First Prayer in Congress

On September 5, 1774, the First Continental Congress met at Carpenters’ Hall in Philadelphia. Among the delegates who attended were George Washington, Patrick Henry, Samuel Adams, John Adams, John Jay, and many other notables.1 This meeting was important since it was the first time the colonies united on a large scale (though one colony was not represented), thus the tone it set would be crucial for America’s future. The congress had been called to address increasing British tyranny,2 including the Intolerable Acts, which had ended self-government in Massachusetts and shut down the port of Boston to commercial shipments.3

On the second day of the gathering, Congress got down to business. There was a call to open the meeting with prayer, but some delegates doubted they could pray together since there were different denominations present.4

Samuel Adams ended the debate when he announced that he was not a bigot and could “hear a prayer” from anyone “who was at the same time a friend to his country.” He then nominated Rev. Jacob Duché to conduct the prayers.5 It was amidst all these circumstances that on the third day, September 7th, the Rev. Duché led the first prayer in Congress.6

Delegate Silas Deane reported Duché prayed for a full ten minutes and then read the Scripture for the day.7

John Adams related to his wife how much this time of prayer meant for the attendees:

[Rev. Duché] read several prayers in the established form, and then read the collect for the seventh day of September, which was the thirty-fifth Psalm. You must remember, this was the next morning after we heard the horrible rumor of the cannonade of Boston. I never saw a greater effect upon an audience. It seemed as if Heaven had ordained that Psalm to be read on that morning.8

That time of prayer united the delegates despite their differences. In fact, Daniel Webster, “Defender of the Constitution,”9 later reminded the US Supreme Court of the unifying power of prayer:

Mr. Duché read the Episcopal service of the Church of England and then, as if moved by the occasion, he broke out into extemporaneous prayer. And those men who were then about to resort to force to obtain their rights, were moved to tears; and flood of tears, Mr. Adams says, ran down the cheeks of the pacific Quakers who formed part of the most interesting assembly. Depend upon it, where there is a spirit of Christianity, there is a spirit which rises above form, above forms, independent of sect or creed, and the controversies of clashing doctrines.10

It was prayer and the Scriptures that united the Founding Fathers, and they can still unite us today.


Endnotes

1 “First Continental Congress,” ushistory.org, accessed September 4, 2024, https://www.ushistory.org/declaration/related/congress.html?R6wF9AvbqY=C2A7B9B226BE11CE692F46F316C45D8F.

2 “10d. First Continental Congress,” ushistory.org, accessed September 4, 2024, https://www.ushistory.org/US/10d.asp?R6wF9AvbqY=C2A7B9B226BE11CE692F46F316C45D8F.

3 “American Revolution: The Intolerable Acts,” July 10, 2017, ThoughtCo., https://www.thoughtco.com/the-intolerable-acts-2361386.

4 John Adams to Abigail Adams, September 16, 1774, Letters of John Adams, Addressed to His Wife, ed. Charles Francis Adams (Boston: Charles C. Little and James Brown, 1841), 23.

5 Ibid.

6 “Wednesday, September 7, 1774, A.M.,” Journals of The American Congress: From 1774 to 1788 (Washington: Way and Gideon, 1823), I:8.

7 Silas Deane to Elizabeth Deane, The Deane Papers (NY: New York Historical Society, 1887), I:20.

8 John Adams to Abigail, September 16, 1774, Letters of John Adams (1841), 23-24.

9 See, for example, Daniel Webster For Young Americans: Comprising the Greatest Speeches of “The Defender of the Constitution” (Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1903).

10 Speech delivered in the Supreme Court on February 20, 1844, The Works of Daniel Webster (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1860), VI:162.

Court Orders D.C. Transit Authority to Accept and Run Unconstitutionally Rejected Ads

In December 2023, First Liberty, ACLU, and Steptoe filed a lawsuit on behalf of WallBuilders relating to ads that were rejected by the DC Transit Authority. (See more about the history of this issue here.) We now have great news!

“Judge Beryl A. Howell of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ordered the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (“WMATA”) to accept and run four advertisements that it had unconstitutionally rejected. The court ruled that WMATA’s ban on issue ads violates the First Amendment’s requirement that restrictions on speech be reasonable.”

Read the full Press Release from First Liberty here.

These ads have already started to appear in Washington DC! You can follow WallBuilders’ social media accounts (Facebook, Instagram, and X) to stay updated.

The ads link to a collection of quotes by numerous Founding Fathers via our article “The Founding Fathers on Jesus, Christianity and the Bible”: https://wallbuilders.com/resource/the-founding-fathers-on-jesus-christianity-and-the-bible/.

Support WallBuilders’ Mission! Donate here!

Black Robe Regiment Hub

What Is It?

The modern National Black Robe Regiment (NBRR) is a network of national and local pastors that equips and empowers pastors to engage in their Biblical and historical role to stand boldly for righteousness and transform society through spiritual and cultural engagement.

The early American pastor had a reputation as a courageous and fearless leader, causing the British during the American Revolution to dub them “The Black Regiment,” a reference to their clerical robes. Those pastors boldly proclaimed the Word of God as it applied to everything in life, whether spiritual or temporal—about eternal life in Christ, taxes, education, public policy, good government, the military, or any other current issues that the Bible addressed.

If there is a decay of conscience, the pulpit is responsible for it…. If satan rules in our halls of legislation, the pulpit is responsible for it. If our politics become so corrupt that the very foundations of our government are ready to fall away, the pulpit is responsible for it.” – Charles Finney

Today, the struggle is for the heart and soul of America. Never before has there been such openly orchestrated frontal attacks against America’s core beliefs, including traditional morality, public religious expressions, the rights of conscience, inalienable rights, common sense economics, and limited constitutional government. An American Revolution, not with guns, but with the same pastoral fervor and leadership is needed today.

This resource is designed to help pastors fulfill that calling.


Historical Origins

Rev Frederick Muhlenberg

The Black Robed Regiment was the name that the British placed on the courageous and patriotic American clergy during the Founding Era (a backhanded reference to the black robes they wore). Significantly, the British blamed the Black Regiment for American Independence, and rightfully so, for modern historians have documented that:

There is not a right asserted in the Declaration of Independence which had not been discussed by the New England clergy before 1763.

It is strange to today’s generation to think that the rights listed in the Declaration of Independence were nothing more than a listing of sermon topics that had been preached from the pulpit in the two decades leading up to the American Revolution, but such was the case….

Read the Full Article Here!


Helpful Resources

Use these resources in your church or consider sending them to your pastor or priest adding a personal note of encouragement to not keep silent on the divisive issues facing our culture.

WallBuilders does not necessarily endorse or agree with all the information from unaffiliated organizations. Listings are provided as additional resources that may be utilized to affirm, enhance, and/or supplement Black Robe Regiment efforts.

Other Groups

http://www.blackrobereg.org/
https://www.danfisherbrr.com/

Legal Resources

ACLJ information for 501(c)(3) incorporated churches

Liberty Counsel and First Liberty have a number of very useful resources for churches and pastors to assist you in informing your church family about today’s issues. Use these resources to learn about what you can and can’t do politically.

This article and this article from the IRS lists activities that are and are not permissible for 501(c)(3) incorporated churches.
Read WallBuilders corrections to an intimidation letter from the Americans United for Separation of Church and State sent to pastors and churches in 2006 attempting to intimidating Christians and churches from being involved.

Christian Legal Organizations


Historical Resources

The sermons and proclamations listed below come from WallBuilders’ Collection. There are many more beyond this curated list available on our Resources page.

Sermons

Election Sermons

These sermons were preached to government officials at the state capitol upon the annual opening of the legislature

Governmental Sermons

Patriotic Sermons

Proclamations

The American practice of calling days of fasting or thanksgiving was so strong that by 1815, civil governments had issued at least 1,400 official prayer proclamations. Thousands more have been issued since that time—a tradition that now spans more than four centuries of the American Story, and one that continues to the present day since a 1952 federal law requires that every president issue a prayer proclamation on the National Day of Prayer, commemorated the first Thursday of every May, and observed by every president since Dwight D. Eisenhower.

History of the Black Robe Regiment

The Black Robed Regiment was the name that the British placed on the courageous and patriotic American clergy during the Founding Era (a backhanded reference to the black robes they wore).1 Significantly, the British blamed the Black Regiment for American Independence,2 and rightfully so, for modern historians have documented that:

There is not a right asserted in the Declaration of Independence which had not been discussed by the New England clergy before 1763.3

It is strange to today’s generation to think that the rights listed in the Declaration of Independence were nothing more than a listing of sermon topics that had been preached from the pulpit in the two decades leading up to the American Revolution, but such was the case.

