The New York Times reports that "Christian Conservatives" in Texas, where I live, are all excited about making sure that schoolchildren are taught that the United States was founded as a "Christian Nation." As I mischievously posted at my Facebook page, no, it wasn't. The American Founders were a bunch of mostly Deist/Masonic/Unitarian traitors who rebelled (in violation of Romans 13 and 1 Peter 2:13-17) against their lawful Christian King and hated the Old Order (Altar & Throne) of Christendom.
It doesn't seem that either side in this debate is interested in including the Loyalist perspective, the neglect of which is one of my historical pet peeves. If American educators were really interested in the full picture, something like James H. Stark's The Loyalists of Massachusetts and the Other Side of the American Revolution (1910) would be required reading.
Unlike my secular liberal friends, as an Anglican I actually like the idea of a "Christian Nation." I just have a rather different concept of it than Americanists do. It's European monarchies before the French Revolution, and to a lesser extent into the 20th century, that were a lot closer to my idea of what a "Christian Nation" would be like.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Living in Germany I didn't know there were so many loyalists who retured to Britain.
As for the Christian Nation concept you may find "The Mystery of Christian Power" by Vladimir Moss interesting:
http://www.orthodoxchristianbooks.com/books/
Moss is an orthodox convert in Britain.
Wrote a corresponding article in german language:
Sind die Vereinigten Staaten eine "christliche Nation"?
Dear Theodore:
I think it is a mistake for monarchists to link support for monarchy to specific religious affiliations. I think it clouds the issue and unnecessarily complicates the discussion. Two of the oldest monarchies in the world, Japan and Thailand, are non-Christian and never have been. If one links Christianity with Monarchy, then how does one include in one's approach such examples?
Best,
Jim
Yes, but in this case I am talking about the 18th century British monarchy, which was Christian, and its colonies. I also support the non-Christian monarchies of non-Christian countries.
I am very interested in the Loyalist side of the debate (as you know) and have tried to write upon it.
I am also trying to teach my children about the Loyalist. Our Lady of Victory's (homeschooling) history selection is 1950ish Americanist rubish. The problem is find good resources. I have not, before now, heard of this book. I shall add it to my wish list.
Thank you, sir, for drawing our attention to this book.
I am sure we can have a lengthy debate on whether America was founded as a Christian nation.
I will just a few things here.
There is certainly a difference between the secular, federal American union and a confessional state, and it is not obvious -- to say the least -- that the latter is a bad thing and belongs in the past, as modernists would have us believe.
However, we must also remember that the American union and the American nation are two related concepts, but they are not the same concept. Of course, by pointing this out to an Americanist, you risk being called theocrat, statist, etc.
The late and great Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn told us that initially 12 of the 13 original states had religious tests for office or other religious connections for the state.
Post a Comment