To hear so many public figures, or even ordinary people who publicly sound their opinions, say it, many might answer “yes” to the above question. So many people, on all sides of any issue, see so many wrongs in a country, including ours, that need to be corrected. It seems to be the fashion these days, indeed, the fashion throughout the ages, to seek solution to moral and social ills in reason and in legislation. We humans tend to look to the source of power for the righting of wrongs; usually, that source of power, intended for the preservation of truth and justice (when Superman is not available, of course), is the government. We go to the halls of legislation and law enforcement to right social and moral wrongs. In doing so continually, we are demonstrating the great confusion we have over (1) the purpose and capability of government and (2) the cause of moral and social problems.

I have discussed these two issues extensively on this blog, so I will not go into these issues presently. Instead, I will focus on answering the original question: “Can legislation and reason change America’s moral climate?”

I choose to answer this question, by presenting to my readers a parable, in the form of a dream that Benjamin Rush had in September of 1808, which he related in a letter to his good friend John Adams in that same month. Benjamin Rush was deeply concerned about the effects of alcoholism on the American populace, especially after observing how one of his patients had abused it. This moral pestilence troubled him deeply, and followed him into his sleep. Hence the dream:

After having recently observed the fatal effects of intemperance in the use of ardent spirits in one of my patients, and reflecting afterwards upon the incalculable evils they are spreading through our country, I went to bed a few evenings ago at my usual hour, and during the night I dreamed that I had been elected President of the United States [may I insert here, that Dr. Rush was a very humble man?*]. At first I objected to accepting of the high and honorable station [See? What did I tell you?], but upon recollecting that it would give me an opportunity of exercising my long-cherished hostility to ardent spirits by putting an end to their general use in our country, I consented to accept the appointment and repaired to the city of Washington where I entered upon the duties with spirit and zeal.

The secretaries brought me a number of letters and reports. I laid them upon a table and told them I would do no business until I got a law passed by Congress to prohibit not only the importation and distilling but the consumption of ardent spirits in the United States and counties in which spirits were consumed in the greatest quantities. Petitions flowed in upon me from all quarters to advise Congress to repeal the law, but I refused to comply with them.

One day sitting alone in my council chamber, a venerable but plain-looking man was introduced to me by one of my servants. I offered him a chair and delicately asked him what his business was with me. “I have taken the liberty,” said he, “Mr. President, to call upon you to remonstrate with you against the law for prohibiting the importation, manufactory, and consumption of ardent spirits. He said the law was well enough for a month or two, during which time all the drunken men had become sober, but, protracted as it was for nearly a year, it did such violence to the physical and commercial habits of our citizens that it had not and could not be carried into general effect; that many of the persons who had conformed to it had been sick form drinking nothing but cold water; that the plow and the wagon stood still from the want of that strength in the men which they formerly derived from their morning dram; that the stage drivers and coachmen everywhere fell from their seats from the same cause; that the clergy in many places were unable to preach and the lawyers to plead from the want of a little grog to moisten and oil their organs of speech; that women everywhere became unusually peevish and quarrelsome from a relaxation of their nerves brought on by the want of a little brandy in their tea; and that all the West India merchants, distillers, and tavern-keepers in the country were in an uproar; and that unless the water and small beer law were instantly repealed, we should soon have our country filled with hospitals and our jails with bankrupts.”

“Hold, sir,” said I. “You don’t know the people of the United States as well as I do; they will submit to the empire of Reason, and Reason will soon reconcile them to the restrictions and privations of the law for sobering and moralizing our citizens.”

“Reason! Reason! Mr. President. Why, you forget that it was Reason in the form of a Goddess that produced all the crimes and calumnies of the French Revolution, and that it was by a book entitled The Age of Reason that Tom Paine demoralized half the Christian world. You forget too that men are rational only, not reasonable creatures. … But Mr. President … permit me to mention an empire of another kind to which men everywhere are yield a willing, and in some instances, involuntary, submission, and that is the Empire of Habit. You might as well well arrest the orbs [planets] of heaven in their course as suddenly change the habits of a whole people. Even in little things they resist sudden innovations upon their ancient and general customs. Peter, the husband of the late Catherine of Russia, lost his life for an attempt to change a part of the dress of his subjects. The inhabitants of Madrid once rose in a mob to oppose an edict which was intended to compel them to use privies in order to prevent the accumulation of night soil in their streets. An hundred other instances might be mentioned of the fatal or mischievous consequences of opposing the settled habits and prejudices of nations and communities.

