{"id":5464,"date":"2020-07-17T12:01:43","date_gmt":"2020-07-17T12:01:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/?p=5464"},"modified":"2020-05-03T06:43:08","modified_gmt":"2020-05-03T06:43:08","slug":"another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-32","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-32\/","title":{"rendered":"ANOTHER COFFEE BREAK: OUR FOREFATHERS\u2019 COVENANTS, Part 32"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/span><\/div><\/div>
<\/div>\r\n\r\n
\r\n\r\n

<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

OUR FOREFATHERS\u2019\r\nCOVENANTS<\/o:p><\/span><\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Part 32<\/o:p><\/span><\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\u00a0<\/o:p><\/span><\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n

July 17, 2020<\/o:p><\/span><\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\u00a0<\/o:p><\/span><\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n

It was in 1980 or 1981\r\nthat I first became acquainted with Jay Sekulow.\u00a0 I had a brief guest appearance\r\non the 700 Club on this occasion (I was heading up CBN's operations in Alaska\r\nat the time), and Jay was the primary guest.\u00a0 When I heard him talk about\r\nLaw and the Constitution, everything inside me just leaped.\u00a0 Here was a\r\nman who had a real grasp of what our nation's founding fathers intended, a man\r\nwho was more than just an astute attorney.\u00a0 Jay had an anointing from the\r\nHoly Spirit to go with his legal brilliance.<\/o:p><\/span><\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n

If memory\r\nserves me correctly, it was in 1977 that Pat Robertson founded CBN University\r\nwith a specific view towards raising up and educating a new generation of\r\nleaders -- not only for America, but for the world at large -- who would be\r\neducated with a thorough knowledge of governmental leadership, the U.S.\r\nConstitution, and the birthing of America under Christian principles.\u00a0\r\nBefore long the name changed to Regent University and in 1980, Regent\r\nUniversity School of Law began operations.\u00a0 Jay Sekulow was tapped as a\r\nprofessor for this new school of law.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

A new\r\ngeneration of lawyers began to emerge from Regent, and with this generation, an\r\nunderstanding that if Christians were going to regain the liberties being\r\nsystematically stolen by atheists, leftists and liberals using their compatriot\r\nand sympathetic judges throughout our nation's court system, Christians were\r\ngoing to have defeat them on their own turf using the law and the still-intact\r\nConstitution.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

In 1990,\r\nPat Robertson founded the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) putting\r\nJay at the head of the organization as Chief Counsel.\u00a0 The ACLJ came into\r\nbeing as a direct means of combating the ultra-liberal, leftist, and anti-God (with\r\ncommunist foundations) ACLU.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

During the\r\nsame time frame that the ACLJ was coming into its existence, Mathew Staver was\r\norganizing the Liberty Counsel with similar goals and objectives.\u00a0 (I met\r\nMatt for the first time at a meeting in Washington, DC a few years ago.)\u00a0\r\nBesides founding the Liberty Counsel, Matt also serves as the Dean of Liberty\r\nUniversity School of Law, and is on the board of Trustees at Jerry Falwell's\r\nLiberty University.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Then in\r\n1994, Kevin J. \"Seamus\" Hasson founded the Becket Fund for Religious\r\nLiberty.\u00a0 Hasson had served in the Reagan Administration in the Office of\r\nLegal Counsel, advising President Reagan on church-state relations.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Add to\r\nthese organizations Donald Wildmon's American Family Counsel, Lou Sheldon's\r\nTraditional Values Coalition, Tony Perkins' Family Research Council, and Alan\r\nSears' Alliance Defense Fund, and you have a formidable array of organizations,\r\nindividuals, and resources allied in the fight to restore our nation's moral\r\nand spiritual foundations.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Thus, in\r\n1993 we saw the tide begin to turn in the way that cases relating to the myth\r\nof \"separation of church and state\" were presented before the courts,\r\nand the way in which they were decided.\u00a0 It was Jay Sekulow and the ACLJ\r\nwho began the reversal.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

New York\r\nstate law permits school districts to allow their buildings to be used outside\r\nschool hours for social, civic, and recreational but not for religious\r\npurposes. The Center Moriches district, interpreting these regulations, denied\r\npermission for a local church group to show a film on Christian family values\r\nin a school building after school hours. The church (Lamb's Chapel) and its\r\npastor brought suit against the district in United States District Court, (the\r\ncase was titled, Lamb's Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free School Dist<\/i><\/b>.<\/i>)\r\nclaiming their First Amendment right of free speech was being denied. The\r\nDistrict Court agreed with the school district. The area was a limited public\r\nforum, the school district had not opened its facilities to organizations for\r\nsimilar religious purposes and therefore the denial was \"viewpoint\r\nneutral.\" The US Court of Appeals affirmed the decision.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

