Revelation Themes and Eschatological Applications

Why the South Must Rise Again

Transcript: AI Transcript

Professor: John Weaver

Subject: New Testament Studies

Genre: Sermon

Dictation Name:

Date: 2006-01-15

Synopsis: John Weaver argues that the American South must reclaim its historic role as a bastion of biblical theology, a citadel of constitutional republicanism, and a bulwark of economic freedom. He contends that the War of Northern Aggression (1861–1865) transformed the United States from a confederated constitutional republic into a centralized, bureaucratic empire dominated by Unitarian rationalism and statist ideology. The South's defeat, he says, led to the loss of genuine liberty, the death of the Constitution, and the rise of a messianic federal government. Using Psalm 94:16 as a call to action, Weaver urges Southerners to rise up against modern evildoers by returning to the Bible, Jesus Christ, and the principles of limited government.

[John Weaver] Psalm 94 and verse 16, the message is entitled, Why the South Must Rise Again. In Psalm 94 and verse 16, God asks these questions. Who will rise up for me against the evildoers? Or who will stand up for me against the workers of iniquity? I want you to look very closely at that verse, because here are two very pertinent questions That really and truly must be answered. Notice if you would, number one, who will rise up for me against the evildoers? And number two, who will stand up for me against the workers of iniquity? Let me just simply say at one time, the South as a whole stood for Christ and his word, as the South opposed northern rationalism, humanism, and centralism. And I want to submit to you today that the South must rise again and take the same stand as she did in days gone by. Everyone has heard the adage and seen the old bumper sticker, save your Confederate money, the South shall rise again.

[John Weaver] The adage indicates that the Southern people have never ever really given up hope as far as restoring their liberties and freedom that they possessed under the original Constitutional Republic. There's a popular bumper sticker that many of you have also seen down here in the South. It pictures an old Confederate soldier holding a battle flag in one hand and A musket in the other hand, and the bumper sticker says, Dern Tootin', I'm a rebel and I ain't forgettin'. Well, the problem in the South today is that too many have forgotten, or they have never ever known to begin with what real, genuine freedom is and what it is about.

[John Weaver] Let me submit a statement to you for your consideration, and I want you to think about this for a moment. The generation that is alive today have never, ever experienced real, genuine freedom. Stop and think about that. The generation that is alive today has never, ever experienced real, genuine freedom. Those of us who are in our 60s and 70s probably tasted the last little bit of freedom that existed in this country.

[John Weaver] Now if you ask the average American, are they free? And the answer is going to come back yes. But the truth of the matter is most people believe they are free simply because they have been told that they are free. They've never ever really experienced real, genuine freedom. I submit to you once again that those of you who are alive today in the 60s and 70s enjoyed the last little bit of real freedom.

[John Weaver] probably about 50-something years ago. Now, many of us, once again, have never ever understood what has happened in this country. Do you realize the war of northern aggression changed our confederated union of states into a nation which now has become an empire? I want you to listen to what northern historian James McPherson said concerning the war of northern aggression. Here's what he said. The war changed the United States as thoroughly as the French Revolution changed France.

[John Weaver] Now that's a very provocative statement. Stop and think about that. The war changed the United States as thoroughly as the French Revolution changed France. Karl Marx, who was alive during that war, and he worked for the New York Tribune. He wrote to his friend Engels, and he said this, the war would be the beginning of a world-transforming revolutionary movement. Well, it certainly was the beginning of a world-transforming revolutionary movement in the United States, because that war changed our Constitutional Republic into a centralized democratic bureaucracy. Horton in his history book said this, the war changed the entire character and system of our government. overthrew the rights of the states and forced amendments against the action of the people which made those amendments unconstitutional. Now stop and think. The war changed the entire character and system of our government. Here are historians admitting that there was a drastic change in the nature and the system of our government. We lost our Constitutional Republic under the reign of Lincoln. Many of you know that Lincoln confessed to and acknowledged violating the Constitution in six specific areas.

[John Weaver] He tried to cover his trail when he basically tried to blackmail Congress into validating his unconstitutional acts after the fact, which Congress did not do so. It was Abraham Lincoln who basically killed our Constitution. Now, Mildred Lewis Rutherford, in her book, The Truths of History, lists 17 specific violations that Lincoln made against the Constitution of the United States. And let me just point out the fact that all the presidents that followed Lincoln carried on his work in destroying the Constitution and following his footsteps. Do you realize it was Abraham Lincoln who violated the Constitution, to use his words, in order to save the Union? How in the world can you save a confederated Union if you destroy the Union itself?

[John Weaver] And the answer is very obvious, you cannot. Do you realize it was Abraham Lincoln who began the use of executive orders? It was Abraham Lincoln who evaded Congress, invaded the South, and ignored the Supreme Court rulings, all without constitutional authority. So I'm just simply pointing out today When our modern day politicians talk about the Constitution, and they tout that document as if it is important, and it is even displayed and shown on certain anniversary dates, yet practically everything our politicians do is absolutely contrary to and in contradiction to the Constitution of the United States. In other words, I'm just simply pointing out the fact, for all practical purposes, the Constitution is a dead letter.

[John Weaver] Now, let me illustrate what I mean by that. Have you ever heard of a politician, I'm talking about a recent politician, who gets a bill that, you know, they want to be made into law. Have you ever heard of a politician taking that bill and examining it in light of the Constitution to make sure that it's constitutionally correct before he ever votes for it? Have you ever heard of a politician refusing to vote for a bill because that bill is unconstitutional?

[John Weaver] And the answer is absolutely no. You must remember that most of our politicians are lawyers. Did you know that an individual can go to law school, graduate from law school with honors, pass the bar exam, become a practicing attorney, and never ever have one course in constitutional law? That's a fact. That's a fact.

[John Weaver] Now, the point I'm just simply trying to make is this. Why is it that in our land today, those who profess to be our rulers have turned from the Constitution? Here's why. Because we are no longer a constitutional republic and law no longer matters to them. We are now a nation that happens to be ruled by an elite who make up their rules as they go. They may use the guise of democracy, they may use the guise of majority rule, yet it is an elite that governs this country, and they do so contrary to the Constitution, and they give to the people the candidates that they choose.

[John Weaver] Let me tell you something, folks. If you have a choice between Socialist A and Socialist B, you're getting Socialism no matter what party you vote for. It's just that simple.

[John Weaver] Now, the proposition that I'm going to submit to you today is this, that the South must rise again. Well, why must it rise again? Well, let me give you, I hope to cover all three reasons today, but if not, I'll go as far as I can. Here's the first reason why the South must rise again. was the bastion of biblical theology. The South at one time was the bastion of biblical theology. Do you realize the South did not get the nickname the Bible Belt for nothing? Why in the world were we called the Bible Belt? Because the leading theologians in America were in the South.

[John Weaver] Think of Robert Louis Dabney, James Henley Thornwell. Benjamin Palmer Morgan, J.P. Boyce, and Broadus. These men were noted theologians and they led the people in truth against Northern Unitarianism and Rationalism. By the way, I hope you understand that the North especially back in the 1800s, and it still continues today, has tried to characterize the people of the South as being backward and ignorant and uneducated. I hope you understand that there were many literary giants in the South in those days. Doctors, there were lawyers, There were men in the Confederate army that could read, write, and speak Hebrew, Greek, Latin. Well, how then can the North call us a backwards and an ignorant people? Here's why. Because the South still held tenaciously to the Word of God. And we believe that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, and the Bible was the inerrant and inspired Word of God. Now, you've got to understand that in the North, it was the Unitarians who held sway. And the Unitarians denied the deity of Christ, they denied the inspiration of the Bible, they denied the doctrine of the Holy Spirit, and they denied practically every other major doctrine in the Bible.

[John Weaver] What they followed was their own rationalistic thinking. They said that their thoughts transcended the Bible. They did not need the Bible. And consequently, because we did not reject the Bible in the South, but we believe the Bible, we then were labeled as a backward and uneducated people. And consequently, what the North then wanted to do was to remake the South into the kind of people and culture and society that they thought it should be.

[John Weaver] I want you to understand that most southern theologians viewed the war of 1861-1865 as a religious war. They saw the crux of the matter. Georgia politician, Presbyterian and Confederate General Thomas Cobb said concerning secession that the revolution has been accomplished mainly by the churches. Now how could he say that it was mainly the churches that got the South to secede? because the churches understood there was a theological war that was going on between the North and between the South. It was Southern Presbyterian and theologian James Henley Thornwell who said this. Listen carefully. Thornwell died, I believe it was in 1862. But he said this, the parties to this conflict, he's talking about the war now, the parties to this conflict are not merely abolitionists, that's in the North, and slaveholders, that's in the South. He says they are atheists, socialists, communists, Red Republicans, Jacobins on the one side, that's the North, and friends of order and regulated freedom on the other, that's the South. So here is a leading theologian who understood this was indeed a theological war.

[John Weaver] And he said, on the one hand, you've got the socialists and the red republicans and the communists. And on the other hand, you have the friends of regulated order and freedom. Southern Methodist leaders proclaim that the maintenance of pure Christianity on the continent, on this continent, depended upon confederate victory. What were they saying? If the South lost, then you're not going to have pure Christianity. You're going to have paganism.

[John Weaver] Basil Manley, who was another Baptist pastor and chaplain to the Provisional Confederate Congress, viewed secession not just as rebellion, but as a Christian reform movement. He says what we're doing is withdrawing from the heathen and reforming the government the way it ought to be reformed. Do you realize there was an overarching theme in the religious military press in the South during the times of 1861 and 1865? And that overarching theme was that the war was a religious war. It was a war against infidels. And I'm going to quote here, a war to free God's chosen nation in order to implement God's plan in the universe. That was the religious military press during that war. Do you realize there were many Yankees who viewed Jeff Davis as the arch villain and as an enemy of God? simply because he was the President of the Confederate States.

[John Weaver] But let me point out the fact, there were plenty of Southern preachers who did not necessarily view the North in a very beautiful light either, because many of them, especially Pastor Jesse Cox from Tennessee, considered the Yankee Army the beast described in the Book of Revelation. And in 1861, now listen, in 1861, Dr. George Todd, Arnott's secessionist and brother-in-law to Honest Abe, you remember Abraham Lincoln's wife was Mary Todd Lincoln? So Dr. George Todd was Mary Todd's brother. So Dr. George Todd, ardent secessionist and brother-in-law to Honest Abe, put it more bluntly.

[John Weaver] He said in a lecture, and he declared that the war was between the children of the devil and the children of the Lord, and he left little doubt as to who the children of the devil really were. It was the North, according to Dr. George Todd.

[John Weaver] Now, I'm just simply pointing out the fact that it was the churches and it was the preachers in the South who were really understanding this was a theological war. So much so did they stir up the people to resist tyranny and wickedness that one Yankee critic said that he believed that the most unmitigated set of villains they have in the South are the Methodist, Baptist, Presbyterian, and Episcopalian preachers all talking secession, drinking mean liquor, and advocating the cause of Jeff Davis and the devil. I mean, come on. They knew the preachers were stirring people up. because the preachers understood it was a theological war. William Nelson Pendleton, who was the Episcopalian pastor and, by the way, chief of Robert E.

[John Weaver] Lee's artillery in the Army of Northern Virginia, early in the war named his four howitzers, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, And when the battle would rage, he would shout to his men, aim low, and may God have mercy on their misguided souls. But here was a pastor who was indeed in charge of Lee's artillery. Do you realize that every one of the officers of one Texas regiment was made up of Methodist preachers? So many Southern Methodist clergy enlisted in the Southern Army that denominational leaders were concerned about the vacant pulpits, because all the pastors were joining in the fight.

[John Weaver] Now let me ask this question, because I want to show you the theological implications of this war. You say, Brother Weaver, how could this war have a theological basis. I've just told you that the North was mainly Unitarian. They were rationalists. That's not saying there were no Christians in the North. Surely there were Christians in the North. There were a lot of Northern people who sympathized with the Southern people who helped the South.

[John Weaver] They were known as Copperheads. But I'm just trying to show you the great diversity between the North and the South. Here is how the war could be reviewed as a religious war and the battle for the Bible. Take, for example, the Unitarian Julia Ward Howe as an example. Now, Julia Ward Howe is best known for her unscriptural, unbiblical, and ungodly song, the Battle Hymn of the Republic. In one of these days, in the not-too-distant future, I'm going to bring you the information concerning that song and take it apart for you just to show you it is indeed unbiblical and ungodly, and it is a Yankee marching song that was to be sung as the South was to be destroyed. Who in the world was Julia Ward Howe?

[John Weaver] Like all Unitarians, she believed that man, by nature, was characteristically good and was fully able to redeem himself by his own merits without a savior. She rejected biblical truths. like hell and the devil, and she said this, I'm quoting her, I threw away once and forever the thought of a terrible hell which appears to me impossible. So she didn't believe in hell, she didn't believe in the devil, moreover she did not believe that Jesus Christ was the Son of God. She also refused The plain teaching of the Bible, when Jesus Christ said in John 14 in verse 6, I am the way, the truth, and the life, and no man cometh in the Father but by me, here are her own words saying, and I'm quoting, having rejected the exclusive doctrine that made Christianity

[John Weaver] and special forms of it the only way of spiritual redemption, I now accept the belief that not only Christians, but all human beings, no matter what their religion, are capable of redemption. Christianity was but one of God's plans for bringing all humanity to a state of ultimate perfection." So what is she saying? It doesn't matter if you're a Hindu, a Buddhist, a Muslim, we're all going to be saved.

[John Weaver] That's why she was a Unitarian. She believed in universal redemption and that Christianity was not the only way to God the Father through Jesus Christ. Why, everybody's going to be saved. Moreover, to Julia Ward, how the real work of Christ, meaning salvation, was incomplete. It was up to men, through civil government, to bring about a free utopian society. And only government could do this. Here is what she said, I'm giving you her words again. Not until the Civil War did I officially join the Unitarian Church and accept the fact that Christ was merely a great teacher with no higher claim to preeminence in wisdom, goodness and power than any other man."

[John Weaver] You know what she just said? Christ is just man. No better than anyone else. I mean, he's just a man. By the way, these are the same fallacies and the same heresies that are espoused today by the religious and academic liberal establishment. Do you understand that the political correctness of today was the rationalism and Unitarianism of the 1860s? You see, Junior Ward Howell, like all Unitarians, basically believed in salvation by government.

[John Weaver] That is why The North, according to their song, was marching to make men free. Salvation through government. It is government that must make man free. It is government that must supply man's needs. It is government that becomes his savior. So in the thinking of the North then, as a whole, The thought was we do not need Christ. We do not need the Bible. We have ourselves and we have civil government and therefore we're able to redeem ourselves and we're able to bring in a perfect utopian society. Let's kick God out. Let's kick Christ out. Let's kick the Bible out. Oh.

[John Weaver] What have we done today? You see what I'm saying? What we have in our government and in our political correct system today is exactly what the Unitarians and the Rationalists advocated in the 1860s. What we must do in the South is this. We must rise up with our ancestors and proclaim that Jesus Christ and Jesus Christ alone is salvation and the word of God alone is our objective standard by which we are to order and regulate our lives.

[John Weaver] It amazes me that so many people can talk about Robert E. Lee, and Stonewall Jackson, and Jeb Stuart, and Richard Stoddard Ewell, and even Forrest, and say, man, we would love to have their character, and their courage, and their faith. How in the world can we ever get their character, and their courage, and their culture If we reject the very foundation upon which they stood, and that foundation is the Word of God, and that Jesus Christ alone is salvation. I want you to listen to what Robert E. Lee said when he issued orders requiring a day of fasting in August of 1863. Everyone knows that Robert E. Lee was an undaunted Christian. Here's what he said. Soldiers, we have sinned against Almighty God.

