Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
For those who still claim, absurdly, that the Constitution intended to establish a Christian Nation, I submit the words of James Madison, commonly called the Father of the Constitution. These words were written in his Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments, a document he composed and distributed to his fellow members of the Virginia Assembly in 1785 to encourage them to vote against a bill submitted by Patrick Henry that would have levied a tax on citizens of that state for the support of religious teachers and to vote instead for the Act for Establishing Religious Freedom, a bill that Thomas Jefferson had written and failed to get passed when he was a member of that body 6 years earlier (at the time Madison resubmitted that bill, Jefferson was in France as our ambassador).
It is important to keep in mind a couple of things about Patrick Henry's bill in order to understand Madison's words. The first is that Henry's bill did not establish any particular denomination. Prior to that time, the Anglican church was the official, established church of Virginia, but this bill would have allowed each household to send their tax levy to the denomination of their choice. So Madison was not arguing only against the establishment of a particular sect or denomination, but against the establishment of Christianity in general.
Contrary to those who argue that the founders only intended to prevent the establishment of a particular sect but wanted Christianity in general to be the official religion, Madison argued that those two situations were identical and that both would be a violation of the natural right of citizens not to have their government endorse a religion they do not share:
Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other Religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other Sects? that the same authority which can force a citizen to contribute three pence only of his property for the support of any one establishment, may force him to conform to any other establishment in all cases whatsoever?
For Madison, the establishment of Christianity and the establishment of a particular sect of Christianity were indistinguishable, both in opposition to the principles of religious freedom.
The second thing to remember is that Henry's bill was non-coercive. It did not force anyone to believe in any religion, nor did it force anyone to worship in or belong to a church whose beliefs they did not share, yet Madison is fiercely opposed to it nonetheless. This clearly mitigates against the argument that the founders only intended to prevent coercive measures that forced people to worship in particular ways.
The most important argument that Madison makes against the establishment of a Christian Nation is this: we have innumerable examples of Christian Nations in European history and the results were horrific. He writes:
During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity, in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution...What influence in fact have ecclesiastical establishments had on Civil Society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the Civil authority; in many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny: in no instance have they been seen the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wished to subvert the public liberty, may have found an established Clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just Government instituted to secure & perpetuate it needs them not.
This is an extremely powerful argument that clearly also defeats the notion that support of liberty is a Christian principles. We have had 1500 years of Christian governments, Madison says, and not one of them has had anything like freedom of conscience for the individual. Madison knew what the Christian Nation advocates refuse to admit, that there is absolutely no support to be found anywhere in the Bible for a free society, nor was there any support to be found in Christian theology prior to the Enlightenment.
Comments
Madison also remarked that one of the factors lending support to the Religious Bill of Virginia was that "it was espoused by some members who were particularly distinguished by their reputed piety and Christian zeal." It was not part of a War Against Christianity conducted by activist judges and evil evolutionists. He also noted Henry's bill was opposed by members of various Christian denominations
Posted by: mark | October 8, 2007 10:14 AM
I love it when you write posts like this, Ed. The way you take a ridiculous argument, look at it from numerous angles and then thoroughly eviscerate it never fails to stimulate me to keep looking at things thoughtfully and rationally. Thanks for the regular doses of inspiration!
Posted by: Satcomguy | October 9, 2007 9:36 AM
I think you mean "militates", not "mitigates".
Other than that, very good post.
Posted by: Wes | October 10, 2007 8:47 AM
The argument from the right wing, at least as it has been presented to me so far, is based on the "intent of the founders" meaning, of course, that the founders intended this to be a Christian nation. When asked what Christian priniciples are embedded in the Constitution, they have no answer but the next retort is usually the "intention" retort. It seems that, as far as Patrick Henry goes, they are correct. How many "founders" had that intent? Any?
Posted by: Oldfart | October 12, 2007 2:27 PM