Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Do the Church Fathers, the Founding Fathers, and Catholic Saints Really Go Together?
Christianity Today ^ | 7/5/2012 | Timothy Samuel Shah

Posted on 07/07/2012 3:01:18 AM PDT by iowamark

America's Roman Catholic bishops just completed the "Fortnight for Freedom," a two-week period intended to "support a great national campaign of teaching and witness for religious liberty." As evangelical and Catholic leaders have spent the past year opposing the Obama administration's so-called contraceptive mandate, the timing, motives, and agenda driving the "Fortnight for Freedom" have prompted widespread commentary. Rather than scrutinizing the Fortnight's agenda, Protestants could examine deeper questions than what took place on the surface.

It's important to consider the Fortnight's placement on the calendar—the significance of the Fortnight's dates, June 21 to July 4—to understand the nature of religious freedom and the relationship between what to some mixes like oil and water: the Christian tradition and American liberty.

It's worth considering whether the church fathers and the founding fathers enjoy a deeper conceptual affinity—precisely around the meaning and foundations of religious freedom—than many people (including perhaps the bishops) have noticed.

The Fortnight for Freedom began on June 21, marking the vigil of the feasts of Saint John Fisher and Saint Thomas More. Fisher and More were both executed because they refused to endorse Henry VIII's claimed supremacy over the English church. The vast majority of English nobles and bishops endorsed the supremacy, while Fisher and More stood virtually alone. Though urged to use mental reservation to endorse the succession while denying its legitimacy in their hearts, the men were convinced that they could not do so without violating their consciences and endangering their salvation. As More declared,

"I could not meet with the Works of any one Doctor, approved by the Church, that avouch a Layman was, or ever could be the Head of the Church."

Fisher was executed on June 22, 1535, and More was executed on July 6, 1535...

(Excerpt) Read more at christianitytoday.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: catholic; churchfathers; fortnightforfreedom; foundingfathers; religiousfreedom
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-68 next last

1 posted on 07/07/2012 3:01:30 AM PDT by iowamark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: iowamark

Thanks for posting


2 posted on 07/07/2012 3:45:33 AM PDT by STJPII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: iowamark

Excellent article. Thanks for posting.

Regards


3 posted on 07/07/2012 3:51:06 AM PDT by Rashputin (Only Newt can defeat both the Fascist democrats and the Vichy GOP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: iowamark

As for myself I would have approached the table differently.
Rather than consider the individual elements and their dissimilarities.(Which was attempted at least.)I considered that the Church was focused upon the term “independence” and
the similarities not discussed here —the Saints rebelled against the secular Government control of Church doctrine and discipline. (which in this case seemed to have been a King much like President Clinton —in that he saw himself as a ladies man-and wanted to bed any woman that caught his fancy—divine right of kings and all that) Our founders like Jefferson opposed the British King and his Anti-Christian rule of the Colonies. The church is(or ought be) governed by God(Christ at the head) America was established by men who
saw Christ at the head(Our system of laws and Govt. were
decidedly and by deliberation Christian-a reflection of the most cited —supreme authority of Scripture.) See David Barton on Is America a Christian nation? In Touch Ministries Veterans Day special some time ago.Presented credibly.The author for the hit piece by Christianity Today did precisely what David Barton addressed in that the CT author seems to have shaped his vision of our Founders on the secular reinvention of Thomas Jefferson —Yet I dare suggest even Jefferson probably read the Bible more than most Americans today,and in more languages. And Jefferson did not seem to question the central fact of Church history -as put by his fellow Deist Franklin (I believe Jefferson would agree) God Governs in the affairs of men.” See Franklins speech calling for Prayer June28 ,1787.


4 posted on 07/07/2012 4:10:28 AM PDT by StonyBurk (ring)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: iowamark

ping for later


5 posted on 07/07/2012 4:36:15 AM PDT by Psalm 144 (Voodoo Republicans. Don't read their lips. Watch their hands.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: iowamark
“Do the Church Fathers, the Founding Fathers, and Catholic Saints Really Go Together?”

A resounding “NO”! and here’s why:

About the time Thomas More was proclaiming the supremacy of his conscience over the king's orders, the Catholic church was the driving force in bringing thousands of those it called heretics to their deaths.

Neither Christ nor his disciples took up violence against even their most aggressive opposers.
And the attitude of the founding fathers was a “live and let live” in matters of religion.

