Timon Cline (click here for a brief personal introduction) has recently written an article that I believe shows the beliefs and intent of many of my fellow religiously conservative American Christians. The article is about the Protestant roots of America and Cline attempts to show how America's founding was, for the most part, based on Protestantism (click here for the article).
To cut to the chase, why Cline wrote the article is explained, with some confusing logic, in the last paragraph of his article. There he writes:
The sects and factions that dominated the socio-political life of the early republic were predominantly of Reformation heritage. Their theological commitments, for better or worse, conditioned the early character and trajectory of the nation. Any who deny this are simply not paying attention to the historical data. Secularist pluralism has no place in the historic, American errand into the wilderness. And until we recognize this, we might toil in the wilderness forever.
So it is rather obvious that Cline believes that for America to successfully continue what it started, it must return to its Protestant roots. And since he believes that religious pluralism and neutrality were basically unknown to Americans way back, then the way forward for America is to return to its Protestant roots rather than continue with Secularism and pluralism.
Cline's case is solely based on the early religious history of the states. And it is necessary for Cline to do that if he wanted to prove his claims because there is no evidence that America was founded as a Christian nation based on The Constitution, the Constitutional debates, the Treaty of Tripoli and other tidbits of American history. One of the only shreds of evidence that America, as a nation, was founded as a Christian nation at the federal level can be found in an 1892 Supreme Court Case of the Church Of The Holy Trinity v. United States in which justice David Brewer proclaimed that America is a Christian nation. However, in another case, Brewer ruled against the Methodist Church in its attempt to outlaw prostitution in all of New Orleans. In addition, Brewer qualified his comment in a 1905 book. He stated that America is a Christian Nation not in the sense that Christianity is the official religion of the US, nor in the sense that the profession of Christianity is necessary to hold office. That was because he stated that the government itself is 'independent of all religions.'
So Cline focuses on the states and what is written in their documents and what they practiced. Cline provides documentation for claiming that these states were heavily influenced by, if their founding was not based on, Protestantism. Also, even before we had 13 states, Cline refers to the Mayflower Compact, the Charter of New England, and William Penn's Frame of Government.
He then points out that God is referenced by several names in the founding documents or Constitutions of states like South Carolina, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Delaware, New Jersey, Vermont, and New York. Then Cline goes on to claim that for 9 of the 13 states, religious tests were prescribed in the states' constitutions. These states allowed for religious tolerance but reserved public offices for Christians in general and Protestants in particular. Cline did note that it wasn't until 1961 when a Supreme Court decision rendered religious tests for holding public office as unconstitutional.
He continues his case by citing a Connecticut law that stated that no town in Connecticut could be incorporated without the presence of a Congregational church. And he goes on to mention Connecticut's enforcement of the state Sabbath law. He also adds a part of the Connecticut state constitution that it is the duty of all people to worship God. But he also noted a shift in Connecticut's state politics because of the growth of the Unitarian Church and decline of more conservative churches.
He then goes on to list a few court cases in which Christianity was privileged and goes on to mention other documents showing the Christian influence on some states.
Toward the beginning of his conclusion, he cites Justice Brewer, mentioned earlier, as saying that the main cause for the beginning of many colonies was Christianity.
So what should we think in the face of Cline's claims and evidence? There are several problems with Cline's claims and point of view here, but I will focus on only two. The first problem is that Cline fails to mention the context of the religious involvement of colonial America and the. beginning of the nation. That context was that many of the people who came here, already had a religious commitment and they passed that on to their children. Of course we are going to see Christian religion play a significant role in the founding of America. But it wasn't because people decided to change from being secular to religious, they were already religious and were looking for a change in scenery.
But the Christian religion also played a large role in why many from England came to settle America. And that leads us to the second problem with Cline's perspective here. The Christian religion played a significant role in the founding of America because Christians were persecuting Christians in England. And when those Christians who were fleeing persecution came here, they too persecuted fellow Christians. For example, in Virginia, those from the Anglican Church persecuted Baptists and Presbyterians. Up in New England, the Puritans were persecuting and even martyred four Quakers.
But it's not all, when Christians here weren't persecuting each other, they were promoting white supremacy and slavery. And when they were not exploiting and oppressing Blacks, they were taking more and more land away from Native Americans. And there were many churches that supported or worked to advance those practices and beliefs.
So the question that goes to Cline here when he makes claims about the role that Protestantism played such a large role in the founding and functioning of early America is one I use to hear on a tv show whose name I can't remember. The question that goes to Cline when he makes the claim that he does about Protestantism in America is: Are you bragging or complaining?
So many injustices have been practiced in America under the Protestant banner that perhaps instead of comparing today's secularism with yesteryear's Protestant domination of the land, he should wonder why we still have Protestantism in America.
We could add that there was much more religious pluralism back in the day than he seems to have admitted here. But we need to really address the reason for Cline's article. If you remember the beginning of the article, the reason why Cline wrote this article was because he wanted to use the Protestant history in America to be the reason why our nation should return to Protestantism. But many of the fruits of that Protestantism had produced include exploitation, atrocities, and oppression. And what we have now is a vast majority of white evangelicals supporting conservative agendas. Those agendas include deliberately neglecting climate change, supporting an economic system that continues to increase the wealth and income disparity between the races here, trying to prevent those from the LGBT community from enjoying full equality in society, supporting unjust wars in the name of patriotism, to name a few agenda items. Don't these Protestants see what they are doing to the reputation of the Gospel by what they do and who they support?
There is a reason why we have changed from being a more religious society to being that of a more secular and pluralistic society; it is because the old ways promoted injustice and thus severely damaged the reputation of the Gospel.
Should we return back to the glory days when Protestantism ruled the day in America? If we are interested in keeping what democracy we have left, the answer should be a resounding 'NO!' Perhaps the best reason for saying no to a return to Protestantism is given by Jeff Helper as he distinguishes between democracy and ethnocracies. Read what he wrote on pg 74 of his book: An Israeli In Palestine:
'An ethnocracy is the opposite of a democracy, although it might incorporate some elements of democracy such as universal citizenship and elections. It arises when one particular group—the Jews in Israel, the Russians in Russia, the Protestants in pre-1972 Northern Ireland, the whites in apartheid South Africa, the Shi’ite Muslims of Iran, the Malay of Malaysia and, if they had their way, the white Christian fundamentalist in the US—seizes control of the government and the armed forces in order to enforce a regime of exclusive privilege over other groups in what is in fact a multi-ethic or multi-religious society. Ethnocracy, or ethno-nationalism, privileges ethnos over demos. whereby one’s ethnic affiliation, be it defined by race, descent, religion, language or national origin, takes precedence over citizenship in determining to whom a country actually “belongs.” Israel is referred to explicitly by its political leaders as a “Jewish Democracy.”'
In other words, what Cline is calling for is not a democracy, but an ethnocracy. He calling for the return of the dominance by and privileged status for Protestantism in America. And if that should occur, then Halper's point is most poignant. Halper's point is that the nation would belong to Protestants, and by understanding Cline's theological viewpoints I would hasten to say that he is referring to conservative Protestants, more than they belong to any other group. And considering Protestantism's history in the US, that return should be resisted rather than welcomed.
- https://americanreformer.org/2022/04/our-distinctly-protestant-states/
No comments:
Post a Comment