Last weekend the Baptist General Association of Virginia issued a resolution defending religious liberty and challenging the revisionist views of American history propagated by religious conservatives in Texas and elsewhere. Here is a snippet from an article in the Associated Baptist Press.
The officer elections came a day after the resolution was passed following lively debate. Meeting in the port city of Hampton, Va., messengers slightly altered the statement before ultimately adopting it by a wide margin on a show-of-hands vote.
Virginia Baptists should “regard it as a threat to the flourishing of religious liberty when any version of our nation’s history minimizes or denies the historical basis” of church-state separation, the resolution says. It also says Virginia Baptists should “be diligent in resisting and correcting any such mistaken version of our history.”
Rob James of Richmond, who chairs the BGAV’s religious-liberty committee, said the resolution was prompted in part by recent attempts by a conservative Christian majority on the Texas State Board of Education to amend standards for the state’s social-studies textbooks. The majority accused the old standards of undermining Christianity and conservative values.
“One of the things that frightened us [the committee] was that the next 10 years of social-studies textbooks would raise questions about the founding of this country and to what extent, if at all, the idea of separation of church and state is part of our national commitment,” said James, a retired professor of religion at the University of Richmond.
“It appeared to us that what was going on amounted to a change of our historical memory,” he added. “If we as individuals are robbed of our memory we can no longer be the same person and can’t be faithful to the same principles. The same is true of a collective body. Its memory can be tampered with.”
In the interest of full disclosure, I was approached by a representative of the Virginia Baptist group responsible for this statement. They wanted to use parts of my forthcoming Was America Founded as a Christian Nation: A Historical Primer in their resolution. I sent them a copy of the manuscript and we had a phone call and a few e-mail exchanges about it. But in the end they were a bit disappointed with the book’s historical and even-handed approach. They wanted a more blatant attack on the “Christian America” view of history.
For what’s it worth.
By the way, have I mentioned that Was America Founded as a Christian Nation will be published in February 2011 with Westminster/John Knox Press? Buy a copy and decide for yourself if I am too even-handed.
I wonder if these Virginia Baptists actually looked at the curriculum changes or just went with the second-hand news and advocate reports.
Sort of like the people who get their Rush Limbaugh from Media Matters.
I examined about half the new curriculum and no howlers jumped out at me. Neither have I seen any reports on the actual curriculum since it came out. Yes, many of the proposals Texas Freedom Network was freaking about were idiotic, but they didn't make the cut.
But in the end they were a bit disappointed with the book's historical and even-handed approach. They wanted a more blatant attack on the “Christian America” view of history.
Good onya, mate.
BTW, during the Texas debate, Peter Marshall explicitly wrote
“One tiny but important quibble: Neither I nor David Barton “call for teaching the biblical foundations of a 'Christian America.'” Neither of us uses that phrase because it is confusing and misleading. In my books and talks I simply call for schools and textbooks to teach the Biblical foundations of America.”
http://petermarshallministries.com/commentary.cfm?commentary=232
Now, I'm not big on the “biblical foundations” argument, as I think Christianity's influence was more indirect. Still, the men should be attacked for what they said, not what they explicitly didn't say, and they explicitly didn't say “Christian America.”
Tom: Go to Peter Marshall's website. The phrase “Christian heritage” is all over the place.
We do have a Christian heritage. I would think your book points that out and that left the Virginia Baptists unsatisfied.
I don't buy into the Marshall/Barton axis in toto, but having looked at the previous Texas standards, they were pretty PC and inane.
And the final curriculum was nowhere near what one would expect from reading the Texas Freedom Network's and mainstream media's howling coverage of the preliminary proposals.
[BTW, if you missed it, I hope you'll catch my reply on Lawler re Locke and Strauss. It's an important area and an undesirable trend, IMO.]