Declaration of Independence Archives - Homeschool Freedom Action Center

It has become taboo today to mention anything relating to Christianity in the same sentence with anything regarding law or public policy. If you mention anything that even remotely sounds like Christian theology in a public policy context, you are immediately met with cries of “Separation of church and state!”, “We are a secular democracy!”, or “You are trying to establish a theocracy!”

In such a climate, it is good to reflect on the proper use of Christian theology in law, governance, and public policy.

The Myth of Secular Public Policy

First of all, I should point out that, whether we want it to be or not, theology (whether good theology or bad theology) actually is at the core of all public policy, especially in the United States. The Declaration of Independence states this: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal . . . ”

Now, let us ask ourselves, is this truth really self-evident?

Throughout the entire course of human history, people have wanted to divide people into classes. Whether it is through the caste system in India, through the nobility of Europe, or through simple racial preference, what has been self-evident to humans is that “we” are better than “they.” So how could the writers of the Declaration of Independence claim that it was a self-evident truth?

The answer is that they had been raised under Christian doctrine.

Christianity: The Source of American Rights

“There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28). “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23). “Suppose a man comes into your meeting wearing a gold ring and fine clothes, and a poor man in filthy old clothes also comes in. If you show special attention to the man wearing fine clothes and say, “Here’s a good seat for you,” but say to the poor man, “You stand there” or “Sit on the floor by my feet,” have you not discriminated among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts?” (James 2:2-4).

And there are many more. So, we can see that at the core of our country, at the Declaration of Independence, we have distinctively Christian doctrine. So, if someone says that using Christian doctrine violates the rights of other people who are not Christian, they are simply incorrect—it is specifically Christian doctrine that has created and enabled those rights to begin with.

The State and the Church: Working Together, But Not as One

However, it is very easy to get the wrong idea.

The goal of using Christian doctrine is not to make the state an arm of the church. Jesus’ commands were to a people who were not in control of the government, and therefore, care must be taken to properly apply Christian doctrine to the affairs of the state. The church’s function is for believers, while the state’s function is for all of the people in the community, no matter how large or small. The state’s actions are, by nature, coercive. The community of God is, by nature, voluntary.

If we tried to use the state’s power to force people to believe in Christianity, we would be misusing the power of the state and misunderstanding what Christianity is.

However, in order to properly govern, the state must presuppose knowledge about nature, reality, and humanity. If the state misunderstands human nature, its laws will be ineffective or even counterproductive. If the state misunderstands the source of evil and corruption, it will also fail to curb it and may wind up perpetuating it instead. Christianity—through the Bible, through church teaching, and through Christian reflection over thousands of years—has quite a bit to say about the nature of reality and especially human nature. Christianity best serves law and governance by providing better perspectives on the nature of reality and then reflecting on how government can be most effective in the light of that reality.

Applying Christian Doctrine: A Case Study and A Warning

Let me present a case study from Reinhold Niebuhr’s The Irony of American History. In this book, he shows how the doctrine of sin has affected different governments. Niebuhr presents two incorrect doctrines of sin which have led many governments astray. Now, as with most theology, being an atheist does not prevent a person from having a theology. A “doctrine of sin” simply means “an explanation for what is wrong with the world and how it got that way.”

Communists, like everyone else, operated with a doctrine of sin—they believed that property was the cause of sin. Therefore, they believed that by removing property from society they would remove sin. Communism failed because it operated on a false doctrine.

Modern Western democracies also have an equally erroneous concept of sin—that ignorance is the cause of sin in the world. Therefore, if we can simply educate the unwashed masses, then our problems will be solved.

Modern libertarians often have their own errant doctrine of sin: that the government is the root of sin in the world, and if we get rid of government, we will have removed sin.

So, what is the Christian doctrine of sin?

The Christian doctrine of sin is that of “original sin.” That is, sin comes with being human—we were born with it, and it cannot be removed. There is no “solution” to sin other than Christ, but the negative impact of an individual’s sin can be mitigated within a larger population guided by Christ. John Adams said, “We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion…Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” Though Adams was a Universalist, he recognized the truth of original sin and the role that Christianity played in maintaining the freedoms outlined in the Constitution.

