Template:Ancient PATERNAL POWER

Ancient PATERNAL POWER

After examining what has been shared in Parents have a prior right and Termination of parental rights we may review some of what has been stated in the past to seek to understand the fundamental principle repeated throughout the ages. Bouvier's Law Dictionary from 1856 Edition examines PATERNAL POWER which the Romans called "Patria potestas, The, authority lawfully exercised by parents, over their children."

Bouvier believed it was proper to consider,

1. Who is entitled to exercise this power?

2. Who is subject to it?

3. What is the extent of this power?

2. - 1. As a general rule the father is entitled to exert the paternal power over his children. But for certain reasons, when the father acts improperly, and against the interest of those over whom nature and the law have given him authority, he loses his power over them. It being a rule that whenever the good of the child requires it, the courts will deliver the custody of the children to others than the father. And numerous instances may be found where, for good reasons, the custody will be given to the mother.

3. The father of a bastard child has no control over him; the mother has the right to the custody and control of such child. 2 Mass. 109; 12 Mass. 887.

4. - 2. All persons are subject to this power until they arrive at the full age of twenty-one years. A father may, however, to, a certain extent, deprive himself of this unlimited paternal power, first, by delegating it to others, as when he binds his son an apprentice; and, secondly, when he abandons his children, and permits them to act for themselves. 2 Verm. Cas. 290; 2 Watts, 408 4 S. & R. 207; 4 Mass. 675.

5. - 3. The principle upon which the law is, founded as to the extent of paternal power is, that it be exerted for the benefit of the child. The child is subject to the lawful commands of the father to attend to his business, because by being so subjected he acquires that discipline and the practice of attending to business, which will be useful to him in after life. He is liable to proper correction for the same reason. 1 Bouv. Inst. n. 326-33. See Correction; Father; Mother; Parent.

Parents may have a prior right but they may lose access to those rights through the creation of binding obligations to the State through a variety of ways.

Even the United Nations' UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS Article 26 speaks of a "Parents have a prior right" concerning their children.

A child does not own itself for it did not create itself nor can it sustain itself at the moment of birth. A child is dependent upon others for the gift of life. Those gifts create natural obligations or duties. A child also does not own its parents but the parent has a natural right to the child. The parent in nature gives life to the child, rears and protects it compounding the obligation of the Child to the parent. The command by God to honor your parents was the command to "fatten" care for and provide for the parents who gave you life so that your own days would be long upon the land.

The state has often competed for this power or "potestas" of the natural Father to its own benefit and obtains that right by offering "tutor" or gifts, gratuities, and benefits to the parents as the custodial parent on behalf of the state.

We see that when the duties of the patria potestas is vested in a ruling class who is elected by the voice of the people, as we see the people of Israel who were warned in 1 Samuel 8, that a loss of parental right would result. The State could reverse that natural right which would become a legal privilege granted and regulated by the State.

The warning in 1 Samuel 8 was if the people established or created a government where there is a ruling authority that ruling power will take your sons and daughter and much much more. The process used by the State from Cain to Nimrod, the Pharaoh to Caesar to obtain the natural patria potestas was the offer of protection along with gifts gratuities and benefits. Once the State obtains that power it is said to be the father of the people.

Remember that "fundamental liberties and equal protection" always include a correlative obligation or duty.

We should also take heed that the UDHR makes it clear that all... all nations ... shall strive ... by progressive measures... to secure their universal and effective ... observance.... among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.

That is to say, "Member States" will secure the obedience of all peoples and nations effectively submitted under their jurisdiction through progressive socialism which is evidently why Christ was not a socialist.

Another way of saying the same thing is by offering people equal protection from want of education or "life, liberty, and security of person" or "right to social security" etc..

Progressive socialists have always offered the people social security, free bread, free education, and freedom from the responsibilities of providing these things through personal sacrifice and mutual charity which is the way America use to do things. While they offered the slothful and greedy liberty from the requirements of a free society their schemes public welfare like Corban would deliver all peoples and the nations into the bondage making them a surety for debt.

The prophecies of 2 Peter 2:19-22 about being promised them liberty would be fulfilled as the people were again entangled in the elements of the world and returned to the mire because they become "servants of corruption" through the modern welfare state.

And they do all this through the covetous practices of socialism.

If people were independent of government benefits provided through men who "exercise authority" they might have a legitimate claim on prior rights and liberties granted by God but if they have sought to have the One purse of socialism and chosen to eat at the table of rulers they are likely snared.

Reason should tell them that the table of the Lord which is not set by "fealty, force, and fear but by faith, hope, and charity. This is why Jesus commanded that His disciples "make the people" organize themselves in companies of Tens.

While your right to educate your children may be prior in nature, do you still have that right?

Are your children still "Your Children" or surety for debt?

Or have you cursed your children through your Covetous Practices?

Do your children have another Father now?

Whom do you pray to for your daily bread, your daily ministration?

Call no man Father
What was Christ trying to tell us about fathers on the earth?
http://www.hisholychurch.org/sermon/fatherabba.php