Wednesday, June 9, 2021
Friday, May 7, 2021
Tuesday, March 30, 2021
March 3, 2021 [This letter was sent to John Rooke on March 4, 2021 via registered mail. I noticed today, March 14, 2021 that the floor number was incorrect. I have changed it to the 24th floor and will be sending this same letter on March 15th , 2021 via registered mail.] From: Helen Dorothy [Mowat] 196057 - 82 Street West Foothills, Alberta (no postal code, non secular] John Rooke Calgary Court Centre 24th floor – N, 601 5th Street S.W. Calgary, Alberta John Rooke, private man Re: Case Number #SES01 118769 Hello. I am writing to you as a private woman in your private capacity. Jesus tells all of his children to make things simple and non confrontational and I want to follow his directions with an agreement from you. I have read the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). I also plan on reading Canada's Emergency Act as it is part of the (ICCPR). I want to know if you recognize this covenant (ICCPR) as binding upon your office should I make a Demand for Accommodation of my religious faith and beliefs. I look forward to receiving a reply from you. Blessings, Helen Dorothy, Christian name with a surname [Mowat]
Sunday, February 21, 2021
Biological Weapons, Bioterrorism, and Vaccines Military Smallpox Vaccination Military smallpox vaccination Department of Defense Military Smallpox Vaccination ACAM2000 vaccine A biological attack by terrorists or a national power may seem more like a plot element in an action film than a realistic threat. And indeed, the possibility of such an attack may be very remote. Biological attacks, however, have occurred in the past, one as recently at 2001. Accordingly, a collection of U.S. government agencies are involved in planning responses to potential biological attacks. Bioweapon threats could include the deliberate release by attackers of an agent that causes one or more of a variety of different diseases. Public health authorities have developed a system to prioritize biological agents according to their risk to national security. Category A agents are the highest priority, and these are disease agents that pose a risk to national security because they can be transmitted from person to person and/or result in high mortality, and/or have high potential to cause social disruption. These are anthrax, botulism (via botulinum toxin, which is not passable from person to person), plague, smallpox, tularemia, and a collection of viruses that cause hemorrhagic fevers, such as Ebola, Marburg, Lassa, and Machupo. These disease agents exist in nature (with the exception of smallpox, which has been eradicated in the wild), but they could be manipulated to make them more dangerous. Category B agents are moderately easy to disseminate and result in low mortality. These include brucellosis, glanders, Q fever, ricin toxin, typhus fever, and other agents. Category C agents include emerging disease agents that could be engineered for mass dissemination in the future, such as Nipah virus. (This index of possible threats from the CDC lists all Category A, B, and C agents. Note that chemical weapons, such as those involving nonbiological substances such as chlorine gas, are not included.) The use of effective vaccines would likely protect lives and limit disease spread in a biological weapons emergency. Licensed vaccines are currently available for a few threats, such as anthrax and smallpox, and research is underway to develop and produce vaccines for other threats, such as tularemia, Ebola virus, and Marburg virus. Many bioweapon disease threats, however, lack a corresponding vaccine, and for those that do, significant challenges exist to their successful use in an emergency situation. What Is a Bioterror Threat? The draft Model State Emergency Health Powers Act of 2001, which is a document designed to guide legislative bodies as they draft laws regarding public health emergencies, has defined bioterrorism as “the intentional use of any microorganism, virus, infectious substance, or biological product that may be engineered as a result of biotechnology, or any naturally occurring or bioengineered component of any such microorganism, virus, infectious substance, or biological product, to cause death, disease, or other biological malfunction in a human, an animal, a plant, or another living organism in order to influence the conduct of government or to intimidate or coerce a civilian population.” Biological warfare and bioterrorism are often used interchangeably, but bioterrorism usually refers to acts committed by a sub-national entity, rather than a country. How Likely Is a Biological Attack to Happen? Expert opinions differ on the plausibility of a biological attack. The U.S. Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the National Intelligence Council stated in 2008 that bioterrorism is a more likely threat than nuclear terrorism. That same year, U.S. Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell revealed that of all weapons of mass destruction, biological weapons were his personal greatest worry (McConnell, 2008). Other defense experts and scientists insist that the possibility of any attack, especially a large-scale one, is small, given the immense challenges to cultivating, weaponizing, and deploying biological agents. For example, the technical difficulties in aerosolizing a disease agent and dispersing it accurately and widely while maintaining its virulence are immense. Regardless, most biosecurity experts acknowledge that the potential of an attack should not be ignored. Moreover, preparations for a biological attack will likely benefit the response to other kinds of public health emergencies. History Biological Weapons Biological weapons are not just a 21st century concern: humans have used infectious agents in conflicts for hundreds of years. Below are a few examples. In a 1336 attempt to infect besieged city dwellers, Mongol attackers in what is now the Ukraine used catapults to hurl the bodies of bubonic plague victims over the city walls of Caffa. Tunisian forces used plague-tainted clothing as a weapon in the 1785 siege of La Calle. British officers discussed plans to intentionally transmit smallpox to Native Americans during Pontiac’s Rebellion near Fort Pitt (present-day Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) in 1763. It is not clear whether they actually carried out these plans. But, whatever its source, smallpox did spread among Natives Americans in the area during and after that rebellion. The Japanese used plague as a biological weapon during the Sino-Japanese War in the late 1930s and 1940s. They filled bombs with plague-infected fleas and dropped them from airplanes onto two Chinese cities; they also used cholera and shigella as weapons in other attacks. An estimated 580,000 Chinese people died as a result of the Japanese bioweapons program (Martin et al., 2007). The U.S. military developed biological weapons and investigated their effects in the 20th century. The U.S. Army’s Biological Warfare Laboratories was based at Camp (later Fort) Detrick, Maryland, from 1949 to 1969. The program produced and weaponized several biological agents, including anthrax and botulinum toxin, though the biological weapons were never used in conflicts. President Richard Nixon ended the biological weapons program 1969, and U.S. biological weapons were destroyed. U.S. research into biological weapons since that time has focused on defensive measures, such as immunization and response. In 1975, the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC) came into force. More than 100 nations, including the United States, have ratified this international treaty, which aims to end the development and production of bioweapons. In spite of the agreement, bioweapon threats from fringe groups, terrorists, and nations not committed to or observing the convention continue to worry public health authorities. The former Soviet Union is known to have produced large quantities of smallpox virus and many other disease agents in its bioweapons program long after it signed the BTWC. In the 1970s, it stockpiled tons of smallpox virus and maintained production capability at least until 1990. The Soviet Union also sponsored an anthrax weapon program; an accidental release of a small amount of weaponized anthrax from a military research facility in 1979 led to at least 70 deaths. The U.S.S.R. claimed that it destroyed its bioweapons stock and dismantled the bioweapons program in the late 1980s, but most experts are skeptical that all stocks, equipment, and records were destroyed. They regard it as possible that illicit transfer of biological materials or knowledge has occurred. So, while only two known sources of smallpox virus exist, both in World Health Organization reference laboratories, many suspect that other groups—whether national or subnational—may have unknown quantities of smallpox virus as well as other remnants of the Soviet biological weapons program. On a similar note, in the 1990s Iraq admitted to United Nations inspectors that it had produced thousands of tons of concentrated botulinum toxin and had developed bombs to deploy large quantities of botulinum toxin and anthrax. Though the Iraqi government abandoned its bioweapons program after the first Iraq war, the status and whereabouts of the large quantities of infectious material they developed are not known. Other groups of current concern to biosecurity experts include Al Qaeda, which had a large-scale bioweapons effort in Afghanistan. This was destroyed when the U.S. bombed its facilities and training camps in 2001. Al Qaeda’s program today is likely to be much smaller in scale because so much of its material and intellectual capital was destroyed. Most experts think that Al Qaeda’s current attempts to reconstitute the weapons are focused on chemical weapons rather than on biological ones. At a national level, a 2007 U.S. military assessment of biological threats included the following overview of bioweapons programs, “According to an unclassified U.S. Department of State report in 2005, nations suspected of continued offensive biological warfare programs in violation of the BWC [Biological Weapons Convention] include China, Iran, North Korea, Russia, Syria, and possibly Cuba” (Martin et al., 2007). Contemporary U.S. Attacks Oregon followers of Indian guru Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh mounted an attack that sickened nearly 800 people with typhoid fever in 1984. Cult members introduced bacteria into salad bars and other restaurant food receptacles after their attempts to contaminate the local water supply failed. They hoped to influence local election results by preventing residents from voting. Though 43 people were hospitalized, no one was killed, and the wrongdoers were prosecuted. A more recent U.S. biological attack occurred just after the Al Qaeda attacks of September 11, 2001, on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. An unknown actor mailed a powder containing infectious anthrax spores to two U.S. senators and several media outlets. Five people died from anthrax after exposure to the material in the letters, and 17 became ill. Medical personnel offered the anthrax vaccine as post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) to 1,727 potentially exposed people who were also taking antibiotics to counter anthrax. Of those people, 199 agreed to take the vaccine and received all doses of it. Law enforcement investigators reached the conclusion that a U.S. biodefense researcher who worked for a military laboratory at Fort Detrick conducted the attacks. The researcher, Bruce Ivins, killed himself in 2008 during the investigation. Ivins, however, was never formally charged with a crime, and no direct evidence links him to the attacks. Speculation about his motives centers on Ivins’s investment in maintaining national interest in an anthrax vaccine he worked on and also on his apparent mental instability. In fact, one might argue that these attacks should be considered a biocrime rather than bioterror incident if the motive was not an attempt to influence the conduct of government or to intimidate a civilian population. Preparation for Biological Attacks In 2001, before the 9/11 attacks, several U.S. agencies and academic groups conducted a simulated biological attack, codenamed Dark Winter, in which smallpox virus was the weapon. The exercise, which operated on an assumption of about 12 million available doses of smallpox vaccine, based on the then-available stores of smallpox vaccine, “demonstrated serious weaknesses in the public health system that could prevent an effective response to bioterrorism or severe naturally occurring infectious diseases” (“Overview of Potential Agents of Biological Terrorism,” Southern Illinois University School of Medicine). One key weakness exposed in the exercise was a shortage of vaccine; this has since been addressed, at least in the case of smallpox, with the addition of hundreds of millions of doses of smallpox vaccine to U.S. vaccine reserves. Other difficulties exposed were the conflicts between federal and state priorities in managing resources, a shortage of medical infrastructure to deal with mass casualties, and the crucial need for U.S. citizens to trust and cooperate with leaders. The reaction of those exposed to anthrax in the post-9/11 attacks illustrates the challenges embedded in the latter issue: a study published in 2008 suggested that the reticence of many exposed individuals to take the anthrax vaccine reflected their fear of the vaccine’s side effects and distrust of medical personnel (Quinn, 2008). In any large-scale bioterror incident, this distrust may be a major hurdle to effective containment of an infectious agent. Authorities hope that disaster planning and the devising of effective medical countermeasures for biological attacks will both minimize the impact of any such attack and also act as deterrent to those who might consider such an attack. If the attack could be easily contained and addressed, then a terrorist or unfriendly nation might have less incentive to initiate one. Agencies Involved in Bioweapon Response A variety of U.S. federal, state, and local agencies are involved in public health emergency preparedness and response. The U.S. Congress funds the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Office of Public Health Preparedness and Response (PHPR) to build and strengthen national preparedness for public health emergencies caused by natural, accidental, or intentional events. Part of the funding supports the Strategic National Stockpile, which manages stores of vaccines, drugs, and medical supplies that may be deployed in national emergencies. (See below for more on the SNS.) The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) houses several offices involved in public health emergency response. The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR) was created after Hurricane Katrina and is responsible for leadership in prevention, preparation, and response to the adverse health effects of public health emergencies and disasters. ASPR conducts research and builds federal emergency medical operational capabilities. Within ASPR, the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) is responsible for the development and purchase of the necessary vaccines, drugs, therapies, and diagnostic tools for public health medical emergencies. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security includes several groups that address bioweapon threats. The National Biodefense Analysis and Countermeasures Center (NBACC) examines the scientific basis of the risks posed by biological threats. NBACC's National Biological Threat Characterization Center (NBTCC) conducts studies and experiments on current and future biological threats, assesses vulnerabilities and conducts risk assessments, and determines potential impacts to guide the development of countermeasures such as detectors, drugs, vaccines, and decontamination technologies. Other offices are responsible for responding to and analyzing bioweapon attacks after they occur to help investigators identify perpetrators and determine the origin and method of attack. State and local health departments, as well as public and private hospitals and local law enforcement agencies, would also be involved in responding to a bioweapon public health emergency. Their roles are outlined in national response plans and are addressed in detail by organization-specific plans. Role of the Food and Drug Administration The U.S. FDA controls the pathway to licensure for vaccines, treatments, diagnostic tests, and other tools for responding to biological threats. The regulatory requirements for licensure of a vaccine are complex and apply to a multi-step process of safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy testing, and post-licensure surveillance. (See the article Vaccine Development, Testing, and Regulation to read about this non-emergency approval process.) A typical vaccine might be in development and clinical trials for 10 to 20 years before licensure. In situations when a new vaccine is needed quickly, the FDA has developed rapid alternative pathways to licensure. One option is an accelerated approval path that might apply in the case of a life-threatening disease with an unlicensed vaccine that has meaningful therapeutic benefit over existing options. Second, in other, more drastic threats, the so-called animal rule may be invoked—if research toward a vaccine or treatment would necessitate exposing humans to a toxic threat, then animal studies, rather than previously conducted studies in humans, may be sufficient for approval. To date, these two rapid pathways have not been invoked for vaccines. More information is available at the FDA’s Critical Path Initiative. U.S. Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) is an option in pandemic and bioweapon response for both civilian and military populations. After a declaration of emergency by the Department of Health and Human Services secretary, this program allows for use of an unapproved medical product (or a product that has been approved but not for the specific use applicable to the situation at hand) that is the best available treatment or prevention for the threat in question. EUAs were issued for antiviral treatments, a respirator, and a PCR diagnostic test during the 2009 A/H1N1 pandemic. One challenge to licensing vaccines for response to bioweapon threats is the absence of some of these disease agents in the natural world. Vaccine efficacy is more difficult to establish when natural exposure to a pathogen is impossible (as with smallpox and other threats) and when human challenge studies are not feasible. The FDA accepts animal testing for proof of efficacy in these cases. In the fall of 2011, national debate focused on the issue of emergency use of bioweapon vaccines. A simulated anthrax attack code named Dark Zephyr was conducted in February 2011 and raised the questions about the use of anthrax vaccine for post-exposure prophylaxis in children. Researchers have never tested the anthrax vaccine for safety and efficacy in children, though it has been extensively studied in adults and has been given to millions of U.S. servicepeople. After considering the issue in the wake of Dark Zephyr, the National Biodefense Science Board, a federal advisory panel to HHS, decided that testing the vaccine in children is ethically justifiable, given that it would provide information important to the health and well-being of any child victims of an attack. Critics have disputed that thinking, stating that the possibility of an anthrax attack is too remote to justify exposing children to any risk at all. HHS has not established a timeline for further action on studying anthrax vaccine in children. In the meantime, if a bioweapon incident involving anthrax were to occur, adults would be given three doses of the vaccine, along with oral antibiotics, as post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) under Emergency Use Authorization, as the vaccine is not currently licensed for PEP nor for use in a three-dose regimen. Children might receive the vaccine under FDA approval of an investigation new drug protocol (IND). Use of anthrax vaccine in children under an IND protocol is not ideal, as the protocol is more suited to clinical trials or to an emergency situation for a single patient. Vaccine Response to Bioweapon Threats In a wide-scale emergency in which a vaccine is available or potentially available, a large supply of vaccine would be necessary and would be needed quickly. Currently, the U.S. Strategic National Stockpile (SNS) has enough smallpox vaccine to vaccinate every person in the country in the event of a bioweapon attack. The stockpile also holds millions of doses of anthrax vaccine, other vaccines, antiviral medications, and other medical supplies. Quick deployment of a vaccine is essential to its success in preventing disease: for some diseases, vaccinating after exposure may have no effect on preventing disease, and for others, vaccination must occur very quickly after exposure for prophylaxis to work. In the case of smallpox, PEP is most likely to be effective when given within four days of exposure to the virus. Plans provide for smallpox vaccine to be shipped starting on the first day of an attack, and it would continue to be shipped from the stockpile to the rest of the country as needed in the five to six days following the attack. Biosecurity experts have suggested that the use of agents for passive immunization could play a role in response to certain bioweapon attacks. (Passive immunization is the introduction of antibodies taken from immune donors into nonimmune individuals. The “borrowed” antibodies offer short-lived protection from certain diseases. See our article on Passive Immunization for more information.) The advantage of using antibodies rather than vaccines to respond to a bioterror event is that antibodies provide immediate protection, whereas a protective response generated by a vaccine is not immediate and in some cases may depend on a booster dose given at a later date. Candidates for this potential application of passive immunization include botulinum toxin, tularemia, anthrax, and plague. For most of these targets, only animal studies have been conducted, and so the use of passive immunization in potential bioweapon events is still in experimental stages. Conclusion A biological attack by terrorists or an unfriendly nation is a remote possibility that nevertheless demands public health emergency response planning. Several multi-agency simulations have exposed weaknesses in systems designed to respond to biological emergencies. These exercises have helped to focus planning efforts on the need for emergency plans to address the potential for a large bioweapons event to overwhelm medical capabilities, cause widespread illness and death, and lead to economic and social disruption. The successful deployment of vaccines, antibodies, and other medications in a bioweapon event will depend on a number factors, such as how many people the attack has the potential to harm, the stability of the transportation system in an emergency, the availability of viable vaccine and drugs, and the ability of the public health system to communicate with the public and get the vaccines and medications into the people who need them. Sources Arnon, S.A., et al. Botulinum as a biological weapon: Medical and public health management. JAMA 2001;285(8):1059-1070. Accessed 01/10/2018. BARDA Strategic Plan. (337 KB). Accessed 01/10/2018. Ben Ouagrham, S. Biological weapons threats from the former Soviet Union. Working Paper Series on Russia and the Former Soviet States. Liechtenstein Institute on Self-Determination at Princeton University. August 2003. Department of Health and Human Services. Challenges in the use of anthrax vaccine adsorbed (AVA) in the pediatric population as a component of post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP): A Report of the National Biodefense Science Board. [PDF File]. October 2011. (1.3 MB). Retrieved from Homeland Security Digital Library. Accessed 01/10/2018. Fenn, E.A. Biological Warfare in eighteenth-century North America: beyond Jeffery Amherst. Politics and the Life Sciences. Accessed 01/10/2018. Henderson, D.A., Inglesby, T.V., Jr. O’Toole, T., Mortimer, P.P. Can postexposure vaccination against smallpox succeed? Clin In Dis. (2003) 36 (5); 622-629. Accessed 01/10/2018. Global Trends 2030: Alternative Worlds. A publication of the National Intelligence Council. December 2012. (20.5 MB). Accessed 01/10/2018. Martin, J.W., Christropher, G.W., Eitzen, E.M., Jr. History of biological weapons: from poisoned darts to intentional epidemics. [PDF]. Medical Aspects of Biological Warfare. Accessed 01/10/2018. McConnell, M. Remarks and Q&A by the Director of National Intelligence. December 2, 2008. (111 KB). Accessed 01/10/2018. McIsaac, J.H. Preparing hospitals for bioterror: a medical and biomedical systems approach. Burlington, Mass.: Academic Press, 2006. Center for Law and Public Health. Model State Emergency Health Powers Act. A Draft for Discussion Prepared by The Center for Law and the Public’s Health at Georgetown and Johns Hopkins Universities. (88.8 KB). Accessed 01/10/2018. Nightingale, S.L., Prasher, J.M., Simonson, S. Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to enable use of needed products in civilian and military emergencies, United States. Emerg Infect Dis [serial on the Internet]. 2007 Jul. Accessed 01/10/2018. O’Tool, T., Michael, M., Inglesby, T.V. Shining light on "Dark Winter." CID 34:7, 972-983. Accessed 01/10/2018. Quinn, S.C., Thomas, T., Kumar, K. The anthrax vaccine and research: reactions from postal workers and public health professionals. Biosecur Bioterror. 2008 December; 6(4): 321–333. Accessed 01/10/2018. Southern Illinois University School of Medicine. Overview of potential agents of biological terrorism. Accessed 01/10/2018. Stein, R. Possible study of anthrax vaccine’s effectiveness in children stirs debate. Washington Post, 10/13/11. Accessed 01/10/2018. Tucker, J.B. Scourge: the once and future threat of smallpox. New York: Grove Press, 1992. Wheelis, M. Biological warfare at the 1346 siege of Caffa. Emerg Infect Dis [serial online] 2002 Sep. Accessed 01/10/2018. Wilkening, D.A. Sverdlovsk revisited: Modeling human inhalation anthrax. PNAS 103;20:7589-7594. Accessed 01/10/2018. Last update 10 January 2018
Tuesday, February 2, 2021
Thursday, January 21, 2021
Notice of a Demand for Accommodation of faith Church of the Ecumenical Redemption International Edmonton, Ecclesia 12431-90th Street Edmonton Alberta Canada. no code non commercial From minister Edward Jay Robin Tel: 780-399-6250 Fax: 780-609-7227 email@example.com 12431-90th Street Edmonton Alberta Canada 09/27th/2020 To: Attention Nick Nanthos 1 East Main Street Front Royal, Virginia 22630 Telephone: (540) 635-5441 Fax: (540) 635-4864 Dear Nick Nanthos, I am writing you as a private man in your private capacity. I am writing this letter to you privately as a minister of Christ and I introduce myself in our redeemers name Yahushuwah as it was in original Hebrew. I am an ecclesiastical emissary called Edward Jay Robin, writing you from Edmonton Alberta Canada. I do so ecclesiastically on behalf of a fellow follower of the way who has encountered colour of law ordinances of your state and federal government that breach hinder impair and restrict his immutable unalienable inherent freedoms that are protected by International law and Federal code Title 18 ss 242 245 and 247. He suffers from a congenital learning impairment as a disability and has difficulty reading writing speaking on his own behalf and comprehending complex subjects. My duty herein as Dean's minister regarding our communication to you as a private man is to follow what Christ said to do in Matthew 5:25, 18:15-20 in gaining an agreement with you privately for Dean [Harting] as a man under his Creator and his laws, as to the salient unarguable facts. I also honourably approach you as a man as of my and Dean's inability to respect persons in law as so cautioned by the holy scriptures. I am honourably asking you according to recognized law binding on all service providers in the US in a "Demand for accommodation" and in Yahushuwah's name thu his father Yahuwah that you recognize and do agree that the International Covenant on Civil and Political rights is binding and obligatory upon your office. I do this to ensure accuracy in our communication to prevent assumptions, based upon a false premise, from prevailing as so many are unaware of or feign ignorance regarding their duty to obey the ICCPR and it's immutable non derogatable rules that Virginia is bound by. I present this demand along with an Honorable agreement of the facts between you and I and Dean Harting privately as three private men governed by scripture. I will start with Romans 13 and the use of the word "minister" as the subject to whom that chapter says we are to submit ourselves to in observing that wise discernment of rendering the word is always best when attempting to interpret the scriptures as this instant emergent matter requires. Referring to Ezra 7:23-26 in the 1611 King James Bible we both can see that the word minister has 4 conditions mentioned there as ascribed to God's ministers. 1.They are of God's temple 2. They pay no tax. 3. They adjudicate with his law alone! 4. They teach them that do not know it. Now since our Creator commanded that no one add to or take away from God's law at Deuteronomy 4:2, 12:32 and warned us to not walk in the ordinance of heathen in Leviticus 18:3-4 we must observe his command of Exodus 20:3-5 in adhering to only his law and not any other. This means that mans law is in contradiction to God's law as he commanded us to not bow to or serve false gods who add to and take away from his law and attempt to steal his gifted and granted religious property of Genesis 1:26-29 Ezekiel 36: 27And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them. What is the ICCPR? I would like you in honour to agree with me that you are aware that this International covenant is indeed binding upon your office as obligatory imposing a duty to perform when you as a public service provider are in receipt of a demand for accommodation. The ICCPR is a key international human rights treaty, providing a range of protections for civil and political rights. The ICCPR, together with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights, are considered the International Bill of Human Rights. The ICCPR obligates countries like the United States that have ratified the treaty to protect and preserve basic human rights, such as: the right to life and human dignity; equality before the law; freedom of speech, assembly, and association; religious freedom and privacy; freedom from torture, ill-treatment, and arbitrary detention; gender equality; the right to a fair trial; right to family life and family unity; and minority rights. The Covenant compels governments to take administrative, judicial, and legislative measures in order to protect the rights and freedoms enshrined in the treaty and to provide an effective remedy. The Covenant was adopted by the U.N. General Assembly in 1966 and came into force in 1976. As of December 2018, 172 countries have ratified the Covenant including the USA. I do pray we can agree upon the following facts 1. The U.S. ratified the ICCPR in 1992. Upon ratification, the ICCPR became the "supreme law of the land" under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which gives ratified treaties the status of federal law. 2.The U.S. must comply with and implement the provisions of the treaty just as it would any other domestic law, subject to Reservations, Understandings and Declarations (RUDs) entered when it ratified the treaty. 3.Though the government retains the obligation to comply with the ICCPR, one of the RUDs attached by the U.S. Senate is a "not self-executing" Declaration, intended to limit the ability of litigants to sue in court for direct enforcement of the treaty. 4.The ICCPR applies to all government entities and agents, including all state and local governments in the United States. 5.The ICCPR thus applies to government actions in all states and counties, and also applies to private contractors who carry out government functions. 6.When the U.S. Senate ratified the ICCPR, it included an Understanding that recognized our federal system of government, and specifically stated that the treaty "shall be implemented by the Federal Government to the extent that it exercises legislative and judicial jurisdiction over the matters covered" by the treaty, "and otherwise by the state and local governments" with support from the federal government for the fulfillment of the Covenant. 7. No man may be lawfully intimidated to violate the commands of God or not partake of his gifts as contained in the 1611 King James Bible. 8. No man can be lawfully intimidated to respect persons if he is bound by Deuteronomy 1:17, 10:17, 2nd Samuel 14:14, Matthew 22:16, Acts 10:34, Romans 2:11 and James 2:9 in the 1611 KJVB for emphasis, in sincere demonstration and exercise of a scriptural directive. 9. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/329/187/ is your own law and is my Ezekiel 33 duty to warn you of limits to the inquiry, into faith based precepts, to the sincerity of the faith based observance of the subject of the proceedings. One of our brethren brother Dean [Harting] living on the land in the area called Virginia following in "The Way" has met with a secular obstacle that is by color of law presently offending his faith and trying to paint him as a criminal for possession and growing the creators gift for his own medical and ecclesiastical use. This at a time where the revealed focused propaganda of the last 80 years regarding Cannabis is finally being realized as being trumped up to defend the Metal Textile Pharmaceutical Forestry Oil and Pulp and Paper industries from a plant, the administration largely supported by those industries, could not compete with. Dean [Harting], your case file number 187GM1900005195, is Christ's anointed faithful and discreet slave as his minister 1st Corinthians 7:22-23 observing God;s gifts of Genesis 1:29 and the Hebrew translation of Exodus 30:23-26 as indicating “Kaneh Bosm” as one of the sacred ingredients in the Holy Annointing oil as offered by the creator. Kaneh Bosm is Cannabis as properly translated by the University of Telaviv. https://standingupfortruth.wordpress.com/2015/10/15/the-bible-and-calamus-vs-cannabis/ Corinthians 7:22-23 King James Version 22 For he that is called in the Lord, being a servant, is the Lord's freeman: likewise also he that is called, being free, is Christ's servant.23 Ye are bought with a price; be not ye the servants of men. Dean just like all of God's Children was gifted and granted all herbs bearing seed by the creator himself as noted in the King James Bible at Genesis 1:26-29 1611 KJVB King James Version 26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. as mirrored by Romans 11:29 in the 1611 KJVB. Romans 11:29 29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. I am as Dean's ecclesiastical minister ordained by Christ Yahushuwah in his and his fathers name YaHuWaH honorably demanding respect for his faith in that that you as a private man, I am communicating to, recognize the Year of the Bible as an Act of Congress and that article 1 of your Amendments in your secular Constitution along with the Religious Freedoms Restoration Act, guarantees Dean's faith will not be subjected to an arbitrary colour of law attack based upon secular poor recollection and lack of awareness of our creators gifts as delineated in the 1611 King James Bible. This at present is being done in an effort to invoke colour of law and forced personage to invoke sin upon Dean and to defeat Deans unalienable freedom to follow Christ and scripture. This is also reflected in Title 18 ss 242 245 and 247 of your federal code. Ezekiel 33 reflects my duty to warn you of the code that may go badly for you if you break it. Romans 11:29 KJVB qualifies any man's use of any of God's gifts as God's property and of a certainty no man citing colour of law secular code and regulation gets to topple and overwrite God's command's and gifts failing to produce a claiming victim or evidence of damage to the states interests. The use of Cannabis for medical purposes has never been proven to represent a threat to anyone nor has anyone died as the record certainly proves so it would be Honorable to recognize the hardship of dropping the charge against Dean. Doing so in obedience to the ICCPR factually represents zero harm or hardship to your office and shows absolute respect for the law that binds you as a public service provider. I know you will agree that article 27 of the Vienna Convention is also glaring upon your office as the United States, as a commercial signatory to that convention has committed all of it's service providers controlled by statute code and regulation to it. I do hope you follow Christ and do agree that no man has any authority to remove the inherent freedom of those called in Christ to use the herb for sacred and consecrated purposes. John 15:16 KJVB is Deans calling and proof therein of who is directing him. As of his sincere faith and extensive study Dean is extremely desirous to able to be free of intimidation and obstruction of his inherent God gifted freedoms to benefit his physical temple with the herbs so designed by our creator for that exact thing. Just as the first Nation people of this land along with various Churches won their freedom to possess and use Peyote for their religious purposes as they do with Iahaosca, Marijuana for sacramental observations health and healing purposes is no threat to the public . https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/546/418/ Dean asks in Yahushuwah's (Jesus's )and his father YaHuWaH's names that you recognize your obligation to cease an attack upon his religious liberty and property and go to the hardship of releasing him from this secular affront to his God granted freedom to use his God granted and gifted plants. "The gifts and the calling of God are without repentance"! Romans 11:29 1611 KJVG. Do the secular governments of men have authority to over ride our creator gifts directions and commands? The scripture says that submitting to your color of law process only applicable to persons is sin at James 2:9 and your law say you cannot intimidate him to violate his faith or punish him for exercising it in a manner of zero potential harm.. Dean was never planning to traffic God's gifted and granted herb..It was for his own private use and benefit for his pain. For truthful purposes Cannabis has never been proven to represent a real threat to anyone no more than would Peyote or Iaosca which are both legal as the record certainly proves so it would be honorable to recognize the hardship of dropping the charge against Dean represents zero damage to your office. Consideration that this benevolent action will show absolute respect for the duty to and the binding obligation to respect the ICCPR covenant article 18 that binds you as a private man working for the legal fiction the the State of Virginia with USA listed as a public service providers is with standing in honor. Dean's faith is directed by scripture at Leviticus 18:3-4 to not walk in the Ordinance of heathen which are those colour of law statute code or regulations added to and taken away from God's law aqs prohibited at Deuteronomy 4:2, 12:32. He is also cautioned to not respect persons or affiliate or react to altered versions of his name that are deemed as "persons". James 2:9. It is Dean's demand that you cease to intimidate him by trying to attach him to an altered version of his name to create a person of law the State has no law to allow. There is no code authorizing the alteration of Deans name for a financial purpose or to create a security without his consent! He is the creator's property and Since the whole earths is God's property Dean in his faith has submitted himself to Christ as God's property, to I do hope you accept it is God who called us his possession in Exodus 19:5-6 interfere with, damage seize or disturb religious property. I believe if you refer to your Title 18 SS 247 you will see it is a Federal offence to offence, to intefere with obstruct damage or destroy religious property I thankyou for your kind consideration in adopting this agreement as an honorable communication respective of Dean's sincere faith as unalienable and protected by International Covenants. This is minister Edward Jay Robin standing on the land by God's grace near Edmonton Alberta Canada wishing you wisdom, blessings upon your future, and the knowledge that Christ is King in Yahushuwah's name in recognition of his father YaHuWah!! minister: Edward Jay Robin wishing you Christ's blessing 1-780-399-6250
Wednesday, January 13, 2021
Tuesday, December 22, 2020
The Essene Gosel Of Peace Book One The Original Hebrew and Aramaic Texts Translated and edited by EDMOND BORDEAUX SZEKELY MCMLXXXI INTERNATIONAL BIOGENIC SOCIETY Book Design by Golondrina Graohics Copyright @ 1981, by the Internation,l Blogenic Society Printed In the United States of America-All Rights Reserved Order a hard copy of The Essene Gospel of Peace Book 1 Buy from Amazon.com And then many sick and maimed came to Jesus, asking him. "if you know all things, tell us, why do we suffer with these grievous plagues? Why are we not whole like other men? Master, heal us, that we too may be made strong, and need abide no longer in our misery. We know that you have it in your power to heal all manner of disease. Free us from Satan and from all his great afflictions. Master, have compassion on us." And Jesus answered- "Happy are you that you hunger for the truth, for I will satisfy you with the bread of wisdom. Happy are you, that you knock, for I will open to you the door of life. Happy are you, that you would cast off the power of Satan, for I will lead you into the kincdom of our Mother's angels, where the power of Satan cannot enter." And they asked him in amazement: "Who is our Mother and which her angels? And where is her kingdom?" "Your Mother is in you, and you in her. She bore you she gives you life. it was she who gave to you your body, and to her shall you one day give it back again. Happy are you when you come to know her and her kingdom; if you receive your Mother's angels and if you do her laws. I tell you truly, he who does these things shall never see disease. For the power of our Mother is above all. And it destroys Satan and his kingdom, and has rule over all your bodies and all living things. "The blood which runs in us is born of the blood of our Earthly Mother. Her blood falls from the clouds; leaps from the womb of the earth; babbles in the brooks of the mountains; flows wide in the rivers of the plains; sleeps in the lakes; rages mightily in tempestuous seas. "The air which we breathe is born of the breath of our Earthly Mother. Her breath is azure in the heights of t heavens; soughs in the tops of the mountains; whispers the leaves of the forest; billows over the cornfields; slumbers in the deep valleys, burns hot in the desert. "The hardness of our bones is born of the bones of our Earthly Mother, of the rocks and of the stones. They stand naked to the heavens on the tops of mountains; are as giants that lie sleeping on the sides of the mountains, as idols set in the desert, and are hidden in the deepness of the earth. "The tenderness of our flesh is born of the flesh of our Earthly Mother; whose flesh waxes yellow and red in the fruits of the trees, and nurtures us in the furrows of the fields. "Our bowels are born of the bowels of our Earthly Mother, and are hid from our eyes, like the invisible depths of the earth. "The light of our eyes, the hearing of our ears, both are born of the colors and the sounds of our Earthly Mother; which enclose us about, as the waves of the sea a fish, as the eddying air a bird. "I tell you in very truth, Man is the Son of the Earthly Mother, and from her did the Son of Man receive his whole body, even as the body of the newborn babe is born of the womb of his mother. I tell you truly, you are one with the Earthly Mother; she is in you, and you in her. Of her were you born, in her do you live, and to her shall you return again. Keep, therefore, her laws, for none can live long, neither be happy, but he who honors his Earthly Mother and does her laws. For your breath is her breath; your blood her blood; your bone her bone; your flesh her flesh; your bowels her bowels; your eyes and your ears are her eyes and her ears. "I tell you truly, should you fail to keep but one only of all these laws, should you harm but one only of all your body's members, you shall be utterly lost in your grievous sickness, and there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. I tell you, unless you follow the laws of your Mother, you can in no wise escape death. And he who clings to the laws of his Mother, to him shall his Mother cling also. She shall heal all his plagues, and he shall never become sick. She gives him long life, and protects him from all afflictions; from fire, from water, from the bite of venomous serpents. For your Mother bore you, keeps life within you. She has given you her body, and none but she heals you. Happy is he who loves his Mother and lies quietly in her bosom. For your Mother loves you, even when you turn away from her. And how much more shall she love you, if you turn to her again? I tell you truly, very great is her love, greater than the greatest of mountains, deeper than the deepest seas. And those who love their Mother, she never deserts them. As the hen protects her chickens, as the lioness her cubs, as the mother her newborn babe, so does the Earthly Mother protect the Son of Man from all danger and from all evils. "For I tell you truly, evils and dangers innumerable lie in wait for the Sons of Men. Beelzebub, the prince of all devils, the source of every evil, lies in wait in the body of all the Sons of Men. He is death, the lord of every plague, and taking upon him a pleasing raiment, he tempts and entices the Sons of Men. Riches does he promise, and power, and splendid palaces, and garments of gold and silver, and a multitude of servants, all these; he promises renown and glory, fornication and lustfulness, gluttony and wine-bibbing, riotous living, and slothfulness and idle days. And he entices every one by that to which their heart is most inclined. And in the day that the Sons of Men have already become the slaves of all these vanities and abominations, then in payment thereof he snatches from the Sons of Men all those things which the Earthly Mother gave them so abundantly. He takes from them their breath, their blood, their bone, their flesh, their bowels, their eyes and their ears. And the breath of the Son of Man becomes short and stifled, full of pain and evil-smelling, like the breath of unclean beasts. And his blood becomes thick and evil-smelling, like the water of the swamps; it clots and blackens, like the night of death. And his bone becomes hard and knotted; it melts away within and breaks asunder, as a stone falling down upon a rock. And his flesh waxes fat and watery; it rots and putrefies, with scabs and boils that are an abomination. And his bowels become full with abominable filthiness, with oozing streams of decay; and multitudes of abominable worms have their habitation there. And his eyes grow dim, till dark night enshrouds them, and his ears become stopped, like the silence of the grave. And last of all shall the erring Son of Man lose life. For he kept not the laws of his Mother, and added sin to sin. Therefore, are taken from him all the gifts of the Earthly Mother: breath, blood, bone, flesh, bowels, eyes and ears, and after all else, life, with which the Earthly Mother crowned his body. "But if the erring Son of Man be sorry for his sins and undo them, and return again to his Earthly Mother; and if he do his Earthly Mother's laws and free himself from Satan's clutches, resisting his temptations, then does the Earthly Mother receive again her erring Son with love and sends him her angels that they may serve him. I tell you truly, when the Son of Man resists the Satan that dwells in him and does not his will, in the same hour are found the Mother's angels there, that they may serve him with all their power and free utterly the Son of Man from the power of Satan. "For no man can serve two masters. For either he serves Beelzebub and his devils or else he serves our Earthly Mother and her angels. Either he serves death or he serves life. I ten you truly, happy are those that do the laws of life and wander not upon the paths of death. For in them the forces of life wax strong and they escape the plagues of death." And all those round about him listened to his words with amazement, for his word was with power, and he taught quite otherwise than the priests and scribes. And though the sun was now set, they departed not to their homes. They sat round about Jesus and asked him: "Master, which are these laws of life? Rest with us awhile longer and teach us. We would listen to your teaching that we may be healed and become righteous." And Jesus himself sat down in their midst and said: "I tell you truly, none can be happy, except he do the Law." And the others answered: "We all do the laws of Moses, our lawgiver, even as they are written in the holy scriptures." And Jesus answered: "Seek not the law in your scriptures, for the law is life, whereas the scripture is dead. I tell you truly, Moses received not his laws from God in writing, but through the living word. The law is living word of living God to living prophets for living men. In everything that is life is the law written. You find it in the grass, in the tree, in the river, in the mountain, in the birds of heaven, in the fishes of the sea; but seek it chiefly in yourselves. For I tell you truly, all living things are nearer to God than the scripture which is without life. God so made life and all living things that they might by the everlasting word teach the laws of the true God to man. God wrote not the laws in the pages of books, but in your heart and in your spirit. They are in your breath, your blood, your bone; in your flesh, your bowels, your eyes, your ears, and in every little part of your body. They are present in the air, in the water, in the earth, in the plants, in th e sunbeams, in the depths and in the heights. They all speak to you that you may understand the tongue and the will of the living God. But you shut your eyes that you may not see, and you shut your ears that you may not hear. I tell you truly, that the scripture is the work of man, but life and all its hosts are the work of our God. Wherefore do you not listen to the words of God which are written in His works? And wherefore do you study the dead scriptures which are the work of the hands of men?" "How may we read the laws of God elsewhere than in the scriptures? Where are they written? Read them to us from there where you see them, for we know nothing else but the scriptures which we have inherited from our forefathers. Tell us the laws of which you speak, that hearing them we may be healed and justified." Jesus said: "You do not understand the words of life, because you are in death. Darkness darkens your eyes and your ears are stopped with deafness. For I tell you, it profits you not at all that you pore over dead scriptures if by your deeds you deny him who has given you the scriptures. I tell you truly, God and his laws are not in that which you do. They are not in gluttony and in wine-bibbing, neither in riotous living, nor in lustfulness, nor in seeking after riches, nor yet in hatred of your enemies. For all these things are far from the true God and from his angels. But all these things come from the kingdom of darkness and the lord of all evils. And all these things do you carry in yourselves; and so the word and the power of God enter not into you, because all manner of evil and all manner of abominations have their dwelling in your body and your spirit. If you will that the living God's word and his power may enter you, defile not your body and your spirit; for the body is the temple of the spirit, and the spirit is the temple of God. Purify, therefore, the temple, that the Lord of the temple may dwell therein and occupy a place that is worthy of him. "And from all temptations of your body and your spirit, coming from Satan, withdraw beneath the shadow of God's heaven. "Renew yourselves and fast. For I tell you truly, that Satan and his plagues may only be cast out by -fasting and by prayer. Go by yourself and fast alone, and show your fasting to no man. The living God shall see it and great shall be your reward. And fast till Beelzebub and all his evils depart from you, and all the angels of our Earthly Mother come and serve you. For I tell you truly, except you fast, you shall never be freed from the power of Satan and from all diseases that come from Satan. Fast and pray fervently, seeking the power of the living God for your healing. While you fast, eschew the Sons of Men and seek our Earthly Mother's angels, for he that seeks shall find. "Seek the fresh air of the forest and of the fields, and there in the midst of them shall you find the angel of air. Put off your shoes and your clothing and suffer the angel of air to embrace all your body. Then breathe long and deeply, that the angel of air may be brought within you. I tell you truly, the angel of air shall cast out of your body all uncleannesses which defiled it without and within. And thus shall all evil-smelling and unclean things rise out of you, as the smoke of fire curls upwards and is lost in the sea of the air. For I tell you truly, holy is the angel of air, who cleanses all that is unclean and makes all evil-smelling things of a sweet odor. No man may come before the face of God, whom the angel of air lets not pass. Truly, all must be born again by air and by truth, for your body breathes the air of the Earthly Mother, and your spirit breathes the truth of the Heavenly Father. "After the angel of air, seek the angel of water. Put off your shoes and your clothing and suffer the angel of water to embrace all your body. Cast yourselves wholly into his enfolding arms, and as often as you move the air with your breath, move with your body the water also. I tell you truly, the angel of water shall cast out of your body all uncleannesses which defiled it without and within. And all unclean and evil-smelling things shall flow out of you, even as the uncleannesses of garments washed in water flow away and are lost in the stream of the river. I tell you truly, holy is the angel of water who cleanses all that is unclean and makes all evil-smelling things of a sweet odor. No man may come before the face of God whom the angel of water lets not pass. in very truth, all must be born again of water and of truth, for your body bathes in the river of earthly life, and your spirit bathes in the river of life everlasting. For you receive your blood from our Earthly Mother and the truth from our Heavenly Father. "Think not that it is sufficient that the angel of water embrace you outwards only. I tell you truly, the uncleanness within is greater by much than the uncleanness without. And he who cleanses himself without, but within remains unclean, is like to tombs that outwards are painted fair, but are within full of all manner of horrible uncleannesses and abominations. So I tell you truly, suffer the angel of water to baptize you also within, that you may become free from all your past sins, and that within likewise you may become as pure as the river's foam sporting in the sunlight. "Seek, therefore, a large trailing gourd, having a stalk the length of a man; take out its inwards and fill it with water from the river which the sun has warmed. Hang it upon the branch of a tree, and kneel upon the ground before the angel of water, and suffer the end of the stalk of the trailing gourd to enter your hinder parts, that the water may flow through all your bowels. Afterwards rest kneeling on the ground before the angel of water and pray to the living God that he will forgive you all your past sins, and pray the angel of water that he will free your body from every uncleanness and disease. Then let the water run out from your body, that it may carry away from within it all the unclean and evil-smelling things of Satan. And you shall see with your eyes and smell with your nose all the abominations, and uncleannesses which defiled the temple of your body; even all the sins which abode in your body, tormenting you with all manner of pains. I tell you truly, baptism with water frees you from all of these. Renew your baptizing with water on every day of your fast, till the day when you see that the water which flows out of you is as pure as the river's foam. Then betake your body to the coursing river, and there in the arms of the angel of water render thanks to the living God that he has freed you from your sins. And this holy baptizing by the angel of water is: Rebirth unto the new life. For your eyes shall henceforth see, and your ears shall hear. Sin no more, therefore, after your baptism, that the angels of air and of water may eternally abide in you and serve you evermore. "And if afterward there remain within you aught of your past sins and uncleannesses, seek the angel of sunlight. Put off your shoes and your clothing and suffer the angel of sunlight to embrace all your body. Then breathe long and deeply, that the angel of sunlight may be brought within you. And the angel of sunlight shall cast out of your body all evil-smelling and unclean things which defiled it without and within. And all unclean and evil-smelling things shall rise from you, even as the darkness of night fades before the brightness of the rising sun. For I tell you truly, holy is the angel of sunlight who cleans out all uncleannesses and makes all evil-smelling things of a sweet odor. None may come before the face of God, whom the angel of sunlight lets not pass. Truly, all must be born again of sun and of truth, for your body basks in the sunlight of the Earthly Mother, and your spirit basks in the sunlight of the truth of the Heavenly Father. "The angels of air and of water and of sunlight are brethren. They were given to the Son of Man that they might serve him, and that he might go always from one to the other. "Holy, likewise, is their embrace. They are indivisible children of the Earthly Mother, so do not you put asunder those whom earth and heaven have made one. Let these three brother angels enfold you every day and let them abide with you through all your fasting. "For I tell you truly, the power of devils, all sins and uncleannesses shall depart in haste from that body which is embraced by these three angels. As thieves flee from a deserted house at the coming of the lord of the house, one by the door, one by the window, and the third by the roof, each where he is found, and whither he is able, even so shall flee from your bodies all devils of evil, all past sins, and all uncleannesses and diseases which defiled the temple of your bodies. When the Earthly Mother's angels enter into your bodies, in such wise that the lords of the temple repossess it again, then shall all evil smells depart in haste by your breath and by your skin, corrupt waters by your mouth and by your skin, by your hinder and your privy parts. And all these things you shall see with your eyes and smell with your nose and touch with your hands. And when all sins and uncleannesses are gone from your body, your blood shall become as pure as our Earthly Mother's blood and as the river's foam sporting in the sunlight. And your breath shall become as pure as the breath of odorous flowers; your flesh as pure as the flesh of fruits reddening upon the leaves of trees; the light of your eye as clear and bright as the brightness of the sun shining upon the blue sky. And now shall all the angels of the Earthly Mother serve you. And your breath, your blood, your flesh shall be one with the breath, the blood and the flesh of the Earthly Mother, that your spirit also may become one with the spirit of your Heavenly Father. For truly, no one can reach the Heavenly Father unless through the Earthly Mother. Even as no newborn babe can understand the teaching of his father till his mother has suckled him, bathed him, nursed him, put him to sleep and nurtured him. While the child is yet small, his place is with his mother and he must obey his mother. When the child is grown up, his father takes him to work at his side in the field, and the child comes back to his mother o nly when the hour of dinner and supper is come. And now his father teaches him, that he may become skilled in the works of his father. And when the father sees that his son understands his teaching and does his work well, he gives him all his possessions, that they may belong to his beloved son, and that his son may continue his father's work. I tell you truly, happy is that son who accepts the counsel of his mother and walks therein. And a hundred times more happy is that son who accepts and walks also in the counsel of his father, for it was said to you: 'Honor thy father and thy mother that thy days may be long upon this earth.' But I say to you, Sons of Man: Honor your Earthly Mother and keep all her laws, that your days may be long on this earth, and honor your Heavenly Father that Eternal Life may be yours in the heavens. For the Heavenly Father is a hundred times greater than all fathers by seed and by blood, and greater is the Earthly Mother than all mothers by the body. And d earer is the Son of Man in the eyes of his Heavenly Father and of his Earthly Mother than are children in the eyes of their fathers by seed and by blood and of their mothers by the body. And more wise are the words and laws of your Heavenly Father and of your Earthly Mother than the words and the will of all fathers by seed and by blood, and of all mothers by the body. And of more worth also is the inheritance of your Heavenly Father and of your Earthly Mother, the everlasting kingdom of earthly and heavenly life, than all the inheritances of your fathers by seed and by blood, and of your mothers by the body. "And your true brothers are all those who do the will of your Heavenly Father and of your Earthly Mother, and not your brothers by blood. I tell you truly, that your true brothers in the will of the Heavenly Father and of the Earthly Mother will love you a thousand times more than your brothers by blood. For since the days of Cain and Abel, when brothers by blood transgressed the will of God, there is no true brotherhood by blood. And brothers do unto brothers as do strangers. Therefore, I say to you, love your true brothers in the will of God a thousand times more than your brothers by blood. FOR YOUR HEAVENLY FATHER IS LOVE. FOR YOUR EARTHLY MOTHER IS LOVE. FOR THE SON OF MAN IS LOVE. "It is by love, that the Heavenly Father and the Earthly Mother and the Son of Man become one. For the spirit of the Son of Man was created from the spirit of the Heaven Father, and his body from the body of the Earthly Mother. Become, therefore, perfect as the spirit of your Heavenly Father and the body of your Earthly Mother are perfect. And so love your Heavenly Father, as he loves your spirit. And so love your Earthly Mother, as she loves your body. And so love your true brothers, as your Heavenly Father and your Earthly Mother love them. And then your Heavenly Father shall give you his holy spirit, and your Earthly Mother shall give you her holy body. And then shall the Sons of Men like true brothers give love one to another, the love which they received from their Heavenly Father and from their Earthly Mother; and they shall all become comforters one of another. And then shall disappear from the earth all evil and all sorrow, and there shall be love and joy upon earth. And th en shall the earth be like the heavens, and the kingdom of God shall come. And then shall come the Son of Man in all his glory, to inherit the kingdom of God. And then shall the Sons of Men divide their divine inheritance, the kingdom of God. For the Sons of Men live in the Heavenly Father and in the Earthly Mother, and the Heavenly Father and the Earthly Mother live in them. And then with the kingdom of God shall come the end of the times. For the Heavenly Father's love gives to all life everlasting in the kingdom of God. For love is eternal. Love is stronger than death. "Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am become as sounding brass or a tinkling cymbal. Though I tell what is to come, and know all secrets, and all wisdom; and though I have faith strong as the storm which lifts mountains from their seat, but have not love, I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and give all my fire that I have received from my Father, but have not love, I am in no wise profited. Love is patient, love is kind. Love is not envious, works not evil, knows not pride; is not rude, neither selfish; is slow to anger, imagines no mischief; rejoices not in injustice, but delights in justice. Love defends all, love believes all, love hopes all, love bears all; never exhausts itself; but as for tongues they shall cease, and, as for knowledge, it shall vanish away. For we have truth in part, and error in part, but when the fullness of perfection is come, that which is in part shall be blotted out. When a man was a child he spoke as a child, understood as a child, thought as a child; but when he became a man he put away childish things. For now we see through a glass and through dark sayings. Now we know in part, but when we are come before the face of God, we shall not know in part, but even as we are taught by him. And now remain these three: faith and hope and love; but the greatest of these is love. "And now I speak to you in the living tongue of the living God, through the holy spirit of our Heavenly Father. There is none yet among you that can understand all this of which I speak. He who expounds to you the scriptures speaks to you in a dead tongue of dead men, through his diseased and mortal body. Him, therefore, can all men understand, for all men are diseased and all are in death. No