Today’s Church Would Say “Nyet” to Black Robed Regiment

By Al Benson Jr.

Recently I watched a You Tube video presentation by Pastor Dan Fisher of Yukon, Oklahoma on a group of pastors during our First War for Independence (the second one was fought from 1861-65 and still continues culturally) which the British dubbed “the Black Robed Regiment.” Pastor Fisher has also written a book dealing with this, Bringing Back the Black Robed Regiment.

Larry Pratt, the head of Gun Owners of America (an organization I support) wrote an article about this in July of 2014 that appeared on http://www.freedomoutpost.com and he described the Black Robed Regiment as “patriot preachers of the 18th Century, who led their congregations to battle the abusive tyranny of the Redcoats.” Can you even picture such a thing today, given the condition of most of our churches? It’s difficult.

We’ve been told for years that “religion and politics don’t mix and they are the two things you never talk about.” I can remember hearing this at home as a kid. It was the prevailing theology in most of the country in the late 1940s and 50s when I grew up, and although that has changed somewhat, the results, due to historical ignorance, have been mixed.

Larry Pratt noted in his article that “The Founding Fathers explicitly believed that politics and religion had to be mixed. How fitting that the ‘shot heard round the world’ was fired in front of Jonas Clark’s church on the Lexington green. During the battle, men went back and forth from the church to get ammo, because that’s where their powder and ball were stored. A nineteenth-century historian, John Adams, said that freedom was not born a bastard. Freedom was birthed when church and state were still married. A British writer, Horace Walpole, said at the time, ‘America has run off with a Presblyterian Parson’.” Quite a few Presbyterian pastors were involved in the First War of Independence, but then so were Lutheran, Baptist, Congregational, and other pastors also. Pastors in that day seem to have had a vision that has been lost in our day.

Dan Fisher has argued, and I have to agree with him, that politics is dirty today and one of the main reasons is that Christians have removed themselves from participation for the most part. Oh, they’ll do their “patriotic” duty and go vote, but they will not take the time to study the issues and do any homework on the personalities involved because, after all, politics is “of the world.” Sorry folks, I have to disagree. It’s “of the world” because Christians have allowed it to get there by default. Pastor Fisher feels that pastors “should teach about biblical principles of liberty and government—indeed about all of life—so their congregants will have a template to use with politicians. Failure to do so today, he says, has resulted in many Christians voting wrong.”

Larry Pratt made an interesting statement. He said “Now, more than ever the people are responsible for the character of their Congress. If that body is ignorant, reckless, and corrupt, it is because the people tolerate ignorance, recklessness, and corruption…” And we must tolerate it, Christians included. Look what we’ve elected to office in the past decades! How many recent presidents have claimed to be “Christian” and Christians have voted for them without bothering to try to find out anything about their backgrounds or what organizations they belong to or any of it. We just take their word and then when the govern like heathens the Christians are shocked. Well, duh—. You still don’t get it! And now the current crop of political “conservatives” are all running to sign up for the 2016 presidential race and all claiming to be “Christian.” It’s all a farce. Any candidate who gets close to the White House will have to have the approval of the CFR and the Bilderbergers, no matter which party he, or she, or it, is in.

I read another article about the Black Robed Regiment, published in the January/February 2011 issue of http://www.libertymagazine.org and written by Gregory W. Hamilton that seemed to view the Black Robed Regiment with kind of mixed feelings. Mr. Hamilton noted that the Black Robed Regiment preachers were “spiritual leaders who had largely strayed from the reform principles of the First Great Awakening. A goodly number of the preachers who participated and led during that First Great Awakening were influenced by the Scottish, English, and French Enlightenments. They opposed some of their colleagues’ fundamentalist approach to Christianity and a brash and brazen involvement in political matters. Some of these Great Awakening preachers…had some considerable influence on the thinking of many of the constitutional founders, who were ‘enlightened’ thinkers as well. They, along with the founders, wanted to dismantle church establishments and see an increased separation between church and state therefore realized.” Seems like he’s telling us that many of our “constitutional founders” were, in some measure, products of the Enlightenment. Folks, I submit that this is not good news.

But then Hamilton said: “The Black Robed Preachers, on the other hand, were, for the most part, not supportive of this new wave of so-called ‘Enlightenmet’ thinking and wanted a return to Puritan values and the preservation and strengthening of religious and church establishments through state legislative means, including the continued taxation of the public for their support.” Now there’s a slight rub here. I can agree with resistance to Enlightenment thinking. That kind of mindset has done us no favors, but I don’t necessarily agree with the state financing the church. The state should be influenced by the church but it should not finance it. For it is an old truth that what government pays for it eventually controls.

Then Hamilton made an interesting statement. I don’t know if he’s accurate here or not, but he stated: “Few realize today that these so-called black-robed radicals fought ratification of the Constitution in every state and were thus one reason, among many other factors, that Jay, Hamilton, and Madison wrote the Federalist Papers—to make sure it was ratified.” I had not been aware that the Black Robed Regiment had opposed ratification of the Constitution. Their taking that position must have meant that they understood something that many, or most, other folks did not. If the constitutional thinkers had been influenced by the Enlightenment, then how much of that influence crept into the Constitution? That might be a subject worth studying at some point.

David Alan Black has written on http://www.daveblackonline.com that: “…we need pastors who are willing to join today’s ‘Black Regiment.’ The Black Regiment was a group of clergy who were fierce opponents of British tyranny and a driving force in the decision of the colonies to seek independence. King George had provoked many of these men to leave England by demanding that they submit to licensing by the crown. He called them the Black Regiment because of the black robes they wore when preaching. These men staunchly opposed the divine right of kings. Their cry was, ‘Restore the crown rights of King Jesus!’”

And a final thought for those that insist the religion be kept out of politics, if you understand the sovereignty of God then you have to understand the God is concerned with what goes on in all areas of life—religion, politics, culture, education, art, whatever it is. God, as creator of the universe and of man, is concerned with it all and He is concerned with what man does with it all. There are not certain areas that are “sacred” while the rest is “secular.” To God it is all sacred and His Word teaches us how to deal with all of it—if we are willing to pay attention.

