America's Founding Fathers: A Christian Critique

America’s Founding Fathers: A Christian Critique Introduction How should Christians look at America’s Founding Fathers? This question is very important, for several reasons. America is torn by unprecedented ideological conflict. Much of this involves Christianity’s place in American history and society Many consider America to have once been a Christian country Many Christians believe that America was founded on Christian principles. And that we should go back to that time Others believe that America was a secular nation from the beginning The Founding Fathers have been extolled as models The Founding Fathers have been criticized for racism and other sins This debate affects people in other countries, including China. To what extent was America ever a “Christian nation”? Or is such a thing impossible? Approach of this lecture. Many capable men led the American independence movement and participated in the government in the early years. There were several “Founding Fathers” including Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, John Jay, and Patrick Henry. Most would have called themselves Christians, though some were skeptics and many were only nominal Christians. Most signers of the Constitution and Declaration were practicing Christians. Benjamin Franklin, on the other hand, didn’t believe in the deity of Christ, though he did believe in a god who governed the universe and rewarded good and evil. He thought religion was useful but shouldn’t take too much time. The main thing was good works, not doctrine. We shall examine three principal Founding Fathers individually: George Washington, John Adams, and Thomas Jefferson. They were leaders in the independence movement and the war against Britain; they and their friends influenced the writing of the Constitution; they were the first three presidents of the new nation; Jefferson mentored the two presidents who followed him, and the son of John Adams was the sixth president. We shall look at their conduct, their attitudes towards Christianity, their character, and their political convictions in relationship to Christianity. We shall evaluate them according to the Bible Before 1775 Overview The American colonies had a long history of self-rule They saw themselves as British citizens, with basic constitutional rights. They were deeply influenced by the Great Awakening in the 1730, when thousands of people were either converted to Christ or revived in their faith, and by Christian values. Some of these are: Man is created in God’s image; he is also fallen and corrupt, a slave to sin. Jesus alone saves us from this sin so that we might live with God forever in a new heaven and new earth. Even now, he gives us victory over sin by the Holy Spirit. Increasingly, however, they absorbed Enlightenment ideas, especially those of John Locke. We should note, however, that Locke himself reflected biblical concepts in his writings. They began to re-interpret “freedom” as freedom from Britain, the Crown and Parliament, rather than freedom from sin and Satan. Some of them, like the Virginia planters, were harmed by Britain’s mercantile policies, whereby the colonies existed for the benefit of the mother nation. Britain imposed taxes to pay for the cost of the French-and Indian War, part of the larger world war between France, England, and other nations. Americans reacted with anger and resistance, even violence. Before the war, the colonists acted more and more violently as the Parliament enacted more and more laws to tax or control them Americans feared that British taxes were making them poor. They also feared the loss of ancient liberties. Britain responded with more laws, more taxes, greater control, and their soldiers. At this time, Britain was ruled by one of the worst governments in its history, and wouldn’t compromise. The American colonies, in contrast, had a large number of extremely intelligent, well-educated, and capable men who were skilled in the arts of government, including debating questions in their state assemblies and making laws. Among them were George Washington, John Adams, and Thomas Jefferson. Washington Washington was a farmer, but he also had experience as a surveyor, a soldier, and a member of the Virginia Assembly. Like all Virginia planters, Washington owned slaves. He was always faithful to his wife Martha and to his step-son. Increasingly, he became angry with England’s mercantilist policies towards the colonies, which directly affected him financially. Adams John Adams was a successful lawyer and a member of the Massachusetts state assembly. He was influential as a speaker and writer. He was faithful to his wife Abigail and devoted to his children. Very early, he became an advocate of independence Jefferson Jefferson was, like Washington, born into a prominent Virginia family. After being taught by tutors at home he attended William and Mary College, where he received an outstanding education. He then studied law for six years, became extremely knowledgeable about law and practiced successfully. Jefferson was a family man; he loved his wife Martha and their children. Like Washington, he was a farmer and owned many slaves. After his legal studies, he participated some in the Virginia Assembly. Though he did not like public speaking, he was effective in conversation and in writing drafts of laws, and was thus highly respected. He wrote “A summary View of the Rights of British America” which relied on John Locke’s thought. He made two main points: The primacy of individual