Most Popular Posts of the Last Week

Here are the most popular posts of the last week at The Way of Improvement Leads Home:

  1.  Historian Heather Cox Richardson on Trump’s Muslim Ban: “It’s a Shock Event.”
  2.  Yet Another Reason Why Evangelicals Should Be Wary of David Barton’s Pseudohistory
  3.  Where Does Judge Neil Gorsuch Go To Church?
  4.  Did Giuliani Say That Trump’s Executive Order on Refugees Was Meant to be Ban on Muslim Immigration?
  5.  When “Principled Constitutionalists” Put Politics Over the Constitution
  6.  Jerry Falwell Jr. Will Head a Trump Task Force on Higher Education
  7.  Thomas Jefferson Remembers the Debate Surrounding His Statute of Religious Freedom
  8.  The Mind of the Evangelical Trump Voter
  9.  Trump Delivered for Evangelicals
  10.  Donald Trump at the National Prayer Breakfast

Christian Nationalism is Still Going Strong in the United States

A recent Pew Research Center survey found that nearly one-third of Americans “believe it is very important to be Christian to be considered truly American.”  It is also interesting that 54% of Greeks and 34% of Poles believe this.

pew-religion-identity

It should not surprise us that most of the people who believe Christianity is essential to American national identity are white evangelicals.

Is a possible third edition in order?

Christian NAtion

#DouglassforTrump

Here is what Donald Trump said yesterday, the first day of Black History Month, about Frederick Douglass:

Later in the day, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said this about Trump’s comments on Douglass:

So it looks like the POTUS is a big fan of Frederick Douglass.  If this is the case, perhaps Trump might appreciate learning more about Douglass’s views.

So I went on Twitter and started the #DouglassforTrump hashtag.  Feel free to head over there and add your favorite Douglass quote.  I know the hashtag is a bit long, but please try to tack it on to your tweet so that others can easily find your quote.

We at The Way of Improvement Leads Home are encouraged that Trump wants to give Douglass the publicity he deserves.  So let’s help his speechwriters get up to speed with some of Douglass’s actual words.

Donald Trump at the National Prayer Breakfast

Watch it here:

At the 11:25 mark he thanks Senate Chaplain Barry Black and says “I am appointing you for another year, what the hell.”

12:32: Trump starts talking about how bad “The Apprentice” is now that Arnold Schwarzenegger is hosting.  He asks to pray for Arnold and the show’s ratings.

14:21:  He he thanks the American people for their “words of worship” for him.

16:00:  Asks for prayer for the military.  Good.  Although as he keeps going he seems to connect religion with American ideals.  Of course the Founding Fathers did this all the time.

17:17: “American is a nation of believers.  In towns all across our land it’s plain to see what we easily forget…the quality of our lives is not defined by our material success, but by our spiritual success.”  Amen.  I just wonder if Trump really believes what he is saying here.

19:45:  Trump quotes Jefferson on religious liberty and then rips into the Johnson Amendment.

20:41: Trump says religious liberty is under threat in the world and the nation.  “The world is in trouble and we are going to straighten it out.”  Interesting statement in light of his recent Muslim ban.

22:00: Trump couches his fight against terrorism in the language of religious freedom.

24:00: Trump now lays out his plan for immigration restriction and couches it in religious liberty.

28:00:  Trump praising the decision to add “under God” to the Pledge of Allegiance.

Yet Another Reason Why Evangelicals Should Be Wary of David Barton’s Pseudohistory

ba98f-david-barton

David Barton’s Wallbuilders radio show is now referring to Barton as “America’s premiere historian.”  On today’s show his co-host Rick Green played a speech Barton gave at his  Dallas Pro-Family Legislators Conference.  (It is unclear when this conference was held).  During the speech Barton attacked me again.  Here is what he said (highlights are mine):

When you look at the Declaration, every single right set forth in the Declaration had been preached from the American pulpit prior to 1763. It’s a fun thing to do.  Read the Declaration sometime and look at it as a list of sermon topics. See if you could come up with Bible verses for all those rights.  Because that’s what they did. We’ve got the old sermons from those days to show you how the Declaration was built out of the pulpit.

