The Constitution's Christian Preamble?

   I am still amazed both those people who attempt to deny that America has a Christian heritage, who assert that her political founders were virtually irreligious and had seemingly no favorable dispositions towards Christianity (let alone a passionate faith in Christ), who proclaim that all that makes America great can be boiled down to a few creedal statements which are the results of logic and reasoning and not the outgrowth of an historic Christian moral tradition.  Inevitably they drag out Franklin and Jefferson and misrepresent much of their works regarding the matter, or they overly-promote Thomas Paine’s influence as though he single-handedly engineered our break with Great Britain (in fact, Paine’s anti-Christian, radical egalitarian views were so far outside the mainstream that Washington passed him up for an appointment to his administration).  It seems as though every person that they utilize to support their proposition was either never an orthodox Christian or strayed from the orthodox faith later in life, as in the case of John Adams.  They almost never cite passages within their context or supplement their assertions by producing supporting documentation, such as quotes from other members of the Constitutional convention, for example.  Let me provide just one sample that reveals to us some of the inner-workings of what happened in the discussions and debates surrounding the adoption of our Constitution.

   William Williams was a signer of the Declaration of Independence as well as a member of the Hartford convention that approved the Constitution.  After the debates had ended, there were some who had objected to the elimination of “religious tests” for prospective office holders under the new Constitution.  Here Williams addresses their concerns and sheds light on how the Connecticut delegates might have preferred the preamble to look:

“When the clause in the 6th article, which provides that "no religious test should ever be required as a qualification to any office or trust, &c." came under consideration, I observed I should have chose that sentence and anything relating to a religious test, had been totally omitted rather than stand as it did, but still more wished something of the kind should have been inserted, but with a reverse sense, so far as to require an explicit acknowledgment of the being of a God, his perfections and his providence, and to have been prefixed to, and stand as, the first introductory words of the Constitution, in the following or similar terms, viz. We the people of the United States, in a firm belief of the being and perfections of the one living and true God, the creator and supreme Governour of the world, in his universal providence and the authority of his laws; that he will require of all moral agents an account of their conduct; that all rightful powers among men are ordained of, and mediately derived from God; therefore in a dependence on his blessing and acknowledgment of his efficient protection in establishing our Independence, whereby it is become necessary to agree upon and settle a Constitution of federal government for ourselves, and in order to form a more perfect union &c., as it is expressed in the present introduction, do ordain &c., and instead of none, that no other religious test should ever be required &c., and that supposing, but not granting, this would be no security at all, that it would make hypocrites, &c. yet this would not be a sufficient reason against it; as it would be a public declaration against, and disapprobation of men, who did not, even with sincerity, make such a profession, and they must be left to the searcher of hearts; that it would however, be the voice of the great body of the people, and an acknowledgment proper and highly becoming them to express on this great and only occasion, and according to the course of Providence, one mean of obtaining blessings from the most high.

But that since it was not, and so difficult and dubious to get inserted, I would not wish to make it a capital objection; that I had no more idea of a religious test, which should restrain offices to any particular sect, class, or denomination of men or Christians in the long list of diversity, than to regulate their bestowments by the stature or dress of the candidate, nor did I believe one sensible catholic man in the state wished for such a limitation; and that therefore the News-Paper observations, and reasonings (I named no author) against a test, in favour of any one denomination of Christians, and the sacrilegious injunctions of the test laws of England &c., combatted objections which did not exist, and was building up a man of straw and knocking him down again. These are the same and only ideas and sentiments I endeavoured to communicate on that subject, tho' perhaps not precisely in the same terms; as I had not written, nor preconceived them, except the proposed test, and whether there is any reason in them or not, I submit to the public.

I freely confess such a test and acknowledgment would have given me great additional satisfaction; and I conceive the arguments against it, on the score of hypocrisy, would apply with equal force against requiring an oath from any officer of the united or individual states; and with little abatement, to any oath in any case whatever; but divine and human wisdom, with universal experience, have approved and established them as useful, and a security to mankind.”¹

   Secular society, huh?  It would appear that at least there were some men in Hartford during that convention who rightly thought the national charter should at least acknowledge its dependence on God.  How much better would our country be if our political leaders and our communities at large lived as though Williams’ proposed preamble were reality?  Father, may we your people live our lives in the firm belief of those words!

Christ, not man, is King!

Dale

            1) “William Williams to the Printer”, The Debate on the Constitution, Pt. II (New York, NY: Library Classics of the United States , 1993), p. 193-95.

