Written July 16, 2009

As I was working yesterday a thought came to me in the form of a question: "Would I be happier to do this task if it was Jesus' dishes to wash and floors to sweep?" Would I not do it "happily", with true joy to be able to do it for Him? But was it not Christ who said "...in-as-much as you have done it unto one of the least of these you have done it for me..." (Paraphrase of Matthew 25:40)? So even if I am literally doing it for family, I can and should do it as cheerfully as if I were literally doing it for Jesus!

In Ephesians 2:10 Paul wrote, "For we are His (God's) workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God before ordained that we should walk in them." In several ways through my life I've heard this idea shared: "Give God 100% and trust Him to do the rest."

"With goodwill doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men, knowing that whatever good anyone does, he will receive the same from the Lord..." (Ephesians 6:7-8)

"And whatever you do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not to men." (Colossians 3:23)

So, as we go through life, let us work hard for Jesus with servant hearts; remembering what Jesus said in Mark 10:45, "For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve..."

Give it All to Jesus - freestyle poem by Lady T.

Everyday you hear of sadness.. sorrows..
people burdened down by woes.
Sickness, sin,
disappointments. trouble..
There IS trouble everywhere *1

Take it.. To the Only Help.. the Only Hope.
To the All-Sufficient.. the Prince of Peace..
the "Man of sorrows, acquainted with grief." *2
Take it all. To the Lord. in prayer.

When it seems EVERYONE has cancer,
many marriages are torn and broken,
jobs are lost.
PEOPLE HURT!

Jesus knows. He cares.
He'll help. He'll heal.
He's life. He's Strength. He is God, and He is in control.

God HATES sin.. but LOVES the sinner.
God made the bodies
and knows the sickness. He knows what's best.

Run to Him. Run from sin.. to God.
Come to Him. with your burden.
"Take [His] yoke upon you and learn
of [Him]"*3
"We should. NEVER. Be discouraged.
Take it. to. the LORD..
in prayer."*4

"Jesus, I come. to THEE."*5

--------------------------

*1 from "What a Friend We Have in Jesus"
*2 from Isaiah 53:3
*3 from Matt. 11:29
*4 from "What a Friend We Have in Jesus"
*5 from "Jesus I Come to Thee"

Spring Break for Country Acres Christian Academy this year

This week we were on spring break in our home-school. Daddy was able to get "off" his usual work, but we weren't work-less on this break! Daddy and Mother primarily, with help from the rest of us, worked to paint their bedroom and two/thirds of our hallways (the other third being done in January) for the first four days of spring break. This included moving out of their room, taping (etc.), priming, cutting-in, rolling, and touching-up. My older brother was not off work this week, but the rest of us focused on the home-work. Oh, and on Thursday my Dad and I went to the Driver's License place and I got my learner's permit. Anyway, we were happy to get all of the painting done Thursday evening and get packed and ready for a weekend trip to Colorado Springs!

We went to Colorado Springs this weekend for the annual Arms Around the World Convention. We have been privileged to attend several of these conventions through the years, and always come away blessed. We are also blessed by dear family members to stay with when the conventions are in Colorado Springs! So, "early" Friday morning we left for the Springs to get there in time for the A.M. "workshops", by Bro. Martin H. and Sis. Durenda B., who spoke on the church in home missions and Christian finances, respectively. After those two services we enjoyed fellow-shipping around the noon potluck with those who had come. On Friday afternoon Daddy, Jeff, and I went on a drive and found a place which we used to take many nice pictures of Jeff for his senior pictures. I mean the backdrops were nice, I'm not advertising my brother. The scenes were a photographer's dream... anyway, we had a nice afternoon doing that. Following that we went out to eat with our family,
and then went to the evening service. One of the things that happened in the Friday evening service was that a Brother who is a pastor in Mexico spoke in testimony and challenge (speaking through a translator). This followed with a good season of prayer.

On Saturday the "workshop" speakers were Bro. Jonathan L. and Bro. Philemon W., speaking on Mission Helps and a national's view of missions, respectively. We enjoyed both of these services as well and a potluck lunch which followed. In the afternoon we four kids were invited to go putt-putt golfing with some of the young, and young adults
of the church as a birthday surprise for a friend of ours, Tonya S.
who helps with the Sunday School we help with nearly every Sunday evening. Anyway there were 22 of us, and we had a fun time with them all! Saturday evening's service began with a special prelude--saw music with piano and organ accompaniment. Saw music? Yes, my great-uncle plays music on the flat side of a saw with a violin bow!


This morning's services included reports from all the AAW missionaries/mission fields, singing, communion, and a short message. It was a blessed service and we enjoyed it. After lunch with our family members, we left and went to Garden of the Gods, where five of us "hiked" around and took pictures for ~45 minutes. It was a beautiful-weathered day. After that we headed home. We didn't have Sunday School tonight due to one's sickness, and the unavailability of the group as a whole to make the trek up there for it. We missed having that and hope the kids missed coming to S.S. bad enough to make a point of coming next week.