So, that’s prior to 1763. Then when you get the Declaration itself it was largely based on the writings and John Locke. Richard Henry Lee said that they copied the Declaration from Locke’s Two Treatises of Government.

I have long said that Two Treatises of Government, John Locke in that work cited or referenced the Bible on 1,500 occasions. Two Treatises is about an inch thick and about 400 pages long.

An article came out last year by an academic named John Fea who just mocked me and said, “How stupid is Barton? There are only 121 references in there.” And it’s on a Biblical worldview website. So, it’s out there.  

So what I’ve been doing the last several months is I’ve gone into John Locke’s Two Treatises and I have documented every time he quotes a Bible verse. The deal with John Locke is he didn’t always tell you he was quoting a Bible verse because everybody knew it back then.

If I said, “For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son.” Most of us would say, “That’s John 3:16.” If I said that to the guy on the street they wouldn’t know what I was talking about.  They don’t know John 3:16. Well see, here’s a Biblical worldview guy who didn’t recognize Bible verses throughout John Locke’s piece.

So, I’ve already documented that 1,500- way over. It’s an embarrassment for a Biblical worldview academic to not recognize the Bible.  But that’s a difficulty we have now.

OK, where do I begin?  Here are a few points:

  1. My name is pronounced “Fee-ah.”  It rhymes with the female names “Mia” or “Tia.”
  2. David Barton puts the following sentence in quotes and attributes it to me: “How stupid is Barton? There are only 121 references in there.”  I challenge him to connect this quote with my name.  He will not be able to do it because I never said these words.
  3. David Barton claims that I have written an article arguing that there are only 121 references to the Bible in John Locke’s Two Treatises of Government.  I have never written such an article.  In fact, I am not on record anywhere–either at The Way of Improvement Leads Home blog, in a published book, or elsewhere–claiming that there are 121 references to the Bible in John Locke’s Two Treatises on Government. Frankly, I have never really been interested in this question and I am too busy to read Locke and count the number of Bible verses. (Maybe one day I will have the time). Yet Barton has criticized me at his conference, on his radio show, and on the transcript of the radio show on his Wallbuilders website.  The fact that Barton has not only mentioned this falsehood, but has put my words in quotation marks, is especially disturbing.  I spend a lot of time with my students teaching them the proper use of quotation marks.
  4. I am glad that Barton considers me a “Biblical worldview academic.”  At least he is not questioning my Christian faith.  I don’t really describe myself using the phrase “Biblical worldview academic,” but I will take it.  It is good to know that Barton still sees me as part of the fold. 🙂
  5. I am glad to see that Barton now believes that the “Declaration itself was largely based on the writings of John Locke.”  I always assumed he believed that the Declaration of Independence was based directly on the writings of the Bible.
  6.  I don’t know how many Bible verses are in Locke’s Two Treatises of Government, but Barton obviously thinks it is important.  Why?  Because if Locke was indeed the primary influence on Jefferson when he wrote the Declaration of Independence (a premise, by the way, that could be debated), then it is absolutely essential for Barton to show that Locke’s biblicism was somehow transferred to the words of the Declaration. Barton’s entire ministry at Wallbuilders depends on it. Let’s remember that Barton is not a historian. He is a politician who practices what the historian Bernard Bailyn once called “indoctrination by historical example.”  He is not studying Locke to advance general knowledge or even to help us better understand Locke in his 17th-century context.  He is doing this because he is trying to convince his followers that the Declaration of Independence is a Christian document.  And if he can prove that the Declaration of Independence is a Christian document then he can tell his followers that the United States was founded a Christian nation.  And if he can prove that the United States was founded as a Christian nation he can convince his followers that we need to “return” to such a place. And if he can do that, he can more easily advance his political agenda as a GOP operative.

