The Founders’ Faith and Politics


We have just concluded one of, if not the, most controversial elections in our history.

My goal here is to emphasize the spiritual aspect of what has just transpired and what lies ahead, and to encourage people to continue to pray and trust God. Our theme is reconciliation –  restoring hope, trust and faith in America – and joining these God-ordained attributes with government.

A young boy, who really wanted $100, prayed for two weeks, but nothing happened. Then he decided to write God a letter requesting $100. When the postal authorities received the letter to “GOD, U.S.A.,” they decided to send it to the president. The president was so impressed, touched and amused that he instructed his secretary to send the boy $50. (Mr. President thought that this would appear to be a lot of money to the little boy.) The boy was delighted with the $50 and immediately sat down to write a thank you note to God that read: “Dear God, Thank you very much for sending me the money. However, I noticed that for some reason you had to send it through Washington, D.C. – and those guys took half of it!”

While humorous, the joke illustrates the idea of trusting, or not trusting, government and upon what we predicate said trust. We have all heard, “Never discuss religion and politics.” Well, there may be a measure of wisdom there, but the truth is, one’s faith, or lack thereof, will always determine one’s politics.

“Integrity” can be defined as saying and doing the same thing. “Hypocrisy” is saying one thing but doing another. “Faith” is the unquestioning acceptance of a person, place or thing without substantive evidence. “Blind” is being without the ability to see. “Blind faith” could be defined as the unquestioning acceptance of a thing without seeing any concrete proof of its validity.

The God of the Judeo-Christian Bible does not demand blind faith. He left abundant proof of His existence. That said, should a greater measure of trust be accorded to something as demonstrably untrustworthy as a political party?

We have just elected a new president with a political party that has the majority in Congress. We have, in effect, committed the destiny of our nation into their hands. Do we simply walk away and leave it at that?

If the Almighty does not require blind faith, should a politician or a political party? If the Creator of the universe provides reasonable and logical support for believing in Him, is it an intelligent decision to simply believe politicians without tangible evidence of the efficacy of their word, and upon what basis their word stands?

The Founders, who were mostly Christians (some deists), were keenly aware of the nature of man. John Adams, second president of United States, cut to the chase: “We have no government armed with the 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.”

Adams’ comments echoed an earlier observation attributed to George Washington: “It is impossible to rightly govern a nation without God and the Bible.” 

As we see the new President Trump and Congress begin the process of governing, let us recall the power of that truth. The men intimately involved in the founding of United States of America were convinced that an acknowledgment of the Creator was inextricably bound up in the life of the nation.

The Founding Fathers were not deceived regarding the inherent dangers of a secular society. This is clearly stated by the sixth president of United States, John Quincy Adams, who said: “The highest glory of the American Revolution was this; it connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government and those of Christianity.”

This “indissoluble bond” between the Founders’ faith and their politics is the basis for our liberties as a nation and the foundation of this powerful engine of human liberty.

Today, when you see people rioting in the streets, burning our flag, refusing to acknowledge the Pledge of Allegiance and disregarding our national anthem, keep in mind the words of John Witherspoon (a signer of the Declaration of Independence, a leader in the Continental Congress, and the sixth president of Princeton University), who summed up such “activism” thusly: “Whoever is an avowed enemy of God, I scruple [hesitate] not to call him an enemy to his country.”

Default Comments (2)

2 thoughts on “The Founders’ Faith and Politics

  1. Sandy Kramer‎
    GrubHub Food Delivery & Takeout
    “I am disabled, and often dependent upon others for food delivery.   I have quite often made use of GrubHub, but I cannot do so any longer in good conscience.   Besides, since Trump voters are unwelcome as your staff members, I am certain you do not wish us to  continue to expend our filthy lucre as customers.   I should let you know that, in addition to being a “deplorable”, I am also a friend of many Blacks, and Latinos. Just in case you are expanding your list of undesirables, I am also a Jew.”
    (Dr.) Sandy Kramer


