Welcome to Call to Decision
This is a excellent read for anyone who is studying how
we lost
our constitution from the start, and how
to move toward getting it back.
YAHWEH Bless
Sam
U.S.A. The RepublicIs The House That No One Lives Inby
|
| Duel Federalisms Compared |
| What Have You Lost Or Gained |
| The Two Sides To The Constitution |
Index.
Our Republic is now
celebrating the 200th birthday of the Bill
of Rights to our Constitution.
Through the wisdom of a few free - thinking
men, we have come incredibly far in 200
years. Our nation has been blessed with
prosperity more than any other in world
history. The technology in this country
compares with no other. Our leadership in
world politics and economics has no rival.
Yet, all this has happened outside the "house"
our predecessors on this continent designed
and built.
Introduction
This fantastic and majestic political
building, which our forefathers
constructed with their lives and sacred
honor, has fallen into disuse and now sits
empty. When it was new, it was the most
beautiful mansion in the world. There was
nothing else like it for it was built on a
foundation called the "common
law." The walls were shaped in
liberty by a unique arrangement referred
to as the separation of powers and its
roof was made of transparent material to
let in the light of the Law. So all
encompassing that it is adaptable to any
people regardless of color, race, creed or
religion.
It didn't crumble overnight. What took
place was the result of a delusion for
people would never give up liberty
knowingly - only through deception.
Gradually the deceptive rot took hold
and, one by one, the citizens of the
house called a "Republic"
moved out for a third rate structure
called a "democracy."
Napoleon said; "History
is a fable agreed upon,"
because he knew that history repeats
itself, especially when the history
lessons have not been learned or
remembered. Thus our history lessons
have fallen into disrepair. Our
forefathers founded this nation
because they believed they had a
God-given Right to walk away from
enslavement to the King. Yet, the very
bondage they walked away from has
opened the door for the most subtle
slavery this world has ever known. So
subtle is this slavery that the
citizens are entrapped by their own
ignorance through offers of
enticements called economic benefits.
Acceptance of these benefits sets into
operation rules and laws that operate
outside the Constitution and thus we
have the largest and most unmanageable
bureaucracy that has ever existed. A
bureaucracy bogged in debt because it
has taught its people that government
is the provider and problem solver
instead of "one people,"
the subjects that used to live in that
special mansion known as the Republic,
lighted in Law.
The peoples freedom has been lost
more because of what they haven't
done than what they have done. In
the pages that follow, you are going
to discover why you are an economic
slave and what you can do about the U.S.
of A. the Republic. Yes, you can
move back into that mansion known as
the Republic for that is what
this treatise is about,
finding your key to liberty. Always
remember that you are the only one
that can take back your liberty. No
one else can do it for you. You can
and you must act independently of
the masses. You and the Law are
capable of awesome accomplishments
in liberty. That is why Thomas
Jefferson's statement in the Declaration
of Independence is as
important today as it was in 1776,
"... it is their [your]
right, it is their [your] duty ...
to provide new guards for their
[your] future security. ... and
such is now the necessity which
constrains them [you] to alter
their [your] former systems of
government."
One man with the Law is a majority.
Index.
Human enslavement has
taken all sorts of forms since the
beginning of time. The most
insidious form is when one
individual, such as a king, claims
that God gave him the right
of enslavement. This is called The
Divine Right of Kings. At the
root of this assumed right is
basic feudal slavery. The divine
right the King of England
claimed was the right to have
absolute authority over every one
of his subjects so they could not
leave his political-religious
jurisdiction. That is, the king's
subjects did not have the right to
expatriate, according to his
assumed divine right over them.
Divine Right Of Kings
The American Revolution
of 1776 was the result of
individuals who believed that
the King did not have the right
to prevent the people from
leaving his political-religious
jurisdiction. The Revolution
was fought over liberty of
choice. Our Constitution
is the political document that
resulted from that struggle and
it guarantees our liberty to
choose the political domain we
want to be controlled by without
compelled performance.
Therefore, if we want to move
from one political jurisdiction
to another, we are guaranteed
that right - called expatriation.
We are guaranteed the right to
change our political territory
any time we desire.
Few are aware today that their
political choice has been made
for them, and it is a
political choice that has
taken away their absolute
rights under the Constitution
and its first ten Amendments,
the Bill of Rights.
They are unaware that they
were given at birth an
economic privilege of an
alternative political domain -
allowed by the Constitution,
but operating outside of it.
An alternative domain that
operates with the same Divine
Right of Kings as did the King
of England. Thus, the
Constitution is operating in
an economic capacity rather
than a political one.
When we ponder why our
nation is in the midst of an
economic crisis like we have
never seen before, we cannot
understand it is the result
of our ignorance. Ignorance
of how our silence has given
our federal government and
its political subdivisions
(called "States")
permission to tax its people
without representation and
confiscate their property
when they do not go along
with the Codes and laws -
especially the tax laws.