When the\r\ncase reached the US Supreme Court on February 4, 1993, the Court reversed the\r\ndecision by a 9-0 vote. They ruled that: 1)<\/span><\/b>the\r\ndistrict's denial of permission to show the film was a violation of the First\r\nAmendment speech clause given that,: a)<\/span><\/b>the\r\ndistrict permitted the use of school property for social or civic purposes; b)<\/span><\/b>there was no suggestion that the film would not\r\nconstitute such a use; c)<\/span><\/b>permission had\r\nbeen denied solely because the film dealt with an otherwise permissible subject\r\nfrom a religious standpoint; 2)<\/span><\/b>it\r\nwould not be a violation of the First Amendment's establishment of religion\r\nclause to permit the church to show the film and; 3)<\/span><\/b>the\r\ndistrict's denial could not be justified on the grounds that: a) the churches\r\nuse of school property would lead to threats of public unrest and even\r\nviolence, or b) the purpose of the board's access rules was to promote the\r\ninterests of the public in general rather than sectarian or other private\r\ninterests. (508 U.S. 384 (1993).<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Interestingly\r\nenough, it was John G. Roberts (now Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, thanks\r\nto President Bush) who co-authored an amicus<\/i> (\"friend of the\r\ncourt\") brief which helped to hammer the final nail in the coffin of the\r\nCourt of Appeals' decision, bringing the Supreme Court's reversal.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

It was two\r\nyears later on March 1, 1995, that Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of\r\nUniversity of Virginia came before the Supreme Court.\u00a0 In the opening\r\npresentation of the case, Justice Anthony Kennedy described the case like this:<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\"The University of Virginia, an instrumentality of the\r\nCommonwealth for which it is named and thus bound by the First and Fourteenth\r\nAmendments, authorizes the payment of outside contractors for the printing\r\ncosts of a variety of student publications. It withheld any authorization for\r\npayments on behalf of petitioners for the sole reason that their student paper\r\n\"primarily promotes or manifests a particular belief in or about a deity\r\nor an ultimate reality.\" That the paper did promote or manifest views\r\nwithin the defined exclusion seems plain enough. The challenge is to the\r\nUniversity's regulation and its denial of authorization, the case raising\r\nissues under the Speech and Establishment Clauses of the First Amendment.\"<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/o:p><\/span><\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Justice\r\nKennedy continued his description of the argument presented before the Court\r\nthus:<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\"Petitioners' organization, Wide Awake Productions (WAP),\r\nqualified as a CIO (Contracted Independent Organization). Formed by petitioner\r\nRonald Rosenberger and other undergraduates in 1990, WAP was established\r\n\"to publish a magazine of philosophical and religious expression,\"\r\n\"to facilitate discussion which fosters an atmosphere of sensitivity to\r\nand tolerance of Christian viewpoints,\" and \"to provide a unifying\r\nfocus for Christians of multicultural backgrounds.\" App. 67. WAP publishes\r\nWide Awake: A Christian Perspective at the University of Virginia. The paper's\r\nChristian viewpoint was evident from the first issue, in which its editors\r\nwrote that the journal \"offers a Christian perspective on both personal\r\nand community issues, especially those relevant to college students at the\r\nUniversity of Virginia.\" App. 45. The editors committed the paper to a two-fold\r\nmission: \"to challenge Christians to live, in word and deed, according to\r\nthe faith they proclaim and to encourage students to consider what a personal\r\nrelationship with Jesus Christ means.\" Ibid. [***] Each page of Wide\r\nAwake, and the end of each article or review, is marked by a cross. The\r\nadvertisements carried in Wide Awake also reveal the Christian perspective of\r\nthe journal. For the most part, the advertisers are churches, centers for\r\nChristian study, or Christian bookstores. By June 1992, WAP had distributed\r\nabout 5,000 copies of Wide Awake to University students, free of charge.<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/o:p><\/span><\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\"WAP had acquired CIO status soon after it was organized.\r\nThis is an important consideration in this case, for had it been a\r\n\"religious organization,\" WAP would not have been accorded CIO\r\nstatus. As defined by the Guidelines, a \"religious organization\" is\r\n\"an organization whose purpose is to practice a devotion to an\r\nacknowledged ultimate reality or deity.\" App. to Pet. for Cert. 66a. At no\r\nstage in this controversy has the University contended that WAP is such an\r\norganization.<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/o:p><\/span><\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\"Having no further recourse within the University\r\nstructure, WAP, Wide Awake, and three of its editors and members filed suit in\r\nthe United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia,\r\nchallenging the SAF's action as violative of Rev. Stat. [sec.] 1979, 42 U.S.C.\r\n[sec.] 1983. They alleged that refusal to authorize payment of the printing\r\ncosts of the publication, solely on the basis of its religious editorial\r\nviewpoint, violated their rights to freedom of speech and press, to the free\r\nexercise of religion, and to equal protection of the law. They relied also upon\r\nArticle I of the Virginia Constitution and the Virginia Act for Religious\r\nFreedom, Va. Code Ann. [secs.] 57-1, 57-2 (1986 and Supp. 1994), but did not\r\npursue those theories on appeal. The suit sought damages for the costs of\r\nprinting the paper, injunctive and declaratory relief, and attorney's\r\nfees.\"<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Justice\r\nKennedy's refutation of the argument presented by the university's rector gets\r\nto the meat of the case, and makes clear why Jay Sekulow, Mathew Staver and\r\nother like-minded legal scholars have turned the argument away from\r\n\"separation of church and state\" to \"freedom of speech.\"<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