one sees the light of life. Blind man leads blind on the dark paths of sins, diseases and sufferings; and at the last all fall into the pit of death. "I am sent to you by the Father, that I may make the light of life to shine before you. The light lightens itself and the darkness, but the darkness knows only itself, and knows not the light. I have still many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them yet. For your eyes are used to the darkness, and the full light of the Heavenly Father would make you blind. Therefore, you cannot yet understand that which I speak to you concerning the Heavenly Father who sent me to you. Follow, therefore, first, only the laws of your Earthly Mother, of which I have told you. And when her angels shall have cleansed and renewed your bodies and strengthened your eyes, you will be able to bear the light of our Heavenly Father. When you can gaze on the brightness of the noonday sun with unflinching eyes, you can then look upon the blinding light of your Heavenly Father, which is a thousand times brighter than the brightness of a thousand suns. But how should you look upon the blinding light of you r Heavenly Father, when you cannot even bear the shining of the blazing sun? Believe me, the sun is as the flame of a candle beside the sun of truth of the Heavenly Father. Have but faith, therefore, and hope, and love. I tell you truly, you shall not want your reward. If you believe in my words, you believe in him who sent me, who is the lord of all, and with whom all things are possible. For what is impossible with men, all these things are possible with God. If you believe in the angels of the Earthly Mother and do her laws, your faith shall sustain you and you shall never see disease. Have hope also in the love of your Heavenly Father, for he who trusts in him shall never be deceived, nor shall he ever see death. "Love one another, for God is love, and so shall his angels know that you walk in his paths. And then shall all the angels come before your face and serve you. And Satan with all sins, diseases and uncleannesses shall depart from your body. Go, eschew your sins; repent yourselves; baptize yourselves; that you may be born again and sin no more." Then Jesus rose. But all else remained sitting, for every man felt the power of his words. And then the full moon appeared between the breaking clouds and folded Jesus in its brightness. And sparks flew upward from his hair, and he stood among them in the moonlight, as though he hovered in the air. And no man moved, neither was the voice of any heard. And no one knew how long a time had passed, for time stood still. Then Jesus stretched out his hands to them and said: "Peace be with you." And so he departed, as a breath of wind sways the green of trees. And for a long while yet the company sat still and then they woke in the silence, one man after another, like as from a long dream. But none would go, as if the words of him who had left them ever sounded in their ears. And they sat as though they listened to some wondrous music. But at last one, as it were a little fearfully, said: "How good it is to be here." Another: "Would that this night were everlasting." And others: "Would that he might be with us always." "Of a truth he is God's messenger, for he planted hope within our hearts." And no man wished to go home, saying: "I go not home where all is dark and joyless. Why should we go home where no one loves us?" And they spoke on this wise, for they were almost all poor, lame, blind, maimed, beggars, homeless, despised in their wretchedness, who were only borne for pity's sake in the houses where they found a few day's refuge. Even certain, who had both home and family, said: "We also will stay with you." For every man felt that the words of him who was gone bound the little company with threads invisible. And all felt that they were born again. They saw before them a shining world, even when the moon was hidden in the clouds. And in the hearts of all blossomed wondrous flowers of wondrous beauty, the flowers of joy. And when the bright sunbeams appeared over the earth's rim, they all felt that it was the sun of the coming kingdom of God. And with joyful countenances they went forth to meet God's angels. And many unclean and sick followed Jesus' words and sought the banks of the murmuring streams. They put off their shoes and their clothing, they fasted, and they gave up their bodies to the angels of air, of water, and of sunshine. And the Earthly Mother's angels embraced them, possessing their bodies both inwards and outwards. And all of them saw all evils, sins and uncleannesses depart in haste from them. And the breath of some became as stinking as that which is loosed from the bowels, and some had an issue of spittle, and evil-smelling and unclean vomit rose from their inward parts. All these uncleannesses flowed by their mouths. In some, by the nose, in others by the eyes and ears. And many did have a noisome and abominable sweat come from all their body, over all their skin. And on many limbs great hot boils broke forth, from which carne out uncleannesses with an evil smell, and urine flowed abundantly from their body; and in many their urine was all but dried up and became thick as the honey of bees; that of others was almost red or black, and as hard almost as the sand of rivers. And many belched stinking gases from their bowels, like the breath of devils. And their stench became so great that none could bear it. And when they baptized themselves, the angel of water entered their bodies, and from them flowed out all the abominations and uncleannesses of their past sins, and like a falling mountain stream gushed from their bodies a multitude of hard and soft abominations. And the ground where their waters flowed was polluted, and so great became the stench that none could remain there. And the devils left their bowels in the shape of multitudinous worms which writhed in impotent rage after the angel of water had cast them out of the bowels of the Sons of Men. And then descended upon them the power of the angel of sunshine, and they perished there in their desperate writhings, trod underfoot by the angel of sunshine. And all were trembling with terror when they looked upon all these abominations of Satan, from which the angels had saved them. And they rendered thanks to God who had sent his angels for their deliverance. And there were some whom great pains tormented, which would not depart from them; and knowing not what they should do, they resolved to send one of them to Jesus, for they greatly wished he should be with them. And when two were gone to seek him, they saw Jesus himself approaching by the bank of the river. And their hearts were filled with hope and joy when they heard his greeting, "Peace be with you." And many were the questions that they desired to ask him, but in their astonishment they could not begin, for nothing came into their minds. Then said Jesus to them: "I come because you need me." And one cried out: "Master, we do indeed, come and free us from our pains." And Jesus spoke to them in parables: "You are like the prodigal son, who for many years did eat and drink, and passed his days in riotousness and lechery with his friends. And every week without his father's knowledge he incurred new debts, and squandered all in a few days. And the moneylenders always lent to him, because his father possessed great riches and always paid patiently the debts of his son. And in vain did he with fair words admonish his son, for he never listened to the admonitions of his father, who besought him in vain that he would give up his debaucheries which had no end, and that he would go to his fields to watch over the labor of his servants. And the son always promised him everything if he would pay his old debts, but the next day he began again. And for more than seven years the son continued in his riotous living. But, at last, his father lost patience and no more paid to the moneylenders the debts of his son. "if I continue always to pay," he said, "there will be no end to the sins of my son." Then the moneylenders, who were deceived, in their wrath took the son into slavery that he might by his daily toil pay back to them the money which he had borrowed. And then ceased the eating and drinking and the daily excesses. From morning until night by the sweat of his face he watered the fields, and all of his limbs ached with the unaccustomed labor. And he lived upon dry bread, and had naught but his tears with which he could water it. And three days after he suffered so much from the heat and from weariness that he said to his master: 'I can work no more, for all my limbs do ache. How long would you torment me?' 'Till the day when by the labor of your hands you pay me all your debts, and when seven years are passed, you will be free.' And the desperate son answered weeping: 'But I cannot bear so much as seven days. Have pity on me, for all my limbs do burn and ache.' And the wicked creditor cried out: 'Press on with the work; if you could for seven years spend your days and your nights in riotousness, now must you work for seven years. I will not forgive you till you pay back all your debts to the uttermost drachma.' And the son, with his limbs racked with pain, went back despairing to the fields to continue his work. Already he could hardly stand upon his feet because of his weariness and of his pains, when the seventh day was come-the Sabbath day, in which no man works in the field. Then the son gathered the remnant of his strength and staggered to the house of his father. And he cast himself down at his father's feet and said: 'Father, believe me for the last time and forgive me all my offenses against your swear to you that I will never again live riotously and that I will be your obedient son in all things. Free me from the hands of my oppressor. Father, look upon me and upon my sick limbs, and harden not your heart.' Then tears came into his father's eyes, and he took his son in his arms, and said: 'Let us rejoic e, for today a great joy is given me, because I have found again my beloved son, who was lost.' And he clothed him with his choicest raiment and all the day long they made merry. And on the morning of the morrow he gave his son a bag of silver that he might pay to his creditors all that he owed them. And when his son came back, he said to him: 'My son, do you see that it is easy, through riotous living, to incur debts for seven years, but their payment is difficult by the heavy labor of seven years.' 'Father, it is indeed hard to pay them, even for seven days.' And his father admonished him, saying: 'For this once alone has it been permitted you to pay your debts in seven days instead of seven years, the rest is forgiven you. But take heed that in the time to come you do not incur more debts. For I tell you truly, that none else but your father forgives you your debts, because you are his son. For with all else you would have had to labor hard for seven years, as it is commanded in our laws.' My father, I will henceforth be your loving and obedient son, and I will not any more incur debts, for I know that their payment is hard.' "And he went to his father's field and watched every day over the work of his father's laborers. And he never made his laborers work hard, for he remembered his own heavy labor. And the years passed, and his father's possession increased ever more and more beneath his hand, for the blessing of his father was upon his labor. And slowly he gave back tenfold to his father all that he had squandered in the seven years. And when his father saw that his son used well his servants and all his possessions, he said to him: 'My son, I see that my possessions are in good hands. I give you all my cattle, my house, my lands and my treasures. Let all this be your heritage, continue increasing it that I may have delight in you.' And when the son had received his inheritance from his father, he forgave their debts to all his debtors who could not pay him, for he did not forget that his debt also had been forgiven when he could not pay it. And God blessed him with long life, with many children and with much riches, because he was kind to all his servants and to all his cattle." Then Jesus turned to the sick folk and said: "I speak to you in parables that you may better understand God's word. The seven years of eating and drinking and of riotous living are the sins of the past. The wicked creditor is Satan. The debts are diseases. The heavy labor is pains. The prodigal son, he is yourselves. The payment of the debts is the casting from you of devils and diseases, and the healing of your body. The bag of silver received from the father is the liberating power of the angels. The father is God. The father's possessions are earth and heaven. The servants of the father are the angels. The father's field is the world, which is changed into the kingdom of the heavens, if the Sons of Man work thereon together with the angels of the Heavenly Father. For I tell you, it is better that the son should obey his father and keep watch over his father's servants in the field, than that he should become the debtor of the wicked creditor and toil and sweat in serfdom to repa y all his debts. it is better, likewise, if the Sons of Man also obey the laws of their Heavenly Father, and work together with his angels upon his kingdom, than that they should become the debtors of Satan, the lord of death, of all sins and all diseases, and that they should suffer with pains and sweat till they have repaid all their sins. I tell you truly, great and many are your sins. Many years have you yielded to the enticings of Satan. You have been gluttonous, wine-bibbers and gone a-whoring, and your past debts have multiplied. And now you must repay them, and payment is difficult and hard. Be not, therefore, already impatient after the third day, like the prodigal son, but wait patiently for the seventh day which is sanctified by God, and then go with humble and obedient heart before the face of your Heavenly Father, that he may forgive you your sins and all your past debts. I tell you truly, your Heavenly Father loves you without end, for he also allows you to pay in seven days the debts of seven years. Those that owe the sins and diseases of seven years, but pay honestly and persevere till the seventh day, to them shall our Heavenly Father forgive the debts of all these seven years. "If we sin for seven times seven years?" asked a sick man who suffered horribly. "Even in that case the Heavenly Father forgives you all your debts in seven times seven days. "Happy are those that persevere to the end, for the devils of Satan write all your evil deeds in a book, in the book of your body and your spirit. I tell you truly, there is not one sinful deed, but it is written, even from the beginning of the world, before our Heavenly Father. For you may escape the laws made by kings, but the laws of your God, these may none of the Sons of Man escape. And when you come before the face of God, the devils of Satan bear witness against you with your deed, and God sees your sins written in the book of your body and of your spirit and is sad in his heart. But if you repent of your sins, and by fasting and prayer you seek the angels of God, then each day that you continue to fast and to pray, God's angels blot out one year of your evil deeds from the book of your body and your spirit. And when the last page is also blotted out and cleansed from all your sins, you stand before the face of God, and God rejoices in his heart and forgets all your sins. He frees you from the clutches of Satan and from suffering; he takes you within his house and commands that all his servants, all his angels serve you. Long life does he give you, and you shall never see disease. And if, thenceforward, instead of sinning, you pass your days in doing good deeds, then the angels of God shall write all your good deeds in the book of your body and of your spirit. I tell you truly, no good deed remains unwritten before God, not from the beginning of the world. For from your kings and your governors you may wait in vain for your reward, but never do your good deeds want their reward from God. "And when you come before the face of God, his angels bear witness for you with your good deeds. And God sees your good deeds written in your bodies and in your spirits, and rejoices in his heart. He blesses your body and your spirit and all your deeds, and gives you for a heritage his earthly and heavenly kingdom, that in it you may have life everlasting. Happy is he who can enter into the kingdom of God, for he shall never see death." And a great silence fell at his words. And those that were discouraged took new strength from his words and continued to fast and to pray. And he who had spoken the first, said to him: "I will persevere to the seventh day." And the second, likewise, said to him: "I also will persevere to the seven times seventh day." Jesus answered them: "Happy are those that persevere to the end, for they shall inherit the earth." And there were many sick among them tormented with grievous pains, and they hardly crawled to Jesus' feet. For they could no longer walk upon their feet. They said: "Master, we are grievously tormented with pain; tell us what we shall do." And they showed Jesus their feet in which the bones were twisted and knotted and said: "Neither the angel of air, nor of water, nor of sunshine has assuaged our pains, notwithstanding that we baptized ourselves, and do fast and pray, and follow your words in all things." "I tell you truly, your bones will be healed. Be not discouraged, but seek for cure nigh the healer of bones, the angel of earth. For thence were your bones taken, and thither will they return." And he pointed with his hand to where the running of the water and the sun's heat had softened to clayey mud the earth by the edge of the water. "Sink your feet in the mire, that the embrace of the angel of earth may draw out from your bones all uncleanness and all disease. And you will see Satan and your pains fly from the embrace of the angel of earth. And the knots of your bones will vanish away, and they will be straightened, and all your pains will disappear." And the sick followed his words, for they knew that they would be healed. And there were also other sick who suffered much from their pains, howbeit, they persisted in their fasting. And their force was spent, and great heat tormented them. And when they would have risen from their bed to go to Jesus, their heads began to turn, as if it were a gusty wind which shook them, and as oft as they tried to stand upon their feet they fell back to the ground. Then Jesus went to them and said: "You suffer, for Satan and his diseases torment your bodies. But fear not, for their power over you will quickly end. For Satan is like a choleric neighbor who entered his neighbor's house while he was absent, intending to take his goods away to his own house. But some told the other that his enemy was ravaging within his house, and he came back to his house, running. And when the wicked neighbor, having gathered together all that pleased him, saw from afar the master of the house returning in haste, then he was very wroth that he could not take all away, and set to breaking and spoiling all that was there, to destroy all. So that even if the things might not be his, the other might have nothing. But immediately the lord of the house came in, and before the wicked neighbor fulfilled his purpose, he took him and cast him out of the house. I tell you truly, even so did Satan enter your bodies which are the habitation of God. And he took in his power all that he wished to steal: your breath, your blood, your bone, your flesh, your bowels, your eyes, and your ears. But by your fasting and your prayer, you have called back the lord of your body and his angels. And now Satan sees that the true lord of your body returns, and that it is the end of his power. Wherefore, in his wrath he gathers his strength once again, that he may destroy your bodies before the coming of the lord. It is for this that Satan torments you so grievously, for he feels that the end is come. But let not your hearts tremble, for soon will the angels of God appear, to occupy again their abodes and rededicate them as temples of God. And they will seize Satan and cast himn from your bodies with all his diseases and all his uncleannesses. And happy will you be, for you will receive the reward of your steadfastness, and you will never see disease." And there was among the sick, one that was more tormented by Satan than all the others. And his body was as parched as a skeleton, and his skin yellow as a falling leaf. He was so weak already that he could not, even upon his hands, crawl to Jesus, and cried only to him from afar: "Master, have pity on me, for never has man suffered, not from the beginning of the world, as I do suffer. I know that you are indeed sent by God, and I know that if you will, you can straightway cast out Satan from my body. Do not the angels of God obey God's messenger? Come, Master, and cast out Satan from me now, for he rages angrily within me and grievous is his torment." And Jesus answered him: "Satan torments you thus greatly because you have already fasted many days, and you do not pay to him his tribute. You do not feed him with all the abominations with which you hitherto defiled the temple of your spirit. You torment Satan with hunger, and so in his anger he torments you also. Fear not, for I tell you, Satan will be destroyed before your body is destroyed; for while you fast and pray, the angels of God protect your body, that Satan's power may not destroy you. And the anger of Satan is impotent against the angels of God." Then they all came to Jesus and with loud cries besought him saying: "Master, have compassion on him, for he suffers more than we all, and if you do not at once cast Satan out of him, we fear he will not live until tomorrow." And Jesus answered them: "Great is your faith. Be it according to your faith, and you shall see soon, face to face, the frightful countenance of Satan, and the power of the Son of Man. For I will cast out from you the powerful Satan by the strength of the innocent lamb of God, the weakest creature of the Lord. For the holy spirit of God makes more powerful the weakest than the strongest." And Jesus milked an ewe which was feeding among the grass. And he put the milk upon the sand made hot by the sun, saying: "Lo, the power of the angel of water has entered this milk. And now the power of the angel of sunshine will enter it also." And the milk became hot by the strength of the sun. "And now the angels of water and of sun will join with the angel of air." And lo, the vapor of the hot milk began to rise slowly into the air. ."Come and breathe in by your mouth the strength of the angels of water, of sunshine, and of air, that it may come into your body and cast out the Satan from you." And the sick man whom Satan tormented did breathe within himself, deeply, the rising whitish vapor. "Straightway will Satan leave your body, since for three days he starves and finds no food within you. He will come out of you to satisfy his hunger by the hot steaming milk, for this food finds favor in his sight. He will smell its smell, and will not be able to resist the hunger which has tormented him three days already. But the Son of Man will destroy his body, that he may torment none else again." Then the sick man's body was seized with an ague, and he retched as though he would vomit, but he could not. And he gasped for air, for his breath was spent. And he fainted on the lap of Jesus. "Now does Satan leave his body. See him." And Jesus pointed to the sick man's opened mouth. And then they all saw with astonishment and terror that Satan was coming out from his mouth in the shape of an abominable worm, straight towards the steaming milk. Then Jesus took two sharp stones in his hands and crushed the head of Satan, and drew out from the sick man all the body of the monster which was almost as long as the man. When the abominable worm came out of the sick man's throat, he recovered at once his breath, and then all his pains ceased. And the others looked with terror at the abominable body of Satan. "See, what an abominable beast you carried and nourished in your body for long years. I have cast it out of you and killed it that it may never again torment you. Give thanks to God that his angels have made you free, and sin no more, lest Satan return to you again. Let your body be henceforth a temple dedicated to your God." And they were all amazed at his words and at his power. And they said: "Master, you are indeed God's messenger, and do know all secrets." "And you," answered Jesus, "be true Sons of God, that you also may partake in his power and in the knowledge of all secrets. For wisdom and power can come only from the love of God. Love, therefore, your Heavenly Father and your Earthly Mother with all your heart, and with all your spirit. And serve them, that their angels may serve you also. Let all your deeds be sacrificed to God. And feed not Satan, for the wages of sin is death. But with God lies the reward of the good, his love, which is knowledge and power of eternal life." And they all knelt down to give thanks to God for his love. And Jesus departed, saying: "I will come again to all who persist in prayer and fasting tAl the seventh day. Peace be with you." And the sick man from whom Jesus had cast out the Satan, stood up, for the strength of life had come back to him. He breathed out deeply, and his eyes became clear, for every pain had left him. And he cast himself down upon the ground where Jesus had stood, and he kissed the print of his feet and he wept. And it was by the bed of a stream, many sick fasted and prayed with God's angels for seven days and seven nights. And great was their reward, because they followed Jesus' words. And with the passing of the seventh day, all their pains left them. And when the sun rose over the earth's rim they saw Jesus coming towards them from the mountain, with the brightness of the rising sun about his head. "Peace be with you." And they said no word at all, but only cast themselves down before him, and touched the hem of his garment in token of their healing. "Give thanks not to me, but to your Earthly Mother, who sent you her healing angels. Go, and sin no more, that you may never again see disease. And let the healing angels become your guardians." But they answered him: "Whither should we go, Master, for with you are the words of eternal life? Tell us, what are the sins which we must shun, that we may nevermore see disease?" Jesus answered: "Be it so according to your faith," and he sat down among them, saying: "It was said to them of old time, 'Honor thy Heavenly Father and thy Earthly Mother, and do their commandments, that thy days may be long upon the earth.' And next afterward was given this commandment, 'Thou shalt not kill,' for life is given to all by God, and that which God has given, let not man take away. For-I tell you truly, from one Mother proceeds all that lives upon the earth. Therefore, he who kills, kills his brother. And from him will the Earthly Mother turn away, and will pluck from him her quickening breasts. And he will be shunned by her angels, and Satan will have his dwelling in his body. And the flesh of slain beasts in his body will become his own tomb. For I tell you truly, he who kills, kills himself, and whoso eats the flesh of slain beasts, eats of the body of death. For in his blood every drop of their blood turns to poison; in his breath their breath to stink; in his flesh their flesh to boils; in his bones their bones to chalk; in his bowels their bowels t o decay; in his eyes their eyes to scales; in his ears their ears to waxy issue. And their death will become his death. For only in the service of your Heavenly Father are your debts of seven years forgiven in seven clays. But Satan forgives you nothing and you must pay him for all. 'Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot; burning for burning, wound for wound; life for life, death for death.' For the wages of sin is death. Kill not, neither eat the flesh of your innocent prey, lest you become the slaves of Satan. For that is the path of sufferings, and it leads unto death. But do the will of God, that his angels may serve you on the way of life. Obey, therefore, the words of God: 'Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to everything that creepeth upon th e earth, wherein there is breath of life, I give every green herb for meat. Also the milk of every thing that moveth and liveth upon earth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given unto them, so I give their milk unto you. But flesh, and the blood which quickens it, shall ye not eat. And, surely, your spurting blood will I require, your blood wherein is your soul; I will require all slain beasts, and the souls of all slain men. For I the Lord thy God am a God strong and jealous, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; and showing mercy unto thousands -of them that love me, and keep my commandments. Love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength: this is the first and greatest commandment.' And the second is like unto it: 'Love thy neighbor as thyself' There is none other commandment greater than these." And after these words they all remained silent, save one, who called out: "What am I to do, Master, if I see a wild beast rend my brother in the forest? Shall I let my brother perish, or kill the wild beast? Shall not I thus transgress the law?" And Jesus answered: "It was said to them of old time: "All beasts that move upon the earth, all the fish of the sea, and all the fowl of the air are given into thy power." I tell you truly, of all creatures living upon the earth, God created only man after his image. Wherefore beasts are for man, and not man for beasts. You do not, therefore, transgress the law if you kill the wild beast to save your brother's life. For I tell you truly, man is more than the beast. But he who kills the beast without a cause, though the beast attack him not, through lust for slaughter, or for its flesh, or for its hide, or yet for its tusks, evil is the deed which he does, for he is turned into a wild beast himself. Wherefore is his end also as the end of the wild beasts." Then another said: "Moses, the greatest in Israel, suffered our forefathers to eat the flesh of clean beasts, and forbade only the flesh of unclean beasts. Why, therefore, do you forbid us the flesh of all beasts? Which law comes from God? That of Moses, or your law?" And Jesus answered: "God gave, by Moses, ten commandments to your forefathers. 