Blog

Childhood Friends

Richard Barnes

Friendships made in college have been known to last a lifetime and in many cases they issue into productive and highly successful partnerships or careers throughout life. Ditto as to many friendships made in high school. In my case, as an example, I’ve remained closer to several friends made in high school than those made in college.

Back in February of this year, I thoroughly enjoyed meeting with a friend I made in junior high. We were classmates from the 8th through the 10th grades and then I transferred out of state. But we remained close throughout the years since then and when we met for lunch it was as if we had said farewell “yesterday”. 

In the case of childhood friends, I wish I could say I’ve been able to stay in touch over the decades. I truly wish so. However, that was one of the negatives of living in El Pao; society was more transient than in, say, Kalamazoo, Michigan, for instance. My next door neighbor, with whom I had two or three fist fights, only to shake hands and be friends again, left when I was about 7 or so. I still remember him, but have no idea where he might be. I like to think he also remembers me with the same fondness.

The Carrasco’s were dear family friends. I was deeply saddened when they left El Pao for greener pastures in Maracay. They might as well have moved to the moon. I was about 6 or 7 and missed them for years. About 10 years later, we had a family trip wherein we drove from El Pao to Maracay — that was the trip I first drank coffee to enable me to stay awake in order to relieve my father driving. 

We had a wonderful time with the Carrasco’s that trip. Our love for one another was rekindled as we enjoyed the day together, visiting the Maracay Zoo and also the first national park in Venezuela, Parque Pittier, named after the famous Swiss naturalist, Henri François Pittier. Mr. Pittier was born in Switzerland but lived out most of his life in Venezuela, where he named over 30,000 varieties of plants and flowers. He lived to 92 years of age, dying in 1950 in Caracas, Venezuela, where he was interred.

I still remember the clouds or light fog and the dark, deep green as we hiked the park and climbed ever higher. The exercise was strenuous but the spectacular sights, the strong breezes, and the cool, moist weather made it all the more memorable and satisfying. I never returned although, over the years, I’d very much wanted to.

The Maracay Zoo was where my father took Aba, his pet jaguar in the early 50s. As with most wildlife, the jaguar tended to revert to form as time went by and although she never struck or bit my father, she did slash another employee in the arm — the employee had reached toward Aba’s plate as the animal was feeding. The wound was not serious, but it was enough to indicate it was time to dispose of Aba. After some inquiries my father learned that the Maracay Zoo had an excellent reputation and so he took her there. By the time we had visited, the jaguar had died and so we did not see her on our visit.

I still get a slight sinking feeling, reminiscent of the sense of loss I felt as we drove away from Maracay that year as our visit ended. “We’ll see them again,” my father — the eternal optimist — said. But we never did.

Childhood friends come to mind often, but especially during the Christmas season.

It was not unusual to see Jaguar as pets, such as Aba. The above jaguar was the first in the Maracay Zoo (Las Delicias) founded by Juan Vicente Gómez in his favorite city, Maracay.

Henri François Pittier (1857 – 1950). The great Swiss botanist, born and educated in Europe, labored in Costa Rica and in the United States from whence he was assigned in 1917 to a short-term project in Venezuela, then governed by Juan Vicente Gómez, who saw Pittier’s potencial for Venezuela and convinced him to stay on. Stay on he did, living and laboring in Venezuela until his death in 1950. He identified over 30,000 varieties of botanical specimens. Above sculpture is in the Henri Pittier National Park near Maracay.

Henri Pittier National Park

Henri Pittier National Park

My friends, Omaira and Jose Luis Carrasco with Doña (I unfortunately do not recall her name) – Circa 1958

As Christmas approaches, childhood friends come readily to mind.

Courteous Behavior

Richard Barnes

The photo below was taken in our home in El Pao, circa 1955. At the left, is my uncle, Alfred Barnes; to the right is Mr. John Tuohy, a dear friend to the very end. 

I do not remember the two gentlemen in the center.

The painting on the wall was held by my mother to the end of her days. It is one of the constants throughout my entire life. Whenever I think of El Pao, invariably that painting comes to my mind. It is of huts in Lake Maracaibo in the late 1940s or early 1950s.

The late Otto Scott used to say that the primary reason he enjoyed watching older movies was not so much the plot or the acting, although both might have been very good in a given picture. The primary reason was to be reminded of how folks used to behave; how they talked; how they dressed and how they exhibited courteous behaviors. 

