In a day and age where there is much discussion and debate over our Christian heritage, who better to settle the argument as to whether or not the United States of America was founded as a Christian nation than the United States Supreme Court — the ultimate authority and final arbiter. What if I told you the modern day argument between the secular progressives and Christian conservatives on this contentious debate was already settled by the United States Supreme Court as far back as 120 years ago!
That’s right. In 1892 in the case of Church of the Holy Trinity v. United States, the Supreme Court examined thousands of documents concerning the founding of our great nation, including all state constitutions and compacts leading up to the time of the Revolution. After ten years of research, the court issued a unanimous decision that included the recognition that the United States of America is not only historically and culturally religious, but that the very system of government and our laws are based on a Christian worldview.
Regarding the mountain of documentary evidence, the high court further stated:
“THERE IS NO DISSONANCE IN THESE DECLARATIONS. THERE IS A UNIVERSAL LANGUAGE PERVADING THEM ALL, HAVING ONE MEANING. THEY AFFIRM AND REAFFIRM THAT THIS IS A RELIGIOUS NATION. THESE ARE NOT INDIVIDUAL SAYINGS, DECLARATIONS OF PRIVATE PERSONS. THEY ARE ORGANIC UTTERANCES. THEY SPEAK THE VOICE OF THE ENTIRE PEOPLE.
THIS IS A RELIGIOUS PEOPLE…THIS IS A CHRISTIAN NATION.”
Regardless of one’s religious, agnostic or atheist persuasion, there is no doubt as evidenced by the Supreme Court’s opinion in Trinity v. United States in 1892 that founders and the citizens of young America were guided by Biblical principles and Christian ideals. Yes, the United States of America is indeed a Christian nation.
Holy Trinity Church had imported labor which was against the law. Contracts to import labor were forbidden by Federal law, and specifically by the Alien Contract Labor Law, an Act of Congress passed in 1885 prohibiting “the importation and migration of foreigners and aliens under contract or agreement to perform labor or service of any kind in the United States, its territories, and the District of Columbia”.
The court held that a minister was not a foreign laborer under the statute even though he was a foreigner.
Written By: Kevin A. Lehmann