How Christian Were the Founders?

[Solon]

Currently, this is the "most e-mailed" on the NY Times website

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/14/ma...ooks-t.html?em

It's about the Texas Board of Education and the enormous influence it has over textbook publishers.

A couple of statements from TBoE members:

“I consider myself a Christian fundamentalist,” [Texas Board of Education Member Don McLeroy] announced almost as soon as we sat down. He also identifies himself as a young-earth creationist who believes that the earth was created in six days, as the book of Genesis has it, less than 10,000 years ago. He went on to explain how his Christian perspective both governs his work on the state board and guides him in the current effort to adjust American-history textbooks to highlight the role of Christianity. “Textbooks are mostly the product of the liberal establishment, and they’re written with the idea that our religion and our liberty are in conflict,” he said. “But Christianity has had a deep impact on our system. The men who wrote the Constitution were Christians who knew the Bible. Our idea of individual rights comes from the Bible. The Western development of the free-market system owes a lot to biblical principles.”

and

In 2008, [Texas Board of Education member] Cynthia Dunbar published a book called “One Nation Under God,” in which she stated more openly than most of her colleagues have done the argument that the founding of America was an overtly Christian undertaking and laid out what she and others hope to achieve in public schools. . . . “We as a nation were intended by God to be a light set on a hill to serve as a beacon of hope and Christian charity to a lost and dying world.” But the true picture of America’s Christian founding has been whitewashed by “the liberal agenda” — in order for liberals to succeed “they must first rewrite our nation’s history” and obscure the Christian intentions of the founders. Therefore, she wrote, “this battle for our nation’s children and who will control their education and training is crucial to our success for reclaiming our nation.”

[creekster]

The founders were, largely, deists. But they did know the bible.

[LA Ute]

The best book I have seen on this subject is Jon Meacham's: [ame="http://www.amazon.com/American-Gospel-Founding-Fathers-Making/dp/0812976665/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1265998892&sr=1-1"]Amazon.com: American Gospel: God, the Founding Fathers, and the Making of a Nation (9780812976663): Jon Meacham: Books@@AMEPARAM@@http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51V89HQan5L.@@AMEPARAM@@51V89HQan5L[/ame].

Here are one reviewer's comments:

"In our finest hours," [Meacham] writes, "we have been neither wholly religious nor wholly secular, but have drawn on both traditions."

The founders consciously allowed, if not encouraged, what Ben Franklin called a "public religion" to flower, even as they were creating a republic in which private religious liberty would be codified into law and embraced by custom.

For Meacham, that careful balance has been ignored in recent decades by another of our cyclical awakenings of aggressive Christian fundamentalism. When preacher Jerry Falwell of the Moral Majority wrote in a 1980 manifesto that "any diligent student of American history finds that our great nation was founded by godly men upon godly principles to be a Christian nation," Meacham thinks he got it only half right.

I think Meacham gets the whole thing right. I also think those people in Texas have it all wrong.

[Jacob]

The founders were, largely, deists. But they did know the bible.

Largely deist?
I don't know how to get the most accurate information, but this list shows only 2 signers of the Declaration as deists (Jefferson and Franklin)
And only 1 signer of the constitution (Franklin).

And has this table:

Episcopalian/Anglican 88 54.7%
Presbyterian 30 18.6%
Congregationalist 27 16.8%

http://www.adherents.com/gov/Founding_Fathers_Religion.html#Declaration

[creekster]

Largely deist?
I don't know how to get the most accurate information, but this list shows only 2 signers of the Declaration as deists (Jefferson and Franklin)
And only 1 signer of the constitution (Franklin).

And has this table:

Episcopalian/Anglican 88 54.7%
Presbyterian 30 18.6%
Congregationalist 27 16.8%



http://www.adherents.com/gov/Foundin...ml#Declaration

I based my comment not on stated affiliations but on my readings of their religious thoughts and approaches. I concede that Jefferson and Franklin are two of my favorites, however, and so that does tend to inform my larger view. But from what I have read of others (Washington and Adams, for example) their approach to religion was very deistic.

I am no expert, however, and offer only my own opinion.

[byu71]

The best book I have seen on this subject is Jon Meacham's: Amazon.com: American Gospel: God, the Founding Fathers, and the Making of a Nation (9780812976663): Jon Meacham: Books.

Here are one reviewer's comments:

"In our finest hours," [Meacham] writes, "we have been neither wholly religious nor wholly secular, but have drawn on both traditions."

The founders consciously allowed, if not encouraged, what Ben Franklin called a "public religion" to flower, even as they were creating a republic in which private religious liberty would be codified into law and embraced by custom.

For Meacham, that careful balance has been ignored in recent decades by another of our cyclical awakenings of aggressive Christian fundamentalism. When preacher Jerry Falwell of the Moral Majority wrote in a 1980 manifesto that "any diligent student of American history finds that our great nation was founded by godly men upon godly principles to be a Christian nation," Meacham thinks he got it only half right.