Influence of The Clergy

But it was not just the British who saw the American pulpit as largely responsible for American independence and government, our own leaders agreed. For example, John Adams rejoiced that “the pulpits have thundered4 and specifically identified several ministers as being among the “characters the most conspicuous, the most ardent, and influential” in the “awakening and a revival of American principles and feelings” that led to American independence.5

Across subsequent generations, the great and positive influence of the Revolutionary clergy was faithfully reported. For example:

As a body of men, the clergy were pre-eminent in their attachment to liberty. The pulpits of the land rang with the notes of freedom.6 The American Quarterly Register [MAGAZINE], 1833

If Christian ministers had not preached and prayed, there might have been no revolution as yet – or had it broken out, it might have been crushed.7 Bibliotheca Sacra [BRITISH PERIODICAL], 1856

The ministers of the Revolution were, like their Puritan predecessors, bold and fearless in the cause of their country. No class of men contributed more to carry forward the Revolution and to achieve our independence than did the ministers. . . . [B]y their prayers, patriotic sermons, and services [they] rendered the highest assistance to the civil government, the army, and the country.8 B. F. Morris, HISTORIAN, 1864

The Constitutional Convention and the written Constitution were the children of the pulpit.9 Alice Baldwin, HISTORIAN, 1918

Had ministers been the only spokesman of the rebellion – had Jefferson, the Adamses, and [James] Otis never appeared in print – the political thought of the Revolution would have followed almost exactly the same line. . . . In the sermons of the patriot ministers . . . we find expressed every possibly refinement of the reigning political faith.10 Clinton Rossiter, HISTORIAN, 1953

The American clergy were faithful exponents of the fullness of God’s Word, applying its principles to every aspect of life, thus shaping America’s institutes and culture. They were also at the forefront of proclaiming liberty, resisting tyranny, and opposing any encroachments on God-given rights and freedoms. In 1898, Methodist bishop and church historian Charles Galloway rightly observed of these ministers:

Mighty men they were, of iron nerve and strong hand and unblanched cheek and heart of flame. God needed not reeds shaken by the wind, not men clothed in soft raiment [Matthew 11:7-8], but heroes of hardihood and lofty courage. . . . And such were the sons of the mighty who responded to the Divine call.11

But the ministers during the Revolutionary period were not necessarily unique; they were simply continuing what ministers had been doing to shape American government and culture in the century and a half preceding the Revolution.

Clergy in American Colonies

For example, the early settlers who arrived in Virginia beginning in 1606 included ministers such as the Revs. Robert Hunt, Richard Burke, William Mease, Alexander Whitaker, William Wickham, and others. In 1619 they helped form America’s first representative government: the Virginia House of Burgesses, with its members elected from among the people.12 That legislature met in the Jamestown church and was opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. Bucke; the elected legislators then sat in the church choir loft to conduct legislative business.13 As Bishop Galloway later observed:

[T]he first movement toward democracy in America was inaugurated in the house of God and with the blessing of the minister of God.14

In 1620, the Pilgrims landed in Massachusetts to establish their colony. Their pastor, John Robinson, charged them to elect civil leaders who would not only seek the “common good” but who would also eliminate special privileges and status between governors and the governed15 – a radical departure from the practice in the rest of the world at that time. The Pilgrims eagerly took that message to heart, organizing a representative government and holding annual elections.16 By 1636, they had also enacted a citizens’ Bill of Rights – America’s first.17

In 1630, the Puritans arrived and founded the Massachusetts Bay Colony, and under the leadership of their ministers, they, too, established representative government with annual elections.18 By 1641, they also had established a Bill of Rights (the “Body of Liberties”)19 – a document of individual rights drafted by the Rev. Nathaniel Ward.20

In 1636, the Rev. Roger Williams established the Rhode Island Colony and its representative form of government,21 explaining that “the sovereign, original, and foundation of civil power lies in the people.”22

The same year, the Rev. Thomas Hooker (along with the Revs. Samuel Stone, John Davenport, and Theophilus Eaton) founded Connecticut.23 They not only established an elective form of government24 but in a 1638 sermon based on Deuteronomy 1:13 and Exodus 18:21, the Rev. Hooker explained the three Biblical principles that had guided the plan of government in Connecticut:

I. [T]he choice of public magistrates belongs unto the people by God’s own allowance.

II. The privilege of election . . . belongs to the people . . .

III. They who have power to appoint officers and magistrates [i.e., the people], it is in their power also to set the bounds and limitations of the power and place.25

Colonial Charters & Constitutions

From the Rev. Hooker’s teachings and leadership sprang the “Fundamental Orders of Connecticut” – America’s first written constitution (and the direct antecedent of the federal Constitution).26 But while Connecticut produced America’s first written constitution, it definitely had not produced America’s first written document of governance, for such written documents had been the norm for every colony founded by Bible-minded Christians. After all, this was the Scriptural model: God had given Moses a fixed written law to govern that nation – a pattern that recurred throughout the Scriptures (c.f., Deuteronomy 17:18-20, 31:24, II Chronicles 34:15-21, etc.). As renowned Cornell University professor Clinton Rossiter affirmed:

[T]he Bible gave a healthy spur to the belief in a written constitution. The Mosaic Code, too, was a higher law that men could live by – and appeal to – against the decrees and whims of ordinary men.27

Written documents of governance placed direct limitations on government and gave citizens maximum protection against the whims of selfish leaders. This practice of providing written documents had been the practice of American ministers before the Rev. Hooker’s constitution of 1638 and continued long after.

For example, in 1676, New Jersey was chartered and then divided into two religious sub-colonies: Puritan East Jersey and Quaker West Jersey; each had representative government with annual elections.28 The governing document for West Jersey was written by Christian minister William Penn. It declared:

We lay a foundation for after ages to understand their liberty . . . that they may not be brought in bondage but by their own consent, for we put the power in the people.29

Under Penn’s document . . .

Legislation was vested in a single assembly elected by all the inhabitants; the elections were to be by secret ballot; the principle of “No taxation without representation” was clearly asserted; freedom of conscience, trial by jury, and immunity from arrest without warrant were guaranteed.30

In 1681, Penn wrote the Frame of Government for Pennsylvania. It, too, established annual elections and provided numerous guarantees for citizen rights.31

Clergy Helped Secure Liberties

There are many additional examples, but it is indisputable that ministers played a critical role in instituting and securing many of America’s most significant civil rights and freedoms. As Founding Father Noah Webster affirmed:

The learned clergy . . . had great influence in founding the first genuine republican governments ever formed and which, with all the faults and defects of the men and their laws, were the best republican governments on earth. At this moment, the people of this country are indebted chiefly to their institutions for the rights and privileges which are enjoyed.32

Daniel Webster (the great “Defender of the Constitution”) agreed:

[T]o the free and universal reading of the Bible in that age men were much indebted for right views of civil liberty.33

Because Christian ministers established in America freedoms and opportunities not generally available even in the mother country of Great Britain, they were also at the forefront of resisting encroachments on the civil and religious liberties that they had helped secure.

For example, when crown-appointed Governor Edmund Andros tried to seize the charters of Rhode Island, Connecticut, and Massachusetts, revoke their representative governments, and force the establishment of the British Anglican Church upon them, opposition to Andros’ plan was led by the Revs. Samuel Willard, Increase Mather, and especially the Rev. John Wise.34 The Rev. Wise was even imprisoned by Andros for his resistance but he remained an unflinching voice for freedom, penning in 1710 and 1717 two works forcefully asserting that democracy was God’s ordained government in both Church and State,35 thus causing historians to title him “The Founder of American Democracy.”36

And when Governor Berkley refused to recognize Virginia’s self-government, Quaker minister William Edmundson and the Rev. Thomas Harrison led the opposition.37 When Governor Thomas Hutchinson ignored the elected Massachusetts legislature, the Rev. Dr. Samuel Cooper led the opposition.38 And a similar pattern was followed when Governor William Burnet dissolved the New Hampshire legislature, Governor Botetourt disbanded the Virginia House of Burgesses, Governor James Wright disbanded the Georgia Assembly, etc.

Leading To War for Independence

And because American preachers consistently opposed encroachments on civil and religious liberties, when the British imposed on Americans the 1765 Stamp Act (an early harbinger of the rupture between the two nations soon to follow), at the vanguard of the opposition to that act were the Revs. Andrew Eliot, Charles Chauncey, Samuel Cooper, Jonathan Mayhew, and George Whitefield39 (Whitefield even accompanied Benjamin Franklin to Parliament to protest the Act and assert colonial rights).40 In fact, one of the reasons that American resistance to the Stamp Act became so widespread was because the “clergy fanned the fire of resistance to the Stamp Act into a strong flame.”41

Five years later in 1770 when the British opened fire on their own citizens in the famous “Boston Massacre,” ministers again stepped to the forefront, boldly denouncing that abuse of power. A number of sermons were preached on the subject, including by the Revs. John Lathrop, Charles Chauncey, and Samuel Cooke;42 the Massachusetts House of Representatives even ordered that Rev. Cooke’s sermon be printed and distributed.43

As tensions with the British continued to grow, ministers such as the Rev. George Whitefield44 and the Rev. Timothy Dwight45 became some of the earliest leaders to advocate America’s separation from Great Britain.

There are many additional examples, but the historical records respecting the leadership of the clergy were so clear that in 1851, distinguished historian Benson Lossing concluded:

[T]he Puritan preachers also promulgated the doctrine of civil liberty – that the sovereign was amenable to the tribunal of public opinion and ought to conform in practice to the expressed will of the majority of the people. By degrees their pulpits became the tribunes of the common people; and . . . on all occasions, the Puritan ministers were the bold asserters of that freedom which the American Revolution established.46

Clergy Fight in the War

However, Christian ministers did not just teach the principles that led to independence, they also participated on the battlefield to secure that independence. One of the numerous examples is the Rev. Jonas Clark.

