Here's a response I sent to Ravitch:
Mr. Ravitch,
In this article you define "deism" as "essentially the belief that true religion must be viewed as natural not revealed." Revealed religion, I presume, requires a revealer. Natural religion only requires the natural order, not a creator/revealer. Blessedness, then, must flow from the study of this natural order. So, prayer, which invokes the intervention of a creator/revealer would be inconsistent with a true "deist." Consider "Franklin's Appeal for Prayer at the Constitutional Convention":
http://www.wallbuilders.com/resources/search/detail.php?ResourceID=19
"... I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth-that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the sacred writings, that 'except the Lord build the House they labour in vain that build it.' "
Hardly the sentiments of a sincere deist.
And from "Religous Founders? Read Their Writings":
http://www.wallbuilders.com/resources/search/detail.php?ResourceID=58
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. Robert Treat Paine, Signer of the Declaration (Last Will and Testament)
My only hope of salvation is in the infinite, transcendent love of God manifested to the world by the death of His Son upon the Cross. Nothing but His blood will wash away my sins. I rely exclusively upon it. Come, Lord Jesus! Come quickly! 14 Benjamin Rush, Signer of the Declaration
These founders must not subscribe to your definition of deism.
You say want more Republicans, and only Christians who can "separate truth from falsehood in thousands of years of G-dtalk." Of course such a Christian is not one who actually believes any of things about God and Jesus many of the founders did (see Paine and Rush above for just two). And as far as I can tell, Christians did not fare well under the fruit of Voltaire and Rousseau, that is, the French Revolution. Washington in his farewell address (
http://www.wallbuilders.com/resources/search/detail.php?ResourceID=12) warned us against parties and the excesses natural to them.
No, we need real Christians in Government. That is why we still have a Republic, while the French have had several.
--Larry
* * *
And here was his reply:
Yes, yes. the Founders used traditional language often to show they
accepted the normative religious rhetoric, but they had very different views
among themselves. NR
* * *
He dismisses such talk as "normative religious rhetoric." How convenient. Words which are inconsistent with deeds are hypocracy. A deist, who by definition believes the demiurge put it all in motion and forgot about it, does not pray.
John Eidsmoe in "Christianity and the Consitution" looks at the religious affiliation of the founders who had both political as well as doctrinal differences. Differences do not a deist make.