Wings of Liberty • August 13, 2025

THE CURSE OF CHURCH AND STATE, PART 3: LIBERTY THREATENED

THE CURSE OF CHURCH AND STATE, PART 3:

LIBERTY THREATENED



Nearly a hundred and forty years ago there was a major national initiative to unite church and state in America and impose what was claimed to be Christianity on society. The push united representatives from at least eleven denominations, and the Women’s Christian Temperance Union. After a severe struggle the movement failed.i Today, America is facing another similar crisis.

THE HISTORICAL PUSH FOR CHURCH AND STATE UNION IN AMERICA


In the late 1800s, the National Reform Association (NRA)ii achieved country-wide political momentum for its initiative for a religious amendment to the Constitution to make the United States a Christian state. Its proposed amendment was worded as follows:


"We the people" would acknowledge "Almighty God as the source of all authority and power in civil government, the Lord Jesus Christ as the Ruler among nations, His revealed will as the supreme law of the land, in order to constitute a Christian government..."iii

i The authors believe that Alonzo T. Jones submissions to the U.S. Congress in 1888 were pivotal in the defeat of the national bill for Sunday sacredness advanced by Senator Blair, and supported by the NRA. These submissions may be read here: https://documents.adventistarchives.org/Tracts/RLT/RLT1892-102.pdf

ii The National Reform Movement had and has no relation or connection to the National Rifle Association.

iii Miller, Randall M.; Stout, Harry S.; Wilson, Charles Reagan (1998). Religion and the American Civil War. Oxford University Press. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Reform_Association_(chartered_1864)


The stated purpose of the NRA was to unite church and state. It’s organizational constitution contained the following purpose:


To secure such an amendment to the Constitution of the United States as will declare the nation's allegiance to Jesus Christ, and its acceptance of the moral laws of the Christian religion, and so indicate that this is a Christian nation, and place all the Christian laws, institutions and usages of our government on an undeniable legal basis in the fundamental law of the land.i


The practical result of the proposed constitutional amendment was stated in the Christian Statesman, the flagship publication of the NRA, on February 21, 1884. Writer Rev. J. C. K. Milligan asked the question, “How is the Amendment to be carried out practically?” In answer he stated:


“In brief, its adoption will at once make the morality of the ten commandments to be the supreme law of the land, and anything in the State constitutions and laws that is contrary to them will become unconstitutional.”ii


Another proponent of the NRA, Rev. Jonathan Edwards, D. D., stated the following in a speech at the New York National Reform Convention:


We want State and religion—and we are going to have it. It shall be that so far as the affairs of State require religion, it shall be revealed religion, the religion of Jesus Christ. The Christian oath and Christian morality shall have in this land ‘an undeniable legal basis.’ We use the word religion in its proper sense, as meaning a man’s personal relation of faith and obedience to God.”i

 


Those who opposed the religious amendment to the Constitution were declared to be “infidels” and “lunatics”, and Jews, deists, Seventh-day Baptists, and all others, including Seventh-day Adventists, were classed with the atheists, and pronounced as ‘atheists’ themselves by Mr. Edwards:


These all are, for the occasion, and so far as our Amendment is concerned, one class… They must be counted together.... they must be treated as [atheists], for this question, one party. Now look at it—look at the controversy. The question is not between opinions that differ, but opinions that are opposite, that are contradictory, that mutually exclude each other. It is between Christianity and infidelity. It is between theism and atheism, between the acknowledgment of a God and the denial that there is any God… They “are conjoined with the other members of this class by the accident of differing with the mass of Christians upon the question of what precise day of the week shall be observed…i


After stating that those who opposed the NRA religious amendment were only a “minority”, Mr. Edwards proceeded to describe the unfitness of such people for “advanced” societal participation:


“I would tolerate him [the atheist, including Jews, deists, Seventh-day Baptists, etc] as I would a conspirator. The atheist is a dangerous man.... But he shall be tolerated. He may live, and go free, hold his lands, and enjoy his home; he may even vote; but for any higher, more advanced citizenship, he is, as I hold, utterly disqualified.ii



The NRA ultimately failed in its initiative to have a national Sunday law passed and the push to unite church and state sullenly subsided for a time. Today, however, a resurgent coalition of parties, Protestant and Catholic, has largely already succeeded where the NRA failed. Christian Dominionism, including the Heritage Foundation/Project 2025, and adherents to the New Apostolic Reformation, have seized political power and are altering government to implement religious policy and goals, as Revelation 13 foretells. We believe this union of church and state represents the image to the beast recorded by John in Revelation:


Revelation 13:12 And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.


