We found out on Valentines Day that Peter Joslyn (Lynchburgh, Virginia) asked our Erin to be his wife. She accepted. They are planning to be married this summer. We are planning a party!
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Monday, February 16, 2009
Good Qualities for a President
"First in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen, he was second to none in humble and enduring scenes of private life. Pious, just humane, temperate, and sincere; uniform dignified, and commanding; his example was as edifying to all around him as were the effects of that example lasting.... The purity of his private charter gave effulgence to his public virtues...."
--John Marshall, official eulogy of George Washington, delivered by Richard Henry Lee, 26 December 1799
--John Marshall, official eulogy of George Washington, delivered by Richard Henry Lee, 26 December 1799
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Sobering Quote
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."
--Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Stephens Smith, 13 November 1787
--Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Stephens Smith, 13 November 1787
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Something to Ponder
"This country and this people seem to have been made for each other, and it appears as if it was the design of Providence that an inheritance so proper and convenient for a ban of brethren, united to each other by the strongest of ties, should never be split into a number of unsocial, jealous, and alien sovereignties."
--John Jay, Federalist No. 2
--John Jay, Federalist No. 2
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Debt and Slavery
1My son, if you have put up security for your neighbor, have given your pledge for a stranger,2if you are snared in the words of your mouth, caught in the words of your mouth,3then do this, my son, and save yourself, for you have come into the hand of your neighbor: go, hasten, and plead urgently with your neighbor.4 Give your eyes no sleep and your eyelids no slumber;5save yourself like a gazelle from the hand of the hunter, like a bird from the hand of the fowler.
Proverbs 6:1-5
15 Whoever puts up security for a stranger will surely suffer harm, but he who hates striking hands in pledge is secure.
Proverbs 11:15
18One who lacks sense gives a pledge and puts up security in the presence of his neighbor.
Proverbs 17:18
"We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt."
--Thomas Jefferson, letter to Samuel Kercheval, 12 July 1816
"Honor, justice, and humanity, forbid us tamely to surrender that freedom which we received from our gallant ancestors, and which our innocent posterity have a right to receive from us. We cannot endure the infamy and guilt of resigning succeeding generations to that wretchedness which inevitably awaits them if we basely entail hereditary bondage on them." --Thomas Jefferson
Wisdom literature is complex. Wisdom literature does not provide black and white rules. It provides wisdom. There is enough admonition in Proverbs to teach us that incurring debt is typically not a good thing. It is a binding of our future. It makes us slaves to our creditors. The U.S. Government is proposing through this massive bail out to impose on this nation trillions of dollars of debt. Whether we like it or not, that debt will fall on us, and not only us, our children as well. The U.S. Government is seeking to sell us and our children even more into slavery. The founding fathers, as statesmen, understood this principle. I just wish our modern politicians understood this concept.
Home of the free and the brave?
Proverbs 6:1-5
15 Whoever puts up security for a stranger will surely suffer harm, but he who hates striking hands in pledge is secure.
Proverbs 11:15
18One who lacks sense gives a pledge and puts up security in the presence of his neighbor.
Proverbs 17:18
"We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt."
--Thomas Jefferson, letter to Samuel Kercheval, 12 July 1816
"Honor, justice, and humanity, forbid us tamely to surrender that freedom which we received from our gallant ancestors, and which our innocent posterity have a right to receive from us. We cannot endure the infamy and guilt of resigning succeeding generations to that wretchedness which inevitably awaits them if we basely entail hereditary bondage on them." --Thomas Jefferson
Wisdom literature is complex. Wisdom literature does not provide black and white rules. It provides wisdom. There is enough admonition in Proverbs to teach us that incurring debt is typically not a good thing. It is a binding of our future. It makes us slaves to our creditors. The U.S. Government is proposing through this massive bail out to impose on this nation trillions of dollars of debt. Whether we like it or not, that debt will fall on us, and not only us, our children as well. The U.S. Government is seeking to sell us and our children even more into slavery. The founding fathers, as statesmen, understood this principle. I just wish our modern politicians understood this concept.
Home of the free and the brave?
Friday, January 30, 2009
Proclaiming the Lord's Death to the Next Generation
For as often as you eat the bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. I Corinthians 11:26.
What an interesting verse! I, for one, find it easy to overlook the very jarring concept of a dead man coming simply due to the passage’s familiarity and its easy explanation that Jesus has died for our sins. Therefore, we declare his death and resurrection and our justification until he comes again. This is the common understanding of the commentaries. The commentaries on I Corinthians typically conclude that there must be some sermon associated with the Lord’s Supper. I think there is more here.
A careful reading of I Corinthians 11:17-34 impresses one with the prevalence of legal terms in the passage. Words such as “covenant” and “judgment” are significant. In addition, this passage describes a “new covenant.” Further, “remembrance” of a covenant in old testament parlance indicated something more than mere intellectual reflection. It entailed a reconfirmation and affirmation through action of the covenantal obligations. N.T. Wright, in his book Jesus and the Victory of God, has hypothesized that Jesus, in the Gospels, is portayed as taking to himself the symbols of the temple and the Sabbath. This passage would seem to support that hypothesis.
I have previously opined that the fourth and fifth commandment set forth a dance between generations. The fourth and the fifth commandments are unique in that they are cast as the only two commandments with positive obligations. I don’t deny that all of the commandments hang on the positive obligations to love Yahweh and love your neighbor, but the other eight commandments are cast as prohibitions. Not only are the fourth and fifth commandments obligatory, they are also reciprocal. The fourth obliges the older generation to live out the cycle of labor and rest before the younger generation. The fifth commandment obliges the younger generation to obey the older generation as it does so.
As the history of the covenant progresses, this dance becomes more explicit. It is highlighted beautifully in Hosea 4. In this passage, it almost appears as if the fifth commandment takes on a new principle, no longer just a commandment to be obeyed, but a principle of life. It is almost as if there is an unalterable truth that the younger generation will follow after the older generation. Because the older generation commits idolatry, the younger generation will do likewise. Because the older generation commits adultery, the younger generation will do likewise.
Without pushing too hard, there is a sense of this in Romans 1. Because men exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images of mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles, God gave them over to impure lusts and dishonorable passions. While there is no explicit generational reference here, there is certainly an implicit understanding of a progression over time. There is an old adage that a church is only two generations away from apostocy. A true church can become cold in one generation and nonexistent in the next.
What Paul “received” and “delivered” (two more legal terms) to the Corinthians was the covenantal act of remembrance Jesus called his disciples to practice. He called them to enter into the dance of the generations through his body and blood. Just as the old covenant paradigmatic worship service in Exodus 24 ended in feasting before Yahweh, his disciples are to culminate their worship service in feasting on his body and blood. Just as the older generation was to remember the Sabbath before the younger generation, so the older generation is now to remember the body and blood of the Lord before the younger generation. By doing so, they are proclaiming or inculcating the feast of the Lord before the younger generation.
There is a principle of life aspect to this passage as well. The worthy participation in the sacrament has consequences. Life and health are the blessings of the sacrament. Sickness and death are the curses of the failure to observe the sacrament. And it is the failure to observe the sacrament that is the focus, because Paul makes very clear that they are not observing the sacrament at all in their feast.
The act of the participation in the body and blood of the Lord is a proclamation to our children of the gospel of Jesus Christ. It is the primary means of discipleship of our children. Yes, there are other things that flow from our communion with Christ, such as educating our children in the nurture of the Lord. But it starts at the dinner table with Christ. No, this is not an automatic, magical event. It is better. It is conduct in a relationship with a faithful God, who always keeps his promises to His covenant people. God is faithful to his covenant promises. He wants us to be faithful to the covenant as well. He will remember us as we remember him.
What an interesting verse! I, for one, find it easy to overlook the very jarring concept of a dead man coming simply due to the passage’s familiarity and its easy explanation that Jesus has died for our sins. Therefore, we declare his death and resurrection and our justification until he comes again. This is the common understanding of the commentaries. The commentaries on I Corinthians typically conclude that there must be some sermon associated with the Lord’s Supper. I think there is more here.
A careful reading of I Corinthians 11:17-34 impresses one with the prevalence of legal terms in the passage. Words such as “covenant” and “judgment” are significant. In addition, this passage describes a “new covenant.” Further, “remembrance” of a covenant in old testament parlance indicated something more than mere intellectual reflection. It entailed a reconfirmation and affirmation through action of the covenantal obligations. N.T. Wright, in his book Jesus and the Victory of God, has hypothesized that Jesus, in the Gospels, is portayed as taking to himself the symbols of the temple and the Sabbath. This passage would seem to support that hypothesis.
I have previously opined that the fourth and fifth commandment set forth a dance between generations. The fourth and the fifth commandments are unique in that they are cast as the only two commandments with positive obligations. I don’t deny that all of the commandments hang on the positive obligations to love Yahweh and love your neighbor, but the other eight commandments are cast as prohibitions. Not only are the fourth and fifth commandments obligatory, they are also reciprocal. The fourth obliges the older generation to live out the cycle of labor and rest before the younger generation. The fifth commandment obliges the younger generation to obey the older generation as it does so.
