Customer Reviews

So Help Me God: The Founding Fathers and the First Great Battle Over Church and State

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Forrest Church unites history and criticism in a timely, readable, informative and entertaining book about the role our Founding Fathers played in the great debate over separation of church and state. This tale of drama and trauma is rich with American history and the surprises that make for any gripping story - for instance, that the Unitarians, Congregationalists and Episcopalians were in favor of a Christian Nation whereas the Baptists championed the separation of church and state. As a result of being religious outsiders, the Baptists knew that they'd be persecuted if not protected under the newly formed American government. Also, how the War of 1812 nearly resulted in New England seceding from the Union to establish a Christian Commonwealth. A wonderful way with detail (and an enormous amount of research) provides reflections on the players and their time. Regarding the relationship between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson - "Theirs was a friendship between the Red Queen and the Cheshire Cat. At the slightest provocation, Adams shouted, 'Off with their heads'; at the first hint of conflict, Jefferson disappeared until nothing remained but his smile." Rev. Church offers insights on the way in which parallel battles over personal freedom continue today, not only with regard to teaching creationism in schools and allowing commandments in courthouses, but the current struggle over how much liberty must be sacrificed for security. Likewise, Rev. Church points out how wartime has always brought church and state closer together (during the Civil War "in God we trust" first appeared on our money), and in peacetime the two diverge. This cleverly crafted account of our nation's founders grappling with religion is a must read for anyone interested in theology, history, or politics (no coincidence that Rev. Church is the son of Idaho Senator Frank Church). It's not often one can say that a new book about an old debate covers fresh ground, but in addition to that, SO HELP ME GOD serves to inform as well as to warn, successfully fulfilling the task of a steadfast and faithful minister (at the Unitarian Church of All Souls in New York City).

For those who think the first five presidents were devout Christians, the news is not good. Nor is the news good for those who think the country was non-religious. There was indeed a "culture war" going on and the arguments were not unlike today's insultfest. Also like today, mutual slanders were propagated by the media, the politicians, and the pulpit. Some things never change.

* Only Adams was a church-goer all his life. Washington, Jefferson, and Madison attended church when living in the White House, seldom otherwise. Monroe didn't go even when he was President. They all doubted the divinity of Christ but all utilized a semblance of faith when it fit their agenda. From the onset in American politics, religion ended up being manipulated for political gain.

* Washington scrupulously avoided the slightest hint of religious favoritism and would not abide any sectarian interference in the affairs of state. By the end of his second term, established church leaders were openly disenchanted with his ambiguous religious posture. He probably did say "So help me God" at his inauguration.

* There would have been no Bill of Rights if it weren't for the Danbury Baptists of Connecticut. Madison and others thought a Bill of Rights was redundant but he needed their support for ratification of the Constitution. In exchange, he presented and fought for a Bill of Rights in the new Congress.

* The Federalist party (mainly northern) was a coalition between those who wanted a strong federal government and the existing controlling Christian denominations (Presbyterians, Unitarians, Congregationalists, Anglicans). The Democratic/Republican party (mainly southern) was a coalition between those influenced by the European Enlightenment (Jefferson, et al) and the minority sects who were not powerful in any state (Baptists, Methodists, Catholics, Jews).

* Monroe was secular to the bone, too disinterested in religion to be disrespectful about anyone's cherished beliefs. His administration was the beneficiary of religious peace as the New England Federalist clerics lost their political franchise. States gradually relinquished support and entanglements with their pet denominations and churches doubled their enrollment. Separation of church and state appears to have helped religion flourish.

An Epilogue records the last days of each President and reminds us that dying memorably is an art. "Tis well," Washington affirmed, summing up his magnificent life in two tiny words. Monroe held on until July 4, 1831, the 55th anniversary of Independence Day. Unfortunately, Adams and Jefferson had done it first, July 4, 1826. Madison made his quieter exit six days before July 4, 1836.

Both sides mentioned in my opening paragraph cherry-pick their data to prove that the colonists and founding fathers were or weren't religious. This book settles the score. As usual, things are not black and white nor even gray - more like black and white paint mixed together, haphazardly stirred. Church is a lifelong scholar of early US history. He provides plenty of references and his assessments appear to this nonhistorian to be accurate. I guarantee you will be enthralled.

The subtitle describes pretty well the content of this book, which aims to describe the first great cultural war in American political history. Pursuant to the author, the ideals of liberty and order will coexist in tension as they have in the nation's womb from the beginning. In that line, he thinks that today's US Christian campaigners and their secular critics seem almost timid compared to the warring American dreamers and would-be saviours who battled for votes in the American early republic.

What I like the most is the way F. Church, with a stroke of his pen, vividly depicts the first five American President's religious stands, often making interesting parallels between them . E.g.:

Washington. Just how religious was George Washington? The short answer is: "Not very" . He had much of the principle, little of the sentiment of religion. He was more moral than pious.

John Adams. The Protestant ethic was bred in his bone. He didn't think like a true believer but he felt like a true believer.

