FOOTNOTES

Footnotes to "The Religious Right as Deja Vu of John Cotton and Patrick Henry in their Debates with Roger Williams and James Madison"

1 I am thinking here of Israel under Moses. Moses combined ecclesiastical and civil functions in his leadership.

2 Note the words of a historian of religious liberty, "...in the case of America--but only in her case--religious liberty and separatism may with good reason be regarded as two correlative terms." Francesco Ruffini. Religious Liberty. NY: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1912. p. 293.

3 Irwin H. Polishook, Roger Williams, John Cotton, and Religious Freedom: A Controversy in New and Old England, (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall) 1-3.

4 This is the conclusion of a review sketched in Larry Pahl, "Is the First Amendment a Luxury We Can No Longer Afford?" a paper presented at the 25th anniversary session of the West Virginia Political Science Association at West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, 1991.

5 Charles Smull Longacre, Roger Williams: His Life, Work and Ideas. (Washington, D.C:Review and Herald: 1939) 103.

6 Ibid

7 Polishook, 14

8 Ibid 15

9 Robert Boston, Why the Religious Right is Wrong About Separation of Church and State (Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1993) 52.

10 Ibid 12

11 Ibid 18

12 Ibid

13 Ibid 26

14 The work of the Constitutional founding of America was understood until 1960 as primarily a liberal event. The writings of John Locke were considered the seminal influence, even though he might not have been widely read and even though many Americans were not even aware of his influence on them. [For instance, Louis Hartz, The Liberal Tradition in America: An Interpretation of American Political Thought since the Revolution (NY: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1955)]. In the 1960's, however, the Lockean, liberal reading of the founding was challenged by a number of scholars. Mildly the challenge was that Locke's influence was too simplistically accepted, and radically, that his influence was vastly overrated. Over the past twenty-five years new paradigms have arisen in attempts to fill the void created if the Lockean thesis is abandoned. Among these new paradigms are "classical republicanism, Scotish common-sense philosophy, and various forms of Calvinist Christianity." (Dale S. Kuehne, "Locke, Liberalism, and the Massachusetts Congregationalists" William Jewell College, Copyright by the American Political Science Association; presented at the 1993 annual meeting, Washington Hilton, Sept 2-5, 1993, p. 5.) "One of these locally important, but often overlooked groups is the Massachusetts Congregational clergy. In Massachusetts no group was more politically influential than the Congregationalists..." (Ibid, p. 8) Noted political scientist Ted Lowi has added to the list in his most recent book The End of the Republican Era. (Norman, OK: Oklahoma University Press, 1995). Lowi says America's truly conservative tradition has been missed by just about everybody. He says Hartz gave only half the truth (not a half-truth). He writes, "It should have been Hartz's volume 2." (p. 23) Lowi is not referring to the conservative wing of the liberal tradition, present conservatives who are very much part of the liberal tradition. He is referring to classical conservatives who clearly put themselves outside of the liberal tradition (according to Lowi) with their insistence that the state can know the good and apply sanctions for deviation from it--such as the Congregationalists referred to above, or to give a modern example, Alan Bloom. Lowi writes, "...the conservative has confidence that true morality can be known...and once known, morality ought to be imposed--preferably by parents and community, but by law if necessary." (25).

15 Polishook, 24

16 The Bible, Romans 13:1.

17 The Writings of Roger Williams, 6 vols. (Providence, RI: Narragansett Club Publications, 1866-74) III, pp161-162 taken from Williams' The Bloudy Tenent of Persecution, for cause of Conscience, discussed,in A Conference between Truth and Peace (1644).

18 Ibid

19 Ibid

20 Ibid 398-399.

21 Daniel Dreisbach, "God and Constitution: Reflections on Selected Nineteenth Century Commentaries on References to the Deity and the Christian Religion in the United States Constitution," School of Public Affairs, The American University, Washington,D.C., paper delivered at the 1993 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, The Washington Hilton, Sept 4, 1993, p. 18.

