Speaking personally, this excerpt has truly started to make me think more deeply on how the church relates to government and the systems that have been in use before the political activism seen among professing Christians today. Whereas before, I would say that there should be some amount of Christian morality put forth from within government. I now see that it does not have the power to change a nation and its people. Stead points out that the framers of the Constitution had a unique perspective on church and state because they had come out of a society where the church was run by the state. The King was the chief priest as well as the chief political ruler—something prohibited by God (2 Chron.
I have two basic reasons for holding this view. First, we live in a secular society. There is a supposed wall of separation between Church and State, and I think rightly so. Church and State should only be united in a theocracy America is not one of those and could not become one without changing the character of the nation. However, I am aware that the moral basis for the tradition of English law that the U.S. legislative and judicial systems are deeply rooted in, are based on essentially Christian principles.
Roger Williams, a minister who migrated to America, also noticed this, and stated that a uniform belief system is not necessary to maintain a stable body politic (Williams 1). His idea was revolutionary and influential to many others who would adopt it into the governing documents of our nation. His claim that “an enforced uniformity of religion throughout a nation or civil state, confounds the civil and religious, denies the principles of Christianity and civility” (2) demands religious freedom, and I find it to be a compelling statement for the period. The Bloudy Tenent of Persecution is a historically important document because it ... ... middle of paper ... ...o the original statement because all men are becoming more equal as time goes on. The Constitution, once used as a tool to segregate, is now being used to integrate.
He focuses on religion as the primary reason, but let us take this one step further. Every American, regardless of religious affiliation (which is in many regards just a detrimental as Boyd 's argument against political alignment) should be wary of political absolutism. The world is not black and white, and neither are our political candidates. To fixate on one issue or one party is to toss reason out the door and become a blind believer. Faith might work for some in the religious arena, it does not and cannot work in the political arena.
As our position in the glo... ... middle of paper ... ...pporting a party that promotes abortion. If we are to have faith as Christians, it should not go to any man or party of self-proclaimed righteousness but to the God that blessed us with the power and responsibility to vote. As moral and conscious citizens of this nation, we must exercise the intelligence we are blessed with to analyze the characteristics of both Presidential candidates and not base our judgments on self-branding, even if it appears to support the universal good of Christian principles. The truth lies in digging underneath the machined propaganda to discover the intentions and motivations of our leaders. Unearthing the mechanism of their true calling, we discover what makes them tick.
Many liberal Enlightenment ideals and free thought were actually the true ideologies of America's Founding Fathers, not Christianity. At the time of the American Revolution, which happened towards the end of the Enlightenment, many new philosophies questioned or challenged the dogma of the Christian Church. One very common philosophy that many of the Founding Fathers considered themselves subscribers to was Deism. Deism is considered a natural religion that does not altogether deny the existence of God, but argues against divinity and supernaturalism. Deists believe that their belief in God should only be founded in nature and reason.
Religion and the U.S. Constitution American History to 1877 THESIS: The Constitution reflects our founder’s views of a secular government, protecting the freedom of any belief or unbelief. Some will argue religion, specifically Christianity, played a large role in the creation of this great nation’s government, the United States Constitution; however the facts reveal otherwise. The historian, Robert Middlekauff, observed, "the idea that the Constitution expressed a moral view seems absurd. There were no genuine evangelicals in the Convention, and there were no heated declarations of Christian piety. "1 INTRODUCTION: When the Constitution was submitted to the American public, many people complained the document had slighted God, for it contained "no recognition of his mercies to us ...or even of his existence."
Keyes argued "power only ultimately respects another power," and Martin Luther King Jr. was not a preacher by accident. Dershowitz also stated that not everything in the Bible should be believed word-for-word, even George Washington said "indulge religion with caution." Keyes believed that if state and religion should be separated, then why does the Declaration of Independence contain so much about religion? Alan Dershowitz and Alan Keyes would have argued endlessly about religion's role in society if there were not a moderator to stop them. Religion and morality exist together in parallel according to Alan Keyes.
When one actually thinks about it they will see that this country and constitution were not based on Freedom from religion but freedom of religion. Our very constitution is based on Christianity. " The Constitution of the United States, for instance, is a marvelous document for self-government by Christian people.
Unlike the Church of England, Puritans wanted to build a church one would join voluntarily and be active in the running of the congregation. “The American governmental system was designed by political architects who assumed that human beings could not be trusted with power” (Wald 49). The Founders focused more on defects of humanity more than its virtues, much like the Puritans. In Reformation theology, Puritans viewed the story of Adam as a lesson that when given the choice between good and evil, mankind will often choose evil. Puritans also believed redemption did not exist and God had already chosen those who would experience his grace and those who would only experience sin and torment.