Further proof the Founders believed religion had no place in public life

C-Pol: Constitutionalist, Conservative Politics ^ | December 30, 2004

[Constitutionalist Conservative]

In the ongoing culture wars, Ben Franklin has been claimed by both Christians and secularists as one of their own. Here's what he had to say about government acknowledgment of religion (at that time, "Religion" meant Christianity; to claim anything else would be nonsense):

That wise Men have in all Ages thought Government necessary for the Good of Mankind; and, that wise Governments have always thought Religion necessary for the well ordering and well-being of Society, and accordingly have been ever careful to encourage and protect the Ministers of it, paying them the highest publick Honours, that their Doctrines might thereby meet with the greater Respect among the common People.

"Necessary for the well ordering and well-being of society". We're now in the midst of terrible experiment to see what effect the purging of religion from the public square has on the well ordering and well-being of society. May God have mercy on us.

(Quote credit: The Federalist's "Founders Quote Daily")

[GarySpFc]

I don't know where the author received his information that Christians claimed Franklin as their own. It is simply not true. Christians have always recognized Franklin was one of two Deists.

[escapefromboston]

publick ??? Ben needs to go back to school! (just kidding)

[Reaganesque]

You should see the Declaration of Independence. "Purfuit of Happineff"?!! ;-)

[Constitutionalist Conservative]

By "one of their own", I meant he sympathized with their side of the debate. Sorry about the miscommunication.

[Congressman Billybob]

The title is grossly unjustified by the single short quote from Ben Franklin. Also, the snotty assumption that any reference to religion automatically meant "Christian" is historically absurd.

The Treasurer for the US during the Revolution was Robert Morris. He was one of those who pledged is "life, property and sacred honor" to the cause. He saved the nation, financially. He died broke. He was also Jewish, as were a significant number of the Founders.

That Franklin sought to identify the common characteristics of all the world's religions does not paint him as a deist. You probably claim Jefferson as a deist. He was a Christian. Thomas Paine was, at the end of his life, a deist. Odds are, you claim him as an atheist, as many atheist websites today do.

Quit trying to leech the religion out of the nation's history and leaders as a set-up for leeching it out of modern politics and society. Neither can be done without falsifying the facts. You wouldn't want to do that, now would you?

Congressman Billybob

Click for latest, "A Tale of Two Grinches, US and UN"

[MamaTexan]

(The Founders considered “natural law” as a synonym for divine law)

[T]he laws of nature . . . of course presupposes the existence of a God, the moral ruler of the universe, and a rule of right and wrong, of just and unjust, binding upon man, preceding all institutions of human society and government.

John Quincy Adams

“We have staked the future of all our political institutions upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God. The future and success of America is not in this Constitution, but in the laws of God upon which this Constitution is founded."

- President James Madison

[The] law established by the Creator, which has existed from the beginning, extends over the whole globe, is everywhere and at all times binding upon mankind. . . . [This] is the law of God by which He makes His way known to man and is paramount to all human control.

Rufus King, Signer of the Constitution, Framer of the Bill of Rights

"The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If 'Thou shalt not covet' and 'Thou shalt not steal' were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society before it can be civilized or made free...."

Defense of the American Constitutions, 1787 John Adams

This is a great resource:
http://www.wallbuilders.com/resources/search/detail.php?ResourceID=41

[GarySpFc]

The Fifty Five Delegates to the Constitutional Convention
The colonists were familiar with deist thinking. But deism never gained a strong foothold in America. The first Great Awakening, the religious revival of the 1740s, was partially responsible for cutting short the spread of deism,

In many states at the time of the Constitutional Convention, confessed deists were not allowed to hold public office. Deism was generally held in low esteem, as such laws indicate. Additionally, Deism as practiced at the time of America's founding was far different from what we find in our country today, and it certainly was not atheism.

New Hampshire
John Langdon, Congregationalist
Nicholas Gilman, Congregationalist

Massachusetts
Elbridge Gerry, Episcopalian
Rufus King, Episcopalian
Caleb Strong, Congregationalist
Nathaniel Gorham, Congregationalist

Connecticut
Roger Sherman, Congregationalist
William Samuel Johnson, Episcopalian
Oliver Ellsworth, Congregationalist

New York
Alexander Hamilton, Episcopalian
John Lansing, Dutch Reformed
Robert Yates, Dutch Reformed

New Jersey
William Paterson, Presbyterian
William Livingston, Presbyterian
Jonathan Dayton, Episcopalian
David Brearly, Episcopalian
William Churchill Houston, Presbyterian

