Leonidas Polk: Man of God & Man of War

August 11, 2009 by Shane Kastler.

By Shane E. Kastler

(NOTE:  The following is a paper I wrote on Civil War General and Episcopal Bishop Leonidas Polk.  While a student at West Point, Polk was dramatically converted to Christ , which began a revival on the campus.  He eventually entered the ministry, against his father’s wishes and served as a missionary and a bishop until the Civil War when he was appointed a General by his old West Point classmate and Confederate President Jefferson Davis.  Polk’s story is fascinating.  I hope you enjoy it.)

Leonidas Polk was born with a silver spoon in his mouth…and he died with a lead shell in his torso. Nevertheless the fifty-eight years that he lived between those two events tells a fascinating story of a man who was born into Southern aristocracy, served the Lord as a minister, and died on the battlefield as a soldier. Polk was maligned by some, adored by many, and forever remembered because of his unrelenting commitment to God and his unwavering belief in serving his country.

The story of Leonidas Polk begins in North Carolina, where he was born on April 10, 1806 as the second of what would be twelve children to William and Sarah Hawkins Polk. The Polks originally came to North Carolina when Leonidas’ grandfather, Thomas Polk moved there from Pennsylvania in 1753. He immediately bought land and began the life of a successful planter. After marrying Susanna Sprat, a fellow Pennsylvanian, Polk continued to make a name and a fortune for himself in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. But Polk was much more than simply a wealthy planter; he was also a fierce patriot.

As tensions mounted between the British throne and the American colonies, Thomas Polk left no doubt where he stood. In 1775 he signed the “Mecklenburg Declaration” which proclaimed that the citizens of Mecklenburg County sought to break all ties with Britain and establish an independent government. The fires of independence were being stoked all throughout the colonies, with the ultimate results being a formal “Declaration of Independence” declared by the Continental Congress on July 4, 1776, and subsequent war with the British.

Thomas Polk was commissioned as a colonel in the Fourth North Carolina regiment where he valiantly fought the British in the American South, before being assigned to serve under George Washington in the North. In the infamous winter of 1777-1778, Polk served at Valley Forge with Washington, amid the perilous conditions of hunger, disease, and weather that took the life of over two thousand colonial soldiers. Washington repeatedly sent requests to the Continental Congress for supplies, but none were to be found. In the early spring, Washington sent Polk back to his native North Carolina to try and gather whatever supplies he could for the destitute men. While Polk was in North Carolina, his immediate superior officer, Brigadier General Francis Nash was killed. The obvious replacement for Nash was Polk, but he was passed over for a junior officer who, according to Polk, had gained the position by political means rather than valorous military achievements. Polk was infuriated, and sent his letter of resignation to the Governor of North Carolina who refused it. Polk then sent a letter of resignation to Washington himself who reluctantly accepted it. Though even in his anger he continued to be a loyal patriot, committed to the hope of an Independent nation, accepting the position of commissary agent with the task of trying to keep the army in North Carolina adequately supplied. In this position, Polk undoubtedly did the best he could under extremely difficult circumstance. Clothes, food, ammunition, and other supplies were simply too scare to be found in the amounts that an army required. Polk frequently clashed with General Horatio Gates, the commander of the Southern theater, who blamed him, even questioning his loyalty to the cause, because of his inability to procure supplies. Given the fact that Polk paid for many of the supplies out of his own pocket, it’s easy to understand his frustration. He again considered resigning, but changed his mind when Nathaniel Greene took over for Gates in 1780. Polk worked well with Greene, and even returned to the battlefield under his command. In 1781, Polk finally received his much coveted promotion to general which he would keep for the duration of the war.

Polk’s son William, who would become the father of Leonidas, was an even greater Revolutionary War hero than his general father. William dropped out of Queens College in 1775, at the age of sixteen, to enlist in the Continental Army where he was assigned the rank of second lieutenant. In a battle in Orangeburg, South Carolina, he received a shoulder wound that knocked him out of service for nine months, and required him to give up his commission. But as soon as the wound healed he joined the Ninth North Carolina regiment where he served as a major under Washington, being once again injured at the Battle of Germantown where he was shot in the jaw, losing four teeth. Amazingly, he was able to remain in active service and was transferred back to his native North Carolina to fight the British in the South. Faithful and fearless service led to his being promoted to lieutenant colonel over the Fourth South Carolina regiment. At the Battle of Eutaw Springs, Polk was officially recognized for his courage where he almost lost his life, and did lose his brother Thomas.

“In one of the numerous hand-to-hand encounters of the day Polk’s horse was shot dead and fell upon him, and a British soldier was in the very act of pinning him to the ground with the bayonet, when a timely saber-stroke from one of his sergeants cut down his assailant and saved his life. As might have been expected in so desperately contested a battle, all the commands suffered heavy loss, and among the killed was William Polk’s youngest brother, Thomas, who was a lieutenant in his regiment.”[1]

The war made the Polk name famous in America, especially William, who was deeply revered in the South for his military conduct. After the war he used his name and political connections to his advantage by becoming the chief surveyor of the central district of Tennessee. At that time, the “Tennessee territory” was still apart of North Carolina, and as chief surveyor, Polk was in a position to accumulate vast portions of land for himself, which he did by claiming 100,000 acres.

Polk’s war heroism and political connections helped him land numerous lucrative positions throughout his life. George Washington appointed him as supervisor of internal revenue for North Carolina, in addition to serving as President of the State Bank of North Carolina for eight years.[2]

In addition to government and financial service, William also served as a trustee for the University of North Carolina, beginning in 1792, where he was instrumental in the institution’s early development. He continued to serve in this capacity for the remainder of his life.

In 1789, William married Grizelda Gilchrist with whom he had two children before the marriage ended with Grizelda’s death in 1799. By 1801, Polk had relocated to Raleigh where he married Sarah Hawkins, who was the daughter of a wealthy land owner named Philemon Hawkins, who served with William Polk in the North Carolina General Assembly; thus making Leonidas the grandson of two prominent aristocrats. Leonidas, the second son, was born in 1806 and raised in Raleigh. Polk’s most well known biographer, his son William, states that not much is known about Leonidas formative childhood years, except that “he appears to have been known as a high spirited and healthy child.”[3] This is undoubtedly true, as he would later in life be known for an irascibility that bordered on obnoxious.