Ignorance that has allowed
our federal government and
its political subdivisions
to compel us to perform to
laws that are destroying our
business by exacting a fee -
like a protection racket -
for what should be a right.
Instead, our absolute
rights are now relative
privileges, handed out
like food in a
concentration camp.
Instead of being able to
stand as an individual for
what you believe, every
special interest group has
become our conscience. Laws
and Codes by the
hundreds are feudalizing
the will to produce from
the soul of each person by
making him pay for the
failures, inefficiency and
greed of others - called
limited liability. And
still more laws are
teaching citizens of all
ages that someone else - Uncle
Sam - is responsible
for us from cradle to
grave.
Index.
The world has
always been filled with
people with good
intentions.
Unfortunately, it seems
that the majority of
those well-intentioned
individuals end up
trying to convince the
rest that their idea is
the best. The extreme in
some countries results
in a dictator, while in
the United States
there developed democracy
with its ever present
special interest groups
dictating the conscience
of the masses. Yes, more
problems are caused when
good intentions become
compelled performance.
As many are aware, "the
road to hell is paved
with good
intentions."
The result is always a
loss of individual
liberty of conscience.
Communalism Raises Its Ugly Head
In the beginning, America
was a free Republic
with vast unsettled
wilderness open for
anybody who had the
courage to take up its
challenges. Thus, America
became the melting pot
for religious and
social ideals and
experiments. Of the
many social theories
espoused throughout
Europe then, there
were three theories
that fit the mold for
America, all three
were communatarian
(communistic) in
nature. The first
communatarian idea was
set up by the
religious sects made
familiar by the Puritans,
Quakers, Shakers,
Rappites,/1Zorities,
etc.. The second
communatarian idea was
established by Robert
Owen of Great
Britain who was
born in 1771, and the
third communatarian
idea was of Charles
Fourier of France
who was born in 1772.
Both Owen and Fourier
experienced the vast
upheavals that
accompanied the French
Revolution from
the onslaughts of Napoleon.
As a result of the
slaughter, Owen
and Fourier
came up with
communatarian plans to
transform the
crises-warped society
of the 19th century
into a more humane
order.
In 1812, Robert
Owen published a
paper titled: "A
New View of
Society".
His treatise
discussed the
formation of the
human character,
and he proposed
ways of changing
society from what
he called the poor
working classes:
"... the
society of the
poor were
trained to
commit crimes'
the later
resulting in
punishment. The
rest of the
population was
instructed to
believe, or at
least to
acknowledge,
that certain
principles are
unerringly true,
but to act as
though they were
grossly false.
The result was
filling the
world with folly
and
inconsistency
making society a
scene of
insincerity and
counter action.
In this state
the world has
continued to the
present time;
its evils have
been and are
continually
increasing and
if we longer
delay, general
disorder must
ensue."
Owen
suggested that the
governing powers
of all countries
should establish
rational plans for
the education and
general formation
of the characters
of their subjects.
Plans must be
devised to train
children, which
would be taken
from their parents
at the age of two
years, to prevent
them from
acquiring
false-hoods and
deception, and
their labor must
be usefully
directed upon the
communatarian view
rather than the
individual. One of
his favorite
phrases was "train
the young
collectively."
Owen
deplored private
property and he
blamed the
world's problems
of ignorance and
selfishness on
it. He also
disliked
commercial
competition. "It
creates civil
warfare, it
exploits the
many and gives
to a few
favorable
individuals
which is
injurious to the
mass."Owen
said, "Without
equality of
condition, there
can be no
permanent virtue
or stability of
society."
Owen laid
plans for Associations
of All Classes
of All Nations
with a purpose
of "founding
as soon as
possible,
communities of
United
Interest."
Owen
wanted to
terminate the
distinction
between the rich
and the poor,
thereby creating
a millennium. Owen
proposed not
only a national
system of
education, but
also public
works projects
designed to
guard the
unemployed
against the mis-educative
effects of
enforced
idleness. He was
determined to
set up a commune
he envisioned,
and he decided America
was the ideal
location.
Owen's
ideas were
put to the
test when he
established
his commune
called "New
Harmony"
in 1825. In a
letter to a Quaker
leader, William
Allen, Owen
reveals more
of his ideals.
"The
United
States, but
particularly
the States
west of the
Allegheny
Mountains,
have been
prepared in
the most
remarkable
manner for
the New
System. The
principle of
union &
cooperation
for the
promotion of
all virtues
& for
the creation
of wealth is
now
universally
admitted, to
be far
superior to
the
individual
selfish
system &
all seem
prepared or
are rapidly
preparing to
give up the
latter &
adopt the
former. In
fact, the
whole of
this country
is ready to
commence a
new empire
upon the
principle of
public
property
&
discard
private
property
& the
uncharitable
notion that
man can form
his own
character as
the
foundation
& root
of all
evil."
Owen
had a lot of
problems from
the start. A
major problem
was poor
production.
