Founding Faith: Providence, Politics, and the Birth of Religious Freedom in America

• #10 in Best Politics Books

25 Reviews

Sort by: Most Helpful ▲ Date Rating

As someone who, for the last quarter century, has researched and written about religious sensibilities in early America, I'm always astonished at the seemingly endless battle between those who insist that the Founding Fathers were orthodox Christians who founded a Christian nation (e.g., Tim LaHaye's Faith of Our Founding Fathers) and those who just as strenuously insist that the Founding Fathers were all Enlightenment secularists who loathed religion (e.g., Isaac Kramnick's The Godless Constitution). Although I think that there's more truth in the second than the first position, both of them are distortions, attempts to squeeze complex men and a complicated religious ethos into neat, unproblematic boxes.

It's refreshing that Steven Waldman refuses to compartmentalize in this way. His Founding Faith is a finessed treatment of the various influences, religious, military, pragmatic, and political, that coalesced to form the legal and cultural traditions of church-state separation. For Waldman, diminuitive "radically pluralistic" Madison is the real hero of the story who "deserves the greatest thanks" (p. 200). But Waldman reminds readers that Baptists such as Isaac Backus and John Leland were some of the most ardent champions of separation (unlike many of their 20th and 21th century descendants); that Thomas Jefferson, villified both during his own lifetime and afterwards as an atheist, in fact greatly admired what he took to be the ethics of Jesus; and that the first Great Awakening was a potent force in encouraging political revolution and independence. Waldman's point is that simplistic divisions of players into religious or nonreligious camps, as well as simplistically linear lines of causation when mapping the founding of the nation and the crafting of the separation policy, just don't have much explanatory value--even though they may be ideologically appealing.

I don't fully agree with everything that Waldman claims. I think, for example, that the case for the Founding Fathers being more deistic than anything else is stronger than he allows, primarily because I see 18th century deism as more fluid and less defined than he does. I'm also more ambivalent about the political influence of the Great Awakening than he is. But Waldman's treatment is pleasingly written, informative, well-researched and, given the current tiresome but loud cultural wars, remarkably timely. The book's final chapter, "They Were Right," focuses on the contemporary culture war by examining and debunking a series of "liberal," "conservative," and "common" fallacies about the Founding Fathers and religion. The discussions throughout the book of Madison's several-yeared campaign (including the sometimes torturous Constitutional debate) to establish religious liberty are especially good.

All in all, highly recommended.
_______
* Representative Elia Boudinot (New Jersey), in a 1789 debate in the House of Representatives on religious freedom and law. Quoted by Waldman on p. 150

First, here's what I like about Waldman's book.

I find his examination of the religious views of the five founders he focuses on to be among the most realistic and accurate that I've seen. I do have a few quibbles with some minor historical details, but most are not significant enough to affect my favorable opinion of this part of the book, in which Waldman presents, in their entirety, many of the quotes that are butchered by the "Christian nationalists" to create a false perception of these same founders. I also find it refreshing to see "the good, the bad, and the ugly" all embraced in the chapter on the settlement and early days of the colonies.

The parts of the book regarding the role of evangelical Christians in the fight for religious liberty are interesting and well-researched. I do, however, find Waldman's assessment of religion as a motivating factor in the fight for independence to be a bit exaggerated. There is no doubt that this was a significant factor for some, but I think Waldman goes a bit too far with this at times.

Now, here's what I don't like about this book.

My main concern is that it will give the reader who is not already familiar with the misuse of history in the church/state debate the erroneous impression that the historical distortions come equally from both sides. This is simply not the case.

The historical misconceptions and misquotes used by the "secularists" can be counted on one hand, while the literally hundreds of misquotes, distortions, and outright lies used by the "Christian nationalists" fill volumes.

The Christian nationalists have large, well-funded organizations, such as David Barton's Wallbuilders, Stephen McDowell's and Mark Beliles's Providence Foundation, whose primary purpose is spreading a distorted version of American history. They produce curriculums, send speakers across the country, and host radio and television programs. Their historical lies have made it into public schools via the National Council On Bible Curriculum, and even into proposed legislation like the recently introduced H. Res. 888, a resolution for the designation of an "American Religious History Week." The secularists, on the other hand, sometimes, in an article or on a website, copy one of a handful of misquotes or repeat the misconception that most of the founders were deists. There is just no comparison between the two sides in the number or level of distortions, or their intent.

There are actually only two secularist misquotes that have ever appeared with any frequency, and even these are rarely seen today as so many secularist websites have spread the word that they are inaccurate. Waldman writes the following about one of these:

"Those hoping to prove the irreligiousness of the Founders have no trouble finding ammunition from Adams. The liberal magazine The Nation and the website www.deism.org both homed in on this comment from Adams: 'Twenty times in the course of my late reading, have I been upon the point of breaking out, 'This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it.' But in typical culture-war behavior, neither the Nation or deism.org included the rest of the quote, in which Adams explained that the negative sentiment soon passed and was replaced by his realization 'Without religion this world would be something not fit to be mentioned in polite company, I mean Hell.'"

