Historian Dr. Kevin Kruse of Princeton University spoke recently at Union Theological Seminary in New York City on the subject of America as a Christian nation. Dr. Kruse, author of One Nation Under God: How Corporate America Invented Christian America, argued that the notion that America was a Christian nation was founded on political and capitalistic movements during the 1940s and 1950s and has no basis in the early history of the country. Dr. Kruse argued that business leaders spearheaded the effort to introduce ideas like “freedom under God” and opposition to idolization of the state; publicly they claimed they were opposing communism, but really – according to Dr. Kruse – these “Christian libertarians” wanted to dismantle the New Deal. Dr. Kruse argues that both Billy Graham and Dwight Eisenhower were key players in this effort who, though set in power by business interests, saw the Christian revival of America as an end in itself.
Dr. Kruse makes much of the separation of Church and State seen in the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Examination of the reasoning behind that principle, however, suggests that the Founders – and indeed the population at large – had a much different self-understanding. James Madison, the “Father of the Constitution” and author of the Bill of Rights, explained his opposition to a Virginia state bill “establishing a provision for Teachers of the Christian Religion,” in explicitly religious terms; he feared that the establishment of a particular denomination or denominations would infringe on each man’s religious duty. He wrote that the free exercise of religion “is unalienable also, because what is here a right towards men, is a duty towards the Creator. It is the duty of every man to render to the Creator such homage and such only as he believes to be acceptable to him…. Before any man can be considered as a member of Civil Society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governour of the Universe.” For Madison, religious freedom was aimed at the protection and encouragement of religion, not at its withdrawal into a purely private sphere.
Madison’s views seem to have been shared by the population at large. The Massachusetts constitution of 1780, for example required “any person chosen governor, lieutenant-governor, councillor, senator, or representative” to declare that “I, A.B., do declare that I believe the Christian religion, and have a firm persuasion of its truth.” The Delaware constitution of 1776 prohibited the establishment of a particular religion, but insisted that “every person who shall be chosen a member of either house, or appointed to any office or place of trust” would swear an oath: “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.” New Hampshire prevented anyone from being a senator or representative unless he “be of the Protestant religion.” Georgia’s 1777 constitution stipulated that representatives “shall be of the Protestant religion.” Maryland’s 1776 constitution stipulated that no test or qualification could be required except an oath of support and fidelity to the state and “a declaration of a belief in the Christian religion.” New Jersey’s 1776 constitution stipulated that only those “professing a belief in the faith of any Protestant sect” were eligible for office. North Carolina’s 1776 constitution provided that “no person, who shall deny the being of God or the truth of the Protestant religion, or the divine authority either of the Old or New Testaments… shall be capable of holding any office or place of trust or profit in the civil department within this State.” South Carolina’s 1778 constitution went so far as to declare “The Christian Protestant religion shall be deemed, and is hereby constituted and declared to be, the established religion of this State.” Vermont’s 1777 constitution stipulated that each member of the legislature swear that ” I ____ do believe in one God, the Creator and Governor of the Diverse, the rewarder of the good and punisher of the wicked. And I do acknowledge the scriptures of the old and new testament to be given by divine inspiration, and own and profess the protestant religion.” Maryland and Vermont only protected the free exercise of Christians, New Jersey only that of Protestants.
Dr. Kruse sees generic, non-sectarian phrases like “In God We Trust,” “One Nation Under God,” and “God Bless America” as attempts to re-create the United States as a Christian nation. He argues that this is also true of public prayer at inaugurations, before cabinet meetings and in Congress. By his own criteria, therefore, early America under the Constitution ought to have been understood as a Christian nation. A majority of the states had provisos in their constitutions explicitly demanding adherence to Christianity in order to qualify for office. Prayer in Congress was not rare before the Revolution, during the Constitutional Convention, or after. Many presidents expressed the importance of religion and Christianity in particular to the lawful and peaceful existence of the nation.