“Indeed, Mr. President, I am sorry to tell you, you are no more a philosopher than you are of a politician, or you never would have blundered upon your spirit law. Let me advise you to retire from your present station and go back to your professor’s chair and amuse your boys with your idle and impracticable speculations, or go among your patients and dose them with calomel and jalap [internal medical purges] –”

“Stop, stop, sir,” said I. “What do you mean by thus insulting the First Magistrate of your country? Here, John (calling to my servant), turn this man out of doors.” The noise of John coming hastily into the council chamber, and the vexation I felt in being thus insulted, awoke me and made me happy in discovering that the whole of the scene that I have described was nothing but a dream.”
Benjamin Rush: Signer of the Declaration of Independence, by David Barton, pages 153-156; cites Letters of Benjamin Rush (edited by Lyman Butterfield), volume 2, pages 977-979
*DISCLAIMER: It is not the intention of the author to be sarcastic, but the styling of Rush’s words here prompted him, and said author could not resist inserting a little humor. Said author does indeed believe in the humble character of Doctor Benjamin Rush.

There is a lesson that can be learned from this. Rush saw a legitimate problem, and he cared about it enough to try to fix it, as much as was within his power. His solution came through the means of strict legislation, that was sure, he thought, to stamp out the problem (liquor) once and for all. He was convinced that the people of America would “submit to the empire of Reason” — that they would see the wisdom in such legislation, and would jump on the bandwagon of anti-alcoholism, “President Rush”-style. This, of course, did not seem to happen. Such was the complaint among the people, that Congress was flooded with petitions, and “President Rush” was himself personally visited by one of the protectors. This anonymous visitor seems to have taken less concern for the moral health of the nation than for other things; and he did not seem to argue very strongly in support of his view, until he argued that men are more creatures of habit than creatures of logic.

This was his unshakable point. It is a point that we Christians especially seem to miss in so many of our efforts to reclaim our culture and win the hearts and souls of our fellow-men. We think that it will only take reason and the arm of the law to at least preserve the corps of what is long-dead. We try to work up and to manufacture what only the Holy Spirit can do with willing and obedient vessels. As I wrote recently, our refusal to learn this lesson is reaping bitter fruit. Let us learn it and apply it while we still have time.

Thanks for reading Founding Father’s Quote Friday! If you would like to participate in the weekly meme, visit this link, and write me a comment, with a link to your blog, letting me know that you participate. If you participated today, leave a comment with a link to your FFQF post below! Thank you!

Allow me to relieve my fellow bloggers and loyal readers: no, I have not yet been deported for sedition, thankfully. I am quite alive and well. A bit under the weather, and certainly very much preoccupied with an increased number of projects, but well. I would like to heartily thank those who have kept up the Founding Father’s Quote Friday meme in my protracted absense. My apologies that I have not kept up on your posts.

But I here now intend to resume said meme, starting today. Again, anyone willing to participate may. Here are the rules.

Because I am getting a late start in this meme, I am not going to put out a full-blown post here, just some weighty words from John Adams:

Posterity! you will never know how much it cost the present generation to preserve your freedom! I hope you will make a good use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in Heaven that I ever took half the pains to preserve it.
Letter to Abigail Adams, 26 April, 1777

SOURCE: Letters of John Adams, Addressed to His Wife (ed. by Charles Francis Adams), volume 1, page 218

After an absence from this blog, and from my own meme “Founding Father’s Quote Friday,” I now resume my pen typewriter. I also apologize (do I do that more than I blog, I wonder?) to my readers and to FFQF participants. My absence was the result of necessity.

Today, we pose the question “Does one size fit all?” Meaning, “Is one form of government appropriate to all kinds of peoples, nations, societies, cultures, and so forth?” It seems ridiculous at first to think so, because all people are different; but it seems that it is viewed as unpatriotic these days to say that the United States Constitution, or ‘democracy,’ is not going to work for all people.

Let’s see what Founder Alexander Hamilton had to say about this:

… I hold, with Montesquieu, that a government must be fitted to a nation as much as a coat to and individual; and consequently, what may be good at Philadelphia [the unofficial United States capitol at the time], may be bad at Paris, and ridiculous at Petersburg [then capitol of Russia].
To Marquis de Lafayette, January 6th, 1801

We are told that all people have an inner desire for freedom (which is true), and that therefore all people should experience political freedom no matter what their beliefs, culture, or moral standards.

