This is a good introduction to the subject. Not the last word, a good
introduction.
There were Deist ideas in the mix, and one theory has it that in at least a
few
particulars the Iroquois influenced some sections, especially the design of
the Senate. And to say "Christian" is too simplistic since there are
important
differences between, say, Baptists and Anglicans, or Lutherans and
Congregationalists. But despite these limitations the study is quite
useful.
Billy
--------------------------
The Declaration and Constitution:
Their Christian Roots
Written by Kerby Anderson
The Declaration of Independence
Many are unaware of the writings and documents that preceded these great
works and the influence of biblical ideas in their formation. In the first
two sections of this article, I would like to examine the Declaration of
Independence. Following this, we'll look at the Constitution.
On June 7, 1776, Richard Henry Lee introduced a resolution to the
Continental Congress calling for a formal declaration of independence.
However, even
at that late date, there was significant opposition to the resolution. So,
Congress recessed for three weeks to allow delegates to return home and
discuss the proposition with their constituents while a committee was
appointed to express the Congressional sentiments. The task of composing the
Declaration fell to Thomas Jefferson.
Jefferson's initial draft left God out of the manuscript entirely except
for a vague reference to "the laws of nature and of nature's God." Yet, even
this phrase makes an implicit reference to the laws of God.
The phrase "laws of nature" had a fixed meaning in 18th century England and
America. It was a direct reference to the laws of God in a created order
as described in John Locke's Second Treatise on Civil Government and
William Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England.
What Jefferson was content to leave implicit, however, was made more
explicit by the other members of the committee. They changed the language to
read
that all men are "endowed by their Creator" with these rights. Later, the
Continental Congress added phrases which further reflected a theistic
perspective. For example, they added that they were "appealing to the Supreme
Judge of the World for the rectitude of our intentions" and that they were
placing "firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence."
The Declaration was not drafted in an intellectual vacuum, nor did the
ideas contained in it suddenly spring from the minds of a few men. Instead,
the
founders built their framework upon a Reformation foundation laid by such
men as Samuel Rutherford and later incorporated by John Locke.
Rutherford wrote his book Lex Rex in 1644 to refute the idea of the divine
right of kings. Lex Rex established two crucial principles. First, there
should be a covenant or constitution between the ruler and the people.
Second, since all men are sinners, no man is superior to another. These twin
principles of liberty and equality are also found in John Locke's writings.
John Locke and the Origin of the Declaration
Although the phrasing of the Declaration certainly follows the pattern of
John Locke, Jefferson also gave credit to the writer Algernon Sidney, who in
turn cites most prominently Aristotle, Plato, Roman republican writers,
and the Old Testament.
Legal scholar Gary Amos argues that Locke's Two Treatises on Government is
simply Samuel Rutherford's Lex Rex in a popularized form. Amos says in his
book Defending the Declaration,
Locke explained that the "law of nature" is God's general revelation of law
in creation, which God also supernaturally writes on the hearts of men.
Locke drew the idea from the New Testament in Romans 1 and 2. In contrast, he
spoke of the "law of God" or the "positive law of God" as God's eternal
moral law specially revealed and published in Scripture._{1}_
(http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4220821/k.1276/The_Declaration_and_Constitution_T
heir_Christian_Roots.htm#text1)
This foundation helps explain the tempered nature of the American
Revolution. The Declaration of Independence was a bold document, but not a
radical
one. The colonists did not break with England for "light and transient
causes." They were mindful that they should be "in subjection to the governing
authorities" which "are established by God" (Romans 13:1). Yet when they
suffered from a "long train of abuses and usurpations," they argued that "it
is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new
government."
The Declaration also borrowed from state constitutions that already existed
at the time. In fact, the phraseology of the Declaration greatly resembles
the preamble to the Virginia Constitution, adopted in June 1776. The body
of the Declaration consists of twenty-eight charges against the king
justifying the break with Britain. All but four are from state
constitutions._{2}_ (http://www.pr
obe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4220821/k.1276/The_Declaration_and_Constitution_Their_Christian_Roots.htm#text2)
Jefferson no doubt drew from George Mason's Declaration of Rights
(published on June 6, 1776). The first paragraph states that "all men are born
equally free and independent and have certain inherent natural Rights; among
which are the Enjoyment of Life and Liberty, with the Means of Acquiring and
possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining Happiness and Safety." Mason
also argued that when any government is found unworthy of the trust placed
in it, a majority of the community "hath an indubitable, inalienable, and
indefensible Right to Reform, alter, or abolish it."
Constitution and Human Nature
The influence of the Bible on the Constitution was profound but often not
appreciated by secular historians and political theorists. Two decades ago,
Constitutional scholars and political historians (including one of my
professors at Georgetown University) assembled 15,000 writings from the
Founding
Era (1760-1805). They counted 3154 citations in these writings, and found
that the book most frequently cited in that literature was the Bible. The
writers from the Foundering Era quoted from the Bible 34 percent of the
time. Even more interesting was that about three-fourths of all references to
the Bible came from reprinted sermons from that era._{3}_
(http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4220821/k.1276/The_Declaration_and_Constitution_Thei
r_Christian_Roots.htm#text3)
Professor M.E. Bradford shows in his book, A Worthy Company, that fifty of
the fifty-five men who signed the Constitution were church members who
endorsed the Christian faith._{4}_
(http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4220821/k.1276/The_Declaration_and_Constitution_Their_Christian_Roots.htm#text
4)
The Bible and biblical principles were important in the framing of the
Constitution. In particular, the framers started with a biblical view of human
nature. James Madison argued in Federalist #51 that government must be
based upon a realistic view of human nature.
But what is government itself but the greatest of all reflections on human
nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels
were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would
be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men
over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the
government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control
itself._{5}_
(http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4220821/k.1276/The_Declaration_and_Constitution_Their_Christian_Roots.htm#text5)
Framing a republic requires a balance of power that liberates human dignity
and rationality and controls human sin and depravity.
As there is a degree of depravity in mankind which requires a certain
degree of circumspection and distrust, so there are other qualities in human
nature, which justify a certain portion of esteem and confidence. Republican
government presupposes the existence of these qualities in a higher degree
than any other form._{6}_
(http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4220821/k.1276/The_Declaration_and_Constitution_Their_Christian_Roots.htm#text6)
A Christian view of government is based upon a balanced view of human
nature. It recognizes both human dignity (we are created in God's image) and
human depravity (we are sinful individuals). Because both grace and sin
operate in government, we should neither be too optimistic nor too
pessimistic.
Instead, the framers constructed a government with a deep sense of biblical
realism.
Constitution and Majority Tyranny
James Madison in defending the Constitution divided the problem of tyranny
into two broad categories: majority tyranny (addressed in Federalist #10)
and governmental tyranny (addressed in Federalist #47-51).
Madison concluded from his study of governments that they were destroyed by
factions. He believed this factionalism was due to "the propensity of
mankind, to fall into mutual animosities" (Federalist #10) which he believed
were "sown in the nature of man." Government, he concluded, must be based
upon a more realistic view which also accounts for this sinful side of human
nature.
A year before the Constitutional Convention, George Washington wrote to
John Jay that, "We have, probably, had too good an opinion of human nature in
forming our federation." From now on, he added, "We must take human nature
as we find it."
Madison's solution to majority tyranny was the term extended republic. His
term for the solution to governmental tyranny was compound republic. He
believed that an extended republic with a greater number of citizens would
prevent factions from easily taking control of government. He also believed
that elections would serve to filter upward men of greater virtue.
Madison's solution to governmental tyranny can be found in Federalist
#47-51. These include separation of powers, checks and balances, and
federalism.
Madison realized the futility of trying to remove passions (human
sinfulness) from the population. Therefore, he proposed that human nature be
set
against human nature. This was done by separating various institutional power
structures. First, the church was separated from the state so that
ecclesiastical functions and governmental functions would not interfere with
religious and political liberty. Second, the federal government was divided
into
three equal branches: executive, legislative, and judicial. Third, the
federal government was delegated certain powers while the rest of the powers
resided in the state governments.
Each branch was given separate but rival powers, thus preventing the
possibility of concentrating power into the hands of a few. Each branch had
certain checks over the other branches so that there was a distribution and
balance of power. The effect of this system was to allow ambition and power to
control itself. As each branch is given power, it provides a check on the
other branch. This is what has often been referred to as the concept of
"countervailing ambitions."
Constitution and Governmental Tyranny
James Madison's solution to governmental tyranny includes both federalism
as well as the separation of powers. Federalism can be found at the very
heart of the United States Constitution. In fact, without federalism, there
was no practical reason for the framers to abandon the Articles of
Confederation and draft the Constitution.
Federalism comes from foedus, Latin for covenant. "The tribes of Israel
shared a covenant that made them a nation. American federalism originated at
least in part in the dissenting Protestants' familiarity with the
Bible."_{7}_
(http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4220821/k.1276/The_Declaration_and_Constitution_Their_Christian_Roots.htm#text7)
The separation of powers allows each branch of government to provide a
check on the other. According to Madison, the Constitution provides a
framework
of supplying "opposite and rival interests" (Federalist #51) through a
series of checks and balances. This theory of "countervailing ambition" both
prevented tyranny and provided liberty. It was a system in which bad people
could do least harm and good people had the freedom to do good works.
For example, the executive branch cannot take over the government and rule
at its whim because the legislative branch has been given the power of the
purse. Congress must approve or disapprove budgets for governmental
programs. A President cannot wage war if the Congress does not appropriate
money
for its execution.
Likewise, the legislative branch is also controlled by this structure of
government. It can pass legislation, but it always faces the threat of
presidential veto and judicial oversight. Since the executive branch is
responsible for the execution of legislation, the legislature cannot exercise
complete control over the government. Undergirding all of this is the authority
of the ballot box.
Each of these checks was motivated by a healthy fear of human nature. The
founders believed in human responsibility and human dignity, but they did
not trust human nature too much. Their solution was to separate powers and
invest each branch with rival powers.
Biblical ideas were crucial in both the Declaration and the Constitution.
Nearly 80 percent of the political pamphlets published during the 1770s were
reprinted sermons. As one political science professor put it: "When
reading comprehensively in the political literature of the war years, one
cannot
but be struck by the extent to which biblical sources used by ministers and
traditional Whigs undergirded the justification for the break with
Britain, the rationale for continuing the war, and the basic principles of
Americans' writing their own constitutions."_{8}_
(http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4220821/k.1276/The_Declaration_and_Constitution_Their_Christian_Ro
ots.htm#text8)
Notes
1. Gary Amos, Defending the Declaration (Brentwood, TN: Wolgemuth and
Hyatt, 1989), 57.
2. Donald S. Lutz, The Origins of American Constitutionalism (Baton Rouge:
Louisiana State University Press, 1988, 114.
3. Ibid., 140.
4. M.E. Bradford, A Worthy Company: Brief Lives of the Framers of the
United States Constitution (Marlborough, NH: Plymouth Rock Foundation, 1982).
5. James Madison, Federalist, #51 (New York: New American Library, 1961),
322.
6. Ibid., Federalist #55, 346.
7. Lutz, Origins, 43,
8. Ibid., 142.
© 2003 Probe Ministries
--
--
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
