The Pursuit of Truth

The story of Christianity in America is both remarkable and complicated, grounded in genuine faith yet marked by grievous contradiction. Many of the beliefs and institutions that shaped America’s founding developed centuries earlier in England.

The Pilgrims, as Separatists, were remnants of the Church of England, convinced it could not be reformed from within. The Puritans hoped to purify the church rather than abandon it. But religious tensions were far from over; they were about to take root together in colonial soil as they carried their convictions and religious traditions from England across the Atlantic.

Not every colonist crossed the Atlantic for the same reason. Separatists, Puritans, Quakers, and other dissenting believers held a genuine conviction that conscience must answer first to God, not a monarch. Anglican loyalists, especially concentrated in Virginia and the South, were often quite content with the king as head of both church and state. A large share of the colonists were apolitical, agnostic on religion. Among them were indentured servants and laborers. Many were little known for their religious or political convictions, beyond the demands of daily survival.

By the time the Constitution was framed, a growing number of influential Enlightenment Thinkers, deists, and skeptics occupied the intellectual landscape. Many of the founders embraced fresh ideas while witnessing the hypocrisy of religious dogma and institutional church authority throughout their lives. Those born and raised in the American colonies were influenced by the distinct culture that had developed there over more than a century of settlement. Colonial society was never one thing. It was dissenters and loyalists, the devout and the indifferent, believers and skeptics, all settling the same soil.

The Great Irony

Aboard the Mayflower, the same church disagreements and authority structures crossed the Atlantic together. The separatists, God’s Saints, called the others Strangers, like tares among the wheat (Matthew 13:25); both would take root and grow alongside one another. The great irony is that religion began organizing in early settlements with government to enforce its laws. Unified with civil government, the religious minority shaped the culture with an increasingly authoritarian lens. The institutions were rooted in centuries of tradition, and the fusion of law and religion allowed the separatists to survive long after the ships had emptied and because generations of ministers inherited their ancestors’ churches.

However, a century and a half later, the ideas that fueled the Revolution were rooted less in Reformation theology than in Enlightenment philosophy. Colonists and founders increasingly drew on thinkers like John Locke, whose ideas about natural rights and liberty of conscience shaped how many understood both religious and civil freedom. As Locke observed, “No man can, if he would, conform his faith to the dictates of another,” arguing that genuine faith cannot be compelled by civil or ecclesiastical authority.

For generations, the colonies wrestled with these questions. It was as much an intellectual battle as a religious one. These ideas and convictions carried real moral weight. By the time the founding generation emerged, many were deeply convicted by the question of human bondage. But the application was uneven and often inconsistent. As the political landscape of the colonies developed, many of the same founders who invoked “unalienable rights” continued to hold enslaved people themselves—a contradiction the era never fully resolved.

The Paradox of Christianity in America

Consider, for a moment, what you already believe. Was America founded as a Christian nation? Historical documents like the Declaration and Constitution reveal that America’s political foundations were shaped by very different men who debated moral and biblical principles. Yet they were also grounded in English common law, influenced by John Locke and the broader concepts of the English Enlightenment. They used principles developed from Greek and Roman political ideas. The Christian nation question is not as simple as it appears. Christianity, as it evolved historically, reflects centuries of theological discussion, denominational traditions, and differing interpretations of Scripture. The founding generation did not inherit a unified expression of the Christian faith. They inherited the accumulated legacy of nearly fifteen centuries of church history.

By the time English settlers crossed the Atlantic, Christianity had passed through the rise of the medieval Roman Catholic Church as the dominant religious institution in Western Europe. The growing union of ecclesiastical and civil authority during the Middle Ages, along with centuries of atrocities and recurring abuses, prompted repeated calls for reform.

The Roots of Reform

Seventeen years after Martin Luther challenged the medieval Catholic Church in 1517, England broke with Rome under Henry VIII. In 1534, the Act of Supremacy established the Church of England and recognized the English monarch, not the pope, as its supreme earthly head.

The break did not end religious conflict. Instead, England entered more than a century of religious upheaval. Under Edward VI, Protestant reforms accelerated. Under Mary I, England returned to Roman Catholicism and hundreds of Protestants were executed, earning her the name “Bloody Mary.”

Elizabeth I restored the Church of England through the Religious Settlement of 1559, but conformity remained compulsory, and dissent persisted. In the generations that followed, no dissenting faith escaped the crown’s reach. Puritans and Separatists suffered under one monarch. Catholics and Presbyterians suffered under another, their fortunes rising and falling with the Crown’s changing policies. Baptists and Quakers found no lasting refuge either. To believe differently was to live at risk, no matter which king occupied the throne.

