God of Liberty: A Religious History of the American Revolution by Thomas S. Kidd argues that evangelicals and deists* agreed upon basic principles of religious freedom key to the success of the Revolution and the nation:
- disestablishment of state churches
- creator God as guarantor of fundamental human rights [common creation of humanity = equal rights]
- threat to polity posed by human sinfulness had to be addressed
- republic needed to be sustained by virtue
- belief in God and/or Providence moved in and through nations
The diversity of faiths made it unlikely that the establishment could work properly. Nonetheless, each person had the liberty to worship God as they deemed fit. Nearly everyone did believe there was a God though some as having a more naturalistic quality.
God created us all and did not play favorites. We have equal liberty. "How about slavery?" Some people did understand the problem. Others wanted to sweep it under the rug since it seemed too hard to end the problem. Jefferson had a lot of that while being honest enough to have some quotable comments.
The concept of "nature and nature's God" shows some redundancy. We can consider humans each a project of a joint creation of nature itself. The idea of an overriding providence, some force that guides us and/or our nation is reassuring. It is like we are "fated" to do something.
The third criterion is reflected in the idea that men are not angels so we need laws and checks and balances. The fourth underlines the importance of ethics and values, not simply the theme of "we have the power, so we can use it." One favored by those now in power.
Alexis Coe discusses Washington's concerns about corrupt factions who could threaten our republic. He warned that "it is not difficult for those who at any time hold the reins of Power, and command the ordinary public favor, to overturn the established Constitution, in favor of their own aggrandisement.
Washington was hopeful that such factions could not overwhelm the large nation as a whole. The nation is made up of people and institutions. The resignations arising from the Eric Adams affair underline how personal and institutional ethics have some real traction. They work off each other. People have personal values but also fit into wider societies that provide pragmatic reasons for their actions. Virtue remains important.
I think religion and spirituality have a broad meaning. The same can be said about "God." The five criteria have merit even if with do not grant the existence of a separate god who is watching over us.
The principles of such things still matter. We should have some "ultimate truth" in our lives with some overall meaning. Nations are guided by the idea that they are not just moving along like an uncontrollable car. If we are, we need to try to act as if we are not.
We should accept our common humanity, our limitations, and the importance of personal virtue. We should respect our right to express our religious and moral beliefs in our different personal ways. The limit there is when it unduly threatens the well-being of others. This is where you can draw lines that allow Native Americans to use peyote without allowing nurses not to vaccinate. At least, in theory.
I respect religion and religious liberty. It is too precious to violate it via Christian Nationalism or selective expression that establishes certain faiths and burdens the free exercises of others. Some understandably are cynical about religion because it is a tool of scoundrels. Fire can be used by arsonists.
It is still a useful tool.
==
* From the book:
In the eighteenth century, deism referred to a philosophical movement advocating natural religion, or a nonsectarian faith based primarily on ethics rather than theology. Deists often believed that God had created the natural world but did not now interfere in the affairs of men. They were often skeptical about traditional Christian doctrines such as the divinity of Christ or his resurrection.
Deism never truly died died out. We now have a growing "none of the above" (Nones) group, only a segment being agnostics or atheists. These people often speak of being "spiritual but not religious."
Overall, they believe in some sort of "spiritual" forces that guide our lives. They might not like to speak of "God" but there does seem to be some overlap here.