The Declaration of Independence at 250: An interview with Bradley J. Birzer

Bradley J. Birzer, professor of history at Hillsdale College since 1999, is a prolific author and a good friend. He has written books on Russell Kirk, J.R.R. Tolkien, Christopher Dawson, Charles Carroll, and drumming legend Neal Peart.

His most recent book is The Declaration of Independence: A Radical Experiment in Liberty (Stone House Press, May 2026). Brad corresponded with me recently about the book, discussing the importance of the document, its place and meaning today, and much more.

CWR: What do you think is the most remarkable thing about the Declaration of Independence, 250 years after it was written? And what is the most misunderstood or least recognized thing about it?

Bradley J. Birzer: Hello, Carl! You are so amazing, and I’m thrilled to be talking with you, especially since our friendship goes back several decades now. Great question.

The most remarkable thing about the Declaration is its statement of human dignity: “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, endowed by their Creator, with certain unalienable rights, among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

Though not at the level of scripture, this sentence is a political, cultural, and social manifestation of the teachings of scripture. Think about St. Paul in his letter to the Galatians. When describing the human person, he notes that he is neither male nor female, neither Greek nor Jew. Though a Deist and skeptic, Jefferson made the same universal claim with regard to human dignity. As such, this one sentence is the single most important sentence in human history, outside of scripture. Further, it is universal, not just American, and it applies to all human beings, past, present, and future, here in the States, or in ancient Athens, or in present-day Nigeria.

Sadly, after a century and a half of progressivism, ideologies, and modernity, we’ve returned to the pre-1776 understanding of humanity, believing—falsely—that some humans are better than others. Further, we often ignore that the Declaration also teaches that 1) man is made in the image of his Creator, and 2) is a rights bearer.

These rights come not from government or society, but from God alone.

CWR: The Declaration mentions “rights” many times, including the famous statement “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights…” What is some of the background to this emphasis, both historically and philosophically? Why is it important? And why does it remain so widely debated today?

Bradley J. Birzer: Again, an excellent question. A right comes from one’s understanding of justice, one of the seven classical and Christian virtues. Properly understood, justice means “to give each person his or her due.” With justice this, we recognize that you, Carl, were born in a certain time and place, with certain accidents of birth, and specific talents. If justice works properly, you, as an individual, have the right and the duty to make the best of all of these.

This is, actually, a “pursuit of happiness”—that is, you are meant to become what nature and Nature’s God made you to be. Justice recognizes the specifics of each individual within the larger community and the larger cosmos. A right literally means “a right place in the order of justice.” For Jefferson, this was an extremely high calling. To have a “right to happiness” doesn’t mean getting stoned and binging Netflix. Rather, to pursue one’s happiness is to pursue excellence in whatever we do—in crafting a table, speaking in a conversation, helping a friend, or making a meal.

Critically, though, a right can come only from nature and God, and they’re inherent in the human person. We moderns have totally misunderstood this and have come to believe that our rights come from government, from the political sphere. Nothing could be more vile to the actual concept of right than to believe that they are man-made. They are man-discovered but not man-made.

No one man (or several men) has the right to determine the rights of a fellow human being. Only God can do that.

CWR: There has also been much debate about the formation and creation of the Declaration. What are some of the key points that you discuss in your book?

Bradley J. Birzer: The Declaration is, at once, a deeply conservative document and a deeply radical document. It is broken into four parts:

Paragraph one: the establishment of God and nature as sovereign, but with a recognition that men play a crucial role in the “course of human events.”

Paragraph two: all men—without exception—are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. Further, a government is only legitimate when it protects these rights. When it repeatedly violates them, we humans actually have a duty to overthrow our government—even if by violent means—not just a right to do so.

Following several paragraphs: a list of 28 grievances, each a violation of common law (law rooted in the experience, norms, and habits of a people; not imposed from above, but emergent from the ground below).

Final paragraph: this one is truly critical, and its most important part is written by Congress, not the Deist Jefferson. In its final sentence, noting Divine Providence and pledging one’s honor, fortunes, and lives, the Founders created a covenant. While not at the level of the Abrahamic or Mosaic covenant, it is a vital and critical reflection of each of these.

The Declaration is conservative in that it references the divine and dramatically protects common law (Common law, it should be noted, is rooted in the pre-Christian, Anglo-Saxons), but it is radical in its universal claims.

CWR: You note that the great first-century Roman historian Tacitus and the Enlightenment philosopher John Locke—the “father of liberalism”—were very influential among the Founders and others of that time. Why was that the case? And how did it shape the Declaration and the American Founding overall?

Bradley J. Birzer: One thing we’ve almost entirely forgotten is how deeply classical the American colonists were. If a person had any pre-collegiate schooling at all, even if, say, he went to school from ages 8 to 10, before he could fully labor on a farm, all—and I mean all—he would learn was Greek and Latin.

In the rare instance that he might attend one of the nine colleges in the colonies, the entrance requirements for each school were 1) the translation of the first three books of St. John’s Gospel from Greek to Latin; 2) the translation of three of Cicero’s orations from Latin to English; and 3) the translation of the first 1500 lines of The Aeneid from Latin to English.

