911:Jesuits In America

From Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search

Site menu:

Political and Religious Foundations of The United States of America
“Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.” (Prov. 30:5,6)

Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes? Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. (Matthew 21:42,43)

Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field: But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way. But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also. So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares? He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up? But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn. (Matthew 13:24-30)

Note To The Reader

This article is the result of years of research after consulting hundreds of sources and resources. Most of what is published today as authoritative and scholarly research is actually revised accounts of historical facts and presents a distorted view of history. Don't be misled. Do your own research. There are many good sources available today to help the honest scholar and researcher prove the accuracy and validity of the claims made in this article. See the links throughout this article and "Historical Books & Documentation of Facts" near the page bottom.


The founding of the United States of America can be compared, in some respects, to the parable put forth by Jesus of the man which sowed good seed in his field. In the seventeenth century, when the Pilgrims and Puritans settled in America, the Bible was the book on which the first laws of the colonies were founded. And, similar to the parable of the man which sowed good seed in his field, while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat. While the Bible was at the foundation of our civil, criminal and moral laws when America declared her independence from Great Britain, the tares of opposition to the Bible and the Decalogue had already begun to take root and appear, and would in the course of less than two centuries result in the moral and spiritual decay of our political, educational and religious institutions. This article, though not a complete history of our nation, is a comprehensive reference work covering many important facts about American history, documented facts that have been omitted from modern history books. Many readers will no doubt be surprised to learn of some of the sources and organizations opposed to America's true Biblical Christian heritage. Some believe that politics or other social maladies are to blame for America's numerous troubles. But it is not a Left verses Right issue. It is a truth verses falsehood issue – true religion verses false religion. Will we choose “the God of heaven” and his true word in the Bible, or “the god of this world” and his ecumenical delusion (Rev. 16:11; 2 Cor. 4:4)? The book of Jeremiah records the following admonition:

“At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it;
If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them.
And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it;
If it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them.”(Jer. 18:7-10).

Few would deny that Americans enjoy more personal freedom than any other people in the world today. And that's why millions have sought and found refuge and liberty within this country. And yet, we see signs of that liberty decaying all around us. A decay that becomes all the more obvious when we compare our nation today to the America of our founding fathers. For example, the total tax rate today for the average U.S. citizen is over fourty-five percent of their income. The tax rate that helped provoked the colonists to declare independence from Great Britain was less than twenty percent. Beyond the rate of taxation our founding fathers realized that the larger the civil government the less personal freedoms its citizens enjoy. Freedom loving people around the wolrd should always be aware of “A government that is big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take everything you have.” (A Taxslaves Manifesto, 2011, p. 174). In 1816 one in approximately eighteen-hundred Americans were employed by the federal government. Today that number has swollen to approximately one in seventy-five -- a twenty-four-hundred percent increase. Over three crimes against property occur every second in the United States today. In 1983 tax payers spent over ten-billion dollars for jails and prisons -- an average of over sixteen-thousand dollars per inmate. It is estimated that one out of every three-hundred and fifty Americans is behind bars today -- the world's highest per-capita ratio. Compare this with historian James Adams' findings in rural America: “I have found only one case of a colonial traveler being robbed in the whole of the century preceding the Revolution.” (Provincial Society, 1690-1763, By James Truslow Adams, 1971, p. 161).

In 1985 two-hundred and sixty-one billion dollars was spent on education. That was more than twice what was spent in 1980 and over ten times the amount spent in 1970. The cost per student jumped from two-hundred and ninty-four dollars in 1956 to two-thousand nine-hundred dollars in 1982 and '83. Even allowing for inflation that's a jump of almost one-thousand percent. While expenditures and personnel have increased dramatically, the quality of education has declined. S.A.T. scores dropped consistently from 1963 to 1980 and beyond. And since then even educators' expectations for S.A.T. scores have been lowered. Twenty percent of all graduating high school students in 2007 were functionally illiterate. As a nation we are producing an increasing number of functionally illiterate adults.... This is in great contrast to early America. At the time of our independence John Adams wrote that to find an “American who cannot read and write, is as rare an appearance as a Jacobite, or a Roman Catholic, i.e. as rare as a comet or an earthquake.” (A Collection of State-papers, By John Adams, 1782, p. 91) (The Roman Catholic Inquisition (link to [1]) , an official church policy that spanned a period of 600 years and used many gruesome and diabolical forms of torture and murder, was still active in 1776. Historian John Acton wrote, “The Inquisition is peculiarly the weapon and peculiarly the work of the popes....”see Letters of Lord Acton to Mary Gladstone, 1913, pp. 147, 148).

Add to this the killing of over fourty-five million children through abortion (1 out of 3 babies conceived die by abortion) since the 1973 Roe V. Wade court decision which legalized abortion-on-demand [despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of Americans were against abortion in 1973 activist judges in the court ruled against the will of the people; and decades of misinformation and socialist propaganda has influenced many to believe that a woman has a so called “right” to murder her unborn child, in spite of the fact that medical science has proven conclusively that human life begins at the moment of conception], just as the Holy Bible says]; the breakdown of the American family through divorce and other social maladies so that today only seven out of one-hundred Americans are living in a traditional family where there is a father, mother and children (as of 2006 thirty-seven percent of babies in the U.S. are born to unwed mothers); an exponential increase in drug and alcohol abuse; the sexual revolution with its numerous casualties, including a host of venereal diseases; a shocking increase in suicide making it the second leading killer of teenagers and the eighth largest killer over-all; a weakening national defense, facilitated by globalist politicians and lawmakers who are violating their sacred oaths of office in failing to uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution by relinquishing U.S. sovereignty to the interests of world bankers, the United Nations Organization and other foreign entities that makes us increasingly vulnerable to the many enemies of true liberty; a government economic take-over by world bankers via the Federal Reserve Act in 1913; and the passing of other unconstitutional laws – Patriot Act in 2001, National Defense Authorization Act in 2011 – which has brought us to the brink of a socialist totalitarian state.

We can see that our liberties are rapidly being lost. The home of the brave to a large extent has become the abode of weakness and moral cowardness, as we surrender our liberties, not so much to the enemy without, but to the one within. Samuel Adams, the father of the American Revolution said, “A general Dissolution of Principles & Manners will more surely overthrow the Liberties of America than the whole Force of the Common Enemy. While the People are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but when once they lose their Virtue they will be ready to surrender their Liberties to the first external or internal Invader.” (The Writings of Samuel Adams, Vol. IV, 1778-1802, p. 124). If virtue and knowledge are diffused among the people, they will never be enslaved. Wendell Phillips stated that "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty:" (Speeches, Lectures and Letters by Wendell Phillips, 1863, p. 52)

To secure our liberties we must first understand what produced them and then be prepared to pay the price to see them restored and maintained. How were those men and women who founded our country able to give birth to the most free nation the world has seen? What produced those seeds of liberty in their lives? What motivated and inspired them? Where did their ideas originate? As we take a look at some of the men's lives as well as some events that were significant in the founding of America, we will see that the most common theme was the firm belief that God is the giver of life, of liberty and of man's right to pursue happiness. Our founding fathers recognized that only where the Spirit of the Lord is, is there any real liberty. They understood that the degree to which a nation applies biblical truths to all of life, is the degree to which that nation secures its freedom. American writer Horace Greeley (1811-1872) established the New York Tribune in 1841 and developed a reputation as the greatest newspaper editor of his day. Greeley stated, “It is impossible to enslave, mentally or socially, a Bible-reading people. The principles of the Bible are the ground-work of human freedom.” (A Dictionary of Thoughts, 1908, p. 301)

In 1852 the Fifth Annual Report of the Board of National Popular Education stated,
“God will have men and nations governed; and they must be governed by one of the two instruments—AN OPEN BIBLE, with its hallowed influences, or A STANDING ARMY WITH BRISTLING BAYONETS. One is the product of God's wisdom, the other, of man's folly; and that nation or people that dare discard, or will not yield to the moral power of the one, must submit to the brute force of the other. Herein do we discover the secret of our ability to govern ourselves. Just so long, and no longer, than we preserve the open Bible in our schools, shall we be capable of self-government.” (Right of the Bible in Our Public Schools, 1859, p. 280)

The popular nineteenth century public school textbook History of the United States by the renowned American Lexicographer and educator Noah Webster (1758-1843) reaffirms the fact that it is true Biblical Christianity which is responsible for true civil and religious liberties:

'“Almost all the civil liberty now enjoyed in the world owes its origin to the principals of the Christian religion. Men began to understand their natural rights, as soon as the reformation from popery began to dawn in the sixteenth century; and civil liberty has been gradually advancing and improving, as genuine Christianity has prevailed. By the principles of the Christian religion we are not to understand the decisions of ecclesiastical councils, for these are the opinions of mere men; nor are we to suppose that religion to be any particular church established by law, with numerous dignitaries, living in stately palaces, arrayed in gorgeous attire, and rioting in luxury and wealth, squeezed from the scanty earnings of the labouring poor; nor is it a religion which consists in a round of forms, and in pompous rites and ceremonies. No; the religion which has introduced civil liberty, is the religion of Christ and his apostles, which enjoins humility, piety, and benevolence; which acknowledges in every person a brother, or a sister, and a citizen with equal rights. This is genuine Christianity, and to this we owe our free constitutions of government.” (History of the United States, 1832, pp. 273,274)

Judge Joseph Story (1779-1845) was a distinguished American lawyer who served on the Supreme Court of the United States from 1811 to 1845. Judge Story published Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States in 1833, the first comprehensive treatise ever written on the U.S. Constitution. Commenting on the Holy Bible and its authority, Judge Story said, “[L]et us cling with a holy zeal to the Bible, and the Bible only, as the religion of Protestants. Let us proclaim, with Milton, that 'Neither traditions, nor councils, nor canons of any visible Church, much less edicts of any civil magistrate, or civil session, but the Scripture only, can be the final judge or rule in matters of religion, and that only in the conscience of every Christian to himself.'”(The Miscellaneous Writings of Joseph Story, 1835, p. 68)

Many of our leaders through the years have not hesitated to declare in unequivocal terms that the perpetuity of our American institutions is dependent upon the practical veneration we give to the preserved Christian Bible. From the first permanent English settlement in 1607 (Jamestown, VA), most who settled in America were distinctively Christian; and it is a fact that for more than three centuries the dominant expression of that Christianity was Protestant – Bible believing Protestants (A History of the United States of America, 1833, pp. 523,524; A Prophet With Honor, The Billy Graham Story, William Martin, 1991, p. 43). The Reverend Charles Hodge (1797-1878), an American writer and founder of the Biblical Repertory and Princeton Review in 1825, stated that “This country is a Christian and Protestant country, granting universal toleration; i.e., allowing men of all religions to live within our borders... and to conduct their religious services according to their own convictions of duty.” (The Question of The Hour: The Bible and The School Fund, Rufus W, Clark, 1870, pp. 14, 15).

What the Reverend Hodge meant was that America was a nation of Christians, given that the overwhelming majority were Protestant Christians for most of our history. We must remember that a country may be a nation of Christians, but No nation on earth can be “a Christian nation.” Jesus Christ said, “My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight,” “I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.” “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.” (John 17:14; 18:36; Mark 12:17). The admonition of 2nd Corinthians 10:4 affirms Jesus's words: “For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal” (II Cor. 10:4). This is one of the great bulwarks of the U.S. Constitution, to prevent any religion from mandating it's ecclesiastic rules on the nation, and at the same time preventing the national government from interfering with the free exercise of religion.

In the Centennial Letter which President Ulysses S. Grant addressed to the American Sunday schools he said: “Hold fast to the Bible as the sheet anchor to your liberties; write its precepts in your hearts, and practice them in your lives. To the influence of this book we are indebted for all progress made in our true civilization, and to this we must look as our guide in the future.” (The Literary Primacy of the Bible, by George Peck Eckman, 1915, p. 148). George P. Eckman, author of The Literary Primacy of the Bible, wrote, “After the battle of Manila and the extraordinary defeat of the Spanish fleet at Santiago in 1898, the editor of an influential newspaper in Buenos Aires declared in his columns that the success of the United States in these and other conflicts was due to the fact that it was a Protestant nation and that its people were nourished on the Bible.” (Ibid, p. 148).

It is important to remember that in 1776 Protestants comprised more than 99% of the population of the new nation, while Catholics comprised less than 1% of the total population. The Roman Catholic church now wields more political power in the U.S., either directly or by proxy, than any other religious organization. This is very significant, because the history of this church reveals a far more sinister organization than what is portrayed by her promoters. With a history of over 1000 years of persecuting “heretics” by way of the Crusades, the “Holy Catholic Inquisitions,” the “Holy Wars,” etc. (murdering millions of people who simply refused to accept Papal dogma or acknowledge the Pope as supreme ruler of Christendom and king of the earth), it would be suicidal to view the church of Rome as anything but a most dangerous politico-religious sect (it is no coincident that the United Nations, a corrupt international organization whose agenda is a one-world police state, has granted to the Roman Catholic church a privileged position held by no other religion). It is also important to remember that the term “Protestant” was originally used in a derogatory sense. The Romish Communion departed from “the faith which was once delivered to the saints,”—the true Catholic faith. When the Reformers, through the grace of God, restored the true faith, the Papists “nicknamed” the Reformed Catholics “Protestants.” This appellation, though originating in Papal contempt, has, in process of time, become honourable and glorious, inasmuch as it patently indicates a protest against the “lying traditions of men, and the cunningly-devised fables of Rome.” (The Catholic Hand-Book, 1851, p. 7).

The following proclamations made in an address of Congress to the people of England, dated at Philadelphia, September 5th, 1774, are not the declarations of a party of a sect, or of a church, but the solemn and sincere deliverances of the first American Congress. In this address to the people of Great Britain, the American Congress of 1774 stated one of their grievances with the British Parliament was that,

  “by another act the dominion of Canada is to be so extended, modeled, and governed, as that by being disunited from us, detached from our interests, by civil as well as religious prejudices, that by their numbers swelling with Catholic emigrants from Europe, and by their devotion to Administration, so friendly to their religion, they might become formidable to us, and on occasion, be fit instruments in the hands of power, to reduce the ancient free Protestant Colonies, to the same state of slavery with themselves.” 
  “Nor can we suppress our astonishment, that a British Parliament should ever consent to establish in that country a religion that has deluged your Island in blood, and dispersed impiety, bigotry, persecution, murder, and rebellion, through every part of the world.”(Journals of the Continental Congress, Vol. 1, 1904, pp. 87,88) (The London Magazine, 1774, p. 631). 

These solemn declarations of Congress show that America's Founding Fathers considered Protestantism as identical with Freedom, and Popery (Roman Catholicism) only another name for tyranny and superstition. Why did America's Founding Fathers view Catholicism as a despotic organization? The answer lies in the fact that for most of her history the church of Rome has sought to control the thoughts and actions of people through her un-scriptural dogmas and her murderous Inquisitions. Among the many distinguished men who signed the 1774 address of the Continental Congress to the people of Great Britain were George Washington, John Adams, Patrick Henry, John Jay, Samuel Adams, and other prestigious American patriots. The scriptures of the true gospel of Jesus Christ and the spirit of the glorious Protestant Reformation—of Luther, Tyndale and Knox, of William of Orange, of his father-in-law the brave Coligny, and of Gustav Vasa—moved the hearts of the Fathers of the American Union.

To find evidence of this we'll have to go to sources other than our contemporary public textbooks. There has been a systematic deletion of historical facts from these books. In 1985 New York University professor Paul C. Vitz did a study for the U.S. Department of Education. After reviewing scores of books from primary readers to high school history text he found "It may be easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a religious figure or for an individual's Christian beliefs to get into the pages of the history books." For example, one book states that "Pilgrims are people who make long trips." Vitz's study clearly demonstrated that an anti-Protestant-Christian agenda exists. He said, “Those responsible for these books appear to have a deep-seated fear of any form of active contemporary Christianity, especially serious, committed Protestantism.”(Recovering the Lost Tools of Learning, Douglas Wilson, 1991, p. 36). Vitz's final assessment: "When it came to the treatment of history, I can assure you that a bias against Christianity existed." — a bias against Christianity in general and a bias against Biblical Protestant Christianity in particular.

Absence of the God of the Bible in our public schools is even more amazing when one understands that the primary purpose for establishing schools in America was to teach everyone to be able to read and understand the Bible. Our first college, Harvard, in its original rules stated, “Let every student be plainly instructed, and earnestly pressed to consider well, the maine end of his life and studies is, to know God and Jesus Christ which is eternall life, Jon. xvii. 3. and therefore to lay Christ in the bottome, as the only foundation of all sound knowledge and learning.” and that “Every one shall so exercise himselfe in reading the Scriptures twice a day,”(A History of Harvard University, Benjamin Peirce, 1833, Appendix, p. 5). In fact, of the first one-hundred and eight colleges in America, one-hundred and six were founded by and for the Christian faith – the Ancient/Protestant Christian faith. “In founding Harvard, Yale, and other American colleges, the propagation of Christianity as a leading purpose of higher, as well as of popular education, was avowed by their founders, and by all provisions and grants of government.”(The Bible in Schools, W. W. Everts, 1870, p. 9). Generations of American children were taught the fundamentals of life from public school textbooks whose pages contained copious amounts of scriptures from the Holy Bible (see Dilworth's Spelling-Book, 1796, The New Instructor, 1803, The American Spelling Book, 1816, The American Spelling Book, 1822, The Elementary Spelling Book, 1842, Romanism, the Enemy of Education, 1853, Right of the Bible in Our Public Schools, 1859, The Bible in Schools, 1870, Bible Readings For Schools, 1897, The Elementary Spelling Book, 1908).

The apostle Paul said, “For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.”(Rom. 13:11). The Lord exhorted his disciples saying, “Take ye heed, watch and pray”(Mark 13:33). Jesus warned what would happen should his people fall asleep spiritually: “But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat”(Matt. 13:25). The subverting of America's Judeo/Christian moral foundations and the systematic deletion of religious references, especially true Christian Biblical references, from public school textbooks over the last century is not accidental. “O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths.”(Isaiah 3:12). The apostle Paul said “that now it is high time to awake out of sleep” because the spirit of slumber is lulling more Americans into spiritual atrophy, as agendas of secular humanism, moral relativism and superstitious “Christian” doctrines are being deliberately pushed on society, undermining our nation's true Biblical moral foundations, and threatening the very existence of our country (I Cor. 3:11). “If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?”(Psa. 11:3).

