Can Church and State Separate AND Cooperate?

The concept of the separation of church and state is as old as America.  Roger Williams talked about it in the early 1600s, Thomas Jefferson in the early 1800s, and we still talk about it today.  And for good reason.  In order for a free society to flourish, the national government cannot, and should not, discriminately endorse, support, and fund one particular religious group.  It should, in this sense, remain separate from religion.

But can religious organizations and the government still cooperate, even if they are to remain institutionally separate?  The answer to that question throughout American history has been a resounding “YES.”  From George Washington to Barack Obama, presidents have supported the idea that the government should cooperate with religious organizations, with two key provisos:  First, the religious organizations must be doing work which results in broad social good.  Second, the government must not discriminate among religious organizations, but must offer their support to any qualified religious organization which is doing the work.

In 1789, George Washington’s government worked through the War Department to fund missionaries to Indians, believing that the missionaries improved diplomatic relations with the Indians.  In 2001, George Bush established the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, an office aimed at connecting small organizations to federal funding for the community work they were doing.  In both instances, the religious organizations were doing work which benefitted the broader society, and the government aided religious organizations indiscriminately.  In both instances, church and state were able to separate, and cooperate.  Here’s hoping such separation-cooperation continues into the future.

FAITH, THE WHITE HOUSE, AND THE PUBLIC SQUARE - September 26, 2013
If you are interested in this topic, I encourage you to attend an event I have organized at Southern Methodist University on Thursday, September 26, 2013, entitled “Faith, the White House, and the Public Square.”  The SMU Center for Presidential History will host every Director, past and present, of the White House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships (so renamed by President Obama).  These world-renowned experts will help us reflect on the role of the White House in matters of faith, community service, and public policy in the 21^st century.  You can register for this FREE event by clicking here, or on the image below.  I hope I’ll see you there!

Some American Constitutions are Christian Documents

In my last post, I made the case that the United States Constitution is clearly not a Christian document.  The framers of the government and the document in 1787-1789 purposefully crafted this sort of document, complete with the disestablishment of all churches and the promise of religious freedom.

But that was for the nation, and for the national Congress.  The story of the state constitutions is a very different story.  From the 1770s through the 1790s, leaders in every state (not every leader) came together to craft state constitutions which in some way, aimed at creating specifically Christian societies.  Here are some of the ways they did this:

Established Churches
The state constitutions of Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, and New Hampshire all established a particular religious denomination as the official religion of the state.  Essentially (although the laws could get very convoluted), this meant that if you were a resident of the state, part of your taxes went toward supporting this denomination.  The State of Massachusetts was the last state to finally disestablish the state-supported church.  It did this in 1833, more than forty years after the ratification of the Constitution and the First Amendment.

Limited Religious Freedom and Toleration
Every state which did not officially establish a Christian denomination still limited freedom and toleration in some way.  Pennsylvania required that all citizens believe in God.  North Carolina's "Declaration of Rights" promised freedom of religion, so long as it was "to worship Almighty God" (This article pointed out an attempt a few weeks ago in North Carolina to return to something like this, and the Washington Post's poor coverage of it).  The 1777 Constitution of South Carolina stated that all people would be "freely tolerated," as long as they "acknowledge that there is one God, and a future state of rewards and punishments, and that God is publicly to be worshiped."

Religious Tests for Public Office
While the U.S. Constitution specifically barred religious tests, many states specifically required them.  Almost every state required that elected officials profess a belief in the God of Christianity.  Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Vermont required officials to believe in the divine inspiration of the Old and New Testaments.  North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, New Jersey, and New Hampshire required members of the state legislature, judges, and governors to be Protestants.  Ironically, most of these constitutions contained the promise that "no further religious test" would ever be required of anyone - except, of course, for the religious test they just had to take.

Religious Tests for Voting
Some states even required religious tests for citizens who wanted to vote.  Pennsylvania only granted civil rights like voting to those who acknowledged "the being of a God."  South Carolina required a belief in God and in "the future states of rewards and punishments."  And don't forget, in most every place, voting was already restricted to property-owning white males.

So What?
All of this information puts the national, constitutional calls for the free exercise of religion and disestablishment of churches in the 1780s in a fascinating context.  Some American leaders in the 1780s were stalwart on the issues of disestablishment and the separation of church and state in the national Constitution because they were such strong proponents of religious freedom.

But many leaders were bent on clarifying the language of the Constitution on religion not because they wanted a nation or government without church influence, but because they wanted the national government to be limited in its religious power.  With that settled, they could return to their states, and state constitutions, in order to exert precisely that power.

So Christians, as you have conversations about the issues surrounding the role of religion in our constitutions, laws, or history, keep in mind that these are historically complex issues.  You should seek answers, and you should take stands.  But you should base it on the varied history of the role religion in American life and laws, not based on a God-and-country caricature of it.


Helpful Links
Constitutions
You can find the early constitutions of all the states, territories, and nation in the multivolume book "The Federal and State Constitutions," freely available on Google Books.  Click here for a link to one of these volumes.

Books and Articles
David Sehat, The Myth of American Religious Freedom
John Fea, Was America Founded as a Christian Nation?
Thomas Kidd, God Of Liberty: A Religious History of the American Revolution
Benjamin Park, "North Carolina's 'Official Religion': The Convoluted History of American States and Established Religions

The Constitution is not a Christian Document

Throughout American history, Christians have sought to spread their faith and influence the nation in a way consistent with that faith.  They have done this in many ways, including religious (missions, Bible societies), social (temperance, abolition, poverty-relief), and political (electing Christian leaders, voting for biblically-inspired laws).

