Found: A National News Organization that Called David Barton America’s Historian

Yesterday, I posted an ad calling David Barton “the most recognized Christian historian in America.” In that post, I noted that Barton says in his bio that “a national news organization has described him as ‘America’s historian.’” That Barton has never named the organization made me skeptical. I also have searched for the source without success.

Until now.

A reader sleuthed out the source and it makes sense for Barton to keep it vague. While other sources may have referred to Barton that way, Janet Porter did so in a 2007 World Net Daily column, titled: “Why I Like Mike for GOP Bus Driver” about Mike Huckabee. Porter wrote:

America’s historian, David Barton, told me last week, “It would be easier to take over the Democratic Party than to start a third party.” He’s right. “But what about faith?” asked a proponent of this losing strategy.

She may not have been the first to use that designation but WND might be the “national news organization” Barton mentions in his bio. Given the goofiness that website is known for, I can see why Barton would not want to get specific. Also, the “news organization” didn’t refer to him that way, Janet Porter did.

America’s historian, really?
 

Former Members of Faith Christian Church (Tucson, AZ) to Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability: Talk to Us

Previously, I posted stories of abuse and pastoral control being alleged by former members of Faith Christian Church in Tucson, AZ. In the Arizona Daily Star article that broke the story, Faith Christian Church was defended by Dan Busby, president of the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability as a member in good standing. Since then, the ECFA told the Daily Star that an executive is investigating.
However, the ECFA has not talked to any former members of Faith Christian Church. Some have now decided to take initiative and contact ECFA directly with the following letter. Signed by 22 former members, the letter makes request to speak with the ECFA in order to explain the coercion and other practices which may placed Faith Christian on the wrong side of the ECFA guidelines for member organizations. Here is that letter sent earlier today to the ECFA:

March 19, 2015
Dear Mr. Busby:
We write as former members hoping to engage you in a discussion of our experience at Faith Christian Church in Tucson, AZ.
We are aware that Faith Christian Church has been a member of the ECFA since 2004. Many of us have attended since then and are aware of the practices of the church while it was a member in good standing with the ECFA.
We saw in the March 12 issue of the Arizona Daily Star that the ECFA is conducting an investigation of Faith Christian Church and has sent an executive to Tucson for that purpose. We welcome this news, however we respectfully ask that the ECFA investigators speak to former members about violations of ECFA guidelines.  We can offer unique insight to the financial policies that current members or current church leadership cannot.
In violation of ECFA’s Donor’s Bill of Rights, most of us experienced pressure to donate at least 10% of our income while at the church.  In fact, it is clearly written in their membership that tithing is a requirement for membership.  If someone did not comply with this requirement, they were often notified that they were not trusting in the Lord and that they would be cursed.  The pastor, Steve Hall, often said he would not pastor cursed people. Weekly, most of us gave our 10%, but the church also encouraged a financial offering on top of that.  We could not designate where our tithe went, but we could designate where we wanted the offering to go (missions, building fund, etc.).  Sometimes, staff members from the church would ask to see the tax returns or bank statements of church members so that the leaders could know the exact figure the members were to give. Some members were even pushed out of the church for not giving the required amount.
Church members were allowed to see the church budget if they asked, although most of us would have felt uncomfortable doing so.  The financial statements were never reported in a church bulletin or discussed at a church meeting.  There was no outside agency that helped determine church spending, salaries, audits, or financial policies, although Steve Hall did use a formula to justify his salary of $100,000+  a year.  Non-staff members did not know how the tithe was being spent.
We ask that you contact ___________ at ­­­­­­­­­­­­_____________ or _____________ to facilitate interviews with former members for the purpose of investigating the issue of compliance by FCC with ECFA standards.
Sincerely,
The Undersigned Former Members (22 names redacted at their request).

Last week, I asked Dan Busby if the ECFA had plans to talk with the former members. He did not reply. However, according to Rachel Mullis, none of the former members disclosed any contact from the ECFA to date.
Below see the requirements for members. While other churches require financial support as a part of a covenant, according to the former members, FCC tied curses, and loss of membership to invasive enforcement.
FCC membership
 

Come Hear the Most Recognized Christian Historian in America

I am not sure what the promoters mean by “most recognized” but I think they mean it in a good way. Sorry, real Christian historians, to make you cringe but you all probably need to make some noise if you don’t like this. The promoter’s name, email and phone number are right there in the ad.
BartonAdNC
 
He also says “a national news organization has described him as ‘America’s historian.'” I would like to know what news organization did that. I have never found the original source.
I don’t buy it.  Someone who had earned the title America’s historian or the most recognized Christian historian would not say the following:

  • The Constitution quotes the Bible verbatim
  • Congress printed the first English language Bible
  • Of the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence, 27 had seminary degrees
  • Virginia law always forbid slave owners to free slaves
  • Unitarian doctrine once included a Trinitarian concept of God
  • Violent crime has increased 694% since 1963
  • William Penn founded the Quakers
  • The Jefferson Bible includes all the recorded words of Jesus
  • Thomas Jefferson founded the Virginia Bible Society
  • Moravian missionaries were in Massachusetts before 1840
  • The NRA was started to arm freed blacks against the KKK
  • There isn’t a vaccine for HIV because God promised to punish gays with HIV

America’s historian probably wouldn’t tell people Simon & Schuster plans to publish a book when the publisher has no plans to do so. Such an historian would not make up a mythical college basketball career playing Division One NCAA college ball for a record-setting team.

Former Mars Hill Churches Continue Support for Ethiopian Pastors

According to Erik Laursen, executive director of the New Covenant Foundation, two former Mars Hill Churches, Foundation Church (Mars Hill Everett) and Trinity West Seattle (Mars Hill West Seattle), have pledged to continue the support of Ethiopian pastors once funded by Mars Hill Church.
Trinity West Seattle’s pastor David Fairchild told me via email that the legacy churches hope to pick up support for all 40 Ethiopian pastors. He said, “Trinity is initially picking up 10 pastors/evangelists to start with and the other legacy churches will pick up the remaining 30 between them.”  Fairchild said the pastors of the legacy churches wanted to ensure currently supported pastors did not experience negative effects from the closing of Mars Hill. He added, “[C]ome next year, we’ll want to see how we might expand our partnerships and work with New Covenant.”
After 2012, Mars Hill Church leaders marketed their support of mission pastors internationally to raise millions of dollars, much of which went to general church growth and support in the U.S. To date, an accounting of how much money was spent on international missions and how much was spent on church support in the U.S. has not been offered by the church. Mars Hill Church continues to be in the process of dissolution.
Understandably, Laursen is glad for the good news. In a statement released to me today, Laursen said:

In the wake of one of the most difficult seasons for anyone connected to Mars Hill, I am so honored and impressed by the integrity of the lead pastors who have committed to the work that was started in Ethiopia. The excitement that they bring to the table about supporting church planters and reaching the Unreached has put gasoline on my fire for missions.

UPDATE: After this was posted, Erik Laursen contacted me to say that Cross & Crown Church (formerly Mars Hill Ballard) has also pledged to support some of the Ethiopian pastors.

Dear David Barton: Virginia Law Allowed Manumission of Slaves After 1782

In his pulled-from-publication bookThe Jefferson Lies, David Barton took the position that Virginia law did not allow Thomas Jefferson to free his slaves. In our book on Jefferson, Getting Jefferson Right, Michael Coulter and I demonstrated that slave owners were allowed to manumit (free) slaves after Virginia lawmakers passed the 1782 Law on Manumission. However, Barton keeps spreading the misinformation.
In February, Barton told Charis Bible College students George Mason was not allowed to free his slaves (at 1:38 into the video). Prior to 1782, slaves could only be freed by the Virginia legislature due to some meritorious service by the slave.  Mason died in 1791 so his window of opportunity to free his slaves came near the end of his life. However, despite his strong rhetoric against slavery, he did not manumit his slaves in life or at his death. Barton told the Bible college students Mason didn’t free his slaves “because in the state of Virginia, it was illegal to free your slaves.” Not so.
More recently, he told the pastor of Calvary Chapel Jack Hibbs that Virginia law didn’t allow manumission. It is beyond me why he keeps saying this when it is an easy to look up Virginia’s manumission law as well as the many deeds of manumission which were filed after 1782 (Utah State’s Michael Nicholls is the go to person on this). In prior posts, I have pointed out the amazing story of Robert Carter III who began a process of manumitting more than 450 slaves beginning in 1791.
Barton’s remarks to Hibbs on his show Real Life with Jack Hibbs are below. I provide the video and link to the transcript.

Barton: So just—Let me jump in again on that because one of the blemishes is Washington owned slaves, Jefferson owned slaves, they could not have been good people. It’s interesting that Washington who did own slaves and inherited slaves and Thomas Jefferson inherited most of his slaves when he was fourteen, he got almost two hundred slaves between his inheritance and his and his in-laws. Virginia law made it illegal to free your slaves.
Hibbs: Listen why, yeah.