The renowned Constitutional scholar, Henry Campbell Black (1860-1927), author of Black's Law Dictionary, and editor of The Constitutional Review from 1917 to 1927, recognized and acknowledged America's Christian foundations. In his Handbook of American Constitutional Law (2nd ed. 1897, 3rd ed. 1910, 4th ed. 1927), Henry Black stated, “...that many of our best civil and social institutions, and the most important to be preserved in a free and civilized state, are founded upon the Christian religion, or upheld and strengthened by its observance; that the whole purpose and policy of the law assume that we are a nation of Christians, and while toleration is the principle in religious matters, the laws are to recognize the existence of that system of faith, and our institutions are to be based on that assumption ; that those who are in fact Christians have a right to be protected by law against wanton interference with the free and undisturbed practice of their religion and against malicious attacks upon its source or authority, calculated and intended to affront and wound them ; and that the prevalence of a sound morality among the people is essential to the preservation of their liberties and the permanence of their institutions, and to the success and prosperity of government, and the morality which is to be fostered and encouraged by the state is Christian morality, and not such as might exist in the supposititious "state of nature" or in a pagan country.”(Handbook of American Constitutional Law, 1910, p. 528).

Daniel Webster (1782-1852), a leading American statesman and the 14th United States Secretary of State (1841-1843), said that “it is a mockery, and an insult to common sense, to maintain that a school for the instruction of youth, from which Christian instruction by Christian teachers is sedulously and vigorously shut out, is not deistical and infidel both in its purpose and in its tendency.”(Right of the Bible in Our Public Schools, 1859, pp. 242, 243). Speaking of the Holy Bible and the Decalogue (the ten commandments), and of those who are under the presumption that the Christian religion is not the only true foundation of all genuine civil and religious liberties, Daniel Webster said, “My learned friend, has referred with propriety to one of the commandments of the Decalogue; but there is another, a first commandment, and that is a precept of religion, and it is in subordination to this that the moral precepts of the Decalogue are proclaimed. This first great commandment teaches man that there is one, and only one, great First Cause, one, and only one, proper object of human worship. This is the great, the ever fresh, the overflowing fountain of all revealed truth; without it, human life is a desert, of no known termination on any side, but shut in on all sides by a dark and impenetrable horizon. Without the light of this truth, man knows nothing of his origin, and nothing of his end. And when the Decalogue was delivered to the Jews, with this great announcement and command at its head, what said the inspired law-giver? that it should be kept from children? that it should be reserved as a communication fit only for mature age? Far, far otherwise. ‘And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thy heart. AND THOU SHALT TEACH THEM DILIGENTLY UNTO THY CHILDREN; and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.’”(Right of the Bible in Our Public Schools, 1859, pp. 244, 245, 246).

Popular nineteenth century American public school textbooks frequently commented on a variety of subjects, not the least of which was man's duties, the sin of unbelief, idolatry, contempt of God's laws, etc. On page 299 of History of the United States Noah Webster stated: “The duties which you owe directly to God are entire, unwavering faith in his promises, reverence of his character, and frequent prayer and worship. Unbelief is a great sin, and so is profaneness, irreverence, contempt of his character and laws, neglect of prayer and of worship, public and private. All worship of images and saints, is an abomination to God; it is idolatry, which is strictly forbidden in the Bible;” (History of the United States, Noah Webster, 1832, p. 299)

Those outside of the United States of America also recognized the dangers posed to genuine liberty by corrupt and despotic religious organizations espousing forms of godliness. English physicist Michael Faraday (1791-1867), who was a Bible believing Christian, said: “That man in his natural state is greatly influenced by his fellow-creatures and the forms of emotion which are amongst them, is doubtless true, even when it concerns what he considers his eternal welfare. How else would the wonderfully varied and superstitious forms of belief have obtained in the world? What carries the Mormons into the desert, surrounded by trouble and the enmity of those around them? What sustains a spiritual dominion like the Papacy, aided by the nations around it, to proclaim the name of Christ whilst it contradicts His Word—refuses it (the record of the Spirit) to the people—and crushes out with all intolerance the simple obedience of the truth?” (The Life and Letters of Faraday, Vol. 2, 1870, pp. 431,432)

John Jay was the 5th President of the Continental Congress of the United States from December 10, 1778 to September 28, 1779. Jay was also the first Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court (1789-95), and the second president of the American Bible Society (1821-28). He wrote about many important issues that were vital to America's civil and religious liberties. Commenting on the dangers of foreign influences which were seeking to subvert the U.S. Constitution, Jay wrote, “The socialism and infidelity of other lands, and especially the Jesuitism which has aroused the enmity of governments, and of the people of all countries and whatever faith, are crowding to our shores. The members of the Society now muster in our republic, boasting of their numbers, their schools, their colleges, their wealth and their power. Their avowed principles and aims are in direct hostility to the supremacy of our constitution and laws, to the independence of the State, to its right to establish public schools, to the validity of our marriages, to the free circulation of the Bible, to liberty of speech and press, of conscience and education.” (The Great Conspiracy Against Our American Public Schools, 1890, p. 257)

Joseph Story, John Jay, Noah Webster, and others, were but a few of the many patriotic Americans who warned citizens of the dangers facing not only our public schools but our U.S. Constitution. In the book Denominational Schools published in 1890 we read: “A preliminary and significant step in the war upon our common-school system was taken a few years since, when it was complained of by some Roman Catholic ecclesiastics connected with the mission to America as being sectarian in its character, for the reason that there was allowed the reading of passages from the Holy Scriptures in a version deemed by their church as erroneous and heretical.” (Denominational Schools, 1890, p. 47) “The latest judicial decision in regard to the Bible in the public schools is that of Judge Bennett, of Wisconsin, in the case of Weiss vs. School Board of Edgerton. The action was brought by Roman Catholic parents for a peremptory writ of mandamus directing the board to cause the reading of King James's version of the Bible in the public schools to be discontinued. The reading was not compulsory, nor the plaintiffs' children required to be present at the reading. The exclusion was demanded on the ground that the reading was 'sectarian instruction,' and an unconstitutional interference with the rights of conscience.” (Ibid, p. 49)

Horace Greeley, editor of the New York Tribune newspaper, was also a member of the U.S. House of Representatives from New York's 6th district from 1848 to 1849. Greeley wrote: “The great body of those who seek to drive the Bible out of our schools will not be satisfied after they have driven it out, but will insist on breaking our common-school system into sectarian fragments. . . . Hence, if we give up the Bible, we only weaken our common-school system, . . . while we fail to conciliate its enemies and only excite them to new and inadmissible exactions.” (Ibid, p. 48)

Author and historian Justin Dewey Fulton describes what took place in the mid nineteenth century in the city of New York, “In 1840 the Catholics, led by Archbishop Hughes, again took the field. They did not come seeking charities, but by one fell stroke to sweep our school system from the board. They did not complain of oppression, nor of being deprived of any rights enjoyed by others, but demanded at the outset, what they claim as theirs, of the school-fund. They found fault with certain reading-books, in general, with the free use of the Bible, in particular.” “As a compromise the Bible was banished from the leading public schools of the city. Everything that could be done to place all upon a common level was performed. But this, instead of satisfying the exacting spirits who had demanded the change, was made, by a most glaring inconsistency, the occasion of a new and more plausible attack. The schools were denounced as 'Anti-christian, heathen, and godless.'” (The Roman Catholic Element in American History, 1857, pp. 247, 248) (See also Appendix, DESTINY OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS)

In his authoritative book, The great conspiracy against our American public schools, historian Richard Harcourt documented many of the facts of the conspiracies being carried out against our civil and religious liberties and public schools. In chapter two of this book, titled CONSPIRACY CONDUCTED THROUGH POLITICIANS AND OUR LIBERAL LAWS, Harcourt wrote: “This band of foreign priestly conspirators, with no sympathy for the American government or its system of education, are secretly plotting for the destruction of both! They have been watching with untiring vigilance every phase of our system, and they have seen that the public schools were the nurseries of American ideas, of American freedom, of American progress, and that a large number of children born of Roman Catholic parents, who were educated in these schools, were thoroughly Americanized by them. Therefore, by the advice and co-operation of the Pope, they have resolved to take possession of our schools, to Romanize them, or to ruin them.” (The great conspiracy against our American public schools, Richard Harcourt, 1890, pp. 33, 34)

Samuel F. B. Morse (1791-1872) is perhaps best known for his contribution to the invention of the telegraph system and the Morse Code. In the mid 1840's a 38-mile long telegraph line was strung between the Capitol Building in Washington, D.C. and Baltimore, Maryland. The line was officially opened on May 24, 1844, as Morse sent these famous words *“What hath God wrought” from the B&O's Mount Clare Station in Baltimore to the Capitol Building along the wire (*Holy Bible, Numbers 23:23). What many people don't know is that Samuel Morse was also a Bible believing Christian who warned the American people of a vast conspiracy being carried out by a certain cunning despotic religious organization that was at work in our country methodically maneuvering to remove the pure words of the Lord, the Holy Bible, from our public school class rooms. In his scholarly book Foreign Conspiracy Against the Liberties of the United States, Morse wrote: “Surely American Protestants, freemen, have discernment enough to discover beneath them the cloven foot of this subtle foreign heresy, and will not wait for a more extensive, disastrous, and overwhelming political interference, ere they assume the attitude of watchfulness and defence. They will see that Popery is now, what it has ever been, a system of the darkest political intrigue and despotism, cloaking itself, to avoid attack, under the sacred name of religion. They will be deeply impressed with the truth, that Popery is a political as well as a religious system; that in this respect it differs totally from all other sects, from all other forms of religion in the country. Popery imbodies in itself THE CLOSEST UNION OF CHURCH AND STATE.” (Foreign Conspiracy Against the Liberties of the United States, Samuel F. B. Morse, 1852, pp. 94, 95)

On pages 103 and 104 of Foreign Conspiracy Against the Liberties of the United States Samuel Morse wrote: “It is no false alarm. Our liberties are in danger.... We must shake off our lethargy, and like the giant awaking from his sleep, snap these shackles asunder. We are attacked in vulnerable points by foreign enemies to all liberty.” (Ibid, p. 103) “The life of our institutions....lies in the culture of the human mind and heart, of the reason and conscience; it is bound up in principles which must be taught by father to son, from generation to generation, with care, with toil, with sacrifice.— Hide the Bible for fifty years... and let our children be under the guidance of men whose first exercise upon the youthful mind is to teach that lesson of old school sophistry which distorts it forever, and binds it through life in bonds of error to the dictation of a man— a man whom, in the same exercise of distorted reason, he is persuaded to believe infallible; let these Jesuit doctors take the place of our Protestant instructors, and where will be the political institutions of the country? Fifty years would amply suffice to give the victory to the despotic principle, and realize the most sanguine wishes of the tyrants of Europe. The first thing to be done to secure safety, is to open our eyes at once to the reality and the extent of the danger. We must not walk on blindly, crying 'all's well.' The enemy is in all our borders. He has spread himself through all the land. The ramifications of this foreign plot are everywhere visible to all who will open their eyes.” (Ibid, p. 104)

And then on pages 106, 109 and 110 Morse wrote: “If Popery in this country is professing friendship to general knowledge, it is a feigned alliance. If it pretends to be in favor of educating the poor, it is a false pretence, it is only temporizing; it is conforming for the present, from policy, to the spirit of Protestantism around it, that it may forge its chains with less suspicion.” (Ibid, p. 106) “Popery...is the tyranny that hopes to escape detection, by assuming the name, and adopting the language of Democracy. It is this tyranny that is courted and favored at political elections by our politicians of all parties, because it has the advantage of a despotic organization. How much longer are the feelings of the religious community to be scandalized, and their moral sense outraged, by the bare-faced bargainings for Catholic and infidel votes? Have the religious community no remedy against such outrage? If they have not, if there is not a single point on which they can act together, if the religious denominations of various names can have no understanding on matters of this kind, if they have no common bond to unite them in repelling common enemies, then let us boast no more of religious liberty.” (Ibid, pp. 109, 110)

Samuel Morse's motives for exposing this foreign threat were not in any way, shape or form malicious, but purely honorable, being the welfare of his fellow citizens and the liberty of men's conscience, of the press, and of his free country. Morse wrote: “The exposure I am now making of the foreign designs upon our liberties, may possibly be mistaken for an attack on the Religion of the Catholics; yet I have not meddled with the conscience of any Catholic; if he honestly believes the doctrine of Transubstantiation, or that by doing penance he will prepare himself for heaven, or in the existence of Purgatory, or in the efficacy of the prayers and masses of priests to free the souls of his relatives from its flames, or that it is right to worship the Virgin Mary, or to pray to Saints, or keep holy days, or to refrain from meat at certain times, or to go on pilgrimages, or in the virtue of relics, or that none but Catholics can be saved, or many other points; however wrong I may and do think him to be, it is foreign from the design of these chapters to speak against them. But when he proclaims to the world that all power, temporal as well as spiritual, exists in the Pope, (denying, of course, the fundamental doctrine of republicanism;) that liberty of conscience is a 'raving' and 'most pestilential error;' that 'he execrates and detests the liberty of the press;'... he has then blended with his creed political tenets that vitally affect the very existence of our government, and no association with religious belief shall shield them from observation and rebuke.” (Ibid, pp. 79, 80)

Other organizations, some of who's members are unwittingly working in concert with the afore mentioned entity, with designs to subvert our liberties and undermine our constitution are still in existence today. Among these un-holy alliances is Freemasonry, the Illuminati, the Knights Templars, the Rosicrucians, along with other cultic groups, which are a modern-day continuation of Gnosticism and of the ancient pagan mystery religions. The sixth President of the United States, John Quincy Adams (1767-1848), wrote extensively on the subject of Freemasonry warning the American people of the dangers of this anti-Biblical oath-bound secretive society (see oaths, obligations and penalties in Masonry). In 1847 John Quincy Adams published a book entitled Letters on The Masonic Institution in which he revealed many of the society's dark secrets (see also Masonic Religion Revealed). On page 5 of the Preface to Adams' book we read, “The Institution of Masonry was introduced into the British Colonies of North America more than a hundred years ago. It went on slowly at first, but from the time of the Revolution it spread more rapidly, until in the first quarter of the present century it had succeeded in winding itself through all the departments of the body politic in the United States, and in claiming the sanction of many of the country's most distinguished men.... Masonry was exercising its influence in the sacred desk, in the legislative hall, and on the bench of justice;” (Letters on The Masonic Institution, 1847, p. 5)

In a December 18th, 1831 letter to Levi Lincoln who was the Governor of Massachusetts, John Quincy Adams said that “the institution of Freemasonry in these United States....[is] destined to produce consequences deeply affecting the interests, the happiness, and the liberties of our country.” (Ibid, p. 41). Several states passed laws forbidding the taking of secret oaths subversive to both the United States Constitution and true Christianity. On pages 3 and 4 of the Preface to Letters on The Masonic Institution we read, “From the moment of the adoption of a penal law, deemed strong enough to meet the most serious of the evils complained of, the apprehension of further danger from Masonry began to subside. At this day, the subject has ceased to be talked of. The attention of men has been gradually diverted to other things, until at last it may be said, that few persons are aware of the fact, provided it be not especially forced upon their notice, that not only Freemasonry continues to exist, but also that other associations partaking of its secret nature, if not of its unjustifiable obligations, not merely live, but greatly flourish in the midst of them.” (Ibid, pp. 3,4)

In his 1831 letter to Governor Levi Lincoln of Massachusetts, John Quincy Adams wrote: “It is now a little more than five years since the true character of Freemasonry, as existing in this Union, was disclosed to the public eye. It first exploded by the catastrophe of one of the deepest tragedies that ever was enacted upon the scene of human being, exploded by a complication of nine or ten of the most atrocious crimes that ever were conceived in human hearts or committed by human hands; crimes committed not by men in the stations of life to which ignorance is a snare, intemperance a stimulant, or indigence a temptation ; not by men under the instigations of malice or revenge ; but by men in the educated classes of society; men who had been instructed in the duties of Christians and citizens; men above the pressure of want; men, in other respects and independent of their secret and mystical ties to this Institution, of fair and respectable lives ; men enjoying the confidence of their fellow-citizens and holding offices of trust committed to them by that confidence.

  “We see these men, not in the solitary depravity of a single heart, but after repeated consultation in Lodges and Chapters, combined, and, for the commission of more than one of the crimes, abusing the sacred authority of the law, with which they had been invested for the furtherance and execution of justice, to the commission of swindling, slander, theft, false imprisonment, man stealing, treachery, arson, transportation of a citizen beyond the limits of his country, and, to close the catalogue, foul and midnight murder.” (Ibid, pp. 42, 43) 

John Marshall (1755-1835) was the 4th Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court (1801-1835). Marshall's court opinions helped lay the basis for American constitutional law. Marshall, like Washington and other patriotic Americans, was enticed to join a Masonic lodge under false pretense. In a letter dated July 22nd, 1833, Marshall explained why he became a Mason and warned of the dangers Freemasonry posed to the nation. Marshall wrote, “Soon after entering the army I was made a Mason. In addition to the motives, which usually actuate young men, I was induced to become a candidate for admission into the society, by the assurance that the brotherly love which pervaded it and the duties imposed on its members, might be of great to me in the vicissitudes of fortune to which a soldier was exposed. After the army was disbanded, I found the order in high estimation, and every gentleman I saw in this part of Virginia was a member. I followed the crowd for a time without attaching any importance to its object, or giving myself the trouble to inquire why others did. It soon lost its attraction, and though there are several Lodges in the city of Richmond, I have not been in one of them for more than forty years, except once, on an invitation to accompany General La Fayette, nor have I been a member of one of them for more than thirty. It was impossible not to perceive the useless pageantry of the whole exhibition. My friend, Mr. Story, has communicated my opinions to you truly. I thought it, however, a harmless plaything, which would live its hour and pass away, until the murder or abstraction of Morgan was brought before the public; — that atrocious crime, and I had almost said, the still more atrocious suppression of the testimony concerning it, demonstrated the abuse, of which the oaths prescribed by the order were susceptible, and convinced me that the institution ought to be abandoned, as one capable of producing much evil,...” (The Political and Economic Doctrines of John Marshall, John E. Oster, 1914, p. 98)

It is often asserted by revisionist historians that Freemasonry is a benign Institution since the Father of our nation, George Washington, was a Freemason. Yes, George Washington once joined the Masonic Order, but attended the lodge only once or twice during the last thirty years of his life. Before his death he warned the whole country to beware of secret societies. From Mount Vernon, in 1798, he wrote in allusion to an assertion relative to his lodge connection: “The fact is, I preside over none, nor have I been in one more than once or twice within the last thirty years.” (Secret Societies, 1888, p. 12). His Farewell Address warns the American people against all such associations and combinations in language explicit and pointed. He says, “The very idea of the power, and right of the people to establish government, presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established government. All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle and of fatal tendency.... they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people, and to usurp for themselves the reins of government;” (September 1796) (Washington's Farewell Address To The People of The United States, 1900, pp. 17,18,19)

While it is true that George Washington was at times influenced and led astray by the machinations of Freemasons, he was also well acquainted with true Biblical Christianity. In a book entitled Daily Sacrifice, all in the handwriting of George Washington, he said, “O most Glorious God, in Jesus Christ my merciful and loving father, I acknowledge and confess my guilt, in the weak and imperfect performance of the duties of this day. I have called on thee for pardon and forgiveness of sins, but so coldly and carelessly, that my prayers are become my sin and stand in need of pardon.... remit my transgressions, negligences & ignorances, and cover them all with the absolute obedience of thy dear Son, that those sacrifices which I have offered may be accepted by thee, in and for the sacrifice of Jesus Christ offered upon the cross for me;” (George Washington, the Christian, 1919, pp. 25,26)

As a result of politico-religious maneuvering in America and on the European continent by certain unscrupulous elements, in the late 1800s Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort (two theologian “scholars” who were both involved in the occult), “transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance” of God's “everlasting covenant”, and revised (corrupted) the KJV Holy Bible that Americans had used and cherished for centuries. Westcott and Hort's theological beliefs did much to influence Europe and the United States of America in what is called higher criticism. To those embracing such beliefs, the KJV Holy Bible is full of errors and was not given by inspiration of God, but is just another human book that should not be taken too seriously. Westcott and Hort despised both the true scriptures and the United States. Hort stated, “I dare not prophesy about America, but cannot say that I see much as yet to soften my deep hatred of democracy in all its forms.” (Arthur Hort, Vol. II, p. 34). Hort further stated, “it cannot be wrong to desire and pray from the bottom of one's heart that the American union may be shivered to pieces.” (Life & Letters, Vol. 1, p. 459).