The low level
of production
was caused by
the lack of
trained and
competent
foreman,
supervisors
and skilled
craftsmen. His
plan for
equality was
failing from
the start
because those
who were
trained could
go work in the
open market
and receive
more pay. The
first
Constitution
that was drawn
was short
lived because
of a crisis of
morale. The
land of milk
and honey that
Owen
promised did
not
materialize.
Equality for
all was
running into
trouble.
"No
one is to be
favored
above the
rest as all
are to be in
a state of
perfect
equality,"
wrote a wife
of one of the
members of the
society, but
she said;
"Oh
if you could
see some of
the rough
uncouth
creatures
here, I
think you
would find
it rather
hard to look
upon them
exactly in
the light of
brothers and
sisters ...
I am sure I
cannot
sincerely
look upon
these as my
equals and
that if I
must appear
to do it, I
cannot
either act
or speak the
truth."
Social
distinctions
and religious
differences
had never been
as sharp as
they became in
the months
following this
brief
experiment in
forced and
premature
social unity.
As the
problems
mounted, Owen
and the people
disbanded one
Constitution
and drew up a
new
Constitution.
In April,
1827; the New
Harmony
experiment
came to a
end.
However, Owen's
influence
in
communatarianism
continued to
spread from
the east as
far west as
Texas.
In
addition
to Robert
Owen's
ideas, Charles
Fourier
was
developing
and
spreading
similar
concepts. Fourier
differed
from Owen
in that
the former
believed
in
religion
and
private
property,/2
where the
latter had
an
opposite
view.
Fourier's
work
was
largely
conditioned
by an
unfortunate
event
that
took
place
early in
his
otherwise
uneventful
life.
His
father,
a
wealthy
merchant,
died and
left a
fortune
of
nearly a
quarter
of a
million
francs.
However,
the
whole of
Fourier's
inheritance
was lost
in the French
Revolution.
Because
of this
event,
he set
himself
to
invent
system
of
society
that
would
prevent
the
recurrence
of
revolution,
preserve
his own
petit-bourgeois
class,
and
abolish
the
appalling
conditions
of labor
prevalent
everywhere.
(Has a
familiar
"New
World
Order"
feel)
Charles
Fourier
never
set a
foot
upon
American
soil,
but
his
theories
did. Albert
Brisbane
was a
young
American
of
liberal
education
and at
the
age of
eighteen,
he
went
to
Europe
to
study
social
philosophy.
Eventually
Brisbane
found
what
he was
looking
for in
Fourier's
treatise
on "Association,"/3
and he
promoted
Charles
Fourier's
ideas
and
wrote
extensively
upon
the
subject.
However,
if
we
can
organize
the
townships
rightly,
so
that
unity
of
interests,
concert
of
action,
vast
economics
and
general
riches
will
be
attained,
that
in
spreading
these
rightly
organized
Townships,
and
rendering
them
general,
a Social
Order
will
be
gradually
established,
in
which
peace,
prosperity
and
happiness
will
be
secured
to
all.
The
great
and
primary
object
which
we
have
in
view
is,
consequently,
to
effect
the
establishment
of
one Association,
which
will
exhibit
practically
the
great
economics,
the
riches,
the
order
and
unity
of
the
system,
and
serve
as a
model
for,
and
lead
to
the
founding
of
others.
Even
though
there
were
other
social
experimenters,
Owen
and
Fourier
had
the
greatest
influence
on
the
leaders
of
the
U.S.A.
and
the
corporate
special
interest
groups.
This
influence
figured
heavily
in
the
formation
of
the
Limited
Liability
Act
of
1851,
the
Civil
Rights
Act
of
1866,
and
the
14th
Amendment
of
1868.
It
was
these
legislative
Acts
that
opened
the
door
of
the
house
called
Democracy/4
that
everyone
moved
into
by
ignorance.
Index.
It
is
interesting
to
note
that
Karl
Marx
and
Friedrich
Engles
were
devoted
students
of
Robert
Owen.
Communism
of
the
Bolsheviks
was
nothing
new.
It
was
incubating
and
maturing
in
non-violent
form
right
here
in
the
(u)nited
States
of
America
almost
100
years
before
Russia
ever
knew
about
it.
Democracy and Communism
Today
communism
is
believed
to
have
been
defeated
as
the
world
has
turned
to
democracy.
However,
is
there
any
difference?
In
the
case
of
Smith
v
Allwright,/5
the
courts
said,
"the
United
States
is
a
constitutional
democracy."
In
other
words,
the
court
said
the
United
States
(as
distinguished
from
the
(u)nited
States
of
America,
a
Republic)
is
a
democracy
that
is
allowed
by
the
Constitution,
but
operating
outside
of
it.