As the history of the covenant progresses, this dance becomes more explicit. It is highlighted beautifully in Hosea 4. In this passage, it almost appears as if the fifth commandment takes on a new principle, no longer just a commandment to be obeyed, but a principle of life. It is almost as if there is an unalterable truth that the younger generation will follow after the older generation. Because the older generation commits idolatry, the younger generation will do likewise. Because the older generation commits adultery, the younger generation will do likewise.
Without pushing too hard, there is a sense of this in Romans 1. Because men exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images of mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles, God gave them over to impure lusts and dishonorable passions. While there is no explicit generational reference here, there is certainly an implicit understanding of a progression over time. There is an old adage that a church is only two generations away from apostocy. A true church can become cold in one generation and nonexistent in the next.
What Paul “received” and “delivered” (two more legal terms) to the Corinthians was the covenantal act of remembrance Jesus called his disciples to practice. He called them to enter into the dance of the generations through his body and blood. Just as the old covenant paradigmatic worship service in Exodus 24 ended in feasting before Yahweh, his disciples are to culminate their worship service in feasting on his body and blood. Just as the older generation was to remember the Sabbath before the younger generation, so the older generation is now to remember the body and blood of the Lord before the younger generation. By doing so, they are proclaiming or inculcating the feast of the Lord before the younger generation.
There is a principle of life aspect to this passage as well. The worthy participation in the sacrament has consequences. Life and health are the blessings of the sacrament. Sickness and death are the curses of the failure to observe the sacrament. And it is the failure to observe the sacrament that is the focus, because Paul makes very clear that they are not observing the sacrament at all in their feast.
The act of the participation in the body and blood of the Lord is a proclamation to our children of the gospel of Jesus Christ. It is the primary means of discipleship of our children. Yes, there are other things that flow from our communion with Christ, such as educating our children in the nurture of the Lord. But it starts at the dinner table with Christ. No, this is not an automatic, magical event. It is better. It is conduct in a relationship with a faithful God, who always keeps his promises to His covenant people. God is faithful to his covenant promises. He wants us to be faithful to the covenant as well. He will remember us as we remember him.
Bipartisanship is Bad
James Madison writes in Federalist No. 10, that the chief fear in a democratic government is the power of factions, particularly a faction that becomes a majority and is able to impose its passions on a minority. It was for this reason that the founders despised democracy. A republican government so diffuses people into factions so that one interest is frustrated in its efforts to impose its passions on a minority faction. Only through republican government could factions be hindered in becoming majorities. It is this same idea that caused them to despise political parties. Political parties seek to combine factions into majorities and minorities, making the republic more akin to a democracy. We now have a majority faction that is seeking bipartisanship from the minority in a bail out plan. But what would the founders say? How would they advise us to counter such an occurrence? It would not be to merge with the majority but to counter the majority and defend the rights of the minority, in this case the tax payer. I quote from Madison at length.
AMONG the numerous advantages promised by a well constructed Union, none deserves to be more accurately developed than its tendency to break and control the violence of faction. The friend of popular governments never finds himself so much alarmed for their character and fate, as when he contemplates their propensity to this dangerous vice. He will not fail, therefore, to set a due value on any plan which, without violating the principles to which he is attached, provides a proper cure for it. The instability, injustice, and confusion introduced into the public councils, have, in truth, been the mortal diseases under which popular governments have everywhere perished; as they continue to be the favorite and fruitful topics from which the adversaries to liberty derive their most specious declamations. The valuable improvements made by the American constitutions on the popular models, both ancient and modern, cannot certainly be too much admired; but it would be an unwarrantable partiality, to contend that they have as effectually obviated the danger on this side, as was wished and expected. Complaints are everywhere heard from our most considerate and virtuous citizens, equally the friends of public and private faith, and of public and personal liberty, that our governments are too unstable, that the public good is disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties, and that measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority. However anxiously we may wish that these complaints had no foundation, the evidence, of known facts will not permit us to deny that they are in some degree true. It will be found, indeed, on a candid review of our situation, that some of the distresses under which we labor have been erroneously charged on the operation of our governments; but it will be found, at the same time, that other causes will not alone account for many of our heaviest misfortunes; and, particularly, for that prevailing and increasing distrust of public engagements, and alarm for private rights, which are echoed from one end of the continent to the other. These must be chiefly, if not wholly, effects of the unsteadiness and injustice with which a factious spirit has tainted our public administrations.