When Paul Revere set off on his famous ride, it was to the home of the Rev. Clark in Lexington that he rode. Patriot leaders John Hancock and Samuel Adams were lodging (as they often did) with the Rev. Clark. After learning of the approaching British forces, Hancock and Adams turned to Pastor Clark and inquired of him whether the people were ready to fight. Clark unhesitatingly replied, “I have trained them for this very hour!47 When the original alarm sounded in Lexington to warn of the oncoming British menace, citizens gathered at the town green, and according to early historian Joel Headley:

There they found their pastor the [Rev. Clark] who had arrived before them. The roll was called and a hundred and fifty answered to their names . . . . The church, the pastor, and his congregation thus standing together in the dim light [awaiting the Redcoats], while the stars looked tranquilly down from the sky above them.48

The British did not appear at that first alarm, and the people returned home. At the subsequent alarm, they reassembled, and once the sound of the battle subsided, some eighteen Americans lay on Lexington Green; seven were dead – all from the Rev. Clark’s church.49 Headley therefore concluded, “The teachings of the pulpit of Lexington caused the first blow to be struck for American Independence,”50 and historian James Adams added that “the patriotic preaching of the Reverend Jonas Clark primed those guns.”51

When the British troops left Lexington, they fought at Concord Bridge and then headed back to Boston, encountering increasing American resistance on their return. Significantly, many who awaited the British along the road were local pastors (such as the Rev. Phillips Payson52 and the Rev. Benjamin Balch53) who had heard of the unprovoked British attack on the Americans, taken up their own arms, and then rallied their congregations to meet the returning British. As word of the attack spread wider, pastors from other areas also responded.

For example, when word reached Vermont, the Rev. David Avery promptly gathered twenty men and marched toward Boston, recruiting additional troops along the way,54 and the Rev. Stephen Farrar of New Hampshire led 97 of his parishioners to Boston.55 The ranks of resistance to the British swelled through the efforts of Christian ministers who “were far more effective than army recruiters in rounding up citizen-soldiers.”56

Weeks later when the Americans fought the British at Bunker Hill, American ministers again delved headlong into the fray. For example, when the Rev. David Grosvenor heard that the battle had commenced, he left from his pulpit – rifle in hand – and promptly marched to the scene of action,57 as did the Rev. Jonathan French.58

This pattern was common through the Revolution – as when the Rev. Thomas Reed marched to the defense of Philadelphia against British General Howe;59 the Rev. John Steele led American forces in attacking the British;60 the Rev. Isaac Lewis helped lead the resistance to the British landing at Norwalk, Connecticut;61 the Rev. Joseph Willard raised two full companies and then marched with them to battle;62 the Rev. James Latta, when many of his parishioners were drafted, joined with them as a common soldier;63 and the Rev. William Graham joined the military as a rifleman in order to encourage others in his parish to do the same64. Furthermore:

Of Rev. John Craighead it is said that “he fought and preached alternately.” Rev. Dr. Cooper was captain of a military company. Rev. John Blair Smith, president of Hampden-Sidney College, was captain of a company that rallied to support the retreating Americans after the battle of Cowpens. Rev. James Hall commanded a company that armed against Cornwallis. Rev. William Graham rallied his own neighbors to dispute the passage of Rockfish Gap with Tarleton and his British dragoons.65

Clergy Targeted by British

There are many additional examples. No wonder the British dubbed the patriotic American clergy the “Black Regiment.”66 But because of their strong leadership, ministers were often targeted by the British. As Headley confirms:

[T]here was a class of clergymen and chaplains in the Revolution whom the British, when they once laid hands on them, treated with the most barbarous severity. Dreading them for the influence they wielded and hating them for the obstinacy, courage, and enthusiasm they infused into the rebels, they violated all the usages of war among civilized nations in order to inflict punishment upon them.67

Among these was the Rev. Naphtali Daggett, President of Yale. When the British approached New Haven to enter private homes and desecrate property and belongings, Daggett offered stiff and at times almost single-handed resistance to the British invasion, standing alone on a hillside, repeatedly firing his rifle down at the hundreds of British troops below. Eventually captured, over a period of several hours the British stabbed and pricked Daggett multiple times with their bayonets. Local townspeople lobbied the British and eventually secured the release of the preacher, but Daggett never recovered from those wounds, which eventually caused his death.68 When the Rev. James Caldwell offered similar resistance in New Jersey, the British burned his church and he and his family were murdered.69

The British abused, killed, or imprisoned many other clergymen,70 who often suffered harsher treatment and more severe penalties than did ordinary imprisoned soldiers.71 But the British targeted not just ministers but also their churches. As a result, of the nineteen church buildings in New York City, ten were destroyed by the British,72 and most of the churches in Virginia suffered the same fate.73 This pattern was repeated throughout many other parts of the country.

John Wise

Truly, Christian ministers provided courageous leadership throughout the Revolution, and as briefly noted earlier, they had also been largely responsible for laying its intellectual foundation. To understand more of their influence, consider the Rev. John Wise.

As early as 1687, the Rev. Wise was already teaching that “taxation without representation is tyranny,”74 the “consent of the governed” was the foundation of government,75 and that “every man must be acknowledged equal to every man.”76 In 1772 with the Revolution on the horizon, two of Wise’s works were reprinted by leading patriots and the Sons of Liberty to refresh America’s understanding of the core Biblical principles of government.77 (The first printing sold so fast that a quick second reprint was quickly issued.78) Significantly, many of the specific points made by Wise in that work subsequently appeared four years later in the very language of the Declaration of Independence. As historian Benjamin Morris affirmed in 1864:

[S]ome of the most glittering sentences in the immortal Declaration of Independence are almost literal quotations from this [1772 reprinted] essay of John Wise. . . . It was used as a political text-book in the great struggle for freedom.79

And decades later when President Calvin Coolidge delivered a 1926 speech in Philadelphia on the 150th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, he similarly acknowledged:

The thoughts [in the Declaration] can very largely be traced back to what John Wise was writing in 1710.80

It was Christian ministers such as John Wise (and scores like him) who, through their writings and countless sermons (such as their Election Sermons and other sermons on the Biblical principles of government) laid the intellectual basis for American Independence.

Clergy Involvement in Politics

Christian clergy largely defined America’s unique political theory and even defended it in military combat, but they were also leaders in the national legislative councils in order to help implement what they had conceived and birthed. For example, the Rev. Dr. John Witherspoon was a member of the Continental Congress who served during the Revolution on the Board of War as well as on over 100 congressional committees.81 Other ministers who served in the Continental Congress included the Revs. Joseph Montgomery, Hugh Williamson, John Zubly, and more.

Numerous ministers also served in state legislatures – such as the Rev. Jacob Green of New Jersey, who helped set aside the British government in that state and was made chairman of the committee that drafted the state’s original constitution in 1776;82 the Rev. Frederick Augustus Muhlenberg, who helped draft Pennsylvania’s 1776 constitution;83 the Rev. Samuel Stillman, who helped draft Massachusetts’ 1780 constitution;84 etc.

When hostilities ceased at the end of the Revolution, Christian ministers led in the movement for a federal constitution. For example, the Revs. Jeremy Belknap, Samuel Stanhope Smith, John Witherspoon, and James Manning began pointing out the defects of the Articles of Confederation,85 and when the Constitution was finally complete and submitted to the states for ratification, nearly four dozen clergymen were elected as ratifying delegates,86 many of whom played key roles in securing its adoption in their respective states.

Following the adoption of the new federal Constitution, ministers were highly active in celebrating its ratification. For example, of the parade in Philadelphia, signer of the Declaration Benjamin Rush happily reported:

The clergy formed a very agreeable part of the procession. They manifested by their attendance their sense of the connection between religion and good government. They. . . . marched arm in arm with each other to exemplify the Union.87

When the first federal Congress under the new Constitution convened, several ministers were Members, including the Revs. Frederick Augustus and John Peter Gabriel Muhlenberg, Abiel Foster, Benjamin Contee, Abraham Baldwin, and Paine Wingate.

Lasting Influence of American Ministers

Ministers were intimately involved in every aspect of introducing, defining, and securing America’s civil and religious liberties. A 1789 Washington, D. C., newspaper therefore proudly reported:

[O]ur truly patriotic clergy boldly and zealously stepped forth and bravely stood our distinguished sentinels to watch and warn us against approaching danger; they wisely saw that our religious and civil liberties were inseparably connected and therefore warmly excited and animated the people resolutely to oppose and repel every hostile invader. . . . [M]ay the virtue, zeal and patriotism of our clergy be ever particularly remembered.88

Incidentally, besides their contributions to government and civil and religious liberty, the Black Robed Regiment was also largely responsible for education in America. Ministers, understanding that only a literate people well versed in the teachings of the Bible could sustain free and enlightened government, therefore established an education system that would teach and preserve the religious principles so indispensable to the civil and religious liberties they forcefully advocated.

