His Holy Church

July 4, 2010

On the 4th of July 1826, on the fiftieth anniversary of the adoption of the Declaration of Independence, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson died.

Exactly when the Republic they cared about died is hard to define.

One reason for this difficulty is because republics don’t really die from anything but neglect and neglect is not something we “do” but something “we fail” to do.

Pure republics are the only real government of the people, by the people, and for the people, because it is the only form of government that rests entirely in the power and liberty of the people.1 What bound the people together was not Constitutions or social contracts granting power to men to exercise authority one over the other, but it was the hardships and trials of settling an often hostile wilderness and the acceptance of the responsibility for one self, family and community. The voluntary application of that responsibility by members of a free society in order to survive and prosper is essential.

To provide for your family was part of the foundational and precepts of Israel and early Christianity1-2, but caring for your neighbor’s needs through voluntary charity was the essence of pure religion.1-3

Millions struggled and died in an attempt to settle this land and create a viable republic of free souls under God. Representatives of the united colonies on July 6, 1775 explained the purpose of that long struggle, “Our forefathers, inhabitants of the island of Great Britain, left their native land, to seek on these shores a residence for civil and religious freedom.”

Samuel Adams stated, on August 1, 1776, within one month of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, “Our Union is complete; our constitution composed, established, and approved. You are now the guardians of your own liberties. We may justly address you, as the decemviri did the Romans, and say: ‘Nothing that we propose can pass into law without your consent. Be yourself, O Americans, the authors of those laws on which your happiness depends.’”

John Adams said that when the signers of the, “Massachusetts Bay Charter carried it to America they ‘got out of the English realm, dominions, state, empire, call it by what name you will, and out of the legal jurisdiction of the Parliament. The king might, by his writ or proclamation, have commanded him to return; but he did not. By this interpretation, the charters accorded Americans’ all the rights and privileges of a natural free-born subject of Great Britain and gave colonial assemblies the sole right of imposing taxes.” 2

It was not a constitution, but the Charters that were proclaimed as the basis of our freedom.

“Accordingly, when Americans were told that they had no constitutional basis for their claim of exemption from parliamentary authority, they answered, ‘Our Charters have done it absolutely.’ ‘And if one protests,’ remarked a Tory, ‘the answer is, You are an Enemy to America, and ought to have your brains beat out.’3”4

In truth the Charters did little more than establish an opportunity to be free. It was the resolution and diligence of the Christian character in the minds and hearts of the people that established liberty for the people and by the people. It is that history of individual sacrifice that earned freedom.

George Washington, in his General Order of July 9, 1776, speaks of rights and liberties already possessed, when he said, “The General hopes and trusts that every officer and man will endeavor so to live, and act, as becomes a Christian Soldier defending the dearest Rights and Liberties of his country.”

One definitions for the word “republic”is, “A commonwealth; that form of government in which the administration of affairs is open to all the citizens. In another sense, it signifies the state, independently of its government.”5 But Americans are not very independent of their government anymore and with that simple realization an answer to the question most people are afraid to ask is provided.

Madison clarified the status of the government then with the description of “a Republic with federal form.” “It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers, but to guard one part of society against the injustice of the other part. Different classes of citizens. If a majority be united by common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure. In a free government the security for civil rights must be the same as that for religious rights.”6

If the common interest of the individuals of society is their personal security over that of their neighbor then righteousness is no more and justice will die. It is the tiny tyranny locked in every beating heart of society that collectively gives rise to despots turning the noble hopes of governments into beasts.

In a pure republic or free society you only give up what you actually choose to contribute to society, but maintain your right to choose7 to do so. “Freedom is the Right to Choose, the Right to create for oneself the alternatives of Choice. Without the possibility of Choice, and the exercise of Choice, a man is not a man but a member, an instrument, a thing.”