While this is a nice sentiment, and one would naturally hope that this could be realized, it is a sad impossibility. Only those who are capable of governing themselves in such a way that is consistent with the order, peace, and protection of society, can sustain any form of popular government.

I will no doubt be accused of bigotry by saying this, but it is truth nonetheless. Only the moral standards of God, who created man, are fit to govern man sufficiently and properly. God has made it clear that His word has been revealed to us in the form of the Holy Scriptures. If you have any doubts about this, I would suggest that you research the facts, internal and external. Some of the greatest internal evidences that have convinced me personally of the Scriptures’ superhuman origin are the scientific and medical facts which were hidden within the passages of the Bible, some of which have been discovered only during this past century. Ray Comfort has listed these facts in his book Scientific Facts in the Bible, available at Amazon.com. Another evidence is the Bible codes. Good reads on this subject include Dr. Chuck Missler’s The Cosmic Codes, and W. E. Filmer’s book God Counts. There are many other evidences of the Bible’s accuracy and supernatural origin, but these two categories of evidence are totally mind-blowing.

Free government has worked in America as long as America has respected and observed those standards. When she departed, she departed from her origins of civic freedom as well. Now, we need politicians to look out for us, and protect us from ourselves. Such is the price a nation pays for deserting its own good by deserting God’s law.

If there is one thing America could use now, it’s an attitude of gratitude. Maybe a major factor in America’s straying is the thinking that we have entertained for several decades, is that we made ourselves great, and that therefore, America’s destiny and purpose was ours to carve. Contrary to what our humanist history books would have us believe, America is not a monument to man’s potential. It is a monument to the Gospel.

Generations of Christian martyrs fought with the world, stood firm under fire, and preserved the Scriptures with their blood, so that their descendants could live in this land in freedom, could spread the Gospel to the most distant corners of the earth, and shelter countless immigrants on our shores.

No nation has ever seen success without God’s help, and the nation that refuses to acknowledge that, and to respond with humility and gratitude has always been humbled.

No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the Invisible Hand which conducts the affairs of men more than those of the United States. Every step by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency; and in the important revolution just accomplished in the system of their united government the tranquil deliberations and voluntary consent of so many distinct communities from which the event has resulted can not be compared with the means by which most governments have been established without some return of pious gratitude, along with an humble anticipation of the future blessings which the past seem to presage. These reflections, arising out of the present crisis, have forced themselves too strongly on my mind to be suppressed.

President George Washington, First Inaugural Address, April 30, 1789

Today, John Adams will answer that question for us. His answer comes from a letter written to an early American historian by the name of Hezekiah Niles, dated February 13, 1818. Several of Niles’ invaluable texts on American history are available for reading and searching here.

But what do we mean by the American Revolution? Do we mean the American war? The Revolution was effected before the war commenced. The Revolution was in the hearts and minds of the people; a change in their religious sentiments of their duties and obligations. …

There might be, and there were others who thought less about religion and conscience, but had certain habitual sentiments of allegiance and loyalty derived from their education. …

This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people was the real American Revolution.

By what means this great and important alteration in the religious, moral, political, and social character of the people of thirteen colonies, all distinct, unconnected, and independence of each other, was begun, pursued, and accomplished, it is surely interesting to humanity to investigate, and perpetuate to posterity.

To this end, it is greatly to be desired, that young men of letters in all the States, especially in the thirteen original States, would undertake the laborious, but certainly interesting and amusing task, of searching and collecting all the records, pamphlets, newspapers, and even handbills, which in any way contributed to change the temper and views of the people, and compose them into an independent nation. (italics are Adams’ original underlining)

SOURCE: The Works of John Adams, volume 10, pp. 282-283

I think that a study of the First Great Awakening, particularly the influence of men like George Whitefield, would very much satisfy the ends of the search which Adams proposed. Indeed, my (hopefully) upcoming book on Alexander Hamilton will deal with this subject, specifically as relates to the shaping of Hamilton’s beliefs and destiny.

How is the Great Awakening responsible in a large degree for the Revolution? Books from the 19th century to the present have been written on the subject; but if I may sum it up simply: The teachings of men like Whitefield convinced men that 1) all men are radically depraved, and 2) they are dependent upon God, and not man-made institutions like the Church of England, for the security of their souls.

The first principle is apparently present in the thinking of our Founding Fathers, the men who framed our founding documents, as they grappled with framing a government with as much balance as possible to counter the constant flow of selfish ambition in all the parties involved in the structure of civil government. And of course, when the second principle was applied, self-government was made possible.