Christians have always had the right, and even the responsibility, to apply their faith in the public square.  However, many Christians have gone beyond this, and have claimed that Christianity deserves a special seat at the national table.  For support, they argue that the United States is a Christian nation, with a Christian Constitution.

Their is one glaring, foundational problem with this argument:
The Constitution of the United States is not a Christian document.

Read the Constitution here, which includes the Amendments (it's really not very long!), and consider the following:

1. There is nothing specific to Christianity mentioned in the Constitution.

2. There is no mention of any deity, much less Jesus Christ, in the Constitution.  A "Creator" appeared in the Declaration of Independence from a decade earlier, but disappeared by the time the Constitution was written

3. The Constitution only mentions religion twice, and neither time has anything to do with Christianity in particular.  One mention is in the First Amendment, which guarantees that Congress will "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the exercise thereof."  The second mention is in Article VI, and it bars the federal government from ever requiring a "religious test" as a qualification for any office.  Together, these two clauses basically state that the government will not establish an official religion, and will not require anyone to profess a particular religion to participate in that government.

4. Some of the writers, framers, and signers of the Constitution rejected orthodox Christian doctrines, and/or rejected the idea that the Constitution should be a uniquely Christian document.  Some who argued for Christianity having some sort of established role (like Oliver Ellsworth) were soundly defeated.

Now, I am not arguing that the Constitution is an unChristian or anti-Christian document.  It is certainly true that the Constitution was born out of a western European tradition which grew out of many streams of ideas, including democracy, republicanism, commonsense philosophy, classical liberalism, and Christianity.  But it was a meld, a mix, a compilation.  There was not direct transition between Christianity and Constitution.  Christianity was one of many influences, not the fountainhead.

So, Christians, be thankful for the Constitution of the United States.  Enjoy the free exercise of your religion.  Rejoice that you do not have to pass a religious test written by the government in order to serve in federal office.  And by all means, exercise your faith in the public square by sharing your faith, serving the poor, and arguing for laws consistent with biblical morality.  This is your right and privilege.

But don't enlist the Constitution as a Christian document, as your second American Bible of sorts.  When you do, you do damage to the document, to American history, and to your faith.

Teaser: This entire post refers specifically and purposefully to the national Constitution.  In my next post, I will explore a surprising and critical issue: how the same nation which rejected establishing an official religion at the national level in 1789, simultaneously championed official religious establishments in many of the states.

Was America Founded as a Christian Nation?: A Complicated Answer to a Complicated Question

Was America founded as a Christian nation?

Take a few minutes to look at or listen to news of any kind - internet, tv, or radio - and chances are that you will find someone, saying something, about the United States, religion, the founders, or a combination of all three.  Our climate is ripe with opinions about the relationship between religion and society today, and what the history of the United States can tell us about it.  Often, the discussion is boiled down to this seemingly simple question - Was America Founded as a Christian Nation? - and our answer to it.

I say "seemingly simple" for a very clear reason: despite what many people believe and argue, this is a complicated question, which demands a complicated answer.

As a Christian historian who thinks and writes about these issues, it discourages me to tell you that the place where I have found the most hesitation, pushback, anger, and even slander for thinking critically about this issue is...the church.  Many of my brothers and sisters who have reacted in this way to my discussion of this issue attest to loving history.  But at root, they seem to have been less concerned with the complexities of history, and more concerned with using history for present-day political battles.  My brothers, this should not be so.

If we want to pursue truth and understand the history permeating this question, we need to be ready for a complex discussion.  This complexity begins with the question itself.  How a person asks the question, and how a person answers, are wholly dependent upon how that person defines the terms in the question.

Walk through the question with me, and consider the following:

"Was" and "Founded"
These words refer to a particular point in the past - the American founding.  The problem with the question, and with our often-simplistic answers, is that we haven't agreed on when this founding happened, or what this founding actually was.

When was it?  1492?  1620?  1776?  1787?
What was it?  European discovery?  Pilgrims at Plymouth Rock?  English, Spanish, French, or a combination of them all?  The Declaration of Independence?  The ratification of the Constitution?

When and what you deem the founding will help determine much of what you think American history and society is all about.  For 1620 supporters, religion and religious freedom are the story.  For 1787 supporters, unification under a common law is the story.  For 1492 supporters, multiculturalism is the story.

"America" and "Nation"
What is this America or nation? Is it a geographical location? A people? A nation-state? A government?

Again, if we don't define our terms, and agree upon them, we shouldn't be surprised when our discussion about the role of religion in "American" history devolves into a morass of confusion.  How can two people actually get a useful answer to the question when one defines "America" as a place or people characterized by union around a common law (the Constitution) and the other defines "America" as the land settled by Puritans dedicated to establishing Christianity?  They can't.

"Christian"
Finally, the most complicated term of all.  What is this "Christian" in the question?  To what does it refer?
A predominately Christian population?
An explicitly Christian state?
A law defined (or influenced by) Christianity?
And which Christianity? Puritan Massachusetts, Anglican Virginia, Catholic Maryland, Quaker Pennsylvania, or something in between?
And what about all those non-Christians who helped frame the colonies, states, and nation?

Was America founded as a Christian nation?

Well, that's a complicated question, with a complicated answer.

If we refuse to acknowledge the complex nature of this issue, we reveal our pride, and will never make progress as a Church, or as a nation.

But there is hope.  Once we humbly acknowledge the complexity of religion and American history, we can actually begin to make the progress we want in our discussions with fellow Christians and with our non-Christian fellow citizens.