[John Weaver] We have forgotten his signal mercies and have cultivated a revengeful, haughty, and boastful spirit. We have not remembered that the defenders of a just cause should be pure in his eyes and that our times are in his hands. And we have relied too much upon our own arms for the achievement of our independence. God is our only refuge and strength. Let us humble ourselves before him. Let us confess our many sins and beseech him to give us a higher courage, a pure patriotism and more determined will.

[John Weaver] That he will convert the hearts of our enemies. That he will hasten the time when war with its sorrows and suffering shall cease. And then he will give us a name and place among the nations of the earth." Would it not be wonderful today if we had any leader, military or governmental, I don't care, that would call upon us to repent and turn back to God. You know why we do not have politicians and military leaders today that call on us to repent as a nation and turn back to God and turn back to the Bible?

[John Weaver] Let me tell you why. Because of the messianic nature of government. Government thinks it's God. And government does not want you turning to the One True and Living God. It wants you turning to itself as God. That's why Whenever you have a Katrina, or tsunami, or flood, or drought, people don't cry out to God for help. They cry out to the federal government. The messianic nature of government.

[John Weaver] If the South will not rise up and stand for the inerrant, inspired, and infallible word of God, may I ask you this question, what section of the country will? If the South will not rise up and proclaim that Jesus and Jesus Christ alone is the only way of salvation, what section of the country will? If the South will not rise up and say that Jesus Christ is Lord, He's King of Kings and Lord of Lords, if the South will not stand up for the sovereignty of Jesus Christ, what section of the country will?

[John Weaver] Do you know the battle cry of our forefathers? No king, but King Jesus. It is time to repent, folks. It is time to return, but it is time to turn from the politically correct sham that we have today and come back to Scripture and come back to Jesus Christ. Why must the South rise again? Because the South originally was the bastion of the biblical faith. And we must come back to that. Secondly today, I want you to understand the South was the citadel for the Constitutional Republic.

[John Weaver] Let me make a statement. The North as a whole, and I know there were exceptions, but I'm talking about as a whole. The North as a whole hated the Union and the Constitution. He said, Brother Weaver, how can you say that? Well, I have the evidence to back it up. Do you remember several years ago? I preached a message two hours long. Entitled the Confederate battle flag, a symbol of hate with a question mark. And in those two hours. I showed you quote after quote from Northern leaders and from Southern leaders, but how the Northern leaders hated and despised the Constitution and the Union, and how the Southern leaders were pleading for the Constitution and the Union. I'm going to give you just a few of those quotes today, not many, but I just want you to know that it is a fact that the North as a whole hated the Constitution and they hated the Union.

[John Weaver] It was artist abolitionist Wendell Phillips who said this, listen carefully, the Republican Party is in no sense a national party. It is a party pledged to work for the downfall of democracy, the downfall of the Union, and the destruction of the United States Constitution. The religious creed of the party was hate of democracy, hate of the Union, hate of the Constitution, and hate of the Southern people." That was by a Northern abolitionist. He's talking about the party of Lincoln. He's talking about the party of George Bush. I'm just simply saying, he is saying that it was not a national party, it was a sectional party, and it was set up to destroy the Union. the Constitution, and the South. Senator Stephen Douglas, in a letter to Mr. Hayes, December 27, 1860, said this, Many Republicans desire a dissolution of the Union and urge war as a means of accomplishing the dissolution. He wrote again on February 2, 1861, and said this, The leaders of the Republican Party are striving to break up the Union under pretense of unbounded devotion to it.

[John Weaver] Hostility to slavery on the part of the disunionists is stronger than fidelity to the Constitution." In other words, they didn't care what happened to the Constitution. Honest Abe, and by the way, I hope you know that Honest Abe was called Honest Abe for the same reason you call a six-foot-four, 250-pound man tiny. Just the opposite. He was not honest. He was dishonest. Honest Abe said in his speech before Congress in 1861, I want you to listen to this.

[John Weaver] It ought to boggle your mind. But he said in his speech before Congress, the states have their status in the Union, and they have no other legal status. If they break from this, they can only do so against the law and by revolution. Now listen to what he said, the states have their status in the Union, and they have no other legal status. In one sentence, Abraham Lincoln denied states' rights, the sovereignty of the states, and basically proclaimed himself as dictator over the Union, over a centralized, federalized bureaucracy. Here's what Lincoln was saying, that the states had no right to exist. outside of the Union. Here's what he's saying. The federal government was not made for the states. The states were made for the federal government. According to Mr. Lincoln, the United States Constitution was not written to limit and to bind the federal government. It was written to limit and to bind the states. Do you realize this is exactly the same stance that the politically correct federal government has today? It's the federal government who claims to be sovereign over the states.

[John Weaver] It's the federal government who claims to be the overseer of the states. It's the federal government who claims to have all authority and all power and it mandates to the states. In case you have never studied history, let me say it very clearly and very pointedly. The federal government did not create the states. The states appointed a federal government and gave it limited power and limited authority.

[John Weaver] But what has happened now, it has reversed. The states were the possessor of all the powers not given to the federal government, the states and the people, according to the Tenth Amendment. I want you to understand how Honest Aid changed his views when he got to the White House. In a speech before Congress in 1847, Abraham Lincoln said this, Any people, whatever, have a right to abolish the existing government and form a new one that suits them better.

[John Weaver] What did he just say? He said any people have a right to abolish the existing government and get another one that will suit them better. In other words, he was advocating the right of cessation. He was advocating the right of withdrawing from a tyrannical form of government. He goes on and he says this. Any people that can may revolutionize and make their own of so much of the territory as they inhabit. Once he says that people can do what they want to do, they have that power.

[John Weaver] So, in 1847, Lincoln agreed with and consented to state sovereignties and state rights. But in 1860, he changed his mind. was the forerunner of our modern-day politicians. He said one thing and practiced another. It was John C. Calhoun, that ironclad southerner from South Carolina, who pointed out the source of the problem. Listen to what John C. Calhoun said. Listen carefully. The error is in the assumption that the general government is a party to the constitutional compact. The states form the compact acting as sovereign and independent communities. Listen to what he said now. The error is in the assumption that the general government is a party in the constitutional compact. The general government or the federal government was not a party to the constitution. The states were the parties in the Constitution. And when you try to make the federal government a part of the Constitution, he said that is the error. The federal government was created by the states and was to operate solely upon the authority and the limited powers that the states gave to it.

[John Weaver] And that which they did not give to it, they reserved to themselves and the people respectively. Let me say it this way. In short, the states were to be the master and the federal government was to be the servant. But what has happened is it has been turned upside down and now the federal government has become the master and the states are the servants. That is why when President Jefferson Davis spoke before the provisional Confederate Congress, he said this, talking about secession and why the South left, listen carefully, President Davis had actuated solely by the desire to preserve our own rights and promote our own welfare. The separation of the Confederate States has been marked by no aggression upon others and followed by no domestic convulsion. We have changed the constituent parts, but not the system of our government. The Constitution formed by our fathers is that of these Confederate states.

[John Weaver] In their exposition of it, in the judicial construction it has received, we have a light which reveals its true meaning. Thus instructed as to the just interpretation of the instrument, and ever remembering that all offices are but trusts held for the people, and that the delegated powers are to be strictly construed. Now, what did Jefferson Davis just say? When we left, we took the United States Constitution basically for our Constitution. Do you realize the reason the South left the Union was to preserve our constitutional rights and liberties and not to destroy the Union? We did not leave the Union to destroy it, but to preserve our rights. What has happened? Well, here's what has happened.

[John Weaver] We've lost our Constitutional Republic, and we are now controlled, governed, manipulated, and enslaved by a federalized, centralized bureaucracy. that will stomp at nothing to control every aspect of life in this country.

[John Weaver] Now, if you think I'm exaggerating, I'm going to give you an illustration. I want you to listen to this Associated Press article of November the 29th of this past year, 2005. Here's the bold headlines. Miami police take new tack against terror. By Kurt Anderson, Associated Press writer, Miami. Now listen, Miami police announced Monday that they will stage random shows of force at hotels, banks, and other public places to keep terrorists guessing and remind people to be vigilant. Deputy Police Chief Frank Fernandez said officers might, for example, surround a bank building, check the IDs of everyone going in and coming out, and hand out leaflets about terror threats.

[John Weaver] This is an in-your-face type of strategy. It's letting the terrorists know that we're out there, Fernandez said. The operations will keep terrorists off guard, Fernandez said. He said Al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups plot attacks by putting places under surveillance and watching for flaws and patterns in security. Police Chief John Timoney said there was no specific credible threat of any imminent terror attack in Miami, but he said the city had repeatedly been mentioned in intelligence reports as a potential target.

[John Weaver] May I ask you just a couple of leading questions? Whatever happened to the Fourth Amendment? That the people have a right to be secure in their persons and their papers? Whatever happened to the Fifth Amendment? Whatever happened to the fact that you cannot stop and question somebody without probable cause? What if you do not carry ID? I have a cartoon on my desk at home. Or cartoon shows the police officer looking at a man, he says. What is your name?

[John Weaver] Tell me who you are. And the guy just stands there. The next picture shows the policeman saying, if you don't give me your name, I'm going to have to arrest you for failing to provide identification. Man just stands there. The next picture shows The police putting handcuffs on him saying, you have a right to remain silent.

[John Weaver] I'm just simply saying, what has happened in this country? People have gone stark raving crazy. You know why? We have forgotten what it was like before our captivity. We have forgotten the principles for which the South stood. We have forgotten the truths. We have so turned from freedom that we are now expected, according to our political leaders, to give up all of our rights and all of our liberties just so we can be protected.

[John Weaver] Let me spell it out for you. I'd rather have my rights and liberties. I'll protect myself. Thank you. I submit to you that we should not speculate as to whether or not the South shall rise again. But we must understand that the South must absolutely rise again. If the South will not rise up and restore our liberty and freedom under the Constitutional Republic as it was handed down from our forefathers, what section of the country will?

[John Weaver] The South. was the bastion for biblical faith. It was the citadel for our Constitutional Republic. And here thirdly today, the South was the bulwark for economic freedom. While it is true that the South capitulated and fell into the paper money trap, it is equally true The South had very little specie, that is, silver and gold. Most of the specie was in northern banks. So in one sense of the word, the South was almost forced to print paper money due to a lack of specie in the South. However, I want you to understand that one of the leading causes of the war was indeed an economic cause, and specifically the high tariffs or the high taxes that the North wished to put upon the South. The tariffs of 1828, 1832, and 1833 were violations of the Constitution. You see, it is true that Congress had power to levy taxes, but according to the Constitution, it must be uniform throughout the land. Now listen carefully. The tariffs were sectional back then because they only penalized the South.

[John Weaver] The South had only one-third of the votes, but paid two-thirds of the custom duties. The cotton states particularly suffered from these tariffs. Do you realize that during that time southern cotton sold abroad totaled 57% of all American exports before the war? 57% of all exports was southern cotton.

[John Weaver] Now the South was willing to have a 10% tariff, but the North wanted 40 to 60%. Listen, Thomas Hart Benton, you may not know that name, but I'm going to tell you who he was in just a moment. He was the father-in-law to John C. Fremont. who was a Yankee general. He was also brother-in-law to James McDowell, who was also a Yankee general. But Thomas Hart Benton was a senator and representative from Missouri. He served as aide-de-camp to General Andrew Jackson was a colonel of a regiment of Tennessee Volunteers, 1812 to 1813, Lieutenant Colonel of the 39th United States Infantry, 1813 to 1815, and he moved to St. Louis, Missouri where he became editor of the Missouri Inquirer. So here's a man who is associated with the North, has Northern relatives high up in the powers that be. And here's what he said. Listen carefully. Under federal legislation, the exports of the South have been the basis of federal revenues. Let me just stop there. What he's saying is most of the money that went to the federal government came from the South.

[John Weaver] Okay? Under federal legislation, the exports of the South have been the basis of the federal revenues. Everything goes out and nothing is returned to them in the shape of government expenditures. The expenditures flow north. This is the reason why wealth disappears from the south and rises up in the north. No territories yet included Georgia, Virginia, and the two Carolinas except to increase the burdens imposed upon them. The political economists of the North, Cary, Eliot, Kettle, and others, who have studied the source of national wealth in America, said, Mr. Benton is right in his explanation given of the sudden disappearance of the wealth from the South. So here's a man who says one of the problems is the North is raping the South economically.

[John Weaver] A war almost broke out in 1832 because South Carolina called a convention to nullify those tariffs of 1828 and 1832 known as the Tariffs of Abomination. Thankfully, a compromise was reached which averted secession and possibly war as well. But the North favored protective tariffs for their manufacturing industry. The South, which exported agricultural products to and imported manufactured goods from Europe, of course favored free trade, are very low tariffs, which meant the higher the tariff, the more money went to the North, and the more hurt would be placed upon the South.

[John Weaver] So, a Northern-dominated Congress enacted laws similar to Britain's Navigation Acts to protect Northern shipping industries. Now, listen carefully. I'm going to give you a quote. You'll find this in Adams' book, When in the Course of Human Events, but listen to what he says. After the 1828 Tariff Law, the South almost seceded. In 1840, the South paid 84% of the tariffs, rising to 87% in 1860. What's that mean? That means nearly 90% of the money the federal government had came from the South. This is what the South did now. They paid 83% of the $13 million, and by the way, you've got to remember a million back then was a million in gold, which would have been, I don't know how many million today, but the South paid 83% of the 13 million federal fishing bounties paid to New England fishermen, and also paid $35 million to Northern shipping interests, which had a monopoly on shipping in Southern ports. The South, in effect, was paying tribute to the North. The Republican platform of 1860 called for higher tariffs.

[John Weaver] That was implemented by the new Congress in the Morrell Tariff of 1861, signed by President Buchanan before Lincoln took the oath of office. It imposed the highest tariffs in U.S. history, with over a 50% duty on iron products and 25% on clothing, rates averaged 47%. By the way, these were passed in March, and you know what happened in April of 1861. Shortly after Lincoln's election, Congress passed these highly protectionist Morrell tariffs, and of course they did so without the southern senators and southern representatives because the South basically had already seceded, and they raised the tariffs in the South to 47 percent. Well, I hope you know that the Confederate Constitution is nearly identical to the United States Constitution, except it outlaws protectionist tariffs, it outlaws business handouts, and mandated a two-thirds majority vote for all spending measures. It was also the first Constitution, by the way, to outlaw slavery. You see, when the South seceded, what does that mean?

[John Weaver] It meant the North was not going to get that money. So Lincoln then was determined to make sure those tariffs flowed into the Federal Treasury. That is why the battle was over Fort Supter. Whoever controlled Fort Supter control the shipping industry at Charleston, South Carolina. So if Lincoln could get his hands on Fort Sumter, then he would still be in charge and still make the South pay.

[John Weaver] Now I want to try to bring this message to a close, but I want you to listen carefully. I'm going to give you a quote from James Madison. May I remind you that James Madison is known as the father of the Constitution. And the reason he's called the father of the Constitution is because he was the secretary of the Constitutional Convention. He took down all the notes.

[John Weaver] You talk about a man who could see in the future. Listen to what he said. If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands. Why do you think we've got hate laws? Why do you think we've got thought crimes today. They may take the care of religion in their own hands.

[John Weaver] Now listen, they may appoint teachers in every state, county, and parish, and pay them out the public treasury. That's public schools. They may take into their own hands the education of the children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union, They may assume the provisions of the poor, and that's why you've got welfare and food stamps and WIC and everything else. They may assume the provision of the poor. They may undertake the regulation of all roads and other post roads, in short, everything from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police would be thrown under the power of Congress. were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations and transmute the very nature of limited government established by the people of America."

[John Weaver] Did the man know what he was talking about? What has Congress done? Everything that James Madison warned against. Today we're in the same situations that our forefathers were in. We have a government that is out of control. It has thrown off the shackles of the Constitution. It has broken the bounds of common sense and it has arrogated to itself unlimited powers. The government that we live under today demands that we pay taxes and whatever amount they demand.