Westcott and Hort worked underhanded with other socialists and Bible despisers, such as the church of Rome which employed the cunning skills of the Jesuits to publish commentaries on the Revelation as a counter-interpretation to the prevailing view among Protestants which identified the Papacy with Antichrist. A leading feature of the Popes for arresting Protestantism was their tactics to employ Jesuits, in the garb of Reformers, to sow dissensions in Protestant countries. After this general permission of all disguises and counterfeits that might further the end in view--namely, the dividing and confounding of heretics--special methods were used. It was recommended to devise “new tenets, doctrines, and covenants.” These strange doctrines, preached from professedly Protestant lips, would evoke loud discords in the heretical meetinghouses, and furious wars in the Protestant camp (The Jesuits, 1881, pp. 51,52). The Jesuits also set out to undermine the Protestant scriptures and the faith of the people with a scheme “to ‘educate’ the Protestant scholars to believe that their Reformation Text was unreliable and that their Authorized Version was ‘not scholarly.’ Once thus programmed, the egotistical scholars would spontaneously attack their own Bible and believe that they were helping God.” (An Understandable History of the Bible, S. Gipp, pp.98,99). How sad and troubling it is to see the seeds of these anti-Protestant schemes come to fruition in modern-day America.

In a sermon delivered before the American Board of Missions at New York on October 12, 1827, Presbyterian minister Lyman Beecher said, “Popery is a system where science and ignorance, refinement and barbarism, wisdom and stupidity, taste and animalism, mistaken zeal and malignant enmity, may sanctimoniously pour out their virulence against the Gospel, and cry Hosanna, while they go forth to shed the blood and to wear out the patience of the saints. And though by revolutions it has been shaken, and compelled by motives of policy to cease a little from blood, not a principle of this system has been abandoned. All the wiles of ages past are put in requisition now to heal the fatal wounds which the beast has received, and to render the system still more powerful and terrific. The leaven is in secret and in open operation in this country ; and the quick action of the beast to the touch of the spear shows that he is neither dead nor asleep. And, considering the civilization, and wealth, and science, which the system comprehends, it is from popery, no doubt, that the Gospel is destined to experience the last and most determined resistance,— popery, as sustained by and sustaining despotic governments.” (Beecher's Works., Vol. II., Lyman Beecher, D.D., 1852, pp. 418, 419)

Many of the early English settlers who came to America in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries sought religious and political freedom. They sought to spread the truth of the Christian religion and expose the false Christian teachings of the Roman Catholic Church that had permeated and corrupted much of Europe for more than a millennium. The great Puritan leader Cotton Mather (1663-1728) commented on the early English settlers and their reasons for coming to America. In his 1702 book Magnalia Christi Americana, or The Ecclesiastical History of New England, comprising seven distinct books and considered to be one of the most important documents in American history, Mather wrote, “It is now Reasonable that before we pass any further, the Reasons of this Undertaking should be more exactly made known unto Posterity, especially unto the Posterity of those that Were the Undertakers, lest they come at length to Forget and Neglect the true Interest of New-England.” (The Ecclesiastical History of New England, Cotton Mather, 1702, p. 17). Transcribing from an early manuscript, Mather said that the first General Considerations for the Plantation of New-England was that, “It will be a Service unto the Church of great Consequence, to carry the Gospel into those Parts of the World, and Raise a Bulwark against the Kingdom of Antichrist, which the Jesuites labour to Rear up in all Parts of the World.” (Ibid. p. 17) (Religion and Education in America, 1840, p. 392)

It is a little known fact in modern-day America that every major Protestant Reformer, without exception, identified the papacy as Antichrist. Reformers such as John Wycliffe, Martin Luther, Cotton Mather, John Wesley, Thomas Cranmer, Roger Williams, John Calvin, and others had a fairly good understanding of history. The early Christian church understood the prophecies of the prophet Daniel and of the apostles Paul and John. And the Reformation Protestants also understood these prophecies and recognized the four “beasts” of Daniel chapter seven as Babylon, Persia, Greece and Rome; and Daniel's “little horn”, Paul's “man of sin” and John's “beast” of Revelation as the papal power that “made war with the saints, and prevailed against them;” (Dan. 7; II Thess. 2; Rev. 13 & 17). These are the true Christians that had to flee from their homes and from their communities into the wilderness to escape the heavy hand of persecution that prevailed against them for centuries. This is the true church that fled “into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished” on the milk and meat of the word of God, the Lord sustaining them and using them to preserve his pure words as they copied and recopied the sacred scriptures and passed them down from one generation to the next (Rev. 12:13,14).

Up until the twentieth century most true ministers of the gospel of Christ recognized the papacy as Antichrist. In 1846 the Rev. Samuel J. Cassels of Norfolk, Virginia wrote “that the ‘little horn’ of Daniel, the ‘man of sin’ of Paul, and ‘the beast’ of John, all symbolize the papal power” (Christ and Antichrist, S. J. Cassels, 1846, p. 14). Many judicious and excellent ministers of various Christian denominations in America recommended Cassels' book, including Robert Boyte C. Howell, Pastor of the First Baptist Church, Nashville, Tenn.; Edward Wadsworth, Pastor of the Methodist Episcopal Church, Norfolk, Va.; James R. Gilland, Pastor of Fishing Creek Presbyterian Church, Chester District, South Carolina.; David Caldwell, Rector of St. Paul's Church, Norfolk, Va.; Upton Beall, Rector of Christ Church, Norfolk, Va.; James B. Taylor, Corresponding Secretary of Foreign Mission Board, Southern Baptist Convention, Richmond, Va.; Joseph C. Stiles, Pastor of the United Presbyterian Church, Richmond, Va.; Samuel L. Graham, D.D. Professor of Oriental Literature, Union Theological Seminary, Va.; James J. Hamner, Pastor of the Fifth Presbyterian Church, Baltimore; Henry V. D. Johns, Rector of Christ Church, Baltimore; G. W. Musgrave, Pastor of the Third Presbyterian Church, Baltimore; H. A. Boardman, Pastor of the Tenth Presbyterian Church, Philadelphia; B. Gildersleeve, Editor of the Watchman and Observer, Richmond, Va. (Christ and Antichrist, 1846, Recommendations pp. 2,3,4).

In 1866 renowned Baptist preacher Charles Spurgeon referred to the papal power as “the insidious monster” and “the detestable Antichrist” and “the harlot of Babylon” (The Sword and The Trowel, C. H. Spurgeon, 1866, p. 3, p. 497). In 1887 historian Henry Grattan Guinness quoting Martin Luther wrote, “Elsewhere again he says, that when Daniel ‘saw the terrible wild beast which had ten horns, which by the consent of all is the Roman empire, he also beheld another small horn come up in the middle of them. This is the Papal power, which rose up in the middle of the Roman empire.’” (Romanism and the Reformation, Henry Grattan Guinness, 1887, pp. 231, 232). Nevertheless, despite the abundance of historical evidence, the clear prophecies of scripture and the numerous testimonies of Christian martyrs and historians, the Roman Catholic church would have us believe that all of these able ministers of the gospel, along with every Protestant Reformer in history, are mis-interpreting prophecy.

Many Americans are surprised to learn that among Westcott and Hort's allies was the Roman Catholic Church. And many Americans are also surprised to learn that the church of Rome fought for the removal of the Holy Bible from public school classrooms. For centuries, the standard policy of the Vatican was the suppression of all non-Catholic religious liberties in America. This policy of suppression of religious liberty would be responsible for prolonging one of the bloodiest civil wars in history, the American Civil War (1861-1865). When many in the southern states were becoming weary with the war, and some were ready to dis-arm and put an end to the bloodshed, the Pope's actions in 1863 would directly contribute to the continuation of the war for nearly two more agonizing years. Historian William Grady, who has done extensive research on the subject, wrote: “The average Christian student of American History is unaware of how close Leo's [Pope Leo's] predecessor [Pope Pius IX] came to dissolving the Union [the United States of America] during the Civil War years. For a sobering insight as to how the Vatican can interfere with foreign governments, consider the chaos incited by a single letter sent by Pius IX to Jefferson Davis in 1863. Responding to correspondence from Davis, dated 23rd September, 1863, the Pope's reply was formally addressed, ‘To Jefferson Davis, President of the Confederate States of America, Richmond.’ This subtle salutation gave the Confederacy a badly needed vote of confidence from ‘His Holiness.’ What followed next is quite unnerving. Whereas the desertion rates of the Northern Armies showed 16 percent for Germans, 0.5 percent for native Americans, 0.7 percent for all others, the Irish figures sky-rocketed to 72 percent! ... The above figures indicate that out of every 10,000 Irish enlistees – almost all Catholics – there were over 33 times as many desertions as among all the other groups put together. The point to be made here is not only the historical one – that the Vatican intervened in the agonies of the American Civil War – but that, in a different context and in a different way, it can do the same in today's conflicts, be they military or political. And even more so in the future.” (Final Authority, Dr. W.P. Grady, 1993, pp. 225,226) (See also America Or Rome, Which? 1895, p. 88)

The reason for the rebellion on the part of the South was the long-cherished purpose of Southern politicians and statesmen to establish a Southern Confederacy on the basis of human bondage. This principle was announced by Alexander H. Stephens, the Vice-President of the Southern Confederacy, in his infamous Cornerstone Speech of March 21st 1861 at Savannah, Georgia: “Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea [of the equality of races]; its foundations are laid, its corner-stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.... It is, indeed, in conformity with the ordinance of the Creator.” (Alexander H. Stephens in Public and Private, 1866, pp. 721, 723).

Historian Justin Fulton remarked on the Roman Catholic church's desire to expand her influence and power across the globe, “Romanism encouraged the South because the corner-stone of the Southern Confederacy rested upon human slavery. How the colored people of the South or the North can forget this and unite with the Roman Catholic church is a mystery. It is the theory of Rome that the toilers should be kept in ignorance. Gentlemen for the palace and serf's for the field, is the spirit of Romanism, incarnated in every despotic government where its power is supreme. Louis Napoleon, the ally of Pius IX, expected to build up in Mexico a Roman Catholic kingdom, and unite it with the Southern States, and so establish a Latin Empire in the new world.” (Washington In The Lap of Rome, 1888, p. 122)

That the Roman Catholic church supported the southern states' political and moral views on slavery is indisputable. The Southern Confederacy's own Vice-President, Alexander H. Stephens, professed in a letter to Thomas W. Thomas dated 9th May, 1855, “But I think of all the Christian denominations in the United States, the Catholics are the last that southern people should join in attempting to put under the ban of civil proscription. For as a church they have never warred against us or our peculiar institutions. No man can say as much of New England Baptists, Presbyterians, or Methodists; the long roll of abolition petitions with which Congress has been so much excited and agitated for years past, come not from the Catholics; their pulpits at the north are not desecrated every Sabbath with anathemas against slavery. And of the three thousand New England clergymen who sent the anti-Nebraska memorial to the Senate last year, not one was a Catholic, as I have been informed and believe.” (Alexander H. Stephens in Public and Private, 1866, p. 464)

The papacy's desire to convert the whole of America to Catholicism was well known by many in the nineteenth century. It is a significant fact that the first shot fired in the American Civil War at Fort Sumter was ordered by the Roman Catholic General Pierre G. T. Beauregard. And it is also not a coincident that every conspirator connected with the assassination of Abraham Lincoln was a Roman Catholic. Unfortunately, most historians today rarely, if ever, mention the fact that Rome, through the Jesuits and other secret oath-bound organizations –Knights of the Golden Circle, Order of American Knights, Son's of Liberty– advised and directed the leaders of the southern states throughout this period. President Abraham Lincoln was personally against slavery, as were the vast majority of Americans. “[T]he restoration of the Union and the abolition of slavery” were Lincoln's prime objectives. In a letter dated July 18, 1864, Lincoln stated that “Any proposition which embraces the restoration of the whole Union, and the abolishment of slavery, and which comes by and with an authority that can control the armies now at war against the United States, will be received and considered by the executive Government of the United States....” (The Life and Public Services of Abraham Lincoln, 1884, p. 248). Again in 1864 Abraham Lincoln said, “This civil war seems to be nothing but a political affair to those who do not see, as I do, the secret springs of that terrible drama. But it is more a religious than a civil war. It is Rome who wants to rule and degrade the North, as she has ruled and degraded the South, from the very day of its discovery. There are only very few of the Southern leaders who are not more or less under the influence of the Jesuits through their wives, family relations, and their friends.” “if the American people could learn what I know of the fierce hatred of the generality of the priests of Rome against our institutions, our schools, our most sacred rights, and our so dearly bought liberties, they would drive them away to-morrow, from among us, or they would shoot them as traitors.” (Fifty Years in the Church of Rome, Charles Chiniquy, 1886, pp. 696, 697)

President Lincoln was murdered April 15, 1865, and documented evidence shows that the papacy played a key role in his assassination (See The Suppressed Truth, 1922; Rome's Responsibility for the Assassination of Abraham Lincoln, 1897; America Or Rome, Which? 1895; Washington In The Lap of Rome, 1888; The Assassination of Lincoln, 1900; Assassination of Lincoln; A History of The Great Conspiracy, 1892) (See also The Catholic Church Helped Nazi War Criminals Escape Justice After WWII: History Channel Documentary).

It is a common but erroneous belief that America's Founding Fathers were pro-slavery. History reveals that “Among the enemies of slavery could be counted Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Franklin, Sherman, Livingston, Patrick Henry, Madison, Hancock, Morris, St. Clair, the Randolphs—John and Thomas. Add to the above the rest of the signers of the Declaration, backed up by the great document itself. We defy and challenge the world to show one single patriot of the Revolution who was in favor of Slavery, or advocated its extension. Some desired its gradual extinction, but not one can be named who spoke in favor of its remaining as a permanent Institution.” (History of The Plots and Crimes of The Great Conspiracy to Overthrow Liberty in America, p. 6)

At a Convention assembled in Philadelphia in 1787, a Constitution was drawn up, thus laying the foundations of our National Government. The U.S. Constitution did not create slavery, for it existed, as an inheritance from Great Britain, long before the Revolution. “Notwithstanding the Revolution had been fought and won on the doctrine of equal rights, yet, when the colonies formed a national compact, they set aside the principles on which their liberties had been gained.” (Ibid, pp. 7,8) Representatives Pinckney and Rutledge of South Carolina attended the Constitutional Convention, where Pinckney remarked that if it prohibited the slave trade South Carolina would never accept the Constitution. The article was so altered as to allow the importation of slaves until 1800, but this was too short a time. Pinkney moved to strike out 1800 and insert 1808, and the motion was carried. Section IX, article 1st, of the Constitution stated that slavery was to be phased out over a period of twenty years, or until 1808. “In the original draft of the Declaration of Independence, the slave trade is denounced as piratical warfare. These denunciations were struck out of the Declaration of Independence in compliance to South Carolina and Georgia, who had never attempted to restrain the importation of slaves, and who, on the contrary, wished to continue it. -- Writings of Thos. Jefferson. “In the South Carolina Convention, Judge Pendleton observed that only three states, Georgia, South Carolina and North Carolina, allowed the importation of negroes. Their reason for so doing was that during the last war they lost vast numbers of them, which loss they wished to supply. “It was notorious that the postponement of immediate abolition (of the slave trade) was indispensable to secure the adoption of the Constitution. It was a necessary sacrifice to the prejudices and interests of a portion of the Southern States. -- 3d Story Com. Con. 1828, 1829.” (History of The Plots and Crimes of The Great Conspiracy to Overthrow Liberty in America, pp. 8, 9)

The continuation of slavery in America until the time of the Civil War was, for the most part, the result of a relatively small number of greedy pro-slavery southerners who's immense wealth and lust for power enabled them to bribe, coerce or otherwise influence law makers and politicians concerning the issue of slavery. Early public school textbooks show that the vast majority of Americans viewed slavery as an evil which is condemned by God in the Bible. In the 1833 edition of A History of The United States of America, historian Charles Goodrich tells us, “A disgust towards this inhuman traffic appeared very early in the colonies;...In Massachusetts, in 1645, a law was made, 'prohibiting the buying and selling of slaves, except those taken in lawful war, or reduced to servitude by their crimes.' In 1703, the same colony imposed a heavy duty on every negro imported, and in a subsequent law on the subject, they called the practice, 'the unnatural and unaccountable custom of enslaving mankind.' In Virginia, as early as 1699, attempts were made to repress the importation of slaves, by heavy duties....In 1778, Virginia abolished the traffic by law; Connecticut, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts prohibited it before the year 1789. The continental congress passed a resolution against the purchase of slaves, imported from Africa, and exhorted the colonies to abandon the trade altogether.” (A History of The United States of America, C. Goodrich, 1833 p. 358)