It is to our detriment today that so many churches suffer from the 501c3 syndrome which renders them incapable of saying anything about our miserable political situation—a situation that will only get worse the longer the church remains silent.

Please Don’t Awaken the Sleeping Church

By Al Benson Jr.

Recently on http://www.thedailybeast.com I read an article entitled: A Global Slaughter of Christians, but America’s Churches Stay Silent. It was written by a Kirsten Powers. I don’t know anything about this lady but she did posit some thoughts that American Christians should be thinking about and probably haven’t a clue about.

Anyone who has read my material in recent years realizes that I have grave questions about what the Church in this country is doing (and isn’t doing). The Church today seems to be submerged in what I would call a wait for the rapture, just be nice, the Lord’s in control and so we do nothing theology. That’s about the briefest way I can describe it and keep it civil.

Powers states in her article: “Christians in the Middle East and Africa are being slaughtered, tortured, raped, kidnapped, beheaded, and forced to flee the birthplace of Christianity. One would think this horror might be consuming the pulpits and pews of American churches. Not so. The silence has been nearly deafening.” She noted further down in the article an event that took place in Nairobi, Kenya that killed more than 70 people. She said: “The Associated Press reported that the Somali Islamic militant group al-Shabab ‘confirmed witness accounts that gunmen separated Muslims from other people and let the Muslims go free.’ The captives were asked questions about Islam. If they couldn’t answer, they were shot…In Syria, Christians are under attack by Islamist rebels and fear extinction if Bashar al-Assad falls.” It’s interesting that weve been told what a bad guy Assad in Syria is and yet Christians, it seems, have been safe under his government and they realize that if he goes, then their safety net is gone.

It’s the same game they played in Iraq a couple decades ago. We were all told what a scumbag Saddam Hussein was, and I will agree, he was no Sunday school teacher, but yet under his regime, Christians in Iraq were left alone. You can’t say that has been the case since. Christians in Iraq now are an endangered species. I find it interesting that in these instances, regimes that have not harassed Christians are the ones that our government has targeted. Any pattern here?

Powers has observed that: “American Christians are quite able to organize around issues that concern them. Yet religious persecution appears not to have grabbed their attention, despite worldwide media coverage of the atrocities against Christians and other religious minorities in the Middle East.”

So what’s the problem with America’s churches? And what “issues” do they organize around that are so important that they easily overlook what happens to their brethren in other areas? Some organize to combat abortion. That’s good. No problem there except that not enough are doing it and not enough are concerned.

I am a Reformed Christian and so I expect I will make some folks mad with my comments, but I feel I have to say what I am saying here. This is a subject I have struggled with. Many churches and Christians today, and for over a century have been caught up in what I call “the rapture cult” (there was a book written by that same name around 30 years ago). The main idea is that the Lord could come back anytime now and so why be involved in anything political, educational, or culture changing because we won’t be here anyway—so just sit back and do nothing and don’t worry about it. You have to wonder where the rapture was for those poor folks getting slaughtered in the Middle East, or for all the martyrs over the centuries that have died for their faith, some of which are still dying for it. It almost seems that this rapture concept was invented for American Christians to keep them on the couch, and therefore doing nothing. Now understand, when I question the “rapture cult” I am not questioning the Lord’s second coming. Scripture says He will return and I believe that. I just don’t think it will happen in the next ten minutes like some of these folks do. Their belief in this neutralizes them.

Then there are the “just be nice” folks who don’t want to offend anyone, anywhere, at anytime and to call sin by its real name they’d have to do that, and so they don’t—anytime. Now admittedly, Christians shouldn’t run around trying to be ornery, but stop and think a bit. Obviously Jesus “offended” the Jewish religious establishment or they would not have schemed to get the Romans to nail Him to the cross. If you read the Gospels, Jesus spent quite a bit of time offending the Jewish religious establishment—and He did it not only by healing and helping people, often on the Sabbath, but He did it by telling that establishment the truth about Himself. They weren’t having any of that. Three years after He started His ministry they proved it. And they continued to prove it all the way through the Book of Acts if you care to read about it. Jesus told them that their religious establishment had become apostate and revolutionary and that He had come to inaugurate God’s Kingdom and do away with their religious establishment and that really ticked them off. It ticks off some Christians today, too, who feel that Christians ought to support political Zionism no matter what. This is a complicated subject and I will try to do another article on it later.

And, last but not least, at least for me, come the folks, many of them Reformed, who say “The Lord’s in control of it all, so why worry or get upset, just let Him take care of it all.” Again, let me state that I have never said the Lord wasn’t in control of all things. I don’t doubt He is, but, again, lots of folks use this as an excuse for doing nothing. If the Lord’s in control then He will sort it all out and I don’t have to do anything except go along for the ride. Another great neutralizer! The Lord’s in control, therefore, I don’t gotta do nothin’. I’ve talked with some of these folks and put forth the novel concept that, while the Lord is in control, maybe, just maybe, He wants to exercise some of that control through His people. That doesn’t go over real well. They don’t like that idea anymore than the Pharisees liked the idea of Jesus healing someone on the Sabbath.

I recently heard a minister say that maybe God is allowing Islam to do what it’s doing in this country and in Europe because the church is basically asleep, or so concerned about non-essential issues that it doesn’t have any time for what’s important. That might explain the great big yawn American Christians give when they hear about horrendous atrocities being committed against their brethren in the Middle East and Africa.

Somehow, American Christians seem to have been neutralized to the point where they really think “it can’t happen here.” They don’t realize that as long as they sit and do nothing about anything it will happen here and is happening while they enjoy spiritual slumber.

Between the Scofield Bible Notes, bland evangelicalism, and unconcerned “Reformers” the Church is in serious trouble in this country and in others as well.