6 posted on 07/07/2012 4:53:01 AM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
About the time Thomas More was proclaiming the supremacy of his conscience over the king's orders, the Catholic church was the driving force in bringing thousands of those it called heretics to their deaths.

"Thousands"? No, that's a gross exaggeration. As the article mentions, More presided over the executions of six heretics (that's *six*, not "thousands") during his time in office. The numbers around the rest of Western Europe are similar.

The real large scale religious persecutions started under Henry VIII *after* he broke with the pope -- read up on the dissolution of the monasteries sometime -- and both sides engaged in bloody atrocities, leading eventually to the massive atrocity of the Thirty Years' War.

It's an historical anachronism to project our ideas about individual freedom of religion back into More's age. Nobody believed it then, not Protestants, not Catholics, not Orthodox ... nobody. Freedom of religion in the West developed in response to the religious wars which followed the reformation, and largely developed on American shores.

The article quite correctly points out that More opposed government control of the church. That's not the same thing as opposing government interference in the religious decisions of individuals, but it is a prerequisite for it. If government controls the church (any church), it's automatically interfering in the religious decisions of individuals who belong to that church.

Give More credit for his correct opinions in the context of his age.

7 posted on 07/07/2012 6:26:46 AM PDT by Campion ("Social justice" begins in the womb)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Campion
“Thousands”? No, that's a gross exaggeration. As the article mentions, More presided over the executions of six heretics (that's *six*, not “thousands”) during his time in office. The numbers around the rest of Western Europe are similar”

Obviously I made no reference to More's executions. Why the confusion of the two I can only guess.
The figure of thousands is correct as Papal decrees called upon secular authorities on threat of excommunication for lack of proper vigor in their work to prosecute a religious war of extermination against groups like the Waldensians of France.

“Freedom of religion in the West developed in response to the religious wars which followed the reformation, and largely developed on American shores.”

Who did Christ order his disciples to persecute and murder?

When I ask this question then come the justifications, the “other guys were worse”, and all the other hand washing arguments to justify murder.

“It's an historical anachronism to project our ideas about individual freedom of religion back into More's age. Nobody believed it then, not Protestants, not Catholics, not Orthodox ... nobody.”

Really? Even a Pharisee knew better than that. (Acts 5:33-41)

8 posted on 07/07/2012 7:41:22 AM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

As the articles states,”More presided over the execution of six Protestants for heresy,” as he approved of burning heretics on principle, though this was not really central to his job as Lord Chancellor. An yet some Catholics accuse More of being a heretic himself .

And while he is seen as opposing government control of the church, what Rome favored was the church essentially being or controlling the government.

One (eloquent) critic, who expresses the contrast btwn Utopia and the later mind of More, writes,

Most absurdly, because of Robert Bolt’s screenplay, this barrister of Catholic repression is widely envisioned as modernity’s diapason: the clear, strong note of individual conscience, the note of the self, sounding against the authoritarian intolerance of the Early Modern state. Thomas More died in defense of an authoritarian intolerance much more powerful than a mere king’s, however, for he died believing in God and in the authority of the pope and the Catholic Church. As Lord Chancellor, he had imprisoned and interrogated Lutherans, sometimes in his own house, and sent six reformers to be burned at the stake, and he had not done this just so that he might die for slender modern scruple, for anything as naked as the naked self. This drained, contemporary view of More, which admires not what he believed but how he believed-his “certainty,” only-is thinly secular, and represents nothing more than the retired religious yearning of a nonreligious age. . - http://www.luminarium.org/renlit/wood.htm

As for how many died under the Roman sanctioned or promoted Inquisitions, there are certainly inflated numbers, as well as attempts to minimize them, and to explain it away as being part of the times.

But while the historical context should be understood as regards the degree of guilt, such things as papal advocation of torture of suspected heretics, which was more strictly defined, and even of witnesses, and using such and even killing to deal with theological dissents cannot be excused any more than burning witches could or any declension can be today by invoking the culture.

For we are not be conformed to this world, but to Christ by the Scriptures, which do not sanction the church ruling over those without and taking up the sword of men to subduing souls because of theological dissent.

While the Church can and should influence the State to enact laws that reflect Biblical morality, and punish acts of violation thereof, and to overall reflect a general ethos (as every State will), yet it should not need to be involved in policing the church, nor is the Church to use the State to punish members because of theological dissent from her, much less after some of the manners employed under the Inquisitions.


9 posted on 07/07/2012 10:30:04 AM PDT by daniel1212 (Come to the Lord Jesus as a damned+morally destitute sinner,+trust Him to save you, then live 4 Him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: iowamark; Alamo-Girl; xzins; YHAOS; wmfights; MHGinTN; metmom; Agamemnon
...the church cannot be true to itself if it does not enjoy independence from the powers that be....

What a beautiful essay!

Thank you ever so much iowamark for posting!!!

10 posted on 07/07/2012 10:44:27 AM PDT by betty boop (We are led to believe a lie when we see with, and not through the eye. — William Blake)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
“Do the Church Fathers, the Founding Fathers, and Catholic Saints Really Go Together?” ------------------------------ And how many Founding Fathers were Catholic?
11 posted on 07/07/2012 10:44:46 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: daniel1212

History usually takes a beating under the hands of a screen play.


12 posted on 07/07/2012 2:05:58 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: betty boop; iowamark; Alamo-Girl; xzins; YHAOS; wmfights; MHGinTN; metmom; Agamemnon
What a beautiful essay!

BB I almost always enjoy reading your posts, but this is one time I will completely disagree.

Now that the RCC has discovered that the alliance with the Rats was a complete mistake I rejoice. However, that doesn't mean that we should rewrite history. I am doubtful that the RCC has embraced free market capitalism, or completely rejected it's "social justice" goals that it wants govt to enact. I think it is more likely that once the RCC, it's hospitals and schools, are given waivers the condemnation of the radical humanists that are the Rat party leadership will die down.

Historically the structure of our govt created by our founders bears remarkable similarity to the structure Moses established in the desert during the exodus and the organizational structure of the Apostolic Era churches. I don't see the founders creating a monarchy like the RCC structure.

The population of our country at the time of the revolution was largely Reformation church members or independent church members that had fled European persecution. The RCC was a persecutor not persecuted.

RC's were blessed that the founders of this country did not establish a State Church and were willing to let anyone freely practice their religion here. If the founders had followed the RCC model the RCC would never have been allowed to establish a church here. IOW, "RC Saints" do not go with the founding fathers.

If the new found conservatism of the RCC is true lets see how it plays out over time. If this is a lasting position I say welcome to the fight, but for now I think it is more likely that the RCC is allies with Evangelical Christians like the allies were in fighting the Axis powers of WWII.

13 posted on 07/07/2012 3:06:11 PM PDT by wmfights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

A truism that is esp. applicable if it comes from Hollywood.


14 posted on 07/07/2012 3:21:12 PM PDT by daniel1212 (Come to the Lord Jesus as a damned+morally destitute sinner,+trust Him to save you, then live 4 Him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: daniel1212
For we are not be conformed to this world, but to Christ by the Scriptures, which do not sanction the church ruling over those without and taking up the sword of men to subduing souls because of theological dissent.

Excellent point.

15 posted on 07/07/2012 5:25:34 PM PDT by metmom (For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slav)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

bump


16 posted on 07/07/2012 6:27:07 PM PDT by foreverfree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
The figure of thousands is correct as Papal decrees called upon secular authorities on threat of excommunication for lack of proper vigor in their work to prosecute a religious war of extermination against groups like the Waldensians of France.

Was that under Pope Innocent III?



Where there's a shell, there's a way.

25 years ago, we had Ronald Reagan, Johnny Cash, and Bob Hope.
Today we have Obama, no cash, and no hope!

If you can't appreciate the pure beauty of the violin after hearing this, something's wrong with your ears.

Or you can get raw with these strings.

How about this gamechanger from America's Got Talent (which they SHOULD have won).

Either way, the violin is sweet yet lethal.

Do it!

17 posted on 07/07/2012 6:50:45 PM PDT by rdb3 (If you were tried in court for being a Christian, would there be enough evidence to convict you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

Is this what the Jehovah’s Witness heretics teach? Some odd , perverted moral equivalent view of history that leaves out much?


18 posted on 07/07/2012 6:56:56 PM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: iowamark; Sirius Lee; lilycicero; MaryLou1; glock rocks; JPG; Monkey Face; RIghtwardHo; ...
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.


19 posted on 07/07/2012 6:58:38 PM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

“Neither Christ nor his disciples took up violence against even their most aggressive opposers.”

False. You ignore the sword in the Garden of Gethsemane and the throwing our of the Moneychanger from the Temple by Our Lord.

Is all of your history taught from the flawed and heretical rewritten false Bible of the Jehovah’s Witness cult?