22 Dreisbach writes, "...the ban opened the door for members of minority sects to become full and equal participants in the democratic enterprise. The ban was thus calculated to secure religious liberty, deter religious persecution, ensure sect equality before the law, and promote independence of civil government from ecclesiastical domination and interference." Ibid.

23 Williams, of course, took issue with Cotton's claim that he had not "meddled" with Williams' banishment, and the record favors Williams. Cotton used his influence to urge upon his brethren the banishment, suggesting that it was not a cruel but a liberating judgment.

24 John Cotton, A Reply to Mr. Williams His Examination (1647) (Arno: NY, 1972 reprint edition).

25 Ibid.

26 Ibid.

27 This section of analysis is being used not only because it does represent a major difference in Cotton and Williams, but because it applies to the religious right of today.

28 John 5:39

29 John 5:46.

30 Roger Williams, The Bloody Tenent yet more Bloody (1652), in Polishook, p. 84.

31 John Cotton, The Powring out of the Seven Vials: or an Exposition of the 16. Chapter of the Revelation, with an Application of it to our Times (London: 1642) Part 3, pp 8-12. 32 John Cotton, The Bloudy Tenent, Washed (1647) (Arno Press: NY, 1972, reprint edition), pp 450-451.

33 Ibid. p. 5.

34 Roger Williams, The Bloudy Tenent, 330.

35 John Cotton, The Bloudy Tenent, Washed, p.59.

36 Paul Johnson, "God and the Americans," Commentary, vol 99 #1 Jan 95, 27.

37 Ibid.

38 No other gods, no graven images, not taking God's name in vain, and the Sabbath commandment.

39 Honor parents, killing, adultery, stealing, false witness, coveting.

40 Roger Williams, The Bloudy Tenent..., in Polishook, p. 60.

41 Ibid.

42 Roger Williams, The Fourth Paper, Presented by Major Butler, to the Honourable Committee of Parliament (1652) in Polishook, p. 62.

43 Ibid., p. 63.

44 Roger Williams, The Hireling Ministry None of Christs, or A Discourse Touching the Propogating of the Gospel of Christ Jesus (1652), in Polishook, p. 65.

45 John Cotton, A Brief Exposition With Practical Observations Upon the whole Book of Canticles Never Before Printed (London: 1655), from Polishook, p. 76.

46 A classic study is Louis Hartz, The Liberal Tradition in America: An Interpretation of American Political Thought since the Revolution (NY: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1955).

47 A.C. Fraser, "John Locke" in the Encylopedia Britannica, 11th ed vol 16, p 846.

48 Madison's reflections here were not the self-flattering dotings of a retired elder statesman, seeking appreciation from a posterity which might not appreciate him. His judgment was that of the selfless and careful observer of history and politics, the judgment of one able to properly place the present in its right relation to the past. No less a religious historian and political scientist than William Lee Miller, has, two centuries later, come to the same assessment as Madison here: "The 'new world' worked out a fresh solution, quite unusual in the history of the human race, to the ancient tangled matter of religion and the state." (WL Miller, The First Liberty, 227.)

49 "Letter from Madison to Jasper Adams, Spring 1833," in James Madison on Religious Liberty, ed. Robert S. Alley (Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1985), pp.87-88.

50 Robert S. Alley, School Prayer: The Court, The Congress and the First Amendment, (Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1994) 25.

51 Ibid.

52 James Madison, Detached Memoranda, ed. by Elizabeth Fleet, William and Mary Quarterly, 1946, p. 554.

53 Robert Alley, School Prayer, 26.

54 Ibid 27.

55 Sam Ervin, Preserving the Constitution, (Charlottsville, VA: The Michie Company, 1984) 225.

56 "Letter from James Madison, Jr. to James Madison, Sr., January 6, 1785" in Robert Rutland and William M. E. Rachal, eds, The Papers of James Madison, vol. 8 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1973) 217.

57 Jefferson, always passionate about issues of liberty, was aligned with Madison in these legislative battles though not a member of the legislature, and went so far as to suggest praying for Henry's death. He wrote Madison in December 1784: "What we have to do I think is devoutly pray for his death, in the meantime to keep alive the idea that the present is but an ordinance and to prepare the minds of the young men..." From Alley, School Prayer, 28. Rather than take Jefferson's religious option concerning Henry, Madison used, as Ralph Ketcham wryly notes, the secular humanist alternative and helped electe Henry as governor, thereby silencing his silver tongue. Ibid.

58 In the Memorial and Remonstrance Madison lists 15 points in negative response to Henry's Assessment Bill. The essence of the 15 points are a powerful affirmation of religious freedom and echo Roger Williams in several places:

  1. Religion can only be directed by conscience and reason; government has no role to play with respect to religion; permitting the majority sole rule can harm minorities.
  2. The legislature would exceed its lawful authority in passing such a bill.
  3. A warning against government interference with human rights.
  4. Coercion in religion is an offense to God. (Williams)
  5. Civil magistrates (the state) is incompetent to judge religious truth; religion is an improper engine of state policy.
  6. Christianity does not require state support to flourish. (Williams)
  7. History shows that state support of Christianity has meant its debasement.
  8. Good government does not need assistance from an established religion.
  9. The assessment would hold out a sign of "persecution" rather than "asylum" to other nations.
  10. The assessment differs from the Inquisition "only in degree."
  11. The assessment might drive away present citizens by revoking "the liberty which they now enjoy."
  12. It is folly to believe religious discord will be solved by the assessment.
  13. Making Virginia a Christian state would discourage non-Christians from immigrating; furthermore it would lead to a hindering of diffusing the gospel.
  14. It would be unwise legislation because attempts to enforce it would be problematic because so many citizens view it as "obnoxious."
  15. A measure of the magnitude of the assessment ought not to be imposed without a clear majority of citizens favoring it.
  16. A powerful defense of natural rights: Liberty of conscience is a "gift of nature."
  17. Freedom of conscience is the only policy consistent with deity.

59 Boston, 71.

60 He certainly subscribed to Jefferson's famous words which echoed the philosophic position of an enlightened generation: We hold these truths to be self-evident; that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness--That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men... (The Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776.)

61 Pahl, "Is the First Amendment a Luxury We can no Longer Afford?" 6.

62 James Madison, Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments, reprinted as an appendix to Justice Rutledge's dissenting opinion in Everson v Board of Ed., 330 U.S. 1, 23 app. at 63 (1947) (Rutledge, J., dissenting.)

63 William Lee Miller, The First Liberty, (NY: Alfred A. Knopf, 1986) 27.

64 Ibid 28.

65 Ibid 29.

66 Lowi, The End of the Republican Era, 11-12. Here is Lowi's taxonomy of liberalism. Notice items 2 and 3. The shaded bookends--"left" and "right"--are not extremes of the "LIBERAL," Lowi explains, (21 ff.) as if this expressed one liberal continuum, but "left" and "right" are their own "body of ideas...separate and independent."

67 Lowi, 13-14. If Lowi's taxonomy is correct, then Henry, most of the Fathers, the Puritans, and the current religious right, are not truly from the liberal tradition. They are as much a part of an alien tradition--the right--as Eugene Debs is of another--the left.

68 Stephen K. McDowell, America's Providential History, (Charlottesville, VA: Providence Press, 1988) 221. NOTE: Jim Allison, Robert Alley, and others have disputed the attribution of this quote to Madison, though David Barton and Rush Limbaugh have insisted on it. (I eliminated this quote from the text 2-4-99, so this is now a phantom footnote!) But notice I drew similar inferences to those provided by this quote by drawing upon the Remonstrance...nobody disputes Madison's authorship there!!!

69 This is in point 6 of the 15 in the Remonstrance.

70 Romans 13, for example.

71 In Christ's teachings in passages such as John 5:44 "How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?" or "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's."

72 This is point 8 of the 15 in the Remonstrance.

73 Ibid.

74 Remonstrance, point 12.

75 No less an icon of the Right than Pat Robertson describes James Madison as "an Anglican with 'New Right' leanings, a 'fundamentalist' in Establishment clothing." Robertson, Dates With Destiny, (NY: Thomas Nelson, 1986) 73.

76 (Jerry Falwell) Lienesch, 146.

77 William Lee Miller, in his rich and insightful book The First Liberty, subtitled Religion and the American Republic, notes that much of the historical scholarhip on Madison overlooks his powerful fight on behalf of religious liberty at the expense of so lauding his place in helping erect the pillars of America's governmental genius. Miller specifially mentions that Gordon Wood's "long book" (First Liberty, 145) by which I'm sure he means The Creation of the American Republic, 1776-1787--on Newt Gingrich's recommended reading list--"never touches the subject." Miller goes so far as to say, "Neither is it clear that the still larger, related subject--the relationship of the religious tradition of the West to this 'republican' tradition...has been fitted together. Historians, like other people, can only see with their eyes, and therefore selectively." (The First Liberty, 145.) I would think that this observation should make liberal scholarship's assessments of authors from the Religioius Right, who find Christian roots in the Constitution generally and in Madison specifically, more generous.

78 I reviewed what sources were available to me in my home library and the library of WIU and in the books I found which dealt with Patrick Henry-- Beeman, Richard R. Patrick Henry: A Biography. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1974. Mayer, Henry. A Son of Thunder: Patrick Henry. New York: Franklin Watts, 1986. Mayo, Bernard. Myths and Men. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 1959. Umbreit, Kenneth. Founding Fathers: Men Who Shaped our Tradition. Port Washington, NY: Kennikat Press, Inc., 1969.

79 Peter Marshall and David Manuel, The Light and the Glory, (Old Tappan, NJ: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1973.

80 LaHaye is one member of the Religious Right profiled by political scientist Michael Lienesch in his ten-year study of the Right, Redeeming America: Piety and Politics in the New Christian Right, (Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press, 1993.)

81 For instance when He said to Pilate, "My kingdom is not of this world. If it was my disciples would fight. But as it is, my kindgom is not of this realm." (John 18:36) Also, "The kingdom of God is within you." Luke 17:21. The apostle Paul also makes numerous references to the mystical body of Christ and its nature as a spiritual, as opposed to a visible, empirical kingdom such as Marshall is arguing for. For instance, "Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit." (Eph. 2:19-22).

82 Marshalls main theological argument against Williams will be resigned to this footnote. Marshall writes: For Williams, then, Christianity became so super-spiritualized that it was removed from all contact with the sinful realities of daily life. In his view, the saints of New England belonged to a spritual Israel, in the same way as did all Christians everywhere...there should be no talk of any attempt on God's part to build His Kingdom on earth through imperfect human beings. For Winthrop and the others to even suggest that God might be creating a new Israel in this Promised Land of America was to [now quoting Williams] "...pull God and Christ and Spirit out of Heaven, and subject them unto natural, sinful, inconstant men..." Marshall then responds to the Williams quote he has used by saying: Williams apparently did not understand that this paradox to which he objected actually described the mystery of Christ's Incarnation, His life on earth, and His death on the Cross! But Williams understands Marshall's point--that Christ became like sinful men, died as a human among sinful men on behalf of the whole sinful race, after coming down out of Heaven. There is thus no reason for any men--or a whole nation, America as the new Israel--to try to do over what Christ has done; that is the essence of the Christian gospel! God does not need another Savior, whether an individual antichrist or budding messiah, or whether an entire fleshy nation--Marshall's America as a "New Israel." The carnal basis of Marshall's edifice has been exposed by Williams and Marshall is spinning madly in reaction. What I have written here is a species of a common critique of the theology of the America-as-a-Christian-nation wing of the Christian Right.

83 The specific issue of this question which occasioned his banishment, discussed in the section introducing the Cotton-Williams comparison in the present work, was his insistence that requiring a loyalty oath--an obligation being imposed by the state--was in essence a religious obligation and therefore should not be required of all citizens, since not all citizens are regenerate, that is, members of Christ's kingdom. Perhaps more importantly, the oath they were supposed to take ended in "So help me, God," [Boston, 51] and Williams said that a person "ought not to tender an oath to an unregenerate man," because it would cause the oath taker "to take the name of God in vain." [Edmund S. Morgan, Roger Williams: The Church and the State (NY: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1967) 31-32.]

84 Edmund Morgan writes of him: "We may praise him...for his defense of religious liberty and the separation of church and state. He deserves the tribute...but it falls short of the man. His greatness was simpler. He dared to think." [Wm L Miller, 224] Perry Miller said of him, "Roger Williams was a profound Christian who, like Pascal, refused to identify the Christian vision with worldly appearance, with either any political order or even the words of the Bible itself. He knew the meaning of life lies not on the surface, but somewhere underneath, and that it must be perpetually sought..in the end, it may be that is most valuable to us because he incarnates the fighter for ends who keeps always present to his consiousness a sense of his own fallibility, of his own insignificance, without ever for that reason giving over, without ever relaxing, the effort." [Ibid] How different a summation of his ego than we get from Marshall!

85 Marshall 192.

86 Ibid 193.

87 Ibid 194.

88 Ibid 194-5. Who is being "judgmental" here? Williams was an active and commited missionary to the native Indians, with whom he shared mutual respect; his record here is much better than the ethnocentric leaders of the Bay Colony. Williams was a great general, but the Bay Colonists to whom he was sent did not recognize his leadership; was he a poor general or they poor soldiers? And Marshall should stop to ponder, as he thinks of the righteous Pharisees who thought they were doing great service to God when they delievered Christ to Pilate, if Williams was not perhaps "smashing through the very gates of hell" when he was disputing with the fathers of Massachusetts Bay.

89 Lienesch, 177.

90 Ibid 174.

91 Ibid 174-5.

92 Ibid 175.

93 See Dolbeare, 53, for example.

94 An exhaustive examination by distinguished constitutional scholar Lawrence Tribe uncovered only two substantive positions in the Constitution: religious liberty and private property. Constitutional Choices, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1985) 11.

95 Furthering the indictment of Calvin here, Servetus had gone to Calvin for asylum. He had been persecuted and arrested in Vienna for his "heresy" and escaped to Geneva, asking Calvin to read his work and provide him safety. Lewis Spitz in Grolier's Encylcopedia writes, "Under the pseudonym Michel de Villeneuve, he published his main work, Christianismi Restitutio (Restitution of Christianity, 1553), which was denounced on all sides for antitrinitarian heresy. Arrested by the Inquisition, he escaped from Vienne to Geneva to see John Calvin, to whom he had sent an earlier manuscript of his work. Calvin, however, ordered his arrest. He was tried and burned as a heretic." Calvin said the law of the Roman Empire, the code of Justinian, prescribed this penalty.

96 Mark Noll, "John Calvin," signed article in Grolier's Electronic Enyclopedia.

97 Statement about the Baptists by the Wittenburg theologians, June 5, 1536, in V. Norshov Olsen, Papal Supremacy and American Democracy, (Loma Linda, CA: Loma Linda University Press, 1987) 131.

98 In our day they would be Billy Graham, the Pope, and for evangelicals likely candidates would be the special dozen that were invited by President Clinton to the White House on _______when he wanted to initiate dialogue with them. Of the 12, only Bill Hybels, senior pastor of the Willow Creek Church in South Barrington, Illinois, was invited to sleep in the White House. Hybels, a very fine man, like Calvin and Luther, was recently highlighted in a special program about new forms of religion in America, hosted by Peter Jennings.

99 Buena Vista, CA.

100 Ted Lowi has reached a similar conclusion: "...we now confront the inherent contradiction of the Right: It has contempt for the pluralist political process that makes its own persistence possible." (End of the Republican Era, 208-9) And again, "On the way to the Christian Republic, toleration of democractic pluralism is necessary. But then there comes a point when the open-minded toleration of toleration can be concluded and the American mind can be properly closed." (215)

101 Lowi says that a "brilliant and comprehensive assessment" of Christian activists shows that their organized legal and political pressure was against tolerance as a public policy. (Nomi Maya Stolzenberg, "He Drew a Circle That Shut Me Out: Assimilation, Indoctrination, and the Paradox of a Liberal Education," Harvard Law Review 106 (Jan. 1993) 581-667.

102 Larry Pahl, The Religious Right, two-paper option WIU, 1995, where I document the treatment of the chairman of the Democratic Party when he spoke to the Christian Coalition in 1993.

103 Quoted in Ellen White, Will America Survive? (Jemison, AL: IBE, Inc., 1994) chapter 16.

104 John W. Whitehead, The Separatist Illusion: A Lawyer Examines the First Amendment, (Milford, MI: Mott Media, 1977).

105 David Barton, The Myth of Separation: What is the correct relationship between Church and State? A revealing look at what the Founders and early Courts really said, (Aledo, TX: WallBuilder Press, 1991).

106 Whitehead, 103. Few historians would second Whitehead's claim except under the most stringent and narrow definitions of authorship. While there were many variants proposed by various committee members, the final wording of the First Amendment is close to what Madison had been pushing for. It certainly summarizes his position. It would be hard to make any other case after studying the record than that Madison was at least one of the major authors of the First Amendment. Constitutional scholar and former Senator Sam Ervin's conclusion after he has laid out the record is: "So we can say that James Madison, whom historians call the Father of the Constitution, was responsible for the phrasing of the First Amendment." (Ervin, 227.)

107 Whitehead, 102. "Nothing could be further from the truth" is certainly overstatement. Madison's views were certainly "controlling" if one allows that word to apply to a majority legislative vote. When a legislature passes a bill, it is then supported by the full police powers of the state. The views of the majority have then led to "control." Few historians, if any, would deny that Madison's efforts in the Virginia legislature (specifically at the time of the writing of the Remonstrance) and the United States Congress (during the deliberations on the First Amendment) achieved legislative majorities on votes for his impassioned views on religious liberty. But Whitehead's comment has more credence if by "controlling" he means that everyone has the same intellectual position on an issue, almost as in "mind control." It is certain that Madison's legislative victories came in the midst of legislators who held a great variety of views on religious liberty and separation. Madison, as has been said in several places in this work, was presenting some ideas which were new not just in America, but in the annals of mankind. New ideas seldom win immediate popular support as I'm sure Galileo would agree. But Madison's ideas were the breaking wave of a mighty tide that extends to our day. How else does one explain that in a world so committed to the marriage of church and state, that in America, soon after the impassioned work of James Madison, the states disestablished the churches they had been aligned with, one by one, until 1833 when Massacusetts became the last? What truth there might be in Whitehead's claim that Madison's view was not "controlling" at the time of the drafting of the First Amendment, is diluted when one views the extent to which it did gain control.

108 Madison's view was much more expansive than this. Ervin concludes after studying the context of Madison's use of the word "establishment" that he "intended to prohibit the Government from establishing any official relation between Government and religion and to prevent Government from using tax moneys to support religion in any way." (Ervin, 227) Ervin says of the Memorial and Remonstrance: "This document is crucial in determining what the Founding Fathers meant when they yielded to the insistence of James Madison and wrote into the First Amendment the provision that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...Madison used the word 'establishment' at least five times in contexts that showed that in his mind 'an establishment of religion' meant an official relationship between the state and one church or many churches or all churches, and the imposition of taxation for the support of one church or many churches or all churches. " Ervin, 225. Boston (Boston, 69-74, a section subtitled "Madison Under Attack") and Alley (Alley, 54-56; 65-69) both are incensed at the mishandling of the Religious Right on this point. Alley laments that it has captured the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, William Rehnquist, when in the Jaffree case he wrote that "the 'wall of separtion between church and state' is a metaphor based on bad history." (Alley, 65).

109 Ervin, 220.

110 Lockridge, A New England Town, the First Hundred Years, (NY: Norton, 1970). I deal with this change in my "Awakenings and Realignments in American History" paper submitted to the Graduate Association of Political Science at Western Illinois University, April, 1995.

111 While many names from the Right could be listed here, I would point out that the list would even include evangelical University of Chicago constitutional scholar Michael McConnell, as evidenced, for instance, in his Religious Freedom at a Crossroads, 59 U Chi L Rev 115-127 (1992).

112 Kenneth M. Dolbeare, American Ideologies Today, (NY: McGraw Hill, 1993) 53.

113 Whitehead's Rutherford Institute, Pat Robertson's American Center for Law and Justice, James Dobson's Alliance Defense Fund.

114 And I would argue that there has been relatively little restriction. The Right simply doesn't like the atomizing and equalizing consequences often associated with the dispassionate enforcement of the establishment clause in a manner which Madison himself would condone.

115 As I am in a hurry to finish this paper right now, I will not document this at the moment. But I have been clipping files that deal with some of the religious liberty cases being taken by these law groups of the right, and while some of them are legitimately cases that would advance liberty, many are exactly ofthe type as I characterizing here--power grabs and demands, not principled appeals for the liberty that should be the right and inheritance of all men.

116 Samuel Huntington, "The Clash of Civilizations", Foreign Affairs, Summer 1993.

117 Ibid, 49.

118 One of the reasons for Williams' dismissal from the Bay Colony was his adamant insistence that the charter of the colony and the other colonies was illegitimate because it did not have the native Indians as party to it. Oceans of sorrow, from the "Trail of Tears" and all other Indian misuse by the Europeans, could have been at least in some measure arrested if Williams had been listened to here, not to mention the millions of dollars in savings to the US Treasury that have had to go out in the way of recompense in recent years. Williams' credentials as "prophet" are increased by his solitary devotion to a cause whose time had not yet come.

119 See his section "The Evil Empire," 211-223.

120 In the future I would like to pursue more fully the lines of influence from Williams to the Founding Fathers. The presently prevailing understanding seems to be that Williams' influence on Madison and the Founders was minimal. (See Michael McConnell "The Origins and Historical Understanding of Free Exercise of Religion", Harvard Law Review, Vol. 103 No. 7, May 1990, p. 1426.) Supposedly his work was forgotten until "rediscovered" by Isaac Backus in 1773. (T. Curry, The First Freedoms: Church and State in America to the Passage of the First Amendment (1986), quoted in McConnell). Perry Miller wrote "although Williams is celebrated as the prophet of religious freedom, he actually exerted little or no influence on institutional developments in America; only after the conception of liberty for all denominations had triumphed on wholly other grounds did Americans look back on Williams and invest him with his ill-fitting halo." (Wm L Miller, The First Liberty, 217.) But there have been many scholarly works extolling the place of Williams in the development of the state constitutions, the Constitution and First Amendment, including M. Howe, The Garden and the Wilderness (1965), P. Miller, Roger Williams: His Contribution to the American Tradition (1953), W. Miller, The First Liberty (1986), and L. Tribe, American Constitutional Law @14-3, at 1158-59 (2nd Ed. 1988). The present study has taken this view from a "common sense" point of view.

121 Alley, 43. He continues, "That he failed is a tribute to the persuaviseness of Madison..."

122 Lienesch documents this, 172 ff.