It is worth noting that Metaxas has made the common mistake of taking Winthrop’s words, which were addressed to the inhabitants of one British-American colony, and applying them to the United States writ-large. Winthrop, of course, was not applying his “city upon a hill” metaphor to the already-existing colonies of Virginia, Plymouth, and the Dutch colony of New Netherland (which became New York thirty-four years later). Yet these colonies and several others–colonies in which the “city upon a hill” metaphor was not part of their founding ideal–would also be part of the United States of America in 1776. Metaxas is in good company here. John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan, both fans of the “city upon a hill” metaphor, also made this mistake. (More on Reagan below).
Wednesday, July 13, 2016
Fea: "Review of Eric Metaxas, 'If You Can Keep It: Part 6"
From Dr. Fea here. A taste:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I think it's a mistake to assume they all made a mistake.
Metaxas used the whole quote [BF mine]
"...for we must Consider that we shall be as a City upon a Hill, the eyes of all people are upon us; so that if we shall deal falsely with our God in this work we have undertaken and so cause him to withdraw his present help from us..."
The City is not by nature good. It is the men inside it who must aspire to be, and that's Metaxas's larger thesis of "If You Can Keep It----that Americans must aspire to virtue, and that virtue requires faith--a controversial assertion these days, but one that Washington also believed, that
reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
GW - “…reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.”
TVD - “…and that virtue requires faith--a controversial assertion these days, but one that Washington also believed…”
Washington makes no such overt assertion in his Farewell Address. The first part of the sentence that you snip and the preceding sentence concedes that morality may “be maintained without religion” via the “influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure.” The snip that you use refers to the utility of religious principle with respect to the “national” or collective morality. And, any religious entity or party stirring animosity toward the unity of the American national government would have been anathema. This, for those interested, was also Baruch Spinoza’s position. You know, the atheist great Satan of the 17th century.
The main thrust of Washington’s Address is a peon to national unity and to fidelity to the new national government:
“Interwoven as is the love of liberty with every ligament of your hearts, no recommendation of mine is necessary to fortify or confirm the attachment.
“The unity of government which constitutes you one people is also now dear to you. It is justly so, for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquility at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very liberty which you so highly prize.”
And
“In this sense it is that your union ought to be considered as a main prop of your liberty, and that the love of the one ought to endear to you the preservation of the other. ”
And
“To the efficacy and permanency of your Union, a government for the whole is indispensable. ”
And
“Respect for its authority, compliance with its laws, acquiescence in its measures, are duties enjoined by the fundamental maxims of true liberty. ”
Etc.
Washington is speaking in secular and not religious terms. And what is it that Washington concludes is “the object of primary importance” to be promoted in the furtherance and preservation of the unity of national government? More churches? More religion?
Does Washington admonish those that he addressed, to not “deal falsely with our God in this work we have undertaken and so cause him to withdraw his present help from us.” No. It’s this…
“Promote then, as an object of primary importance, institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge. In proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public opinion, it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened. ”
Washington makes no such overt assertion in his Farewell Address. The first part of the sentence that you snip and the preceding sentence concedes that morality may “be maintained without religion” via the “influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure.” The snip that you use refers to the utility of religious principle with respect to the “national” or collective morality
Easy there, tough guy. You snipped, not me. Washington says "national morality," meaning "on the whole." I was going to add "for the great mass of men" for nigglers like yourself, and obviously should have to keep you off my back.
You're welcome.
TVD:
The City is not by nature good. It is the men inside it who must aspire to be, and that's Metaxas's larger thesis of "If You Can Keep It----that Americans must aspire to virtue, and that virtue requires faith--a controversial assertion these days, but one that Washington also believed, that
reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.>>>
Good point.
I think the fact that every constitution of all 50 states contains a reference to God or the equivalent is significant and relevant to the subject at hand.
It seems that the dots connect.
http://undergod.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000081
Post a Comment