Don't mess with "Old Tom!"

I thought this story was so remarkable, even though it's from the early 19th century, I just had to share it.  Father, give us such men, and women, again!!!

“The following well authenticated account of the adventures of a ranger is so graphically described in Brown's History of Illinois, that we give it in the words of the writer:

"Thomas Higgins, a native Kentuckian, was, in the summer of 1814, stationed in a block-house eight miles south of Greenville, in what is now Bond County, Illinois. On the evening of the 30th of August, 1814, a small party of Indians having been seen prowling about the station, Lieutenant Journay, with all his men, twelve only in number, sallied forth the next morning, just before daybreak, in pursuit of them. They had not proceeded far on the border of the prairie, before they were in an ambuscade of seventy or eighty savages. At the first fire, the lieutenant and three of his men were killed. Six fled to the fort under cover of the smoke, for the morning was sultry, and the air being damp, the smoke from the guns hung like a cloud over the scene. But Higgins remained behind to have 'one more pull at the enemy,' and to avenge the death of his companions.

"He sprang behind a small elm scarcely sufficient to protect his body, when, the smoke partly rising, discovered to him a number of Indians, upon whom he fired, and shot down the foremost one. Concealed still by the smoke, Higgins reloaded, mounted his horse, and turned to fly, when a voice, apparently from the grass, hailed him with: Tom, you won't leave me, will you?

"He turned immediately around, and seeing a fellow soldier by the name of Burgess lying on the ground, wounded and gasping for breath, replied, 'No, I will not leave you; come along.' 'I can't come,' said Burgess, 'my leg is all smashed to pieces.'

"Higgins dismounted, and taking up his friend, whose ankle had been broken, was about to lift him on his horse, when the animal, taking fright, darted off in an instant and left them both behind. 'This is too bad,' said Higgins, 'but don't fear. You hop off on your three legs and I will stay behind between you and the Indians and keep them off. Get into the tallest grass and creep as near the ground as possible.' Burgess did so and escaped.

"The smoke which had hitherto concealed Higgins now cleared away, and he resolved, if possible, to retreat. To follow the track of Burgess was most expedient. It would, however, endanger his friend. He determined, therefore, to venture boldly forward and, if discovered, to secure his own safety by the rapidity of his flight. On leaving a small thicket in which he had sought refuge, he discovered a tall, portly savage near by, and two others in the direction between him and the fort.

"He started, therefore, for a little rivulet near, but found one of his limbs failing him, it having been struck by a ball in the first encounter, of which, till now, he was scarcely conscious. The largest Indian pressed close upon him, and Higgins turned round two or three times in order to fire. The Indian halted and danced about to prevent his taking aim. He saw that it was unsafe to fire at random, and perceiving two others approaching, knew that he must be overpowered unless he could dispose of the forward Indian first. He resolved, therefore, to halt and receive his fire.

"The Indian raised his rifle, and Higgins, watching his eye, turned suddenly as his finger pressed the trigger, and received the ball in his thigh. He fell, but rose immediately and ran. The foremost Indian, now certain of his prey, loaded again, and with the other two pressed on. They overtook him. He fell again, and as he rose the whole three fired, and he received all their balls. He now fell and rose a third time, and the Indians, throwing away their guns, advanced upon him with spears and knives. As he presented his gun at one or another, each fell back. At last the largest Indian, supposing his gun to be empty, from his fire having been thus reserved, advanced boldly to the charge. Higgins fired and the savage fell.

"He had now four bullets in his body, an empty gun in his hand, two Indians unharmed as yet before him, and a whole tribe but a few yards distant. Any other man would have despaired. Not so with him. He had slain the most dangerous of the three, and having but little to fear from the others, began to load his rifle. They raised a savage whoop and rushed to the encounter. A bloody conflict now ensued. The Indians stabbed him in several places. Their spears, however, were but thin poles, hastily prepared, and which bent whenever they struck a rib or a muscle. The wounds they made were not therefore deep, though numerous.

