Did the Founders Mean What They Said? Part One
While over the past three posts, we have examined the definition of “Christian nation” applicable in the American case, the biblical grounding for our Revolution, and the biblical slogan of our Revolution, we shall henceforth commence the study of whether or not our founding documents themselves are founded on biblical principles — but first, a word from the men behind those documents.
I would, however, like to remind my readers, that the argument I have been advancing is not to prove that the Founders wanted a union between the organized church and the organized government. To further that kind of argument would be to further the harm of both the church and government, and as a result, the harm of the liberties of Americans.
The argument I am advancing is simply that the principles of our civil government, and the concepts which need to be ingrained in American society in order for free government to be sustained, ultimately come from the Bible. An essay by Kerry L. Morgan, explaining this concept can be read here. It is clear and concise, and well worth a read. If you would like to better understand this blog’s approach to the issue, please read it. It is available through the website The Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God, and is reprinted with permission.
Before we actually begin examining the documents themselves, we must examine the views of those who wrote them. What did they have to say about our identity? What did they have to say about the relationship of our political structure and philosophy to Christianity? And what did they have to say about the role of Christianity in our founding?
Let us therefore examine the words 1) of the Founding Fathers themselves, 2) of the early 
office-holders of America, 3) of precedent-setting court decisions, and 4) of the historians closest to the time of the Founders. In this post, we will see what the Founding Fathers themselves had to say.
Before I delve into a documentation of the Founders’ words, I would like to begin by addressing some of the controversy over what they said. One of the quotations I and others have often used to illustrate the truth of the “Christian nation” claim, comes from a letter that John Adams wrote to Thomas Jefferson. Here is the quotation:
“And what were these general principles [upon which the Founders achieved independence]? I answer, the general principles of Christianity, in which all those sects were united, and the general principles of English and American liberty, in which all those young men united, and which had united all parties in America, in majorities sufficient to assert and maintain her independence. Now I will avow, that I then believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God; and that those principles of liberty are as unalterable as human nature and our terrestrial, mundane system. I could, therefore, safely say, consistently with all my then and present information, that I believed they would never make discoveries in contradiction to these general principles.” To Thomas Jefferson, 28 June, 1813 (The Works of John Adams, ed. Charles F. Adams; volume 10, pages 45-46 (emphasis original)
Now, let me address some of the controversy concerning this quote. I have presented this quotation from Adams in different places and times, and I have been accused of taking it out of its context, thus distorting the meaning of “the general principles of Christianity.” Let me begin my rebuttal to that charge by saying first of all, that when you are putting something back “into its proper context,” you must be careful that you do not read a meaning into or out of the text itself. Many times my accusers are guilty not only of the same error, but of trying so hard to explain the plain text away, that they make the Founders say something that is totally absurd. This case, is a case in point. Here is the larger context of the above quotation:
“Who composed the army of fine young fellows that was then before my eyes? There were among them Roman Catholics, English Episcopalians, Scotch and American Presbyterians, Methodists, Moravians, Anabaptists, German Lutherans, German Calvinists, Universalists, Arians, Priestlyans, Socinians, Independents, Congregationalists, Horse Protestants, and House Protestants, Deists and Atheists, and Protestants ‘qui ne croyent rien[Protestants who believe nothing].’ Very few, however, of the several of these species; nevertheless, all educated in the general principles of Christianity, and the general principles of English and American liberty.
“Could my answer be understood by any candid reader or hearer, to recommend to all the other the general principles, institutions, or systems of education of the Roman Catholics, or those of the Quakers, or those of the Presbyterians, or those of the Methodists, or those of the Moravians, or those of the Universalists, or those of the Philosophers? No. The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence, were the only principles in which that beautiful assembly of young men could united, and these principles only could be intended by them in their address, or by me in my answer. And what were these general principles [upon which the Founders achieved independence]? I answer, the general principles of Christianity, in which all those sects were united, and the general principles of English and American liberty, in which all those young men united, and which had united all parties in America, in majorities sufficient to assert and maintain her independence. Now I will avow, that I then believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God; and that those principles of liberty are as unalterable as human nature and our terrestrial, mundane system. I could, therefore, safely say, consistently with all my then and present information, that I believed they would never make discoveries in contradiction to these general principles. In favore of these general principles, in philosophy, religion, and government, I could fill sheets of quotations from Fredric of Prussia, from Hume, Gibon, Bolingbroke, Rousseau, and Voltaire, as well as Newton and Locke; not to mention thousands of divines and philosophers of inferior fame.”
First of all, we see that Adams emphasis of “general principles of Christianity” indicates that he is trying to make sure that his hearers (and readers) understood that he was saying that the principles of the Founding were principles upon which all denominations of Christians could agree upon — the principles of Christianity were not just according to one denomination.
