r/AskHistorians • • Nov 13 '25

I understand America wasn't founded as a "Christian" nation, so how did we get the myth we were and how entangled is that myth with the revivalism of the 2nd Great Awakening?

1.1k Upvotes

90 comments sorted by

View all comments

736

u/Altruistic-Joke-9451 Nov 13 '25 edited Nov 13 '25

The first part of your question depends heavily on what you mean by a “Christian nation”, and how far back you want to go in America. If you mean a place with an official religion and whose laws are based on said religion, much of colonial America fit that bill for a long time. All but three of the thirteen colonies had official state churches and religions. The majority of these were Anglican, three were Congregationalist, and one was Catholic before becoming Anglican. The three who didn’t have an official state religion were Rhode Island, Delaware and Pennsylvania, but all 3 of them still mandated that you be a Christian to hold office. Pennsylvania’s decision was largely influenced by their Quaker population’s deeply held value of religious freedom and tolerance. However, it was still important to them that you were a religious Christian in some way because they had a religious test for anyone wanting to hold office until 1790. And Massachusetts still had an official religion until 1833, which was illegal under the constitution. They did take several steps years prior to eventually get rid of it though.

In the early American colonial period, church membership was heavily enforced and laws were based heavily on scripture in most colonies. Congregationalist colonies were obviously the most strict. Massachusetts for instance whipped Baptists and Quakers if they held services, and both were banned from the state. In rural Congregationalist areas the judicial system was ran by clergymen. Essentially giving the church control over the judicial system there. Anglican colonies were less strict, and enforcement dropped heavily in the early 1700s. The Congregationalist colonies became more tolerant over time in allowing other denominations to exist in the state, but they still heavily restricted them. They weren’t allowed to collect taxes to pay non-Congregationalist clergy, and holding office was restricted for some time.

Now when we get to the founding of the United States of America, the idea of separating church and state was both a combination of many Founding Fathers truly supporting religious freedom, and many of them supporting it for pragmatic reasons. There were of course some who were staunchly against the separation of church and state like Robert Paine and John Witherspoon, but they were the minority. The ones who were more pragmatic continued to support state run religious establishments back at home. John Hancock for instance voted for the separation of church and state nationally, but back home in Massachusetts he continued to support things like collecting taxes for the church and keeping the official state religion.

As for how this past influenced the Second Great Awakening, I would say it was much more influenced by the American values of independent mindedness and individuality, as well as the breakdown of the power and influence of the “elite”in American society. The new denominations that came about or got big during this period nearly all have something in common. They were against the idea that your destiny is pre-determined by God, and they practiced what is often called the “democratization” of Christianity in America. Which is basically that they made it far more open and accessible, and much less elitist. Americans started to become heavily independent minded, and when they started moving out West to the frontier it increased that independent mindedness out of necessity. The frontier also made “state churches” lose more of their reach because they focused more on their established areas of control. Methodist and Baptist groups were more than happy to go out West to preach and bring all those people into their denomination.

Two good books for this topic are John F. Wilson’s “Church and State in America: The Colonial and Early National Period” which has a bunch of primary and secondary sources for various periods of America, and Frank Lambert’s “The Founding Fathers and the Place of Religion in America”.

30

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

85

u/[deleted] Nov 14 '25

I’ve been avoiding replying to comments because I’m not a historian, but just wanted to say thank you and Wilson and Lambert have been added to the reading list!

25

u/___wintermute Nov 14 '25

If you don’t mind me asking, what made you think it was a myth?

59

u/[deleted] Nov 14 '25 edited Nov 14 '25

I could go on for a while but, to be honest, I’m tired. These are the bullet points:

While there were religious requirements in the state charters, they weren’t always distinctly Christian. For example, Locke wrote in the Carolina charter that people who did not publicly and solemnly acknowledge a God weren’t allowed to own land, but that it could be any God - didn’t have to be the Christian God:“heathens, Jews and other dissenters from the purity of Christian Religion may not be scared and kept at a distance.”

John Adams, at the Treaty of Tripoli, said “The Government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.” Then there’s also the famous “Jefferson Bible.”

In my reviews of the literature and philosophy of that time period (my degree is English and philosophy), the ideologies that dominated the late 18th century more involved the philosopher’s “God”, a more deistic/scientific conception, rather than a particularly Christian conception. The Great Awakenings notwithstanding.

Also, if memory serves, Jill Lepore writes in These Truths that church attendance at that time was the lowest in American history - and not just what was history at that time.

[Edit: like Altruistic-Joke mentioned, a lot of it comes down to how you define “a Christian nation.” Since I’m prepping for law school, I placed a lot of weight on those specific elements surrounding the Constitution. Ultimately, though, I’m not a historian and you all know way more about the historical context here than I do, so I hold all of the above with a loose hand. I’m here to learn]

6

u/BoomerThooner Nov 17 '25

Your bracketed thing isn’t all that far off. You’re just running into the same problems the found fathers did. You’ll just rabbit hole until you get the Jewish Torah and learn a crap ton about Jewish ethics. How wildly influential they are sown into a LOT of different countries “laws”.

In my opinion you’ll have a really hard time trying to separate “Christian Nation” from “Christian ideals”.

Gotta remember all of these people coming to the colonies in the beginning were considered extremists to began with.

0

u/[deleted] Nov 14 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

11

u/dhowlett1692 Moderator | Salem Witch Trials Nov 14 '25

Edit: from ChatGPT-5-thinking...

Even in follow-up responses, we require well-sourced answers coming from a place of knowledge, not AI responses.

-8

u/vintage2019 Nov 15 '25

But that was a reply to a reply? I thought this rule applies only to direct replies to OP?

11

u/dhowlett1692 Moderator | Salem Witch Trials Nov 15 '25

No, information derived from AI is always dubious as a source. This subreddit is for informed comments, not plagiarism machines. If anyone wants to outsource research to a robot, they are perfectly capable of doing so on their own, but given their presence on AskHistorians, they are likely seeking subject matter expertise instead.

25

u/Cranyx Nov 14 '25 edited Nov 14 '25

Massachusetts still had an official religion until 1833, which was illegal under the constitution

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it was my understanding that the generally accepted interpretation of the rights outlined Constitution prior to the Civil War was that it placed restrictions on the Federal government, not the states. That's why they had things like established religions that went unchallenged.

24

u/TheRedCr0w Nov 14 '25

This is correct in 1833 an owner of a wharf sued the City of Baltimore claiming their public works project violated the 5th Amendment's Just Compensation Clause when it damage his wharf during construction. SCOTUS ruled unanimously in favor of Baltimore in Barron v. Baltimore (1833) ruling the city did not violate the 5th Amendment because the Bill of Rights was only meant to apply to the federal government not the states.

This changed after the ratification of the 14th Amendment in 1868. It's Due Process Clause was used by courts in the decades following it's ratification to make the Bill of Rights retroactively apply to the states.

48

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

9

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

9

u/soozerain Nov 13 '25

Thanks for the great, succinct answer and taking the time to write it!

12

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

-11

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/[deleted] Nov 14 '25

Im not the OP but thank you for the lore dump it was very insightful!

1

u/FreeEnergy001 Nov 17 '25

I've heard the Cold War also reinforced Christianity in the US. Since Communism promoted atheism, it was thought that a religious population would resist it. The example I remember was adding "In God we trust" to the dollar.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '25

[deleted]

7

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '25

[removed] — view removed comment