Remember: our First Revolution did not start with just a Tea Party; it started with a return of professing Christians to the Bedrock of the foundation of the Church — the Gospel of Christ. Unless this happens on an individual level, our nation can never be pleasing to God, nor can the body of professing American Christians be acceptable to God, and definitely, nor can our nation return to its founding principles of freedom.

I would encourage readers to refer to my very first Founding Fathers’ Quote Friday post.

I am very thrilled to announce that we have another new participant in FFQF: The Young American! See last week’s FFQF post here.

Ben Franklin died this day, on April 17, 1790. So today we will cite a great quote from him:

Sell not virtue to purchase wealth, nor liberty to purchase power. From Poor Richard’s Almanac (1734)

Loss of liberty was no accident in our country. Nor was it the fault of corrupt politicians alone. We sold our virtue for luxury, and our politicians, who are not inherently worse than us, purchased power at the price of liberty. The reason why our national condition is never improved, even as election after election goes by, is because our nation lacks virtue. George Washington once wisely observed, “Few men have virtue to withstand the highest bidder.” And right now, the wealthy elite who pull the strings in our country, and in other countries, are making extraordinary bids. And if you don’t cooperate, they’ll certainly find something in your past to fill the newspapers with, and knock you out of the ring of power. And the cycle is repeated with almost every new-comer in office.

It’s encouraging to know that people are being mobilized and activated around the country to protest the blatant injustice of the bullies in power — it’s high “tea time”! But it’s going to take a lot more than protest to win our liberties back.

Everyone knows the famous saying by Ben Franklin, that the only things that are certain in life are death and taxes. Which one is worse? Heh.

(Hat tip: Patriot Humor)

My FFQF today comes from an email I recently received from Wallbuilders, David Barton’s group. As usual, his stuff is choc-full of quotations from the Founding Fathers. The email and the quotations are so good, I would like to share it all with my readers today. “JOIN A TEA PARTY TODAY!”

Next week there will be thousands of TEA parties (Taxed Enough Already) across the nation. In a relatively short period of time, we have seen an explosive increase in government spending and national debt.

Previous generations avoided these unhealthy practices, being guided by wise political leaders who understood the blessings of frugality and the dangers of debt.

For example, Alexander Hamilton — America’s first Secretary of the Treasury and also a signer of the Constitution — wisely declared:

Allow a government to decline paying its debts and you overthrow all public morality — you unhinge all the principles that preserve the limits of free constitutions.

Nothing can more affect national prosperity than a constant and systematic attention to extinguish the present debt and to avoid as much as possibly the incurring of any new debt.

George Washington similarly warned:

Avoid occasions of expense… and avoid likewise the accumulation of debt not only by shunning occasions of expense but by vigorous exertions to discharge the debts, not throwing upon posterity the burden which we ourselves ought to bear.

Perhaps no Founding Father was as forthright on this topic as Thomas Jefferson:

If the debt should be swelled to a formidable size, we shall be committed to the career of debt, corruption, and rottenness. . . . The discharge of the debt, therefore, is vital to the destinies of our government.

The principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale. I. . . place economy among the first and most important of republican virtues, and public debt as the greatest of the dangers to be feared.

Jefferson even wisely foresaw where America generally finds itself today:

I am not among those who fear the people… [A]nd to preserve their independence we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy [frugality] and liberty, or profusion [excess spending] and servitude. If we run into such debts as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for our callings and our creeds, our people must come to labor sixteen hours in twenty-four, give the earnings of fifteen of these hours to the government for their debts and daily expenses; and the sixteenth being insufficient to afford us bread. The [forerunner] of this is public debt. Taxation follows that, and in its train wretchedness and oppression.

Millions of citizens, following the example of America’s early residents, have finally decided to draw a line and raise their voice against the government’s exorbitant spending and exploding debt. On April 15, citizens at more than 1,000 locations across the country will be sponsoring TEA parties.

If you want to participate with your fellow citizens, go to http://www.teapartyday.com/ to find a location near you.

[*] You may notice that Hamilton is quoted here as advocating the elimination, and not the accumulation, of public debt here. Indeed, there are many, many such statement throughout Hamilton’s writings. This goes directly against what we have been taught for decades in our history textbooks, and what many people are being led to believe through Thomas DiLorenzo’s writings on Hamilton.