Under Edward VI (1547–1553), Protestant reforms accelerated. Under Mary I (1553–1558), England returned to Roman Catholicism, and Protestants faced persecution. Elizabeth I’s Religious Settlement of 1559 restored the Church of England but did not end the divisions.

By the time English settlers crossed the Atlantic in the early seventeenth century, they carried with them not only the hope of religious freedom but also the deeply rooted convictions and divisions.

The colonists sought to escape generations of religious conflict, but the conflict itself crossed the ocean with them. Tested through persecution and the fear of imprisonment, those experiences became part of the historical inheritance. To understand why this matters, it is helpful to distinguish religion from the gospel itself.

Why Religion Exists

Religion exists because every generation confronts the same questions. Why do we suffer? Why do we die? Is there purpose beyond this life, or does nothing ultimately matter? Is there a Creator, or are we merely the product of chance? Is there objective truth, or does each person determine truth for themselves? Religion is the organized expression of faith through forms of worship and biblical interpretation.

Neither Jesus nor the apostles established a religion. The gospel began with the personal works of Jesus Christ, the firstborn among many brethren (Romans 8:29), through whom God brought forth a new covenant and an entirely new creation of believers (2 Corinthians 5:17).

The historical religion known as Christianity developed over the centuries through a spectrum of churches and institutions. Church councils met, creeds were written, and traditions were established. Religious and civil authority became increasingly intertwined, with religious leaders holding political power. Ordinary citizens often appealed to civil government to preserve religious conformity and suppress dissent. What many colonists believed would protect the faith often led to consequences and doctrines far removed from Christ’s teachings. The pattern did not end after centuries in Europe. It crossed the Atlantic.

Cut it Straight

Many interpret reality through assumptions they already hold and seek out a variety of sources for their interpretations. Every choice has consequences. Whether we embrace the truth or reject it, the fruit of a decision follows. Paul warned believers, “Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men… and not according to Christ” (Colossians 2:8). Scripture also reminds us that unbelief and compromise with truth have consequences. James said A double-minded man, unstable in all his ways” (James 1:8).

False doctrines arose with the same challenges within the early church. Paul exhorted the young minister Timothy to be a skilled workman whose mastery could withstand careful inspection. “Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth”(2 Timothy 2:15).

The Greek verb Paul uses, translated “rightly dividing,” literally means “to cut straight” — the sense of making a straight path and handling the Word accurately. False teachers misused the Law and promoted speculative myths, endless genealogies, and false doctrines. Elsewhere, Paul confronted those who insisted that circumcision, the observance of days and ceremonies, and other requirements of the Mosaic Law were necessary for righteousness.

Hymenaeus and Philetus went further still. They taught that the future resurrection of believers had already taken place. Paul warned his churches that their teaching would spread like a disease that consumes healthy flesh. “But shun profane and idle babblings, for they will increase to more ungodliness. And their message will spread like cancer (literally gangrene). Hymenaeus and Philetus are of this sort, who have strayed concerning the truth, saying that the resurrection is already past; and they overthrow the faith of some.”(2 Timothy 2:17–18)

The Religion of Christianity

The title or designation “Christian” was not a name believers originally chose for themselves. It first appeared in Antioch, where Barnabas brought Saul after finding him in Tarsus. Together they assembled with the church for an entire year and taught hundreds of believers.

Luke, the writer of the Acts, wrote that it was there that the disciples were first called Christians (Acts 11:26). The designation came from the people of Antioch, who identified the disciples as followers of Christ. Its Greek form resembles names such as Herodian—followers of Herod—a public designation that identifies a group by its leader.

Throughout the New Testament, believers most often referred to themselves as disciples and believers, or those belonging to “the Way,” an expression drawn from Jesus’ own words, “I am the way, the truth, and the life.”

Luke repeatedly uses this designation throughout Acts, describing the Way as believers’ earliest identity, long before the Christian faith developed into the many traditions and denominations known today. These early believers did not understand themselves primarily as adherents of a new religion. They saw themselves as those who had entered the New Covenant through the promised Messiah.

They walked in the way of life He revealed. Many of the earliest believers were Jews who did not understand themselves as abandoning the God of Israel but as embracing the fulfillment through the Messiah. In following Christ, they stepped outside the authority of the religious establishment dominated by the Pharisees, Sadducees, and the temple leadership and faced rejection, persecution, and expulsion from their own communities. Their identity was rooted not in membership within an institutional religious system but in their relationship with Christ as His disciples.

