Home | Editorials | Simply Speaking: Independence Day

Simply Speaking: Independence Day

By
Font size: Decrease font Enlarge font

I’m old enough to remember (some say I was there way back then) when the just-past holiday falling on July 4th was mostly referred to as Independence Day (not July the Fourth), in remembrance of our Founders signing a document known as the Declaration of Independence on that date in 1776, preparing it for forwarding to England, King George, and Parliament. 

Some thoughtful people say the document was simply a declaration of secession by the 13 colonies (nations), temporarily uniting simultaneously in Philadelphia’s Independence Hall, to state and sign, in plain English text and engrossed on *parchment, an announcement of each colony’s withdrawal from a former connection not living up to its promises and piling on undue burdens for far too long.

Each little nation knew the chances were good (bad) their former connection would send powerful, red-coated, bayoneted, artilleried military units to quash their move to secede, so being united in common defense would be a smart, necessary move for any chance of success at independence.

In 1781, near the end of the long-fought war with the British, which ran from 1775 to 1783, the colonies established a national constitution in common, mainly for defensive purposes, probably not knowing for sure if they would be successful in their present struggle, but the Founders were obviously a far-sighted group, planning for the long run.

That constitution, known as the Articles of Confederation, removed not a jot nor a title from any colony’s independence, but had a few short-comings needing mending. 

The “First Constitutional Convention” met in 1787 to, it was understood and desired by most, modify and repair the Articles of Confederation.

We know that did not happen and, whether by accident, natural process, or conspiracy, a spanking new constitution ended up being the product of that convention. Patriots and Founders such as Patrick Henry and Samuel Adams refused to go to the convention, with Henry telling James Madison, “I smell a rat.”

The new constitution, as we can readily see today, had the effect of removing a large portion of each state’s, and its people’s, sovereignty, even moving a nation of nations toward a single monolithic, all-encompassing, all-powerful national government.

This is precisely what a small portion of early Founders, such as Alexander Hamilton and a few others had desired, but certainly not leading to the obtuse degree to which we have come.

So, instead of allowing ourselves to be guided only toward a study of such documents as the Federalist Papers and the current constitution, which never mention the Bible nor the need for Godly magistrates, promoting only one side of this issue, why not also take a look at the Anti-Federalist Papers and the Articles of Confederation and, perhaps, discover what very well might have prevented this sorry state to which we have come.

An intensive study of Patrick Henry and Samuel Adams might turn up nuggets we have rarely been introduced to, along with clues as to where we went wrong, plus possibilities for a return to sane government, certainly including personal and state sovereignty, which our most sovereign God would have for His obedient people. 

May our Heavenly Yahweh Father bless us in our quest for sovereignty through His Only Begotten Yeshua Son.

*The original Declaration of Independence was engrossed on sheepskin parchment, which was specially treated with lime and stretched to create a strong, long-lasting writing support. 


Subscribe to comments feed Comments (0 posted)

total: | displaying:

Post your comment

  • Bold
  • Italic
  • Underline
  • Quote

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Captcha

Log in

  • Email to a friend Email to a friend
  • Print version Print version
  • Plain text Plain text

Tagged as:

No tags for this article

Rate this article

0
Powered by Vivvo CMS v4.5.2