'These commandments are hard,' said your forefathers, and they could not keep them. When Moses saw this, he had compassion on his people, and would not that they perish. And then he gave them ten times ten commandments. For he whose feet are strong as the mountain of Zion, needs no crutches; but he whose limbs do shake, gets further having crutches, than without them. And Moses said to the Lord: 'My heart is filled with sorrow, for my people will be lost. For they are without knowledge, and are not able to understand thy commandments. They are as little children who cannot yet understand their father's words. Suffer, Lord, that I give them other laws, that they may not perish. if they may not be with thee, Lord, let them not be against thee; that they may sustain themselves, and when the time has come, and they are ripe for thy words, reveal to hem thy laws.' For that did Moses break the two tablets of s tone whereon were written the ten commandments, and he gave them ten times ten in their stead. And of these ten times ten the Scribes and Pharisees have made a hundred times ten commandments. And they have laid unbearable burdens on your shoulders, that they themselves do not carry. For the more nigh are the commandments to God, the less do we need; and the farther they are from God, then the more do we need. Wherefore are the laws of the Pharisees and Scribes innumerable; the laws of the Son of Man seven; of the angels three; and of God one. "Therefore, I teach you only those laws which you can understand, that you may become men, and follow the seven laws of the Son of Man. Then will the unknown angels of the Heavenly Father also reveal their laws to you, that God's holy spirit may descend upon you, and lead you to his law." And all were astonished at his wisdom, and asked him: "Continue, Master, and teach us all the laws which we can receive." And Jesus continued: "God commanded your forefathers: 'Thou shalt not kill.' But their heart was hardened and they killed. Then Moses desired that at least they should not kill men, and he suffered them to kill beasts. And then the heart of your forefathers was hardened yet more, and they killed men and beasts likewise. But I do say to you: Kill neither men, nor beasts, nor yet the food which goes into your mouth. For if you eat living food, the same will quicken you, but if you kill your food, the dead food will kill you also. For life comes only from life, and from death comes always death. For everything which kills your foods, kills your bodies also. And everything which kills your bodies kills your souls also. And your bodies become what your foods are, even as your spirits, likewise, become what your thoughts are. Therefore, eat not anything which fire, or frost, or water has destroyed. For burned, frozen and rotted foods will burn, freeze and rot your body also. Be not like the foolish husbandman who sowed in his ground cooked, and frozen, and rotten seeds. And the autumn came, and his fields bore nothing. And great was his distress. But be like that husbandman who sowed in his field living seed, and whose field bore living ears of wheat, paying a hundredfold for the seeds which he planted. For I tell you truly, live only by the fire of life, and prepare not your foods with the fire of death, which kills your foods, your bodies and your souls also." "Master, where is the fire of life?" asked some of them. "In you, in your blood, and in your bodies." "And the fire of death?" asked others. "It is the fire which blazes outside your body, which is hotter than your blood. With that fire of death you cook your foods in your homes and in your fields. I tell you truly, it is the same fire which destroys your foods and your bodies, even as the fire of malice, which ravages your thoughts, ravages your spirits. For your body is that which you eat, and your spirit is that which you think. Eat nothing, therefore, which a stronger fire than the fire of life has killed. Wherefore, prepare and eat all fruits of trees, and all grasses of the fields, and afl milk of beasts good for eating. For all these are fed and ripened by the fire of life; all are the gift of the angels of our Earthly Mother. But eat nothing to which only the fire of death gives savor, for such is of Satan." "How should we cook our daily bread without fire, Master?" asked some with great astonishment. "Let the angels of God prepare your bread. Moisten your of death gives savor, for such is of Satan." "How should we cook our daily bread without fire, Master?" asked some with great astonishment. "Let the angels of God prepare your bread. Moisten your wheat, that the angel of water may enter it. Then set it in the air, that the angel of air also may embrace it. And leave it from morning to evening beneath the sun, that the angel of sunshine may descend upon it. And the blessing of the three angels will soon make the germ of life to sprout in your wheat. Then crush your grain, and make thin wafers, as did your forefathers when they departed out of Egypt, the house of bondage. Put them back again beneath the sun from its appearing, and when it is risen to its highest in the heavens, turn them over on the other side that they be embraced there also by the angel of sunshine, and leave them there until the sun be set. For the angels of water, of air, and of sunshine fed and ripened the wheat in the field, and they, likewise, must prepare also your bread. And the same sun which, with the fire of life, made the wheat to grow and ripen, must cook your bread with the same fire. For the fire of the sun gives life to the wheat, to the bread, and to the body. But the fire of death kills the wheat, the bread, and the body. And the living angels of the living God serve only living men. For God is the God of the living, and not the God of the dead. "So eat always from the table of God: the fruits of the trees, the grain and grasses of the field, the milk of beasts, and the honey of bees. For everything beyond these is of Satan, and leads by the way of sins and of diseases unto death. But the foods which you eat from the abundant table of God give strength and youth to your body, and you will never see diseases For the table of God fed Methuselah of old, and I tell you truly, if you live even as he lived, then will the God of the living give you also long life upon the earth as was his. "For I tell you truly, the God of the living is richer than all the rich of the earth, and his abundant table is richer than the richest table of feasting of all the rich upon the earth. Eat, therefore, all your life at the table of our Earthly Mother, and you will never see want. And when you eat at her table, eat all things even as they are found on the table of the Earthly Mother. Cook not, neither mix all things one with another, lest your bowels become as steaming bogs. For I tell you truly, this is abominable in the eyes of the Lord. "And be not like the greedy servant, who always ate up, at the table of his lord, the portions of others. And he devoured everything himself, and mixed all together in his gluttony. And seeing that, his lord was wroth with him, and drove him from the table. And when all had ended their meal, he mixed together all that remained upon the table, and called the greedy servant to him, and said: 'Take and eat all this with the swine, for your place is with them, and not at my table.' "Take heed, therefore, and defile not with all kinds of abominations the temple of your bodies. Be content with two or three sorts of food, which you will find always upon the table of our Earthly Mother. And desire not to devour all things which you see around you. For I tell you truly, if you mix together all sorts of food in your body, then the peace of your body will cease, and endless war will rage in you. And it will be blotted out even as homes and kingdoms divided against themselves work their own destruction. For your God is the God of peace, and does never help division. Arouse not, therefore, against you the wrath of God, lest he drive you from his table, and lest you be compelled to go to the table of Satan, where the fire of sins, diseases, and death will corrupt your body. "And when you eat, never eat unto fulness. Flee the temptations of Satan, and listen to the voice of God's angels. For Satan and his power tempt you always to eat more and more. But live by the spirit, and resist the desires of the body. And your fasting is always pleasing in the eyes of the angels of God. So give heed to how much you have eaten when your body is sated, and always eat less by a third. "Let the weight of your daily food be not less than a mina, but mark that it go not beyond two. Then will the angels of God serve you always, and you will never fall into the bondage of Satan and of his diseases. Trouble not the work of the angels in your body by eating often. For I tell you truly, he who eats more than twice in the clay does in him the work of Satan. And the angels of God leave his body, and soon Satan will take possession of it. Eat only when the sun is highest in the heavens, and again when it is set. And you will never see disease, for such finds favor in the eyes of the Lord. And if you will that the angels of God rejoice in your body, and that Satan shun you afar, then sit but once in the day at the table of God. And then your days will be long upon the earth, for this is pleasing in the eyes of the Lord. Eat always when the table of God is served before you, and eat always of that which you find upon the table of God. For I tell you truly, God knows well what your body needs, and when it needs. "From the coming of the month of Ijar, eat barley; from the month of Sivan, eat wheat, the most perfect among all seed-bearing herbs. And let your daily bread be made of wheat, that the Lord may take care of your bodies. From Tammuz, eat the sour grape, that your body may diminish and Satan may depart from it. in the month of Elul, gather the grape that the juice may serve you as drink. In the month of Marchesvan, gather the sweet grape, dried and sweetened by the angel of sun, that your bodies may increase, for the angels of the Lord dwell in them. You should eat figs rich in juice in the months of Ab and Shebat, and what remain, let the angel of sun keep them for you; eat them with the meat of almonds in all the months when the trees bear no fruits. And the herbs which come after rain, these eat in the month of Thebet, that your blood may be cleansed of all your sins. And in the same month begin to eat also the milk of your beasts, because for this did the Lord give the herbs of the fields to all the beasts which render milk, that they might with their milk feed man. For I tell you truly, happy are they that eat only at the table of God, and eschew all the abominations of Satan. Eat not unclean foods brought from far countries, but eat always that which your trees bear. For your God knows well what is needful for you, and where and when. And he gives to all peoples of all kingdoms for food that which is best for each. Eat not as the heathen do, who stuff themselves in haste, defiling their bodies with all manner of abominations. "For the power of God's angels enters into you with the living food which the Lord gives you from his royal table. And when you eat, have above you the angel of air, and below you the angel of water. Breathe long and deeply at all your meals, that the angel of air may bless your repasts. And chew well your food with your teeth, that it become water, and that the angel of water turn it into blood in your body. And eat slowly, as it were a prayer you make to the Lord. For I tell you truly, the power of God enters into you, if you eat after this manner at his table. But Satan turns into a steaming bog the body of him upon whom the angels of air and water do not descend at his repasts. And .the Lord suffers him no longer at his table. For the table of the Lord is an altar, and he who eats at the table of God is in a temple. For I tell you truly, the body of the Son of Man is turned into a temple, and his inwards into an altar, if he does the commandments of God. Wherefore, put naught u pon the altar of the Lord when your spirit is vexed, neither think upon any one with anger in the temple of God. And enter only into the Lord's sanctuary when you feel in yourselves the call of his angels, for all that you eat in sorrow, or in anger, or without desire, becomes a poison in your body. For the breath of Satan defiles aR these. Place with joy your offerings upon the altar of your body, and let all evil thoughts depart from you when you receive into your body the power of God from his table. And never sit at the table of God before he call you by the angel of appetite. "Rejoice, therefore, always with God's angels at their royal table, for this is pleasing to the heart of the Lord. And your life will be long upon the earth, for the most precious of God's servants will serve you all your days: the angel of joy. "And forget not that every seventh day is holy and consecrated to God. On six days feed your body with the gifts of the Earthly Mother, but on the seventh day sanctify your body for your Heavenly Father. On the seventh day eat not any earthly food, but live only on the words of God, and be all the day with the angels of the Lord in the kingdom of the Heavenly Father. And on the seventh day let the angels of God build the kingdom of the heavens in your body, as you labor for six days in the kingdom of the Earthly Mother. And let not food trouble the work of the angels in your body throughout the seventh day. And God will give you long life upon earth, that you may have life everlasting in the kingdom of the heavens. For I tell you truly, if you see not diseases any more upon earth, you will live for ever in the kingdom of the heavens. "And God will send you each morning the angel of sunshine to wake you from your sleep. Therefore, obey your Heavenly Father's summons, and lie not idle in your beds, for the angels of air and water await you already without. And labor all day long with the angels of the Earthly Mother that you may come to know them and their works ever more and more well. But when the sun is set, and your Heavenly Father sends you his most precious angel, sleep, then take your rest, and be all the night with the angel of sleep. And then will your Heavenly Father send you his unknown angels, that they may be with you the livelong night. And the Heavenly Father's unknown angels will teach you many things concerning the kingdom of God, even as the angels that you know of the Earthly Mother, instruct you in the things of her kingdom. For I tell you truly, you will be every night the guests of the kingdom of your Heavenly Father, if you do his commandments. And when you wake up upon the morrow, you will feel in you the power of the unknown angels. And your Heavenly Father will send them to you every night, that they may build your spirit, even as every day the Earthly Mother sends you her angels, that they may build your body. For I tell you truly, if in the daytime your Earthly Mother folds you in her arms, and in the night the Heavenly Father breathes his kiss upon you, then will the Sons of Men become the Sons of God. "Resist day and night the temptations of Satan. Wake not by night, neither sleep by day, lest the angels of God depart from you. "And take no delight in any drink, nor in any smoke from Satan, waking you by night and making you to sleep by day. For I tell you truly, all the drinks and smokes of Satan are abominations in the eyes of your God. "Commit not whoredom, by night or by day, for the whoremonger is like a tree whose sap runs out from its trunk. And that tree will be dried up before its time, nor will it ever bear fruit. Therefore, go not a-whoring, lest Satan dry up your body, and the Lord make your seed unfruitful. "Shun all that is too hot and too cold. For it is the will of your Earthly Mother that neither heat nor cold should harm your body. And let not your bodies become either hotter or colder than as God's angels warm or cool them. And if you do the commandments of the Earthly Mother, then as oft as your body becomes too hot, will she send the angel of coolness to cool you, and as oft as your body becomes too cold, will she send you the angel of heat to warm you again. "Follow the example of all the angels of the Heavenly Father and of the Earthly Mother, who work day and night, without ceasing, upon the kingdoms of the heavens and of the earth. Therefore, receive also into yourselves the strongest of God's angels, the angel of deeds, and work all together upon the kingdom of God. Follow the example of the running water, the wind as it blows, the rising and setting of the sun, the growing plants and trees, the beasts as they run and gambol, the wane and waxing of the moon, the stars as they come and go again; all these do move, and do perform their labors. For all which has life does move, and only that which is dead is still. And God is the God of the living, and Satan that of the dead. Serve, therefore, the living God, that the eternal movement of life may sustain you, and that you may escape the eternal stillness of death. Work, therefore, without ceasing, to build the kingdom of God, lest you be cast into the kingdom of Satan. For eternal joy abounds in the living kingdom of God, but still sorrow darkens the kingdom of death of Satan. Be, therefore, true Sons of your Earthly Mother and of your Heavenly Father, that you fall not as slaves of Satan. And your Earthly Mother and Heavenly Father will send you their angels to teach, to love, and to serve you. And their angels will write the commandments of God in your head, in your heart, and in your hands, that you may know, feel, and do God's commandments. "And pray every day to your Heavenly Father and Earthly mother, that your soul become as perfect as your Heavenly Father's holy spirit is perfect, and that your body become as perfect as the body of your Earthly Mother is perfect. For if you understand, feel, and do the commandments, then all for which you pray to your Heavenly Father and your Earthly Mother will be given you. For the wisdom, the love, and the power of God are above all. "After this manner, therefore, pray to your Heavenly Father: Our Father which art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. For thine is the kingdom, the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen. "And after this manner pray to your Earthly Mother: Our Mother which art upon earth, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come, and thy will be done in us, as it is in thee. As thou sendest every day thy angels, send them to us also. Forgive us our sins, as we atone all our sins against thee. And lead us not into sickness, but deliver us from all evil, for thine is the earth, the body, and the health. Amen. And they all prayed together with Jesus to the Heavenly Father and to the Earthly Mother. And afterwards Jesus spoke thus to them: "Even as your bodies have been reborn through the Earthly Mother's angels, may your spirit, likewise, be reborn through the angels of the Heavenly Father. Become, therefore, true Sons of your Father and of your Mother, and true Brothers of the Sons of Men. Till now you were at war with your Father, with your Mother, and with your Brothers. And you have served Satan. From today live at peace with your Heavenly Father, and with your Earthly Mother, and with your Brothers, the Sons of Men. And fight only against Satan, lest he rob you of your peace. I give the peace of your Earthly Mother to your body, and the peace of your Heavenly Father to your spirit. And let the peace of both reign among the Sons of Men. "Come to me, all that are weary and that suffer in strife and affliction! For my peace will strengthen you and comfort you. For my peace is exceeding full of joy. Wherefore do I always greet you after this manner: 'Peace be with you!' Do you always, therefore, so greet one another, that upon your body may descend the peace of your Earthly Mother, and upon your spirit the peace of your Heavenly Father. And then you will find peace also among yourselves, for the kingdom of God is within you. And now return to your Brothers with whom hitherto you were at war, and give your peace to them also. For happy are they that strive for peace, for they will find the peace of God. Go, and sin no more. And give to every one your peace, even as I have given my peace unto you. For my peace is of God. Peace be with you." And he left them. And his peace descended upon them; and in their heart the angel of love, in their head the wisdom of law, and in their hands the power of rebirth, they went forth among the Sons of Men, to bring the light of peace to those that warred in darkness. And they parted, wishing one to another: "PEACE BE WITH YOU." THE STORY OF THE ESSENE GOSPEL OF PEACE Translated by Edmond Bordeaux Szekely In Four Volumes It was in 1928 that Edmond Bordeaux Szekely first published his translation of Book One of The Essene Gospel of Peace, an ancient manuscript he had found in the Secret Archives of the Vatican as the result of limitless patience, faultless scholarship, and unerring intuition. This story is told in his book, The Discovery of the Essene Gospel of Peace, published in 1975. The English version of Book One appcared in 1937, and ever since, the little volume has traveled over the world, appearing in many different languages, gaining every year more and more readers, until now, still with no commercial advertisement, over a million copies have been sold in the United States alone. It was not until almost fifty years after the first French translation that Book Two and Book Three appeared (The Unknown Books of the Essenes and Lost Scrolls of the Essene Brotherhood), achieving rapidly the popularity of Book One. In 1981, Book Four, The Teachings of the Elect, was published posthumously according to Dr. Szekely's wishes, representing yet another fragment of the complete manuscript which exists in Aramaic in the Secret Archives of the Vatican and in old Slavonic in the Royal Library of the Habsburgs (now the property of the Austrian government). The poetic style of the translator brings to vivid reality the exquisitely beautiful words of Jesus and the Elders of the Essene Brotherhood. Some of the chapters: The Essene Communions. The Sevenfold Peace. The Holy Streams of Life, Light, and Sound. The Gift of the Humble Grass. EXCERPTS FROM The Essene Gospel of Peace, Book Two: The Unknown Books of the Essenes And one man spoke: "But, Master, we are but men, we are not angels. How then can we hope to walk in their ways? Tell us what we must do." And Jesus spoke: As the son inherits the land of his father, So have we inherited a Holy Land From our Fathers. This land is not a field to be ploughed, But a place within us Where we may build our Holy Temple. -And even as a temple must be raised, Stone by stone, So will I give to you those stones For the building of the Holy Temple; That which we have inherited From our Fathers, And their Fathers' Fathers. And all the men gathered around Jesus, and their faces shone with desire to hear the words which would come from his lips. And he lifted his face to the rising sun, and the radiance of its rays filled his eyes as he spoke: "The Holy Temple can be built Only with the ancient Communions, Those which are spoken, Those which are thought, And those which are lived. For if they are spoken only with the mouth, They are as a dead hive Which the bees have forsaken, That gives no more honey. The Communions are a bridge Between man and the angels, And like a bridge, Can be built only with patience, Yea, even as the bridge over the river Is fashioned stone by stone, As they are found by the water's edge. And the Communions are fourteen in number, As the Angels of the Heavenly Father Number seven, And the Angels of the Earthly Mother Number seven. And just as the roots of the tree Sink into the earth and are nourished, And the branches of the tree Raise their arms to heaven, So is man like the trunk of the tree, With his roots deep In the breast of his Earthly Mother, And his soul ascending To the bright stars of his Heavenly Father. And the roots of the tree Are the Angels of the Earthly Mother, And the branches of the tree Are the Angels of the Heavenly Father. And this is the sacred Tree of Life Which stands in the Sea of Eternity. EXCERPTS FROM The Essene Gospel of Peace, Book Three: Lost Scrolls of the Essene Brotherhood For the earth shall be filled with the Peace of the Heavenly Father, as the waters cover the sea. I will invoke the Angel of Peace, Whose breath is friendly, Whose hand is clothed in power. In the reign of Peace, there is neither hunger nor thirst, Neither cold wind nor hot wind, Neither old age nor death. In the reign of Peace, Both animals and men shall be undying, Waters and plants shall be undrying, And the food of life shall be never-failing. It is said that the mountains Shall bring peace to the people, And the little hills, righteousness. There shall be peace As long as the sun and moon endure, Throughout all generations. Peace shall come down like rain upon mown grass, As showers that water the earth. In the reign of Peace shall the Law grow strong, And the Children of Light shall have dominion From sea to sea, unto the ends of the earth. T'he reign of Peace hath its source In the Heavenly Father; By his strength he setteth fast the mountains, He maketh the outgoings of morning and evening To rejoice in the Light, He bringeth to earth the river of the Law, To water and enrich it, He maketh soft the earth with showers; They drop upon the pastures of the wilderness, And the little hills rejoice on every side. The pastures are clothed with flocks; The valleys also are covered over with corn; They shout for joy, they also sing. O Heavenly Father! Bring unto thy earth the reign of Peace! 7'hen shall we remember the words Of him who taught of old the Children of Light: I give the peace of thy Earthly Mother To thy body, And the peace of thy Heavenly Father To thy spirit. And let the peace of both Reign among the sons of men. Come to me all that are weary, And that suffer in strife and affliction! For my peace will strengthen thee and comfort thee. For my peace is exceeding full of joy. Wherefore do I always greet thee after this manner: Peace be with thee! Do thou always, therefore, so greet one another, That upon thy body may descend The The Peace of thy Earthly Mother, And upon thy spirit The Peace of thy Heavenly Father. And then wilt thou find peace also among thyselves, For the Kingdom of the Law is within thee. And return to thy Brothers And give thy peace to them also, For happy are they that strive for peace, For they will find the peace of the Heavenly Father. And give to every one thy peace, Even as I have given my peace unto thee. For my peace is of God. Peace be with thee!
City University of New York Law Review Volume 9 | Issue 1 Winter 2005 Quoting the Bible: The Use of Religious References in Judicial Decision-Making Sanja Zgonjanin CUNY School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/clr Part of the Law Commons The CUNY Law Review is published by the Office of Library Services at the City University of New York. For more information please contact firstname.lastname@example.org. Recommended Citation Sanja Zgonjanin, Quoting the Bible: The Use of Religious References in Judicial Decision-Making, 9 N.Y. City L. Rev. 31 (2005). Available at: 10.31641/clr090102 Quoting the Bible: The Use of Religious References in Judicial Decision- Making Acknowledgements The author thanks Professor Ruthann Robson for her invaluable comments and suggestions. This article is available in City University of New York Law Review: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/clr/vol9/iss1/3 QUOTING THE BIBLE: THE USE OF RELIGIOUS REFERENCES IN JUDICIAL DECISION-MAKING Sanja Zgonjanin* INTRODUCTION The use of religion in judicial decision-making is the subject of an ongoing debate.1 Whether and to what extent a decision is based on religious argument or influenced by religious convictions is a difficult question to answer. While scholars disagree on the appropriateness of religious arguments or influences in judicial decision- making,2 they commonly recognize that explicit reference to religious authority in a written opinion is problematic.3 Many * J.D. Candidate, City University of New York School of Law, May 2006; M.A., Columbia University, 2000; M.L.S., Queens College, 1999. The author thanks Professor Ruthann Robson for her invaluable comments and suggestions. 1 See Constitution Restoration Act of 2005, S. 520, 109th Cong. (2005); H.R. 1070, 109th Cong. (2005). 2 Scholars differ on the issue of the appropriateness of religion in judicial decision- making. However, most legal literature on the issue is written from the perspective advocating the use of religion in judicial decision-making. That viewpoint is shared by moderates and conservatives alike. See generally MICHAEL J. PERRY, RELIGION IN POLITICS: CONSTITUTIONAL AND MORAL PERSPECTIVES 102-04 (1999); KENT GREENAWALT, RELIGIOUS CONVICTIONS AND POLITICAL CHOICE 239-41 (1988) [hereinafter GREENAWALT, RELIGIOUS CONVICTIONS]; Scott C. Idleman, The Concealment of Religious Values in Judicial Decisionmaking, 91 VA. L. REV. 515 (2005) [hereinafter Idleman, Concealment]; Teresa S. Collett, “The King’s Good Servant, but God’s First”: The Role of Religion in Judicial Decisionmaking, 41 S. TEX. L. REV. 1277 (2000); Mark B. Greenlee, Faith on the Bench: The Role of Religious Belief in the Criminal Sentencing Decisions of Judges, 26 U. DAYTON L. REV. 1 (2000); Daniel G. Ashburn, Appealing to a Higher Authority?: Jewish Law in American Judicial Opinions, 71 U. DET. MERCY L. REV. 295 (1994). 3 GREENAWALT, RELIGIOUS CONVICTIONS, supra note 2, at 239 (“Judicial opinions are formalized justifications for decisions. Opinions are supposed to refer only to what is legally relevant . . . . What is legally relevant is generally conceived to be the same for all judges, so neither personal religious convictions nor any other idiosyncratic convictions are legally relevant. Given this understanding about judicial opinions, it follows that opinions should not contain direct references to the religious premises of judges.”); Mark C. Modak-Truran, Reenchanting the Law: The Religious Dimension of Judicial Decision Making, 53 CATH. U. L. REV. 709, 814 (2004) (“In addition, judges are not insincere by leaving their religious or comprehensive justifications out of their opinions but consistent with the Establishment Clause (i.e., the ‘rule of law’) and a proper understanding of religious pluralism. Leaving out religious justifications also facilities [sic] consensus on legal results and lower-level legal rules and principles without raising the thorny philosophical, theological, and hermenuetical [sic] questions implicated by religious justifications.”); Scott C. Idleman, The Limits of Religious Values in Judicial Decisionmaking, 81 MARQ. L. REV. 537, 542-43 (1998) (“In fact, given that religious bases may be less than universal in their acceptance among the relevant audiences to the opinion, it is quite sensible that the judge would not necessarily 31 32 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 judges are religiously active and outspoken about the impact of religion on their work.4 Some well-known Supreme Court justices were, and are, deeply religious.5 Unlike the past, today’s Supreme Court Justices, such as Antonin Scalia, speak publicly about their religious faith.6 Some judges have explicitly stated in their opinions that “[c]ourts must recognize that the state is but one of several spheres of government, each with its distinct jurisdiction and make reference to them in the act of justification.”); Bruce A. Green, The Role of Personal Values in Professional Decisionmaking, 11 GEO. J. LEGAL ETHICS 19, 35 (1997) (“One would expect that a savvy judge who bases his or her decision on personal morality will not do so explicitly, but will cite only legally relevant grounds for the decision.”); Kent Greenawalt, Religious Expression in the Public Square—The Building Blocks for an Intermediate Position, 29 LOY. L.A. L. REV. 1411, 1419 (1996); see generally David Barringer, Higher Authorities, A.B.A. J., Dec. 1996, at 68. 4 See, for example, Raul A. Gonzalez, Climbing the Ladder of Success—My Spiritual Journey, 27 TEX. TECH. L. REV. 1139, 1157 (1996), in which Texas Supreme Court Justice Gonzalez describes his religious re-awakening and the impact his faith had on his decisions, including Nelson v. Krusen, 678 S.W.2d 918 (Tex. 1984); Kennedy v. Hyde, 682 S.W.2d 525 (Tex. 1984); In re Unnamed Baby McLean, 725 S.W.2d 696 (Tex. 1987); Jilani v. Jilani, 767 S.W.2d 671 (Tex. 1988); Cox v. Thee Evergreen Church, 836 S.W.2d 167 (Tex. 1992), Speer v. Presbyterian Children’s Home, 847 S.W.2d 227 (Tex. 1993); Valenzuela v. Aquino, 853 S.W.2d 512 (Tex. 1993); Tilton v. Marshall, 925 S.W.2d 672 (Tex. 1996); and Krishnan v. Sepulveda, 916 S.W.2d 478 (Tex. 1995). He concludes: In each of the above cases, my relationship with God impacted the way I considered and wrote about the issues presented. How we experience God and our level of religious commitment (or lack of commitment) impacts our work. One’s views on how the world began, sin, forgiveness, and redemption influences our attitudes, behavior, and everything that we do. Gonzalez, supra, at 1157. 5 See generally James W. Gordon, Religion and the First Justice Harlan: A Case Study in Late Nineteenth Century Presbyterian Constitutionalism, 85 MARQ. L. REV. 317 (2001); Thomas C. Berg & William G. Ross, Some Religiously Devout Justices: Historical Notes and Comments, 81 MARQ. L. REV. 383 (1998); Stephen L. Carter, The Religiously Devout Judge, 64 NOTRE DAME L. REV. 932 (1989). Some judges believe that they have a right to use religious references in justifying their decisions. Judge Griffen, who is also a Baptist pastor, explains why he thinks he has that right: Finally, devout judges must remain sensitive to the important role that religious values and their proper expression serve within a pluralistic society. If the devout judge does not remind society that certain conduct is condemned as offensive to domestic tranquility, contrary to the laws of nature, or inconsistent with truth, then society is denied the value of that information and judgment in its pursuit of justice. The give-and-take of competing moral, behavioral, intellectual, and cultural philosophies is how a pluralistic society operates. The devout judge, as a citizen of two societies, helps society remain pluralist by thinking and acting in a holistic way, not by trivializing religious conviction. Wendell L. Griffen, The Case for Religious Values in Judicial Decision-Making, 81 MARQ. L. REV. 513, 520 (1998). 6 See Joan Biskupic, Scalia Makes The Case for Christianity; Justice Proclaims Belief in Miracles, WASH. POST, Apr. 10, 1996, at A1; see also, e.g., Michael Stokes Paulsen & Steffen N. Johnson, Scalia’s Sermonette, 72 NOTRE DAME L. REV. 863 (1997). 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 33 limited authority granted by God,”7 and “that God, not the state or any government established by man, is the source of all our rights.”8 Some judges use religion as an alternative to traditional sentencing such as jail or rehabilitation for drug and alcohol offenders. 9 Other judges go as far as prohibiting the parents in a divorce decree from exposing their child to “non-mainstream” religious beliefs and rituals.10 Despite the unprecedented presence of religion in the lives of ordinary American citizens,11 some scholars12 continue to maintain “a modern myth that religion is somehow persecuted in American life.”13 Responding to the argument that explicit religious references are rare or absent from judicial opinions,14 this Article will demonstrate that judges’ personal religious beliefs and religious education very often find a place in decisions they write.15 A quick 7 Ex parte G.C., No. 1040001, 2005 WL 1793345, at *22 (Ala. July 29, 2005) (Parker, J., dissenting). 