Dr. Kruse is correct that the United States were not founded with Christianity as their official religion, but is anyone really making that argument? Certainly a vast majority of the population considered themselves Christian and many of the Founders were church members. Indeed, the revival of civil religion in the 1950s can only make sense if America had been and still was predominantly Christian. It was precisely because of this Christian foundation that civil religion (rather than, say, appeals to abstract rights) could be used effectively to win political support for candidates and free market policies. While Dr. Kruse may be correct that the revival of civil religion during the Cold War was often initiated and co-opted by business interests, he clearly errs if he argues that the United States was not founded as a nation that considered itself Christian.
Comment by brookspj on April 13, 2015 at 12:03 pm
There is no such thing as a Christian nation, only Christian persons. Nations along with all other civil institutions of identity have their place in the current world, but in The Kingdom they like all other divisions of humankind fade into oblivion. The idea of America is no more significant or privileged in the mind of God than the idea of the city of Corinth.
Comment by Gary Whiteman on April 14, 2015 at 11:26 am
We’re much worse than Corinth. Even the Corinthians would have guffawed at homosexual “marriage.”
Comment by yolo on April 13, 2015 at 12:37 pm
When the First Amendment was approved, the drafters had in mind not making official any particular denomination of Christianity. However, that is an entirely different issue than whether the U.S. is a Christian nation. The drafters never asserted that the U.S. was not a Christian nation. Yes, it wasn’t an Anglican nation and it wasn’t a Congregationalist nation, but the drafters never asserted that the U.S. was not a Christian nation and the drafters never asserted that the First Amendment was supposed to have that effect.
Comment by brookspj on April 14, 2015 at 9:13 am
“When the bill for establishing religious freedom… was finally passed,… a singular proposition proved that its protection of opinion was meant to be universal. Where the preamble declares that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word ‘Jesus Christ,’ so that it should read ‘a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion.’ The insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend within the mantle of its protection the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo and infidel of every denomination.” Thomas Jefferson
“As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen [Muslims]; and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan [Muslim] nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.” Treaty of Tripoli signed by President John Adams 1797
Comment by Gary Whiteman on April 14, 2015 at 10:43 am
Oh, brother. The old Treaty of Tripoli spiel – again. What a crock.
Let’s do a reality check: The Treaty of Tripoli, drawn up 1796, approved by the U.S. Senate in 1797, was a peace treaty between the U.S. and the Barbary states (which were Muslims) of north Africa. It is often cited by atheists because it states that “the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.” What follows this declaration is an assurance that the U.S. bears no animus against Muslims – in other words, the treaty is merely affirming that the undeclared war that had been going on between the U.S. and the Barbary pirates of north Africa was not religious in nature. The Barbary pirates justified their piracy by claiming they were Muslims at war with Christian nations, so the treaty was worded to make it sounds like the US government was neutral toward religions – NOT an indication that the nation itself wasn’t predominantly Christian. The treaty was in no sense binding forever, and in fact it was superseded by an 1805 treaty with the Barbary states, and that 1805 treaty did not contain the clause about “not founded on the Christian religion.” No one in 1797 or afterward saw the Treaty of Tripoli as in any way defining the role of religion in the U.S. It had no legal status once it was superseded by the 1805 treaty, and it has no legal status today.
Much more recently: 1952: “We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being.” That sentiment was voiced by the U.S. Supreme Court on this date, ruling on the case Zorach v. Clauson. The SCOTUS showed no awareness of the Treaty of Tripoli and obviously did not share the 21st century view that the treaty had somehow set it in stone that the U.S. was a secular nation. An excellent article in Forbes magazine (it’s secular, not religious) refers to the Treaty of Tripoli as “an obscure treaty,” which it definitely was, since it was largely forgotten until the rise of aggressive atheism in the 21st century.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/billflax/2012/09/25/was-america-founded-as-a-christian-nation/
Keith Olberman, who says a lot of stupid things, referred to the Treaty of Tripoli, but PolitiFact showed how he misconstrued the treaty:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/may/11/keith-olbermann/countdown-host-says-founding-father-reached-out-mu/
John Adams, who as president signed the Treaty of Tripoli, certainly did not think of the U.S. as secular. In a letter to Thomas Jefferson, dated June 28, 1813, Adams wrote: “The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the only principles on which that beautiful assembly of young men could unite. . . . And what were these principles? I answer, the general principles of Christianity, in which all those sects were united.” While president, Adams proclaimed April 25, 1799 as a national “day of solemn humiliation, fasting, and prayer.” That proclamation refers to “Most High God” and to Christ as “the Great Mediator and Redeemer.” How ironic that all the secularists know of John Adams is that he signed the Treaty of Tripoli, when in fact his proclamation of April 25, 1799 had much more effect on the American public and reflected his own personal beliefs more than the Treaty of Tripoli.