To reinforce what I said above -- that this misquote is rarely seen anymore -- the Nation article cited by Waldman is from 2005, and deism.org no longer exists. Waldman even says in his endnote that this site was accessed in 2006.

Even the origin of this misquote can't be blamed on modern-day secularists. It actually dates to the mid-1800s. Because the first edition of Jefferson's writings was published in 1829, but none of Adams's writings until the 1850s, all anyone had for several decades was Jefferson's reply to Adams's statement. It was Jefferson who first repeated only part of the quote. In his reply, Jefferson put this in quotation marks, obviously quoting Adams, and it soon began appearing in other books. A number of nineteenth century books contain only the partial quote, attributing it to Adams, but citing Jefferson's letter as the source.

As I said above, most of the minor historical inaccuracies in Mr. Waldman's descriptions of the founders religious views are insignificant. There are, however, a few that are significant because they address actions rather than opinions, and tend to perpetuate some of the Christian nationalist myths.

For example, in his chapter on Thomas Jefferson's religious views, Waldman makes the claim that Jefferson "allowed for some government support of religion." He later states: "Initially, he even opposed having theology taught at the University of Virginia." Initially? That implies that Jefferson changed his mind at some point. Jefferson opposed this until the day he died, as did Madison, who took over after him. No theology was taught at the university until the 1840s, after both Jefferson and Madison were dead.

Comparing the post-Constitution government to the Continental Congress, Waldman claims that "the new government abandoned the practice of the Continental Congress of officially referring to the United States as a 'Christian Nation.'" Never once did the Continental Congress refer to the United States as a 'Christian Nation.' There is not a single instance of this phrase anywhere in the Journals of the Continental Congress.

Despite its flaws, I do recommend that people read Waldman's book. But, I also urge those who read it to do some further investigation, particularly regarding the amount of errant history coming from the Christian nationalists as opposed to the secularists. Compare David Barton's Original Intent: The Courts, the Constitution & Religion to...well...my book, Liars For Jesus: The Religious Right's Alternate Version of American History Vol. 1, enough of which is freely available online for such a comparison. Amazon's rules prohibit me from posting a link to my website, but it can be found in my reviewer profile.

This is a very special book. The author has done an utterly superb job of original research and elegant concise representation of the nuances in belief, practice, and circumstances with respect to the matter of religion as confronted by the Founding Fathers, and especially Ben Franklin, John Adams, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison.

We learn early on that freedom of religion was originally designed to apply only at the federal level--only later, when the North pushed through the Fourteenth amendment, did this get grandfathered upon the states.

We learn throughout the book that the original evangelicals wanted separation of the church and state, and made common cause with the rationalists, both groups believing that individual liberty and freedom of personal conscience were the core values.

Midway through the book we are confronted by the author with the reality that the diversity of faiths existent today in the USA render meaningless and unachievable any thought of America being a Christian or even a Protestant nation--pluralism rules.

Religion was appreciated by the Founding Fathers for its generally good impact on civic morals. George Washington especially, in the Continental Army, demanded religious tolerance, authorized chaplains, encouraged officers and men to attend religious services, and generally communicated a sense that the American Revolution was a "holy war" with God standing firmly with the colonies against England and the Church of England.

The author provides concise but no less shocking accounts of the early religious wars in America, with torture and execution and jail being imposed on Quakers and Baptists, Protestants against Jews and Catholics.

We learn that both Jefferson and Franklin doubted divinity but respected Jesus for his moral code.

Adams considered Catholics the "whore of Babylon" and this resonates with more than one modern US evangelical who has endorsed John McCain.

We larn that the Great Awakening and the revivals spawned a general practice of questioning authority.

The author draws a clear connection between political liberty and religious freedom--the two were intertwined from the beginning of the revolutionary impulse.

George Washington was spiritual but not theological.

There are many gifted turns of phrase throughout the book. One that stayed with me: Jefferson saw God not as devine, but as a "brilliant wise reformer offering a benevolent code of morals."

Madison held a dispassionate faith in contrast to the others. He also felt that one should err on the side of separation.

From page 192 the author lists and discuonts four liberal and four conservative falacies. Buy the book.

The conclusion is as elegant as the rest of the book: Separation is the root condition for nurturing the fullest possible religious diversity and vitality.

I put this book down with an intellectual, spiritual, and civic "WOW" in mind. Truly an extraordinary work, a very important work, a lovely piece of scholarship that is meaningful to every American and every immigrant would would be an American citizen.

Other books that are faith-related that I recommend:
God's Politics LP
The Left Hand of God: Taking Back Our Country from the Religious Right
Faith-Based Diplomacy: Trumping Realpolitik
The Complete Conversations with God (Boxed Set)
American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War On America
Tempting Faith: An Inside Story of Political Seduction
Dogs of God: Columbus, the Inquisition, and the Defeat of the Moors

DVDs I recommend:
Gandhi (Widescreen Two-Disc Special Edition)
Bonhoeffer
Tibet - Cry of the Snow Lion

I just heard Steven Waldman on PBS and intend to buy this book as soon as I can get to a store.

