Check this out

Fiskare said:

It's a tough time for believers everywhere. Best to keep your religion alive at home and pray and work for the conversion of nations rather than enforce religious laws against the unwilling unbelievers. Christ is a shepherd, not a cowboy.

Click to expand...

Very insightful Fiskare.

Knight said:

I am not on a "high horse."

Click to expand...

Whatever. Denial ain't just a river in Egypt.

Exactly. But there is also no statement of church as an institution interfering in government, like the medieval church did. Public life is not the issue in the proper distinction of church and state in protestant thought. Religion is largely a private and personal matter, and the protection of the right to have freedom of belief or disbelief is the issue as it stands regarding public life.

Click to expand...

The FF were never worried about the church controlling the state - what more, most of the colonies were founded for just that purpose! However, by the 18th century, religious pluralism had been firmly established in America. Are you aware that Denominationalism is an American idea? Prior to its advent, each church, each sect professed that they alone had the true gospel and that all others were ****** to hell. YES including Knox, Luther, and Calvin. The number of people John Calvin had put do death rivals the alleged iniquities of the Spanish Inquisition!

Still - Look at what the FF said about religion in the state:

Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle - George Washington.

Religion is the only solid basis of good morals; therefore education should teach the precepts of religion and the duties of man towards God. - Gouvernor Morris

Of all t he dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports - George Washington



The great pillars of all government and of social life . . . are virtue, morality and religion. - Patrick Henry.

We have been assured , Sir, in the Sacred Writings that except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it. I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without His concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political building no better than the builders of Babel. - Benjamin Franklin

The religion which has introduced civil liberty in the religion of Christ and his apostles . . . And to this we owe our free constitutions of government. - Noah Webster

I doubt Washington was an active cleric, and I've never heard of that before. Perhaps he gave that up. In those days, it was illegal for an Anglican cleric to have position in the military other than chaplain. It still is in some dioceses. If he had slaves he was also breaking Anglican canon law, and thus could not be eligible for ordination.

Click to expand...

The office he held was equivalent to elder. I did not say he was a cleric, but that he was a member of clergy only because not being well versed in the offices of the Anglian church I was (and am still) unable to name the office which he held, but I do know that it was equivalent to an elder. He did not hold this post while active in the military, but during the interims between What more, he served as chaplain for his troops when none other was available. AND, what people fail to remember about Mr. Washington is that he did in fact free His slaves.

If he had slaves he was also breaking Anglican canon law, and thus could not be eligible for ordination.

Click to expand...

Oh I don’t know - the episcopal’s ordained a bishop who is in active and willful violation of the word of God so . . . .

FINALLY - America is NOT and I stress NOT nor was it ever intended to be a Democracy! We are a republic. In a democracy the feelings and whims of the mob rule. In a Republic, the Law rules. The FF LOATHED the notion of a democracy.

Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide. - John Adams

Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security, or the rights of property; and have, in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths. - James Madison.

A simple democracy . . . is one of the greatest of evils - Benjamin Rush

In democracy. . . There are commonly tumults and disorders . . . therefore, a pure democracy is generally a very bad government. It is often the most tyrannical government on earth. - Noah Webster



No one is forcing anyone to believe anything. If I speak a prayer are you obliged to agree with every word of my prayer? NO! You have a free conscience and can choose to disregard that which you do not agree with. Does it mean that I should be restricted from praying where you might hear me? In America today - yes it does. THAT is the problem. No one is trying to wrangle people into embracing religion, but are those who descent so weak in their faith of what they profess to believe that my displaying publically what I profess PRIVATELY will coerce them into faith in Jesus Christ? The last thing I believe in or want is for people to be forced to embrace any religious systems or any irreligious systems for that matter. Nor is any descenter forced to embrace Christianity because of a Nativity displayed at Christmas, nor by a prayer offered at Graduation.

La Bonita Zorilla said:

Sorry, I've never read the whole thing, but it was quoted by Paul Fussell in Class: A Guide Through the American Status System on page 149.

Click to expand...

Interesting because I've read through the whole book twice (Democracy in America that is) and never once did I notice that quote.

*am STILL trying to figure out why this OP has been taken so offensively*
NOONE is asking ANYONE to believe in what they personally believe. noone is saying that anyone HAS to pray before a football, soccer, rugby, (insert your sport here) game!!!!!! i for one will NOT back down in saying grace publicly(if you don't like it--don't look at me) nor will i back down from telling my children that it is PERFECTLY FINE to say under God when they recite the pledge in school.
what exactly is the problem here?????????????????????????

kimber" the problem here is that Christianity must become crime before the end comes.