In the 1826 edition of The American First Class Book, educator John Pierpont quotes an extract from Daniel Webster's Discourse delivered at Plymouth, Mass. Dec. 22, 1820, in commemoration of the first settlement of New-England, “I deem it my duty, on this occasion, to suggest, that the land is not yet wholly free from the contamination of a traffic, at which every feeling of humanity must revolt—I mean the African slave trade. Neither public sentiment, nor the law, has yet been able entirely to put an end to this odious and abominable trade. At the moment when God, in his mercy, has blessed the world with a universal peace, there is reason to fear, that, to the disgrace of the Christian name and character, new efforts are making for the extension of this trade, by subjects and citizens of Christian states, in whose hearts no sentiment of justice inhabits, and over whom neither the fear of God nor the fear of man exercises a control. In the sight of our law, the African slave trader is a pirate and a felon; and in the sight of Heaven, an offender far beyond the ordinary depth of human guilt. There is no brighter part of our history, than that which records the measures which have been adopted by the government, at an early day, and at different times since, for the suppression of this traffic; and I would call upon all the true sons of New-England, to cooperate with the laws of man, and the justice of Heaven.” (The American First Class Book, 1826, p. 184)

In the 1811 edition of The American Preceptor, educator Caleb Bingham quotes an extract from a speech of Mr. Pitt, in the British Parliament, on The Subject of the Slave Trade, “I say, because I feel, that in continuing this trade you are guilty of an offence beyond your power to atone for; and by your indulgence to the planters, thousands of human beings are to be consigned to misery.” (The American Preceptor, 1816, p. 85)

In the 1803 edition of The New Instructor, Section 33 titled A Family Conversation on the Slavery of the Negroes, educator Asa Rhoads writes the following, “Many persons of great talents and virtue, have made several fruitless attempts to obtain an act for the abolition of this trade. Men interested in its continuance have hitherto frustrated these generous designs: but we may rely upon the goodness of that Divine Providence, who cares for all creatures, that the day will come, when their rights will be considered: and there is great reason to hope, from the light already cast upon the subject, that the rising generation will prefer justice and mercy, to interest and policy; and will free themselves from the odium we at present suffer, of treating our fellow-creatures in a manner unworthy of them, and of ourselves.” (The New Instructor, 1803, p. 127)

In the 1816 edition of The Columbian Orator, educator Caleb Bingham quotes an extract from a Discourse delivered before the New-York Society for Promoting the Manumission (freeing) of Slaves, April 12, 1797, by Rev. Samuel Miller, “I HAVE hitherto confined myself to the consideration, of slavery as it exists among ourselves, and of that unjust domination which is exercised over the Africans and their descendants, who are already in our country. It is with regret and indignation which I am unable to express, that I call your attention to the conduct of some among us, who, instead of diminishing, strive to increase the evil in question.” (The Columbian Orator, 1816, p. 293)

In an attempt to defame his character, some of Abraham Lincoln's enemies falsely charged him with engaging in seances at the White House, a claim that is totally unfounded in facts. John Nicolay, the private secretary and intimate associate of Abraham Lincoln during the war, stated that he dismissed the tales about Lincoln's spiritualism as idle nonsense. Nicolay resided constantly in the White House, and he was positive that no seances were ever held there. Nicolay declared, “I never knew of his attending a seance of Spiritualists at the White House or elsewhere....” (The Religion of Abraham Lincoln, William J. Wolf, 1959, p. 202)

Unfortunately there has been a systematic revision of American history for well over a century, which has given rise to a number of misconceptions among many who take neither the time nor the interest in researching the facts. Certain Jesuitical Roman Catholic elements within our own government are responsible for the vast amount of mis-information and distortion of facts being promulgated among the masses.

It is quite possible that some of our readers may think that the Roman hierarchy in America do not approve of the policy of their church in interfering with the freedom of speech and of the press, and that they would repudiate it if they dared to do so. We therefore reprint from the article on “Censorship of Books,” in the Catholic Encyclopedia (Vol. Ill, pages 519-527), edited by American Catholics and published in New York City, some paragraphs upon this subject: —

   From the beginning and at all times in principle, the church adhered to the censorship. . . . 
   When the church, after the era of persecution, was given greater liberty, a censorship of books appears more plainly. . . . 
   The religious disruption of Germany had not yet begun when Rome took precautionary measures by insisting on a preventive censorship of all printed works. . . . 
   During the Lateran Council, Leo X promulgated, 3 May, 1515, the bull Inter sollicitudines. This is the first papal censorial decree given for the entire church which was universally accepted. . . . 
   Leo X issued the bull Exsurge Domine [June 15, 1520], by which all writings of Luther, even future ones, were forbidden under pain of excommunication. . . . 
   Pius X issued in 1905 orders regarding the printing and publication of liturgical chants and melodies, and In the encyclical letter Pascendi dominici gregis (8 Sept., 1907) most urgently enjoined on all the prohibition and censorship of books. . . . 
   It is, of course, absolutely Impossible for both the Pope and the Congregation of the Index to watch over the press of all countries in order to suppress at once each and every pernicious writing. . . . The Pope, of course, has the right of censorship for the entire church. (The Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. III, 1913, “Censorship of Books”, pp. 519-527)

It certainly borders on the ludicrous for intelligent men of this century, boasting of their admiration for the liberty vouchsafed in America, to maintain that one man in Rome, and he not noted for his scholarship, has the right to condemn and to forbid the printing of any writing, anywhere in the whole world, which he decides would be injurious to the faithful. The wisdom which has sometimes been displayed in this effort to control human thought may be appreciated when it is remembered that in 1616 the Congregation of the Index "altogether prohibited and condemned" a work by Father Paul Anthony Foscarini "wherein the said father has endeavored to show that the doctrine of the immobility of the sun in the center of the universe, and the mobility of the earth, is consonant to truth and is not opposed to Holy Scripture." From the last paragraph quoted from the encyclopedia it is plain that if such a thing were possible, the Pope and the Congregation of the Index would "suppress at once each and every pernicious writing" in all the countries of the world, they of course being the judges as to what is pernicious. This is the logical result of the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church concerning freedom of speech and of the press. "To make America Catholic" means the application of this doctrine in this country. (The Censorship of Printing, 1913, pp. 525,526)

Commenting on the papacy's policy to suppress facts and control the flow of information, Roman Catholic historian John Acton (1834-1902), commonly known as Lord Acton, wrote: “The Council instituted the index of prohibited books, which is the fourth article in the machinery of resistance.... The idea of drawing up a comprehensive list of all that no man should read commended itself to the zeal of Caraffa, having been suggested to him by Della Casa, who had published such a list at Venice.... A congregation was appointed to examine new publications, to issue decrees against them as required, and to make out catalogues from time to time of works so condemned. Besides this, censures were also pronounced by the Pope himself, the Inquisition, the Master of the Sacred Palace, and the Secretary of the Index, separately. In this way an attempt was made to control what people read, committing to oblivion the works of Protestant scholars, and of such men as Machiavelli, and correcting offensive texts, especially historians. Several such corrected editions were published at the time, and many things were reprinted with large omissions.” (Lectures on Modern History, ed. John Neville Figgis and Reginald Vere Laurence, London: Macmillan, 1906, pp. 119, 120)

Abraham Lincoln's death was perhaps as much a murder of revenge as it was a political assassination. As a Lawyer, Abraham Lincoln came to the defense of a man whom the Roman Catholic priesthood plotted against and “charged him with crimes which, if not disproved, would have incarcerated him in the State penitentiary for life.” The man was Charles Chiniquy, a Roman Catholic priest who was exposing the corruption of the Catholic priesthood and speaking out against the Church's superstitious idolatries, false doctrines and dangerous anti-constitutional policies. Several Jesuits had come from Chicago and St. Louis to see to it that Chiniquy be condemned. But when Lincoln successfully defended Chiniquy and wrenched him from their cruel hands, nothing can be compared to the expression of their rage against Lincoln. Propaganda was circulated among Romanists describing Lincoln as an excommunicated Catholic apostate, and several Roman-Catholic plots to assassinate Lincoln were concocted. In the 11th century, pope Gregory VII decreed that the killing of an apostate is not murder, but a good Christian act. That decree is incorporated in the canon law which every priest must study, and which every good Catholic must follow.... Coligny, a Protestant, was brutally murdered on St. Bartholomew's night; Henry IV was stabbed by the Jesuit assassin, Revaillac, the 14th of May, 1610, for having given liberty of conscience to his people; William, Prince of Orange, the head of the Dutch Republic, was stricken down July 10th, 1584, by Girard, the fiendish embodiment of all that was crafty, bigoted, and revengeful in Spanish Popery. (Washington In The Lap of Rome, Justin Fulton, 1888).

In the 16th century Ignatius Loyola founded a Catholic order called the Society of Jesus, also known as the Jesuits. In Secret Instructions of The Jesuits, historian William C. Brownlee informs us that as a soldier Ignatius Loyola “received a severe wound in the service of Ferdinand V. of Spain, in 1521; and he had been long confined in a place where he had access, probably, to no other books than The Lives of the Saints. It is not to be wondered at that his mind was thence turned away from military enthusiasm to ghostly fanaticism. When recovered, he speedily gave proofs of his insane fanaticism by assuming the name and office of 'Knight of the Virgin Mary.'... he pursued with solemn gravity, a course of the wildest and most extravagant adventures, in the belief that he was her most exalted favorite.” Ignatius assured Pope Paul III “that the plan and constitution were given to him by an immediate revelation from Heaven.” No doubt Ignatius said this to impress his “Holiness”, as Dr. Stillingfleet had shown, “every order of monks and nuns in Rome has been ordained, by visions, and inspirations from Heaven.” (Secret Instructions of the Jesuits, 1857, pp. 5, 6).

The Jesuits definitely have a dark history of intrigue and sedition, that’s why they were expelled from numerous countries throughout most of their history: France (1594 & 1764), England (1584, 1604, 1829), Venice (1606), Portugal (1759), Spain (1767), Naples (1767 & 1848), Malta (1768), Russia (1820), Switzerland (1847), Genoa (1848), Austria (1848), Germany (1872), and others (The Historic Note-Book, by E. Cobham Brewer, 1909, pp. 469, 470; The Mirror of Parliament, Vol. 4, 1839, pp. 2605-2609). No less than fifty-one documented expulsions from world governments gives us an idea of the motives and methods employed by the Jesuits. Their reputation for “Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;” “subterfuge, espionage, subversion and worse is well-known to the serious student of history” (I Tim. 4:1-3).

Jesuit priests have been known throughout history as the most wicked political arm of the Roman Catholic Church. Edmond Paris, in his scholarly work, The Secret History of the Jesuits, reveals and documents much of this information. At the Council of Trent, the Catholic Church gave the Jesuits the specific assignment of destroying Protestantism and bringing people back to the “Mother Church.” This was to be done not only through the Inquisition, but also through propaganda (theology, philosophy, politics, etc.). Adolf Hitler said, “Let me control the textbooks and I will control the state.” (Christianity's Dangerous Idea, 2010, p. 191). Textbook propaganda is a tool that has been used since the invention of the printing press by dictators and tyrants to mold the thoughts, ideas and philosophies of young impressionable minds. The mind of a child can easily be imprinted upon and acquire the learned behaviors and attitudes of authority. Thus brainwashed, they become part of the dominant culture. A strategy the Jesuits have understood and employed for many years. Page 547 of History of the Christian Church states, “One of the principal means which the Jesuits employed against the Reformation was the school.... Their tact in handling youth gave them a religious influence over the developing minds under their care which was almost sure to result in loyalty to the Roman Catholic Church.... Especially did they strive to win the sons of the noble families, because among them were the seats of political influence. In every possible way it was undertaken to outdo the Protestant schools and universities in the educational field.... The same method in another form led them to seek everywhere positions as fathers confessor, especially among the nobility and the wealthy classes, thereby not only molding religious opinion, but gaining great political influence.” (History of the Christian Church, John Fletcher Hurst, George Park Fisher, Vol.2, 1900, p. 547).

In 1807 the Society was established in the United States. On May 6th, 1816, John Adams wrote to Thomas Jefferson stating, “I do not like the late Resurrection of the Jesuits. They have a General, now in Russia, in correspondence with jesuits in the U.S. who are more numerous than everybody knows. Shall We not have Swarms of them here? In as many shapes and disguises as ever.... In the shape of printers, Editors, Writers, School masters, etc. If ever any Congregation of men could merit, eternal Perdition on Earth and in Hell... it is this Company of Loyola.” (The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. XV, 1905, p. 17). On August 1st Jefferson replied: “I dislike, with you, their restoration, because it marks a retrograde step from light towards darkness.” (The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. XV, 1905, p. 58; The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. VII, 1857, p. 27; Adams-Jefferson Letters, Vol. 2, p. 474; Secret History, E. Paris, p. 75). The fact that so few people have any knowledge of these important statements made by America's Founding Fathers is further proof of the Jesuit's success at re-writing history and influencing public opinion.

Commenting on the secretive Roman Catholic Jesuit society, the 1904 edition of Webster's Universal Dictionary says: “The power of the organization lies largely in its close scrutiny into affairs, its secret methods.... For the means it has sometimes employed to accomplish its purposes in statecraft it has been condemned as unscrupulous in intrigue and deceptive in purpose, tending to the subversion of legitimate government.” (Webster's Universal Dictionary, 1904, p. 907). Historian Edmond Paris wrote: “It is the same today; the 30,000 official members of the [Jesuit] Society operate all over the world in the capacity of her personnel, officers of a truly secret army containing in its ranks heads of political parties, high ranking officials, generals, magistrates, physicians, Faculty professors, etc., all of them striving to bring about, in their own sphere,“l'Opus dei”, God's work, in reality the plans of the papacy.” (Secret History, E. Paris, pp. 27,30).

In 1821 John Adams wrote, “I have long been decided in opinion that a free government and the Roman Catholick religion can never exist together in any nation or Country.” (The Founders on Religion, James H. Hutson, p. 41). John Adams was not intolerant of others with differing religious opinions than his own. John Adams, like many other distinguished early American patriots, recognized the dangers that the church of Rome posed in America; and they were not coerced, bribed or otherwise intimidated into silence, like many modern-day politicians and religious leaders. The church of Rome was at the forefront of the push to remove the Holy Bible from public school classrooms, because it was the Protestant Bible, the Bible of the Reformation which contained the preserved historical scriptures of Christianity. The Vatican's plan to remove the KJV Bible would result in a breakdown of Christian moral values in our public schools whereby the Roman church would then come to the rescue and offer a solution to the problem, eg. private Catholic schools to indoctrinate the American populace. Furthermore, the church of Rome has never removed the Protestant Holy Bible from her list of forbidden books. And why? Because the plain words of the Lord in the Holy Bible exposes the superstitious traditions of the Romish church; and the plain words of the Lord in the Holy Bible reveals the simple and only way to true salvation which is by grace through faith in Jesus Christ alone and “Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us” (Titus 3:5) when “Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many” (Heb. 9:28), “Who...by himself purged our sins” (Heb. 1:3), and “we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all” (Heb. 10:10); Christ “offered one sacrifice for sins for ever” (Heb. 10:12), and “there is no more offering for sin” (Heb. 10:18) (see Romanism, The Enemy of Education, 1853; Romanism vs. The Public School System, 1888; Bible Possession Banned By Catholic Church; the Holy Bible, Ephesians 2:8,9). John Adams said, “Liberty and Popery cannot live together.” (The Founders on Religion, James H. Hutson, p. 41). Christian minister and historian Charles A. Goodrich said in 1830 that: “The present depressed state of Popery, both in England, and on the continent [North America], is no proof that its leading principles [propagation of pagan doctrines, persecution of Protestant Christians] have been abandoned. By means of various revolutions, its power has been shaken, and, from motives of policy, it has been compelled to cease from blood [murder, burning people at the stake]; but, in the language of a distinguished divine of our own country, ‘not a principle of the system has been abandoned. All the wiles of ages are put in requisition now... to render the system still more powerful [influential]...’* “Within a short period, the attention of the Pope of Rome has been directed to North America, and systematic efforts are now making, under his immediate patronage, and at his expense, to introduce and establish this corrupt system, in various parts of our land.” “The question presents itself to the American people: ‘Shall this system find encouragement, in the land of the pilgrims?’ We fear not, indeed, that Popery can ever greatly flourish on the American soil.... Yet, while the friends of truth should not be needlessly alarmed, neither should they sleep. A holy vigilance should guard well the approaches of an enemy, whose triumphs here would be the ruin of that fair fabric, which cost our fathers so much toil to erect..... It is only necessary that the volume [Foxe's Book Of Martyrs] should be carefully and candidly read, to convince [any one], that the papal system is not that harmless, innocent thing, which some would represent. We wish not, indeed, that the papists should be persecuted; we would say, protect them in their private capacity, wherever they exist in the land; but beware of so encouraging them, as to bring the American people, under their temporal and spiritual domination.... A Church, which pretends to be infallible, will always seek the destruction of those, who dissent from it;” (Charles A. Goodrich, Book Of Martyrs, Hartford, Connecticut, 1830, pp. 3,4. *Dr. Beecher's Missionary Sermon).

Such was the case during the Inquisition when the Roman Catholic church sought to eradicate those whom it considered “heretics.” This court of inquisition was originally established by ‘father’ Dominic (1170-1221), founder of the order of Dominican friars, who was charged by pope Innocent III (1198-1216) with orders to excite Catholics to exterminate heretics, namely Protestant Christians and others who refused to bow to papal dogma. The ‘Holy’ Roman Catholic Inquisition was not an anomaly of the church brought into existence by a small handful of rogue popes. This office of the Inquisition, or Tribunal of horrors, was official church policy for six-hundred years which was sanctioned by dozens of successive popes – Innocent III circa 1200, Gregory IX in 1229, Clement VII in 1380, Leo X in 1531, Paul III in 1542, and others. Catholic popes also authorized the Crusades or so called “Holy Wars” (1095-1272), the French Wars of Religion (1562-98), the Thirty Years' War (1618-48), and other atrocities through the 18th century. From A.D. 1200 to 1800, the world witnessed six centuries of unparalleled terror and mayhem as a direct result of the official policies of the church of Rome.