Leonidas grew up in a home where there was much love and over indulgence, but little in the way of religion. William, though descended from devout Presbyterians, was lukewarm at best where religion was concerned. On one occasion, when Leonidas and a friend were visiting on the Polks front porch, William joined in and told the boys of the heroism that led to their independence during the Revolutionary War. In an effort to fuse the boys with a desire to cherish and honor their freedom, William reminded the young men that there were older patriots to thank for the liberties they enjoyed. Leonidas mentioned his belief that the in order for the political freedoms to be adequately recognized they should be melded with Christianity, since it was ultimately God who blessed their arms with victory. With this, William quietly stood up and left the conversation.

On another occasion, William had a conversation with John S. Ravenscroft, the Episcopal Bishop of North Carolina, in which he asked if a man could earn his way to Heaven by performing good deeds. Ravenscroft responded in the negative saying: “No sir: he would go straight to Hell.”[4] Polk appeared unbothered by the answer, perhaps because he didn’t believe it. In his mind, a life of good deeds combined with faithfulness to one’s country would certainly result in a pleasant afterlife, if one even existed. Even Leonidas’ son William reluctantly admits the lack of religious feelings in his grandfather, stating: “It must be admitted that he was not a professedly religious man.”[5]

In 1821, Leonidas enrolled as a student at the University of North Carolina where he was successful and popular among the student body. After spending two years there, his father gained for him an appointment to the United States Military Academy at West Point. Leonidas was thrilled at the chance to attend and arrived on campus in June 1823.

At this point in his life the wide-eyed seventeen year old contemplated his future with unending optimism. Perhaps he would be a military hero like his father and grandfather before him. Or maybe a West Point education would ultimately lead to political office and national fame. At the very least, a combination of family, political, and educational influence promised a successful and lucrative life for young Leonidas Polk. But in all the thoughts of his future, religion played no large part. His eyes were on earthly treasures, but he had no way of knowing how his eyes would be opened to eternal realties before his time at West Point was over. Indeed, his life would soon change in a dramatic and permanent way.

In those days, a West Point education began by living outdoors in “camp” for the first summer. Beginning in September, the cadets would move into the barracks and assume the life of a soldier-scholar. Polk initially enjoyed the excitement of camp life, but it soon began to wane. He was grateful when September arrived and he was assigned a room, with three other cadets, one of whom was second year student Albert Sydney Johnston, who would remain a lifelong friend, as well as a future fellow Confederate general until his death at the Battle of Shiloh in 1862.

Polk was an overall good student. His previous education had prepared him well for the academic rigors of West Point, but it was his attitude that occasionally landed him in trouble. Two controversies involving Polk arose during the early part of his West Point tenure. One involved money, the other involved academic integrity.

Clearly, Polk was somewhat spoiled where material pleasures were concerned; and because of this, he had a difficult time sustaining the lifestyle he was accustomed to on a cadet’s salary. Nevertheless, West Point had strict rules regarding finances and the cadets were forbidden to accept money from home. Regardless of this rule, Polk wrote to his wealthy father requesting money, to which William Polk readily acquiesced, mailing fifty dollars to him. Superintendent Sylvanus Thayer learned of the matter and quickly fired off a firm, but kind letter to William, notifying him of this violation of rules, and informing him that it was a dismissible offense. However, Thayer was willing to overlook it this time, provided it not happen again. William graciously relented, but Leonidas was furious. He accused Thayer of planting spies who were snooping around in his personal business. He suggested to his father that Thayer’s actions proved his ungentlemanly status, but ultimately Leonidas’ pleas fell on deaf ears. William was not willing to rock the boat on behalf of his spoiled son.

At this point in his life, it’s easy to see the sinful materialism that permeated Leonidas’ character. To be sure, he had many good qualities, but they were often overshadowed by the fact that at heart he was the privileged son of a wealthy aristocrat; and what’s more, he expected to be treated as one. While other students either obeyed the rules, or simply didn’t have the financial means to break them, Polk saw himself as above the law. During his time at the University of North Carolina, Polk had written a letter to his sister in which he bemoaned his brother’s inability to find a wife by stating that few women were worthy to be Polks.[6] Though perhaps he was writing somewhat “tongue in cheek” concerning his brother, he clearly held a view of superiority over his colleagues.

The other West Point controversy involving Polk regarded the practice of cheating in a drawing class. Apparently several cadets were caught tracing the work of another student instead of doing their own drawing. When caught, Polk admitted to the offense, but amazingly argued that there was nothing wrong with doing it. Furthermore, he felt that he and a few others had been singled out for discipline of something that virtually all the cadets took part in. Polk biographer Glenn Robins writes:

“Believing that he had been unjustly penalized, Polk registered a formal complain with Secretary of War James Barbour. At no point during the investigation did Polk deny that he had traced his assignments but he did supply a ridiculous excuse for continuing to disregard Thayer’s direct order. He maintained that no cadet gained an unfair advantage by tracing because ‘the practice was so general that it might be called universal, and since they traced without the semblance of secrecy toward each other, its criminality was lessened to almost nothing, and their perfect openness seemed very little like a wish…to defraud’ anyone. In addition, Polk asserted that the cadets ‘were willing to risk violating the order, and …abide by the consequence, provided each suffered in proportion to the magnitudes of his offense.”[7]

Not surprisingly, Barbour dismissed Polk’s complaint and Thayer’s disciplinary action stood. Those found guilty would be docked one letter grade. Ironically, and humorously, Polk seems to have expended far more time and energy fighting the issue than he would have had he simply done the assignment the right way to begin with. But his youthful exuberance and his prideful sense of justice, took control of his actions.

During Polk’s first two years at West Point, he was an intelligent, albeit precocious student. Like many, his keen intellect waged war with his youthful mischievousness, resulting in the occasional disciplinary action. But all in all, he was a successful student with a promising military career before him. And like most students, he went to class, did his assignments, performed his duties, and attended the mandatory chapels, where students typically daydreamed or studied while the campus chaplain gave dry and boring theological lectures. However, the chapels underwent a dramatic change with the arrival of Charles P. McIlvaine as professor of ethics and chaplain in the summer of 1825.