http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=7&article=4520
One secularist who claims the Treaty of Tripoli is somehow binding on American refers to it as a “little-known U.S. document.” He fails to mention that the reason that the Treaty of Tripoli is a “little-known U.S. document” is that no one then or later saw its statement about the U.S. government as having any significance for public policy. If you want to see how amusingly this writer tries to make a mountain out of a mole-hill, and how secularists can cherry-pick quotes from the Founders, here is the link:
http://www.earlyamerica.com/review/summer97/secular.html
Comment by brookspj on April 14, 2015 at 12:07 pm
The point is that the Treaty whatever it’s authority was signed by a sitting U.S. President (and founding father) and approved by Congress and it does state in clear and unambiguous terms that America is not a Christian nation. No one here or anywhere has been able to point to a legally binding document that does state unambiguous that we are a Christian nation, not a religious one, but a Christian one. Instead their arguments always hinge on clever interpretation of this or that person’s intentions which often don’t hold up to closer examination.
Also the case of Zorach v. Clauson rested on the premise that the state was actually endorsing or supporting any religion by allowing students time to leave school grounds for religious instruction off campus. Also this was not offered only to Christians, but also Jews living in the city. Therefore neither the statement in the case itself nor the issues surrounding it points to America being a Christian nation.
Let me ask you this. Do you consider Adams, Jefferson, and Franklin to have been “Christian” men? I ask because their beliefs sharply diverted from what most of the people who follow this page would consider “orthodox”. Adams was a Unitarian. Franklin was a deist who publicly expressed skepticism in Jesus’ divinity. Jefferson wrote his own version of the Bible, careful to take out any and all references to miracles and the supernatural. All of them claimed Jesus was a great moral teacher in the tradition of other religious figures like Moses, Muhammad, and the Buddha. They believed the very sorts of ideas this website decries against progressives and agnostics. I don’t see how you can label modern progressive Christians as heretics with one hand while stressing the “piety” of the Founding Fathers with the other. As much as you might want to see yourselves and your beliefs reflected back in the Founders I think it just doesn’t work.
Comment by Carlos on April 14, 2015 at 5:50 pm
A document that is ignored for two centuries is a DEAD LETTER. Using that treaty to “prove” America is not a Christian nation is something too stupid to take seriously. If you hate Christianity, that’s cool, but don’t project you hatred on the Americans living in 1792, they are not you.
Comment by yolo on April 14, 2015 at 5:52 pm
He has nothing else to point to and nothing else to cite. That’s how embarrassing his argument is.
Comment by Carlos on April 14, 2015 at 6:35 pm
The Tripoli thing gets quoted all the time by the religion-haters. It’s like they worship relics.
Comment by brookspj on April 14, 2015 at 7:15 pm
Would it matter to any of you that Christian leaders of the 18th and 19th Century took issue with the Constitution precisely because they believed it meant America didn’t privilege Christianity?
“[The Constitution] is entirely disconnected from Christianity.” Rev. Samuel Austin 1811
“[The Constitution] is negatively atheistical, for no God is appealed to at all. In framing many of our public formularies, greater care seems to have been taken to adapt them to the prejudices of the INFIDEL FEW, than to the consciences of the Christian millions.”