As the centuries passed, however, the apostles’ faith came to be known as Christianity. With that designation came the development of creeds, councils, institutions, denominations, confessions, and theological traditions. As the Roman church emerged as the dominant religious institution in Western Europe, religious and civil authority became increasingly intertwined. Over the centuries, efforts to preserve doctrinal unity often suppressed dissent and renewed calls to return to Scripture’s authority. In many respects, the Church entered a prolonged period of spiritual darkness in which the freedoms believers had known as disciples of Christ were increasingly overshadowed by institutional authority.

These developments shaped the historical religion known as Christianity and profoundly influenced how succeeding generations understood the faith. It’s important to distinguish between Christianity as a historical religion and the profound truth revealed in Scripture. Religion is humanity’s understanding, expression, and organization of what it believes to be true. Scripture, however, remains the standard by which every religious tradition, doctrine, and practice must continually be examined.

In America, the term Christian has often become as much a cultural identity as a biblical one. Many identify themselves as Christians because of family, national heritage, or cultural association, even though they may know little of Jesus or the teachings of Scripture. The Christian name may be inherited, but discipleship can not.

A nation may be influenced by Christianity, and a culture may call itself Christian, yet every individual must still ask the same question He asked His disciples: “Who do you say that I am?” (Matthew 16:15).

Waves of Awakening and Denominational Diversity

About a century after Jamestown was established in 1607, waves of Separatists and Puritans carried their faith across the Atlantic to settle the New World. About a century later, the First Great Awakening transformed countless lives. Passionate preaching stirred the colonies, calling men and women to repentance and personal faith in Christ. Yet alongside these genuine works of the Holy Spirit came what critics of the day called “enthusiasm”—religious excitement that, in some cases, crossed into fanaticism.

This tension between authentic faith and emotional excess has accompanied the Church throughout its history. Yale-educated minister James Davenport expressed his disdain for Puritan and Reformed authors, saying they were “unconverted” and “murdering of Souls by Thousands and by Millions”; he urged crowds to burn respected Christian devotional and theological books, making his own spiritual impressions the measure of genuine faith and conversion. His behavior became so extreme that the Connecticut General Assembly concluded he was “under the influence of enthusiastical impressions and impulses, and thereby disturbed in the rational faculties of his mind.”

Gilbert Tennent likewise publicly condemned many established ministers as unconverted and urged believers to leave churches under their care in his famous 1740 sermon, The Danger of an Unconverted Ministry. Both Davenport and Tennent later repented of their excesses. Tennent nevertheless declared that “a converted plowman is more worthy than an unconverted prince,” challenging the assumption that spiritual authority belonged simply to kings, clergy, or social rank. His preaching encouraged ordinary people to search the Scriptures for themselves rather than relying solely upon inherited religious authority.

Jonathan Edwards undertook the more difficult task of distinguishing the genuine work of the Spirit from its imitators. In his sermon, The Distinguishing Marks of a Work of the Spirit of God, he argued that outward manifestations—weeping, trembling, or physical collapse—were neither proof of genuine conversion nor evidence against it. He taught that the true measure was a transformed life marked by repentance, humility, and an increasing love for Christ.

Roughly half a century later, the Second Great Awakening swept across America’s expanding frontier. Circuit riders traveled hundreds of miles on horseback to reach scattered settlements, often ministering alone across vast distances with little accountability. Families journeyed for miles and camped for days in hopes of encountering God. Places such as Cane Ridge, Kentucky, drew thousands beneath the open sky. Contemporary accounts describe remarkable conversions alongside weeping, shouting, trembling, and people falling to the ground under what they believed to be God’s overwhelming presence. Once again, genuine spiritual renewal was accompanied by emotional excess.

Decades later, Charles Finney described western New York as a “burned-over district,” a region so repeatedly swept by revival that, in his words, little spiritual fuel remained to ignite. These movements were neither neat nor uncomplicated. Manipulation, misplaced zeal, and religious performance appeared alongside genuine transformation. Yet God remained faithful to those who sincerely sought Him.

Throughout the colonies, Anglicans, Congregationalists, Presbyterians, Baptists, Quakers, and many other Christian traditions sincerely sought to preserve what they believed was the true understanding of the Gospel. Which tradition most faithfully preserved it? Honest believers reached different conclusions. Civil authority could not settle those disagreements. Rather than establishing one Christian tradition above another, the founders framed a Constitution that protected every citizen’s freedom of conscience.

The Rise of a Secular Narrative

My mother taught first grade from the late 1960s into the 1990s. By the time she entered the classroom, the Supreme Court rulings had already been handed down, and secular influences were in force. I recall our conversations as she witnessed firsthand how cultural changes affected children and families as public education increasingly reflected a different set of moral and philosophical values.

Public education was formally established under the leadership of Horace Mann beginning in 1837. From its earliest years, the Bible was commonly included in the curriculum; Mann regarded biblical moral instruction as foundational to the school’s purpose. He believed religion—especially the moral teachings of Christianity—belonged in education, but that government schools should avoid taking sides in theological disputes between denominations. As public education expanded throughout the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, prayer and Scripture became longstanding features of many American public schools.

For more than 120 years, these practices remained a familiar part of the school day before they faced constitutional challenges. In Engel v. Vitale (1962), the Supreme Court ruled 6–1 that a brief, nondenominational prayer composed by the New York State Board of Regents violated the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause. The voluntary prayer read: “Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our Country.”

The Court concluded that the government could not compose or sponsor an official prayer for use in public schools. Justice Potter Stewart was the lone dissenter, arguing that because participation was voluntary, prohibiting its recitation denied students the opportunity to participate in the nation’s longstanding tradition of voluntary public prayer.

The following year, in Abington School District v. Schempp (1963), the Court extended that reasoning, holding that school-sponsored Bible readings and the recitation of the Lord’s Prayer were likewise unconstitutional. The decisions garnered widespread public reaction. The Court reported that a Gallup poll found that roughly 79 percent of Americans opposed the ruling. For many Americans, the decision was deeply unsettling because it marked the end of a practice familiar for generations.

The deeper question, however, reaches beyond law and public policy. These decisions removed officially sponsored religious practices and longstanding traditions of prayer and devotional Bible reading from public schools, but they did not remove truth itself. Truth is not established by government, nor is it abolished by judicial decree. Religion and tradition can preserve, obscure, or point people toward truth, but they are not truth in themselves.

The deeper issue was never the loss of a religious practice or tradition. It was the growing rejection of biblical truth itself. As the light of God’s truth receded from public life, science, history, and philosophy increasingly came to be interpreted through a secular lens that sought to explain the earth, the universe, and human existence apart from God, often denying or dismissing the divine and the miraculous.

Critical thinking and observation

Sir Francis Bacon (1561–1626) was an English philosopher, statesman, and lawyer. A prolific writer and essayist, he served at the highest levels of the English government under both Queen Elizabeth I and King James I. Often regarded as the father of the modern scientific method, Bacon spoke of two “books” through which God had revealed Himself — not literal books, but two ways God’s truth could be read. The first was the Book of Scripture, revealing His will. The second was the Book of Creation, the natural world itself, revealing His power. Because both came from the same divine Author, Bacon believed, they could never truly contradict each other — rightly understood, they would always testify to the same truth.

He famously observed that “a little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism; but depth in philosophy bringeth men’s minds about to religion,” believing that careful observation, rightly pursued, should deepen man’s understanding of God’s creation rather than obscure it.

Bacon understood that observation alone was never enough. He warned that the human mind is susceptible to what he called the “Idols”—the distortions arising from human nature, personal bias, language, and inherited systems of thought. Unless those influences are continually examined, they shape the interpretation of evidence itself. The problem is not empirical observation but the assumptions brought to it. When God is no longer acknowledged as the source of truth, science, history, and philosophy become increasingly vulnerable to ideological interpretation.

Truth is that which corresponds to reality as it actually is, independent of human opinion, tradition, culture, or government. Yet evidence and historical narratives are routinely reshaped to serve prevailing assumptions rather than the pursuit of truth—and when those assumptions no longer recognize God as their source, history bends to ideology instead.

The Drift from Truth

During the cultural upheavals of the 1960s, debates over objective truth increasingly gave way to discussions of situational ethics, moral relativism, and the idea that truth itself could be defined by personal perspective or changing social values. In the decades that followed, psychologists increasingly recognized that human reasoning is profoundly shaped by intuition and prior assumptions. An array of social influences and cognitive biases shaped that reasoning. Social psychologist Jonathan Haidt observed that “human reasoning is not very good at dispassionate analysis. It makes a very good lawyer, but not a good impartial judge,” and summarized decades of research by concluding that “intuitions come first, strategic reasoning second.”