McIlvaine was an evangelical Episcopal, who transformed the dry chapel lectures into fiery evangelistic sermons. Cadet C.J. Wright remembered McIlvaine’s first day in chapel vividly:

“On the first Sunday of Dr. McIlvaine’s preaching at West Point the cadets went to chapel, as usual, some with books to read, and others hoping to sleep, but none expecting to take any interest in the sermon. Had a bugle been sounded in the chapel they could not have been more astonished. Books were dropped, sleep was forgotten, attention was riveted. There was general surprise and gratification. From that day on the chaplain’s influence grew more and more powerful…”[8]

Like many outspoken evangelists, McIlvaine drew skeptical interest from the young people. They were enamored with his preaching, but somewhat fearful of being drawn into a lifetime commitment to Christ. Nevertheless, the chaplain sought to evangelize the students and openly welcomed any religious inquiry, or even pastoral counseling requests that came his way. In April of 1826, after having served just short of a year, McIlvaine was delighted to have a student seek him out for advice. McIlvaine gave the young cadet some wise counsel, and also sent him away with two gospel tracts. He encouraged him to keep and read one of them, and place the other one somewhere around campus where another student might find it. This he dutifully did, and the result was a second visit from another student one week later. The second student was a very agitated Leonidas Polk.

Polk came into McIlvaine’s study and said, “My name is Polk.” According to McIlvaine, that was about all Polk could manage to say as he was on the verge of an emotional outburst. With tears in his eyes and a lump in his throat, Polk was led to a seat where McIlvaine sought to counsel him. Apparently Polk’s reputation had preceded him because McIlvaine later said he assumed that Polk was in trouble with the institution’s authorities. But Polk’s reason for visiting wasn’t disciplinary in nature, but rather spiritual. He told of how the chaplain’s recent chapel messages on the evidences of Christianity had deeply affected him. Furthermore, after hearing that McIlvaine had left several copies of Olynthus Gregory’s “Letters on the Evidences” in the West Point library, Polk had acquired a copy and eagerly read it. Polk’s conviction of sin was at a fever pitch, when he surprisingly happened onto the gospel tract that was lying in the barracks. It proved be the last straw, and now a distraught Polk had sought out Rev. McIlvaine. Tenderly and lovingly, McIlvaine shared the gospel and prayed with the deeply convicted Polk, who wanted to commit his life to Christ but feared the ridicule he might face from his fellow cadets. According to McIlvaine, he was not aware of a single professing Christian among the student body at that time. While this may be an overstatement, it seems clear that religion was not a big deal on the West Point campus. Chapel attendance was merely another in a long line of “duties” that a dedicated soldier was expected to comply with.

McIlvaine pulled no punches in his exhortations to Polk. Indeed, he said their may very well be ridicule, but this was to be expected from those who follow Christ. In fact, Jesus himself had stated:

“If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you.  If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.” John 15:18-19 (KJV)

Polk’s mind and heart were settled. He would become a follower of Jesus Christ both privately and publicly. The student body initially experienced this shock on the next day, when at the end of the service at the time of prayer, Polk got out of his seat and kneeled in prayer. The other cadets were stunned and mesmerized, not to mention spiritually convicted themselves. A hushful reverence fell over the room as they witnessed the transformation of the ornery, spoiled, fun loving rich kid from Raleigh. Polk was a broken and humbled man, who had become a “new creature in Christ Jesus.” (2 Corinthians 5:17) In addition to this, Polk’s conversion sparked a revival on the spiritually lethargic campus. McIlvaine recounted:

“Cadets and officers afterward told me that if I had chosen one man out of the whole corps, whose example would have the greatest effect on the minds of his comrades, I should have chosen him. In the course of a week, one and another, strangers to me, came on the same errand, each without previous communication with anyone until he went to Cadet Polk and asked to be introduced to me. I found it necessary to have meetings for them twice or thrice a week in my house for instruction and prayer. Soon the number of cadets, with some professors and instructors, was so great as wholly to occupy the largest room I had, and in the case of almost every cadet who came his chosen introducer was Leonidas Polk, the first-born of these many brethren.”[9]

On May 25, 1826, Polk along with fellow Cadet William Magruder, became the first two cadets ever baptized in the West Point chapel. At the end of the service, McIlvaine charged them to “pray your Master and Savior to take you out of the world rather than allow you to bring reproach on the cause you have now professed.”[10] Polk responded with a deep, loud, and heart felt, “Amen!”

Polk wrote home to tell his father about his newfound faith, but not surprisingly he found a cool response. William feared that his son had simply been caught up in some emotional excitement and that he had rashly embraced religion; but Polk’s conversion proved to be no passing fancy. His attitude, actions, and academic conduct were all transformed by the event, which as time would tell, proved to be a lifelong change.

In 1827, Polk graduated eighth in a class of thirty-eight and was brevetted as a second lieutenant of artillery, but his desires for the future were non-military. Superintendent Thayer had recommended Polk as a professor of mathematics at a Massachusetts college, which would eventually become Amherst. Polk saw it as opportunity not only to teach and make a living, but also further his own education. Additionally, he desired to have two of his younger brothers attend the college where he could mentor them in academic and undoubtedly spiritual pursuits. He graciously wrote to his father requesting permission to seek the appointment. Although he would be required to resign from the Army, he saw no problems given the fact that it was his Superintendent who had recommended him for the position. But William Polk saw this as an unnecessary interruption in what was his son’s true calling as a professional soldier. He wrote Leonidas that he could not consent because a man should pursue what he is genuinely meant to do rather than waste more time with further education. Leonidas agreed, but not in the way his father had hoped. Indeed, he did have a desire to pursue his true calling in life. And so he wrote his father that he would not be a professor, nor would he be a soldier. He had decided to enter the ministry and give his life to the vocational service of God. William was beside himself. In his mind, Leonidas had become a full fledged religious fanatic and was throwing away a promising career for no good reason. Leonidas would enter the Virginia Theological Seminary and become a minister. William snorted that the seminary would “ruin a good soldier to make a poor parson.”[11]

For quite some time, Leonidas had courted Frances Devereaux, who like him, came from a wealthy, North Carolina family. Ironically, Devereaux was also the great-granddaughter of Puritan theologian Jonathan Edwards, whose preaching had sparked the revival known as the First Great Awakening in colonial America. Leonidas sought marriage prior to his entrance to seminary, but Frances thought it unwise. In May 1828, they became engaged, but they weren’t married until May of 1830. Shortly thereafter, Polk accepted his first assignment as Assistant Rector of Monumental Episcopal Church in Richmond, Virginia.

In the fall of 1830, Leonidas quickly discovered that a minister’s life was not void of suffering. Two of his siblings died in a short amount of time, including his younger brother Hamilton. Leonidas had taken a leave of absence from his church duties to go to Raleigh and help care for Hamilton both physically and spiritually. Shortly before his death, Hamilton was baptized by his brother; then Leonidas preached his funeral before heading back north to Richmond.