What I heard from him today was a refreshing, unvarnished and honest description of our country's beginnings. Both liberals and conservatives should listen carefully to what he has to say......they've both got it wrong.

I agree with the evangelicals of the day, the Baptists, who thought: if we Americans truly want religious freedom, we must leave religion out of the political realm and protect it from both conservative and liberal political interference.

I can't wait to read this book

Highly useful book on the religion of the Founding Fathers, and their intent concerning religious freedom and the separation of church and state. Founding Faith is a fair and balanced book, puncturing liberal and conservative myths about the topic with equal cheer, and more importantly, placing the discussion squarely within the historical context of what the Founders were doing and what it was possible for them to accomplish.

So were the colonies Christian? Yes, of course, and more, predominantly Protestant with considerable anti-Catholic bias. Most colonies did have an established church, mostly Anglican or Congregationalist, yet, after the revivalism of the Great Awakening period in the mid-1700s, the colonies were more religiously diverse than ever. The fear that the British Crown would force all the colonists to be Anglican was a factor in the Revolution.

Some of the factors leading the young nation into religious tolerance were pragmatic. George Washington, for example, was trying to forge a unified fighting force out of a religiously diverse group of soldiers. He had to quell the level of anti-Catholicism because he was trying to persuade the French Catholics in Canada to join in the Revolution.

Were the Founders Deists? No, they weren't, as even Jefferson and Franklin acknowledged the hand of Providence in the affairs of men. But neither were the five Founding Fathers that Waldman profiles orthodox Christians. Franklin flirted with a variety of religions, including Deism (the philosophy that God created the Universe like a watchmaker creates a watch, and then retreated from participation in his creation), but he also was was interested in the Great Awakening and thought the influence of Christianity upon the morals of people was a good one. Adams was more likely than the others to support government involvement in religion, but he moved more towards Unitarianism the older he got and rejected much of orthodox Christianity, thinking that the much that was good in it had been corrupted, but that its founding principles were still the best. Jefferson was similar but more so. Like Adams, he despised the influence of clerics throughout history. He rejected the divinity of Jesus and the miracles, but was so enthralled by the moral teachings of Jesus he twice cut apart Bibles and pasted the parts he thought uncorrupt into new documents and apparently read them often. Washington was the most silent about religion, rarely attended church, yet often used the religious rhetoric of his day. He did, though, speak of religious equality (for Jews specifically) . Most important of all was James Madison, who was the primary writer of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Madison did not leave behind a clear record of his religious views, but from what there is, he seems to have been more orthodox than the others. He was, however, of all of them, the most devoted to the idea of religious toleration. One of the factors that shaped this was his knowledge of the Baptist preachers in Virginia who were often jailed and beaten, and who had to go through lots of hoops to even be able to perform marriages. Madison believed that religious support for one church over others was BAD FOR RELIGION, as well as the state, that it oppressed some religions while making the dominant one lazy. He also thought it a weak faith than needed government support, as well as believing it was bad to force anyone to profess and be taxed to support a religion in which they did not believe. The original language of what is now the First Amendment refers to the "rights of conscience", an even broader formulation than what is in the current amendment.

One of the important historical points that Waldman made is that Madison was a politician, who had to be able to get the votes of other Congressmen to get the Bill of Rights passed. Madison did not get everything he wanted, and what was passed enabled those who wanted some religion in politics to interpret the result their way, as well as those who wanted a strict separation to interpret it their way. Most importantly, Madison did not get a law that applied the Bill of Rights to the states. This meant, for example, that states were perfectly free to establish churches, which most did, though they gradually disappeared during the first half of the nineteenth century. It wasn't until the 14th Amendment was passed after the Civil War that the Bill of Rights did apply to the states.

Waldman's most important point, perhaps, is that many religious people did then and do now support religious toleration. "He [Madison] and his Baptist allies would be mystified by the assumption that being pro-separation means being anti-God." (p. 201). It seems no coincidence that the United Sates is one of the most religiously free, religiously diverse, and religiously flourishing nations on earth.

I approach this book from a rather different point of view than some other reviewers. I'm a Christian apologist. My most recent book, The Truth Behind the New Atheism, attempted to refute Richard Dawkins and allies. One of the chapters of that book, "What About the American Taliban?" tackled the allegation that conservative Christians are a threat to democracy. Despite Chris Rodda's claim below that "historical misconceptions and misquotes used by the 'secularists' can be counted on one hand," counting dubious claims by that great scholar of American history, Richard Dawkins, alone might wear out the toes on a centipede. And an ACLU poster glibly suggests that the Constitution built a "wall of separation" between church and state -- which as Waldmon shows, is at least an exageration, if not a fantasy.

On the other hand, I'm also leery of books like "Sea to Shining Sea," and the gross exagerations Christians are also sometimes guilty of.