I think Meacham gets the whole thing right. I also think those people in Texas have it all wrong.

So is Meacham saying we were out of balance and the fundamentalism movement has brought us back into balance. Surely he isn't saying we are now out of balance because of the movement.

[Jacob]

So is Meacham saying we were out of balance and the fundamentalism movement has brought us back into balance. Surely he isn't saying we are now out of balance because of the movement.

I took it as Meecham saying that Fallwet et al are swinging the pendulum too far in the opposite direction. When Meacham says Fallwell only has this quote half right:

"any diligent student of American history finds that our great nation was founded by godly men upon godly principles to be a Christian nation,"

I take him to mean that our nation was founded by godly men upon godly principal, but not as a Christian nation.

If that's what he means, I agree with it. The federal government is quite clearly intended to be secular, IMO.

[LA Ute]

So is Meacham saying we were out of balance and the fundamentalism movement has brought us back into balance. Surely he isn't saying we are now out of balance because of the movement.

No, almost the opposite. He's saying were in balance and they took us out of balance.

I'd say we were out of balance in the secular direction, and Falwell and Co. took us too far in the religious direction.

[Pheidippides]

I think Meacham gets the whole thing right. I also think those people in Texas have it all wrong.

As long as we're bringing Texas into it, I have yet to see the overt religious influence in schools. Overt.

And it may be because my daughter's school does have children of other faiths, such as the occasional Muslim and Hindu.

However, I am shocked at the TBoE's statements. I will add it to the list of dissatisfaction I have with education in Texas.

[statman]

I will add it to the list of dissatisfaction I have with education in Texas.

The biggest problem with Texas schools is football. Everything else is a distant second.

As cool as it is to have awsome football played at the HS level in the state, it's sad to see how much emphasis is put on it, and what they sacrifice to do so.

We lived in the Keller ISD - next to Southlake Carrol. The vast majority of kids came from homes with college-educated parents working white-collar professional-type jobs. Based on demographics alone, you'd think that there would have been a big emphasis on school, and that a whole lot of kids would be taking advanced courses, that the school would have really good SAT/ACT scores, etc. And it was good - for Texas. But compared to national averages, it was only a slightly above average school.

The saving grace of the district - and the way to tell if your district is good if you live in TX - was the performance of the top quintile. The performance of the district's best students was very good. Talented kids got steered into the right courses and achieved well. If your district could do that, they were doing okay. But the average kids undoubtedly had resources, emphasis and focus sucked away by football...

[Solon]

No, almost the opposite. He's saying were in balance and they took us out of balance.

I'd say we were out of balance in the secular direction, and Falwell and Co. took us too far in the religious direction.

Two thoughts:

One is the difference between public religion and private conviction. This is something I'll probably work up into a Foyer post someday since it's something I've been working on (in a different culture). To some extent, in preindustrial society, the observances and rituals of religion superseded notions of individual mystic experiences. In fact, the mystics were often mistrusted (e.g. Julian of Norwich or Margery of Kempe), or left their communities altogether (eremitic monasticism). Modern notions of faith and religion are different than pre-industrial ones. Even if we decide that the Founders were devout Christians, it was a Christianity different from today's.

The other thought is that the decisions of the Texas Board of Education affect the educations in lots of other states, since publishing companies cater to their biggest customer. There isn't a "Texas Edition" of that history textbook - so what your kids are reading might have been impacted by Texas' suggestions or requirements.

[LA Ute]

Even if we decide that the Founders were devout Christians, it was a Christianity different from today's.

I don't think anyone who seriously studies the issue can conclude that they were devout Christians.

[All-American]

A very pro-Washington friend of mine made an interesting point about this article.

In all of George Washington's 70 volumes of writing, he used the words "Jesus Christ" only once in which he was writing to Native Americans (then referred to as Indians) that children should be instructed in His teachings. But, it was more for their philosophical benefit than for salvation. He was a God-fearing man, but to call him Christian is a misnomer. The same goes for Jefferson and Madison. This dude is pushing his agenda hard.

[Viking]

The significant influence of the Scottish Enlightenment, directly by way of Witherspoon to Madison and others, and in writ principally by Hume, seems to contradict assertions that this was anything close to a christian movement. I'm no historian but I have often guessed that the founders had to wrap their humanism/rationalism into the prevailing christianity of the day and there wasn't much more to it than that.

Thank god for the Scots

[All-American]

The significant influence of the Scottish Enlightenment, directly by way of Witherspoon to Madison and others, and in writ principally by Hume, seems to contradict assertions that this was anything close to a christian movement. I'm no historian but I have often guessed that the founders had to wrap their humanism/rationalism into the prevailing christianity of the day and there wasn't much more to it than that.

Thank god for the Scots

I would think that if you were trying to show that it wasn't a Christian movement, you could find a better way to do it than to examine one particularly influential philosopher.