rights as given as God. The second was a “fundamental commitment to popular sovereignty.” He linked “popular sovereignty with liberty, rooted in a divine plan. This gave Americans a conceptual basis for their actions. Bernstein, Jefferson, 23-25. He also wrote a proposal for the Virginia state government to stop supporting the Anglican church; he argued for separation of church and state. Christian involvement in the independence movement At that time, most Americans professed to have some sort of belief in God, and most called themselves Christians. Many Christian church leaders, especially Presbyterians, were teaching their people that the Bible supported rebellion against unjust government. As we saw earlier, these people had changed the concept of salvation as deliverance from sin and Satan to deliverance from political bondage. On the other hand, many religious leaders and churchgoers strongly protested the move towards independence. Most of this resistance to the revolutionaries came from the Anglican church. They not only rejected the use of violence and force, but also opposed the idea that Americans had the right to rebel against the British government. They cited biblical passages that command Christians to obey their rulers, even bad and tyrannical ones (see Romans 13 and 1 Peter 2). They noted that these commands were written when Rome was ruled by Nero, one of the worst emperors in history. They also argued that Jesus did not lead his followers in a rebellion against the evil and unjust rule of Rome and the corrupt Jewish leaders in Palestine. Nor did the apostles ever suggest that disciples of Jesus should use violence to rebel against the government. See, for example, Titus 3:1-8. 1775-1783 During the War for independence, Washington commanded the army faithfully. Though he made many mistakes, he overcome obstacles by perseverance, endurance of hardship, and bravery in battle. He often rode to the front and lead his men personally into the fight. During the war he adopted a spartan lifestyle, living simply among the men. Washington’s greatness as a leader was recognized by everyone. After the negotiations in Paris had ensured American independence, but before the articles of the treaty had been formally announced, many officers in the army were discontented, having not received adequate pay during their long hard years of service. In particular, they wanted to force Congress to guarantee that they would receive a pension, something for which Washington had repeatedly urged Congress promise to do. Some of the officers of his army wrote a letter urging the army either to disband immediately, even though the British still occupied New York, or to refuse to dissolve when peace was made, thus leaving the army in a position to dictate terms to Congress. Washington loved his army, but he was also committed to the republican insistence upon civilian control of the military. He did not want to lead a coup d’etat. He called a meeting of all officers and then addressed them in a way that left many of them weeping and ashamed of themselves. It was one of the most dramatic moments in American history, and only George Washington could have succeeded in saving the nation from the danger of an army out of control. For a vivid account of this event, see Ferling, 266 Then, in his final act as general of the army, he appeared at a ceremony with Congress and “surrendered the power as General that Congress had bestowed on him. They, like his countrymen, appreciated Washington’s long years of sacrifice and dedication, but he had won their affection, and that of the world, by relinquishing his power.” Many were weeping as he put on his greatcoat and left for Mount Vernon. When King George III heard about it, he said that Washington was “the greatest man in the world.” Ferling, 271-272. By these actions, he saved the country from military rule for more than two hundred years, in stark contrast to the fate of Latin American nations who gained independence from Spain. Adams As a member of the Continental Congress, Adams worked hard. He spoke during debates, wrote, and worked in committees. He became an expert in military affairs. Later, went to France as an envoy with Benjamin Franklin. There, he endured hardship and opposition from the French government. Then he went to Holland to get a loan. After years of hard work, he was finally successful. The loan enabled the colonies to keep fighting. At all times during the long war, Adams lived simply and denied himself pleasure, even to the point of injuring his health. Jefferson In contrast to Adams, Jefferson avoided the Virginia assembly. Instead, he stayed home with Martha as much as he could Jefferson lived luxuriously at home. O His behavior during [this time] sheds light on his temperament. One historian writes: “This was a man who indulged himself throughout a long life, content to live amid the affluence provided by the toil of his slave laborers. In the late 1770s, unmoved by the entreaties of others, he was happy to remain on his mountain while thousands of his fellow citizens bore the burden of winning this republican revolution.” Ferling, 167. He remained at home to be with Martha until she died in 1782 while giving birth to their sixth child. She made him promise not to remarry, so her children would not be brought up by a stepmother, as she was. Finally, his friends persuaded him to serve as governor of Virginia. Many criticized him for his weak leadership. Being very sensitive to criticism, he retired from politics and returned home to be with