| . |
Editorial
The
Biblical Roots of American Civilization
By Robert Maynard
Americans have historically
taken a great deal of pride in their tradition of the protection of individual
rights enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. What is less well known is that
the constitutional protection of individual rights represents the legal
codification of principles that developed over a period of 180 years.
That was the period of time
between the first Pilgrim settlers and the establishment of the U.S. Constitution.
During that time the "Puritans" set up Churches, schools, a university
system, charitable institutions and pretty much created an American Civilization
defined by a distinct worldview regarding human nature and the relationship
of the individual to society. This worldview culminated in the Declaration
of Independence and the U.S. Constitution.
The word "Puritan" here is
used in the broadest sense to include Presbyterian and Congregational Calvinists,
as well as Methodists, Baptists, Quakers and some other groups. The unifying
theme, be they separatists or non-separatists, was a desire to "purify"
the Church and enjoy the freedom to worship as they saw fit and to set
up communities governed by the principles derived from their religious
ideals.
Despite the difference in
theological emphasis from one group to another, their views formed a fairly
coherent worldview in regards to human nature and the relationship between
an individual and society. The early Puritans saw themselves as called
by God to set up an experiment in liberty that would be an inspiration
for the world. In a 1630 sermon by John Winthrop entitled "City upon a
Hill", he reminded his Congregation that:
"…for wee must
Consider that wee shall be as a Citty upon a Hill, the eies of all people
are uppon us; soe that if wee shall deale falsely with our God in this
worke wee have undertaken and soe cause him to withdrawe his present help
from us, wee shall be made a story and a byword through the world, wee
shall open the mouthes of enemies to speake evill of the wayes of God and
all professours for Gods sake; wee shall shame the faces of many of gods
worthy servants…"
As they were predominately Christian,
they took most of their ideas from the Bible. The early Pilgrims patterned
their "Errand in the Wilderness" after the Jewish people who escaped tyranny
in Egypt for freedom in the "Promised Land". This "prototype" in the struggle
for liberty not only inspired the early pilgrims, but the later abolitionist
movement with its "Underground Railroad" and the struggle to end slavery.
One big difference between
the early American settlers and the ancient Israelites was that, taken
as a whole, America was not nearly as ethically or religiously homogeneous.
This led them to employ the "Natural Law" approach when they expressed
the foundational ideas at the heart of their sacred cause in the Declaration
of Independence. There were some principles that, while derived from the
book of Genesis, applied to all people regardless of religion by virtue
of being created in the image of God. This notion was expressed in the
Declaration when they asserted that:
"When in the
Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve
the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume
among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which
the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to
the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which
impel them to the separation."
The phrase: the Laws of
Nature and of Nature's God has often been regarded as a conscious
attempt to describe God in deistic terms. As has been pointed out by Gary
Amos & Richard Gardiner in their book "Never Before in History", this
terminology had been part of the Canon Law of the Roman Catholic Church
for centuries. From there it was passed to Christians more generally in
England and became squarely implanted in English Common Law of the thirteenth
century.
One of Jefferson’s most influential
sources was the Puritan Sir Edward Coke. Coke’s writings on the Common
Law served as the central textbook for legal studies at the College of
William and Mary, where Jefferson received his formal training. In 1610,
Coke explained the meaning
of the phrase "law of nature" in "The Reports of Sir Edward Coke":
"The law of nature
which God at the time of creation of the nature of man infused into his
heart, for his preservation and direction; and is lex aeternal [The Eternal
Law], the moral law, called also the law of nature… And by the law, written
with the finger of God in the heart of man, were the people of God a long
time governed, before the law was written by Moses, who was the first reporter,
or writer of law in the world. The Apostle, in the second chapter to the
Romans saith, Cum enim gentes quae legen non habent naturaliter ea quae
legis sunt faciant[While the gentiles who do not have the law do
naturally the things of the law]… This law of nature, which is indeed
the eternal law of the creator, infused into the heart of the creature
at the time of his creation, was before any written laws, and before any
judicial or municipal laws."
