John Adams on the United States Not Being Founded on Christian

 1-1-26 

John Adams’s statement that “the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion” comes from Article 11 of the 1797 Treaty of Tripoli, a diplomatic agreement between the United States and the Muslim state of Tripoli. The quotation appears in the English text submitted to the Senate by President Adams and unanimously ratified. It is widely reproduced in modern sources, including Goodreads Goodreads and A‑Z Quotes A-Z Quotes.

This statement is one of the clearest and most authoritative declarations from the early American government about the secular nature of the United States. It was not an offhand remark by Adams but part of an official treaty—drafted under George Washington’s administration, submitted by Adams, approved by the Senate, and published for the public. Its purpose was to assure Muslim nations that the United States had no religious hostility toward them and that its government was not based on Christianity.

The historical context is crucial. In the late 18th century, the United States was negotiating with the Barbary States to protect American ships from piracy. European powers often framed conflicts with Muslim states in religious terms, but the United States—newly independent and eager to avoid religious wars—explicitly rejected that framing. By stating that the U.S. government was not founded on Christianity, the treaty emphasized that American foreign policy was secular and based on peaceful relations rather than religious rivalry.

Philosophically, the statement reflects the broader Enlightenment principles embraced by many Founders. Adams himself was personally religious, but he believed strongly in separating civil authority from ecclesiastical power. His writings show skepticism toward established churches and clerical influence. The Treaty of Tripoli’s language aligns with this view: the United States, unlike European nations, did not claim divine sanction or Christian identity as the basis of its laws.

The treaty also reflects the constitutional structure of the new republic. The U.S. Constitution contains no reference to Christianity, no invocation of God, and no religious test for office. The First Amendment prohibits laws “respecting an establishment of religion,” ensuring that the government cannot privilege one faith over another. Adams’s treaty statement is consistent with this constitutional framework: the government is secular, and its legitimacy comes from the people, not from religious doctrine.

Modern scholars often cite the Treaty of Tripoli as evidence against claims that the United States was founded as a Christian nation. While many Americans at the time were Christian, the government they created was deliberately secular. The treaty’s language makes this explicit: the United States has “no character of enmity” toward Muslims and no religious basis for its laws Goodreads A-Z Quotes.

In sum, Adams’s statement in the Treaty of Tripoli is a powerful affirmation of American secularism. It reflects the Founders’ desire to avoid the religious conflicts that plagued Europe, to establish peaceful relations with other nations, and to ground the new republic in universal principles of liberty rather than sectarian identity. The treaty remains one of the clearest historical documents demonstrating that the U.S. government was designed to be neutral toward religion—not founded on Christianity, but protective of the freedom of all faiths.

Links 


Sources:,

·       Goodreads Goodreads, “As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion…”
A-Z Quotes A‑Z Quotes, John Adams quotations on religion and the Treaty of Tripoli

·       https://www.au.org/the-latest/church-and-state/articles/a-word-from-john-adams-a-224-year-old-treaty/?utm_source=copilot.com

·       https://oll.libertyfund.org/quotes/john-adams-religion-constitution?utm_source=copilot.com

·       https://www.truthorfiction.com/john-adams-the-government-of-the-united-states-of-america-is-not-in-any-sense-founded-on-the-christian-religion/?utm_source=copilot.com

·       https://www.lnquotes.com/quote/as-the-government-of-the-united-states-of-america-is-not-in-any-sense-founded-on-the-christian-religion-as-it-has-in-itself-no-character-of-enmity-against-the-laws-religion-or-tranquility-of-musse/?utm_source=copilot.com

·       http://www.john-adams-heritage.com/quotes/?utm_source=copilot.com

·       https://www.democracydieswithlies.com/church-state-separation/quotes-about-religion-by-founding-fathers/adams-on-religion?utm_source=copilot.com

·       https://libquotes.com/john-adams/quotes/religion?utm_source=copilot.com

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

115 Years of War Since 1900 for America

Since 1900, the United States has been at war or engaged in major military conflicts for roughly 100 to 115 years. A few nations have participated in more conflicts, but that does not diminish the extraordinary amount of resources the United States has devoted to warfare over this period. These estimates come from reliable sources, including the Library of Congress and other authoritative conflict records. Some of these wars can be argued as justified. In my view, World War II, the Gulf War, and the war in Afghanistan had legitimate grounds to some degree. Yet many other conflicts might have been resolved peacefully—or avoided entirely—had different choices been made. This does not mean the United States, or any nation, should retreat into isolationism. Global problems require global participation. When a nation removes itself from the table, it leaves space for authoritarian actors or non‑state armed groups to step in and shape outcomes. Beyond material costs, many sources estim...
Read more

Immigrants are Not Committing More Crime

Editor Notes:  Are we truly focused on reducing crime, addressing immigration, or simply stoking fear? If the goal is to lower crime rates, then the attention should be on those statistically committing more offenses—native-born citizens—rather than scapegoating immigrants. ( Link ) If opposition to immigration is the stance, that's understandable, even if I don’t personally agree with it. However, that position can be argued without fueling fear across entire immigrant communities.  The reality is that the GOP, under Trump’s dominant influence, relies on fear-mongering as a political strategy. They see it as a tool to mobilize voters and maintain their grip on power. Fear can be effective in driving political engagement, but it comes at the cost of facts, fairness, and a more constructive dialogue on crime, immigration and damage to due process.   No, immigrants aren't more likely to commit crimes than US-born, despite Trump's border speech Published 11:26 a.m. ET...
Read more

Grievance with Trump and the Republican Party

The follow is my list of the grievances I have with President Trump and the Republican party.  1. Executive Overreach President Trump has asserted direct control over areas traditionally and constitutionally reserved for Congress. He uses executive orders as de facto legislation, directing agencies to implement the President’s personal agenda and not an agenda that is beneficial for the country. This expansion of unilateral authority bypasses the legislative process and weakens the separation of powers. 2. Failure of Congressional Oversight Congress has not exercised adequate oversight of the executive branch, enabling expansions of presidential authority in emergency powers, tariffs, immigration, and the use of acting officials. This neglect weakens the rule of law and undermines democratic accountability. 3. Misuse of National Emergency Powers The President has declared national emergencies without legitimate justification, using them to bolster executive orders rathe...
Read more