In his\r\nsummation of the court's decision, he writes, \"Were\r\nthe dissent's view to become law, it would require the University, in order to\r\navoid a constitutional violation, to scrutinize the content of student speech,\r\nlest the expression in question--speech otherwise protected by the\r\nConstitution--contain too great a religious content. The dissent, in fact,\r\nanticipates such censorship as \"crucial\" in distinguishing between\r\n\"works characterized by the evangelism of Wide Awake and writing that\r\nmerely happens to express views that a given religion might approve.\"\r\nPost, at 896.<\/o:p><\/span><\/i><\/b><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\u201cThat eventuality raises the specter of governmental censorship,\r\nto ensure that all student writings and publications meet some baseline\r\nstandard of secular orthodoxy. To impose that standard on student speech at a\r\nuniversity is to imperil the very sources of free speech and expression. As we\r\nrecognized in Widmar, official censorship would be far more inconsistent with\r\nthe Establishment Clause's dictates than would governmental provision of\r\nsecular printing services on a religion-blind basis.<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/o:p><\/span><\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\"The dissent fails to establish that the distinction\r\n[between 'religious' speech and speech 'about' religion] has intelligible\r\ncontent. There is no indication when 'singing hymns, reading scripture, and\r\nteaching biblical principles' cease to be 'singing, teaching, and reading'--all\r\napparently forms of 'speech,' despite their religious subject matter--and\r\nbecome unprotected worship.' . . .<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/o:p><\/span><\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\"Even if the distinction drew an arguably principled line,\r\nit is highly doubtful that it would lie within the judicial competence to\r\nadminister. Merely to draw the distinction would require the university--and\r\nultimately the courts--to inquire into the significance of words and practices\r\nto different religious faiths, and in varying circumstances by the same faith.\r\nSuch inquiries would tend inevitably to entangle the State with religion in a\r\nmanner forbidden by our cases. E. g., Walz v. Tax Comm'n of City of New York,\r\n397 U.S. 664 (1970).\" 454 U.S., at 269-270, n. 6.\"<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/o:p><\/span><\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n

On February\r\n28, 2001, the Supreme Court had another case presented before it -- also based\r\nin the First Amendment's free speech protection rather than its freedom of\r\nreligion protection.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

When Rev.\r\nStephen Fournier, who sponsored a Good News Club in the upstate New York\r\nvillage of Milford, sought to move his Christian youth group's meeting place to\r\nthe one public school in town, he was not trying to make a federal case of his\r\nwork or faith.\u00a0 Rather, his decision was more a matter of car pool\r\nstrategy \u2014 something every working parent understands. Rev. Fournier's own\r\nthree children attended the school, and his wife volunteered there. In seeking\r\nto move the Club to the school, he merely sought to join the several other\r\nexternal youth clubs, such as 4-H and the Boy Scouts, which used the school\r\nfacilities after classes were dismissed.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

But when\r\nFournier applied to use a room, the school district said absolutely not. The\r\nClub was too much like a mid-week Sunday School, was the claim. There were\r\nBible stories, praise, and prayer involved. Children might get the idea that\r\nthe school was supporting God.\u00a0 \"Evangelism as hard sell\" was\r\nhow Club opponents described meetings. Children, they said, were evangelized\r\nwith passionate pleas for their very souls \u2014 albeit pleas that were sandwiched\r\nbetween scripture memory games and lots of sugary treats. It was vacation bible\r\nschool, after school \u2014 and children might think it was part<\/i> of school.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