Spiritualists, Abolitionists, and Socialists—An unholy trinity

By Al Benson Jr.

Contrary to the politically correct of our era, there are some things the Lord sees as an abomination besides the supposed sin of “white racism.” Deuteronomy 18:10-12 gives us a small sampling. Scripture says: “There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter or a witch, Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer. For all that do these things are an abomination unto the Lord: and because of these abominations the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee.”

An Encyclopedia of Religion published by the Philosophical Library in New York in 1945 says of Spiritualism that it is: “A religious-philosophical cult which is given to the study of psychic phenomena and which holds that these are to be explained in terms of discarnate spirits who have a lively interest in the living. Spiritualism was formerly inaugurated (at least in this country) in 1848,…” In 1848, gee, what a surprise! It seems that 1848 was a banner year for all sorts of apostate goings on, from the socialist revolts in Europe that gave us “Lincoln’s Marxists” to the advent of Spiritualism here. Don’t supposed there are any connections do you? Naw, all sheer coincidence—nothing to see here folks, just move along.

I recently came across an interesting site on the Internet (another reason it has to be “regulated” for our own safety and good) called http://www.alternatehistory.com that gives a brief overview of Spiritualism for many of the years in the 19th century. For 1848 it states: “Failed revolutions in Germany and other parts of Europe. The 48’ers, as they are called, are settlers from Germany across the Mid-west. Mostly leftist in their views, some out right Communist, they are open to conversion to the Spiritualist movement, except for the extreme Communists who view all religious ideas as evil. In 1860, they will vote for Lincoln and, some say, turn Iowa, Illinois and Indiana from Douglas to Lincoln, winning the election for him.” Then they go on to 1858: “The Spiritualists support Lincoln in the state election, although he still loses. It is greatly rumored, correctly, that Lincoln is a member of the Spiritualists. Most Abolitionists are Spiritualists, or share some views with them. Mainstream Churches have begun to be influenced by the Spiritualists, mostly in ideas of Mediumship…1859—Spiritualist John Brown leads a revolt of slaves at Harper’s Ferry. It fails.” Brown was an abolitionist/terrorist, but I’ve never heard of him being a Spiritualist up to this point. But the article continues: “1860—American Civil War. Volunteers from the Midwest introduce ideas of Spiritualism to other groups of people. 1 out of 4 Union soldiers are foreign born, a majority of which are German Spiritualists. One such German Spiritualist is Charles Schurz.” I think, here, the author must be referring to Carl Schurz because I couldn’t find a Charles Schurz anywhere having to do with that time period. Although I did find one reference which mentioned that he had a sister in Chicago that was into Spiritualism. And in researching for this article I came across a book, The Psychic Life of Abraham Lincoln written by a Susan B. Martinez, and it listed some of Lincoln’s friends who were Spiritualists—and on the list were Robert Dale Owen, Harriet Beecher Stowe, Frederick Douglas, and Carl Schurz. This is the first I ever heard of Schurz being a Spiritualist—if this is accurate. When Donnie Kennedy and I did our research for Lincoln’s Marxists we came across a ton of information on Carl Schurz. We still have it, filed along with documentation on all the 48’ers we wrote about in our book, and I don’t recall seeing anything about Schurz having a connection with Spiritualism. Author Ann Braude in her book Radical Spirits doesn’t mention Carl Schurz either, and she pretty well covered the Spiritualist Movement in this country during the 19th century—from a positive viewpoint.

Braude noted that: “Radical abolitionists, in turn, found in Spiritualism a religion in harmony with their individualist principles. Abolitionist’s interest in both woman’s rights and Spiritualism derived from their fierce loyalty to the principle of individualism.” This goes along with what I stated about the Abolitionists in an earlier article, that they had an agenda that encompassed far more than the slavery issue. They were, in fact, the change agents of the 19th century. And Braude observed, on page 27 of her book: “As already noted, abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison was an early convert and remained loyal to the movement until his death. The famous Grimke sisters, Sarah and Angelina, talked to spirits…Mary Todd Lincoln spoke with her dead son, Willie, and brought mediums into the White House, where they conducted séances for senators and cabinet members.” And Lydia Maria Child wrote in 1862 that “Spiritualism is undermining the authority of the Bible in the minds of what are called the common people faster than all other causes put together.” That also from Braude’s book on page 28. Take a look at what Child was saying. The aim of Spiritualism was to undermine the authority of Scripture. The Abolitionists often did the same thing and the Socialists had this as a main part of their agenda. If you don’t think so, then read The Communist Manifesto.

If you look at all of this together, it would seem that the Confederacy was combating much more than just the Union armies, as bad as they were. There were spiritual issues involved in the War of Northern Aggression that are never brought up in the “history” books. All they ever prattle about is the slavery issue and the Abolitionist’s own leaders admit that, over and above that, they had other agendas in mind, some closely paralleling those of the Marxists.

The “late unpleasantness” was, at its core, a war of theologies every bit as much as one of economic issues. And because it was a theological war it was also a culture war—and this is why it has never really ended for the Yankee/Marxist mindset—they only told us it did, and unfortunately, we took their word for it.

We have got to get it through our heads that “those people” are still at war with us and they will be until they manage to destroy our culture, with its Christian roots, and our heritage. Folks, we have got to learn to start fighting back and not be content to just lay prostrate with the dictator’s boot on our necks. There are some ways you can fight back.

Take your kids out of their propaganda mills and if you can’t afford a good Christian school then teach them at home. It’s not as hard as most of you have been led to believe it is. Start educating yourselves while you still have the Internet so you realize what’s going on in the country. That takes a little bit of work but it can be done, and when you do start to learn some truth, put it in letters to the editor of your local paper. They haven’t been totally censored yet. I know lots of folks that write letters to the editor and get them printed. And start seceding from the Sodom on the Potomac culture around you. I realize this all flies in the face of the Reality Show mentality you are bombarded with, but be willing to forego that rather dubious pleasure for the sake of your children and grandchildren because, in the final analysis, you are doing this for them, not yourself. And if you are a Christian, then you should be doing all this to further the Kingdom of God, because, in the end, that is the Kingdom that will triumph and it would be nice to be able to say that, by God’s grace, you had even a small part in that victory.