This
court
case
is
substantiated
by
the
following:
"What
is
futile
is
to
puzzle
ourselves
as
to
whether
the
American
or
Russian
use
of
`democracy'
is
the
true
or
correct
one."/6
"...
the
first
step
in
the
revolution
by
the
working
class,
is
to
raise
the
proletariat
to
the
position
of
ruling
class,
to
win
the
battle
for
democracy."/7
"A
government
of
Russia
could
not
terminate
its
existence
either
by
dissolution
or
by
merger,
for
it
was
a
corporation
formed
under
our
laws,
and
its
corporate
life
continued
until
the
law
of
its
creation
declared
that
it
should
end."/8
Here
we
see
the
real
meaning
of
democracy
and
its
communal
governing
system.
A
democracy
is
the
opposite
of
a
republic.
More
on
this
latter.
However
remember,
unknowingly
you
have
been
participating
in
a
communal
government
to
the
loss
of
absolute
liberty,
but
it
can
be
restored!
Index.
Let's
understand
the
meaning
of
private
law
versus
public
municipal
law.
Private
law,
also
called
non-positive
law
and
local
law,
is
a
term
that
is
used
to
describe
the
principles
and
regulations
that
an
individual
uses
to
direct
his
or
her
own
life.
It
is
also
called
the
"law
of
conscience."
That
is,
it
is
your
personal
philosophical
and
religious
belief
system
that
you
use
to
control
your
own
life
and
decisions.
For
example,
if
you
state
that
you
believe
that
abortions
are
not
proper,
then
you
are
verbalizing
a
part
of
your
private
law.
If
you
express
that
you
believe
that
it
is
not
proper
for
you
to
own
a
gun,
then
you
are
again
expressing
a
part
of
your
private
law.
Private Law And Public Municipal Law
Private
law's
only
area
of
function
outside
your
own
conscience
is
in
the
area
of
contracts.
In
other
words,
a
person
will
always
use
his
personal
principles
of
conscience
in
negotiating
any
agreement
with
another
individual.
An
example
of
this
would
be
the
merchant
who
works
out
a
contract
with
a
company
to
provide
items
for
sale
in
a
store
he
owns.
His
reason
for
contracting
with
this
particular
company
is
because
he
believes
the
items
they
manufacture
should
be
in
every
household
for
health
reasons.
The
merchant's
personal
beliefs
or
conscience
are
involved
in
this
contract
as
in
any
contract.
Private
law
operates
outside
of
the
Constitution
under
the
rights
of
private
contract
as
stipulated
in
Article
I,
Section
10.Article
I,
in
its
entirety,
expresses
all
the
private
law
that
is
allowed
in
the
operation
of
government
of
the
several
states
of
the
union.
Section
8
and
clause
17
of
this
Article
states
that
any
other
private
law
that
is
necessary
for
operation
of
government
for
the
commercial
benefit
of
the
several
states
of
the
union
can
be
legislated.
It
must
be
remembered
that
Article
I
is
not
entirely
private
law.
There
is
some
public
municipal
law
there.
This
public
municipal
law
is
for
the
establishment
of
public
services
for
private
benefit,
i.e.,
"Post
Roads
and
Post
Offices,"
and
the
Public
Laws
of
Obligation
of
Contracts,
etc..
It
must
be
understood
that
private
law,
as
referred
to
in
the
Constitution,
operated
in
the
private
sector
as
a
part
of
negotiating
bilateral
contracts.
Private
law
was
never
meant
to
operate
in
the
public
sector
as
a
basis
for
controlling
public
policy.
Our
founders
made
that
very
clear.
In
the
next
section
on
Roman
civil
law
you
will
be
shown
how
private
law
was
made
into
public
policy
by
entrapment
to
produce
compelled
performance.
Public
municipal
law
(also
referred
to
as
positive
law
and
general
law
in
contrast
to
private
law)
is
the
expression
of
all
the
laws
that
limit
government
and
maintain
the
separation
of
powers
of
the
"states
in
this
union."/9Public
municipal
law
is
an
expression
of
the
people
limiting
government
for
their
own
personal
benefit
and
liberty.
Remember,
the
people
are
the
government.
What
powers
the
people
do
not
delegate
for
the
administration
of
government
are
kept
by
them.
The
Public
Laws
are
laws
that
assure
the
people
of
maintaining
their
private
rights
of
bilateral
contracts
separate
from
any
government
intervention.
The
only
time
that
public
municipal
law
is
used
actively
for
private
purposes,
in
a
legal
sense,
is
when
a
private
right
has
been
violated
and
the
public
municipal
law
is
used
in
the
court
to
address
the
wrong
and
correct
it.
"The
individual
may
stand
upon
his
constitutional
rights
as
a
citizen.
He
is
entitled
to
carry
on
his
own
private
business
in
his
own
way.
His
power
to
contract
is
unlimited.
He
owes
no
duty
to
the
State
or
to
his
neighbors
to
divulge
his
business,
or
to
open
his
doors
to
an
investigation,
so
far
as
it
may
tend
to
incriminate
him.