The Club's\r\nopponents overstated their case, to say the least. Can a fourth grade student distinguish\r\nbetween a 2:00 p.m. Social Studies class and a 3:00 p.m., afterschool Good News\r\nClub meeting? Of course. The children can and do distinguish.\u00a0 The\r\nFourniers then sued in federal court, arguing that the school district was\r\nengaging in \"viewpoint discrimination.\"<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Initially,\r\nthey won: A preliminary injunction allowed the Club to hold weekly after-school\r\nmeetings in school facilities for a year, while awaiting trial.\u00a0 But trial\r\nnever happened. Instead, in August 1998, the federal trial judge vacated the\r\ninjunction and summarily ruled in favor the school district. The Club's subject\r\nmatter was ruled \"decidedly religious in nature, and not merely a\r\ndiscussion of secular matters from a religious perspective.\" As a result,\r\nthe Club was kicked out of the building.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

We'll take\r\nup the remainder of this case and conclude our series on Our Forefather\u2019s\r\nCovenantsnext week.\u00a0 I had thought to finish today, but after I saw all\r\nthe material I had expected to cover, and put it down on paper, it was nine\r\npages long.\u00a0 That was simply too much for a single Coffee Break, so I've\r\ncut what was to be today's final discussion into two parts.\u00a0 We'll wrap up\r\nin our next Coffee Break with a look at one of the most far-reaching (in\r\nAmerican jurisprudence) Supreme Court cases dealing with America's Christian\r\nheritage.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

We don't get what we\r\ndeserve; we get only what we declare and operate in according to the laws of\r\nthe Kingdom of God.<\/a><\/o:p><\/span><\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n

In case you\r\nare missing out on real fellowship in an environment of Ekklesia, our Sunday\r\nworship gatherings are available by conference call \u2013 usually at about 10:30AM\r\nPacific.\u00a0 <\/span>That conference number is <\/span><\/b>(712) 770-4160<\/span><\/b>, and the\r\naccess code is <\/span><\/b>308640#.<\/span><\/b>\u00a0 <\/span>We are now making these gatherings\r\navailable on video usingZOOM.\u00a0 <\/span>If you wish\r\nto participate by video on ZOOM, our login ID is 835-926-513.\u00a0 <\/span>If you miss the live voice-onlycall, you can\r\ndial <\/span><\/b>(712) 770-4169<\/span><\/b>, enter the same access code and listen in later.\u00a0 <\/span>The video call, of course, is not recorded \u2013\r\nnot yet, anyway.<\/span><\/b><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Blessings on you!<\/o:p><\/b><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\u00a0<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Regner<\/span><\/b><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span><\/o:p><\/span><\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Regner A. Capener<\/span><\/b>
\r\nCAPENER MINISTRIES<\/b><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

RIVER WORSHIP CENTER<\/span>
\r\nTemple, Texas 76502<\/span><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Email Contact: <\/span>CapenerMinistries@protonmail.com<\/span><\/u><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\u00a0<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

All Coffee Break articles are copyright by Regner A.\r\nCapener, but authorization for reprinting, reposting, copying or re-use, in\r\nwhole or in part, is granted \u2013provided proper attribution and this notice are\r\nincluded intact. Older Coffee Break archives are available .<\/span><\/u> Coffee Break articles are normally published\r\nweekly.
\r\n
\r\nIf you would like to have these articles arrive each morning in your email,\r\nplease send a blank email to: <\/span>AnotherCoffeeBreak@protonmail.com<\/span><\/u> with the word, \u201cSubscribe\u201d in the subject line.\u00a0 <\/span>To remove yourself from the mailing list,\r\nplease send a blank email to <\/span>AnotherCoffeeBreak@protonmail.com<\/span><\/a> with the word \u201cUnsubscribe\u201d in the subject\r\nline. <\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\u00a0<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

CAPENER MINISTRIES<\/span><\/b>\u00a0<\/span>is\r\na tax-exempt church ministry. Should you desire to participate and covenant\r\nwith us as partners in this ministry, please contact us at either of the above\r\nemail or physical addresses, or visit:\u00a0<\/span>http:\/\/www.RiverWorshipCenter.org<\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n

<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div> \r\n
<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