[John Weaver] To support programs which they deem best for us. What we the people want or desire does not matter. The Constitution does not matter. As President George W. Bush said recently, after taking God's name in vain, the Constitution is just a piece of paper. Does it matter to them? Does it matter? Do you realize many of the problems that Georgians experienced in the 1860s are the same problems we experience today. For instance, Georgians back then were complaining about oppressive federal government that seeks to intervene and dominate in every area of life, high taxes, and a growing government unwilling to listen to law-abiding citizens." Does that sound familiar? Those were the complaints of Georgians in the 1860s. I want to end with a quote from Alexander Hamilton Stevens. Alexander Hamilton Stevens was the Vice President of the Confederacy, and listen to what he said.

[John Weaver] The only hope in my view for the maintenance of constitutional liberty on this continent is that another like Christ should hereafter be raised and go forth from hilltop to valley, from coast to the lakes, from the Atlantic to the Pacific. The cause of the South is the cause of us all." I'm going to explain that in just a moment, but listen to what he said. I'm going to read it again. The only hope, in my view, for the maintenance of constitutional liberty on this continent is that another like cry should hereafter be raised and go forth from hilltop to valley, from the coast to the lakes, from the Atlantic to the Pacific. The cause of the South is the cause of us all. What was he saying? He was saying the only hope for a constitutional liberty on this continent is that people would awaken and realize what had happened because of the war of northern aggression. Much like What happened in the Boston Port Bill?

[John Weaver] You remember when the colonists were fighting against George III? What did George III do? He sent his navy to blockade the Port of Boston. He passed a bill that nothing could go in or come out until tribute was given. And you know what the other colonists said? The other colonists said, the cause of Boston is the cause of us all. If Boston goes under, we go under. And then all the other colonists got together to make sure Georgia Third never starved the Bostonians out. They took everything those people of Boston would need to sustain them and nurture them during that siege.

[John Weaver] Now, what is Alexander Hamilton Stephen saying? He's saying this, if constitutional liberty is to be maintained on this continent, then there has to be a cry going out all across this nation, the cause of the South is the cause of us all. In other words, we've got to realize what we lost in the war of Northern Aggression. And if we don't realize that, folks, there will never be an awakening in this country. As Stephen Wilkins said very aptly, the war of 1861 to 1865 did not end slavery.

[John Weaver] It merely enlarged the plantation. We are now all slaves. There is no alternative. The South must rise again. and seek to restore our liberties, our rights, our constitution, and our common sense. We must once again become the bastion of the biblical faith. We must once again become the citadel for our constitutional republic and the bulwark for economic freedom. What did our Lord ask? Who will rise up for me against evil doers?

[John Weaver] will stand up for me against the workers of iniquity. We must rise. And we must stand. For he is the one true and the living God. And beside him, there's no other. Let's pray. Father, we do ask and we do pray in the name of Jesus Christ that you would awaken us. Cause us, Lord, to understand from where we have fallen, what we have lost, and that we must be awakened and aroused to reclaim our biblical faith, our constitutional republic, and our economic freedom as we submit all to Thee and to Thy Word. May we stand, Father, for Thy truth. In the name of Jesus Christ we ask and pray, Amen.

Why the South Must Rise Again

John Weaver | SermonAudio

Lecture Metadata	Details
Speaker	John Weaver
Source	SermonAudio
Media ID	32706201629
Subject	New Testament Studies
Course	Revelation Themes and Eschatological Applications
Genre	Sermon
Date	2006-01-15
Dictation Name
Book	Book 141: Revelation Themes and Eschatological Applications — Chapter 4
Source Timed Segments	71

Formatted Transcript

Introduction: The Call to Rise Up

Weaver opens with Psalm 94:16, asking who will rise up against evildoers. He asserts that the South once stood for Christ and His Word against northern rationalism, humanism, and centralism, and must do so again.

Psalm 94 and verse 16, the message is entitled, "Why the South Must Rise Again." In Psalm 94 and verse 16, God asks these questions:

Scripture Reading — Psalm 94:16

"Who will rise up for me against the evildoers? Or who will stand up for me against the workers of iniquity?"

I want you to look very closely at that verse, because here are two very pertinent questions that really and truly must be answered. Notice if you would, number one,

Scripture Reading — Psalm 94:16

"Who will rise up for me against the evildoers?"

And number two,

Scripture Reading — Psalm 94:16

"Who will stand up for me against the workers of iniquity?"

Let me just simply say at one time, the South as a whole stood for Christ and His Word, as the South opposed northern rationalism, humanism, and centralism. And I want to submit to you today that the South must rise again and take the same stand as she did in days gone by. Everyone has heard the adage and seen the old bumper sticker, "Save your Confederate money, the South shall rise again."

The Loss of Genuine Freedom

Weaver claims that the current generation has never experienced real freedom, with those in their 60s and 70s having tasted the last remnants of liberty about 50 years ago.

Let me submit a statement to you for your consideration, and I want you to think about this for a moment. The generation that is alive today has never, ever experienced real, genuine freedom. Stop and think about that. The generation that is alive today has never, ever experienced real, genuine freedom. Those of us who are in our 60s and 70s probably tasted the last little bit of freedom that existed in this country.

Now if you ask the average American, "Are they free?" the answer is going to come back "yes." But the truth of the matter is most people believe they are free simply because they have been told that they are free. They've never ever really experienced real, genuine freedom. I submit to you once again that those of you who are alive today in the 60s and 70s enjoyed the last little bit of real freedom. Probably about 50-something years ago. Now, many of us, once again, have never ever understood what has happened in this country. Do you realize the War of Northern Aggression changed our confederated union of states into a nation which now has become an empire? I want you to listen to what northern historian James McPherson said concerning the War of Northern Aggression. Here's what he said: "The war changed the United States as thoroughly as the French Revolution changed France."

The War Changed the Nature of Government

Citing historians, Weaver argues that the War of Northern Aggression transformed the Constitutional Republic into a centralized democratic bureaucracy, with Lincoln violating the Constitution in multiple ways.

Now that's a very provocative statement. Stop and think about that. The war changed the United States as thoroughly as the French Revolution changed France. Karl Marx, who was alive during that war, and he worked for the New York Tribune, wrote to his friend Engels, and he said this: "The war would be the beginning of a world-transforming revolutionary movement." Well, it certainly was the beginning of a world-transforming revolutionary movement in the United States, because that war changed our Constitutional Republic into a centralized democratic bureaucracy. Horton in his history book said this: "The war changed the entire character and system of our government, overthrew the rights of the states and forced amendments against the action of the people which made those amendments unconstitutional." Now stop and think. The war changed the entire character and system of our government. Here are historians admitting that there was a drastic change in the nature and the system of our government. We lost our Constitutional Republic under the reign of Lincoln. Many of you know that Lincoln confessed to and acknowledged violating the Constitution in six specific areas.

He tried to cover his trail when he basically tried to blackmail Congress into validating his unconstitutional acts after the fact, which Congress did not do so. It was Abraham Lincoln who basically killed our Constitution. Now, Mildred Lewis Rutherford, in her book, "The Truths of History," lists 17 specific violations that Lincoln made against the Constitution of the United States. And let me just point out the fact that all the presidents that followed Lincoln carried on his work in destroying the Constitution and following his footsteps. Do you realize it was Abraham Lincoln who violated the Constitution, to use his words, "in order to save the Union"? How in the world can you save a confederated Union if you destroy the Union itself? And the answer is very obvious, you cannot. Do you realize it was Abraham Lincoln who began the use of executive orders? It was Abraham Lincoln who evaded Congress, invaded the South, and ignored the Supreme Court rulings, all without constitutional authority. So I'm just simply pointing out today, when our modern day politicians talk about the Constitution, and they tout that document as if it is important, and it is even displayed and shown on certain anniversary dates, yet practically everything our politicians do is absolutely contrary to and in contradiction to the Constitution of the United States. In other words, I'm just simply pointing out the fact, for all practical purposes, the Constitution is a dead letter.

Now, let me illustrate what I mean by that. Have you ever heard of a politician, I'm talking about a recent politician, who gets a bill that, you know, they want to be made into law. Have you ever heard of a politician taking that bill and examining it in light of the Constitution to make sure that it's constitutionally correct before he ever votes for it? Have you ever heard of a politician refusing to vote for a bill because that bill is unconstitutional?

The Constitution as a Dead Letter

Weaver contends that modern politicians ignore the Constitution, and that the U.S. is now ruled by an elite that makes up rules as it goes, offering only socialist choices to voters.

And the answer is absolutely no. You must remember that most of our politicians are lawyers. Did you know that an individual can go to law school, graduate from law school with honors, pass the bar exam, become a practicing attorney, and never ever have one course in constitutional law? That's a fact. That's a fact.

Now, the point I'm just simply trying to make is this. Why is it that in our land today, those who profess to be our rulers have turned from the Constitution? Here's why. Because we are no longer a constitutional republic and law no longer matters to them. We are now a nation that happens to be ruled by an elite who make up their rules as they go. They may use the guise of democracy, they may use the guise of majority rule, yet it is an elite that governs this country, and they do so contrary to the Constitution, and they give to the people the candidates that they choose. Let me tell you something, folks. If you have a choice between Socialist A and Socialist B, you're getting Socialism no matter what party you vote for. It's just that simple.

Now, the proposition that I'm going to submit to you today is this, that the South must rise again. Well, why must it rise again? Well, let me give you, I hope to cover all three reasons today, but if not, I'll go as far as I can. Here's the first reason why the South must rise again. It was the bastion of biblical theology. The South at one time was the bastion of biblical theology. Do you realize the South did not get the nickname "the Bible Belt" for nothing? Why in the world were we called the Bible Belt? Because the leading theologians in America were in the South.

First Reason: The South as Bastion of Biblical Theology

The South was the Bible Belt, home to leading theologians who opposed Northern Unitarianism. Southern leaders saw the war as a religious conflict against atheists, socialists, and communists.

Think of Robert Louis Dabney, James Henley Thornwell, Benjamin Palmer Morgan, J.P. Boyce, and Broadus. These men were noted theologians and they led the people in truth against Northern Unitarianism and Rationalism. By the way, I hope you understand that the North, especially back in the 1800s, and it still continues today, has tried to characterize the people of the South as being backward and ignorant and uneducated. I hope you understand that there were many literary giants in the South in those days. Doctors, there were lawyers, there were men in the Confederate army that could read, write, and speak Hebrew, Greek, Latin. Well, how then can the North call us a backwards and an ignorant people? Here's why. Because the South still held tenaciously to the Word of God. And we believe that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, and the Bible was the inerrant and inspired Word of God. Now, you've got to understand that in the North, it was the Unitarians who held sway. And the Unitarians denied the deity of Christ, they denied the inspiration of the Bible, they denied the doctrine of the Holy Spirit, and they denied practically every other major doctrine in the Bible.

What they followed was their own rationalistic thinking. They said that their thoughts transcended the Bible. They did not need the Bible. And consequently, because we did not reject the Bible in the South, but we believe the Bible, we then were labeled as a backward and uneducated people. And consequently, what the North then wanted to do was to remake the South into the kind of people and culture and society that they thought it should be. I want you to understand that most southern theologians viewed the war of 1861-1865 as a religious war. They saw the crux of the matter. Georgia politician, Presbyterian and Confederate General Thomas Cobb said concerning secession that "the revolution has been accomplished mainly by the churches." Now how could he say that it was mainly the churches that got the South to secede? Because the churches understood there was a theological war that was going on between the North and between the South. It was Southern Presbyterian and theologian James Henley Thornwell who said this. Listen carefully. Thornwell died, I believe it was in 1862. But he said this: "The parties to this conflict," he's talking about the war now, "the parties to this conflict are not merely abolitionists," that's in the North, "and slaveholders," that's in the South. He says, "they are atheists, socialists, communists, Red Republicans, Jacobins on the one side," that's the North, "and friends of order and regulated freedom on the other," that's the South. So here is a leading theologian who understood this was indeed a theological war.

And he said, on the one hand, you've got the socialists and the red republicans and the communists. And on the other hand, you have the friends of regulated order and freedom. Southern Methodist leaders proclaimed that the maintenance of pure Christianity on the continent, on this continent, depended upon Confederate victory. What were they saying? If the South lost, then you're not going to have pure Christianity. You're going to have paganism. Basil Manley, who was another Baptist pastor and chaplain to the Provisional Confederate Congress, viewed secession not just as rebellion, but as a Christian reform movement. He says what we're doing is withdrawing from the heathen and reforming the government the way it ought to be reformed. Do you realize there was an overarching theme in the religious military press in the South during the times of 1861 and 1865? And that overarching theme was that the war was a religious war. It was a war against infidels. And I'm going to quote here, "a war to free God's chosen nation in order to implement God's plan in the universe." That was the religious military press during that war. Do you realize there were many Yankees who viewed Jeff Davis as the arch villain and as an enemy of God, simply because he was the President of the Confederate States?

But let me point out the fact, there were plenty of Southern preachers who did not necessarily view the North in a very beautiful light either, because many of them, especially Pastor Jesse Cox from Tennessee, considered the Yankee Army the beast described in the Book of Revelation. And in 1861, now listen, in 1861, Dr. George Todd, ardent secessionist and brother-in-law to Honest Abe, you remember Abraham Lincoln's wife was Mary Todd Lincoln? So Dr. George Todd was Mary Todd's brother. So Dr. George Todd, ardent secessionist and brother-in-law to Honest Abe, put it more bluntly.

He said in a lecture, and he declared that the war was between the children of the devil and the children of the Lord, and he left little doubt as to who the children of the devil really were. It was the North, according to Dr. George Todd. Now, I'm just simply pointing out the fact that it was the churches and it was the preachers in the South who were really understanding this was a theological war. So much so did they stir up the people to resist tyranny and wickedness that one Yankee critic said that he believed that "the most unmitigated set of villains they have in the South are the Methodist, Baptist, Presbyterian, and Episcopalian preachers all talking secession, drinking mean liquor, and advocating the cause of Jeff Davis and the devil." I mean, come on. They knew the preachers were stirring people up, because the preachers understood it was a theological war. William Nelson Pendleton, who was the Episcopalian pastor and, by the way, chief of Robert E.

Lee's artillery in the Army of Northern Virginia, early in the war named his four howitzers, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. And when the battle would rage, he would shout to his men, "Aim low, and may God have mercy on their misguided souls." But here was a pastor who was indeed in charge of Lee's artillery. Do you realize that every one of the officers of one Texas regiment was made up of Methodist preachers? So many Southern Methodist clergy enlisted in the Southern Army that denominational leaders were concerned about the vacant pulpits, because all the pastors were joining in the fight.

The Unitarian Influence and the Battle Hymn

Weaver critiques Julia Ward Howe's Unitarian beliefs, which denied Christ's deity and promoted universal redemption, reflecting the rationalism that underpinned Northern ideology and persists today.

Like all Unitarians, she believed that man, by nature, was characteristically good and was fully able to redeem himself by his own merits without a savior. She rejected biblical truths like hell and the devil, and she said this, I'm quoting her, "I threw away once and forever the thought of a terrible hell which appears to me impossible." So she didn't believe in hell, she didn't believe in the devil, moreover she did not believe that Jesus Christ was the Son of God. She also refused the plain teaching of the Bible, when Jesus Christ said in John 14:6, "I am the way, the truth, and the life, and no man cometh in the Father but by me." Here are her own words saying, and I'm quoting, "Having rejected the exclusive doctrine that made Christianity

and special forms of it the only way of spiritual redemption, I now accept the belief that not only Christians, but all human beings, no matter what their religion, are capable of redemption. Christianity was but one of God's plans for bringing all humanity to a state of ultimate perfection." So what is she saying? It doesn't matter if you're a Hindu, a Buddhist, a Muslim, we're all going to be saved. That's why she was a Unitarian. She believed in universal redemption and that Christianity was not the only way to God the Father through Jesus Christ. Why, everybody's going to be saved. Moreover, to Julia Ward Howe, the real work of Christ, meaning salvation, was incomplete. It was up to men, through civil government, to bring about a free utopian society. And only government could do this. Here is what she said, I'm giving you her words again. "Not until the Civil War did I officially join the Unitarian Church and accept the fact that Christ was merely a great teacher with no higher claim to preeminence in wisdom, goodness and power than any other man."