Consequently, in 1635 the Puritans established America’s first public school,89 and in 1647 passed America’ first public education law (“The Old Deluder Satan Act”90). And Harvard University was founded through the direction of Puritan minister John Harvard;91 Yale was founded by ten congregational ministers;92 Princeton by Presbyterian ministers Jonathan Dickinson, John Pierson, and Ebenezer Pemberton;93 William and Mary by Episcopal minister James Blair;94 Dartmouth by Congregational minister Eleazar Wheelock;95 etc.

This trend of Gospel ministers founding and leading American educational institutions continued for the next two-and-a-half centuries, and by 1860, ninety-one percent of all college presidents were ministers of the Gospel – as were more than a third of all university faculty members.96 Of the 246 colleges founded by the close of that year, only seventeen were not affiliated with some denomination;97 and by 1884, eighty-three percent of America’s 370 colleges still remained denominational colleges.98 As Founding Father Noah Webster (the “Schoolmaster to America”) affirmed, “to them [the clergy] is popular education in this country more indebted than to any other class of men.”99

Conclusion

In short, history demonstrates that America’s elective governments, her educational system, and many other positive aspects of American life and culture were the product of Biblical-thinking Christian clergy and leaders. Today, however, as the influence of the clergy has waned, many of these institutions have come under unprecedented attack and many of our traditional freedoms have been significantly eroded. It is time for America’s clergy to understand and reclaim the important position of influence they have been given. As the Rev. Charles Finney – a leader of the Second Great Awakening – reminded ministers in his day:

Brethren, our preaching will bear its legitimate fruits. If immorality prevails in the land, the fault is ours in a great degree. If there is a decay of conscience, the pulpit is responsible for it. If the public press lacks moral discrimination, the pulpit is responsible for it. If the church is degenerate and worldly, the pulpit is responsible for it. If the world loses its interest in religion, the pulpit is responsible for it. If Satan rules in our halls of legislation, the pulpit is responsible for it. If our politics become so corrupt that the very foundations of our government are ready to fall away, the pulpit is responsible for it. Let us not ignore this fact, my dear brethren; but let us lay it to heart, and be thoroughly awake to our responsibility in respect to the morals of this nation.100

America once again needs the type of courageous ministers described by Bishop Galloway:

Mighty men they were, of iron nerve and strong hand and unblanched cheek and heart of flame. God needed not reeds shaken by the wind, not men clothed in soft raiment [Matthew 11:7-8], but heroes of hardihood and lofty courage. . . .And such were the sons of the mighty who responded to the Divine call.101

It is time to reinvigorate the Black Robed Regiment!


Endnotes

1 Boston Gazette, December 7, 1772, article by “Israelite,” and Boston Weekly Newsletter, January 11, 1776, article by Peter Oliver, British official. See also Peter Oliver, Peter Oliver’s Origin & Progress of the American Rebellion, eds. Douglas Adair and John A. Schutz (San Marino California: The Huntington Library, 1961), 29, 41-45; Carl Bridenbaugh, Mitre and Sceptre (New York: Oxford University Press, 1962), 334; Alice M. Baldwin, The New England Clergy and the American Revolution (New York: Frederick Ungar, 1958), 98, 155.

2 Alpheus Packard, “Nationality,” Bibliotheca Sacra and American Biblical Repository (London: Andover: Warren F. Draper, 1856), XIII:193, Article VI. See also Benjamin Franklin Morris, Christian Life and Character of the Civil Institutions of the United States (Philadelphia: George W. Childs, 1864), 334-335.

3 Baldwin, New England Clergy (1958), 170.

4 John Adams, The Works of John Adams, ed. Charles Francis Adams (Boston: Charles C. Little and James Brown, 1851), III:476, “The Earl of Clarendon to William Pym,” January 20, 1766.

5 Adams, Works, ed. Adams (1850), X:284, to Hezekiah Niles, February 13, 1818; X:271-272, to William Wirt, January 5, 1818.

6 “History of Revivals of Religion, From the Settlement of the Country to the Present Time,” The American Quarterly Register (Boston: Perkins and Marvin, 1833), 5:217; Morris, Christian Life and Character (1864), 334-335.

7 Alpheus Packard, “Nationality,” Bibliotheca Sacra (1856), XIII:193, Article VI; Morris, Christian Life and Character (1864), 334-335.

8 Morris, Christian Life and Character (1864), 334-335.

9 Baldwin, New England Clergy (1958), 134.

10 Clinton Rossiter, Seedtime of the Republic (New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co., 1953), 328-329.

11 Charles B. Galloway, Christianity and the American Commonwealth (Nashville, TN: Publishing House Methodist Episcopal Church, 1898), 77.

12 “The First Legislative Assembly at Jamestown, Virginia,” September 4, 2022, National Park Service, https://www.nps.gov/jame/learn/historyculture/the-first-legislative-assembly.htm.

13 Galloway, Christianity (1898), 1131-114; John Fiske, Civil Government in the United States Considered with some Reference to Its Origins (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin & Co., 1890), 146.

14 Galloway, Christianity (1898), 114.

15 Old South Leaflets (Boston: Directors of the Old South Work), 372, “Words of John Robinson (1620)”; “John Robinson’s Farewell Letter to the Pilgrims, July 1620,” Pilgrim Hall Museum, https://pilgrimhall.org/pdf/John_Robinson_Farewell_Letter_to_Pilgrims.pdf.

16 “Plymouth Colony Legal Structure,”1998, Plymouth Colony Archive Project, http://www.histarch.illinois.edu/plymouth/ccflaw.html; Robert Baird, Religion in America (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1845), 51.

17 “Plymouth Colony Legal Structure,”1998, Plymouth Colony Archive Project, http://www.histarch.illinois.edu/plymouth/ccflaw.html.

18 Henry William Elson, History of the United States of America (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1904), Ch. IV, 103-111.

19 “Plymouth Colony Legal Structure,”1998, Plymouth Colony Archive Project, http://www.histarch.illinois.edu/plymouth/ccflaw.html.

20 George Bancroft, History of the United States from the Discovery of the American Continent (Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1858), I:416-417; Galloway, Christianity (1898), 124-125; Old South Leaflets, 261-280, “The Body of Liberties: The Liberties of the Massachusetts Colonie in New England, 1641.”

21 “Charter of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations,” July 15, 1663, The Avalon Project, https://avalon.law.yale.edu/17th_century/ri04.asp.

22 Baldwin, New England Clergy (1958), 27, quoting Roger Williams’ The Bloody Tenet, 137, quoted by Isaac Backus, Church History of New England, I. 62 of 1839.

23 “Timeline: Settlement of the Colony of Connecticut,” Connecticut History Online, May 26, 2021, https://connecticuthistory.org/timeline-settlement-of-the-colony-of-connecticut/.

24 The Federal and State Constitutions, Colonial Charters, and Other Organic Laws, ed. Francis Newton Thorpe (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1909), 1:534, “Charter of Connecticut-1662.”

25 Rossiter, Seedtime (1953), 171.

26 John Fiske, The Beginnings of New England (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin & Co., 1898), 127-128.

27 Rossiter, Seedtime (1953), 32.; J. M. Mathews, The Bible and Civil Government, in a Course of Lectures (New York: Robert Carter & Brothers, 1851), 67-68.

28 “Province of West New Jersey in America,” November 25, 1681, Art. I, The Avalon Project, https://avalon.law.yale.edu/17th_century/nj08.asp; “The Fundamental Constitutions for the Province of East New Jersey in America, Anno Domini 1683,” Art. II-III, The Avalon Project, https://avalon.law.yale.edu/17th_century/nj10.asp.

29 Ernest Sutherland Bates, American Faith (New York: W. W. Norton & Company Inc., 1940), 186-187.

30 Bates, American Faith (1940), 186-187.

31 “Charter for the Province of Pennsylvannia-1681,” The Avalon Project, https://avalon.law.yale.edu/17th_century/pa01.asp.

32 Noah Webster, Letters of Noah Webster, ed. Harry R. Warfel (New York: Library Publishers, 1953), 455, to David McClure, October 25, 1836.

33 Daniel Webster, Address Delivered at Bunker Hill, June 17, 1843, on the Completion of the Monument (Boston: T. R. Marvin, 1843), 31.

34 Fiske, Beginnings of New England (1898),  267-272.

35 John Wise, A Vindication of the Government of New- England Churches (Boston: John Boyles, 1772), 45.

36 J. M. Mackaye, “The Founder of American Democracy,” The New England Magazine (September 1903), XXIX:1:73-83.

37 John Fiske, Old Virginia and Her Neighbors (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin, and Company, 1901), II:57 & I:306, 311.

38 Dictionary of American Biography (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1930), s.v. “Samuel Cooper.”

39 Baldwin, New England Clergy (1958), 90; Stephen Mansfield, Forgotten Founding Father: The Heroic Legacy of George Whitefield (Cumberland House, 2001), 112.

40 Mansfield, Forgotten Founding Father (2001), 112.

41 Baldwin, New England Clergy (1958), 30.

42 Claude H. Van Tyne, The Causes of the War of Independence (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1922), 362.

43 John Wingate Thornton, Pulpit of the American Revolution (Boston: Gould and Lincoln, 1860), 147-148; Van Tyne, Causes of the War of Independence (1922),  362.

