The Creation of a More Perfect Union: An American Christian’s Peaceful Yet Bold Political Life

“The secular depends on virtues that it cannot generate from within itself.” [1]
— Charles Chaput

Finding the appropriate balance between promoting Christian living and loving their neighbor has been difficult for American Christians in this tumultuous political climate. Living in a republic demands political involvement from each citizen, yet such involvement may tempt the Christian citizen to engage in the toxic discourse which conflicts with Christ’s mandate of unconditional love. At the same time that confrontational attitudes in politics have forced many people out of the public discourse, willful retreat from the public square is merely self-exclusion from the process of policy creation. Reaching a compromise between these two poles of incivility and indifference equally requires boldness in defending one’s beliefs and respect toward political opposition. Striking a balance is crucial for American Christians who want to make a better country. The United States’ founding values on religious political engagement and doctrines of tolerance position American Christians to promote their political beliefs peacefully and respectfully.  

American identity included deep religious sentiment at its inception. The first settlers of the American colonies were English Anglicans settling in Virginia. Soon after, many groups of English religious minorities seeking to practice their faiths without persecution from the British crown settled in the northeast. By the time of the ratification of the Constitution, John Jay wrote in Federalist no. 2 that “Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people—a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion” [2]. America was rejecting European sectarianism by becoming a pluralistically Christian nation in which many denominations coexisted under the same unified mission of Christ and became tolerant of one another. To this point, in an 1813 exchange with Jefferson, John Adams described such unity between Christians: “The general Principles, on which the Fathers Achieved Independence, were the only Principles in which, that beautiful Assembly of young Gentlemen could Unite…And what were these general Principles? I answer, the general principles of Christianity, in which all these Sects were United” [3]. The Founders decided against being a Catholic nation, or a Calvinist nation, or a Lutheran nation, or any nation belonging to any particular sect of Christianity. They decided to form a unified Christian nation.

In addition to Jay and Adams, the majority of the Founders were professing Christians and shaped the United States’ founding with their religious language and imagery. The Declaration of Independence itself, which Thomas Jefferson authored, justifies the secession of the American colonies from the English Empire in explicitly religious terms: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” [4]. The intrinsic equality of all men, a concept best explicated in Christian belief and harkening from Genesis, cemented the moral fabric of his day around the egalitarian ideal [5]. Later political movements for abolition and desegregation would weave this same value into the centers of their platforms. 

---

The intrinsic equality of all men, a concept best explicated in Christian belief and harkening from Genesis, cemented the moral fabric of his day around the egalitarian ideal.

---

As the Founders looked to Christianity as a rallying point for the nation’s development, they carved out special protections for religious belief. James Madison, the leading author of the Constitution, understood the need for governance through a Christian worldview: “If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary” [6]. Such controls included the right to practice any religion without government coercion—that is, no governing body should be able to force any person to hold certain religious beliefs. Madison’s sentiment that “it is the duty of every man to render to the Creator such homage and such only as he believes to be acceptable to him” highlights the convictions which would later undergird the First Amendment [7]. Many in and after the Founding era have misunderstood Madison’s position. He, along with the other Founders, advocated for the institutional separation of Church and State—not a country devoid of religious morals. 

Thomas Jefferson’s 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptist Association showcases how the Founders conceived of the relationship between the church and the state in light of the First Amendment. As religious minorities in the state of Connecticut, the Danbury Baptists wanted assurance that the ability to practice their Baptist faith without interference from the Puritan state-funded church was not simply “as favors granted” by the government but as a part of their “inalienable rights” [8]. Jeffersone reassured the Danbury Baptists that the First Amendment erects “a wall of separation between Church & State” [9]. The First Amendment served, as it continues to serve, as a bulwark against governmental encroachment by preventing the federal government from promoting a single faith at the expense of the others. Jefferson’s “Wall of Separation” refers only to the institutional overlap of the government and the Church and does not seek to remove the religious from public life. The American Founders do not suggest that Americans must reject God as a part of society or in advising governing. On the contrary, they often insist that Christianity and religion are necessary to the proper functioning of the Republic.

This conversation in the federal sphere trickled down to the state level. Within a few decades of the First Amendment’s ratification, many of the states began debating their use of tax revenues to fund state churches. In one debate regarding the Church of England in Virginia, Madison contended that a state-supported church may infringe upon the right to practice religion according to one’s own conscience. His opposition to the establishment of a Virginian state church did not lie with an animosity toward Christianity but with a deep distrust in the government’s ability to handle religion without trampling upon an individual’s natural rights. The power given to a government to declare one faith as favored (inherent in state funding) carries the risk of the trampling over the entirety of one’s liberty: “The same authority which can force a citizen to contribute three pence only of his property for the support of any one establishment, may force him to conform to any other establishment in all cases whatsoever” [10]. Madison’s contention was not that Christianity has no place in government but rather that government has no justifiable place in Christianity. The power and presence of government could all too easily suppress an individual’s right to worship as he pleases. The improper encroachment of the State onto one’s conscience had led the Founders to revolt against the British monarch, and they were determined to prevent a similar intrusion from ever occurring again.

