My apologies for the delay in posting. We've just started into the first wave of the birthday bashes. (Brother Stephen's and Natalie's on Saturday. And today marked the third of four separate party celebrations for Andrew, who turns four tomorrow. I can't keep up with all of the cake, punch, and party favors.)
Well, I waited as long as I could before taking advantage of the blog medium and publishing this myself. I got the call from The Indianapolis Star 10 days ago but didn't make the cut apparently regarding a Letter to the Editor I submitted. It seems that my journalistic ambitions may have found their way on to the editing floor this time around.
You presumably have heard the question bandied about as different people seek to establish once and for all whether or not this country was founded as a Christian nation. That back-and-forth exchange has been taking place on The Star's editorial page over recent weeks. It began with a letter from Tom Hallett (Feb. 5) challenging what he perceives as a watering down of religion. In his letter, he was also advocating the position that America was indeed founded by people "of the Christian persuasion."
Two weeks ago Bryan M. Cahen wrote his Letter to the Editor in The Indianapolis Star taking a contrary position, unequivocally stating that there was no Christian influence whatsoever in the founding of this country. Given the inflexible nature of his letter and his revisionist view of our nation's historical beginnings, I felt it necessary to respond with this submission:
The contention that America was founded as a Christian nation will not be settled anytime soon. Advocates on both sides of the debate are quick to present their perspectives on the question. Thus, I must respectfully take issue with Bryan M. Cahen's (Letters, Feb. 12) statement that "none of the founding documents mentions any religion, much less Christianity."
Dr. Benjamin Rush, one of the original signers of the Declaration of Independence has this to say in his essay, "Thoughts Upon the Mode of Education Proper in a Republic":
"...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."
So important is the value of religion to the establishment of the republic says Dr. Rush, "...that I had rather see the opinions of Confucius or Mohammad inclucated 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 the religion of Jesus Christ."
This statement in no way resolves the debate about our country's origins, But it does suggest that perhaps there is more to the discussion than Mr. Cahen's revisionist assertions would have us believe.
Who knows, maybe I've jumped the gun and the editors at The Indianapolis Star are still planning to publish the letter. But, if not, you can take it for whatever it's worth.
Frankly, while I have a certain level of respect for those who engage in principled debate on both sides of this issue, I have come to recognize that questions such as whether or not our country was founded as a Christian nation are not ones I'm personally willing to go to the stake for. Does our answer to this question actually make a difference? Probably not as much as some folks would believe. I think the important thing where our nation is concerned is where we go from here. In that sense, I would concur with Dr. Rush's additional comments in his essay that there are ideas specific to the Christian religion that are quite beneficial to the furtherance of healthy governance in this Republic. Imagine for a minute what our country would be like if we actually applied the Christian ideals of considering others better than ourselves (Philippians 2:3-5) or follow Jesus command to "...in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you" (Matthew 7:12). 
Comments