13 And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,


14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.i


EXAMPLES OF CHURCH/STATE UNION TODAY


There is no shortage of examples to evidence that religious power is influencing, or outright controlling in some instances, the state. For example, Christian dispensationalism controls foreign policy in the Middle East, as Senator Ted Cruz recently admitted in an interview with Tucker Carlson. Ecumenical Christianity is convinced that whoever blesses the nation of Israel will be blessed, and whoever curses it will be cursed.

 

As Tucker Carlson alluded to in this interview, the flimsiness of the theology behind this belief has done nothing to suppress its popularity. Since World War 2, Israel has been the largest single foreign recipient of US aid by far,i and these figures do not include direct and indirect military and intelligence assistance.


This religious narrative is held by House Speaker Mike Johnson, who is also a believer in the Christian dispensationalist view that the temple must be rebuilt in Jerusalem to usher in the final events of Bible prophecy, and who was recently in Israel for both diplomatic and religious reasons.



A strong ecumenical Christian lobby led by Paula White Caan (herself a third temple advocate) has the ear of the President, who for his part had promised that Christians would receive political power like they never imagined.i




Christian dominionist Pastor Doug Wilson believes in a union of church and state, and his pastoral staff supports the rescission of the 19th Amendment, which guarantees the right to vote to American women. One of his congregants, is Pete Hegseth, the Secretary of Defence, who is also a vocal advocate for the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem.

We are living in incredible times. A dramatic shift is under way, and it is a fulfilment of prophecy. Today, Christian Dominionists argue for the reinstatement of blasphemy laws, claiming falsely (and ridiculously?) that suppressing public speech for religious reasons is entirely consistent with the Founding Fathers’ vision for America, as though the American Founders had not fled that very type of persecution in Europe!


Note minute 41 in the following video:


THE NEW PUSH FOR SUNDAY SACREDNESS


Sunday laws were a central aim of the NRA in the 1800s, and they are central to Christian Dominionism today. Right now, in our time, demands are rapidly increasing for the implementation of Sunday sacredness by government edict.i


The Heritage Foundation, creator of Project 2025, is linked with Opus Dei, and is intimately connected with the current administration of the executive branch of government.ii Multiple contributors to Project 2025 are serving in cabinet. The full extent of the reach is unknown, but the Heritage Foundation’s influence over government is explicitly religious in nature.


Project 2025 contains a proposal on page 589 to legislate religious doctrine in the form of Sunday laws. In the section on reforming the Department of Labor, the following statement is made: “God ordained the Sabbath [Sunday] as a day of rest, and until very recently the Judeo-Christian tradition sought to honor that mandate by moral and legal regulation of work on that day.”iii


The individual who wrote that provision, attorney Jonathan Berry, has been nominated to take the position of Solicitor of Labor in the current administration. His nomination has been contested, and congressional hearings have not yet occurred.


It is no secret, however, what Project 2025 or Jonathan Berry wish to do with political power. In a 2024 article in the publication First Things, Mr. Berry outlined his argument for government laws to compel observation of what he terms “the Christian Sabbath”.


Mr. Berry discusses the intentional new embrace by the Republican Party of labor unions, which were previously aligned with the Democratic Party, and discusses how Sabbath (Sunday) rest laws should protect workers, then writes as follows:


The biblical account of work does not end with work. “And on the seventh day, God ended his work . . . and he rested” (Gen. 2:2–3). Rest completes work, for human beings as it does for God. It preserves workers’ dignity as co-creators. As the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church explains, Sabbath rest “constitute[s] a barrier against becoming slaves to work whether voluntary or by force” and thus gives us a “fuller freedom”.