I have (finally) posted the second installment of my critical examination of DiLorenzo’s claims, here.

Founding Father Benjamin Rush, signer of the Declaration of Independence and “father of American education” (until about 100 years ago) brings things in perspective.

I have been alternately called an aristocrat and a democrat. I am now neither. I am a Christocrat. I believe all power … will always fail of producing order and happiness in the hands of man. He alone who created and redeemed man is qualified to govern him. David Ramsey, An Eulogium Upon Benjamin Rush, M. D., 1813, p. 103

SOURCE: Benjamin Rush: Signer of the Declaration of Independence, by David Barton

I hope to continue posting my series called “The Law of Liberty.” I’ve only posted my first installment, and that was some time ago. But, I promise to continue it, and also to continue my exciting series of posts unfolding the relationship between the Founding Fathers, and the Illuminati.

Today’s quote somewhat reflects the theme that I will be touching on in my upcoming installments of “The Law of Liberty.” It’s short, sweet, and simple truth, presenting by the admirable John Adams:

Strait [sic] is the gate and narrow is the way that leads to liberty, and few nations, if any, have found it.

To Richard Rush, Quincy, 14 May, 1821

Liberty — civil liberty — is not a thing easily achieved, or maintained. The essential ingredient that liberty requires is totally missing from human nature. Liberty requires virtue and accountability to be maintained. It requires purity, stability, and a selfless steadfastness. It requires the ability not to be bought or sold, or lulled or hushed.

Liberty is a rare thing in the world because (warning: politically incorrect statement ahead) liberty and human nature are incompatible. Human nature, left to itself in its fallen state, cannot achieve, much less maintain, lasting liberty. Human nature must experience a change before true and lasting liberty is possible.

Keep in mind that Adams made the above statement 5 years previous to his death. He was 86 years old. He had spent his life in making America independent and free. For him to make such a statement toward the end of his life reveals how sobering reality must have been.

It is not as simple as riot and anarchy to bring about, or to restore liberty. As I’ve said before, liberty is NOT maintained (as Jefferson made the mistake of asserting in his famous “tree of liberty” quote) by continually struggling with authority. History has shown that anarchy is substituted for liberty in those cases, and it’s high time that humanity learned the hard lesson that order NEVER comes out of chaos. Liberty is achieved when virtue (i. e., God’s standards) are maintained. Usually, this has only been practiced on a small scale among small groups.

Such were the Separatist Pilgrims who came to this country. They were our original Founders. Because of their godly dedication, our nation was the first republic in history to realize civil liberty on a national scale.

In a day and age when our society embraces moral relativism and religious relativism, in a day and age when these demented philosophies have produced more major problems than we seem to be able to grapple with, and in a day and age that refuses to turn to God in the midst of escalating licentiousness and decadence, the words of our wise forefathers need so much to be considered and applied.

It is now several months since I promised to give you my reasons for preferring the Bible as a schoolbook to all other compositions. Before I state my arguments, I shall assume the five following propositions:

1 . That Christianity is the only true and perfect religion; and that in proportion as mankind adopt its principles and obey its precepts they will be wise and happy.

2. That a better knowledge of this religion is to be acquired by reading the Bible than in any other way.

…

Every just principle that is to be found in the writings of Voltaire is borrowed from the Bible; and the morality of Deists, which has been so much admired and praised where it has existed, has been, I believe, in most cases, the effect of habits produced by early instruction in the principles of Christianity.

Benjamin Rush, A Defense of the Use of the Bible in Public Schools

Why then, if these books for children must be retained, as they will be, should not the Bible regain the place it once held as a school book? Its morals are pure, its examples captivating and noble. The reverence for the sacred book that is thus early impressed lasts long; and probably, if not impressed in infancy, never takes firm hold of the mind.

Fisher Ames, Essay on School Books (1801)

Why may not the Bible, and especially the New Testament, without note or comment, be read and taught as a divine revelation in the college — its general precepts expounded, its evidences explained, and its glorious principles of morality inculcated? What is there to prevent a work, not sectarian, upon the general evidences of Christianity, from being read and taught in the college by lay-teachers? … Where can the purest principles of morality be learned so clearly or so perfectly as from the New Testament? Where are benevolence, the love of truth, sobriety, industry, so powerfully and irresistibly inculcated as in the sacred volume?

Chief-Justice Joseph Story, Opinion of the United States Supreme Court in the case Vidal v. Girard’s Executors (1844)