20 posted on 07/07/2012 7:04:48 PM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: narses

our = out
Moneychanger = money changers


21 posted on 07/07/2012 7:06:50 PM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: narses

Do you equate chasing some sheep and oxen out the temple with murder? I can hear Pilate washing his hands.

Particularly so when Jesus reproved Peter for cutting the ear of a slave off?


22 posted on 07/07/2012 9:11:28 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

So is your flawed history and Biblical knowledge due to your JW heresy or is it from bad schooling?


23 posted on 07/07/2012 9:22:31 PM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: rdb3

Innocent III and VIII I believe.


24 posted on 07/07/2012 9:23:14 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: rdb3

Of course the role of Simon of Montfort is ignored by those slamming HH Pope Innocent III. The Jehoveh Witness heresy rewrites hisyory and Holy Writ to make their odd views palatable to their deluded adherents.


25 posted on 07/07/2012 9:30:25 PM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: narses
You'll have to do better than that or I'll simply ignore you. One time offer since I don't respond to anyone engaging in attempts at petty personal insults.
26 posted on 07/07/2012 9:32:08 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

Aww poor little thing, you said violence, I refuted your false understanding of scripture with two clear examples of your error. You may do what you will, I will always point out lies, falsehoods and errors when I can. Get used to it.


27 posted on 07/07/2012 9:35:14 PM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: betty boop

Indeed. Thank you so much for the ping, dearest sister in Christ!


28 posted on 07/07/2012 10:02:37 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

And all the Catholics that were killed at that time? Far outnumber your assumption in my opinion.


29 posted on 07/07/2012 10:07:47 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

Two


30 posted on 07/07/2012 10:09:29 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Only in the real world Sal, in the JW alternate reality it is what they want it to be.


31 posted on 07/07/2012 10:11:31 PM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

At what time and by whom?


32 posted on 07/07/2012 10:12:26 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

You first. Sources please.


33 posted on 07/07/2012 10:17:17 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

A good start would be The History of the Waldenses Vol. I& II. by Alexis Muston and The Israel of the Alps: A History of the Persecutions of the Waldeses by Alexis Muston and W. Hazlitt.

Add to this a number of histories.

“And all the Catholics that were killed at that time? Far outnumber your assumption in my opinion.”

Your turn.


34 posted on 07/08/2012 1:37:35 AM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change; Salvation
A good start would be The History of the Waldenses Vol. I& II. by Alexis Muston and The Israel of the Alps: A History of the Persecutions of the Waldeses by Alexis Muston and W. Hazlitt.
Right. A virulently anti-Catholic tract written to promote the heretical views of the authors. That isn't a scholarly citation, it is simply fiction - like Foxe, with a nasty anti-Catholic bias.
35 posted on 07/08/2012 6:37:36 AM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: narses

Of course! Everyone not genuflecting to Rome has “a nasty anti-Catholic bias.”


36 posted on 07/08/2012 8:00:54 AM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

Nope. Many honest historians are not Catholic. That you choose extremely biased and obscure tomes such as that illustrates how narrow and limited the JW heresy is.

And since this is about AMERICA how about telling us how many JW’s signed the Declaration of Independence or served in the Revolutionary war? Can you?


37 posted on 07/08/2012 11:54:31 AM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: narses

“extremely biased and obscure tomes” ???

Yes, yes, we all know where that comes from so it that all?


38 posted on 07/08/2012 12:48:49 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

And since this is about AMERICA how about telling us how many JW’s signed the Declaration of Independence or served in the Revolutionary war? Can you?


39 posted on 07/08/2012 1:11:41 PM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Salvation; count-your-change

Count seems tongue tied on this on Sal, maybe you know how many JW’s signed the Declaration? Or fought in the Revolution?


40 posted on 07/08/2012 1:18:53 PM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change; Sirius Lee; lilycicero; MaryLou1; glock rocks; JPG; Monkey Face; RIghtwardHo; ...
count-your-change wrote:
A resounding “NO”! and here’s why:

About the time Thomas More was proclaiming the supremacy of his conscience over the king's orders, the Catholic church was the driving force in bringing thousands of those it called heretics to their deaths.

Neither Christ nor his disciples took up violence against even their most aggressive opposers.
And the attitude of the founding fathers was a “live and let live” in matters of religion.

And yet count-your-change seems unable to identify even ONE Jehovah's Witness who signed the Declaration of Independence. Odd, s/he knows so much about the middle ages and yet cannot answer a simple American history question. Anyone care to help count-your-change with either the flaws in his odd views of history or the answer to my question?
41 posted on 07/08/2012 1:26:34 PM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: narses

You said it better than me. Thanks.


