| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 5/25 |
| 2002/5/2-3 [Reference/Religion] UID:24684 Activity:very high |
5/2 Don't forget to pray:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/04/20020426-2.html
\_ I like the stuff about "In the year of our Lord." I like that
inclusive part of Our Christian Nation. I think I'll burn a
cross today.
\_ i'll just pray for the democrats to come up with a real
candidate for 2004 so we can get this neandrathal motherfucker
\_ It's telling that you
can't spell this, but
can spell motherfucker.
out of office.
\_ How about a candidate (anyone, dem or rep) that will stand
up and say NO to foreign aid. FUCK the foreign aid to
Israel and Egypt. FUCK THEM ALL! They want to kill
themselves, go ahead. the US doesn't owe them jack shit.
\_ Ah, to be blissfully ignorant of international
dependencies.
\_ Just be prepared for the occasional 767 flying into a
densely occupied and important skyscraper.
\_ Sorry, I'm still burning a cross. Maybe a flag too. I'm
out to offend people right now.
\_ The teaching of Christ and the Bible are evil,
what a HORRIBLE foundation for modern
society. A much better mantra: do what feels
good and assume no personal responsibility.
\_ Yeah.. it's too bad christians, to a person,
continuously miss the point of the teachings
of christ, making hedonism seem a valid
alternative.
\_ Exactly, thats why you should let other
dictate how you think and act, especially
the press, Europe, and the U.N.
\_ Wow. You completely missed _my_ point
as well.
\_ If someone doesn't "get" your point
you must consider that maybe it's
your fault for lacking clarity and not
entirely the reader's fault. Your
followup sure didn't clarify anything.
\_ Not that this needs to be stated,
but... you're an idiot.
\_ http://www.tshirthell.com/insensitive.htm if you really
are serious about offending people
\_ What happened to separation of church and state?
\_ Nothing in particular. They still have an opening prayer in
Congress. What's up with all you stupid ignorant fucks who
think this country has always had some magical line between
religion and government thicked than your skulls? It's a myth,
a fantasy, a delusion created by liars, the ignorant and the
psychotic. You don't even know what the principle of separation
is about. It has zippo to do with Bush talking about God.
\_ It's in the 1st Amendment. Nat'l Prayer is establishing
religion.
\_ Oh nonsense. The President talking about God in some
random speech is not the instituting of National Prayer or
a National Religion. Take it to alt.conspiracy. And oh
yeah, here's the FULL TEXT of the 1st amendment:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of
religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or
abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the
right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition
the government for a redress of grievances." Ignorant
fucking hippies....
\_ there has been a slow erosion since WWII. The "under god"
portion of the Pledge of Allegiance is new too (1954).
\_ So is "In God We Trust". The original motto was
"E Pluribus Unum", but that was changed in the 50s.
\_ Slow erosion of what? You're nuts. Here's a quote from
the God Damned Declaration of Indepence. It's the very
first line, btw: "When in the Course of human events, it
becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political
bands which have connected them with another, and to
assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and
equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's
God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of
mankind requires that they should declare the causes which
impel them to the separation." Hey did you catch how those
old dead white dudes snuck in that evil stuff about G-d???
Really scary stuff! Wowzerz! Who knew? And oh my G-D!!!
There's another mention of the Creator(!!!) in the very
next line!!! I need a new country and I need it now!
http://www.religioustolerance.org/nat_mott.htm
\_ hey moron, the Decleration of Independence has NOTHING
to do with our government. Nada.
\_ Yeah it was only written by most of the same folks
(dead rich white wasp men) who wrote the constitution
and bill of rights. Yeah, nothing, uh huh.
\_ The Declaration of Independence has no i
other people shove their religion down my throat.
laws in it. The government is made of
laws. Think of the DoI as sort of a
"mission statement." And take a intro
to law class, please. You rube.