We had a really restful, spiritually, physically, and emotionally beneficial weekend trip in Colorado Springs, and we thank God for the opportunity to be with many new and old friends.

The suitcases are unpacked, and thus I rest my case.

April 1st

On April 1st many people celebrate April Fool's Day by telling lies or playing pranks, or something along those lines. I would like to second the opinion of the person who wrote the below article concerning these activities, especially in regard to the Bible verses referenced, as God's opinion is very important to me, personally.
-Lady Theophilus

-------------

A Little Talk on April Fools Day - Mr. J.D. Albertson

As Christians, we believe April Fools’ Day jokes, pranks, lies, and all other forms of deception or humiliation should be eradicated from our Christian life practices.
These kinds of “jokes” will be referred to as pranks in the continuance of this essay.

The reason we believe these pranks should be eradicated from our life practices is multifaceted.

First, these pranks carry a spirit of dishonesty and unkindness. We quote Wikipedia.org: “[April Fools’ Day] is marked by the commission of hoaxes and other practical jokes of varying sophistication on friends, family members, enemies, and neighbors, or sending them on a fool's errand, the aim of which is to embarrass the gullible.”

The practice of these dishonest and unkind pranks, though usually done playfully, should be most carefully reconsidered. God loves honesty and kindness. Romans 12:17 says “Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men.”

Second, playing these pranks hurts our witness. Ecclesiastes 10:1 says “Dead flies putrefy the perfumer's ointment, and cause it to give off a foul odor; so does a little folly to one respected for wisdom and honor.” We as Christians should be known for being upright and truthful. Why should we take a break from our righteous lives for one day in order to have fun or to fit in with others?

Third, the practice of pranks on April 1st hurts the trustworthiness of events that actually happen on April 1st. We again quote Wikipedia.org:
“The April 1, 1946 Aleutian Island earthquake tsunami that killed 165 people in Hawaii and Alaska resulted in the creation of a tsunami warning system (specifically the Pacific Tsunami Warning Centre), established in 1949 for Pacific Ocean countries. The tsunami in question is known in Hawaii as the "April Fools' Day Tsunami" due to people drowning because of the assumptions that the warnings were an April Fools' prank.”

“Gmail's April 2004 launch was widely believed to be a prank, as Google traditionally perpetrates April Fools' Day hoaxes each April 1. Another Google-related event that turned out not to be a hoax occurred on April 1, 2007, when employees at Google's New York City office were alerted that a ball python kept in an engineer's cubicle had escaped and was on the loose. An internal e-mail acknowledged that "the timing…could not be more awkward" but that the snake's escape was in fact an actual occurrence and not a prank.”

So, in conclusion, we should not have a practice of playing pranks on others because doing so would displease God, both by our lies, and the resulting damage to our witness. Also, having a practice of pranks on April Fools’ Day destroys the credibility of those things that are true, in the same way as the boy, in “The Boy Who Cried Wolf”’, destroyed his trustworthiness by his lies.

-------------

After saying this, and having you read that article to know where I stand on such things, I do honestly, un-foolishly, and humbly tell you my reader-friends, that today I'm thankful for the Lord's help to me taking a test to get my learner's permit for learning to drive.
-Lady Theophilus

Sweet things

First: this letter was in the Greeley Tribune on March 12th, and I thought it was really sweet of the 50-year-married man to write this to his wife. I wondered if they were a Christian couple and was pleased as I read towards the end to find that they are! I enjoyed reading it so I copied it and hope you can click on it to make it a readable size.

The second sweet thing, no less sweet, is a picture my almost 3 year old nephew made for us! Love you Quilster! :) His favorite thing to talk to us about is "Com[ing] to see [us]".

----> Lady Theophilus

Seasons of Life

Season's Greetings to you all! But it's not Christmas! Well, it is a season anyway. Not only is this winter in the northern hemisphere and summer in the southern, but in each life, we are at different “seasons”. This is something I've been thinking about a lot lately, and hope to articulate some things to you through this blog post.

I am at, perhaps, one of the easiest places in life! I can take care of myself far more than I could as a baby or young child, but I'm also still at home with food, and other necessities provided by my parents. I don't yet have to work full time, or “worry” about finances. Other than babysitting or helping watch/play with kids (non-babysitting) I have no responsibilities for taking care of children.

But also, at this time of life, I have a lot of things to learn before I'm “pushed out of the nest (to soar)”. This growing list of things to learn and do within the next two-and-a-half years or so, is very daunting to me: learn to drive, learn to sew proficiently, get better at piano playing, learn more about cooking, finish Algebra 2, study physics, and learn other housekeeping and scholastic lessons, necessities to have under one's proverbial belt.

But, I realize that my pre-highschool-graduation season of life is not the only season of life that has major changes. My babysitting boy, three-years-old, doesn't realize the change he will go through in the next three years or so. He will need to learn his alphabet, numbers, and other things, and his life will slowly but surely get to the place where he plays less in the daytime and instead goes to/does school daily, like his older sisters.

