James Madison and Samuel Clarke
Jonathan Rowe on May 13th 2007
See this past post where I noted that James Madison was not a Christian, but a theistic rationalist. While very reticent to give the personal details of his creed, his most explicit discussion on the matter comes from his letter TO FREDERICK BEASLEY, November 20, 1825. Madison noted that in order to fully do justice to a theological work he’d have to “resort to the celebrated work of Dr. Clarke,” which he “read fifty years ago….” Madison’s philosophical argument for God is as follows:
The finiteness of the human understanding betrays itself on all subjects, but more especially when it contemplates such as involve infinity. What may safely be said seems to be, that the infinity of time & space forces itself on our conception, a limitation of either being inconceivable; that the mind prefers at once the idea of a self-existing cause to that of an infinite series of cause & effect, which augments, instead of avoiding the difficulty; and that it finds more facility in assenting to the self-existence of an invisible cause possessing infinite power, wisdom & goodness, than to the self-existence of the universe, visibly destitute of those attributes, and which may be the effect of them. In this comparative facility of conception & belief, all philosophical Reasoning on the subject must perhaps terminate.
Even at an old age, his mind is still very lucid. Though he read it 50 years prior, he still follows Clarke’s argument quite closely. From Stanford’s Encyclopedia of Philosophy:
The main lines of Clarke’s argument are as follows. Since something exists now, something has always existed, otherwise nothing would exist now because nothing comes from nothing. What has existed from eternity can only be either an independent being, that is, one having in itself the reason of its existence, or an infinite series of dependent beings. However, such a series cannot be the being that has existed from eternity because by hypothesis it can have no external cause, and no internal cause (no dependent being in it) can cause the whole series. Hence, an independent being exists.
Clarke was an Anglican Divine, an Arian heretic, and a philosophical rationalist. Here is the Encyclopedia on his Arian heresy:
In 1712, apparently against the advice of some of Queen Anne’s ministers, Clarke published The Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity, which was accused of Arianism, the view that Christ is divine but created. The ensuing controversy culminated two years later in his humiliating promise to the Upper House of Convocation not to preach or write on the topic any longer. However, this act of submission did not silence the correct rumors that he, like Newton himself, was still an Arian. How much these suspicions of heterodoxy damaged his ecclesiastical career is unclear. However, Voltaire reports that Bishop Gibson effectively prevented Clarke’s elevation to the see of Canterbury by pointing out that Clarke was indeed the most learned and honest man in the kingdom, but had one defect: he was not a Christian.
I should note too that John Witherspoon, though a Calvinist/orthodox Christian, actually introduced Madison and his other students to Samuel Clarke’s work at Princeton. Witherspoon was greatly influenced by Locke and the religious rationalists of the Enlightenment who were disproportionately non-Trinitarians. Witherspoon was not, contrary to misperceptions, teachings his students to be good orthodox Trinitarian Christians at Princeton, though that is what he preached from the pulpit. On matters of government, Witherspoon, first and foremost, taught his students to be good Whig-republicans.
Filed in The Belfry, The Bureau
See this past post where I noted that James Madison was not a Christian, but a theistic rationalist.>>
Now for the truth. The blogger will never find a quote by Madison denying the trinity or Christianity. That Madison later changed his views and believed in not supporting Christianity is irrelevant to Madison’s faith. Hi faith never changed, only his application of it towards govt.
“[A]lways keep the Ministry obliquely in View whatever your profession be. This will lead you to cultivate an acquaintance occasionally with the most sublime of all Sciences and will qualify you for a change of public character if you should hereafter desire it. I have sometimes thought there could not be a stronger testimony in favor of Religion or against temporal Enjoyments even the most rational and manly than for men who occupy the most honorable and gainful departments and are rising in reputation and wealth, publicly to declare their unsatisfactoriness by becoming fervent Advocates in the cause of Christ, and I wish you may give in your Evidence in this way.”–
James Madison, in a letter Sept. 25, 1773 to William Bradford, reprinted in The Papers of James Madison, eds. William T. Hutchinson and William M.E. Rachal (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1962), vol. 1, p. 96.
Notice Madison declares religion and the most rational of man to support Christianity.
Madison was a member of the committee that authored the 1776 Virginia Bill of Rights and approved of its clause declaring that:
It is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian forbearance, love, and charity toward each other.
The Proceedings of the Convention of Delegates, Held at the Capitol in the City of Williamsburg, in the Colony of Virginia, on Monday the 6th of May, 1776, 103 (Williamsburg: Alexander Purdie 1776) (Madison on the Committee on May 16, 1776; the “Declaration of Rights” passed June 12, 1776).
Witherspoon was not, contrary to misperceptions, teachings his students to be good orthodox Trinitarian Christians at Princeton, though that is what he preached from the pulpit. >>
What a contradiction! Witherspoon believing the Deity of Jesus Christ mandatory for salvation, and telling his flock not to believe.
Here is proof James Madison was not a rationalist but a Christian. Notice I put in Christianity for clarification.
“Because, the policy of the bill is adverse to the diffusion of the light of Christianity. The first wish of those who enjoy this precious gift(Christianity), ought to be that it may be imparted to the whole race of mankind. Compare the number of those who have as yet received it(Christianity) with the number still remaining under the dominion of false Religions; and how small is the former! Does the policy of the Bill tend to lessen the disproportion? No; it at once discourages those who are strangers to the light of (revelation)(Christianity) from coming into the Region of it; and countenances, by example the nations who continue in darkness, in shutting out those who might convey it(Christianity) to them. Instead of levelling as far as possible, every obstacle to the victorious progress of truth(Christianity), the Bill with an ignoble and unchristian timidity would circumscribe it, with a wall of defence, against the encroachments of error.”
James Madison
Memorial and Remonstrance, June 1785
Notice, Madison calls Christianity a precious gift, and he calls other religions false. And his precious gift is Christianity as it’s (revelation) which is only from the bible.
There is no writing of James Madsion to refute his faith of Christianity. So he believed Christianity should not be supported in any way, big deal.
In 1789, Madison served on the Congressional committee which authorized, approved, and selected paid Congressional chaplains.
In 1812, President Madison signed a federal bill which economically aided a Bible Society in its goal of the mass distribution of the Bible.
throughout his Presidency (1809-1816), Madison endorsed public and official religious expressions by issuing several proclamations for national days of prayer, fasting, and thanksgiving.
Madison SUPPORTED CHRISTIANITY while he was in office, only AFTER he left office did he reject govt. support of religion, which has nothing to do with his faith.