Comments about ‘Founding Fathers not deists’

Yes, the founders were believers, but most of the signers of the Declaration of Independence, for example, were Masons, and Freemasonry is a vehicle for deism.

Yes. Bravo!

As I pointed out yesterday, holding Church service in federal and other public buildings was common. Displays of the Ten Commandments were everywhere. The use of public property was decided by the public.

The issue is whether we as a society have the same rights as exercised by those who wrote our rights. Unless they didn't understand their own words, the answer is yes.

Saying that the Constitution is based on Christianity is simply to say that it arose out of a Christian climate and was tried in that context.

The existence of other religious beliefs is reason for extending those rights, as determined by individual communities. It is not justification for doing away with those rights.

We as a people hold the responsibility of government in our hand. We direct the direction in which the Country goes not Washington or the courts. This is where we error as a people. If we are to maintain the rights of all Americans to believe what they will we have to hold government accountable to us as a people, not through public opinion polls but through seeking out good honest men of principles and values, who won't buckle under the pressures of Washington.
Our country is indeed great, but it can be better and this can only be accomplished by upholding Constitutional principles.
Many of the founding fathers were deemed deists by historians because they didn't 1)belong to a religion or 2) spoke out on organized religion. Many were disgusted by the constant bickering of the different religionist of the day and refused to participate in what they considred irreverent displays of piety. Does that make them non-Christians, I think not, does that make them deists maybe some of them prefered to accept that in place of the pretended piety or religious clashes which they witnessed.

It may be that people don't all have the same definition of "Deist". We can look up the dictionary term, but real life can sometimes be different. I am a "Deist" in that I don't believe in any one truth and although I believe in some type of "God", I don't believe in some of the forms that religion tries to put on "God."
The founding fathers remind me of this too. They clearly stated that although they believed in "God" they clearly showed that separation between government and religion.

I thought this was already settled. Look folks, some founders were Deists (Jefferson, Franklin, etc.), some were definitely devout Christians, others (like Washington) were influenced by both world-views.

We cannot separate the men from the historical setting without doing damage to history and our own rational thought. These men's views were VERY different from those of today. They were NOT fundamentalist Christians. That perspective evolved over the following century. They were children of the Enlightenment. They were often critical of both organized religion and dogmatic views. They could hold Christian views and Deist ideas simultaneously.

Ryan Larsen, (I hope you are taking a break from teaching seminary and reading this) you can hunt through that Constitution, and you will not find conclusive proof of the religious views of the authors. This is NOT a religious document. You DO find evidence of the philosophical views and phrases. Deism is evident in references to Deity. The concepts found in the document are Enlightened 18th century political philosophy, NOT Christianity. You could take the Constitution and footnote it with Hobbes, Locke, and Montesquieu. You would never turn to the Bible as a source.

Lew Jeppson, while true that most of the signers were also Masons, Masonry has gone through some changes. Back in the 1700's it evolved into two camps; one based on traditional or Ancient Masonry and other Modern. One held its grand lodge in Scotland and the other York. One was very Christian and the other secular. And most of our Founding Fathers to include George Washington were of the Ancient, Scotish brand which was very Christian. And most of the British to include Cornwallis and even King George III happened to be of the modern or secular one out of York.

Interesting note that after the surrender at Yorktown Masons actually signed a peace treaty. And in the early 1800's reconciled the differences between Ancient and Modern Masonry. This is found in Masonry today with the Scotish and York Rites of advanced Masonry. And if you ask any Mason who has been through both rites he will tell you that York Rite is very Christian and Scotish Rite is mure humanist. The reason for this is that when they reconciled they switched catechishms.

Interesting history that most do not know, but now you do. Our Founders were Christian Masons.

My only point to this is that no one really knows what they believed.

Yes, history tells us these men were this or that. The problem with history it is written with only one prespective. Therefore to get a complete picture of anything in history you must find several different perspectives......

By the way, whoever said the Constitution was based upon Greek and Roman laws is incorrect, it was based on the Judean/Christian laws based out of the bible and very prevalant thoughts of the day.

Al R and Larsen: Some of the Founders are considered Deists by historians because they openly challened the divinity of Jesus Christ (Jefferson, Paine, Franklin) and because they spoke of the laws of nature and nature's God quite frequently in their writings--both Deist expressions. Deism, as some of the posts would have us believe, is a modern construct created by secular historians. This is false. Deism entered the American lexicon in the early 18th c. and found its way over to America from across the Atlantic. It was openly discussed--and denigrated by evang. Christians--in dozens of colonial newspapers and pamphlets. I think that Mark's post is dead on: they felt comfortable embracing both Deist and Christian beliefs. It is we, some 200 yrs later, who chafe at their inconsistency.

Mr. Miner,
According to the US Treasury, the phrase "In God we Trust" came about around the time of the Civil War . . . just so you know.

Masonry is more like a "club" more than a religion. People can be different religions and still be Masons. Some of the Founding Fathers were Deists and some were devout Christians. They made it clear, however, that they didn't mix government with any one religion.
This is what we're trying to express and what some religions deny.

Thanks to Publius and Amy B. for reassuring me that well-informed and thoughtful people are still out there. For my part, I just wish there were more people that understood that a commitment to a specific religion is not necessary for a thoughtful, ethical existence.

I like your style and have read many of your articles. Religion is a private matter. It doesn't so much matter what religion the founding fathers were or if some of them were any religion. It also doesn't much matter that many of them were Masons. If we research Masonry, we find that it was like a club and mostly generic as far as religion.
I think it's clear that most of them believed in some type of "God", but they also made it clear that government and religion should be separate.

Amy --

"When the Constitution mentions religion, it is only to clarify that it should be private and should have no bearing on government (in so many words).

There's quite a lot of editorializing packed into that "in so many words," isn't there? The Constitution forbids religious tests for office (i.e. the government can't bar office to atheists, Jews, Mormons, etc.) and prohibits the establishment of a state church.

The "keep religion private" ideology -- the idea that religion should be completely barred from the public sphere -- has more in common with the anticlericalism of the French Revolution, and is foreign to the Constitution.

People whose principles ultimately derive from religious teaching (i.e., people who believe that things are right and wrong because God so ordained them) are every bit as entitled to promote their arguments in the public sphere -- so long as they do not establish a state church or enact a religious test for office -- as are people whose morality is derived from their personal judgment. In each case, what is right and wrong ultimately rests on some unexamined assumption. Shutting religious people up is not what the Constitution intended.

Boyd Petrie, must have spent too much time awake in his philosophy 101 class, to think that being Deist or Mason means that they weren't Christian. Joseph Smith was a Mason. The Founders were able to balance their belief in God with their own views of life, and then gave us a Constitution based on the Christian virtues, which had at that time proven to be the best model available to them, and they knew more about philosophy than most college students of today. That is why our Constitution is able to incorporate such diverse religious views in spite of ourselves. That said, there is no permanent cure for bigotry.

Thomas: You misread the Founders. They were very complex in their religious views, more so than you make them out to be. I offer this as a tidbit: President no. 1 (Washington) and president no. 2 (Adams) both believed in public days of fasting and prayer and the government hiring chaplains in the military. President no. 3(Jefferson) and no. 4 (Madison) vehemently opposed this (actually Madison later regretted it, as he wrote in 1819). Both TJ and JM believed that the govt calling for national days of fasting and prayer and the govt hiring chaplains in the military violated the sep. of church and state. Now it doesn't say that in the amendment, but that's how they interpreted it. That's how Washington interpreted it too, as he frequently wrote in the 1790s addressing non-Christian groups. They clearly believed in the separation of church and state--no issue here--but the issue is to what extent? Is the wall really impermeable or are there some cracks in it? Would they tolerate school prayer? Bible reading? Tax dollars to support religious schools? They didn't say--that's why we have to rely on the Courts to make those determinations.

I agree that it was never intended for people to be totally silent about religion. We can be accepting of others without pushing our own beliefs unto them. The very nature of our nation has been religious diversity. But certain religious beliefs which differ among us should not be pushed by governmental authority.

Historians are in agreement that most leading Founding Fathers deists, but Tom Paine (who coined the name "The United States of America" and deserves Founding Father status) came close to atheism. Deism was sunk by Darwin when he demonstrated logical and natural explanations that didn't require even the god of the deists.

More than the secular American State documents, neither the Christian nor Hebrew Bibles show any underlying philosophy of government that could possibly be connected to the democratic form under which we live. Where in the Bible is a reference to voting for representatives? Where is a reference to systems of checks and balances to control the branches of government? Where is the encouragement or even the right of individual governmental participation? Where are the freedoms of speech, religion, the press, the right to bear arms, the right not to incriminate oneself, the right to a trial by jury, or any other Constitutional rights referred to? NOWHERE!!!

GVS said:

"The Founders were able to balance their belief in God with their own views of life, and then gave us a Constitution based on the Christian virtues, which had at that time proven to be the best model available to them..."

This is clearly not true. Again, I ask, as have so many others, just where in the babble are the values and principles of constitutional government? Where is any reference to voting by secret ballot? The reference to the branches of government? The references to the intent of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments? The references to the rights retained by the States or the people (Tenth Amendment). They don't exist!

The best model available to the FFs was the Athenian tradition of pure democracy (for citizens only) and the Roman tradition of republican government (again, citizens only - but the Romans were very liberal about providing citizenship to conquered peoples).

One more thing. The Constitution of the United States of America does not mention any derivation of power from a god. The Constitution of the Confederate States of America does. Which one survived?

Agki-

Check the story of Moses and his father-in-law, Jethro. Therein, you will find where Jethro suggest to Moses that he cannot run all the affairs of the people by himself. The direct result of this is the birth of representation when Jethro suggested to moses, he set up Captains of 10 , 50 and 100 to help him rule. Hmmm, sounds an awful lot like republican democracy, only today we have city, county, and state and federal seperations. This has been, dare I say, called the "Ward System." Oh, no, I just inserted the Evil Morman religion into this too.

You want to know who was the formost authority on the Ward System? Yup, the ultimate of athiest, Thomas Jefferson. As a result of his study of the Anglo-Saxons and their system of government, he found that they actually practiced Gods law. But wait, how can this be? They were pagans weren't they. Oh, yeah. That's right, they were a nomadic people who had spent time around the Black Sea area(the last known location of the lost ten tribes of Israel). This is where Jefferson determined they learned and began practicing Gods Law.

Lets not forget that