` March 2012 | Veritas Academy
28 March

Spring History & Heritage — #3 (March 26)

 Our entries this week are based on The Christian Almanac (Grant/Wilbur); America, Vol. 1 (Bennett); and Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture.

 Zora Neale Hurston — (Jack Trotter; Chronicles, March 2012)

A Floridian and a folklorist, this African-American novelist (1903–1960) is perhaps best known for her Their Eyes Were Watching God (1937)?  No friend of Jim Crow era segregation, she nonetheless decried the “race pride” and “black consciousness” of the African-American elite in her 1942 autobiography Dust Tracks on a Road.  Her betrayal of her color, in liberal eyes, reached its nadir when she protested Brown v. Board of Education (the Supreme Courtʼs lauded school desegregation mandate, 1954).

 Islamic Spain — (Dario Fernandez-Morera; Chronicles, March 2012)

This medieval civilization (Al-Andalus), running roughly from the 700s to the 1400s, is more often than not hailed for its enlightened multiculturalism by modern scholars? The society supposedly rescued Europe from the “Dark Ages” by preserving Greek knowledge, and promoted peace between otherwise hostile ethnic and religious groups. For the record, Greek knowledge was preserved in the Greek (Eastern) Roman Empire, and tolerance of outsiders wasnʼt one of Al-Andalusʼs virtues.

 Iceland — (Almanac, March 15)

Alegendary land discovered by Norsemen in the 800s, this European country teemed with fresh water, fish, forests, and pastureland despite its far north Atlantic location? The  Vikings who settled it were known for their ferocity on the continent, though they were mostly Christians intent on building a society to the glory of their new-found Savior. TheAlthing, the first European parliament charged with settling disputes by law, was one of their sterling achievements.

 Christ of theAndes—(Almanac, March 13)

Located high in the mountains on the border of Chile andArgentina, this 1904 statue commemorates peace between the countries?  Itʼs a tall bronze representation of Christ (holding out His right hand in blessing while clutching a cross with His left) standing in Uspallata Pass with Mt.Aconcagua towering in the background. Chile and Argentina had been warring in the Tierra del Fuego region, but they settled their differences with President Theodore Roosevelt and Englandʼs King Edward VII acting as mediators.

 Jeffersonʼs First Inaugural —  (America, Vol. 1, pp. 175-176)

In this conciliatory address, delivered in Washington City on March 4, 1801, President Jefferson endeavored to heal the divisive wounds of the contentious election of 1800? “We have called by different names,” he said, “brethren of the same principle.  We are all Republicans, we are all Federalists.”  Jefferson also affirmed “the support of the State governments in all their rights, as the most competent administrations for our domestic concerns and the surest bulwarks against anti-republican tendencies.”

“Letter to the Danbury Baptists” — (America, Vol. 1,pp. 179-181)

In this 1802 letter to a Connecticut religious society, Jefferson noted the existence of “a wall of separation between Church & State” to restrain the conduct of the government of the U.S.? Oft-cited and controversial, Jeffersonʼs letter pointed to the FirstAmendment and the express powers of the president and Congress to cast doubt on the constitutionality even of national days of prayer. Curiously, Jefferson attended worship in the House of Representatives not long after he penned the letter.

 Sally Hemings — (America, Vol. 1, pp. 181-182)

In the 1802 midterm elections, the Federalists disgraced themselves further by alleging that Jefferson begot children by this woman, one of his slaves?  Jefferson was stung by the accusation, but it did nothing to brighten his opponentsʼ prospects at the ballot box; Republicans (Jeffersonʼs party) won in a landslide. The dubious charge has resurfaced in our day with fanfare and supposed DNA confirmation, but it cannot be proven that Thomas Jefferson was the father of the children in question.

 Stephen Decatur — (America, Vol. 1,pp. 182-183)

“Our country: In her intercourse with foreign nations may she always be in the right; but our country right or wrong!” The sentiments were uttered in a toast by this U.S. Navy Lieutenant, hero of the War against the Barbary Pirates (1801–1805) off the northern coast of Africa? The Muslim states of that region (the Barbary coast) had made it a practice for centuries to seize and demand ransom for European (and also American) merchant ships, a practice Jefferson decided to challenge by force.

 treaty-making power — (America, Vol. 1, pp. 183-186)

When Napoleon offered to sell Louisiana to the U.S., President Jefferson wanted desperately to make the deal.  For 12 million dollars or 4 cents an acre, the 1803 transaction would double the size of the country and, more importantly, secure the port city of New Orleans forAmerican trade. Jefferson, however, had doubts about the constitutionality of the purchase, doubts resolved in the end by appeal to this express presidential power (exercised with “the advice and consent of the Senate”)?

