You hear it every day, I don’t need to provide a source. Conservative Christians in the USA say the US was founded as a Christian nation. But what does the evidence from that time show?
Thomas Jefferson, who wrote the document that contains our founding principles no less, the Declaration of Independence, was a Deist! I think most of our founding fathers were, no? All I know is that it was very in vogue at the time to be a Deist.
Let’s examine Deism a little bit here. They don’t believe in Divine Providence, so there goes prayer in public school (sorry religious conservatives). And they don’t believe in divine revelation, so there goes Creationism (sorry again).
Anyways, that is my rather simplistic view of the situation. I could always be wrong, and welcome correction as well as alternative views:).
Deism isn’t that neat and tidy. Ben Franklin was a Deist, yet called for prayer at the Constitutional Convention. Thomas Jefferson as President regularly attended Christian Sunday worship services held INSIDE the Capitol Building and authorized federal funds for Bibles &, IIRC, missionaries, to Native Americans. The Founders established the offices of Congressional chaplains and allowed for state-level established churches, which lasted up until the 1830s. Also, although Jefferson and Franklin were not conventional Christians, they were Jesus-fans who esteemed him as a great, if not the greatest, moral teacher. While they probably would have had no problems with evolutionary theory as such, they also would have had no problems with Intelligent Design, though we do agree they would have not bought into Young-Earth Creationism.
A document that people often cite as evidence that the US always viewed itself as a secular state is the 1797 US treaty with Tripoli which reads in part:
It’s worth noting that all of the references to God on our money and in the Pledge of Allegiance were added in the 1950s.
I would, however, say that it’s likely some of the key figures in the construction of our most important legislative documents were Deists or had Deist tendencies, most of the other signatories were probably regular ol’ Christians.
Though, then again, it is worth noting that Jefferson’s Bible, which removes all mysticism and magic from the NT and replaces it with simple philosophy, was handed out to every new congress for “many years” starting in the early 1900s. So it seems likely that at least at that point in time that the idea of a secular approach to things was non-questionable.
Lest someone think the major point here is just that it happened fairly recently, let me point out that “In God We Trust” as the national motto and on our (paper) currency, and “under God” added to the pledge, was done in the heat of McCarthyism.
Yes, blacklists, un-American activities committee, loyalty reviews, “In God We Trust,” and “under God” are all products of the same pathology. In their fear of communism, they became like them.
Washington was known to refer to “Providence”, but is not considered to be religious. Lincoln was almost certainly an atheist until he was President, and only then starts referring to God frequently and in a way that might indicate he believed.
Jefferson was accused of atheism in the 1800 election - maybe why he had the services. Madison personally helped Tom Paine, whose Age of Reason can hardly be called Christian. However, the late 18th century was between revivals and religion, while the default, was hardly the big deal it is today.
As for established churches, that the default both in England and in the colonies. The surprising thing was not that some states kept it, but that some states (and the federal government) didn’t.
So, I don’t think it is right to say the US was founded on deism. It was founded on diversity, where supporting the new government was far more important than what church you went to or didn’t go to.
I think it could possibly be alternated said that it was a bigger deal then, than today. But because of that, it was seen to be something that you kept private and which was no one else’s business, because anything else would have been havoc.
These days the US is all Christians. Back then it was Catholics, Quakers, Lutherans, Calvinists, Presbyterians, or what-have-you and everyone was suspicious and mildly antagonistic of the other.*
Note that I haven’t taken any care to make sure that those groups aren’t time period accurate, nor that they aren’t different words for the same group. It would take a while to find the different “religions” of each of the original states.
This is true, but it’s also worth pointing out that being a Christian does not automatically entail supporting government entanglement with or support of religion. American history has some notable examples of deeply devout Christians who firmly believed in a secular (not anti-religious) government. Roger Williams, the 17th century founder of Rhode Island, was an early proponent of separation of church and state and religious liberty for people of all views, because–though he was undoubtedly convinced that the beliefs of non-Christians or of Christians who disagreed with his own (Calvinistic) theology were in error–he very much didn’t want the worldly government to intrude into what he considered God’s domain. In the Revolutionary era, John Leland, a Baptist minister from Virginia, was also a strong supporter of full and equal religious liberty for all and the separation of government from religious matters; again, not because he didn’t take religion seriously, but rather because he did take religion seriously.
I don’t think it’s quite correct to say that it’s a question of keeping religion “private”, but rather a question of prohibiting the state from intruding into religious questions.
In discussions about religion and government these days there are a lot of–in my opinion muddled if not downright dishonest–references to keeping religion out of or allowing it into “the public square”. I certainly don’t think Roger Williams, John Leland, or Thomas Jefferson would have suggested that religion should be kept out of “the public square” in the sense that religion should be something people practice in the privacy or their own homes, or together with like-minded people behind the closed doors of their churches (synagogues, mosques, etc.) on Sunday (or Saturday or Friday). Rather, people should certainly be free to vigorously advance their religious beliefs in public discourse, even to (non-violently) proselytize; but the civil government should stay out of it, confining itself to keeping the peace, protecting the rights of all persons regardless of their religious faith or lack thereof, and making and enforcing theologically neutral laws that benefit citizens of all viewpoints in the here-and-now, but staying out of the business of “saving souls” (if there are any such things).
I don’t disagree with you but I think you misunderstood my point. I wasn’t talking about political stances, I was just pointing out that at that time and place the various sects of Christianity were viewed as opponents of one another, not just different flavors of the same thing.
Deism probably was able to rise because people were less likely to ask other people about their religion. Not because people were less religious at that time. Probably feelings of religious fervor were stronger then (among the populace, as individuals), not less than today. But that probably did bubble up into politics in that people didn’t feel like they all believed in the same thing. They felt like there were more religions and all of equal popularity.
Deism was never particularly popular, but it rose in prominence among European intellectuals because of the enlightenment and the scientific revolution. If there was a God, then how do you explain a mechanistic, naturalistic universe that seems to run according to specific measurable and predictable natural laws. But if there’s no God, then how was the universe created in the first place, and how did people develop a sense of morality and a universal concept of religion? So, Deism was an attempt to find a middle ground by saying there’s a God who created the universe and established certain physical and moral laws, and since then hasn’t played a role.
There is some historical evidence that the Establishment Clause was intended to protect the official churches then existing in some states from encroachment by an official federal church.
Perhaps, but this was an era when daily business for most people was conducted with coins.
Since the Lincoln penny appeared a century ago, there hasn’t been a time when this phrase wasn’t on the currency, and indeed it had appeared there beforehand. So chalking this up to Cold War hysteria is misplaced obviously.
As for the Declaration, Jefferson may have written it but it had to be ratified by the Continental Congress - and we know the religious affiliation of these men pretty well. Deism wasn’t well represented - Anglicans, Congregationalists, and Presbyterians dominated, with a few Unitarians, Deists, Quakers and a Catholic rounding out the mix. Given this religious pluralism, it would have made sense for the Founders to have emphasized freedom of religion and not to have established a national church - which is what they subsequently did. It would not have made sense for them to have codified a state officially atheist or deist, and indeed they did not do this.
