'Tolerance is a Christian Idea'
by Wendy Cloyd, senior editorial coordinator
How can a country and government founded on the premise of religious tolerance now be intolerant of religion? Author William Federer traces the origin of tolerance to Christianity and explains just what went awry.
In his book "Backfired: A Nation Born for Religious Tolerance No Longer Tolerates Religion," William Federer delves deep into the archives of American history. From the time the first colonists set foot on a new continent in search of the freedom to worship God as they wished to the politically divided nation today, Federer documents the origin and progression of religious tolerance and discusses why the very concept has backfired, leaving Christianity out in the cold.
The first migrants from England were fed up with the king forcing his chosen religion on the country and punishing any who had a different point of view. These Puritans arrived in the New World in pursuit of religious freedom, and soon others began to follow. Many held different beliefs than the Puritans, but all wanted the same thing -- the freedom to worship as they believed without the government dictating a national religion.
As more and more people moved to America, the once homogeneous Puritans became neighbors with Protestants, Catholics and those of myriad Christian faiths. The Christians that came to America insisted on the right to worship freely, and Federer says it was this mixture that taught neighbors to tolerate each other's differences.
"In order to be intellectually consistent, the Puritans had to extend the same rights they demanded for themselves to other Christian groups," Federer told CitizenLink. "Out of this is born the concept of tolerance."
CitizenLink talked further with Federer about the genesis of tolerance and about his book.
Q: Mr. Federer, you discuss an evolution of toleranceâ€â€Christians learning to accept other Christians who believed differently, Christians learning to accept other religions and those who held religious beliefs accepting those who did not. Tell me about that.
A: In England the control over religion was from the outsideâ€â€the king told you what to believe and how to worship. Those who fled this system wanted to create a system of belief that was personalâ€â€without government control. If you didn't believe, then you were persecuted and you fled.
The first group to do that was the Puritans. They were separatists who wanted to "purify" the church. Then in 1630 began the great migrationâ€â€starting with 20,000 who left England for America. Even then they only tolerated other Puritans. You'll remember from history lessons that they hung witches. But they also hung Quakers and anyone who believed differently. So then people began breaking off into colonies to have the freedom to worship.
The nation became more and more diverse as Catholic, Protestant, Jewish and even non-believers began to live side by side. It was never anticipated that there would be huge waves of immigrants coming to our country. But out of this was born evangelismâ€â€the idea that you would welcome non-Christians into your neighborhood so you could love them in Christ and share your faith. And out of this was born religious tolerance.
This progression of an all-inclusive society with tolerance for personal belief has now resulted in a society now intolerant of religion. How did this happen?
In Islamic countries religion is forced from the outside inâ€â€they even have religious police. But in America, Christians said "Jesus never forced anyone to believe in Him, so we shouldn't." The Sermon on the Mount where Jesus said "Do unto others"â€â€that is a Christian idea.
But now many of are using that freedomâ€â€the freedom gained from the progression of toleranceâ€â€against Christians. In strict Islamic societies, they prohibit Judeo-Christian expression. And now the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) is doing the same in our country.
Tell me, in a nutshell, what your book is about. What are you trying to get across to the reader?
The purpose is to approach the whole separation of church and state debate from an entirely new angle. When secularists try to say that Christians are intolerant, we need to point out that tolerance is a Christian idea and secularists are indebted to Christians for their freedom. It is a fact that this country was not founded by secularists. Christians in Europe fled to America and insisted on the right to worship freely.
The country was born out of Christians tolerating Christians then tolerating non-Christians. History shows that the tolerance all lifestyles are enjoying todayâ€â€they are indebted to Christians.
Some people say that we can't rely on documents and opinions of the founding fathers to define America because it is a different world today than it was hundreds of years ago. Why is the idea of the Constitution as a living document a dangerous one?
Human nature has not changed, and the Constitution is a limit on greedy human nature. In England the King held all power. It was Lord Acton that said, "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." So they divided the power in threeâ€â€executive, legislative and judicial.
The Constitution is based on the biblical idea of fallen manâ€â€that sinners will keep other sinners from sinning. If you have three boys and one piece of pie they all want, the best way to divide the pie is to have one draw, one cut and one assign who gets which piece. They all want to be sure they get enough, so they'll do it fairly.
The Constitution assumes concentrated power is evil. The only alternative to the Constitution is concentrated power. And once government gets power -- even emergency powerâ€â€they keep it.
If you knock away the legs of the table, don't be surprised when the table falls. Take away the foundation of our governmentâ€â€the Judeo Christian foundationâ€â€don't be surprised when the system falls.
Most people who read this book will be people of faith, people who experience intolerance but aren't sure what to do about it. What do you hope they learn from your book?
To win an argument you have to cite an authority both sides respect. You can't pull out your Bible and begin reciting Scripture to a non-believer. You won't win the argument.
So look to the historical documents and speeches of John F. Kennedy and Harry S. Truman, for example. Let these people and documents of history that the other side respects be used in support of your own argument. Kennedy and Truman understood the importance of our religious foundation.
If you look up the definition of religion, it means "a system of belief." Look up "religion," look up "belief"â€â€our government is a belief system with its foundations in religion. You can't have a separation of government and belief system.
There are those that want their own thoughts to underlie the actions of government instead of the Judeo-Christian foundation. If they are saying, "The founders had it but we don't need it," then you take away a standard and you end up with chaos.
Tell me any final thoughts you'd like to share.
Look at other countries who do not have religious toleranceâ€â€who do not allow the Judeo-Christian faithâ€â€and then examine the history of America. Christians birthed the progression of tolerance. Polls say 78 percent of Americas are Christian. Yet our courts are targeting the Judeo-Christian faith.
Remember the words of Calvin Coolidge: "Unless the faith of the American in these religious convictions is to endure, the principles of our Declaration will perish. We can not continue to enjoy the result if we abandon the cause."