Leonidas’ own health was weak at this time as well. During the summer of 1830 he had taken on most of the church duties with the Rector on leave. The strain, coupled with the stress of his dying brothers weighed on him deeply. After Hamilton’s death, he returned to Richmond and served until April 1831, when he felt compelled to resign. His first son, whom he named Hamilton after his late brother, was born in January of 1831, and so it was with a growing family that Leonidas and Frances returned to North Carolina in the spring of 1831. But Leonidas’s stay would be short. He ventured to Philadelphia to see a trusted doctor friend about his own health problems. The doctor told him he had only a few months to live, but Polk wisely sought a second opinion, which recommended that he immediately take a sea voyage to bolster his failing health. Without returning to North Carolina, Polk departed New York for Europe in August of 1831, where he spent fourteen months traveling and seeking medical care. Eventually he was told that his only ailment was weariness, and after almost a year abroad, he returned to his family in 1832. Though such a seemingly sudden and extended trip to Europe seems rash to modern ears, such ventures were not that uncommon in Polk’s day among those who had the money and the doctor’s counsel to do it. He returned with renewed vigor, strength, and health to take on his next challenge.

The Polks decided that they would relocate to Tennessee, where Leonidas’ brother Lucius was a successful planter. William still owned five thousand acres there, which he divided between his four adult sons. But Leonidas’ portion was leased until 1834. Regardless of this, the Polks moved to Maury Country, Tennessee in 1833 and Leonidas began working on a house for his family to live in. In the midst of this, in early 1834, William Polk passed away, leaving the family devastated. Especially Leonidas who had written and spoke to his father repeatedly about the need to make a commitment to Christ as Lord. William had brushed it aside time and time again, but now time was gone for him and Leonidas felt the pain sharply.

Polk began running his own plantation in 1834, where he also built a family chapel, St. John’s Chapel for his family, his brother’s family, and their plantation workers. At the same time, he also accepted the role as Rector of St. Peter’s Church in Columbia, Tennessee. Though the Tennessee diocese was tiny under Bishop James Otey, Polk was content to serve the small church while making the majority of his living as a planter. In a sense, he had the best of both worlds. The ministry would never gain him the financial security of a plantation, but his heart’s desire was to serve the Lord. In Tennessee, he could do both.

The Episcopal church of that day had a desire to spread the gospel to the American Southwest, which back then consisted of Louisiana, Texas, Arkansas, and Indian Territory (now Oklahoma). Consequently, they saw no greater candidate for the task than the zealously evangelistic Polk, and so he was elected as “Missionary Bishop to the Southwest” in 1838.

Polk left his Tennessee land in the care of his brother and moved his family to Louisiana where he began an Apostle Paul-like life of missionary travels. Officially, his territory stretched as far east as Alabama and as far west as the outskirts of West Texas, so he was seldom home. He preached the gospel all across the Southwest and tried to assist in the establishment of Episcopal churches.

On one trip through Indian Territory, Polk encountered two desperados. While passing on the trail they nodded at each other and continued on their perspective ways. Eventually, Polk came to his destination, the home of Cherokee Chief John Ross, where he recounted the story and described the two men. Ross knew them well as robbers in the area and told Polk they must have known he was well armed or they would have attacked. To the contrary, Polk responded that as a minister he abstained from carrying a gun, trusting on God alone for protection.

Later that evening, Ross was speaking with Polk’s black servant about the perils of their traveling unarmed. The servant responded that, to the contrary, they were always well armed and protected. The next day, when Polk prepared to leave he noticed Ross was much cooler towards him than the previous day. When he mentioned it to his servant, and the topic of their arms came up, Polk perceived that Ross thought he was lying to him. Polk asked the servant why he told Ross they were armed. The servant responded: “Aren’t you armed Master, with the sword of the Spirit?”[12] Indeed they were, and that sword protected them through many perilous missionary journeys.

In 1841, Polk was elected Bishop of Louisiana, which at that time also included Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, Texas, and Indian Territory. Although he was now the reigning bishop over a vast territory, his ecclesiastical title did not take away from his missionary zeal. He sought to plant churches throughout his region that would call sinners to repentance and faith in Christ; and the sinner’s skin color was irrelevant. Even though Polk was himself a slave owner, he made himself unpopular with many other slave owners by his call to evangelize the black slaves, as well as their white owners. Some of the owners feared that if the slaves came to an understanding that God was sovereign over all things, including the owners, then their ultimate allegiance would be to God. But Polk argued that though this was true, teaching slaves Christianity would not only fulfill the Christians’ call to “make disciples of all the nations” (Matthew 28:19), but would in fact produce slaves even more hard working and loyal because they would do their work as though they were doing in “unto the Lord.” (Colossians 3:23)

The idea of slave discipleship was not merely a theoretical concept to Polk. Upon his move to the New Orleans area to take up his bishopric, he purchased a large sugar plantation known as Leighton. The plantation proved to be one of the largest and most productive in Louisiana, due in large part to the fact that Polk owned over two hundred slaves that worked the land.

Polk and his wife viewed the slaves as an extension of their family. He hired a full-time chaplain to see to their religious training and he encouraged marriage among the slaves. When two slaves decided to marry, Polk would perform the ceremony himself at his house, then host a party for the newlyweds, as well as the other slaves. His wife would make a wedding dress for the bride, and the entire Polk household would take part in the festivities. In terms of “master-slave” relations, Polk far exceeded many of his contemporaries in the kindness and grace he showed towards those whom he saw as under his care.

In the late 1850’s Polk, along with other Episcopal leaders, began to formulate plans for a university to serve the denomination. Too many Southern Episcopalians had seen their children migrate north for education, only to be taught from an “anti-Southern” mindset. Seeking to squelch such prejudices, Polk desired a college that would rival any Ivy League school in terms of scholarship, but which would stay true to the southern region’s philosophical worldview. Others within the denomination sought the school to be simply an Episcopal training center, bereft of any “regional” characteristics; but Polk’s side won the day and the University of the South was founded in Sewanee, Tennessee in 1860.

In 1861, the Civil War brought a deep crisis to Polk’s life. Though he was a man of the cloth, he had fierce loyalties to the South and believed wholeheartedly in their right to secession. He was also a West Point graduate with military training, though he had no combat experience.

