Beyond the Bible: America’s true Founders
Last Sunday’s Times Free Press Perspective cover was an opinion piece by Os Guinness titled, “What is Truth? The Roots of the Present Crisis.” The thrust of Guinness’ argument is that the principles underlying both the American Revolution and our system of government are biblical in nature. By arguing that the American republic rests only on Christian scriptural foundations, Guinness paints an inaccurate portrait of America’s rich religious and political heritage, omitting not just other Christian, but also Classical and Enlightenment thinkers and theorists.
He maintains that the American Revolution was rooted in the scripture of Exodus and Deuteronomy, along with the writings of John Calvin and John Knox. He states that separation of powers in the Old Testament is the basis for our strong attachment to checks and balances and separation of powers in our Constitution. Additionally, he argues that the basis of American constitutionalism rests in the Hebrew notion of a covenant. Somewhat fantastically, Guinness observes that the great “divide” in America today rests upon the differences between those who distinguish between the “largely … biblical” American Revolution of 1776 on the one hand, and those who understand America through the lens of the “anti-religious, anti-biblical, anti-clerical, and anti-Christian” French Revolution, which commenced in 1789 on the other.
Certainly, various scholars have recognized the importance of religion to the American cause. As Stephen Green, author of “Inventing a Christian America: The Myth of the Religious Founding,” observes, the Bible was “the most familiar and universally available book in colonial America.” He notes that Exodus provided both a symbol to the New England Puritans who wanted to establish a “New Israel” and a “City Upon a Hill,” as well as a template for revolutionary clergy to tell the story of the American Revolution. To many Americans, George Washington became the American Moses. So, too, the revivalistic
Great Awakening (1730s-1740s) substantially contributed to colonial unity, religious freedom, democracy (all people were could be saved and were equals in the eyes of God), Protestant diversity and religious revitalization.
Guinness, however, overlooks important religious leaders of the day such as Roger Williams, Thomas Hooker, Isaac Backus, John Witherspoon, Anne Hutchinson and others, who stressed the importance of the freedom of the soul, the spirit of free inquiry, and liberty of conscience.
Additionally, Guinness also omits the vital importance of Enlightenment thought to the American cause. The Founders — Madison, Jefferson, Franklin and Hamilton for instance — digested John Locke’s “Two Treatises of Government” (1689), which underscored the importance of equality and a compact system of government. The Declaration of Independence, which borrows heavily from Locke, established an agreement between government and the people, not the people and God. Citizens had life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (property); men instituted government to secure these rights. If not secured, the people could revolt against the government. In 1748, Baron de la Brede et de Montesquieu wrote “The Spirit of the Laws,’ which praised the English system of government that combined the best features of monarchy, aristocracy and democracy. He also believed that the legislative, judicial and executive functions of power should be separated from one another. The American Founders were devoted to these principles as a method to prevent tyranny. Indeed, Montesquieu and Locke were a much greater part of the Founders’ intellectual bloodstream than John Knox or John Calvin.
Guinness also ignores many Classical thinkers. The Founders studied Classical theorists such as Polybius (ca. 204-122
BCE) who, borrowing from Aristotle, advocated for a mixed constitution representing aristocracy, monarchy and democracy (think of the Senate, the president and the House of Representatives). If left unchecked he said, monarchy could descend into tyranny, aristocracy into oligarchy, and democracy into mob rule; so, a system with checks and balances served an important function. Cicero (106-46 BCE) reiterated this balanced approach, stressing the importance of consent as the basis of legitimate government. To Cicero, “Liberty has no dwelling place in any state except that in which the people’s power is the greatest ….” As one scholar observed, “The [Founders] learned valuable lessons from the stirring stories of Greece and Rome, tales they first encountered as children.”
Finally, Guinness also overemphasizes religious covenants. As Greene observed, the Puritan covenants rested on a “saved” population and stressed obligation and punishment; but over time, many members of the Calvinist clergy adopted the Enlightenment compact theory. For example, John Wise, a Congregationalist pastor, observed: “There is no form of Civil Government described in Gods [sic] word, nor does nature prompt it.”
Lastly, let us remember our Constitution — a secular document designed for a civil state — neither mentioned God nor acknowledged the existence of a national creed. In it, sovereignty rests with the people, not God, for they are the absolute, final source of authority in our government.
CORRECTION: A Perspective cover commentary on June 7, titled “What is Truth?,” should have stated that Hessian, not Haitian, troops surrendered with the British troops at Yorktown in 1781.