This method of applying doctrine to public policy issues is not something that can be done quickly, lightly, or half-heartedly. It requires a commitment to deep thought and reflection. It requires looking deeply into the issues that affect us, not just their surface features. We have to look not just at the laws themselves but at their purposes and understandings of how reality works and then analyze whether those hold up under the truth of Christianity.

I will leave you with this illustration from G. K. Chesterton’s Heretics:

“Suppose that a great commotion arises in the street about something, let us say a lamp-post, which many influential persons desire to pull down. A grey-clad monk, who is the spirit of the Middle Ages, is approached upon the matter, and begins to say, in the arid manner of the Schoolmen, ‘Let us first of all consider, my brethren, the value of Light. If Light be in itself good—’ At this point he is somewhat excusably knocked down. All the people make a rush for the lamp-post, the lamp-post is down in ten minutes, and they go about congratulating each other on their unmediaeval practicality. But as things go on they do not work out so easily. Some people have pulled the lamp-post down because they wanted the electric light; some because they wanted old iron; some because they wanted darkness, because their deeds were evil. Some thought it not enough of a lamp-post, some too much; some acted because they wanted to smash municipal machinery; some because they wanted to smash something. And there is war in the night, no man knowing whom he strikes. So, gradually and inevitably, to-day, to-morrow, or the next day, there comes back the conviction that the monk was right after all, and that all depends on what is the philosophy of Light. Only what we might have discussed under the gas-lamp, we now must discuss in the dark.”

WRITTEN BY:

Jonathan Bartlett

Check out Classical Converations^® blogs and Homeschool Freedom Action Center blogs.

By Lauren Gideon

There has been a revival among conservatives to improve our functional U.S. Constitutional literacy. It’s only natural when things devolve into disorder and chaos to wonder,

“What happened?”

“How did we get here?”

“Where did we get off course?”

To answer these questions, one would have to learn what the course was and where the course came from before one could assess the deviation from that course. This curiosity to rediscover the “course” is a good thing. The human experience is full of good things, and like all good things, achieving or acquiring them requires of us the same weighty virtues of ownership and discipline that Classical Conversations^® highlights for students in the Challenge programs.

Thus, before proceeding to the following list, heed this disclaimer:

If you want a “quick fix” for improving your U.S. Constitutional literacy…. this is NOT the list for you.

The U.S. Constitution

When learning about something, one should always start with the thing itself. It’s interesting that when you finally meet someone that you have heard much about ahead of time, you can’t ever really unhear those things or unknow them.

For better or for worse, you will (at least initially) always see that new person through the lens of what you heard about them. The same is true of ideas and documents. This is one of the reasons why classical educators are so passionate about reading source texts before we turn to functional summaries or commentaries.

Webster’s Dictionary 1828

Inevitably, you will run into words that are outside our modern vernacular. Look them up! And look them up in a dictionary completed in close chronological proximity to the document itself.

While you are at it, pick up a good biography of Noah Webster for a fascinating window into how unique and essential this dictionary was for the formation of American culture.

The Declaration of Independence

After reading the U.S. Constitution thoroughly, you might be disappointed. Let me explain. No one gets through reading the rules of Monopoly and says to themselves, “Wow, that was profoundly inspiring!” Rule books, by nature, are quite dry and boring. The point of the rule book is not the rule book itself, but the rules allow you to play the game! The game of Monopoly is enjoyed by many families for something other than the excitement of the rule book.

The U.S. Constitution is merely the rule book. The Declaration of Independence articulates so beautifully the “why.” These documents are so intertwined that they ought never to be divorced. The U.S. Constitution is the manifestation, the conduit, and the protection of the truth claims spelled out in the Declaration of Independence.

The Articles of Confederation

It is important to remember that the U.S. Constitution was a “do-over.” It was not the first attempt to make manifest the principles of the Declaration of Independence. However, there was enough unfavorable public sentiment surrounding the Articles of Confederation and the perception that they had missed the mark, to tolerate what was called the Second American Revolution.

The new form of government created was literally illegal under the Articles of Confederation.

While this may cause internal conflict for those with warm affection for the rule of law under the U.S. Constitution, it is something worthwhile to wrestle with. It’s important to remember that things haven’t always been the way they are, nor is there any assurance that they will stay this way if the public perception and sentiment wills otherwise.