He
owes
no
such
duty
to
the
State,
since
he
receives
nothing
there-from,
beyond
the
protection
of
his
life
and
property.
His
rights
are
such
as
existed
by
the
law
of
the
land
long
antecedent
to
the
organization
of
the
State.
...
He
owes
nothing
to
the
public
so
long
as
he
does
not
trespass
upon
their
rights."/10
As
early
as
1782,
Jefferson
told
Monroe
that
it
was
ridiculous
to
suppose
that
a
man
should
surrender
himself
to
the
state.
This
would
be
slavery,
and
not
the
liberty
which
the
Bill
of
Rights
has
made
inviolable,
and
for
the
preservation
of
which
our
government
has
been
changed.
[Changed
from
the
Roman
civil
law
to
the
Common
Civil
Law/11
-
see
section
on
Roman
Civil
Law.]
Jefferson
continued
and
said
that
liberty
would
be
destroyed
anytime
there
is,
"....
the
establishment
of
the
opinion
that
the
state
has
a
perpetual
right
to
the
services
of
all
its
members."/12
The
term
"that
liberty"
to
which
Jefferson
refers
is
Public
Law
for
private
purposes
and
"that
liberty"
is
self-evident
and
comes
before
the
State
and
is
opposite
to
"the
Blessings
of
Liberty"
in
the
preamble
of
the
Constitution
-
which
is
commercial./13
Index.
Those
who
have
studied
U.S.
History
from
the
traditional
standpoint
do
not
realize
there
is
a
lot
more
to
U.S.
History.
There
is
probably
more
about
the
history
of
the
(u)nited
States
of
America/14
that
you
have
not
been
told
than
what
you
have
been
told.
Take
for
example
our
federal
government.
The
provisions
for
setting
it
into
operation
were
written
into
the
Constitution,
but
its
present
look
and
function
are
a
far
cry
from
what
our
founding
fathers
intended.
What
has
happened
to
make
such
a
difference
from
the
original
intent?
In
world
history,
religion
has
always
been
a
key
center
for
accumulating
wealth
while
ignorance
and
superstition
promote
religion.
Religion
has
been
used
by
everyone
from
Kingly
dictators
to
preachers
to
persuade
people
to
give
up
everything
from
gold
and
land
to
their
own
lives.
Wealth
meant
power
and
the
power
to
get
wealth
was
religion.
The
Roman
Church
discovered
this
early
and
became
a
"storehouse"
for
the
money
and
property
the
people
were
persuaded
to
give
in
exchange
for
limited
liability
-
go
directly
to
heaven
instead
of
hell.
As
the
people
became
more
educated
and
saw
what
was
really
behind
the
power
of
religion,
the
Roman
Church
fell
under
greater
and
greater
criticism.
This
led
to
the
development
of
a
banking
system
to
handle
and
control
church
wealth
and
take
the
critical
focus
of
the
church.
In
a
nutshell,
this
was
how
the
church's
influence
has
always
figured
so
heavily
in
the
administration
and
control
of
world
politics.
The
bank
learned
from
the
church
about
limited
liability.
If
you
could
get
people
to
borrow
money
beyond
their
ability
to
pay
back,
you
could
get
them
to
keep
performing
on
the
debt
(liability)
without
ever
demanding
it
back,
thereby,
loaning
out
that
same
credit
to
more
than
one
individual
or
company.
This
meant
that
the
bank
was
limiting
the
liability
of
the
borrower
so
he
was
not
fully
responsible
for
the
debt
as
long
as
he
continued
to
perform
by
paying
the
interest.
This
way
real
money
(gold)
became
credit
(paper
money)
by
loaning
to
more
than
one
person.
Being
involved
in
this
sort
of
commerce
was
called
"private
commerce."
With
the
churches
control
over
wealth,
this
private
commerce
became
standard
practice
in
world
trade
upon
the
sea
-
private
international
or
admiralty/maritime
law
became
known
as
Roman
civil
law
as
it
began
to
figure
heavily
in
the
politics
of
every
city
and
country
it
touched
through
international
commerce.
Roman Civil Law
Among
the
many
things
that
were
important
to
our
fore-fathers,
the
one
thing
that
stood
out
was
to
establish
a
government
free
of
any
relationship
or
influence
of
the
private
Roman
civil
law
operating
in
and
controlling
public
policy.
It
was
the
oppression
of
the
Roman
civil
law,
as
the
king
and
parliament
dictated,
that
was
at
the
foundation
for
seeking
expatriation
from
England
under
the
king's
assumed
divine
right.
The
Roman
civil
law
(also
referred
to
as
"admiralty-maritime
law"/15
or
the
"law
of
the
sea"
as
well
as
"private
international
law")
was
the
result
of
private
church
law
operating
for
commercial
purposes
in
the
public
sector.
The
amalgamation
of
church
law
and
civil
government
was
derived
from
three
ingredients;
Greece,
Rome
and
Christianity.