Mr. Scott’s point was not that folks were necessarily “better” or “purer”; rather that they observed restrictions that are necessary for the proper functioning of a society. 

Courteous behavior is like motor oil in a finely tuned machine. If the oil runs out, the machinery will collapse.

As you observe the photo below, which was sent by a family friend to my sister, you will notice that the four gentlemen are dressed in coats and ties simply for a visit to a home in the mining camp in a jungle. You will also notice that they are well groomed. Based on my personal knowledge of my uncle and of Mr. Tuohy, I can tell you that they also carried on lively, knowledgeable, interesting, and — most importantly — respectful conversations.

Again, no one is saying these men were “good” — there is none good but God — or that they had no blemishes or dark spots. That is not the point. 

What I am saying is that the courtesy they learned at home and exhibited throughout their lives enabled society to proceed despite rough spots and sharp edges. 

As that courtesy and rules of manners have eroded, society also has eroded alongside.

What maintains such courtesy? Well, readers of this blog will know my position: Christianity is what produces such courtesy. Christianity gives us the law of God by which we live, and by which we agree to function. 

Last Sunday was the First of Advent. May we all enjoy this season and also ponder its significance.

Edward Winslow and His Friend, Massasoit

Richard Barnes

Much history concerning the New England Pilgrims is relatively unknown. This is unfortunate, especially given the flagrant tergiversations of American history by those whose mission is to teach our children to hate their country. 

This short post on this Thanksgiving Day, of 2023, will tell a little about Edward Winslow, who is inextricably bound not only with the Plymouth Colony but with the Wampanoag Chief, Massasoit. Although he was one of the signers of the Mayflower Compact, his name nevertheless remains relatively obscure.

Winslow was one of the best educated among the Pilgrims. He was the son of a prominent merchant in the salt industry in England; a Puritan as distinguished from a Pilgrim Separatist. However, in Holland, he became acquainted with William Brewster and Winslow himself joined the Pilgrim congregation which eventually sailed to the New World. 

Winslow’s education and temperament propelled him to eminence among both the Pilgrims and the Indians. He was chosen to greet Massasoit on the chief’s first visit to the Plymouth Colony. They became immediate friends and Winslow became the primary author of the Pilgrim-Wampanoag Peace Treaty that was signed on April 1, 1621. This was a notable accomplishment as the treaty remained in force for over 50 years, outlasting the lives of William Bradford, Winslow, and Massasoit. 

It is the only such treaty to have been honored throughout the lives of its signatories. “It established the longest-lasting and most equitable peace between natives and immigrants in the history of what would become the United States.” Put another way, in the face of bloody conflicts between other colonists and tribes, such as the Pequot War in Connecticut, the Pilgrims had no such conflicts. A most unusual and worthy feat for which we can be grateful to Edward Winslow and Massasoit.

Winslow wrote about the Plymouth colony that it was a community “not laid upon schism, division, or separation, but upon love, peace, and holiness; yea, such love and mutual care of the Church of Leyden for the spreading of the Gospel, the welfare of each other and their posterities to succeeding generations, is seldom found on earth.”

Winslow lived what he wrote.

In 1623 word reached the colony that Massasoit was very ill, near death. Winslow, accompanied by a Pilgrim and an Indian, immediately departed on a 40-mile journey, by foot, to his friend. He did what he could, including chicken soup. “There is a wonderful relation by Winslow about going to Massasoit’s home and making chicken broth for him,” a historian writes. “It’s very tender.”

Massasoit recovered and said, “Now I see the English are my friends and love me.” 

Winslow was also able to nurse back to health several other Indians who seemed to have been stricken with the same disease. As a result, Massasoit bound himself more firmly with the Pilgrims.

Winslow’s comments about the foundation of love undergirding Plymouth Colony were true. This love enabled tolerance towards those who did not subscribe to the Pilgrim tenets and, most importantly, towards the Indians whom they served and sought to help, even as they, the Pilgrims, had been helped.

Winslow proclaimed the success of the Pilgrims in England, earning the respect and admiration of Oliver Cromwell who assigned him to various diplomatic tasks, the last of which was Cromwell’s appointment of Winslow as governor of Jamaica.