(^my sister and babysitting boy on his birthday)

As I wrap up this post, I ask my readers to pray for me, as I'm going through this season of my life: preparing for adulthood. Sometimes I picture myself as a flower bud, who feels like my flower will only bloom after an eternity's wait. Oft-times I get impatient as I wait for “the future”, but I have to stop and realize that this is the best season of my life for me to be in right now.. yeah, that's pretty profound isn't it? But sincerely, I'm not yet ready for “life”, so I need God's help to patiently wait, and heartily work* ... in this SEASON. I like this definition of contentment from Dr. Phil Brown: "Contentment: the satisfaction that comes from knowing that God is sovereign over my circumstances and is giving me what is best for me".

* (“And whatever you do, do it heartily, as to the Lord and not to men.” - Col. 3:23)

Victoria - a parable by Rowen Albertson May 1993

There was once a seventeen-year-old orphan girl named Victoria, who lived with her foster parents in a small city in the Midwest. She often had dreams that seemed very real. She dreamed of beautiful things, frightening things, of boys, of jobs, of school, of friends, and the like.

On night she dreamed that she met a handsome, strong, fun-loving guy in a city called Salem. In the dream, she fell in love with him and married him.

When she awoke the next morning, she wondered if such a wonderful thing would ever really happen in her life. She thought about that dream a lot during school that day.

Upon arriving home from school that afternoon, she noticed her name hand-written on an envelope in the mail. As a high school senior, she was accustomed to receiving computer-generated mail: applications and propaganda for colleges, military careers, and other such things. But this letter was different. She excitedly picked up the small, plain envelope, anxious to see who had personally written to her. She glanced at the postmark. It had been mailed five days before in SALEM, but there was no state or zip code readable.

Quickly she opened the envelope to see who had written. Inside she found a greeting card. "Thinking of you" was written on the front and on the plain, blank inside someone had neatly penned:

Dear Victoria,
For many years I've waited for you to be my companion. Though you don't know me right now, I'm sure that we will one day be married. I know all about you, and I have appreciated you for many years. I've waited until now to get in touch with you, because I knew that you weren't ready for the permanent relationship that I desire to have with you. But now, I sense that you are ready. Please come to me. I am sending the money for your expenses to arrive here in two weeks. I know that you'll never be sorry that you came.
Love, Joshua, from Salem

Victoria looked again at the envelope, and found that there were $1000 in cash that she had overlooked.

Now, holding the card and the money in her shaking hand, she was deep in though. Should she go? Who should she ask? And where in the world was Salem? She'd never heard of such a place - except in her dream. How could she travel to a place she didn't know the way to, or even what state or country it was in?

She went and grabbed the family atlas from its place on the shelf and began to search for a place called Salem. Going to the index of the United States, she found six cities by the name Salem: in Massachusetts, in New Hampshire, in Ohio, in Oregon, in Illinois, and in Virginia.

She closed the atlas in frustration mixed with anger. Nobody could ever really love me. She thought. But then she realized that she was still holding two $500 bills in her hand.

That evening as she and her foster parents sat at the table eating, the doorbell rang. Victoria excused herself and ran to see who it was. There on the doorstep was a very good looking guy holding an envelope. As she opened the door, he smiled and said, "Victoria? Joshua sent this to you." He handed her the envelope, turned, and left. She went directly to her room and hid this envelope, unopened, on the bookshelf between some old books. She returned to the table full of though.

With the evening meal finished and cleaned up, she decided to go to the mall, to walk, to think, to dream...

As she walked, her thoughts turned more and more to the $1000 in her purse. What could she buy that she had always wanted? New outfits that would be the envy of the girls at school, a new hairdo, new jewelry more expensive than others her age could afford?

And that's what she did. Within two hours before the mall was closed, the money was gone. She returned home, excited, and anxious for the next day when she could show her new self to her friends.

She though about that unopened envelope, but decided not to open it just yet.

Her friends were indeed impressed with her purchases. She began to be very popular. The most sought-after guys asked her to go out with them. She soon forgot all about her appointment in two weeks. She now had friends!

What she did not know was that Joshua was a multi-millionaire. At the age of 22, he had inherited his family's business. He had everything that he had ever wanted. He had purchased an airline ticket for Victoria, with all the detailed instructions that she would need to come to him in Salem. He had delivered the ticket and instructions to her door himself that evening. He was at the airport in Salem on the appointed day with his seat reserved beside hers, to be her traveling companion on the new journey.

The End


The above parable is about Jesus' gift of Salvation. Will you reject his offer like Victoria? or will you choose to follow the "Way, Truth, and Life" to heaven? Jesus said, "No one comes to the Father except through Me." (John 14:6B)

Some Devotional Thoughts

"Where there is no revelation, the people cast off restraint; But happy is he who keeps the law." Proverbs 29:18

Revelation is knowing what God is saying to us through His Word. I think that without knowing or caring what God wants of us we become like the people described in Ephesians 4:17-19, when Paul tells us that we are to no longer walk "as the rest of the Gentiles walk, in the futility of their mind, having their understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God, because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart; who, being past feeling, have given themselves over to lewdness, to work all uncleanness with greediness..." We certainly do NOT want to live as those who do not know "the life of God"!! It sounds very much like God wants to change our lives so that we are not like the people who don't follow God.