Martha. In 1784 he was sent to France to join Franklin and Adams as ministers to that country. He became sole ambassador in 1785. Jefferson brought his daughter and some slaves, including Sally Hemings, with him. Because of his mild and conciliatory manner, he was a very skillful diplomat While in Paris, he began an affair with Sally Heming, one of his slaves; as the daughter of Martha’s father by a slave woman, she was also half-sister of his wife Martha Jefferson returned to the US 1789 Jefferson’s political ideas included hatred of monarchy and aristocracy; After the War After the war, the Congress called a convention to draw up a constitution for the new nation. As the most respected person, Washington presided over the debates. Adams worked hard and effectively. Jefferson was still in France at this time. Religion and the Constitution Some believe that the Constitution was drawn up at a time when America was mostly secular, and reflects this fact. Others point out that all the states except Rhode Island and Virginia had constitutions that, in one way or another, called for the establishment or support of Protestant Christianity. Basic principles The basic principles of the Constitution reflect the Christian world view of the members of the convention: Man is created in the image of God, so he must be given freedom to flourish. There is a God who rules the world, including the affairs of mankind. There is absolute truth, and an absolute distinction between right and wrong, which can be understood. God has revealed his truth in the Bible, so we should also write down laws for governing society. Man is essentially sinful, and therefore must not be given too much power. For the same reason, there must be separation of powers, so that no one branch of government has too much power. As a consequence, there is a balance between the central government and state governments. Within the federal government, there are three branches: Executive, Legislative, Judicial. In addition, there are two houses of Congress: the Senate and the House of Representatives. After the Constitution was ratified, they added a Bill of rights, which guaranteed freedom of speech, freedom of the press, the press, and freedom of assembly. Furthermore, Congress could make no law that would establish a state church or to prohibit anyone from practicing his religion according to his own conscience. At the same time, states could continue to sponsor a Christian denomination There would be no requirement of religious faith for office in the federal government. The Constitution is not anti-religion. Everyone assumed that religion, particularly Christianity, especially Christian ethics, would play an essential role in society and in government. Furthermore, they all agreed that religion was important to social order, and that “religious matters should be left up to the states.” Fea, 162. The process of writing the Constitution was mostly cordial, with long arguments and several compromises, between big states vs. little states, for example. Most important, and most damaging to the future of the country, was the compromise between northern states and southern states on the issue of slavery. They thought they had to compromise or the southern states would withdraw and the whole project of a national government would have failed There were limitations on slavery: they were only counted as 2/3 of a person, to prevent the South from having too many representatives in the House of Representatives; the slave trade was to be abolished in 20 years. Washington, Adams, and Jefferson had different views: Washington and Adams believed in a strong central government, while Jefferson feared centralized power and wanted the states to have power to govern themselves. Washington and Adams also wanted a strong president, whereas Jefferson feared monarchy and dictatorship and argued that the executive should be restrained by the legislature and the judiciary. Nevertheless, everyone assumed Washington would be president, and he was unanimously elected; Adams was elected Vice-President A basic assumption was that government should have limited power. No one believed that governments could solve our problems or “save” the nation; they only thought that good government would allow people to flourish within a stable and fair legal order. A “Christianized society Thus, because of the convictions of most of the Founding Fathers, the biblical foundation upon which the Constitution was constructed, the institutionalized Christianity that penetrated the legal system through the universal acceptance of the authority of Blackstone’s Commentaries on the English Common Law, the powerful influence of the Great Awakening and other religions movements, and the penetration of Christian ideas through the preaching and liturgy of countless churches, McGuffeys’ Readers, and Noah Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language, in the nineteenth century, and up to the mid-twentieth century, was a highly “Christianized” nation. As president Washington Washington appointed Jefferson as Secretary of State and Alexander Hamilton as Secretary of the Treasury. These two men clashed often. Jefferson believed that only a nation of farmers could remain virtuous; Hamilton insisted that both agriculture and industry were essential. Washington kept the US neutral in the great war between Britain and France after the French revolution. Adams stressed that only a people with long experience in self-government, like America, could build a strong republic; he saw the violence