 “the Corps of Discovery” — (America, Vol. 1, pp. 186-189)

What is known to history as the “Lewis and Clark Expedition” to explore the Louisiana Territory (1804–1806), President Jefferson called by this name?  Led by Captains Meriwether Lewis and William Clark, the party included the French trapper Toussaint Charbonneau and his Shoshone wife Sacagawea.  They eventually made it all the way to the Pacific via the Columbia River, but the legendary dream of an all-water Northwest Passage to the Orient died with their intrepid mission.

Click here for a printable copy…

 

Read More
12 March

Spring History & Heritage — #2 (March 12)

Our entries this week are based on our usual sources with an assist from Forrest McDonaldʼs Statesʼ Rights and the Union: Imperium in Imperio (1776–1876). 

Cornelius Jansen — (Almanac, March 6)

This Flemish theologian (1585-1636) was censured by the papacy (Urban VIII) and the Jesuits for his Augustinus, a book about the teachings of the famous church father? ACatholic professor at Louvain in todayʼs Belgium, his writings influenced profoundly the French clergy, of whom about a fifth conceded agreement with his theses. In his feud with the Jesuits, he accused them of relying too much upon manʼs unaided reason and his good works as opposed to a truly Christian trust in Scripture and grace.

 

secularism — (Almanac, March 8th)

This modern ideology, prominent in the wake of the Enlightenment and the French Revolution, requires what it regards as strict religious neutrality in political matters?It allows for nearly any input in the public square—reason, science, business, labor, race, gender, party—except the voice of the church or a traditional religion like Christianity. Curiously, the ideology has triumphed both in communist countries, where overt persecution is the norm, and democratic ones where propaganda holds sway.

 

Washingtonʼs Farewell — (America, Vol. 1, p. 164)

With assistance from Alexander Hamilton, Washingtonʼs wise and carefully crafted Farewell Address was first published in a Philadelphia newspaper in 1796.  It was never delivered publicly as a speech.

 

The main thrust of the message was to warn of what author William Bennett called “twin evils:” a divisive spirit of party and longterm commitment to the interests of foreign powers by means of entangling alliances. This was good counsel in the era of the Founders and, frankly, good counsel for any era. By Washingtonʼs second term (1793–1797), Federalists and Republicans were often at each otherʼs throats and the influence of foreign nations and their agents (France, England, Spain) made the political divide even wider.

 

Lastly, Washingtonʼs eloquent reminder about the importance of Christianity, and the manners and mores derived therefrom, to the cause of ordered liberty merits attention in all ages, particularly our own with its secular zeitgeist (“spirit of the times” in German). The Father of our Country wrote (in part):“Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and morality are indispensable supports.  In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great Pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of Men and citizens. . .

Alien and Sedition Acts — (America, Vol. 1, pp. 167-168)

President JohnAdams may have won a second term had he not agreed to these contentious bills (1798), supported strongly by the Federalist majority in Congress? One act made immigrants wait longer to become naturalized citizens, while the other sanctioned prosecution for publishing “defamatory” lies about U.S. officials. Aside from holding on to power, Federalist motives for the measures included fear of revolutionary unrest as well as the possibility (however remote) of invasion by France.

 

Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions — (America, Vol. 1, pp. 168-169)

These resolutions (1798) censured the “Alien & Sedition Acts” and affirmed the general consensus of the Union as a compact of free and sovereign states?  Madison and, particularly, Jefferson argued that states may judge the constitutionality of U.S. laws and nullify them within their jurisdictions if found wanting. Logically, such an argument implied state secession as a last resort, if the constitutional crisis provoked by nullification could not be resolved to the satisfaction of all parties concerned.

 

Peace with France in the Year 1800 — (America, Vol. 1, pp. 169-170)

Undertaken for this purpose in U.S. foreign relations, JohnAdams, reflecting back on his presidential administration, said he would “defend [his] missions as long as I have an eye to direct my hand, or a finger to hold my pen”? Adams called the missions in question “the most disinterested and meritorious actions of my life.”  He had resisted the war-cries coming from Hamilton and many Federalists, thus preparing the ground, unwittingly, for an astounding U.S. real estate acquisition three years later (1803).

 

Alexander Hamilton and the Election of 1800 — (America, Vol. 1, pp. 171-176) Federalist titan Alexander Hamilton could hardly have played a more decisive role than he did in the election of his arch-rival, Republican Thomas Jefferson, to the presidency in 1800.

 

For starters, Hamilton denounced fellow-Federalist, sitting-President, and reelection candidate John Adams in a stinging 54-page letter. And in the end, his power to persuade Federalists in the House of Representatives swung the tie-breaking vote to Jefferson over the ambitious and crafty New York Republican Aaron Burr.