Coke, like medieval Catholic
thinkers and most Puritans of his day, grounded the law of nature in the
Judeo-Christian doctrine of Creation. Jefferson also drew heavily on Sir
William Blackstone, who followed
directly in Coke’s footsteps in explaining the law of nature.
In short, it is the dignity
of the human individual in whose heart God has written His Law that entitled
them to a separate and equal station.
This notion is based on what
the some Christian Theologians referred to as the "Creator – Redeemer distinction".
God relates to all men as Creator with the indwelling law written in their
hearts at the time of creation. God also relates as Redeemer to people
chosen to receive his special revelations regarding the providence of salvation.
Another example of this approach is seen in the assertion in the Declaration
of Independence that:
"We hold these
truths to be self-evident"
The phrase "self evident" as
way of describing the truths they held has long been a source of confusion.
Amos and Gardiner clear up this confusion by pointing out that Jefferson’s
first draft read as follows:
"We hold these
truths to be sacred and undeniable:"
In the final draft of the Declaration,
the terms "self evident" were substituted for the term "sacred and undeniable".
The question is why was this substitution made? John Locke has pointed
out in his "Essay on Human Understanding" that the truth of a proposition
was self-evident if its truth was immediately apparent upon reflection.
Is this a case of denying that these truths are sacred and insisting on
a secular origin? Again, a closer look at the issue reveals that such is
not the case. Christian Theology recognizes at least two types of sacred
truths: 1) those that God made known only to a chosen select few by special
revelation and 2) those that God made universally apparent upon reflection
by imparting them in the human heart. Self Evident truths are of the latter
variety. In other words, the truths that our founders were taking a stand
on were not the exclusive property of any particular religion, but were
universally the common property of all humankind simply by virtue bearing
the image of their Creator.
Again, this was because of
the diversity of religious views held by various Americans. A statement
by America as a whole was, by necessity, a statement of truths, which were
the common property of all mankind. The general approach to expressing
such truths was also necessitated by the fact that they were declaring
their principles to the world as a whole and trying to inspire the world
to adapt those principles.
Now let’s take a little more
detailed look at the worldview that was at the heart of their struggle
for liberty.
The Individual Pursuit
of Excellence
The starting point for this
American worldview is the book of Genesis where it is stated that God created
man in his own image and blessed him to be fruitful, multiply and have
dominion. This was taken as a definitive statement about human nature and
purpose. The "three blessings" were not merely seen as blessings, but as
a responsibility given by God to man to fulfill his purpose. They also
considered the Genesis passage that God picked up the dust of the earth
and breathed into it and man became a "Living Soul". Man’s very essence
is tied to his relationship with God and the indwelling presence of God
in man. Man is incomplete until he realizes his purpose as the image of
God and allows that image to be reflected clearly. This is a theme that
America’s prominent philosopher/theologian Jonathan Edwards wrote about
extensively. Man achieved his purpose of the realization of excellence
via "self expansion" as he manifested God’s image. Such a process was a
source of joy to both man and God. When man becomes selfish and looks inward
he experiences "self contraction" and the result is misery.
The question becomes "how
does one manifest the image of God". Throughout the Old Testament God is
referred to as "Holy" and wants his people to be "Holy" as he is. Holiness
was something to be pursued by God’s people both as a community as well
as individuals. Of course, they took "Holy" to mean "set apart". In the
creation narrative God is portrayed as creating plants and animals collectively.
When he comes to Adam, the creation is of an individual who is tasked with
naming the various animals. This led Adam to realize that he was different
from them and had no helpmate. Through this process, Adam was "set apart".
In a similar way, the Jewish prophets would often encounter God in solitude
prior to embarking upon their mission to convey God’s will to his people.
They too were "set apart". Jesus himself is often portrayed in the Gospels
as seeking out a "lonely place" in which to pray during his ministry. As
for the Christian followers of Christ, the Apostle Paul has reminded them
that "Christ within you the hope of glory".