While speaking on the subject of the power of the Popes, the Roman Catholic historian John Acton said that “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” (Life and Letters of Mandell Creighton, 1913, p. 372). John Acton wrote extensively about the history of the Inquisition and the Roman Catholic church. Acton said,

  “The Inquisition is peculiarly the weapon and peculiarly the work of the popes. It stands out from all those things in which they co-operated, followed or assented as the distinctive feature of papal Rome. It was set up, renewed and perfected by a long series of acts emanating from the supreme authority in the Church. No other institution, no doctrine, no ceremony is so distinctly the individual creation of the papacy, except the dispensing power. It is the principal thing with which the papacy is identified, and by which it must be judged. 
  The principal of the Inquisition is the Pope's sovereign power over life and death. Whosoever disobeys him should be tried and tortured and burnt. If that cannot be done, formalities may be dispensed with, and the culprit may be killed like an outlaw. 
  That is to say, the principal of the Inquisition is murderous, and a man's opinion of the papacy is regulated and determined by his opinion of religious assassination.” (Letters to Mary Gladstone by Lord Acton, 1904, pp. 185, 186) 

Early English dictionaries and encyclopedias reveal some of the facts surrounding the Inquisition. The following definition was taken from one such early English dictionary. Note the quality and quantity of information offered to the reader, unheard of in most modern dictionaries: “(in Spain, Portugal, &c.) an ecclesiastical court of the church of Rome, erected for the putting a stop to Heresy, and the punishment of Heretics. The rise and progress of this court seems to have been as follows. Some have observed that before the conversion of the emperor Constantine the Great, none but the bishops examined into doctrines and punished Heresy with excommunication; but after the emperors became Christians, they ordered that such as has been convicted of Heresy and excommunicated, should be banished and their effects confiscated; this practice was continued till about the year 800 after Christ, when the power of the western bishops enlarged to the authority citing persons to their courts, and to convict and punish them by penances or imprisonment. This continued till the XIIth century, when Heresy, as it was then called, being much increased by the Albigenses and Waldenses, pope Gregory the IXth in the year 1229 in a council held at Thoulouss, established new constitutions, committing the whole management of them to the bishops; but afterwards he thinking that the bishops were too indulgent, he committed the direction of this inquisition to the Dominicans, who for their cruelty were banished from Thoulouss by the inhabitants. And so this court was never firmly established in France; but was received by Italy, except the kingdom of Naples, and in Spain and Portugal and the countries depending. This court or tribunal takes cognizance of Heresy, Judaism, Mahometanism, Sodomy and Polygamy; and the people of those countries so very much dread it, that parents deliver up their children, and husbands their wives to the officers, without so much as daring to murmur in the least. In Portugal they erect a theatre capable of containing 3000 persons, on which they place a very rich alter; having seats fixed on each side of it, in the form of an amphitheatre, where the criminals are placed, and over against them there is a high chair, to which they are singly called by one of the inquisitors, to hear their crimes and condemnation. The prisoners know their doom by the clothes they wear that day, for those who wear their own clothes are discharged, upon paying a fine: they that have a Santo Benito, or a strait yellow coat without sleeves, charged with a St. Andrew's cross, have their lives spared, but their effects forfeited to the royal chamber, and to pay the expenses of the inquisition: they that have flames of red serge sewed on their Santo Benito without any cross, are convicted of having been pardoned before, and threatened to be burnt, if ever they relapse again; but those which besides these have their own pictures round their Santo Benito, with figures of devils, are condemned to die. The persons charged with or suspected of Heresy, are shut up in dismal dungeons, and there confined for several months, till they accuse themselves, being never let to know their accusers, or confronted by witnesses; their friends go into mourning for them as if dead, and dare not either solicit their pardon or come near them, and are often forced to fly their country for fear of being sent to the inquisition likewise. Several other countries besides those above mentioned, have had inquisitions; but they have been laid down, by reason of the extraordinary severity and cruelty used in the punishment of those called offenders. The power of the inquisition is also very much curbed in the republick of Venice, where it seems rather to be a political instrument to preserve the state than the church. In the Indies it is severe to extravagancy, for those there must be the oaths of seven witnesses to condemn a person, yet slaves and children are allowed to be witnesses against him, and the person is tortured till he accuses himself, the slightest expression against the church or office of inquisition, which they call by the name of the holy office, is sufficient. (The New Universal Etymological English Dictionary, Nathan Bailey, London, 1756).

Historian Dave Hunt said, “Why would Rome ever apologize for or even admit this holocaust? No one calls her to account today. Protestants have now forgotten the hundreds of thousands of people burned at the stake for embracing the simple gospel of Christ and refusing to bow to papal authority. Amazingly, Protestants are now embracing Rome as Christian while she insists that the ‘separated brethren’ be reconciled to her on her unchangeable terms! Many evangelical leaders are intent upon working with Roman Catholics to evangelize the world.... They don't want to hear any ‘negative’ reminders of the millions of people tortured and slain by the Church to which they now pay homage, or the fact that Rome has a false gospel of sacramental works.” (A Woman Rides The Beast, Dave Hunt, 1994)

It must be realized that, America's founding fathers and patriots, men like John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, Noah Webster, and others, were not anti-Catholic bigots discriminating against a harmless church espousing superstitious doctrines. Unlike most of America's modern-day political and religious leaders, our early leaders had a Biblical understanding of history and recognized that the church of Rome constituted the greatest threat to fundamental Christianity. America's early politicians and religious leaders had the courage and fortitude to stand up to and speak out against corruption and deceit, which is one of the reasons why the Papacy's influence in America was hindered for centuries.

In 1854 The Home and Foreign Record of The Free Church of Scotland published the following statistics: “Again, if we pass to America, we see that Popery is not making such progress as its abettors pretend. For example, the State of Maryland was settled by Papists. Florida was the same. Louisiana, Arkansas, and Missouri were all Papal in their first European occupants, for they were French. The history of Canada as a French colony is well known. The State of Texas was thoroughly Popish. The same is true of California; and when to these and similar facts we add the consideration, that hundreds of thousands of Irish and other Romanists have been pouring into America, we might have expected that the Romish apostasy would have been wholly, ascendant,—suppressing truth, and fostering error, as it is the essential nature of the Papacy to do. " But what is the fact? "In Maryland, once utterly Popish, there are at this day only 65 Papal Churches to about 800 Protestant places of worship. "In Florida there are 152 Churches, and only five of them Popish. "In Louisiana there are 278 places of worship, but only 55 are the Pope's. "In Texas there are 164 Churches, but only 13 of them are Popish. "In a word, the recent census of America, like our own, has exposed the pretences of Popery, and proved that the system is repelled by myriads. In the entire country, from the Atlantic to the Pacific, Rome has only 1112 churches, accommodating 821,000 hearers, which is not one-eleventh part of the number of Methodist churches alone; scarcely one-eighth of the Baptists, and not one-fourth of the Presbyterians. "Moreover, American politicians, like some of our own, begin to detect the danger of Papal friendship.” (The Home and Foreign Record of The Free Church of Scotland, Vol. 4, Edinburgh, 1854, Committee on Popery, p. 302).

When the military battles of the American Civil War ended, the battle for America was far from over. In the century following the Civil War the papacy's plans to rule America continued. By undermining our political institutions and education system the papacy slowly gained control of many key positions within our government. The U.S. Supreme Court is a good example. For the first time in the history of the United States the majority of Supreme Court Justices are Roman Catholic. President Barack Hussein Obama's 2009 appointment of Sonia Sotomayor raised the number of Catholics on the Court to six, compared to three non-Catholics, a two to one ratio, making this the largest disproportionate number of Catholic Justices in the history of our country. In 2009 Protestant Christians in the United States outnumbered Catholics two to one (23% Catholic; 51% Protestant). So why such a lopsidedly Catholic majority court? To understand the present we must look to the past. Under Andrew Jackson's presidency, the papacy was successful at getting one of their own appointed to the Court. Roger Brooke Taney (1777-864) was the fifth Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court (1836-1864) and was the first Roman Catholic to hold that office. He is most remembered for delivering the majority opinion in Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), that ruled, among other things, that African Americans could not be considered citizens of the United States, because they were (according to Taney) “beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations, and so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect” (The New American Cyclopaedia, 1863, Vol. 15, P. 284).

Since the early 19th century the papacy schemed to have not only a “Catholic seat” on the Court, but eventually to control the Court by a Catholic majority. In contrast to historical patterns of having Justices from a diversity of Christian denominations, the Court has gone from having a “Catholic seat” to being a Catholic Court. Under the guise of being “conservative”, these pro-Roman puppets of the Supreme Court are ready to try and do what cannot easily be done by the democratic process, viz. take over America for the Vatican and the World Council of Churches.

Historian Justin Dewey Fulton commented on the Romish Jesuitical designs on our nation's interests. In 1888 he wrote: “How Rome crept into Washington has been described. Stealthily, slowly, meekly, but surely, she came; and she came to stay. Long before the Revolution Rome was here. Washington saw her, and warned against her insidious influence. She came among us in poverty of spirit and in the ashes of humiliation..... and soon American Protestants placed their children in their hands for safe-keeping; helped them build their churches and public institutions because of their avowed purpose to enjoy our free institutions.” (Washington in the lap of Rome, Justin D. Fulton, 1888, p. 101) “Religious toleration has given welcome to a Jesuit priesthood that is making a religion without God and a state without liberty. They denounce the public schools, curse the Bible, murder history, and maim and mutilate literature. They teach American children, that all the founders of this Republic were Papists; that Washington, the father of his country, died a Roman Catholic.” (Ibid, p. 102) “The federal compact, formed by the New England colonies in 1643, to resist the Indians, was the first Union made by the Anglo-Saxon upon our soil, and prepared the way for their Declaration of Rights later on. Jesuitism fought liberty amid its birth-throes.... Difficulties like mountains towered in the path of the Fathers. A spirit of opposition and discord pervaded their councils.... Romanists were then, as now, opposed to the upgoing structure. The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union between the thirteen original States were not ratified until 1781, because the Roman Catholics of Maryland opposed and refused to unite; so steadfast has ever been the opposition of the Romish priesthood to our liberty.” (Ibid, p. 104)

From the first permanent English settlement in America in 1607 (Jamestown, Virginia, named after the devout Christian King James I of England), Protestant Christianity and the Bible were interwoven into every facet of life. The Bible and its teachings dominated the lives of the vast majority of men, women and children in America; not because it was forced on them by the government or by a religious hierarchy, but because these freedom loving people desired to worship God “in spirit and in truth” according to the freedom of their own conscience and “the simplicity that is in Christ.” (John 4:23; II Cor. 11:3; Eph. 1:13). But by the late 1800s, as more Bible believing Americans became slothful in their spiritual lives, our Judeo-Christian morals began to decline at an alarming rate. Jesus admonished his followers to “rise and pray, lest ye enter into temptation.” (Luke 22:46). The Anglican Church of England had already begun its descent into apostasy by compromising with the papacy. In the proceeding decades (circa early 1900s), as ungodliness and worldly lusts became more prevalent in American society, many of our churches were infected with secular philosophies, false theologies, spurious Christian doctrines and lukewarm practices which opened the floodgates of ecumenical apostasy.

During the first few decades of the 20th century many churches in America began to sink deeper and deeper into spiritual apostasy, due in part to the influence of spurious superstitious doctrines and European organizations and churches who's leaders were propagating the false notion that the true Holy Bible, the pure word of God preserved in the 1611 English Authorized Version (KJV), was an error ridden translation, or essentially just another book, and that it should not be accepted as the inspired infallible word of God. It was not until the United Kingdom officially rejected its Holy Bible, the KJV, in 1881 with the appearance of the corrupt Revised Standard Version, a supposed revision of the KJV, that their empire started to decay. The United States has followed suit and is becoming a declining world power, rotting from within because its people, too, has rejected the word of God. By replacing the Holy Bible with the scholarship of man, a pseudo-Christianity emerged and is now a dominating force in America.

Back in 1920 a small group of people, who's members were affiliated with the Communist Party, formed an organization called the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Their literature made it clear that the best way to take over the United States was to destroy American morality by undermining the Protestant Bible, the family structure and the public affirmation of the Christian faith. The ACLU's leaders and its followers declared that they found common ground with socialists around the world, including socialist theologians like Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort.

Most Americans are surprised to learn that the United States Pledge of Allegiance has nothing whatsoever to do with America's independence or with true liberty or genuine Christianity. The Pledge of Allegiance was written by a radical socialist and promoted by jesuitical papists for the purpose of undermining America's traditional Protestant heritage and subverting our Republican form of government. The Pledge of Allegiance was written in 1892 by a “Christian” Socialist named Francis Bellamy (1855-1931), who was expressing the ideas of his first cousin, Edward Bellamy, author of the American socialist utopian novels, Looking Backward (1888) and Equality (1897). The Pledge was first published in the September 8th issue of The Youth's Companion, the leading family magazine of its day. Its owner and editor, Daniel Ford, had hired Francis in 1891 as his assistant when Francis left his baptist church in Boston because of his socialist sermons. Francis Bellamy was also a chairman of a committee of state superintendents of education in the National Education Association. Coinciding with the first Columbus Day holiday in the United States in 1892, four-hundred years after Columbus' landing in the West Indies, (organized by the Roman Catholic Columbian Order), Bellamy, as chairman of the N.E.A., prepared a program for the public schools' quadricentennial celebration structured around a flag raising ceremony, a flag salute, and his 'Pledge of Allegiance.' (In the 20th century, the Knights of Columbus, an international Roman Catholic society, lobbied state legislatures to declare October 12th a legal holiday, ‘Columbus Day’; and in 1954, this same Catholic society persuaded Congress to add the words, 'under God,' to the Pledge to make it appear more ‘Christian’ and patriotic.)

By the early 1900's a form of socialism had already begun to spread its roots in America. The attacks against the historical, traditional text of Christianity (the KJV Bible), and the assault against the U.S. Constitution was affecting the minds and hearts of Americans like an infectious disease, and many were beginning to bear corrupt fruit. In 1907 an activist socialist Supreme Court judge, Charles Evans Hughes, stated that “the Constitution is what the judges say it is.” Then in 1947, in order to advance their socialist anti-Protestant-Christian agenda, activist judges on the Supreme Court used wording taken totally out of context from a private letter written by Thomas Jefferson in 1802. Jefferson (who did not participate in the drafting of the U.S. Constitution) sent this letter to the Danbury Baptist Convention affirming that government should keep its hands off the free exercise of religion, and not that government should prohibit any of its citizens (including governmental employees) from practicing the free exercise of religion, be it private or public. In his letter of January 1st, 1802, Thomas Jefferson wrote, “Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative 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.” (The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. VIII, 1854, p. 113)

In the case of Everson v. Board of Education activist judges on the Court took one tiny snippet of Jefferson's letter (“wall of separation between church and state”) and misused it to further their anti-Christian-American agenda. This move by the Court was something that had never happened before in the history of the United States, because Congress has never given this power to any Court. “Now by its own authority, never authorized by Congress, the Court transferred a prohibition against the congressional establishment of a national church to a prohibition against any religious acts by the state government or their agents.” This was never intended by the framers of the United States Constitution. The so called “separation of church and state,” as used by propagandists, is not to be found anywhere in the Constitution, nor was it ever eluded to in any of America's laws prior to 1947, a period of 340 years. (The Ten Offences, pp. 27,32,33)

The land of the free and the home of the brave is slowly but surely being taken over by social elitists at all levels of government backed by despotic politico-religious entities that have been at work in our country for over a century imposing their own superstitious beliefs on the people to bring about a new world order of Pagan-Christian tyrannical fascist/socialism. In the mid nineteenth century Samuel Morse warned: “Do not Catholics of the present day use the bonds of religious union to effect political objects in other countries? Did not the Pope interfere in Poland in the late revolution, and, through the priests, command submission to the tyranny of the Czar? At the moment I am writing, are not monks and priests leaders in the field of battle in Spain; in Portugal? Is not the Pope encouraging the troops of Don Miguel, and exciting priests and people to arms in a civil contest? Has Popery abandoned its everbusy meddling in the politics of the countries where it obtains foothold? Will it be said, that however officious in the old countries, yet here, by some strange metamorphosis, Popery has changed its character, and is modified by our institutions; that here it is surely religious, seeking only the religious welfare of the people—that it does not meddle with the state? It is not true that Popery meddles not with the politics of the country. The cloven foot has already shown itself.” (Foreign Conspiracy Against the Liberties of the United States, Samuel F. B. Morse, pp. 92, 93)

From the time of the Reformation to the present the standard policy of the papacy has been to divide and conquer the nations of the world, not only by inquisition and war, but by manipulating public opinion, especially in America, by pitting political party against political party, by pitting Protestant sect against Protestant sect, by encouraging and perpetuating racial strife, and by influencing and using the courts to its own advantage. But we must remember that in our republican form of government, the people are supreme, not the courts. We lend authority to our elected representatives. The executive, legislative, and judicial branches are the bureaucracy empowered by government to execute the will of the people. Therefore, government, at all levels, exists to serve, and not to rule. And whenever biased judges begin to twist and shape the Constitution into any form they please, then we are no longer a free people but slaves of a dangerous un-constitutional agenda. Even Catholic Justice Antonin Scalia seems confused. He wrote, “Day by day, case by case, [the Court] is busy designing a Constitution for a country I do not recognize.”(American Original, 2009, p.219)

On page eighteen of Foreign Conspiracy Against the Liberties of the United States Samuel Morse wrote: “I readily concede that there has been, and are now, many true patriots among this sect, many estimable men of sound political views, sincere in supporting the democratic institutions of the country; but making the most ample allowance, they are but exceptions to the rule. The sect, as a sect, is still justly chargeable with the tendency of its acknowledged principles. If a Roman Catholic in the United Slates is a Democratic Republican, he is so in spite of, and in opposition to, the system of his church, and not in accordance with it. To the truth of this fact, the arguments of Schlegel, a Catholic, and the profoundest investigator of the subject in the present age, are unanswerably conclusive. From their principles of passive obedience, and the denial of the right of private judgment alone, Roman Catholics, as a sect, must be ignorant and willing slaves to the schemes of any despotic ecclesiastic that a foreign power may see fit to send to this country to rule over them. The secret plans, the real designs of the Jesuits may be confined to few bosoms, it is by no means necessary that the mass of the sect should have any knowledge of the plot, for from the nature of their system they may be blind instruments of the few.” (Foreign Conspiracy Against the Liberties of the United States, Samuel F. B. Morse, p. 18)