You know what she just said? Christ is just man. No better than anyone else. I mean, he's just a man. By the way, these are the same fallacies and the same heresies that are espoused today by the religious and academic liberal establishment. Do you understand that the political correctness of today was the rationalism and Unitarianism of the 1860s? You see, Julia Ward Howe, like all Unitarians, basically believed in salvation by government.

That is why the North, according to their song, was marching to make men free. Salvation through government. It is government that must make man free. It is government that must supply man's needs. It is government that becomes his savior. So in the thinking of the North then, as a whole, the thought was we do not need Christ. We do not need the Bible. We have ourselves and we have civil government and therefore we're able to redeem ourselves and we're able to bring in a perfect utopian society. Let's kick God out. Let's kick Christ out. Let's kick the Bible out. Oh.

What have we done today? You see what I'm saying? What we have in our government and in our political correct system today is exactly what the Unitarians and the Rationalists advocated in the 1860s. What we must do in the South is this. We must rise up with our ancestors and proclaim that Jesus Christ and Jesus Christ alone is salvation and the Word of God alone is our objective standard by which we are to order and regulate our lives.

Second Reason: The South as Citadel for the Constitutional Republic

Weaver argues that the North hated the Union and Constitution, while the South sought to preserve them. He cites Northern abolitionists and Lincoln's own words to show a reversal on states' rights.

Let me make a statement. The North as a whole, and I know there were exceptions, but I'm talking about as a whole, the North as a whole hated the Union and the Constitution. He said, "Brother Weaver, how can you say that?" Well, I have the evidence to back it up. Do you remember several years ago I preached a message two hours long entitled "The Confederate Battle Flag: A Symbol of Hate?" with a question mark. And in those two hours I showed you quote after quote from Northern leaders and from Southern leaders, but how the Northern leaders hated and despised the Constitution and the Union, and how the Southern leaders were pleading for the Constitution and the Union. I'm going to give you just a few of those quotes today, not many, but I just want you to know that it is a fact that the North as a whole hated the Constitution and they hated the Union.

It was ardent abolitionist Wendell Phillips who said this, listen carefully: "The Republican Party is in no sense a national party. It is a party pledged to work for the downfall of democracy, the downfall of the Union, and the destruction of the United States Constitution. The religious creed of the party was hate of democracy, hate of the Union, hate of the Constitution, and hate of the Southern people." That was by a Northern abolitionist. He's talking about the party of Lincoln. He's talking about the party of George Bush. I'm just simply saying, he is saying that it was not a national party, it was a sectional party, and it was set up to destroy the Union, the Constitution, and the South. Senator Stephen Douglas, in a letter to Mr. Hayes, December 27, 1860, said this: "Many Republicans desire a dissolution of the Union and urge war as a means of accomplishing the dissolution." He wrote again on February 2, 1861, and said this: "The leaders of the Republican Party are striving to break up the Union under pretense of unbounded devotion to it.

Hostility to slavery on the part of the disunionists is stronger than fidelity to the Constitution." In other words, they didn't care what happened to the Constitution. Honest Abe, and by the way, I hope you know that Honest Abe was called Honest Abe for the same reason you call a six-foot-four, 250-pound man "Tiny." Just the opposite. He was not honest. He was dishonest. Honest Abe said in his speech before Congress in 1861, I want you to listen to this. It ought to boggle your mind. But he said in his speech before Congress: "The states have their status in the Union, and they have no other legal status. If they break from this, they can only do so against the law and by revolution." Now listen to what he said: "The states have their status in the Union, and they have no other legal status." In one sentence, Abraham Lincoln denied states' rights, the sovereignty of the states, and basically proclaimed himself as dictator over the Union, over a centralized, federalized bureaucracy. Here's what Lincoln was saying, that the states had no right to exist outside of the Union. Here's what he's saying. The federal government was not made for the states. The states were made for the federal government. According to Mr. Lincoln, the United States Constitution was not written to limit and to bind the federal government. It was written to limit and to bind the states. Do you realize this is exactly the same stance that the politically correct federal government has today? It's the federal government who claims to be sovereign over the states.

It's the federal government who claims to be the overseer of the states. It's the federal government who claims to have all authority and all power and it mandates to the states. In case you have never studied history, let me say it very clearly and very pointedly. The federal government did not create the states. The states appointed a federal government and gave it limited power and limited authority.

But what has happened now, it has reversed. The states were the possessor of all the powers not given to the federal government, the states and the people, according to the Tenth Amendment. I want you to understand how Honest Abe changed his views when he got to the White House. In a speech before Congress in 1847, Abraham Lincoln said this: "Any people, whatever, have a right to abolish the existing government and form a new one that suits them better." What did he just say? He said any people have a right to abolish the existing government and get another one that will suit them better. In other words, he was advocating the right of secession. He was advocating the right of withdrawing from a tyrannical form of government. He goes on and he says this: "Any people that can may revolutionize and make their own of so much of the territory as they inhabit." Once he says that people can do what they want to do, they have that power.

So, in 1847, Lincoln agreed with and consented to state sovereignties and state rights. But in 1860, he changed his mind. He was the forerunner of our modern-day politicians. He said one thing and practiced another. It was John C. Calhoun, that ironclad southerner from South Carolina, who pointed out the source of the problem. Listen to what John C. Calhoun said. Listen carefully. "The error is in the assumption that the general government is a party to the constitutional compact. The states form the compact acting as sovereign and independent communities." Listen to what he said now. "The error is in the assumption that the general government is a party in the constitutional compact." The general government or the federal government was not a party to the constitution. The states were the parties in the Constitution. And when you try to make the federal government a part of the Constitution, he said that is the error. The federal government was created by the states and was to operate solely upon the authority and the limited powers that the states gave to it.

And that which they did not give to it, they reserved to themselves and the people respectively. Let me say it this way. In short, the states were to be the master and the federal government was to be the servant. But what has happened is it has been turned upside down and now the federal government has become the master and the states are the servants. That is why when President Jefferson Davis spoke before the provisional Confederate Congress, he said this, talking about secession and why the South left, listen carefully: "President Davis had actuated solely by the desire to preserve our own rights and promote our own welfare. The separation of the Confederate States has been marked by no aggression upon others and followed by no domestic convulsion. We have changed the constituent parts, but not the system of our government. The Constitution formed by our fathers is that of these Confederate states.

In their exposition of it, in the judicial construction it has received, we have a light which reveals its true meaning. Thus instructed as to the just interpretation of the instrument, and ever remembering that all offices are but trusts held for the people, and that the delegated powers are to be strictly construed." Now, what did Jefferson Davis just say? When we left, we took the United States Constitution basically for our Constitution. Do you realize the reason the South left the Union was to preserve our constitutional rights and liberties and not to destroy the Union? We did not leave the Union to destroy it, but to preserve our rights. What has happened? Well, here's what has happened.

We've lost our Constitutional Republic, and we are now controlled, governed, manipulated, and enslaved by a federalized, centralized bureaucracy that will stop at nothing to control every aspect of life in this country.

Modern Erosion of Liberties

Using a 2005 Miami police tactic as an example, Weaver illustrates how constitutional protections like the Fourth and Fifth Amendments are being ignored in the name of security.

Now, if you think I'm exaggerating, I'm going to give you an illustration. I want you to listen to this Associated Press article of November the 29th of this past year, 2005. Here's the bold headlines: "Miami police take new tack against terror." By Kurt Anderson, Associated Press writer, Miami. Now listen, Miami police announced Monday that they will stage random shows of force at hotels, banks, and other public places to keep terrorists guessing and remind people to be vigilant. Deputy Police Chief Frank Fernandez said officers might, for example, surround a bank building, check the IDs of everyone going in and coming out, and hand out leaflets about terror threats. "This is an in-your-face type of strategy. It's letting the terrorists know that we're out there," Fernandez said. The operations will keep terrorists off guard, Fernandez said. He said Al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups plot attacks by putting places under surveillance and watching for flaws and patterns in security. Police Chief John Timoney said there was no specific credible threat of any imminent terror attack in Miami, but he said the city had repeatedly been mentioned in intelligence reports as a potential target.

May I ask you just a couple of leading questions? Whatever happened to the Fourth Amendment? That the people have a right to be secure in their persons and their papers? Whatever happened to the Fifth Amendment? Whatever happened to the fact that you cannot stop and question somebody without probable cause? What if you do not carry ID? I have a cartoon on my desk at home. The cartoon shows the police officer looking at a man, he says, "What is your name?

Tell me who you are." And the guy just stands there. The next picture shows the policeman saying, "If you don't give me your name, I'm going to have to arrest you for failing to provide identification." Man just stands there. The next picture shows the police putting handcuffs on him saying, "You have a right to remain silent."

I'm just simply saying, what has happened in this country? People have gone stark raving crazy. You know why? We have forgotten what it was like before our captivity. We have forgotten the principles for which the South stood. We have forgotten the truths. We have so turned from freedom that we are now expected, according to our political leaders, to give up all of our rights and all of our liberties just so we can be protected.

Let me spell it out for you. I'd rather have my rights and liberties. I'll protect myself. Thank you. I submit to you that we should not speculate as to whether or not the South shall rise again. But we must understand that the South must absolutely rise again. If the South will not rise up and restore our liberty and freedom under the Constitutional Republic as it was handed down from our forefathers, what section of the country will?

Third Reason: The South as Bulwark for Economic Freedom

Weaver explains that high protective tariffs imposed by the North economically oppressed the South, which paid the majority of federal revenues while receiving little in return, leading to secession.

The South was the bastion for biblical faith. It was the citadel for our Constitutional Republic. And here thirdly today, the South was the bulwark for economic freedom. While it is true that the South capitulated and fell into the paper money trap, it is equally true the South had very little specie, that is, silver and gold. Most of the specie was in northern banks. So in one sense of the word, the South was almost forced to print paper money due to a lack of specie in the South. However, I want you to understand that one of the leading causes of the war was indeed an economic cause, and specifically the high tariffs or the high taxes that the North wished to put upon the South. The tariffs of 1828, 1832, and 1833 were violations of the Constitution. You see, it is true that Congress had power to levy taxes, but according to the Constitution, it must be uniform throughout the land. Now listen carefully. The tariffs were sectional back then because they only penalized the South.

The South had only one-third of the votes, but paid two-thirds of the custom duties. The cotton states particularly suffered from these tariffs. Do you realize that during that time southern cotton sold abroad totaled 57% of all American exports before the war? 57% of all exports was southern cotton.

Now the South was willing to have a 10% tariff, but the North wanted 40 to 60%. Listen, Thomas Hart Benton, you may not know that name, but I'm going to tell you who he was in just a moment. He was the father-in-law to John C. Fremont, who was a Yankee general. He was also brother-in-law to James McDowell, who was also a Yankee general. But Thomas Hart Benton was a senator and representative from Missouri. He served as aide-de-camp to General Andrew Jackson, was a colonel of a regiment of Tennessee Volunteers, 1812 to 1813, Lieutenant Colonel of the 39th United States Infantry, 1813 to 1815, and he moved to St. Louis, Missouri where he became editor of the Missouri Inquirer. So here's a man who is associated with the North, has Northern relatives high up in the powers that be. And here's what he said. Listen carefully. "Under federal legislation, the exports of the South have been the basis of federal revenues." Let me just stop there. What he's saying is most of the money that went to the federal government came from the South.

Okay? "Under federal legislation, the exports of the South have been the basis of the federal revenues. Everything goes out and nothing is returned to them in the shape of government expenditures. The expenditures flow north. This is the reason why wealth disappears from the south and rises up in the north. No territories yet included Georgia, Virginia, and the two Carolinas except to increase the burdens imposed upon them." The political economists of the North, Cary, Eliot, Kettle, and others, who have studied the source of national wealth in America, said, "Mr. Benton is right in his explanation given of the sudden disappearance of the wealth from the South." So here's a man who says one of the problems is the North is raping the South economically.

A war almost broke out in 1832 because South Carolina called a convention to nullify those tariffs of 1828 and 1832 known as the Tariffs of Abomination. Thankfully, a compromise was reached which averted secession and possibly war as well. But the North favored protective tariffs for their manufacturing industry. The South, which exported agricultural products to and imported manufactured goods from Europe, of course favored free trade, or very low tariffs, which meant the higher the tariff, the more money went to the North, and the more hurt would be placed upon the South.

So, a Northern-dominated Congress enacted laws similar to Britain's Navigation Acts to protect Northern shipping industries. Now, listen carefully. I'm going to give you a quote. You'll find this in Adams' book, "When in the Course of Human Events," but listen to what he says. After the 1828 Tariff Law, the South almost seceded. In 1840, the South paid 84% of the tariffs, rising to 87% in 1860. What's that mean? That means nearly 90% of the money the federal government had came from the South. This is what the South did now. They paid 83% of the $13 million, and by the way, you've got to remember a million back then was a million in gold, which would have been, I don't know how many million today, but the South paid 83% of the 13 million federal fishing bounties paid to New England fishermen, and also paid $35 million to Northern shipping interests, which had a monopoly on shipping in Southern ports. The South, in effect, was paying tribute to the North. The Republican platform of 1860 called for higher tariffs.

That was implemented by the new Congress in the Morrill Tariff of 1861, signed by President Buchanan before Lincoln took the oath of office. It imposed the highest tariffs in U.S. history, with over a 50% duty on iron products and 25% on clothing, rates averaged 47%. By the way, these were passed in March, and you know what happened in April of 1861. Shortly after Lincoln's election, Congress passed these highly protectionist Morrill tariffs, and of course they did so without the southern senators and southern representatives because the South basically had already seceded, and they raised the tariffs in the South to 47 percent. Well, I hope you know that the Confederate Constitution is nearly identical to the United States Constitution, except it outlaws protectionist tariffs, it outlaws business handouts, and mandated a two-thirds majority vote for all spending measures. It was also the first Constitution, by the way, to outlaw slavery. You see, when the South seceded, what does that mean?

It meant the North was not going to get that money. So Lincoln then was determined to make sure those tariffs flowed into the Federal Treasury. That is why the battle was over Fort Sumter. Whoever controlled Fort Sumter controlled the shipping industry at Charleston, South Carolina. So if Lincoln could get his hands on Fort Sumter, then he would still be in charge and still make the South pay.

James Madison's Warning and Modern Parallels

Weaver quotes Madison's prediction that an unlimited general welfare clause would lead to federal control over religion, education, and welfare—all of which he says have come to pass.

You talk about a man who could see in the future. Listen to what he said. "If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands." Why do you think we've got hate laws? Why do you think we've got thought crimes today? They may take the care of religion in their own hands.

Now listen, "they may appoint teachers in every state, county, and parish, and pay them out the public treasury." That's public schools. "They may take into their own hands the education of the children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union. They may assume the provisions of the poor," and that's why you've got welfare and food stamps and WIC and everything else. "They may assume the provision of the poor. They may undertake the regulation of all roads and other post roads, in short, everything from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police would be thrown under the power of Congress. Were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations and transmute the very nature of limited government established by the people of America."

Did the man know what he was talking about? What has Congress done? Everything that James Madison warned against. Today we're in the same situations that our forefathers were in. We have a government that is out of control. It has thrown off the shackles of the Constitution. It has broken the bounds of common sense and it has arrogated to itself unlimited powers. The government that we live under today demands that we pay taxes and whatever amount they demand.

Conclusion: The South Must Rise Again

Weaver calls for a renewed cry that 'the cause of the South is the cause of us all,' urging a return to biblical faith, constitutional republicanism, and economic freedom, ending with prayer.