The solitary nature of this
"setting apart" and the fact that neither the prophets, nor Jesus and the
Apostles, held institutional positions of authority was a factor in the
American emphasis on individual dignity and liberty. We never know whom
God is going to call and there are aspects of such a person’s destiny that
is strictly between him and God.
When they read the story
of how Moses had to endure self exile from Egypt for 40 years before he
could lead the chosen people out of Egypt, or that the chosen people had
to wander for 40 years before entering the promised land, the Pilgrims
came to realize that God’s blessing and the realization of his purpose
does not come without a struggle to overcome obstacles. Those whom God
would bless, he often must purify. Of course the supreme example of the
necessity of struggle preceding victory is the crucifixion leading to the
resurrection. Christians were told by Jesus to "Pick up your cross and
follow me". They came to experience this in their own lives as they struggled
to build a new civilization in the wilderness among often hostile Indians.
Family and Community
At the point where Adam came
to realize that he was different from all of the animals, God declared
that "It is not good for man to be alone". God made Eve for Adam and declared
that a man shall leave his family and cleave to his wife and the two shall
become "one flesh". Man and women complete one another and make the image
of God in mankind more complete. It is along this line that Jonathan Edwards
stated "One alone can not be excellent". The self-expansion one experiences
in a relationship to God drives one to reach out to others in love and
compassion. Indeed, the Gospels and the Epistles of the New Testament insist
that God IS love. This reaching out to others as an act of love starts
with what is referred to as the "nuclear family", but extends from there
to the larger community.
Indeed, the notion of "spontaneous
order" which many associate strictly with economics, asserted that individuals
left free to pursue happiness would naturally realize the public good.
Although Adam Smith is now better known for his work on economics entitled
"The Wealth of Nations", he was actually a moral philosopher. His main
work at the time was entitled "The Theory of Moral Sentiments", in which
he suggested that humans had a natural moral intuition, or sentiment, which
led them to find fulfillment in showing benevolence toward others. This
again was a result of humans being created in God’s image. Of course the
reality of sin acted as a corrupting influence so that moral and religious
instruction were seen as needed to bring out these sentiments. Because
the notion of morality presupposed that behavior was freely chosen, voluntary
persuasion, rather than coercion, was what was needed. Some groups like
the Quakers, believed that this, coupled with the "inner light", was all
that was needed. They saw no need for the coercive power of the State and
ran the colony of Pennsylvania for a time with virtually no government
at all.
The tendency of Americans
to form voluntary associations was noted by Alexis de Tocqueville in his
classic "Democracy in America":
"Americans of
all ages, all stations of life, and all types of disposition are forever
forming associations. There are not only commercial and industrial associations
in which all take part, but others of a thousand different types - religious,
moral, serious, futile, very general and very limited, immensely large
and very minute. Americans combine to give fetes, found seminaries, build
churches, distribute books, and send missionaries to antipodes. Hospitals,
prisons, and schools take shape that way. Finally, if they want to proclaim
a truth or propagate some feeling by the encouragement of a great example,
they form an association. In every case, at the head of any new undertaking,
where in France you would find the government or in England some territorial
magnate, in the United States you are sure to find an association."
Economics
For various reasons, the
early Pilgrims experimented in an approach to economics where all property
was held in common and then equally distributed among them. This experiment
in what we would now refer to as socialism was a dismal failure. In commenting
on this failure, Governor Bradford of the Plymouth Colony noted that such
an approach was more in line with the utopian schemes of Plato than the
principles God laid out in the Bible:
"The experience that has
had in this common course and condition, tried sundrie years, and that
amongst Godly and sober men, may well evince the Vanities of the conceit
of Plato's and other ancients, applauded by some of later times; that the
taking away of propertie, and bringing into commone wealth, would make
them happy and flourishing, as if they were wiser than God."
Governor Bradford concluded
that the Biblical injunction in the Ten Commandments against stealing and
coveting one’s neighbor’s goods implied a divine sanction on the right
to private property. This observation, along with the realization that,
as a being created in the image of God man possessed immeasurable creativity,
prompted the Puritans to embrace a free market approach to economics.