44 Bancroft, History of the United States (1858), V:193.

45 Morris, Christian Life and Character (1864), 367-368.

46 Benjamin Lossing, Pictorial Fieldbook of the Revolution (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1851), I:440.

47 Franklin Cole, They Preached Liberty (New York: Fleming H. Revell, 1941), 34.

48 J. T. Headley, The Chaplains and Clergy of the Revolution (New York: Charles Scribner, 1864), 79.

49 Headley, Chaplains and Clergy (1864), 79-82

50 Headley, Chaplains and Clergy (1864), 82.

51 James L. Adams, Yankee Doodle Went to Church: The Righteous Revolution of 1776 (Old Tappan, NJ: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1989), 22.

52 Cole, They Preached Liberty (1941), 36.

53 Cole, They Preached Liberty (1941), 36.

54 Cole, They Preached Liberty (1941), 36.

55 Cole, They Preached Liberty (1941), 36.

56 Adams, Yankee Doodle (1989), 153.

57 Cole, They Preached Liberty (1941), 36.

58 Cole, They Preached Liberty (1941), 36.

59 Headley, Chaplains and Clergy (1864), 68.

60 Headley, Chaplains and Clergy (1864), 69; Appleton’s Cyclopedia of American Biography, s.v. “John Steele.”

61 Headley, Chaplains and Clergy (1864), 71-72.

62 Cole, They Preached Liberty (1941), 36.

63 Headley, Chaplains and Clergy (1864), 72.

64 Headley, Chaplains and Clergy (1864), 69.

65 Daniel Dorchester, Christianity in the United States from the First Settlement Down to the Present Time (New York: Phillips & Hunt, 1888), 265.

66 Boston Gazette, December 7, 1772, article by “Israelite,” and Boston Weekly Newsletter, January 11, 1776, article by Peter Oliver, British official. See also Oliver, Peter Oliver’s Origin & Progress, eds. Adair and Schutz (1961), 29, 41-45; Bridenbaugh, Mitre and Sceptre (1962), 334; Baldwin, New England Clergy (1958), 98, 155.

67 Headley, Chaplains and Clergy (1864), 58.

68 William Buell Sprague, Annals of the American Pulpit: Trinitarian Congregation (New York: Robert Carter & Brothers, 1857), 482.

69 Morris, Christian Life and Character (1864), 350.

70 Dorchester, Christianity in the United States (1888), 265.

71 Headley, Chaplains and Clergy (1864), 58.

72 Dorchester, Christianity in the United States (1888), 266.

73 Dorchester, Christianity in the United States (1888), 267.

74 Linda Stewart, “The Other Cape,” April 2001, American Heritagehttps://www.americanheritage.com/other-cape.

75 Rossiter, Seedtime (1953), 219.

76 J. M. Mackaye, “The Founder of American Democracy,” The New England Magazine (September 1903), XXIX:1:73-83.

77 J. M. Mackaye, “The Founder of American Democracy,” The New England Magazine (September 1903), XXIX:1:73-83.

78 Van Tyne, Causes of the War of Independence (1922), I:357.

79 Wise, Vindication of the Government of New England Churches: and the Churches’ Quarrel Espoused (Boston: Congregational Board of Publication, 1860), xx-xxi, “Introductory Remarks” by Rev. J. S. Clark; Morris, Christian Life and Character (1864), 341

80 Calvin Coolidge, “Speech on the One Hundred and Fiftieth Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence,” July 5, 1926, The American Presidency Project, https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/node/267359.

81 Political Sermons of the American Founding Era: 1730-1805, ed. Ellis Sandoz (Indianapolis, Liberty Fund: 1998), 1:530, from Sermons 17 on John Witherspoon intro.

82 Morris, Christian Life and Character (1864), 366.

83 William Warren Sweet, The Story of Religion in America (New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers, 1950), 182.

84 Frank Moore, Patriot Preachers of the American Revolution (Boston: Gould and Lincoln: 1860), 260.

85 James Hutchinson Smylie, American Clergymen and the Constitution of the United States of America (New Jersey: Princeton Theological Seminary, doctoral dissertation 1958), 127-129, 139, 143.

86 John Eidsmoe, Christianity and the Constitution (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1987), 352, n.15.

87 Benjamin Rush, Letters of Benjamin Rush, ed. L. H. Butterfield (Princeton: American Philosophical Society, 1951), I:474, to Elias Boudinot, “Observations on the Federal Procession in Philadelphia,” July 9, 1788.

88 Gazette of the United States (Washington, D.C.: May 9, 1789), 1, quoting from “Extract from “American Essays: The Importance of the Protestant Religion Politically Considered.”

89 “BLS History,” Boston Latin School, accessed June 4, 2024, https://www.bls.org/apps/pages/index.jsp?uREC_ID=206116&type=d.

90 The Code of 1650, Being a Compilation of the Earliest Laws and Orders of the General Court of Connecticut (Hartford: Silus Andrus, 1822), 90-92; Church of the Holy Trinity v. U. S., 143 U. S. 457, 467 (1892).

91 Appleton‘s Cyclopedia of American Biography (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1888), s.v. “John Harvard.”

92 Noah Webster, Letters to a Young Gentleman Commencing His Education (New Haven: Howe & Spalding, 1823), 237.

93 John Maclean, History of the College of New Jersey, from its Origin in 1746 to the Commencement of 1854 (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott & Co., 1877), I:70.

94 The History of the College of William and Mary, from its Foundation, 1660, to 1874 (Richmond, VA: J.W. Randolph & English, 1874), 95.

95 “Eleazar Wheelock,” Dartmouth, accessed June 4, 2024, https://president.dartmouth.edu/people/eleazar-wheelock.

96 Warren A. Nord, Religion & American Education (North Carolina: The University of North Carolina Press, 1995), 84, quoting from James Tunstead Burtchaell, “The Decline and Fall of the Christian College I,” First Things, May 1991, p. 24; George Marsden, The Soul of the American University (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), 11; Galloway, Christianity (1898), 198.

97 E. P. Cubberley, Public Education in the United States (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin Co., 1919), 204; Luther A. Weigle, The Pageant of America: American Idealism, ed. Ralph Henry Gabriel (Yale University Press, 1928), X:315.

98 Galloway, Christianity (1898), 209-210.

99 Noah Webster, A Collection of Papers on Political, Literary, and Moral Subjects (New York: Webster and Clark, 1843), 293, from his “Reply to a Letter of David McClure on the Subject of the Proper Course of Study in the Girard College, Philadelphia. New Haven, October 25, 1836.”

100 The Christian Treasury Containing Contributions from Ministers and Members of Various Evangelical Denominations (Edinburgh: Johnstone, Hunter and Co., 1877), 203.

101 Galloway, Christianity (1898), 77.

God’s People Want to Know

This 2015 survey by Dr. George Barna asked theologically conservative Christians the areas in which they felt that they needed additional teaching from the pulpit. Here are a just a few highlights:

  • Among the national sample of spiritually active Christian conservatives and moderates, only one in ten people (10%) said their church has been very involved in the election process in the last two voting cycles (2012, 2014). Four out of ten said their church was somewhat involved. The remaining one-half said their church was not involved.
  • Christian conservatives indicated they want their church to get in the game: six out of ten (58%) said they want their church to be more involved in the election process. Among the Christian conservatives, 61% want greater involvement; among the politically moderate Christians only one-quarter (23%) want heightened church engagement.
  • A majority of the survey respondents said it is “extremely important” for their pastor to preach or teach the congregation about the following issues:
      • Abortion 71%
      • Religious persecution 61%
      • Sexual identity 56%
      • Israel 54%
      • Poverty 54%
      • Cultural restoration 53%

See the complete report here.

Protecting Private Property Through the Uniform Commercial Code

Protecting Private Property Through the Uniform Commercial Code

Questions are now being raised about important laws that have been added to state codes in all 50 states over the past 25 years. These laws were deliberately designed to abrogate private property rights and could in the future be used to harm all Americans who hold investment securities, including those held in IRA and 401(k) accounts. At the state level, the concerning statutes in question are contained within the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), primarily in Article 8, which deals with securities.

WallBuilders’ Pro-Family Legislative Network (PFLN), and other organizations and leaders, urge state legislators to carefully consider this alarming infringement on private property.

This letter explains our concerns, summarizes the legal aspects of UCC Article 8, and outlines near-term options for state policymakers who want to take action to protect their constituents and their states. Read the full letter for additional information.

What can you do to help?

Share this Information: We encourage you to forward this to your friends, family and state legislators to help make them aware of this critical issue in your state’s uniform commercial code.

Stay Apprised of the Issue: If this issue is important to you, sign up for our Concerned Citizens legislative update email and we will keep you apprised of this issue.

Sign the Letter: If you represent an organization, or are an elected official who would like to sign this letter, please email us for consideration.

Contribute: If you would like to support this effort to help us brief more lawmakers across the country on this matter, please consider making a tax-deductible donation to WallBuilders Pro-Family Legislative Network Fund.

Lawsuit Challenges D.C. Transit Authority for Violating the First Amendment

In December 2023, First Liberty, ACLU, and Steptoe filed a lawsuit on behalf of WallBuilders.