8 Id. at *14 (Bolin, J., concurring specially). 9 See Alan Maimon, Judge Lets Some Defendants Attend Worship as Sentencing Option, COURIER-J. (Louisville, KY), May 31, 2005, at A1. Michael Caperton, a Laurel district judge since 1994 and a devout Christian, offered the option of attending worship for ten services “about 50 times to repeat drug and alcohol offenders.” Id. 10 See Kevin Corcoran, Father Appeals Anti-Wicca, INDIANAPOLIS STAR, May 26, 2005, at A1. 11 See generally Faith Based and Community Initiatives, http:// www.whitehouse.gov/government/fbci/index.html (last visited Jan. 24, 2006). In the field of legal theory, one author suggested it is time to develop a Christian jurisprudence. Jonathan Edward Maire, The Possibility of a Christian Jurisprudence, 40 AM. J. JURIS. 101, 101-02 (1995). 12 Paulsen & Johnson, supra note 6, at 867 (commenting that Justice Scalia’s speech at a prayer breakfast at the First Baptist Church in Jackson, Mississippi, on April 9, 1996, was “about the clash of world views between Christianity and today’s dominant culture. It was about the difficulties of being a Christian in a secular world—our culture and, especially, our legal culture.”). 13 Biskupic, supra note 6, at A7 (quoting James Dunn, executive director of the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs). 14 Idleman, Concealment, supra note 2, at 520 (“To most observers of the American legal system, including its participants, the absence of overt religious language or reasoning in judicial decisionmaking is unremarkable. In all likelihood, it is not even noticed.”); Modak-Truran, supra note 3, at 786-87 (“[e]xplicit religious references rarely appear in judicial opinions.”); Berg & Ross, supra note 5, at 387 (“Note, however, the limits on the importance of religious arguments. First, such arguments do not appear as often as one might expect in an age of pervasive Christianity: one can basically count them on two hands.”); Richard H. Hiers, The Death Penalty and Due Process in Biblical Law, 81 U. DET. MERCY L. REV. 751, 752 (2004) (“Biblical texts occasionally are even cited as authority in judicial opinions.”). 15 See generally J. Michael Medina, The Bible Annotated: Use of the Bible in Reported American Decisions, 12 N. ILL. U. L. REV. 187 (1991). This annotation collects cases where a court directly cites a biblical passage, and the author lists the following doctrines for which the Bible is cited as the foundation: “the sequestration rule, punitive damages, forgiveness of debts, due process, forfeiture, alien rights, statutory construc34 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 Westlaw online survey of federal and state cases for the use of biblical books, such as Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy, produces a high number of results.16 Interestingly, courts of the nineteenth century rarely quoted the Bible, despite the fact that many judges were devoutly religious and active in their local congregations. 17 Quoting the Bible is much more characteristic of twentieth-century American courts and is a matter of great concern to anyone who believes that judicial decision-making should not be based on comprehensive doctrines such as religion.18 The first part of this Article discusses the judicial use of the Bible in criminal sentencing by trial courts. The second part examines some of the ways in which courts undermine the religious character of biblical quotations. The third part examines the variety of purposes for which courts use biblical quotations. The fourth part is a case study of judicial use of two specific biblical tion, basic agency doctrine, tenancy by the entirety, the two-witness rule, the right of confrontation, judicial impartiality, criminalization of sodomy, the necessity defense to criminal charges, the right of free travel, usury, eminent domain, impeachment of witnesses, the law of apportionment, property tax exemptions, double jeopardy, and various elements of past and present domestic relations law.” Id. at 189-91. 16 For example, a Westlaw search performed on February 10, 2006 resulted in the following: Genesis 1 is quoted in 10 state and 11 federal cases; Exodus 21 is quoted in 59 state and 27 federal cases; Leviticus 24 is quoted in 5 state and 8 federal cases; Deuteronomy 19 is quoted in 16 state and 7 federal cases. In the same search, the word Leviticus appeared in 126 state, 89 federal, and 4 Supreme Court cases; the word Deuteronomy appeared in 173 state, 100 federal, and 5 Supreme Court cases. This author’s review of search results showed that only a small number of quotations are part of the facts of a case. Due to the lack of more precise search methods in Westlaw and Lexis databases that would allow comprehensive inquiries of biblical quotations, this Article was limited to a discussion of a very narrow scope of biblical quotations in judicial opinions. 17 See infra Appendix. 18 John Rawls based his theory of justice on the concept of public reason shared by all citizens, “independent of opposing and conflicting philosophical and religious doctrines,” and “an overlapping consensus of reasonable religious, philosophical, and moral doctrines.” He said: The religious doctrines that in previous centuries were the professed basis of society have gradually given way to principles of constitutional government that all citizens, whatever their religious view, can endorse. Comprehensive political and moral doctrines likewise cannot be endorsed by citizens generally, and they also no longer can, if they ever could, serve as the professed basis of society. JOHN RAWLS, POLITICAL LIBERALISM 9-10 (1993). Rawls viewed the Supreme Court as the best exemplar of public reason in a society of constitutional regime with judicial review and argued that public reason is “well suited to be the court’s reason in exercising its role . . . .” Id. at 231. But see generally GREENAWALT, Publicly Accessible Grounds of Decision and Religious Convictions, in RELIGIOUS CONVICTIONS, supra note 2, at 49-84; and Richard Posner, The Problematics of Moral and Legal Theory, 111 HARV. L. REV. 1637 (1998). 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 35 passages, Matthew 6:24 and Luke 16:13. The fifth part considers the judicial use of religious references other than the Bible. The Article concludes that the use of religious references in judicial decision- making should be prohibited.19 “The Christian state knows only privileges.”20 Christian faith is privileged in the United States.21 Because a privilege is not a right, the government is under no obligation to confront the injustice and discrimination created by it.22 On the contrary, since the religious beliefs of a majority of Americans are associated with Christianity, 23 such privilege is largely invisible and sustained by the power it creates.24 As is often the case, the characteristics of the majority become so internalized that they are considered the social norm.25 In a way, they “domesticate” the minority.26 Additionally, 19 “The justices cannot, of course, invoke their own personal morality, nor the ideals and virtues of morality generally. Those they must view as irrelevant. Equally, they cannot invoke their or other people’s religious or philosophical views.” RAWLS, supra note 18, at 236. 20 KARL MARX, On The Jewish Question, in 3 KARL MARX & FREDERICK ENGELS: COLLECTED WORKS 1843-44, at 146, 146 (Jack Cohen et al. trans., 1975). 21 Joseph R. Duncan, Jr., Privilege, Invisibility, and Religion: A Critique of the Privilege that Christianity Has Enjoyed in the United States, 54 ALA. L. REV. 617, 626 (2003). See, e.g., Zorach v. Clauson, 343 U.S. 306, 313 (1952) (upholding a New York City program permitting public schools to release students to attend religious instruction and stating, “[w]e are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being.”); Church of the Holy Trinity v. United States, 143 U.S. 457, 471 (1892) (holding that a statute prohibiting the contracting of foreigners to perform labor and services did not apply to clergy, and stating that “this is a Christian nation”). 22 See Duncan, supra note 21, at 621. 23 See BARRY A. KOSMIN ET AL., THE GRADUATE CENTER OF THE CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK, AMERICAN RELIGIOUS IDENTIFICATION SURVEY 12 (2001), http:// www.gc.cuny.edu/faculty/research_studies/aris.pdf (on file with the author). According to the most comprehensive study of religious identification of American adults, done by the Graduate Center of the City University of New York, 76.5% of the U.S. population self-identifies as Christians. Id. See also Largest Religious Groups in the United States of America, http://www.adherents.com/rel_USA.html (last updated Jan. 24, 2006). 24 Duncan, supra note 21, at 622. See also Simpson v. Chesterfield County Bd. of Supervisors, 404 F.3d 276, 283 (4th Cir. 2005). Applying Marsh v. Chambers, 463 U.S. 783 (1983), the court held that the county board’s invocation policy excluding a county resident’s Wiccan religion was constitutionally sound and that the Wiccan religion was not monotheistic, did not “fit broadly within ‘the Judeo-Christian tradition,’” and lacked “the unifying aspects of our heritage.” Id. 25 See Stephanie M. Wildman with Adrienne D. Davis, Language and Silence: Making Systems of Privilege Visible, 35 SANTA CLARA L. REV. 881, 890 (1995). See also STEPHANIE M. WILDMAN, PRIVILEGE REVEALED: HOW INVISIBLE PREFERENCE UNDERMINES AMERICA 141 (1996). [O]ur social system is not supposed to privilege organized religion or religious belief over the secular realm. But this protection of the secular creates a peculiar vacuum, in which religion is supposed to be invisible, yet Christmas is a national holiday. Even the phrasing ‘church [but 36 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 religious practices and expressions are widely accepted and sanctioned by courts based on their context27 or tradition.28 It is now accepted that religious practices and expressions that are deeply embedded in the nation’s history and tradition do not violate the Constitution.29 They include, among others, opening the Supreme Court session with “God save the United States and this honorable not synagogue or mosque] and state’ privileges Christianity as the defining religion for constitutional drafting. Systems of privilege and the religious/ secular dichotomy intertwine with the rule of law to contribute to the undermining of justice. Systemic privileging and oppression remain invisible and undiscussed, in accordance with the unwritten rules of our society. The rule of law does nothing to end this invisibility and may even contribute to its continuation. Thus the very act of seeing that the rule of law and systems of privilege undermine justice is itself problematic. A full attack on privileging and oppression can begin in earnest only when the legal profession recognizes this privileging dynamic. But this reality—privilege—that we must see has not even found articulation in legal vocabulary. Id. 26 The term “domestication” is borrowed from lesbian legal theory. “Domestication also describes a process of substituting one way of thinking for another. Domestication has occurred when the views of the dominant culture, in this case legal culture, are so internalized they are considered common sense.” Ruthann Robson, Mother: The Legal Domestication of Lesbian Existence, 7 HYPATIA 172, 172 (1992). 27 See County of Allegheny v. ACLU, 492 U.S. 573, 621 (1989) (holding that a display of the cr`eche in a county courthouse violates the Establishment Clause while the display of a menorah in front of a county building, in a particular setting next to a Christmas tree, does not); Lynch v. Donnelly, 465 U.S. 668, 687 (1984) (holding that “notwithstanding the religious significance of the cr`eche,” its display by the city did not violate the Establishment Clause). Justice Burger stated: It would be ironic, however, if the inclusion of a single symbol of a particular historic religious event, as part of a celebration acknowledged in the Western World for 20 centuries, and in this country by the people, by the Executive Branch, by the Congress, and the courts for 2 centuries, would so “taint” the city’s exhibit as to render it violative of the Establishment Clause. To forbid the use of this one passive symbol— the cr`eche—at the very time people are taking note of the season with Christmas hymns and carols in public schools and other public places, and while the Congress and legislatures open sessions with prayers by paid chaplains, would be a stilted overreaction contrary to our history and to our holdings. Id. at 686. 28 See Freethought Soc’y of Greater Phila. v. Chester County, 334 F.3d 247, 269 (3d Cir. 2003) (holding that a Ten Commandments plaque affixed to a courthouse is not a real threat to the Establishment Clause). The court noted that “the age and history of the plaque provide a context which changes the effect of an otherwise religious plaque.” Id. at 264 (citing County of Allegheny, 492 U.S. at 630 (O’Connor, J., concurring)). 29 See Marsh, 463 U.S. at 788-89. Justice Burger held that a century-old practice of opening legislative sessions with a prayer by a chaplain paid with public funds does not pose a real threat to the Establishment Clause. Id. at 795. 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 37 Court;”30 opening a legislative session with a prayer;31 recognizing the nation in the pledge of allegiance as “one Nation under God;”32 and printing “In God We Trust” on our money,33 and posting it in court rooms, Congressional chambers, and other places of government business. After all, “In God we trust” is our national motto,34 and Thanksgiving and Christmas are national holidays.35 President Reagan even once proclaimed 1983 the year of the Bible.36 The privilege of Christian religion is also affirmed and supported by Congress. For example in 2005, members of Congress introduced a House resolution directing the Speaker of the House to display the Ten Commandments in the House Chamber in case the Supreme Court was to rule that the government display of the Ten Commandments in public places is unconstitutional.37 Advanced by Representatives King, Chabot, Bartlett, Norwood, Pitts, Westmoreland, Blackburn, Fox, Gingrey, Hostettler, Goode, and Alexander, the resolution was introduced in anticipation of the Supreme Court ruling on two Ten Commandment cases argued during the April 2005 term: Van Orden v. Perry38 and McCreary County v. ACLU.39 The resolution states, among other things, that the House “recognizes that posting the Ten Commandments in the House Chamber is a constitutionally protected expression of our Nation’s heritage and the foundation of our laws.”40 The statement that biblical commands are the foundation of our laws may come as a surprise to law school students who, upon entering law school, first 30 County of Allegheny, 492 U.S. at 630 (O’Connor, J., concurring) (reaffirming the secular purpose of “ceremonial deism” of the phrase, “God save the United States and this honorable Court,” which, despite its religious roots, does not convey endorsement of a particular religious belief). 31 Marsh, 463 U.S. at 795. See also Simpson, 404 F.3d at 282 (applying Marsh, which “teaches[ ] legislative invocations perform the venerable function of seeking divine guidance for the legislature”). But see Wynne v. Town of Great Falls, 376 F.3d 292, 301-02 (4th Cir. 2004), cert. denied, 125 S. Ct. 2990 (2005) (holding that the Town Council’s invoking of Jesus Christ while excluding deities associated with other faiths was “not constitutionally accepted legislative prayer like that approved in Marsh”). 32 4 U.S.C. § 4 (2000). 33 31 U.S.C. § 5112 (2000). 34 36 U.S.C. § 302 (2000). 35 5 U.S.C. § 6103 (1990). 36 S.J. Res. 165, 97th Cong., 96 Stat. 1211 (1982). 37 H.R. Res. 214, 109th Cong. (2005). 38 125 S. Ct. 2854, 2864 (2005) (holding that the display of a monument inscribed with the Ten Commandments on the Texas state capitol grounds did not violate the Establishment Clause). 39 125 S. Ct. 2722, 2745 (2005) (holding that displaying the Ten Commandments at a Kentucky county courthouse violated the Establishment Clause). 40 H.R. Res. 214, 109th Cong. (2005). 38 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 learn about the history and sources of American law. One of the most popular law school books on this topic is the Historical Introduction to Anglo-American Law in a Nutshell.41 In tracing American legal history, this book starts by pointing out that most of the concepts of Anglo-American law were developed in the last eight hundred years,42 thus excluding the Bible as a direct source of our laws. The book also lays out two main sources of law upon which the American legal system relies: cases and statutes.43 The Bible is not mentioned as a source of American law. The privilege of Christianity as the predominant religion in the United States is vigorously supported by the media. While the author was working on this Article, Pope John Paul II died on April 2, 2005.44 Shortly thereafter, on April 11, 2005, Maurice Hilleman, one of the greatest scientists of modern times, died.45 While Pope John Paul II was considered by many to be one of the most important “spiritual leaders and moral teachers of the Modern Era”46 and probably one of the most famous people in the world, microbiologist Maurice Hilleman remained “the world’s best kept secret.” 47 The discrepancy in the print media coverage of the deaths of these two important persons speaks for itself and is stunning. A search of the term “Pope John” in the “Major Newspapers” section of the Lexis News & Business online database produced 1086 entries for the period between April 2, 2005, when the Pope died, and April 3, 2005, when the news was announced. In contrast, a search for “Maurice Hilleman” in the same database for the period between April 11, 2005, when the scientist died, and April 12, 2005, when the news was released, produced only four results: the Balti- 41 FREDERICK G. KEMPIN, JR., HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION TO ANGLO-AMERICAN LAW IN A NUTSHELL (3d. ed. 1990). 42 Id. at 2. 43 See id. at 95-125. For a detailed explanation of sources of Anglo-American law, see generally CARLETON KEMP ALLEN, LAW IN THE MAKING (1927); and SIR FREDERICK POLLOCK & FREDERIC WILLIAM MAITLAND, THE HISTORY OF ENGLISH LAW BEFORE THE TIME OF EDWARD I (2d ed. 1923). 44 See After 26-Year Reign, Pontiff Dies at 84, CNN, Apr. 2, 2005, http:// www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/04/02/pope.dies/index.html; Ian Fisher, Pope John Paul II Dies at 84, N.Y. TIMES, Apr. 3, 2005, at A1. 45 Lawrence K. Altman, Maurice Hilleman, Master in Creating Vaccines, Dies at 85, N.Y. TIMES, Apr. 12, 2005, at A1. 46 S. Res. 95, 109th Cong. (2005). See also S. Res. 94, 109th Cong. (2005); H.R. Res. 186, 109th Cong. (2005). 47 Patricia Sullivan, Maurice R. Hilleman Dies; Created Vaccines, WASH. POST, Apr. 13, 2005, at B6. Maurice Hilleman “invented over 40 vaccines, including those for mumps, chickenpox, measles, rubella, hepatitis A and B, meningitis, and countless variants of the flu virus.” Caroline Richmond, Obituary, Maurice Hilleman; Inventor of More than 40 Vaccines, INDEPENDENT (London), Apr. 20, 2005, at 35. 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 39 more Sun, the New York Times, the Orlando Sentinel, and the Seattle Times. While religious expression is recognized as part of American tradition and history, no court has yet provided a reasonable explanation of how the passage of time makes religious expression less religious and more secular so that it becomes a primary source of constitutional legitimacy.48 The proposition that religious practices and expressions do not violate the Constitution because they are accepted by a majority of society or are somehow “secularized” is a dangerous one.49 The government’s endorsement and use of religion encourages the oppression of minorities because it makes religious privilege invisible, allowing the majority in power to use the law according to its own beliefs.50 Congress is the biggest threat today to both judicial independence from religion and the court’s traditional role as the interpreter of the law. Members of Congress introduced the Constitution Restoration Act of 2005: Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review, by appeal, writ of certiorari, or otherwise, any matter to the extent that relief is sought against an entity of Federal, State, or local government, or against an officer or agent of Federal, State, or local government (whether or not acting in official or personal capacity), concerning that entity’s, officer’s, or agent’s acknowledgment of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government.51 48 Charles Gregory Warren, No Need to Stand on Ceremony: The Corruptive Influence of Ceremonial Deism and the Need for a Separationist Reconfiguration of the Supreme Court’s Establishment Clause Jurisprudence, 54 MERCER L. REV. 1669, 1691-92 (2003). See also State v. Ceballos, 832 A.2d 14, 55 (Conn. 2003) (Zarella, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part). [N]ot all religious references, including allusions to the Bible, God or other biblical characters, are impermissible. This is because many words and phrases traditionally viewed as religious in nature or derived from religious sources have become, over time, an integral part of the English language, and no longer may be recognized by either prosecutors or jurors as having purely religious connotations or derivations. Consider, for example, the phrases “raising Cain” and “for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap.” Both phrases are common expressions derived from the Bible. Still other expressions, such as “an eye for an eye,” have both religious and secular origins. Id. (citation omitted). 49 Warren, supra note 48, at 1692-93. 50 See generally Duncan, supra note 21. 51 S. 520, 109th Cong. (2005); see also H.R. 1070, 109th Cong. (2005). The Constitution Restoration Act was first introduced during the 108th Congress. See S. 2082, 108th Cong. (2004); S. 2323, 108th Cong. (2004); H.R. 3799, 108th Cong. (2004). During the 108th Congress, many other bills and resolutions were introduced recog40 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 By imposing its own religious values, the conservative religious right movement is destroying two of the most important values of American society: tolerance and pluralism.52 Attempts by conservative members of Congress to deprive the Supreme Court and the federal courts of their jurisdiction in solving disputes with religious subject matter are without precedent in our history. These attempts undermine the long-standing principle of judicial review articulated in Marbury v. Madison.53 At the same time, courts’ use of religious references and religious convictions in their decisionmaking is on the rise.54 It is hardly worth noting that, in a society with a Christian majority, the majority of judges are Christians.55 The power of the nizing the privilege of Christianity. See also H.R.J. Res. 39, 108th Cong. (2004) (constitutional amendment proposing “[a] law that prescribes the Pledge of Allegiance or provides for United States coins or currency is not a law respecting an establishment of religion because it refers to God in the Pledge or includes a reference to God on coins or currency.”); S. 1558, 108th Cong. (2003) (Religious Liberties Restoration Act proposing: the power to display the Ten Commandments on government property; the power to recite the Pledge of Allegiance on government property; the power to recite the national motto “In God We Trust” on government property; and the power to except this subject matter from the jurisdiction of federal courts inferior to the Supreme Court); S. Con. Res. 91, 108th Cong. (2004) (proposing to designate April 2005 as American Religious History Month and requesting that “the President issue a proclamation calling upon the people of the United States to observe the year with appropriate ceremonies and activities”). 52 Abraham H. Foxman, Foreword to ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE, THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT: THE ASSAULT ON TOLERANCE AND PLURALISM IN AMERICA, at iii-iv (1994). This book provides an insight into the grassroots organizing and political commitment of the religious right that led to its enormous power and influence over all three branches of the government in the 1990s. The author defines the religious right as an: array of politically conservative religious groups and individuals who are attempting to influence public policy based on shared cultural philosophy that is antagonistic to pluralism and church/state separation. The movement consists mainly of Protestants, most of them evangelical or fundamentalist, a far smaller number of Catholics, and a smattering of Jews. Id. at 7. 53 See Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137, 177 (1803). “It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.” Id. 54 See infra Appendix. 55 The first Jewish Justice of the Supreme Court, Louis D. Brandeis, was appointed in 1916 by President Wilson. See Ruth Bader Ginsburg, From Benjamin to Brandeis to Breyer: Is There a Jewish Seat?, 41 BRANDEIS L.J. 229, 233 (2002). See also Religious Affiliation of the U.S. Supreme Court, http://www.adherents.com/adh_sc.html (last modified Jan. 31, 2006) (noting that with the confirmation of Samuel Alito, the Supreme Court consists of seven Christian (Alito, Kennedy, Roberts, Scalia, Souter, Stevens, and Thomas) and two Jewish (Breyer and Ginsburg) justices). Statistics show that the Supreme Court is 78% Christian, with a Catholic majority of 56%; while 76.5% of the total U.S. population is affiliated with Christianity. Id. 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 41 courts to use religious references as they see fit should not be underestimated. Speaking about the power of judicial review, Alexander Bickel once said, “[t]he least dangerous branch of the American government is the most extraordinarily powerful court of law the world has ever known.”56 Judges should be mindful of the power they are vested with and the public trust in their impartiality and refrain entirely from using religious references in their decision-making. Judges are bound by the Code of Judicial Conduct, which, in addition to its canons requiring that judges uphold the integrity, independence, and impartiality of the judiciary,57 clearly states: A judge shall perform judicial duties without bias or prejudice. A judge shall not, in the performance of judicial duties, by words or conduct, manifest bias or prejudice, including but not limited to bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation or socioeconomic status, and shall not permit staff, court officials and others subject to the judge’s direction and control to do so.58 The arbitrariness, inconsistency, and lack of law on the use of religious references in decision-making are some of the main reasons why such use should be proscribed. I. RELYING ON THE BIBLE IN CRIMINAL SENTENCING While the use of religious references in judicial decision-making is generally unjustified and inappropriate, the most disturbing and harmful invocation of the Bible takes place in criminal sentencing decisions. The Bible is regularly quoted during the criminal sentencing phase of trials by prosecutors and defense attorneys. In their closing arguments, both sides often invoke the Bible in order to convince juries that defendants deserve or do not deserve punishment. Even those defendants who do not wish to use biblical passages in their closing arguments, or for whom such use may be inappropriate, are coerced into doing so in response to prosecutorial use of religion. Such biblical invocation poses a great threat to a defendant’s constitutional rights.59 However, attorneys 56 ALEXANDER M. BICKEL, THE LEAST DANGEROUS BRANCH: THE SUPREME COURT AT THE BAR OF POLITICS 1 (2d. ed. 1986). 57 ANNOTATED MODEL CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT Canons 1 & 3 (2004). 58 Id. at Canon 3 (B)(5). 59 See generally Marcus S. Henson, Carruthers v. State: Thou Shalt Not Make Direct Religious References in Closing Argument, 52 MERCER L. REV. 731 (2001). But see Elizabeth A. Brooks, Thou Shalt Not Quote the Bible: Determining the Propriety of Attorney Use of Religious Philosophy and Themes in Oral Arguments, 33 GA. L. REV. 1113 (1999). 42 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 are not alone in quoting the Bible. They are increasingly joined by trial judges, who use religious references in their decision-making process and their written opinions.60 While no court has yet specifically addressed whether judicial reliance on religious convictions in written opinions violates the Establishment Clause,61 some courts have considered the issue of whether a defendant’s due process rights are violated when judges rely on religious convictions or religious texts during the sentencing phase. In one well-publicized case, televangelist James O. Bakker, convicted of fraud and conspiracy, challenged his forty-fiveyear sentence claiming a due process violation because the trial judge made personal religious remarks during sentencing.62 The Fourth Circuit held that the trial judge’s comment, “[h]e had no thought whatever about his victims and those of us who do have a religion are ridiculed as being saps from money-grubbing preachers or priests,” made during sentencing, violated Bakker’s due process.63 The Bakker court recognized that the Constitution does not require judges to relinquish their religious beliefs when they assume the office, but it stated that “[c]ourts, however, cannot sanction sentencing procedures that create the perception of the bench as a pulpit from which judges announce their personal sense of religiosity and simultaneously punish defendants for offending it. Whether or not the trial judge has a religion is irrelevant for purposes of sentencing.”64 While Bakker does not involve explicit religious reference by a judge, it serves as a good example of a decision validating the utmost importance of judicial impartiality. However, judges differ on their approach to the use of religious references by their colleagues. The Ohio case of James Arnett is illustrative of the opposing views that judges hold about the use of religious references in judicial decision-making. James Arnett was sentenced to fifty-one years in prison after pleading guilty to ten counts of rape and one count of pandering obscenity to the minor daughter of his live-in girl- 60 See Lis Wiehl, Judges and Lawyers Are Not Singing from the Same Hymnal When It Comes to Allowing the Bible in the Courtroom, 24 AM. J. TRIAL ADVOC. 273, 274 (2000). 61 Modak-Truran, supra note 3, at 783. For a discussion about the lack of Establishment Clause violation challenges in capital cases involving religion during the penalty phase, closing arguments, and jury deliberations, see Gary J. Simson & Stephen P. Garvey, Knockin’ on Heaven’s Door: Rethinking the Role of Religion in Death Penalty Cases, 86 CORNELL L. REV. 1090, 1104-30 (2001). 62 United States v. Bakker, 925 F.2d 728, 740 (4th Cir. 1991). 63 Id. at 740-41. 64 Id. at 740. 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 43 friend.65 On appeal, the court remanded for resentencing, holding that the trial judge acted outside the state’s sentencing guidelines and that she violated the defendant’s due process when she used a specific text from the Bible as a determining factor in sentencing.66 The trial judge explained to the defendant that when she had recently imposed a twenty-year sentence for a murder, at least the victim was gone and there was no pain to suffer, but in his case the victim would hurt for the rest of her life.67 The judge proceeded by describing her struggle the night before the sentencing decision about what sentence to impose when she found the answer in a biblical passage.68 The judge then quoted a passage from Matthew 18:5-6: “And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name, [sic] receiveth me. But, [sic] whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that [sic] he were drowned in the depth of the sea.”69 It is interesting to note that Judge Painter, who wrote the Ohio Court of Appeals opinion, added a footnote after the above quotation, in which he noted: We must quote from the trial transcript, which is not entirely consistent with the Bible, King James Version. The notation “sic” indicates instances where words should have been italicized and where commas should not have been added. We assume that the court reporter added these errors and that the judge read the passage correctly.70 The apologetic tone of this footnote about quoting from a nonauthoritative version of the Bible and the care taken to achieve compliance with the King James Version is most striking. The authoritativeness of the King James Version71 appears to be self-evident for readers familiar with Christian religious texts, but this is most peculiar for someone who does not belong to that majority. It is not entirely clear why the judge took such care to correct the 65 State v. Arnett, Nos. C-980172, C-980173, 1999 WL 65632, at *1 (Ohio Ct. App. Feb. 5, 1999), cert. denied 126 S. Ct. 207 (2005). 