Republicans No Different In 2015 Than In 1860

By Al Benson Jr.

I continue to be amazed at the number of patriotic and “conservative” sites on the Internet that express shock that the Republican Party seems to be playing along with Comrade Obama’s socialist agenda for this country. They seem to feel that the Republican Party is some great bastion of conservatism that will step up to do battle with the “liberal Democrats” in the name of God and country. Folks, that outdated notion is hogwash. Get over it! It has never been that way and it never will be. The Republican Party is almost as far to the left as today’s Democratic Party is. They are just better at hiding it. This is nothing new.

In our book, Lincoln’s Marxists, Walter D. Kennedy and I noted, on page 48, that: “The very foundation for modern-day liberalism/socialism was laid by the many and various utopian ideologues of the nineteenth century. The fact that these utopian socialists/communists found Abraham Lincoln and the Republican Party to be objects worthy of their zeal and efforts speaks volumes as to why post-Appomattox America has adopted most, if not all of the early American socialist/communist goals. Universal suffrage was a dream of every socialist/communist movement in Europe and America; even Karl Marx spoke in favor of universal suffrage. The same can be said about a progressive income tax, abolition of the rights of inheritance, a system of national education, centralized banking and many other such socialist/communist measures.” And on page 50 we also noted: “The thought of Lincoln as the first American president to have had a communist sympathizer working in a key part of his administration is, and should be, shocking to all Americans. Charles Dana, who visited Marx in 1848, was an associate of Horace Greeley and an early convert to the communistic Fourierist movement. Dana served as assistant secretary of war under Edwin Stanton during the Lincoln administration, thus becoming the first communist, or at least the first communist sympathizer, to serve in a high position within the government of the United States.” And this was in a Republican administration and it was only the beginning. Then there were the socialists, notably Carl Schurz among them, who helped to write the Republican Party Platform in 1860.

There are some who inform us that the Republican Party is the party of small government. Though many of them may be sincere, they are sincerely in error—grave error, and we shouldn’t believe it. Walter Kennedy has also observed, in his recently released book Rekilling Lincoln that: “While often characterized as the homely rail-splitting lawyer from backwoods Illinois, Lincoln was in reality a high-pressure, well-connected corporate lawyer of the largest corporation in America during the early part of the nineteenth century. Although Lincoln is often depicted as a meek and humble friend of the common people and the downtrodden, in actuality Lincoln had a close association with numerous railroad barons. These railroad barons were some of the richest and most powerful men in America at that time.” Both Lincoln and his mentor, Henry Clay, were men who believed in the use of governmental power to protect special industries. And Donnie Kennedy has noted that: “…this system establishes a means whereby well-placed persons could leverage their position in government and finance for personal advantage.” Does that sound any different from today? Republicans and Democrats alike play this game and one hand washes the other.

For those still under the illusion that the Republican Establishment will combat Comrade Obama’s rampant socialism all you have to do to disabuse yourselves of that fantasy is to read an article that appeared on http://townhall.com for March 7, 2015, which was written by John Hawkins. Mr. Hawkins presents some very cogent points folks need to begin to consider. He says: “How do you think Republicans would have done in the 2014 elections if they had told the truth about what they intended to do when they took over the Senate? What if they had campaigned on working hand-in-hand with Obama to enact his illegal alien amnesty while supporting his budget priorities, confirming a new Attorney General who thinks everything Obama is doing is fine and promised they would do nothing while he illegally bans ammo, cripples the Internet, and lets the EPA run wild? Republicans are even gearing up to SAVE OBAMACARE if the Supreme Court guts the subsidies…What’s left unsaid is that he’s only able to do it because Republicans in the House and Senate are standing by impotently and allowing him to do whatever he wants.” Hawkins accuses the Republicans of “rank cowardice” in all their confrontations with Obama. Up to now, he’s called it right, but here I have to disagree with him. It’s not cowardice on their part. The problem is that the Republicans are just as much socialists as Obama is and they really have no problem with any of what he is doing. Doesn’t that thought give you the warm fuzzies? We have a Congress, no matter which party is in power, that really has no problem with socialism and they will do whatever it takes to protect Obama’s socialist agenda, all the while loudly complaining about how much they are opposed to it. Socialist Party A and Socialist Party B, your names are really Republican and Democrat, and you both work together to give this country the socialism most of us don’t want—but we’ll get it from you anyway, no matter the party label.

The legislative branch of government has sold out to the executive branch, and all of this will soon be “legitimized” by the judicial branch when they again okay Obamacare as they have done in the past, and again, the supposed system of “checks and balances” we are supposed to have with the Constitution has gone by the boards. It has gone by the boards so much in my lifetime I am beginning to wonder if it really ever existed except on paper.

We have got to begin to rethink the fable that the Republican and Democratic Parties are different than one another, that they have different worldviews and goals. It just ain’t so. They both have a One World socialist viewpoint and that’s where they are both trying to take us. You can’t depend on the Republican Party or its minions to combat Obama’s socialism/Marxism. The Republican Party exists to lead you into it without your being aware of it.

Thanks to our government “education system” the average American citizen is being rendered unfit to govern himself and he is being recreated as nothing more than a mindless zombie who is just one more cog in the government/socialist wheel. And as long as you continue to “educate” your kids in this system all you are doing is helping them to create junior socialist cogs for their One World wheel. We have got to start thinking outside of that box. We don’t have much time left. Maybe we had best start asking the Lord to remove the scales from our eyes so we can begin to see what we need to do.

The Guilt Complex Industry

by Al Benson Jr.

Marxist Cultural Genocide takes many forms, everything from destroying the cultural symbols of a people to making them feel guilty about who they are, making them ashamed to be what they are so they long to be something else.