The second part of Proverbs 29:18 gives hope, "happy is he who keeps the law." In James 1:25, we find that knowing God truly and obeying His "rules" from our heart brings liberty -- not to sin, but to give ourselves to God. This is what it says: "But he who looks into the perfect law of liberty and contiues in it, and is not a forgetful hearer but a doer of the work, this one will be blessed in what he does."

Romans 6:16: "Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one's slaved whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness?" From this we learn that whether we are sinning or serving the Lord, we are slaves. But we get to choose who our master is! When sinning we are slaves of Satan, but if we are doing righteousness we are bondservants or "love-slaves" of God.

The next verse, Romans 6:17 shows us an important piece of the puzzle. "But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered." If we are going to obey the doctrine of the Lord, we have to do it from a submissive heart.

"Having been set free from [slavery to] sin, [we can become] slaves of righteousness." (Romans 6:18).

Going back to Proverbs 29:18B, "happy is he that keeps the law," I am reminded of 2 Corinthians 3:6 which reads, "...the new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life." If we're just obeying rules because we have to, but our heart is not obedient, our spiritually wrong heart is "killed" in the doing thereof. But if we "have been crucified with Christ;" and "it is no longer [we] who live, but Christ lives in [us]," then we can truly have life and pleasure in obedience - knowing Who we are serving -, and "the life which [we] live in the flesh [we] live by faith in the Son of God, who loved [us] and gave Himself for [us]." (Galations 2:20)

Conclusion: Let us therefore, having considered these things, "stor[e] up for [our]selves a good foundation for the time to come, that [we] may lay hold on eternal life." (1 Timothy 6:19)

About our Father's business... Merry Christmas

A little while ago I started thinking about Jesus' words as a twelve-year-old in Luke 2:49, "...I must be about My Father's business," which He said in explanation (to His parents) of His having stayed behind in the temple when His family had left. At that time His people were celebrating a special feast. This Christmas (a special hol[y]day for Christians) there are many missionaries around the world who are "about our Father's business" sharing Christ and His wondrous love, the message of salvation with the peoples of the world. Whether in America working among the Indians, in Romania working with children, in Japan, sharing Christ with English students or anywhere else in the world, God is working through His children, who are "About our Father's business". In prison cells, in Missions, on the streets, in charities, among the persecuted, in children's services, in pastorates, where ever God calls us ... we must be doing the work of the Lord.
Praying the Lord will bless our missionaries this Christmas - Beth

How "Freedom of Religion" morphed into "Freedom from Religion"

This is a research paper I did this semester for a Constitution class (Institute on the Constitution) that my family and I were part of. If you don't have time to read it in it's entirety, please take time to read the introduction and conclusion, especially the conclusion.

How "Freedom of Religion" morphed into "Freedom from Religion"
Introduction:

Does the Bill of [our] Rights contain any protection of religion and religious practice for Americans? Hmm.. maybe something about a “separation of church and state”? Many claim this is part of the First Amendment, but upon looking at a copy of the Bill of Rights, one can see that it is not in any part of it. Where then does this ever-popular explanation of the First Amendment come from? Is it a good interpretation of the First Amendment’s religion phrases? What has the Supreme Court done with this phrase? These are some questions that headed up my research and to which I found studied answers. I have attempted in the paper below to share my researched findings.

Paper:

Well, in fact, religion and religious practice is talked about in the First Amendment of our Bill of Rights. The religion clauses of the First Amendment read:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof...”

Now what does this mean? First of all, we must know that the meaning of a writing can only be interpreted just as the author wrote it (in the first place) to mean.¹ Authors write what they write on purpose, using particular words intentionally²; and I believe especially in the case of those who write Constitutions and other important lasting documents, authors are particularly careful in their choice of words. So, we must know the writers’ intentions. Since all of the Framers of the Constitution are dead, we should look at their recorded writings, words, and actions to know what they purposed for the Amendments or any other part of the Constitution to mean.

Here are some quotes from the Founding Fathers:

“ ‘The moral principles… contained in the Scriptures ought to form the basis of all our civil constitutions and laws.’ —Noah Webster, fighter in Revolution, ratifier of Constitution, judge”³

“ ‘ It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ!’ —Patrick Henry, revolutionary and driving force behind adoption of the Bill of Rights”⁴

In Patrick Henry’s quote is found the basis of why the Framers wanted freedom of religion. It was for everyone, but they were thinking especially of Christians being free, which is not what was happening under English rule.

“ ‘[E]ducation should teach the precepts of religion, and the duties of man towards God.’ —Gouverneur Morris, United States Senator who actually wrote down the Constitution”⁵

“ ‘It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible.’

—George Washington, first President and Chairman of the Constitutional Convention”⁶

“ ‘God grant that in America true religion and civil liberty may be inseparable...’