It has been the willingness of the people to take away their neighbor’s right to choose how and when to contribute to the welfare of society that has diminished freedom. It is the willingness to devour the sweat, blood, and fruits of their neighbors for their personal welfare that has snared men again into a society of servants and slaves.8

Madison warned us when he wrote, “I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachment of those powers than by violent and sudden usurpations.”9

Rights of an American citizen use to be described as “People of a state are entitled to all rights which formerly belonged to the king by his prerogative.”10 “In one sense, the term ‘sovereign’ has for its correlative ‘subject.’ In this sense, the term can receive no application; for it has no object in the [Original] Constitution of the United States. Under that Constitution there are citizens, but no subjects.”11 “For when the [so called American] revolution took place, the people of each state became themselves sovereign; and in that character hold the absolute right to all their navigable waters, and the soils under them, for their own common use, subject only to the rights since surrendered by the constitution to the general government.”12

Today, “in the United States ‘it [citizenship] is a political obligation’ depending not on ownership of land, but on the enjoyment of the protection of government; and it ‘binds the citizen to the observance of all laws’ of his sovereign.”13 Originally, citizenship did not include the title or sense of subject ,but later in the United States, we see a citizenship binding subjects to the laws of a “sovereign”.

What happened?

“Protection draws to it subjection; subjection protection”14

As stated by Supreme Court Justice Field, “There is no such thing as a power of inherent sovereignty in the government of the [federal] United States… In this country sovereignty resides in the people, and Congress can exercise no power which they [the sovereign people] have not, by their Constitution entrusted to it: All else is withheld.”

In the distant past, “The government” was said to have “no inherent sovereignty within the 50 union states…and Congress can exercise no power which the sovereign people have not entrusted to it: all else is excluded.”15 Unfortunately the people have entrusted almost every aspect and responsibility of society to governments both state and federal.

The Declaration of Independence lists a “long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them [the freemen of the colonies] under absolute Despotism,” and goes on to say “it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

A similar list of authoritarian activities could be provided today, but are they “usurpations”?

William O. Douglas wrote, “We must realize that today’s Establishment is the new George III… the truth is that the vast bureaucracy now runs this country, irrespective of what party is in power… Man has come to realize that if he is to have material ‘success,’ he must honor the folklore of the corporation state, respect its desire, and walk to the measure of its thinking.” 16

The people have not heard or heeded the warning of William Pitt who said, “As long as we look to government to solve our problems we will always suffer tyranny.”

Those signers of that declaration who appealed to the Supreme Judge of the world were willing to mutually pledge to each other their Lives, their Fortunes, and their sacred Honor with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence. The spirit in our present population is willing to pledge your fortunes with a firm reliance on the gods of governmemt.To covet your neighbor’s fortune is listed as a crime by God.

“Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.” Exodus 20:17

“What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.” Romans 7:7

“For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” Romans 13:9

“Who breaks no law is subject to no king.” 17

Republics are often the result not of revolution by throwing off a king, but by purging the tyrant from our own heart. It is by changing our ways so we have no need for a king, a ruler or benefactor who exercise authority that will truly endow us with liberty again. It has been our appetite for the dainties of the king at the expense of our neighbors18 that has brought us into bondage.19

The great republic was described by historian Titus Livy:

“There really was, it seemed, a nation on this earth prepared to fight for the freedom of other men, and to fight at her own expense, and at the cost of hardship and peril to herself; a nation prepared to do this service not just for her near neighbors, for those in her part of the world … but even prepared to cross the sea in order to prevent the establishment of unjust dominion in any quarter of the globe, and to ensure that right and justice, and the rule of law, should everywhere be supreme.”20

After a civil war Senator Marcus Cicero, wrote:

“There came a man whose cause was not right but evil; and his success was … horrible. Mere confiscations of the property of individual citizens were far from enough to satisfy him. Whole provinces and countries succumbed to his onslaught, in one comprehensive universal catastrophe. Entire foreign nations were given over to ruin and destruction.”

“Surely, our present sufferings are all too well deserved. For had we not allowed outrages to go unpunished on all sides, it would never have been possible for a single individual to seize tyrannical power.”

“Here in the city nothing is left — only the lifeless walls of the houses. And even they look afraid that some further terrifying attack may be imminent. The real Rome has gone forever.”

A new Rome of dictator and oppression was born out of the selfishness and fear of the people.

So, why did you celebrate the fourth of July?

Print Friendly copy Click here

Real Audio
Audio Part 1 Fourth of July Message
Audio Part 2 Fourth of July Message

Footnotes:

http://hisholychurch.org/news/articles/4thjuly.php

---