Latest Articles on Religious freedom and the land
from The ekklesia News Room Go:Home Page - Letters - News central


      The examination of this bill before congress has been done for several reasons.
      1. That you may see the nature and mind set of the leaders of the United States government.
      2. Is so that you will see the direction the people of America are taking as the apostate Church and Government confuse and deprive the people of the nature of the Church.
      3. Is to bring your attention to the devious adversaries of freedom and faith working cleverly behind the seen. Take heed to thyself, lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land whither thou goest, lest it be for a snare in the midst of thee: (Exodus 34, 12.)
      You should understand that the LORD God gave man this planet upon which to live and to exercise dominion over.
      You should understand that Jesus the Christ saved us from the sin of making other men gods over us.
      You should understand that we have been deceived and have returned to the mire and gone under the authority of others.
      ...and ye shall be plucked from off the land whither thou goest to possess it....and there thou shalt serve other gods,.. shalt thou find no ease...shalt have none assurance of thy life: (Deuteronomy 28:63, 66)
      There are ways out of this subjective dominion of the State but the door is closing as the grip of the world order closes about us.

      "The first farmer was the first man, and all historic nobility rests on possession and use of land." 1

      You should understand the difference between a 501c3 church and the 508 Church, a.k.a. The ekklesia and the Body of Christ. see: The Body of Christ Vs. The Body of the State
      Also, you should desire to know the importance of possession of the land.

; "For as labor cannot produce without the use of land, the denial of the equal right to the use of land is necessarily the denial of the right of labor to its own produce."2

     
      The `Religious Liberty Protection Act of 1999', HR 1691 RH
Union Calendar No. 125 106th CONGRESS 1st Session [Report No. 106-219] is not a BILL To protect religious liberty. It is an attempt to end all liberty throughout the land.
      It states in, "SEC. 2. (b).. A government may substantially burden a person's religious exercise if the government demonstrates that application of the burden to the person--
      (1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and
      (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest." Government is establishing its interest above the Church, making the Church subservient to its will instead of God's will.
      Section 2 (c) centralizes the power of the "Attorney General or the United States or any agency, officer, or employee thereof under other law, including section 4(d) of this Act, to institute or intervene in any action or proceeding."
      Section. 3.(a) States that someone whose freedom of religion is violated, "shall bear the burden of persuasion on whether the challenged government practice, law, or regulation burdens or substantially burdens the claimant's exercise of religion." In other words you will have to prove to a judge that your religious rights are "substantially" burdened. Your right has become a privilege at the permission of a judge.
      (b) LAND USE REGULATION-
      In the same section (1) (A), concerning land, "a government has the authority to make individualized assessments of the proposed uses to which real property would be put," and again puts the "governmental interest" above religious rights. Paragraphs (1) of section 3 reduces "religious assemblies or institutions" to an equal status "with nonreligious assemblies or institutions" like McDonald's and the corner gas station.
      In "SEC. 5. RULES OF CONSTRUCTION". Paragraph "(e) GOVERNMENTAL DISCRETION IN ALLEVIATING BURDENS ON RELIGIOUS EXERCISE- A government may avoid the preemptive force of any provision of this Act by changing the policy that results in the substantial burden on religious exercise, by retaining the policy and exempting the burdened religious exercise, by providing exemptions from the policy for applications that substantially burden religious exercise, or by any other means that eliminates the substantial burden." With such "discretion" the government may burden one religious belief and establish another by policy manipulation in opposition to the second amendment.
      And paragraph, referring to the Constitution, (g) says the "Act should be construed in favor of a broad protection of religious exercise" but it does not say "shall".
      In SEC. 7. of the AMENDMENTS TO RELIGIOUS FREEDOM RESTORATION ACT. The definitions, deletions and insertions in the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 2000bb-2) amends and expand the agencies that can "substantially burden a person's religious exercise".
      We see a significant change in the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993. Paragraph (3) of Section 7 of the `Religious Liberty Protection Act of 1999' redefines "exercise of religion" by altering paragraph (4) Section 5 of The 1993 RFRA. It states, "by striking all after `means,' and inserting `any exercise of religion, whether or not compelled by, or central to, a system of religious belief, and includes (A) the use, building, or conversion of real property by a person or entity intending that property for religious exercise; and (B) any conduct protected as exercise of religion under the first amendment to the Constitution.'"
      This phrase alone undermines all liberty and freedom left in this land. It is so cleverly devious that I can not believe that it is included for anything but the most malevolent of purposes and is no accident legal jargon.
      The same phrase is also included again in "SEC. 8. DEFINITIONS. As used in this Act-- (1) the term `religious exercise' means any exercise of religion, whether or not compelled by, or central to, a system of religious belief, and includes (A) the use, building, or conversion of real property by a person or entity intending that property for religious exercise; and (B) any conduct protected as exercise of religion under the first amendment to the Constitution;" The use of the words like use and conversion seem to be unimportant but they are key to the infammy of this bill. We will examine why below.
      This same section in Paragraph (2) goes on to include the religious Church under the infamous privilege of the 14th Amendment, relegating a mandatory and separate body and right to a subjective and controlled relationship.
      (2) the term `Free Exercise Clause' means that portion of the first amendment to the Constitution that proscribes laws prohibiting the free exercise of religion and includes the application of that proscription under the 14th amendment to the Constitution;
      And paragraph (3) subjects the non 501c3 Church with a freehold title in land to a subjected vassal of the state with mere privileges subjecting it to governmental strangulation.
      (3) the term `land use regulation' means a law or decision by a government that limits or restricts a private person's uses or development of land, or of structures affixed to land, where the law or decision applies to one or more particular parcels of land or to land within one or more designated geographical zones, and where the private person has an ownership, leasehold, easement, servitude, or other property interest in the regulated land, or a contract or option to acquire such an interest;
      And Paragraph (5) again places access to a right only after proof to the judiciary. (5) the term `demonstrates' means meets the burdens of going forward with the evidence and of persuasion; and
      Paragraph (6) broadly redefines "the term `government'--(A) means--(i) a State, county, municipality, or other governmental entity created under the authority of a State; (ii) any branch, department, agency, instrumentality, subdivision, or official of an entity listed in clause (i); and (iii) any other person acting under color of State law; and
      (B) for the purposes of sections 3(a) and 5, includes the United States, a branch, department, agency, instrumentality or official of the United States, and any person acting under color of Federal law. Union Calendar No. 125"
      The phrase "any person acting under color of Federal law" is a stunning vote for tyrannical anarchy. "Color of law" in Black's 3rd is defined "The appearance or semblance, without the substance, and legal right."
     
      What does all this mean to those seeking freedom in America?
      The door is closing . Shall you be sealed in or out of the LORD's house?
      Religious freedom in America was the last bastion of freedom and liberty in the world today and it is about to suffer another killing blow from the federal government of the United States
      Almost every person in the world no longer truly owns the land upon which they live. The have settled for a mere legal title. The holder of a legal title to anything is not the owner of the property. A legal title is not a freehold, allodial, true and actual title or a fee simple title. Although a "legal title" is "one cognizable... in a court of law."3 It is only "complete and perfect so far as regards the apparent right of ownership and possession, but which carries no beneficial interest in the property, another person being equitably entitled thereto; in either case, the antithesis of 'equitable title.'"4
      The appearance of a right of ownership is not the same as ownership which is evident in the fact that a legal title "carries no beneficial interest in the property". Beneficial interest does not include a right to the "profit, benefit, or advantage resulting from a contract," nor does it include "the ownership of an estate." After all, a beneficial interest is "distinct from the legal ownership."5 In the simplest of terms a legal title only appears to be a right to ownership but it does not include the right to the use of the property, its profit and benefit and it is not the "ownership of an estate." In order to maintain access to the use of the property you only have a mere legal title to you must pay the use tax, also called an excise tax and in Rome and the Bible was called tribute.

      How doth the city sit solitary, [that was] full of people! [how] is she become as a widow! she [that was] great among the nations, [and] princess among the provinces, [how] is she become tributary ! (La 1:1)

      The word 'use' is described, in Black's Law Dictionary 3rd p1787. Bouvier's,as a "A right in one person, so called the cestui que use, to take the profits of land of which another has legal title and possession, together with the duty of defending the same and of making estates therefore according to the direction of the cestui que use." A use by nature then is a trust. "Uses and trusts are not so much different things as different aspects of the same subject." 6
      The most important aspect of a legal title to understand is that it is the "antithesis" or the opposite of an "equitable title." An equitable title as opposed to a legal title "is a right in the party" rather than only appearing to be a right. More important it is "the beneficial interest of one person whom equity regards as the real owner, although the legal title is vested in another."7

      Abolition of private property. First plank of the COMMUNIST MANIFESTO

      The importance of the fact that no one owns the land upon which they are domiciled begins to take on an ominous perspective when we realize that a "Freeman; the possessors of allodial lands."8 And with out the freehold title in land our rights as freemen are diminished.

"Liber homo. A free man; a freeman lawfully competent to act as juror.9 An allodial proprietor, as distinguished from a vassal or feudatory."10

      Even our citizenship in a free republic is drastically altered.

      "The words 'citizen' and 'citizenship,' however, usually include the idea of domicile."11

      This division of legal title on the one hand and equitable title on the other is known as "equitable conversion". The reverse of this process and a return to a true and actual title is known as equitable reconversion.
      This reconversion is relatively simple to accomplish but almost impossible to maintain in the wilderness of judicial and bureaucratic ignorance found in America today. Whoso causeth the righteous to go astray in an evil way, he shall fall himself into his own pit: but the upright shall have good [things] in possession. (Proverbs 28:10)
      When the non 501c3 Church purchases a parcel of land and removes it from the tax roles they are virtually equitably reconverting the title. This conversion of title by the free Church is the last hope of freedom in America.

      And if it seems evil to you to serve the Lord, choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the river, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you dwell. But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord. (Joshua 24:15)

      Gregory at the ekklesia

Footnotes
1 Emerson.
2 Henry George - Progress and Poverty. Bk. VII. Ch. I.
3 Black's 3rd p 1734.
4 Black's 3rd "legal title" p 1734.
5 Black's 3rd "beneficial Interest" p 206.
6 Black's Law Dictionary 3rd p1787p.Mozele and Whitely.
7 Black's 3rd "Equitable Title" p 1734.
8 liberi. In Saxon Law - Blacks 3rd. Oxford Dictionary
9 Ld. Raym. 417; Kebl. 563.
10 Black's 3rd Ed. page 1105.
11 Black's 3rd. Ed. p. 330.

For more reading on land visit.
Law vs legal

Conversion vs. Reconversion



Please email your questions or comments to: ekklesia@presys.com
Phone: (541) 943-3208
Fax: (541) 943-3268
Or write us via "snail mail" at:
The ekklesia News
attn. Gregory
Via Post Office Box 10
Summer Lake, Oregon [97640]

Note: Subscriptions to ekklesia News hard copy are done on a donation bases only. Though we try to mail bimonthly time does not always allow.

Go:Home Health Links Writings