Ironically, one of his West Point classmates and friends, Jefferson Davis, had been elected President of the new Confederate States of America; and shortly after his election Davis received a letter from Polk in which he expressed fear over a Northern attempt to gain control of the Mississippi River. Davis expressed doubt that the Yankees would initially seek the river because they were marshaling forces for an invasion of Virginia and it was there that most of the Confederate firepower was assigned. At the end of Davis’ letter of response to his old friend, he mentioned a desire to visit with him in person. Davis would eventually seek Polk’s services as a general on three separate occasions. Twice Polk refused, but the third time was a charm. Yet, even then he did not enter into the decision lightly. He wrote to his wife:

“No man is more deeply impressed with the paramount importance of our success in this movement, nor more filled with apprehension at the prospect of its failure; but what my duty may be I have not yet determined. I cannot ignore what I know; I cannot forget what I have learned; nor can I forget I have been educated by the country for its service in certain contingencies. Yet I feel the step to which I have been invited is one of the very gravest character in all its bearings all the way around, and I am not going to decide it hastily. Whatever may be the result, I hope I may be guided from on High in determining, and I trust, in any event, I may be permitted to see my way clear before me.”[13]

Polk clearly felt a sense of duty stemming from his military education and natural talents as a leader. Consequently, he felt led of God to accept the commission as a Major General in the Confederate Army.

Polk’s decision received mixed reviews. Some ministerial colleagues believed that a minister had no business taking part in war, unless it was to serve as a Chaplain. Others supported, and even admired Polk for his willingness to put himself in personal danger for a cause he believed in. Still others simply saw the appointment as token one Davis made to an old friend who had no military experience.

His Civil War record is also somewhat disputed. Without question, he was beloved by many of the men who served under him. He was a gracious and kind commander who sought not only their physical, but also their spiritual well being. At times, he could be combative with his fellow commanders, most clearly seen in his spat with Braxton Bragg in which he requested to Davis, Bragg’s removal. But in fairness to Polk, many Confederate generals clashed with the abrasive Bragg and Polk’s request was simply one of a plethora that reached Davis’ desk.

Through the annals of history, Polk has been remembered more for his religious duties than his military prowess. Or more specifically, he is known for his melding of the two interests. Famously nicknamed, “The Fighting Bishop” Polk serves as an enigmatic figure of one who was devoted to God, while also willing to take up arms in defense of country. And in the midst of war, his faith made a lasting impression on the men around him. He performed the wedding ceremony for cavalryman John Hunt Morgan, and in 1864, he baptized Generals Joseph Johnston and John Bell Hood with a simple water cup, which was all that could be found in their camp.

The end came for Polk on June 14, 1864, when he along with Johnston, William Hardee, and their staffs rode to the top of Pine Mountain, Georgia during the Atlanta campaign to try and ascertain the best strategy for battling William T. Sherman’s mammoth Union force. Their location, atop the mountain left them vulnerable to artillery fire, and not surprisingly the Federals fired a salvo their direction. Johnston, Hardee, and their men scattered; but mysteriously Polk took his time. With his hands crossed behind him, he slowly sauntered towards the others when a second shot landed near him. Calmly, peaceably, with not a hint of fear he continued walking, until seconds later when a third shell ripped through his arm and torso. The shot almost ripped his body in two, and he was killed instantly. Johnston ran out to him and mournfully exclaimed: “I would rather anything than this!”[14]

The news of Polk’s death was met with tremendous sorrow across the Confederacy. Private Sam Watkins perhaps summed it up best in his memoir of the war:

“My pen and ability is inadequate to the task of doing his memory justice. Every private soldier loved him. Second to Stonewall Jackson, his loss was the greatest the South ever sustained. When I saw him there dead, I felt that I had lost a friend whom I had ever loved and respected, and that the South had lost one of her best and greatest generals. His soldiers always loved and honored him. They called him ‘Bishop Polk.’ ‘Bishop Polk’ was ever a favorite with the army, and when any position was to be held, and it was known that ‘Bishop Polk’ was there, we knew and felt that ‘all was well.’”[15]

Leonidas Polk’s life and death offer a compelling example of God’s grace exhibited in a sinner’s heart. Raised wealthy and privileged, Polk initially sought fame through a military career at West Point; but God had other plans. Overcoming the fear of ridicule from his classmates, and the fear of rejection from his father; Polk publicly committed his life to Christ and subsequently devoted his career to ministry. He chose service to God over service to country, then ironically ended up dying on the battlefield serving both. In Polk we see a man tortured between duty to God and country, and eventually dying at peace as both a man of God and a man of war. As a young man, Polk’s heart was dramatically changed by the power of Christ’s gospel and he ultimately died without fear because he was confident that beyond the grave the Lord would bless him with an eternal reward in a place where death, sin, pain, sorrow, and even war would be no more.

---

[1] William Mecklenburg Polk, Leonidas Polk: Bishop and General, 2 Volumes. (New York: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1915) 1:45.

[2] Glenn Robins, The Bishop of the Old South: The Ministry and Civil War Legacy of Leonidas Polk (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 2006) pg. 8.

[3] Polk, pg. 63.

[4] E. Clowes Chorley, Men and movements in the American Episcopal Church (New York: Scribner, 1946) pg. 164. Also quoted in, Robbins, pg. 12.

[5] Polk, 1:52.

[6] Robins, pg. 14.

[7] Robins, pg. 21; and Leonidas Polk to James Barbour, 23 January 1826, Leonidas Polk Papers, Jesse du Pont Library, University of the South, Sewanee, Tennessee.

[8] Polk, pg. 89.

[9] Ibid, pg. 92-93.

[10] Ibid.

[11] Robins, pg. 33.

[12] Polk, pg. 171.

[13] Polk, pg. 357.

[14] Craig L Symonds, General Joseph E. Johnston: A Civil War Biography. (New York: W.W. Norton, 1992), pg. 306, Robbins, pg. 193.

[15] Sam Watkins, Co. Aytch: Maury Grays First Tennessee Regiment or The Side Show of the Big Show (Chattanooga, TN: Times Printing Company, 1900) pg. 133.

Posted in History | Print | 1 Comment »

The History of Conservatism & Liberalism in the American Republic

April 30, 2009 by Shane Kastler.

(NOTE:  This is somewhat lengthy paper I wrote on the history of Conservatism vs. Liberalism in America.  Read it if you wish.)

