Our American Legacy, Part III

Yesterday, I introduced at the very end of my blog another group like the Puritans that infiltrated America around 1650, slightly after the Puritans – the German Pietists known as Pietism. This was a renewal movement in German-Lutheran churches led by Jacob Spener.

Pietism had become an ordthodox religion and had lost “Its heart religion” (the love for God has declined). God used Jacob Spener mighly. It was said of Spener, “His words were like thunder, because his life was like lightning.” A preacher named John Wesley came out of Pietism. He called for “churches within churches.” They were small groups within the church to encourage devotion and discipleship.

From 1703 thru 1758, the First Great Awakening in America occurred led by Jonathan Edwards, George Whitfield, and others. Whitfield alone was called the most single influential person in America before the Revolution. He is believed to have preached 18,000 times to possibly 100 million people throughout Europe and the New World. It was said that his meetings were full of “great conviction.” The conviction was so great that he could say “Mespotamia” and people would begin to shed tears. His meetings were known for bold responses, people fainting, and great wailing in prayer.

The Puritan and Pietist movements helped form the foundation for the vast Christian influence upon the founding of America that shaped its government, commerce, morals and values, families, and how individuals viewed and interacted with Almighty God. This was not just some short-lived revival or effect upon a mass group of people. Listen to what the Supreme Court said about Christianity’s influence upon the USA in the last part of the 19th century:

For decades, members of the U.S. Supreme Court openly embraced our nations Biblical foundations. In an 1892 decision, the Court stated, “Our laws and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise; and in this sense and to this extent our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian. This is a religious people. This is historically true. . . . This is a Christian nation”(Church of the Holy Trinity v. United States, 1892).

President Calvin Coolidge acknowledged, “The foundations of our society and our government rest so much on the teachings of the Bible that it would be difficult to support them if faith in these teachings would cease to be practically universal in our country.” Coolidge understood that if the foundations are destroyed, our nation won’t just cease to be moral, it could very well cease being a nation at all.

The two quotes above came from the Supreme Court and a former U.S. president who recognized that the framers of the Constitution believed that religious freedom was supremely important. Any true study of colonial history shows that the primary reason English settlers came to America was for freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.

The assurance of religious liberty was the very intent of the two separation clauses placed back to back in the First Amendment of the Constitution known as the “Establishment Clause” and the “Free Exercise Clause.” The Establishment Clause states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. . . .” The “Free Exercise Clause” reads, “…or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
America’s forefathers adopted the separation clauses for the clear purpose of promoting religious freedoms. Most Americans today have been indoctrinated with the idea that the First Amendment contains language requiring a wall of separation between church and state, when, in reality, such language cannot be found anywhere in the Constitution, Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights or the Federalist Papers. The language of a wall of separation between church and state was taken from a letter penned by Thomas Jefferson several years after the Constitution was written. Sadly, Jefferson’s phrase has been distorted and taken out of context by those advocating a rigid separation between church and state.