The Ten Commandments

The Seven Aphorisms by Summum
a UFO religious group

Sponsored link.

Read about events from other years

About Summum:

Summum is a religious group in Ogden, UT with headquarters in Salt Lake City. They were founded in 1975 and currently claim a membership of 250,000. One of their beliefs is that Yahwehd did not initially give Moses the Ten Commandments on Mount Sinai as stated in Exodus 20. Instead, Moses received the "Seven Aphorisms" containing:

"... aphorisms of a Higher Law that held very profound and deep meanings. During his life, Moses had been initiated into an understanding of the inner, esoteric source of these aphorisms -- aphorisms that outlined principles underlying Creation and all of nature." ₁

Moses then returned to the base of the mountain and saw how the ancient Hebrews had reverted to Pagan beliefs and practices. He realized that his people could not understand the Seven Aphorisms. He destroyed the tablets, returned up the mountain, and obtained a second set of tablets from God. These contained the Ten Commandments, and represents a "lower law" . Even today, they believe that relatively few people are able to handle the higher law.

The Seven Aphorisms each refer to a separate principle:

1. Psychokinesis: "SUMMUM is MIND, thought; the universe is a mental creation."
2. Correspondence: "As above, so below; as below, so above."
3. Vibration: "Nothing rests; everything moves; everything vibrates."
4. Opposition: ""Everything is dual; everything has an opposing point; everything has its pair of opposites; like and unlike are the same; opposites are identical in nature, but different in degree; extremes bond; all truths are but partial truths; all paradoxes may be reconciled."
5. Rhythm: "Everything flows out and in; everything has its season; all things rise and fall; the pendulum swing expresses itself in everything; the measure of the swing to the right is the measure of the swing to the left; rhythm compensates."
6. Cause and Effect: "Every cause has its effect; every effect has its cause; everything happens according to Law; Chance is just a name for Law not recognized; there are many fields of causation, but nothing escapes the Law of Destiny."
7. Gender: "Gender is in everything; everything has its masculine and feminine principles; Gender manifests on all levels."

Conflicts with Salt Lake County, City of Ogden, City of Duchesne and City of Pleasant Grove.

Various court decisions have established the principle that a municipal government or state agency of federal government cannot promote a single religious faith by erecting an isolated monument containing the Ten Commandments, or a manger scene at Christmas, etc. However, they are allowed to create a cultural display that contains elements from a variety of religions and secular symbols. Thus evolved the "Three Reindeer rule:" As long as there are sufficient secular symbols such as a snowperson, reindeer, Santa along with a symbols from a variety of religions like a manger scene and menorah, then the display would qualify as a cultural display and be constitutional.

Still, governments at all levels have tried to resist the principle of separation of church and state by projecting an exclusively Christian image. They often receive considerable support from religious and social conservatives.

Summum was involved in a number of lawsuits:

In 1997, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with Summum, ruling:

"We conclude that Summum's amended complaint sufficiently alleges that a limited public forum has been created and that the County engaged in viewpoint discrimination in violation of Summum's free speech rights."

Rather than allowing the Seven Aphormisms to be displayed, the County removed their Ten Commandments monument.

"The City (somewhat ironically in light of the City's simultaneous insistence that the display of the Ten Commandments Monument alone does not violate the Establishment Clause) notes that the presence of the Seven principles Monument on the Municipal Grounds, coupled with the fact that Summum would be the only church to have contributed a monument to the relevant forum, would leave an observer to conclude that the City of Ogden endorses Summum. Again, we must disagree; we are persuaded that a reasonable observer would, instead, note the fact that the lawn of the municipal building constituted a diverse array of monuments, some from a secular and some from a sectarian perspective....The Free Speech clause of the First Amendment compels the City of Ogden to treat with equal dignity speech from divergent religious perspectives. On these facts, the City cannot display the Ten Commandments Monument while declining to display the Seven Principles Monument." ₃

The Deseret News reported that there is a possibility that the city would remove the Ten Commandments monument rather than give equal space for the Summum Aphorisms. Again, faced with the alternatives of recognizing diverse religious beliefs, or having no monument of the Ten Commandments, the City chose to remove its Ten Commandments display.

"Effectively, a city cannot accept a monument posthumously honoring a war hero without also being prepared to accept a monument that lampoons that same hero. Nor may a city accept a display that positively portrays Native American culture unless it is prepared to accept another that disparages that culture."

Such are the problems associated with freedom of speech.

Attorneys for Summum asked that the Supreme Court not take up the case. They wrote:

"Because the narrow and fact-specific decision [by the 10th Circuit] … turns on the city’s own treatment of the Ten Commandments monument as private speech, it does not implicate, and would not give this court a chance to address, any broader issues concerning the line between government and private speech under the free-speech clause. Likewise, because the [lower] court held only that the government may not discriminate among private speakers in a traditional public forum, the decision does not raise any broader issues."

Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of ACLJ -- a fundamentalist Christian legal society -- said:

"The Supreme Court is faced with a dramatic opportunity: preserve sound precedent involving the well-established distinction between government speech and private speech -- or permit a twisted interpretation of the Constitution to create havoc in cities and localities across America."

Brian Barnard of the Utah Legal Clinic represents Summum. He commented:

"Summum says, 'Our Seven Aphorisms are comparable and complimentary to the Ten Commandments, so please let us put ours up. It's a matter of simple fairness."

U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear case:

On 2008-MAR-31, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the Pleasant Grove City v. Summum case, #07-665 sometime during or after 2008-OCT.

References:

1. "The Aphorisms of Summum and the Ten Commandments," Sumum, at: http://www.summum.us/
2. "Seven Summum Principles," at: http://www.summum.us/
3. "Circuit court rules for 'Aphorisms' as squabbles over religious sloganeering, commandments continue," AANews, 2002-AUG-1.
4. Pete Yost, "Court Agrees to Take 2 Free Speech Cases," Associated Press, 2006-MAR-31, at: http://www.newsday.com/
5. Robert Marus, "," Church Executive News, 2008-APR-01, at: http://www.churchexecutive.com/

Site navigation:

Copyright © 2008 by Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance
Originally written: 2008-APR-02
Latest update: 2008-APR-02
Author: B.A. Robinson