Jon Meacham, the editor of Newsweek, and the author of “American Gospel” and “Franklin and Winston,” writes in the New York Times:
[....The only acknowledgment of religion in the original Constitution is a utilitarian one: the document is dated “in the year of our Lord 1787.” Even the religion clause of the First Amendment is framed dryly and without reference to any particular faith. The Connecticut ratifying convention debated rewriting the preamble to take note of God’s authority, but the effort failed.
A pseudonymous opponent of the Connecticut proposal had some fun with the notion of a deity who would, in a sense, be checking the index for his name: “A low mind may imagine that God, like a foolish old man, will think himself slighted and dishonored if he is not complimented with a seat or a prologue of recognition in the Constitution.” Instead, the framers, the opponent wrote in The American Mercury, “come to us in the plain language of common sense and propose to our understanding a system of government as the invention of mere human wisdom; no deity comes down to dictate it, not a God appears in a dream to propose any part of it.” ...
Thomas Jefferson said that his bill for religious liberty in Virginia was “meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and the Mahometan, the Hindu, and infidel of every denomination.” When George Washington was inaugurated in New York in April 1789, Gershom Seixas, the hazan of Shearith Israel, was listed among the city’s clergymen (there were 14 in New York at the time) — a sign of acceptance and respect. The next year, Washington wrote the Hebrew Congregation of Newport, R.I., saying, “happily the government of the United States ... gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance. ... Everyone shall sit in safety under his own vine and fig tree, and there shall be none to make him afraid.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/07/opinion/07meacham.html?th=&emc=th&pagewanted=print
I recommend reading the whole of Mecham's erudite article,which comments also on the current statements by politicians expressing the view that the United States is a "Christian nation." He says, for example:
"JOHN McCAIN was not on the campus of Jerry Falwell’s Liberty University last year for very long — the senator, who once referred to Mr. Falwell and Pat Robertson as “agents of intolerance,” was there to receive an honorary degree — but he seems to have picked up some theology along with his academic hood. In an interview with Beliefnet.com last weekend, Mr. McCain repeated what is an article of faith among many American evangelicals: “the Constitution established the United States of America as a Christian nation.”
Meachem's piece prompted me to consider the influence of religious views on a broader scale, that is on the current conflicts among nations internationally, notably in the Middle East .
The contemporary distortions and delusions of the Semitic religions- Judaism, Christiianity and Islam - are being challlenged in the Middle East now, partly for regional socio- poitical reasons, partly as one expression of the worldwide pressures of globalization and nations seeking to control natural resources. As for the future of contemporary religions , all are divided within themselves and seeking reform.
History shows that Jews living in Islamic countries fared well; in Europe and Russia they did not, for many centuries. The Jews were the largest single plurality in Iraq , about 30%, prior to the creation of Israel. A significant number of Palestinians were Christians, in some cities a majority, until Israel became a state. In Iraq, before the US invasion in 2003, there were many Christians. The earliest Christian churches, some dating from the 3rd century, exist in Iraq , Iran , Syria, Egypt and other countries.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 33
That is why I personally, altho I would not wish to have to deal with the subject of abortion, the decision that a woman chooses to make for what ever reason...has nothing to do with the law of the state or government...it is a personal, decision that the government has no business dictating...as right or wrong...just like our founders Franklin, Madison and Jefferson stated regarding religion.."The state has no right to know one's religion. " James Madison , who wrote the first law on separation of religion and state for the State of Virginia, which later was adopted in the Constitution, stated the state had ... no.... right.... to ... know.
I appreciate your finding it of some value.
Here is the link.
Very informative. I recommend reading Meacham's timely article.
No kidding!
Scandal Brewing at Oral Roberts
JUSTIN JUOZAPAVICIUS - The Associated Press
[The hypocrisy of the self-righteous who put themselves up as moral arbiters.]
TULSA, Okla. -- Twenty years ago, televangelist Oral Roberts said he was reading a spy novel when God appeared to him and told him to raise $8 million for Roberts' university, or else he would be "called home."