66 Id. at *2. 67 Id. at *1. 68 Id. 69 Id. 70 Id. at *1 n.1. 71 More than fifty English translations were printed before the King James Bible was published in 1611. DAVID CRYSTAL, THE STORIES OF ENGLISH 271-75 (2004). The King James Version, popularly known as the “Authorized Version,” was selected to be read in churches. Id. Most of its vocabulary and phrasing derived from the first English translation by William Tyndale, printed in 1525-1526. Id. 44 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 errors, namely italics and misplacement of commas, or why there was a concern with whether the judge read the passage correctly. It seems almost as if there was a legal requirement that when a court cites the Bible, the King James Version must be used. After the state appealed, the Ohio Supreme Court reinstated the sentence, holding that a sentencing judge’s quotation of a religious text and the acknowledgement of its use during the deliberation process is not impermissible per se and does not violate a defendant’s due process.72 The defendant petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus claiming a violation of the First Amendment Establishment Clause and his due process rights.73 The district court held that the First Amendment claim was waived due to failure to include it in a brief and argument before the state appellate court, but that the judge’s reliance on a biblical passage as the final source for determining the sentence warranted conditional habeas relief until resentencing by a different judge.74 Subsequently, the Sixth Circuit dismissed the habeas petition, holding that the trial judge’s quotation of Matthew 18:5-675 in determining the sentence did not violate the defendant’s due process right because the biblical passage relied upon was just an “additional” source, rather than the “final” source of the decision.76 However, the dissent noted that the trial judge’s reliance on the New Testament provision to determine the sentence was dispositive because, according to the record, the judge admitted that her struggle over the final sentence was answered by this biblical passage. 77 Relying on Bakker, the dissent concluded that the use of a religious text as an authoritative source for reaching a legal result violated the defendant’s fundamental expectation of due process and expressed this related concern: If the Constitution sanctions such direct reliance on religious sources when imposing criminal sentences, then there is nothing to stop prosecutors and criminal defense lawyers from regularly citing religious sources like the Bible, the Talmud, or the Koran to justify their respective positions on punishment. The 72 State v. Arnett, 724 N.E.2d 793, 804 (Ohio 2000), cert. denied 126 S. Ct. 207 (2005). 73 Arnett v. Jackson, 290 F. Supp. 2d 874, 875 (S.D. Ohio 2003). The court found that the Magistrate Judge correctly applied the standard of review set forth in the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d). Id. at 877-78. 74 Id. at 878. 75 Arnett v. Jackson, 393 F.3d 681, 684 (6th Cir. 2005), cert. denied 126 S. Ct. 207 (2005). 76 Id. at 688. 77 Id. at 689 (Clay, J., dissenting). 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 45 judge would be placed in the position of not only considering statutory sentencing factors, but also deciding which religious texts best justify a particular sentence. Under this approach, the judgments of trial courts could begin to resemble the fatwas of religious clerics, and the opinions of appellate courts echo the proclamations of the Sanhedrin.78 The Sixth Circuit’s conclusion that “[t]here is nothing in the totality of the circumstances of Arnett’s sentencing to indicate that the trial judge used the Bible as her ‘final source of authority,’ as found by the district court,”79 is contrary to the trial judge’s own words: Because I was looking for a source, what do I turn to, to make, to make that determination, what sentence you should get . . . . And in looking at the final part of my struggle with you, I finally answered my question late at night when I turned to one additional source to help me.80 Although the trial judge said she turned to “one additional source,” she used the words “make that determination” when she referred to the sentence to impose.81 More importantly, she used the words “final part” and “finally answered” which clearly emphasized that the finality of her sentencing decision was solved by that one additional source.82 The plain meaning of the language “final” and “finally” was simply dismissed by the Sixth Circuit. The court justified its conclusion by reasoning that, “The [b]iblical principle of not harming children is fully consistent with Ohio’s sentencing consideration to the same effect.”83 The fact that the judge did not impose the maximum sentence commanded by the Bible proved that she did not actually sentence the defendant based upon her religious belief.84 As is obvious from the Arnett case, courts often justify the use of religious references on the grounds of consistency with the statutory law applied in the case. That is an unnecessary and disturbing practice. In considering the defendant’s due process 78 Id. at 691 (Clay, J., dissenting). 79 Id. at 688. 80 Id. at 684. 81 Id. In discussing what constitutes reliance on religious convictions, Kent Greenawalt states, “[t]he clearest instances of reliance on religious convictions occur when the person is certain that he would make a different choice if he disregarded those convictions. . . . A person is clearly not relying on religious convictions when his choice rests firmly on independent grounds.” GREENAWALT, RELIGIOUS CONVICTIONS, supra note 2, at 36. 82 Arnett, 393 F.3d at 684. 83 Id. at 688. 84 Id. 46 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 violation claim in Arnett, the Sixth Circuit used the Supreme Court rule that a defendant’s due process rights are violated when the death sentence is based on “factors that are constitutionally impermissible or totally irrelevant to the sentencing process, such as for example the race, religion or political affiliation of the defendant.” 85 The Sixth Circuit then said, without any additional explanation, that the trial judge in Arnett did not base her decision on an impermissible factor, and that the factor used was not “totally irrelevant” because it was consistent with the sentencing statute.86 Nevertheless, before it reversed and remanded the case, the Sixth Circuit recognized the following: “We reach this conclusion despite the fact that reasonable minds could certainly question the propriety of the trial judge making mention of the Bible at all in her sentencing decision.”87 Whether the biblical passage quoted in an opinion is consistent or inconsistent with the statutory provision governing the case is irrelevant and, as such, should not be considered or included in a written opinion justifying a decision. Another example of the judicial use of biblical passages in criminal sentencing is the Nebraska case State v. Pattno.88 In Pattno, the defendant pled guilty to the sexual assault of a child and was sentenced to a minimum of twenty months and a maximum of five years in prison by the trial court judge.89 Before he imposed the sentence, the trial judge recited an extensive biblical scripture against homosexuality90 followed by the comment that he also con- 85 Id. at 686 (quoting Zant v. Stephens, 462 U.S. 862, 885 (1983)). 86 Id. at 686-87. 87 Id. at 688. 88 579 N.W.2d 503 (Neb. 1998). 89 Id. at 506. 90 Id. at 505-06. Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, namely, his external power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse; for although they knew God they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him as God, but they became futile in their thinking and their senseless minds were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man or birds or animals or reptiles. Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever [sic]. Amen. For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error. 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 47 sidered the “nature . . . of the defendant.”91 The Nebraska Supreme Court held that a reasonable person could have questioned the trial judge’s impartiality because he relied upon his personal religious beliefs in deciding the sentence.92 The court also pointed out that the defendant was convicted of having sexual contact with a minor, which is a crime, and not of having sexual contact with a person of the same gender, which is not a crime in the state of Nebraska.93 It is not unusual for judges to inject biblical passages in their opinions as justification for supporting the harsh punishment of certain crimes such as child sexual abuse. In People v. Jagnjic, the defendant pleaded guilty to aggravated sexual abuse of a child and was sentenced to no less than five and no more than fifteen years in prison.94 However, the New York Appellate Division found that, absent a professional psychiatric evaluation, the sentence was excessive. 95 In a dissenting opinion, Justice Lupiano pointed to the heinous nature of the crime, arguing that the sentencing decision should not be disturbed and quoted a biblical passage to support that view: The condemnation of crimes against the young is deeply ingrained in the ethical and moral history of western civilization. Indeed, the bible is replete with references to this universal condemnation as, for example, the following scriptural passage concerning children—“Whosoever shall offend one of these little ones . . . it were better than a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea” (Matthew 18:6).96 Quoting the Bible in support of a judicial decision is in clear violation of the judicial code, and it prejudices defendants not only by the content of the religious reference, but by the very fact that an irrelevant, extralegal source is used in the decision-making process. Id. (quoting the Bible). 91 Id. at 506. 92 Id. at 509. 93 Id. at 508. No statute in this state criminalizes sexual contact between consenting adults of the same gender. Thus, Pattno’s crime is that he had sexual contact with a minor; not that he had sexual contact with another male. Therefore, the biblical scripture which the judge read was not relevant to the crime to which Pattno pled guilty, and it should not have been considered by the judge in determining an appropriate sentence. Id. 94 447 N.Y.S.2d 439, 439 (App. Div. 1982). 95 See id. at 439-40. 96 Id. at 443 (Lupiano, J., dissenting). 48 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 As the Arnett, Pattno, and Jagnjic cases illustrate, any reliance on the Bible as a direct or supporting source of authority in the decisionmaking process jeopardizes the integrity of the criminal justice system and, if not proscribed, encourages further use of the Bible by judges and other officers of the court. II. UNDERMINING THE RELIGIOUS CHARACTER OF RELIGIOUS REFERENCES There are many cases where judicial reference to a biblical passage is justified by the use of language that undermines the religious character of the text or its authority.97 This type of qualifying statement is in direct contradiction to the actual meaning of the text and to courts’ use of the Bible to support their arguments in countless cases in which the biblical references are used in their proper meaning. It is only logical to conclude that any use of biblical references in judicial decision-making, especially in written opinions, must be entirely arbitrary. On one hand, judges invoke the Bible as serious support for their propositions, and, on the other, their use of the Bible is trivialized. Judge Hildebrandt, who dissented in the State v. Arnett Ohio Court of Appeals decision finding a violation of due process, used the “mere”98 language justifica- 97 By qualifying a statement with “mere” or “merely,” courts undermine the religious value of the source from which the quotation is taken, despite the fact that the Bible is cited as the authority. This trend is consistent with the Supreme Court’s “secularization” of religious expressions. See generally Ashley M. Bell, “God Save This Honorable Court”: How Current Establishment Clause Jurisprudence Can Be Reconciled with the Secularization of Historical Religious Expressions, 50 AM. U. L. REV. 1273 (2001). Bell criticizes the Supreme Court’s secularization approach to religious expression: In addition to being an inconsistent solution, secularization does a great disservice to both religion and society. . . . Moreover, the Court seems more apt to secularize practices derived from Christianity, thus preferring Christianity over other religions. This consequence results in ‘religious divisiveness, violating the fundamental principles behind the religion clauses.’ Thus, the entire purpose of secularization backfires in its process. While attempting to neutralize religious influence, the Court in actuality prefers some religions, namely Christianity, over others. Id. at 1305-07. This critique is consistent with the famous quote of the Supreme Court that, “The Ten Commandments are undeniably a sacred text in the Jewish and Christian faiths, and no legislative recitation of a supposed secular purpose can blind us to that fact.” Stone v. Graham, 449 U.S. 39, 41 (1980). 98 The Oxford English Dictionary defines “mere” and “merely” as follows: “mere- Having no greater extent, range, value, power, or importance that the designation implies; that is barely or only what it is said to be;[ ] insignificant, ordinary, foolish, inept” and “merely-Without any other quality, reason, purpose, view, etc.; only (what is referred to) and nothing more.” SHORTER OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY ON HISTORICAL PRINCIPLES 1750 (5th ed. 2002). 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 49 tion twice in a very short opinion. Hildebrandt stated that “[t]he language quoted from the Bible merely reflects society’s interests in protecting its most vulnerable citizens, a laudable goal that is incorporated into the sentencing guidelines enacted by the General Assembly.”99 The dissent concluded, “[t]he mere citation of scriptural material in pronouncing the sentence should not be permitted to obscure the fact that the trial judge based her decision on the proper statutory considerations and that the defendant has failed to demonstrate that any prejudice resulted from the judge’s statements.”100 In reinstating the sentence, Supreme Court of Ohio Judge Cook used the “mere” language to distinguish general principles from personal beliefs: “Several state supreme courts, though they cite Bakker with approval, have declined to vacate sentences where the judge’s religious comments merely acknowledge generally accepted principles, as opposed to highly personal religious beliefs that become the basis for the sentence imposed.”101 In conclusion, the court found that “Arnett’s sentencing judge cited a religious text merely to acknowledge one of several reasons—‘one additional source’—for assigning significant weight to a legitimate statutory sentencing factor.”102 The court’s distinguishing of Bakker from Arnett is unpersuasive when it states that “Bakker merely prohibits a judge’s personal religious principles from being ‘the basis of a sentencing decision.’”103 There is no explanation of how the trial judge’s personal religious principles in Arnett were not implicated within the general principles when she turned to the book of Matthew for final help in determining the sentence. A judge’s personal perception of the meaning of biblical passages seems to be crucial in determining whether the use of the Bible is authoritative or symbolic. A judge’s use of the word “mere” often determines whether a defendant’s due process challenge succeeds. For example, in State v. Cribbs, the Tennessee Supreme Court affirmed the death sentence of a defendant convicted of premeditated first degree murder.104 On appeal, the defendant argued that the prosecution’s use of biblical references to justify the death sentence violated his due process rights.105 The state argued 99 Arnett, 1999 WL 65632, at *3 (Hildebrandt, J., dissenting). 100 Id. 101 Arnett, 724 N.E.2d at 803. 102 Id. 103 Id. at 804. 104 967 S.W.2d 773, 776 (Tenn. 1998). 105 Id. at 783. 50 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 that although biblical quotations were impermissible, the prosecutor’s use of the language “‘whatever a man sows, so shall he reap’ was merely a metaphor for individual accountability, rather than a justification for imposition of the death penalty.”106 Noting that a biblical reference in this case was inappropriate, the court nevertheless accepted the state’s argument finding that it did not prejudice the defendant.107 The court justified its finding by calling attention to the consistency of the biblical principle with the statute: “[W]e view the comments by the prosecutor which implied that Tennessee law embraced the principle of ‘reap what you sow’ as merely an extension of that metaphor.”108 Similarly, the dissent in People v. Harlan used the “merely” phraseology to point out the trial court’s misquoting of biblical passages in the trial record. Harlan was sentenced to death for first-degree murder, but his sentence was vacated because the jury was permitted to bring “the Bible into the jury room to share with others the written Leviticus and Romans texts during the deliberation.” 109 According to the dissent, the trial court concluded that one of the jurors used Romans 13:1, “which requires that one look at government authorities as God’s representative on earth and follow their lead as agents of ‘wrath to bring punishment to the wrongdoer.’”110 The dissent did not contest that the juror used Romans 13:1, but it explained that the passage “merely states ‘Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities for there is no authority except from God and the authorities that exist are appointed by God.’”111 The judge said that the trial court actually imported the language “wrath to bring punishment to the wrongdoer” from Romans 13:4 and criticized the majority for not correcting “these overstatements.”112 The thrust of the Romans passage is an absolute submission to the authorities—and only those established by God. The trial court’s use of language from 106 Id. 107 Id. at 784. 108 Id. 109 109 P.3d 616, 632 (Colo. 2005). This case immediately caught the attention of the media. See Kirk Johnson, Colorado Court Bars Execution Because Jurors Consulted Bible, N.Y. TIMES, Mar. 29, 2005, at A1; Thane Rosenbaum, Is Court a Place for Morals?, L.A. TIMES, Mar. 30, 2005, at B11; Eric Gorski, Book, Not Faith, Broke Court Rules, DENV. POST, Mar. 30, 2005, at 1A; Suzanne Goldenberg, US Jury’s Bible Death Sentence Quashed, GUARDIAN, Mar. 30, 2005, at 11; Bible-Influenced Death Penalty Ruling Rejected, IRISH TIMES, Mar. 30, 2005, at 10. 110 Harlan, 109 P.3d at 635 (Rice, J., dissenting). 111 Id. 112 Id. 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 51 Romans 13:4 about the consequences of wrongdoing that would be imposed by God’s appointees neither changed the nature of the command from Romans 13:1 nor undermined the main idea of divine authority this biblical passage conveyed. The juror’s reference to Romans 13:1 alone was sufficient as an improper invocation of an extra-legal authority and cannot be undermined by the dissent’s language “merely states.” This case exemplifies how a judge’s personal view and interpretation of the Bible may affect the outcome of a case. There are many other ways courts qualify the use of religious references in order to find it justifiable or to undermine the impact of such references. One example of the characterization of the use of a biblical passage is found in Bussard v. Lockhart.113 In that case, the court denied a habeas petition for a defendant who escaped from arrest after committing murder, remaining at-large for four years.114 The prosecutor in Bussard used a biblical passage to support the inference of guilt from the escape: “Proverbs 28:1 fits it just as clear as it can be. ‘The guilty flee when no man pursueth while the righteous stand bold as a lion.’ He fled to avoid coming to trial. That shows guilt.”115 In addressing the use of the biblical passage, the court stated: The prosecutor did not use the Bible to invoke the wrath of God against Bussard or to suggest that the jury apply divine law as an alternative to the law of Arkansas. Instead, the prosecutor simply resorted to Proverbs for a more poetic version of a commonsense connection expressly recognized by Arkansas law: flight suggests consciousness of guilt.116 The court cited two cases Killcrease v. State117 and Ward v. State118 in support of the proclamation that Arkansas law expressly recognizes that flight suggests consciousness of guilt.119 A careful reader will notice, however, that only in the Killcrease case was there an issue of flight from arrest.120 Although in Ward the court discussed the fact that the defendant fled the scene upon the arrival of the police, nowhere did the court indicate that the flight was an issue in the case, nor did it state a particular rule related to flight other than “it 113 32 F.3d 322 (8th Cir. 1994). 114 Id. at 323. 115 Id. at 324. 116 Id. 117 836 S.W.2d 380, 382 (Ark. 1992) (flight from arrest corroborates other evidence of guilt). 118 816 S.W.2d 173, 175 (Ark. Ct. App. 1991) (flight from scene of crime). 119 Bussard, 32 F.3d at 324. 120 Killcrease, 836 S.W.2d at 381. 52 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 may be considered with other evidence in determining guilt.”121 In Killcrease, the defendant was convicted of raping his minor daughter and sentenced to life in prison. On appeal he contended that the evidence of his arrest in Louisiana was irrelevant because no warrant was issued or any charges filed when he left Arkansas.122 The court held that it was up to a jury to determine whether the defendant fled to avoid arrest and that “[f]light to avoid arrest may be considered by the jury as corroboration of evidence tending to establish guilt.”123 In support of this rule, the Killcrease court cited two opinions, Riddle v. State and Ferguson v. State.124 The long line of cases using this rule leads to Stevens v. State, the first case that formulated it as follows: “Flight of the accused is admissible as a circumstance in corroboration of evidence tending to establish guilt.”125 Although many courts followed the rule as articulated in Stevens,126 the court in Ferguson changed the language by omitting the word “circumstance” from its holding that flight may “be considered as corroboration of evidence tending to establish guilt.”127 The difference between the biblical proverb used by the prosecutor in Bussard to support the demonstration of guilt and the rule as originally formulated by the Supreme Court of Arkansas is evident. The language in the proverb sends the message that fleeing is evidence of guilt, while the language of the court’s rule states that fleeing may be considered as a circumstance in corroboration of evidence tending to prove guilt. Even if one compares the modified language of the rule that fleeing suggests consciousness of guilt, the difference is still insufficient for the court to conclude that the biblical passage was a “poetic version” of the rule. The Bussard case is an illustration of the judicial slippage from biblical text to legal rules without realizing the impact such conflation actually has on the life of a human being. Concerned with the confounding of morality and law, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said in his famous essay The Path of the Law, “[t]he law is full of phraseology drawn from morals, and by the mere force of language continually invites us to pass from one domain to the other without perceiving it, as we are sure to do unless we have the 121 See Ward, 816 S.W.2d at 175. 122 Killcrease, 836 S.W.2d at 382. 123 Id. 124 Id. (citing Riddle v. State, 791 S.W.2d 708 (Ark. 1990), and Ferguson v. State, 769 S.W.2d 418 (Ark. 1989)). 125 221 S.W. 186, 188 (Ark. 1920). 126 See Smith v. State, 238 S.W.2d 649, 655 (Ark. 1951); Mason v. State, 688 S.W.2d 299, 300 (Ark. 1985); Yedrysek v. State, 739 S.W.2d 672, 675 (Ark. 1987). 127 Ferguson, 769 S.W.2d at 419. 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 53 boundary constantly before our minds.”128 However, there are a variety of ways in which religious references are used in the decision-making process and in reasoning justifying decisions. Courts quote the Bible in order to support their propositions and to show that they are consistent with traditional morality. They sometimes use biblical passages as metaphors or to illuminate a particular common law principle. The Bible often becomes part of the historical explanation of a particular law or practice. In some instances, a biblical passage appears as a rule upon which a decision is based or accompanies a common law or statutory rule as a confirmation of the consistency of our law. The next part will show different ways in which the Bible is used in judicial opinions. III. QUOTING THE BIBLE FOR VARIOUS PURPOSES In some instances, judges use the Bible to express their personal religious and moral beliefs, and former Chief Justice Moore of the Supreme Court of Alabama may be the best example of this practice. In Ex parte H.H., a lesbian ex-wife was denied custody of her children despite the fact that there was evidence of her exhusband’s excessive disciplinary punishment of children.129 Justice Moore’s special concurring opinion is an illustration of inappropriate judicial decision-making using the Bible as law. He starts his opinion with a strong statement: [T]he homosexual conduct of a parent—conduct involving a sexual relationship between two persons of the same gender— creates a strong presumption of unfitness that alone is sufficient justification for denying that parent custody of his or her own children or prohibiting the adoption of the children of others.130 Justice Moore’s perspective that a parent’s homosexual conduct is unfit per se is founded entirely on religious teachings against samesex sexual relationships.131 Unlike the gender-based tender years presumption that the Supreme Court of Alabama found unconstitutional, 132 the sexual orientation-based presumption is still valid in some states.133 The main justification for the per se rule is ex- 128 Oliver Wendell Holmes, The Path of the Law, 10 HARV. L. REV. 457, 459-60 (1897). 129 830 So. 2d 21, 25-26 (Ala. 2002). 130 Id. at 26. 131 See Romans 1:18-32 (New International). 132 See Ex parte Devine, 398 So. 2d 686, 696-97 (Ala. 1981). 133 See, e.g., Roe v. Roe, 324 S.E.2d 691 (Va. 1985). Some courts require that a 54 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 plained by Justice Moore: “Homosexual conduct is, and has been, considered abhorrent, immoral, detestable, a crime against nature, and a violation of the laws of nature and of nature’s God upon which this Nation and our laws are predicated.”134 Justice Moore finds support for his proposition in Blackstone’s Commentaries135 and proceeds to quote from the Bible and various other sources condemning homosexuality.136 He concludes his opinion with the following words: “The common law adopted in this State and upon which our laws are premised likewise declares homosexuality to be detestable and an abominable sin. Homosexual conduct by its very nature is immoral, and its consequences are inherently destructive to the natural order of society.”137 By quoting biblical passages in support of their decisions, judges like Justice Moore perpetuate homophobia and the legitimacy of laws based on religious morality138 without any concern for the parties involved and the actual legal standards governing our society. One of those standards directly disregarded by Justice Moore in the Ex parte H.H. case is the best-interest-of-the-child standard. This case demonstrates the judicial misconduct present in invoking personal religious beliefs and morality as a basis of judgment. It is most interesting that Justice Moore was never disciplined for basing his decisions on his personal religious beliefs, but was actually removed when he refused to comply with a court order to remove the Ten Commandments monument he displayed in the rotunda of the state judicial building.139 In commenting on the controversy around Justice Moore, one author contrasted the invisibility of the judicial use of religious references to the physical appearance of impropriety, making the following point: parent involved in a same-sex relationship prove absence of harm. See, e.g., Thigpen v. Carpenter, 730 S.W.2d 510, 513-14 (Ark. 1987). Other courts use a “nexus test” requiring only proof that a parent’s sexual conduct will have or has had an adverse impact. See, e.g., A.C. v. C.B., 829 P.2d 660, 664 (N.M. Ct. App. 1992). 134 Ex parte H.H., 830 So. 2d at 26. 135 Id. at 32, 34, 37. 136 Id. at 33-37 (quoting biblical passages Genesis 1:27, 2:24; Leviticus 20:13). 137 Id. at 38. 138 See Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986). Upholding a Georgia sodomy statute, the Court stated that “[p]roscriptions against that conduct have ancient roots,” referring to Judeo-Christian moral standards. Id. at 192. Concurring Justice Burger reiterated that, “Condemnation of those practices is firmly rooted in Judeao-Christian [sic] moral and ethical standards,” id. at 196, validating the state’s invocation of the biblical books of Leviticus and Romans to justify the sodomy statute, id. at 211 (Blackmun, J. dissenting). 139 See Glassroth v. Moore, 278 F. Supp. 2d 1272, 1275 (M.D. Ala. 2003), aff’d 335 F.3d 1282 (11th Cir. 2003), cert. denied 540 U.S. 1000 (2003). 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 55 While the plaintiffs, media, and judicial ethicists were earnestly setting their sights on this highly conspicuous jurist, they were devoting little if any attention to the question of the proper relationship between religion and the decisions judges actually render, including religiously devout judges like Chief Justice Moore. To be sure, the Chief Justice’s fundamental mistake, at least from a job retention perspective, appears not to have been his firm and guiding belief that God’s law ought to inform human law, or even his clear expression of that belief in judicial opinions, which is to say that he was not and would not obviously have been removed from office for actually implementing and manifesting his religious beliefs in his judicial capacity. His apparent mistake, instead, was to manifest them by erecting a granite monument in his administrative, and in many respects less important or less influential, role.140 Often courts use biblical references to explain the historical background of a legal concept. For example, tracing the origin of an in rem forfeiture proceeding by the government against the property involved in or acquired by crime, the Supreme Court cited Exodus 21:28: “[i]f an ox gore a man or a woman, and they die, he shall be stoned and his flesh shall not be eaten.”141 After locating the original source of this legal concept in the Bible, the Court traced the development of the forfeiture further to the common law concept of “deodand,” citing to Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England and Holmes’s The Common Law.142 While it is a fact that Blackstone cited Exodus in his Commentaries,143 Holmes and other authors did not go that far.144 Other federal and state courts have also used the biblical passage Exodus 21:28 to explain not only the origin of the law of forfeiture, but also other tort actions, despite the availability of other sources of legal history upon which American law is actually founded.145 140 Idleman, Concealment, supra note 2, at 517-18. 141 Calero-Toledo v. Pearson Yacht Leasing Co., 416 U.S. 663, 681 n.17 (1974). See also United States v. Bajakajian, 524 U.S. 321, 330 n.5 (1998). 142 Calero-Toledo, 416 U.S. at 681 (citing to “O. Holmes, the Common Law, c. 1 (1881)” and “1. W. Blackstone, Commentaries *300”). See also Bajakajian, 524 U.S. at 330 (citing to “1 W. Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England 290-292 (1765); O. Holmes, The Common Law 10-13, 23-27 (M. Howe ed. 1963)”). 143 WILLIAM BLACKSTONE, 1 COMMENTARIES *291. 144 See OLIVER WENDELL HOLMES, JR., THE COMMON LAW 1-38 (45th printing 1923, 1909, 1881); FREDERICK POLLOCK & FREDERIC WILLIAM MAITLAND, THE HISTORY OF ENGLISH LAW, 473-74 (2d ed. 1923). 