\_ The founding fathers concept of "Nature's God" was
completely different from the post WWII Christian
God that has steadily been working its way into our
government. The founders were also very keen on keeping
the Christian God out of our gov (there isn't a single
mention of god in the constitution) and they would have
not have been happy with the current state of events.
\_ You could not be more incorrect. On what *facts*
do you base this assertion, or is it your
'opinion'. Everything you wanted to know
about the intent of the original founders
is in the Federalist Papers and other
writings. You can try to
twist history to your liberal secular
agenda on the MOTD, but their own statements
reveal you to be a farce. All you have
to do is READ the First Amendment. But's lets
be honest, activist judges have vastly
accelerated the trashing of the Constitution
since FDR, so its a moot point anyways.
\_ Have you read the constitution? Not one
mention of god. Not even in the oath of
office. The only mention of religion is
other people shoving their religion down my throat.
that no religious test would be required
for someone taking public office.
\_ http://www.religioustolerance.org/nat_mott.htm
If you read the arguments put forth by
the opponents of the constitution, you
will find that chief among them was that
the framers had abandoned "christianity"
and had written the constitution so that
anyone could hold public office. The
constitution was written in a secular
fashion for many reasons, some of which
had to do with the deist believes of the
framers. I'm sure you want some links so
here you are:
http://www.postfun.com/pfp/worbois.html
http://www.earlyamerica.com/review/summer97/secular.html
http://candst.tripod.com/tnppage/quote2.htm
\_ please please PLEASE learn something about
Colonial and English history. The whole
point of seperating church and state, and
distancing the christian god from the govern-
ment, is that in England, the King was the
head of the church. Look at the publishing
date of the Federalist Papers. There are
"facts" that back this up.
http://www.dimensional.com/~randl/founders.htm
\_ http://http://www.religioustolerance.org/nat_mott.htm
\_ These links have ZERO to do with the
intention of the founding fathers "The
U.S. National Mottos" - what
is your point? Either way socialist
secular sympathisers have effectively
won. However, when you are finally
able to get rid of the guns, and facism,
or shall we call victory of the
proletariat, finally comes to the free
world, you or your children have no
right to complain. Religious
fanatisism does not exist in the west, all
totalirian regimes have been strictly
atheist and secular.
\_ Wow. Not to confuse this argument with
facts, but... you're an idiot.
\_ Why do people bother posting drivel
like this? You're really not dragging
the poster down at all. Actually when
I see a long post written in decent
English followed by a quickie smear,
it only adds to the belief that they
may be right since you can't come up
anything better.
\_ I agree. When someone as kooky
as our religion loving nutcase
posts a drooling rant, it is
better to let it stand on its
own "merits." You can't argue
with someone whose belief is
based on faith, not reason.
\_ A bit more subtle but still just
a personal attack. Nice try.
How about you take a shot at
responding to his last point
about religious extremism in the
West vs. other parts of the
world. Then maybe you won't
look so intellectually weak.
\_ I have better things to do
than try and teach you
history. Look up Reformation
and Counter-Reformation in
any good reference to start.
\_ Not to mention the timothy
mcveighs and abortion bombers
and KKK members of the world.
Get a fucking clue.
\_ Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!
\_ I did. Nothing new about persecution
of religious minorities even then.
\_ Nice to see them working on pragmatic solutions.
\_ Like it or not, the civilization you live in today
is the product of 2000 years of Christianity. Exactly
what is so offensive about spirituality?
\_ I have nothing against spirituality. I have everything against
other people shoving their religion down my throat. [formatd]
\_ What other people would that be?
\_ The president of the United States.
\_ And he's forcing you to commit Christian acts of
kindness how exactly? I don't recall hearing news of
the "Twice A Year Mandatory Christianity" bill getting
a lot of support in Congress. You sound like one of
those whining atheism-as-religion fanatics that make
us real atheist look like hypocritical crackpots. You
do real atheists a disservice with your noise.