These observations echo Francis Bacon’s warning that the human mind is susceptible to deeply rooted prejudices and inherited assumptions that shape the interpretation of evidence itself. Rather than approaching evidence as neutral observers, people often reason from convictions they already hold, underscoring the need to continually test their assumptions in the pursuit of truth.

The rulings reflected a broader cultural shift already underway, one in which secular assumptions increasingly shaped education, public policy, and the interpretation of history. Naturalism, secular humanism, and scientific materialism gained greater influence in public education, while evolutionary theory became more firmly established in science curricula. As these perspectives expanded, history and society were increasingly interpreted through secular frameworks that often excluded or minimized the role of God and Scripture.

While many today speak of “my truth” or “your truth,” truth, by its very nature, is neither personal nor subjective. Every person approaches life with assumptions, traditions, and deeply held convictions, but those convictions do not determine what is true. The pursuit of truth requires the humility to examine our beliefs rather than merely inherit or defend them. For the Christian, Scripture remains the final authority by which every religion, tradition, philosophy, and human claim is to be tested.

The Founders Spoke of God and Providence

It’s improbable that God, who raises up kingdoms, judges them, and directs the course of nations, was absent from one of the most important moments in American history. His providence neither justifies every decision the founders made, nor does Scripture present America as a nation with a special covenant purpose. But it does remind us that God remains sovereign over the affairs of men.

God is involved with His Creation; He is an all-powerful, all-knowing, invisible, eternal Spirit that fills heaven and earth. Man cannot portion him out, legislate, or contain Him. He is intimately involved with His creation through His Son Jesus. Jesus does not lead through compulsion but through invitation. He calls, and His sheep willingly follow because they know His voice. Jesus stands at the door and knocks — “If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him” (Revelation 3:20). God’s invitation is extended to everyone willing to receive it: “He who has ears to hear, let him hear!” (Matthew 11:15).

The testimony of Christ as King requires no government, tribe, or nation to validate it. A government designed to protect the freedom of conscience does not diminish God. It reflects the way He has always worked: not through force or coercion, but through the willing response of the human heart.

The Birth of Constitutional Government

In 1772, James Madison, often called the Father of the Constitution, completed his studies at the College of New Jersey (now Princeton University) and returned to his family’s home at Montpelier in Virginia. There he witnessed firsthand how the established Anglican Church exercised civil authority over matters of faith. Baptist ministers and other religious dissenters were harassed, fined, and imprisoned for not preaching without the approval of the established church.

When Virginia later proposed requiring citizens to support Christian ministers through taxation, Madison responded with his Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments (1785). He argued that religion “can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence.” The proposal failed. The following year, Jefferson’s Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom became law, establishing one of the clearest legal affirmations of freedom of conscience in American history.

Many of the men, including Madison, who helped shape the American founding came from remarkably different religious traditions and intellectual backgrounds. George Washington’s Anglican upbringing fostered a sincere but restrained public faith. John Witherspoon, a Presbyterian minister, believed that moral government depended upon virtue rooted in biblical principles. Roger Sherman brought the convictions of an orthodox Congregationalist shaped by Reformed theology. James Wilson drew from both Scottish Enlightenment philosophy and the Christian natural law tradition, arguing that the sovereignty of the people reflected God’s moral order. Gouverneur Morris openly acknowledged Divine Providence while moving comfortably within Enlightenment philosophical circles. Alexander Hamilton admired Christianity’s moral framework and, later in life, expressed a more explicit personal faith.

Their theological convictions were often quite different, yet they shared something uncommon in an age marked by religious establishment and confessional rivalry: the willingness to examine ideas, debate convictions, and reason together despite profound disagreement. Rather than attempting to resolve those differences by civil authority, they sought to establish a constitutional government that protected every citizen’s liberty to follow the dictates of conscience. They understood that liberty could not endure without moral responsibility and that civil authority could not rightly govern the human conscience.

The historical record reveals no single religious consensus among the founders. They were not united by a single denomination, theological system, or philosophical school. They drew from many sources—Scripture, classical antiquity, and the Enlightenment. English common law shaped their politics. Their disagreements were often passionate, born of lived experience and a shared determination not to repeat England’s mistakes.

What ultimately united many of them was not complete agreement on theology but a shared conviction that government does not create human rights. Its purpose is to recognize, secure, and protect rights that, according to Scripture, belong to every individual by virtue of their humanity.

