa. But I am a poor administrator – I can barely run my own home properly! However, my dream job is to sit on the US supreme Court. THAT is something I can do!

      Comment by Publius/Huldah | June 27, 2012 | Reply

      • When I am POTUS, I will nominate you for Supreme Court Justice even if I have to adopt Turley’s Court-packing scheme to make room for you. Or FDR’s.

        Comment by pa | June 27, 2012 | Reply

  28. [...] The Biblical Foundation of Our Constitution. « Publius-Huldah’s Blog [...]

    Pingback by New and Noteworthy for Today, June 25, 2012 - Survival Blog With A Family Focus | June 25, 2012 | Reply

  29. [...] Publius-Huldah’s Blog | The Biblical Foundation of Our Constitution. [...]

    Pingback by Weekend Reading (Good Blogs!) | What Would The Founders Think? | June 23, 2012 | Reply

  30. [...] For more information on this intertwined nation, please read the Publius-Huldah’s Blog. [...]

    Pingback by God, the Bible, and the United States of America | June 23, 2012 | Reply

  31. This is an excellent article! Thank you for writing it.

    Comment by Bill Fisher | June 23, 2012 | Reply

    • Thank you!

      Comment by Publius/Huldah | June 23, 2012 | Reply


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 841 other followers

%d bloggers like this: