American Government and Christianity - America's Christian Roots

Probe Ministries ^ | 2004 | Kerby Anderson

[Tailgunner Joe]

John Adams was the second president of the United States. He saw the need for religious values to provide the moral base line for society. He stated in a letter to the officers of the First Brigade of the Third Division of the Militia of Massachusetts:

We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.{1}

In fact, John Adams wasn't the only founding father to talk about the importance of religious values. Consider this statement from George Washington during his Farewell Address:

And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.{2}

Two hundred years after the establishment of the Plymouth colony in 1620, Americans gathered at that site to celebrate its bicentennial. Daniel Webster was the speaker at this 1820 celebration. He reminded those in attendance of this nation's origins:

Let us not forget the religious character of our origin. Our fathers were brought hither by their high veneration for the Christian religion. They journeyed by its light, and labored in its hope. They sought to incorporate its principles with the elements of their society, and to diffuse its influence through all their institutions, civil, political, or literary.{3}

Religion, and especially the Christian religion, was an important foundation to this republic.

Christian Character

It is clear that the framers of this new government believed that the people should elect and support leaders with character and integrity. George Washington expressed this in his Farewell Address when he said, "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and Morality are indispensable supports."

Benjamin Rush talked about the religious foundation of the republic that demanded virtuous leadership. He said that, "the only foundation for a useful education in a republic is to be laid on the foundation of religion. Without this there can be no virtue, and without virtue there can be no liberty, and liberty is the object and life of all republican governments."{4}

He went on to explain that

A Christian cannot fail of being a republican . . . for every precept of the Gospel inculcates those degrees of humility, self- denial, and brotherly kindness which are directly opposed to the pride of monarchy. . . . A Christian cannot fail of being useful to the republic, for his religion teaches him that no man "liveth to himself." And lastly a Christian cannot fail of being wholly inoffensive, for his religion teaches him in all things to do to others what he would wish, in like circumstances, they should do to him.{5}

Daniel Webster understood the importance of religion, and especially the Christian religion, in this form of government. In his famous Plymouth Rock speech of 1820 he said,

Lastly, our ancestors established their system of government on morality and religious sentiment. Moral habits, they believed, cannot safely be trusted on any other foundation than religious principle, nor any government be secure which is not supported by moral habits. . . .Whatever makes men good Christians, makes them good citizens.{6}

John Jay was one of the authors of the Federalist Papers and became America's first Supreme Court Justice. He also served as the president of the American Bible Society. He understood the relationship between government and Christian values. He said, "Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers."{7}

William Penn writing the Frame of Government for his new colony said, "Government, like clocks, go from the motion men give them; and as governments are made and moved by men, so by them they are ruined too. Wherefore governments rather depend upon men, than men upon governments. Let men be good, and the government cannot be bad."{8}

The founders believed that good character was vital to the health of the nation.

New Man

Historian C. Gregg Singer traces the line of influence from the seventeenth century to the eighteenth century in his book, A Theological Interpretation of American History. He says,

Whether we look at the Puritans and their fellow colonists of the seventeenth century, or their descendants of the eighteenth century, or those who framed the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, we see that their political programs were the rather clear reflection of a consciously held political philosophy, and that the various political philosophies which emerged among the American people were intimately related to the theological developments which were taking place. . . . A Christian world and life view furnished the basis for this early political thought which guided the American people for nearly two centuries and whose crowning lay in the writing of the Constitution of 1787.{9}

Actually, the line of influence extends back even further. Historian Arnold Toynbee, for example, has written that the American Revolution was made possible by American Protestantism. Page Smith, writing in the Religious Origins of the American Revolution, cites the influence of the Protestant Reformation. He believes that

The Protestant Reformation produced a new kind of consciousness and a new kind of man. The English Colonies in America, in turn, produced a new unique strain of that consciousness. It thus follows that it is impossible to understand the intellectual and moral forces behind the American Revolution without understanding the role that Protestant Christianity played in shaping the ideals, principles and institutions of colonial America.{10}

Smith argues that the American Revolution "started, in a sense, when Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to the church door at Wittenburg." It received "its theological and philosophical underpinnings from John Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion and much of its social theory from the Puritan Revolution of 1640-1660.{11}

Most people before the Reformation belonged to classes and social groups which set the boundaries of their worlds and established their identities. The Reformation, according to Smith, changed these perceptions. Luther and Calvin, in a sense, created a re- formed individual in a re-formed world.

Key to this is the doctrine of the priesthood of the believer where each person is "responsible directly to God for his or her own spiritual state.... The individuals who formed the new congregations established their own churches, chose their own ministers, and managed their own affairs without reference to an ecclesiastical hierarchy."{12}

These re-formed individuals began to change their world including their view of government and authority.

Declaration of Independence

Let's look at the Christian influence on the Declaration of Independence. Historian Page Smith points out that Thomas Jefferson was not only influenced by secular philosophers, but was also influenced by the Protestant Reformation. He says,

Jefferson and other secular-minded Americans subscribed to certain propositions about law and authority that had their roots in the Protestant Reformation. It is a scholarly common-place to point out how much Jefferson (and his fellow delegates to the Continental Congress) were influenced by Locke. Without disputing this we would simply add that an older and deeper influence -- John Calvin -- was of more profound importance.{13}

Another important influence was William Blackstone. Jefferson drew heavily on the writings of this highly respected jurist. In fact, Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England were among Jefferson's most favorite books.

In his section on the "Nature of Laws in General," Blackstone wrote, "as man depends absolutely upon his Maker for everything, it is necessary that he should, in all points, conform to his Maker's will. This will of his Maker is called the law of nature."{14}

In addition to the law of nature, the other source of law is from divine revelation. "The doctrines thus delivered we call the revealed or divine law, and they are to be found only in the Holy Scriptures." According to Blackstone, all human laws depended either upon the law of nature or upon the law of revelation found in the Bible: "Upon these two foundations, the law of nature and the law of revelation, depend all human laws."{15}

Samuel Adams argues in "The Rights of the Colonists" that they had certain rights. "Among the natural Rights of the Colonists are these: First, a Right to Life; second, to Liberty; third, to Property; . . . and in the case of intolerable oppression, civil or religious, to leave the society they belong to, and enter into another. When men enter into society, it is by voluntary consent."{16} This concept of natural rights also found its way into the Declaration of Independence and provided the justification for the American Revolution.

The Declaration was a bold document, but not a radical one. The colonists did not break with England for "light and transient causes." They were mindful that they should be "in subjection to governing authorities" which "are established by God" (Rom. 13:1). Yet when they suffered from a "long train of abuses and usurpations," they believed that "it is the right of the people to alter or abolish [the existing government] and to institute a new government."

Constitution

The Christian influence on the Declaration is clear. What about the Constitution?

James Madison was the chief architect of the Constitution as well as one of the authors of the Federalist Papers. It is important to note that as a youth, he studied under a Scottish Presbyterian, Donald Robertson. Madison gave the credit to Robertson for "all that I have been in life."{17} Later he was trained in theology at Princeton under the Reverend John Witherspoon. Scholars believe that Witherspoon's Calvinism (which emphasized the fallen nature of man) was an important source for Madison's political ideas.{18}

The Constitution was a contract between the people and had its origins in American history a century earlier:

One of the obvious by-products [of the Reformation] was the notion of a contract entered into by two people or by the members of a community amongst themselves that needed no legal sanctions to make it binding. This concept of the Reformers made possible the formation of contractuals or, as the Puritans called them, "covenanted" groups formed by individuals who signed a covenant or agreement to found a community. The most famous of these covenants was the Mayflower Compact. In it the Pilgrims formed a "civil body politic," and promised to obey the laws their own government might pass. In short, the individual Pilgrim invented on the spot a new community, one that would be ruled by laws of its making.{19}

Historian Page Smith believes, "The Federal Constitution was in this sense a monument to the reformed consciousness. This new sense of time as potentiality was a vital element in the new consciousness that was to make a revolution and, what was a good deal more difficult, form a new nation."{20}

Preaching and teaching within the churches provided the justification for the revolution and the establishment of a new nation. Alice Baldwin, writing in The New England Clergy and the American Revolution, says,

The teachings of the New England ministers provide one line of unbroken descent. For two generations and more New Englanders had . . . been taught that these rights were sacred and came from God and that to preserve them they had a legal right of resistance and, if necessary a right to . . . alter and abolish governments and by common consent establish new ones.{21}

Christian ideas were important in the founding of this republic and the framing of our American governmental institutions. And I believe they are equally important in the maintenance of that republic.