—John Witherspoon, who signed the Declaration of Independence and served on over one hundred Congressional Committees”⁷

“ ‘Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.’ – John Adams”⁸

“ ‘I see this truth… God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid?… ‘except the Lord build the house, they labor in Vain that build it.’ I firmly believe this;… without His concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political building no better than the builders of Babel. …’ – Benjamin Franklin [in the] Constitutional Convention, [June 28,] 1787”⁹

“ ‘This is all the inheritance I can give to my dear family. The religion of Christ can give them one which will make them rich indeed.’ –Patrick Henry[‘s] Last Will and Testament” ¹⁰

The Framers believed that the right of men to follow God according to the dictates of their own consciences was not something that the government should have a right to give or take away because it was God-given.

Let’s look at the meaning of the words of the Religious Clauses.

“Congress” – This, the First Amendment, was only applied to Federal Congress, not the Executive or Judicial branches; because only Congress was given the authority to make and pass laws.¹¹ It was not written to apply to the states, as they had their own constitutions. This changed with the passing of the Fourteenth Amendment, which made all the amendments apply to states’ actions as well as the federal Congress.
“Respecting” - “concerning”¹² or having to do with

“Establishment of Religion” -

“When used within the context of religion in this country throughout the 1600s
and 1700s, the term “establishment” had long borne a specific, well-known,
universally understood meaning:

§ A single, dominant ecclesiastical institution (or religion, church, denomination,
faith, sect, creed, or religious society) that …

§ enjoyed a government-preferred, government-sanctioned, government-
financed, and government-protected status within a state, …

§ and which represented an indistinguishable union with government and the
preferred (or “established”) ecclesiastical institution.
The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary contains the following context-pertinent
definitions which it identifies as having appeared during the times referenced:
§ Establish: give legal form and recognition to (a Church) as the official church of
a country. [1350-1469]
§ Establishment: The ecclesiastical system established by law; the Established
Church. [1730-69]
§ Establishment: The action of making a church an established Church. [1630-
69]”¹³

“Established church n. A church that is officially recognized and given support
as a national institution by a government” ¹⁴

I am putting an emphasis on defining establishment because what it meant in 1789 and the years previous to that (what the Framers knew it to mean) is different than what it means today… it could mean a business, or something else in today’s vernacular.

“make no law… or Prohibiting” - “Prohibit tr.v. 1. To forbid by authority. 2. To prevent or debar.”¹⁵

“Free” – “Free adj. 3. c. Immune to arbitrary interference by a government.”¹⁶

”Exercise” – “ ’Exercise’ has to do with the participation in duties, activities, ceremonies, responsibilities, and the living out of one’s faith and belief system.” ¹⁷

From the help of these definitions we come to some understanding about the meaning of the text of this, the beginning of First Amendment of the Bill of Rights.

“The First clause (called the Establishment Clause) prohibited the federal government from establishing a single national denomination; the second clause (called the Free Exercise Clause) prohibited the federal government from interfering with the people’s public religious expressions and acknowledgments. Significantly, both clauses restricted the actions of the federal government; neither restricted the actions of the citizens. … [the Framers] did expect Biblical principles and basic values to be present throughout public life and society: [which refers to the second clause of the First Amendment]…” ¹⁸

“Our Founders did not want the new government to have power over the religious lives and consciences of its citizens.”¹⁹ Congress was supposed to be incapable of stepping into jurisdiction of people’s public and private religious lives and activities. By the Constitution the Congress can NOT in any situation restrict the people of the United States from exercising religion as their consciences dictate.

But “It was never intended by the Constitution that the government should be
prohibited from recognizing religion.” ²⁰

“… the Establishment Clause never served to purge “religion” in general (or
“religious activities from government…” ²¹

We can see this in bills and resolutions the Founding Fathers passed around the same time as when they wrote the Establishment Clause.
In 1789 Congress renewed the Northwest Territory Ordinance.
“Article the 3^rd. Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good
government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education
shall be forever encouraged. …”²²

We notice that religion and morality were things to be encouraged and learned about in school; for the good of all people within the Northwest Territory.

“[This declaration] would necessarily conflict with the Establishment Clause if, as
some presume, the Establishment Clause does more than merely proscribe a
‘national establishment.’ ”²³

In August 1789 the House passed a bill that included taxpayer-funded recompense for congressional chaplains. The Senate approved, and Washington signed the bill in September , “three days before Congress approved the text of the Establishment Clause.” ²⁴ This act – by some of the same people as those who signed the Constitution (and the Bill of Rights) proves that the Religion Clauses were not meant to make “government disassociate itself from…religious’ subject matter or ‘religious activities.’ “²⁵

On September 25, 1789, only one day after its vote of final approval of the text of the Establishment Clause the House passed a “thanksgiving” resolution to request from the President that he would recommend to the American people a day of public thanksgiving and prayer to Almighty God. The Senate agreed to ask the President, and President Washington complied with their wish. He proclaimed the same on October 3, 1789, and set the day of Thanksgiving for November 26^th that year. “That contemporaneous 1789 Thanksgiving Proclamation, authored by the same institutional author of the Establishment Clause proves consistent with the purpose, function, and meaning of the Establishment Clause within historical context in which Congress wrote it…”²⁶ Congress’s Resolution and President Washington’s Proclamation serve to discredit the theory that the Establishment Clause was written to keep government from participating in non-denominational religious activities.