From early on in our history even our secular press has been under the influence of despotic elements within our government. Morse wrote: “Does the secular press take care of our religious liberty? Is there a secular journal that has even hinted to its readers the existence of this double conspiracy? The most dangerous politico-religious sect that ever existed ; a sect that has been notorious for ages for throwing governments into confusion, is politically at work in our own country, under the immediate auspices of the most despotic power of Europe, interested politically and vitally in the destruction of our free institutions, and is any alarm manifested by the secular press? No! they are altogether silent on this subject.” (Ibid, p. 111)

Secrecy and diversion and false claims of “persecution” has allowed despotism to gain ascendancy in our country. Morse wrote: “Has Popery so cloaked itself in sacredness, has this political engine of foreign despotism so sanctified its very name, that our press is awe-struck at its movements, and cries sacrilege if its political claims to our reception be in the slightest degree disputed? Whence come all the sorrows and regrets about controversy, and lamentations and whinings about intolerance, because freemen are jealous of the meddling of foreigners in our concerns? Is this discussion of the political principles of Popery really ill-timed and gratuitous? Who has provoked it? What! shall foreign powers combine together, secretly and openly send their money and their agents, to spread a great political and religious system over the country; a system notorious for enslaving, impoverishing, and degrading the people; shall they build their means of attack within our borders, and American freemen be rebuked into silence, when they venture to examine the character of this foreign enterprise, and to question the purely benevolent nature of their imperial majesties' love for our souls? It is a subject of deep interest indeed, to the community, to know how far our press is inoculated with this no-controversy spirit; this truly papal spirit; this emphatically anti-American spirit.” (Ibid, pp. 24,25) “Is our press indeed in awe of Popish bishops? Does it fear to touch the civil character of Popery, for fear of giving offence to Popish bishops? Truth has nothing to fear from the severest scrutiny. It is error that loves mystery; that seeks concealment; that shrouds itself in secrecy, and cries out persecution! Yes, persecution, forsooth, if any one attempts to drag it into the light.” (Ibid, p. 26)

Not only the press but our civil and criminal judiciary is under the influence of despotism. Roy Moore, former Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, was unjustly ordered to remove the Ten Commandments monument from the Alabama state court house. Not only was Judge Moore ordered to remove the monument, he himself was unjustly removed from office by his fellow judges for refusing to obey that un-constitutional order handed down by a judge who unfaithfully interpreted to U. S. Constitution to fit the agendas of his co-conspirators. Roy Moore said,

    “How did we get to such a misunderstanding — that we follow the Constitution as the law unless and until a federal judge issues an order contrary to the law by which we are bound? The unwillingness of judges to follow the Constitution according to its express meaning and clear interpretation is precisely the problem in our government today.” 
    “The Constitution signifies to the world that the United States is to be governed by the rule of law, not of man. It leaves no doubt on this point by declaring—as Constitution Corner reminds us—that '[t]his Constitution... shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby.' 
    “The long and short of it is that our written Constitution—this nation's fixed, fundamental law—is synonymous with the rule of law. Enumeration of the powers of the federal government in the Constitution shows that those powers are 'few and defined,' as Madison stated, holding the government accountable to the people, who can point to the written Constitution for proof of government abuses of power.” 
    “...the rule of law in this country is the United States Constitution, not the courts. This means that if the Constitution says one thing and a federal court says something else, a federal or state official who is sworn to support the Constitution must follow the Constitution. To do otherwise is to disregard the rule of law. (So Help Me God, Roy S. Moore, 2005, p. 212,213,214,216) 

Most judges today believe that they are the final arbiters of the laws of the land and that their ruling, and not the U. S. Constitution, is the supreme 'Law of the Land.' Former Chief Justice Moore explained,

    “In Cooper v. Aaron in 1958, the United States Supreme Court boldly but erroneously claimed for the first time that Marbury [v. Madison] stood for the proposition that 'the federal judiciary is supreme in the exposition of the law of the Constitution.' From that point forward, the federal courts have presumed that their rulings were equivalent to the Constitution—whatever federal judges say is 'the supreme law of the land.' For the most part, lawyers and laymen throughout the country have accepted this as the truth. 
    But what Chief Justice Marshall actually said in the Marbury case could not be further from the Supreme Court's self-serving characterization. Marshall stated that 'it is apparent, that the framers of the Constitution contemplated that instrument as a rule for the government of courts, as well as the Legislature. Why otherwise does it direct judges to take an oath to support it?...How immoral to impose it [the oath] on them [judges], if they were to be used as the instrument, and the knowing instrument, for violating what they swear to support!' 
    In other words, the Constitution is the rule of law for the courts just as much as it is for Congress and the state legislatures. Judges cannot be above the Constitution that they are sworn to support. As Chief Justice Marshall noted, all judges take an oath to the Constitution, not to the Supreme Court.” (So Help Me God, Roy S. Moore, 2005, p. 215) 

Chief Justice John Marshall of the U.S. Supreme Court (1801-1835) delivered the opinion of the Court in the case of Marbury v. Madison. The decision of the Chief Justice in this case is universally regarded as the substantial foundation of the distinctive constitutional law of this country. Chief Justice Marshall said that “the Constitution controls any legislative act repugnant to it” and that “a legislative act contrary to the Constitution is not law.” And again, as to leave no doubt on the subject, Marshall reiterated, stating that “an act of the Legislature repugnant to the Constitution is void.” (Marbury v. Madison, (Chief Justice Marshall, U.S. Supreme Court, 1803. 1 Cranch's Reports, 137-180), pp. 32,33). This means that if any Legislature or Judge in the nation passes an act or imposes a law that is contrary to the U.S. Constitution, and if any federal, state or local official enforces such legislative act or judicial ruling, these Government Officials who are sworn to support the U.S. Constitution are violating their Sacred Oaths of Office. Chief Justice Marshall said, “This original and supreme will [the written constitution] organizes the government, and assigns to different departments their respective powers.” “To what purpose are powers limited and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing, if these limits may at any time be passed by those intended to be restrained? The distinction between a government with limited and unlimited powers is abolished if those limits do not confine the persons on whom they are imposed....”(John Marshall: Complete Constitutional Decisions, 1903, p. 32) “It is also not entirely unworthy of observation that, in declaring what shall be the supreme law of the land, the Constitution itself is first mentioned, and not the laws of the United States generally.... Thus, the particular phraseology of the Constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to all written Constitutions, that a law repugnant to the Constitution is void, and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument.”(Ibid, pp. 36,37)

Constitutional Scholar Henry Campbell Black commented on the susceptibility of the police powers of the states to violate the U.S. Constitution. In Handbook of American Constitutional Law Henry Black said, “The police power is an attribute of government fundamentally necessary to the public safety, but so easily perverted as to be extremely dangerous to the rights and the liberty of the citizen. Even when properly defined and limited, it is so far-reaching in its importance and so paramount in its sway, even as against guarantied private rights, that its enlargement, by continual loose applications of the term to cases where it is neither needed nor appropriate, is a serious menace to personal freedom.”(Handbook of American Constitutional Law, 3rd ed., 1910, p. 390)

On July 1st 2003 the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta unanimously ruled that the Ten Commandments monument must go. It is extremely important to note that in the official decision of the Court the term King James, referring to the KJV Holy Bible, was used no less than five times. As part of their reasoning for ruling against Chief Justice Moore the Court of Appeals erroneously labeled the KJV Bible as a sectarian denominational book. They concluded that “Chief Justice Moore chose the excerpts of the Ten Commandments from the King James Version of the Bible, which is a Protestant version.” (United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit. - 335 F.3d 1282).

Were these 11th Circuit Court of Appeals Judges simply ignorant of the fact that the King James Bible has been used by many different Christian denominations and non-denominations alike for the past 400 years (Amish, Anglican, Assemblies of God, Baptist, Churches of Christ, Congregationalist, Episcopal, Lutheran, Mennonite, Methodist, Mormon, Pentecostal, Presbyterian, Quakers, Shakers, et al)? In fact, the King James Version is the Bible most used, in the past and present, by the largest number and largest variety of Christians (sectarian, non-sectarian, denominational, non-denominational) in the history of the world. To this day every Christian denomination and non-denomination, except Catholicism, that uses an English Bible uses the King James Version. To say that the KJV is a “non-Catholic” version would be absolutely correct. But to say that the KJV is a “Protestant version” in the context used by the Court of Appeals Judges is very misleading, because the great body of historical evidence dating back to antiquity proves that the text of the KJV Bible is in fact the inspired, preserved text of Christianity. Before producing their own version of the scriptures in the 1950's even the Jehovah's Witness Organization (notorious for their attacks against Biblical Christianity) used the KJV Bible extensively. In the hope of luring prospective converts, the Mormon church even gives away, free of charge, KJV Bibles to anyone who requests one (though Mormonism denies the fundamental doctrines of the Bible). Do our “good” Judges on the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals claim the “King James Version” is the official Mormon Bible?

For anyone, especially a high court judge, to claim that the KJV Bible is in any way a “sectarian” book is to deny the facts of history. Our Founding Fathers and Patriots used the KJV Bible extensively for both private reading and in their public addresses. In fact, every U.S. President who used a Bible to take the Oath of Office, from George Washington in 1789 to Barack Obama in 2009, used a KJV Bible (with the exception of John F. Kennedy in 1961 who used a Catholic version). And for most of our history our public school text-books used scriptures from the KJV Bible extensively for the simple fact that the KJV does not “officially prefer one religious denomination over another” as suggested by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals Judges (See Judges Footnotes 3). The Judges who decided the Roy Moore case were either unfamiliar with both Christian and American history, or they were taught a revised version of history based on ignorance or bias, or they had an ulterior agenda being orchestrated by conspirators behind the scenes.

Are “We the People of the United States” obligated to submit to unjust unconstitutional laws passed by ignorant or corrupt judges who are sworn to uphold and abide by the Constitution? Absolutely not. Over the years the people have demonstrated with whom ultimate power rests, for on four separate occasions the Constitution has been amended to “recall” a previous Supreme Court opinion (see the 11th, 14th, 16th, and 26th Amendments). In a speech delivered at Cincinnati, Ohio in September of 1859, Abraham Lincoln said, “The people of these United States are the rightful masters of both congresses and courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”(Political Debates Between Abraham Lincoln and Stephen A. Douglas, 1894 p. 315)

Known as the prophet of the American Revolution, Jonathan Mayhew was a Congregationalist minister and Harvard graduate who published a sermon in 1750 entitled “A Discourse Concerning Unlimited Submission and Non-Resistance to the Higher Powers” in which he addressed the issue of obedience to a higher authority as required by Romans chapter 13, stating, “That no civil rulers are to be obeyed when they enjoin things that are inconsistent with the commands of God.... All commands running counter to the declared will of the supreme legislator of heaven and earth, are null and void: And therefore disobedience to them is a duty, not a crime.”(A Discourse Concerning Unlimited Submission and Non-Resistance to the Higher Powers, Jonathan Mayhew, 1750, pp. 37, 38)

Mayhew continued: “From whence it follows, that as soon as the prince sets himself up above law, he loses the king in the tyrant: he does to all intents and purposes, unking himself, by acting out of, and beyond, that sphere which the constitution allows him to move in. And in such cases, he has no more right to be obeyed, than any inferior officer who acts beyond his commission.”(Ibid, pp. 45)

The mainstream news media plays a big role in the corrupting of the American justice system. Columnist Thomas Sowell wrote, “One of the reasons judicial activists get away with ignoring the law and imposing their own pet notions instead is that much of the mainstream media treat the actions of judges as automatically legitimate and all criticism of them as undermining the rule of law.” He goes on to say, “The time is long overdue to stop treating judges as little tin gods who can do no wrong. An independent judiciary does not mean a judiciary independent of the law. If it does, then we can forget about being a free and democratic nation” (No Stinkin' Badges: The Case Against Judicial Activism). Jonathan Mayhew said that “Civil tyranny is usually small in its beginning, like 'the drop of a bucket,' til at length, like a mighty torrent, or the raging waves of the sea, it bears down all before it, and deluges whole countries and empires.” (A Discourse Concerning Unlimited Submission and Non-Resistance to the Higher Powers, Jonathan Mayhew, 1750, Preface p. 2).

The scriptures warn us “against spiritual wickedness in high places.” (Eph. 6:12). Many of America's enemies are within our own government. Our true political and religious enemies – Jesuitical elements in our government, universities, religious organizations, law schools, entertainment industry, news media – are very much in favor of an activist court, and they vigorously defend the Court's usurpation of power. They know that Congress would never be able to convince the American people to support their un-constitutional agendas – abortion, gay marriage, racial preferences, gun-ban laws, banning the Ten Commandments, anti-biblical Sunday laws, and discriminating against the free exercise of religion – so they do it through the courts.

With the steady departure from traditional biblical moral values in our society, due in part to puppet judges re-writing America's laws, an ever increasing philosophy of socialism, moral relativism, un-scriptural religious beliefs, and an attitude of self-gratification which has seared the conscience of millions of Americans who have become “lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God” (II Tim. 3:4), our nation is decaying from within and is quickly becoming “the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit” (Rev. 18:2). For hundreds of years the overwhelming majority of Americans were united in their convictions of right and wrong, and good and evil, as a direct result of the teachings of the Holy Bible. But with the ongoing assault against the preserved Christian scriptures and traditional biblical values, Americans have never been more divided in their moral, ethical and political beliefs (the rift among our citizens over government policies, abortion and other moral issues clearly illustrates the great divide within our nation). The Lord Jesus Christ said that “Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand” (Matt. 12:25). English jurist Lord Devlin said, “History shows that the loosening of moral bonds is the first stage of disintegration.”

During the 20th century some profound events changed the very course and fabric of the United States of America. While “Christian America,” including many of our political leaders, “slept,” socialist judges in concert with Freemasonry and the Vatican took advantage of America's spiritual atrophy and usurped authority over Congress and began re-writing American law. In 1962, in the case of Engel v. Vitale, and in 1963, in the case of Abington School District v. Schempp, prayer was taken out of public schools and Bible reading was no longer permitted. Justice Potter Stewart adamantly dissented against the majority decision of the court saying that “to treat a simple prayer the same as the establishment and patronage of a church by the federal government makes a mockery of the dangers the First Amendment was aimed at preventing”. Saying prayers before school, according to Stewart, is no different than saying prayers to open the sessions of Congress or the Supreme Court itself. Regarding Bible reading in public schools, Justice Stewart went on to say, “For a compulsory state educational system so structures a child's life that if religious exercises are held to be an impermissible activity in schools, religion is placed at an artificial and state-created disadvantage. Viewed in this light, permission of such exercise for those who want them is necessary if the schools are truly to be neutral in the matter of religion. And a refusal to permit religious exercises thus is seen not as the realization of state neutrality, but rather as the establishment of a religion of secularism.” Justice Stewart was correct. While Congress turned a deaf ear and a blind eye, the Court was establishing the religion of secular humanism in the public school system, embracing a brave new one world government of socialism and helping to pave the way for antichrist's ecumenical one world religion.

In 1980 the Supreme Court threw the Ten Commandments out of our public schools. Speaking for the majority in the case of Stone v. Graham, Justice Paul Stevens wrote: “If the posted copies of the Ten Commandments are to have any effect at all, it will be to induce the children to read, meditate upon, perhaps to venerate and obey the Commandments . . . [This] is not a permissible state objective under the Establishment Clause.” According to Justice Stevens, obeying the Ten Commandments in not “permissible”. This is quite an astonishing statement, given the fact that since the 1600s most of America's laws were based upon the Bible and the Ten Commandments. It is somewhat ironic that Justice Stevens, probably without even realizing it, touched on one very important truth in America's history: that being the positive effects of God's Commandments on our children at home, in church and in our public schools for hundreds of years. The “Establishment Clause” that Justice Stevens referred to in the Constitution has nothing whatsoever to do with forbidding Bible reading, prayer and posting the Ten Commandments in public schools. The Establishment Clause was not written to prevent government from practicing religion: the Establishment Clause was written to prevent government control of religion, because the framers of the Constitution were well aware of the negative affects of government monopoly on religion.

From the fist European settlers in America to the drafting of the U.S. Constitution, many of these men (women and children also) had either read about, heard first hand accounts of, or had witnessed for themselves the atrocities committed by a government established religion, such as that imposed by England under certain of its Kings and Queens in the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries. As had been the case in other European countries over the centuries, at times the English government imposed the religion of the Roman Catholic church upon its citizens and passed laws forbidding anyone from practicing any other form of Christianity. At the urging of the Catholic hierarchy, any Bible other than that sanctioned by the church of Rome was banned and burned, and Protestants who refused to accept the ‘official’ government established religion were severely persecuted: many were tortured before being burned at the steak along with their Bibles. America's first leaders were well aware of the history of the horrific Catholic Inquisitions in France, Spain, Germany, Italy, et al. The 3rd President of the United States, Thomas Jefferson, said in his first Inaugural Address in 1801, “Let us reflect that, having banished from our land that religious intolerance under which mankind so long bled and suffered, we have yet gained little if we countenance a political intolerance as despotic, as wicked, and capable of as bitter and bloody persecution.”(American Patriotic Prose and Verse, 1917, p. 57).

America's founding fathers and patriots and early educators understood that “If truth be not diffused, error will be” (The Family Christian Almanac for the United States, 1855, p. 34).. For hundreds of years students were taught historical facts in America's public schools. In his public school textbook, History of the United States, Noah Webster said that King Edward VI successor, “queen Mary, was a papist, and she endeavored to re-establish popery in England. The consequence was, a most cruel persecution of the reformers in England, many of whom were burnt at the stake for refusing to comply with the popish rites.” (History of the United States, 1832, p. 86). Many public school textbooks, like The American Preceptor, were used to teach our children historical truths, such as the story of Queen Mary and the Martyrs, an account of the horrific cruelties of Catholic Queen bloody Mary who persecuted Protestant Christians: “Mary possessed few qualities either estimable or amiable.... amidst the complication of vices which entered into her composition, obstinacy; bigotry, violence, cruelty,... multitudes, of all conditions, ages and sexes, were committed to the flames.... [for refusing] to subscribe to the doctrines of the papal supremacy, and the real presence.” (The American Preceptor, 1837, pp. 33,34)

In recent decades secularists and certain religionists have omitted from public school history textbooks practically every reference to our nation's true Christian foundations. Since the burning of Bibles is no longer in vogue in most civilized countries, certain religious educators, Catholic and other ecumenical denominations, have been teaching a revised version of history in order to destroy people's faith in the Bible and give their own peculiar religious dogmas a positive image in the public eye. The assault against the true religion and the true Bible upon which most of America's laws are based continues relentlessly by the courts, the main-stream news media, socialistic politicians, and even certain professed “Christians.” The average student of the Bible and of history is usually surprised to learn the truth about certain popular “Christian” sects and denominations.