Notes of Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787

In modern America, there is debate on whether we can know what the Constitutional Convention meant by the words and phrases they used. This question is only tolerated by those ignorant of James Madison’s exhaustive notes on every conversation that transpired.

What was included, what wasn’t included, why did they choose the words they chose; all this and much more give us the conversational context to every element debated. The fewer the debates, the more unanimously certain positions were held by the convention.

Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers

Beyond the internal debate, a national debate transpired as well. The Federalist Papers argued for the U.S. Constitution, while the Anti-Federalists opposed ratification. More important than the sides men took are the ideas they unpacked. Often, these papers hospitably acknowledge the weakness of their positions while confessing the limitations of a free society.

By reading these papers, we can deeply dive into the comparison, circumstance, relationship, and testimony of these ideas.

Discourses Concerning Government—Algernon Sidney

Like people, ideas have family trees and ancestors. While the ideas that shaped the U.S. Constitution are as old as time itself, curious observers have done their part to articulate what previously lived outside of the body of human discovery.

Algernon Sidney was one of those discoverers. His thoughts ultimately cost him his very life when his own unpublished writing was used against him as a second witness to convict him of treason. Sidney’s writings, though written about 100 years before the American Revolution, were so influential that Thomas Jefferson had this to say about them in a letter to Henry Lee:

“But with respect to our rights, and the acts of the British government contravening those rights, there was but one opinion on this side of the water. All American whigs thought alike on these subjects. When forced, therefore, to resort to arms for redress, an appeal to the tribunal of the world was deemed proper for our justification. This was the object of the Declaration of Independence. Not to find out new principles, or new arguments, never before thought of, not merely to say things which had never been said before; but to place before mankind the common sense of the subject, in terms so plain and firm as to command their assent, and to justify ourselves in the independent stand we are compelled to take. Neither aiming at originality of principle or sentiment, nor yet copied from any particular and previous writing, it was intended to be an expression of the American mind, and to give to that expression the proper tone and spirit called for by the occasion. All its authority rests then on the harmonizing sentiments of the day, whether expressed in conversation, in letters, printed essays, or in the elementary books of public right, as Aristotle, Cicero, Locke, Sidney, &c. The historical documents which you mention as in your possession, ought all to be found, and I am persuaded you will find, to be corroborative of the facts and principles advanced in that Declaration.“

Two Treatises of Government and A Letter Concerning Toleration—John Locke

The other modern author named by Jefferson was John Locke. His Two Treatises of Government was published around the same time that Sidney was alive. These two men pioneered ideas such as “just power being derived through the consent of the governed,” which flew in the face of the Divine Rights Theory. So, it is plain to see how the Declaration of Independence did not invent any new ideas. The Declaration merely served as an inventory of collective sentiment shaped by the ideas discovered and shared by brave men who gave their lives for the transcendental ideals enumerated in our Declaration and consequently informed and transformed our form of government, the U.S. Constitution.

The Bible

It cannot go without saying that the U.S. Constitution is not divinely inspired. Only one text can make that claim. So, when looking at anything else in the created order, we must consider the authority of Scripture.

We began this conversation considering “the course” or “how things ought to be.” While the Scriptures may not explicitly say how humans ought to form a good human state, it does teach us about spheres of authority, the principle of justice, the idea of having multiple witnesses, the image-bearing nature of humanity, and other building blocks.

While we may often wish for a cookie-cutter example that we could cut and paste, there is no quick fix for searching out the mysteries of Scripture either. Let us remember Proverbs 25:2 (ESV), “It is the glory of God to conceal things, but the glory of kings is to search things out.”

It is our joy and responsibility to bring everything under the dominion of Christ’s authority: to discover, to name, to identify, to compare, to understand, to inform, to discern. In this discernment of revelation through Scripture and the created order, we, too, can wisely participate in this enduring classical conversation.

Read other articles by Lauren here.

Lauren Gideon is the Director of Public Relations for Classical Conversations. She has been a home educator since her first student was born 18 years ago. She came to Classical Conversations for support when the student count in their home grew beyond what she thought she could navigate on her own. In addition to homeschooling her seven children, she co-leads community classes that unpack our nation’s founding documents and civic responsibility. However, she is happiest at home, preferably outside, with her husband of 18 years, tackling their newest adventure of building a modern homestead.

Tag: Declaration of Independence

Integrating Christian Theology into Politics