"The only hope in my view for the maintenance of constitutional liberty on this continent is that another like cry should hereafter be raised and go forth from hilltop to valley, from coast to the lakes, from the Atlantic to the Pacific. The cause of the South is the cause of us all." I'm going to explain that in just a moment, but listen to what he said. I'm going to read it again. "The only hope, in my view, for the maintenance of constitutional liberty on this continent is that another like cry should hereafter be raised and go forth from hilltop to valley, from the coast to the lakes, from the Atlantic to the Pacific. The cause of the South is the cause of us all." What was he saying? He was saying the only hope for a constitutional liberty on this continent is that people would awaken and realize what had happened because of the War of Northern Aggression. Much like what happened in the Boston Port Bill?

You remember when the colonists were fighting against George III? What did George III do? He sent his navy to blockade the Port of Boston. He passed a bill that nothing could go in or come out until tribute was given. And you know what the other colonists said? The other colonists said, "The cause of Boston is the cause of us all. If Boston goes under, we go under." And then all the other colonists got together to make sure George III never starved the Bostonians out. They took everything those people of Boston would need to sustain them and nurture them during that siege.

Now, what is Alexander Hamilton Stephens saying? He's saying this, if constitutional liberty is to be maintained on this continent, then there has to be a cry going out all across this nation, "the cause of the South is the cause of us all." In other words, we've got to realize what we lost in the War of Northern Aggression. And if we don't realize that, folks, there will never be an awakening in this country. As Steve Wilkins said very aptly, "the war of 1861 to 1865 did not end slavery. It merely enlarged the plantation. We are now all slaves." There is no alternative. The South must rise again and seek to restore our liberties, our rights, our constitution, and our common sense. We must once again become the bastion of the biblical faith. We must once again become the citadel for our constitutional republic and the bulwark for economic freedom. What did our Lord ask? "Who will rise up for me against evildoers?

Who will stand up for me against the workers of iniquity?" We must rise. And we must stand. For He is the one true and the living God. And beside Him, there's no other. Let's pray. Father, we do ask and we do pray in the name of Jesus Christ that You would awaken us. Cause us, Lord, to understand from where we have fallen, what we have lost, and that we must be awakened and aroused to reclaim our biblical faith, our constitutional republic, and our economic freedom as we submit all to Thee and to Thy Word. May we stand, Father, for Thy truth. In the name of Jesus Christ we ask and pray, Amen.

Study Guide

Major Themes

Biblical Orthodoxy vs. Unitarian Rationalism

Summary: The South historically upheld the inerrancy of Scripture and the deity of Christ, while the North embraced Unitarian rationalism that denied core Christian doctrines.

Evidence: Weaver states: 'the South still held tenaciously to the Word of God... the Unitarians denied the deity of Christ, they denied the inspiration of the Bible' (768.9-808.5s).

Loss of Constitutional Republic

Summary: The War of Northern Aggression transformed the U.S. from a confederated union of sovereign states into a centralized empire, with the Constitution now a dead letter.

Evidence: Weaver says: 'the war changed our Constitutional Republic into a centralized democratic bureaucracy' (238.9-344.9s) and 'the Constitution is a dead letter' (475.2-505.3s).

Economic Oppression through Tariffs

Summary: The North imposed high protective tariffs that disproportionately burdened the South, extracting wealth and fueling secession.

Evidence: Weaver notes: 'the South paid 84% of the tariffs, rising to 87% in 1860' and 'the South, in effect, was paying tribute to the North' (3161.6-3256.4s).

Messianic Nature of Government

Summary: Modern government has assumed a salvific role, replacing reliance on God with dependence on the state, as seen in responses to disasters.

Evidence: Weaver argues: 'Government thinks it's God... people don't cry out to God for help. They cry out to the federal government' (1715.8-1754.1s).

The War as a Religious Conflict

Summary: Southern theologians and leaders viewed the Civil War as a theological war against infidelity, atheism, and socialism.

Evidence: Weaver quotes Thornwell: 'the parties to this conflict are not merely abolitionists and slaveholders... they are atheists, socialists, communists... on the one side, and friends of order and regulated freedom on the other' (810.2-905.1s).

Erosion of Civil Liberties

Summary: Contemporary security measures, such as random police ID checks, violate constitutional protections and reflect a broader loss of freedom.

Evidence: Weaver cites a 2005 Miami police tactic and asks: 'Whatever happened to the Fourth Amendment?' (2639.6-2685.8s).

Necessity of Southern Revival

Summary: If the South does not rise to restore biblical faith, constitutional government, and economic freedom, no other section of the country will.

Evidence: Weaver asks: 'If the South will not rise up and stand for the inerrant, inspired, and infallible Word of God... what section of the country will?' (1756.8-1792.7s).

Key Arguments

The South was the bastion of biblical theology

Summary: The South earned the nickname 'Bible Belt' because its leading theologians defended orthodox Christianity against Northern Unitarianism, making the Civil War a religious war.

Evidence: Weaver says: 'the leading theologians in America were in the South... the South still held tenaciously to the Word of God' (658.0-768.2s).

The North hated the Constitution and the Union

Summary: Northern abolitionists and Republican leaders sought to destroy the Union and the Constitution, while the South fought to preserve them.

Evidence: Weaver quotes Wendell Phillips: 'The Republican Party is... pledged to work for the downfall of democracy, the downfall of the Union, and the destruction of the United States Constitution' (1932.5-2016.4s).

Lincoln subverted the Constitution and states' rights

Summary: Lincoln violated the Constitution, denied states' sovereignty, and used executive orders to centralize power, setting a precedent for modern federal overreach.

Evidence: Weaver states: 'Abraham Lincoln denied states' rights, the sovereignty of the states, and basically proclaimed himself as dictator' (2064.2-2173.6s).

High tariffs were a primary cause of secession

Summary: The North imposed protective tariffs that forced the South to pay the vast majority of federal revenues, economically oppressing the region and prompting secession.

Evidence: Weaver explains: 'the South paid 84% of the tariffs, rising to 87% in 1860... The South, in effect, was paying tribute to the North' (3161.6-3256.4s).

Modern government mirrors Unitarian rationalism

Summary: Today's political correctness and statism are direct descendants of 1860s Unitarianism, which rejected biblical authority and looked to government for salvation.

Evidence: Weaver asserts: 'What we have in our government and in our political correct system today is exactly what the Unitarians and the Rationalists advocated in the 1860s' (1537.3-1576.1s).

The Constitution has been rendered meaningless

Summary: Politicians no longer consider constitutionality when passing laws, and the federal government acts as master over the states, contrary to the Tenth Amendment.

Evidence: Weaver asks: 'Have you ever heard of a politician refusing to vote for a bill because that bill is unconstitutional? And the answer is absolutely no' (506.2-547.0s).

The South must rise to restore liberty

Summary: Only a Southern revival can reclaim biblical faith, constitutional government, and economic freedom; without it, constitutional liberty on the continent is lost.

Evidence: Weaver quotes Alexander Stephens: 'The only hope... for the maintenance of constitutional liberty on this continent is that another like cry should hereafter be raised... The cause of the South is the cause of us all' (3665.6-3731.6s).

Scripture References

Psalm 94:16

Context: Weaver opens the sermon with this verse, using it as the foundational call for the South to rise up against evildoers and workers of iniquity.

John 14:6

Context: Weaver cites this verse to contrast Julia Ward Howe's Unitarian rejection of Christ as the only way to salvation.

Revelation (unspecified)

Context: Weaver mentions that Pastor Jesse Cox considered the Yankee Army the beast described in the Book of Revelation.

Historical References

War of Northern Aggression (American Civil War, 1861–1865)

Context: Weaver refers to the Civil War as the 'War of Northern Aggression,' arguing it transformed the U.S. from a constitutional republic into a centralized empire.

Abraham Lincoln

Context: Weaver accuses Lincoln of violating the Constitution in multiple ways, killing the Constitution, and centralizing power, calling him dishonest.

James McPherson (historian)

Context: Weaver quotes McPherson's statement that the war changed the United States as thoroughly as the French Revolution changed France.

Karl Marx

Context: Weaver notes that Marx, writing for the New York Tribune, predicted the war would be the beginning of a world-transforming revolutionary movement.

Mildred Lewis Rutherford, 'The Truths of History'

Context: Weaver references Rutherford's book listing 17 specific violations Lincoln made against the Constitution.

Robert Louis Dabney, James Henley Thornwell, Benjamin Palmer Morgan, J.P. Boyce, Broadus

Context: Weaver names these Southern theologians as leading figures who opposed Northern Unitarianism and rationalism.

Julia Ward Howe and 'The Battle Hymn of the Republic'

Context: Weaver critiques Howe's Unitarian beliefs and her song as unbiblical and ungodly, representing Northern rationalism.

Tariffs of 1828, 1832, 1833 (Tariffs of Abomination)

Context: Weaver discusses these tariffs as unconstitutional sectional measures that penalized the South and nearly caused secession in 1832.

Morrill Tariff of 1861

Context: Weaver notes this tariff imposed the highest rates in U.S. history, averaging 47%, and was passed after Southern secession.

Alexander Hamilton Stephens

Context: Weaver quotes the Confederate Vice President's statement that 'the cause of the South is the cause of us all' as essential for restoring constitutional liberty.

Important Quotes

Who will rise up for me against the evildoers? Or who will stand up for me against the workers of iniquity?

Significance: This is the foundational Scripture call that frames the entire sermon, urging the South to take action against modern evildoers.

The war changed the United States as thoroughly as the French Revolution changed France.

Significance: Weaver uses this quote from historian James McPherson to emphasize the radical transformation of American government after the Civil War.

I threw away once and forever the thought of a terrible hell which appears to me impossible.

Significance: Weaver quotes Julia Ward Howe to illustrate the Unitarian rejection of biblical doctrines like hell.

The states have their status in the Union, and they have no other legal status.

Significance: Weaver cites Lincoln's 1861 speech to show his denial of states' rights and sovereignty.

The only hope, in my view, for the maintenance of constitutional liberty on this continent is that another like cry should hereafter be raised and go forth from hilltop to valley, from coast to the lakes, from the Atlantic to the Pacific. The cause of the South is the cause of us all.

Significance: This quote from Alexander Stephens serves as the climactic call to action, urging a nationwide recognition of the South's cause.

Discussion Questions

In what ways does the sermon's claim that 'the generation that is alive today has never, ever experienced real, genuine freedom' challenge or affirm your understanding of American liberty?

Context: Weaver makes this statement early in the sermon to set up his argument about the loss of constitutional freedoms.

How does Weaver's portrayal of the Civil War as a 'theological war' between biblical orthodoxy and Unitarian rationalism affect your view of the conflict's causes?

Context: Weaver extensively quotes Southern theologians who saw the war in religious terms.

Weaver argues that modern political correctness is the direct descendant of 1860s Unitarianism. Do you see parallels between the two worldviews?

Context: He draws this connection when discussing Julia Ward Howe's beliefs and contemporary statism.

What is your response to the claim that 'the Constitution is a dead letter' because politicians no longer consider constitutionality when voting on bills?

Context: Weaver illustrates this by asking if any politician refuses to vote for unconstitutional bills.

How does the concept of 'salvation by government' manifest in contemporary society, according to Weaver, and do you agree with his assessment?

Context: He discusses the messianic nature of government in the context of disaster response and welfare.

Weaver contends that the South paid a disproportionate share of federal tariffs, leading to economic oppression. How does this historical argument inform current debates about federal taxation and spending?

Context: He provides statistics on tariff burdens and quotes Thomas Hart Benton on wealth transfer.

What would it practically look like for the South to 'rise again' as a bastion of biblical faith, citadel of constitutional republicanism, and bulwark of economic freedom?

Context: This is the central application of the sermon, summarized near the end.

Applications

Return to Biblical Authority

Summary: Believers must reject political correctness and rationalism, and instead submit all of life to the inerrant Word of God and the lordship of Jesus Christ.

Evidence: Weaver exhorts: 'We must rise up with our ancestors and proclaim that Jesus Christ and Jesus Christ alone is salvation and the Word of God alone is our objective standard' (1537.3-1576.1s).

Repentance and Humility

Summary: Like Robert E. Lee's call for fasting and repentance, modern leaders and citizens should humble themselves, confess national sins, and turn back to God.

Evidence: Weaver quotes Lee's order: 'Soldiers, we have sinned against Almighty God... Let us humble ourselves before him' (1637.7-1715.6s).

Resist Government Overreach

Summary: Citizens should recognize and oppose unconstitutional actions by the federal government, such as warrantless searches and erosion of due process.

Evidence: Weaver critiques Miami police tactics and asks: 'Whatever happened to the Fourth Amendment?' (2639.6-2685.8s).

Restore Constitutional Understanding

Summary: The South must relearn and advocate for the original constitutional framework where states are sovereign and the federal government has limited, delegated powers.

Evidence: Weaver states: 'the states were to be the master and the federal government was to be the servant' (2386.1-2454.3s).

Economic Self-Determination

Summary: The South should reject protectionist tariffs and economic policies that enslave regions to federal tribute, advocating instead for free trade and fiscal restraint.

Evidence: Weaver notes the Confederate Constitution 'outlaws protectionist tariffs, it outlaws business handouts, and mandated a two-thirds majority vote for all spending measures' (3347.8-3382.3s).

Raise the Cry for Liberty

Summary: Believers must echo Alexander Stephens' call that 'the cause of the South is the cause of us all,' awakening others to the loss of constitutional liberty.

Evidence: Weaver quotes Stephens and applies it: 'there has to be a cry going out all across this nation' (3776.3-3825.0s).

deepseek | deepseek-v4-pro | clean_readable_transcript | 2026-06-05T16:20:12Z

deepseek | deepseek-v4-pro | weaver_study | 2026-06-06T06:56:54Z

Clean Transcript

Why the South Must Rise Again

Clean readable transcript. This view follows the Commentary.net cleaned segment text while preserving timestamps for audio follow-along.