. . . . . .
No man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause, because his interest would certainly bias his judgment, and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity. With equal, nay with greater reason, a body of men are unfit to be both judges and parties at the same time; yet what are many of the most important acts of legislation, but so many judicial determinations, not indeed concerning the rights of single persons, but concerning the rights of large bodies of citizens? And what are the different classes of legislators but advocates and parties to the causes which they determine? Is a law proposed concerning private debts? It is a question to which the creditors are parties on one side and the debtors on the other. Justice ought to hold the balance between them. Yet the parties are, and must be, themselves the judges; and the most numerous party, or, in other words, the most powerful faction must be expected to prevail. Shall domestic manufactures be encouraged, and in what degree, by restrictions on foreign manufactures? are questions which would be differently decided by the landed and the manufacturing classes, and probably by neither with a sole regard to justice and the public good. The apportionment of taxes on the various descriptions of property is an act which seems to require the most exact impartiality; yet there is, perhaps, no legislative act in which greater opportunity and temptation are given to a predominant party to trample on the rules of justice. Every shilling with which they overburden the inferior number, is a shilling saved to their own pockets.
It is in vain to say that enlightened statesmen will be able to adjust these clashing interests, and render them all subservient to the public good. Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm. Nor, in many cases, can such an adjustment be made at all without taking into view indirect and remote considerations, which will rarely prevail over the immediate interest which one party may find in disregarding the rights of another or the good of the whole.
The inference to which we are brought is, that the CAUSES of faction cannot be removed, and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its EFFECTS.
If a faction consists of less than a majority, relief is supplied by the republican principle, which enables the majority to defeat its sinister views by regular vote. It may clog the administration, it may convulse the society; but it will be unable to execute and mask its violence under the forms of the Constitution. When a majority is included in a faction, the form of popular government, on the other hand, enables it to sacrifice to its ruling passion or interest both the public good and the rights of other citizens. To secure the public good and private rights against the danger of such a faction, and at the same time to preserve the spirit and the form of popular government, is then the great object to which our inquiries are directed. Let me add that it is the great desideratum by which this form of government can be rescued from the opprobrium under which it has so long labored, and be recommended to the esteem and adoption of mankind.
. . . . .
Hence, it clearly appears, that the same advantage which a republic has over a democracy, in controlling the effects of faction, is enjoyed by a large over a small republic,--is enjoyed by the Union over the States composing it. Does the advantage consist in the substitution of representatives whose enlightened views and virtuous sentiments render them superior to local prejudices and schemes of injustice? It will not be denied that the representation of the Union will be most likely to possess these requisite endowments. Does it consist in the greater security afforded by a greater variety of parties, against the event of any one party being able to outnumber and oppress the rest? In an equal degree does the increased variety of parties comprised within the Union, increase this security. Does it, in fine, consist in the greater obstacles opposed to the concert and accomplishment of the secret wishes of an unjust and interested majority? Here, again, the extent of the Union gives it the most palpable advantage.
The influence of factious leaders may kindle a flame within their particular States, but will be unable to spread a general conflagration through the other States. A religious sect may degenerate into a political faction in a part of the Confederacy; but the variety of sects dispersed over the entire face of it must secure the national councils against any danger from that source. A rage for paper money, for an abolition of debts, for an equal division of property, or for any other improper or wicked project, will be less apt to pervade the whole body of the Union than a particular member of it; in the same proportion as such a malady is more likely to taint a particular county or district, than an entire State.
In the extent and proper structure of the Union, therefore, we behold a republican remedy for the diseases most incident to republican government. And according to the degree of pleasure and pride we feel in being republicans, ought to be our zeal in cherishing the spirit and supporting the character of Federalists.
