Why
Church-State Separation is Important to Believers and Non-Believers
Virginia Chapter of Americans United
September 27, 2008
Rev. Cedric A. Harmon
I wish
to begin my response to the title with at paraphrase of Thomas Jefferson.
Church-state separation is important to religious leaders and non-believers
alike; in order to ensure that we enjoy, “the quiet and comfort of leaving
everyone to confess freely and openly those principles of religion which
they adopt (or do not adopt) of their own reason, serious conviction and
inquiry.” The protection of non-believers from unwanted religious messages
and invitations to become and adherent, accept the beliefs, or adopt them
as law is an essential element of this nation’s respect for freedom of
conscience.
For believers, like John Leland,
Roger Williams and others the notion of government interference and pledging
of allegiances to political figures was distasteful. With government
involvement comes the diminution of religious freedom, diluted prophetic
integrity and faith with weights attached. Excessive entanglement
of government and religious institutions harms both.
The reasonable neutrality of government to all faiths and the protection
of all without regard to belief or non-belief is a valued commodity in
governance the world over. Travelers from nations like; Indonesia,
Jordan, Nigeria, Singapore, India, China and Turkey have come to the United
States via State Department visits and private organizations to study
the concept of church-state separation as an essential part of our constitutional
republic. I have lectured international groups, high school tour
groups and college students about this valued principle.
With a complex and diverse American religious landscape, a highly charged
political atmosphere where political parties court communities of faith
and candidates tout their religious biography the need for church-state
separation should be obvious. Former Senator John C.
Danforth said
last year, “When religion becomes a base of a political party, there is
nothing more divisive. We have known this. Our founding fathers
knew this...That’s why they created the separation of church and state.”
James Madison in a similar tone wrote, “the lesson that religion
flourishes in greater purity, without than with the aid of government”
this lesson had been well learned by July 1822 in the State of Virginia
which earlier had embraced the Episcopal faith.
Faith flourishes and freedoms are protected by a commitment to the principle
of institutional separation of church and state. Government is not suited
for the particularities of doctrine, theology, philosophy, eschatology,
pneumatology, comparative religion. Religious leaders are less than
stellar experts in the theory and practice of political science, legislative
processes and procedures, analytical political systems and comparative
politics. Perhaps the best advice and approach is for each institution
to do what it does best, respect the strength of the other and share necessary
perspectives on the work of building a strong citizenry.
Tomorrow the Alliance Defense Fund, founded by Dr. James Dobson,
is encouraging pastors to participate in “Pulpit Freedom Sunday” by endorsing
Presidential candidates in protest of the 1954 IRS rules for tax exempt
501 © 3 organizations. They are calling this an act of “civil disobedience”
and claim that the rule “stifles free speech” in the pulpit. Houses
of worship, churches and other tax exempt organizations have considerable
freedom to address issues, and no issue if off limits for religious dialogue
by the IRS restrictions. We have witnessed this already in the 2008
Presidential Campaign engagement in the Compassion Forum and dialogue
at the Saddleback
Church.
Now, in 21st Century America defenders of the principle of church-state
separation face questions. Questions about vouchers to attend private
schools (the majority of which are religious), displays of the ten commandments
or other religious documents in public buildings and public schools, curriculum
challenges in public schools (dealing with evolution, religious instruction,
American history), social service provision (direct funding of religious
institutions and Title XVII)
political activity by religious groups (tax exemption and endorsing candidates),
and a host of religious based fights over cultural and social issues impacting
our society. Why is the principle important? Because this issue
touches upon the most personal and heartfelt aspects of our lives
and has serious implications for our ability to live together as citizens
of one nation — one world. We have fortunately avoided the religious
animosity found elsewhere and yet there are among us fellow-citizens who
desire a deep melding of government and religion, a preferred religious
basis for our public policy agenda, a “Christian Nation” identity and
religious litmus tests for full citizenship. Theocracy, uncritical
ideology, intolerance, irrational and dangerous passion are among the
leading worries of those critical of religion wrote Dr. Robert P. Jones.
Over the last 20+ years the “Christian Right” or “Religious Right”
have been the photo in the American dictionary next to religion. Their
ascendancy served as catnip for the news media. I will not prematurely
announce the demise, however, competing voices and perspectives are stronger
now than before and their influence has waned. The richness of plurality
of belief and the welcome presence of those not embracing religious belief
is to be celebrated. Also, to be celebrated is the plurality within
faith traditions; not every evangelical, protestant, or Pentecostal thinks
exactly the same. This diversity has opened the door for a broader
range of issues to be explored and for points of commonality to be unearthed.
We live at a time when the National Association of Evangelicals
is criticized by Dr. James Dobson
for positions it has taken on the environment and other issues. E.
J. Dionne
has coined a phrase and labeled our current space in time as, “post religious
right America.”
While the enjoyment of religious freedom as a right is to be celebrated,
the concomitant responsibility to vigorously defend the non-establishment
of any faith by government is to be undertaken by each citizen.
In small ways you can participate in this work. Ask the question
of friend and neighbor when your community faces challenges to religious
liberty, question candidates about this issue as an individual citizen,
support the local chapter of AU and other civil liberty organizations,
write a blog entry or a letter to the editor, and remind religious and
non-religious friends to stand up for the principle.
Let us, non-believers and devout religious adherents both embrace respect
for our Constitution, eschew attempts to meld government and religion,
and work tirelessly for the good of our country and the forward momentum
of our world.