However, the Lord had a different purpose. Edward Winslow took ill and died on the open seas, on his journey to Jamaica, in 1655.

Our early and colonial history is rich with truly remarkable men and women. It is critical to know that history and teach it to our children.

With that very brief background about one of the individuals on the Mayflower and his Indian friend, it is most appropriate to conclude with President Ronald Reagan’s last Thanksgiving Proclamation, given in 1988:

“In this year when we as a people enjoy the fruits of economic growth and international cooperation, let us take time both to remember the sacrifices that have made this harvest possible and the needs of those who do not fully partake of its benefits.

“The wonder of our agricultural abundance must be recalled as the work of farmers who, under the best and worst of conditions, give their all to raise food upon the land.

“The gratitude that fills our being must be tempered with compassion for the needy.

“The blessings that are ours must be understood as the gift of a loving God Whose greatest gift is healing.

“Let us join then, with the psalmist of old: O give thanks to the Lord, call on His name, Make known His deeds among the peoples!

“Sing to Him, sing praises to Him, Tell of all His wonderful works!

“Glory in His holy name; Let the hearts of those who seek the Lord rejoice!

“NOW, THEREFORE, I, RONALD REAGAN, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim Thursday, November 24, 1988, as a National Day of thanksgiving, and I call upon the citizens of this great Nation to gather together in homes and places of worship on that day of thanks to affirm by their prayers and their gratitude the many blessings God has bestowed upon us.”

Edward Winslow (1595-1655)

Massasoit (circa 1581-circa 1661)

Signing of the Mayflower Compact; Edward Winslow is standing at center, right hand on the table, left hand holding the ink bottle.

Pilgrim-Wampanoag Peace Treaty, April 1, 1621

President Ronald W. Reagan (1911-2004)

Nothing New Under The Sun III (Conclusion)

Richard Barnes

About 15 years ago, I jotted the points below from a lecture or from a book but neglected to write the source. If a reader knows the source, I would very much appreciate hearing from him or her so that I might give due credit.

The author or lecturer demonstrated that all great peoples or nations usually run a familiar course, which roughly followed the experience of the ancient Jewish people:

  • God rescues a people from slavery giving them faith
  • Faith gives great courage to a people
  • From great courage, the people obtain great liberties
  • From great liberties the people obtain great abundance
  • From great abundance the people become selfish
  • From selfishness the people fall into complacency
  • From complacency the people fall into apathy
  • From apathy the people fall into moral decay
  • From moral decay the people fall into dependence
  • From dependence the people fall into slavery

What we see around us is nothing new. Every great nation or empire or people has seen the same regression — including ancient Israel, as even a cursory reading of the Bible will attest: a time of great faith and great courage; a time of great liberties and prosperity; and then a time of complacency, degeneracy, dependence, and slavery: immorality and pleasure-seeking never produce growth or wealth — quite the opposite.

In the case of America, we have something additional that, although not unique, is nevertheless noteworthy: we have been busy indoctrinating several generations to hate themselves and their native or adopted land. This too has historical precedence, as, for example, the Romans refused to defend themselves from the hordes of invaders. In our case, we have been trained to hate our history and fathers. But that doesn’t mean we end up loving nothing. As someone somewhere has put it, “history abhors a vacuum”. 

We now love “the other”: that which a mere generation ago was thought immoral, indecent, degenerate, tyrannical, and worse, is now what our upcoming generations are taught to “love”. We hate ourselves, but we love something completely opposite to our history and heritage. It follows that we will not defend, let alone fight for, something we hate. 

And “the other” doesn’t just sit there basking in our “love” for it. No, it becomes the viper we have nursed to our bosom; it becomes our master. And nothing good can come of that.

The recent congressional brouhaha over the discovery that Communist China has been influencing the curricula in American elementary schools was much ado about nothing because we knowingly have been teaching the very same atheistic claptrap for generations, without China’s help. Her involvement now ought not to be occasion to clutch our pearls.

So, what is to be done?

There is an example in history of not too long ago which ought to give us hope.

Eighteenth Century England was a moral disaster. There are journals of proper Englishmen registering their having gone to church and successfully “feeling up” a lady or two. Drawings exist of pubs with “clean hay” or simply “hay” to sleep off drunken stupors. The “clean hay” meant that it had no vomit, as opposed to the other, which did, but was cheaper and many resorted thereto. The dog returning to his vomit proverb was very real to 17th Century England. Pornography was rampant.