Rev. D.X. Junkin
Comment by ken on April 16, 2015 at 12:17 pm
Excellent choice of quotes! Because EVERY Christian in America knows who Samuel Austin and D. X. Junkin are. In fact, we rate their writings on a par with the Holy Bible!
You won this debate – just quote those household names Samuel Austin and D. X. Junkin, ’cause everyone knows they speak for all American Christians. In fact, a search at Amazon reveals all their books are huge sellers.
LOL
Comment by brookspj on April 16, 2015 at 5:26 pm
I was just demonstrating that to the question clearly not settled among those living in the past. Even among Christians themselves there was not agreement. But if you don’t like my sources then feel free to provide your own. I asked again and again for someone to provide an authoritative statement from the past that America is a Christian nation, not a religious one, but a Christian one in unambiguous terms. So far no one has done so, so I ask again: Where is it written?
Comment by brookspj on April 14, 2015 at 6:50 pm
I don’t hate Christianity. I am a Christian. What I hate is the kind of doublespeak and selective historic memory conservatives show when they claim America is a Christian nation. I ask again where is written in unambiguous terms that America is a Christian nation by the Founders or any specific document? Don’t start attacking my character just because you’re out of arguments.
Comment by Kyle on April 14, 2015 at 8:59 pm
For some reason all the gay websites post stuff about the Treaty of Tripoli because they hate Christianity so much, and that is so ironic, considering that it’s the Muslims that are killing them, and when the US is under sharia – 30 years, probably less – the few homosexuals still living may be wishing they were back in the Christian nation again. Also, the religious left makes a big issue of the Treaty, I think it’s a matter of wanting to distance themselves from evangelicals. I cannot see how any Christian would object to America being called a Christian nation, but then, the religious left are ashamed of being Christian so in a strange way it does make sense.
Comment by brookspj on April 15, 2015 at 4:05 pm
Are you going fry or grill that red herring, Kyle?
Maybe I’m saying America isn’t a Christian nation because I don’t think it is per and simple. Maybe because I legitimately don’t believe its what the Founders intended. Maybe because I don’t think being true to my faith involves self-delusion. Why don’t you actually provide some evidence to the contrary instead of attacking me personally?
Comment by Mark Brooks on April 24, 2015 at 5:53 am
Its called being diplomatic. Diplomacy is the art of making a deal, and truth isn’t always the first consideration. In other words, the 1796 Treaty of Tripoli engaged in a deliberate lie to provide cover for the Islamic ruler of Tripoli, who had sworn war against Christianity in the name of the prophet of Islam. Islam requires that all things be interpreted religiously; that is what the ruler of Tripolitana was fearful of, since his own religion allowed and allows lying in order to obtain an advantage. Irony.
Article 11 of said treaty does not in fact either accurately reflect the true state of religion in the United States in 1796, where Christianity was the established religion of several of the states and there were even established state churches in some states, nor was it very long in force, since it was superseded by the 1805 treaty which specifically excluded article 11. So it is meaningless twaddle to quote it, since it is contradicted by virtually everything else.
The 1st Amendment was enacted to prevent the Federal Government from interfering in religion or creating an established U.S. government church, “establishment” in the sense of the established Church of England in the United Kingdom, nothing more. Individuals might have held secularist ideals; on the whole the very opposite was the case.
So while your quotation may seem like good polemic, it merely highlights your lack of historical knowledge.
Comment by Trevor Thomas on April 13, 2015 at 1:33 pm
Interesting and somewhat in-depth piece on this topic from the Heritage Foundation from a few years ago here: http://www.heritage.org/research/lecture/2011/06/did-america-have-a-christian-founding
Also, as the previous comments indicate, in answering whether or not America is a “Christian Nation,” one must decide what is a “Christian Nation.” In 1905, Supreme Court Justice David Brewer (1837-1910) attempted to answer this with his book entitled “The United States: A Christian Nation.” In his book he wrote, “This republic is classified among the Christian nations of the world. It was so formally declared by the Supreme Court of the United States. But in what sense can it be called a Christian nation?”