AMONG the numerous advantages promised by a well constructed Union, none deserves to be more accurately developed than its tendency to break and control the violence of faction. The friend of popular governments never finds himself so much alarmed for their character and fate, as when he contemplates their propensity to this dangerous vice. He will not fail, therefore, to set a due value on any plan which, without violating the principles to which he is attached, provides a proper cure for it. The instability, injustice, and confusion introduced into the public councils, have, in truth, been the mortal diseases under which popular governments have everywhere perished; as they continue to be the favorite and fruitful topics from which the adversaries to liberty derive their most specious declamations. The valuable improvements made by the American constitutions on the popular models, both ancient and modern, cannot certainly be too much admired; but it would be an unwarrantable partiality, to contend that they have as effectually obviated the danger on this side, as was wished and expected. Complaints are everywhere heard from our most considerate and virtuous citizens, equally the friends of public and private faith, and of public and personal liberty, that our governments are too unstable, that the public good is disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties, and that measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority. However anxiously we may wish that these complaints had no foundation, the evidence, of known facts will not permit us to deny that they are in some degree true. It will be found, indeed, on a candid review of our situation, that some of the distresses under which we labor have been erroneously charged on the operation of our governments; but it will be found, at the same time, that other causes will not alone account for many of our heaviest misfortunes; and, particularly, for that prevailing and increasing distrust of public engagements, and alarm for private rights, which are echoed from one end of the continent to the other. These must be chiefly, if not wholly, effects of the unsteadiness and injustice with which a factious spirit has tainted our public administrations.
. . . . . .
No man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause, because his interest would certainly bias his judgment, and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity. With equal, nay with greater reason, a body of men are unfit to be both judges and parties at the same time; yet what are many of the most important acts of legislation, but so many judicial determinations, not indeed concerning the rights of single persons, but concerning the rights of large bodies of citizens? And what are the different classes of legislators but advocates and parties to the causes which they determine? Is a law proposed concerning private debts? It is a question to which the creditors are parties on one side and the debtors on the other. Justice ought to hold the balance between them. Yet the parties are, and must be, themselves the judges; and the most numerous party, or, in other words, the most powerful faction must be expected to prevail. Shall domestic manufactures be encouraged, and in what degree, by restrictions on foreign manufactures? are questions which would be differently decided by the landed and the manufacturing classes, and probably by neither with a sole regard to justice and the public good. The apportionment of taxes on the various descriptions of property is an act which seems to require the most exact impartiality; yet there is, perhaps, no legislative act in which greater opportunity and temptation are given to a predominant party to trample on the rules of justice. Every shilling with which they overburden the inferior number, is a shilling saved to their own pockets.
It is in vain to say that enlightened statesmen will be able to adjust these clashing interests, and render them all subservient to the public good. Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm. Nor, in many cases, can such an adjustment be made at all without taking into view indirect and remote considerations, which will rarely prevail over the immediate interest which one party may find in disregarding the rights of another or the good of the whole.
The inference to which we are brought is, that the CAUSES of faction cannot be removed, and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its EFFECTS.
If a faction consists of less than a majority, relief is supplied by the republican principle, which enables the majority to defeat its sinister views by regular vote. It may clog the administration, it may convulse the society; but it will be unable to execute and mask its violence under the forms of the Constitution. When a majority is included in a faction, the form of popular government, on the other hand, enables it to sacrifice to its ruling passion or interest both the public good and the rights of other citizens. To secure the public good and private rights against the danger of such a faction, and at the same time to preserve the spirit and the form of popular government, is then the great object to which our inquiries are directed. Let me add that it is the great desideratum by which this form of government can be rescued from the opprobrium under which it has so long labored, and be recommended to the esteem and adoption of mankind.
. . . . .
Hence, it clearly appears, that the same advantage which a republic has over a democracy, in controlling the effects of faction, is enjoyed by a large over a small republic,--is enjoyed by the Union over the States composing it. Does the advantage consist in the substitution of representatives whose enlightened views and virtuous sentiments render them superior to local prejudices and schemes of injustice? It will not be denied that the representation of the Union will be most likely to possess these requisite endowments. Does it consist in the greater security afforded by a greater variety of parties, against the event of any one party being able to outnumber and oppress the rest? In an equal degree does the increased variety of parties comprised within the Union, increase this security. Does it, in fine, consist in the greater obstacles opposed to the concert and accomplishment of the secret wishes of an unjust and interested majority? Here, again, the extent of the Union gives it the most palpable advantage.
The influence of factious leaders may kindle a flame within their particular States, but will be unable to spread a general conflagration through the other States. A religious sect may degenerate into a political faction in a part of the Confederacy; but the variety of sects dispersed over the entire face of it must secure the national councils against any danger from that source. A rage for paper money, for an abolition of debts, for an equal division of property, or for any other improper or wicked project, will be less apt to pervade the whole body of the Union than a particular member of it; in the same proportion as such a malady is more likely to taint a particular county or district, than an entire State.
In the extent and proper structure of the Union, therefore, we behold a republican remedy for the diseases most incident to republican government. And according to the degree of pleasure and pride we feel in being republicans, ought to be our zeal in cherishing the spirit and supporting the character of Federalists.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Posts