Thomas Jefferson. If Adams was skeptical about almost everything, Jefferson worshiped just as doggedly at the altar of reason and progress. He was a fundamentalist of the left, inflexible in his fidelity to rational religion. However, as devoted as Jefferson was to church-state separation, religion and politics mixed freely in Washington throughout his administration.

James Madison. Jefferson supported freedom of religion to protect the state from the church but also to free mind from the state while Madison sought to protect the state from the church by encouraging sectarian competition and seems to have been a reverent agnostic (in the gentlest sense of the word, i.e., "unknowing"), too modest to advance any claims of his own and respectful of the claims promoted by others.

James Monroe. His moral and religious character is closer in almost every respect to Washington's than to those of his senior partners in the Republican troika, Jefferson and Madison. He was a Stoic, a Mason, secular to the bone, conservative by nature, and not interested enough in religion to bother being disrespectful toward anyone's cherished beliefs.

...

A final insight Church garnered along the way is this: In America's early politics, religion, even when entered into the halls of government freely, wound up being manipulated for political gain. When church and state tucked into bed together, it was the church that ended up asking, "Will you respect me in the morning?", and the answer was almost always "No".

So I recommend it, my rate being between 4 (content) and 4 (pleasure, sometimes falling to 3, sometimes raising to 5).

Other books I would also recommend would be the following:

On the US: a) Religious history (interpreted sociologically): "The Churching Of America, 1776-2005: Winners And Losers In Our Religious Economy" by Roger Finke and Rodney Stark; b) Political history (Democracy and its discontents): "The Rise of American Democracy. Jefferson to Lincoln" by Sean Wilentz.

On religion (published this very Fall): a) "Discovering God: The Origins of the Great Religions and the Evolution of Belief" by Rodney Stark (apologetic, brilliant and controversial); b) "Secular Age" by Charles Taylor (a fascinating voluminous social and intellectual history); c) "How to Read the Bible: A Guide to Scripture, Then and Now" by James L. Kugel (extremely scholarly and easy to read, a combination difficult to find).

I'm a business professor and native South African but thoroughly enjoyed this informative and entertaining look at American history. Church has a clever and accessible style that brings the times and characters to life without sacrificing scholarship (which can be found in abundance). It's much easier to understand today's culture wars when you read how they began. Church is extremely knowledgable on Thomas Jefferson and does a terrific job of incorporating recent findings, including his relationship with Sally Hemings and the question of slavery.

I was attracted to this book because of the Author and some prior experience I've had with other writings of his. The first book I reviewed here on Amazon was the Jefferson Bible with a forward by Forrest Church and I recall at the time being struck by the polarized reviews and voting patterns that I observed by those responding to that work and how much of it centered upon the importance of Jefferson's Bible and what it said about the religious views of that vital founding father and the original intent of the founders in terms of religion and its impact upon American society. I was struck at the time as to how easy it was for the different points of view to polarize with little middle ground and how focused the dissent was upon the point of view of the reviewer. It was almost as if their need to incorporate Jefferson or any Founding Father into their "camp" trumped objective history.

I read this book after having done more study and reading in the field, and in particular I read the entire correspondance between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson and I was particularly interested in how well what I gathered from that primary source would compare with this secondary interpretation. In fact, based upon my conclusions from reading Church's take on Adams and Jefferson I was determined that I'd have a pretty good base on what to conclude on his information related to Washington, Madison and Monroe as I am not as familiar with their religious and constitutional views despite having done some reading in this field in the past as well.

My conclusion is that Church has a very good handle and makes a fair and reasonable presentation that to me rang true in those areas where I was equipped to make that observation.

Church is a Unitarian/Universalist Minister and it might be easy to dismiss him on that basis as biased toward finding religion wherever he looks. I found him to be reasonable in his treatment of each of the men and willing to deal objectively with their personal and public faith and willing to accept that being human, they at times were inconsistent and at times willing to make compromises to promote their own political careers and cater to the necessities of the day where religion was prevalent and entangled in public policy.

The only real complaint I have, and it is the basis for the 4 star evaluation rather than the 5 I would have given it if I could, is that although there are end notes that provide sources for the more serious reader to explore and check, the lack of in-text notation leaves the reader having to rely upon the author's judgment to a great degree. The emphasis is upon flow and readability and Church does a good job in this regard. I think people taking the time to read this focused a book are going to want to be able to see the sources without having to continually turn to the back to see if there is a source in the first place and then once located by page to determine where on the page the source is incorporated. Any serious reader wishing to use this book for resource or reference will find this a frustrating element.

Worth the time and effort to read and reasonably objective in my opinion.

Bart Breen

Reviewed by Jamie Driggers

Separation of church and state has been a contentious issue on both sides of the discussion for many a year. And both sides use the founding fathers to promote their agenda. One side will contend that the founders were deists at best and couldn't possibly have intended for religion to have any bearing on civil matters while the other side will contend that the founders instituted the separation to protect the religious, not the state. Who is right? And is it as simple as anyone makes it?