While millions are being mis-educated today, the evidence of God's hand in our nation's history is overwhelmingly apparent for those who take the time to look. One place it can be found is in and on our nations monuments, buildings and national symbols.... As we aproach the U.S. Supreme Court we see an image of Moses carrying the Ten Commandments engraved into the building; as we procede into the building we find engraved into the door panels of the Supreme Court a representation of the Ten commandmetns.

Next is the Library of Congress which is another historical structure rich in Christian influence. Of the eight inscriptions which adorn the library's Main Reading Room, four of these extol God's greatness. Denoting Religion is the image of the scriptures with the quote from Micah 6:8 that says, "What doth the Lord require of thee but do jo justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God." On the walls of the Library of Congress are numerous quotations such as, "The Heavens declare the Glory of God, and the firmament showeth His handiwork" (Psalm 19:1), and "the light shineth in darkness and the darkness comprehendeth it not" (John 1:5).

At the U.S. Capitol Building we find a painting of the Pilgrims leaving Holland. It shows the Pilgrims praying, and William Brewster with an open Bible. The rotunda includes some carved images including the landing of the Pilgrims and a bronze design on the floor containing the Ten Commandments with Senate and Justice to the right of them, which symbolizes that our legal system has its origin in God's law. Inside the Capital building we see the Columbus doors which were hung in recognition of the journey Columbus made in 1492 when he discovered the new world.

Unfortunately, Columbus' crossing the sea is also a sad chapter in the history of the Americas. Among other Spanish atrocities, Columbus was to become the first trans-Atlantic slave trader. (In stark contrast to the early Protestant settlers who befriended many of the American Indians and dealt fairly with the native inhabitants and converted many to Christianity with the sword of the Spirit—the word of God (Heb. 4:12), Columbus and other early Roman Catholic voyagers took many native inhabitants as slaves and converted the American Indians with the sword of man—weapons of war.) Columbus' trip took much longer than he had anticipated due to one of many serious errors in Jerome's Latin Vulgate, the official Bible of his church. The Catholic church had drawn the dogma from II Esdras 6:42 that the earth was mostly dry land, causing Columbus to believe that sailing west to the Indies would be a very short trip. This error nearly resulted in a mutiny among his crew. Columbus thought he had found India. The islands he had found were called, therefore, the West Indies. (The Outline Of History, Vol. 2, H.G. Wells, 1920, New Revised Edition, 1971, p. 654)

It is an undisputed fact that Columbus was a papal zealot. Bartolome' de Las Casas, a Catholic priest who knew Columbus personally, said that “without doubt he was a Catholic and of great devotion.... In whatever letter or other thing he wrote, he put at the head ‘Jesus and Mary be with us on the way.’” Each day of the voyage, Columbus would have one of his young sailors pray aloud the “Ave Maria”, Hail Mary (“But when ye pray,” said Jesus, “use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.” (Matt. 6:7)). The name of Columbus' ship was the “Santa Maria”, Saint Mary. (America's God and Country Encyclopedia of Quotations, pp. 115,132,133). While some educators portray Columbus as a true Christian explorer, history reveals a man who was not loyal to the historical scriptures of Christianity, but loyal to the dogmas of the Roman church. The assault against Biblical Christianity comes, not only from secular sources, but from religious sources as well: religionists and others espousing a pseudo-pagan-Christianity masquerading as true Christians. The pseudo-Christian historian will often cherry-pick quotes from Columbus' journals to present a false picture to the world. From Columbus' journals of his voyage to the New World, for instance, they will quote,

“It was the Lord who put into my mind (I could feel His hand upon me) the fact that it would be possible to sail from here to the Indies. All who heard of my project rejected it with laughter, ridiculing me. There is no question that the inspiration was from the Holy Spirit, because He comforted me with rays of marvelous illumination from the Holy Scriptures.... For the execution of the journey to the Indies I did not make use of intelligence, mathematics or maps -- it is simply the fulfillment of what Isaiah had prophesied.... No one should fear to undertake any task in the name of our Savior, if it is just and if the intention is purely for His holy service.... The fact that the gospel must still be preached to so many lands in such a short time, this is what convinces me.” (America's God and Country Encyclopedia of Quotations, pp. 113,114,115)

Columbus' mission to spread “the gospel” of Jesus Christ to “many lands” was undermined by the influence of the Roman Church through its erroneous teachings and false doctrines, the same church that deceived and conquered the peoples of Europe during the Dark Ages (circa A.D. 500 - 1500) by moving from a word based culture (the scriptures) to an image based culture (statues, symbols, relics, etc.). The average American reader in the 21st century knows little or nothing of true Catholicism, the Catholicism which first reached the Americas. While Columbus was seeking backers for his exploration, the Dominicans, agents of the papacy, were busy burning thousands of copies of the scriptures throughout Spain in an effort to keep its citizens ignorant of the truth, and thus conquer the inhabitants. At the urging of Tomas de Torquemada, a Dominican priest, Ferdinand and Isabella, the Roman Catholic King and Queen of Spain, petitioned the pope, and in 1478 the horrific Inquisition of the ‘holy mother’ church was revived, unleashing a new wave of satanic murder and mayhem against Protestant Christians and other non-Catholics.

The major contrast between the earlier Spanish explorers who came to America and the later English settlers who came to America was that the latter came for the purpose of fleeing religious persecution while the former came for the purpose of financing religious persecution. It must be remembered, that the reason Ferdinand and Isabella sponsored Columbus' journey was to find land and gold to finance the Inquisition and to conquer the New World for the pope. Columbus wrote in his Journal of the First Voyage on November 27th, 1492, “And I say that your highness ought not to consent that any foreigner does business or sets foot here, except Christian Catholics....” (America's God and Country Encyclopedia of Quotations, p. 118). On his second voyage, Columbus brought twelve Franciscan monks, whose purpose was to convert the natives to Catholicism. Historian James W. Knox wrote that “As a result, whatever the missionary priests taught the conquered peoples was not from the word of God... but was the dogma of the Roman Church... nothing was established that bore any resemblance to the New Testament church or Biblical Christianity.” (The History of The Holy Bible In The united States of America, Vol. 1, James W. Knox, 1998, p. 52)

Historian Charles Francis Adams said “that the discovery of America by Columbus in 1492, instead of being of unqualified beneficence to mankind, was one of the greatest misfortunes that has ever befallen the human race, because he was in the service of Catholic Spain.... As for the discoverers – never in the history of buccaneering did any black-visaged gang of ruffians swarming over a vessel's side indulge in such atrocities, in such general plunder, murder and cruelty, as that band with Columbus at its head.” (The Critic, A Weekly Review of Literature and the Arts, New York, 1894, p. 427)

A popular twentieth century public school history book, The Story Of Louisiana, relates some of the events surrounding Columbus and the Spanish expeditions. This history book was used in public schools in the United States, including Louisiana, from the early 1900's into the 1960's. The Story Of Louisiana stated that “The Spanish rulers lost no time in sending other expeditions to explore their new lands across the sea and to search for gold, silver, and other riches which they hoped to find there. Columbus himself made three more voyages, but he always sailed south of our continent, and failed to reach any part of North America.” By the early 1500's the Spaniards “set out from Cuba to explore the country along the northern shores of the gulf.... They had heard stories of a rich city not far away called Apalache, and they marched into the country in search of it. They saw no signs of gold, and when their food gave out they began to plunder the Indians instead of trying to make Christians out of them. They treated the natives very cruelly.”(The Story Of Louisiana, William O. Scroggs, Ph.D., 1936, pp. 4, 5)

“It is to the great advantage of the United States that it was not to be dominated and Christianized by Spain. It is one of the marvelous curiosities of history that the extensive labors of the Romanized discovers, conquerors and colonists failed so consistently and so decisively. Had God not willed it so, America would have been founded, it's laws and government built upon, and it's people subjected to the none-biblical, yea, the anti-biblical system of papal rule priestcraft which plunged Europe into the Dark Ages [for a thousand years]. The history of the Holy Bible in the United States of America begins with the understanding that those who arrived first, without a Holy Bible, were not permitted to take root.” (The History of The Holy Bible In The united States of America, Vol. 1, James W. Knox, 1998, pp. 46, 47)

It would be over a century later before colonization occurred in America. Historian B. F. Morris wrote that during the intervening century, “No era in human history is more signally and sublimely marked with the manifest providence and presence of God than that of the discovery and Christian colonization of the North American continent.” “More marked and decided changes, affecting science, religion, and liberty, occurred in that period than had occurred in centuries before; and all these changes were just such as to determine the Christian character of this country.” (Christian Life and Character of the Civil Institutions of the United States, 1864, pp. 41,42).

It was during this time that the Protestant reformation was occurring. The Bible, God's word, which had been hidden from many by the Roman religious system during the Dark Ages was now being translated, distributed and read and acted upon. As the Scripture went into the hearts of men, religious and civil liberty began to follow. In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries many constitutions, compacts and charters of liberty were written -- these would never have come into existence without the translation of the Holy Bible into the languages of the common people, English, German, et al, (namely the KJV 1611-1769). In 1647 the American Colony of Connecticut along with the Colony of Massachusetts passed the Old Deluder Satan Law to prevent the abuse of power over an illiterate population ignorant of the true scriptures, as had been the case in Catholic countries in Europe and abroad. The law stated: “It being one chiefe project of that old deluder, Sathan, to keepe men from the knowledge of the scriptures, as in former times, keeping them in an unknowne tongue.... It is therefore ordered...[that] after the Lord hath increased [the settlement]... to teach all such children as shall resorte to him, to write and read....”(The Code of 1650, 1822, pp. 92,93).

When Mary Tudor (Bloody Mary) became queen of England in 1553, she was determined to roll back the Reformation and reinstate Roman Catholicism. Mary had strong ties to Catholic Spain. She married Philip II of Spain and induced the English Parliament to recognize the authority of papal Rome. Mary met with a great deal of resistance from Protestant reformers in her own country. Mary showed no signs of compromise. The persecution of Protestants expanded. The era known as the Marian Exile drove thousands of English speaking people abroad with little hope of ever seeing their home and friends again. God used this exodus experience to advance the Reformation. A number of English Protestants settled in Geneva, and the Church of Geneva produced an English Bible – the Geneva Bible. Other English Bibles were being produced by Christian translators such as Wycliffe, Tyndale and others during the Reformation period prior to Queen Mary's rise to the throne, even as England, under the church of Rome's influence, “prohibited the translation or ownership of the English Bible”. These fires of persecution burned the New Testament truths into the very hearts of the people. The great Christian Historian, John Foxe (A.D. 1516–1587), describes person after person burned at the stake for owning the scriptures in English. The following are but a few of the hundreds of martyrs and thousands of Bibles burned:

. Thomas Curson was martyred in 1530 for “having the New Testament of Tyndale’s translation, and another book containing certain books of the Old Testament, translated into English...” . Lawrence Staple was martyred in 1531, “For having the Testament in English, the five books of Moses...” . Christopher, a Dutchman from Antwerp, was martyred in 1531, “[F]or selling certain New Testaments in English.” . Walter Kiry was martyred in 1531, because he “had and used...The Testament in English...” . John Mel was martyred in 1532, “For having and reading the New Testament in English, the Psalter in English...” (Foxe, vol. 5, pp. 29, 32, 37, 38).

William Tyndale himself was burned at the stake in October, 1536 for translating the Bible into English. When the flames arose, just before Tyndale died, he prayed, “Lord, open the King of England’s eyes.” And God answered his cries. Not long after the reign of bloody queen Mary, God appointed an evangelical Christian to the throne, King James the VI of Scotland & I of England, a godly man who believed “all scripture is given by inspiration of God”. Led by the Spirit of God, King James chose a dedicated team of God fearing Christian translators to faithfully and accurately translate the Bible into English. The result was the 1611 Authorized Version, the Holy Bible used and preserved by faithful Christians to this day. (See The English Language & The English Bible)

While many modern-day public school history textbooks portray King James I of England as some sort of arrogant, egotistical, self-indulgent, intolerant dictator, King James' own words prove that the charges made against him by his critics are false (World History, The Human Experience, 1992, p. 488; United States History, 1998, pp. 45,59); Civilization, Past and Present, 1996, p. 404). Unlike the Roman Catholic church, who's official policy was to torture and murder those who rejected its authority and spoke out against its corrupt bible and its false doctrines, King James was against such sadistic practices, stating, “I will never allow in my conscience that the blood of any man shall be shed for diversity of opinion in religion, but I would be sorry that Catholics should so multiply as that they might be able to practise their old principles upon us.”(The Cecil Family, George R. Dennis, 1914, p. 184) (see also The Gunpowder Treason, 1609; The History of The Gunpowder Plot, 1804).

When the Pilgrims crossed the Atlantic ocean on the Mayflower in 1620 and arrived in America they carried with them the Geneva Bible and the 1611 Authorized Version Bible (or King James Version as it later became known) (THE PILGRIMS BIBLES; Pilgrim Hall Museum). The text of these two Bibles (Geneva and KJV) are essentially the same with only minor differences (see In Awe Of Thy Word, the first and only documented history of the words of the Holy Bible). When the King James Bible was completed in 1611 it “immediately became the standard English Bible, and superseded all the other versions....it had the effect at once to develope and fix the structure and character of the English language; and with that language it has since been borne abroad even to the ends of the earth.” (Report on The History and Recent Collation of The English Version of The Bible, 1857, p. 7). Generally speaking, the early English Bibles (like the KJV) which follow the traditional received text type, such as the Gothic, Anglo-Saxon, Anglo-Norman, Great, Geneva, and Bishops' are the same. Nevertheless, by the year 1611 when English coalesced into what we know today as the English language, God permanently replaced earlier English Bibles with the Majestic King James Bible (Authorized Version) for the English speaking people of the world, because the KJV was the seventh and final polishing of the English Bible, made unique among all English Bibles because it was and still is the only Bible whose translators invited the input of all interested English-speaking Christians before it was published. The KJV Bible has endured centuries of attacks by critics and remains uncorrupted. Among all modern Bible versions only the Authorized Version (KJV) remains faithful to the preserved traditional received text of Christianity. “The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou [God] shalt preserve them [the words of the Lord] from this generation for ever.” (Psalms 12:6,7).

On January 21, 1781, American patriot Robert Aitken presented a petition to the U. S. Congress offering to print “a neat Edition of the Holy Scriptures for the use of schools.” On September 12, 1782, the U. S. Congresses endorsed and "highly approv[ed]" the printing of the Holy Bible and recommended this edition of the Bible, copied from the authorized English version (KJV), to the inhabitants of the United States for public and private use (See Aitken Bible). Aitken's edition of the Bible (sometimes referred to as “The Bible of the Revolution”) appeared in 1782, having on the title-page the significant motto of Virtue, Liberty, and Independence (American Baptist Memorial, Volume 15, 1856 pp. 220,221; Early Bibles of America, 1894 p. 59). In 1812, President Madison signed a federal bill which economically aided the Bible Society of Philadelphia in its goal of the mass distribution of the Bible. ("An Act for the relief of the Bible Society of Philadelphia" Approved February 2, 1813 by Congress). Noah Webster said in 1832 that “The principals of all genuine liberty, and of wise laws and administrations, are to be drawn from the Bible and sustained by its authority. The man, therefore, who weakens or who destroys the divine authority of that Book may be accessory to all the public disorders which society is doomed to suffer.” (The Western Welshman: Volume 1, Issue 1, 1837 p. 40).

In April of 1607, after four long months at sea, one-hundred and four English colonists landed on the south coast of Virginia, where they set up camp on a sandy stretch of land near what is now Virginia Beach. One of the first acts of the colonists after they landed in Virginia on April 26 was to erect a wooden cross on the shore at Cape Henry. They named their settlement Jamestown, in honor of King James I of England, and then kneeled down to dedicate the new land to Jesus Christ. It was at the foot of this cross that Rev. Robert Hunt led the newly arrived settlers of the Virginia company in public prayer, thanking God for their safe journey, and recommitting themselves to God's plan and purpose for this new world. The Virginia Charter of 1606 reveals that part of their reason for coming to America was to propagate “the Christian religion to such people as yet live in darkness and in miserable ignorance of the true knowledge and worship of God....”(Christian Life and Character of the Civil Institutions of the United States, B. F. Morris, 1864, p. 92).

Within the U.S. Capital building rotunda can be seen the painting of the departure of the pilgrims from Holland to America. A leader of the pilgrims, William Brewster, has an open Bible on his lap with the words, "The New Testament of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ." On the sail of the small ship can be seen the phrase, "God with us." This marks well the entire lifestyle of these men and women who have been called the parents of our Republic. From their earliest years in England through the establishment of the Plymouth colony their words and actions reveal their entire life was centered around God and doing his will.

William Bradford, Governor of Plymouth Plantation for thirty-three years relates how in their early years in Scurvy, England these peoples lives "became enlightened by the Word of God, and had their ignorance and sins discovered unto them by the Word of God's grace, and began, by His grace, to reform their lives."(The Panorama of Life and Literature, Vol. 2, 1856, p. 477). But this enlightening brought much persecution from some of the religious systems of Europe, refusing to submit themselves under their unscriptural authorities which "were unlawful and anti-Christian, being such as have no warrant in the Word of God, but the same that were used in Popery, and still retained.... So many, therefore, of those professors who saw the evil of these things, in these parts, and whose hearts the Lord had touched with heavenly zeal for his truth, they shook off this yoke of anti-Christian bondage, and as the Lord's free people, joined themselves by a covenant of the Lord into a church estate, in the fellowship of the Gospel, to walk in all his ways made known, or to be made known, unto them, according to their best endeavors, whatsoever it should cost them."(Ibid, p. 478)

This desire to worship God freely was costly. They were exiled to Holland where they encountered persecutions, poverty and much hard work, but by God's grace and their faith in the shed blood of Jesus Christ and his word they were able to overcome the difficulties. After twelve years in Holland they decided to sail to the new land of America. Their decision was prompted by a desire to find a home where they could more freely worship God and that was more conducive to raising godly children. They were also motivated, in the words of Bradford, by "a great hope and inward zeal they had of laying some good foundation, or at least to make some way thereunto for the propagating and advancement of the gospel of the kingdom of Christ in those remote parts of the world, yea, although they should be but as stepping-stones unto others for the performance of so great a work."(New-England's Memorial, 1855, p. 12)

Upon arriving in America, before leaving the ship, the pilgrims drew up their own governmental compact which states, "Having undertaken for the Glory of God, and Advancement of the Christian Faith, and the Honour of our King and Country, a Voyage to plant the first colony in the Northerne Parts of Virginia; doe, by these Presents, solemnly and mutually in the Presence of God and one of another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil Body Politick."(The Spirit of America as Shown by Her Great Documents, 1920, p. 7). This document, The Mayflower Compact (signed on 11 Nov. 1620), placed the pilgrim's civil government on a firm Christian base and was the beginning of American constitutional government. Upon arriving on shore, the pilgrims fell to their knees and blessed and thanked God and confirmed their reliance upon Him.