Another proof of the freedom of religion the Founders afforded themselves to enjoy in public offices (government), and also a proof that they stood upon their belief in Almighty God and the necessity of all men to live under His judgment, was the writing of the oath of office (for Justice of the Supreme Court) which included this phrase, “So help me God”.²⁷

Five things Congress did in later years, which did not defy the authority of the Bill of Rights (as part of the Constitution), but allowed religious freedom for people were:
1. (1864) - Putting “In God We Trust” on coins as a “motto” for the United States

2. (1931) - “The Star-Spangled Banner”, with phrase “In God is our trust”, was made

the National Anthem.

3. (1952) – Congress proclaimed a “National Day of Prayer” (which was reaffirmed in
1998)

4. (1954) - Adding to the Pledge of Allegiance the phrase “One Nation under God”
5. (1956) - Congress solidified “In God We Trust” as the national motto. ²⁸

If all these things are true, then how did we get into the mess we’re in right now? Everyone has heard the phrase “separation of church and state”. What is its origin? Is it a constitutional idea?
This phrase is one line of a letter President Thomas Jefferson wrote in January 1802 in reply to the Danbury Baptist association (from Connecticut) who had written him in October of the year before. Let it be noted that the purpose of the letter the Danbury Baptists wrote was not to complain of religious activity but

“to complain about the establishment evils of Connecticut’s Congregationalist [a state, not national, church], precisely the kind of dominant ecclesiastical institution that the Establishment Clause prohibits on a national level.”²⁹

So “Jefferson’s famous letter ‘was a political statement written to reassure Jefferson’s Baptist constituents in New England of his continuing commitment to their religious rights. …’ ”³⁰

I will quote here part of Jefferson’s letter, as it will help to explain itself; and the context will be helpful for interpretation. This is [the second of three paragraphs of] the letter ⁹:

“Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between Church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.”³¹

Notice that Jefferson quoted the First Amendment’s religion phrases and then summarized in his own words by saying, “thus building a wall of separation between church and state”.

He was agreeing with the First Amendment as it was written and not interpreting it in a different way. He was not suggesting that all religious activity should be kept away from the government, but reinforcing the fact that the “state” can not establish a church denomination. He himself was against Presidents calling for days of prayer or thanksgiving, as he saw it as interference with the people’s freedom of conscience.³²

“… the ‘wall’ of the Danbury letter [was] not to limit religious activities in public; rather [it was] to limit the power of the government to prohibit or interfere with those expressions.³³

“…the grammatical context of Jefferson’s ‘wall’ suggests that, to the extent that it ‘separates’ anything, it disables the ‘state’ from interfering with the ‘church’ in the arena of ‘opinions’, but not with respect to ‘actions’.” ³⁴

In other words, the wall suggests that government can not punish people for opinions, but only for hurtful deeds. One phrase of Jefferson’s 1781 Notes on the State of Virginia is very parallel to one phrase of his Danbury letter.

“1781 Notes: ‘the legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are
injurious to others.’
1802 letter: ‘the legitimate powers of government reach actions only and not
opinions.’”³⁵

Regardless of Jefferson’s personal beliefs and what he put in his letter, Jefferson should not have ever been considered an authority- rightly explaining the full “scope and effect of the Establishment Clause”³⁶ - on the Constitution and Bill of Rights because he didn’t help write the Constitution and he wasn’t a member of the team of ninety³⁷ who crafted the First Amendment, either. Furthermore he was in France from July 1784 – November 1789, which included the whole of the time the Framers were working on the Constitution and the First Amendment. His “wall of separation” phrase was first written “more than 12 years after Congress finalized the Establishment Clause in September 1789.” ³⁸

The other problem, besides Jefferson’s lack of genuine authority, is that the Court (in taking his words and making a big deal about them) eventually took them completely out of context of what he wanted to say.

For years the Supreme Court did not distort the First Amendment. For example, the Supreme Court decided in Reynolds v. United States (1878) that

“… the federal government was only to inhibit religious expressions that were ‘subversive of good order’ or ‘broke out into overt acts against peace and good order,’ that Court… provided examples of the types of ‘religious’ acts into which the government did have legitimate reason to intrude – acts such as human sacrifice,… injury to children, etc. But in traditional religious practices (whether public prayer, the use of the Scriptures, etc.) the government was never to interfere.³⁹

The idea was that a person could not be punished for religious practice, unless it “worked ill to his neighbor.”⁴⁰

Thus, the distinction of those “religious” things the government could and could not interfere in, became the “… clearly understood meaning of Jefferson’s separation letter and the manner in which it was applied for [150 yrs.]”⁴¹

