"America Was Not Founded on Christian Principles"
By Mark Weldon Whitten
Mark Weldon Whitten is a college philosophy and religion instructor. In the following viewpoint, he refutes the argument that the United States was founded as a Christian nation. Whitten examines historical evidence, including the text of the Constitution, and concludes that the nation's founders intended to establish a national government based on the principle that church and state should be wholly separate.
As you read, consider the following questions:
What arguments does Whitten make to explain the absence of the words "separation of church and state" in the Constitution? What are the seven main points of evidence that the author uses to support his argument that church-state separation was fundamental constitutional principle? What does separation of church and state mean, according to Whitten?
It has often been charged that America was founded as a 'Christian nation' and that separation of church and state is a 'lie' or a 'myth,' because it is not 'in' the Constitution of the United States. How accurate are such judgments?
As a matter of fact, the words 'separation of church and state' are not contained in the text of the Constitution. Yet, the words 'separation of powers' are also not
found in the text of the Constitution--but who could competently argue that the separation of powers is not a constitutional doctrine?
Members of the Religious Right who reject church-state separation are predominantly Christian trinitarian theists, yet the word 'trinity' is not found in the Bible. Do they, therefore, wish to deny that trinitarianism is a biblical doctrine?
The real issue is not whether the words 'separation of church and state' are found in the text of the Constitution, but whether the principle of church-state separation is a constitutional assumption and principle, and what church-state separation actually means and entails.
Seven Evidences
Seven decisive evidences demonstrate that church-state separation is a constitutional assumption and principle. One such evidence consists in the fact that no theological or biblical arguments, and no prayers for divine guidance or approval, were offered during the Constitutional Convention of 1787, contrary to what contemporary myth-makers like [author and speaker] David Barton have irresponsibly asserted....
A second evidence consists of the fact that the text of the Constitution makes no appeals to religious authorities, rationales, or purposes. The Constitution is a 'Godless document,' a fact that was immediately evident to evangelical Christians of the constitutional era. Timothy Dwight, evangelical president of Yale University declared:
The nation has offended Providence. We formed our constitution without any acknowledgment of God; without any recognition of his mercies to us as a people, of his government or even of his existence. The [constitutional] convention by which it was formed, never asked, even once, his direction, or his blessings, upon their labors. Thus we commenced our national existence under the present system without God.
A third evidence that church-state separation is a constitutional principle consists of the fact that Article VI, Section III of the Constitution--the only substantive mention of religion in the Constitution--prohibits any religious tests for holding political office. It was rightly recognized by most (and wrongly objected to by many) at the time that this restriction allowed anyone of whatever religion, or none at all, to serve in the federal government....
A fourth evidence that church-state separation is a constitutional principle consists of the fact that the Federalist Papers--written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay to 'sell' the new Constitution to the American people--also made no appeal to religious authorities, rationales, or purposes to legitimize the Constitution....
Madison's Views
Fifth of all, while it is true that Thomas Jefferson, who wrote the letter to Danbury Baptists which contains the phrase 'wall of separation,' was not a member of the Constitutional Convention, James Madison was. Madison was the most influential member of the Constitutional Convention and was the driving force behind the creation and adoption of the Bill of Rights, including the First Amendment with its guarantees of flee exercise and non-establishment of religion. Madison as president practiced a quite strict separation of church and state. Madison wrote:
There remains ... a strong bias toward the old error, that without some sort of alliance or coalition between government and religion neither can be duly supported. Such indeed is the tendency to such a coalition, and such is its corrupting influence on the parties, that the danger cannot be too carefully guarded.... Every new and successful example of a perfect separation between ecclesiastical and civil matters is of importance.... And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in showing that religion and government will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together....
Sixth, the debate in the First congress on the wording of the First Amendment demonstrates that it was designed and understood to disallow not only particular and preferential aid to one Christian denomination over others, but also non-preferential aid to religion in general. Wording that would have allowed non-preferential aid to Christian denominations in general was carefully considered and rejected....
Separation of Church and State
Finally, the text of the First Amendment itself refutes the idea that it does not embody the principle of church-state separation. As Justice Wiley Rutledge incisively and decisively wrote in the Supreme Court decision Zorach vs. Clauson(1947):
The amendment's purpose was not to strike merely at the official establishment of a single sect, creed, or religion.... The object was broader than separation of church and state in the narrow sense.... 'Religion' appears only once in the amendment. But the word governs two prohibitions and it governs them alike. It does not have two meanings, one narrow to forbid an 'establishment' and another, much broader, for securing 'the free exercise thereof.' Congress and now the states are as broadly restricted concerning the one as they are the other.
Government cannot make any law respecting an establishment of religion--any and all religions! Nor can government prohibit the free exercise of religion--any and all religions! And no religion can use its political influence upon government to establish itself socially in a favored position over other religions. That is separation of church and state.
Source Citation:
"America Was Not Founded on Christian Principles" by Mark Weldon Whitten. Religion in America. William Dudley, Ed. Opposing Viewpoints® Series. Greenhaven Press, 2002. Reprinted, with permission, from "Was America Founded as a 'Christian Nation'?" by Mark Weldon Whitten, Human Quest, May/June 1999. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Thomson Gale. 06 December 2005. [http://galenet.galegroup.com/servlet/OVRC]
Source Database: Opposing Viewpoints: Religion in America
Document Number: X3010231206
