Would breaking the law to save Baby Doe from his painful, cruel and unusual fate have been wrong?

I hope that the series of posts the followed ED post # 6 made the point that sometimes breaking man’s law is the right thing, sometimes even the best thing, to do.

If you read all of the previous posts addressing this concept of civil disobedience then you have now begun the process of thinking this question through.

That makes you a better patriot. And a true American, for this theory is, if nothing else, very American.

More than a few pro-lifers were thinking this question through during the 1980s. Francis Schaeffer released his work A Christian Manifesto and many, Protestant and Catholic, were struggling with the question of obedience to man’s law in the face of a national trajedy.  Click here for a posting on Schaeffer’s thought.

Most Christians agreed that the preborn were human. What was debated was how far one should go to protect the preborn.

Were it a “doctor” killing born children against the will of their parents the answer would have been much easier. Even if the “doctor” was killing the children with the help of the parents the answer would have been easier. One can separate such a child from their assailant.

The children being killed in America’s abortuaries were in utero. Always their mothers, and often their fathers, too, were asking the “doctors” to kill the little ones.

The question of what should be done, how much peaceful “direct action” was the right amount, buzzed around pro-life circles throughout the 1980’s. Much hope was put in President Ronald Reagan. Much good was done through him, but it seemed that every step forward was followed by a step back.

Pro-life angst was growing as the Reagan years drew to a close.

More on this in the posts to come . . .

In the Name of Patriotism (Who are the Patriots?)
***

The original American patriots were those individuals brave enough to resist with force the oppressive power of King George. I accept the definition of patriotism as that effort to resist oppressive state power. The true patriot is motivated by a sense of responsibility, and out of self interest—for himself, his family, and the future of his country—to resist government abuse of power. He rejects the notion that patriotism means obedience to the state.

***

It is dissent from government policies that defines the true patriot and champion of liberty.

***
We currently live in the most difficult of times for guarding against an expanding central government with a steady erosion of our freedoms.

***
The true patriot challenges the state when the state embarks on enhancing its power at the expense of the individual. Without a better understanding and a greater determination to reign in the state, the rights of Americans that resulted from the revolutionary break from the British and the writing of the Constitution, will disappear.

Time is short but our course of action should be clear. Resistance to illegal and unconstitutional usurpation of our rights is required. Each of us must choose which course of action we should take education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience, to bring about the necessary changes.

But let it not be said that we did nothing.

***Patriotism is more closely linked to dissent than it is to conformity and a blind desire for safety and security.

United States Congressman Ron Paul’s speech in the House of Representatives on 5/22/07

*** = redacted materials.

Read this inspiring speech in its entirety here

Father George Gabet (pictured celebrating the ancient Latin rite) is a good friend of the Institute, and is well known for his pro-life activism before becoming a priest. He was active in Fort Wayne, Wichita and more than a few cities across the nation.

He recently addressed the ideas that have been recently discussed on this site. The Institute did not solicit Father George’s commentary, but have it to post thanks to an email from Louise Gonya:

St. Mother Theodore Guerin Latin Community
(Established by Bishop D’Arcy for the Extraordinary form of the Mass)

Reprinted from the Sacred Heart Saint Henry Parish Bulletin July 4th issue

Happy 4th of July Weekend!

This past Friday we celebrated the 232nd birthday of the United States of
America born on the 4th of July 1776.
I recently found the Declaration of Independence on the Internet to read
through a transcript of our nation’s first document.
As I read through it I tried to put myself in the shoes of Thomas
Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and the other 54 Fathers of our country.

How their hearts must have pounded as they signed the paper that they
fully realized would probably cost them dearly. Their
lives, their fortunes, their families and their sacred honor were all at
stake. This was no step they were taking but it was a step they felt
was absolutely necessary. In the Declaration, they state that normally
what they were doing would be wrong for they wrote,
“Prudence indeed will dictate that government long established should not
be changed for light and transient causes, and accordingly
all experience has shown that mankind is more disposed to suffer, while
evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing, by
abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.” But because the King
- their rightful authority – had overstepped his power
by denying the inalienable right of life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness, rights by which the people were endowed by their
“Creator”, rights given by God Himself; the people need no longer obey
the King.

