CADRE Comments

On July 9, 2019, Public Discourse published an insightful article (which was apparently either earlier or later delivered as a speech) by Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput entitled, “ Building A Culture of Religious Freedom .” Early in the article, Archbishop Chaput made three points that deserve to be repeated, and so I will spend a little time in the next three blogposts reviewing and expanding upon what he wrote. His first point begins with an undeniable fact of human existence: We’re mortal, we’re going to die. However, for those with faith in God (and here, Archbishop Chaput means the God of the Bible), this simple truth can compel Christians to live lives in a way that those who lack faith cannot comprehend. When the non-religious world looks at death, it is rarely to consider the consequences of one’s actions in life. After all, from the worldly viewpoint there is no afterlife. As a result, as explained so elegantly in the first few chapters of Ecclesiastes, in the ...

As time has passed, some in our society have come to push back against the idea that the United States was founded in a Christian environment. They turn to small episodes from the time of the founding to argue that the founders weren't really Christian in their worldview. Some of the source of the confusion lies on the fact that a few of the founders were deists - but not the type of deists that we think about today. Other confusion arises because of the manner in which the founders spoke was different than today. What the founders understood as a clear reference to God, such as the use of the words "divine providence," is mistranslated today into other more nebulous meanings.  Yet, the evidence of a deep devotion on behalf of most of the founders to God - and especially His Son, Jesus Christ - is found without a great deal of effort. Given that it is the Fourth of July, it is appropriate to look back to one of the first times that the founders gathered together to d...

With the possible exception of some poor soul who has been living in a cave for the past eighty years, virtually every American is aware of the "Wall of Separation between Church and State" (the "Wall Metaphor"). It has been used to try to summarize the relationship between the government and religion under the United States Constitution. Yet, as most everyone also knows (except for the aforementioned cave-dweller), the Constitution does not use the words "wall" or "separation" of church and state. This post will give a brief examination of the source of the Wall Metaphor and why it has been misused since 1947. Jefferson's Letter to the Danbury Baptist Association The Wall Metaphor entered into the Constitutional lexicon as a result of two court decisions regarding the First Amendment and religion: First, in Reynolds v. United States , 98 U.S. 145 (1878), and later in Everson v. Board of Education , 330 U.S. 1 (1947).  Both of these d...

In a comment I posted on the Christian CADRE Comments blog page, I made the following statement: The consent of the governed is noted in the Declaration of Independence quoted above--and numerous other of our founding documents--as the basis for any government's legitimate claim to power. If the judges depart from that to which the people agreed in promoting their own political agenda, then they are undercutting the very foundation that they rely upon to add legitimacy to their decisions. Thus, when judges use the language of the Constitution (such as the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment) to grant equal rights to homosexuals on a par with heterosexuals--a position that would have been unthinkable to most people in the 1860s and 1870s when the 14th Amendment was adopted--contrary to what the polls suggest is contrary to the vast public opinion even today, the decision is being made without the consent of the governed, and the edifice is built without a firm foundation. ...