Notes

1. John Adams, October 11, 1798, in a letter to the officers of the First Brigade of the Third Division of the Militia of Massachusetts. Charles Francis Adams, ed., The Works of John Adams - Second President of the United States: with a Life of the Author, Notes, and Illustration (Boston: Little, Brown, & Co., 1854), Vol. IX, 228-229.
2. George Washington, Farewell Address (September 19, 1796). Address of George Washington, President of the United States, and Late Commander in Chief of the American Army. To the People of the United States, Preparatory to His Declination.
3. Daniel Webster, December 22, 1820. The Works of Daniel Webster (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1853), Vol. I, 48.
4. Benjamin Rush, "Thoughts upon the Mode of Education Proper in a Republic," Early American Imprints. Benjamin Rush, Essays, Literary, Moral and Philosophical (Philadelphia: Thomas and Samuel F. Bradford, 1798), 8.
5. Ibid.
6. Webster, The Works of Daniel Webster, 22ff.
7. John Jay, October 12, 1816, in The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, Henry P. Johnston, ed., (New York: G.P Putnam & Sons, 1893; reprinted NY: Burt Franklin, 1970), Vol. IV, 393.
8. William Penn, April 25, 1682, in the preface of his Frame of Government of Pennsylvania. A Collection of Charters and Other Public Acts Relating to the Province of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia: B. Franklin, 1740), 10-12.
9. C. Gregg Singer, A Theological Interpretation of American History (Nutley, NJ: The Craig Press, 1964), 284-5.
10. Page Smith, Religious Origins of the American Revolution (Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1976), 1.
11. Ibid, 2.
12. Ibid., 3.
13. Ibid, 185.
14. William Blackstone, "Of the Nature of Laws in General," Commentaries on the Laws of England, Book 1, Section II.
15. Ibid.
16. Samuel Adams, "The Rights of the Colonists" (Boston, 1772), The Annals of America, Vol. II, 217.
17. John Eidsmoe, Christianity and the Constitution (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1987), 94.
18. James H. Smylie, "Madison and Witherspoon: Theological Roots of American Political Thought," American Presbyterians, 112.
19. Smith, Religious Origins, 3.
20. Ibid., 4
21. Alice M. Baldwin, The New England Clergy and the American Revolution (Durham: Duke University Press, 1928), 169.

[Long Cut]

Oh, goody, another "Christian Nation" thread.

They never tire from attempting to WISH it into being.

Some people, it would seem, just cannot get over the fact that they cannot, in our system, force others to recognize the "superiority" of their beliefs.

And make no mistake, that's what the point of all this fantasizing is.

[Long Cut]

Why do you need the "blessing" of the government for YOUR religion, and its power to force others to recognize its "superiority", if it's The Truth? Surely government force is unnecessary. Why does other people believing different things, or not believing anything at all, bother you so much that you want the government to do something about it?

[AmericanFaith]

By your logic, we should tolerate any deviant behavior such as sodomy or atheism as long as they don't interfere with our own day-to-day lives. Yes it does bother me if a muslim moves in next door to me, and yes it does bother me if the media condones homosexuality to such an extend that I can't protect my children from it without unplugging the TV altogether. I don't support Christianity because it is MY religion, but because it is the one true way to mankind's salvation. Everyone insists on their right to define their own morals and "life my life as I choose so long as I don't interfere with my neighbor's right to do the same." What about our right to live in a country free from pagans and terrorists? But you do have a point that it is infeasible to force any religious doctrine upon the country, at least in a literal sense. Outlawing the practice of islam would probably cause riots (not to mention make people vote democrat in droves), although I personally wouldn't have a problem with it. We need to start with smaller victories and slowly change this country's culture back to the Christian values we once had.