The
political
theory
derived
from
the
first
two
of
these
ingredients
was
tempered
to
accommodate
the
third.
Its
originators
and
apologists
were
the
first
Christian
Emperor,
Constantine,
and
the
first
historian
of
the
Christian
Church,
Eusebius
of
Caesarea.
Through
his
writings,
Eusebius
had
once
and
for
all
established
the
new
way
to
interpret
history,
and
his
followers
applied
the
same
political
philosophy
for
over
1000
years.
Starting
with
Constantine,
religious
belief
had
come
to
be
as
important,
for
the
state,
as
religious
practice.
Constantine
was,
among
other
things,
a
"teacher
of
knowledge
about
God."
The
unity
of
a
threatened
empire
was
seen
to
depend
on
a
unity
of
religious
belief
among
its
subjects.
So
it
was
that
in
a
theocratic
society
it
was
increasingly
hard
to
be
sure
where
things
temporal
ended
and
things
spiritual
began.
"Where
a
necessary
qualification
for
citizenship
was
Orthodoxy
in
religious
belief,
it
was
natural
that
the
canons
of
the
church
councils
which
had
defined
that
belief
should
also
be
the
law
of
the
land.
Justinian
had
decreed
that
`the
canons
of
the
first
four
councils
of
the
church
...
should
have
the
status
of
law.
For
we
accept
as
holy
writ
the
dogmas
of
those
councils
and
guard
their
canons
as
laws.'
....
But
some
emperors
thought
themselves
empowered
to
do
likewise
and
to
legislate
on
ecclesiastical
or
even
doctrinal
matters.
Hence
there
came
into
existence
the
collections
known
as
nomocannones
in
which
the
laws
of
the
church
and
the
laws
of
the
state
were
set
down
side
by
side
and
compared,
though
the
former
always
precede
the
latter
...
The
nomocanones
and
the
commentaries
of
the
canonists
advertised
the
fact
that
church
and
state
went
together.
The
two
were
interdependent
and
it
was
generally
believed
that
the
one
could
not
exist
without
the
other
...
In
the
last
and
apparently
hopeless
years
of
the
empire's
existence,
there
were
various
schools
of
thought
about
what
had
gone
wrong.
By
far
the
most
prevalent
explanation
was
that
God
was
punishing
the
people
for
their
sins.
This
was
the
favorite
theme
of
sermons
in
the
fourteenth
and
fifteenth
centuries
...
The
only
hope
of
salvation
lay
in
a
return
to
the
faith
and
practice
of
the
pure,
unadulterated
Orthodox
faith
..."/16
Yes,
history
is
being
repeated
even
now
as
you
read
this.
Guilt
and
self
righteousness
compels
the
alteration
of
public
policy
in
more
bizarre
ways
by
the
pressure
of
the
special
interest
groups
of
the
trust
-
and
the
inquisition
is
being
repeated.
Church
law
first
got
involved
with
commercial
ventures
when
the
Roman
Church
started
funding
the
Roman
Army
during
the
time
they
were
fighting
Greece.
From
there
it
was
an
easy
transition
to
becoming
directly
involved
in
the
civil
government
of
Rome
and
then
converting
the
Roman
Empire,
what
was
left
of
it,
into
their
own
commercial
state.
When
the
Roman
Church
set
up
their
own
state
they
became
a
commercial
enterprise.
It
was
from
that
point
on
that
Church
law,
controlling
civil
government,
became
known
as
Roman
civil
law.
In
simple
terms,
Roman
civil
law
is
a
perversion
of
private
law.
That
is,
the
conscience
of
private
law
was
never
meant
to
operate
in
forming
public
policy
of
government.
Private
law
was
always
a
part
of
establishing
bilateral
contracts
and
could
be
used
in
government
only
for
setting
up
private
commercial
relations
between
government
and
corporations
called
"licenses."
But
the
conscience
of
private
law
could
never
operate
without
bilateral
contracts
unless
it
was
through
a
trust.
With
the
spread
of
commerce,
the
church's
influence
and
wealth
grew.
Around
596
A.D.,
Pope
Gregory
began
a
process
of
moving
Roman
civil
law
into
England.
Up
until
that
time
it
had
not
been
a
part
of
the
English
economy,
but
Pope
Gregory
was
determined
to
have
his
inspiration
of
Roman
law
and
economy
supreme
there.
He
[Pope
Gregory]
was
inspired
with
the
idea
of
converting
England
not
to
Christianity,
[for
the
British
branch
of
the
Catholic
Church
was
already
there]
-
but
to
the
discipline
of
Rome./17
Moving
Roman
civil
law
into
England
was
strictly
using
a
commercial
venture
of
the
mercantile
Church
to
take
over
the
economy
and
the
country
and
enslave
its
people
to
the
private
or
conscience
law
of
the
Church.