145 Federal courts citing or quoting Exodus 21:28: United States v. All Funds in Account Nos. 747.034/278, 295 F.3d 23, 25 (D.C. Cir. 2002); United States v. Gilbert, 244 F.3d 888, 918 (11th Cir. 2001); United States v. One Parcel Prop., 74 F.3d 1165, 1168 (11th Cir. 1996); United States v. 785 St. Nicholas Ave., 983 F.2d 396, 401 (2d 56 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 The controversial Justice Moore of Alabama provides another example of biblical invocation in support of a historical analysis of a particular concept. Dissenting in Yates v. El Bethel Primitive Baptist Church, he engaged in a historical discussion of the concept of separation between the church and state, quoting from numerous biblical passages.146 Other judges also turn to the Bible in order to solidify the idea that a particular law is rooted in history. In a case involving a defamation suit, the West Virginia Supreme Court used Exodus 20:16, Deuteronomy 19:16-21, and Ecclesiastes 7:1 as historical evidence that slander was prohibited since the beginning of time.147 After quoting the Bible as its first source, the court proceeded by listing numerous legal sources on defamation, libel, and slander. The historical concept of subjecting “illegitimate” children to legal discrimination is also explained using Deuteronomy 23:2: “Throughout history, illegitimate children were precluded from, among other legal rights, entering certain professions. The Book of Deuteronomy states: a bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to this tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the Lord. Deut. 23:2.”148 Supreme Court justices join lower court judges in quoting the Bible when they resort to providing a historical review of certain Cir. 1993); United States v. Seifuddin, 820 F.2d 1074, 1076 (9th Cir. 1987); United States v. Sandini, 816 F.2d 869, 872 (3d Cir. 1987); United States v. $39,000 in Canadian Currency, 801 F.2d 1210, 1218 n.4 (10th Cir. 1986); United States v. One 1976 Mercedes Benz 280S, 618 F.2d 453, 454 (7th Cir. 1980); United States v. Funds from Prudential Sec., 362 F. Supp. 2d 75, 79 (D.C. Cir. 2005); United States. v. Croce, 334 F. Supp. 2d 781, 786 n.13 (E.D. Pa. 2004); United States v. Funds From Prudential Sec., 300 F. Supp. 2d 99, 100 n.1 (D.C. Cir. 2004); United States v. 38 Whalers Cove Drive, 747 F. Supp. 173, 177 (E.D.N.Y. 1990); United States v. Haro, 685 F. Supp. 1468, 1473 (E.D. Wis. 1988). State courts citing or quoting Exodus 21:28: Allen v. State, 605 A.2d 994, 998 n.3 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1992); Prop. Clerk of N.Y. City Police Dep’t v. Molomo, 583 N.Y.S.2d 251, 253 (App. Div. 1992); Duren v. Kunkel, 814 S.W.2d 935, 937 n.3 (Mo. 1991); Commonwealth v. One 1988 Ford Coupe, 574 A.2d 631, 636 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1990); Holtzman v. Samuel, 495 N.Y.S.2d 583, 585 n.1 (Sup. Ct. 1985); Dist. Attorney of Queens County v. McAuliffe, 493 N.Y.S.2d 406, 411 (Sup. Ct. 1985); Dir. of Fin. v. Cole, 465 A.2d 450, 456 n.2 (Md. 1983); New Jersey v. One 1977 Dodge Van, 397 A.2d 733, 734 n.1 (Middlesex County Ct. 1979); Prince George’s County. v. Blue Bird Cab Co., 284 A.2d 203, 205 (Md. 1971); Magrine v. Spector, 241 A.2d 637, 639 n.2 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1968); Robidoux v. Busch, 400 S.W.2d 631, 639 (Mo. Ct. App. 1966); Johnson v. Olson, 67 P.2d 422, 425 (Kan. 1937). 146 847 So. 2d 331, 350-53 (Ala. 2002) (quoting the following chapters from King James: 2 Chronicles 26:16-21, 2 Chronicles 26:18, 1 Samuel 13:13-14, Ezra 7:21-24, Matthew 22:21, Matthew 18:15-20, Matthew 16:19, 1 Corinthians 6). 147 Crump v. Beckley Newspapers, Inc., 320 S.E.2d 70, 76 (W. Va. 1984). 148 Miscovich v. Miscovich, 688 A.2d 726, 728 n.2 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1997). See also Kohler v. Bleem, 654 A.2d 569, 572 n.1 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1995). 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 57 legal principles. While such biblical references are usually placed in footnotes, occasionally they are prominently displayed in the main body of the opinion. For example, in Payne v. Tennessee, holding that the Eighth Amendment does not prohibit the admission of victim impact evidence in jury sentencing,149 Chief Justice Rehnquist quoted Exodus 21:22-23, proscribing “[a]n eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” to demonstrate how the guiding principles in criminal sentencing varied over time.150 In his review of the historical principles guiding criminal sentencing, Justice Rehnquist started with the Bible before he moved on to the English law and legislative enactments.151 Sometimes, a court quotes the Bible as support for a proposition using a “cf.” as a citation signal. “Cf.” is an abbreviation for the Latin word “confer,” which means “compare.”152 Black’s Law Dictionary states, “As a citation signal, cf. directs the reader’s attention to another authority or section of the work in which contrasting, analogous, or explanatory statements may be found.”153 Such support was used in the United States v. Ryan case by a dissenting judge to interpret the statutory meaning of “the building used . . . in . . . any activity affecting interstate . . . commerce.”154 The dissenting judge argued that the statutory requirement of “activity” was missing in respect to the building in question.155 The dissent cited the Bible, stating, “The building here was just cumbering the ground. Cf. Luke 13:7 (King James). It was not being ‘used’ in any ‘activity.’” 156 The biblical passage cited states: “So he said to the man who took care of the vineyard, ‘For three years now I’ve been coming to look for fruit on this fig tree and haven’t found any. Cut it down! Why should it use up the soil?’”157 The judge used this citation assuming the reader’s familiarity with a biblical passage of this length and on this particular topic, which was listed under the chapter “Repent or Perish” in Luke. This assumption seems to be a long stretch if the extralegal authority was used as an analogy to show that there was no use for the building in question. Another example of the use of a biblical citation with a cf. citation signal is in the Conklin v. Anne Arundel County Bd. of Educ. 149 501 U.S. 808, 827 (1991). 150 Id. at 819. 151 Id. 152 BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY 243 (8th ed. 2004). 153 Id. 154 41 F.3d 361, 369 (8th Cir. 1994) (Arnold, C.J., dissenting). 155 Id. 156 Id. 157 Luke 13:7 (New International). 58 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 case.158 Parents of a dyslexic child challenged the county’s program as not being in compliance with the Education of the Handicapped Act.159 In a footnote, discussing the fact that the board took advantage of the child’s temporary progress (which was actually due to private tutoring) to show its compliance with the statute, the court quoted this passage from the Bible when it said: “Annual grade promotion may, as a result, be a reasonable barometer for measuring the progress that this handicapped child can achieve in the coming years. . . . Cf. Matthew 26:52 (King James) (‘[A]ll they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.’).”160 The court took the board’s argument and created a standard to which the board should adhere in the future, consisting of annual grade promotion and additional tutoring provided by the board.161 The court assumed that the reader was familiar with the biblical passage it partially quoted. The passage is part of the chapter on Jesus’s arrest and its idea only becomes clear if one knows its entire context: Then the men stepped forward, seized Jesus and arrested him. With that, one of Jesus’ companions reached for his sword, drew it out and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear. “Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.”162 The fact that judges resort to citing the Bible in support of their arguments shows the privilege that Christianity enjoys in our society. The invisibility of that privilege is enhanced by the judges’ assumptions of their audience’s familiarity with the Bible and by their disregard of the need for a full explanation of a cited source and its relation to the proposition at hand. Courts also use the Bible to explain the origins of a word. For example, in Bok v. McCaughn, the court explained that “[c]harity, derived from the Latin caritas, originally meant love. In the thirteenth chapter of first Corinthians the revised version uses the word ‘love’ in defining the third of the three cardinal virtues, which, in King James’ version read ‘Faith, Hope and Charity.’”163 The term “sodomy” also finds its origin in the Bible, as the court noted in Stone v. Wainwright, citing Genesis 13:13 and 18:20 and quoting Leviticus 18:22: “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: 158 946 F.2d 306 (4th Cir. 1991). 159 Id. at 309. 160 Id. at 315 n.6. 161 Id. 162 Matthew 26:50-52 (New International). 163 42 F.2d 616, 618-19 (3d Cir. 1930). 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 59 it is abomination.”164 Similarly, Justice Breyer quoted the Bible to explain the origin of the word “carries” in a drug trafficking case where the statute included the phrase “carries a firearm.”165 Arguing that the word includes “conveyance in a vehicle,” he said, “[t]he greatest of writers have used the word with this meaning. See, e.g., The King James Bible, 2 Kings 9:28 (‘[H]is servants carried him in a chariot to Jerusalem’); id., Isaiah 30:6 (‘[T]hey will carry their riches upon the shoulders of young asses’).”166 The Bible has also been called upon to determine the meaning of seemingly simple words such as “daytime.” In a criminal prosecution, a defendant moved to quash a search warrant because it was not served during daytime as required by law.167 He claimed that the warrant was served at 7:15 p.m. and that the sun set at 6:53 p.m. on that day.168 Before citing Shakespeare, Webster’s Dictionary, and finally federal and state courts, the court resorted to the Bible as its first source of interpretation: “In the Bible, Genesis 1:5, we find ‘And God called the light day and the darkness he called night.’”169 The court dismissed the motion to quash the warrant, concluding that it had no merit because of the general rule that daytime is determined by the presence of light.170 While today’s courts are comfortable using biblical passage as a rule, the courts in the past refrained from actually quoting the Bible. For example, in a famous 1872 case, the Supreme Court held constitutional Illinois’s refusal to admit a woman to practice law, stating, “[t]he paramount destiny and mission of woman are to fulfill the noble and benign offices of wife and mother. This is the law of the Creator.”171 The Court did not specify what exact legal source it was referring to when it invoked “the law of the Creator.” 172 Modern courts, however, are more explicit in the invoca- 164 478 F.2d 390, 393 n. 14 (5th Cir. 1973). The text of the cited passages state, “Now the men of Sodom were wicked and were sinning greatly against the LORD,” Genesis 13:13 (New International), and “Then the LORD said, ‘The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous,’” Genesis 18:20 (New International). 165 Muscarello v. United States, 524 U.S. 125, 128-29 (1998). 166 Id. 167 United States v. Liebrich, 55 F.2d 341, 342 (M.D. Pa. 1932). 168 Id. 169 Id. 170 Id. at 343 (stating “it is reasonable to hold that it is daytime for at least thirty minutes after the time when the sun sets, and it is nighttime from then until thirty minutes before the time when the sun rises”). 171 Bradwell v. State, 83 U.S. 130, 141 (1872). 172 Id. 60 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 tion of biblical passages when formulating rules upon which they decide cases. The Second Circuit, in a suit for a securities violation, discussed the doctrine of “offensive collateral estoppel (more recently called offensive issue preclusion),” pointing to judicial efficiency as a primary “virtue” of the doctrine.173 It then indicated its disadvantage: Its virtues do not come without a price, however. Just as occasionally ‘the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong . . . but time and chance happeneth to them all,’ Ecclesiastes 9:11 (King James ed.), so too the results of an earlier resolution of an issue may simply be wrong.174 Some courts, when formulating standards, go directly to the Bible for support. In a dual adultery divorce suit, the husband filed a counterclaim alleging that the wife’s lesbian relationship constituted adultery.175 The court started its inquiry this way: To better understand the underlying issue it is helpful to briefly review both the legal and social standards and to distinguish between adultery as a crime as opposed to a private civil wrong. The [S]eventh [C]ommandment states that “Thou shall not commit adultery” Exodus 20:14. A biblical definition of “Adultery” is “the lying with a woman married to a husband.” See Deuteronomy 22:22 and Leviticus, 20:10. . . . If a married man be “lying with a woman not betrothed” the biblical crime was fornication and punishment by a fine of 50 shekels of silver. Deuteronomy 22:29 (The commentators generally opine that even the thought of adultery was an offense under the biblical code, an issue which we need not deal with today.)176 After the court quoted the above biblical passages, it proceeded with common law and New Jersey statutory treatment of adultery. Despite announcing that it would review “legal and social standards,” the court started with religious moral authorities on the issue, assuming that religious morality is a synonym for a social standard. These are just some of the various ways in which courts use biblical references in written opinions. The next part of this Article will demonstrate the many different forms in which a particular biblical passage enters judicial opinions. 173 Sec. Exch. Comm’n v. Monarch Funding Corp., 192 F.3d 295, 303 (2d Cir. 1999). 174 Id. at 303-04. See also Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Fag Bearings Corp., 335 F.3d 752, 763 (8th Cir. 2003) (quoting the same biblical passage from Monarch Funding, 192 F.3d at 303-04). 175 S.B. v. S.J.B., 609 A.2d 124, 124 (N.J. Super. Ct. Ch. 1992). 176 Id. at 125. 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 61 IV. REFERENCING “NO MAN CAN SERVE TWO MASTERS”177 While the Supreme Court has never cited either Matthew or Luke, federal and state courts prominently do so when using the phrase “no man can serve two masters” to express the rule against an attorney’s dual representation.178 In Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Foster, a state court invoked the following sources of authority: “The [b]iblical mandate that ‘No man can serve two masters’ has its modern-day application in cases of this nature. See Canon 6, Canons of Professional Ethics, 31 F.S.A.”179 Canon 6 of Professional Ethics, entitled Adverse Influences and Conflicting Interests, imposes a duty on a lawyer to disclose to a client any potential interest that might adversely affect the client.180 Contrary to biblical mandate, Canon 6 does not prohibit a lawyer from representing two clients, but instead permits such representation by express consent of all parties after full disclosure of the facts.181 The invocation of a biblical mandate in this case is unclear because the court held that the insured who was represented by the insurer’s attorney was not harmed by any breach of fiduciary duty in failing to provide information about settlement offers.182 Thus it follows that not only can a man serve two masters, but even when such servitude constitutes a breach of fiduciary duty, the attorney will only be liable when the plaintiff who is suing suffered harm. Some judges are willing to disregard existing legal standards, instead quoting biblical teaching as a primary source of the authority for their decision. In People v. Williams, a case charging a husband and wife for sex offenses upon their minor adopted child, a court held that there was no conflict of interest that would make joint representation of the defendant and codefendant improper. 183 Dissenting in an extensive opinion, Justice Pincham stated: Civilization’s most sacred, learned, dedicated and staunchest advocate of all times, centuries ago, admonished: “No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will hold to the one and despise the other.” The advocate was the Christ Jesus; the admonition was to his disci- 177 See infra Appendix. 178 See infra Appendix. 179 528 So. 2d 255, 277 (Miss. 1988) (citing Spadaro v. Palmisano, 109 So. 2d 418 (Fla. App. 1959)). 180 CANONS OF PROF’L ETHICS Canon 6 (2004). 181 Id. 182 Foster, 528 So. 2d at 276. 183 538 N.E.2d 564, 566 (Ill. App. Ct. 1989). 62 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 ples and the multitude during His Sermon on the Mount; the admonition is cited in the most dynamic, accurate and prestigious of all law books, The Holy Bible, at Matthews the 6th Chapter and the 24th Verse.184 After citing the highest authority to support his argument, the dissenting judge then proceeded to cite Canon 5 (5-1, 5-14, 5-15, 5- 17) of The Model Code of Professional Responsibility of the American Bar Association.185 A significant number of cases state that the biblical mandate “no person can serve two masters” is consistent with the Restatement of the Law on Agency and reflects the current legal framework within which courts operate. Contrary to what many judges state in their opinions, however, the Restatement of the Law of Agency does not prohibit dual servitude. The rules regulating the relation of agency explicitly provide that “[a] person may be the servant of two masters, not joint employers, at one time as to one act, if the service to one does not involve abandonment of the service to the other.”186 The comments for this section further elaborate on this issue, allowing for a servant to be employed by joint masters.187 The most important issue in the servant’s relationship with a master is the master’s consent to service188 and not, as the courts suggest, whether there is one or multiple masters. The same is true for the law governing lawyers. The Restatement of the Law Governing Lawyers clearly establishes that a lawyer may not represent a client if the representation involves a conflict of interest189 unless the client consents to such representation.190 Consent, and not the number of clients or masters, is the key element in a lawyer’s representation of a single or multiple clients in civil and criminal litigation.191 Similarly, the ABA Model of Professional Conduct Rule 1.13 allows an attorney to represent an organization and “its directors, officers, employees, members, shareholders or other constituents, subject to the provisions of Rule 1.7.”192 It is also worth noting that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure include one of the most important rules allowing for 184 Id. at 569 (Pincham, J., dissenting). 185 Id. at 569-570. 186 RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF AGENCY § 226 (1958). 187 Id. § 226(b). 188 Id. § 221. 189 RESTATEMENT (THIRD) OF THE LAW GOVERNING LAWYERS § 121 (2001). 190 Id. § 122. 191 See id. §§ 128, 129. 192 MODEL RULES OF PROF’L CONDUCT R. 1.13(g) (2004). 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 63 multiple representation: Rule 23 governing class action.193 The Restatement of the Law of Agency and the Law Governing Lawyers, together with the ABA Rules of Conduct, represent legal authorities upon which judges should rely. Any extralegal authorities, especially those that conflict with legal standards established by the accepted authoritative legal sources of statutory or common law, are constitutionally suspect and their invocation in judicial opinions is unsound. V. USING OTHER RELIGIOUS REFERENCES While citations to the King James version of the Bible are numerous, courts rarely use other religious authorities. A search for the word “Talmud,” a collection of Jewish civil and canonical laws,194 returns only three results in the Supreme Court cases database in Westlaw: County of Allegheny v. ACLU,195 School District of Abington Township, Pennsylvania. v. Schempp,196 and Permoli v. Municipality No. 1 of New Orleans.197 The word “Torah,” the first five books of the Old Testament, appears only five times in Supreme Court opinions: Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet,198 Lee v. Weisman,199 County of Allegheny v. ACLU,200 Hernandez v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue,201 and Miranda v. Arizona. 202 The word “Halakhah,” a Jewish law book consisting of the 193 FED. R. CIV. P. 23(g). 194 BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY 1494 (8th ed. 2004). 195 492 U.S. at 583-84 (using the Talmud in describing certain Jewish practices). 196 374 U.S. 203, 273 (1963). “There was ample precedent, too, for Theodore Roosevelt’s declaration that in the interest of ‘absolutely nonsectarian public schools’ it was ‘not our business to have the Protestant Bible or the Catholic Vulgate or the Talmud read in those schools.’” Id. (citation omitted). 197 44 U.S. 589, 604-05 (1845). “In the case of The Commonwealth v. Abram Wolf, 3 Serg. & Rawle, 48, Chief Justice Tilghman affirmed the validity of an ordinance of Philadelphia, imposing a fine for working on a Sunday, against a Jew; though under the teachings of the Jewish Talmud and the Rabbinical Constitutions, the Jew deemed Saturday as the Jewish Sabbath, and felt it both as a privilege and a duty to labour for six days, and to rest on the seventh, or Saturday.” Id. 198 512 U.S. 687, 691 (1994) (part of the facts). 199 505 U.S. 577, 639 (1992) (Scalia, J., dissenting). 200 492 U.S. at 584 n.24. “A Torah scroll—which contains the five Books of Moses—must be buried in a special manner when it is no longer usable. App. 237- 238.” Id. 201 490 U.S. 680, 701 (1989). “We also assume for purposes of argument that the IRS also allows taxpayers to deduct ‘specified payments for attendance at High Holy Day services, for tithes, for torah readings and for memorial plaques.’” Id. (quoting Foley v. Comm’r of Internal Revenue, 844 F.2d 94, 96 (1988)). 202 384 U.S. 436, 458 n.27 (1966). “Thirteenth century commentators found an analogue to the privilege grounded in the Bible. ‘To sum up the matter, the principle that no man is to be declared guilty on his own admission is a divine decree.’ 64 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 Torah and the law instituted by the rabbi, appears in only one opinion: Garrity v. New Jersey.203 The Supreme Court used the words “Koran,” “Kuran,” “Qur’an,” or “Qor’an,” a Muslim book of revelations, in Zelman v. Simmons-Harris,204 O’Lone v. Estate of Shabazz,205 Clay v. United States,206 and Lemon v. Kurtzman.207 The Book of Mormon, a Mormon scripture, is cited in two decisions: Zelman v. Simmons-Harris208 and Hernandez v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue.209 Statistical evidence demonstrates that the appearance of references from Jewish or Muslim religious authorities is rare. Federal and U.S. Supreme Court case law mentions “Talmud” in 63 cases, “Torah” in 155 and “Halakhah” in 4 cases.210 The same search in the state case law database produces “Talmud” in 151 cases, “Torah” in 306 cases, and “Halakhah” in 2 cases, a pale comparison with the words “King James,” which produce 599 cases in state case law, and the word “Bible,” which is not possible to search due to an extremely high number of cases in which it appears.211 The various versions of the word “Koran” produce 499 cases in federal law and 349 cases in state law, but in most of those cases the word actually appears as a personal name.212 One needs go no farther than statistical data to conclude that the Bible is by far the most bellowed religious authority that judges use in their decision-making process and their written opinions. The apparent disparity in the use of different religious sources re- Maimonides, Mishneh Torah (Code of Jewish Law), Book of Judges, Laws of the Sanhedrin, c. 18, ¶ 6, III Yale Judaica Series 52-53.” Id. 203 385 U.S. 493, 497 n.5 (1967) (comparing Jewish law with the Fifth Amendment). 204 536 U.S. 639, 713 n.24 (2002) (quoting the New Testament, the Book of Mormon, the Pentateuch, and the Koran). 205 482 U.S. 342, 345 (1987). “Jumu’ah is commanded by the Koran and must be held every Friday after the sun reaches its zenith and before the Asr, or afternoon prayer. See Koran 62:9-10; Brief for Imam Jamil Abdullah Al-Amin et al. as Amici Curiae 18-31.” Id. 206 403 U.S. 698, 708 n.2, 709 (1971) (quoting the Koran 61:10-13 to define “jihad as an injunction to the believers to war against non-believers”). 207 403 U.S. 602, 630-31 (1971) (Douglas, J., concurring). “The advantages of sectarian education relate solely to religious or doctrinal matters. They give the church the opportunity to indoctrinate its creed delicately and indirectly, or massively through doctrinal courses. Many nations follow that course: Moslem nations teach the Koran in their schools . . . .” Id. 208 Zelman, 536 U.S at 713 n.24. 209 490 U.S. at 709. 210 Westlaw search performed on February 10, 2006. 211 Westlaw search performed on February 10, 2006. 212 Westlaw search performed on February 10, 2006. 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 65 affirms the privileged status that Christianity enjoys in the United States. It is a constant reminder of the composition of the judiciary and the lack of diversity that contributes to the ongoing proliferation of the use of biblical references by the courts. CONCLUSION Language analysts recognize that the Bible had a substantial impact on standard English language.213 Many biblical passages, having been read at home and in church for generations, entered the popular linguistic milieu of the majority of Americans. However, not all of them became independent lexical units: A usage has to have achieved some degree of linguistic autonomy; it must be capable of being meaningful outside of its original biblical context, usable by English speakers who do not read (or even know) the Bible as well as those who do. (The same point applies to expressions derived from Shakespeare or any other author.) . . . A usage that does not meet this criterion is really only a quotation.214 One of the standard English expressions derived from the King James version of St. Matthew’s Gospel is, “No man can serve two masters.”215 However, courts continue to quote the Bible when referring to this expression. The variety of ways in which courts use biblical passages from Matthew and Luke is impressive.216 If the biblical passage that “no man can serve two masters” is part of folk wisdom, there would seem to be no need to quote the Bible. If, on the other hand, it is important to cite the ultimate source of this proverb, referencing the Bible seems logical. While this biblical quotation and citation to Matthew or Luke by courts may be trivial, the continuous use of the Bible by judges to support their arguments in written opinions is unjustified and should be barred. The Bible contains many passages as simple as the one above, but the scope of their impact on decision-making is impermissibly broad, including such decisions as life or death in capital cases. The arbitrariness of judicial choice to use some biblical passages as traditional folk expressions and to quote others as authoritative sources 213 CRYSTAL, supra note 71, at 274. See also Ashburn, supra note 2, at 343-47 (citing examples of courts using aphorisms from Jewish law). 214 CRYSTAL, supra note 71, at 276. “The King James Bible . . . has contributed far more to English in the way of idiomatic or quasi-proverbial expressions than any other literary source. . . . Matthew’s Gospel alone, for example, yields over forty locutions which, directly or indirectly, are part of Modern English.” Id. 215 Id. at 277. 216 See infra Appendix. 66 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 is analogous to the arbitrariness in which some biblical passages entered the everyday speech.217 Additionally, the use of the same biblical passage as a folk expression by some courts and as a biblical quote by the others creates a sense of arbitrariness and subjectivity, bringing into question judicial impartiality. The use of religious references in judicial decision-making is not rare and cannot be underestimated. The numerous ways in which the Bible finds its way into judicial opinions are a direct result of judges’ willingness to disregard the rules of judicial conduct and apparent constitutional violations stemming from such misuse. Since there is no bright line between a common expression such as “eye for eye, tooth for tooth”218 and the biblical mandate “[i]f anyone takes the life of a human being, he must be put to death,”219 courts should never use either text, especially not during a sentencing phase. Courts should be prohibited from using religious references in judicial decision-making because any reliance on extralegal sources of authority is contrary to the basic principles of the American justice system. Using religious references in judicial opinions is an impermissible exercise of a privilege that coerces the minority to accept the norms of the majority. Whether disguised as morals, proverbs, principles, tradition, or history, religious references undermine judicial integrity and impartiality. Long ago, Justice Holmes expressed one of the most creative ideas in respect to delineating morality and law. Although his idea may sound radical today to moderate and conservative proponents of the use of religion in decision-making, it is one that should resonate with any person who is genuinely concerned with the American justice system: For my own part, I often doubt whether it would not be a gain if every word of moral significance could be banished from the law altogether, and other words adopted which should convey legal ideas uncolored by anything outside the law.220 217 See CRYSTAL, supra note 71, at 278. What is really intriguing, of course, is why some expressions entered English in this way, and others did not. Why did such similes as wise as serpents or harmless as doves ([Matthew] 10:16) not become everyday phrases? As always, when we consider lexical innovation, the bigger puzzle is to explain why so many apparently vivid or useful items did not appeal. Id. See also BARTH D. EHRMAN, MISQUOTING JESUS: THE STORY BEHIND WHO CHANGED THE BIBLE AND WHY (2005) (discussing intentional and accidental alterations of the Bible made by translators throughout history). 218 Leviticus 24:20 (New International). 219 Leviticus 24:17 (New International). 220 Holmes, The Path of the Law, supra note 128, at 464. 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 67 APPENDIX CASES USING “NO MAN CAN SERVE TWO MASTERS”221 “No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money.” Matthew 6:24 (New International). “No servant can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money.” Luke 16:13 (New International). Terms Used by Courts to Refer to “No Man Can Serve Two Masters” Admonition Familiar scriptural quotation Ancient admonition Fundamental law Ancient axiom Fundamental rule Ancient injunction Fundamental truth Ancient maxim Fundamental proposition Ancient principle General rule Ancient truth General principle Authority of Holy Writ Good Authority Authoritative declaration Gospel Axiom Hallowed petition Biblical admonition High authority Biblical advice Highest Authority has said Biblical expression Infallible declaration Biblical doctrine Biblical mandate Infallible truth Biblical quote Injunction Biblical teaching Jesus said Christ said Law for two thousand years Christian morality Legal maxim Centuries-old scriptural passage Maxim Common experience Moral maxim Declaration Moral rule Divine declaration Old adage Divine injunction Old as Holy Writ Divine precept Old principle Doctrine of the Holy Writ Old proverb Divine saying Philosophy Eternal truth Philosophy of the Galilean Expression Phrase from the Bible Fact Principle 221 Westlaw search performed on February 10, 2006 using a sesarch phrase “can serve two masters.” 68 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 Proposition of the Highest and best Scriptural references authority Scriptural teaching Proverb Statement Public policy rule Theory Quoted from the Bible Truth Rule Truth of the biblical admonition Rule of the moral law Truth of the Scriptural injunction Rule of law Unanimous verdict of mankind Saying Universal moral rule Scriptural maxim Utterance of the divine Nazarene Scriptural pronouncement Very high authority has said Scriptural quotation Wisdom of the ages SUPREME COURT CASES NLRB v. Health Care & Ret. Corp. of Am., 511 U.S. 571, 595 n.14 (1994) (Ginsburg, J., dissenting) (“No man can serve two masters. If you are negotiating a contract, a lawyer does not represent both clients. That is all that is involved here.”) Sec. & Exch. Comm’n v. Capital Gains Research Bureau, Inc., 375 U.S. 180, 197 n.50 (1963) (Justice Goldberg quoting from United States v. Miss. Valley Generating Co., 364 U.S. 520, 550 n.14 (1961)) United States v. Miss. Valley Generating Co., 364 U.S. 520, 550 n.14 (1961) (Warren, J.) (“The reason of the rule inhibiting a party who occupies confidential and fiduciary relations toward another from assuming antagonistic positions to his principal in matters involving the subject matter of the trust is sometimes said to rest in a sound public policy, but it also is justified in a recognition of the authoritative declaration that no man can serve two masters; and considering that human nature must be dealt with, the rule does not stop with actual violations of such trust relations, but includes within its purpose the removal of any temptation to violate them.” (quoting Mich. Steel Box Co. v. United States, 49 Ct. Cl. 421, 439 (1914))) Supreme Lodge Knights of Pythias v. Withers, 177 U.S. 260, 269 (1900) (Brown, J.) (“But if the insured is to be now bound as having thus contracted, there must be mutuality in the contract. No man can serve two masters.”) 