It was in 1980 or 1981 that I first became acquainted with Jay Sekulow. I had a brief guest appearance on the 700 Club on this occasion (I was heading up CBN’s operations in Alaska at the time), and Jay was the primary guest. When I heard him talk about Law and the Constitution, everything inside me just leaped. Here was a man who had a real grasp of what our nation’s founding fathers intended, a man who was more than just an astute attorney. Jay had an anointing from the Holy Spirit to go with his legal brilliance.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[204,1],"tags":[205,65,93],"class_list":["post-5464","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-204","category-another-coffee-break","tag-205","tag-another-coffee-break","tag-july"],"yoast_head":"\nANOTHER COFFEE BREAK: OUR FOREFATHERS\u2019 COVENANTS, Part 32 - Regners Morning Coffee<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-32\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"ANOTHER COFFEE BREAK: OUR FOREFATHERS\u2019 COVENANTS, Part 32 - Regners Morning Coffee\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"It was in 1980 or 1981 that I first became acquainted with Jay Sekulow. I had a brief guest appearance on the 700 Club on this occasion (I was heading up CBN's operations in Alaska at the time), and Jay was the primary guest. When I heard him talk about Law and the Constitution, everything inside me just leaped. Here was a man who had a real grasp of what our nation's founding fathers intended, a man who was more than just an astute attorney. Jay had an anointing from the Holy Spirit to go with his legal brilliance.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-32\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Regners Morning Coffee\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2020-07-17T12:01:43+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"coffee\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"coffee\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"22 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-32\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-32\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"coffee\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/b4475bd1dbeb84d0016274b68e3de28f\"},\"headline\":\"ANOTHER COFFEE BREAK: OUR FOREFATHERS\u2019 COVENANTS, Part 32\",\"datePublished\":\"2020-07-17T12:01:43+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-32\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":4457,\"keywords\":[\"2020\",\"Another Coffee Break\",\"July\"],\"articleSection\":[\"2020\",\"ANOTHER COFFEE BREAK:\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-32\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-32\\\/\",\"name\":\"ANOTHER COFFEE BREAK: OUR FOREFATHERS\u2019 COVENANTS, Part 32 - Regners Morning Coffee\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2020-07-17T12:01:43+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/b4475bd1dbeb84d0016274b68e3de28f\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-32\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-32\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-32\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"ANOTHER COFFEE BREAK: OUR FOREFATHERS\u2019 COVENANTS, Part 32\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/\",\"name\":\"Regners Morning Coffee\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/b4475bd1dbeb84d0016274b68e3de28f\",\"name\":\"coffee\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/author\\\/coffee\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"ANOTHER COFFEE BREAK: OUR FOREFATHERS\u2019 COVENANTS, Part 32 - Regners Morning Coffee","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-32\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"ANOTHER COFFEE BREAK: OUR FOREFATHERS\u2019 COVENANTS, Part 32 - Regners Morning Coffee","og_description":"It was in 1980 or 1981 that I first became acquainted with Jay Sekulow. I had a brief guest appearance on the 700 Club on this occasion (I was heading up CBN's operations in Alaska at the time), and Jay was the primary guest. When I heard him talk about Law and the Constitution, everything inside me just leaped. Here was a man who had a real grasp of what our nation's founding fathers intended, a man who was more than just an astute attorney. Jay had an anointing from the Holy Spirit to go with his legal brilliance.","og_url":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-32\/","og_site_name":"Regners Morning Coffee","article_published_time":"2020-07-17T12:01:43+00:00","author":"coffee","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"coffee","Est. reading time":"22 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-32\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-32\/"},"author":{"name":"coffee","@id":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/#\/schema\/person\/b4475bd1dbeb84d0016274b68e3de28f"},"headline":"ANOTHER COFFEE BREAK: OUR FOREFATHERS\u2019 COVENANTS, Part 32","datePublished":"2020-07-17T12:01:43+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-32\/"},"wordCount":4457,"keywords":["2020","Another Coffee Break","July"],"articleSection":["2020","ANOTHER COFFEE BREAK:"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-32\/","url":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-32\/","name":"ANOTHER COFFEE BREAK: OUR FOREFATHERS\u2019 COVENANTS, Part 32 - Regners Morning Coffee","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/#website"},"datePublished":"2020-07-17T12:01:43+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/#\/schema\/person\/b4475bd1dbeb84d0016274b68e3de28f"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-32\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-32\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-32\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"ANOTHER COFFEE BREAK: OUR FOREFATHERS\u2019 COVENANTS, Part 32"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/#website","url":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/","name":"Regners Morning Coffee","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/#\/schema\/person\/b4475bd1dbeb84d0016274b68e3de28f","name":"coffee","url":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/author\/coffee\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5464","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5464"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5464\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5465,"href":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5464\/revisions\/5465"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5464"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5464"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5464"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}