Ever since the supposed end of the War of Northern Aggression (it never truly ended because it was a culture war) in 1865 it has been the main chore of the Yankee/Marxist propaganda mills to make sure the Southern people never felt good enough about themselves or their Cause that they would stand up and defend either their Cause or themselves. These subversive tactics ranged everywhere (and they are blatantly apparent in our day) from the removal of Confederate flags, statues and even street and park names to trying to make Southern folks feel guilty about their Southern accents. I think I’ve mentioned this before, but I once talked to a couple of nurses in a doctor’s office I visited. They noted the difference between my accent and theirs and they told me “we sound stupid.” I tried to disabuse them of such foolishness and asked them right out “who told you that you sound stupid?” No reply, but they were convinced that their Southern accents made them sound dumb, ignorant, or whatever and I could not convince them otherwise.

They even have courses in some colleges to help Southern young folks “get rid” of their Southern accents and sound just like those cookie-cutter models you see on the network “news” programs. Yuk!!! Give me a good Southern accent anytime! I guess one way to promote egalitarianism is to try to make everyone sound alike. Again, yuk! No matter what noble sounding reasons they attempt to give for this kind of thing, it is still cultural genocide. You are consciously tearing down Southern cultures and speech patterns and what are you replacing them with–a New Jersey accent? Heaven help us!

I’ve been watching much of what has gone on in Lexington and Charlottesville, Virginia recently, where Confederate flags are being removed, not allowed to fly anywhere except maybe on one day a year, or where holidays commemorating Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson are being “removed” so they are no longer celebrated–but you’ll notice they are quick to celebrate Martin Luther King day or Black History month. You have to wonder in these towns what holiday will replace Lee-Jackson Day, the celebration of Che Guevarra’s birthday maybe or Fred Shuttlesworth Day? If you don’t know who these last two names are, look them up while you can still find them on the Internet, before it is “neutralized.”

One major thing guaranteed to make Southern folks ashamed of who they are is the slavery question. This has been trotted out for so long by so many that it has finally gotten old. Southerners are constantly having the slavery issue thrown in their faces. Like they never had slaves in the North? Again, do a little homework. There is still evidence on the Internet (though it may disappear shortly) that shows that slavery was a going concern in the North. Most of you have probably heard of the state of Rhode Island, but how many of you know the full name of the state? It is the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. Want three guesses as to why they named it that? Anyone that informs you that they never had any slaves in the North really hopes you are dumb, and if you are that dumb, maybe he can sell you a gold brick–genuine gold at bargain basement rates! Just give him your bank account number and he’ll deposit it in your account immediately if not sooner. The major difference between slavery in the North and in the South was that the Northern folks did away with it a few years earlier than the South did. And many Northerners that had slaves sold them South and after they’d got paid for them, told Southern folks that having those slaves was a sin and they should get rid of them. If it had been such a sin then why didn’t the Northerners emancipate them instead of selling them? You see, guilt often depends on whose ox gets gored (or who makes the profit).

One way the Yankee/Marxists have been able to instill guilt into Southern folks is via the public school system. You train three or four generations of public school kids with the idea that what their ancestors fought for was inherently evil and eventually, believe it or not, you are going to come up with a batch of kids that really believes that, and they end up feeling guilty because of who they are and not because of anything they ever did. I recall talking to a pastor once who told me that “after the War Between the States the South was the most heavily brainwashed part of the country.” He was right. Having lived down here for several years (and even before that) I have seen examples of it. Iv’e met Southerners who feel so much guilt over being born in the South that they feel this compelling need to atone for that sin by embracing Abraham Lincoln and the Union flag and denouncing as traitors anyone who will not do that. Someone from Georgia did that to me once and I replied with Patrick Henry’s famous quote “If this be treason then make the most of it.” I found it ironic that he, born and raised in the South felt the compelling need to wrap himself in Lincoln and his collectivist cause while I, born and raised in the North, felt, in the words of my friend, Donnie Kennedy that “the South was right.”

This kind of cultural genocide continues today, even as I write this. There are Marxist mentalities in Washington, New York, and other environs around the country that are working overtime to destroy the culture of the South, a culture more biblically based than anything they ever grew up in. I have long contended that the Christian base of Southern culture is really what they are trying to destroy. I haven’t yet seen anything to make me change my mind. The Christian faith is really hated by those people and those people actively work at trying to destroy it.

The Cultural Genocide Marxists are at war with the Christian faith and it’s time more of the Christians woke up and realized that.

“Socialist Feminism”

by Al Benson Jr.

At present, I am working my way through an excellent book written by Stanley Kurtz back in 2010 and entitled Radical-In-Chief. It is a history of the deep socialist background of the present occupier of the White House and it is available on Amazon.com

I will have more to say about Mr. Kurtz’s book in future articles because he brings out an amazing amount of documentation about the “stealth socialist” movement in this country, in which our president has been and is a major player.

On page 140 of his book, Kurtz deals with something called “Socialist Feminism” and he goes on to show that socialism has been a major part of the Feminist Movement in the 1970s. He notes: “Yet Heather Booth’s chief efforts in 1971 were devoted to organizing for socialist feminism. Booth and her early collaborator at the Midwest Academy, Day Creamer, were involved in both the Chicago Women’s Liberation Union (CWLU) and the Action Committee for Decent Childcare. The juxtaposition of the explicitly socialist CWLU and the less ideological daycare project–open to all women, not just committed socialists– exemplifies the strategy Booth and her collaborators had laid out in 1969’s Socialism and the Coming Decade, in which small, consciously socialist groups quietly build and guide less openly ideological mass movements. Booth’s developing ideological and strategic perspective is presented in her 1971 pamphlet, written with Day Creamer and a small group of others, Socialist Feminism: A Strategy for the Women’s Movement. This pamphlet was reprinted by the Midwest Academy ‘for historical purposes,’ and was sometimes used in the Academy’s training sessions.” So you can see here, in recent times, the socialist involvement in the Feminist Movement. Sadly, this is not a new development.

