Interview Questions
About The U.S. Constitution
For Contemporary Christian Federalists

Most Christian Federalists – those defending Madison and Washington – have always ignored, obfuscated, or side-stepped a number of vital questions. Rarely will they deal forthrightly with issues related to the primary source documents. It is not often that these questions are considered together, so their cumulative force is not perceived or dealt with.

These questions explain why the Christian Federalists so often divert our attention from the source documents. Typically, they do this by puffing the alleged Christian faith of the founders, ignoring their unitarian tendencies.

They also like to focus on after-the-fact assessments of various cheerleaders for the founders. These include, for example, the myths perpetuated by the pietist biographers and various Supreme Court pronouncements coming decades after ratification.

We list them here in interview format for any of our friends in the contemporary Christian Federalist camp. We invite them to respond and will post their responses to the Patrick Henry BLOG for the sake of cordial debate.

1. If the United States Constitution is a Christian document, why is it that the name of God is not mentioned and the appeal for governing authority is to “we the people” rather than to the God of the Bible?

2. If the United States Constitution is a Christian document, why is it that (apart from Franklin’s neglected prayer request) none of the delegates made any appeal to biblical principles of government, or to the Bible, or to God in the entire 4-volume “Notes From the Federal Convention” (a primary source document)?

3. If the United States Constitution is a Christian document, why do the Federalist Papers (a primary source document) contain no references to God, the Bible, or any biblical principles of government?

4. If the United States Constitution is a Christian document, why do the authors of the Federalist Papers never cite the nation of Israel as an example for Biblical principles of government, referring instead to Athens, Sparta and numerous other non-Christian examples?

5. If the United States Constitution is a Christian document, why does it outlaw any requirement for a public official to swear to govern according to the Bible in Article VI, Section 3?

6. If the United States Constitution is a Christian document, why does it make itself rather than the Bible the highest law of the land in Article VI, Section 2?

7. If the United States Constitution is a Christian document, why does it grant "all legislative power" to the Congress of the United States rather than to God?

8. If the United States Constitution is a Christian document, why did so many strong Christians, including Patrick Henry, resist its passage so vehemently during the ratification debates? Why do you ignore their protests and biblical argumentation?

9. If the United States Constitution is a Christian document, why did virtually all of the negative consequences of its passage predicted by Patrick Henry come to pass? These include among other things, an imperial Supreme Court, two levels of oppressive taxation, abuse of the General Welfare Clause, abuse of the Elastic Clause, and a bloody Civil War within 100 years.

10. If the United States Constitution is a Christian document, why did the Federalists have to break the law to get it ratified? For example, why did they refuse to limit themselves to their legal commission to modify the Articles of Confederation. In addition, why did they reject the requirement that the Constitution be approved by the state legislatures. Are you saying that the end justified the means?

11. To summarize the above, the United States Constitution totally neglects God, the Bible, any reference to the Bible for principles of civil government, and repudiates any religious test oath while appealing to the governing authority of the people, all in stark contrast to earlier colonial documents.

Given these facts, how then can the United States Constitution be anything other than a covenant breaking document, rejecting or refusing to model itself after the forthright covenants with God contained in earlier colonial documents and committing America to a secular, pluralistic form of government?

12. If then the United States Constitution is a covenant-breaking document, why do you constantly insist on referring to it and the circumstances of its ratification as “our Christian heritage?”

13. If an accurate remembrance of the past is the first step to national repentance, why do you insist on presenting this false view of American history as our “Christian Heritage?” Why do you call white what God calls black, in effect misleading the American Christian public?

14. Why do you rest so much of your argument for the United States Constitution being a Christian document on secondary sources that contradict the evidence of the primary documents themselves: the Constitution, the Federalist Papers, and The Notes From the Federal Convention?

Typically, you present letters, commentary or Supreme Court decisions occurring decades after the fact – why do you refer to them as “primary sources”, when they are in fact secondary sources providing only indirect evidence?

15. Why do you rest so much of your argument on alleged proof that the founding Federalists were evangelical Christians, as if that would excuse their covenant-breaking act of rebellion against God? 

Christian Federalists Respond To Interview Questions

Christian Federalists are invited to respond to the above questions or any other questions or issues raised on this site! How do you defend the Constitution as a Christian document? Where am I missing the boat?

Click below to see contributions from other visitors to this page...