First Liberty Press Release

Lawsuit Challenges D.C. Transit Authorit – First Liberty

First Liberty Article

https://firstliberty.org/news/ads-about-americas-religious-history-not-allowed/ 

WallBuilders Rejected Ads




WallBuilders Article

These ads would have linked to a collection of quotes by numerous Founding Fathers via our article “The Founding Fathers on Jesus, Christianity and the Bible”: https://wallbuilders.com/resource/the-founding-fathers-on-jesus-christianity-and-the-bible/

Additional Information & Questions

We have asked our attorneys to handle all media inquiries. Please contact Jeremy Dys at 304-881-5196 or [email protected]. Thank you.

David Barton: A Dominionist and Reconstructionist?

Over the past several decades, numbers of my detractors have resorted to making extremist claims about me intended to create distrust or even fear in the minds of those who might hear me. By so doing, they hope potential listeners or readers will reject my message out of hand before even considering the evidence. One common ridiculous claim is that I am a Dominionist (someone who wants to reinstitute Old Testament law and establish a theocracy).

As a result, over the years, I have received questions like this one:

Does David adhere to or teach Dominion Theology or “Kingdom Now” theology? That is in part, that the Church of Jesus Christ will bring in God’s reign of righteousness rather than it happening through the physical return of Jesus Christ?

I disagree with Dominion and Kingdom Now theology and I am not a Dominionist.

Additionally, to establish a theocracy in America would require the abolition of our elective constitutional government. I have worked for decades to educate Americans about the history, excellence, and importance of the US Constitution. I am passionate about knowing and applying it and preserving its principles through the elective voting process. Since having elections precludes the possibility of a theocracy, and since I am such a strong promoter of citizen involvement in the election process, I definitely don’t seek a theocracy.

Furthermore, I am clearly on record about the definite limits of Old Testament law in modern culture. (As an example, see my commentary accompanying Exodus 20 in the very popular Founders’ Bible1.)

The evidence is abundant that their claims are wrong.

The allegations about me and Dominionism originated decades ago, almost exclusively from defamatory articles of atheist and anti-religious writers. Over subsequent years, many individuals doing casual web searches of my name found those earlier articles and innocently accepted their wild claims and then repeated or reposted them without any serious investigation of the truth. As a result, today scores of newer articles brand me as something I am not, and never have been.

Understanding the Original Claims

Examining the writings of those who originally made these errant claims two decades ago, it is clear that the issues the critics considered to be reflective of Dominionism were actually issues that were mainstream across the depth and breadth not only of the Christian community but of much of the nation. Notice the things they pointed to as evidence of Christian support for Dominionism.

According to Eric La Freniere, at the time a columnist for the Daily News Record, one of the most obvious indicators of those who seek a Theocracy is their belief that traditional marriage is to be between one man and one woman (what they often describe as following Old Testament law). He warned that to vote for any state constitutional amendment to protect traditional marriage (which was extremely popular in the 2000s and the 2010s, with support up to 70% in some states2) was “to cast a vote for Dominionism….the righteous religious-political movement to reclaim America as a Christian nation.”3 If La Freniere was correct, the tens of millions of voters in the 31 states who passed a state marriage amendment4 (before the US Supreme Court redefined marriage in 20155) were all part of the Christian Dominionist movement.

Author and journalist Chip Berlet agreed, asserting that the “anti-democratic tendencies in the Christian Right6 concerning marriage amendments proved their Dominionist and Theocratic beliefs. By the way, notice his oxymoronic logic: having citizens publicly vote on marriage amendments placed on the public ballot through the elected legislative process was “anti-democratic.”

Chris Hedges in Harper’s Magazine linked such Dominionists to Adolf Hitler and fascism,7 asserting that conservative Christians were so dangerous that it was acceptable to confront and defeat them outside “the old polite rules of democracy8—that is, the normal rules of constitutional republicanism could be set aside in order to defeat Christians. So is it Christians or the Secular Left who is really anti-democratic?

The Southern Poverty Law Center similarly warned that “Dominionist” Christians “seek to impose Old Testament law on the United States,” and that this desire runs “all the way to the [George W.] Bush White House.”9 What indications did they have of this Dominionism? —what role did the George W. Bush White House have in imposing “Old Testament law on the United States”? They, too, pointed to the state marriage amendments, and the further fact that President Bush had openly endorsed a federal Marriage Amendment.10

A Michigan newspaper (Eastern Echo) likewise alerted voters that a candidate running for Governor was part of Dominionism—that he was “seek[ing] to legislate American life under an ultimate authority of a right-wing interpretation of the Bible.”11 What made him a Dominionist? He not only supported traditional marriage but even opposed embryonic stem cell research. Clearly, he was a religious extremist seeking to impose Old Testament law on Michigan.12

Political commentator and writer Kevin Phillips added that “Christian Reconstructionists” also describe the separation of church and state as a “myth.”13 During the time he made these claims, some 1,800 legal incidents related to “separation of church and state” had occurred.14 Christian attorneys argued that the proper application of the historic separation of church and state did not mean people of faith could not express their faith in public, and that they had the same right to express their beliefs that secular folks did. But for secularists, the “separation of church and state” requires full secularization; therefore, those Christians arguing for equal protection were pursuing a “myth” and attempting to establish a Theocracy. (In recent years the US Supreme Court has issued a series of landmark decisions constitutionally repudiating the extremist views of the secularists, and, according to these arguments, they, too, are apparently Dominionists.)

More Claims

Numerous books and other seemingly countless articles used similar extremist rhetoric in attacking the Christian leaders who supported what were typically mainstream public issues.15 National Jewish writer and columnist Stanley Kurtz reviewed many of those writings and sarcastically summarized the ridiculous claims about Christians he found in those attack pieces:

What is the real agenda of the religious far Right? I’ll tell you what it is. These nuts want to take over the federal government and suppress other religions through genocide and mass murder rather than through proselytizing. They want to reestablish slavery. They want to reduce women to near-slavery by making them property, first of their fathers, and then of their husbands. They want to execute anyone found guilty of pre-martial, extramaritial, or homosexual sex. They want to bring back the death penalty for witchcraft. But aren’t extremists like this far from political power? On the contrary, the political and religious movement called “Dominionism” has gained control of the Republican Party, and taken over Congress and the White House as well. Once they take over the judiciary, the conversion of America to a theocracy will be sealed. The Dominionists are very close to achieving their goal. Once they have the courts in their hands, a willing Dominionist Republican-controlled Congress can simply extend the death penalty to witchcraft, adultery, homosexuality, and heresy. The courts will uphold all this once conservatives are in control, since [Supreme Court Justice Antonin] Scalia himself appears to be a Dominionist.16

Kurtz then singled out one of the voices making these ridiculous claims, Kathryn Yurica. He noted that she and her extremist accusations were actually mainstream among a considerable number of secularist groups:

Yurica’s article [“The Despoiling of America”] is so wild-eyed and strange that it would barely be worth mentioning were Yurica not a featured speaker at a recent conference called, “Examining the Real Agenda of the Religious Far Right.” That conference . . . was supported by the National Council of Churches, People for the American Way, The Nation, The Village Voice, and United Americans for Separation of Church and State.17

The speakers at that conference identified five congressional policies they believed provided absolute proof that America was being placed under Old Testament law by Christian Dominionists. What were those five theocratic policies?

(1) Enacting tax cuts;
(2) Funding faith-based programs;
(3) Decreasing welfare spending;
(4) Giving the Federal Communication Commission additional tools to crackdown on indecency on television; and
(5) Attempts to end judicial filibusters.18

Horrors! Once Christians begin enacting tax cuts, the next thing they’ll do is stone rebellious children and publicly pillory adulterers! Yet as Kurtz noted, most of what were labeled Dominionist views were rational positions widely embraced by a majority of the population.

Interestingly, a much later 2020 study claimed that more than half of all Americans today are Dominionists who want a Christian Nation.19 Really??? At a time when public polls show church attendance,20 Bible reading,21 and Biblical worldview22 are at record lows, more than half the nation are Christian Dominionists? This claim is just as absurd today as it has been for the past several decades. (A brilliant rebuttal of that study and its ridiculous conclusion was done by Prof. Mark David Hall in his “Tilting at Windmills: The ‘Threat’ of Christian Nationalism.”23)

Perhaps Supreme Court Attorney David French, who has handled countless federal court cases in his career, best summarized the ludicrous nature of the false call of Dominionism:

If originalist legal arguments and a call to return our country to its founding constitutional ideals constitute dominionism, which social conservatives aren’t dominionist? Is free speech a dominionist concept? What about religious liberty? How about protecting life and ensuring that it cannot be taken without due process of law? We’re all dominionists now.24

In summary, holding traditionally conservative and constitutional positions is what it meant to be a Dominionist when the term became popular some 20 years ago and when it was first applied to me. Those who used the term intended that it should scare unknowing citizens away from fearsome “Dominionist” leaders such as Justice Anthony Scalia, President George Bush, House Speaker Newt Gingrich, or me, all of whom publicly supported traditional marriage, opposed abortion and embryonic stem cell research, and thought voluntary prayer was appropriate in schools. This is how I came to be labeled a “Dominionist.”