[AmericanFaith]

Also, don't forget that refusing to recognize the superiority of any doctrine is what secularism is all about. We don't need another pledge of allegiance fiasco or Roy Moore controversy.

[NCPAC]

"If our government accepts cultural deviance, it is signaling a green light for out children to stray off the path."

It is up to the parents of a given child to decide what is or isn't "deviant," and then it is up to the parents of the child to get him/her on "the path" if the child strays from it. It is the parents' role - not the governments', thank God!

A free society engineers itself. A free society honors all religious beliefs, while allowing its equally protected citizens to have no particular beliefs whatsoever, if they so desire.

[Long Cut]

"By your logic, we should tolerate any deviant behavior such as sodomy or atheism as long as they don't interfere with our own day-to-day lives."

How is "sodomy" deviant? It is practiced daily by married, heterosexual couples, if you actually know the definition.

Likewise, "atheism" is not only not "deviant", but is something that you would never even know about another person, unless they told you. Even then, it would not affect your life in any way concievable.

"yes it does bother me if the media condones homosexuality to such an extend that I can't protect my children from it without unplugging the TV altogether."

No law says you even have to have a TV.

" I don't support Christianity because it is MY religion, but because it is the one true way to mankind's salvation."

As far as you know.

"Everyone insists on their right to define their own morals and "life my life as I choose so long as I don't interfere with my neighbor's right to do the same.""

Yep. Gotta problem? If your neighbor's not violating your right to life, liberty, or property through force or fraud, he is by definition not bothering you, and any discomfort you have with him is YOUR problem, not his.

"What about our right to live in a country free from pagans and terrorists?"

The terrs are being handled. The pagans have as much right to their religion as you.

"We need to start with smaller victories and slowly change this country's culture back to the Christian values we once had."

After reading your posts, I can only wonder what this means.

[Long Cut]

"Christians are the majority but our rights are being restricted."

Exactly what rights of yours, previously enjoyed, are being so restricted? Be specific, and keep in mind that rights only confer to individuals, not entire religious groups.

[Long Cut]

" A republic/democracy type of government"

"Consent of the governed"

" Trial by jury"

" Due process of law"

Seems to me we got these things, at least, from the Greeks and Romans...all pagans.

[AmericanFaith]

I agree that the government should be our last line of defense, but it reality it is our only line of defense. Too many parents are letting the liberal media raise their children for them. Someone needs to step in and do something. A country that accepts the homosexual lifestyle,for example, is not "free". Quite the opposite, it makes us all slaves by forcing us to accept a deviant lifestyle which is not compatible with Christianity. Call me an extremist, but I am not an anarchist and I truly feel there are some rights we simply should not have. The secularists want a "free society" where homosexuals and muslims can act as they please, yet Americans with honest Christian values are forced to live among these heathens. If Kerry wins (God-willing he won't), Christianity will change from a core value to something you practice in the privacy of your own home / church.

[AmericanFaith]

If sodomy is so innocent, then how do you rationalize the protection of marriage? And I think you know I'm talking about the homosexual kind.

[Melas]

Tolerates atheists? What are you proposing, that the government kill of all the atheists? You're backing yourself into a corner here, and you'd better explain yourself.

[Long Cut]

"Too many parents are letting the liberal media raise their children for them. Someone needs to step in and do something."

Ah, "It Takes A Village", huh?

"A country that accepts the homosexual lifestyle,for example, is not "free". Quite the opposite, it makes us all slaves by forcing us to accept a deviant lifestyle which is not compatible with Christianity."

So, we're only "free" if we're all devout Christians, huh? Or at least, "compatible" with Christianity, right? Sorry, I and a lot of others don't want to be your Dhimmis.

" Call me an extremist..."

You don't have to tell me twice.

" but I am not an anarchist and I truly feel there are some rights we simply should not have. "

Which ones do you want to take away? How many of your friends will come with you to take mine? I need to know so I can stock up on ammo.

". The secularists want a "free society" where homosexuals and muslims can act as they please, yet Americans with honest Christian values are forced to live among these heathens."