In the mid 1900s things went “down hill”. One example: the Supreme Court (in Everson v. Board of Education, 1947), assumed without logical explanation “that Jefferson’s allegorical ‘church’ referenced religion in general, as opposed to the more probable reference to a physical institution of the kind always associated with an ‘establishment’… an association of the term ‘church’ to anything but a single dominant ecclesiastical institution within the context of the Establishment Clause simply makes no sense…”⁴²

The Supreme Court thus “interpreted the ‘separation’ phrase as requiring the federal government to remove religious expressions from the public arena – that is, it interpreted the First Amendment not as a limitation on government interference but rather as a limitation on religious expressions and principles.” ⁴³

The Everson Court decision solidified Jefferson’s “wall” in the vernacular, thought, and future decisions of the Court regarding the First Amendment. In this decision the Judges, who were supposedly only considering the Establishment Clause, added to it, and applied what they came up with to not only the Congress at a federal level, but also to the individual States. ⁴⁴

It was, again, so ridiculous that the Court was basing a decision about the First Amendment on a short little part of a letter that wasn’t authoritative or all-encompassing on the subject at hand.

The Court also changed definitions of ‘church’ and ‘state’ (found in Jefferson’s letter) in Engel v. Vitale (1962). Church went from meaning a federal denomination to meaning public religious activity, and State went from meaning federal government to public square. This brought about a new consideration for Jefferson’s “separation of church and state” phrase as a whole. The old meaning was this:

“federal government [can] not establish a federal denomination”⁴⁵,

while the new meaning was

“… religious expressions must be kept separate from the public square.⁴⁶

“The result is that the First Amendment is now used to prohibit the very religious activities that the Founders themselves once encouraged under that same Amendment”⁴⁷ In Abington v. Schempp (1963) it was decided that the Bible and its principles and teachings would no longer be permitted in public education. This went against two centuries of precedent. The reason was that unexplained portions of the New Testament, having been read to a class, could and had brought psychologically harmful effects to students.⁴⁸ If the Court had always “tuned in” to the wisdom of Benjamin Rush, Noah Webster, Robert Winthrop and other Founding Fathers, we would not be in the mess we are today; for these Fathers warned that if the Bible was taken out of schools or society, crimes would escalate. That’s exactly what happened after the 1962-1963 court decisions.⁴⁹

“…In Stone v. Graham [1980], the Supreme Court ruled that because of the new ‘separation of church and state’ it was unconstitutional for a student at school to continue, even voluntarily, to see a copy of the Ten Commandments. The Court explained: ‘If the posted copies of the Ten Commandments are to have any effect at all, it will be to induce the schoolchildren to read, meditate upon, perhaps to venerate and obey the Commandments… [T]his… is not a permissible… objective.’ ” ⁵⁰

While wickedness has prevailed in the U.S. (partially due to the Court’s actions) studies demonstrate that basic religious principles do “produce morality and self-control” as Washington, Fisher Ames, and other Framers and Founding Fathers said.⁵¹

There have been other cases, which considered the First Amendment, however, whose outcomes were Constitutional or in which one or more justices had Constitutional input. Marsh v. Chambers (1983) is an example of this kind of case. The Supreme Court decided in this case that… “Nebraska Legislature’s practice of opening each legislative day with a non-denominational prayer by a chaplain paid by the state [did not run] afoul of the Establishment Clause.”⁵² Chief Justice Burger ruled, “In light of the unambiguous and unbroken history of more than 200 years, there can be no doubt that the practice of opening legislative sessions with prayer has become part of the fabric of our society. To invoke Divine guidance on a public body entrusted with making the laws is not, in these circumstances, an establishment of religion or a step toward establishment; it is simply a tolerable acknowledgement of beliefs widely held among the people of this country.”⁵³ (Emphasis my own.)

In another Supreme Court case (Meek v. Pettinger, 1975) Justice William Rehnquist had a Constitutional viewpoint in regards to the Establishment Clause when he said, “I am disturbed as much by the overtones of the Court’s opinion as by its actual holding. The Court apparently believes that the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment not only mandates religious neutrality on the part of the government, but also requires that this Court go further and throw its weight on the side of those who believe that our society as a whole should be a purely secular one. Nothing in the First Amendment or in the cases interpreting it requires such an extreme approach.”⁵⁴ Justice William Rehnquist was (sadly) right when he said that the Court [was acting like it believed] that it was their duty to help American society be completely secular.

The fact is that we must have a Court which uses the rules of historical interpretation, reflecting the intent of the authors of the Constitution, or “we are left to the subjective whims of the majority of the Court.”⁵⁵

Conclusion:

“Separation of church and state” currently means almost exactly the opposite of what it originally meant.⁵⁶ Using the idea of one-way streets, we can see a picture of what the 1) First Amendment and the 2) ‘current thought’ restrain and protect, for they are indeed near opposites. The First Amendment as written by our Founding Fathers restrains the Federal government from having one national church, while it protects people from having to support a state church and provides freedom of conscience to U.S. citizens. The ‘current thought’ – going one-way in the opposite direction restrains people from public religious expression and “protects” society from being polluted by Christian religion – it is ‘freedom from religion’. In fact, “freedom from religion” is a common phrase used in letters to the editor in our local paper; in reference to the First Amendment.