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 69 CITING TO MATTHEW Federal Court Cases Freund v. Butterworth, 117 F.3d 1543, 1572 n.67 (11th Cir. 1997) United States v. Mett, 65 F.3d 1531, 1538 (9th Cir. 1995) Sanjour v. EPA, 56 F.3d 85, 100-01 (D.C. Cir. 1995) Chapman v. Klemick, 3 F.3d 1508, 1512 (11th Cir. 1993) Sanjour v. EPA, 984 F.2d 434, 447 (D.C. Cir. 1993) United States v. $124,570 U.S. Currency, 873 F.2d 1240, 1247 (9th Cir. 1989) United States v. Gambino, 864 F.2d 1064, 1074-1075 n.1 (3d Cir. 1988) U.S. Fid. & Guar. Co. v. Louis A. Roser Co., 585 F.2d 932, 938 n.5 (8th Cir. 1978) Cinema 5, Ltd. v. Cinerama, Inc., 528 F.2d 1384, 1386 (2d Cir. 1976) Phelan v. Middle States Oil Corp., 220 F.2d 593, 619 (2d Cir. 1955) Armstrong Cleaners, Inc. v. Erie Ins. Exch., 364 F.Supp. 2d 797, 815 (S.D. Ind. 2005) Rocchigiani v. World Boxing Counsel, 82 F.Supp. 2d 182, 189 (S.D.N.Y. 2000) Union Ins. Co. v. Knife Co., 902 F. Supp. 877, 881 (W.D. Ark. 1995) ESM Gov’t. Sec., Inc. v. ESM Group, Inc. 66 B.R. 82, 84 (S.D. Fla. 1986) United States v. Bergmann, 47 F. Supp. 765, 767 (S.D. Cal. 1942) In re BH & P, Inc., 103 B.R. 556, 560 (Bankr. D.N.J. 1989) In re Tampa Chain Co., 35 B.R. 568, 579 n.10 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1983) United States v. Short, 50 M.J. 370, 374 (C.A.A.F. 1999) (phrase from the Bible) 70 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 United States v. Nabisco, Inc., 117 F.R.D. 40, 44-45 (E.D.N.Y. 1987) Kamean v. Local 363, 109 F.R.D. 391, 396 (S.D.N.Y. 1986) United States v. Agosto, 528 F. Supp. 1300, 1310 (D. Minn. 1981) United States v. Garafola, 428 F. Supp. 620, 621 (D.N.J. 1977) (Biblical teaching) Vance Trucking Co. v. Canal Ins. Co., 249 F. Supp. 33, 38 n.2 (D.S.C. 1966) United States v. Kawakita, 96 F. Supp. 824, 836 (S.D. Cal. 1950) State Court Cases Office of Consumer Counsel v. Conn. Dep’t of Pub. Util. Control, No. CV020513718S, 2002 WL 31319517, at *3 (Conn. Super. Ct. Sept. 24, 2002) Wis. Patients Comp. Fund v. Physicians Ins. Co. of Wis., 620 N.W.2d 457, 461-62 (Wis. Ct. App. 2000) Aluminum Co. of Am. v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 998 P.2d 856, 877 (Wash. 2000) State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Traver, 980 S.W.2d 625, 634 (Tex. 1998) In re Estate of Koch, 849 P.2d 977, 993 (Kan. Ct. App. 1993) Geauga County Bar Ass’n. v. Psenicka, 577 N.E.2d 1074, 1074 (Ohio 1991) Friends of La Vina v. County of L.A., 284 Cal. Rptr. 171, 178 n.1 (Ct. App. 1991) (Gates, Acting P.J., dissenting) Ex parte Weaver, 570 So.2d 675, 682 (Ala. 1990) J.K. & Susie L. Wadley Research Inst. & Blood Bank v. Morris, 776 S.W.2d 271, 284 (Tex. Ct. App. 1989) People v. Williams, 538 N.E.2d 564, 569 (Ill. App. Ct. 1989) (admonition) Collins v. Citizens & S. Trust Co., 373 S.E.2d 612, 617 (Ga. 1988) 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 71 Swartz v. State, 429 N.W.2d 130, 132 (Iowa 1988) SHV Coal, Inc. v. Cont’l Grain Co., 545 A.2d 917, 921 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1988) Brickner v. Normandy Osteopathic Hosp., Inc., 746 S.W.2d 108, 113 (Mo. Ct. App. 1988) Jim Royer Realty, Inc. v. Moreira, 363 S.E.2d 10, 12 (Ga. Ct. App. 1988) Pearl River Valley Water Supply Dist. v. Hinds County, 445 So.2d 1330, 1356 n.25 (Miss.1984) In re Conduct of Samuels and Weiner, 674 P.2d 1166, 1171 (Or. 1983) Webb v. State, 433 So.2d 496, 499 (Fla. 1983) Ellis v. Flink, 374 So.2d 4, 5 n.4 (Fla. 1979) Conn. Comm’n on Special Revenue v. Conn. Freedom of Info. Comm’n, 387 A.2d 533, 537 (Conn. 1978) Harford County v. Tatar, Lininger, Clark & Wood, Inc., 363 A.2d 501, 505 (Md. 1976) In re Runals’ Estate, 328 N.Y.S.2d 966, 978 (Sur. Ct. 1972) Onorato v. Wissahickon Park, Inc., 244 A.2d 22, 25 (Pa. 1968) Spratlin, Harrington & Thomas, Inc. v. Hawn, 156 S.E.2d 402, 407 (Ga. Ct. App. 1967) (Biblical expression) State v. 62.96247 Acres of Land, More or Less, in New Castle, 193 A.2d 799, 806 n.7 (Del. Super. Ct. 1963) State v. Brewer, 129 S.E.2d 262, 277 (N.C. 1963) Martin v. Hieken, 340 S.W.2d 161,165 (Mo. Ct. App. 1960) Hughes v. Robbins, 164 N.E.2d 469, 473 (Ohio Ct. Com. Pl. 1959) (“It has been well written that ‘no servant can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will hold to the one and despise the other.’”) 72 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 Powers v. Johnson, 306 S.W.2d 616, 624 (Mo. Ct. App. 1957) Fruchtl v. Foley, 84 So.2d 906, 909 (Fla. 1956) (admonition) Lexington Insulation Co. v. Davidson County, 90 S.E.2d 496, 498 (N.C. 1955) City of Miami v. Benson, 63 So.2d 916, 920 (Fla. 1953) Ridgway v. Super. Ct. of Yavapai, 245 P.2d 268, 271 (Ariz. 1952) Safeway Stores v. Retail Clerks Int’l Ass’n, 234 P.2d 678, 682 (Cal. Dist. Ct. App. 1951) State ex rel. Young v. Niblack, 99 N.E.2d 839, 845 (Ind. 1951) Bossler v. Wilson, 65 Pa. D. & C. 164, 171 (Phila. Mun. Ct. 1949) City of Jackson v. McLeod, 24 So.2d 319, 325 (Miss. 1946) (“The public interest requires the undivided loyalty of police officers to the public service and we were told long ago by One whose judgment was infallible that ‘no man can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will hold to the one and despise the other.’”) Barr v. Sun Life Assurance Co. of Can., 200 So. 240, 244 (Fla. 1941) Century Indem. Co. v. Carnes, 138 S.W.2d 555, 560 (Tex. Civ. App. 1940) Moffett Bros. P’ship Estate v. Moffett, 137 S.W.2d 507, 511 (Mo. 1939) Caudle v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 182 So. 461, 464 (Ala. 1938) Whitlow v. Patterson, 112 S.W.2d 35, 41 (Ark. 1937) (“No man can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one and despise the other.”) Hood ex rel. N.C. Bank & Trust v. N.C. Bank & Trust, 184 S.E. 51, 62 (N.C. 1936) Olson v. Gaddis Inv. Co., 39 P.2d 744, 747 (Utah 1935) City of Leesburg v. Ware, 153 So. 87, 89 (Fla. 1934) 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 73 State ex rel. Union Elec. Light & Power Co. v. Pub. Serv. Comm’n, 62 S.W.2d 742, 746 (Mo. 1933) Harris v. United Serv. Co., 32 S.W.2d 618, 619 (Ark. 1930) (general principle) Robson v. Hahn, 277 P. 507, 508 (Cal. Dist. Ct. App. 1929) Schwartzman v. London & Lancashire Fire Ins. Co. of Liverpool, Eng., 2 S.W.2d 593, 602 (Mo. 1927) Castellanos v. Castro, 289 S.W. 104, 105 (Tex. Civ. App. 1926) (“It was said by the Great Teacher that ‘no man can serve two masters . . . .’”) Rezos v. Zahm & Nagel Co., 246 P. 564, 565 (Cal. Dist. Ct. App. 1926) Carolina Bagging Co. v. Byrd, 116 S.E. 90, 92 (N.C. 1923) Hume v. Baggett & Baggett, 221 S.W. 1002, 1003 (Tex. Civ. App. 1920) (“This rule of law not only rests on an understanding of human nature but on the utterance of the Divine Nazarene, when he said: ‘No man can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other.’”) Murray v. Lizotte, 77 A. 231, 238 (R.I. 1910) (“No matter how high his motives or how honorable his intention, ‘no man can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or he will hold to the one, and despise the other.’”) Shamokin Mfg. Co. v. Ohio German Fire Ins. Co., 39 Pa. Super. 553, 556 (Super. Ct. 1908) (“It involves a question whether the same person may be an agent in a private transaction for both parties, without the consent of both, so as to entitle him to compensation from both or either. We have the authority of Holy Writ for saying that ‘no man can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will hold to the one and despise the other.’ All human experience sanctions the undoubted truth and purity of this philosophy, and it is received as a cardinal principle in every system of enlightened jurisprudence.“) U.S. Tel. Co. v. Middlepoint Home Tel. Co., 19 Ohio Dec. 202, 208 (Ct. Com. Pl. 1908) (“It is as true today as when first spoken in the 74 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 parable, and has become a fundamental rule that ‘No servant can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other; or else he will hold to the one and despise the other.’”) Gann v. Zettler, 60 S.E. 283, 283 (Ga. Ct. App. 1908) (Powell, J.) (“It is recorded of Him ‘who spake as never man spoke’ that, ‘seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain, and when he was set his disciples came unto him; and he opened his mouth and taught them; saying: “No man can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will hold to the one and despise the other.”’ So, also, is our law. Whoso, having undertaken the service of his master, counsels with another and agrees also to serve him in those same things wherewith he has been trusted, cannot claim the reward promised by his master unless he makes it plain that he has not acted privily, but that his master was consenting thereto.” (internal citations omitted)) City of Philadelphia v. Durham, No. 1, 1907 WL 3343, at *13 (Pa. Ct. Com. Pl. Jan. 30, 1907) (“We have the authority of Holy Writ for saying that ‘no man can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will hold to the one and despise the other.’ All human experience sanctions the undoubted truth and purity of this philosophy, and it is received as a cardinal principle in every system of enlightened jurisprudence.”) McDowell v. First Nat’l Bank of Sutton, 102 N.W. 615, 617 (Neb. 1905) Nat’l Tube Co. v. Eastern Tube Co., 13 Ohio Cir. Dec. 468 (Cir. Ct. 1902) Home Bldg. & Loan Ass’n v. Evans, 53 S.W. 1104, 1105 (Tenn. Ct. Ch. App. 1899) Moore v. Grow, 1 Pa. Super. 125, 127 (Super. Ct. 1896) Northrup v. Phillips, 99 Ill. 449, 454 (1881) Dickson v. People ex rel. Brown, 17 Ill. 191, 193 (1855) CITING TO LUKE State Court Cases Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v. Bourlon, 617 S.E.2d 40, 60 (N.C. Ct. App. 2005) 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 75 Barefield v. DPIC Cos., 600 S.E.2d 256, 281 (W. Va. 2004) Rose ex rel. Rose v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 599 S.E.2d 673, 688 (W. Va. 2004) People v. Graham, 794 N.E.2d 231, 236 (Ill. 2003) Myer v. Preferred Credit, Inc., 117 Ohio Misc. 2d 8, 24 (Ct. Com. Pl. 2001) State v. Reddick, 534 S.E.2d 473, 477 (Ga. Ct. App. 2000) Brooks v. Zebre, 792 P.2d 196, 200 (Wyo. 1990) Watkins v. Floyd, 492 S.W.2d 865, 870 (Mo. Ct. App. 1973) Wise v. S. Pac. Co., 77 Cal. Rptr. 156, 160 (Ct. App. 1969) Pac. Indem. Co. v. Indus. Accident Comm’n, 81 P.2d 572, 575 (Cal. Ct. App. 1938) Smith v. Harvey-Given Co., 185 S.E. 793, 796 (Ga. 1936) Jordan v. Austin Sec. Co., 51 P.2d 38, 58 (Kan. 1935) State v. Gautier, 147 So. 240, 246 (Fla. 1933) Never Fail Land Co. v. Cole, 149 S.E. 585, 588 (N.C. 1929) Patterson v. De Haven, 263 P. 568, 572 (Cal. Dist. Ct. App. 1928) Chippewa Power Co. v. R.R. Comm’n of Wis., 205 N.W. 900, 902 (Wis. 1925) Reserve Loan Life Ins. Co. v. Phillips, 119 S.E. 315, 317 (Ga. 1923) Pagel v. Creasy, 6 Ohio App. 199, 206 (Ct. App. 1916) McCudden v. Brockmeyer, 26 Ohio Dec. 432, 436 (Ct. Com. Pl. 1915) Carr v. Ubsdell, 71 S.W. 112, 113 (Mo. Ct. App. 1902) Bell v. McConnell, 37 Ohio St. 396, 399 (1881) 76 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 NO QUOTATION MARKS Federal Court Cases United States v. Freyer, 333 F.3d 110, 112 (2d Cir. 2003) (no lawyer can serve two masters) United States v. Levine, 794 F.2d 1203, 1205 (7th Cir. 1986) Ottawa Tribe v. United States, 166 Ct. Cl. 373, 379 (Ct. Cl. 1964) (gospel) Speeter v. United States, 42 F.2d 937, 940 (8th Cir. 1930) (old principle) Parkerson v. Borst, 264 F. 761, 765 (5th Cir. 1920) (scriptural maxim) United States v. Krafft, 249 F. 919, 928 (3d Cir. 1918) Curved Electrotype Plate Co. of N.Y. v. United States, 50 Ct. Cl. 258, 272 (Ct. Cl. 1915) (authoritative declaration) Crites, Inc., v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 134 F.2d 925, 927 (6th Cir. 1943) (principle) Rankin v. United States, 98 Ct. Cl. 357, 367 (Ct. Cl. 1943) (authoritative declaration) Mich. Steel Box Co. v. United States, 49 Ct. Cl. 421, 439 (Cl. Ct. 1914) (authoritative declaration) Bramhall v. United States, 4 Ct. Cl. 51, 59 (Cl. Ct. 1868) Klein v. Miller, No. Civ.A.SA-02-CA-687FB, 2004 WL 1118725, at *10 (W.D. Tex. Mar. 30, 2004) (biblical advice) Costa v. U.S. Dep’t of Veteran’s Affairs, 845 F. Supp. 64, 69 (D.R.I. 1994) (biblical advice) Overfield v. Pennroad Corp., 42 F. Supp. 586, 608 (E.D. Pa. 1941) In re Int’l Match Corp., 20 F. Supp. 420, 422 (S.D.N.Y. 1937) (truth of the biblical admonition) John Conlon Coal Co. v. Westchester Fire Ins. Co. of N.Y., 16 F. Supp. 93, 95 (M.D. Pa. 1936) (principle) 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 77 Marshall v. Lovell, 11 F.2d 632, 639 (D. Minn. 1926) Brookings State Bank v. Federal Reserve Bank of S.F., 281 F. 222, 228 (D. Or. 1922) Brookings State Bank v. Federal Reserve Bank of S.F., 277 F. 430, 432 (D. Or. 1921) Brown v. Pa. Canal Co, 229 F. 444, 452 (E.D. Pa. 1916) In re Va. Hardwood Mfg. Co., 139 F. 209, 218 (W.D. Ark. 1905) Farmers’ Loan & Trust Co. v. Winona & Sw. Ry. Co., 59 F. 957, 961 (C.C.D. Minn. 1893) Putnam v. Commonwealth Ins. Co., 4 F. 753, 760 (C.C.N.D.N.Y. 1880) In re Tinley Plaza Assocs., 142 B.R. 272, 279 (Bankr. N.D. Ill.1992) In re Huddleston, 120 B.R. 399, 401 (Bankr. E.D. Tex.1990) United States v. Hubbard, 43 C.M.R. 322, 325 (C.M.A. 1971) (truth of the Scriptural injunction) Midwest Farmers v. United States, 64 F. Supp. 91, 102 (D. Minn. 1945) State Court Cases People v. Hardin, 840 N.E.2d 1205, 1212 (Ill. 2005) Coronado v. Schoenmann Produce Co., 99 S.W.3d 741, 753-55 (Tex. Ct. App. 2003) State ex rel. S.G., 814 A.2d 612, 616 (N.J. 2003) Barrett v. Union Twp. Comm., 553 A.2d 62, 65 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1989) (moral rule) Siegman v. Bd. of Educ., 477 N.E. 2d 241, 243 (Ill. App. Ct. 1985) Copple v. City of Lincoln, 274 N.W.2d 520, 526 (Neb. 1979) Pa. Labor Relations Bd. v. E. Lancaster County Sch. Dist., 1973 WL 16227, at *3 (Pa. Ct. Com. Pl. May 18, 1973) (fundamental truth) 78 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 City of Montgomery v. Brendle Fire Equip., Inc., 279 So.2d 480, 486 (Ala. 1973) Procidano v. Mautner, 335 N.Y.S.2d 17, 24 (N.Y. Civ. Ct. 1972) St. Paul at Chase Corp. v. Mfrs. Life Ins. Co., 278 A.2d 12, 25 (Md. 1971) Bd. of Educ. v. Wilton, 273 A.2d 44, 50 (N.J. 1971) Caddie v. Warden, Md. Correctional Inst., 238 A.2d 129, 129 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1968) (theory) Hasbrouck v. Rymkevitch, 268 N.Y.S.2d 604, 606 (App. Div. 1966) Commonwealth ex rel. Whitling v. Russell, 176 A.2d 641, 643 (Pa. 1962) Van Dyke v. White, 349 P.2d 430, 437 (Wash. 1960) Md. Credit Finance Corp. v. Hagerty, 139 A.2d 230, 233 (Md. 1958) Jedwabny v. Phila. Transp. Co., 135 A.2d 252, 255 (Pa. 1957) (scriptural references) Coble v. Econ. Forms Corp. 304 S.W.2d 47, 51 (Mo. Ct. App. 1957) Aldom v. Borough of Roseland, 127 A.2d 190, 194 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1956) (moral rule) Jersey City v. Hague, 115 A.2d 8, 13 (N.J. 1955) Henshie v. McPherson & Citizens State Bank, 280 P.2d 937, 947 (Kan. 1955) In re Ridgely, 106 A.2d 527, 530 (Del. 1954) (injunction) Cornale v. Stewart Stamping Corp., 129 N.Y.S.2d 808, 814 (Sup. Ct. 1954) Shernoff v. Schimel, 112 N.Y.S.2d 333, 347 (Sup. Ct. 1952) Klein v. Twentieth Century-Fox Int’l Corp., 108 N.Y.S.2d 767, 768 (Sup. Ct. 1951) (fact) State ex inf. Taylor v. Cumpton, 240 S.W.2d 877, 884-85 (Mo. 1951) 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 79 Petition of Topham, 58 Pa. D. & C. 649, 654 (Ct. Com. Pl. 1947) Nagel v. Todd, 45 A.2d 326, 328 (Md. 1946) City of Lincoln v. First Nat’l Bank of Lincoln, 19 N.W.2d 156, 159 (Neb. 1945) (moral rule) Alabama State Fed’n of Labor v. McAdory, 18 So.2d 810, 829 (Ala. 1944) Phillips v. Phillips, 13 So.2d 922, 923 (Fla. 1943) Almon v. Am. Carloading Corp., 38 N.E.2d 362, 363-64 (Ill. App. Ct. 1941) (rule of law) Cowan v. Hamilton Nat’l Bank, 146 S.W.2d 359, 362 (Tenn. 1941) Jarrett v. French & Co., 3 N.Y.S.2d 227, 228 (App. Div. 1938) (theory) Valley & Siletz R.R. Co. v. Thomas, 48 P.2d 358, 383 (Or. 1935) Beatty v. Employers’ Liab. Assurance Corp., 168 A. 919, 924 (Vt. 1933) Greenfield v. Bausch, 263 N.Y.S. 19, 21 (App. Div. 1933) (fact) Elco Shoe Mfrs. v. Sisk, 183 N.E. 191, 191-92 (N.Y. 1932) Kane v. McClenachan, 159 A. 61, 64 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1932) Pac. Fin. Corp. v. City of Lynwood, 300 P. 50, 53 (Cal. Dist. Ct. App. 1931) (principle) New England Oil Ref. Co. v. Can. Mex. Oil Co., 174 N.E. 330, 337 (Mass. 1931) Terrell v. Town of Tempe, 274 P. 786, 788 (Ariz. 1929) Lucas Realty Co. v. Franks, 6 S.W.2d 273, 274 (Ky. 1928) Eastham v. Stumbo, 279 S.W. 1109, 1110 (Ky. 1926) C.M. Condon & Co. v. Richardson, 232 P. 1070, 1071 (Kan. 1925) De Crette v. Mohler, 127 A. 639, 642 (Md. 1925) 80 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 Smith v. Ward, 197 N.W. 684, 685 (S.D. 1924) Williams v. Bolling, 121 S.E. 270, 273 (Va. 1923) Grady v. Pink Hill Bank & Trust Co., 113 S.E. 667, 669 (N.C. 1922) In re Moses, 195 N.Y.S. 358, 360 (App. Div. 1922) (old as Holy Writ) Meeks v. Fink, 89 So. 543, 544 (Fla. 1921) Wilson v. S. Pac. Land Co., 46 Cal. App. 738, 745 (Ct. App. 1920) Clarksburg Light & Heat Co. v. Pub. Serv. Comm’n, 100 S.E. 551, 555 (W. Va. 1919) State v. Nichols, 166 N.W. 813, 813 (N.D. 1918) Southampton Twp. v. Johnson, No. 3, 1916 WL 4261, at *1 (Pa. Ct. Com. Pl. Jan. 17, 1916) Schenectady Illuminating Co. v. Bd. of Supervisors, 151 N.Y.S. 830, 831 (Sup. Ct. 1914) Hirsh v. Twyford, 139 P. 313, 316 (Okla. 1913) Norbeck & Nicholson Co. v. State, 142 N.W. 847, 852 (S.D. 1913) (fundamental proposition) City of Minneapolis v. Canterbury, 142 N.W. 812, 814 (Minn. 1913) Hill v. Whiteside, 85 A. 425, 425 (Pa. 1912) Bell v. Riggs, 127 P. 427, 430 (Okla. 1912) (high authority) Langford v. Issenhuth, 134 N.W. 889, 894 (S.D. 1912) (fundamental law) Salene v. Queen City Fire Ins. Co. of Sioux Falls, 116 P. 1114, 1115 (Or. 1911) (principle) Cobe v. Coughlin Hardware Co., 112 P. 115, 117 (Kan. 1910) Mitchell v. Schreiner, 1910 WL 4143, at *1 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1910) (quoted from the Bible) Lightcap v. Nicola, 34 Pa. Super. 189, 202 (Super. Ct. 1907) 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 81 Harper v. Fidler, 78 S.W. 1034, 1035 (Mo. Ct. App. 1904) (authoritative declaration) Hier v. Miller, 75 P. 77, 77 (Kan. 1904) Edwards v. Home Ins. Co., 73 S.W. 881, 885 (Mo. Ct. App. 1902) In re Reifschneider, 69 N.Y.S. 1069, 1074 (App. Div. 1901) Murphy v. Indep. Order of Sons & Daughters of Jacob of Am., 27 So. 624, 625 (Miss. 1900) McFarland v. Gordon, 41 A. 507, 508 (Vt. 1898) Delaware, L. & W. R. Co. v. Hardy, 34 A. 986, 987 (N.J. 1896) Shepard v. Hill, 34 P. 159, 160 (Wash. 1893) State v. Hastings, 55 N.W. 774, 789 (Neb. 1893) Huggins Cracker & Candy Co. v. People’s Ins. Co., 41 Mo. App. 530, 541 (1890) (authoritative declaration) Whited v. Germania Fire Ins. Co., 76 N.Y. 415, 420 (1879) Roll v. Riddle, 5 Ohio Dec. Reprint 232, 655 (Super. Ct. 1874) Ex rel. Dawson, 39 Ala. 367, 404 (1864) In re Miller, 30 Pa. 478, 494 (1858) Laight St. Baptist Church v. Noe, 12 How. Pr. 497, 497 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1855) Buckles v. Lafferty’s Legatees, 41 Va. (2 Rob.) 292, 302 (1843) Gayden v. Gayden, 1842 WL 2414, at *5 (S.C. Ct. App. Eq. 1842) (eternal truth) State v. Hunt, 20 S.C.L. (2 Hill) 1, 64 (Ct. App. 1834) Gallatian v. Cunningham, 8 Cow. 361, 371 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1826) Carter v. Harris, 25 Va. (4 Rand.) 199, 204 (1826) (principle) McAllister v. Marshall, 6 Binn. 338, 350 (Pa. 1814) 82 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 QUOTATION MARKS WITHOUT CITATION Federal Court Cases United States v. Bowens, 108 F. App’x 945, 971 (5th Cir. 2004) Berwind Corp. v. Fyfe, No. 89-55880, 1990 WL 208794, at *3 (9th Cir. 1990) United States v. Evans, 572 F.2d 455, 480 (5th Cir. 1978) Fund of Funds, Ltd. v. Arthur Andersen & Co., 567 F.2d 225, 233 (2d Cir. 1977) Bhd. of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen v. Mitchell, 190 F.2d 308, 308 (5th Cir. 1951) (scriptural pronouncement) Va. Ferry Corp. v. NLRB, 101 F.2d 103, 105 (4th Cir. 1939) (high authority) Turner v. Kirkwood, 49 F.2d 590, 594 (10th Cir. 1931) (infallible truth and divine saying) Crawford v. United States, 30 App. D.C. 1, 12 (D.C. Cir. 1907) Olcott v. Rice, 69 F. 199, 202 (5th Cir. 1895) (truth) McGlothlin v. Connors, 142 F.R.D. 626, 635 (W.D. Va. 1992) (biblical admonition) Schwartz v. O’Grady, No. 86 CIV. 4243, 1990 WL 156274, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 12, 1990) SEC v. Commonwealth Sec. Investors, Inc., No. 2161, 1970 WL 202, at *7 (E.D. Ky. Oct. 21, 1970) (Biblical quote) Mo. State Life Ins. Co. v. Keyes, 46 F. Supp. 181, 185 (W.D. Ky. 1933) (Jesus said) United States v. Walter, 291 F. 662, 663 (S.D. Fla. 1921) United States v. Del. & Hudson Co, 164 F. 215, 258 (C.C.E.D. Pa. 1908) United States v. Booth, 148 F. 112, 116 (C.C.D. Or. 1906) (principle) 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 83 Symmes v. Union Trust Co. of N.Y., 60 F. 830, 864 (C.C.D. Nev. 1894) United States v. Sippel, 8 C.M.R. 698, 745 (C.M.R. 1953) (principle) In re Grand Jury Investigation, 436 F. Supp. 818, 821 (W.D. Pa. 1977) (ancient axiom) Dobbins v. Local 212, 292 F. Supp. 413, 451 n. 19 (S.D. Ohio 1968) In re W.T. Byrns, Inc., 260 F. Supp. 442, 445 (E.D. Va. 1966) Shapiro v. Stahl, 195 F. Supp. 822, 825 (M.D. Pa. 1961) (infallible declaration) Livingston v. Shreveport-Texas League Baseball Corp., 128 F. Supp. 191, 199 (W.D. La. 1955) (axiom) State Court Cases People v. Woidtke, 729 N.E.2d 506, 513 (Ill. App. Ct. 2000) Winmark Ltd. P’ship v. Miles & Stockbridge, 674 A.2d 73, 87 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1996) Friendship Heights Citizens Comm. v. Barlow, 329 A.2d 122, 125 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1974) Am. Ins. Ass’n v. Ky. Bar Ass’n, 917 S.W.2d 568, 571 (Ky. 1996) Md. Metals, Inc. v. Metzner, 382 A.2d 564, 568 (Md. 1978) In re Brown, 559 P.2d 884, 889 (Or. 1977) Drenning v. Kuebel, Inc., 327 So. 2d 571, 575 (La. Ct. App. 1976) In re Boivin, 533 P.2d 171, 174 (Or. 1975) Commonwealth v. Shank, 54 Pa. D. & C.2d 602, 605 (Ct. Com. Pl. 1971) Elizabeth Fire Officers Ass’n v. City of Elizabeth, 274 A.2d 817, 819 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1971) Warminster Twp. Appeal, 56 Pa. D. & C.2d 99, 111 (Ct. Com. Pl. 1971) 84 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 Claughton v. Bear Stearns & Co., 156 A.2d 314, 319-20 (Pa. 1959) (infallible declaration and public policy rule) McCall v. Johns, 294 S.W.2d 869, 871 (Tex. Ct. App. 1956) State v. Haesemeyer, 78 N.W.2d 36, 40 (Iowa 1956) (ancient truth) In re Bond & Mortg. Guar. Co., 103 N.E.2d 721, 725 (N.Y. 1952) (centuries-old scriptural passage) Ky. State Fair Bd. v. Fowler, 221 S.W.2d 435, 439 (Ky. Ct. App. 1949) (philosophy) In re Buder, 217 S.W.2d 563, 574 (Mo. 1949) Kurtz v. Steinhart, 60 Pa. D. & C. 345, 360 (Ct. Com. Pl. 1947) (old adage) In re Laegen’s Estate, 43 N.Y.S.2d 924, 926 (Sur. Ct. 1943) Rotzin v. Miller, 277 N.W. 811, 817 (Neb. 1938) (hallowed petition) Int’l Serv. Union Co. v. People ex rel. Wettengel, 70 P.2d 431, 436 (Colo. 1937) Haines v. Biddle, 188 A. 843, 844 (Pa. 1937) (infallible declaration and public policy rule) Richter Jewelry Co. v. Schweinert, 169 So. 750, 753 (Fla. 1936) (general rule) Whelan v. Bailey, 36 P.2d 709, 710 (Cal. Dist. Ct. App. 1934) (saying) Bland v. Smith, 33 P.2d 25, 27 (Cal. Dist. Ct. App. 1934) (rule) Clawans v. Ordway Bldg. & Loan Ass’n., 164 A. 267, 283 (N.J. 1933) (wisdom of the ages) Mees v. Grewer, 245 N.W. 813, 815 (N.D. 1932) Hall v. Williams, 50 S.W.2d 138, 140 (Mo. 1932) (ancient maxim) Neb. State Bank of Norfolk v. Sch. Dist. of Pierce, 240 N.W. 570, 571 (Neb. 1932) (good authority) 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 85 Wick v. Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co., 1930 WL 2386, at *5 (Ohio Ct. Com. Pl. Dec. 29, 1930) Cent. Nat. Bank of Lincoln v. First Nat. Bank, 219 N.W. 894, 895 (Neb. 1928) (philosophy) McDaniel v. Cont’l Cas. Co., 240 Ill. App. 535, 549 (App. Ct. 1926) In re Water Rights in Silvies River, 237 P. 322, 358 (Or. 1925) Shealy v. S. Ry. Co., 120 S.E. 561, 568, 575 (S.C. 1924) Koons v. Richardson, 227 Ill. App. 477, 484 (App. Ct. 1923) (rule of the moral law and expression) Tex. Ref. Co. v. Alexander, 202 S.W. 131, 134 (Tex. Civ. App. 1918) (very high authority has said) Tusant v. Grand Lodge A.O.U.W., 163 N.W. 690, 693 (Iowa 1917) (law) Kirby-Sorge-Felske Co. v. Doty, 157 N.W. 273, 276 (Mich. 1916) (infallible declaration) Peterson v. Lewis, 154 P. 101, 106 (Or. 1915) In re E. Cameron Twp. Auditors’ Report, 1915 WL 3321, at *7 (Pa. Com. Pl. Aug. 11, 1915) (statement) (general principle) In re Krauthoff, 177 S.W. 1112, 1125 (Mo. Ct. App. 1915) (Highest Authority has said) King v. Reed, 141 P. 41, 43 (Cal. Ct. App. 1913) (infallible declaration and public policy rule) Clopton v. Meeves, 133 P. 907, 910 (Idaho 1913) (common experience and unanimous verdict of mankind) Jacobs v. Beyer, 125 N.Y.S. 597, 599 (App. Div. 1910) (rule) Biddle v. Cumberland County, No. 15, 1908 WL 2834, at *1 (Pa. Ct. Com. Pl. Oct. 20, 1908) Commonwealth ex rel. Kutz v. Witman, 66 A. 986, 987 (Pa. 1907) (statement) 86 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 Evans v. Rockett, 32 Pa. Super. 365, 369 (Super. Ct. 1907) (infallible declaration) Commonwealth v. Miller, 1906 WL 3769, at *4 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1906) (expression) Wilkinson v. McCullough, 46 A. 357, 358 (Pa. 1900) (infallible declaration) Leathers v. Canfield, 75 N.W. 612, 616 (Mich. 1898) (infallible declaration) Addison v. Wanamaker, 39 A. 1111, 1111 (Pa. 1898) (proposition of the highest and best authority) Deutsch v. Baxter, 47 P. 405, 405 (Colo. App. 1896) (fact) Wildberger v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 17 So. 282, 283 (Miss. 1895) Finch v. Redding, 26 A. 368, 369-70 (Pa. 1893) (infallible declaration and public policy rule) Caswell v. Jones, 26 A. 529, 530 (Vt. 1893) Harkness v. Briscoe, 47 Mo. App. 196, 198 (Ct. App. 1891) (principle) Pearson v. Concord R.R., 62 N.H. 537, 545 (1883) Memphis, Kan. & Colo. Ry. Co. v. Parsons Town Co., 26 Kan. 503, 509 (1881) Haxton v. Harris, 19 Kan. 511, 512 (1878) Draper v. Moore, 1872 WL 6072, at *4 (Ohio Super. Ct. 1872) BIBLICAL MANDATE State Court Cases Hartford Accident & Indem. Co. v. Foster, 528 So.2d 255, 277 (Miss. 1988) (ancient principle) Kirby v. Cruce, 688 S.W.2d 161, 171 (Tex. Ct. App. 1985) (Christian morality) 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 87 In re Hershberger, 606 P.2d 623, 627 (Or. 1980) (biblical admonition) Citizens Bank v. C & H Constr. & Paving Co., 600 P.2d 1212, 1217 (N.M. Ct. App. 1979) (centuries-old scriptural passage) Twp. Comm. of Hazlet Twp., Monmouth County v. Morales, 289 A.2d 563, 565 (N.J. Super. Ct. Law Div. 1972) (moral rule) State v. Goode, 171 N.W.2d 733, 733 (S.D. 1969) (ancient admonition) State ex rel. Londerholm v. Schroeder, 430 P.2d 304, 314 (Kan. 1967) (ancient injunction) Riviera Congress Assocs. v. Yassky, 264 N.Y.S.2d 624, 634 (Sup. Ct. 1965) (centuries-old scriptural passage) Schear v. City of Elizabeth, 196 A.2d 774, 778 (N.J. 1964) (universal moral rule) Naftalin v. John Wood Co., 116 N.W.2d 91, 99 (Minn.1962) (truth of the biblical admonition) Dick & Reuteman Co. v. Doherty Realty Co., 114 N.W.2d 475, 479 (Wis. 1962) (centuries-old scriptural passage) Schauer v. City of Miami Beach, 112 So.2d 838, 841 (Fla. 1959) (familiar scriptural quotation) Spadaro v. Palmisano, 109 So.2d 418, 421 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1959) (biblical mandate) Raymond v. Bartlett, 175 P.2d 288, 289 (Cal. Dist. Ct. App. 1946) (biblical doctrine) Higginbotham v. Pub. Belt R.R. Comm’n, 181 So. 65, 71 (La. Ct. App. 1938) (biblical doctrine) In re Flavin’s Guardianship, 18 N.E.2d 514, 518 (Ohio Ct. App. 1938) (law for two thousand years) Adams v. Hearn, 178 A. 606, 611 (Md. 1935) (divine injunction) Stubbs v. Fla. State Finance Co., 159 So. 527, 528 (Fla. 1935) (familiar scriptural quotation) 88 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 Mangels v. Safe Deposit & Trust Co. of Balt., 173 A. 191, 197 (Md. 1934) (divine precept) State v. Williams, 68 S.E. 900, 902 (N.C. 1910) (scriptural teaching) Hamilton v. Allen, 125 N.W. 610, 612 (Neb. 1910) (philosophy of the Galilean and declaration) Beasley v. Swinton, 24 S.E. 313, 322 (S.C. 1896) (Christ said) Funk v. Washington Twp., No. 196, 1893 WL 2925, at *4 (Pa. Ct. Com. Pl. July 15, 1893) (authority of Holy Writ) Pa. R.R. Co. v. Flanigan, 4 A. 364, 367 (Pa. 1886) (authority of Holy Writ) Everhart v. Searle, 71 Pa. 256, 259 (1872) (authority of Holy Writ and principle) Scheible v. Bacho, 41 Ala. 423, 450 (1868) (Divine declaration) Herman v. Martineau, 1 Wis. 151, 158 (1853) (doctrine of Holy Writ) PRINCIPLE OR PROPOSITION State Court Cases People v. Dobrino, 592 N.E.2d 391, 401 (Ill. App. Ct. 1992) People v. Arnold, 577 N.E.2d 1355, 1362 (Ill. App. Ct. 1991) Fed’n of State Cultural & Educ. Prof’l v. Commonwealth, 546 A.2d 147, 150 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1988) People v. Spreitzer, 525 N.E.2d 30, 34 (Ill. 1988) State v. Basham, 170 N.W.2d 238, 255 (S.D. 1969) (principle) Batson v. Strehlow, 59 Cal. Rptr. 195, 205 (Cal. Ct. App. 1967) Holmes v. McKey, 383 P.2d 655, 664 (Okla. 1963) In re Guardianship of Angell, 167 N.E.2d 711, 713 (Ill. App. Ct. 1960) Battle v. Reserve Life Ins. Co., 168 N.E.2d 915, 918 (Ohio Ct. App. 1959) 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 89 Fred Tuke & Son v. Burkhardt, 156 N.E.2d 490, 491 (Ohio Mun. Ct. 1958) State v. Hambrick, 196 P.2d 661, 667 (Wyo. 1948) Callahan v. Jones, 93 P.2d 326, 330 (Wash. 1939) Gallin v. Nat’l City Bank of N.Y., 273 N.Y.S. 87, 101 (Sup. Ct. 1934) Rossi v. Firemen’s Ins. Co. of Newark, N. J., 165 A. 16, 18 (Pa. 1932) Garibaldi Bldg. & Loan Ass’n of Atlantic City v. Garibaldi, 162 A. 419, 423 (N.J. Ch. 1932) Swearingen v. Moore, 280 P. 295, 299 (Okla. 1929) Johnson ex rel. McCarter v. Nippert, 144 A. 404, 406 (Pa. 1928) Adams v. Kennard, 253 P. 1048, 1049 (Or. 1927) Quell v. Boyajian, 90 Pa. Super. 386, 389 (Super. Ct. 1926) (ancient principle) Murray v. Stuart, 247 P. 187, 188 (Colo. 1926) (ancient principle) W.R. Pickering Lumber Co. v. Sherritt, 233 P. 179, 180 (Okla. 1924) Rowe v. Freeman, 172 P. 508, 511 (Or. 1918) Livermore Falls Trust & Banking Co. v. Riley, 78 A. 980, 981 (Me. 1911) Wolford v. Upper Salford Twp. Sch. Dist., 46 Pa. Super. 1, 4 (Super. Ct. 1910) Clark v. Hubbard, 44 Pa. Super. 37, 42 (Super. Ct. 1910) (public policy rule) Edwards v. Meyers, 76 A. 510, 511 (Pa. 1910) Marshall v. Reed, 32 Pa. Super. 60, 61 (Super. Ct. 1906) (declaration and general principle) Maxwell v. West, No. 603, 1900 WL 4333, at *1 (Pa. Ct. Com. Pl. Feb. 3, 1900) 90 NEW YORK CITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 9:31 Cincinnati, H. & D. R.R. Co. v. Morris, 10 Ohio C.C. 502, 520 (Cir. Ct. 1895) Rice v. Davis, 20 A. 513, 514 (Pa. 1890) (infallible declaration and public policy rule) Bensley v. Moon, 7 Ill. App. 415, 421 (App. Ct. 1880) Bassett v. Monte Christo Gold & Silver Min. Co., 15 Nev. 293, 299 (1880) (general principle) Eur. & N. Am. Ry. Co. v. Poor, 59 Me. 277, 277 (1871) Morrison v. Ogdensburgh & Lake Champlain R.R. Co., 52 Barb. 173, 173 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1868) PROVERB OR MAXIM State Court Cases In re Estate of Shano, 869 P.2d 1203, 1210 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993) Plaquemines Parish Com’n Council v. Delta Dev. Co., 502 So.2d 1034, 1040 (La. 1987) Alexander v. Super. Ct., 685 P.2d 1309, 1315 (Ariz. 1984) Int’l Ass’n of Fire Fighters, Local 1052 v. Pub. Employment Relations, 630 P.2d 470, 474 (Wash. Ct. App. 1981) In re Adkins’ Estate, 319 P.2d 512, 515 (Mont. 1957) (old proverb) Shell Oil Co. v. Bd. of County Com’rs, 231 P.2d 220, 224 (Kan. 1951) (maxim) Engle v. Dist. Ct., 85 P.2d 627, 629 (Utah 1938) In re Union Real Estate Inv. Co. First Mortgage 6% Gold Bonds Due July 1, 1941, 1 A.2d 662, 666 (Pa. 1938) Howard v. Potts, 233 N.W. 909, 912 (S.D. 1930) (moral maxim) Horan v. Varian, 265 P. 263, 267 (Cal. Dist. Ct. App. 1928) Cameron v. White, 262 P. 664, 668 (Okla. 1927) Salata v. Dylewski, 207 N.W. 895, 896 (Mich. 1926) 2005] QUOTING THE BIBLE 91 Farnsworth v. Hatch, 151 P. 537, 541 (Utah 1915) In re Ramsey, 123 N.W. 726, 728 (S.D. 1909) (moral maxim) Casey v. Donovan, 65 Mo. App. 521, 529 (Ct. App. 1896) Burke v. Bours, 32 P. 980, 981 (Cal. 1893) Piatt v. Longworth’s Devisees, 27 Ohio St. 159, 195 (1875) (legal maxim)https://academicworks.cuny.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1119&context=clr City University of New York Law Review Volume 9 | Issue 1 ...
Translation It takes the average person about 90 days to ingest the full 60 gram treatment. I suggest that people start with three doses pe...