Sunday, September 13, 2009

The Protestant Minimum:

My co-blogger at American Creation, Tom Van Dyke, has a good post on the Protestantism that prevailed during America's Founding. It reminds me somewhat of the late Avery Cardinal Dulles' outstanding article "The Deist Minimum."

We hear a lot of terms thrown around; America had a “Christian” Founding, an “Enlightenment” Founding, a “Judeo-Christian” Founding, a “Protestant Christian” Founding…everything depends on what those terms mean. My biggest problem with "Christian Nationalists" is that terms like "Christian" or "Protestant Christian" get read as a D. James Kennedy kind of "Christian"...or even worse a John Lofton type of "Protestant."

Sure those kinds of Protestant Christians existed in more than nominal numbers during the Founding era. But they probably didn't form a statistical majority of the population; or if they did, there is no way to prove it (you'll have to ask God that question when you meet him).

But using modern dialog Van Dyke accurately captures what I see as the "Protestant minimum" of America's Founding:

A man [or woman] had the Bible, and they made of it what they would or could, and God help the clergyman who got in the way. If anything, the Founding generation and their ancestors fled Europe's clergy and their politics as much as they fled Europe itself.

No surprise, then, we ended up with the First Amendment, and that's largely what Dr. Shain means by "Protestant"---decidedly not Roman Catholic, but other Protestants too are kindly invited---keep your hands off my religious conscience!

Do you believe Jesus is God?
---I dunno. The Messiah, probably. You know, special.

That Jesus died for our sins?
---Mebbe. But mebbe he died for ALL men's sins. The Bible's a little unclear on whether there's definitely a Hell. My mother didn't believe in God much, but I'd still like to see her in heaven, y'know? Hate to think of Mom burning in Hell.

Is Christ present in the Eucharist?
---I have no idea. Tastes weird to me.

Is the Bible true?
---Sure. But people might have messed it up. People are people. And when it comes to interpreting the Bible, Rev. Smith is an idiot like Rev. Mayhew says---as if Romans 13 says I have to believe Charles II was some sort of saint, and now I have to obey King George III, who's a total bastard.

Look, the wife takes care of religion for the both of us, and I got a field to plow. Whatever. Just Don't Tread on Me, OK?


It went down sorta like that.

5 comments:

Phritz said...

Just another confused, tasteless Randian hack site (if not perp site): that's 'Merican Creation

Perhaps be honest for once and disclose the Randian/Objectivist and LDS connections--or is it scientologists

Holy Volcano Gods Batman

UUFreespirit said...

Jon, for once I have to agree with Tom. That's my understanding--and, unlike Tom--I have no problem calling it (as Jefferson did) primarily Unitarian in its "radical protestant" spirit of critical discernment. It's a heritage of personal filtering and prioritizing of what appeared to be the "transient" from the "permanent""...the wheat from the chaff, or as Jefferson again colorfully described it, the "diamonds" from amidst the dung hill.

UUFreespirit said...

Just to try to clarify my point a little more...I think that the nation was founded more on a commonality of "attitude" than of theology, but (as Tom suggested) that attitude did extend to matters of religion and conscience.

Jonathan Rowe said...

Thanks for checking in Ron.

I always appreciate your feedback.

Anonymous said...

酒店打工

酒店兼職

台北酒店

打工兼差

酒店工作

酒店經紀

禮服酒店

酒店兼差

酒店

酒店PT

酒店上班

酒店喝酒

酒店消費

喝花酒

粉味

喝酒