of the French revolution as proof that they were not ready for self-government. Jefferson believed that all people should govern themselves, and didn’t mind the mass violence in France. During the war, he privately attacked Washington and Hamilton through gossip and a newspaper. But he – and others - saw that Washington possessed a mind that was “great and powerful,” though slow in action. Washington possessed the great political virtue of prudence, never acting hastily, but always waiting until he had gathered information and pondered different points of view. When Washington said he wanted to retire after his first term, both Hamilton and Jefferson persuaded him that he must serve a second term, for he was indispensable to the survival of the republic. Washington, with great patience, tried to make peace between Hamilton and Jefferson, but failed. “The whole stress of Washington’s presidency . . . was on the absolute necessity to obey the Constitution.” Johnson 229. In his Farewell Address, he emphasized that the US is a nation of laws, under the Constitution. In other words, he did not want the country to be ruled by powerful men, including himself. Adams After Washington, in 1796 Adams was elected President. He “possessed more learning, probably, both ancient and modern, than any other signers of the Declaration.” Johnson, 231. As President, he favored England in its war against revolutionary France. He also supported laws that would silence criticism of the government, which were passed and widely hated. He was often away from Washington in order to return home and care for his ailing wife. Adams mentored his son John Quincy throughout his career, preparing him to become the sixth president. By this time, the conflicts between those who favored Jefferson’s idea of limited government and those who agreed with Hamilton that the central government should be strong created two political parties, with Adams leading the Federalists and Jefferson leading the Republicans, as they were then called. Jefferson Jefferson hated conflict. He resigned from the cabinet in 1794, before Washington’s second term ended. This resignation before Washington’s term was up received a great deal of criticism. Though he and Adams had once been very close friends, he encouraged his political allies to attack Adams in the press. He and the Adamses were estranged for many years because of this. He came out of retirement to run for president against Adams in 1800 . The election was hotly contested, with many people accusing him of being an atheist, but he won the election. The election was a milestone in world history, for it marked the first peacetime transfer of power from one party to another. 1801-1805 Jefferson was in some ways a good president: Johnson: He received thousands of letters from the people, and answered every letter personally. He stopped all the ceremonial grandeur employed by Washington and Adams. He rode horseback around thew new capital, not in a carriage. Ever the gracious host he received all visitors in his study. He sought to remove all hints of monarchy or aristocracy from the presidency; to adhere to the Constitution; to limit the power of the central government by eliminating the national debt, a standing army, and a powerful navy. His power as a writer was used to set the agenda of American public life. One key principle was the “separation of church and state,” by which he meant that the government should not favor one church over another. He did not mean that religion should play no part in public life. After saying that there should be separation of church and state, he attended religious services with the Congress. As governor of Virginia, he made many religious proclamations. On the other hand, though he said he believed in freedom of the press, he encouraged the U. S. attorneys in different states to prosecute editors of newspapers who wrote critical articles of him. He was elected to a second term in 1805. During this term, he displayed “tendencies of dogmatism, intolerance, and rigidity.” Bernstein, 165. Returning home, he oversaw the completion of Monticello, where he entertained many guests and engaged in correspondence with political leaders and others, exercising great influence. He mentored James Madison and James Monroe, who were the next two presidents. He founded the University of Virginia. Unlike previous universities, which were designed to train church leaders, Jefferson’s institution would be governed by the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom: religious liberty for all, separation of Church and State, and the pivotal importance of secular learning.” Bernstein, 180. He and John Adams were eventually reconciled Adams and Jefferson carried on a corresponded until they died, in which one can see their amazing learning and erudition, as well as their literary skill and wit. Because of his writings, including the Declaration of Independence, his thousands of private letters, his crafting of many laws, including the Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom, and the secular idea of education upon which he founded the University of Virginia he is now the most influential of America’s Founding Fathers. Religious beliefs of these Founding Fathers Washington didn’t always go to church and he referred to “Providence,” not God. But he was not a classical Deist, for he was fully convinced the divine Providence guided and governed human events, including the lives of individuals. He attended church as often as most Virginia planters did, but left