De Tocqueville, Christianity, and Equality

2008-01-15
By

de TocquevilleLiberty Letters, 2008-01

In his 1832 work, “Democracy In America,” Alexis de Tocqueville reminds us that “Christianity, which has declared that all are equal in the sight of God, will not refuse to acknowledge that all citizens are equal in the eye of the law. … Religion … is the companion of liberty in all its battles and all it conflicts; the cradle of its infancy and the divine source of its claims.”

Amen.

Long forgotten by a state school system infected by Supreme Court rulings, ACLU lawsuits, and Education Associations that worship Dewey and Humanism, while banning God and Christianity; is that it was Jesus Christ’s teaching of the common brotherhood of men, the Golden Rule, and the equal accountability of ALL before the Judgment Bar of Christ, that exercised a mighty hand in inspiring equality before the law, inalienable rights, and the principle of representation in the founding of our republic. Those teachings were the divine source, their first practice, the very cradle of liberty.

De Tocqueville was right.

And because of this liberating influence, the day of the elitist notion of the “King is Law” was over. The ringing reversal that “the Law is King” properly stood in its place. And to state it as clear as clear can be: every man now found pleasure in appealing to his own copy of the Bible to cite principles of Higher Law to protect himself and his neighbor from tyrants, bullies, ruffians, and blue bloods.

This was revolutionary. The democratic principle, largely crushed for ages, rose from the tomb thanks to the invention of the Guttenberg press, followed by the printing of the Bible, its free distribution in the common tongue, and its liberating influence, especially in the free air of America on men’s minds and souls.

And far better than what occurred in a more secular Enlightenment Europe, Faith-and-Reason-America founded a better democratic order. Not like the anarchies of Greece, nor the disgusting and bloody extremes that destroyed all in France, but a sort of moral liberalism. Or to put it another way, a republic of laws, a liberty widely understood as freedom to do what is right, with checks on the magistrate and citizen who did what was wrong, and God-given rights as checks on all. A new, legitimate, solid, constitutional democratic order. Made to prosper, made to last. And last it did.

It turned the world upside down, shook off the shackles of superstition and ignorance, and set man on the pathway to faith and knowledge, freedom and prosperity as never before. Thank goodness, and thank God.

Alexis de Tocqueville had it right, and so we now hear his conclusion:

“These two tendencies (the moral and political world), apparently so discrepant, are far from conflicting; they advance together, and mutually support each other. … The safeguard of morality is religion, and morality is the best security of law and the surest pledge of freedom.”

So we once believed. I still do. Not a state church. De Tocqueville opposed that. He was sounding like Washington, in his Farewell address. Religion and morality must be free to work a salutary influence on us all, to prevent the sort of liberty Burke described as “[like] a madman” or else “a highwayman and murderer who has broke prison upon the recovery of his natural rights.” That’s not liberty. De Tocqueville would agree.

The Liberty Letters are a project of the Latter-day Center for Moral Liberalism, and NewsMax.com pundit Steve Farrell. Mr. Farrell also serves as associate professor of political economy at George Wythe College, and is the author of the highly praised inspirational classic, “Dark Rose.”

Steve Farrell is one of the original pundits with Silver Eddie Award Winner, NewsMax.com (1999-2008), associate professor of political economy at George Wythe University, author of the highly praised inspirational novel, "Dark Rose," and Editor In Chief of TheMoralLiberal.com.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

  • Artfldgr

    It was also the same religious thought that opened the doors to more thought and the realization that if the world is made by god, then if we study how the world is constructed, we will have a glimpse into the mind of the creator through his/her work.

    this then led to people learning how things worked, and pure science was born out of this, since what they were studying had as purpose to learn from a maker by studying his work. this was the first time that man was learning without a reason other than to know.

    it was from that pool of knowlege that principals were discovered, and THEN everything else flowed from that. without that, most of what we have would not be here, we would never have had the ability to get past a certain first order pragmatic level.

    the greeks and romans while great thinkers had the roots of the steam engine, it was only a novelty, as was the diesel effect, which they also knew. but nothing was done with them. the ruling class had things so didnt invent. the merchange class would use inventions, but would not waste money on anything they could not underdstand outright. the chinese invented, but not directed, by accidents and the same process as most other places. paper was from the egyptians, but how long before a simple press with type of some sort would be made.

    there technically wasnt anything stopping the industrial revolution from happening earlier except three things. the population was not large enough, our desire to know about the world was not there, wealth was not there high enough to allow for the frivolous endeavor to learn how something worked for no returns. the wealth one is very keen, as the first scientists, and such were priests and the wealthy.

    these principals though lead to more and more learning, and more and more principals. that led to more and more wealth and the people gained idle time, their OWN time, and ownership of property which allowed them to buy materials and experiment.

    couple this with the concept of law that is mentioned above, and you get a means that the common man can change his station by his own will and work. you get a middle class that acts like a garden where anyone with potential and hard work can grow.

    this is what amazed toqueville… he saw what we dont see anymore.
    we are allowing our middle class to be destroyed by socialist programs that will return us to the state of an elite with no need to invent, and a poor with no means to invent. the engine of all this greatness is being dismantled in the effort to improve it, and get more out of it than it can give. remove merit, and morals, ethics, and so forth, and the wealth of the middle goes.

    why do so many immigrants come to america? if its so awful, then why?

    there really is only one reason…

    America has always (but not for always) has had a situaiton where a person that comes here can change their station in life and not be held in place.

    the examples are almost as varied as each american. contrary to the old belief of classes, americas classes are not stationary. they are constantly churning over and through gnerations rise and fade…

    so they all come here to change how they live. even if they go back they can go back better than they were before, and be more respected.

    its kind of too bad that the american public is the way it is and can no longer support such a relizable ideal now that its chasing a false ideal.

    as carly simon sang…

    dont it always seem to go,
    that you dont know what youve got till its gone..


Buy the book now on Amazon.com. Or listen to Ronnie tell a story at escaping-from-reality.com.

Archives