In our book Lincoln’s Marxists Walter Kennedy and I deal with the Feminist Movement in this country, and in Europe, in Addendum 3, on page 307, in a section called Feminists and Forty Eighters, which was originally published in my quarterly newsletter The Copperhead Chronicle back in the fourth quarter of 2006. We observed: “Modern historians with what appears to be a selective historical bias seldom examine or mention the close connections between individuals with strong communist connections and other left of center personalities. For example the outright influence of communists in the Roosevelt administration was seldom brought to light until well after his death. Likewise, the connection between socialists and outright communists and the founding of the Republican Party, or the connection between the radical feminists and the Forty Eighters in Europe is seldom if ever reported. Radical Feminism was not something new in France and Germany during the turbulent years of the 1848 socialist revolts in Europe. When the socialist (it should be noted that the terms socialist and communist were equivalent at that time) revolutions erupted in Europe in 1848, the majority of the feminists supported and otherwise aided those revolutions. Many of these women were supporters of St. Simon and Charles Fourier, both of whom were well known for their socialist philosophies.” The article then goes on to name names. Some of them you may have heard of, such as Margaretta Meyer Schurz, the wife of the well known Forty Eighter Carl Schurz who became the Secretary of the Interior during the Hayes administration. Mrs. Schurz established the first kindergarten in this country at Watertown, Wisconsin in 1856. Interestingly enough, the government in Prussia, only two years after the socialist revolts in that country had ended, outlawed kindergartens. The Prussian government was on record as viewing these schools as places of radical indoctrination for children. Given what goes on in public schools nowadays, can one really say they were wrong? Or were they remarkably prescient?

In her book Freethinkers–A History of American Secularism Susan Jacoby notes another well known feminist, “Red Emma” Goldman. She says: “At the same time there was a politically radical agnostic minority supported by European Marxist, socialist and anarchist thought and quite willing to challenge American institutions. ‘Red Emma’ Goldman was the most fiery, persuasive, and visible representative of that minority, an outspoken atheist and feminist as well as an anarchist’…Another early “Women’s Libber” over on the left! Goldman had a strong influence on Margaret Sanger, although it’s not known if Sanger ever openly acknowledged her leftist indoctrination from “Red Emma.” Sanger is reported to have been the one that invented the term “birth control.”

Back in 2003, Henry Makow, Ph.D. wrote an article that appeared on http://www.savethemales.ca called Betty Friedan: Mommy was a Commie. In part, Dr. Makow stated: “Betty Friedan, the ‘founder of modern feminism’ pretended to be a typical 1950s American mother who had a ‘revelation’ that women like her were exploited and should seek independence and self-fulfillment in career. What Friedan (nee: Betty Naomi Goldstein) didn’t say is that she had been a Communist propagandist since her student days at Smith College (1938-1942) and that the destruction of the family has always been central to the Communist plan for world government…Friedan dropped out of grad school to become a reporter for a Communist news service. From 1946-1952 she worked for the newspaper of the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America, (UE) ‘the largest Communist-led institution of any kind in the United States.’ In 1947, Congress targeted the UE as a Communist front and its membership began a steady decline.” This is hardly the background for most ordinary 1950s mothers. Friedan obviously did not want lots of folks to be aware of her radical leftist past. If they had been, her book The Feminist Mystique might not have sold over five million copies. One has to wonder, seeing that the Communists are opposed to filthy rich “capitalists” making all manner of filthy lucre, who got the royalties from five million copies of Friedan’s book? Did she donate it all to the Communist Party USA? Actually, the Communists don’t really have a big problem with profit–as long as it’s their people making it and not the rest of us.

It’s important that we realize that the Feminist Movement, the Women’s Liberation Movement, or whatever brand of feminism you happen to run across swimming in your soup, is all steeped in socialism, communism, or some other brand of aberrant leftism. They are not, nor have they ever been, really concerned about helping women–they are concerned about helping their women into positions of power and influence here and around the world, so they can help to shape the socialist agenda in various countries, and tell the rest of us how we should live. They are interested, and have a vested interest in tearing down every Biblical truth regarding women and replacing it with their socialist dogma and rules. That’s something Christians need to become aware of because, today, not nearly enough are.

There Is Nothing New In Unbelief–Part Two

by Al Benson Jr.

Then, there was the article from the gentleman in Oklahoma. It had originally been published in the Civil War Times Illustrated  in August of 1976. It was authored by Peggy Robbins and was entitled The Lincoln’s and Spiritualism.  According to Robbins, spiritualism began to gain a foothold in this country in 1848.  Interesting coincidence–socialist revolution in Europe in 1848, spiritualism in the United States the same year. The shooting part of our revolution was not to come for another twelve years, but the spiritual part was already in progress. Unfortunately most Christians in the North were too busy sending their children off to the Unitarian public school system to be “educated” to notice.

Robbins reported that during 1862 Mrs. Lincoln was involved with a number of mediums, some of whom were just out and out fakes. Historians have disagreed as to whether Lincoln, himself,  believed in spiritualism, because, pragmatic politician that he was, he never gave any of those who inquired into his beliefs on this question a straight answer.  However, in 1861, he did listen to a “lengthy dissertation on spiritualism” by none other than Robert Dale Owen. You’ve all heard that name before, and his father’s name as well. This is the same Robert Dale Owen that gave professional South-hater Thaddeus Stevens quite a bit of input into the drafting of the 14th Amendment. A spiritualist seeking to influence the 14th Amendment–bet your “history” books never passed that bit of info along to you. Robbins’ article labeled Owen as a “distinguished author.” The only thing I have read about Mr. Owen being distinguished in was his penchant for socialism, and spiritualism. Socialist that he was, Owen seems to have had contact with the big wigs in Washington. That may tell you a little about the elite in Washington.and where they were coming from, even during the so-called “good old days.”

