Lyssa Royal, through Royal Priest Research, has provided the term Spiritual Sovereignty. In 1992, she presented a detailed accounting of this concept, including the legal definitions of certain important terms, in <http://www.worldtrans.org/lyssa/spirsovereign.html>. The latter includes:
Privilege -- permission granted by a higher authority to carry out an activity. When gaining a privilege, one must often give up a natural right. Example: According to the U.S. Constitution, people have a right to travel public roads in their private vehicles. However, when they enter into a contract with the state to receive a drivers license, they exchange their constitutional right to travel for a state-granted privilege to drive, and are thus subject to the stipulations of the state (auto insurance, realm of integral registration, etc.).
Rights -- natural states of being, whether recognized or unrecognized, that all humans inherently possess. (For example, the right to procreate or grow food is obvious, but not necessarily recognized by documentation.) Rights are nullified when they are exchanged for privileges, such as when one enters into a contract with the state through a marriage. When natural rights are exchanged for privileges granted from an outside source, one becomes a nonsovereign, or a subject of the authority who has given the privilege.
Civil law -- the structure that organizes, controls, punishes and rewards individuals who have given up their rights in exchange for privileges.
Common Law -- a law of sovereigns, based on the idea of self-responsibility and natural rights. It is recognized under the Constitution as being the natural state of being. Only in the last century has common law been methodically exchanged for civil law.
Sovereignty -- the state of being achieved when one operates only under common law, or has taken total self-responsibility for their lives.
Excerpts from “Spiritual and Emotional Sovereignty”
Spiritual sovereignty is the result of emotional sovereignty. A state of emotional sovereignty is obtained when a person recognizes, both intellectually and emotionally, that he/she is the total creator of his/her reality and has sole responsibility for him/herself. And even though many claim they want spiritual and emotional sovereignty, they are actually perpetuating its opposite.
On the one hand, when you sign anything to do with a state or a local government, you will often relinquish certain rights. When you sign a marriage contract, for example, you may give up your right to educate your children the way you see fit, giving the state the authority to educate them. This may not be understood when you enter the marriage contract. But it is very important to note that nobody is trying to ‘get’ you. Because of your own deep-seated emotional beliefs, you have created covert ways to keep yourself stuck in these dysfunctional emotional beliefs.
Another example, one written into your Constitution, is the right to drive. When you apply for a drivers license, you give up your right and are thereby granted a privilege. But because you exist under the Constitution, you have a right to drive, to travel on the roads. The Supreme Court has ruled that this includes one’s personal automobile. Because that is your right, you don’t have to do anything to exercise it other than to exist.
However, when you enter into a contract (a drivers license), you relinquish that right and subject yourselves to laws that are made regarding the privilege you are now given. As teenagers you are taught that you take drivers education, apply for a license and then you can legally drive. Of course, when you get your license you are then subject to the laws about automobile insurance, vehicle registration, the laws of the road, etc. Your traveling then becomes a privilege instead of a natural right. You’re not taught you have a choice.
If you are caught by a policeman for speeding there may be a hassle but constitutionally you still have the right to travel. You can be fined or punished only when you have given away your rights in exchange for privileges; then you are bound by the laws. Of course, not having a drivers license, according to the law, does not give you the right to violate the safety laws. According to the Supreme Court you are still subject to the speed laws and other rules of the road. The punishment for not having a drivers license differs from state to state. In Arizona, as you said, it is simply a fine. In other states it can be jail. So there is a wide variety in the type of crime as well as punishment. A misdemeanor in Arizona could be a felony in another state.
The point to be made here is when you give up your power to another person or an institution to keep yourself in line, you have given up your sovereignty. The alternative is one of total self-responsibility, meaning if you hit someone, you’re responsible. But if you are hit by someone else, you are still responsible! In any type of automobile dispute, each person involved takes responsibility for their position. There are never any victims.
In that case civil law is not applicable. Civil law ensures that someone is a victim, that someone must be held responsible because no one is willing to take responsibility for themselves. This system reinforces the idea that someone is at fault, and therefore there must be someone to punish fault maker - because everyone is unable or unwilling to take total responsibility for their own reality. Thus victimhood [and Scapegoatology] is continually perpetuated. When an injured person says, “It wasn’t my fault. Don’t I deserve something for my pain and suffering?”; they are perpetuating an attitude, a dynamic, that constitutes a refusal to take full responsibility for one’s self.