The History of Conservatism & Liberalism in the American Republic:  From Jefferson vs. Hamilton to the Political Right vs. Left

By Shane E. Kastler

In the summer of 1776, the American colonies were in turmoil. Outrageous taxes charged by the British government; a lack of representation, and a desire for freedom had captured the minds and hearts of many colonists. As representatives from the colonies gathered in Philadelphia to discuss a declaration of independence from Britain, many feared and suspected a long and bloody war would be the result. Naturally, some opposed the idea of independence and would thus have to be convinced of the need. The best of orators would be needed for this task. Men like John Adams, Patrick Henry, and Alexander Hamilton could be counted on for such prestigious work. But there was a “lesser” job that was also required. This “Declaration of Independence” would need to be fleshed out in written form.

The founding fathers assigned this task to a committee made up of men who simply felt too busy and too important to do the job. Therefore the assignment was given to a young, bashful, red-headed and little known Virginian by the name of Thomas Jefferson. One of the few things known about Jefferson was that he had a very prolific pen. When left alone in his study he could powerfully craft documents to meet a number of needs. Within a couple of days work, he had written his declaration of independence and the Continental Congress took on the task of editing the document for their mutual agreement.

Perhaps the most well known phrase in the document, which has been memorized by multitudes of Americans:

“We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal; and endowed by their Creator with inalienable rights including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

While this was the version that was ultimately accepted, it was not what Jefferson initially wrote. Rather than “self evident” Jefferson declared these truths to be “sacred”—a word that conjures up images of Divine blessings that some of our founders, most notably Benjamin Franklin had issues with. At Franklin’s recommendation the word was changed to “self evident” and thus the document had at least somewhat lesser of a religious tone. Jefferson was much chagrined. Though in spite of these editorial revisions, the Declaration still clearly pointed to our Creator as the one who blesses us with truth, liberty, and human rights.

While most likely not a “born again” Christian, Jefferson had a healthy respect for God and a true desire to see religious liberty be the hallmark of American spirituality. It is Thomas Jefferson who is credited with coining the phrase “separation of church and state”; a phrase that has been picked up and used by Americans including the Supreme Court of the United States. In shocking rulings the Court has based decisions upon the “wall of separation that was to exist between the church and the state.” Yet the phrase “separation of church and state” is not found in the United States Constitution; the Declaration of Independence; nor any other founding American document. Jefferson used the phrase in a private letter written to the Danbury, Connecticut Baptist Association who feared the growing Federal government would try to dictate matters of religion to them. Far from being a rule to ban religion from the government or public square, Jefferson’s phrase was meant to allay Christian fears that Government would interfere in their free exercise of worship.

While Jefferson assured the Danbury Baptists that government would not interfere with their religious practices; the U.S. Constitution explicitly said it would not. In the very first amendment to the Constitution freedom of religion was protected with these words:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

The so called “establishment clause” has been used and abused by scores of secularists to try and succeed in doing everything from banning prayer in school to ripping down monuments of the Ten Commandments in court houses. Yet none of these activities are in violation of the Constitution; though ironically, prohibiting them are. By the state taking a stand for or against religion they are blatantly “respecting and prohibiting the free exercise” of religion. Such bans and government meddling are direct violations of the Constitution.

If a school required adherence to a specific religion then an argument could be made for government intrusion. But prayer, Bible reading, public displays of religion, including nativity scenes or Ten Commandment monuments are clearly not an establishment of religion. Because it requires no one to accept the tenets of said faith. America cannot escape its heritage of being founded on Christian principals by many people who were of the Christian faith. Admitting and honoring this Divine past is simply an exercise in History rather than a government establishment of religion.

While Thomas Jefferson’s views on religious liberty were clearly “pro-faith” his view on government as a whole should be studied and embraced by liberty loving Americans. The first political schisms began to show their faces early in our Nation’s history. Members of George Washington’s’ cabinet, who had been largely united in the cause of Independence had very different view on the role of Federal government in the lives of its citizens. The Federalists, led by Alexander Hamilton and John Adams sought to establish a strong (some might say overbearing) Federal government that would grant stability to the nation by providing a National defense; a National bank; and a hierarchical system of government. Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and others who came to be known early on as “Republicans” saw this growing Federal government as a grave threat to the cause of liberty. Jefferson famously said that “the government that governs best is the one that governs least.” Much like modern day Conservatives; Jefferson sought a Federal government that had very minimal power and control over the daily lives of its people. An early advocate of “States Rights” Jefferson believed that the more local a government was, the more adequately it would be equipped to meet the needs of its particular region. For example, rather than a large and cumbersome Federal government, which was at that time headquartered in New York, dictating local matters to far away states. Jefferson sought to allow the states the freedom to make their own decisions, assuming they didn’t violate the U.S. Constitution. Again, the Constitution explicitly stated that this would be in the case in the tenth amendment which says:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

In other words, any powers not specifically granted by the Constitution to the Federal government were matters for the individual states to decide. Clearly, this amendment is being largely ignored by the Federal albatross that exists in the 21^st century.

As a case in point, the recent ruling by the Supreme Court that the Ten Commandments monument should be removed from the Alabama Supreme Court, at that time headed by Roy Moore, was clearly outside the bounds of Federal jurisdiction. Not only was such a ruling not in line with the establishment clause; the ruling was a direct violation of the tenth amendment which requires the Federal government to keep their nose out of Alabama matters. If, for example, Massachusetts decides that they don’t want the Ten Commandments in their court house then they are legally allowed to make that decision. But Massachusetts convictions cannot be forced upon Alabama as an established Federal law. And yet travesties of justice like these are committed on a frequent basis by an out of control Federal judiciary.

Amazingly, this rift that existed in Washington’s first cabinet between the Federalists and the Republicans continues to exist today. Though the names have changed and at times the divisions have morphed into several factions; for the most part a two party system has dominated American politics for over two centuries. In an array of semantic confusion, the Federalists of Revolutionary America became the Whigs and Republicans of Civil War America, and then became the Democrats of New Deal and 21^st century America. The Republicans of Jefferson’s time became the “State’s Rights” Democrats of the Civil War, which once again shifted to the current Republican party of our day. While the names have changed and sometimes simply switched camps; these two overarching political and governmental philosophies have remained constant. One group seeks Federal government control; while the other group seeks Individual liberty without an overwhelming Federal presence. One group seeks to expand government with programs and taxes, while the other group seeks to limit government by eliminating programs and cutting taxes. While hybrids of these two philosophies exist in some circles, the broad political philosophies still hold true.