\_ By virtue of holding a powerful position, the
urging of prayer by an elected leader can make
those uncomfortable with prayer feel uncomfortable
in their civic position. This is the drive behind
the separation of church and state, and the quaker
movement in general. Oh, also: atheism, while not
a religion, is, by naature, a religious choice.
The general intolorance to that choice is what the
previous poster is concerned with. |
| 5/25 |
|
| www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/04/20020426-2.html In times of trial, we ask God for wisdom, courage, direction, and comfort. We offer thanks for the countless blessings God has provided. And we thank God for sanctifying every human life by creating each of us in His image. As we observe this National Day of Prayer, we call upon the Almighty to continue to bless America and her people. Especially since September 11, millions of Americans have been led to prayer. They have prayed for comfort in a time of grief, for understanding in a time of anger, and for protection in a time of uncertainty. We have all seen God's great faithfulness to our country. America's enemies sought to weaken and destroy us through acts of terror. None of us would ever wish on anyone what happened on September 11th. Yet tragedy and sorrow none of us would choose have brought forth wisdom, courage, and generosity. In the face of terrorist attacks, prayer provided Americans with hope and strength for the journey ahead. We give thanks for our families and loved ones, for the abundance of our land and the fruits of labor, for our inalienable rights and liberties, and for a great Nation that leads the world in efforts to preserve those rights and liberties. We give thanks for all those across the world who have joined with America in the fight against terrorism. We give thanks for the men and women of our military, who are fighting to defend our Nation and the future of civilization. We continue to remember those who are suffering and face hardships. On this National Day of Prayer, I encourage Americans to remember the words of St. BUSH, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim May 2, 2002, as a National Day of Prayer. I ask Americans to pray for God's protection, to express gratitude for our blessings, and to seek moral and spiritual renewal. I urge all our citizens to join in observing this day with appropriate programs, ceremonies, and activities. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-sixth day of April, in the year of our Lord two thousand two, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and twenty-sixth. BUSH # # # 81 Printer-Friendly Version 82 President | 83 Vice President | 84 First Lady | 85 Mrs. |
| www.tshirthell.com/insensitive.htm -> www.tshirthell.com/ TSHIRT HELL: FUNNY TSHIRTS | CRAZY TSHIRTS | COOL TSHIRTS | TEES! Looking for a funny t-shirt, a cool t-shirt, a crazy t-shirt? |
| www.religioustolerance.org/nat_mott.htm On 1776-JUL-4, Congress appointed John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and Thomas Jefferson to prepare a design for the Great Seal of the United States. Five other designs also failed to meet with Congress' approval during the next five years. Thomson, Secretary of Congress, to complete the project. Thomson, along with a friend named Barton, produced a design that was accepted by Congress on 1782-JUN-10. It included an eagle with a heart-shaped shield, holding arrows and an olive branch in its claws. The motto "E Pluribus Unum" appeared on a scroll held in its beak. Watkinson of Ridleyville PA was the first of many to write a letter to the Secretary of the Treasury Salmon P. The phrase was a subtle reminder that the Union was on the side of God regarding slavery. It also has appeared on all gold coins and silver dollar coins, half-dollar coins, and quarter-dollar coins struck since" 1908-JUL-1. Decades later, Theodore Roosevelt disapproved of the motto. It is a motto which it is indeed well to have inscribed on our great national monuments, in our temples of justice, in our legislative halls, and in building such as those at West Point and Annapolis -- in short, wherever it will tend to arouse and inspire a lofty emotion in those who look thereon. Atheism, and Western capitalistic democracies, which were at least nominally Christian. The phrase "Atheistic Communists" has been repeated so many times that the public has linked Atheism with communism; Many consider Atheism as unpatriotic and "un-American" as is communism. The new motto was first used on paper money in 1957, when it was added to the one-dollar silver certificate. By 1966, "In God we Trust" was added to all paper money, from $1 to $100 denominations. Humanistic legislators at the federal and state levels, few if any are willing to reveal their beliefs, because of the immense prejudice against Atheism. During the 1950's the federal government's references to God multiplied: bullet The phrase "under God" was added to the otherwise secular Pledge of Allegiance. The "In God we Trust" motto promotes theistic religion at the expense of non theistic religion and a secular lifestyle. It promotes the belief in a single, male deity which is followed by the Abramic religions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam; It would seem to violate the principle of 8 separation of church and state. Agnostics, 10 Atheists, 11 Buddhists, 12 Hindus, 13 Wiccans, other 14 Neopagans, and others are offended by the motto. However, the religious motto has been challenged by three lawsuits and has been found to be constitutional. The courts basically found that the motto does not endorse religion. The United States District Court, Western District of Texas, referring to the wording of the Ninth Circuit above, ruled that: "From this it is easy to deduce that the Court concluded that the primary purpose of the slogan was secular; |
