Christian Foundation???

One of the things which bothers me about the Christian right, but also to a lesser extent the Christian left as well, is the historical myth that the founding fathers set with a Bible in one hand and a quill pen in the other writing the constitution.

We hear it all the time. "This country was built on Christian prinicples." However, when you look at our form of government, it bears little resemblance to any type of Biblical government Old Testament or new.

God's plan for Isreal was a sort of theocratic socialism. The prophet would be in charge as a "Judge" over Isreal and receive instructions from God for the big issues. Otherwise, they would follow a code of laws which were quite interesting in light of America's preoccupation with capitalism. Now, I'm not opposed to capitalism, per se. We have benefitted as a nation from it, but we must not enshrine it as essentially Biblical. There was a type of free enterprise in the sense of individuals such as farmers and craftspeople selling their own goods, but the foundation of capitalism is loaning money at interest which was forbidden under the Law.

One of the most interesting elements of the law had to do with land ownership. Here's what Leviticus has to say about it:


And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof: it shall be a jubile unto you; and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every man unto his family.
(Lev 25:10)

As you read further, you find out that every 50 years all of the land which had been sold to other people was redistributed to the original families so that no one could build up a monopoly on wealth because in those days wealth was measured in land and cattle and the produce of the land.

Also, they were not allowed to sell the land at whatever they could get for it. The price was fixed based on the produce of the land for the years the owner held it. They were not allowed to "charge what the market would bear." Such profiteering which is the American way of life in business was forbidden.

Since Isreal is not free in the New Testament, we must look at the organization of the church community for hints as to Government. In this case we see a type of communal living at the beginning. The church shared their funds with each other so that all could share in the prosperity of others. Of course, this was necessary considering the persecution of the times. There was a rude democracy at work, but it was direct democracy in the sense of coming to a consensus on issues rather than voting on them and taking the 51 percent solution.

So, where did our form of government come from? Well, most of the models had their roots in Greece and Rome. The original form of government in the U.S. was a type of elected oligarchy. The franchise was limited to males and landowners. With the exception of local offices and the house of representatives, Senators and Presidents were elected by the electoral college. The electors were not bound by law to vote for their candidate either, although they usually would.

The Roman senate was composed of the heads of ancient families for the most part and the Procounsuls were elected by popular vote of a limited citizenry as well. In the period before the emperors this provided a type of representative form of Government which was later refined into the Parliaments of Europe and eventually that of the U.S.

Likewise, our legal system has its roots in Roman Law. The Justinian Code laid the groundwork for legal codes throughout the Middle Ages, the Renaissance and the Age of Enlightenment. Those codes were the models upon which our legal system is built. The Romans were the first to set forth the principle of presumption of innocence which is the hallmark of western Juris Prudence. The Justinian Code more than the 10 Commandments laid the foundation of our laws. Indeed, only the laws concerning theft, murder, and perjury are based on Mosaic law and those are shared by nearly all legal systems.

So, does this mean that our system is bad? No, not at all. What it does mean is that we cannot turn American History into some sort of apologetic for tearing down the wall of separation between church and state. Contrary to the assumptions of some, the founding fathers did not consider themselves to be setting up a "Christian" nation, even though most of them would consider themselves Christian (even though probably not by the standards of modern day evangelicals or the early church). They were driven more by classical ideals and the French enlightenment. The produced a good system. Would God's system be better? Probably, but I fear you need God to run it, since I don't think we have very many humans capable of doing so equitably.