"Official records express the faith and theory of those who form and administer the civil institutions of a nation. The fathers and founders of the American republic, being Christian men and designing to form a Christian republic, would be expected to imbue their state papers and their civil constitutions with the spirit and sentiments of the Christian religion. This fact is historic in the civil institutions of the country and gives to its official documents a Christian feature and influence which belong only to American constitutions and American political annals." - B. F. Morris, "Christian Life and Character of the Civil Institutions of the United States of America" 1864, page 46.
In the previous post, we have discussed the fact the founders' purpose was not to establish a Christian State, however, it would be an impossibility for their faith not to be expressed in the civil institutions which they formed. Though the document itself would not be a Christian document, it would reflect as a mirror the Christian faith and the principles that governed the founders' lives. Though the intention would not be to produce a religious document, of necessity it would consist of the principles by which these men governed their lives and deemed necessary for society.
This inadvertently gets twisted on both sides of the issue. Many of the Christian faith recognizes the Christian tone that is set by our founders' and are bold the proclaim the Constitution a Christian document and America a Christian nation. None believers or those of other religious persuasions push back on those ideas
Sean Faircloth in an article on the TheHill website stated: "Our population may be majority Christian, but as stated in the Treaty of Tripoli, signed by President John Adams in 1797, 'the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.'
Rather, the United States was founded on secular values, such as equality, democracy and religious liberty, designed to prevent Americans from imposing their personal religious views on one another or on our government."
Christians read such statements and they push back, thus the friction we now feel in our society. Mr. Faircloth in his assessment above was quite accurate, however, the friction is felt in the second part of his quote. In the formation of our institutions, it is doubtful secular values were resting upon the minds of the founders'. It is also doubtful they were purposely selecting religious values as the foundation of those institutions. It is most likely they were striving to build civil institutions in a free nation that were conducive to the values of that nation. As Faircloth himself stated, its values would have been predominantly Christian as the population was majority Christian, therefore, those values would be reflected in its documents. As to the wording in the Treaty of Tripoli, which I have already addressed in a post over a decade ago, you can view it by clicking on this link General Principles.
This is overwhelmingly evident when one looks at the States Constitutions that were first drawn up throughout the nation. The founders' envisioned a federal government with limited powers, the individual states being also limited, but granted powers in a much broader sense. To a large degree, this is operating in the reverse today.
A few examples are listed below from State Constitutions.
Maryland 1776
LV. That every person, appointed to any office of profit or trust, shall, before he enters on the execution thereof, take the following oath; to wit :-" I, A. B., do swear, that I do not hold myself bound in allegiance to the King of Great Britain, and that I will be faithful, and bear true allegiance to the State of Maryland; " and shall also subscribe a declaration of his belief in the Christian religion.
Delaware 1776
ART. 22. Every person who shall be chosen a member of either house, or appointed to any office or place of trust, before taking his seat, or entering upon the execution of his office, shall take the following oath, or affirmation, if conscientiously scrupulous of taking an oath, to wit:
" I, A B. will bear true allegiance to the Delaware State, submit to its constitution and laws, and do no act wittingly whereby the freedom thereof may be prejudiced."
And also make and subscribe the following declaration, to wit:
" I, A B. do profess faith in God the Father, and in Jesus Christ His only Son, and in the Holy Ghost, one God, blessed for evermore; and I do acknowledge the holy scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be given by divine inspiration." And all officers shall also take an oath of office.
Tennessee 1796
Article 8
Section 1. Whereas the ministers of the gospel are, by their professions, dedicated to God and the care of souls, and ought not to be diverted from the great duties of their functions; therefore no minister of the gospel, or priest of any denomination whatever, shall be eligible to a seat in either house of the legislature.
Section 2. No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of the State.
All of the state constitutions were similar in their understanding during the founding era. These only serve as an example of the cultural mindset that pervaded the country. It is obvious a people so religiously minded would not have been purposely seeking secular values as a foundation of their institutions. These religious oaths would later be removed by amendments, however, it gives us an understanding of the religious aspect of the American culture during its formation. So those who try and imply the founders were seeking a secular-based society are making their claim against a mountain of evidence to state the contrary.
Though the nation over the last two centuries has remained largely religious, its theological understanding has undergone an enormous change along with cultural changes, thus making these previous religious oaths unacceptable. It is disingenuous for us to try and claim our current views as the original intent of our founders', a more honest approach would be to acknowledge their intent and simply admit we are a different people and no longer want to be governed by their ideas.
However, simply denying or acknowledging the original intent of our founders' will not remove the friction we feel today. The root of the issue runs back to the beginning, we are simply not the same people. Our founding documents and institutions arguably created the greatest experience of freedom the world had ever known. The problem is, we are no longer that people. If we were starting over today and establishing a new government, it would be something entirely different than what we have, our ideas are that far removed from those of our founders'. It is not that we cry freedom lest loudly than they, it is our understanding of that freedom and the path to achieving that freedom that is so profoundly different. This will become more and more obvious as we continue on in our study.
May the Grace of God be with each of you,
David