Steven Waldman does a good job of going beyond propaganda for either side. While honest and pretty balanced, he is also passionate, engaged, and not afraid to write well, or to add interesting asides. He concentrates on five figures: Washington, Franklin, Jefferson, Adams, and Madison, and tells their stories fairly. He weaves these stories in with a general history of how the new American idea of church and state evolved. He doesn't try to pin a halo on anyone's head, but he clearly respects these men, and explains why he thinks their solution was best. The book is to the point, pithy, and readable -- I zipped through it in two or three days.

The question that often came to mind, while reading, was "Why didn't Christians get this earlier?" Sociologist of religion Rodney Stark makes a strong case for a market view of religious organizations -- any "church," whatever it's ideology, will oppress, just as Ma Bell will give bad service, given a monopoly. Jesus seemed to understand that from the get-go. And some Christians -- Francis Bacon, John Locke, Edmund Burke -- figured it out again, over time. But as Waldman shows, sometimes we Christians have to learn the implications of our own faith from those who, like Franklin, Adams, Madison, and Jefferson, have in some sense already left the faith, or like Gandhi, who never claimed it. Sometimes we have to be hit over the head with oppression to see what is in front of our eyes.

[...]But after reading the book, I'm inclined to agree with the principals that Providence was working through its chosen instruments over the course of the American revolution. I'm also inclined towards a stricter view of separation, not on legal grounds -- as Waldon shows, those are fairly muddled -- but because to paraphrase Madison, with friends like Big Government, who needs enemies?

An important part of the truth.

"Founding Faith" makes an excellent contribution to our understanding of the origins and development of religious liberty in the United States. Nevertheless, I believe that Mr. Waldman places too much emphasis on the views and writings of just a handful of individuals, especially James Madison. His affection for Madison is palpable, but the truth of the matter is--a reality that Waldman grudgingly concedes--that Madison had to compromise his principles in order to secure adoption of what, for him, was a watered-down First Amendment.

Waldman also exaggerates the extent to which the views of Jefferson and Madison regarding the separation of church and state subsequently prevailed in this country. He applauds President Madison for abandoning his predecessors' practice of periodically calling for a national day of prayer and fasting, suggesting that Madison had seen the wisdom of not using his high office to encourage religious practices. But Mr. Waldman fails to note that Abraham Lincoln on no fewer than three occasions called for national days of fasting, humiliation and prayer. Lincoln, like Washington, believed that the country could not survive the current crisis without divine assistance and a willingness on the part of the citizenry to acknowledge and correct their misdeeds. No one at the time suggested that Lincoln had inappropriately breached the "wall" separating church from state, nor should they today.

In addition, Waldman, in his final chapter openly acknowledges the extent to which government and religion overlap and offer each other mutual support. Government pays for chaplains in the military, references God on its currency, and commences its legislative sessions with a word of prayer (though, given Congress' recent performance, I'm not sure the Almighty has been listening). The federal treasury also provides tremendous financial subsidies to churches: they don't pay taxes and all tithes and donations are fully deductible by church members--deductions that reduce the tax revenue the government ultimately receives. Although such an arrangement unquestionably constitutes government support of religion, it is one that redounds to the benefit of both parties. Because of these tax breaks, the Catholic Relief Services has the resources it needs to provide services to needy individuals who would otherwise be seeking assistance from the government. And just ask the folks in New Orleans who did a better job of providing emergency aid after Hurricane Katrina: FEMA or the tax-exempt Mormon Church?

Yes, as Mr. Waldman notes, we should not be wasting our time over matters such as prayers in public schools, but, by the same token, we should not deny that the "wall" that separates church and state has a lot of doors in it--doors that swing both ways to the benefit of all.

The antagonists in today's culture wars, conservatives and liberals, appeal to the faith (or alleged lack of such) of our Founding Fathers. The conflict rages around the relationship of government and faith-based organizations: Is the wall of separation between church and state a reality or a myth?

Asserting that both sides in this debate distort history--one by a heavy ideological agenda, the other by romantic wishful thinking--Waldman clarifies what is accurate and fallacious in the arguments of each.

The book concentrates on five leaders, whose words and deeds are pivotal in the battle to redefine the relationship between religion and government: Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison.

Waldman's hero is James Madison, who crafted the most holistic and enduring approach, one that viewed separation of church and state primarily as a benefit to religion. Church and state, when married, Madison believed, bring out the worst in each other.

"Madison had it right," says Waldman. He concludes that the "founding faith" of America was neither Christian nor secular; it was religious liberty--a revolutionary formula for promoting faith by leaving it alone.

Founding Faith sets the record straight, revealing the real history of religious freedom to be dramatic, unexpected, paradoxical, and inspiring.

Steven Waldman is co-founder, CEO, and editor in chief of Beliefnet.com, the largest faith and spirituality Web site. Previously, Waldman was the national editor of U.S. News & World Report and a national correspondent for Newsweek. His writings have also appeared in The Atlantic, The Washington Post, The New York Times, Slate, The Washington Monthly, National Review, and elsewhere. He appears frequently on television and radio to discuss religion and politics. He is also the author of The Bill, a book about the creation of AmeriCorps. Waldman lives in New York with his wife, the writer Amy Cunningham, and their children, Joseph and Gordon.

[...]

Mr. Waldman has written a very thorough and very readable book about religion in the era of the Revolutionary War as well as the role of religion in the creation of the constitution and the First Amendment. Mr. Waldman has not only written an account of the trends in the period of the constitution but describes the religious beliefs of the most important figures of the period, namely John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Goerge Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison. Mr. Waldman demonstrates how these men were religious and believed in the role and utility of religion in society but were not dogmatic. Instead these men often used reason and conscience to refine and modify religious dogma. Mr. Waldman also describes how evangelicals as well as religious skeptics helped formulate the First Amendment to protect religion as well as skepticism from any government sponsored or established church.

It must be noted that Mr. Waldman's book is extremely well referenced with both extensive footnotes and references. Mr. Waldman has obviously done original and stirling work in the research for this book. And Mr. Waldman does his best to be objective, to present the evidence regardless of its effect on the present day religious debate. Needless to say this book is invaluable.

Will this book end present day religious disputes? No. But this book will provide a factual and objective basis to uderlay the debate.

Mr. Waldman has demonstrated he is able to be much more than a weenie of the uberstatist Charles Peters.

Give this book a read.

A first-rate work of historical scholarship. Based on a close reading of original texts, Waldman neatly corrects the distortions wrought by partisans on the issue of separation of church and state in America. Those on the right will, if they are honest, be chastened for their belief that Christianity is somehow embedded in our federal government (it is not), while those on the left will be surprised to learn that the Founders were as much concerned to PROMOTE Christianity through separation of church and state as they were to ensure man's freedom not to participate in religion at all. Particularly illuminating to this reader was Waldman's point that the 1789 Founders did not view the Constitution as precluding establishment of particular religions by the STATES -- and that it was not until the protections of the First Amendment were deemed "incorporated" into the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of due process to citizens of the several states that this policy was proscribed. This is a must read for anyone who, like me, believes in the strict separation of church and state, for, merely by laying out the facts in an even-handed and objective way, Waldman establishes the central point: honest people can disagree how much the Founders wanted Christianity to flourish in our society; they cannot disagree that neither Christianity nor any other religion forms any part of our CONSTITUTIONAL order.

"Founding Faith" is a tongue in cheek offering of a balanced view of Christianity vs secularization of American history. If one accepts the author's reasonable premise that a wall was placed between religion and the federal government, one must yet account for the isolation of religion from the marketplace of ideas by intrusion of this wall between local governments and religion.
During The Sixties, federal monies starting coming into the education system dictating content that caused test scores and morality to plummet.
Unfortunately, this is pop history reacting to and fitting in well with current viewpoints. No positive contribution has been made here.

Christ founded America's ideology beginning not only with the culmination of a constitution, but with those seeking to follow god's instead of man's dictates. Just because it took a while to work out the kinks in the systems inherited from thousands of years of error doesnt' mean that the system of liberty of conscience we take for granted didn't come at real cost and dedication, and that Christianity doesn't deserve credit for sponsoring the only system that developed strength and liberty.

A couple things make this book exceptional. The first thing the reader will soon notice is Waldman's even handed portrayal of Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Henry, Franklin, et al. He is, however, no apologist, nor should he be. Yet, the reasons for the "grand infidel" Jefferson's insistence on isolating Congress from decisions over states' sovereignty with regard to religion deserves--demands--that we understand his motives.

By the way, I live not far from the Massachusetts town of Cheshire, and John Leland's First Baptist Church, the one mentioned in the opening paragraph, where in 1802 local farmers presented Jefferson with a 1,235 pound cheese, emblazoned with "REBELLION TO TYRANTS IS OBEDIENCE TO GOD." Coincidentally, I attended my friend's memorial service inside that very same Cheshire First Baptist Church only two weeks ago, and mentioned this book to its present pastor.

Leland, by the way, was considered a "theological forefather" of Jerry Falwell, yet the two couldn't have been more different on the position of separation of religion and government.

"Guard against those men who make a great noise about religion in choosing representatives," Leland wrote.

The alliance of the devoutly religious with Jefferson is a remarkable testimonial to the First Amendment's protection over religious freedoms, and the gift cheese is emblematic of everything hoped for in a new nation's constitution.

The second interesting thing is the research is a hybrid of primary, later, and internet sources. If you don't read the extensive notes pages, you'll be missing out on about one-sixth the content. It's probably starting to become de rigeur, but still interesting that Waldman will list complete web page URLs as his sources. Of course, Waldman is something of his own internet source, being a founder of belief.net.

The major hero of the story is James Madison, who began his adult life as a Congregationalist in New Jersey, but whose eyes were opened when he observed Philadelphia's laissez faire. There he had an epiphany, that government should in no wise stand on any issue even remotely religious, even deciding on such seemingly innocuous matters as Sunday postal closings or Thanksgiving fasts.

Waldman eventually deconstructs contemporary myths that have grown up about our Founding Fathers' "intent," and explores the burning question of our time, whether the U.S. was really established to be a "Christian nation." He even makes an attempt at divining their psyche with respect to modern attributions on these important issues.

One of the pleasant surprises to me was learning how incredibly tolerant and non-partisan George Washington was about religious plurality.

I checked the book out from my local library, but I wouldn't mind owning a personal copy for future reference. I suggest combining this with Susan Jacoby's "Freethinkers"

Founding Faith is a very timely book. Many people on the far left and far right like to use words from some of our founding fathers as evidence that their philosophies are justified. Waldman is very balanced throughout this book. He shows how both sides get it wrong and where they get part of it right. In this book the central topic is as the title makes clear the role of religion in the founding of our nation. Key individuals discussed in some depth include George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and James Madison "the father of the Constitution".

This period in American history, like other major periods including the Civil War, has seen a real proliferation of titles for the public's consumption, indicating a high interest and a real market (profit interest is always a factor) in the public's yearning to know more about our roots as a nation. The First Amendment rights, which include freedom of religion, are rights deeply ingrained in most Americans, but do we really know the background behind it. This is Waldman's focus.

Waldman looks at the earliest settlers and the role religion played, which was a significant one. Many were seeking religious liberty from the incidents of oppression experienced in Great Britain. But along with this search for religious freedom came some not so pleasant attitudes, such as anti-Catholicism, persecution of "witches" and others who held "deviant" beliefs. The Great Awakening and the impact of preachers like George Whitefield and others are all discussed in the course of the early years of the United States. Of course what will probably interest most readers are the views held by the "big figures" of the Revolutionary War period and the early years of the republic. What did Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Franklin, Madison, and others think about faith? Were the founders Deists? Did they really want a wall of separation between church and state? Were they pluralists or were they tolerant of the Christian faith only? These are the types of questions that will be asked and at least partially answered.

As Waldman writes, Washington's experience as commander of the Continental Army and its diverse group of men had a major impact on his attitude towards the diversities of faith. Jefferson's enlightenment views and his views of the clergy had a lasting impact on his religious attitudes. Madison's experiences in a Christian associated university and the plight of minority Christian denominations in his home region of Virginia were factors in shaping his views. In essence, the backgrounds of each founder had lasting impact. But in addition, these views could evolve or become more simplified as time passed for these leaders.

Many other figures make appearances here including other prominent politicians, preachers, and etc. who played a role in the debates surrounding religious liberty. There were established churches in many of the colonies before and after the famous First Amendment was ratified. The debate over a national establishment of a particular faith was what most interested the founders, though some did see a problem at the state level. Madison is the man who most comes across as the one who wanted to ensure through the law that government and religion should be protected from each other, but as Madison believed, according to the author, for the betterment of religion. Why did religion need the support of government when faith and belief in God should be enough? This is the type of reasoning the author makes in discerning the views held by those who argued for separation of church and state.

This is an endlessly fascinating study and could lead to further analysis of each of these major founders and how they were influenced by faith, but I'm cutting it short. I found it an enjoyable read and one that will hopefully lead people to be more open to interpreting what was said and done by our nation's earliest leaders.

Steven Waldman has provided a great service to the modern debate about freedom of religion and the separation of church and state. In a clear, tight style, he lays out the historical facts, paints accurate pictures of our founding fathers' faith, and makes his points relevant to 21st century America. His arguments and presentation would make James Madison, the rightful hero of his book, proud.

Our book club at church selected "Founding Faith" because of its timeliness today. The author goes into detail about the influential men, most notably George Washington, James Madison, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, and Thomas Jefferson, who contributed to the shaping of the First Amendment. The book first tells of what led up to the decision that this amendment was necessary, with stories about Massachusetts and Connecticut and their "one" religion and about Virginia and Rhode Island, who were more tolerant, as well as many other states' approaches. Waldman pointed out that the states were not yet "united."

The author outlines the personal religions of many of the Founding Fathers, so the reader can understand why these men reacted as they did traveling the rocky political road to the finished amendment. Amazing to the book group studying and discussing this selection was that political shenanigans did not start with the 20th or 21st century. We concluded that this is a valuable book for all to read.

This is a fascinating and delightful historical discussion of what has become an extremely timely subject, the separation of church and state as viewed by the Founding Fathers. I believe anyone who is interested in this topic will be greatly enlightened by Waldman's excellent study. It is thoroughly documented, well organized and terrifically readable.

There are few questions that can get legal scholars, jurists, and ideologues as excited as the question of what the attitude of the American founders towards religion was. For the last fifty-or-so years, the issue has had no shortage of opinions written on the issue. Some feel that the founders advocated for complete seperation between religion and government. Others believe that the founders only wished to prevent establishing a national religion; anything short of that would have been acceptable.

This book (along with several others, like American Gospel) take the middle view. Profiling the seperate views of Franklin, Washington, Adams, Jerfferson, and Madison, Waldman an attempt to show that the founders themselves may have been of a divided mind on the question of how much religion and state should intermingle. The conclusion the author comes to: (a) the founders were as confused on the subject as we are, and had as many different opinions; (b) myths abound on both sides of the current church/state debates.