The revival of “blue laws” and other measures to guard Sabbath rest is thus one more example of a prudent policy intervention to protect the subjectivity, the personhood, of workers.i


Mr. Berry makes no effort to hide the fact that this is an overtly Catholic view of work/rest in which one earns rest by working, and in which Sunday is the reward for union labor in a world which has exploited their efforts without properly compensating them. He invokes both Pope John Paul II, and Father John Ryan,i the latter of whose writings on Catholic social doctrine influenced the New Deal economics of Franklin Roosevelt to argue that America is broken, and only Sunday laws will fix it.


Berry concludes his article, entitled “Renewing Labor”, with a strange paragraph that could well be viewed as a threat if the demands for protection of workers rights and union favors are not met. Read the article for yourself and leave your comments in the chat below.


As we previously discussed, Sunday is the mark of the authority of the first beast of Revelation 13, the papal power, a fact which we suspect Mr. Berry is well-aware of.


The Catholic Church explicitly claims the move of the 4th commandment of the Decalogue as the mark of her authority.


Q. Have you any other way of proving that the Church has power to institute festivals of precept?


A. Had she not such power, she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her; —she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday the seventh day, a change for which there is no Scriptural authority.

—Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 174


Q. In what manner can we show a Protestant, that he speaks unreasonably against fasts and abstinences?


A. Ask him why he keeps Sunday, and not Saturday, as his day of rest, since he is unwilling either to fast or to abstain. If he reply, that the Scripture orders him to keep the Sunday, but says nothing as to fasting and abstinence, tell him the Scripture speaks of Saturday or the Sabbath, but gives no command anywhere regarding Sunday or the first day of the week.


If, then he neglects Saturday as a day of rest and holiness, and substitutes Sunday in its place, and this merely because such was the usage of the ancient Church, should he not, if he wishes to act consistently, observe fasting and abstinence, because the ancient Church so ordained?

—Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 181

Question: Which is the Sabbath day?


Answer: Saturday is the Sabbath day.


Question: Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday?


        Answer: We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church transferred the                    solemnity from Saturday to Sunday.


—Rev. Peter Geiermann C.SS.R., The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, p. 50


Of course the Catholic Church claims that the change was her act. And the act is a mark of her ecclesiastical power and authority in religious matters.

—C. F. Thomas, Chancellor of Cardinal Gibbons, in answer to a letter regarding the change of the Sabbath, November 11, 1895.

“Sunday is our mark of authority. . . . The church is above the Bible, and this transference of sabbath observance is proof of that fact.” –The Catholic Record, London, Ontario, September 1, 1923



CONCLUSION


Nearly a hundred and forty years ago there was a major national initiative to unite church and state in America and impose what was claimed to be Christianity on society. The push united representatives from at least eleven denominations, and the Women’s Christian Temperance Union. It ultimately failed.


Today, America is facing another similar crisis, but a great change has taken place in the resolve, education, and independence of the population. We are equal parts deceived and entertained by mass media, loaded with personal and national debt, and collectively uncomprehending of the stakes, and thus indifferent. Most Americans are detached from the history of the Founding Fathers through miseducation and wilful neglect of history, and today’s contest finds resistance to the new theocratic aggression unprepared.


The well-known aphorism, “those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it”,i is applicable to America. This nation is founded on the express rejection of the despotism of church and state. A return to a papal model where religionists control government marks the end of the American dream. As was pronounced over a hundred years ago, “When Protestant churches shall unite with the secular power to sustain a false religion, for opposing which their ancestors endured the fiercest persecution, then will the papal sabbath be enforced by the combined authority of church and state. There will be a national apostasy, which will end only in national ruin.”ii



The next article in this series will discuss further instances of church and state union, both in America and the western world abroad.





The authors believe that Alonzo T. Jones submissions to the U.S. Congress in 1888 were pivotal in the defeat of the national bill for Sunday sacredness advanced by Senator Blair, and supported by the NRA. These submissions may be read here: https://documents.adventistarchives.org/Tracts/RLT/RLT1892-102.pdf


The National Reform Movement had and has no relation or connection to the National Rifle Association.