Republicans, including Jefferson, saw a need for a certain amount of Federal governance. For example, the Federal government would be the protector of the people’s rights by providing a strong national defense. But the common belief of men like Jefferson was that “government made a great servant but a lousy master.” The government was meant to serve the people, yet today many people think they exist and are allowed to function as a gift from the Federal government. And therein lies one of the most inherent dangers in a large and cumbersome Federal entity. People are prone to look at government as their ultimate provider and protector rather than God. This sad and fearsome slide towards secularism began in early America, peaked during Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal Administration, and continues to hold sway over millions of Americans today who’s first reaction to any tragedy be it natural, accidental, or terrorism related is “where is the government?” Our people have exchanged the freedom they were meant to have by founders like Jefferson, for government control that more closely resembles Soviet Russia than the United States. With cradle to grave government control, some seek a Federal babysitter to meet their every whim and need rather than a Federal guard dog that will stay out of the way and let them live how they choose to, provided they don’t violate another citizen’s rights to do the same.

American Liberalism is a form of Socialism that is very similar in philosophy to Communism made famous by such dictators as Joseph Stalin, Fidel Castro, and modern day China. While many on the political left bristle at such suggestions the facts bear out the truth of this comparison. Communist regimes want no power to be conceived of higher than themselves. The last thing a dictatorial government wants its people to believe is that all people are accountable to a Sovereign God for their life and actions on earth. Such “theistic” views threaten the strangle hold these governments have upon their people. Communism, like American Liberalism, is an obvious system of power that is easily corrupted by its adherents because its core message is an evil denial of the ultimate power of an Omnipotent God. Therefore Communism, like American Liberalism, is in direct conflict with Biblical Christianity and the principals of freedom and liberty inherent in a Republican form of government. Just because American Liberals may sound sweeter and talk in more loving and flowery phraseology doesn’t mean their underlying desires for governmental control are any more benevolent than the heavy handed tactics of a militant dictator. American Liberalism, like Communism, means government control at the expense of Divine worship and personal liberty.

Ironically, this type of government control was the very reason the United States of America became a country in the first place. The British monarchy of King George III had driven the colonists to a state of rebellion because of its smothering taxation and despotism. Though they had fiercely fought and won freedom from the monarchy, some within the government sought to re-attach the yoke of oppression under a different name. Rather than a King ruling over the nation, the Federalists sought to have a Federal government rule the people in much the same fashion. Men like Jefferson fiercely opposed this and sounded the alarm early on. Yet Jefferson’s pleas were drown out by the overwhelmingly influential Alexander Hamilton.

Hamilton was a protégé, almost a son, to President George Washington. Born out of wedlock and raised on the island of St. Croix, Hamilton migrated to America and fought in Washington’s Army during the War for Independence. Immediately recognized by General Washington as an extremely able soldier of tremendous organizational skills and intelligence; he was made a member of Washington’s staff serving as Aide-de-Camp. When Washington was overwhelmingly elected as the first President of the United States, he sought to have a group of advisors who would assist him in the administration of the government. Though not specifically laid out in the Constitution, Washington’s plan for a “Cabinet” became a fixture in Executive American government.

Washington’s Cabinet sounded like a “who’s who” of great American patriots. John Adams was Vice-President and President of the Senate based upon his 2^nd place finish in the Presidential election. Thomas Jefferson, who had just completed a five year stretch as Ambassador to France, was tapped as the first Secretary of State. And Alexander Hamilton, a brilliant financier, was named the first Secretary of the Treasury. Though today, a “pecking order” is somewhat established by the Presidential succession laws, in Washington’s time Cabinet power was largely up for grabs, and Hamilton seized it early on. He was clearly seen as Washington’s right hand man and closest confidant. Subsequently, many of the arguments that Republicans like Jefferson made to the President fell on deaf ears.

Hamilton had a massive job ahead of him as Treasury Secretary with a Nation nearly broke from a long and expensive war with Britain. Many of the individual states were deeply in debt because of war costs, but Hamilton had a plan to alleviate the states of this burden. His plan of “Assumption” called for the Federal government to take over the war debts of the individual states. Kind of like a modern day “consolidation loan” Hamilton sought to unify the state debts into one massive national debt. On the surface this might seem like a tremendous blessing to the states, but make no mistake Federal strings were attached. The reliance and power this would give to the Federal government made men like Jefferson way too uncomfortable. Furthermore, the Southern states had already worked hard to eliminate much of their war debts; so the North would stand to benefit much more from the measure. The ultimate lynch pin for whether or not this plan would pass was the support (or lack of support) granted by President Washington. The most revered and influential man in America, Washington eventually backed the Assumption plan which led to its acceptance. Again Jefferson was bitterly disappointed with even more political fights and disappointments to come.

Alexander Hamilton’s next desire was to establish a National bank that could boost the economy and provide loans to the business sector. While Jefferson did not oppose financial institutions per se, he cringed at the thought of one that had as much government influence as Hamilton’s plan called for. No doubt seeing the “hand writing on the wall” Jefferson entered into an act of shrewd cunning in order to grant Hamilton the support he sought for his bank.

In what has been called the most important dinner party in American History, Thomas Jefferson invited Alexander Hamilton and James Madison over to his house for dinner. Many years later, as President, Jefferson would become legendary for his dinner party deals and politicking; but this dinner party dwarfed all others in its bearing on history. Jefferson was a loyal Virginian who favored the “State’s Rights” doctrine of his fellow Southerners. Furthermore, with the Nation’s capital in New York or Philadelphia; Jefferson feared that too much Northern Federalism would permeate the government. He desperately wanted to move the capital South so that he and other Virginians could keep an eye on it. His belief was that the Federal government would become way too radical unless it was in a physical location that forced the Northern Federalists to be aware of their Southern Republican brethren. To grant the Nation’s capital to any one state seemed unwise, therefore Jefferson proposed that a “Federal city” be built to house the Capital and the President’s office and home. A tract of land on the Potomac River, surrounded by Virginia and Maryland, both Southern states, was suggested for the new capital that would be named after the first President, Washington, D.C. If it was support for a National bank that Hamilton sought, Jefferson said he was willing to grant it…IF, Hamilton would support plans to move the capital to Washington. The agreement was made, and the rest is history.