42 posted on 07/08/2012 1:26:58 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

**Waldensians, Waldenses or Vaudois are names for a Christian movement of the later Middle Ages, descendants of which still exist in various regions, primarily in North-Western Italy.**

About Europe

We are talking about America here — not Europe.


43 posted on 07/08/2012 1:30:16 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: narses

LOL!


44 posted on 07/08/2012 1:31:33 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: narses

I thought it would be obvious that you’re being ignored and rightly so, but I guess it’s necessary that I continue to explain the obvious, so....You’re being ignored.


45 posted on 07/08/2012 1:37:48 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
Most informative:

Signers of the Declaration of Independence - Christian Background

http://churchvstate.blogspot.com/2007/10/signers-of-declaration-of-independence.html

Many question whether our Founders really were Christians. Here are some facts about the signers of the Declaration of Independence. (See also the post from 10/25 about signers of the Constitution.)


  • Adams, John - Congregationalist and later a Unitarian (he did not accept the Trinity). He said, "To enable me to maintain this declaration I rely, under God, with entire confidence on the firm and enlightened support of the national legislature and upon the virtue and patriotism of my fellow citizens." (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Adams, Samuel - Congregationalist. "We have this day restored the Sovereign to Whom all men ought to be obedient. He reigns in heaven and from the rising to the setting of the sun, let His kingdom come." Also: "The rights of the colonists as Christians...may be best understood by reading and carefully studying the institutes of the Great Law Giver and Head of the Christian Church, which are to be found clearly written and promulgated in the New Testament." (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Bartlett, Josiah - Bartlett was a Congregationalist. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Braxton, Carter - Braxton was a member of the Episcopal church. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Carroll, Charles - Roman Catholic. Carroll said, "Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure...are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments." (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Chase, Samuel - Chase was an Episcopalian. As a Supreme Court Justince he said, "Religion is of general and public concern, and on its support depend, in great measure, the peace and good order of government, the safety and happiness of the people. By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty." (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Clark, Abraham - Clark was a Presbyterian, and said once, ""Nothing short of the Almighty Power of God can Save us-it is not in our Numbers, our Union, or our Valour that I dare trust." (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Clymer, George - Was both a Quaker and an Episcopalian (Signer of Declaration of Independence, Delegate to Constitutional Convention, Signer of Constitution)
  • Ellery, William - Ellery was known as a Congregationalist and a devout Christian. From Lossing's "Signers of the Declaration of Independence" we hear, "As a patriot and a Christian, his name will ever be revered." (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Floyd, William - Floyd was a Presbyterian. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Gerry, Elbridge - Gerry was an Episcopalian. Promoted Massachusetts' Religious Freedoms Act. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Gwinnett, Button - Gwinnett was an Episcopalian and a Congregationalist. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Hall, Lyman - Hall was a Congregationalist and served as a minister in Connecticut. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Hancock, John - Hancock was a Congregationalist. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Harrison, Benjamin - Harrison was a member of the Episcopal church. He professed that religion was necessary to society and that government should support it. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Hart, John - Hart was a Presbyterian. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Hewes, Joseph - Hewes was a Quaker and an Episcopalian. He was the son of a pious and well-to-do Quaker farmer and received a strict religious upbringing. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Heyward, Thomas - Heyward was a member of the Episcopal church. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Hooper, William - Hooper was an Episcopalian. He was trained at Harvard as a minister. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Hopkins, Stephen - He was a Quaker with an active interest in the church. He believed in the divinity of the Christian religion. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Hopkinson, Francis - Hopkinson was an Episcopalian. He became a Church music director and edited a hymnal that set all of 150 psalms to music. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Huntington, Samuel - He was a Congregationalist. According to B. J. Lossing's “Signers of the Declaration of Independence,” it is known that “Governor Huntington lived the life of the irreproachable and sincere Christian... as a devoted Christian and a true patriot, he never swerved from duty...” (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Jefferson, Thomas - Jefferson was probably best called a Deist, but he is also claimed by Unitarians and some Christian denominations. He was the one who penned the idea that our rights come from God (“Creator”) (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Lee, Francis Lightfoot - Lee was an Anglican and a devout Christian. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Lee, Richard Henry - Lee was an Anglican and known as a sincere Christian. He professed that religion was necessary to society and that government should support it. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Lewis, Francis - Lewis was an Episcopalian. His father was an Episcopal clergyman, his mother was a clergyman's daughter. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Livingston, Philip - Livingston was a Presbyterian and belonged to an eminent Christian family. He followed the Christian religion. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Lynch, Thomas - Member of the Episcopal Church (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Madison, James - Member of the Episcopal Church. He said, "The belief in a God, all powerful, wise, and good, [is] essential to the moral order of the world, and to the happiness of man." (Signer of Declaration of Independence, Delegate to Constitutional Convention, Signer of Constitution)
