Fearless Faith

In the church’s politically revitalized rush to impart Christian principle and accountability toward governance of the nation, a burden can be placed squarely at the feet of our country’s founding fathers. Spurious claims that we are first and foremost a Christian nation from its inception make for memorable sound bites but carry little weight with the founding fathers. Expectations by six of the most respected founders — Franklin, Adams, Madison, Jefferson, Washington and Hamilton — embrace a decidedly different conclusion, one that strictly and unambiguously indorses separation of church and state.

The erudite self-proclaimed Deist, Benjamin Franklin, recognized the complexities of religion and its tendency to create division. “It was Franklin’s firmly held contention that ‘most sects in religion think themselves in possession of all truth, and that whenever others differ from them, it is so far error.’” (Brooke Allen, Moral Minority, 2006) Whose dogma shall we adopt? Whose religious truths shall we enact? Who shall preserve the sacred intent of the Establishment and Free Exercise clauses?

The words of Thomas Jefferson echo loudly. “Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinion, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church and State.” (Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptist Association, January 1, 1802)

John Adams cautioned that “mixing sacred character with that of the statesman, as it is quite unnecessary at this the time of day, in these colonies, is not attended to with any good effects. The clergy are universally too little acquainted with the world and the modes of business to engage in civil affairs with an advantage.”

Adams further noted, “Nothing is more dreaded than the national government meddling with religion.” James Madison voiced similar sentiments; “There is not a shadow of right in the general government to intermeddle with religion. Its least interference with it would be a most flagrant usurpation.” He also shared, “During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity, in both, superstition bigotry and persecution.”

George Washington, in communication with New Church in Baltimore dated Jan. 27, 1793, allowed further expression … ”We have abundant reason to rejoice that in this Land the light of truth and reason has triumphed over the power of bigotry and superstition. In this enlightened Age and in this Land of equal liberty it is our boast, that a man’s religious tenets will not forfeit the protection of the Laws “Alexander Hamilton similarly offered, “There is a bigotry in politics as well as in religions, equally pernicious in both. The zealots, of either description, are ignorant of the advantage of a spirit of toleration.”

Author/historian Brooke Allen notes, “During [Hamilton’s] youth, he heartily supported his Virginian colleagues in their efforts to keep God out of the Constitution, to forbid religious establishments and to promote full religious liberty.” (Allen) It is, of course, always more complicated than we want or imagine it to be. Inconvenient truth nearly always irritates in some measure or another, though over time it can open doors to other considerations that contribute to a more well-rounded actionable faith. One thing appears certain; the establishment of a single national religion remains a phenomenally dangerous precept, the very last thing that our founding fathers envisioned on our behalf. They must be turning over in their graves.