"At last one of them threw his tomahawk. It struck him upon the cheek, severed his ear, laid bare his skull to the back of his head, and stretched him upon the prairie. The Indians again rushed on, but Higgins, recovering his self-possession, kept them off with his feet and hands. Grasping at length one of their spears, the Indian, in attempting to pull it from him, raised Higgins up, who, taking his rifle, dashed out the brains of the nearest savage. In doing this, however, it broke, the barrel only remaining in his hand. The other Indian, who had heretofore fought with caution, came now manfully into the battle. His character as a warrior was in jeopardy. To have fled from a man thus wounded and disarmed, or to have suffered his victim to escape, would have tarnished his fame for ever. Uttering, therefore, a terrific yell, he rushed on and attempted to stab the exhausted ranger. But the latter warded off his blow with one hand and brandished his rifle barrel with the other. The Indian was as yet unharmed, and, under existing circumstances, by far the most powerful man. Higgins' courage, however, was unexhausted and inexhaustible.

"The savage at last began to retreat from the glare of his untamed eye to the spot where he had dropped his rifle. Higgins knew that if he recovered that, his own case was desperate. Throwing, therefore, his rifle barrel aside, and drawing his hunting knife he rushed upon his foe. A desperate strife ensued—deep gashes were inflicted on both sides. Higgins, fatigued and exhausted by the loss of blood, was no longer a match for the savage. The latter succeeded in throwing his adversary from him, and went immediately in pursuit of his rifle. Higgins at the same time rose and sought for the gun of the other Indian. Both, therefore, bleeding and out of breath, were in search of arms to renew the combat.

"The smoke had now passed away, and a large number of Indians were in view. Nothing, it would seem, could now save the gallant ranger. There was, however, an eye to pity and an arm to save, and that arm was a woman's. The little garrison had witnessed the whole combat. It consisted of but six men and one woman; that woman, however, was a host—a Mrs. Pursley. When she saw Higgins contending single-handed with a whole tribe of savages, she urged the rangers to attempt his rescue. The rangers objected, as the Indians were ten to one. Mrs. Pursley, therefore, snatched a rifle from her husband's hand, and declaring that 'so fine a fellow as Tom Higgins should not be lost for want of help,' mounted a horse and sallied forth to his rescue.

"The men, unwilling to be outdone by a woman, followed at full gallop, reached the spot where Higgins had fainted and fell, before the Indians came up, and while the savage with whom he had been engaged was looking for his rifle, his friends lifted the wounded ranger up and throwing him across a horse before one of the party, reached the fort in safety.

"Higgins was insensible for several days, and his life was preserved by continued care. His friends extracted two of the balls from his thigh. Two, however, yet remained, one of which gave him a good deal of pain. Hearing afterwards that a physician had settled within a day's ride of him, he determined to go and see him. The physician asked him fifty dollars for the operation. This Higgins flatly refused, saying that it was more than half a year's pension. On reaching home he found that the exercise of riding had made the ball discernable; he requested his wife, therefore, to hand him his razor. With her assistance he laid open his thigh until the edge of the razor touched the bullet, then, inserting his two thumbs into the gash, 'he flirted it out,' as he used to say, 'without it costing him a cent.'

"The other ball yet remained. It gave him, however, but little pain, and he carried it with him to the grave. Higgins died in Fayette County, Illinois, a few years ago. He was the most perfect specimen of a frontier man in his day, and was once assistant door-keeper of the House of Representatives in Illinois. The facts above stated are familiar to many to whom Higgins was personally known, and there is no doubt of their correctness."

Excerpted from Daniel Boone: The Pioneer of Kentucky by John S.C. Abbott (New York, NY: Dodd & Mead, 1874), pp. 182-88

Christ, not man, is King!

Dale

Give 'em Watts!

"The zeal of Presbyterians during the war exposed them to special cruelties at the hands of the British soldiery. Among the foremost patriots of that day was the Rev. James Caldwell, pastor of the Presbyterian church of Elizabethtown, N. J.

'Descended from the Huguenots,' writes the Rev. Dr. Sprague in his Annals, 'and imbibing the spirit of the Scotch Covenanters, he may be said to have inherited a feeling of opposition to tyrants. Connected with his congregation were the Daytons, the Ogdens, Francis Barber, William Crane, Oliver Spencer, Elias Boudinot, William Livingston, Abram Clark, and others who became eminent for their wisdom, piety, valor and patriotism.'

When the news of the passage of the Declaration of Independence reached the New Jersey brigade, of which he was chaplain, the men were called together, and Parson Caldwell gave this toast: 'Harmony, honor and all prosperity to the free and independent United States of America; wise legislators, brave and victorious armies, both by sea and land, to the United States of America.'  His church was given up to be used as a hospital for the sick. Its bell sounded the alarm on the approach of the foe.