  • McKean, Thomas - McKean was a member of the Presbyterian Church. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Middleton, Arthur - Member of the Episcopal Church (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Morris, Lewis - Morris was an Episcopalian. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Morris, Robert - Member of the Episcopal Church (Signer of Declaration of Independence, Delegate to Constitutional Convention, Signer of Constitution)
  • Morton, John - Member of the Episcopal Church. In his will he said, “...for the settling of such temporal estate as it hath pleased God to bless me with in this life...” (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Nelson, Thomas Jr. - Nelson was a member of the Episcopal church. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Paca, William - Paca was an Episcopalian and a consistent Christian. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Paine, Robert - Paine left Calvinism to become a Unitarian. He served as a military chaplain. He said, "I am constrained to express my adoration of . . . the Author of my existence . . . [for] His forgiving mercy revealed to the world through Jesus Christ, through whom I hope for never ending happiness in a future state." (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Penn, John - Penn was a member of the Episcopalian church. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Read, George - Read was an Episcopalian. (Signer of Declaration of Independence, Signer of Constitution)
  • Rodney, Caesar - Rodney was an Episcopalian. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Rush, Benjamin - Rush was a Presbyterian. He was founder and manager of the Philadelphia Bible Society (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Ross, George - Ross was an Anglican. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Rutledge, Edwards - Rutledge was an Anglican. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Smith, James - Smith was a Presbyterian. He was quite strick that those in his presense should not speak ill of Christianity. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Stockton, Richard - Stockton was a Presbyterian. He said, "I think it proper here not only to subscribe to . . . doctrines of the Christian religion . . . but also, in the bowels of a father's affection, to exhort and charge them [my children] that the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, that the way of life held up in the Christian system is calculated for the most complete happiness." (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Stone, Thomas - Stone was an Episcopalian. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Taylor, George - Taylor was a Presbyterian and the son of a clergyman. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Thornton, Matthew - Thornton was a member of the Presbyterian Church and known as a devout Christian. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Walton, George - Walton was an Episcopalian. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Whipple, William - . (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Williams, William - Williams was a Congregationalist and a devout Christian. He studied for the ministry. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Witherspoon, John - Witherspoon was a Presbyterian. He said, "[S]hun, as a contagious pestilence,... those especially whom you perceive to be infected with the principles of infidelity or [who are] enemies to the power of religion" (Signer of Declaration of Independence, Signer of Constitution)
  • Wolcott, Oliver - He was a Congregationalist and a devout Christian. (Signer of Declaration of Independence)
  • Wythe, George - Wythe was a member of the Episcopal church. He helped draft instructions for an embassy in Canada, which said, "You are further to declare that we hold sacred the rights of conscience, and may promise to the whole people, solemnly in our name, the free and undisturbed exercise of their religion. And...that all civil rights and the right to hold office were to be extended to persons of any Christian denomination." (Signer of Declaration of Independence)


46 posted on 07/08/2012 1:50:07 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

ROTFLMAO! Ignored? And yet you keep posting to me, all the while ignoring the questions that expose your ignorance and heresies. Too funny. Ignored!


47 posted on 07/08/2012 1:50:07 PM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: narses
Episcopalian/Anglican 88 54.7%
Presbyterian 30 18.6%
Congregationalist 27 16.8%
Quaker 7 4.3%
Dutch Reformed/German Reformed 6 3.7%
Lutheran 5 3.1%
Catholic 3 1.9%
Huguenot 3 1.9%
Unitarian 3 1.9%
Methodist 2 1.2%
Calvinist 1 0.6%
TOTAL 204
 
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080704190612AAZUkpj


48 posted on 07/08/2012 1:51:14 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Not a single JW, how strange. It is almost like they did not even exist then. Strange.


49 posted on 07/08/2012 1:51:24 PM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: narses

You are too funny... :)


50 posted on 07/08/2012 1:57:20 PM PDT by GGpaX4DumpedTea (I am a Tea Party descendant...steeped in the Constitutional Republic given to us by the Founders.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-68 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson