Protestantism

» Migisi - Speaking for the Founders

In response to Speaking for the Founders posted by pink101:

.
That's what I've read too.

-- posted by Migisi

» pink101 - The Citation

In response to Speaking for the Founders posted by Migisi:
.
I'm sorry I forgot the citation for the above quotation. It's too late to add it there as the edit window has closed; but, here it is:
.
http://huuweb.org/Sermons/deism.html
.
It is an interesting site. If you go there, you can do a "find on this page search" by typing in the word, mason. Try it.
.

.
Here's another quotation--regarding George Washington--from the same site:
.
Our first President, George Washington, would not kneel for prayer or take communion in church. When pressed about this by his minister, Washington fixed the man with an icy stare, and, from that day on, made it his practice to leave church early, before the communion service. Washington was an ardent Mason, and he maintained (to the United Baptist Churches in Virginia in May, 1789) that every man "ought to be protected in worshipping the Deity according to the dictates of his own conscience." On one occasion, he went out of his way to champion the right of a Unitarian minister to serve as a military chaplain, when other such chaplains petitioned to have the man removed.
.
This is in strong and precise reference to the "unalienable rights" referred to in our Founding documents.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Brian Tubbs - GW and Deism

In response to Speaking for the Founders posted by Migisi:

Migisi, don't get me started on Washington. I am aware that many make the claim he was a Deist, but the historical record doesn't support that. Washington was an Anglican.

» pink101 - GW and Deism

In response to GW and Deism posted by BrianTubbs:

.
Migisi, don't get me started on Washington.
.

.
heh heh heh

-- posted by pink101

» Migisi - GW and Deism

In response to GW and Deism posted by BrianTubbs:
.
Washington was an Anglican.
.
Not disputed. My link says that too. It explains:
.
"Washington, like many people in colonial America, belonged to the Anglican church and was a vestryman in it. But in early America, particularly in pre-revolutionary America, you had to belong to the dominant church if you wanted to have influence in society, as is illustrated by the following taken from Old Chruches, Ministers and Families of Virginia, by Bishop William Meade, I, p 191. "Even Mr. Jefferson, and George Wythe, who did not conceal their disbelief in Christianity, took their parts in the duties of vestrymen, the one at Williamsburg, the other at Albermarle; for they wished to be men of influence."
.
Nothing's changed. Those who aspire to influence and politics today join churches. See how Obama became a Christian not long ago. I wonder what chance he'd have had for the Presidency if he hadn't.

-- posted by Migisi

» Migisi - Speaking of infidels

In response to Speaking for the Founders posted by pink101:

.
Pretty good summation. Guess I'm an 'infidel'.

-- posted by Migisi

» Brian Tubbs - GW and Deism

In response to GW and Deism posted by Migisi:

I read the article. It argues that George Washington was an Anglican in public, but a Deist in reality. The exact opposite is the truth. George Washington's public comments conveyed the image of a Deist, and this appears to be deliberate. He believed passionately in religious freedom, while at the same time, wanting the USA to assume a monotheistic or deistic framework.

If you look closely at Washington's life and letters, however, one can see that he was very much an Anglican.

Check out the following...

http://hnn.us/articles/34925.html

And then (if you still doubt) pick up a copy of Lillback's George Washington's Sacred Fire. When I read it, I had pretty much accepted the possibility that GW was a nominal Christian at best. This book erased those doubts completely. It's that good, and NO book - and I do mean NO book - has amassed the extensive scholarship and research that this one does on the subject.

» pink101 - GW and Deism

In response to GW and Deism posted by BrianTubbs:
.
"I want to examine with you the historical facts in the case of a particular legend of religious nationalism, namely the legend that our most prominent founders were good Christians -puritans even -and that by extension, our nation has a Christian foundation.
.
"I want to show that it was Deism -a powerful force of modernity-not any variant of Christianity, that had the greatest spiritual influence on our most prominent Founders. I do this, unabashedly, in the spirit of patriotism.
.
"Let's start with some historical context: "
.
http://huuweb.org/Sermons/deism.html
.

-- posted by pink101

» Migisi - GW and Deism

In response to GW and Deism posted by BrianTubbs:
.
It's too bad GW and the other Founders aren't around today to personally share their beliefs with us here, and clear up any controversy.
.
Suppose my participation at Suite came to an end. Depending on what somebody read, and WHEN I wrote it... one might contend that I was a Christian, another think I was an athiest, another a Catholic, still another a pagan, etc. My beliefs have gone through a transition over time. Could this also have been true for GW? Perhaps someday you may experience a transition in beliefs (you never know). Folks here would remember you as Brian the Baptist Pastor by what you wrote - which would be correct for your past, but not your present. Get what I'm saying?

-- posted by Migisi

» Brian Tubbs - Not a hopeless examination

In response to GW and Deism posted by Migisi:

Migisi, you speak with some wisdom. That's a compliment.

I agree that people's values can and often do change. And certainly the specifics of their beliefs change.

One of the toughest Founders to pin down, due to this, is Thomas Jefferson. He was literally all over the place on some issues throughout his public life.

But there are some constants - at least with some people. And GW was such a person. There were some things with GW that stayed consistent throughout his life. I think the area of his faith is one of them.

Note that I'm not (I really am not) remaking GW in my image. I'm not projecting onto GW my Baptist faith. (There are some that do - Baptists, I'm talking about). I see GW for what he was - a Virginia Anglican/Episcopalian in the 1700s, who kept most of his theology close to the vest. I accept that and respect it. But it bothers me when people come along and call him a Deist. That, he most certainly was NOT. The evidence, for those who take the time to study it, is pretty convincing that he was a sincere Anglican/Episopalian -- albeit one who didn't wear his religion on his sleeve.