Pennsylvania
Benjamin Franklin, Deist
Robert Morris, Episcopalian
James Wilson, Episcopalian/Deist
Gouverneur Morris, Episcopalian
Thomas Mifflin, Quaker/Lutheran
George Clymer, Quaker/Episcopalian
Thomas FitzSimmons, Roman Catholic
Jared Ingersoll, Presbyterian

Delaware
John Dickinson, Quaker/Episcopalian
George Read, Episcopalian
Richard Bassett, Methodist
Gunning Bedford, Presbyterian
Jacob Broom, Lutheran

Maryland
Luther Martin, Episcopalian
Daniel Carroll, Roman Catholic
John Francis Mercer, Episcopalian
James McHenry, Presbyterian
Daniel of St Thomas Jennifer, Episcopalian

Virginia
George Washington, Episcopalian
James Madison, Episcopalian
George Mason, Episcopalian
Edmund Jennings Randolph, Episcopalian
James Blair, Jr., Episcopalian
James McClung
George Wythe, Episcopalian

North Carolina
William Richardson Davie, Presbyterian
Hugh Williamson, Presbyterian/Deist (?)
William Blount, Presbyterian
Alexander Martin, Presbyterian/Episcopalian
Richard Dobbs Spaight, Jr., Episcopalian

South Carolina
John Rutledge, Episcopalian
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, Episcopalian
Pierce Butler, Episcopalian
Charles Pinckney, III, Episcopalian

Georgia
Abraham Baldwin, Congregationalist
William Leigh Pierce, Episcopalian
William Houstoun, Episcopalian
William Few, Methodist

[Always Right]

Political Correctness dictates that we treat all perverts as saints and we treat all religious people as leopards.

[lastfreeamerican]

"We're now in the midst of terrible experiment to see what effect the purging of religion from the public square has on the well ordering and well-being of society."

I'm not sure what you mean. I'll agree that things in this country are in bad shape, but I don't see how it can reasonably be blamed on religion. Is religion in America in any tangible danger? Is it (or will it be) banned/suppressed by the government in ways characteristic of an oppressive communist regime, for example? No, of course not. I think our real problem is that we've purged RATIONAL DISCOURSE from the public square. On both sides, our national discourse is more emotional and less substantive than ever. Historically, this situation left unchecked invariably leads to a dopey ideological citizenry, easily led to the evil extremes on both the Left (communism) and the Right (fascism).

[GarySpFc]

That Franklin sought to identify the common characteristics of all the world's religions does not paint him as a deist. You probably claim Jefferson as a deist. He was a Christian. Thomas Paine was, at the end of his life, a deist. Odds are, you claim him as an atheist, as many atheist websites today do.

Neither Franklin or Jefferson ever accepted the deity of Jesus Christ, which all orthodox Christians consider necessary for one to be considered a Christian believer. Furthermore, there is nothing I have ever found which allows Paine to escape being labeled an atheist.

[Constitutionalist Conservative]

The title is grossly unjustified by the single short quote from Ben Franklin.

Actually, the title was meant to be ironic, or sarcastic, or whatever, since the quote suggested the exact opposite.

Also, the snotty assumption that any reference to religion automatically meant "Christian" is historically absurd.

Sorry, the "snottiness", as you call it (though it wasn't intended that way) was directed at the multi-culti historical revisionists. I acknowledge that Jews had a place (in many cases an honored place) in our society at the time. My impression, though, is that their numbers (and the numbers of adherents of other non-Christian religions) were small enough that any official reference to "Religion" was at that time understood to mean the amalgamation of the many flavors of Christianity that existed in the nation. Of course the term means something different today.

Other than the fact that other religious communities existed in America at the time, do you know of any evidence that Franklin meant, for example, that the doctrines of Mohammedanism should "meet with the greater Respect among the common People"?

Look at what actually happened -- did the government at the time pay "the highest publick Honours" to the ministers of any religion other than Christianity (in all of its forms)?

Still not trying to be snotty. I'm willing to be educated on this.

That Franklin sought to identify the common characteristics of all the world's religions does not paint him as a deist. You probably claim Jefferson as a deist. He was a Christian. Thomas Paine was, at the end of his life, a deist. Odds are, you claim him as an atheist, as many atheist websites today do.

I think that comment was supposed to be directed at GarySpFc.

[Constitutionalist Conservative]

Is religion in America in any tangible danger? Is it (or will it be) banned/suppressed by the government in ways characteristic of an oppressive communist regime, for example? No, of course not.

I asserted none of these things. I spoke of the war against the public expression of religion.

There is, in fact a concerted effort by many to purge the "public square" of any expressions of religion (in particular, the majority religion, Christianity). Didn't you see the zillion posts on the topic during the Christmas (er, excuse me, "holiday") season?

