How Christian Were the Founding Fathers?

How Christian Were the Founding Fathers? in his essay. The guiding principles that the American civil spirit and society were built upon are examined by Russell Shorto. Although there were many allusions to Christian principles, in his opinion, the founding fathers’ establishment of the separation of church and state led the country away from core religious principles. The highly religious population had been persuaded to accept the new political system that represented the state of the union by using Christianity as a rallying cry. The relationship between the church and the government had to be severed because the various state administrations had already been unified. The country had shifted from confederacy to provide a more unified socio-political front. The articles of confederation had offered states complete sovereignty, limited congressional prerogatives and the enforcement of all laws by state courts. A federal government promised a more centralized executive governance. It presented a unified socio-economic domain where all states could interact with oversight from a representative congress. Rancière argues that the dismantling of confederacy marked the onset of the elimination of democracy for the average American public. The federal governmental arrangement presented far more multispectral advantages as compared to confederacy. However, it limited the level of civic expression that citizens had over their governance. The federation of American states were championed by the founding fathers with little regard or input of the public as a vast section o of the population were not deemed sufficiently learned to participate in governmental and political issues regardless of how monumental the matters discussed would come to affect America then and in hundreds of years that followed.

Were American Founding Fathers Democratic Reformers?

The reputation of America’s founding fathers as selfless and democratic has often been challenged by countless reports evidencing the contrary. For the better part of modern American history, scholars have grappled accusations that the forefather’s acts were predicated on some sort of compensational or political gain. Hitherto the most outlandish claim forwarded by researchers is the denunciation that the Emancipation Proclamation by Abraham Lincoln was less about abolishing slavery but rather, a strategic decision to disadvantage the south and short the confederacy cause. It is speculated that the president’s fundamental motivation was to deny the south critical slave labor which accounted for a vast portion of its workforce. Slaves formed an essential component of the southern state’s economy.

They ensured a seamless production of goods and services at a minimal operational cost. To advance his henchmen’s political disposition, Lincoln is believed to have drafted the document that freed African-Americans from bondage. To many, the character of the respected statesman and beloved patriarch is simply beyond reproach. Whether this is an accurate representation of the occurrence of events or not remains a mystery. However, the fact that there are many historians propagating such beliefs brings the staunch Christian President’s real intentions into serious doubt.

Another commonly believed instance where the founding fathers’ democratic reform credentials have been questioned is the introduction of the Electoral College voting system for the highest office in the land. As Schubert, Dye and Zeigler intimate, the actual events leading up to the formation of the voting arrangement is often shrouded in much controversy. While most history books claim that the system was designed purely to alienate the increasing number of black voters in the south, the real intention could not be any less sinister. As American founding father and 4th President, James Madison observed,

“There was one difficulty however of a serious nature attending an immediate choice by the people. The right of suffrage was much more diffusive in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of Negroes. The substitution of electors obviated this difficulty and seemed on the whole to be liable to the fewest objections”

There appeared to be minimal opposition to the plan, at least at the very surface. States with less population such as New Jersey and Maryland favored the system as it offered its residents some say in national politics. Unbeknownst to many, the Electoral College construction was conceptualized for a totally different reasons, at least from the perspective of certain historical researchers.

The Electoral College

The journey to suffrage for many of America’s demographic groups has been long and eventful. In 1776, only barons with large tracks of land could vote. The poor were largely uneducated and widely believed to be incapable of making sound political decisions. Women and non-whites were also not regarded as sufficiently articulate to participate in political matters of the infant American state. The prospect of the less affluent gaining the right to vote was particularly inconceivable. There already had been growing discontent about the preferential treatment of the rich. As such, there had to be a plan to ensure only the elite could make key political decisions. As Skocpol indicates, the Electoral College’s fundamental objective was to establish a select few who could exclusively elect the president in spite of the general public’s choice. Expectedly, this theory has been challenged by many legal scholars who believe that the intent of the plan was noble and that it provided a democratic front where the interests of everyone could be represented. Nonetheless, it brings to question of the founding fathers’ purported belief in democracy.

Bibliography

Rancière, J., 2014. Hatred of democracy. Verso Books.

Schubert, Louis, Thomas R. Dye, and Harmon Zeigler. The irony of democracy: An uncommon introduction to American politics. Nelson Education, 2015.

Shorto, Russell. 2017. ”How Christian Were The Founders?“. Nytimes.Com. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/14/magazine/14texbooks-t.html.

Skocpol, Theda. Diminished democracy: From membership to management in American civic life. Vol. 8. University of Oklahoma press, 2013.