So La Bonita.... I guess that given your sig lines, you should get off your high horse too..... sheesh... you are just spoing for a fight aren't you?

at one point you said "What is being said is "stop uttering sectarian prayer in official context as agents of government"...
ok... so how is saying a prayer before a football game considered acting as an agent of the government?

you said "Perhaps if that is your desire. A better course of action might be to embrace it, get off your high horse, and recognize that things are not all black and white."
Who are you to decide for anyone else what is black and white and what is not? eg, when telling others to get off their high horse, you surely fail to realize that you are attempting to sit pretty high in the saddle yourself.... you encouraged others to read a Scripture earlier.. well, here is one for you.....
(Mat 7:3-5 NASB) "And why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? {4} "Or how can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' and behold, the log is in your own eye? {5} "You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.

(Mat 7:3-5 NASB) "And why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? {4} "Or how can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' and behold, the log is in your own eye? {5} "You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.

Click to expand...

AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Br. Max said:

kimber" the problem here is that Christianity must become crime before the end comes.

Click to expand...

true true, and the way society is treating Christians today, i'm betting the end isn't too far off. good thing i know my destination!! amen!

Br. Max said:

The number of people John Calvin had put do death rivals the alleged iniquities of the Spanish Inquisition!

Click to expand...

One? (and he wasn't happy about that either. He was compelled by the local council to have Servetus executed)

The office he held was equivalent to elder. I did not say he was a cleric, but that he was a member of clergy only because not being well versed in the offices of the Anglian church I was (and am still) unable to name the office which he held, but I do know that it was equivalent to an elder.

Click to expand...

Elder? In the protestant sense, there are no elders in the Anglican Church. In the Biblical sense (presbyteros) those men are priests.

Unless he was a deacon, priest or bishop he was not a cleric in the Anglican Church.

I'm beginning to think he was probably Methodist or something, just from what you describe. Either that or he was a vestry member, which is equivelent to being a on a parish council, voting about what colour carpet to have in the sanctuary.

Oh I don’t know - the episcopal’s ordained a bishop who is in active and willful violation of the word of God so . . . .

Click to expand...

In the 1700's? Who?

FINALLY - America is NOT and I stress NOT nor was it ever intended to be a Democracy!

Click to expand...

I agree. It's an oligarchy, it's not even a republic.

The last thing I believe in or want is for people to be forced to embrace any religious systems or any irreligious systems for that matter. Nor is any descenter forced to embrace Christianity because of a Nativity displayed at Christmas, nor by a prayer offered at Graduation.

Click to expand...

The problem- as I have alluded to before- is whether or not you should in fact cite the FF as though they were the Blessed Apostles and just as infallible on matters of politics!

Times have changed. What the FF wanted is no longer relevant, it's what the people want now that matters when the rubber hits the road.

The nation may have been founded on certain principles, but those principles have obviously been found wanting by the people and are subject to change. Sure, the US of A may have been a Christianised nation once upon a time, but it sure isn't now (don't even try to tell me it is- listen to its music, watch its movies and television, see the sin of its leaders, watch the rapidly changing morals, observe the obsession with abortion and death etc). So, perhaps the entire Christianised paradigm is no longer wanted by the majority of the people. Quoting the FF ad infinitum is not gonna change that- they're dead, they can't vote, and holding them with in highly religious sentimentality is more than likely not what they had intended.

Fisk: Times may have changed, but the original intent of the FF still stand. We cannot divorce the Constitution from the intent of the FF. For more than 100 years, this country was taught and observed the original intent of the FF. It's not until the post WWII world and the beginnings of an activist judiciary that we have forgotten the original intent. The one thing that the FF feared most in out government was an activist Judiciary, because they knew if that happened America would cease to be a republic and become an oligarchy.

BTW - I was not talking about an 18th century bishop but a modern day one. That wonderful man in New Hampshire who is living in contravention of the Word of God and is completely unrepentant in the process.

Br. Max said:

Fisk: Times may have changed, but the original intent of the FF still stand.

Click to expand...

...but are they wanted?

We cannot divorce the Constitution from the intent of the FF. For more than 100 years, this country was taught and observed the original intent of the FF. It's not until the post WWII world and the beginnings of an activist judiciary that we have forgotten the original intent. The one thing that the FF feared most in out government was an activist Judiciary, because they knew if that happened America would cease to be a republic and become an oligarchy.

Click to expand...

Interesting point. Of course, some people in political science believe that a republic based on capitalism is the seedling of an oligarchy so there is no surprise that one has resulted. Perhaps the FF didn't foresee that regardless of their intentions, this was inevitable based on the economic system that developed.

BTW - I was not talking about an 18th century bishop but a modern day one. That wonderful man in New Hampshire who is living in contravention of the Word of God and is completely unrepentant in the process.

Click to expand...

Yes, of course I knew what you were referring to. However, it was irrelevant to the question of Washington's ministry as an Anglican clergyman. The church of the 1700's was somewhat different than today's, so I took your comment as a moot point.

Fiskare said:

...but are they wanted?


Interesting point. Of course, some people in political science believe that a republic based on capitalism is the seedling of an oligarchy so there is no surprise that one has resulted. Perhaps the FF didn't foresee that regardless of their intentions, this was inevitable based on the economic system that developed.




