This is what we know about the religious commitments of our founding fathers:
Lambert (2003) has examined the religious affiliations and beliefs of the Founders. Of the 55 delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention, 49 were Protestants, and two were Roman Catholics (D. Carroll, and Fitzsimons). Among the Protestant delegates to the Constitutional Convention, 28 were Church of England (or Episcopalian, after the American Revolutionary War was won), eight were Presbyterians, seven were Congregationalists, two were Lutherans, two were Dutch Reformed, and two were Methodists.
A few prominent Founding Fathers were anti-clerical Christians, such as Thomas Jefferson (who created the so-called “Jefferson Bible”) and Benjamin Franklin. Others (most notably Thomas Paine) were deists, or at least held beliefs very similar to those of deists.
Historian Gregg L. Frazer argues that the leading Founders (Adams, Jefferson, Franklin, Wilson, Morris, Madison, Hamilton, and Washington) were neither Christians nor Deists, but rather supporters of a hybrid “theistic rationalism”. Souce: Wikipedia
Doesn’t it seem that the mere presence of dispute over the religions of Franklin, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, etc. shows they were likely not Christians, at least not in the sense that we understand Christianity today? Can you imagine that in a society where everything was either handwritten or published on a printing press, so little evidence would exist that these learned men (of many books and papers) were Christians that there is room for uncertainty? If you are a Christian, and historians studied your life after you are gone, would they be able to tell what religion you were? Probably so. If not, then I would guess it wasn’t that big of a deal to you, and that would be a reasonable guess.
Having established that America was founded by a mix of people from different religious traditions, I next want to state the obvious, which is that it doesn’t really matter. If America were founded entirely by Satanists, that does not mean they either did or did not intend to make all Americans Satanists. The point is, religion itself was not the point. These men came together to build a nation, and were trying to figure out what principles a nation would best thrive on. Among those principles were both freedom of religion, separation of church and state.
Yeah, I know. That phrase isn’t in the Constitution or Declaration of Independence.
In English, the exact term is an offshoot of the phrase, “wall of separation between church and state”, as written in Thomas Jefferson‘s letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802. In that letter, referencing the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, Jefferson writes: “Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, 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 reflected his frequent speaking theme that the government is not to interfere with religion.
The Bill of Rights was one of the earliest examples in the world of complete religious freedom (adopted in 1791, only preceded by the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen in 1789) but it was interpreted as establishing a separation of Church and State only after the letter of Jefferson (see section United States for more details). At the time of the passage of the Bill of Rights, many states acted in ways that would now be held unconstitutional, some of them with official state churches. All of the early official state churches were disestablished by 1833. Source: Wikipedia
My point was that religion was not the point, but rather the building of a nation, and how religion was to be understood within that nation. If I am correct, then we can already dispense with national ideas of God and Country, since we are guaranteed the right to consider that God is Allah, Buddha, Jesus, Mother Earth, Yahweh, or ourselves. When we say God and Country, then, we’re not saying something that is meaningful to other people. It’s like saying, “Abortion is wrong.” Many people would “amen” that phrase, but be dismayed to find out that many who agree with the statement nonetheless think the decision is ultimately up to each woman. So “abortion is wrong” may unite some people initially, until they find out that large numbers of people don’t agree with their interpretation of it, or how to act on it. At that point it actually becomes divisive, and we see that division constantly in America.
Clearly, our nation has always been secular in a certain sense, in that it has always been intended to grant freedom to all, of whatever, or no, religious persuasion (as Jefferson makes very clear in the quote above). What is the alternative? Forced religion of one kind of another? Of course not. So this is a point that I think should have been settled long ago. The foundations were established for religious freedom, which includes freedom of religious conscience to believe, not to believe, whatever. There was never an intention for America to be a “Christian nation” governed by a Christian version of sharia law. Nor was there ever an intention for religion to be illegal, nor forced on anyone. Nor was there ever a time in America where the country itself was Christian. There was a time when churchgoing was more socially enforced than it is now, just like there was a time when woman wore dresses to vacuum the house. But that does not mean America was more Christian. What does it even mean to say “more Christian?” That there were larger numbers of people seeking/serving God? That people were more sincere in their faith? That people were merely less open about their lack of faith? That the public square had more “Christian stuff” in it? I don’t even think the phrase “more Christian” means anything. It’s just another amorphous term that makes people suspect that “back then” it was somehow “better” (again, what does THAT mean?) than right now.
Despite occasional problems with interpretation of this church/state separation guideline, I as a Christian and pastor am pretty happy with the balance in our country. If anything I’d like to see government more OUT of the religion game. I’d be fine taking “in God we trust” off our money since it’s not actually true for the majority of citizens (and even, I suspect, for many professing Christians), and “under God” out of our pledge. I want government out of my religion, as completely as possible. Let’s dump the feel-good God and country charade. All it does is create warm fuzzies in the toes of certain people, but it doesn’t reflect reality either as it was once, or as it is now.
Some would argue, “I just think it’s nice to have nativity scenes in the public square.” I get that. I don’t feel the same way and can take them or leave them, but I get the sentiment. But someone who feels that way should either move to a community where that’s something that is done, or simply get politically active on the grounds that “it is nice.” It’s okay to think certain things are nice and comfortable, and it’s okay to ask your city government to respond to that. What is not okay is, if the city decides to honor what someone else thinks is nice (not having a nativity scene in the public square), to insist that it is somehow un-American. Christians are no more American than anyone else and until every last Christian understands that, and is as willing to defend the public rights of atheists as their own rights and the rights of fellow Christians, Christians are going to rightly be seen as arrogant and out of touch. If you’re a Christian, when is the last time you got angry at a Christian for trying to force his Christian beliefs on his mostly non-Christian community? Or do you always see the Christian as the persecuted one? If so, history shows you that Christians have as often been the oppressor as it has been the oppressed. Perhaps a great deal more.
Finally, in no way does my opinion denigrate the service of those who have served, or their sense of duty to God in service to their country. It does not even do away with having a desire for God to “bless” America, or hoping God looks upon our nation favorably. I’m simply suggesting that unless the CIA, FBI, IRS, military, Congress, the Supreme Court, and all branches of government are going to be run according to “Christian principles,” then we are not in fact a country “under God.” I don’t even think a country CAN BE under God except to the extent that its individual citizens are decidedly under God. For example, what is the opinion of Jesus on drones? On the global economic crisis? On unions? On welfare? On the war in Iraq? On immigration? On President Obama? Christians of good will are all over the map. There simply is no one Christian position on these things, and in acting as if there is, Christians end up looking mighty un-Christian most of the time. What, then, can it possibly mean to say America is, or should be, a Christian nation? I don’t want America’s policies cloaked in the name of God for a single second. I’d rather we focus on trying to do good and allow others to decide if God is working through our country, but we are in great danger when we presume God is on our side to begin with.