Isn’t that amazing! The whole rationale given by the Fathers of our
country as to why they were able to declare independence from a tyrant king was that he overstepped his rights given to the people by their Creator God.

There can be no doubt that God has blessed this undertaking. How else
could a small untrained, inexperienced colonial army defeat the greatest sea power on the planet at the time? This great country has truly been blessed by God with a superabundance of food and harvest. We have never been invaded by a foreign power. The Catholic Church has grown despite prejudices and the United States has been instrumental in ending the chastisements foretold by Our Lady of Fatima – WWI and WWII. The U.S.
has become the world superpower. Surely God has blessed us.

But where do we stand today? A hard look at ourselves will show that “We
the People” as our constitution begins, have seemingly declared independence from God Himself, the Kings of Kings, for we the people of this republic are indeed responsible that our country has embraced a “culture of death” as Pope John Paul II referred to it during his pontificate.

We have become a country that sacrifices 4,000 + of its young each day to
the goddess of choice in mockery of the 5th commandment. As if that were not enough we see the specter of the same gender unions hanging over us in mockery of the 6th commandment as well.

By overriding these commandments, it seems the nation has declared
independence from Almighty God: Isn’t it ironic that although the very rationale that was used to verify why we should be independent from Great Britain – because of rights endowed by our Creator were being denied – we now see this nation denying the Creator. This weekend let us therefore pray for the United States of America and declare our total dependence on our Creator God who has been so good to us. For as we read in
Psalm 32 “Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord.”

The Golden Rule

Fr. Frank Pavone
National Director, Priests for Life
June 4, 2007 release date“So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you” (Matthew 7:12).

“Do to others what you would have them do to you.” It applies when the “others” are unborn children, living and growing in their mothers’ wombs, and scheduled to be aborted. We are to do to them what we would want others to do to us if we were in the same situation.

I once asked a pro-abortion person if he would prefer to have been aborted. His response was, “I would not have known the difference.” And thus he avoided answering the question, which was whether he would prefer (now) to have been aborted (then), not what he would or would not have known then. Put another way, if you were in danger of losing your life and could not rescue yourself, what would you want others to do for you?

The answer for every sane person is that we would want others to rescue us, to save us. According to the teaching of Jesus, then, we have to do save and rescue the unborn. “In everything, do to others what you would have them do to you.” Yet most believers in Jesus do not follow this advice.

Were we in danger, would we want others to speak up for us, even if they would face ridicule, opposition, and accusations of being fanatical single-issue people? The answer is yes. Were we in danger, would we want preachers to sound the alarm and rally people to come to our aid and protect our lives? The answer is yes. Were we in danger, would we want public officials and candidates for public office to make an issue of saving our lives, and restore to us the protection of which we were deprived? The answer is yes.

If, then, we follow the teaching of Jesus, we know what we have to do. “In everything, do to others what you would have them do to you.”

A lot of pro-life people lose time and sleep figuring out how much risk they should take in their pro-life activity – how many people should they risk offending, how many positions should they risk losing, and how many legal entanglements should they risk incurring. It’s time to stop wondering. “In everything, do to others what you would have them do to you.” Just ask the simple question, “If it were my life at stake, how much risk would I want others to take to save me?”

*** end of quoting of Father Frank Pavone

So far we have discussed Refusal and Resistance in a Christian, Natural law framework. If you thought that was too controversial then you should probably skip this post and come back later this week when I change channels and start talking about Indiana’s idea of a good education.

Civil disobedience arises out of a Higher Law framework of political theory. That same framework that starts with a right to refuse does not end with the right to resist. It goes all the way.

Pagans just cannot get it, just did not get it historically. Man’s law was to be brutally enforced, no “civil disobedience” allowed. As one of paganism’s best leaders said,

If you must break the law, do it to seize power: in all other cases observe it.
Julius Caesar

Sounds much like Samuel Johnson’s quip, later embellished upon by Bob Dylan , that goes like this:

“They say that patriotism is the last refuge to which a scoundrel clings; Steal a little and they throw you in jail; Steal a lot and they make you king.”
- Bob Dylan (from “Infidels” album, the cut “Sweetheart like you.”)

Christian jurisprudence believes that good government can exist, and holds government to high standards for that very reason. We acknowledge Dylan’s cynicism, but believe that imperfect men can govern ethically through the Light of Reason and Revelation.

But what happens when good government goes bad. Very bad. As in rejects the Truth and advances many lies.

Here are the ancient and accepted steps that the Christian Church has developed for addressing such apostacy among those who rule over us:

401. The Church’s social doctrine indicates the criteria for exercising the right to resistance: “Armed resistance to oppression by political authority is not legitimate, unless all the following conditions are met: 1) there is certain, grave and prolonged violation of fundamental rights, 2) all other means of redress have been exhausted, 3) such resistance will not provoke worse disorders, 4) there is well-founded hope of success; and 5) it is impossible reasonably to foresee any better solution”.[824] Recourse to arms is seen as an extreme remedy for putting an end to a “manifest, long-standing tyranny which would do great damage to fundamental personal rights and dangerous harm to the common good of the country”.[825] The gravity of the danger that recourse to violence entails today makes it preferable in any case that passive resistance be practised, which is “a way more conformable to moral principles and having no less prospects for success”.[826]

*** End of citation to the Compendium.

Some will find this ironic: The above quote was published by the PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR JUSTICE AND PEACE. It would appear that the Vatican supports your right to bear arms, at least under certain circumstances.

If you find the idea of justice and peace difficult to reconcile with armed resistance and the overthrow of oppressive regimes then may the Institute suggest that it could be that you lack a sense of history. America’s Founders had no problem with it. They sought peace and justice through rebellion, after having listed their grievances in a document, the Declaration of Independence, that passes review under the framework set forth above.

It is interesting to ponder whether the British Monarchy’s break with Rome under King Henry VIII tracked with the above teaching. That set off such a firestorm of controversy and convulsions that shook Christendom to its very core. Did the initial break follow or reject longstanding Christian teaching?

Not all rebellion is Godly rebellion. But there is such a thing as Godly rebellion. See II Kings 9 as but one fine example.

If the eschatology most common in the Church is correct then the Church ends up in a situation in which all of the above criteria will be met.

In that case Godly rebellion should be discussed and studied, even if quite controversial.

We serve a Risen King. Let the governments of Earth take notice. See Psalm 2.

Back in the days of Rescue we faced off against a pro-abort group that called itself “Refuse and Resist.” They were mostly volunteers who organized the clinic escorts and others interested in violently breaking through sit ins to ensure that babies were aborted as soon as possible and with as little aforethought as possible.

Refuse and Resist is still around. Click here to go to their site.

The Refuse and Resist crew tended to be Marxists and/or Pagans. Which is quite ironic if you think about it, for societies organized by Marxists (like the former USSR) and Pagans (like pre-Christian Rome) tend to allow NO room for Refusing or Resisting.

Refusers (conscientious objectors) and resisters in ancient Rome usually ended up as the subjects of violent entertainment. The same social dissidents in the USSR usually ended up ordered into psychiatric observation. Refuse and Resist is fortunate to have the USA to operate in. I doubt they have any chapters in China, Burma, Yemen, the Sudan, Cuba, etc and etc.