Endnotes:

¹ Adamson p.126-7

² Adamson p.11

³ all quotes from Leah Farish’s book p. 54

⁴ all quotes from Leah Farish’s book p. 54
⁵ all quotes from Leah Farish’s book p. 54

⁶ all quotes from Leah Farish’s book p. 54
⁷ all quotes from Leah Farish’s book p. 54
⁸ Institute on the Constitution student workbook p. 50
⁹ Institute on the Constitution student workbook p.37
¹⁰ Institute on the Constitution student workbook p.38
¹¹ Kennedy p.15

¹² Dictionary p.1053

¹³ Adamson p.19

¹⁴ Dictionary p.466

¹⁵ Dictionary p.990

¹⁶ Dictionary p. 531

¹⁷ Janet Albertson direct quote

¹⁸ Barton booklet p.7

¹⁹ Kennedy p.15

²⁰ Adamson p.26

²¹ Adamson p. 141

²² Adamson p. 143

²³ Adamson p. 146

²⁴ Adamson p. 139

²⁵ Ibid. p. 139

²⁶ Adamson p. 148

²⁷ Adamson p. 141

²⁸ Adamson p. 149-156

²⁹ Adamson p.193

³⁰ Adamson p. 185

³¹ Adamson p.182-3

³² Adamson p. 177
³³ Barton paper off web para. 24

³⁴ Adamson p.189

³⁵ Adamson p.190

³⁶ Adamson p.17

³⁷ Barton paper off web para. 35

³⁸ Adamson p. 175

³⁹ Barton booklet p. 13
⁴⁰ Barton paper off web para. 7

⁴¹ Barton booklet p. 13

⁴² Adamson p. 193

⁴³ Barton booklet p.13-14

⁴⁴ Adamson p. 230-1

⁴⁵ Barton booklet p.14

⁴⁶ Ibid. p.14

⁴⁷ Barton booklet p. 7

⁴⁸ Barton booklet p.15

⁴⁹ Barton booklet p.8-9

⁵⁰ Barton booklet p.14

⁵¹ Barton booklet p.19

⁵² Adamson p.139-41

⁵³ Kennedy p. 29

⁵⁴ Kennedy p. 26

⁵⁵ Kennedy p. 25

⁵⁶ Barton paper off web para. 36

Pictures from Thanksgiving 2009 (pt 2)

Make a Smilebox photobook

Pictures from Thanksgiving 2009 (pt 1)

Make a Smilebox photobook

Autumn Beauty! and more

Below are some pictures I have taken today.



A fire roaring in the fireplace on a snowy October evening in Colorado.




Amazing how pretty a shade of green the grass is this time of year!



Mint for tea

Fall beauty!

Backyard birdhouse.

Haircut materials (except the glasses).

Fall red.

A work in progress.

Happy Autumn!

Slideshow of my baptism

This is a slideshow of the baptism on August 2, 2009 in NC, when I (and 3 others) got baptized.

My trip to North Carolina

Thank you to each one who prayed for me and my trip to North Carolina. I had a very good trip, with several new experiences. It was a first time for me to fly and for me to be without my immediate family for any amount of time. I really enjoyed being with my cousin, Shari's family and meeting lots of their church people. (Shari's husband, Eric, is a pastor.) Eric and Shari took me to the beach one Friday, and I got to go for a boat ride with Eric and Mitch (age 3). We also went to Williamsburg, VA on the Thursday before I left. I was glad to have the opportunity to get baptized while I was visiting there.
I had a fun time playing with Mitch and Mandi and helping care for the twin babies, Michael and Melissa, who became 2 months old while I was there.
I had good flights on my way to NC and back home to CO. I had to change planes once on my way there. On the way home I had three flights without changing planes, but we went to FL and LA before coming to CO.
Everyday was busy, whether we did one of the above mentioned outings, or if we just played toys, changed diapers, and did housework! :)
For those of you who are curious about if I liked NC - a new state for me - I lkiked about everything except the bugs and humidity.
I did get a little homesick a couple of times, but by the time it was time to come home, I felt like NC was a second home.
Since coming home, I have been trying to get back into the "Beth-in-Colorado" normal. I was gone 10 days with my family visiting family in MO and helping with a VBS, had one day home to do laundry and repack, then I had the 25 day trip to NC.
Before my trips to MO and NC I had 3 flute lessons, and was borrowing a flute from the teacher to see if I would like to learn to play flute. After ~2 months and those 3 lessons I have decided not to continue the lessons.
We started home-school again today. I am the oldest student this year, and I'm doing 11th grade.
Enjoy the pictures!

Mandi and Mitch in Williamsburg, VA

L-R: Melissa, me, Michael

Melissa and Eric

Mandi, Shari, and Mitch having lunch in Williamsburg, VA

The beautiful tree we sat under

historic downtown Williamsburg, VA

a small NC highway

Makin' cookies with Mitch and Mandi

Melissa and Michael

Mitch and his clown design

Mandi

Mitch and I after the boat ride

Thanks for stoppin' by.