| www.postfun.com/pfp/worbois.html To speak of unalienable Rights being endowed by a Creator certainly shows a sensitivity to our spiritual selves. What is surprising is when fundamentalist Christians think the Founding Fathers' faith had anything to do with the Bible. Without exception, the faith of our Founding Fathers was deist, not theist. Here is what our Founding Fathers wrote about Bible-based Christianity: Thomas Jefferson: I have examined all the known superstitions of the world, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; Rogueries, absurdities and untruths were perpetrated upon the teachings of Jesus by a large band of dupes and importers led by Paul, the first great corrupter of the teaching of Jesus. John Adams: Where do we find a precept in the Bible for Creeds, Confessions, Doctrines and Oaths, and whole carloads of other trumpery that we find religion encumbered with in these days? Also Adams: The doctrine of the divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity. Article 11 states: The Government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion. Here's Thomas Paine: I would not dare to so dishonor my Creator God by attaching His name to that book (the Bible). Among the most detestable villains in history, you could not find one worse than Moses. Here is an order, attributed to 'God' to butcher the boys, to massacre the mothers and to debauch and rape the daughters. I would not dare so dishonor my Creator's name by (attaching) it to this filthy book (the Bible). It is the duty of every true Deist to vindicate the moral justice of God against the evils of the Bible. The Christian church has set up a religion of pomp and revenue in pretended imitation of a person (Jesus) who lived a life of poverty. Finally let's hear from James Madison: What influence in fact have Christian ecclesiastical establishments had on civil society? In many instances they have been upholding the thrones of political tyranny. In no instance have they been seen as the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wished to subvert the public liberty have found in the clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate liberty, does not need the clergy. Madison objected to state-supported chaplains in Congress and to the exemption of churches from taxation. He wrote: Religion and government will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together. These founding fathers were a reflection of the American population. Having escaped from the state-established religions of Europe, only 7% of the people in the 13 colonies belonged to a church when the Declaration of Independence was signed. Among those who confuse Christianity with the founding of America, the rise of conservative Baptists is one of the more interesting developments. The Baptists believed God's authority came from the people, not the priesthood, and they had been persecuted for this belief. It was they--the Baptists--who were instrumental in securing the separation of church and state. They knew you can not have a "one-way wall" that lets religion into government but that does not let it out. They knew no religion is capable of handling political power without becoming corrupted by it. And, perhaps, they knew it was Christ himself who first proposed the separation of church and state: Give unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and unto the Lord that which is the Lord's. In the last five years the Baptists have been taken over by a fundamentalist faction that insists authority comes from the Bible and that the individual must accept the interpretation of the Bible from a higher authority. These usurpers of the Baptist faith are those who insist they should meddle in the affairs of the government and it is they who insist the government should meddle in the beliefs of individuals. Religious fundamentalism and zealous patriotism have always been the forces which require the greatest attention. Since then we've received volumes of mail from politically conservative Christians supplying us with quotes from public speeches made by the authors above. While most of these author politicians were diplomatic in their public expressions concerning religion, in their private conversations, voluminous writings and correspondences they expressed contrary beliefs. If a politician appears one way in public and another in private, which do you think better represents their true beliefs? How do you reconcile the inflamatory writings above with various pro-Christian statements that the same men made in public over the course of their careers? Could it be called "politics," an attempt to appease Christians while ensuring a more rational government based on the separation of church and state? In addition, the Editor does not recognize any religious intentions of the so-called "Founding Fathers" as relevant to discussions of political process today. |