Miller, Randall M.; Stout, Harry S.; Wilson, Charles Reagan (1998). Religion and the American Civil War. Oxford University Press. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Reform_Association_(chartered_1864)


Beck, Luke (2018). Religious Freedom and the Australian Constitution: Origins and Future. Routledge.


he American Sentinel, A. T. Jones, December 1886.


Ibid.


Ibid.


Ibid.


Revelation 13:12-14


https://usafacts.org/articles/which-countries-receive-the-most-aid-from-the-us/


Christianity will have power,” he said. “If I’m there, you’re going to have plenty of power, you don’t need anybody else. You’re going to have somebody representing you very, very well. Remember that.” https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/09/us/evangelicals-trump-christianity.html


https://adventmessenger.org/the-christian-post-claims-that-americas-spiritual-renewal-begins-with-reclaiming-sunday-as-the-lords-day/;https://adventmessenger.org/the-christian-reformed-church-in-north-america-says-keeping-the-sabbath-is-no-longer-optional/; https://adventmessenger.org/respect-our-holy-day-public-backlash-as-rugby-tournament-is-scheduled-on-sunday/


https://www.afge.org/article/new-trump-administration-packed-with-project-2025-architects/


https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24088042-project-2025s-mandate-for-leadership-the-conservative-promise/#document/p589


https://firstthings.com/renewing-labor/


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_A._Ryan


George Santayana, The Life of Reason


Ellen G. White, Manuscript 51, 1899




By Wings of Liberty July 30, 2025
The largest earthquake to hit the planet in 14 years struck off the coast of Russia on July 29, 2025. The monster 8.8 magnitude quake triggered global tsunami warnings, including officials urging the evacuation of the Hawaii islands coastline. Sirens blare. Anxious millions watch the internet for news updates, concerned for themselves and the safety of their loved ones. People watch and wonder. Floods and storms and earthquakes. War and disease and famine. What do these things mean? It is all a fulfilment of Bible prophecy. Nearly two thousand years ago, Jesus warned humanity of the signs of the end of the world, culminating in His return to this planet to raise the dead and rescue His faithful believers - 1 Thessalonians 4:15-18, and the destruction of the wicked – Matthew 13:30. We should expect to hear of “wars and rumors of wars” – Mathew 24:6, and to see “pestilences and famine” – Matthew 24:7. The Lord specifically referred to earthquakes and the roaring of the waves. Christ warned: And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh. Luke 21:25-28 The signs of the times are everywhere, friend. While officials can tell you to evacuate the coastline, and news agencies can inform you of the devastation which took place from this or that natural disaster, the explanation and deeper meaning of the increasing agitation and unrest in our world is found only in the Bible. These are the signs of the approaching Creator and Redeemer. Are you ready? Today is the day of salvation - 2 Corinthians 6:2, the door of mercy is still open. Christ is ministering in the courts in heaven on ehalf of humanity. But when he returns to this earth it will already be too late for repentance. The work of intercession will be finished and the door of mercy closed. Today is the day to seek the Lord while He may be found!. It is not safe to trifle with the call of mercy.
By Wings of Liberty July 23, 2025
Control is the aim of all religionists who desire civil power. They want the power of government for one single reason: they are not content to allow their religious ideas to stand or fall in competition with other religions and philosophies in the marketplace of ideas, judged by each person for themselves as true or false. Instead, they intend to dominate human thought and behavior by having government compel their religious views on society using the force of law. Since they have lost the argument in the public square, they will win it by force. Some of these religionists may have vague intentions of altruism, hoping to reform a corrupt society through religious compulsion. But, regardless of motive, as soon as the objective is obtained it is inevitable that the union of church and state will result in persecution. This is because the power of government is to make laws for society. When religionists have this power they will make laws for their religious purposes, and laws to punish breaches of their religious laws. The result is religious persecution, and the corruption of church and state. There are many examples to demonstrate that the above proposition is true. In theocratic Muslim countries where the church controls the state, censorship of media of all sorts is enforced, from books to movies, and the internet. There are religious restrictions on every aspect of society, and these restrictions are for the good of society in the minds of those who pass them and enforce them. Compliance is mandatory, and a person is considered an enemy of the common good if he dissents. In Islam, as in all religions, the ultimate dissent is considered to be conversion away from one’s former religion. But when the mosque controls the state, one converts from the religion which controls the government. In much of Islam, conversion is to be punished by death. Islamic teaching stipulates that a delay of three days for “reconsideration”, is appropriate prior to carrying out the death penalty. i The Roman Papacy also wants control of government, even global government, i and it long ago proved that it persecutes dissenters. For centuries it banned books and persecuted their authors, ii justifying it actions with the claim that reading John Locke, Galileo, and John Milton, was “heresy” and “contrary to morality”, and suppression of writings is necessary for the common good. Many martyrs were tortured and killed for possession or creation of prescribed religious materials. This censorship and persecution is supposedly justified by the papal teaching extra ecclesiam nulla salus - "outside of the Church, there is no salvation”, and, “it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” iii Thomas Aquinas, often lauded by Catholic scholars, agreed that "to be subject to the Roman Pontiff is absolutely necessary for salvation." iv Thus, the Papacy justifies censorship by the following perverse argument: since only Catholic doctrine can save society, dissenting or heretical views must not be tolerated if society is to be saved. This position is not only ancient, but also modern. In advocating for a new reinterpretation of the Constitution through a lens of Catholic social doctrine deceptively called “common good constitutionalism”, v Harvard legal scholar and Catholic Integralist, Adrien Vermuele, stated: The libertarian assumptions central to free-speech law and free-speech ideology – that government is forbidden to judge the quality and moral worth of public speech … [should] fall under the ax. Libertarian conceptions of property rights and economic rights will also have to go, insofar as they bar the state from enforcing duties of community and solidarity in the use and distribution of resources. vi Carefully consider Vermuele’s assertions in this vein and it will slowly dawn on you that he is quietly but vehemently opposed to American independence, the Bill of Rights, and probably apple pie. Vermeule believes the United States government should be subordinate to the Roman Catholic Papacy. When he advocates for government censorship of public speech that is low in “quality and moral worth”, what he means is that the Catholic Church should direct the government to suppress public speech it opposes. Vermeule’s contentions prove the proposition that a union of church and state results in wickedness and oppression, as President John Adams wrote. vii But there may be another word to describe his intentional attack on US independence. What do you call a proposition that your country’s government and Constitution be subordinated to the Pope of Rome, who is not only a religious leader but a foreign monarch, and that your fellow citizens be stripped of their freedom of speech and property rights? While these menacing thoughts are published under the sometimes-subversive cloak of academia, Vermuele betrays enough of an inner latent Torquemada that there should be serious alarm bells for liberty lovers. Take David French, for example. French, a lawyer, former editor of the National Review, and Protestant twice has debated Sohrab Amari, a well-known Catholic Integralist and editor of the New York Post, on the subjects of American liberty and Originalism versus a Catholic social doctrine reinterpretation of the Constitution. viii French is a staunch supporter of individual rights, and the defense of civil liberties as enshrined in the Bill of Rights. Amari believes the government should be subordinated to the Catholic Church, and that the Constitution needs to be “reinterpreted” so that it conforms with Catholic doctrine. French handily won both debates. But if the Catholic church controlled the government, the French/Amahri debates probably do not end with a handshake. They end with French’s writings proscribed, his house expropriated and converted into a camp for Catholic migrants, ix and French himself chained to a rack and tortured for heresy. That is the difference when the church controls the state. Many Protestants today want civil power, and claim to be setting up a kingdom for Jesus Christ. They claim there will be more liberty in this kingdom, not less. But Protestants who believe in a union of church and state are not much different than Papists. They have behaved like Papists when they have had civil power and there is every reason to believe they will again if they obtain it again. There are many examples of the foregoing, but one or two will suffice. In Scotland, “The National Covenant or Confession of Faith” was first created in 1580 and certified by an act of Parliament in 1640. The law was approved by Charles II in 1651 as a condition precedent of his restoration to power. As noted by author and liberty advocate A. T. Jones, the Covenant “declares, in approval of various acts of the Scottish Parliament, as follows: … do condemn all erroneous books and write concerning erroneous doctrine against the religion presently professed, or containing superstitious rites and ceremonies papistical, … and ordains the home-bringers of them to be punished … and ordains the users of them to be punished for the second fault as idolaters. i In order to protect the Covenant religion, the Covenant declares that “all within the realm are bound to profess it”, and states all must: … recant all doctrine and errors repugnant to any of the said articles, and all magistrates, sheriffs, etc., are ordained to search, apprehend, and punish all contraveners; … that none shall be reputed loyal and faithful subjects to our sovereign Lord or his authority, but be punishable as rebellers and gainstanders of the same, who shall not give their confession and make their profession of the said true religion. ii Magistrates were required by the Covenant to: Maintain the true religion of Jesus Christ… and be careful to root out of their empire all heretics and enemies of the true worship of God who shall be convicted by the true Kirk of God [Church of God] of the aforesaid crimes. iii Scottish Reformer Jon Knox himself stated that “none provoking the people to idolatry ought to be exempted from the punishment of death”, and “it is not only lawful to punish to the death such as labor to subvert the true religion, but the magistrates and people are bound to do so unless they will provoke the wrath of God against themselves.” iv As noted, this is far from the only example of Protestant misdeeds when they obtain civil power. John Calvin had Michael Servetus arrested and murdered over a religious disagreement. Zwingli endorsed violence to encourage conversion, and Melanchthon drowned an Anabaptist for the “heresy” of being rebaptized. Thus we see a union of church and state in Islam, Catholicism and Protestantism all yields the same evil result. The supposedly “true” religion (as declared by thin-skinned religionists who cannot stand to have their ideas debated and adopted or discarded as the individual decides) is established by civil law, dissenting views are censored, and the expositors punished, persecuted and murdered. That is the lesson of history in all ages, and it is the prophecy of Revelation 13 that so will it be at the end of time. Revelation 13:11 And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon. 12 And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed. 13 And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men, 14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live. 15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. 16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: 17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. 18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six. The next installment in this series will examine the links between Catholic social doctrine, the labor movement, and the push for church and state union. 
By Wings of Liberty July 6, 2025
In times of persecution and danger, anonymity has long been the necessary cloak for the truth. Speaking of the oppression under which the truth labored as the Revolutionary War approached, the eventual second president of the United States, John Adams, anonymously stated the following in the Boston Gazette in 1765: Every body knows how dangerous it was to speak or write in favour of any thing in those days but the triumphant system of religion and politicks. And our fathers were particularly the objects of the persecutions and proscriptions of the times. It is not unlikely therefore, that, although they were inflexibly steady in refusing their positive assent to any thing against their principles, they might have contracted habits of reserve, and a cautious diffidence of asserting their opinions publickly. These habits they probably brought with them to America, and have transmitted down to us. i Adams was saying that the pilgrims who fled Europe passed down a knowledge of the dangers which public opinions could bring from kings and priests. The Papacy was hostile to not only religious freedom, but to freedom of thought, speech and the press. English monarchs, both Catholic and