David Barton


Endnotes

1 The Founders Bible (Newbury Park, CA: Shiloh Road, 2017), Exodus 20.
2 See, for example, ballot measures passed with 70% or greater approval in 2004 for Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Dakota, and Oklahoma (“Ballot Measures,” 2004, CNN); in 2006 for South Carolina and Tennessee (“Ballot Measures,” 2006, CNN); and numerous other ballot measures throughout the early 2000s for states with a pass rating of over 50% but lower than 70% (“Ballot Measures, 2008, CNN; “Approved Amendments,” Wikipedia, accessed on March 14, 2022).
3 Eric La Freniers, “You Can Vote For Dominionism,” Daily News-Record, October 31, 2006.
4 See, for example, constitutional amendments passed in Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Arizona, California, Colorado, Georgia, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Wisconsin: “Approved Amendments,” Wikipedia, accessed on March 14, 2022.
5 Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. 644 (2015).
6 Chip Berlet, “The Christian Right & Theocracy,” Political Research Associates, accessed on March 14, 2022.
7 Chris Hedges, “Soldiers of Christ,” Harpers Magazine, May 5, 2005; Stanley Kurtz, “Dominionist Domination,” National Review, May 2, 2005.
8 Chris Hedges, “Soldiers of Christ,” Harpers Magazine, May 5, 2005; Stanley Kurtz, “Dominionist Domination,” National Review, May 2, 2005.
9 Mark Potok, “Democracy vs. Theocracy,” Southern Poverty Law Center, October 19, 2006.
10 George W. Bush, “Remarks on the Constitutional Amendment Protecting Marriage,” The White House, February 24, 2004.
11 Staff Edit / In Our Opinion, “Governor campaign fails to address issues,” Eastern Echo, October 30, 2006.
12 “Motors and Voters: Michigan’s Gubernatorial Race,” Wall Street Journal, 2006.
13 Kevin Phillips, American Theocracy: The Peril and Politics of Radical Religion, Oil, and Borrowed Money in the 21st Century (Viking, 2006), 233.
14 See the publication Undeniable by First Liberty, available at https://firstliberty.org/undeniable/.
15 See, for example, Tony Kiddie, Republican Jesus: How the Right Had Rewritten the Gospels (University of California Press, 2021); James C. Sanford, Blueprint for Theocracy: The Christian Right’s Vision for America (Metacomet Books, 2014); Michael L. Weinstein and Davin Seay, With God On Our Side: One Man’s War Against an Evangelical Coup in America’s Military (Thomas Dunne Books, 2013); Sam Harris, Letter to a Christian Nation: A Challenge to the Faith of America (Transworld, 2011); Clyde Wilcox, Onward Christian Soldiers? The Religious Right in American Politics (New York: Routledge, 2011); Michael Lerner, The Left Hand of God: Taking Back Our Country from the Religious Right (Harper San Francisco, 2006); Damon Linker, The Theocons: Secular America Under Siege (Doubleday, 2009); Robin Rex Meyers, Why the Christian Right is Wrong: A Minister’s Manifesto for Taking Back Your Faith, Your Flag, Your Future (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2006); Phillips, American Theocracy (2006); Jim Wallis, God’s Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn’t Get It (HarperCollins, 2006); Bill Press, How the Republicans Stole Christmas: the Republican Party’s Declared Monopoly on Religion and What Democrats Can Do to Take it Back (Crown Publishing Group, 2005); Clint Willis, Jesus is Not a Republican: the Religious Right’s War on America (De Capo Press, 2005); Philip Gold, Take Back the Right : How the Neocons and the Religious Right have Betrayed the Conservative Movement (Basic Books, 2004); Jan G. Linn, What’s Wrong with the Christian Right (Florida: Brown Walker Press, 2004); Douglas Anthony Long, Fundamentalists and Extremists (2002); Rob Boston, Close Encounters with the Religious Right: Journeys into the Twilight Zone of Religion and Politics (New York: Prometheus Books, 2000); Frederick Clarkson, Eternal Hostility: The Struggle Between Theocracy and Democracy (University of Michigan, 1997); William Curtis Martin, With God on Our Side: the Rise of the Religious Right in America (Broadway Books, 1996); Bruce Barron, Heaven on Earth? The Social & Political Agendas of Dominion Theology (Zondervan, 1992); Sara Diamond, Spiritual Warfare: The Politics of the Christian Right (New York: Black Rose Books, 1989); and numerous others.
16 Stanley Kurtz, “Dominionist Domination,” National Review, May 2, 2005.
17 Stanley Kurtz, “Dominionist Domination,” National Review, May 2, 2005.
18 Jon Ward, “Left aims to smite ‘theocracy’ movement,” The Washington Times, May 1, 2005.
19 Andrew Whitehead and Samuel Perry, Taking America Back for God: Christian Nationalism in the United States (New York: Oxford University Press, 2020), 25.
20 Jeffery M. Jones, “U.S. Church Membership Falls Below Majority for First Times,” Gallup, March 29, 2021.
21 Alec Gallup & Wendy W. Simmons, “Six in Ten Americans Read Bible at Least Occasionally: Percentage of frequent readers has decreased over last decade,” Gallup, October 20, 2000.
22 George Barna, “Perceptions about Biblical Worldview and Its Application,” Center for Biblical Worldview, May 2021, 6.
23 Mark David Hall, “Tilting at Windmills: The “Threat” of Christian Nationalism,” Standing for Freedom, February 8, 2022.
24 David French, “I’m a Dominionist? I Had No Idea,” National Review, September 1, 2011.

America: God Shed His Grace on Thee Tract

This tract contains a variety of quotes that exemplify the Founders’ regard for a Biblically based system of government. See the complete text below and download it for your personal use!


America God Shed His Grace on Thee

By David Barton

America is not only one of the greatest nations in the history of the world, it has also become its longest ongoing constitutional republic. Its original government has now endured well over two centuries. However, America’s longevity is only as stable and secure as its foundation, so what is the foundation of American government?

Political scientists now know that the greatest source of political inspiration for our founding fathers was the Bible, which was cited in 34% of the quotations from the founding era (1760-1805).1

This discovery, while it might surprise many today, would have come as no surprise to the founders. It was John Adams who explained:

The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were….the general principles of Christianity.2

Founding father Noah Webster echoed the same message:

The religion which has introduced civil liberty is the religion of Christ and His Apostles….This is genuine Christianity and to this we owe our free constitutions of government.3

Founder after founder declared the same belief:

Whether this [new government] will prove a blessing or a curse will depend upon the use our people make of the blessings which a gracious God hath bestowed on us. If they are wise, they will be great and happy. If they are wise, they will be great and happy. If they are of a contrary character, they will be miserable. Righteousness alone can exalt them as a nation [Proverbs 14:34]. Reader! Whoever thou art, remember this, and in they sphere practice virtue thyself and encourage it in others.4 Patrick Henry

Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that His justice cannot sleep forever.5 Thomas Jefferson

Contrary to what is often asserted today, the founders never intended that God’s Word or His principles be separated from public life. They knew these principles were vital to the success of our new government. James Madison explained:

Before any man can be considered as a member of civil society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor of the Universe.6

And to the same Divine Author of every good and perfect gift [James 1:17] we are indebted for all those privileges and advantages, religious as well as civil, which are so richly enjoyed in this favored land.7

Furthermore, the founders saw the Bible as inseparable from public education. Benjamin Rush, the first founder to call for free national public schools, explained:

Let the children…be carefully instructed in the principles and obligations of the Christian religion. This is the most essential part of education.8

The great enemy of the salvation of man, in my opinion, never invented a more effectual means of extirpating [removing] Christianity from the world than by persuading mankind that it was improper to read the Bible at schools.9

The founders even viewed the principles of the Bible as inseparable from civil law. James Wilson, a signer of the Constitution and an original Justice on the U.S. Supreme Court, explained:

Human law must rest its authority ultimately upon the authority of that law which is diving….Far from being rivals or enemies, religion and law are twin sisters, friends, and mutual assistants. Indeed, these two sciences run into each other.10

These statements, despite the prominence of those who made them, are virtually unknown today. Instead, for the last four decades we have been taught that our founders were irreligious, desiring a complete separation between religious principles and public policy. However, the facts dispute the contention.

First, consider the actions of the founding fathers. The overwhelming majority of these men were so firmly committed to the principles of God’s Word that they went to great lengths to propagate those principles. For example, do you realize that many founders helped organize and lead several of the Christian societies which today are still spreading the gospel? Those men helped found the American Tract Society; the American Sunday School Union; over one hundred city, county, and state Bible societies, including the American Bible Society; the American Board of Foreign Missions; the Christian Constitutional Society; the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge; the American Society for Educating Pious Youth for the Gospel Ministry; and many other similar groups. Are such organizations likely to be started by supposedly irreligious men who wanted God’s principles separate from society?

Second, consider their words––or their lack thereof. Today’s well-known phrase “separation of church and state” appears in no part of the Constitution. Furthermore, the discussions of the ninety founding fathers who framed the First Amendment (which the Courts now tell us means “separation of church and state”) are recorded in the Congressional Journal from June 7 to September 25, 1789. Interestingly, not once in those months of discussions did one of the founders ever mention that phrase. Doesn’t it seem logical that if they had intended today’s doctrine of “separation of church and state” that at least one of those ninety would have mentioned it? Ironically, today we no longer learn about what our founders did say in the Constitution; instead, we learn about something that they didn’t say!