| www.earlyamerica.com/review/summer97/secular.html Although they supported the free exercise of any religion, they understood the dangers of religion. Most of them believed in deism and attended Freemasonry lodges. Masonry welcomed anyone from any religion or non-religion, as long as they believed in a Supreme Being. Washington, Franklin, Hancock, Hamilton, Lafayette, and many others accepted Freemasonry. The Constitution reflects our founders views of a secular government, protecting the freedom of any belief or unbelief. The historian, Robert Middlekauff, observed, "the idea that the Constitution expressed a moral view seems absurd. Weems, a Christian minister portrayed Washington as a devout Christian, yet Washington's own diaries show that he rarely attended Church. Washington revealed almost nothing to indicate his spiritual frame of mind, hardly a mark of a devout Christian. In his thousands of letters, the name of Jesus Christ never appears. He rarely spoke about his religion, but his Freemasonry experience points to a belief in deism. Washington's initiation occurred at the Fredericksburg Lodge on 4 November 1752, later becoming a Master mason in 1799, and remained a freemason until he died. In many of his letters, he denounced the superstitions of Christianity. He did not believe in spiritual souls, angels or godly miracles. Although Jefferson did admire the morality of Jesus, Jefferson did not think him divine, nor did he believe in the Trinity or the miracles of Jesus. In a letter to Ezra Stiles Ely, 25 June 1819, he wrote, "You say you are a Calvinist. In a letter to Thomas Jefferson, he wrote: "I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved -- the Cross. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; In 1785, Madison wrote in his Memorial and Remonstrance against Religious Assessments: "During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity; In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. His Autobiography revels his skepticism, "My parents had given me betimes religions impressions, and I received from my infancy a pious education in the principles of Calvinism. But scarcely was I arrived at fifteen years of age, when, after having doubted in turn of different tenets, according as I found them combated in the different books that I read, I began to doubt of Revelation itself. It happened that they wrought an effect on my quite contrary to what was intended by them; The primitive Christians thought persecution extremely wrong in the Pagans, but practiced it on one another. The first Protestants of the Church of England blamed persecution in the Romish church, but practiced it upon the Puritans. Although he held Deist beliefs, he wrote in his famous The Age of Reason: "I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. Constitution The most convincing evidence that our government did not ground itself upon Christianity comes from the very document that defines it-- the United States Constitution. If indeed our Framers had aimed to found a Christian republic, it would seem highly unlikely that they would have forgotten to leave out their Christian intentions in the Supreme law of the land. In fact, nowhere in the Constitution do we have a single mention of Christianity, God, Jesus, or any Supreme Being. There occurs only two references to religion and they both use exclusionary wording. The 1st Amendment's says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. Indeed they do not, but neither does it exactly say "freedom of religion," yet the First Amendment implies both. Only a secular government, divorced from religion could possibly allow such tolerant diversity. However, the God in the Declaration does not describe Christianity's God. Today, the Declaration represents an important historical document about rebellious intentions against Great Britain at a time before the formation of our independent government. Although the Declaration may have influential power, it may inspire the lofty thoughts of poets, and judges may mention it in their summations, it holds no legal power today. Our presidents, judges and policemen must take an oath to uphold the Constitution, but never to the Declaration of Independence. Of course the Declaration depicts a great political document, as it aimed at a future government upheld by citizens instead of a religious monarchy. It observed that all men "are created equal" meaning that we all come inborn with the abilities of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The establishment of a secular government did not require a reflection to themselves about its origin; For this