    GrubSnub: CEO Can’t Stomach Trump Voters
    November 14, 2016
    Grubhub offers take out, but not before telling conservative employees to get out! The food delivery service ordered something to go alright — workplace freedom. In the wake of last Tuesday’s stunning results, 40-year-old Matt Maloney managed to catapult his company to the top of the trending storylines, and not for a good reason. The young entrepreneur had penned an angry letter to employees urging Trump supporters to show themselves out of the company. In an email to staff that was leaked to the press, Maloney fumed:
    “I absolutely reject the nationalist, anti-immigrant, and hateful politics of Donald Trump and will work to shield our community from this movement as best as I can… I want to be clear that this behavior — and these views — have no place at Grubhub. Had he worked here, many of his comments would have resulted in his immediate termination… If you do not agree with this statement then please reply to this email with your resignation, because you have no place here. We do not tolerate hateful attitudes on our team.”
    If Maloney had bothered to look at the electoral map, he might have guessed at the outrage his comments would spark. In many ways, his email only managed to reaffirm the frustration that led to Trump’s stunning win. On Twitter, voters on both sides slammed the young CEO. “One day, these arrogant [liberals] will realize we deplorables are done being silent. @Grubhub we’re done with you. #BoycottGrubhub.” Others could only shake their heads at the ignorance of such a stance. “Congrats, Grubhub. You just alienated half of your customers!” The backlash was so intense that the company’s stock dropped five percent overnight. As of this morning, shares were down nine points — hardly the news executives were hoping for after October’s bleak financial report. “The stock is down by one-fifth since its earnings report late last month on concerns of slowing growth,” the Wall Street Journal warned. “Perhaps Mr. Maloney was trying to get his customers so angry that they worked up an appetite.”
    Desperate to end the PR nightmare, Maloney insisted on Friday that his comments were “misconstrued” (how, no one knows). “I want to clarify,” he told reporters, “that I did not ask for anyone to resign if they voted for Trump. I would never make such a demand. Grubhub welcomes and accepts employees with all political beliefs, no matter who they voted for in this or any election. We do not discriminate on the basis of someone’s principles, or political or other beliefs.” For customers, the damage control was too little too late. “There is something truly ironic about the way some executives say they support diversity and inclusion, unless of course you happen to disagree with their narrow point of view on the topic,” Fox Business’s Steve Tobak points out. “In that case, tolerance be damned, don’t let the door hit you on your way out.”
    And while we’re 100 percent supportive of corporations making their own decisions and setting their own policies, we believe that consumers have choices too — like taking their business elsewhere. That’s the beauty of the free market. If CEOs want to enter the culture wars, that’s their prerogative. But they shouldn’t be surprised when the market fires back — as it has with Target, Lands’ End, J.C. Penney, and others who’ve taken socially extreme positions. A year and a half after Angie’s List decided to fight a bill protecting religious liberty, their company is also on the brink. Last month, Angie’s List laid off 150 employees — with plans for more. The CEO who decided it was a good decision to support the bullying of Christians is gone, and so is the revenue. Sales have been sliding, thanks to a nationwide boycott that kicked off in 2015. With losses of more than $16.8 million, it’s pretty clear now that the company is paying for its radical agenda.
    Let this be a lesson to other CEOs — and the Americans they’re trying to bully. When places like Grubhub draw a line in the cultural sand, it’s time to take your business elsewhere. Brendan Eich did, when he was forced out of his job at Mozilla Corporation for holding views on marriage that more than half of the country still does! Now, two years after liberals chased him out of the company he built, Eich is back and stronger than ever. He’s created a revolutionary ad-free web browser that experts say is blowing away the competition. But because of Eich’s history, LifeSiteNews explains, Brave “was opposed before it was officially launched. Major media websites took legal action to stop it.”
    But that didn’t slow down Brendan Eich any more than the Left’s smear campaign did. He defended the concept and won. “Brendan picked the name ‘Brave,'” a spokesman said, “because we need users who will take a stand and fight back.” Well, users/consumers are fighting back all right. And you can join them! Download the 2nd Vote app to see where the companies you do business with stand. The election may be over, but you can keep voting with your dollars!

    Tony Perkins’ Washington Update is written with the aid of FRC senior writers.

  2. Quintin Johnson says:

    A very powerful message! Especially the final quote. I wish more people understood this; though spiritual discernment cannot come to the non-spiritually discerned.

Leave a Reply to Princeton University Cancel reply

Facebook Comments (2)

Disqus Comments (0)

%d bloggers like this: