American Revolution was a product of the religious enlightenment that occurred 20 years earlier.
The comment is a partial truth that's oversimplified and imprecise, but it gestures at a real historical dynamic. The American Revolution (1775–1783) drew on both Enlightenment rationalism and vibrant Protestant religious energies, which had been stirring in the colonies for decades. Calling it a "product of the religious enlightenment" 20 years earlier (roughly the 1750s–early 1760s) isn't standard terminology, but it captures something important about how religious revivalism and moderate Enlightenment ideas reinforced each other in America.
Was There a "Religious Enlightenment"?
Yes, in a broader sense. Historians like David Sorkin describe a "Religious Enlightenment" across Europe (and influencing America) in the 18th century: a moderate strand of Enlightenment thought that sought to reconcile reason, science, and religious faith rather than rejecting religion outright (as more radical French Enlightenment figures like Voltaire sometimes did). It emphasized "reasonable belief," religious tolerance, moral philosophy grounded in natural law, and personal piety over rigid dogma or hierarchy.
In the American colonies, this overlapped with (and was amplified by) the First Great Awakening (peaking 1730s–1740s, with effects continuing into the 1750s–1760s). Key figures included Jonathan Edwards and George Whitefield, who promoted emotional, personal conversion experiences, direct access to God (bypassing established clergy), and the idea that ordinary people could challenge authority. This wasn't purely "Enlightenment" (which stressed cool reason), but it shared themes of individualism, anti-hierarchical thinking, and questioning tradition.
The timing in the comment is off by a bit—the Awakening's height was 20–40 years before the Revolution—but its cultural ripples (new denominations, inter-colonial networks, empowered laity) were still fresh in the 1760s–1770s. The Stamp Act crisis (1765) and later events occurred against this backdrop.
Did It Make People More or Less Religious? Or a New View?
More religious in practice, with a new emphasis on personal experience: The Great Awakening was a revival that countered the perceived "deadness" of established churches. It increased church attendance in many areas, split congregations (Old Lights vs. New Lights), boosted evangelical groups like Baptists and Methodists, and fostered a more democratic, emotional style of faith. It made religion feel immediate and accessible rather than formal or inherited.
Not less religious overall: Unlike the more secular strains of the European Enlightenment, America's version didn't broadly erode faith. Many colonists blended Awakening-style piety with Enlightenment ideas. Religion remained central to daily life and politics.
A new view of religion: It promoted individualism ("priesthood of all believers" on steroids), skepticism of religious (and by extension political) authority, and the notion that liberty and virtue were divinely ordained. This "new view" was Protestant, often Calvinist-inflected, but open to reason and moral philosophy. Many Founding-era Americans saw rights as coming from God (or "Nature's God"), not kings or parliaments.
How Did This Influence the American Founding?
The Revolution and founding weren't purely secular or purely religious—they were a unique synthesis:
Religious fuel for resistance: Clergy (the "black-robed regiment") preached that resisting tyranny was a Christian duty, framing taxes and British policies as moral and providential issues. Biblical language (e.g., Exodus, liberty as God's gift) was everywhere in sermons and pamphlets. The Awakening built inter-colonial networks and a sense of shared identity that made coordinated rebellion easier.
Enlightenment ideas translated through religion: Thinkers like John Locke (natural rights, social contract) were filtered through a Protestant lens. Ideas of consent, equality before God/law, and republican virtue resonated because of the Awakening's democratizing effects. Many Founders (e.g., John Witherspoon, a Presbyterian minister and signer) embodied this blend.
Founders' own beliefs: Varied widely. Many were conventional Christians (e.g., Patrick Henry, Samuel Adams); others were Deists or liberal Christians influenced by Enlightenment reason (Franklin, Jefferson, Paine). Deism posited a distant Creator who endowed rights via reason/nature, without much emphasis on miracles or dogma. The founding documents reflect this: "endowed by their Creator" (Declaration) alongside no established national church and religious liberty (Constitution/First Amendment). This was pragmatic—avoiding Europe's religious wars while assuming a moral, religious citizenry.
Long-term impact: The synthesis supported religious disestablishment, tolerance, and the view that a free republic required virtuous (often religiously informed) citizens. It wasn't secularism as we might think of it today, nor theocracy.
Critique of the comment: It's insightful in rejecting a purely secular "Enlightenment = Revolution" narrative (a common oversimplification). Edmund Burke and others noted America's energetic Protestantism as key to its "free spirit." However, it overstates by calling it "the product" of a specific "religious enlightenment" 20 years prior—ignoring economic grievances, classical republicanism, English common law traditions, and the broader, ongoing interplay. The Awakening was more revivalist than "Enlightenment," and the causal link is contributory, not deterministic. Historians still debate the exact weight.
In short, the American founding succeeded partly because religious energies and Enlightenment reason mutually reinforced each other in a way that was distinctively colonial American. The comment gets the fusion right but simplifies the timeline and causality.