In an attack upon Springfield, when the wadding [strips of paper or cloth necessary for the proper loading of a musket] of the patriots gave out, Caldwell ran to the Presbyterian church; and returning with his arms and pockets filled with Watts Psalms and Hymns, he scattered them among the soldiers, exclaiming, 'Now, boys, give them Watts!'

In vexation at his patriotism, British officers offered large rewards for his capture. Failing in this, the British soldiery set fire to his church and shot his wife through the window of her own room in the midst of her nine children, dragged her bleeding corpse into the street and laid the house and other surrounding buildings in ashes. The following poem by Bret Harte tells the story:

'Here’s the spot. Look around you. Above on the height

Lay the Hessians encamped. By that church on the right

Stood the gaunt Jersey farmers. And here ran a wall.

You may dig anywhere, and you’ll turn up a ball.

Nothing more. Grasses spring, waters run, flowers blow

Pretty much as they did ninety-three years ago.

'Nothing more did I say? Stay one moment; you’ve heard

Of Caldwell, the parson, who once preached the word

Down at Springfield? What, no? Come, that’s bad! Why,

he had

All the Jerseys aflame. And they gave him the name

Of the rebel high priest. He stuck in their gorge,

For he loved the Lord God, and he hated King George.

'He had cause, you may say. When the Hessians that day

Marched up with Knyphusen, they stopped on the way

At the Farms, where his wife, with a child in her arms,

Sat alone in the house. How it happened none knew

But God and that one of the hireling crew

Who fired the shot. Enough! there she lay,

And Caldwell the chaplain, her husband, away.

'Did he preach? did he pray? Think of him as you stand

By the old church to-day; think of him and that band

Of militant ploughboys. See the smoke and the heat

Of that reckless advance, of that straggling retreat!

Keep the ghost of that wife, foully slain, in your view,

And what could you, what should you, what would you do?

'Why, just what he did. They were left in the lurch

For the want of more wadding. He ran to the church,

Broke the door, stripped the pews, and dashed out in the

road

With his arms full of hymn-books, and threw down his load

At their feet. Then above all the shouting and shots

Rang his voice: Put Watts into ‘em! boys, give ‘em Watts!

'And they did. That is all. Grasses spring, flowers blow

Pretty much as they did ninety-three years ago.

You may dig anywhere, and you’ll turn up a ball,

But not always a hero like this; and that’s all.'" ¹

Christ, not man, is King!

Dale

1)  W.P. Breed, Presbyterians and the Revolution (Philadelphia, PA: Presbyterian Board of Publication, 1876), pp. 79-82

Bartram's Travels

       The following selection is from the introduction to William Bartram’s Travels which was first published in 1791.  It is an account of his travels through the southeastern American colonies during the years 1773-78.  A botanist, and the son of a botanist, Bartram certainly knows that of which he speaks, and what he speaks of in his journals is the benevolent hand of God forming and fashioning the diverse animal and plant life he observed.  To me, there are echoes of Psalm 19 and Romans 1 in Bartram’s words.

“THE animal creation also, excites our admiration, and equally manifests the almighty power, wisdom and beneficence of the Supreme Creator and Sovereign Lord of the universe; some in their vast size and strength, as the mamoth, the elephant, the whale, the lion and alligator; others in agility; others in their beauty and elegance of colour, plumage and rapidity of flight, have the faculty of moving and living in the air; others for their immediate and indispensable use and convenience to man, in furnishing means for our clothing and sustenance, and administering to our help in the toils and labours through life; how wonderful is the mechanism of these finely formed, self-moving beings, how complicated their system, yet what unerring uniformity prevails through every tribe and particular species! the effect we see and contemplate, the cause is invisible, incomprehensible, how can it be otherwise? when we cannot see the end or origin of a nerve or vein, while the divisibility of mater or fluid, is infinite. We admire the mechanism of a watch, and the fabric of a piece of brocade, as being the production of art; these merit our admiration, and must excite our esteem for the ingenious artist or modifier, but nature is the work of God omnipotent: and an elephant, even this world is comparatively but a very minute part of his works. If then the visible, the mechanical part of the animal creation, the mere material part is so admirably beautiful, harmonious and incomprehensible, what must be the intellectual system? that inexpressibly more essential principle, which secretly operates within? that which animates the inimitable machines, which gives them motion, impowers them to act speak and perform, this must be divine and immortal?”

            William Bartram, Travels of William Bartram (New York, NY: Dover Publications, 1955), pp. 20-1.

Christ, not man, is King!

Dale