I am going to stop there.  I have critiqued Barton’s work many times (including the idea that the Declaration of Independence was “built out of the pulpit”).  You can read some of those critiques by clicking here.  I have also addressed the relationship between Christianity and the founding in my book Was America Founded as a Christian Nation?: A Historical Introduction.

I should also add that all of my critiques of Barton’s work are based on actually things that he has said and written.  As a fellow “Biblical world view” guy I would ask him to give me the same courtesy.

Pepperdine Law Prof: Gorsuch Will Be Another Anthony Kennedy

neil-gorsuch

This is a very  interesting interview with Pepperdine University Law School professor and Barack Obama supporter Douglas Kmiec.  He tells National Public Radio  today that he thinks Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch is ideologically closer to Anthony Kennedy than he is to Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, or John Roberts.  Kmiec also believes that Gorsuch would probably have supported the majority in Obergfell v. Hodges. (He admits that many conservatives will not like this).

Listen here.

George Washington on the Difference Between Religious Toleration and Religious Freedom

tourosyn_creditRead George Washington to the Touro Synagogue in Newport, Rhode Island, August 18, 1790.

This is an amazing letter for all kinds of reasons, but I am always struck by how Washington makes a clear distinction between religious toleration and religious freedom.

Here is a taste:

The Citizens of the United States of America have a right to applaud themselves for having given to mankind examples of an enlarged and liberal policy: a policy worthy of imitation. All possess alike liberty of conscience and immunities of citizenship It is now no more that toleration is spoken of, as if it was by the indulgence of one class of people, that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights. For happily the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens, in giving it on all occasions their effectual support.

When “Principled Constitutionalists” Put Politics Over the Constitution

Watch the first five minutes of this CNN interview with Texas Senator Ted Cruz:

Cruz is rejoicing today that Trump nominated a “principled Constitutionalist” to the Supreme Court.  He is not alone.  Conservatives all over the country are singing the praises of Neil Gorsuch.  As I argued last night, it seems Gorsuch is more than qualified to serve on the bench.  But what disgusts me is the hypocrisy of it all.  “Principled Constitutionalists” like Cruz DID NOT FOLLOW THE CONSTITUTION with the Merrick Garland pick.  In this interview Cruz said that he and his fellow GOP Senators thought it was best to keep open the seat vacated by the death of Antonin Scalia because it was an election year and “the people” should be able to decide who the next Supreme Court justice should be through their choice for POTUS.  That may sound like a reasonable request, but it has no Constitutional support.  The Constitution requires the POTUS to nominate a justice and the Senate to advise and consent.  In this case, the Senate did not fulfill its duty.  It did not follow the Constitution.  So please spare me the “principled Constitutionalist” language.

Ted Cruz is a product of the Christian Right’s rise in the 1980s.  He has no political career without the culture wars.  He touts his credentials as a strict constitutionalist but he is really just another politician who will depart from his constitutional principles at the drop of a hat if he can gain political points.

I would love to hear what Gorsuch thinks about the Senate’s failure to give Garland a hearing?  Heck, I wish I could hear what Scalia would have thought about it.

Where Does Judge Neil Gorsuch Go To Church?

st-johns-boulder

According to this piece at Religion News Service, Neil Gorsuch, Donald Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court, attends St. John’s Episcopal Church in Boulder, Colorado.

St. John’s is a member of The Episcopal Church of the United States of America and the Episcopal Diocese of Colorado.

Since conservative evangelicals seem to be very happy with Gorsuch, it is worth noting that Gorsuch’s church is far from conservative and evangelical.  The Episcopal Church in America is an LGBT-friendly church that ordained Eugene Robinson, an openly gay bishop. It also supports abortion rights (with some limits).