The House had the final say because Jefferson and Burr each garnered seventy-three electoral college votes in the election. Although it was abundantly clear to all that the Republicans had intended Jefferson to be president and Burr vice president, Burr was ambiguous on the matter publicly, and it took 36 ballots for the House of Representatives to decide in favor of Jefferson.

Click Here for a Printable Copy…

Read More
08 March

Spring History & Heritage — #1 (March 5)

We begin our spring posts with entries (Q&Aor summaries) based on readings in The ChristianAlmanac (Grant/Wilbur) and America, Vol. 1 (Bennett).

Look for 8 or 9 posts for the months of March, April, and May, followed by our Spring 2012 History & Heritage Test at the end of May.

 Mardi Gras — (Almanac, Feb. 23)

Seemingly of Celtic Christian origin, this festival (meaning “Fat Tuesday” in English) was introduced to NorthAmerica by the French in the early 1700s?Associated mostly with the Winter Carnival finale in New Orleans, the revelry is a lively component of culture in the entire Gulf Coast region.Author George Grant describes it as “a celebration of lifeʼs excesses before the austere self-sacrifices of the Christian season of Lent,” traditionally a time of fasting commencing on Ash Wednesday.

Hudson Taylor — (Almanac, March 1)

“My feelings on stepping ashore I cannot attempt to describe.My heart felt as though it had not room and must burst its bonds, while tears of gratitude. . .fell from my eyes.” So wrote this English missionary (1832–1905), a medical student of Methodist upbringing, when he first arrived on the streets of Shanghai in March 1854? Facing difficult cultural barriers, he adopted native dress and ways, founded an indigenous church, and evangelized far and wide through his China Inland Mission.

Charles Haddon Spurgeon — (Almanac, March 6)

A Calvinist and a proponent of Puritan writings, this English Baptist (1834–1892) was so masterful in the pulpit that he was dubbed the “Prince of Preachers”?  Under his leadership, Londonʼs Metropolitan Tabernacle became the largest single Christian congregation in the world.But however impressive his success as an orator, writer, and evangelist, he maintained his many charitable works (schools, orphanages, hospitals, and the like) were truly his most blessed endeavors.

From Whiskey Rebellion to Civil War? — (America, Vol. 1, pp. 161-162)

Author William Bennett points out, rather approvingly, that President Washingtonʼs armed response to the Whiskey Rebellion in 1794 would be taken up byAbraham Lincoln as a precedent for his use of force against the secessionist South in 1861.

 As Lincoln read the events of his day, the laws of the United States were once again being opposed (this time in several Southern states) “by combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings,” a phrase found in the Militia Act of 1792 under which Washington acted.

But were the two events so similar?  Were they both instances of unlawful rebellion or insurrection on the part of delinquents or bands of protestors?The events in western Pennsylvania in the late 18th-century did seem to be of that variety. They were blamed on Democratic-Republican clubs whose zealotry, including a threat to take over Pittsburgh, was stirred up in part by the French ambassador Citizen Genet.  Neither the government of Pennsylvania nor the people of Pennsylvania gave any formal sanction to the protestors, and over half of Washingtonʼs militia consisted of Pennsylvanians.

19th-centurysecession, on the other hand, was carried out with scrupulous care for legality and republican liberty. In fact, the seceding states withdrew in precisely the same manner in which they entered the Union by ratifying the U.S. Constitution in the late-1780s. The legislatures of the Southern states, in both instances, provided for special state conventions in which representatives of the people took up the questions (whether to ratify the Constitution and embrace the Union, in the former instance, or whether to dissolve the bond with the United States and its Constitution in the latter). In other words, the same way the states entered the Union is the way they left it.

The acts of riotous mobs or powerful “combinations” of rebels? Hardly. Secession was an orderly act of the people of the seceding states in representative conventions under the sanction of their own legislatures.  Its character was republican through and through. Identical, as noted above, to the process used in the several states to ratify the U.S. Constitution in the first place, and just as representative as what the colonies did in 1776 in their Continental Congress when they “[dissolved] the political bands” connecting them to Great Britain and declared themselves “free and independent states.”

Lincolnʼs show of force to prevent Southern secession (and independence) only makes sense if you argue that states, acting communally as states under their own laws, cannot withdraw voluntarily from a political union they entered into voluntarily. Thatʼs a hard case to make (morally, legally, historically) no matter how you look at it.

The unpleasant, and deeply ironic, truth about the War Between the States may be this: In the name of republicanism or the consent of the governed, Lincoln made war against such consent; and in the name of saving the Union, he struck a mortal blow against it (at least in the sense of its character as a voluntary union of states).

“Forcing a state to remain in the union at gunpoint,” as professor Thomas DiLorenzo pointed out, “renders that state a conquered province, not a genuine partner.”

Click Here for Printable Copy

Read More