At the end of the day the moniker Refuse and Resist does not really work for Pagans or Marxists. But it does work for Christians. Very well, in fact. Earlier in the week we looked at Refuse. Here is the ancient and accepted Church teaching on Resistance to misused governmental authority:

The right to resist

400. Recognizing that natural law is the basis for and places limits on positive law means admitting that it is legitimate to resist authority should it violate in a serious or repeated manner the essential principles of natural law. Saint Thomas Aquinas writes that “one is obliged to obey … insofar as it is required by the order of justice”.[823] Natural law is therefore the basis of the right to resistance.

There can be many different concrete ways this right may be exercised; there are also many different ends that may be pursued. Resistance to authority is meant to attest to the validity of a different way of looking at things, whether the intent is to achieve partial change, for example, modifying certain laws, or to fight for a radical change in the situation.

***end of citation to The Compendium of Social Teaching of the Church

And thus disobeying your government can be a very Christian thing to do!

Think about it — Jesus did it, St. Paul did it, the Apostle John did it, the early Christian Church did it, Martin Luther King, Jr. did it, Dietrich Bonhoeffer did it . . .

Have you done it . . . yet?

What are you waiting for, a time when Natural Law is completely erased and Marxists and Pagans run the show?

Don’t count on a right to refuse or resist once that sad day dawns.

The parable of the frog in the kettle comes to mind.

It is good to be briefed on the rights and responsibilities of the Christian in the face of governmental action that violates the law of the Moral Lawgiver as revealed in the Bible and though the Church.

But before that can be contemplated, one must consider the standard to which the Creator holds government — an institution, like the Church, that He created.

Here is a fine briefing on the same. It is taken from the recently released “Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church.”

III. POLITICAL AUTHORITY

a. The foundation of political authority

393. … Political authority is therefore necessary [800] because of the responsibilities assigned to it. Political authority is and must be a positive and irreplaceable component of civil life.[801]

394. Political authority must guarantee an ordered and upright community life without usurping the free activity of individuals and groups but disciplining and orienting this freedom, by respecting and defending the independence of the individual and social subjects, for the attainment of the common good. … Political authority, … must always be exercised within the limits of morality and on behalf of the dynamically conceived common good, according to a juridical order enjoying legal status. When such is the case citizens are conscience-bound to obey”.[802]

…

b. Authority as moral force

396. Authority must be guided by the moral law. All of its dignity derives from its being exercised within the context of the moral order,[804] “which in turn has God for its first source and final end”.[805] Because of its necessary reference to the moral order, which precedes it and is its basis, and because of its purpose and the people to whom it is directed, authority cannot be understood as a power determined by criteria of a solely sociological or historical character. “There are some indeed who go so far as to deny the existence of a moral order which is transcendent, absolute, universal and equally binding upon all. And where the same law of justice is not adhered to by all, men cannot hope to come to open and full agreement on vital issues”.[806] This order “has no existence except in God; cut off from God it must necessarily disintegrate”.[807] It is from the moral order that authority derives its power to impose obligations [808] and its moral legitimacy,[809] not from some arbitrary will or from the thirst for power,[810] and it is to translate this order into concrete actions to achieve the common good.[811]

397. Authority must recognize, respect and promote essential human and moral values. These are innate and “flow from the very truth of the human being and express and safeguard the dignity of the person; values which no individual, no majority and no State can ever create, modify or destroy”.[812] These values do not have their foundation in provisional and changeable “majority” opinions, but must simply be recognized, respected and promoted as elements of an objective moral law, the natural law written in the human heart (cf. Rom 2:15), and as the normative point of reference for civil law itself.[813] If, as a result of the tragic clouding of the collective conscience, scepticism were to succeed in casting doubt on the basic principles of the moral law,[814] the legal structure of the State itself would be shaken to its very foundations, being reduced to nothing more than a mechanism for the pragmatic regulation of different and opposing interests.[815]