the worship service before the Lord’s Supper, as did most others, perhaps partly because they did not approve of the “high church” attitude towards Holy Communion. He believed that the Bible was the inspired Word of God. He read the Bible privately and publicly, gave Bibles to his family, saw that the Bible was given to his soldiers, and quoted from the Bible frequently in his speeches and writing. He had a life of prayer. He participated in the worship of the Anglican (Episcopalian) Book of Common Prayer, which would have included confession of sins and recital of the Apostles’ Creed. Those close to him said that as soon as he had dressed in the morning, he knelt to pray to God. He agreed to serve as Godfather to eight children; this rite included recited declaring faith in the Trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Like many other professing Christians, he was more committed to the role of religion in promoting individual and public virtue than in enabling us to draw near to God. Religion, for him, seems to have been a means to and end, which was political freedom and order. He did not seem to be interested in Jesus Christ as Savior from sin.` His real religion seems to have been a belief in political freedom. In other words, he thought that God was on the side of political freedom. Adams John Adams wrote much of the new constitution for the state of Massachusetts, which required all state officeholders to hold to basic Christian beliefs. The political leaders of the time “set out to maintain ‘a Christian’ state.” Fea, 143. Adams grew up in a Christian home and considered himself a Christian, but he did not believe that Jesus was the divine-human Son of God who had come to save us from our sin. He thought that the doctrine of the Trinity was unreasonable, and thus unbelievable. For Adams, the purpose of Christianity, or any religion, was to promote individual and public virtue. To him, the essence of Christianity was its ethical teaching, not its message of salvation from sin and eternal death. Adams believed fervently in freedom of religion. Each person should be able to decide for himself what he believed and how he worshiped; no one should be compelled to believe, or prevented from practicing his religion. He was influenced by Calvinism, so he thought that all of us are selfish and driven by irrational passions. He was conscious of his sins and repented of them often. Like Washington, he had a firm faith in Providence as the ruler of human beings. The ethical teachings of the Bible and of Calvinism served a useful purpose, he thought, because they instructed people on how to live with justice and love. But he did not accept the Calvinist doctrine of original sin, for he felt that all people had the capacity to do what is good and right. Adams was convinced that God favored the American campaign for freedom, for God was always on the side of freedom. On the other hand, he believed that a country’s citizens must be virtuous in order to be free, and that the judgment of Providence would fall on any person or nation that abandoned virtue, as England had done. Government should promote religion, since religion was the only source of virtue. In 1798, he called for a national day of fasting and prayer to “acknowledge before God the manifold sins and transgression with which we are justly chargeable as individuals and as a nation, and offer sincere repentance and reformation which may afford us reason to hope for his inestimable favor and heavenly benediction.” Fea,201. He was a God-fearing man who tried to live a life of virtue, and to a great extent he did. But he was not a Christian in the usual sense of the word, for he rejected fundamental Christian teachings. Jefferson Compared with Washington and Adams, Thomas was “the man least affected by religion.” Ferling 206. Indeed, he was “the most skeptical of all the founders.” Fea, 204. Like Adams, he was not hostile to religion, but to intolerance and bigotry. Unlike Washington, he refused to serve as Godfather to his friends’ children, because he could not affirm a belief in the Trinity. In the Declaration of Independence, he referred to “Nature’s God,” a phrase used by Enlightenment thinkers. Franklin added the phrase that we are endowed with rights by the Creator, and Congress imserted the phrase that God is the Judge of all mankind. Still, these phrases could be used as Deists as well as Christians. Unlike the Deists, however, Jefferson believed in a God who had created the world according to an intelligent design. God ruled every aspect of nature and of human events. As a child of the Enlightenment, Jefferson firmly believed in the power of human reason to bring the knowledge of the truth and to guide our conduct. He thus rejected the core teachings of Christianity, such as the incarnation and deity of Jesus Christ, his death for our sins, his resurrection ascension to heaven, and his promise to return to save his people and judge the wicked. To him, these doctrines were unreasonably and thus unbelievable. As for Jesus, Jefferson held that the “system of morals” proclaimed by Jesus was “the most perfect and sublime that has ever been taught by man.” Fea, 205.True followers of Jesus would obey his commands, and only they would be granted entrance into the eternal kingdom of God. Jefferson believed that he was “a real Christian.” Fea, 206. He did not believe that the Bible was the inspired Word of God. Instead, he thought that the sublime ethical teachings of Jesus had been obscured by the writers of the New Testament, who, he