Psalm 94 and verse 16, the message is entitled, "Why the South Must Rise Again." In Psalm 94 and verse 16, God asks these questions: "Who will rise up for me against the evildoers? Or who will stand up for me against the workers of iniquity?" I want you to look very closely at that verse, because here are two very pertinent questions that really and truly must be answered. Notice if you would, number one, "Who will rise up for me against the evildoers?" And number two, "Who will stand up for me against the workers of iniquity?" Let me just simply say at one time, the South as a whole stood for Christ and His Word, as the South opposed northern rationalism, humanism, and centralism. And I want to submit to you today that the South must rise again and take the same stand as she did in days gone by. Everyone has heard the adage and seen the old bumper sticker, "Save your Confederate money, the South shall rise again."
#1 | 0:00 to 1:19 | cleaned
The adage indicates that the Southern people have never ever really given up hope as far as restoring their liberties and freedom that they possessed under the original Constitutional Republic. There's a popular bumper sticker that many of you have also seen down here in the South. It pictures an old Confederate soldier holding a battle flag in one hand and a musket in the other hand, and the bumper sticker says, "Dern Tootin', I'm a rebel and I ain't forgettin'." Well, the problem in the South today is that too many have forgotten, or they have never ever known to begin with what real, genuine freedom is and what it is about.
#2 | 1:21 to 2:08 | cleaned
Let me submit a statement to you for your consideration, and I want you to think about this for a moment. The generation that is alive today has never, ever experienced real, genuine freedom. Stop and think about that. The generation that is alive today has never, ever experienced real, genuine freedom. Those of us who are in our 60s and 70s probably tasted the last little bit of freedom that existed in this country.
#3 | 2:09 to 2:44 | cleaned
Now if you ask the average American, "Are they free?" the answer is going to come back "yes." But the truth of the matter is most people believe they are free simply because they have been told that they are free. They've never ever really experienced real, genuine freedom. I submit to you once again that those of you who are alive today in the 60s and 70s enjoyed the last little bit of real freedom.
#4 | 2:45 to 3:14 | cleaned
Probably about 50-something years ago. Now, many of us, once again, have never ever understood what has happened in this country. Do you realize the War of Northern Aggression changed our confederated union of states into a nation which now has become an empire? I want you to listen to what northern historian James McPherson said concerning the War of Northern Aggression. Here's what he said: "The war changed the United States as thoroughly as the French Revolution changed France."
#5 | 3:15 to 3:56 | cleaned
Now that's a very provocative statement. Stop and think about that. The war changed the United States as thoroughly as the French Revolution changed France. Karl Marx, who was alive during that war, and he worked for the New York Tribune, wrote to his friend Engels, and he said this: "The war would be the beginning of a world-transforming revolutionary movement." Well, it certainly was the beginning of a world-transforming revolutionary movement in the United States, because that war changed our Constitutional Republic into a centralized democratic bureaucracy. Horton in his history book said this: "The war changed the entire character and system of our government, overthrew the rights of the states and forced amendments against the action of the people which made those amendments unconstitutional." Now stop and think. The war changed the entire character and system of our government. Here are historians admitting that there was a drastic change in the nature and the system of our government. We lost our Constitutional Republic under the reign of Lincoln. Many of you know that Lincoln confessed to and acknowledged violating the Constitution in six specific areas.
#6 | 3:58 to 5:44 | cleaned
He tried to cover his trail when he basically tried to blackmail Congress into validating his unconstitutional acts after the fact, which Congress did not do so. It was Abraham Lincoln who basically killed our Constitution. Now, Mildred Lewis Rutherford, in her book, "The Truths of History," lists 17 specific violations that Lincoln made against the Constitution of the United States. And let me just point out the fact that all the presidents that followed Lincoln carried on his work in destroying the Constitution and following his footsteps. Do you realize it was Abraham Lincoln who violated the Constitution, to use his words, "in order to save the Union"? How in the world can you save a confederated Union if you destroy the Union itself?
#7 | 5:46 to 6:50 | cleaned
And the answer is very obvious, you cannot. Do you realize it was Abraham Lincoln who began the use of executive orders? It was Abraham Lincoln who evaded Congress, invaded the South, and ignored the Supreme Court rulings, all without constitutional authority. So I'm just simply pointing out today, when our modern day politicians talk about the Constitution, and they tout that document as if it is important, and it is even displayed and shown on certain anniversary dates, yet practically everything our politicians do is absolutely contrary to and in contradiction to the Constitution of the United States. In other words, I'm just simply pointing out the fact, for all practical purposes, the Constitution is a dead letter.
#8 | 6:50 to 7:54 | cleaned
Now, let me illustrate what I mean by that. Have you ever heard of a politician, I'm talking about a recent politician, who gets a bill that, you know, they want to be made into law. Have you ever heard of a politician taking that bill and examining it in light of the Constitution to make sure that it's constitutionally correct before he ever votes for it? Have you ever heard of a politician refusing to vote for a bill because that bill is unconstitutional?
#9 | 7:55 to 8:25 | cleaned
And the answer is absolutely no. You must remember that most of our politicians are lawyers. Did you know that an individual can go to law school, graduate from law school with honors, pass the bar exam, become a practicing attorney, and never ever have one course in constitutional law? That's a fact. That's a fact.
#10 | 8:26 to 9:07 | cleaned
Now, the point I'm just simply trying to make is this. Why is it that in our land today, those who profess to be our rulers have turned from the Constitution? Here's why. Because we are no longer a constitutional republic and law no longer matters to them. We are now a nation that happens to be ruled by an elite who make up their rules as they go. They may use the guise of democracy, they may use the guise of majority rule, yet it is an elite that governs this country, and they do so contrary to the Constitution, and they give to the people the candidates that they choose.
#11 | 9:09 to 9:58 | cleaned
Let me tell you something, folks. If you have a choice between Socialist A and Socialist B, you're getting Socialism no matter what party you vote for. It's just that simple.
#12 | 9:59 to 10:11 | cleaned
Now, the proposition that I'm going to submit to you today is this, that the South must rise again. Well, why must it rise again? Well, let me give you, I hope to cover all three reasons today, but if not, I'll go as far as I can. Here's the first reason why the South must rise again. It was the bastion of biblical theology. The South at one time was the bastion of biblical theology. Do you realize the South did not get the nickname "the Bible Belt" for nothing? Why in the world were we called the Bible Belt? Because the leading theologians in America were in the South.
#13 | 10:12 to 10:56 | cleaned
Think of Robert Louis Dabney, James Henley Thornwell, Benjamin Palmer Morgan, J.P. Boyce, and Broadus. These men were noted theologians and they led the people in truth against Northern Unitarianism and Rationalism. By the way, I hope you understand that the North, especially back in the 1800s, and it still continues today, has tried to characterize the people of the South as being backward and ignorant and uneducated. I hope you understand that there were many literary giants in the South in those days. Doctors, there were lawyers, there were men in the Confederate army that could read, write, and speak Hebrew, Greek, Latin. Well, how then can the North call us a backwards and an ignorant people? Here's why. Because the South still held tenaciously to the Word of God. And we believe that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, and the Bible was the inerrant and inspired Word of God. Now, you've got to understand that in the North, it was the Unitarians who held sway. And the Unitarians denied the deity of Christ, they denied the inspiration of the Bible, they denied the doctrine of the Holy Spirit, and they denied practically every other major doctrine in the Bible.
#14 | 10:58 to 12:48 | cleaned
What they followed was their own rationalistic thinking. They said that their thoughts transcended the Bible. They did not need the Bible. And consequently, because we did not reject the Bible in the South, but we believe the Bible, we then were labeled as a backward and uneducated people. And consequently, what the North then wanted to do was to remake the South into the kind of people and culture and society that they thought it should be.
#15 | 12:48 to 13:28 | cleaned
I want you to understand that most southern theologians viewed the war of 1861-1865 as a religious war. They saw the crux of the matter. Georgia politician, Presbyterian and Confederate General Thomas Cobb said concerning secession that "the revolution has been accomplished mainly by the churches." Now how could he say that it was mainly the churches that got the South to secede? Because the churches understood there was a theological war that was going on between the North and between the South. It was Southern Presbyterian and theologian James Henley Thornwell who said this. Listen carefully. Thornwell died, I believe it was in 1862. But he said this: "The parties to this conflict," he's talking about the war now, "the parties to this conflict are not merely abolitionists," that's in the North, "and slaveholders," that's in the South. He says, "they are atheists, socialists, communists, Red Republicans, Jacobins on the one side," that's the North, "and friends of order and regulated freedom on the other," that's the South. So here is a leading theologian who understood this was indeed a theological war.
#16 | 13:30 to 15:05 | cleaned
And he said, on the one hand, you've got the socialists and the red republicans and the communists. And on the other hand, you have the friends of regulated order and freedom. Southern Methodist leaders proclaimed that the maintenance of pure Christianity on the continent, on this continent, depended upon Confederate victory. What were they saying? If the South lost, then you're not going to have pure Christianity. You're going to have paganism.
#17 | 15:05 to 15:39 | cleaned
Basil Manley, who was another Baptist pastor and chaplain to the Provisional Confederate Congress, viewed secession not just as rebellion, but as a Christian reform movement. He says what we're doing is withdrawing from the heathen and reforming the government the way it ought to be reformed. Do you realize there was an overarching theme in the religious military press in the South during the times of 1861 and 1865? And that overarching theme was that the war was a religious war. It was a war against infidels. And I'm going to quote here, "a war to free God's chosen nation in order to implement God's plan in the universe." That was the religious military press during that war. Do you realize there were many Yankees who viewed Jeff Davis as the arch villain and as an enemy of God, simply because he was the President of the Confederate States?
#18 | 15:40 to 16:53 | cleaned
But let me point out the fact, there were plenty of Southern preachers who did not necessarily view the North in a very beautiful light either, because many of them, especially Pastor Jesse Cox from Tennessee, considered the Yankee Army the beast described in the Book of Revelation. And in 1861, now listen, in 1861, Dr. George Todd, ardent secessionist and brother-in-law to Honest Abe, you remember Abraham Lincoln's wife was Mary Todd Lincoln? So Dr. George Todd was Mary Todd's brother. So Dr. George Todd, ardent secessionist and brother-in-law to Honest Abe, put it more bluntly.
#19 | 16:54 to 17:50 | cleaned
He said in a lecture, and he declared that the war was between the children of the devil and the children of the Lord, and he left little doubt as to who the children of the devil really were. It was the North, according to Dr. George Todd.
#20 | 17:50 to 18:07 | cleaned
Now, I'm just simply pointing out the fact that it was the churches and it was the preachers in the South who were really understanding this was a theological war. So much so did they stir up the people to resist tyranny and wickedness that one Yankee critic said that he believed that "the most unmitigated set of villains they have in the South are the Methodist, Baptist, Presbyterian, and Episcopalian preachers all talking secession, drinking mean liquor, and advocating the cause of Jeff Davis and the devil." I mean, come on. They knew the preachers were stirring people up, because the preachers understood it was a theological war. William Nelson Pendleton, who was the Episcopalian pastor and, by the way, chief of Robert E.
#21 | 18:08 to 19:02 | cleaned
Lee's artillery in the Army of Northern Virginia, early in the war named his four howitzers, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. And when the battle would rage, he would shout to his men, "Aim low, and may God have mercy on their misguided souls." But here was a pastor who was indeed in charge of Lee's artillery. Do you realize that every one of the officers of one Texas regiment was made up of Methodist preachers? So many Southern Methodist clergy enlisted in the Southern Army that denominational leaders were concerned about the vacant pulpits, because all the pastors were joining in the fight.
#22 | 19:02 to 19:50 | cleaned
Now let me ask this question, because I want to show you the theological implications of this war. You say, "Brother Weaver, how could this war have a theological basis?" I've just told you that the North was mainly Unitarian. They were rationalists. That's not saying there were no Christians in the North. Surely there were Christians in the North. There were a lot of Northern people who sympathized with the Southern people who helped the South.
#23 | 19:51 to 20:28 | cleaned
They were known as Copperheads. But I'm just trying to show you the great diversity between the North and the South. Here is how the war could be reviewed as a religious war and the battle for the Bible. Take, for example, the Unitarian Julia Ward Howe as an example. Now, Julia Ward Howe is best known for her unscriptural, unbiblical, and ungodly song, "The Battle Hymn of the Republic." In one of these days, in the not-too-distant future, I'm going to bring you the information concerning that song and take it apart for you just to show you it is indeed unbiblical and ungodly, and it is a Yankee marching song that was to be sung as the South was to be destroyed. Who in the world was Julia Ward Howe?
#24 | 20:28 to 21:18 | cleaned
Like all Unitarians, she believed that man, by nature, was characteristically good and was fully able to redeem himself by his own merits without a savior. She rejected biblical truths like hell and the devil, and she said this, I'm quoting her, "I threw away once and forever the thought of a terrible hell which appears to me impossible." So she didn't believe in hell, she didn't believe in the devil, moreover she did not believe that Jesus Christ was the Son of God. She also refused the plain teaching of the Bible, when Jesus Christ said in John 14:6, "I am the way, the truth, and the life, and no man cometh in the Father but by me." Here are her own words saying, and I'm quoting, "Having rejected the exclusive doctrine that made Christianity
#25 | 21:19 to 22:19 | cleaned
and special forms of it the only way of spiritual redemption, I now accept the belief that not only Christians, but all human beings, no matter what their religion, are capable of redemption. Christianity was but one of God's plans for bringing all humanity to a state of ultimate perfection." So what is she saying? It doesn't matter if you're a Hindu, a Buddhist, a Muslim, we're all going to be saved.
#26 | 22:19 to 22:52 | cleaned
That's why she was a Unitarian. She believed in universal redemption and that Christianity was not the only way to God the Father through Jesus Christ. Why, everybody's going to be saved. Moreover, to Julia Ward Howe, the real work of Christ, meaning salvation, was incomplete. It was up to men, through civil government, to bring about a free utopian society. And only government could do this. Here is what she said, I'm giving you her words again. "Not until the Civil War did I officially join the Unitarian Church and accept the fact that Christ was merely a great teacher with no higher claim to preeminence in wisdom, goodness and power than any other man."
#27 | 22:52 to 23:51 | cleaned
You know what she just said? Christ is just man. No better than anyone else. I mean, he's just a man. By the way, these are the same fallacies and the same heresies that are espoused today by the religious and academic liberal establishment. Do you understand that the political correctness of today was the rationalism and Unitarianism of the 1860s? You see, Julia Ward Howe, like all Unitarians, basically believed in salvation by government.
#28 | 23:51 to 24:41 | cleaned
That is why the North, according to their song, was marching to make men free. Salvation through government. It is government that must make man free. It is government that must supply man's needs. It is government that becomes his savior. So in the thinking of the North then, as a whole, the thought was we do not need Christ. We do not need the Bible. We have ourselves and we have civil government and therefore we're able to redeem ourselves and we're able to bring in a perfect utopian society. Let's kick God out. Let's kick Christ out. Let's kick the Bible out. Oh.
#29 | 24:42 to 25:34 | cleaned
What have we done today? You see what I'm saying? What we have in our government and in our political correct system today is exactly what the Unitarians and the Rationalists advocated in the 1860s. What we must do in the South is this. We must rise up with our ancestors and proclaim that Jesus Christ and Jesus Christ alone is salvation and the Word of God alone is our objective standard by which we are to order and regulate our lives.
#30 | 25:37 to 26:16 | cleaned
It amazes me that so many people can talk about Robert E. Lee, and Stonewall Jackson, and Jeb Stuart, and Richard Stoddard Ewell, and even Forrest, and say, "Man, we would love to have their character, and their courage, and their faith." How in the world can we ever get their character, and their courage, and their culture if we reject the very foundation upon which they stood, and that foundation is the Word of God, and that Jesus Christ alone is salvation? I want you to listen to what Robert E. Lee said when he issued orders requiring a day of fasting in August of 1863. Everyone knows that Robert E. Lee was an undaunted Christian. Here's what he said: "Soldiers, we have sinned against Almighty God.
#31 | 26:16 to 27:16 | cleaned
We have forgotten his signal mercies and have cultivated a revengeful, haughty, and boastful spirit. We have not remembered that the defenders of a just cause should be pure in his eyes and that our times are in his hands. And we have relied too much upon our own arms for the achievement of our independence. God is our only refuge and strength. Let us humble ourselves before him. Let us confess our many sins and beseech him to give us a higher courage, a pure patriotism and more determined will.
#32 | 27:17 to 27:53 | cleaned
That he will convert the hearts of our enemies. That he will hasten the time when war with its sorrows and suffering shall cease. And then he will give us a name and place among the nations of the earth." Would it not be wonderful today if we had any leader, military or governmental, I don't care, that would call upon us to repent and turn back to God. You know why we do not have politicians and military leaders today that call on us to repent as a nation and turn back to God and turn back to the Bible?
#33 | 27:53 to 28:35 | cleaned
Let me tell you why. Because of the messianic nature of government. Government thinks it's God. And government does not want you turning to the One True and Living God. It wants you turning to itself as God. That's why whenever you have a Katrina, or tsunami, or flood, or drought, people don't cry out to God for help. They cry out to the federal government. The messianic nature of government.
#34 | 28:35 to 29:14 | cleaned
If the South will not rise up and stand for the inerrant, inspired, and infallible Word of God, may I ask you this question, what section of the country will? If the South will not rise up and proclaim that Jesus and Jesus Christ alone is the only way of salvation, what section of the country will? If the South will not rise up and say that Jesus Christ is Lord, He's King of Kings and Lord of Lords, if the South will not stand up for the sovereignty of Jesus Christ, what section of the country will?
#35 | 29:16 to 29:52 | cleaned
Do you know the battle cry of our forefathers? "No king, but King Jesus." It is time to repent, folks. It is time to return, but it is time to turn from the politically correct sham that we have today and come back to Scripture and come back to Jesus Christ. Why must the South rise again? Because the South originally was the bastion of the biblical faith. And we must come back to that. Secondly today, I want you to understand the South was the citadel for the Constitutional Republic.
#36 | 29:55 to 30:51 | cleaned
Let me make a statement. The North as a whole, and I know there were exceptions, but I'm talking about as a whole, the North as a whole hated the Union and the Constitution. He said, "Brother Weaver, how can you say that?" Well, I have the evidence to back it up. Do you remember several years ago I preached a message two hours long entitled "The Confederate Battle Flag: A Symbol of Hate?" with a question mark. And in those two hours I showed you quote after quote from Northern leaders and from Southern leaders, but how the Northern leaders hated and despised the Constitution and the Union, and how the Southern leaders were pleading for the Constitution and the Union. I'm going to give you just a few of those quotes today, not many, but I just want you to know that it is a fact that the North as a whole hated the Constitution and they hated the Union.