The North American colonies were well aware of England’s degeneracy: the third bill of right reads:

No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

During the War for Independence, British soldiers and foreign mercenaries took over private homes, in many cases assaulting or otherwise ravishing the wives and daughters. Drunken rampages were not uncommon, even among ranking officers.

England was the place where apostates like Voltaire caught the atheistic urge to spew hatred towards Christianity and took that pornographic bacteria back to France where it produced oceans of blood and violence. 

Why did England not go the way of France in the 18th Century?

Well, in her fields and street corners, men such as John and Charles Wesley were preaching the Gospel and thousands were convicted and their hearts opened. George Whitefield preached in both England and also the colonies, although he died before the fruits of his ministries became visible in England.

The Lord used the preaching and teaching of His Word and Law to turn England around. A turnaround the likes of which are rarely seen — Ninevah after Jonah’s preaching comes to mind. And in the following century, she led the greatest evangelical missionary outreach in history, other than the Apostolic age. King George lost his colonies, but gained the world.

From debauchery to world conquest in one century.

Of course, this is not something wrought by human ingenuity or power. It is the work of God. But we know that many mothers and fathers in England were praying for their sons and daughters, that they would return to the old paths.

And that is the course we must ask God to help us take if we hope to see a return to the old paths here in our country, a country whose history irrefutably was founded upon eternal spiritual values which in turn made us a great nation.

John Adams said, “Individuals have conquered themselves. Nations and large bodies of men, never.” However, he overlooked Nineveh … and also England.

Let us listen to Jeremiah as he rebuked Judah:

“Were they ashamed when they had committed abomination? nay, they were not at all ashamed, neither could they blush: therefore they shall fall among them that fall: at the time that I visit them they shall be cast down, saith the LORD. Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein.”

May we say, “We shall walk therein.”

All the while, knowing that without the intervention of God, nations will decline and cease to be.

John Wesley, left (1703-1791) and Charles Wesley (1707-1788)

George Whitefield (1714-1770)

Voltaire (1694-1778)

The Barbarian invasions and sackings took place in the face of little to no opposition.

Nothing New Under The Sun II

Richard Barnes

Contrary to the hopes of millions of peoples around the world, the fall of the Communist Soviet Union did not mark an end to the state’s ages long, relentless offensive to bring all humanity and her activities under the state’s total control.

Nor did Soviet Communism mark the beginning of that quest. The previous post noted that Marx and Engels assumed Communism to be the Jacobins’ program a century before; Lenin himself said the Jacobins’ fatal error was to stop the terror, a mistake he (Lenin) was determined to not repeat.

However, going back to the Jacobins is not going back anywhere near far enough.

In the Middle Ages, there was a real tension within the church as to which was the more important or critical: the particulars or the absolute? How this question was answered would also lead to determining the standard by which the church should be governed: by men and their traditions or by the full authority of the Bible? Francis Schaeffer’s How Should We Then Live has an interesting narrative on this point, as does R. J. Rushdoony’s The One And The Many. 

This was a very real debate which “swung” one way to the other and back, with consequences for centuries thereafter.

Over time, those who pushed for men and their traditions won out over those who pushed for the authority of the Bible. The humanist victory was accompanied with absolutism, which is usually the case when the authority of the Bible, the Word and Law of God, is minimized or otherwise not recognized. According to St. Peter, judgment must begin in the house of God. As goes the church, so goes the rest. So the tension within the church devolved into a tension between the church and the state. After all, both claimed authority on the basis of men and traditions, not on the basis of eternal Law.

Interestingly, most folks believe that the church in the Middle Ages was running things. That’s a dangerous oversimplification. The church may have opened the door for the tyranny that followed; however, she ended up being blamed for crimes which she actually opposed. She clearly preferred to be the one running things, however the fact is that she was not.

In the battle to determine who was the supreme manifestation of man on earth, church or state, the state clearly won out. Yes, many in the church fought and argued for her supremacy, while many in the kings’ courts argued for the supremacy of Caesar.

Very few argued for the supremacy of God over both church and state. That was inherent in Augustine’s phrase, “The One and the Many” — God is One in Three Persons. Wherever the Trinitarian faith prevails, not only in creeds, but in sincere belief and practice, there is freedom. There is a recognition of individual liberty and desires (the Many) but also of community and communion, acknowledging the need for unity (the One). And there is the recognition that there are spheres in life, of which church and state are two. Others include family, school, work, etc. But all are under God and none is to usurp the sphere of another.