With his first term as President coming to completion, George Washington desperately sought retirement. He longed to be back on his farm at Mount Vernon and to hand the reins to another. But both political sides balked at such an idea. Jefferson’s Republicans and Hamilton’s Federalists were united in their desire for Washington to serve another term. While the two sides had drastically different ideas about government, they were in agreement on their desire to see America succeed, and they couldn’t see that happening without Washington’s unifying presence. Washington finally acquiesced and won a second term by unanimous support of the American people. Four years later when he finally did step down, the scene was set for a bitter fight to assume his mantle. The Federalist John Adams and the Republican Thomas Jefferson squared off in the infamous election of 1796 and again in 1800. Historians have declared that the 1800 election could have very well been the most vicious campaign in American History. Both sides slandered the other in a vain attempt to gain power. “Dumpster diving” newspaper reporters were employed to find, or make up, dirt on political opponents. When it was all settled, Adams won the battle for the Presidency in 1796, though he might have lost the greater War of Historical importance. Jefferson, who finished second, was named Vice-President according to the current law of the land, and would go on to win the Presidency in 1800.

Although by 1800 Adams and Jefferson were bitter enemies, this was not always so. During the 1780’s both men had served in Europe as ambassadors of the United States, Jefferson in France and Adams in Britain. During this time a strong bond was forged between the two. So much so that Adams referred to his son John Quincy as “our” when talking about him to Jefferson. Adams stated that John Quincy almost considered Jefferson to be a second father to him. Likewise, Abigail Adams serves as a powerful feminine influence to the widower Jefferson. In her forthright manner, she implored him to send for his daughter living in America so that his family would be united. Jefferson eventually took her counsel with Abigail actually picking up Jefferson’s daughter when her ship docked in England. Abigail stated that her husband John had no closer confidant in the world than Thomas Jefferson. They were the stereotypical example of opposites attracting. Adams was a short stocky, outspoken Northerner from Massachusetts with a legendary temper. Jefferson was a tall, lean, bookish Southerner who hated confrontation. Their friendship flourished while in Europe, but was severely strained once they jointly served in Washington’s cabinet, and was all but destroyed by the election of 1800.

The first twelve years of the Presidency saw a Federalist in power. Though technically Washington was a political neutral, his policies were so heavily influenced by Hamilton that he is largely considered a Federalist; and Adams was clearly a Federalist. But Jefferson’s 1800 election ushered in twenty-four years of Republican dominance. Jefferson served from 1801-1809, followed by his protégé, and fellow Virginian James Madison from 1809-1817, followed once more by another Virginian James Monroe from 1817-1825. During this period of Republican dominance, the Nation grew in numbers and in land. Jefferson’s Louisiana Purchase, considered the greatest real estate deal in History, doubled the size of the country for a paltry $15 million. It was also during these years that Jefferson’s legacy began to grow and become enshrined in American lore. As Jefferson and the Republicans grew in stature, the Federalists of John Adams day began to wither. In 1824, Adams’ son John Quincy won the Presidency only to lose it after one term to a Southerner, Andrew Jackson. While Jefferson’s name grew more famous and John Adams grew more forgotten the two had an amazing reconciliation in their later years.

Benjamin Rush, who had served with both Jefferson and Adams in the Continental Congress, had kept up correspondence with both men; and he pleaded with them both to contact each other. Finally on New Years Day 1811 John Adams picked up a pen and wrote wishing Holiday wishes to his old friend and enemy. Jefferson wrote back in what would be the first of 158 letters to go back in forth between the two. They discussed everything from books to philosophy to education to religion. When Adams’ beloved with Abigail passed away in 1818, Jefferson consoled his friend as no others could, having lost his own wife Martha at the age of 39 and remaining a widower to the end. In 1826, the curtain was closing on these two lions of the American Revolution. Adams, 90, and Jefferson, 83, were both in poor health. As providence would have it, John Adams passed away on July 4, 1826; the 50^th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. His final words were: “Jefferson survives.” Though unbeknownst to him, his final words were in error; for Thomas Jefferson in had passed away in Virginia five hours earlier. Thus two of the most influential men in American History, the second and third Presidents of the United States both died on the 50^th anniversary of the Nation’s Independence. An eerie coincidence that many read as a sign from Heaven that America was indeed a gift from God to the world. A nation where freedom would exist unlike any other nation in world history. A freedom that would have to be fought for and defended on countless battle fields. And a freedom that would have to be protected in government from those within the nation who would seek to undermine and even destroy it.

Jefferson’s political descendants remain. They can be seen in all liberty loving Americans who want nothing more than to live their lives in peace and earn a living by the sweat of their brow. They can be seen in the local and state governments that believe they can better serve their people than a faraway Federal dictator can. They can be seen in the home schooling parents that wish to provide a solid Christian education to their children without the atheistic and secular control of a government that scoffs at all they believe in. They can be seen in a movement of Conservatism that seeks relief from overbearing taxation that punishes hard work and robs citizens of the finances that are rightfully theirs. Jefferson’s political descendants can be seen in those who truly believe that “we hold these truths to be self-evident (and sacred). That all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Jefferson’s personal belief was that “all men” included black men as he sought early in his career to see slavery abolished. Today his political descendants can be seen in those who stand up for the equal rights and opportunities granted to black, white, male, female, children born and unborn. Though occasionally taken to an extreme, the majority of Jefferson’s political descendants can be seen in the faces of hard working, truth seeking, liberty loving Americans who work hard for their families, and expect their government to work hard for them; rather than against them. Jefferson’s political descendants are there. They live daily in what many would call the political right. Adams’ and Hamilton’s political descendants exist today as well in a position that has veered so far to the left and away from anything any of the founders would have ever dreamed of. Indeed many within 21^st century America seek to take the Federalist philosophy to a totalitarian extreme. Re-enslaving the people to overwhelming taxation; government banned religion, and legalized infanticide.

The “American Experiment” has now lasted well over 200 years, but will America remain the world power and bastion of freedom it once was? Excessive governmental control is the very antithesis of liberty, but Federal control is mushrooming in our nation today. The election of Barack Obama as President has caused the radical, left to seize power…and the results will be nothing short of catastrophic to the American people, and the cause of liberty. It’s a fight that has existed since our Nation’s inception, and it will continue one. Will government be your Master? Or will it be your Servant? In a free society like ours….the people decide. The question remains….which will they choose…and what will become of our once cherished Nation of Freedom and Liberty.

Posted in History, Current Events, Political Issues | Print | No Comments »