Now, his son, Oral Roberts University President Richard Roberts, says God is speaking again, telling him to deny lurid allegations in a lawsuit that threatens to engulf this 44-year-old Bible Belt college in scandal. Richard Roberts is accused of illegal involvement in a local political campaign and lavish spending at donors' expense, including numerous home remodeling projects, use of the university jet for his daughter's senior trip to the Bahamas, and a red Mercedes convertible and a Lexus SUV for his wife, Lindsay...."
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20071006/D8S3MC9G0.html
The separation of Church and State is inarguably good for religion, too.
Nothing corrupts faith more quickly and completely than the exercise ot wordly power.
It is so short-sighted of the religious right to ignore the fact the absence of an established Church is what has preserved religious vitality in this nation.
We are the most religious modern state because there has been no entanglement of political authority and power (at least, until recently).
Thanks for your comment. Now the wackos are screwing around with us Episcopalians.
Like the Catholic Church, these holier-than-thou types are hypocritical to the max.
I worked in the Pentagon and got to know what went on there and among Congressmen. The washrooms in the Pentagon were "interesting." A lot of ""Don't see , don't tell." The virus of Christian fundamentalism sadly has infected the military.
Very nice article Clarke
The "Don't Ask, Always Deny" army of closeted conservatives is enormous and pathetic.
Yes, very relevant.
I have always believed that religion thrives in this country because of the First Amendment. It's nice to hear your sentiments.
Thanks for a great article, Clarke.
Been there, seen that. It isn't really a matter of either Demos or Rebuls.
Blessings and best wishes - S.
"Do you have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ?"
"Are you in favor of abortion rights?"
"Are you in favor of Gay marriage or civil unions?"
"do you believe in lowering taxes?"
...
anyway, they had either yes, no, 'no comment', or 'did not respond' next to all those questions. Conspicuously missing was any question about the war in Iraq etc... I know this was a pamphlet circulated not by this small church but by a larger florida christian group. I thought it was a pathetic demonstration of what this enormously important state (for presidential elections) is voting on.
Is this a solution that was founded centuries ago?
Too bad we can't do that now.
Thanks
Important to give a name, a label, a handle, to the unofficial (but just as damning) state religion of the USA: "CONSUMER RELIGION."
Consume, as in burn up - "Baghdad was consumed by flames as bombers and tanks blah blah blah.."
Consume, as in death-by-overeating - "The military budget ate up all the funding that should have gone to universal health care and raises for teachers across the board and blah blah blah....."
When we see pamphlets on a church pew pushing an agenda, look beyond the politically correct religious label - go underneath that - and you'll find CONSUMER RELIGION invading your will yet again.
Sooner or later, we are going to have to reign in our voracious appetites. The earth is being depleted of fossil fuels, fresh water and many nonrenewable minerals. Life will be a whole lot different in a hundred years...if we survive that long without blowing ourselves up or poisoning the environment so severely that no living thing survives.
It is a shame when you consider the intentions of the American Founding Fathers, to welcome all - including those of other faiths.
What is more offensive is that anyone who doesn't toe the line is branded traitor, heretic, or, at best, suspect. America can only reclaim its paramountcy by embracing a more tolerant approach. This present slate of candidates from either political party is not promising in this regard.
But even 'tolerance' isn't really the correct answer in my opinion as people tolerate many things that they don't like. I feel that it therefore, is better to have a society that is very trusting of all others and all their beliefs disregarding all their religions, and accepting all.
Of course, the Constitution prohibits any kind of religious test for political office, but that doesn't prevent churches or religious groups from conducting quiet campaigns, under the IRS radar, to promote their slate of devoutly religious candidates.
I wrote a piece a couple years ago describing a county attorney in Kentucky who tried to sidestep the Constitution on this. If you read it, read the comments too, because the guy got wind of my article somehow and came and offered some comments.
Here is the link.