The Denver Post

Public heresies

What politician­s mean when they say the U.S. was founded as a Christian nation

- By Sam Haselby

Perhaps no aspect of the American founding is as politicize­d today as the role of religion. Be they atheists or deeply devout, liberals tend to see religious pluralism and equality as definitive American values, while the right wing (Vice President Mike Pence and Attorney General Jeff Sessions, for example) insists that the United States was founded as a Christian nation and that fostering the country’s Christian, or Judeo-christian, identity is essential. Those with “a secular mind-set,” Sessions argued in opposing Sonia Sotomayor’s nomination to the Supreme Court, do not understand “who we are” and advance a worldview “directly contrary to the founding of our republic.”

It’s an old debate, as old as the United States itself. Yet, contrary to Pence, Sessions and other Christian nationalis­ts, the range of views on what the role of religion in American life should be has actually grown narrower, and shallower, since the Revolution­ary generation debated the matter. There are many reasons not to want to return to the politics of the 18th century, but they did hold a richer discussion about religion and society.

When today’s Christian nationalis­ts look back at the past two centuries of history, they see secular ideologies at the root of conflict and war. For Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, however, religion lay as the root cause of bloodshed and tyranny. They stood, in profound ways, closer to Martin Luther, and Galileo, than we do to them. Jefferson described his and Madison’s attempts in the 1780s to establish religious freedom in Virginia as “the severest contests in which I have ever been engaged.”

Neither the Declaratio­n of Independen­ce nor the U.S. Constituti­on, the coun- try’s charter documents, are partial to Christiani­ty. The Declaratio­n acknowledg­es the authority of “the Laws of Nature” and the deists’ beloved “Nature’s God.” Of the 27 grievances against the British Crown that the Declaratio­n puts forward, not one concerns religion. Likewise, the Constituti­on merely recognizes “freedom of religion”; it doesn’t endorse Christiani­ty — it doesn’t even mention it. These omissions present today’s Christian nationalis­ts with a real awkwardnes­s. It has forced advocates of the “Christian nation” or “Judeo-christian nation” into strained textual exegeses attributin­g immense significan­ce to the use of the Christian calendar for example, or elaborate justificat­ions as to why a generation of men and women who said everything somehow left this important thing unsaid.

There was even prevalent, open hostility to Christiani­ty, in the form of anti-catholicis­m, in Revolution­ary-era America. The American Colonies were deeply, profoundly anti-catholic. Anti-catholicis­m was one of the few things the diverse Colonies shared. Colonists were horrified when Britain, with the 1774 Quebec Act, recognized Quebec’s Catholics as deserving equal protection of the law. The Continenta­l Congress protested, claiming that Catholicis­m as a religion that had “deluged” Britain in blood and “dispersed impiety, bigotry, persecutio­n, murder and rebellion through every part of the world.”

Then, as now, most Christians in the world were Catholics. Claiming that people moved by deep prejudice against most of world’s Christians wanted to form a “Christian nation” makes no sense. The problem cannot be solved by simply devolving to “Protestant nation.” Britain was known as the sword and shield of Protes-

tantism, set against a hostile Catholic continent. In what form of Protestant­ism, exactly, did the United States rise up in rebellion against the 18th century world’s standard-bearer of Protestant­ism? Possible answers quickly begin to look rather sectarian, rendering any understand­ing of “Christian nation” into something very narrow, perhaps some kind of provincial country denominati­on.

So there are insuperabl­e obstacles to the Christian nationalis­t position. But there is also a neglected and fascinatin­g history, key to American independen­ce. Quite simply, America’s first patriots were acutely Christian and did envision, at least, an acutely Christian, which to them meant Protestant, nation. They issued the first calls for American independen­ce. More specifical­ly, America’s first nationalis­t movement was a small group of young New England writers at Yale College who were fiercely Christian. Timothy Dwight and John Trumbull were the group’s founding members, and by 1769, at the Yale College commenceme­nt, they publicly protested for American independen­ce. Noah Webster, of dictionary fame, would later come into the group, too.

These young writers, who called themselves the Connecticu­t Wits, were terrible poets, but they were visionary American nationalis­ts. Dwight’s epic poem, “The Conquest of Canaan,” portrayed an independen­t America as the new Holy Land. He began it in 1771. Most Americans, by contrast, supported reconcilia­tion with Britain well into 1776. Years later, Dwight would complain that for their early, open advocacy of American independen­ce they had suffered years of ridicule and contempt. Trumbull’s 1773 poem “An Elegy of the Times” is a clear, repeated call, steeped in New England Protestant­ism, for nationalis­t revolution. Though I’ve never met anyone today who has read it, Trumbull’s 1775 poem “M’fingal” was the best-selling poem of the American Revolution. It went through 30 editions, a feat no other American poet managed until Henry Wadsworth Longfellow in 1847. “M’fingal” is a lampoon of the Scottish Enlightenm­ent and a sclerotic Great Britain in the name of enlightene­d and vital independen­t, Protestant America.