An example of the state’s tyranny for which the church is usually blamed is the case of John Hus. At the Council of Constance (1414-1418 in Bohemia) the church declared that John Hus was not a heretic. The members of the council disagreed with his focus on the Bible, but this was not heresy, according to them.

Emperor Sigismund had promised safe conduct to Hus. But that was a lie: as soon as Hus arrived he was arrested and was not permitted to defend himself; he was only permitted to renounce his faith, something he would not do. Regardless, Sigismund declared that even if Hus recanted his faith, he would be executed.

Hus declared, “I appeal to Jesus Christ, the Only Judge who is omnipotent and wholly Just. In His hands I place my cause, not on the foundation of false witnesses and councils, but on the foundation of truth and justice.”

He was cruelly burned at the stake, by Caesar’s orders and henchmen. Hus’s example can be multiplied by the thousands.

The state requires conformity, whether it be 21st Century health mandates, 20th Century Soviet Union, or 15th Century Bohemia. And for total conformity to become a reality, total control is necessary: everyone is to think the same and to do the same. For this to be so, the state must control even our thoughts and our beliefs. 

This is nothing new, not even in the 15th Century.

Incidentally, throughout the Inquisition, a program in which the Church did not execute anybody, the state did, sober estimates of executions range from a low of 2,000 to a high of 20,000. Compare that to the deaths chargeable to atheistic Communist regimes in the 20th Century alone, where the numbers go into the tens of millions and even up to 200,000 million, depending on your sources. I am most certainly not excusing the church’s role in this nefarious period of history; however, the tale needs to be told truthfully.

The important point for the purposes of this post is to realize that the battles of the Middle Ages revolved around the question: Christ or Caesar? The 16th Century Reformation decidedly proclaimed the Crown Rights of Christ the King — which became the cry of the English Puritans of the 17th Century, which conviction they brought to the Americas. This meant that Christ was over both the church and the state.

To the Reformers the solution of The One And The Many was the Trinitarian faith under which men were free to govern themselves according to the Bible, the only Rule for life. Under that faith, all legitimate institutions were under Jesus Christ. This meant that the state had no business regulating the church nor did the church have any business performing duties delegated by God to the civil authorities. So, for instance, the administration of justice was a civic duty. But the church could and should proclaim the justice of God including rebuke of a State which would deviate from God’s Law. This was a church duty and she had the liberty to freely exercise that duty.

With the passing of the decades and centuries, Americans increasingly inclined towards a more Erastian persuasion, meaning that as the state grew, citizens saw it as god, without actually saying so. For example, the federal income tax laws “exempt” charitable organizations, into which they lump the church. However, the 17th Century understanding was that the church was a separate sphere or kingdom under God’s Kingdom. The income tax authorities (if there had been any back then), would have absolutely no business determining if a church met their definition of charitable organization or not, much less demand a certification or registration to that effect.

The Erastian view is that the church must indeed “prove” to the state whatever the state demands. And that’s where we are today: a spot where the church is seen as “under” the state. The past three years where churches were shut down or ordered to cease communion or to wear masks or to practice social distance clearly demonstrated that the state, and many churchgoers, do not believe that Jesus is the Head of His Church, let alone King.

But, again, even that is not something new under the sun.

Way back in the Garden of Eden, man was tempted to be his own god; a god who determines what is right and what is wrong. He was tempted to not obey the Triune God Who had told him that He, God, tells him, man, what is right and what is wrong. R. J. Rushdoony has written much about this and any reader who is interested is encouraged to look into his writings.

Practically all of history is man’s quest to be god. The City and Tower of Babel (Genesis 11) is collective man attempting to be god. The attempt failed.

All such schemes will fail, whether they be Sigismund executing John Hus, whether they be Communist China seeking to control what her people think, whether they be federal and state officials telling churches how to worship and when, or whether it be the World Economic Forum predestinating us to a solitary, nasty, brutish, and short life.

All will fail.

There is nothing new under the sun.

Jan Hus (1370-1415) statue in Prague, Czech Republic

Emperor Sigismund (1368-1437)

Thomas Erastus (1524-1583)