So, every white colonist had a background in the classics. Even at the Battle of Yorktown, for example, the majority of French soldiers on the field had no English skills, and the minority of American soldiers knew no French. Instead, all field and military orders were in Latin, the language common to both sides. Therefore, it’s not surprising that the colonists loved historians like Tacitus, heroes like Aeneas, and philosophers like Cicero.

To be sure, though, the lineage of Western thinkers was not exclusively classical. Americans read widely and incorporated the then-modern teachings of John Locke and Algernon Sidney.

Famously, when Jefferson was asked in May 1825 what his influences were, he noted, critically, that he had said absolutely nothing new in the Declaration, itself an expression of the American mind of the colonies, the ideas of Aristotle, Cicero, Sidney, and Locke. While each of these individuals certainly played a role in the American mind, it’s vital that he recognize that Jefferson’s answer and professed lineage was shorthand for “the western heritage.”

CWR: To what degree, so to speak, were the Founders “Christian” or “Deist”? And what influence did Catholicism have on the Declaration and the Founding?

Bradley J. Birzer: I get this question a lot, and it’s evidence that the liberal and progressive historians have been up to much mischief.

There were four Enlightenment figures during the founding: Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Paine, and Benjamin Rush. While each of these men was crucial to the Revolution, they are, after all, only four guys. Simply put, the Enlightenment had almost no influence on the average colonist. The average white American—meaning about 99 out of 100—was immensely Protestant. As Edmund Burke would say, these Americans were the most Protestant of Protestants. As with all Protestants, they had two things that dramatically aided in the revolution—1) a distrust of authority and 2) extremely high literacy.

Remember, when the American colonies were being created, the English were experiencing their own Reformation and Civil War over religion. Consequently, the American Protestants were not just Protestants, but truly participants in a Reformation. Even Maryland—which we often erroneously remember as the “Catholic colony”—was only 8% Catholic in 1775. It was 92% Protestant.

Demographically, then, Catholics would have no say in America until the 1840s, when vast numbers of Irish and Germans immigrated to America. America from 1607 to 1846 was truly the most Protestant of Protestant countries.

That said, two Catholics—Charles Carroll of Carrollton, and his cousin and best friend, Jacky Carroll (later Archbishop John Carroll)—stood firm against immense prejudice and hatred of Catholicism. They were not only serious Catholics—trained in the liberal arts and in the anti-statist and anti-monarchical ideas and ideals of Bellarmine, Suarez, and de Mariana—but they were serious patriots, too.

They almost single-handedly made Catholicism respectable in the colonies. We Catholics owe them a great deal.

CWR: If Jefferson or Madison or Washington were alive today, what do you think they would say about what the United States has become?

Bradley J. Birzer: If any of the founders came back today, they’d be horrified by the state of society.

To them, a self-interested and self-satisfied society of smug tattooed and pierced human beings would look like some kind of cacotopia. They firmly believed that a republic could only exist if at least a significant minority of the population were virtuous and interested in the common good (the res publica). They would adamantly reject our democracy as a perversion of animal lusts, and they would find our progressivism bizarre and inhumane.

They would also—to the very marrow of their bones—be stunned by the size of government. In every single way, the founders believed that the political sphere should be radically limited, allowing for the flourishing of civil and civic society. Even the most pro-government of the founders, Alexander Hamilton, would never recognize our worship of Demos, Mars, and Leviathan.

On the good side, though, they would be incredibly impressed that 1) the republic still exists, no matter how bruised and beaten; and 2) that we have, for the most part, solved the race problem.

CWR: Why is the Declaration important today, in 2026, on this 250th anniversary? And how do you hope your book will help readers better understand and appreciate the document and the Founding?

Bradley J. Birzer: A hard question. I would say this—the Revolution, at heart if not in every instance, was an eruption of eternity into time. That is, its principles are true for all places, all times, and all men.

In our progressive and modern world, we so desperately need to remember that each person is a unique embodiment of truth, goodness, and beauty, a manifestation of Christ’s love, and a temple of the Holy Spirit. Yes, we remain fallen, but the Incarnation, Death, and Resurrection demand that we view all men and women as potential citizens of the City of God. As objective as I hope to be, I’m also a patriot and a Catholic.

Specifically, I hope for three things as we celebrate today.

First, I hope we recognize how precious each and every life is.

Second, I hope we one day extend our Declaration to the one population that has yet to receive its benefits, the American Indian. Drive onto the Pine Ridge Reservation, for example. What do you see? 90% poverty, little freedom (because of the horrific Bureau of Indian Affairs), and extremely high alcoholism. Every people in the world has benefited from the creation and settlement of America, with this one exception. We have a duty and moral obligation to make this wrong right.

Third, I would ask us to remember that the Founders severely limited the political sphere and political life. That sphere is meant to remain political only, and not extend into family, business, or community. We must reject politics, politicians, and political machinations and return our patriotic gaze upon our families, our neighborhoods, our schools, our voluntary associations, and our small businesses.

Simply put, democracy and Leviathan mechanize the human person. We must rehumanize society and return to the roots of our glorious republic.