It
was
the
authority
and
conscience
of
the
Roman
Church
that
dictated
the
Statutes,
Codes
and
laws
through
the
King
and
Parliament
for
controlling
human
behavior
that
resulted
in
the
best
economic
and
commercial
advantage
for
the
Church.
Anyone
who
was
not
controlled
by
Roman
civil
law
at
that
time
was
considered
to
be
pagan.
That
is,
if
you
were
operating
free
of
the
Roman
civil
law
-
under
the
common
law
-
you
were
a
heathen
as
far
as
the
Roman
Church
was
concerned.
It
was
their
intent
to
enslave
everyone
possible
to
the
Roman
civil
law
for
a
commercial
advantage.
By
the
way,
this
Roman
civil
law
was
referred
to
as
"Black
Letter
Law."/18
To
see
how
this
law
is
acknowledged,
look
up
the
books
in
which
your
state's
Constitution
and
Statutes
are
published.
What
many
have
found
is
that
the
titles
to
the
first
volumes,
that
cover
the
Declaration
of
Independence
and
the
U.S.
Constitution
and
the
state's
Constitution,
are
printed
differently
than
the
titles
to
the
volumes
that
cover
the
consolidated
Statutes
and
Codes
of
the
state.
We
are
aware
that
in
many
states
(possibly
all)
you
will
find
the
titles
to
the
volumes
that
begin
the
state
Statutes
will
be
printed
in
black
gothic
letters.
This
confirms
the
fact
the
"black
letter
law"
-
Roman
civil
law
-
is
the
basis
of
state
Statutes
that
dictate
public
municipal
policy
via
private
laws
of
the
trust.
It
was
this
Roman
civil
law
that
had
taken
over
all
Europe
and
England
and
our
founding
fathers
wanted
nothing
of
it
in
the
"commercial
law
system
of
the
American
states."
It
represented
to
them
the
most
insidious
form
of
slavery
of
both
body
and
mind,
that
is,
slavery
by
entrapment
through
one-sided
or
implied
contracts
the
individual
never
was
aware
he
was
getting
into
until
he
was
hit
with
compelled
performance.
Thomas
Jefferson
expressed
this
disdain
of
Roman
civil
law
being
introduced
into
English
common
law
in
1760
by
Lord
Mansfield./19
In
fact,
it
was
this
decision
that
sparked
the
American
revolution.
After
this
date,
Jefferson
wanted
nothing
to
do
with
the
common
law
of
England
because
of
the
way
it
had
been
polluted
with
Roman
civil
(ecclesiastical)
law
by
Mansfield./20
In
a
letter
to
Dr.
Thomas
Cooper
in
1814,
Jefferson
goes
into
minute
detail
to
show
how
the
private
ecclesiastical
law
[Roman
civil
law]
got
mixed
with
the
common
law
of
England.
He
outlines
the
fact
that
the
common
law
was
in
England
200
years
before
Christianity.
In
describing
when
Christianity
was
possibly
included
into
the
common
law,
Jefferson
said:
"If
it
ever
was
adopted,
therefore,
into
the
common
law,
it
must
have
been
between
the
introduction
of
Christianity
and
the
date
of
the
Magna
Carta.
But
of
the
law
of
this
period
we
have
a
tolerable
collection
by
Lambard
and
Wilkins,
...
But
none
of
these
adopt
Christianity
as
a
part
of
the
common
law."/21
Yet
the
common
law
of
England
did
become
polluted
with
the
compelled
performance
of
private
church
law
and
Jefferson's
understanding
of
the
problem
marked
out
the
path
for
the
new
commercial
system
of
the
American
states
to
be
protected
from
the
slavery
of
ecclesiastical
authority
dictating
public
commercial
law
(policy).
In
truth,
the
alliance
between
Church
and
State
in
England
has
never
made
their
judges
accomplices
in
the
frauds
of
the
clergy;
and
even
bolder
than
they
are.
For
instead
of
being
contented
with
these
four
surreptitious
chapters
of
Exodus,
they
have
taken
the
whole
leap,
and
declared
at
once
that
the
whole
Bible
and
Testament
in
a
lump,
make
a
part
of
the
common
law;
...
And
thus
they
incorporate
into
the
English
code,
laws
made
for
Jews
alone,
and
the
precepts
of
the
Gospel,
intended
by
their
benevolent
Author
as
obligatory
only
for
their
conscience;
and
they
arm
the
whole
with
the
coercions
of
municipal
law.
In
doing
this,
too,
they
have
not
even
used
the
Connecticut
caution
of
declaring,
as
is
done
in
their
blue
laws,
that
the
laws
of
God
shall
be
the
laws
of
their
land,
except
where
their
own
contradict
them;/22
Unfortunately,
because
Jefferson
saw
the
tyranny
of
private
ecclesiastical
law
dictating
public
commercial
policy
and
compelled
performance,
he
was
attacked
by
the
"do
gooders"
as
being
a
heretic.