#37 | 30:54 to 32:11 | cleaned
It was ardent abolitionist Wendell Phillips who said this, listen carefully: "The Republican Party is in no sense a national party. It is a party pledged to work for the downfall of democracy, the downfall of the Union, and the destruction of the United States Constitution. The religious creed of the party was hate of democracy, hate of the Union, hate of the Constitution, and hate of the Southern people." That was by a Northern abolitionist. He's talking about the party of Lincoln. He's talking about the party of George Bush. I'm just simply saying, he is saying that it was not a national party, it was a sectional party, and it was set up to destroy the Union, the Constitution, and the South. Senator Stephen Douglas, in a letter to Mr. Hayes, December 27, 1860, said this: "Many Republicans desire a dissolution of the Union and urge war as a means of accomplishing the dissolution." He wrote again on February 2, 1861, and said this: "The leaders of the Republican Party are striving to break up the Union under pretense of unbounded devotion to it.
#38 | 32:12 to 33:36 | cleaned
Hostility to slavery on the part of the disunionists is stronger than fidelity to the Constitution." In other words, they didn't care what happened to the Constitution. Honest Abe, and by the way, I hope you know that Honest Abe was called Honest Abe for the same reason you call a six-foot-four, 250-pound man "Tiny." Just the opposite. He was not honest. He was dishonest. Honest Abe said in his speech before Congress in 1861, I want you to listen to this.
#39 | 33:37 to 34:23 | cleaned
It ought to boggle your mind. But he said in his speech before Congress: "The states have their status in the Union, and they have no other legal status. If they break from this, they can only do so against the law and by revolution." Now listen to what he said: "The states have their status in the Union, and they have no other legal status." In one sentence, Abraham Lincoln denied states' rights, the sovereignty of the states, and basically proclaimed himself as dictator over the Union, over a centralized, federalized bureaucracy. Here's what Lincoln was saying, that the states had no right to exist outside of the Union. Here's what he's saying. The federal government was not made for the states. The states were made for the federal government. According to Mr. Lincoln, the United States Constitution was not written to limit and to bind the federal government. It was written to limit and to bind the states. Do you realize this is exactly the same stance that the politically correct federal government has today? It's the federal government who claims to be sovereign over the states.
#40 | 34:24 to 36:13 | cleaned
It's the federal government who claims to be the overseer of the states. It's the federal government who claims to have all authority and all power and it mandates to the states. In case you have never studied history, let me say it very clearly and very pointedly. The federal government did not create the states. The states appointed a federal government and gave it limited power and limited authority.
#41 | 36:14 to 36:47 | cleaned
But what has happened now, it has reversed. The states were the possessor of all the powers not given to the federal government, the states and the people, according to the Tenth Amendment. I want you to understand how Honest Abe changed his views when he got to the White House. In a speech before Congress in 1847, Abraham Lincoln said this: "Any people, whatever, have a right to abolish the existing government and form a new one that suits them better."
#42 | 36:49 to 37:33 | cleaned
What did he just say? He said any people have a right to abolish the existing government and get another one that will suit them better. In other words, he was advocating the right of secession. He was advocating the right of withdrawing from a tyrannical form of government. He goes on and he says this: "Any people that can may revolutionize and make their own of so much of the territory as they inhabit." Once he says that people can do what they want to do, they have that power.
#43 | 37:35 to 38:07 | cleaned
So, in 1847, Lincoln agreed with and consented to state sovereignties and state rights. But in 1860, he changed his mind. He was the forerunner of our modern-day politicians. He said one thing and practiced another. It was John C. Calhoun, that ironclad southerner from South Carolina, who pointed out the source of the problem. Listen to what John C. Calhoun said. Listen carefully. "The error is in the assumption that the general government is a party to the constitutional compact. The states form the compact acting as sovereign and independent communities." Listen to what he said now. "The error is in the assumption that the general government is a party in the constitutional compact." The general government or the federal government was not a party to the constitution. The states were the parties in the Constitution. And when you try to make the federal government a part of the Constitution, he said that is the error. The federal government was created by the states and was to operate solely upon the authority and the limited powers that the states gave to it.
#44 | 38:08 to 39:45 | cleaned
And that which they did not give to it, they reserved to themselves and the people respectively. Let me say it this way. In short, the states were to be the master and the federal government was to be the servant. But what has happened is it has been turned upside down and now the federal government has become the master and the states are the servants. That is why when President Jefferson Davis spoke before the provisional Confederate Congress, he said this, talking about secession and why the South left, listen carefully: "President Davis had actuated solely by the desire to preserve our own rights and promote our own welfare. The separation of the Confederate States has been marked by no aggression upon others and followed by no domestic convulsion. We have changed the constituent parts, but not the system of our government. The Constitution formed by our fathers is that of these Confederate states.
#45 | 39:46 to 40:54 | cleaned
In their exposition of it, in the judicial construction it has received, we have a light which reveals its true meaning. Thus instructed as to the just interpretation of the instrument, and ever remembering that all offices are but trusts held for the people, and that the delegated powers are to be strictly construed." Now, what did Jefferson Davis just say? When we left, we took the United States Constitution basically for our Constitution. Do you realize the reason the South left the Union was to preserve our constitutional rights and liberties and not to destroy the Union? We did not leave the Union to destroy it, but to preserve our rights. What has happened? Well, here's what has happened.
#46 | 40:55 to 41:52 | cleaned
We've lost our Constitutional Republic, and we are now controlled, governed, manipulated, and enslaved by a federalized, centralized bureaucracy that will stop at nothing to control every aspect of life in this country.
#47 | 41:53 to 42:13 | cleaned
Now, if you think I'm exaggerating, I'm going to give you an illustration. I want you to listen to this Associated Press article of November the 29th of this past year, 2005. Here's the bold headlines: "Miami police take new tack against terror." By Kurt Anderson, Associated Press writer, Miami. Now listen, Miami police announced Monday that they will stage random shows of force at hotels, banks, and other public places to keep terrorists guessing and remind people to be vigilant. Deputy Police Chief Frank Fernandez said officers might, for example, surround a bank building, check the IDs of everyone going in and coming out, and hand out leaflets about terror threats.
#48 | 42:16 to 43:21 | cleaned
"This is an in-your-face type of strategy. It's letting the terrorists know that we're out there," Fernandez said. The operations will keep terrorists off guard, Fernandez said. He said Al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups plot attacks by putting places under surveillance and watching for flaws and patterns in security. Police Chief John Timoney said there was no specific credible threat of any imminent terror attack in Miami, but he said the city had repeatedly been mentioned in intelligence reports as a potential target.
#49 | 43:22 to 43:56 | cleaned
May I ask you just a couple of leading questions? Whatever happened to the Fourth Amendment? That the people have a right to be secure in their persons and their papers? Whatever happened to the Fifth Amendment? Whatever happened to the fact that you cannot stop and question somebody without probable cause? What if you do not carry ID? I have a cartoon on my desk at home. The cartoon shows the police officer looking at a man, he says, "What is your name?
#50 | 43:59 to 44:45 | cleaned
Tell me who you are." And the guy just stands there. The next picture shows the policeman saying, "If you don't give me your name, I'm going to have to arrest you for failing to provide identification." Man just stands there. The next picture shows the police putting handcuffs on him saying, "You have a right to remain silent."
#51 | 44:45 to 45:09 | cleaned
I'm just simply saying, what has happened in this country? People have gone stark raving crazy. You know why? We have forgotten what it was like before our captivity. We have forgotten the principles for which the South stood. We have forgotten the truths. We have so turned from freedom that we are now expected, according to our political leaders, to give up all of our rights and all of our liberties just so we can be protected.
#52 | 45:18 to 45:54 | cleaned
Let me spell it out for you. I'd rather have my rights and liberties. I'll protect myself. Thank you. I submit to you that we should not speculate as to whether or not the South shall rise again. But we must understand that the South must absolutely rise again. If the South will not rise up and restore our liberty and freedom under the Constitutional Republic as it was handed down from our forefathers, what section of the country will?
#53 | 46:03 to 46:52 | cleaned
The South was the bastion for biblical faith. It was the citadel for our Constitutional Republic. And here thirdly today, the South was the bulwark for economic freedom. While it is true that the South capitulated and fell into the paper money trap, it is equally true the South had very little specie, that is, silver and gold. Most of the specie was in northern banks. So in one sense of the word, the South was almost forced to print paper money due to a lack of specie in the South. However, I want you to understand that one of the leading causes of the war was indeed an economic cause, and specifically the high tariffs or the high taxes that the North wished to put upon the South. The tariffs of 1828, 1832, and 1833 were violations of the Constitution. You see, it is true that Congress had power to levy taxes, but according to the Constitution, it must be uniform throughout the land. Now listen carefully. The tariffs were sectional back then because they only penalized the South.
#54 | 47:02 to 48:30 | cleaned
The South had only one-third of the votes, but paid two-thirds of the custom duties. The cotton states particularly suffered from these tariffs. Do you realize that during that time southern cotton sold abroad totaled 57% of all American exports before the war? 57% of all exports was southern cotton.
#55 | 48:31 to 49:03 | cleaned
Now the South was willing to have a 10% tariff, but the North wanted 40 to 60%. Listen, Thomas Hart Benton, you may not know that name, but I'm going to tell you who he was in just a moment. He was the father-in-law to John C. Fremont, who was a Yankee general. He was also brother-in-law to James McDowell, who was also a Yankee general. But Thomas Hart Benton was a senator and representative from Missouri. He served as aide-de-camp to General Andrew Jackson, was a colonel of a regiment of Tennessee Volunteers, 1812 to 1813, Lieutenant Colonel of the 39th United States Infantry, 1813 to 1815, and he moved to St. Louis, Missouri where he became editor of the Missouri Inquirer. So here's a man who is associated with the North, has Northern relatives high up in the powers that be. And here's what he said. Listen carefully. "Under federal legislation, the exports of the South have been the basis of federal revenues." Let me just stop there. What he's saying is most of the money that went to the federal government came from the South.
#56 | 49:07 to 50:50 | cleaned
Okay? "Under federal legislation, the exports of the South have been the basis of the federal revenues. Everything goes out and nothing is returned to them in the shape of government expenditures. The expenditures flow north. This is the reason why wealth disappears from the south and rises up in the north. No territories yet included Georgia, Virginia, and the two Carolinas except to increase the burdens imposed upon them." The political economists of the North, Cary, Eliot, Kettle, and others, who have studied the source of national wealth in America, said, "Mr. Benton is right in his explanation given of the sudden disappearance of the wealth from the South." So here's a man who says one of the problems is the North is raping the South economically.
#57 | 50:51 to 51:49 | cleaned
A war almost broke out in 1832 because South Carolina called a convention to nullify those tariffs of 1828 and 1832 known as the Tariffs of Abomination. Thankfully, a compromise was reached which averted secession and possibly war as well. But the North favored protective tariffs for their manufacturing industry. The South, which exported agricultural products to and imported manufactured goods from Europe, of course favored free trade, or very low tariffs, which meant the higher the tariff, the more money went to the North, and the more hurt would be placed upon the South.
#58 | 51:51 to 52:40 | cleaned
So, a Northern-dominated Congress enacted laws similar to Britain's Navigation Acts to protect Northern shipping industries. Now, listen carefully. I'm going to give you a quote. You'll find this in Adams' book, "When in the Course of Human Events," but listen to what he says. After the 1828 Tariff Law, the South almost seceded. In 1840, the South paid 84% of the tariffs, rising to 87% in 1860. What's that mean? That means nearly 90% of the money the federal government had came from the South. This is what the South did now. They paid 83% of the $13 million, and by the way, you've got to remember a million back then was a million in gold, which would have been, I don't know how many million today, but the South paid 83% of the 13 million federal fishing bounties paid to New England fishermen, and also paid $35 million to Northern shipping interests, which had a monopoly on shipping in Southern ports. The South, in effect, was paying tribute to the North. The Republican platform of 1860 called for higher tariffs.
#59 | 52:41 to 54:16 | cleaned
That was implemented by the new Congress in the Morrill Tariff of 1861, signed by President Buchanan before Lincoln took the oath of office. It imposed the highest tariffs in U.S. history, with over a 50% duty on iron products and 25% on clothing, rates averaged 47%. By the way, these were passed in March, and you know what happened in April of 1861. Shortly after Lincoln's election, Congress passed these highly protectionist Morrill tariffs, and of course they did so without the southern senators and southern representatives because the South basically had already seceded, and they raised the tariffs in the South to 47 percent. Well, I hope you know that the Confederate Constitution is nearly identical to the United States Constitution, except it outlaws protectionist tariffs, it outlaws business handouts, and mandated a two-thirds majority vote for all spending measures. It was also the first Constitution, by the way, to outlaw slavery. You see, when the South seceded, what does that mean?
#60 | 54:17 to 55:47 | cleaned
It meant the North was not going to get that money. So Lincoln then was determined to make sure those tariffs flowed into the Federal Treasury. That is why the battle was over Fort Sumter. Whoever controlled Fort Sumter controlled the shipping industry at Charleston, South Carolina. So if Lincoln could get his hands on Fort Sumter, then he would still be in charge and still make the South pay.
#61 | 55:47 to 56:22 | cleaned
Now I want to try to bring this message to a close, but I want you to listen carefully. I'm going to give you a quote from James Madison. May I remind you that James Madison is known as the father of the Constitution. And the reason he's called the father of the Constitution is because he was the secretary of the Constitutional Convention. He took down all the notes.
#62 | 56:26 to 56:54 | cleaned
You talk about a man who could see in the future. Listen to what he said. "If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands." Why do you think we've got hate laws? Why do you think we've got thought crimes today? They may take the care of religion in their own hands.
#63 | 57:00 to 57:37 | cleaned
Now listen, "they may appoint teachers in every state, county, and parish, and pay them out the public treasury." That's public schools. "They may take into their own hands the education of the children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union. They may assume the provisions of the poor," and that's why you've got welfare and food stamps and WIC and everything else. "They may assume the provision of the poor. They may undertake the regulation of all roads and other post roads, in short, everything from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police would be thrown under the power of Congress. Were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations and transmute the very nature of limited government established by the people of America."
#64 | 57:37 to 58:35 | cleaned
Did the man know what he was talking about? What has Congress done? Everything that James Madison warned against. Today we're in the same situations that our forefathers were in. We have a government that is out of control. It has thrown off the shackles of the Constitution. It has broken the bounds of common sense and it has arrogated to itself unlimited powers. The government that we live under today demands that we pay taxes and whatever amount they demand.
#65 | 58:40 to 59:24 | cleaned
To support programs which they deem best for us. What we the people want or desire does not matter. The Constitution does not matter. As President George W. Bush said recently, after taking God's name in vain, "the Constitution is just a piece of paper." Does it matter to them? Does it matter? Do you realize many of the problems that Georgians experienced in the 1860s are the same problems we experience today. For instance, Georgians back then were complaining about "oppressive federal government that seeks to intervene and dominate in every area of life, high taxes, and a growing government unwilling to listen to law-abiding citizens." Does that sound familiar? Those were the complaints of Georgians in the 1860s. I want to end with a quote from Alexander Hamilton Stephens. Alexander Hamilton Stephens was the Vice President of the Confederacy, and listen to what he said.
#66 | 59:26 to 1:01:03 | cleaned
"The only hope in my view for the maintenance of constitutional liberty on this continent is that another like cry should hereafter be raised and go forth from hilltop to valley, from coast to the lakes, from the Atlantic to the Pacific. The cause of the South is the cause of us all." I'm going to explain that in just a moment, but listen to what he said. I'm going to read it again. "The only hope, in my view, for the maintenance of constitutional liberty on this continent is that another like cry should hereafter be raised and go forth from hilltop to valley, from the coast to the lakes, from the Atlantic to the Pacific. The cause of the South is the cause of us all." What was he saying? He was saying the only hope for a constitutional liberty on this continent is that people would awaken and realize what had happened because of the War of Northern Aggression. Much like what happened in the Boston Port Bill?
#67 | 1:01:05 to 1:02:11 | cleaned
You remember when the colonists were fighting against George III? What did George III do? He sent his navy to blockade the Port of Boston. He passed a bill that nothing could go in or come out until tribute was given. And you know what the other colonists said? The other colonists said, "The cause of Boston is the cause of us all. If Boston goes under, we go under." And then all the other colonists got together to make sure George III never starved the Bostonians out. They took everything those people of Boston would need to sustain them and nurture them during that siege.
#68 | 1:02:11 to 1:02:56 | cleaned
Now, what is Alexander Hamilton Stephens saying? He's saying this, if constitutional liberty is to be maintained on this continent, then there has to be a cry going out all across this nation, "the cause of the South is the cause of us all." In other words, we've got to realize what we lost in the War of Northern Aggression. And if we don't realize that, folks, there will never be an awakening in this country. As Steve Wilkins said very aptly, "the war of 1861 to 1865 did not end slavery.
#69 | 1:02:56 to 1:03:45 | cleaned
It merely enlarged the plantation. We are now all slaves." There is no alternative. The South must rise again and seek to restore our liberties, our rights, our constitution, and our common sense. We must once again become the bastion of the biblical faith. We must once again become the citadel for our constitutional republic and the bulwark for economic freedom. What did our Lord ask? "Who will rise up for me against evildoers?
#70 | 1:03:46 to 1:04:30 | cleaned
Who will stand up for me against the workers of iniquity?" We must rise. And we must stand. For He is the one true and the living God. And beside Him, there's no other. Let's pray. Father, we do ask and we do pray in the name of Jesus Christ that You would awaken us. Cause us, Lord, to understand from where we have fallen, what we have lost, and that we must be awakened and aroused to reclaim our biblical faith, our constitutional republic, and our economic freedom as we submit all to Thee and to Thy Word. May we stand, Father, for Thy truth. In the name of Jesus Christ we ask and pray, Amen.
#71 | 1:04:34 to 1:05:37 | cleaned

