Civil Religion - Establishment of Religion

Gamer Geek excellent response to Our Civil Religion gets me started on the next part of this little reflection. He wrote, "Our founding fathers very explicitly wrote a secular constitution without reference to any specific gods" and questioned the understanding of those claiming this to be a "Christian Nation." Is this true? Did they purposefully write a secular constitution? Was their vision of this separation absolute?

My reading tells me that the founding father never envisioned a "Christian Nation" but neither did they envision a purely secular one. Indeed, we see God references throughout our nation's history. Our relationship with the divine is part of who we are. Do not forget that this was a nation formed by Quakers & Puritans.

Our first great "sacred text," The Declaration of Independence makes it's case with the statement "endowed by their Creator." This is not a secular case.

The preamble to the Constitution did not invoke the name of God, but it maintained that same transcendent feeling. Words like "Blessings of Liberty" and "more perfect Union" have a religious tone in any age.

When I read the first Amendment to Bill of Rights, I see the hand of men who fled persecution for their beliefs. Is this an effort to keep our great nation secular or was it to ensure that we might all have religious freedom? To be certain, some of these men were early forerunners to modern secular humanism, but most were Christian of one form or another. The fact that their efforts transcended the mindsets of their age and has bridged generations is nothing short of miraculous. So radical where these ideas that it took an extra 3 years to add them to the constitution!

See how easily this history lends itself to the founding myth of American civil religion?

All that said, the best way to protect religious freedom is by doing exactly what the first Amendment states, "make no law respecting an establishment of religion." In such that the end result is a secular society, then so be it. Any mindset that suggests (for or against) this idea is anti-religion is wrong. The first Amendment is so positively protective of religious freedom that it counters both pure secularism and theocracy.

So, what's wrong with this? It sounds rather inspired. Therein lies the potential for trouble. Consider this:

This unique and often paradoxical notion of protecting religion by not establishing a state one, was so radical that it has become foundational to the lifting up of the civil religion. Indeed, people on both sides of the issue can easily point to it as the cornerstone of their "faith" in the American ideal. It simply mesmerizes me to think about it. So, powerful is are these words that sacred sites were built in Philadelphia & Washington, DC so that millions of Americans can make pilgrimage. Who else comes to see these artifacts? Why, millions of prospective converts from all over the globe. We call the tourists.

What's the harm in lifting up such a revolutionary concept for all the world to see? One word: Zealots. Zealots see one truth. They ignore all contradictions as false-hoods. Zealots start wars. Zealots talk in absolutes. To religious communities, Zealots are idolaters. To secular communities they are destroyers of pluralism. This is the group that Gamer Geek & Nord both fear in their comments. They are the group that we should all fear.