This raises an important question. Given their different denominations, theological traditions, and philosophical perspectives, was a national church ever realistic?

The answers lie in the lessons they inherited from history and in the convictions they formed through experience. They understood that a government representing such religious diversity could not establish doctrinal unity without privileging one tradition over another. Recognizing that genuine faith cannot be compelled by law, they sought not to remove Christianity from public life but to prevent the federal government from granting religious privilege, and thereby preserving freedom of conscience for every citizen.

The Seeds of Liberty

The story of America cannot be understood apart from Christianity’s profound influence. Yet the central message of the New Testament has never been the exaltation of any earthly nation. It is right to appreciate America’s heritage and honor the wisdom of those who established its constitutional system. But no nation, however greatly blessed, occupies the place reserved for the Kingdom of God.

To understand how that heritage was formed, we must return to where it truly began—not in Philadelphia in 1776 or 1787, but in the lives of the men and women who crossed an ocean generations earlier, carrying with them their faith, hopes, fears, and deeply held convictions.

A believer’s high calling is never determined by declarations, constitutions, or the rulings of any earthly court. We are called to live for Christ and seek to influence society toward what is pure and righteous. The removal of school-sponsored prayer neither diminishes our civic responsibility nor hinders a believer’s authority. We are called to “render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s” (Matthew 22:21).

Our commission is not to force God’s Kingdom into public institutions but to proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the world and allow Him to transform hearts. Governments may protect freedom of conscience, and religion may preserve traditions, but neither can transform the human heart.

Christ did not pour “new wine into old wineskins” (Matthew 9:17), and neither can spiritual life be produced through political power or legislation. Godly faith has always flourished apart from man’s institutions—and often in spite of them. Christ’s Kingdom is established not by earthly borders or political power but by transformed lives.“Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.” (Matthew 5:16)

Was America Founded as a Christian Nation? — Sources

• Abington School District v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203 (1963). United States Supreme Court.
• Davenport, James. The Reverend Mr. James Davenport’s Confession and Retractions. Boston: S. Kneeland and T. Green, 1744.
• Edwards, Jonathan. The Distinguishing Marks of a Work of the Spirit of God. Boston: S. Kneeland and T. Green, 1741.
• Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962). United States Supreme Court.
• Finney, Charles G. Memoirs of Reverend Charles G. Finney Written By Himself. New York: A. S. Barnes, 1876.
• Jefferson, Thomas. Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom. 1786. In The Papers of Thomas Jefferson. Vol. 2. Edited by Julian P. Boyd. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1950.
• Kaestle, Carl F. Pillars of the Republic: Common Schools and American Society, 1780–1860. New York: Hill and Wang, 1983.
• Kidd, Thomas S. God of Liberty: A Religious History of the American Revolution. New York: Basic Books, 2010.
• Madison, James. Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments. 1785. In The Papers of James Madison. Vol. 8. Edited by Robert A. Rutland et al. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1973.
• Mann, Horace. Twelfth Annual Report of the Secretary of the Massachusetts Board of Education. Boston: Dutton and Wentworth, 1848.
• Noll, Mark A. America’s God: From Jonathan Edwards to Abraham Lincoln. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002.
• Ravitch, Diane. The Troubled Crusade: American Education, 1945–1980. New York: Basic Books, 1983.
• Spring, Joel. The American School, 1642–2004. 7th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2005.
• Tennent, Gilbert. The Danger of an Unconverted Ministry. Philadelphia: Benjamin Franklin, 1740.
• Tyack, David, and Elisabeth Hansot. Managers of Virtue: Public School Leadership in America, 1820–1980. New York: Basic Books, 1982.
• Urban, Wayne J., Jennings L. Wagoner Jr., and Milton Gaither. American Education: A History. 6th ed. New York: Routledge, 2019.
• Wood, Gordon S. The Creation of the American Republic, 1776–1787. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1969.
• Jonathan Haidt, interview by Jörg Fegert, “A Chat with Social Psychologist Jonathan Haidt,” Leipzig Glocal, April 7, 2015, quoting, “Human reasoning is not very good at dispassionate analysis. It makes a very good lawyer, but not a good impartial judge.”
• Jonathan Haidt, “The Emotional Dog and Its Rational Tail: A Social Intuitionist Approach to Moral Judgment,” Psychological Review 108, no. 4 (2001): 814–834.
• Jonathan Haidt, The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion (New York: Pantheon Books, 2012).