Robbins noted that “There is ample proof that the President did attend a number of seances, but it may be that he did so not as a believer but as a detached observer, there to look after his emotionally overwrought wife.” Robbins mentioned that Lincoln had curiosity about the supernatural because he was superstitious, and had long been subject to visions,dreams, premonitions etc.

One spiritualist the Lincolns received at the White House was a Lord Colchester. It seems that he was allowed to hold several seances on the premises. It also seems, however, that Lord Colchester’s  reputation was somewhat suspect, and a friend of the Lincoln’s Noah Brooks, rather bluntly suggested to him that he “get out of Dodge.”

During the latter part of 1862 Mrs. Lincoln attended several seances held by a Nettie Colburn.  In order to keep Mrs. Colburn close to Washington, Mrs. Lincoln managed to get her a position in the Interior Department.  Colburn held a seance in the White House in December of 1862.

Robbins also noted in her article that “famous psychic investigator A. Conan Doyle, creator of Sherlock Holmes, termed this, the first of a number of meetings between medium Nettie Colburn and President Lincoln one of the most important events in the history of spiritualism.”

One seance held in the White House in April, 1863, was attended by Secretary of War Edwin Stanton and Secretary of the Navy Gideon Wells.  Some of these sessions were actually reported in the newspapers of that time, but interestingly enough,  Lincoln was never criticized for them.  Apostasy must love company.

If Lincoln were the stalwart “Christian” we have been led by so many books to believe he was, would he have allowed either his wife or himself to be drawn into such activities? One can most certainly sympathize with Mrs. Lincoln over the loss of her son. But surely, if her husband were a Christian,  he would have sought some sort of biblical counsel and comfort for his wife rather than allowing her to indulge in spiritualism  and then going along for the ride himself.  In truth, Mr. Lincoln was not a Christian, even his own wife admitted as much.. The book Lincoln’s Marxists deals with Lincoln’s religion, or lack thereof in some detail.

Most of this is not particularly “fun” material to have to pass along to people. However, it is further proof that this country, having abandoned its Reformation foundations, at least in the North, had turned almost completely to apostasy by the time the shooting part of the revolution got under way in 1861.  Apostasy was rampant, from the highest to the lowest stations in society.  The real question is–did we ever really turn from that apostasy? In spite of all the so-called “revivals” since the War Between the States, I think not. Until we turn from it and turn back to the God of the Holy Scriptures, we will continue to go down the tubes.

There Is Nothing New In Unbelief

by Al Benson Jr.

Several years ago, when Ronald Reagan was still in office the spin masters in the “news” media were all agog over stories about Nancy Reagan having consulted an astrologer.  The “news” media picked up that story and ran with it because there were probably some useful idiots in the media that thought Reagan was much more conservative than he really was and this sort of story was their chance to get their leftist licks in at him. So Nancy and her astrologer were headline news for a few days. Christians and conservatives weren’t happy with the revelations, but they should have known.  They goofed with Nixon and didn’t learn anything and mostly they still haven’t based upon what I see going on in the current Republican run for president. You almost wonder if those that direct their attentions would rather have Obama back than a genuine conservative, but I digress.

However, let us not be naive enough to think that Nancy Reagan’s consorting with an astrologer is anything new. Consorting with mediums, astrologers, spiritualists and witches is strictly forbidden in the Old Testament and that prohibition has not changed. It stands today. It stood in the 1800s, when spiritualism  started to become “fashionable” in this country. Spiritualism and these other related activities are the result of apostasy–the result of a people having been exposed to God’s truth and then ignoring or disbelieving it in favor of something more “contemporary.”

I recently did an article on Harriet Beecher Stowe’s adventures into spiritualism.  Several years ago, upon my return from a trip to eastern California and western Arizona, I found in my pile of mail, an article from a man in Oklahoma that dealt with Mary Todd Lincoln’s excursions into this same murky area. The article was informative and, after doing a little research, I found other sources that corroborated the article’s findings.

According to many sources (and there are more now than there were years ago) Mrs. Lincoln was emotionally unstable at times. When her son, Willie, died she struggled with that loss for several years and arrived at the point where she started visiting spiritualists in an effort to contact her dead son.

The book Abraham Lincoln–A Biography by Benjamin P. Thomas (Alfred A. Knopf, N.Y.) recorded a friend of the Lincoln’s writing the following: “Mrs. Lincoln told me she had been, the night before…out to Georgetown, to see a Mrs. Laury, a spiritualist and she had made wonderful revelations to her about her little son, Willie…Among other things she revealed that the cabinet were all enemies of the President, working for themselves, and that they would have to be dismissed and others called to his aid before he had success.” Very interesting, and not totally inaccurate. Makes you wonder where Mrs. Laury got her information.

Another reference, though a short one, referring to Mrs. Lincoln’s dabbling in spiritualism  is found in the book Who Was Who In The Civil War  by Stewart Sifakis.  This large book contains biographical sketches  of most prominent people in the country during the “late unpleasantness” both North and South. In the section on Mary Todd Lincoln it has noted: “The loss of the idolized Willie deeply disturbed her and she refused to enter the room in which he had died and been embalmed. She even held at least one seance in the White House to try to make contact with his departed soul.”

It reminds you of the verse in Ecclesiastes (chapter one, verse 9) which says: “The thing which hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.”

To be continued.

So Where Did Our Troubles Begin? Part Two

by Al Benson Jr.

Since all these rejections of the Reformed faith, which was the foundational cornerstone of the nation, only continued to grow and never diminish, it stands to reason that the problems the apostates brought in because of their unbelief had to affect the country.

During the late 1700s,  membership in the Congregational churches was comprised of 60% women, and by the early 1800s that figure had risen to 70%. Where were the men, who, according to Scripture, should have leadership rolls among God’s elect?  Because of unbelief they had apparently decided they were capable of building the republic without God’s help or guidance and so they stayed away from worship services in droves. Consequently, many ministers, seeing that their congregations were comprised of mainly women, began to tailor their sermons to them. which, in the eyes of many. made the churches to appear effeminate.