deepseek | deepseek-v4-pro | clean_readable_transcript | 2026-06-05T16:20:12Z

Why the South Must Rise Again

John Weaver | Freedom Ministries

John Weaver argues that the American South must reclaim its historic role as a bastion of biblical theology, a citadel of constitutional republicanism, and a bulwark of economic freedom. He contends that the War of Northern Aggression (1861–1865) transformed the United States from a confederated constitutional republic into a centralized, bureaucratic empire dominated by Unitarian rationalism and statist ideology. The South's defeat, he says, led to the loss of genuine liberty, the death of the Constitution, and the rise of a messianic federal government. Using Psalm 94:16 as a call to action, Weaver urges Southerners to rise up against modern evildoers by returning to the Bible, Jesus Christ, and the principles of limited government.

Introduction: The Call to Rise Up

Psalm 94 and verse 16, the message is entitled, "Why the South Must Rise Again." In Psalm 94 and verse 16, God asks these questions:

Scripture Reading — Psalm 94:16

"Who will rise up for me against the evildoers? Or who will stand up for me against the workers of iniquity?"

I want you to look very closely at that verse, because here are two very pertinent questions that really and truly must be answered. Notice if you would, number one,

Scripture Reading — Psalm 94:16

"Who will rise up for me against the evildoers?"

And number two,

Scripture Reading — Psalm 94:16

"Who will stand up for me against the workers of iniquity?"

The Loss of Genuine Freedom

Weaver claims that the current generation has never experienced real freedom, with those in their 60s and 70s having tasted the last remnants of liberty about 50 years ago.

The War Changed the Nature of Government

The Constitution as a Dead Letter

Weaver contends that modern politicians ignore the Constitution, and that the U.S. is now ruled by an elite that makes up rules as it goes, offering only socialist choices to voters.

First Reason: The South as Bastion of Biblical Theology

The South was the Bible Belt, home to leading theologians who opposed Northern Unitarianism. Southern leaders saw the war as a religious conflict against atheists, socialists, and communists.

The Unitarian Influence and the Battle Hymn

Weaver critiques Julia Ward Howe's Unitarian beliefs, which denied Christ's deity and promoted universal redemption, reflecting the rationalism that underpinned Northern ideology and persists today.

Second Reason: The South as Citadel for the Constitutional Republic

Weaver argues that the North hated the Union and Constitution, while the South sought to preserve them. He cites Northern abolitionists and Lincoln's own words to show a reversal on states' rights.

Modern Erosion of Liberties

Using a 2005 Miami police tactic as an example, Weaver illustrates how constitutional protections like the Fourth and Fifth Amendments are being ignored in the name of security.

Third Reason: The South as Bulwark for Economic Freedom

Weaver explains that high protective tariffs imposed by the North economically oppressed the South, which paid the majority of federal revenues while receiving little in return, leading to secession.

James Madison's Warning and Modern Parallels

Weaver quotes Madison's prediction that an unlimited general welfare clause would lead to federal control over religion, education, and welfare—all of which he says have come to pass.

Conclusion: The South Must Rise Again

Weaver calls for a renewed cry that 'the cause of the South is the cause of us all,' urging a return to biblical faith, constitutional republicanism, and economic freedom, ending with prayer.

Why the South Must Rise Again

John Weaver | SermonAudio

Lecture Metadata	Details
Speaker	John Weaver
Source	SermonAudio
Media ID	32706201629
Subject	New Testament Studies
Course	Revelation Themes and Eschatological Applications
Genre	Sermon
Date	2006-01-15
Dictation Name
Book	Book 141: Revelation Themes and Eschatological Applications — Chapter 4
Source Timed Segments	71

Lecture Guide

Outline

Introduction: The Call to Rise Up: Weaver opens with Psalm 94:16, asking who will rise up against evildoers. He asserts that the South once stood for Christ and His Word against northern rationalism, humanism, and centralism, and must do so again.
The Loss of Genuine Freedom: Weaver claims that the current generation has never experienced real freedom, with those in their 60s and 70s having tasted the last remnants of liberty about 50 years ago.
The War Changed the Nature of Government: Citing historians, Weaver argues that the War of Northern Aggression transformed the Constitutional Republic into a centralized democratic bureaucracy, with Lincoln violating the Constitution in multiple ways.
The Constitution as a Dead Letter: Weaver contends that modern politicians ignore the Constitution, and that the U.S. is now ruled by an elite that makes up rules as it goes, offering only socialist choices to voters.
First Reason: The South as Bastion of Biblical Theology: The South was the Bible Belt, home to leading theologians who opposed Northern Unitarianism. Southern leaders saw the war as a religious conflict against atheists, socialists, and communists.
The Unitarian Influence and the Battle Hymn: Weaver critiques Julia Ward Howe's Unitarian beliefs, which denied Christ's deity and promoted universal redemption, reflecting the rationalism that underpinned Northern ideology and persists today.
Second Reason: The South as Citadel for the Constitutional Republic: Weaver argues that the North hated the Union and Constitution, while the South sought to preserve them. He cites Northern abolitionists and Lincoln's own words to show a reversal on states' rights.
Modern Erosion of Liberties: Using a 2005 Miami police tactic as an example, Weaver illustrates how constitutional protections like the Fourth and Fifth Amendments are being ignored in the name of security.
Third Reason: The South as Bulwark for Economic Freedom: Weaver explains that high protective tariffs imposed by the North economically oppressed the South, which paid the majority of federal revenues while receiving little in return, leading to secession.
James Madison's Warning and Modern Parallels: Weaver quotes Madison's prediction that an unlimited general welfare clause would lead to federal control over religion, education, and welfare—all of which he says have come to pass.
Conclusion: The South Must Rise Again: Weaver calls for a renewed cry that 'the cause of the South is the cause of us all,' urging a return to biblical faith, constitutional republicanism, and economic freedom, ending with prayer.

Major Themes

Key Arguments

The South was the bastion of biblical theology

The South earned the nickname 'Bible Belt' because its leading theologians defended orthodox Christianity against Northern Unitarianism, making the Civil War a religious war.

Weaver says: 'the leading theologians in America were in the South... the South still held tenaciously to the Word of God' (658.0-768.2s).

The North hated the Constitution and the Union

Northern abolitionists and Republican leaders sought to destroy the Union and the Constitution, while the South fought to preserve them.

Weaver quotes Wendell Phillips: 'The Republican Party is... pledged to work for the downfall of democracy, the downfall of the Union, and the destruction of the United States Constitution' (1932.5-2016.4s).

Lincoln subverted the Constitution and states' rights

Lincoln violated the Constitution, denied states' sovereignty, and used executive orders to centralize power, setting a precedent for modern federal overreach.

Weaver states: 'Abraham Lincoln denied states' rights, the sovereignty of the states, and basically proclaimed himself as dictator' (2064.2-2173.6s).

High tariffs were a primary cause of secession

The North imposed protective tariffs that forced the South to pay the vast majority of federal revenues, economically oppressing the region and prompting secession.

Weaver explains: 'the South paid 84% of the tariffs, rising to 87% in 1860... The South, in effect, was paying tribute to the North' (3161.6-3256.4s).

Modern government mirrors Unitarian rationalism

Today's political correctness and statism are direct descendants of 1860s Unitarianism, which rejected biblical authority and looked to government for salvation.

Weaver asserts: 'What we have in our government and in our political correct system today is exactly what the Unitarians and the Rationalists advocated in the 1860s' (1537.3-1576.1s).

The Constitution has been rendered meaningless

Politicians no longer consider constitutionality when passing laws, and the federal government acts as master over the states, contrary to the Tenth Amendment.

Weaver asks: 'Have you ever heard of a politician refusing to vote for a bill because that bill is unconstitutional? And the answer is absolutely no' (506.2-547.0s).

The South must rise to restore liberty

Only a Southern revival can reclaim biblical faith, constitutional government, and economic freedom; without it, constitutional liberty on the continent is lost.

Weaver quotes Alexander Stephens: 'The only hope... for the maintenance of constitutional liberty on this continent is that another like cry should hereafter be raised... The cause of the South is the cause of us all' (3665.6-3731.6s).

Scripture References

Psalm 94:16: Weaver opens the sermon with this verse, using it as the foundational call for the South to rise up against evildoers and workers of iniquity.
John 14:6: Weaver cites this verse to contrast Julia Ward Howe's Unitarian rejection of Christ as the only way to salvation.
Revelation (unspecified): Weaver mentions that Pastor Jesse Cox considered the Yankee Army the beast described in the Book of Revelation.

Historical References

War of Northern Aggression (American Civil War, 1861–1865): Weaver refers to the Civil War as the 'War of Northern Aggression,' arguing it transformed the U.S. from a constitutional republic into a centralized empire.
Abraham Lincoln: Weaver accuses Lincoln of violating the Constitution in multiple ways, killing the Constitution, and centralizing power, calling him dishonest.
James McPherson (historian): Weaver quotes McPherson's statement that the war changed the United States as thoroughly as the French Revolution changed France.
Karl Marx: Weaver notes that Marx, writing for the New York Tribune, predicted the war would be the beginning of a world-transforming revolutionary movement.
Mildred Lewis Rutherford, 'The Truths of History': Weaver references Rutherford's book listing 17 specific violations Lincoln made against the Constitution.
Robert Louis Dabney, James Henley Thornwell, Benjamin Palmer Morgan, J.P. Boyce, Broadus: Weaver names these Southern theologians as leading figures who opposed Northern Unitarianism and rationalism.
Julia Ward Howe and 'The Battle Hymn of the Republic': Weaver critiques Howe's Unitarian beliefs and her song as unbiblical and ungodly, representing Northern rationalism.
Tariffs of 1828, 1832, 1833 (Tariffs of Abomination): Weaver discusses these tariffs as unconstitutional sectional measures that penalized the South and nearly caused secession in 1832.
Morrill Tariff of 1861: Weaver notes this tariff imposed the highest rates in U.S. history, averaging 47%, and was passed after Southern secession.
Alexander Hamilton Stephens: Weaver quotes the Confederate Vice President's statement that 'the cause of the South is the cause of us all' as essential for restoring constitutional liberty.

Important Quotes

Who will rise up for me against the evildoers? Or who will stand up for me against the workers of iniquity?

This is the foundational Scripture call that frames the entire sermon, urging the South to take action against modern evildoers.

The war changed the United States as thoroughly as the French Revolution changed France.

Weaver uses this quote from historian James McPherson to emphasize the radical transformation of American government after the Civil War.

I threw away once and forever the thought of a terrible hell which appears to me impossible.

Weaver quotes Julia Ward Howe to illustrate the Unitarian rejection of biblical doctrines like hell.

The states have their status in the Union, and they have no other legal status.

Weaver cites Lincoln's 1861 speech to show his denial of states' rights and sovereignty.

The only hope, in my view, for the maintenance of constitutional liberty on this continent is that another like cry should hereafter be raised and go forth from hilltop to valley, from coast to the lakes, from the Atlantic to the Pacific. The cause of the South is the cause of us all.

This quote from Alexander Stephens serves as the climactic call to action, urging a nationwide recognition of the South's cause.

Discussion Questions

[Question]

In what ways does the sermon's claim that 'the generation that is alive today has never, ever experienced real, genuine freedom' challenge or affirm your understanding of American liberty?

[Context]

Weaver makes this statement early in the sermon to set up his argument about the loss of constitutional freedoms.

[Question]

How does Weaver's portrayal of the Civil War as a 'theological war' between biblical orthodoxy and Unitarian rationalism affect your view of the conflict's causes?

[Context]

Weaver extensively quotes Southern theologians who saw the war in religious terms.

[Question]

Weaver argues that modern political correctness is the direct descendant of 1860s Unitarianism. Do you see parallels between the two worldviews?

[Context]

He draws this connection when discussing Julia Ward Howe's beliefs and contemporary statism.

[Question]

What is your response to the claim that 'the Constitution is a dead letter' because politicians no longer consider constitutionality when voting on bills?

[Context]

Weaver illustrates this by asking if any politician refuses to vote for unconstitutional bills.

[Question]

How does the concept of 'salvation by government' manifest in contemporary society, according to Weaver, and do you agree with his assessment?

[Context]

He discusses the messianic nature of government in the context of disaster response and welfare.

[Question]

Weaver contends that the South paid a disproportionate share of federal tariffs, leading to economic oppression. How does this historical argument inform current debates about federal taxation and spending?

[Context]

He provides statistics on tariff burdens and quotes Thomas Hart Benton on wealth transfer.

[Question]

What would it practically look like for the South to 'rise again' as a bastion of biblical faith, citadel of constitutional republicanism, and bulwark of economic freedom?

[Context]

This is the central application of the sermon, summarized near the end.

Applications

Format deepseek deepseek-v4-pro structured study JSON | Source Commentary.net transcript enrichment

deepseek | deepseek-v4-pro | weaver_study | 2026-06-06T06:56:54Z