WAS AMERICA FOUNDED AS A CHRISTIAN NATION? (Revised
Edition, 2016)
By John
Fea
Westminster
John Knox Press, 324 pages
★★★★
This review first posted at: https://nepca.blog/2017/05/05/was-america-founded-as-a-christian-nation-book-review/
For tens of millions of Americans, there’s no need to pose
the question raised in the title of John Fea's monograph. Most self-identified
evangelicals adamantly insist that it was, and humanists and political
progressives vigorously assert that the Founding Fathers intended that a “wall”
be erected between church and state. You might expect Fea to side with
evangelicals, given that he’s a believer and a professor at a Christian school,
Messiah College. He doesn’t. Nor does he cast his lot with those who take the
opposing view. As a historian, Fea sees nuances, not nostrums. His is a take that,
depending upon the openness of the reader, will be seen as a rare middle view
within a polarized nation, or will induce outrage.
He begins this edition—the first appeared in 2011—with a
recounting of recent reactions to his work. Predictably, he has been attacked
by both born-again believers and committed secularists. Neither is satisfied
with his insistence that how one answers the central question depends upon several
subordinate questions. These are not political questions, though the debate is
often discursively framed that way. For example, during his values-centered 2016
presidential campaign Mike Huckabee insisted that “most” of the signers of the
Declaration of Independence were ministers. In truth, just one was a man of the
cloth: New Jersey’s John Witherspoon. Fea, however, suggests it really wouldn’t
matter if all had been ministers; hard-right conservatives such as Huckabee,
Glenn Beck, and David Barton fail to define their terms. Was America founded as
a Christian nation? It depends upon what one means by “Christian, “founding,”
and “nation.”
In a careful analysis of Founders such as Washington, Adams,
Jefferson, and Witherspoon, Fea employs the very important concepts of
orthodoxy and orthopraxy, that is, adherence to Christian doctrine and practice
of its precepts. Although he agrees with those who deny that Franklin and
Washington were Deists and that Jefferson was an atheist, all three flunk the
orthodoxy test, and most slaveholders resorted to selective Bible reading to
justify the practice and come up short on the orthopraxy standard. Moreover, it
takes more to be called a Christian than merely seeing it as admirable or
useful for keeping public order. Attempts to make Jefferson into a Christian,
therefore, must be seen as sophistry; Jefferson did, after all, slice all
references to Jesus’ divinity from his personal Bible.
Then again, when was the United States “founded?” Did it
come into being under the Declaration of Independence? If so, the Declaration
indeed mentions God and makes appeals to the guidance of Providence. Fea finds
this at best anecdotal evidence, as those references do not specify the
Christian God and the document’s overall intent was exactly as embedded in its
title—to serve as a political treatise justifying rebellion. If “founding” came
with the adoption of the Constitution, all ambiguity disintegrates, as it does
not contain any mention of a deity.
But what if the nation was founded through the practice of
democracy? What is meant by a “nation?” Had 19th century Americans
been polled, they would have asserted that the United States was indeed founded
as a Christian nation. Christianity was the prevailing belief of nearly every
Euro-American of the day, and few would have imagined a "wall"
between church and state. Jefferson used that term, but within the context of
forbidding the establishment of any official
church. The Founders feared the sort of exclusivity that precipitated Europe’s
wars of religion or Puritan bigotry, but most would have viewed some variety of
Protestantism as necessary for public morality and a healthy body politic.
Moreover, until the Civil War settled the question, the republic was often referenced
as these, not the United States. The U.S. Constitution did not mention God, but
state constitutions uniformly did so and meant the Christian God. Even after
the Civil War, there is little in the historical record to challenge
evangelical beliefs that America was founded as a Christian nation until the
Supreme Court did so beginning in the 1960s.
Fea is willing to concede the evangelicals’ view that this
has been a Christian nation, but he also shows how moments in history have
forced a broadening of what that means. For example, the post-World War II
period has seen the Cold War evangelicalism of Billy Graham, the Americanized
Catholicism of John Kennedy, the activist Christianity of Martin Luther King,
Jr. and the political born-again movements that have coalesced around
conservative Republicanism. Consider how markedly the materialism of the last of
these departs from the Social Gospel movement of the early 20th
century or the Jesus Freaks movement of the 1960s and 1970s.
Frances FitzGerald’s new book, The Evangelicals, argues that modern evangelicals have essentially
merged Christianity with capitalism as if Adam Smith had become an honorary
member of the Trinity. I wish Fea had tackled this. Because he avoids siding
with anyone, the bulk of his post-Civil War analysis centers on evangelical belief rather than orthopraxy. FitzGerald shows the deep roots of
evangelical materialism, leading me to wonder how Fea would explain Christian
Donald Trump voters, given that Trump doesn’t pass muster as either an orthodox
believer or as a Christian practitioner. I also wanted to hear from liberal Christians
like Jim Wallis or Randal Balmer. Lea sometimes falls into the trap of saying
that a thing is true if enough loudmouths say so. Not so if orthopraxy is the
ultimate Christian sniff test.
Rob Weir
No comments:
Post a Comment