Not every parish in the Episcopal Church agrees with the official position of the denomination on these issues.  But this does not seem to be the case with St. John’s-Boulder. The church hosted a viewing of a film about Eugene Robinson and took an offering for an LGBT Episcopalian organization.  The church is listed on this website as a gay-friendly church. St. John’s also appears to bless same-sex marriages.

Of course a person can attend a congregation with his family and not embrace the church’s teaching on social issues like gay marriage or abortion.  Perhaps Gorusch falls into this category.  I know many people with very conservative positions on marriage and abortion who attend a liberal Protestant congregation because they appreciate the liturgy and the church community.

Gorsuch, I might add, is a judge, not a denominational official. Technically, he is not supposed to bring his personal views on these issues–whatever they are–to bear on his legal decisions.  Supreme Court justices in the past have ruled in ways that contradict the teachings of their religious communities.  For example, Sonia Sotomayor is a Catholic but she voted in the majority in the Obergfell v. Hodges case legalizing gay marriage.  On the other hand, this has rarely been the case with conservative Catholic justices such as Scalia, Thomas, Alito, and Roberts.

In the end, I wrote this post because it is worth noting that Gorsuch doesn’t seem to have any problems with attending a church with social views like St. John’s.  Perhaps this is something conservative evangelicals might be interested in knowing.

Trump Delivered for Evangelicals

gorsuchHere is what I wrote in a Religion News Service piece back in August:

(RNS) The most important day of Donald Trump’s campaign for the presidency was May 18, 2016.

On that day, the soon-to-be GOP nominee released the names of 11 judges he would consider nominating to the Supreme Court. The list was put together with input from the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank known for defending traditional marriage, opposing abortion and fighting for the right of religious institutions to follow their conscience on these matters (and others) without government interference.

By suggesting that he would appoint conservative justices, and actually naming their names, Trump made huge inroads among evangelical voters. This is because many of Trump’s evangelical supporters are still using the 40-year-old political playbook written by Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and other founders of the so-called Christian right.

Trump’s promise to promote a conservative justice probably won him the presidency.  And now he is keeping his promise to the 81% of evangelical voters who pulled the level for him last November.

I don’t know much about Neil Gorsuch, but he looks like a solid pick.  Liberals are not going to like him, but let’s face it–they lost the election.   Gorsuch is the kind of choice that any conservative POTUS would have chosen.

Right now the liberal press is making it sound like Gorsuch is some kind of extreme conservative pick unlike anything they have ever seen before.  Not true.  Gorsuch is really no different than Clarence Thomas, Sam Alito, Antonin Scalia, and John Roberts.  It is telling that Trump picked someone who respects the institution of the Supreme Court and did not go with a more extreme pro-life crusader like William Pryor Jr.

It will be interesting to see how the Democrats respond, especially since Mitch McConnell’s decision to block Merrick Garland is still fresh in their minds.  I lost nearly all respect for McConnell and the GOP when they threw the Constitution out the window and refused to give Garland a hearing.  I wrote about it last March in a piece at Fox News. Frankly, McConnell turns my stomach every time I see him on television.  I never want to hear him and his GOP cronies talk again about their reverence for the Constitution.  In fact, as I type this I am watching conservative commentary Sean Hannity on Fox News.  He keeps praising Gorsuch as a “constitutionalist” and talking about his own love of the Constitution.  I assume that a “constitutionalist” follows the Constitution.  Hannity and his friends in the Senate did not do this with the Garland nomination.

So what will the Senate Democrats do with Gorsuch?  Will they play the “eye for an eye” card.  Probably.

Will they practice what Reinhold Niebuhr called the “spiritual resistance against resentment?”  I doubt it.   This is about revenge.  The political sphere is a dark, hateful, and angry place.

The Democrats will try to block the nomination of Neil Gorsuch.  It will be a long shot, but they will try.  It is going to be very ugly.  If they do manage to succeed, Donald Trump will simply appoint another nominee that they will not like and the circus will begin again.

When will it end?  When will our national open wound start to heal?  Not anytime soon.