The finesse for American Christians is to promote these values while recognizing that political aspirations are transient. Their sights should rest on building up Christ’s kingdom on earth rather than pursuing personal gains. Though Christ’s mission carried political implications, Christ descended from Heaven to save mankind from sin. Before Pontius Pilate on the eve of His crucifixion, Jesus directly stated: “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world” [11]. While He did not seek to form an earthly kingdom, Jesus did establish a throne which holds primacy over every secular authority. As Archbishop emeritus Charles Chaput wrote in Render Unto Caesar, Christ’s response to the question of whether the Jews ought to pay their taxes to the Roman Emperor “desacralizes Caesar—in fact, he demotes—Caesar by suggesting that Caesar has no rights over those things that belong to God” [12]. In this scene, the aim of the religious leaders, by using politics as a weapon, was to put Jesus at odds either with the occupying Romans or with the zealous Jewish rebels. Jesus distanced Himself from the issue by saying, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s” [13]. This answer was satisfactory to the challenge while retaining its political weight and avoiding hostility toward the question [14]

This response also gives Caesar his due respect. The Apostle Paul elaborates on this command in his explanation that Christians should “be subject to the governing authorities” because “there is no authority except from God” [15]. Paul continues, “Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed” [16]. In contrast to an empire or monarchy which demands pure obedience to the governing authorities, democratic forms of government require an informed and moral citizenry to function. If citizens are meant to vote for their leaders, then they need to be well-equipped in ethics. To this end, John Adams wrote in a 1798 letter, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other” [17]. The Christian citizen shares the same responsibility as any other member of the Republic to inform with attention and moral clarity his vote for the leaders of his government. A Christian’s response to this universal civic duty should reflect their faith and be a beacon of light for the country. As Christ explained to the crowds, “You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden. Nor do people light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a stand, and it gives light to all in the house” [18]. The Christian must uphold his beliefs with boldness because they are the source of light and life for all of mankind. 

That duty becomes more difficult as the contemporary culture increasingly demands that Christians put aside their Christianity when dealing with state affairs. A 2024 Pew Research Center report found that about a bare majority (51%) of Americans think that the Bible should have little to no influence on U.S. laws [19]. This percentage increases dramatically among Muslims (57%), Jews (79%), and the religiously unaffiliated (80%). Asking a Christian to engage with policy creation without consulting Christian belief should be as unacceptable as asking a Muslim to endorse a position without first examining his faith. Moreover, that request for abstention removes the authentic political engagement of more than half of the nation’s citizens—62% of Americans identified as Christians in 2023-24 [20]. Archbishop Chaput harps on this point: “These interior acts of faith are not empty pieties; when sincere, they will always have external, public consequences” [21]. Living an authentic Christian life should produce bold, external results. The central mission of spreading the Gospel requires that every Christian live boldly in a public arena that includes but is not limited to the political realm. The American Christian’s political engagement then becomes an honorable display of the external, public consequences of Christ’s power and glory.

Human politics exists on an inferior and temporary playing field relative to the kingdom of God. Even the Founders were culpable in many evils, but they created a system of government which allowed for its citizens to overcome the Founders’ personal shortcomings. In effect, the American system is constantly creating, constantly innovating, and constantly refining. While a useful instrument for moral development, the American system will eventually pass. The Church (i.e., the collection of all believing Christians) may disagree internally about a number of policy questions which fall outside of the focus of Christ’s kingdom, but a great number of topics have unified responses that stewardship of this moral tool called government demands. If Christians truly believe Christ’s message and desire to watch His kingdom thrive, then apathy toward politics is not a viable option. Courage to proclaim Christ into the American public sphere without sowing division strengthens the Republic. More importantly, Christ’s kingdom continues to grow.

References

1. Chaput, Charles J. Render Unto Caesar: Serving the Nation by Living Our Catholic Beliefs in Political Life. New York: Image, 2012. Page 72.
2. Madison, James, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and Isaac Kramnick. The Federalist Papers / James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay ; Edited by Isaac Kramnick. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1987. Page 91.
3. Adams, John. “Founders Online: John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, 28 June 1813.” National Archives and Records Administration. https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/03-06-02-0208. 
4. “The Declaration of Independence: A Transcription.” National Archives. https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript.
5. Genesis 1:27 ESV
6. Madison, James, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and Isaac Kramnick. The Federalist Papers / James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay ; Edited by Isaac Kramnick. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1987. Pages 319-320.
7. Madison, James. “Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments.” National Archives. https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-08-02-0163.
8. “To Thomas Jefferson from the Danbury Baptist Association.” National Archives and Records Administration. https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/01-35-02-0331. 
9. Jefferson, Thomas. “Jefferson’s Letter to the Danbury Baptists.” Library of Congress Information Bulletin 57, no. 6 (June 1998). https://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html.
10. Madison, James. “Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments.” National Archives. https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-08-02-0163.
11. John 18:36 ESV.
12. Chaput 204.
13. Matthew 22:22 ESV.
14. Ibid.
15. Romans 13:1 ESV.
16. Romans 13:7 ESV.
17. Adams, John. “From John Adams to the Massachusetts Militia, 11 October 1798.” National Archives. https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/99-02-02-3102. 
18. Matthew 5:14-15 ESV.
19. “8 in 10 Americans Say Religion Is Losing Influence In Public Life.” Pew Research Center, Washington, D.C. (2024) https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2024/03/15/8-in-10-americans-say-religion-is-losing-influence-in-public-life/. 
20. Pew Research Center. 2025. “2023-24 U.S. Religious Landscape Study Interactive Database.” doi: 10.58094/3zs9-jc14.
21. Chaput 183.