Waldman debunks two myths simulteneously myths. The founders were neither deists as the "left" supposes, or Christians of the variety that the "right" commonly supposes. While most of the founders were Christians, most were quite liberal by any conservative Christian standard. (Of Washington, Waldman notes that he was the type of Christian who would have gone to church "unless there was a good football game on." Of Jefferson, Waldman notes that he was a Christian only in the sense that he believed Christ to be a good moral philosopher.) While all the founders seemed to believe in a God active in the world (ruling out deism), most (excepting Adams) took the bible as highly metaphorical, rarely referred to Jesus Christ in writings, and made disparaging comments in private letters to do with organized religion.

Waldman's book is well-researched, very readable, and hard to argue with. He takes us from the early days of the colonies (where all but two states had strong political support for religion), through the Revolution and Constitutional Convention (where discussion of religion was always brief), all the way through Madison's death. The drafing of the first amendment is focused on quite heavily, and Waldman does a good job in showing how our Bill of Rights was more an act of political compromise than ideeological zest. (The first amendment went through multiple drafts, the final of which is the one using the vaguest, and thus most politically expedient, language.)

In the end, Waldman concludes that hoping for any "original intent" of our Founders on religion is hopeless. Like Jack Rakove's book "Original Meanings," Waldman reminds us through astute historical analysis that not only were their too many heads to have any single intent, but that even the founders (namely Franklin and Adams) had quite evolving and not always consistent internal views. They are not Gods whose views were fully formed, but humans whose views were nuanced and evolving.

A very good read for those who want a well-researched and -argued book on the Founding Faiths.

Finally a book that uses historical facts, instead of subjective opinions.
FANTASTIC FANTASTIC FANTASTIC!!!!!!!
A must read...

Founding Faith is a very good, even-handed review of the attitudes and the possible intentions of the founding fathers, especially as it pertains to the contentious issue of separation of church and state.

While I would love to hear that the fathers intended this to be a strongly "christian nation" and others might wish to hear that they intended it to be a strictly "secular nation" the author makes the compelling case that neither extreme is the case. In listening to this book I got the impression that I was getting the whole story, rather than one side or the other.

I pulled the following points from the book:

1. The founding fathers did not all agree on the issue of separation.
2. While most of the fathers were very spiritual, not all would fit the classifications of "conservative" or "evangelical".
3. The 1st Ammendment was designed as much to protect "religion from the state" as to protect the "state from religion".
4. The biggest problem both in England and in the colonies was between christian denominations (Congregationalists against Quakers, Presbyterians against Baptists, etc) rather than religious versus atheist. The official denomination of the colony would collect taxes and make the laws specific to their creeds, to the detriment of the members of other denominations.
5. The fathers wrestled and compromised over the wording of the first ammendment but surely never envisioned the lengths to which their words would have been applied in 20th and 21st century America.

The book is interesting and full of quotes and insights into the lives of the various fathers. At times it gets a bit laborous but the author ties the pieces together nicely in the later chapters (CD 7) and brings it home. This is probably a book to read several times in order to fully understand all of the details.

"Is an Ecclesiastical Establishment absolutely necessary to support civil society in a supreme Government?" So James Madison asked a Pennsylvanian friend in 1773 before making a huge contribution to the writing of the American Constitution.

"... at the time of ratification, few states had religious liberty of the sort that Madison wanted. All but two states had religious tests banning Jews, Unitarians, and agnostics from public office. Taxpayers supported the churches and ministers in MA, NH, CT, NJ, GA, NC, and SC. In some states, only Trinitarian Protestants could vote or testify in trials. It was considered blasphemy, and therefore illegal in some states, to criticize, reproach, or deny Christianity, the Trinity, Jesus Christ, or the Bible. Nontheists were restricted from owning property or giving money to certain charities; schools required religious services; and people were regularly prosecuted for not observing the Sabbath. All THAT, THE US CONSTITUTION LET STAND." (emphasis added)

"The First Amendment was a grand declaration that the federal government couldn't support or regulate religion---but it was also a grand declaration that states absolutely could." "That was part of the compromise that enabled the First Amendment to gain widespread support." p156

Then why, as some are prone to argue, wasn't God mentioned in the US Constitution? Or why didn't the founders give pride of place to religion therein?

"The new England colonies---MA, CT, NH---were dominated by Puritans and their Congregational churches. They disliked the Anglicans. VA, NC, SC, and GA were at one point or another dominated by the Church of England. They disliked Puritans." RI was more tolerant. PA gave protection to Quakers and other minorities. Thanks to the trading issue the Dutch embraced religious tolerance earlier than other countries. So New Amsterdam, before becoming NY, shared a bit of this inclination. Maryland was settled explicitly as a refuge for Catholics, through a land grant by Charles l to Catholic convert George Calvert, aka Lord Baltimore, in 1632. By 1681 Protestants outnumbered Catholics in MD 30 to 1. The Church of England was established soon after. By 1700 the colony prevented Catholics from inheriting or purchasing land; by 1704 catholic worship was prohibited; by 1716 public office holders were required to swear allegiance to the Church of England. And by 1718 Catholics were denied even the right to vote unless they did likewise."