In the next decade God led many other men and women to America, individuals who had the same desire for religious and civil liberty. In the spring of 1630 some one-thousand Puritans sailed to America under the leadership of John Winthrop. A statue in the Capital honors this man whom historian John Fiske called "the Moses of the great Puritan exodus"(The Writings of John Fiske, 1902, p. 124). While at sea in passage to America Winthrop wrote a model of Christian charity which contains their reasons for starting a new colony and the goals they wished to accomplish. Winthrop spoke of their desire to "be as a City upon a hill" that all the people of the earth could look upon and then say of their own land, "Lord make it likely that of New England."(Life and Letters of John Winthrop, 1867, p. 19)

President Reagan often spoke of this vision that our pilgrim and Puritan fathers had for America: "Call it mysticism if you will, but I have always believed there was some divine Providence that placed this great land here between the two great oceans, to be found by a special kind of people from every corner of the world, who had a special love for freedom and a special courage that enabled them to leave their own land, leave their friends and their countrymen, and come to this new and strange land to build a new world of peace and freedom and hope." (The City On A Hill, Michael Reagan, 1997, p. 115) (See also RONALD REAGAN AND THE KING JAMES BIBLE)

We have been an example throughout the world as a godly nation. However, as we have forgotten that it was the Lord who made us a nation we have also failed to be a model of Christian charity in various ways. We must remember as Winthrop wrote that "if we shall deal falsely with our God in this work we have undertaken, and so cause him to withdraw his present help from us, we shall be made a story and a by-word throughout the world."(Life and Letters of John Winthrop, 1867, p. 19). How tragic that this prophetic insight has begun to be fulfilled.

Within the Capital rotunda is a carved relief of a gentleman who most certainly did not deal falsely with his God. Quaker William Penn was given the land between New York and Maryland in 1681. He said that "my God that has given it me through many difficulties, will, I believe, bless and make it the seed of a nation."(The Life of William Penn, 1882, p. 166). In 1682 Penn wrote the colony's frame of government "to make and establish such Laws as shall best preserve true Christian and Civil Liberty, in opposition to all Unchristian, Licentious, and unjust practices, (Whereby God may have his due, Caesar his due, and the people their due,)"(Charter to William Penn, and Laws of The Province of Pennsylvania, Volume 2, 1879, p. 107). Thomas Jefferson called Penn "the greatest lawgiver the world has produced;"(Hazard's Register of Pennsylvania, Vol. 16, 1835, p. 48). Penn, who's wisdom was "derived from that book of Gospel statutes," recognized Christian character as the basis of good government. At a later time William Penn told the Russian czar, Peter the Great, that "If thou wouldst rule well, thou must rule for God; and to do that, thou must be ruled by him...."(The Life of William Penn, 1882, p. 407). But Penn also warned that "implicit faith and blind obedience in religion will also introduce implicit faith and blind obedience in government."(The Life of William Penn, 1852, p. 144)

Not only was God the foundation of these colonies, but the Christian religion was central to every other colony in America as well. These early Americans saw that God desired to establish them "in the faith" as a nation where the church of Christ had the liberty to "grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ" and to be a light to the entire world (Acts 16:5; 2 Pet. 3:18). When we speak of our founding fathers we are in a large part speaking of their colonial clergy. They not only educated the people, but were involved in every aspect of the life of America. Many statues in our Capital honor these clergy-men who colonized our states, wrote our laws and constitutions, established our schools and universities, trained our leaders and served as judges and lawyers: they were actively involved in every aspect of the development of America. Ministers literally discipled our nation. Besides founding colonies and writing our laws, they preached many sermons dealing with government in public affairs. These election sermons, artillery sermons, and thanksgiving and fast-day sermons began as early as 1633 and continued until the late 19th century.

How ironic it is to see in recent years the persecution that has been leveled against Christians for attempting to participate in the political process. In a nation literally founded and nurtured by Christians and built upon Biblical principles, how can it be that some people would prevent devout Christians from being involved in public policies as well as holding elected office?

Our forefathers understood that the birth of this nation marked the birth of the first nation in history founded upon true Biblical Christian principles. Our sixth president, John Quincy Adams stated, “The highest, the transcendent glory of the American Revolution was this—it connected, in one indissoluble bond, the principles of civil government with the precepts of Christianity.”(The Historical Magazine, Vol. 4, 1860, p. 194). Our courts have concurred with this a number of times. For example, in 1883 the Illinois Supreme Court declared that “our laws and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of the redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise. And in this sense and to this extent our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian....”(Richmond v Moore, 1883, p. 435).

Tragically, many of our modern day judges and politicians no longer share the same biblical convictions as those of earlier generations of Americans. The founding fathers and successive leaders (Presidents, Congressmen, judges, et al) for well over a century clearly understood the importance of our biblical Christian foundations. If we, as a nation, will turn back to God from our present course of superstition and idolatry, there may still be hope for the United States. “If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.” (II Chron. 7:14). “And I will restore thy judges as at the first, and thy counsellors as at the beginning: afterward thou shalt be called, The city of righteousness, the faithful city.” (Isa. 1:26)

The colonist's Christian beliefs and their firm reliance upon God's protection proved invaluable throughout the Revolutionary war and the establishing of the nation of the United States of America. This protection of God was certainly upon the father of our nation, George Washington. Washington, in a letter to his brother reported, "By the all powerful dispensations of Providence, I have been protected beyond all human probability or expectation;"(The Life of George Washington, 1840, p. 45). When the war for independence began Washington was selected as General of the Army of the United States. The day after he took charge he issued orders requiring, "all officers and soldiers, not engaged on actual duty, a punctual attendance on Divine service, to implore the blessings of Heaven upon the means used for our safety and defence."(The Writings of George Washington, 1834, p. 491)

The colonists continued to pray and rely upon God throughout the war. During the harsh winter of 1777 and '78 when the American troops were suffering at Valley Forge, Washington could often be found upon his knees within the woods, laying the cause of his bleeding country at the throne of grace. In the prayer room of the Capital we can see in the stained glass window the kneeling figure of George Washington. Behind him a prayer from the first verse of Psalms sixteen is etched, "Preserve me, O God: for in thee do I put my trust."

Washington was observed by his troops, his Officers and various civilians to regularly pray in his tent as well as in secluded groves. On May 6th, 1982, President Reagan remarked on this event in his national day of prayer proclamation: "I've said before that the most sublime picture in American history is of George Washington on his knees in the snow at Valley Forge. That image personifies a people who know that it's not enough to depend on our own courage and goodness; we must also seek help from God, our Father and Preserver."(Apostle of Liberty, 2007, p. 89)

Contained within our constitution and declaration are ideas that our biblical concepts, such as the rule of law, fair trial under the law, religious freedom, private property rights and the recognition that rights are granted not by government, but by God. These ideas and others would never have come forth in America were it not for God and the Bible -- both permeated the early life of this nation.

For example, after rededication of the constitution George Washington was elected as the President. The inauguration was on April 30th, 1789. On the morning Washington was inaugurated, a general prayer meeting was held in New York city to commit the new government to the holy protection and blessings of the Most High. This was not unique because, as we have already seen, private and public prayer permeated colonial America.

Through some of the people and events that shaped America's beginning, we have seen that God and those principles found in His Holy Word, are primarily the source and the basis for our nations existence and freedoms. Our U.S. house of representatives summed it up well in a resolve passed in 1854. Based on an extensive study of the influence of Christianity in America, Congress declared, that as a nation our posterity will be dependant upon Almighty God. They went on to say that "the great vital and conservative element in our system is the belief of our people in the pure doctrines and divine truths of the Gospel of Jesus Christ,"(Christian Life and Character of the Civil Institutions of the United States, 1864, p. 328).

The great nineteenth century statesman and politician, Daniel Webster, said, "If we and our posterity shall be true to the Christian religion, —if we and they shall live always in the fear of God and shall respect his commandments,... —we may have the highest hopes of the future fortunes of our country;... But if we and our posterity neglect religious instruction and authority, violate the rules of eternal justice, trifle with the injunctions of morality, and recklessly destroy the political constitution which holds us together, no man can tell how sudden a catastrophe may overwhelm us that shall bury all our glory in profound obscurity."(Christian Life and Character of the Civil Institutions of the United States, 1864, p. 270).

Charles A. Goodrich, a Christian minister and researcher in the nineteenth century, said, “Thus it is evident that wickedness and infidelity are certainly, though sometimes slowly, punished by Him who is just, although merciful: and if he has hitherto graciously refrained from visiting the sins of this nation with the punishment which they deserve, let us not be vain of that exemption: let us not attribute it to any merit of our own; but rather let it afford an additional motive to our gratitude and praise; let us unfeignedly thank him for his tender mercies daily vouchsafed to us; and, while we bow before him in humble adoration, let us earnestly endeavour to preserve our worship of him, free from all ungodliness and superstition.” (Charles A. Goodrich, Book Of Martyrs, Hartford, 1830, pp.66,67)

Since the signing of the Declaration of Independence and the birth of The United States of America on July 4th, 1776 our nation as a society has been under spiritual attack and many people have been influenced by a number of un-biblical religious denominations, cults, and various pagan and occult teachings. Spiritual warfare over the hearts, minds and souls of Americans began years before 1776 and continues unabated to this day. Over the years there has been an increase in the number of un-biblical and anti-biblical doctrines of men [Free Masonry, Catholicism, Mormonism, Scientology, Jehovah's Witnesses, not to mention Eastern mysticism, et al] which have crept into our nation as well as into our churches and homes. The corrupt religious system of Rome, for instance, has gained popularity in the States with the influx of Roman Catholics since the mid 1800's which coincides with the increasing acceptance of so called “Christianized” pagan holidays by many professing ‘Christians’.

The Lord Jesus Christ forewarned his disciples that in the latter days many would come in his name “and shall deceive many” (Mark 13:6). He repeatedly urged us to “Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things” (Luke 21:36). He said, “Why sleep ye? rise and pray, lest ye enter into temptation.” (Luke 22:46). Sadly, many people today have failed to heed the Lord's words and have fallen asleep spiritually. “But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat” (Matt. 13:25). With the proliferation of Charismatic type ‘Christian’ movements across North America in recent decades, millions of Americans, including the majority of our political and religious leaders, have compromised true Christian standards and true holiness, and have been given over to a reprobate mind. Having lukewarm forms of godliness, many have compromised God's word and replaced the words of the Holy Bible with psychology, philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: who change the truth of God into a lie, and worship and serve the creature (man) more than the Creator (the Lord Jesus Christ) who is blessed for ever. (II Tim. 3:1-5; Col. 2:8; Rom. 1:22-27) “I also will choose their delusions, and will bring their fears upon them; because when I called, none did answer; when I spake, they did not hear: but they did evil before mine eyes, and chose that in which I delighted not.” “I will do these things unto thee, because thou hast gone a whoring after the heathen, and because thou art polluted with their idols.” “for the spirit of whoredoms hath caused them to err, and they have gone a whoring from under their God.” ( Isa. 66:4; Ezk. 23:30; Hos. 4:12)

In the book of Hosea God said, “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge” (Hosea 4:6). Jesus said, “Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.” (Matt. 22:29). As the mainstream anti-Biblical news media, Hollywood movie producers, major TV networks and others continue their all out campaign of mis-information – mis-leading the American people – and as most Americans, including many who claim to be ‘Christians’, have turned away their ears from the truth and have been turned unto fables, America will surely pay a great price for her rebellion. If there was ever a time when we needed to return to the true God of the true Bible with our whole heart, the time is now. “For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God? And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?” (I Peter 4:17,18). The day of reckoning is upon us. (See Ecumenism - A New Age of Darkness)

           Bro. Terry

The Holy Bible and America's Founding Fathers

The Holy Bible and America's Founding Fathers - What Leading Americans have said about the Bible

“It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible.” George Washington, 1st President of the United States – Haley's Bible Handbook, 18.
“The Bible is the best Book in the world.”v John Adams, 2nd President of the United States (Upper Room Bulletin, Vol. 3, 1916, p. 8.)
“The older I grow and the more I read the Holy Scriptures, the more reverence I have for them and the more I am convinced that they are not only the people's guide for the conduct of this life, but the foundation of our hope respecting the future state.” Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States (Upper Room Bulletin, Vol. 3, 1916, p. 8.)
“In what light soever we regard the Bible, whether with reference to revelation, to history, or to morality, it is an invaluable and inexhaustible mine of knowledge and virtue.” John Q. Adams, 6th President of the United States (The New Dictionary of Thoughts, 1960, p. 45.)
“My custom is to read four to five chapters [of the Bible] every morning immediately after rising from my bed. It employs about an hour of my time...” John Q. Adams, 6th President of the United States, in a letter to his son, September 1811.
“That book [the Bible], sir, is the rock on which our republic rests.” Andrew Jackson, 7th President of the United States – Haley's Bible Handbook, 19.
“I have read the sacred Scriptures a great deal and deeply reverence them as divine truth.” James K. Polk, 11th President of the United States (Herald of Gospel Liberty, Vol. 106, 1914.)
“In regard to the Great Book [the Bible], I have only to say that it is the best gift which God has given man. All the good from the Saviour of the world is communicated to us through this book. But for this book we could not know right from wrong.” Abraham Lincoln, 16th President of the United States (The Political History of The United States of America, 1865.)
“Hold fast to the Bible as the sheet anchor to your liberties; write its precepts in your hearts, and practice them in your lives. To the influence of this book we are indebted for all progress made in our true civilization, and to this we must look as our guide in the future.” Ulysses S. Grant, 18th President of the United States (The Literary Primacy of the Bible, 1915, p. 148)
“I believe in the Holy Scriptures as the revealed Word of God to the world for its enlightenment and salvation.” Rutherford B. Hayes, 19th President of the United States (Upper Room Bulletin, Vol. 3, 1916, p. 9.)
“I very much hope that in sending out this book you will do something to invite more attention to the study of the New Testament and to the Bible as a whole. It seems to me that in these days there is an unhappy falling off in our appreciation of the importance of this study. I do not believe, as a people, that we can afford to allow our interest in and our veneration for the Bible to abate.” Grover Cleveland, 22nd President of the United States (Upper Room Bulletin, Vol. 3, 1916, p. 9.)
“That I am a firm believer in the religion of Jesus Christ and in the Holy Scriptures as the Word of God, is not a virtue of mine. I imbibed it at my mother's breast and can no more divest myself of it than I can of my nature.” Benjamin Harrison, 23rd President of the United States (Upper Room Bulletin, Vol. 3, 1916, p. 9.)
“A thorough knowledge of the Bible is worth more than a college education.” Theodore Roosevelt, 26th President of the United States – Distilled Wisdom, 36.
“The whole inspiration of our civilization springs from the teachings of Christ and the lessons of the prophets. To read the Bible for these fundamentals is a necessity of American life.” Herbert C. Hoover, 31st President of the United States – (Charles E. Jones. The Books You Read (Harrisburg, PA: Executive Books, 1985), 116.
“We have been assured, Sir, in the Sacred Writings [the Bible], 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, Founding Father of the United States (Memoirs of The Life and Writings of Benjamin Franklin, 1818, p. 389.)
“The Bible contains more knowledge necessary to man in his present state than any other book in the world.” Benjamin Rush, Founding Father of the United States (Herald of Gospel Liberty, Vol. 106, 1914.)
“All the distinctive features and superiority of our republican institutions are derived from the teachings of Scripture.” —Edward Everett, President of Harvard University, Governor of Massachusetts, United States Secretary of State (Faiths of Famous Men in Their Own Words, 1900, p. 119)
“The nearer I approach to the end of my pilgrimage, the clearer is the evidence of the divine origin of the Bible” Samuel F.B. Morse, inventor of the telegraph – Henry M. Morris. Men of Science - Men of God (El Cajon, CA.: Master Books, Creation Life Publishers, Inc., 1990), 47.
“I believe a knowledge of the Bible without a college course is more valuable than a college course without the Bible.” —William Lyon Phelps, American author and scholar (Human Nature In The Bible, 1922, p. 9)
“Why may not the Bible, and especially the New Testament, without note or comment, be read and taught as a divine revelation in the [school] - its general precepts expounded, its evidences explained and its glorious principles of morality inculcated?... Where can the purest principles of morality be learned so clearly or so perfectly as from the New Testament?” U.S. Supreme Court, court's opinion written by Justice Joseph Story in 1844 – Vidal v. Girard's Executors, 43 U.S. 205-206.
“I believe that the Bible is to be understood and received in the plain and obvious meaning of its passages; since I cannot persuade myself that a book intended for the instruction and conversion of the whole world, should cover its true meaning in such mystery and doubt, that none but critics and philosophers can discover it.” —Daniel Webster, American statesman, Secretary of State (The Writings and Speeches of Daniel Webster, 1903, p. 10)
“The Bible must be considered as the great source of all the truth by which men are to be guided in government as well as in all social transactions.” Noah Webster, American Lexicographer (1758-1843), (The Ten Commandments & Their Influence on American Law - A Study in History, 2002, p. 194)
“All the miseries and evils which men suffer from vice, crime, ambition, injustice, oppression, slavery and war, proceed from their despising or neglecting the precepts contained in the Bible.” Noah Webster (1758-1843), History of The United States, 1832, p. 310
“I cannot too greatly emphasize the importance and value of Bible Study— more important than ever before in these days of uncertainties, when men and women are apt to decide questions from the standpoint of expediency rather than upon the eternal principles laid down by God, Himself.” —John Wanamaker, United States merchant, religious leader, and political figure (The Missionary Review of The World, Vol. 43, 1920, p. 1029)
“The Bible is the Chief moral cause of all that is good, and the best corrector of all that is evil, in human society; the best book for regulating the temporal concerns of men, and the only book that can serve as an infallible guide....” Noah Webster (1758-1843), America's God and Country Encyclopedia of Quotations, p. 679