The Bible in American Law and Politics. John R. Vile
424, 428), printed a King James Version copy of the New Testament, which he had already begun to sell. On January 21, 1781, he appealed to Congress to support his publication of both Old and New Testaments. In his memorial to Congress, he observed,
That in every well regulated Government in Christendom The Sacred Books of the Old and New Testament, commonly called the Holy Bible, are printed and published under the Authority of the Sovereign Powers, in order to prevent the fatal confusion that would arise, and the alarming Injuries the Christian Faith might suffer from the spurious and erroneous Editions of Divine Revelation. That your Memorialist has no doubt but this work is an Object worthy the attention of the Congress of the United States of America, who will not neglect spiritual security, while they are virtuously contending for temporary blessings. (Pears 1939, 229)
18
Noting that he had already “made considerable progress in a neat Edition of the Holy Scriptures for the use of schools,” he indicated that he was “cautious of suffering [allowing] his copy of the Bible to Issue forth without the sanction of Congress” (Pears 1939, 229). He further wanted Congress to advance money for this purpose.
Although Congress neither advanced money to Aitkin for this purpose nor offered to purchase his Bibles, a committee, which included two congressional chaplains, did examine the Bible for accuracy, and on September 10, 1782, Congress adopted its first and only such endorsement of such a publication:
Whereupon, Resolved, That the United States in Congress assembled highly approve the pious and laudable undertaking of Mr. Aitken, as subservient to the interest of religion, as well as an instance of the progress of arts in this country, and being satisfied from the above report of his care and accuracy in the execution of the work, they recommend this edition of the Bible to the inhabitants of the United States, and hereby authorize him to publish this Recommendation in the manner he shall think proper. (Pears 1939, 234)
In a subsequent advertisement, which appeared in the Freeman’s Journal of September 25, 1782, Aitken published an advertisement. It stated,
The serious Christian will be pleased to find, that the scarcity of Bibles, of which he has so long had reason to complain, is now removed; and the patriot will rejoice at the advance in the arts, which has at length produced The First Edition of the Holy Scriptures, in the English language, ever printed in America; each of these will allow the merit due to so capital an undertaking; and the trader will find his interest in affording his patronage and encouragement to this work, as several circumstances, particularly the largeness of the type, and the remarkable good quality of the paper, render this edition superior to any of the same size important from Europe. (Pears 1939, 235)
Aitkin further indicated that the Bibles were available “either bound or in sheets” or as large family Bibles (Pears 1939, 235).
A further communication appeared in the Freeman’s Journal dated November 20, 1782, noting that apart from a German Bible and an Indian Bible, this was the first such Bible printed in America, and that given that even “the very paper that has received the impression of these sacred books was manufactured in Pennsylvania, the whole book is, therefore, purely American, and has risen, like the fabled Phoenix, from the ashes of that pile in which our enemies supposed they had consumed the liberties of America” (Pears 1939, 237).
Aitken had hoped that Congress might buy a copy for each of those who had served under him, but although he said that “it would have pleased me well, if Congress had been pleased to make such an important present to the brave fellows who have done so much for the security of their country’s rights and establishment,” he indicated that it was now too late to do so since most of them had been released (Pears 1939, 238).
In 1789, prior to the establishment of copyright laws, Aitken asked Congress to give him the exclusive right to publish Bibles in the United States for the next fourteen years, but it did not do so, and editions by other publishers quickly 19followed (Pears 1939, 240). James H. Smylie claims that Aitken “never recovered his investment” (1997, 153). Matthew Carey observed that as soon as the Revolutionary War ended and Bibles could be imported, “Bibles were imported on a large scale, somewhat superior in quality and at a far lower price, so that he lost the sale of his, or if he sold, it was at a considerable loss” (quoted in Carter 2007, 453).
It is important to recognize that Aitken’s request for government authorization and subsidy came prior to the adoption of the First Amendment, which limits the governmental “establishment” of religion. Although Aitken is believed to have printed as many as ten thousand copies, relatively few remain, and they are highly valued (“Aitken’s Bible Endorsed by Congress”).
When approached by Christopher Talbot about publishing a Catholic version of the Bible, Talbot reported that “in a holy fit of zeal,” Carey had said “that he would rather print the woman of pleasure, than such a pestiferous, idolatrous book” (quoted in Carter 2007, 453–54).
See also King James Version of the Bible; Revolutionary War
For Reference and Further Reading
“Aitken’s Bible Endorsed by Congress.” Free Republic. www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2722475/posts. Accessed March 25, 2019.
Carter, Michael S. 2007. “‘Under the Benign Sun of Toleration’: Matthew Carey, the Douai Bible, and Catholic Print Culture, 1789–1791.” Journal of the Early Republic 27 (Fall): 437–69.
Davis, Deric H. 2000. Religion and the Continental Congress, 1774–1789: Contributions to Original Intent. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hogue, William M. 1991. “An Authorized Bible for America.” Anglican and Episcopal History 60 (September): 361–82.
Pears, Thomas C., Jr. 1939. “The Story of the Aitken Bible.” Journal of the Department of History (the Presbyterian Historical Society) of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A . 18 (June): 225–41.
Smylie, James H. 1997. “America’s Political Covenants, the Bible, and Calvinists.” Journal of Presbyterian History 75 (Fall): 153–64.
Spawn, Willman, and Carol Spawn. 1963. “The Aitken Shop: Identification of an Eighteenth-Century Bindery and Its Tools.” Papers of the Bibliographical Society of America 57 (Fourth Quarter): 422–37.
Sweet, William W. 1935. “The English Bible in the Making of America.” Christian Education 19 (October): 9–13.
Alternate Scriptures
Although the focus of this work is on the Bible consisting of the Old and New Testaments, and its role in U.S. law and politics, it is important to recognize that there are alternate scriptural texts that are considered as inspired holy books by other religions and that a number of these have been homegrown.
Jews rely not only on the Scriptures that Christians call the Old Testament but also on interpretations found in the Talmud. Muslims subscribe to the Koran, which they believed God directly dictated to the prophet Muhammad. In contrast to the general Christian willingness to accept translations of Scripture, some Muslims believe that the Koran should not be translated but can only be 20efficacious in its original Arabic. Hindus consider the Bhagavad Gita to be their Scripture. Both of these Scriptures have been used when members