The majority of people are unaware that they are perpetuating this cycle of fear, non-responsibility, blame and victimhood. But imagine what it would be like to drive daily and 100% of the time know that you are creating your reality, know that everything that happens to you is created by you for a very specific reason. If you get into an automobile accident, if you hit someone, you take responsibility for it. Even if you are hit from behind, for instance, you recognize that it is within your reality only because you have drawn it there. Imagine a society that holds these beliefs. It would have no victimhood; it would be a society totally willing to take responsibility for everything that happens to it. [Including such events as 9-11-2001! I.e. did we bring it on ourselves?]
Note that anger is not taking responsibility, as well.
If one studies the Constitution for the United States of America and then realizes what was set up and what is happening now is not the same, there is a sense of victimhood. One might become angry about the situation and because they are not willing to look at the source of their anger - their own inner victimhood, their own relinquishment of their sovereignty - they externalize the victimization and see the system as the perpetrator.
zzzYou then have someone who is angry and decides they’re going to buck the system. Let’s say they refuse to register their car, get automobile insurance or a drivers license. In their anger, their intent is to make a statement - to cause trouble. This creates resistance toward the very structure they are struggling to pull away from. All it does is balance the intensity of the structure. It will not free them but keep them chained to it. The person never looks at the real reason for the anger - the relinquishment of personal sovereignty - but instead blames that loss on someone else. You can never be sovereign if you blame anyone else for anything. And whenever you do, the structure is kept in place.
There are many individuals who feel they are engaged in good causes when they are acting in anger. But anger will never solve the structural challenges of your society. It can never break the structure. The question is, what will break the structure? First an intelligent understanding of the structure itself, why it was created and how it is kept in place. After that it will be necessary to process any anger, martyrdom or victimhood that you feel, and be willing to act from your own integrity - not from anger or an intent to make a statement, but because it’s the only thing you can do in your integrity.
There are people at present who are starting to hear the voice of their conscience, who are processing their victimhood, who are beginning to see the true nature of the structure and how it was put there. And when they realize this in their own conscience, they can no longer keep it intact. They must follow their own integrity. In that choice to follow integrity - cleanly, clearly, with no anger - the structure begins to change. The issue is not the structure that is enslaving you, but the fact that you have allowed it to enslave you. If you can begin to understand why you’ve allowed this, why you’ve forgotten you put it here to begin with, then true Sovereignty is right around the corner.
Dealing with one’s own victimhood is challenging, to say the least. It includes the ability and willingness to recognize whenever you reward yourself for pain, suffering, or anything that is not of service to you in a positive, exciting way. It is recognizing what you are doing, such as letting the insurance companies pay your medical bills only because you were not to blame. You are rewarded by an outside entity if you are not to blame! That concept is totally incompatible with the ultimate concept of Common Law and of spiritual and emotional sovereignty.
The challenge now is to begin, in the darkness, to make out the shape that you have created to enslave yourself. We cannot express to you how powerful the changes will be on your planet when you begin relinquishing these old structures. You will do this layer by layer. Sometimes you may think you’re at the end, but there will be another five layers to go. It’s a very deep process you’ve created to protect yourself, believing that you yourselves need to be taken care of, protected, told what to do.
Becoming Sovereign Includes Integrity, Education and Discernment
In some states, the drivers license issue could lead to jail. There is also jail for the insurance issue in some states. So people have to get to the point where they recognize the consequences of their actions on both sides - the consequences of having given up their sovereignty and continuing and perpetrating this state - and the consequences of taking their sovereignty back.
The consequence for bowing down to the system is that you keep the structure intact. There are definitely consequences for pursuing the sovereignty idea, because you may be punished. However, what it comes down to is acting from your integrity. In your own inner searchings, when you find what your integrity is guiding you to do, your sovereignty lies in following that.
One of the key ideas is educating yourself on the Constitution and as much law as you can; educating yourself beyond the textbooks that the structures provide for you, because the textbooks are written within the structure. You must educate yourself from the source. That is where one of the big challenges lie, because many of you have not been able to tell the difference between textbooks written by the structures and ‘clean’ information from the source that leads you into sovereignty -- a process of discernment, [Discrimination].