By the early 1800s, especially in Massachusetts, the Unitarians had become influential enough  that they were able to launch the nation’s first public school system as we know that system today. You have by now all heard of Horace Mann, the “father of the common schools.”  The “history” books belabor his “monumental” achievements in behalf of establishing public schools. They don’t bother to mention, however, that Mann was a Unitarian whose efforts to establish public education were driven by his hatred for church schools. By the time Mann appeared on the scene, many Christian assemblies were so thoroughly penetrated by apostasy that they eagerly went along with public education instead of opposing it as they should have.  Robert Owen, the socialist, was also in favor of public schools. He saw them as a vehicle for changing society, and who can honestly doubt that they have more than lived up to his expectations? So, from the beginning, the socialists recognized that it wasn’t about education. It was about indoctrination.

Logical thinking would require us to say that public education in this country was the fruit of apostasy. After the War Between the States, one of the first things the North did during what has euphemistically been called “reconstruction” was to shove public education down the throats of the Southern states. They brought Yankee schoolteachers down here to make sure it was done right and their textbooks were geared to show why the North was virtuous and the South was guilty of all manner of crimes against humanity. Unitarians had gained influential positions in both the abolitionist and “women’s rights” movements in the early 1800s. So had the spiritualists.

By the time the War Between the States was thrust upon us, the North had been so thoroughly “unitarianized”  that it was hardly recognizable in regard to the Christian faith it had repudiated.

All this time, the South was moving more and more toward the orthodox Christian faith and, indeed, might have been the springboard for national revival if given enough time. That could not be permitted to happen–hence the War.

Apostasy–rejection of the truth of Scripture and rejection of the Person and work of Christ Jesus, is the bottom-line reason for our national problems, both today and 150 years ago.  Our political and economic problems are merely symptoms of that apostasy.  If we continue to fail to recognize that fact, we will NEVER make any meaningful changes for the good of the country–and our current public education system will continue to make sure that we fail to recognize that fact.. That is part of its reason for being.

If we continue to think that all our troubles in this country started with FDR, or even in 1913, as bad a year as that was, our thinking is the result of an apostate reaction to Christianity that permeated this country long before we were born.  If you don’t believe me, I challenge you to do the homework like I had to.  Don’t take my word for it. Find out for yourselves, and then act, with prayer, on what you find.

So Where Did Our Troubles Begin?

by Al Benson Jr.

At their deepest point, our national woes, and they are many, are not just political, economic, or even educational, critical though all these areas are. Our deepest national problems are our theological problems. No country on the face of God’s earth has had more biblical truth than this country, yet no country has so lightly regarded that truth as we have for the last 150-180 years. We have become as apostate nation and will be judged for our apostasy. It is a mark of our apostasy and unbelief that we cannot see that our problems go far beyond just electing a few more “conservatives” to Congress or “reforming” our public school system or electing the right person to be president. None of these things will be anymore than a bandaid  on a hemorrhage. Some want to abolish the Federal Reserve System. While I agree that would be a bold step in the right direction it would ultimately not solve our national problems.

For most “political” people, God is out of the picture except as someone to pay lip service to in stump speech. They think they are going to straighten the country out themselves. Boy do I have news for them!  We all need to remember that without the Sovereign power of Almighty God not one of us could even draw the breath of life. That fact alone should humble us.

Let us consider that the Holy Scriptures contain accurate accounts of how the Lord judged apostate nations. In Second Chronicles 24:24 it is stated: “For the army of the Syrians came with a small company of men, and the Lord delivered a very great host (from Judah)  into their hand, because they had forsaken the Lord God of their fathers. So they executed judgment against Joash.” This occurred because of apostasy, as preceding chapters in Second Chronicles show. Will it be any different for this country?  Can we continue to elect some of the people to polit8cal offices that we have elected and not be held responsible?  Can we continue to believe the lies both political parties tell us and not be held responsible? Can we continue to believe the outright lies told by the “news” media and by our institutions of “learning” without at least trying to question some of this and not be held responsible? Our lack of discernment today is horrendous. We are ready to believe anyone who tells us he is a Christian politician and we never bother trying to check to see if the walk agrees with the talk. We just take their word and they get a pass. Our current “president” has informed us that he is a Bible-believing Christian. Do his actions portray that? Does any “Christian” president actively fill every available position in his government with socialists and Marxists? Yet many evangelical Christians support this man and will work for him when he runs for a second term. That is apostasy in action.

This country had a Reformation Christian heritage bequeathed to it by the Pilgrims, Puritans, and others and we walked away from that faith. We embraced Unitarianism, radical socialism, spiritualism, and a whole host of other anti-Christian “isms”. This conscious plunge into unbelief eventually resulted in the American revolution we call the War Between the States (and that revolution was NOT perpetrated by the South). That war was the culmination of this country’s revolt against Jesus Christ, and this country, to this day, has never recovered from the revolution, just as France has never recovered from the French Revolution.  Unfortunately, it is a sign of our spiritual and doctrinal unbelief, as well as our horrendous public school educations that we can’t see any further back than the early 1900s as the source of our problems.

We had notable problems with apostasy in this country as early as the 1750s.  Let that early date sink in a little.

With minor exceptions, American Unitarianism seemed to develop out of Massachusetts Congregational churches, which, before the mid-1700s, seemed to be growing tired of what they felt was a “strict Calvinism.” As the 1700s drew to a close, nearly all the Congregational ministers in Boston and more than half of those in eastern Massachusetts had walked away from their Calvinist faith, the faith that was their heritage and the country’s, and they had embraced Christ-denying Unitarianism.  Also present at the same time were Arianism (another denial of the Trinity)  and Arminianism, a denial of Reformed theology that manifested itself in pietism.  Should you ask what pietism is, it is a form of Christianity that promotes personal holiness (which is fine in itself)  but never applies God’s law or commandments to the society around it.  All these teachings were present in this country before our War for Independence from Great Britain.

To be continued.