Gregg Frazer emails me a response to
my review of
Mark David Hall's new book.
How can you conclude: “I think he makes a reasonable case for his position that America had a 'Christian' founding. And I think it deserves popular success along with Drs. John Fea's and Gregg Frazer's books on the matter” when he never defines what “Christian” is and never defines what “founding” is??? For what, exactly, does he make a reasonable case? Is it that various people with their own idiosyncratic notions of the word “Christian” can believe that at some point in history there was some kind of ostensibly religious influence on the geographical area known as “America”? So what? What is the significance of this claim – and who couldn’t have said this without offering any “evidence” at all? What makes this a “nifty” book? You, yourself, speculate and struggle with various possible meanings in your review – should that be the case if a book is well-written, “a reasonable case,” “nifty” and a valuable contribution to the subject?
In his comment, Mr. Van Dyke points out two of several potential meanings for “founding” and notes that the one Mark is ostensibly claiming doesn’t apply at all to the Constitution – but Mark’s overall point (given the last 2/3 of the book) is TO apply it to the Constitution. Most of the book is about how the Constitution has been improperly interpreted and applied and is based on the idea that there was a Christian founding of it! This is why what he means by “founding” and “Christian” really matters and cannot be glossed over. What you mean by “Christian” also matters because his primary audience is people who have a particular perspective on what that means and he, like Barton, speaks to them in their terminology while apparently NOT meaning what they do – so it is misleading at best, and deceptive at worst.
Note that in Mark’s “comment,” his response regarding Washington is again simply that he wasn’t a deist! Again he posits the false dichotomy of deist or Christian – but again uses the qualifier “orthodox” to allow Washington to still be a Christian (whatever that is) of some sort. I, of course, also argue that he wasn’t a deist – that’s not hard to show – but that doesn’t necessarily mean that he was a “Christian” of any sort unless you posit the false dichotomy. It would require some evidence that shows him to be some sort of Christian – though that’s impossible to do if you don’t have a definition of “Christian.”
[By the way, in your email to me, you say that Washington was not a “strict deist” – how was he a deist in any way? He denied both of the fundamental beliefs of deism: absentee God and no written revelation from God (along with the corollary that Mark emphasizes: criticism of Christianity). Why say he wasn’t a “strict” deist instead of just saying he wasn’t a deist? What evidence is there of any deism on his part?]
If being a good or virtuous person makes Washington a “Christian” – if that’s the definition – then it’s meaningless from a religious perspective. Many Jews would be “Christians” and so would many Muslims and many Buddists and many who have no religious beliefs whatsoever. So what meaning does it have? This is why what he means by “Christian” really matters and cannot be glossed over.
Re Jasper Adams: it’s worth noting that he sent his book to Madison and asked for an endorsement of his thesis (that America was founded on Christian principles), but Madison refused to do so.
More discussion to come. And also check out the discussion in the comments
here.
6 comments:
Re Jasper Adams: it’s worth noting that he sent his book to Madison and asked for an endorsement of his thesis (that America was founded on Christian principles), but Madison refused to do so.
Are there actual quotes by Madison to this effect.
To answer Our Founding Truth:
Jasper Adams sent Madison a copy of his pamphlet, "The Relations of Christianity to Civil Government in the United States" and he asked Madison for comment. In the pamphlet, Adams argued that "the people of the United States have retained the Christian religion as the foundation of their civil, legal, and political institutions." Madison wrote a response letter to Adams, but in his response letter, Madison did not affirm Adams's thesis that Christianity was the foundation of American institutions. This was a golden opportunity for a key Founder to affirm the thesis of the Christian America camp -- he was specifically asked to do so; but Madison did not do so.
It can only be conjectured what Madison declining to endorse Jasper Adams' thesis actually meant. Supreme Court Justices John Marshall and Joseph Story heartily endorsed it.
Madison used the occasion of his letter to Adams to harp on his current concern at that time, against government money used to support churches. Whatever his opinion--well after his presidency and departure from public life--Madison [along with Jefferson] was an outlier on the subject. There is no record of Madison objecting to the payment of chaplains for both the Congress and the military when they were established, and even if he had, it was a battle he lost.
As Hall points out in his book, although Madison vetoed a bill to pay for an Episcopal church in Washington DC, the Congress had passed it--suggesting that THAT was the prevailing sentient and understanding of the Constitution in the immediate post-Founding.
Like the Jefferson-John Adams correspondence, it is an error to take post-presidential musing and meandering as authoritative.
Dr.Frazer,
Excellent discernment again regarding Madison, and his failure to promote the flawed Christian nation thesis. JM failed to concur with Jasper Adams even though he knew Marshall and Story did concur. Madison did this at a time when his racist democrat buddie Thomas Jefferson was long gone, yet he still rejected the Christian foundation of the nation. His hypocrisy is magnified more so in that JM called the USA a Christian nation in 1813.
I am so happy, i never believe i will be this happy again in life, I was working as an air-hoster ( cabby crew ) for 3years but early this year, i loose my job because of this deadly disease called Herpes virus (HSV), I never felt sick or have any symptom, till all workers were ask to bring their doctors report, that was how i got tested and i found out that am HSV positive that make me loose my job, because it was consider as an STD and is incurable disease, i was so depress was thinking of committing suicide, till i explain to a friend of mine, who always said to me a problem share is a problem solved, that was how she directed me to Dr Isibor, that was how i contacted him and get the medication from this doctor and i got cured for real, I just went back to my work and they also carry out the test to be real sure and i was negative. Please contact this doctor if you are herpes positive diseases his email is: drisiborspellhome@gmail.com
or his WhatApp contact +2348107855231
I was scrolling the internet like every day, there I found this article which is related to my interest. The way you covered the knowledge about the subject and the best group in bhopal
was worth to read, it undoubtedly cleared my vision and thoughts towards Best group in Bhopal
. Your writing skills and the way you portrayed the examples are very impressive. The knowledge about best group in Bhopal
is well covered. Thank you for putting this highly informative article on the internet which is clearing the vision about who are making an impact in the real estate sector by building such amazing townships.
Post a Comment