reason, an insight from at a little known but legal document written in the late 1700s explicitly reveals the secular nature of the United States to a foreign nation. Officially called the "Treaty of peace and friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli, of Barbary," most refer to it as simply the Treaty of Tripoli. Consul General of Algiers Copyright National Portait Gallery Smithsonian Institution/Art Resource NY "As the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion; Joel Barlow, the American diplomat served as counsel to Algiers and held responsibility for the treaty negotiations. Barlow had once served under Washington as a chaplain in the revolutionary army. He became good friends with Paine, Jefferson, and read Enlightenment literature. Later he abandoned Christian orthodoxy for rationalism and became an advocate of secular government. Barlow, along with his associate, Captain Richard O'Brien, et al, translated and modified the Arabic version of the treaty into English. Timothy Pickering, the secretary of state, endorsed it and John Adams concurred (now during his presidency), sending the document on to the Senate. The Senate approved the treaty on June 7, 1797, and officially ratified by the Senate with John Adams signature on 10 June, 1797. All during this multi-review process, the wording of Article 11 never raised the slightest concern. The treaty even became public through its publication in The Philadelphia Gazette on 17 June 1797. So here we have a clear admission by the United States that our government did not found itself upon Christianity. They use various quotes from Supreme Court Justices proclaiming that Christianity came as part of the laws of England, and therefore from its common law heritage. But one of our principle Founding Fathers, Thomas Jefferson, elaborated about the history of common law in his letter to Thomas Cooper on February 10, 1814: "For we know that the common law is that system of law which was introduced by the Saxons on their settlement in England, and altered from time to time by proper legislative authority from that time to the date of Magna Charta, which terminates the period of the common law. This settlement took place about the middle of the fifth century. But Christianity was not introduced till the seventh century; Here then, was a space of two hundred years, during which the common law was in existence, and Christianity no part of it. These were so far alterations of the common law, and became themselves a part of it. But none of these adopt Christianity as a part of the common law. Jefferson realized that a misinterpretation had occurred with a La... |
| candst.tripod.com/tnppage/quote2.htm Each founder is linked to a separate article that explains his beliefs about church and state. Note: we've only just begun to research this section in detail. Only a few names on this list are now linked to separate articles. We will add more to this section as we have time, but it's going to take a long time, and we'd love to have help. |
| www.dimensional.com/~randl/founders.htm They try to depict the founding fathers as pious Christians who wanted the United States to be a Christian nation, with laws that favored Christians and Christianity. The early presidents and patriots were generally Deists or Unitarians, believing in some form of impersonal Providence but rejecting the divinity of Jesus and the absurdities of the Old and New testaments. Washington Championed the cause of freedom from religious intolerance and compulsion. When John Murray (a universalist who denied the existence of hell) was invited to become an army chaplain, the other chaplains petitioned Washington for his dismissal. On his deathbed, Washinton uttered no words of a religious nature and did not call for a clergyman to be in attendance. He wrote that he found among the lawyers 'noble and gallant achievments" but among the clergy, the "pretended sanctity of some absolute dunces". John as "the ravings of a maniac" and wrote: The Christian priesthood, finding the doctrines of Christ levelled to every understanding and too plain to need explanation, saw, in the mysticisms of Plato, materials with which they might build up an artificial system which might, from its indistinctness, admit everlasting controversy, give employment for their order, and introduce it to profit, power, and pre-eminence. The doctrines which flowed from the lips of Jesus himself are within the comprehension of a child; Adams April 11,1823) James Madison, fourth president and father of the Constitution, was not religious in any conventional sense. New York, NY) quoting a letter by JM to William Bradford April 1, 1774, and James Madison, A Biography in his Own Words, edited by Joseph Gardner, p. From: Benjamin Franklin, A Biography in his Own Words, edited by Thomas Fleming, p. Wells in his Outline of History, says: "It was a Western European civilization that had broken free from the last traces of Empire and Christendom; The absence of any binding religious tie is especially noteworthy. It had a number of forms of Christianity, its spirit was indubitably Christian; |