The Case for Christian Nationalism

10. The Foundation of American Freedom | III. Religious Liberty in the Founding Era (Part 1)

Previously:

The Case for Christian Nationalism

Wolfe begins this section with the sweeping statement that “The founders were unanimous in the belief that religion is necessary for civic morals and public happiness.”¹ This is a highly reductionist and dubious framing; one of the most influential founders, especially in the realm of civil law, Thomas Jefferson, was an outspoken materialist who outright rejected Christ as presented in Scripture, as well as Protestantism’s core tenets of Sola Fide and Sola Gratia. In an 1820 letter to William Short, the former American ambassador to Spain (and his former private secretary), in which he enclose a syllabus on the Philosophy of Jesus, he wrote:

But while this Syllabus is meant to place the character of Jesus in it’s true and high light, as no imposter himself, but a great Reformer of the Hebrew code of religion, it is not to be understood that I am with him in all his doctrines. I am a Materialist; he takes the side of spiritualism: he preaches the efficacy of repentance towards forgiveness of sin, I require a counterpoise of good works to redeem it Etc. Etc. it is the innocence of his character, the purity & sublimity of his moral precepts, the eloquence of his inculcations, the beauty of the apologues in which he conveys them, that I so much admire; sometimes indeed needing indulgence to Eastern hyperbolism. my eulogies too may be founded on a postulate which all may not be ready to grant. among the sayings & discourses imputed to him by his biographers, I find many passages of fine imagination, correct morality, and of the most lovely benevolence: and others again of so much ignorance, so much absurdity, so much untruth, charlatanism, and imposture, as to pronounce it impossible that such contradictions should have proceeded from the same being. I separate therefore the gold from the dross; restore to him the former, & leave the latter to the stupidity of some, and roguery of others of his disciples. of this band of dupes and impostors, Paul was the great Coryphaeus, and first corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus. these palpable interpolations and falsifications of his doctrines led me to try to sift them apart. I found the work obvious and easy, and that his part composed the most beautiful morsel of morality which has been given to us by man. the Syllabus is therefore of his doctrines, not all of mine. I read them as I do those of other ancient and modern moralists, with a mixture of approbation and dissent.²

This type of questionable framing continues in the next subsection on the political thought of John Witherspoon, the only active clergyman to sign the Declaration of Independence. Wolfe provides selective quotes from Witherspoon and then attempts to frame them through his previous statements on “prudence”. The problem is that the quotes, even when highly edited, read far more like an endorsement for a modern, Baptist view of liberty of conscience than for even a prudent theocratic Caesarism. For example, he quotes Witherspoon:

[We] ought in general to guard against persecution on a religion account as much as possible because such as hold absurd tenets are seldom dangerous. Perhaps they are never dangerous, but when they are oppressed. Papists are tolerated in Holland without danger to liberty.³

He then writes, “Witherspoon has not denied that civil governments can, in principle, withhold toleration from subversive sects. Rather, he denies that withholding toleration is effective, since subversion is often its consequence.”⁴ Yet Wolfe has previously set the limit of his toleration at publicly expressed heretical thought that “cause[s] public harm, both to the body and the soul,” and has stated that “the civil government must ensure that truth is taught and that harmful false teaching is restrained.”⁵ Let us compare this with the sentences in Witherspoon’s lecture leading up to the portion that Wolfe selectively quoted:

It is commonly said, however, that in case any sect holds tenets subversive of society, and inconsistent with the rights of others, that they ought not to be tolerated. On this footing Popery is not tolerated in Great Britain; because they profess entire subjection to a foreign power, the fee of Rome; and therefore must be in opposition to the proper interest of their own state; and because violence or persecution for religion is a part of their religion, which makes their prosperity threaten ruin to others, as well as the principle imputed to them, which they deny, That faith is not to be kept with heretics. But, however just this may be in a way of reasoning, we ought in general to guard against persecution on a religious account as much as possible because such as hold absurd tenets are seldom dangerous. Perhaps they are never dangerous, but when they are oppressed. Papists are tolerated in Holland, without danger to liberty. And though not properly tolerated, they are now connived at in Britain. (emphasis mine)⁶

In the full paragraph, Witherspoon states that it is not inaccurate to believe that Catholics meet all of the qualifications Wolfe sets for a heretical group to be of damage to the body and soul of the citizens of a Protestant nation; but Witherspoon then affirms that nations should “guard against persecution” of these heretical groups “as much as possible”, because they are usually not dangerous until they are actively suppressed. In essence, he makes the case that restricting a vocal religious minority, in the ways proposed by Wolfe in chapter 9, leads to inter-religious violence. Half a century after his death, his theory would be proven correct in two murderous riots between Protestants and Catholics in the city of Philadelphia.

Next:

The Case for Christian Nationalism

1. Stephen Wolfe, The Case for Christian Nationalism (Moscow, Idaho: Canon Press, 2022), 412.

2. Thomas Jefferson, “Letter to William Short, 13 April 1820” (University of Virginia Press, n.d.), http://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/03-15-02-0505.

3. Ibid., 416.

4. Ibid., 416

5. Ibid., 31, 357.

6. John Witherspoon, The Works of John Witherspoon: Containing Essays, Sermons, &c., on Important Subjects ... Together with His Lectures on Moral Philosophy Eloquence and Divinity, His Speeches in the American Congress, and Many Other Valuable Pieces, Never Before Published in This Country (J. Ogle, 1815), 120.