Nobody's FORCING you to live anywhere you don't want to. You can move out into the Mojave Desert if you want, or save your pennies and buy a large spread of land or an island somewhere. You could even leave the country if you so choose.

"Christianity will change from a core value to something you practice in the privacy of your own home / church."

Since it's not practiced by all Americans, or even an overwhelming majority, that's pretty much what it is now.

You can pray to Christ anytime you want, so long as you do not disrupt others.

[Long Cut]

I do not believe in homosexual marriage. Marriage is a man and a woman. What's your point? Two gay guys living next door doesn't bother me. Nor does it violate a single one of my rights.

[Mulder]

Those that say Christianity played no role in our Founding are simply wrong.

I've read a great deal of stuff from that time, and Christianity played a big role. Many sermons from that time were centered around the British tyranny, and how to deal with it. These sermons also involved lengthy discourses on the Rights on man, including the Right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Many talk about the duty of Free men to keep and bear arms in defense of Liberty.

And one of the most influential people in Lexington was pastor Jonas Clarke. His sermons made the case for Freedom and Liberty, and helped to form the ideological stand of the Patriots in Lexington.

Having said also, the stuff I've read from that time period demonstrates that 'religion' was different back then. It was more 'free will' based, and less controlling.

I don't think our Founders would recognize the 'church' of today, that teaches homosexuality is okay, guns are bad, and that we should submit to the gov't in all cases.

[risk]

Not directly. Mentioning Christianity would have been redundant. The Founding Fathers were not redundant writers.

That's a very long piece of nothing. If it were as important as you say it is, then it would have been there. Instead they were very concerned about religious civil war, and knew better than to include anything about a particular religion.

That doesn't serve your purposes very well, now does it?

[risk]

The problem is that our government has changed so that it no longer represents Christians equally.

Most such "issues" are crass exaggerations by manipulative TV evangelists like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, who toy with peoples' fears and worries to the point of propaganda.

Despite all the convenience of illegitimate "Federalist" arguments, even state constitutions in the most conservatives states indicate that your power to redress this problem is logically restricted.

One tool you may not use in order to solve this problem is to choose religious dogma or sectarian language in your laws. You must find other mechanisms. To do anything else would put us back into a situation where Some Americans were under represented or outright discriminated against.

If you use your minds you can meet the challenges our Founding Fathers presented us and rise to the occasion. Laws can be fashioned to serve within the ascribed limits.

[american spirit]

No doubt you're correct in your assertions but the key element to this paradigm shift is the question of why. How can people who take an oath of office to protect and defend this country allow this cultural coup d'etat to happen?....and even worse, we're letting them get away with it. Add to that immigration policy that borders on national suicide and it's even more perplexing. This country cannot last another 10-20 yr.'s under this type of social engineering idiocy......looks like our future could be a re-play of Bosnia.

[NCPAC]

If "too many parents are letting the liberal media raise their children for them" - as terrible as that may be- that is the decision made by those parents. Reprehensible? Absolutely - but it is still their call.

"Quite the opposite, it makes us all slaves by forcing us to accept a deviant lifestyle which is not compatible with Christiantiy."

Why does everything (and I am not speaking particularly about homosexuality here) in America have to be compatible with Christianity? I am not a Christian. Am I less of an American than you?

[risk]

Bravo, LC. Demagogues will always try to refashion the Constitution for their aims. The same-sex marriage advocates find collective "ghost" rights for arbitrary couples in the Constitution. I don't know where, though. The 5th circuit court finds collective rights for the National Guard in the 2nd amendment. And the theocrats find Christianity written all over nowhere.

[risk]

Am I less of an American than you?

Most of these well-meaning people wouldn't intend for that to happen. But it would. And some would be happy for it. This document is brilliant in its protections for Christians and you. Nowhere on the planet has religious teaching flourished the way it has here.

By keeping the government out of religion, the founding fathers actually encouraged it. We have some issues with socialism supporting certain anti-Christian media, but that can be solved without a single dogma entering our laws.

We can abolish the NEA, PBS, NPR, and other government agencies that encourage anti-Christian media. Let taxpayers figure out on their own which of those causes they want to support.