398. Authority must enact just laws, that is, laws that correspond to the dignity of the human person and to what is required by right reason. “Human law is law insofar as it corresponds to right reason and therefore is derived from the eternal law. When, however, a law is contrary to reason, it is called an unjust law; in such a case it ceases to be law and becomes instead an act of violence”.[816] Authority that governs according to reason places citizens in a relationship not so much of subjection to another person as of obedience to the moral order and, therefore, to God himself who is its ultimate source.[817] Whoever refuses to obey an authority that is acting in accordance with the moral order “resists what God has appointed” (Rom 13:2).[818] Analogously, whenever public authority — which has its foundation in human nature and belongs to the order pre-ordained by God [819] — fails to seek the common good, it abandons its proper purpose and so delegitimizes itself.

End of citation to the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church.

What is the Christian to do when the government fails miserably in upholding its responsibilities under God, such as when the Indiana Court System decreed that Baby Doe be allowed to die of dehydration?

That is the subject of the next post.

We are talking Christian dissent and civil disobedience.

Thanks in large part to Retta and Mike Kohrman, the Gabriel Division’s radio-quality studio is officially up and running as of June 9, 2008.

Computer hardware problems, logistical problems, Vista problems, Vista problems and more Vista problems slowed us down, but we climbed onward and upward!

It is fitting that the man behind the curtain, our landlord, the principal operating the Donegal Corridor, LLC, was the first one interviewed in the ArchAngel Institute’s studio. John Brown of New Haven has put many long hours and much treasure into the pro-family cause. He has been a stalwart for Life, Liberty and our Risen Lord in this community for decades.

Retta has now interviewed John Brown and will soon post that interview on this website.

We have more than a few other great people on deck. We promise a full quiver of interesting interviews in the months to come.

Stay tuned for more news from the Michael and Raphael Divisions as the Institute comes up to full operational capacity. The old brick building at 827 Webster Street was once a formidable and tragic death star. It is now becoming the very opposite of that.

Resistance is never futile if done in the Name of the Risen King!

My past and ongoing “problems” with the authorities who govern the West in general (and Indiana in specific) pretty much started when I became a student of this great man. He is the late Francis Schaeffer, and he spent most of his time in the 70’s and 80’s trying to convince the Protestant Evangelical Church to stand and fight for what Pope John Paul II called the Civilization of Love.

Secularists call it “the West.” It was once called Christendom.

In 1979, I attended Francis Schaeffer’s three day seminar entitled “Whatever Happened to the Human Race.” More than a few from the Allen County attended as well, including Pastor Gordon Smith, Arlen Birkey, Lynn Wegmann, Denny Laub and the Zimmermans (Max and Linda).

It changed my life and view of the Faith. It did the same to most all who attended. My thanks to Lynn and Gordon for making that pilgrimage possible for me.

Here is an excerpt from my former teacher’s sermon and call to cultural arms . . . Hit the link below to read the balance.

A Christian Manifesto
by Dr. Francis A. Schaeffer

This address was delivered by the late Dr. Schaeffer in 1982 at the Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church, Fort Lauderdale, Florida. It is based on one of his books, which bears the same title.

Christians, in the last 80 years or so, have only been seeing things as bits and pieces which have gradually begun to trouble them and others, instead of understanding that they are the natural outcome of a change from a Christian World View to a Humanistic one; things such as overpermissiveness, pornography, the problem of the public schools, the breakdown of the family, abortion, infanticide (the killing of newborn babies), increased emphasis upon the euthanasia of the old and many, many other things.

All of these things and many more are only the results. We may be troubled with the individual thing, but in reality we are missing the whole thing if we do not see each of these things and many more as only symptoms of the deeper problem. And that is the change in our society, a change in our country, a change in the Western world from a Judeo-Christian consensus to a Humanistic one. That is, instead of the final reality that exists being the infinite creator God; instead of that which is the basis of all reality being such a creator God, now largely, all else is seen as only material or energy which has existed forever in some form, shaped into its present complex form only by pure chance.

I want to say to you, those of you who are Christians or even if you are not a Christian and you are troubled about the direction that our society is going in, that we must not concentrate merely on the bits and pieces. But we must understand that all of these dilemmas come on the basis of moving from the Judeo-Christian world view — that the final reality is an infinite creator God — over into this other reality which is that the final reality is only energy or material in some mixture or form which has existed forever and which has taken its present shape by pure chance.

Click here for the balance of this sermon.

We have officially entered the third stage of our launch here at the Institute. Stage one was planning and planting. Stage two was office preparation. In this third stage we will become much more communicative. Much more.

This blog will, in fact, be updated three times a week. So drop in to keep up with the unveiling of many mysteries going on at the ArchAngel Institute!

On August 25, 2007 I (Bryan Brown) stood before a crowd of about 150 at the Allen County Public Library and laid out the big picture of the birth of the Institute and its goals for 2008. Most of that information is now loaded onto this site. (See especially the tiles at the top.)

One of those goals was getting me admitted to Indiana to practice law. I was admitted to so practice in Kansas in 1996 and I am an attorney in good standing in Kansas. I was admitted to practice before the United States Supreme Court in 2001, and remain a fellow in good standing. I was approved to join the Montana bar in 1996 and the Missouri bar in 2006.

Still, Indiana has not, more than a year after I applied, come to a decision on whether I should be allowed to join its bar.

I told the August 25, 2007 crowd that I thought I would have to “battle my way into the Indiana bar.” It would appear that I was not that far off.

Why? Read on, I will spell it out in excruciating detail over the weeks to come. Find foreshadowing in the purple highlights below.

Before I delve into my quite complicated relationship with the Indiana authorities allow me to first present some great teaching I found in a bulletin insert at St. Joseph’s Catholic Church (Hessen Castle, Father Tom Lombardi) ) on June 21.

This teaching sets the stage for a discussion of why the Indiana Supreme Court is having a difficult time inviting me into its elitist club:

*** begin quoted text

We have often heard the old adage, never talk about politics or religion if you want to avoid arguments and keep the peace. The “wisdom” of this adage has become part of the philosophy of our contemporary society. We avoid any type of show of religious practices in public (like saying grace before our meals in a restaurant). We avoid situations where we might have to share our faith with anyone lest we be accused of cramming our religion down their throats. We try to rinse every last trace of religion from the fabric of our government. In short, to modern man religion is OK – as long as it is done in private and so that it does not make anyone uncomfortable. Anything other than that is considered to be religious fanaticism.

In the midst of this “enlightened” approach Jesus speaks a very different word to us. “Everyone who acknowledges me before others I will acknowledge before my heavenly Father. But whoever denies me before others, I will deny before my heavenly Father.” What is Jesus saying to us? He is reminding us that we are called to be servants of His kingdom and not servants of the world or of our own comfort. For His followers the greater good is not peace at all costs. Rather the greater good is to not be afraid to live our faith without counting the cost; regardless of how it makes us look to others. “Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather be afraid of the one who can destroy both body and soul in Hell.” Faith is a precious gift from God. And it is not a gift that is meant to be hidden under a bushel basket. It is meant to be held up for others to see. Your faith is meant to be held up for others to see!

Our Protestant friends might be surprised by such Evangelical zeal on the part of the Church. Don’t be. The Catholic Church preaches Jesus crucified for the sins of the world, Jesus risen to rule over those saved by Grace, and Jesus coming in glory to judge the living and the dead.

Catholics are, by their very calling, Evangelical. They have the Gospel of Life to proclaim!

Most Protestants are proclaimers as well. (Some denominations are not. Those are, by and large, the denominations where the movers and shakers of this present fallen order tend to congregate.)

Evangelicals all, let us preach Jesus together, in the same Light that shines from the quoted text above! He is our unity, if we will only follow Him.

Postscript: The painting leading off this post is the Conversion of Constantine by the great Flemish artist Peter Paul Rubens.(1577 -1640).