Justice Brewer answers his own question, noting that America is “most justly called a Christian nation” because Christianity “has so largely shaped and molded it.” David Barton adds that, “A Christian nation as demonstrated by the American experience is a nation founded upon Christian and Biblical principles, whose values, society, and institutions have largely been shaped by those principles…Christianity is the religion that shaped America and made her what she is today.”
Prominent politicians, statesmen, and historians alike throughout our storied history support this conclusion. Also, see this (http://www.trevorgrantthomas.com/2009/07/is-america-christian-nation-response-to.html) for a significant account from David McCullough’s Pulitzer Prize winning biography, “John Adams,” that supports the idea that America was founded as a Christian nation.
Comment by Mark Brooks on April 24, 2015 at 6:40 am
Thanks very much for this excellent comment.
Comment by EqualTime on April 15, 2015 at 2:44 am
Yes, right wing evangelicals are making the argument that the U.S. was founded as a Christian nation. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. The harder the radicals push, the harder the secularists push back.
Comment by Matthew Kilburn on April 15, 2015 at 7:33 am
And who, exactly, are the radicals? Certainly not those just trying to carry forward the widespread public morality that has been practiced in America for two centuries, up until a few decades ago.
Comment by EqualTime on April 16, 2015 at 11:00 pm
I’d describe those trying to legislate Christian morality in our secular world as radical. FWIW, I generally support the goal of RFRA on personal liberty grounds.
Comment by Matthew Kilburn on April 15, 2015 at 7:33 am
And who, exactly, are the radicals? Certainly not those just trying to carry forward the widespread public morality that has been practiced in America for two centuries, up until a few decades ago.
Comment by Ch Hoffman on April 15, 2015 at 5:23 am
The US is a country that was established or founded by men who were, for the most part, raised in Christian environments. They were sufficiently educated in religious texts to find within the Bible a sense of justification or support for whatever positions and policies they wished to adopt.
Viewed in that way, we can acknowledge that they were politicians and statesmen, not saints.
Comment by brookspj on April 15, 2015 at 4:09 pm
But how many today would pass for Christian in place like this? If they can be called Christian, then were among most left-leaning Christians of their day and held many views organizations like the IRD consider heretical.
Comment by plains-rabbit on April 15, 2015 at 9:09 pm
That’s really stupid. Deists were not “left-leaning Christians.”
You need to think before ranting. If you hate IRD so much, hang out at the religious left’s blogs where everyone repeats the same ignorant cliches.
Comment by brookspj on April 16, 2015 at 9:50 am
What would you call them then?
Comment by Sabot1965 on April 15, 2015 at 10:41 am
Without defining what “Christian Nation” means it’s difficult to determine the answer to the question. Certainly by design were not a theocracy. But since half of the signers of the Declaration of Independence had a seminary degree, all had roots in Christendom (i.e. Europe), and the Bible was the most quoted source during the Constitutional Convention, it stands to reason that Christianity influenced this nation’s laws and mores a great deal. To argue otherwise is simply an agenda in and of itself.
Comment by mikehorn on April 15, 2015 at 10:54 am
The author chooses his supporting quotes very carefully, all pre-Constitution. The Constitution has Amendment 1 that people know, but it also has Article VI, which prohibits any religious test for public office or position of public trust (to include military). Article VI, USC makes moot all the evidence provided by the article. Most states lost such religious language through repeal within a short time after ratification of the Constitution.
The historical reasons are real and bloody, and even factored directly into the British losing the Revolutionary War. Europe had been bloody and barbaric due to religious wars for centuries. England and France were bitter enemies along the Protestant/Catholic divide, so we enlisted Catholic France to open a colonial front against the British. The Pilgrims, though internally theocratic, came here to escape national theocracies, like many other colonists. America wrote its Constitution drawing its power from “We the People”, not God or bible, a distinctly secular founding. We were predominantly Christian, but of many sects living in relative harmony. The Founders did not want to repeat the bloodshed religious ideologues had caused in Europe.
Comment by James Stagg on April 15, 2015 at 11:30 am
“Dr.” Kruse is ignorant.