believed, had added layers of superstition and irrational dogma. He later produced a version of the New Testament that deleted all accounts of the miracles of Christ and his resurrection. He called it The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth and carried it with him for the rest of his life. What Washington, Adams, and Jefferson agreed upon was that America was under God’s Providence. Character Washington George Washington was “never arrogant or pushy.” Johnson 152. He served for eight years in the army at his own expense. “He did nothing common, or mean, or cruel, or vengeful. He behaved, from first to last, like a gentleman.” Johnson 160. No scandal was ever attached to his name. More to quote on p. 160-161. Almost everyone noted that Washington was unusually “reserved, formal, and aloof, a man of ‘mild gravity’ and ‘stately bearing’ who was habitually wary of strangers.” Ferling, 172. Hardly anyone felt totally at ease with him, except a few of his close aids and the French general Lafayette. On the other hand, some people thought that he possessed a “hard, violent side,” while others called him “vain, petty, coarse, or insensitive,” or cold, though always courteous. Still, everyone spoke of his “virtue,” referring to qualities such as his “selflessness, courage, dedication, integrity, calmness, firmness, industry, and honesty. . . No one described Washington as a genius, but some said that he understood his limitations and sought out and listened to good advisors. Virtually everyone agreed that he reached important decisions slowly and after great deliberation.” He was “slow, but sure.” Ferling, 171-172. On the other hand, like Adams and Jefferson, he was “thin-skinned and insecure and permitted “personal jealousies and emotional weaknesses to intrude on his tactical, strategic, and personnel considerations.” Ferling 304. He believed that all men acted out of self-interest. Adams Everyone thought that John Adams was “self-righteous, opinionated, independent-minded,” and argumentative.” Johnson 141. Part of the reason that Adams adapted better to the rigors of being a legislator, with the long, boring, and tedious committee meetings, was his “churning ambition.” He was hungry for glory and fame, as were both Washington and Jefferson. When congress appointed him as minister to France, his wife Abigail urged him to stay home, aware that he accepted this appointment out of vanity and ambition, hungering for recognition by Congress. “Abigail realized that she and her husband were consumed by irreconcilable urges. ‘Honour and Fame’ moved him. ‘Domestic happiness was paramount for her” (Ferling, 203). Adams insisted, departing for France and leaving a wife who considered herself a “widow” and children who saw themselves as “orphans.” Adams was “a man of passionate and even more emotional likes and dislikes, mainly personal” Johnson232 When Jefferson won the presidential election in 1800. He left Washington and was embittered against Jefferson for many years, until they finally reconciled. Jefferson He loved his wife and children, so he stayed home as much as possible. He supervised the education of his children. When Martha died in 1782, he was overcome by grief for several months. But he constantly lectured his children, who could not stand his criticisms and advice. The complained that he didn’t understand them. He sought in the family what he did not find in public office: Love and admiration and obedience. Though he had written against the institution of slaver, he kept himself from his slaves as much as possible. “In terms of all-around learning, gifts, sensibilities, and accomplishments there has never been an American like him.” Johnson 143. But “he was a mass of contradictions.: hated slavery, but owned and traded slaves all his life; Elitest, but complained of elites. He gloried in violent revolution, but praised Washington for having saved America from one. He was priggish but kept a black mistress Sally Hemings. He could use inflammatory language, but spoke in a low, quiet voice. He kept careful accounts but didn’t know he was amassing huge debts.” Johnson 144-145. He was disloyal to Washington, though he denied it. He was not honest in his statements. Jefferson was always in debt, despite keeping records. “His problems arose is part from his unfettered, and seemingly ungovernable, habits of consumerism.” Ferling 299. Jefferson was always self indulgent: “There was no delight he did not sample, or rather indulge in habitually. This set his views and practices in constant conflict. Slavery was a case in point.” Johnson 242. Jefferson hated slavery and wrote against it but seldom did anything to abolish it. He thought that blacks were inferior and could never live in the South as freemen. As much as he might have wanted to, he couldn’t afford to set them free: he was too much in debt. He was marked by “unresolved contradictions in his thinking, and his occasional evasiveness and hypocrisy.” Bernstein 199. Conclusion In their beliefs, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson were not orthodox Christians, for they denied the authority of Scripture, the deity, death, resurrection, current heavenly rule, and promised return of Jesus Christ, as well as the necessity that we are all sinful and must be born again. George Washington, on the other hand, seems to have believed all the central doctrines of Christianity. In their conduct, all three men seem to have been driven by powerful ambition; they were proud and resented any criticism; they held grudges