Forrest Church, author of So Help Me God would contend no, it isn't simple at all. Even the founders contradicted themselves in their words, actions, and policies. For example, Thomas Jefferson, credited for the "wall of separation between church and state," worshiped regularly, while religious freedom and religion itself flourished under James Monroe, credited for being quite secular.

In this fascinating and seemingly well-researched book I found much to chew on. There is no cut-and-dried answer, but his gives a lot of evidence. Working chronologically, he discusses George Washington, John Adam, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and James Monroe. Through their policies and private actions and what others--many in a faith--said and did for and against them, we get a taste of how complex the issue really is.

If you are interested in the debate over the separation of church and state, this book is a fantastic place to start.

I found this a very readable and very persuasive book. Forrest Church writes with the passion of a liberal theologian and the insight of a skilled historian. He brings alive the dynamic interplay of religion and politics over the first six presidents of the U.S. Most importantly, he shows us how various presidents shifted outlooks between two poles -- "moral order" and "sacred liberty" -- two concepts which still shape our domestic debate over values to this very day. Church writes this history in an appealingly-inductive way, revealing the personalities of the presidents as well as those around them, and enriching his text with major episodes in these presidencies. The book really gets moving with John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, who clearly represent Church's two poles, but who also emerge as vivid and complex figures in this work. Forrest Church's book makes for a great read and I learned something very important in the process. A winner!

SO HELP ME GOD: THE FOUNDING FATHERS AND THE FIRST GREAT BATTLE OVER CHURCH AND STATE will prove an excellent choice for both religious and history collections from the young adult level through college and public library readerships. It documents an early, fierce battle between church and state - a nearly-forgotten conflict which ranged from Washington's presidency to Monroe's leadership, and which addressed issues of whether God should enter into the political arena. Any who would understand early American history and religious connections to politics needs this history to understand thoroughly the early foundations of modern church and state struggles.

I just finished reading SO HELP ME GOD and have already begun a second read-through. I am so excited by what I've read. I'd like to thank the author for writing such a wonderful and enlightening book! It's clearly the work of a mind that knows the history of the period and the historical persons very well, and yet it's a more exciting read that most of the historical studies I've read over the years.

At a number of points in the book, I couldn't believe what I was reading--did John Adams really say that? What would a three-minute sentence in a State of the Union address actually look like?, etc...--so checked the sources in the back of the book. And since I have instant access to a wonderful library, I was able to get some of the sources the author used and read the context around some of the quotes that he used and see that 3-minute sentence for myself.

What a wonderful introduction to the challenges the first five U.S. presidents faced regarding the church-state question/nexus/interaction/relationship!

I look forward to enjoying a second read of this book (probably read aloud to myself so I can savor the writing from my own lips to my own ears) and to using some of the insights I've gained from this author's amazing labor of love.

If questions about the relationship between church and state are of interest to you, and you'd like to hear more about the early challenges we faced in the early years of our government, this book is made for you.

A wonderful read. And a page turner at that. I can't recommend it too highly. It's that good.

In today's culture wars, the Christian Right like to claim that America was founded as a Christian nation; to which the Left (Christian and otherwise) replies, "No way!" Each side has their own proof texts from the founders which they trot out.

The reality, as masterfully shown by Rev. Church, is that the period from the revolution through the first five Presidents was one of intense struggle over what the nature of this new Republic's relations with God will be. Seen up close, phrases like "America was founded..." or "The Founding Fathers intended..." dissolve into the disparate voices of a bunch of squabbling politicians with big egos - hey, remarkably like today, and every other time in history.

Along the way, this book brings to life some remarkable, and to me, totally unanticipated ironies:

* the leaders in the struggle against Establishment were the Baptists, who were then an oppressed religious minority - unlike today, on both counts!

* the Unitarians, then part of the New England religious Establishment, and a far more dominant (and more conservative) presence in American life than they are today, were leaders in the movement to retain an Established church in the teeth of the First Amendment.

*Of the first five Presidents, only one - the New Englander, Adams - was pushing for a stronger alliance between church and state. Yet Adams was a Unitarian, who did not believe in the deity of Christ, the Trinity, or the Atonement! The other founding Presidents were less Christian than he.

*Washington, whom later hagiographers would praise for his faith, never joined the church, never took Communion in his life, and spoke in his correspondence far more warmly to his fellow Masons than to any Christian groups.

*Theodore Dwight, a New England publisher from a clerical family, wrote in the early days of the Jefferson Administration: "We have a country governed by blockheads and knaves; the ties of marriage with all its felicities are severed and destroyed; our wives and daughters are thrown into the stews; our children are cast into the world from the breast and forgotten; filial piety is extinguished, and our surnames, the only mark of distinction among families, are abolished. Can the imagination paint anything more dreadful on this side of hell?" Imagination indeed - he seems to have been his generation's Glen Beck. Yet under Jefferson, the Second Great Awakening began, and churches began to flourish as never before (perhaps not the *right* churches, according to the Congregationalists).

All in all, a wonderful read, and a delightful mix of surprises and moments of "The more things change..."