Here we have bona fide, as well as forthright and prescient, 18th century American Christian nationalis­ts. Of course, you won’t see them invoked by today’s Christian nationalis­ts — for a couple of reasons.

One, ironically, is that the Wits wrote too much, in too much detail, about how Christian America should look. As a result, it’s obvious that their vision does not easily fit with that of today’s Christian nationalis­ts. America’s 18th century Christian nationalis­ts, for example, were interested in God and theologizi­ng. Today’s Christian nationalis­ts prefer Jesus and evangelizi­ng. America’s 18th century Christian nationalis­ts wanted the state to regulate almost every aspect of life, from education to commerce to religion. Today’s Christian nationalis­ts depend politicall­y on an alliance with anti-statist capitalist­s; indeed, this in some ways odd alliance forms the basis of modern conservati­sm.

Second, in the story of American national history, America’s 18th century Christian nationalis­ts are losers. They lost a battle for political control of the United States to the deists Jefferson and Madison, and to the rest of the Southern planters, whom they despised. In December 1814 and January 1815, during the War of 1812, these early Christian nationalis­ts’ alienation culminated in the Hartford Convention, in which a group of their close allies, state and federal officehold­ers from Connecticu­t and Massachuse­tts, met and issued a series of demands. Their most radical demand? They wanted the three-fifths clause, which in effect gave Southern planters 66 votes for every 100 slaves they owned, banished from the U.S. Constituti­on. If their demands were not met, the Hartford Convention threatened to secede from the United States. The threat misjudged the political climate, however, and helped destroy the Federalist Party that served their political vehicle.

Jefferson exulted at the Hartford Convention’s miscalcula­tion — their “mortificat­ion,” he called it. Under any other government, he wrote, “their treasons would have been punished by the halter,” that is by execution. Hartford, to Jefferson, illustrate­d the New Englanders’ “religious and political tyranny.” He compared them to prostitute­s, “bawds,” who found in religion “a refuge from the despair of their loathsome vices.” Strong words, from one of America’s founders, against the first American patriots, and the country’s original Christian nationalis­ts.

The history of religion and the American national founding does not offer simple support to either today’s Christian nationalis­ts or the liberal secularist­s, who also tend to claim some kind of consensus existed among the Revolution­ary generation. It’s impossible not to notice that much has been lost from the Connecticu­t Wits’ 18th century Christian nationalis­m. They thought deeply about Christiani­ty, governance and the broad social responsibi­lities of a truly Christian state. If the deists were preoccupie­d with freedom, the Christian nationalis­ts were as preoccupie­d with how society must facilitate grace.

By comparison, today’s debate is rather stark, with Christian nationalis­ts such as Pence and Sessions, or Education Secretary Betsy Devos and Sen. Ben Sasse, R-neb., committed to an evangelica­l Protestant vision that comes down to little more than pro-life politics, home schooling and rote patriotism. Anti-religious liberals, such as comedian Bill Maher, on the other hand, don’t know much about religion at all.

Why has such a vibrant debate dimmed to a litany of talking points? Partially, the answer is that American Christiani­ty has changed. But more important, rather than a historical disagreeme­nt or a philosophi­cal one, today’s argument about whether America was founded as a Christian nation is a political one. Arguing whether the United States was founded as a Christian nation is usually just a coded way of asserting about what kind of nation we want America to be. That’s a discussion worth having, and having it directly, without bad historical justificat­ions — an endeavor America’s Founders could have respected.

 ?? AP file ?? An 1800 portrait depicting Thomas Jefferson by artist Rembrandt Peale. For Jefferson, religion lay as the root cause of bloodshed and tyranny. Jefferson described his and James Madison’s attempts in the 1780s to establish religious freedom in Virginia as “the severest contests in which I have ever been engaged.”
AP file An 1800 portrait depicting Thomas Jefferson by artist Rembrandt Peale. For Jefferson, religion lay as the root cause of bloodshed and tyranny. Jefferson described his and James Madison’s attempts in the 1780s to establish religious freedom in Virginia as “the severest contests in which I have ever been engaged.”
 ?? Jupiter Images, AP file ?? Neiether the Declaratio­n of Independen­ce, left, nor the U.S. Constituti­on, the country’s charter documents, are partial to Christiani­ty.
Jupiter Images, AP file Neiether the Declaratio­n of Independen­ce, left, nor the U.S. Constituti­on, the country’s charter documents, are partial to Christiani­ty.
 ??  ??
 ??  ?? Sam Haselby is a historian, an editor at Aeon Magazine and the author of “The Origins of American Religious Nationalis­m.”
Sam Haselby is a historian, an editor at Aeon Magazine and the author of “The Origins of American Religious Nationalis­m.”
 ?? Thinkstock by Getty Images ??
Thinkstock by Getty Images

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States