In
reality,
he
saw
so
clearly
the
need
for
separation
of
powers
and
how
Public
Law
would
be
vital
for
private
use
to
protect
individual
rights
of
the
minority.
Thus
he
stood
vehemently
on
the
ground
that
private
law
has
absolutely
no
place
in
dictating,
public
policy.
Those
who
opposed
his
views
totally
missed
his
solid
Christian
principles
based
on
liberty
of
conscience."The
common
law
protects
both
opinions
[both
his
and
theirs],
but
enacts
neither
into
law."
Those
that
did
not
thoroughly
understand
this
were
the
first
to
promote
their
private
conscience
(religious)
opinions
into
Public
Law
(policy)
-
the
rope
of
compelled
performance
hanging
us
today.
"All
honor
to
Jefferson
-
to
the
man
who,
in
the
concrete
pressure
of
a
struggle
for
national
independence
by
a
single
people,
had
the
coolness,
forecast,
and
capacity
to
introduce
into
a
merely
revolutionary
document,
an
abstract
truth,
and
so
to
embalm
it
there,
that
today
and
in
all
coming
days,
it
shall
be
a
rebuke
and
a
stumbling
block
to
the
very
harbingers
of
reappearing
tyranny
and
oppression."/23
One
of
the
most
important
aspects
of
the
common
law
before
1760
was
that
it
did
not
recognize
unilateral
contracts
where
there
was
no
full
disclosure
and
no
meeting
of
the
minds.
The
right
to
the
private
law
of
contracting
was
basic
to
the
common
law.
However,
those
common
law
contracts
always
meant
that
all
parties
involved
understood
all
the
facts
and
clauses
and
all
parties
had
to
agree
by
endorsement
in
order
for
the
contract
to
be
valid.
Everything
was
spelled
out.
No
hidden
implications
or
strings
attached.
Roman
civil
law
relies
entirely
on
unilateral
or
implied
contracts.
This
is
where
one
party
agrees
by
the
simple
act
of
accepting
a
benefit(s)
the
civil
government
has
to
offer.
In
other
words,
the
individual
has
something
offered
to
him
that
he
accepts
-
usually
an
economic
or
mercantile
benefit.
The
act
of
acceptance,
with
or
without
a
signature
of
acceptance,
comes
with
strings
of
compelled
performance
attached.
This
is
because
the
very
act
of
voluntary
acceptance
(by
your
silence)
implied
your
endorsement.
The
implied
endorsement
creates
a
constructive
trust/24
arrangement
with
the
civil
government
for
your
assumed
benefit.
This
means
the
trust
becomes
the
third
party
who
can
dictate
the
Statutes,
Codes
and
laws
by
its
legislature
and
we
are
compelled
to
align
our
lives
with
them,
because
of
our
silent
volunteering.
After
accepting
some
benefit
under
Roman
civil
law
and
you
discover
the
hidden
strings
that
you
do
not
like,
too
bad,
you
are
bound
to
perform
or
suffer
the
consequence
of
those
holding
the
strings.
If
you
wrong
the
trust
that
you
are
involved
with,
you
are
assumed
guilty
and
the
burden
of
proof
is
up
to
you
to
clear
yourself.
Your
job,
under
the
Roman
civil
law,
is
to
jump
even
when
you
didn't
have
to.
Their
job
-
the
civil
administrator
and
their
courts
-
is
to
tell
you
how
high.
The
Roman
civil
law
is
a
perversion
of
private
conscience
law
because
it
is
placing
the
private
conscience
of
one
or
a
few
over
the
private
consciences
of
the
masses.
And
it
is
done
without
full
disclosure
of
bilateral
contracts.
This
allows
government
to
always
become
a
superior
entity
to
the
citizen
by
binding
him
in
constructive
trust
arrangements.
This
is
why
there
is
no
separation
of
power,
only
one
power
and
that
is
government.
The
people
are
subservient
because
they
are
involved
in
a
constructive
trust
that
controls
their
conscience
and
they
are
not
even
aware
of
it.
Take
a
look
at
the
illustration
of
"The
Great
Seal
Of
The
State
Of
California."
This
seal
is
a
dramatic
representation
of
how
the
Roman
civil
law
is
the
basis
of
the
franchise
of
the
"several
states
of
the
union"
granted
by
the
people
of
the
Republic.
Each
state
has
its
own
corporate
seal
and
most
use
much
of
the
same
symbolism.
Remember,
under
Roman
civil
law
the
corporate
state
is
a
diocese
of
the
National
Church
of
the
14th
Amendment
trust.
Note
first
the
seal
contains
a
woman
seated
on
a
rock
wearing
a
Roman
military
uniform
holding
both
a
shield
and
spear.
This
woman
is
the
Goddess
Minerva/25
from
Roman
mythology.
This
represents
the
authority
of
the
Roman
civil
law
founded
on
the
rock
(church)
of
private
law
of
the
woman
(or
law