Yes, of course I knew what you were referring to. However, it was irrelevant to the question of Washington's ministry as an Anglican clergyman. The church of the 1700's was somewhat different than today's, so I took your comment as a moot point.

Click to expand...

are they wanted? welp, if you don't like the American Constitution as it was written and in the spirit it was given, you can always move to australia.

I'll have to figure out what book I read about that it and find out what office it was that he held. All I remember for sure is that it was an unusal name for a possition and it was presented as being the euivolant to an elder/eucharistic minister.

Br. Max said:

are they wanted? welp, if you don't like the American Constitution as it was written and in the spirit it was given, you can always move to australia.

Click to expand...

*chuckle*

Actually, I 've really come to appreciate the Aust. system of govt. over the years I have spent here. But, really, there is a lot of good in the US gov't system too. However, my favorite system is the Swedish model.

I'll have to figure out what book I read about that it and find out what office it was that he held. All I remember for sure is that it was an unusal name for a possition and it was presented as being the euivolant to an elder/eucharistic minister.

Click to expand...

Cool. I'll be interested.

kimber1 said:

*am STILL trying to figure out why this OP has been taken so offensively*
NOONE is asking ANYONE to believe in what they personally believe. noone is saying that anyone HAS to pray before a football, soccer, rugby, (insert your sport here) game!!!!!! i for one will NOT back down in saying grace publicly(if you don't like it--don't look at me) nor will i back down from telling my children that it is PERFECTLY FINE to say under God when they recite the pledge in school.
what exactly is the problem here?????????????????????????

Click to expand...

The problem is two-part: sectarian prayer at public events such as ending a prayer with "in Jesus' name we pray, Amen" is offensive and illegal. And inoffensive generalized prayers are not that easy to come by; people don't know them or how to write them, though, for example, the Masonic Lodges have several they use in meetings or ceremonies which pass the test. It's just in places like those I mentioned (Santa Fe, Texas; Tupelo, Mississippi) this has become an instrument of bullying and tyranny of the majority-definitely not what God intended for us in our prayer life.

My favorite system of Government is the American - PRE-WWII. We had Statesmen back then. I can't think of a single Statesman in the world today. PLENTY of politicians, no statemen.

Fiskare said:

I guess I can also understand how there appears to be a diminishing of the influence of the church in secular life and how it will cause alarm among many Christians.

Click to expand...

Fiskare, I believe you are correct that there appears to be a diminishing influence of the church in secular life to some...but in reality is "the Church" really experiencing such?

Obviously, in small town American life 80 years ago, for example, a person's affiliation with a particular church and participation in it was viewed by most of their neighbors as a sign of their character. But how accurate was that, really? Billy Carter, the self-styled 'redneck' brother of the churchgoing President Jimmy Carter, was known to indulge in beer consumption and he derided some of his brother's fellow Baptists as "kitchen drinkers" because they would not drink publicly but did so in their homes behind closed doors. Wasn't it always thus? Certainly the numerous church related scandals should clearly establish church membership and public piety is no guarantee of righteousness. My fellow United Methodist Ken Lay, erstwhile Chairman of the odious Enron Corporation, was a lay speaker and liturgist and (supposedly) committed Christian even as he was stuffing his pockets with his ill-gotten gains.

Another aspect is that as Harvard Divinity School's Dr. Diana L. Eck subtitled her book A New Religious America: How a "Christian Country" Has Became The World's Most Religiously Diverse Nation, "...Muslims, Buddhists, Sikhs, Hindus, Jains, Zoraastrians, and new varieties of Jews and Catholics have arrived from every part of the globe, radically altering the religious landscape of the United States." Whether some like it or not (and many don't) that is reality as opposed to the pompous assertion of the writer of the original article. How shall Christians interact with our new neighbors? If it is traditional for the City Council to begin a meeting with a prayer given by local clergy, this may mean not only will Baptist, Presbyterian, and Catholic clergy perform this duty, but also Muslim Imans, Jewish Rabbis, Santeria priests, Wiccan priestesses, or a Sadhu from India will do the same. To refuse equal access to this ceremony would be illegal. This is no time for bullying by the majority.

Ken said:

So La Bonita.... I guess that given your sig lines, you should get off your high horse too..... sheesh... you are just spoing for a fight aren't you?

at one point you said "What is being said is "stop uttering sectarian prayer in official context as agents of government"...
ok... so how is saying a prayer before a football game considered acting as an agent of the government?

Click to expand...

If it is a game featuring a school team, it is a school activity-and in America we use the term "public schools" to indicate government-run schools (I understand in Britain and the Commonwealth the term "public schools" refers to the prep schools for the rich like Eton). Hence, a game for a school team is a government activity-any court would agree that is obvious.

rotfl! there is no bullying by the majority. It's the majority who are being bullied. REMEMBER please that it is only BECAUSE we are a Christian nation that we HAVE religious diversity. LOOK if you will at any Islamic, buddist, or even Jewish country in the world and you will see freedoms limited. Look at any communist state and things are even WORSE!