In the socialist view, most
prominently represented by Karl Marx, capital is physical raw material
such as goods or money. In this view, because there is only a limited amount
of resources to go around, then one person’s gain is another's loss. The
focus of socialist economic systems is usually distribution. The idea being
that if someone does not redistribute a society's resources, many will
go without. The ones who usually do the distributing are central government
bureaucrats. Needless to say, their knowledge of economics is less than
perfect. This view may sound compelling to some until the alternative is
presented. In the capitalist view, physical raw material is not the main
source of capital, but rather, human creativity. Physical raw materials
may be limited but human creativity is not. Creative entrepreneurs can
use raw material in an ever-increasing quantity and quality. Here the power
of human liberty is clearly demonstrated. What's more, if an exchange is
voluntary, one person’s gain is not necessarily another's loss. In fact,
if we are left free to make our own choices, an exchange is not likely
to take place unless it benefits both parties. The focus of economic activity
in the free market is not distribution, but production and the agent of
economic activity is the entrepreneur, rather than the government bureaucrat.
This approach bore fruit
in the colony of Pennsylvania, where the Quakers operated with no taxes
and for a period of time virtually no government at all. They based their
whole experiment on "Brotherly Love" rather than centralized coercion.
The result was that the colony prospered greatly and surpassed a lot of
other colonies that had been established longer.
The idea of allowing people
free reign to develop their God given creativity in the field of economics
led to the notion of the free market being guided by "an invisible hand".
This notion became popularized by Adam Smith in his classic "The Wealth
of Nations".
Politics
The Puritans believed that
government power could only legitimately be exercised with the "Consent
of the governed". 140 years before the Declaration was written, Puritan
John Winthrop wrote in "A Defense of an Order of Court Made in the Year
1637":
"It is clearly
agreed, by all, that the case of safety and welfare was the original cause
or occasion of common weales and of many families subjecting themselves
to rulers and laws. From the premises will arise these conclusions: No
common weale can be founded but by free consent."
Of course the Puritans got this
notion from the Biblical Israelites who were led out of bondage in Egypt
into the promised land of Canaan. The early Puritans saw a parallel in
their being led out of religious persecution in England into the promised
land of America.
They saw the ancient Jewish
federation during the time of the Judges (before Israel asked God for a
King) as the purest example of a free republic that the world has seen.
The first written constitution of modern democracy was "The Fundamental
Orders of Connecticut", according to historian G.P. Gooch. They were drawn
up in response to a
1638 sermon by Puritan Minister
Thomas Hooker before the general assembly in
Hartford. Hooker’s view was
centered on the verse in Deuteronomy 1:13 "Take ye wise men, and understanding,
and known among your tribes, and I will make them rulers over you".
Hooker interpreted the words "take ye" to imply some form of democratic
choice in who was to rule over them. In other words, the choice of rulers
belongs to the people by God’s own allowance. The foundation of the ruler’s
authority is therefore in the free consent of the people. Puritan pastors
combined this verse, coupled with the strong denunciation of monarchy found
in I Samuel, to mean that God required a democratic Republic.
By the time of the revolution,
this view had become prevalent among the colonists. So much so that the
best selling pamphlet by Thomas Paine entitled "Common Sense", which has
been credited with generating widespread support for the revolution, echoed
it.
He used the verses in I Samuel
and the words of Gideon in Judges to denounce not only the British crown,
but the institution of monarchy itself.
The warning by God in I Samuel
about the abuse of power on the part of monarchs was taken by many early
Americans to apply to centralized political power in general. For this
reason, they sought to keep the role of the government strictly limited.
This skepticism in regards to the role of government was expressed by George
Washington as such:
"Government is not reason,
it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and
a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible
action."
Many Christian not only contrasted
the force inherent in government with reason and eloquence, but more importantly
with love. The Christian ideal of community was based on the notion of
love and thus was not compatible with an expanded role of government.
Robert Maynard is the
Editor of the True North website.
# # # # #
|