Thus, one could easily argue, as James Madison himself did, that "The absence of God from the Constitution was pro-religion."

"Much of the population had been raised to believe that to ensure a religion's health, the state must support it. The Constitution demanded a paradigm shift, away from public responsibility and toward private." As George Washington said: "The path of true piety is so plain as to require but little political direction." To boot, "on the very day the House of Representatives passed the Bill of Rights, it approved a resolution for a `day of public thanksgiving and prayer to be observed...[for] the many signal favors of Almighty God.'" "It would not be until after the passage of the 14th Amendment in 1868 that states would fall under the restrictions of the US Constitution's Bill of Rights."

"The New World was settled to promote Christianity. For more than 150 years, colonial governments actively supported the dominant faith. Less acknowledged today is a point well understood by the Founding Fathers: Nearly all of these experiments in state encouragement of religion failed." p.3 Moreover, in the American colonies "Before 1690, 90% of churches were affiliated with dominant sects---Congregationalism or Anglicism. By 1770, only 35% were." "By the time of the Revolution, religious minorities were in the majority." This evolution, in turn, led to "the revolutionary view that political and religious freedom were intertwined." And the fact that Great Britain had a state church made it an almost effortless leap for many colonists to carryover their hostility to Britain's state church and Anglicanism into hostility for Great Britain itself. That is the author's view herein. That the 1726-60 Great Awakening in American colonies heavily influenced colonists towards being inclined, whence given some cause, to consider breaking with Great Britain. The author could just as easily called this book "The Godly Roots of Rebellion." The "break from Britain had many causes, but desire for religious freedom was one of them. In the South, the Church of England was the official religion, even though the majority of the population by that point was not Anglican. The oppressiveness of the Church seemed part and parcel of the royal tyranny." p195. Hence the revolutionary troops banner called by Pennsylvania's troops: "Resistance to Tyrants is Obedience to God." This message was also proposed (by Franklin) as part of the American national seal. p.107

The US Constitutional/Presidential oath: I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

It wasn't put in the Constitution, it wasn't official in other words, but for Washington (not to mention other Founding Fathers) it apparently was not a stretch to add a coda to the above oath: "So help me God." As George Washington said, America was great first because of "cheapness of land" which allowed many to own property ...and secondly because of "civil and religious" liberty; civil and religious liberty being not at odds with each other, but being intrinsically connected. Cheers

PS: This book provides great internet links for the papers of Washington, Adams, Jefferson and many other archived historical resources. Consult the author's website for the details: Belief net . com

If you enjoy discussing history, politics and religion, you will be fascinated by this fact-based review of what the founding fathers thought and believed as they designed this country's principles of religious freedom. Well researched and documented, it moves beyond the rhetoric often heard from today's advocates for one interpretation versus another regarding the separation of church and state. Instead of the partial picture each camp utilizes to promote its argument, Steven Waldman lays out the history of governments and religion that preceded the constitution, the various positions held by the founders that came together to agree on the fundamental principles of this country, and how the early precedents were set. This is a well written and entertaining insight into our way of life.

The evolution of religious freedom in America has been of interest to me for years. Waldman's book is balanced, insightful, and well documented. His explanation of the Founding Fathers' views of religion provides human interest. It seems there was less religious freedom in early America than we might imagine; what we have today is the result of compromise. Waldman also brings in elements of today's debate over religious freedom, although the focus remains on the historical context.

This is truly an excellent book. It's really the first non-hysterical treatment of church-state separation I've ever read. Written in a very readable style, the book is easily accessible to a high school student or even a bright middle-schooler, yet the wealth of footnotes and references, and the extensive bibliography, provide ample starting places for those interested in digging deeper.

Moreover, as a Christian, I found this a very encouraging book. If you've already made up your mind on either side of the debate, the book will probably just irritate you. But if you're concerned and trying to make sense of the discussion, this book is great. It made clear, for starts, that the culture wars we have now on the separation of church and state started with the founding of the country (and actually before). "Founding Fathers" on both sides of the issue had well-thought-out reasons for their positions, which the author articulates. Most interesting of all, perhaps, is that much of the drive for church-state separation came from Christians who felt that the interaction of government and religion harmed faith, which, after some discussion, turns out to be a compelling view.

In short, I found the book quite valuable, and will keep it instead of donating it to the public library where most of my purchased books go. I wish that I could make those I know on both sides of the issue read this thing.

Fabulous book, especially if you are into American History with a little religion thrown in. Great.

Current conservative thinking depicts the founders of the United States as staunch Christians, therefore we need religion in our daily discourse. This book uses copious footnotes to refute this belief. It is also a fast and entertaining read. Highly recommended for anyone who needs ammunition to counter conservatives' arguments to make the US a Christian-based and -run nation.