The Bible reminds us that the most important part of any structure is its foundation: “If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?” (Psalm 11:3). It is time to remember our foundations, and to listen again to the words of those who were instrumental in making this country one of the world’s most powerful and respected nations. As George Washington reminded us:

No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the invisible Hand which conducts the affairs of men more than the people of the United State….We ought to be no less persuaded that the propitious [favorable] smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation which disregards the eternal rules of order and right which Heaven itself ordained.11

For America’s continuing survival and world leadership, we must recapture the founders’ vision of the importance of God’s Word and His gospel for this nation. America must again embrace the wisdom articulated so well by President John Adams:

We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion….Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.12

Download the complete tract here!


Endnotes

1 Origins of American Constitutionalism, 1987
2 Letter to Thomas Jefferson, June 28, 1813
3 History of the United States, 1832
4 From Henry’s handwritten notes on the back of his copy of the Stamp Act resolutions, made public after his death
5 Notes on the State of Virginia, 1781
6 A Memorial and Remonstrance, 1785
7 Presidential Proclamation, 1815
8 A Plan for Free Schools, 1787
9 “A Defense of the Use of the Bible in Schools,” 1791
10 “Lectures on Law, Delivered in the College of Philadelphia,” 1790-1791
11 “Inaugural Address,” April 30, 1789
12 Letter of October 13, 1789.

Modern Thanksgiving Celebrations

The Pilgrims inaugural Thanksgiving in 1621 was followed by sporadic national Thanksgiving celebrations but more common celebrations at the state level. The switch to a standard Thanksgiving holiday at the federal level came about in the 1800s.

Lincoln’s 1863 Proclamation

Much of the credit for this adoption may be attributed to Mrs. Sarah Josepha Hale, editor of Godey’s Lady’s Book (a popular magazine containing poetry, art work, and articles by America’s leading authors). She persistently campaigned for an established national Thanksgiving, such as in this 1852 editorial:

The American people have two peculiar festivals, each connected with their history, and therefore of great importance in giving power and distinctness to their nationality. The Fourth of July Is the exponent of independence and civil freedom. Thanksgiving Day is the national pledge of Christian faith in God, acknowledging him as the dispenser of blessings. These two festivals should be joyfully and universally observed throughout our whole country, and thus incorporated in our habits of thought as inseparable from American life.1

For two decades, Hale promoted the idea of a national Thanksgiving Day,2 writing president after president. Abraham Lincoln eventually responded to this persistence in 1863 by setting aside the last Thursday of that November. The Thanksgiving proclamation issued by Lincoln at that time was remarkable not only for its strong religious content but also for its timing. It was delivered in the midst of the darkest days of the Civil War, after the Union had lost multiple battles in the first three years of that conflict. Yet, despite those dark circumstances, Lincoln called Americans to give thanks that:

In the midst of a civil war of unequaled magnitude and severity, which has sometimes seemed to invite and provoke the aggressions of foreign States, peace has been preserved with all nations, order has been maintained, the laws have been respected and obeyed, and harmony has prevailed everywhere, except in the theater of military conflict.3

In that proclamation, President Lincoln also noted that:

The year that is drawing toward its close has been filled with the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies. To these bounties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the Source from which they come, others have been added which are of so extraordinary a nature that they can not fail to penetrate and soften even the heart which is habitually insensible to the ever-watchful providence of Almighty God. . . . No human counsel hath devised nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the Most High God, Who, while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy.4

Presidents After Lincoln

Over the seventy-five years following Lincoln’s Thanksgiving Proclamation, presidents faithfully followed Lincoln’s precedent, annually declaring a national Thanksgiving Day. The date, however, of the celebrations varied widely from proclamation to proclamation.

Among the many Thanksgiving proclamations in the WallBuilders’ collection is an 1887 handwritten one issued by President Grover Cleveland in which he once again emphasized God’s hand:

The goodness and the mercy of God, which have followed the American people during all the days of the past year claim our grateful recognition and humble acknowledgment. By His omnipotent power He has protected us from war and pestilence and from every national calamity; by His gracious favor the earth has yielded a generous return to the labor of the husbandman, and every path of honest toil has led to comfort and contentment; by His loving kindness the hearts of our people have been replenished with fraternal sentiment and patriotic endeavor, and by His Fatherly guidance we have been directed in the way of national prosperity.5

In 1933, President Franklin D. Roosevelt set the precedent of celebrating Thanksgiving on the fourth Thursday of each November. And in 1941, Congress permanently established that day as the national Thanksgiving holiday.6

During World War II, (which would eventually claim the lives of over 400,000 Americans7), President Franklin Delano Roosevelt issued a Thanksgiving proclamation for November 1944 asking Americans to be thankful . . .

For the preservation of our way of life from the threat of destruction; for the unity of spirit which has kept our Nation strong; for our abiding faith in freedom; and for the promise of an enduring peace.8

President George W. Bush summarized this history of Thanksgiving proclamations and celebrations in his 2007 Thanksgiving proclamation:

Our country was founded by men and women who realized their dependence on God and were humbled by His providence and grace. The early explorers and settlers who arrived in this land gave thanks for God’s protection and for the extraordinary natural abundance they found. Since the first National Day of Thanksgiving was proclaimed by President George Washington, Americans have come together to offer thanks for our many blessings.9

As Americans continue to “Be thankful in all circumstances” (1 Thessalonians 5:18 NLT), our Thanksgiving celebrations should include reflections on all the reasons to be truly thankful to God for His many blessings. Perhaps the four items George Washington mentioned in America’s original federal Thanksgiving proclamation in 178910 should be the basis for future Thanksgiving commemorations:

  1. Acknowledge the providence of Almighty God;
  2. Obey His will;
  3. Be grateful for His benefits; and
  4. Humbly implore His protection and favor.

For additional articles on Thanksgiving, see:

See previous articles in this series on Thanksgiving: “The Pilgrims Thanksgiving,” https://wallbuilders.com/resource/the-pilgrims-thanksgiving/ and “The Founders Thanksgivings,” https://wallbuilders.com/resource/the-founders-thanksgivings/.


Endnotes

1 “Editor’s Table,” Godey’s Lady’s Book (Philadelphia: October 1852), 388, https://www.google.com/books/edition/Godey_s_Lady_s_Book_and_Ladies_American/3Y9MAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA388&printsec=frontcover.
2 Appleton’s Cyclopedia of American Biography, eds. James Grant Wilson & John Fiske (New York: D. Appleton & Co, 1888), III:35, https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39076005094201&seq=55.
3 Abraham Lincoln, Proclamation for Thanksgiving, October 3, 1863, The Works of Abraham Lincoln, eds. John H. Clifford & Marion M. Miller (New York: University Society Inc, 1908), VI:160-161, https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Works_of_Abraham_Lincoln/v5B14zepO3MC?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA160&printsec=frontcover; Abraham Lincoln, “Thanksgiving Proclamation,” October 3, 1863, WallBuilders, https://wallbuilders.com/resource/proclamation-thanksgiving-day-1863/.
4 Lincoln, Proclamation for Thanksgiving, October 3, 1863, Works of Lincoln, eds. Clifford & Miller (1908), VI:160-161, https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Works_of_Abraham_Lincoln/v5B14zepO3MC?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA160&printsec=frontcover; Lincoln, “Thanksgiving Proclamation,” October 3, 1863, WallBuilders, https://wallbuilders.com/resource/proclamation-thanksgiving-day-1863/.
5 Grover Cleveland, “Thanksgiving Proclamation,” issued October 25, 1887, WallBuilders, https://wallbuilders.com/resource/proclamation-thanksgiving-day-1887/.
6 “Congress Establishes Thanksgiving,” The National Archives, accessed August 31, 2023, https://www.archives.gov/legislative/features/thanksgiving/; “Presidential Thanksgiving Proclamations 1940-1949: Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry S. Truman,” Pilgrim Hall Museum, https://www.pilgrimhall.org/pdf/TG_Presidential_Thanksgiving_Proclamations_1940_1949.pdf, Proclamation 2571, November 11, 1942, referring to a “joint resolution of Congress approved December 26, 1941, which designates the fourth Thursday in November of each year as Thanksgiving Day.”
7 “WWII Memorial Registry,” accessed August 31, 2023, https://wwiiregistry.abmc.gov/.
8 Franklin D. Roosevelt, “Thanksgiving Proclamation,” issued November 1, 1944, WallBuilders, https://wallbuilders.com/resource/proclamation-thanksgiving-day-1944/.
9 George W. Bush, “Thanksgiving Day, 2007,” issued November 15, 2007, https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/11/20071115-5.html.
10 George Washington, Proclamation for a National Thanksgiving on October 3, 1789, Writings of George Washington, ed. Jared Sparks (Boston: Russell, Odiorne and Metcalf, 1838), XII:119; George Washington, “Thanksgiving Proclamation,” issued on October 3, 1789, WallBuilders, https://wallbuilders.com/resource/proclamation-thanksgiving-day-1789/.