[Congressman Billybob]

Since I am in the process of completing a book on Thomas Paine, I assure you your claim that Paine was an "atheist" is false and a canard. In his early writings, he was clearly a Christian. Remember his "Letter to the Quakers" in Philadelphia when he sought to convince his co-religionists to support the Revolution.

Late in his life, in The Age of Reason, Paine clearly rejected all organized religions. He equally clearly accepted the same sort of universal pantheism -- that the very nature of the universe was proof of a Prime Mover, that people like Albert Einstein have accepted in our times.

You clearly need to do more reading in the life and times of these people. You are buying into misunderstandings that oversimplifications that would readily be dispelled by reading more of the original documents.

Billybob

[lastfreeamerican]

But even if the public expression of religion is being attacked (I'm assuming you are referring to developments such as the banning of Ten Commandments on public property, prohibition of organized public school prayer, etc.), what are the tangible results of this? Specifically, what is this doing to our country? I don't see any evidence that the loss of public religion is the cause of our national woes.

[Constitutionalist Conservative]

what are the tangible results of this?

As I said in my original post, we are "in the midst" of this experiment. I don't think the results are in yet. But I do agree with Franklin that the result will resemble nothing like "the well ordering and well-being of Society" that a healthy presence of religion in the public square affords us.

[GarySpFc]

Since I am in the process of completing a book on Thomas Paine, I assure you your claim that Paine was an "atheist" is false and a canard.
Late in his life, in The Age of Reason, Paine clearly rejected all organized religions. He equally clearly accepted the same sort of universal pantheism -- that the very nature of the universe was proof of a Prime Mover, that people like Albert Einstein have accepted in our times.

I hate to tell you this, but strictly speaking pantheism is atheism. It denies the existence of a "personal" God. Let me repeat myself, Paine was an atheist.

I know You clearly need to do more reading in the life and times of these people. You are buying into misunderstandings that oversimplifications that would readily be dispelled by reading more of the original documents.

Let's see, I am president of The Errant Skeptics Research Institute, have a doctorate in theology, and have studied the lives and writings of the Founding Fathers for thirty years. Please enlighten me on my misunderstandings and oversimplifications?

[GarySpFc]

Since I am in the process of completing a book on Thomas Paine, I assure you your claim that Paine was an "atheist" is false and a canard.
Late in his life, in The Age of Reason, Paine clearly rejected all organized religions. He equally clearly accepted the same sort of universal pantheism -- that the very nature of the universe was proof of a Prime Mover, that people like Albert Einstein have accepted in our times.

I hate to tell you this, but strictly speaking pantheism is atheism. It denies the existence of a "personal" God. Let me repeat myself, Paine was an atheist.

I know You clearly need to do more reading in the life and times of these people. You are buying into misunderstandings that oversimplifications that would readily be dispelled by reading more of the original documents.

Let's see, I am president of The Errant Skeptics Research Institute, have a doctorate in theology, and have studied the lives and writings of the Founding Fathers for thirty years. Please enlighten me on my misunderstandings and oversimplifications?

[FreeKeys]

the "snottiness" ... was directed at the multi-culti historical revisionists.

I agree that the moral relativism of the so-called multi-culturalists are the greatest danger, rotting the country from within. We definitely owe Christianity in general the greatest debt for instilling honor for the great virtues and a general respect for THE DEFINITE ABSOLUTES in nature and in morality. Further, the united States of America could not have been the great country it is without the spirit, enthusiasm, generosity, industriousness, integrity and general contributions of Christians in general, and Protestants in particular. But I have met some very patriotic atheists who agree with all THAT, including the moral absolutes (as being mandated by nature, in their view), and I've met some wishy-washy Christians who prattle about multi-culturalism and moral relativism. So it's the insistence on the life-affirming moral absolutes that are the defining distinction for me.

Here's an excerpt from Thomas Jefferson's autobiography, which you might find interesting:

       "The bill for establishing religious freedom, the principles of
     which had, to a certain degree, been enacted before, I had
     drawn in all the latitude of reason & right. It still met with
     opposition; but, with some mutilations in the preamble, it was
     finally passed; and a singular proposition proved that it's
     protection of opinion was meant to be universal. Where the
     preamble declares that coercion is a departure from the plan of
     the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by
     inserting the word 'Jesus Christ,' so that it should read 'a
     departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our
     religion.' The insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof
     that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of it's
     protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and
     Mahometan, the Hindoo, and infidel of every denomination." 
           -- Thomas Jefferson

[secretagent]

Political Correctness dictates that we treat all perverts as saints and we treat all religious people as leopards.

And send them all to a colony of leopards. Right next to those infected jaguars. :)