against their enemies and they seemed to act out of self-interest as well as what they thought was best for the country. It would seem that Adams and Jefferson were not true followers of Jesus Christ. Some people think that George Washington was faithful Christian, but both his conduct and his public statements raise doubts. His pastor thought that he was not a true Christian. If we look carefully at their lives, we can see an interesting connection between Christian faith and personal conduct. Of the three men, Washington was most influenced by the Christian faith, and he was regarded then as the most virtuous man among the Founding Fathers, and is still thought to be a very great man, and our greatest president. Adams, though not a Christian, was committed to Christian ethics and tried very hard to live a virtuous life. Aside from his sensitivity to criticism, he is still widely respected for his character. Jefferson, who was least impacted by Christianity, was considered by his friends and enemies to be a man full of contradictions; in our time the more scholars find out about him, the less they respect him. Nevertheless, they did promote some Christian values, especially biblical ethics; they were not anti-Christian, as are most American intellectuals and politicians today, and they exhibited some qualities to such a degree that they are rightly regarded as American heroes, if not Christian examples. Was the War for Independence Justified? In recent years, some Christian scholars have begun to question whether the War for Independence was justifiable by biblical standards. Increasingly, they are coming to agree with the biblical arguments of the Loyalists, that the Bible teaches us to submit to our rulers, even when, like the Emperor Nero, Pontius Pilate, and the Jewish leaders who condemned Jesus to death, they are evil people. At the same time, the faith of the Founding Fathers has come under closer scrutiny. As we have seen, the top echelon of leaders, with a few exceptions (such as Patrick Henry) were, at best, nominal Christians. Even evangelicals like Henry were so obsessed with political freedom that they mis-read their Bibles to justify rebellion. We can sympathize with them, since the British were corrupt and were responding to disobedience with brutal force. Still, it seems that too many evangelical Christians had made politics their idol. This has happened repeatedly in American history, as in Christian history since the time of Constantine. In that light, the War for Independence, no matter how justified it was according to human standards of right and wrong, does not conform to the teaching of the Bible. A Christian nation? Finally, however, we should realize that there is no such thing as a “Christian nation.” There are only Christian people. No nation other than ancient Israel was ever chosen by God. Christians have made a great impact upon America, for good and for bad. When they have sought to be, as Jesus said, “salt and light” in society, demonstrating God’s character, then they have brought great benefits to the country. When, however, as they have often done, they seek to be “savior and lord,” and to use political power to advance what they think is God’s will, they have done great harm. May this be a warning to Christians in other countries as well. G. Wright Doyle Select Bibliography Aikman, David. One Nation Without God: The Battle for Christianity in an Age of Unbelief. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2012. Amos, Gary T. Defending the Declaration: How the Bible and Christianity Influenced the Writing of the Declaration of Independence. Charlottesville, VA: The Providence Foundation, 1994. Barzun, Jacques. From Dawn to Decadence: 1550 to the Present: 500 Years of Western Cultural Life. New York: HaperCollins Publishers, 2000. Bernstein, R.B. Thomas Jefferson. London: oxford University Press, 2003; revised and reprinted in paperback, 2005. Citations in this paper are taken from the Folio Edition, 2008. Boyd, Gregory A. The Myth of a Christian Nation: How the Quest for Political Power is Destroying the Church. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2005. Doyle, G. Wright. Christianity in America: Triumph and Tragedy. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2013. Eidsmoe, John. Christianity and the Constitution: The Fath of our Founding Fathers. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1995. Fea, John. Was America Founded as a Christina Nation? A Historical Introduction. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2011. Ferling, John. Setting the World Ablaze: Washington, Adams, Jefferson, and the American Revolution. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000. Fuller, Edmund, and David E. Green. God in the White House: The Faiths of American Presidents. New York: Crown Publishers, 1968. Hart, Benjamin. Faith and Freedom: The Christian Roots of American Liberty. Dallas: Lewis and Stanley, 1998. Johnson, Paul. A History of the American People. New York: HarperCollins, 1998. Keillor, Steven J. This Rebellious House: American History and the Truth of Christianity. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1996. Noll, Mark. A History of Christianity in the United States and Canada. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Co., 1992. ________. America’s God: From Jonathan Edwards to Abraham Lincoln. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. Olasky, Marvin. The American Leadership Tradition: Moral Vision from Washington to Clinton. New York: The Free Press, 1999. 24