The more oppressive the “system” becomes, the more individuals are going to feel the pressure. The more they will be spurred on to do their own research and the more they find out about their rights and their privileges, then the more they will begin exercising their rights. It’s not going to come by rejecting privileges; it’s going to come by exercising rights. [emphasis as a matter of course]
Privilege is something that is granted to you from another source. Right is inherent by your existence, innately. For instance, you have a right to celebrate God. But you’re given the “privilege” of worshipping God when you go to church and pay your dues.
If you were sovereign, no one could have rights over you, but if you’re not an active sovereign, someone assumes rights over you. There’s always Hierarchy in a nonsovereign atmosphere, but in a sovereign atmosphere there is never a hierarchy.
You have a right to explore all levels of consciousness and reality. You have set up privileges to protect yourself from some of the scary things because you feel nonsovereign. And as you build this elaborate structure (based on privileges and not rights), you start distorting your own version of the universe. Those rights that we just mentioned are always active, but if you are not sovereign, you can’t interface with them. Therefore, you will act out your right to interact with other species through the privilege structure you have set up, which will be equal to your belief systems.
To put this in another way, you will always act out your right to travel, but because you are not sovereign, you must act out that right according to the structure of the privileges. Therefore, you act out your right to travel through the privilege of your license, your insurance and your registration. This is a very significant point.
Your rights will always be there, but you can’t see them. You can’t know your rights unless you are sovereign. Therefore, you must act according to the nonsovereign privileges, which seem as if they are given to you by someone else. Therefore, because you believe you are not sovereign and can be victimized, you will act out your right to communicate with other species through that belief system and the structure that allows you to be victims. You are, in fact, always in touch with your rights. You’ve cloaked them, you’ve twisted them, you’ve distorted them into your privileges and have come to believe that privileges are rights, when they are really two different things.
One of the things that keeps people from claiming sovereignty is their religious structure. The concept is God is sovereign and humans are his subjects. But a true sovereign can never have subjects. If the religious structure broke apart on the planet, every other structure would collapse. No other structure could support itself after that.
In achieving sovereignty, you can start by identifying the areas of your life in which you are blatantly nonsovereign. Understand why that is so. First, look at your religious structure. Look at your political structure, your economics and your education system. Then look at your legal system. (Those suggestions are going to open a can of worms.) Each person will go through the process of attaining sovereignty in his/her own way, but begin by obtaining any research material you can. There are schools that teach these principles (and we’re not referring to metaphysical schools; we’re referring to schools that teach Common Law). That's a start for some people. There’s no structure to follow on becoming sovereign, because it’s not anything most have ever experienced. You are Creating Reality creating on an individual basis the structure as you go.
Keep in mind the following idea: Which has more impact - 100,000 men burning their draft cards out of protest or 100,000 men shifting their consciousness? It is tempting to say that burning draft cards has more impact, but that is not the case. [It may achieve more publicity, but garnering the attention of the Media is not something any sovereign is going to care about. Also, those people who burned their draft cards may be burning them out of anger or fear, not necessarily out of a change in consciousness. And if the 100,000 men who burned their draft cards because of a change in consciousness, were then forced to go to war anyway. Having those 100,000 men with that change of consciousness in the army would have a tremendous impact on the mass consciousness of the army itself.
is not something any sovereign is going to care about. Also, those people who burned their draft cards may be burning them out of anger or fear, not necessarily out of a change in consciousness. And if the 100,000 men who burned their draft cards because of a change in consciousness, were then forced to go to war anyway. Having those 100,000 men with that change of consciousness in the army would have a tremendous impact on the mass consciousness of the army itself.
Note also that you are led to believe, just like with the drivers and marriage licenses, that when you get that draft card and you are inducted, you must serve. However, you are never committed to serve until you raise your hand and take the oath, and the taking of the oath is voluntary. Because being forced to take an oath is invalid. There have been men who have not taken the oath and thus were dismissed from the induction and didn’t have to serve. It caused quite a commotion, but they were ultimately dismissed.
Copyright © 1992 by Royal Priest Research, All Rights Reserved. This manuscript may be copied for private distribution, but may not be sold.
For more information on available tapes, transcripts, books, and videos, contact: Royal Priest Research; PO Box 30973, Phoenix, Arizona 85046.
2003© Copyright Dan Sewell Ward, All Rights Reserved [Feedback]