Anglican, had harshly punished dissenting views. The “fathers” Adams references are those who suffered for their faith and opinions in the public square, even to the point of martyrdom. They had consequently learned to be careful when expressing their views publicly, especially on the “triumphant system of religion and politicks”. Today, many so-called Christians loudly (and often arrogantly) demand that church and state once more come together in America and enforce their version of Christianity on the population by force of law. ii But of course such a system will result in the same oppression and punishment of dissent as it has in the past. Politicians and advocates of church/state union in America might be surprised to hear the second president of the United States speak with such ardor against their cause. But John Adams denounced the union of church and state as “tyrannical” and “wicked”. Hear this father of American independence in his own words: Since the promulgation of Christianity, the two greatest systems of tyranny that have sprung from this original, are the canon and the feudal law … By the former of these, the most refined, sublime, extensive, and astonishing constitution of policy that ever was conceived by the mind of man was framed by the Romish clergy for the aggrandizement of their own order. All the epithets I have here given to the Romish policy are just, and will be allowed to be so when it is considered, that they even persuaded mankind to believe,faithfully and undoubtingly, that God Almighty had entrusted them with the keys of heaven, whose gates they might open and close at pleasure; with a power of dispensation over all the rules and obligations of morality; with authority to license all sorts of sins and crimes; with a power of deposing princes and absolving subjects from allegiance; with a power of procuring or withholding the rain of heaven and the beams of the sun; with the management of earthquakes, pestilence, and famine; nay, with the mysterious, awful, incomprehensible power of creating out of bread and wine the flesh and blood of God himself. All these opinions they were enabled to spread and rivet among the people by reducing their minds to a state of sordid ignorance and staring timidity, and by infusing into them a religious horror of letters and knowledge. Thus was human nature chained fast for ages in a cruel, shameful, and deplorable servitude to him, and his subordinate tyrants, who, it was foretold, would exalt himself above all that was called God, and that was worshiped. In the latter we find another system, similar in many respects to the former; which, although it was originally formed, perhaps, for the necessary defense of a barbarous people against the inroads and invasions of her neighboring nations, yet for the same purposes of tyranny, cruelty, and lust, which had dictated the canon law, it was soon adopted by almost all the princes of Europe, and wrought into the constitutions of their government. It was originally a code of laws for a vast army in a perpetual encampment. The general was invested with the sovereign propriety of all the lands within the territory. Of him, as his servants and vassals, the first rank of his great officers held the lands; and in the same manner the other subordinate officers held of them; and all ranks and degrees held their lands by a variety of duties and services, all tending to bind the chains the faster on every order of mankind. In this manner the common people were held together in herds and clans in a state of servile dependence on their lords, bound, even by the tenure of their lands, to follow them, whenever they commanded, to their wars, and in a state of total ignorance of every thing divine and human, excepting the use of arms and the culture of their lands. But another event still more calamitous to human liberty, was a wicked confederacy between the two systems of tyranny above described. i You likely were unaware that Founding Father John Adams spoke so strongly against a union of church and state. And you will not likely hear his views repeated by most modern conservative thinkers or politicians. You will not hear them from the Opus Dei-linked Heritage Foundation, which authored Project 2025, or from Harvard scholar and Catholic Integralist Adrian Vermeule, who openly advocates that the Catholic Church should control the U.S. government. i You will not hear of John Adams treatise on canon and feudal law from adherents of the New Apostolic Reformation, who believe they have a mandate from Christ to control every major aspect of society. ii All these would prefer John Adams be buried in the dustbin of history because he speaks contrary to church/state ambitions. In denouncing canon law, John Adams condemned the Roman Papacy as an engine of superstition and oppression, designed to imprison the minds of the populace in “a state of sordid ignorance and staring timidity”. In denouncing feudal law, he condemned that system of nobles and lords who owned the land, while all the common people were required to serve them, supposedly in exchange for protection. Medieval feudal law finds its echo in the policies of the World Economic Forum. The oft-repeated claim that “you will own nothing and be happy” is in fact nothing less than a call to return to serfdom. The devil, prince of this world, tempted our Savior in the wilderness with the allure of earthly power – the same earthly power that many Christians covet today. Satan took Christ up into an exceedingly high mountain and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world and the glory of them and said unto Him, “all these things will I give thee if Thou wilt fall down and worship me.” Jesus replied, “get thee hence, Satan” – see Matthew 4:8-10. It is the antichrist of the Scriptures, that man of sin, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalt himself above all that is called God, who desires temporal power. As soon as he had it he turned persecutor. As soon as modern Christians have civil power, they also will turn persecutor. This has been proven time and again in history, as will be discussed in the next article. In denouncing both canon and feudal law combined, John Adams condemned the unconstitutional aims of a growing and ambitious group of modern Christians who intend to make their “Christianity” the law of the land for the common good of society. The heart of humanity has not changed. Such a system was a curse in the time of the Inquisition, and it would be a curse in our day should it be recreated.