At 14, Jefferson was not allowed to free his slaves. As an aside, Jefferson did not inherit most of his slaves at 14. This is easily checked by examining Jefferson’s Farm Book. He acquired many of his slave through inheritance from his father-in-law John Wayles. By 1774, Jefferson listed “187 in all.
Barton asserts that “Virginia law made it illegal to free your slaves.” Before 1782, that was true; after 1782, Virginia allowed manumissions. Jefferson owned slaves until he died (1826) and so it is misleading to say Jefferson could not have freed slaves. In fact, he did. He freed two slaves before he died and then he freed five more in his will. Barton is simply misleading his audience.
In The Jefferson Lies, Barton made the claim that Virginia law did not allow manumission. In a prior post, I pointed out that Barton cited the Virginia law of 1782 in his book but left out the part of the law which allowed slave owners to free slaves by a deed of manumission. Here is what Barton cites from the law in his book:

[T]hose persons who are disposed to emancipate their slaves may be empowered so to do, and…it shall hereafter be lawful for any person, by his or her last will and testament…to emancipate and set free, his or her slaves.

Now, here is the entire relevant section of the 1782 law on manumission:

[T]hose persons who are disposed to emancipate their slaves may be empowered so to do, and the same hath been judged expedient under certain restrictions: Be it therefore enacted, That it shall hereafter be lawful for any person, by his or her last will and testament, or by any other instrument in writing, under his or her hand and seal, attested and proved in the county court by two witnesses, or acknowledged by the party in the court of the county where he or she resides to emancipate and set free, his or her slaves, or any of them, who shall thereupon be entirely and fully discharged from the performance of any contract entered into during servitude, and enjoy as full freedom as if they had been particularly named and freed by this act.

Note the second selection above in bold print. This is the relevant portion of the 1782 law Barton omits. This section allowed living slave owners to release their slaves by filing a deed. Emancipated slaves needed a document which was recorded according to the law as proof of their status. This law allowed slave owners when they were alive to free their slaves, provided slaves were of sound body and older than eighteen if a female and older than 21 if a male, but not above the age of 45. Thus, Jefferson could have freed many of his slaves within the law while he was alive. Not only was Jefferson legally permitted to free his slaves, he actually freed two slaves in the 1790s, Robert (1794) and James (1796) Hemings.

Barton clearly knows what the law on manumission said but chose to remove the part of the law that contradicts his statements to the public. Even though this has been pointed out, he still fails to tell audiences that Virginia law allowed manumission.

While it would have been economically difficult for Jefferson and Mason and Washington to manumit large numbers of human beings, it is simply false to say there was not an opportunity to do it.

The Monticello website explains:

DID JEFFERSON FREE HIS SLAVES?

During his lifetime, Jefferson freed two enslaved men.  At his death, Jefferson bequeathed freedom to five men in his will.  At least three other slaves were unofficially freed when Beverly Hemings, Harriet Hemings, and James Hemings, son of (Critta Hemings Bowlesto leave Monticello without pursuit. 

A single paragraph cannot do justice to the issue of Jefferson’s failure to free more than a handful of his slaves. Some of the possible reasons include: the economic value of his human property (at certain times, his slaves were mortgaged and thus could not be freed or sold); his lifelong view that emancipation had to go hand-in-hand with expatriation of the freed slaves; his paternalistic belief that slaves were incapable of supporting themselves in freedom and his fear they would become burden to society; his belief in gradual measures operating through the legal processes of government; and, after 1806, a state law that required freed slaves to leave Virginia within a year. Jefferson wrote that this law did not “permit” Virginians to free their slaves; he apparently thought that, for an enslaved African American, slavery was preferable to freedom far from one’s home and family.

Jefferson did free slaves. It might have been economically difficult for him to free the rest of them at various times between 1782 and 1806 but Virginia law allowed it. Barton misleads the audience when he says without qualification that the law did not permit it. Jefferson said in a letter that the law did not permit Virginians to free slaves, but he wrote this in 1814, long after the laws had changed to make it difficult to emancipate slaves. Barton then has to account for George Washington’s actions to free his slaves at death in 1799.

They would not let you free your slaves, now there was a period of reprieve for a short time starting in 1782 and so when George Washington died he freed all of his slaves on his death, there was a loophole in the law and the legislature goes “oh my gosh we didn’t see that,” they changed the law, so Jefferson was not even able to free his slaves on his death.

This is a misleading story from The Jefferson Lies. Barton here mentions “a period of reprieve for a short time starting in 1782” and then correctly says that George Washington freed his slaves in his will in 1799. However, the “loophole in the law” is a fiction. As noted above, Jefferson freed five slaves at his death via his will in 1826. There was no loophole. Virginia made it more difficult for freed slaves after 1806 because freed slaves needed to leave the state. For some slaves, this was deterrent because it meant leaving family.
There are many other things Barton told Hibbs and his audience that are inaccurate. For now, I hope it is clear that Virginia law allowed manumission of slaves after 1782 and that many such slaves were freed by owners in Virginia.