Jerry Falwell Jr. Will Head Up A Trump Task Force on Higher Education

U.S. Republican Presidential candidate Donald Trump shakes hands with Jerry Falwell Jr. during a campaign event in Sioux City Iowa

Here’s a taste of a piece from the Chronicle of Higher Education.  I am sure there will be more to come here and elsewhere.

Jerry L. Falwell Jr., president of Liberty University, has been asked by President Trump to head up a new task force that will identify changes that should be made to the U.S. Department of Education’s policies and procedures, Mr. Falwell told The Chronicle on Tuesday.

The exact scope, size, and mission of the task force has yet to be formally announced. But in an interview, Mr. Falwell said he sees it as a response to what he called “overreaching regulation” and micromanagement by the department in areas like accreditation and policies that affect colleges’ student-recruiting behavior, like the new “borrower defense to repayment” regulations.

“The goal is to pare it back and give colleges and their accrediting agencies more leeway in governing their affairs,” said Mr. Falwell, who said he had been discussing possible issues with several other college leaders and at least one head of an accrediting agency for the past two months. “I’ve got notebooks full of issues,” he said.

Read the rest here. Stay tuned.

Benjamin Rush on Religious Education

6e84c-rushIn 1786 Benjamin Rush wrote “Thoughts Upon the Mode of Education Proper in a Republic.”It is a classic example of what historians and political theorists call “civic humanism.” At one point Rush states that goal education is to “convert men into republican machines.” Religion and Christianity is mentioned a lot in this essay, but Rush often mentions it in a utilitarian way.  In other words, religion is good when it serves the needs of a virtuous republic.

Here is one of my favorite quotes from the document:

I proceed in the next place, to enquire, what mode of education we shall adopt so as to secure to the state all the advantages that are to be derived from the proper instruction of youth; and here I beg leave to remark, that the only foundation for a useful education in a republic is to be laid in Religion. Without this there can be no virtue, and without virtue there can be no liberty, and liberty is the object and life of all republican governments.

Such is my veneration for every religion that reveals the attributes of the Deity, or a future state of rewards and punishments, that I had rather see the opinions of Confucius or Mahomed inculcated upon our youth, than see them grow up wholly devoid of a system of religious principles. “But the religion I mean to recommend in this place, is that of the New Testament.”

Will You Be Watching the Season Finale of “The Justice” Tonight?

trump-apprentice

Tonight, Donald Trump will say “You’re Fired” to either Neil Gorusch or Thomas Hardiman

I hope that tonight you will have some time to watch the season finale of Donald Trump’s “The Justice.”  That’s right, Trump will be announcing his Supreme Court Justice tonight on live television.  The POTUS has identified two finalists:  Neil Gorsuch and Thomas Hardiman.  Both men have arrived in Washington D.C. for the live finale.

Here is what I am expecting:  The two men will be sitting next to each other on one side of a large conference table. Trump will enter the room and sit across from them.  Then, with the live cameras rolling, he will publicly question both men concerning their credentials and judicial philosophy.

Trump will then fire one of the judges and nominate the other one as a Supreme Court Justice.

Reality TV meets the Supreme Court.  The ratings will be yuuuuuge!

Sally Yates Followed Jeff Sessions’s Advice

Watch this.  It is Jeff Sessions, Senator from Alabama, interviewing Sally Yates at her Senate hearing for the position of Deputy Attorney General.

As many of you know, Donald Trump fired Yates last night because Yates refused to defend his executive order banning refugees from seven Muslim nations.

Jeff Sessions, of course, is Trump’s current nominee for Attorney General.  I think the video speaks for itself:

It looks likes Yates took Sessions’s advice.  I wonder if Sessions will take his own advice.

Sean Spicer: “America is the Greatest Country on Earth.” Donald Trump: “Make America Great Again.”

make-america-great-againEarlier today Sean Spicer, Donald Trump’s press secretary, said to reporters:

Look, coming into this country is still a privilege. We’re the greatest country on Earth. And being able to come to America is a privilege, not a right. And it is our duty and it is the president’s goal to make sure that everybody who comes into this country to the best of our ability is here because they want to enjoy this country and come in peacefully. And so he takes that obligation extremely seriously.

Wait a minute, I am really confused now.  I thought America was a land of carnage and decay that can only be fixed by Donald Trump.  If America is the “greatest country on Earth” then why do we have to make it great again?

Here is how Trump described America in his inauguration address:

But for too many of our citizens, a different reality exists: Mothers and children trapped in poverty in our inner cities; rusted-out factories scattered like tombstones across the landscape of our nation; an education system, flush with cash, but which leaves our young and beautiful students deprived of knowledge; and the crime and gangs and drugs that have stolen too many lives and robbed our country of so much unrealized potential.

This American carnage stops right here and stops right now.

Why would so many refugees and immigrants want to come to a dump like this?

🙂

HT: Marty Masar.

The Mind of the Evangelical Trump Voter

liberty-trump

Over the last several months I have had some good conversations (and some not so good conversations) with a few dozen of the 81% of American evangelicals who voted for Donald Trump. The more I listen to these evangelical Trump supporters the more I realize that they are divided over the new President’s policies regarding trade, job creation, and even Obamacare. While some of them mentioned their support of Trump’s policies on these issues, it was clear that they are secondary.

Here is what unites them:

Abortion:  Trump evangelicals believe that a Trump presidency is their best chance to overturn Roe v. Wade.  So far they are ecstatic about Trump’s support for last Friday’s March for Life and his efforts to end funding for international organizations that perform abortions.  They will no doubt cheer Trump’s forthcoming Supreme Court justice nominee.

These evangelicals limit their understanding of “pro-life” to the issue of abortion.  So, for example, they do not see Trump’s recent executive order banning refugees to be a “life” issue.  Many of them are outraged that protesters are making such a big deal over Trump’s decision to stop the flow of Muslim refugees into the country when thousands and thousands of babies are being killed in the womb each year

Religious Liberty:   Trump evangelicals are thrilled that the President is aware that thousands of Christians being persecuted for their faith around the world. I imagine Christian colleges are, for the most part, breathing a sigh of relief over the fact that they will no longer be discriminated against when it comes to federal and other types of funding.

So far we have heard very little from these evangelicals about extending religious liberties to Muslim refugees. As evangelical  Washington Post columnist and Trump critic Michael Gerson recently wrote, “In the long run, religious liberty is weakened in every case when it is weakened in any case. On this matter, hypocrisy is a form of self-harm.”

Fear:  Evangelicals want their country back.  Trump will not only make America great again, but he will protect them against internal and external threats.  Most Trump evangelicals I talk with love his recent executive order banning refugees from Muslim countries.  Man of them don’t want Muslims in America.  Some of them still think that Barack Obama is a Muslim.  They believe Muslim terrorists pose a threat to their lives, even though they are more likely to be killed by a moving train, flammable clothing, or cows than a Muslim terrorist.

Trump is delivering “big league” for his evangelical voters.  He is keeping his promises. It looks as if the 81% will not be going away anytime soon.

Thomas Jefferson Remembers the Debate Surrounding His Statute of Religious Freedom

va-statuteHere is what Thomas Jefferson wrote in his 1821 “Autobiography” about the passing of his Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom (1786). Note the part at the end about the rejection of a proposal to mention “Jesus Christ” as “the holy author of our religion” in order to accommodate Jews, Muslims, Hindus and “infidels.”

The bill for establishing religious freedom, the principles of which had, to a certain degree, been enacted before, I had drawn in all the latitude of reason and right. It still met with opposition; but, with some mutilations in the preamble, it was finally passed; and a singular proposition proved that its protection of opinion was meant to be universal. Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word “Jesus Christ,” so that it should read, “a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;” the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan (Muslims), the Hindoo, and Infidel of every denomination.