Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Latter-day Saint
History and Religion
A couple of brief constitutional meditations

A couple of brief constitutional meditations

Last updated on: February 19, 2026 at 6:26 pm by Dan Peterson

0 Comments

A couple of brief constitutional meditations 2026-02-19T18:26:02-07:00 Dan Peterson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

The “key art” poster for our ongoing “Becoming Brigham” series of mini-documentaries

Have you visited becomingbrigham.com yet? Four episodes of our new series of mini-documentaries have already gone up online; a fifth will drop on Monday. Don’t fall too far behind.

I’m rather fond of this quaint old document, and wish more people and more politicians were closely acquainted with it. (Wikimedia Commons public domain image)

I saw recently that the highly respected Latter-day Saint historian and recent editor of BYU Studies Steven C. Harper has announced his intention to devote some time over the next while to comment upon the Constitution of the United States. He reasons that, since Latter-day Saints believe the Constitution to be divinely inspired, paying close attention to it seems a part of his religious duty.

I was struck by this and, although I don’t necessarily intend to give the subject systematic or sustained attention, I thought that — for reasons not unlike Professor Harper’s — I might make at least a few occasional comments on the topic . Today, I’ll very briefly allude to two aspects of the Constitution that have always struck me and that I think have been somewhat ignored.

I think it significant that Article 1 of the Constitution isn’t about the Executive Branch of the Federal Government. It isn’t about the Presidency. Today’s imperial presidency, something that has been developing for many decades but has risen to a new high in the second Trump administration, is not, I think, what the framers of the Constitution had in mind.

Article 1 of the Constitution is about the Legislative Branch. The will of the people is to be expressed through Congress. The president isn’t even supposed to be popularly elected. That’s why we have the Electoral College, although it is, today, merely a shadow of what it was intended to be.

I don’t think that the Swiss model is applicable to the United States, and I don’t advocate its importation or adoption. But I do feel some degree of wistfulness for a system in which an educated and articulate Swiss citizen told me, when I asked him who the president of Switzerland was, told me that he couldn’t quite remember, that it was either Nellio Cellio or Cellio Nellio. In fact, during that year — the presidency of Switzerland’s seven-member Executive Council rotates annually — it was Nello Celio, from the Italian-speaking Swiss canton of Ticino, south of the Alps.

Strictly speaking, the president of Switzerland is actually the president of the Swiss Confederation, and primus inter pares, first among equals, on the Executive Council of the Confederation. The formal name of the country isn’t really Switzerland at all but, instead, in German, Schweizerische Eidgenossenschaft; in French, Confédération suisse; in Italian, Confederazione Svizzera; in Romansh, Confederaziun svizra — all of the preceding four are official, national, spoken languages (used by, respectively, more than 60% of the population, approximately 23%, roughly 8%, and less than 1%, most of the latter of whom also speak German) — and, in Latin, Cōnfoederātiō Helvētica.

I thought it wonderful that here was a country, Switzerland, in which the news cycle didn’t focus continuously on the country’s president, as if he were some sort of emperor. It was and is a country, too, in which the citizenry seemed to be far more involved in local and regional politics in its twenty-six cantons (states or provinces) and far more aware of local leaders and politicians than oriented toward federal matters — as (I think) the Framers of our Constitution intended the United States of America to be. (Why do we use singular verbs with the plural subject United States? When did we begin to do that? At the time of the civil war? My impression is that, in the antebellum period, we were more prone to say that “The United States have” or “The United States are” than to say, quite ungrammatically, “The United States has” or “The United States is.” We really did regard the United States as a federal republic rather than as a unitary state.

I later learned that Edward Gibbon, justly famous for his wonderful six-volume History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (1776–1788), originally wanted to write a History of Switzerland because of his admiration for Swiss freedom and democracy. He worked on that project in the 1760s but ultimately abandoned the effort, leaving it unfinished and unpublished. I can well understand Gibbon’s affection for Switzerland.

Years later, living in Egypt, I was negatively impressed by the fact that every evening’s television news broadcast necessarily began with several minutes of video footage about the رئيس جمهورية مصر العربية, the President of the Republic, visiting a rural village or praying in a mosque or addressing a bored and uncomfortable group of rubber-stamp legislators crammed too tightly together in the People’s Assembly and applauding obligatorily after every presidential sentence. Egypt, in my view, has never entirely outgrown the idea of a pharaoh.

Given some of what I wrote above, I’m a strong believer in federalism, and it should be no surprise that I didn’t like President Trump’s recent description of the states as mere functional subordinates of the federales (“Trump says states are agents of federal government in elections”) and that I can’t endorse his calls to “nationalize elections.”

My opposition to the federalization of, well, just about everything is of ancient date. It goes back a very long way. I recall seeing a sign on Valley Boulevard, in Rosemead, California, back before I was married. It announced that the improvements on the street were being funded by some sort of federal program. The “improvements” consisted of replacing ordinary crosswalks — painted lines on an asphalt surface — with red bricks situated flush with the street, and placing planters and trees along the sidewalk in such a way that, I estimate, 20% of the parking spaces along the side of the street would be eliminated.

Now, it wasn’t that I opposed such “improvements.” They seemed fairly unobjectionable to me, perhaps even attractive. But I could not see why they should be a federal project, involving federal money derived from taxing shopkeepers in Boston and farmers in Iowa. If ever there were local matters, to be decided upon locally and paid for by local residents, such street projects surely seemed local to me. Ideally, too, for purposes of prudent spending and sound governance, I think that costs and benefits should be as closely connected as possible, so that voters can make intelligent and grounded decisions.

Which is a very hasty and summary way of leading up to another part of the Constitution, the Tenth Amendment (which was ratified in 1791 as part of the Bill of Rights), which I think is almost completely neglected.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

The federal government of the United States is now fully involved in almost every aspect of state and local life, in agriculture and education and housing and road construction and healthcare and everywhere else, in ways that I find difficult to square with the Tenth Amendment.

History and Religion

Travel and Religion

Previous Post

February 18, 2026

Ramadan Kareem!

Next Post

February 20, 2026 "Who Wrote Alma 29?"

Recent Comments

0 | Leave a Comment

"DP: “But Mr. Sutherland worries about the fact that our time, when we can communicate ..."

Theodore Brandley

Learning more about a region of ..."

"Another class of memories are of individuals who previously lived. Some of these remembered individuals ..."

PlasmaMiasma

Accounts of Premortality?

"Sutherland's lecture sounds interesting. He seems to restate the Washington consensus that trade brings peace ..."

B. Wilson

Learning more about a region of ..."

"In a meeting today, I learned another important reason why accurate (or at least as ..."

the PROBLEM

From Serbia’s “White City,” Belgrade

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 March 2014 August 2013 February 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Which queen visited Solomon to test his wisdom?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Queen Jezebel Queen of Sheba Queen Esther Queen Vashti