• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is the US founded on "Christian values" ?

tumbleweed41

Resident Liberal Hippie
Concerning "Common Law" and Christianity, Thomas Jefferson wrote in his letter to to Thomas Cooper on February 10, 1814;

"For we know that the common law is that system of law which was introduced by the Saxons on their settlement in England, and altered from time to time by proper legislative authority from that time to the date of Magna Charta, which terminates the period of the common law. . . This settlement took place about the middle of the fifth century. But Christianity was not introduced till the seventh century; the conversion of the first christian king of the Heptarchy having taken place about the year 598, and that of the last about 686. Here then, was a space of two hundred years, during which the common law was in existence, and Christianity no part of it.

". . . if any one chooses to build a doctrine on any law of that period, supposed to have been lost, it is incumbent on him to prove it to have existed, and what were its contents. These were so far alterations of the common law, and became themselves a part of it. But none of these adopt Christianity as a part of the common law. If, therefore, from the settlement of the Saxons to the introduction of Christianity among them, that system of religion could not be a part of the common law, because they were not yet Christians, and if, having their laws from that period to the close of the common law, we are all able to find among them no such act of adoption, we may safely affirm (though contradicted by all the judges and writers on earth) that Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law."

Full text of letter HERE
 

Kathryn

It was on fire when I laid down on it.
In "A Defense of the Constitution of Government of the United States of America" John Adams wrote;

"The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses."

". . . Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind."

Full text HERE

Have you read those states' constitutions? I posted a link to them earlier.
 

tumbleweed41

Resident Liberal Hippie
In spite of that, several states included that and STILL have such restrictions in their state constitutions. I posted a link earlier. I believe there are seven such states.
And as I pointed out before, State laws counter to the US Constitution have nothing to do with the founding of the US as a nation.
 

CynthiaCypher

Well-Known Member
Actually what it means is "He has favored our undertakings."
Annuit c

There is no actual "He" in the motto.

I think what it means given the Masonic symbolism is the The Eye of Providence consents to our undertakings, so that is really not about the Christian God but the Deist/Masonic version of Deity.
 

Kathryn

It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Concerning "Common Law" and Christianity, Thomas Jefferson wrote in his letter to to Thomas Cooper on February 10, 1814;

"For we know that the common law is that system of law which was introduced by the Saxons on their settlement in England, and altered from time to time by proper legislative authority from that time to the date of Magna Charta, which terminates the period of the common law. . . This settlement took place about the middle of the fifth century. But Christianity was not introduced till the seventh century; the conversion of the first christian king of the Heptarchy having taken place about the year 598, and that of the last about 686. Here then, was a space of two hundred years, during which the common law was in existence, and Christianity no part of it.

". . . if any one chooses to build a doctrine on any law of that period, supposed to have been lost, it is incumbent on him to prove it to have existed, and what were its contents. These were so far alterations of the common law, and became themselves a part of it. But none of these adopt Christianity as a part of the common law. If, therefore, from the settlement of the Saxons to the introduction of Christianity among them, that system of religion could not be a part of the common law, because they were not yet Christians, and if, having their laws from that period to the close of the common law, we are all able to find among them no such act of adoption, we may safely affirm (though contradicted by all the judges and writers on earth) that Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law."

Full text of letter HERE

So? I've never argued that it was.

But you mentioned the Magna Carta -an original of which is on display in Washington DC's National Archives as one of the documents which played such a large part in the formation of our country. Here's the text:

The Magna Carta
(The Great Charter)

Preamble: John, by the grace of God, king of England, lord of Ireland, duke of Normandy and Aquitaine, and count of Anjou, to the archbishop, bishops, abbots, earls, barons, justiciaries, foresters, sheriffs, stewards, servants, and to all his bailiffs and liege subjects, greetings. Know that, having regard to God and for the salvation of our soul, and those of all our ancestors and heirs, and unto the honor of God and the advancement of his holy Church and for the rectifying of our realm, we have granted as underwritten by advice of our venerable fathers, Stephen, archbishop of Canterbury, primate of all England and cardinal of the holy Roman Church, Henry, archbishop of Dublin, William of London, Peter of Winchester, Jocelyn of Bath and Glastonbury, Hugh of Lincoln, Walter of Worcester, William of Coventry, Benedict of Rochester, bishops; of Master Pandulf, subdeacon and member of the household of our lord the Pope, of brother Aymeric (master of the Knights of the Temple in England), and of the illustrious men William Marshal, earl of Pembroke, William, earl of Salisbury, William, earl of Warenne, William, earl of Arundel, Alan of Galloway (constable of Scotland), Waren Fitz Gerold, Peter Fitz Herbert, Hubert De Burgh (seneschal of Poitou), Hugh de Neville, Matthew Fitz Herbert, Thomas Basset, Alan Basset, Philip d'Aubigny, Robert of Roppesley, John Marshal, John Fitz Hugh, and others, our liegemen.

1. In the first place we have granted to God, and by this our present charter confirmed for us and our heirs forever that the English Church shall be free, and shall have her rights entire, and her liberties inviolate; and we will that it be thus observed; which is apparent from this that the freedom of elections, which is reckoned most important and very essential to the English Church, we, of our pure and unconstrained will, did grant, and did by our charter confirm and did obtain the ratification of the same from our lord, Pope Innocent III, before the quarrel arose between us and our barons: and this we will observe, and our will is that it be observed in good faith by our heirs forever. We have also granted to all freemen of our kingdom, for us and our heirs forever, all the underwritten liberties, to be had and held by them and their heirs, of us and our heirs forever.

(some local laws left out)

10. If one who has borrowed from the Jews any sum, great or small, die before that loan be repaid, the debt shall not bear interest while the heir is under age, of whomsoever he may hold; and if the debt fall into our hands, we will not take anything except the principal sum contained in the bond.

11. And if anyone die indebted to the Jews, his wife shall have her dower and pay nothing of that debt; and if any children of the deceased are left under age, necessaries shall be provided for them in keeping with the holding of the deceased; and out of the residue the debt shall be paid, reserving, however, service due to feudal lords; in like manner let it be done touching debts due to others than Jews.

(More local laws left out)

14. And for obtaining the common counsel of the kingdom anent the assessing of an aid (except in the three cases aforesaid) or of a scutage, we will cause to be summoned the archbishops, bishops, abbots, earls, and greater barons, severally by our letters; and we will moveover cause to be summoned generally, through our sheriffs and bailiffs, and others who hold of us in chief, for a fixed date, namely, after the expiry of at least forty days, and at a fixed place; and in all letters of such summons we will specify the reason of the summons. And when the summons has thus been made, the business shall proceed on the day appointed, according to the counsel of such as are present, although not all who were summoned have come.

15. We will not for the future grant to anyone license to take an aid from his own free tenants, except to ransom his person, to make his eldest son a knight, and once to marry his eldest daughter; and on each of these occasions there shall be levied only a reasonable aid.

16. No one shall be distrained for performance of greater service for a knight's fee, or for any other free tenement, than is due therefrom.

17. Common pleas shall not follow our court, but shall be held in some fixed place.

18. Inquests of novel disseisin, of mort d'ancestor, and of darrein presentment shall not be held elsewhere than in their own county courts, and that in manner following; We, or, if we should be out of the realm, our chief justiciar, will send two justiciaries through every county four times a year, who shall alone with four knights of the county chosen by the county, hold the said assizes in the county court, on the day and in the place of meeting of that court.

19. And if any of the said assizes cannot be taken on the day of the county court, let there remain of the knights and freeholders, who were present at the county court on that day, as many as may be required for the efficient making of judgments, according as the business be more or less.

20. A freeman shall not be amerced for a slight offense, except in accordance with the degree of the offense; and for a grave offense he shall be amerced in accordance with the gravity of the offense, yet saving always his "contentment"; and a merchant in the same way, saving his "merchandise"; and a villein shall be amerced in the same way, saving his "wainage" if they have fallen into our mercy: and none of the aforesaid amercements shall be imposed except by the oath of honest men of the neighborhood.

21. Earls and barons shall not be amerced except through their peers, and only in accordance with the degree of the offense.

22. A clerk shall not be amerced in respect of his lay holding except after the manner of the others aforesaid; further, he shall not be amerced in accordance with the extent of his ecclesiastical benefice.

23. No village or individual shall be compelled to make bridges at river banks, except those who from of old were legally bound to do so.

24. No sheriff, constable, coroners, or others of our bailiffs, shall hold pleas of our Crown.

25. All counties, hundred, wapentakes, and trithings (except our demesne manors) shall remain at the old rents, and without any additional payment.

26. If anyone holding of us a lay fief shall die, and our sheriff or bailiff shall exhibit our letters patent of summons for a debt which the deceased owed us, it shall be lawful for our sheriff or bailiff to attach and enroll the chattels of the deceased, found upon the lay fief, to the value of that debt, at the sight of law worthy men, provided always that nothing whatever be thence removed until the debt which is evident shall be fully paid to us; and the residue shall be left to the executors to fulfill the will of the deceased; and if there be nothing due from him to us, all the chattels shall go to the deceased, saving to his wife and children their reasonable shares.

27. If any freeman shall die intestate, his chattels shall be distributed by the hands of his nearest kinsfolk and friends, under supervision of the Church, saving to every one the debts which the deceased owed to him.

The Magna Carta 1215

There's a lot more, but this should do for now.
 

Kathryn

It was on fire when I laid down on it.
You didn't read the John Adams letter, did you?

Actually I did - and it's not the first time I've read it.

Taken out of context, it's easy to build a case for either position with quotes and letters and documents. That's why I prefer to look at the American Revolution and the founding of our country IN HISTORICAL CONTEXT and consider MANY different letters and documents penned by the men in question - not just a snippet here and there that may support my own position.

That's why I've put so much research and information in my posts about so many various expressions of the Christian faith/Theism from not only our founding fathers, but from state documents, letters, historical documents, monuments, etc.

But believe what you will. I'm done here.
 

Kathryn

It was on fire when I laid down on it.
There is no actual "He" in the motto.

I think what it means given the Masonic symbolism is the The Eye of Providence consents to our undertakings, so that is really not about the Christian God but the Deist/Masonic version of Deity.

Please refer to my reference which gives the official "interpretation" of the quote by the US government. It provides links as well.
 

Kathryn

It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Irrelevant to the US Constitution and the founding of the US as a nation.

Frankly I think that's ridiculous. Some of the same men were involved in penning BOTH the Constitution and their state constitutions.

The state constitutions from that same era are irrelevent to the founding of our nation only to those who wish to ignore their inconvenient contents I guess.

But please carry on - you'll have to do it without me though.
 

tumbleweed41

Resident Liberal Hippie
Just wondering why you would post the Magna Carta when Adams himself was arguing against Christianity being the basis for Common Law.
 

tumbleweed41

Resident Liberal Hippie
Historical influences on the US Constitution.


  1. Common Law and the Magna Carta. (Referenced by Adams above)
  2. Edward Coke-English Jurist known for fighting against the authority of ecclesiastical courts.
  3. William Blackstone- English Jurist and author of Commentaries on the Laws of England
  4. John Locke- Father of Classical Liberalism and influential Enlightenment thinker.
  5. Thomas Hobbes- Philosopher and author of Leviathan. Introduced the political and moral philosophy of "social contract".
  6. Montesquieu- French philosopher and Enlightenment thinker. Famous for his articulation of the theory of separation of powers in government. Author of The Spirit of the Laws
  7. The works of John Adams, full texts HERE.
  8. Thomas Paine and his pamphlet Common Sense.
  9. James Madison- Political theorist and primary author of the Bill of Rights. Co-author, along with Alexander Hamilton and John Jay of the Federalist Papers, which outlined how the proposed Constitution would work.
 

Kathryn

It was on fire when I laid down on it.
I'm not going to read through 22 pages, so apologies if this was already shared:

Is America A Christian Nation?
Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc.

The U.S. Constitution is a secular document. It begins, "We the people," and contains no mention of "God" or "Christianity." Its only references to religion are exclusionary, such as, "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust" (Art. VI), and "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" (First Amendment). The presidential oath of office, the only oath detailed in the Constitution, does not contain the phrase "so help me God" or any requirement to swear on a bible (Art. II, Sec. 1, Clause 8). If we are a Christian nation, why doesn't our Constitution say so?

In 1797 America made a treaty with Tripoli, declaring that "the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion." This reassurance to Islam was written under Washington's presidency, and approved by the Senate under John Adams.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . ."

—The First Amendment To The U.S. Constitution
WHAT ABOUT THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE?

We are not governed by the Declaration. Its purpose was to "dissolve the political bands," not to set up a religious nation. Its authority was based on the idea that "governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed," which is contrary to the biblical concept of rule by divine authority. It deals with laws, taxation, representation, war, immigration, and so on, never discussing religion at all.

The references to "Nature's God," "Creator," and "Divine Providence" in the Declaration do not endorse Christianity. Thomas Jefferson, its author, was a Deist, opposed to orthodox Christianity and the supernatural.

WHAT ABOUT THE PILGRIMS AND PURITANS?

The first colony of English-speaking Europeans was Jamestown, settled in 1609 for trade, not religious freedom. Fewer than half of the 102 Mayflower passengers in 1620 were "Pilgrims" seeking religious freedom. The secular United States of America was formed more than a century and a half later. If tradition requires us to return to the views of a few early settlers, why not adopt the polytheistic and natural beliefs of the Native Americans, the true founders of the continent at least 12,000 years earlier?

Most of the religious colonial governments excluded and persecuted those of the "wrong" faith. The framers of our Constitution in 1787 wanted no part of religious intolerance and bloodshed, wisely establishing the first government in history to separate church and state.

DO THE WORDS "SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE" APPEAR IN THE CONSTITUTION?

The phrase, "a wall of separation between church and state," was coined by President Thomas Jefferson in a carefully crafted letter to the Danbury Baptists in 1802, when they had asked him to explain the First Amendment. The Supreme Court, and lower courts, have used Jefferson's phrase repeatedly in major decisions upholding neutrality in matters of religion. The exact words "separation of church and state" do not appear in the Constitution; neither do "separation of powers," "interstate commerce," "right to privacy," and other phrases describing well-established constitutional principles.

WHAT DOES "SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE" MEAN?

Thomas Jefferson, explaining the phrase to the Danbury Baptists, said, "the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions." Personal religious views are just that: personal. Our government has no right to promulgate religion or to interfere with private beliefs.

The Supreme Court has forged a three-part "Lemon test" (Lemon v. Kurtzman, 1971) to determine if a law is permissible under the First-Amendment religion clauses.

A law must have a secular purpose.
It must have a primary effect which neither advances nor inhibits religion.
It must avoid excessive entanglement of church and state.
The separation of church and state is a wonderful American principle supported not only by minorities, such as Jews, Moslems, and unbelievers, but applauded by most Protestant churches that recognize that it has allowed religion to flourish in this nation. It keeps the majority from pressuring the minority.

WHAT ABOUT MAJORITY RULE?

America is one nation under a Constitution. Although the Constitution sets up a representative democracy, it specifically was amended with the Bill of Rights in 1791 to uphold individual and minority rights. On constitutional matters we do not have majority rule. For example, when the majority in certain localities voted to segregate blacks, this was declared illegal. The majority has no right to tyrannize the minority on matters such as race, gender, or religion.

Not only is it unAmerican for the government to promote religion, it is rude. Whenever a public official uses the office to advance religion, someone is offended. The wisest policy is one of neutrality.

ISN'T REMOVING RELIGION FROM PUBLIC PLACES HOSTILE TO RELIGION?

No one is deprived of worship in America. Tax-exempt churches and temples abound. The state has no say about private religious beliefs and practices, unless they endanger health or life. Our government represents all of the people, supported by dollars from a plurality of religious and non-religious taxpayers.

Some countries, such as the U.S.S.R., expressed hostility to religion. Others, such as Iran ("one nation under God"), have welded church and state. America wisely has taken the middle course--neither for nor against religion. Neutrality offends no one, and protects everyone.

THE FIRST AMENDMENT DEALS WITH "CONGRESS." CAN'T STATES MAKE THEIR OWN RELIGIOUS POLICIES?

Under the "due process" clause of the 14th Amendment (ratified in 1868), the entire Bill of Rights applies to the states. No governor, mayor, sheriff, public school employee, or other public official may violate the human rights embodied in the Constitution. The government at all levels must respect the separation of church and state. Most state constitutions, in fact, contain language that is even stricter than the First Amendment, prohibiting the state from setting up a ministry, using tax dollars to promote religion, or interfering with freedom of conscience.

WHAT ABOUT "ONE NATION UNDER GOD" AND "IN GOD WE TRUST?"

The words, "under God," did not appear in the Pledge of Allegiance until 1954, when Congress, under McCarthyism, inserted them. Likewise, "In God We Trust" was absent from paper currency before 1956. It appeared on some coins earlier, as did other sundry phrases, such as "Mind Your Business." The original U.S. motto, chosen by John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and Thomas Jefferson, is E Pluribus Unum ("Of Many, One"), celebrating plurality, not theocracy.

ISN'T AMERICAN LAW BASED ON THE TEN COMMANDMENTS?

Not at all! The first four Commandments are religious edicts having nothing to do with law or ethical behavior. Only three (homicide, theft, and perjury) are relevant to current American law, and have existed in cultures long before Moses. If Americans honored the commandment against "coveting," free enterprise would collapse! The Supreme Court has ruled that posting the Ten Commandments in public schools is unconstitutional.

Our secular laws, based on the human principle of "justice for all," provide protection against crimes, and our civil government enforces them through a secular criminal justice system.

WHY BE CONCERNED ABOUT THE SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE?

Ignoring history, law, and fairness, many fanatics are working vigorously to turn America into a Christian nation. Fundamentalist Protestants and right-wing Catholics would impose their narrow morality on the rest of us, resisting women's rights, freedom for religious minorities and unbelievers, gay and lesbian rights, and civil rights for all. History shows us that only harm comes of uniting church and state.

America has never been a Christian nation. We are a free nation. Anne Gaylor, president of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, points out: "There can be no religious freedom without the freedom to dissent."

Nontracts - FFRF Publications

I guess this is the post you're referring to. I've read this before. It does make it's way around the internet pretty regularly.

I didn't respond directly to it for a variety of reasons:

1) It's definitely not from an unbiased source. It's from a source whose purpose for existing is to refute the very idea that Christianity played a significant and defining role in the history of the formation of the United States. So right away I was a bit put off by it.

2) I have addressed many of the points in this article, either before or after you posted it, for instance the Treaty of Tripoli, which I addressed in a lot of detail.

3) It's overview of the various issues the article addresses is cursory at best. Over the course of this thread, I've gone far beyond the overly simplistic version of events that the article portrays.

I did keep your article in mind as I was responding in general after that point and I believe that you will see several of your points discussed by me on this thread. Sorry that I didn't cut and paste each quote - I am sure that makes following my responses to your article a bit difficult!:eek:
 

BruceDLimber

Well-Known Member
Bruce said:
The meaning of "Annuit coeptis" is "It favors our undertakings." God is not mentioned here.
Bruce said:
Actually what it means is "He has favored our undertakings."

You object too much, methinks.

If you know Latin, you'll agree that the verb can equally have a subject of "he," "she," or "it" with no obvious preference given to any of them absent additional data from other words in the sentence--other words which don't exist in this case.

So any of the three meanings is equally valid, but as I pointed out, none of them explcitly mentions God.

Peace, :)

Bruce
 
Last edited:

Kathryn

It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Bruce said:
The meaning of "Annuit coeptis" is "It favors our undertakings." God is not mentioned here.
Bruce said:


You object too much, methinks.

If you know Latin, you'll agree that the verb can equally have a subject of "he," "she," or "it" with no obvious preference given to any of them absent additional data from other words in the sentence--other words which don't exist in this case.

So any of the three meanings is equally valid, and STILL none of them explcitly mentions God.

Peace, :)

Bruce

I was referring to the "official translation" by the US government, not my own interpretation. Please refer to the link I provided for clarification.
 

tumbleweed41

Resident Liberal Hippie
I was referring to the "official translation" by the US government, not my own interpretation. Please refer to the link I provided for clarification.
According to your link, the State Department's official translation is "He [God] has favored our undertakings"

But the designer, Charles Thomson, a Latin instructor, gave this official explanation of the motto and seal he designed;
"The Eye over it [the pyramid] and the motto Annuit Cœptis allude to the many signal interpositions of providence in favor of the American cause."




03490339.gif

 

CynthiaCypher

Well-Known Member
Please refer to my reference which gives the official "interpretation" of the quote by the US government. It provides links as well.

Well the correct and authoritative interpretation would be the masonic since the motto is derived from them.

It has nothing to do with the Christian God, it is instead referring to the Deist God
 
Top