However, it would seem (and it does indeed seem to those who quote this section), that John Adams is saying that non-Christians (universalists, aryans, deists, atheists, etc.) also embrace the general principles of Christianity. That statement is utterly absurd! Atheists are on the opposite spectrum of the matter, because they reject belief in God. Anyone who knows anything should know that the existence of God is as general a principle of Christianity you can get! I think that John Adams knew that. But for some reason, these secularists don’t get it.
Why then does Adams say that all his hearers could unite in the general principles of Christianity? Answer: he doesn’t. Read the following carefully:
And what were these general principles [upon which the Founders achieved independence]? I answer, the general principles of Christianity, in which all those sects were united, and the general principles of English and American liberty, in which all those young men united, and which had united all parties in America, in majorities sufficient to assert and maintain her independence.
He says that all those “sects” were united in the general principles of Christianity, and that all the young men were united in the general principles of English and American liberty. Atheists, deists, etc., were not considered Christian sects (of course), so they cannot be said to be united with Christians on the general principles of Christianity. In those days, the Founders and most Americans, used “sects” to refer to Christian denominations, unless the context showed otherwise. In this case, the context and plain common sense (i.e. those who consciously reject the basic teachings of the Bible cannot be said to hold on to the general principles of Christianity) suggest that Adams’ reference to “sects” is limited to those of Christian denominations.
Adams also says that “all those young men” were united in the principles of English and American liberty, and that these principles had once united the different political parties in America. Adams is therefore saying that while only those of Christian denominations could agree on the general principles of Christianity (of course!), ALL those listening, Christians and non-Christians alike, could agree on the general principles of English and American liberty. Hence, the “general principles of Christianity” cannot be twisted to mean something else other than the general principles of Christianity.
However, keep in mind, that John Adams said that the principles of the Founding came from BOTH the general principles of Christianity, AND the general principles of English and American liberty. Based on what we have just seen, does the context of his letter destroy the “Christian nation” theory? No. Rather, it supports it. The general principles of Christianity, and the general principles of English and American liberty, go hand-in-hand in the American system, according to the Founding Father, John Adams.
In the following posts (when I find the leisure to write again), we will uncover more of the Founders’ opinion on the Christian nation claim.
6 Responses to “Did the Founders Mean What They Said? Part One”
December 22nd, 2009 at 12:15 am
The quote you use– the second one (“Who composed the army…”) doesn;t quite make sense to me. But then again I am distracted by the fine pizza I am eating.
However, what Adams SEEMS to be saying is that DESPITE atheists and etc, they were ALL educated in the general principals or Christianity/liberty, and thus prepared for the war for liberty. Is this what you are saying?
December 22nd, 2009 at 12:16 am
Hi Cato, thanks for taking the time to read and to comment. I appreciate it.
It took me a while to understand what Adams was getting at by that portion of his quote too (only I wasn’t distracted by pizza
). However, I think what he was trying to say was that, the most basic principles of Christianity and liberty were understood by all Christians of all denominations, and even non-Christians, understood what those principles were. That doesn’t however mean that they all believed them. Adams wasn’t ignorant enough to make that kind of insinuation.
My point was 1) Adams was NOT saying that atheists, et. al, could hold the “general principles of Christianity,” and 2) Adams was saying that both the general principles of Christianity and the general principles of American and English liberty, formed the basis of the Founding. The fact that non-Christians were listening in the crowd, and would understand what he meant, is of little consequence to that statement itself.
He was speaking to a group of young men, who were honoring Adams and Jefferson for their role in establishing American independence, according to the context of this letter. These young men were probably not of the same generation that fought the Revolution, since they were apparently “young” 30 years after it ended. They were merely commemorating what the previous generation had accomplished. Adams was merely clarifying and specifying the “principles handed down by our ancestors” which had given momentum to the Cause. I think that’s what he was doing.
I hope that satisfactorily answers your question.
December 22nd, 2009 at 12:17 am
Thank you for responding; yes that clarification is sufficient.
December 22nd, 2009 at 12:17 am
I’m glad that it was. My apologies, I was worried at first, because I never took the time to re-read and proof-read it. So I’m glad it turned out fine.
December 22nd, 2009 at 12:18 am
Well done, Herky. I read it before, but today it made more sense. Could it be that my mind is more alert first thing in the morning?
I do have a completely unrelated question. Where did you get the template for this blog? With my new computer, I’ve discovered that mine has completely different colors than I thought, so I’m going to change it. As long as I’m doing that, I would very much like to go to a 3-column format like you have, but I don’t know where to find it. Help me out, new buddy?
December 22nd, 2009 at 12:18 am
Hi Jean, and thanks for your comment. I’m glad it made sense to you.
For your convenience, I will discuss the template issue on your own blog, so you don’t have to jump around so many links.
Leave a Comment