Separation of Church and State

The signers of the Mayflower Compact were Separatists.  They desired a government that promoted liberty rather than a denominational government similar to what they had experienced in Great Britain.  This post will attempt to describe the differences between the views of “the Separation of Church and State” in our time and theirs.
The basis for the often quoted “Separation of Church and State” can be found in the letter Thomas Jefferson wrote responding to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802.  The Danbury Baptist Association was concerned about a rumor of a national denomination being established (Patton 1995).  Jefferson responded by quoting the part of the First Amendment which states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”  Jefferson then said that the establishment clause formed a “wall of separation between church and State.”
The critical point is that this separation was a protection of the Church from the State.  The Danbury Baptists were concerned about the state encroaching on religious liberty, thus making this wall a barrier to the State and not the Church. 
Today’s view is that this applies mainly to the encroachment of religion on government or according to Patton (1995), “a separation of basic religious principles from public life.”  This view of government being protected from religion certainly does not represent the context of Jefferson’s statements correctly nor is it consistent with the views of the founding fathers.  As John Adams said, “It is Religion and Morality alone which can establish the principles under which freedom can securely stand.” 
The “Separation of Church and State” is important to sustaining the religious liberty the signers of the Mayflower Compact envisioned. Unfortunately today it is used out of context in an attempt to remove God from every aspect of public life.

References
Jefferson, T. (1802) Letter to the Danbury Baptist Association
Krause, M. H. (2014, February), Module 5.2

Patton, J. W. (1995) The Wall of Separation between Church and State, retrieved from: http://www.fee.org/the_freeman/detail/the-wall-of-separation-between-church-and-state#axzz2tR93o22e

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Process Philosophy and its Effect on Education

Education is a valuable tool in the hands of those who wish to change a nation.   As Herbert Schlossberg said in his book Idols for Destruction, “ One of the most useful tools in the quest for power is the educational system” (1983, p209).   Process Philosophy has undoubtedly controlled our educational system for   some time.   Its fundamentals have changed our way of thinking and unwittingly altered the worldview of Christians and non-Christians alike.   As Glenn Martin states in his book, Prevailing Worldviews, “ For the last century and a half, it has been process philosophy which has been filtering down from the intellectual community into the general culture” (2006, p153). Since this philosophy is prevalent in our culture, how did it come to dominate our academic system?   In the 1830’s, Horace Mann was very influential in bringing education under state control in Massachusetts (Krause, 2014, Module 4.3)...
Read more

A Blurry Picture of God's Love

  In 2018, Brad Lewis and his 8 year old son Oscar were playing with a Nerf gun on the balcony of their friend’s home in Sydney, Australia. Oscar fired the nerf gun at his dad and watched as some of the darts went bouncing over the edge of the balcony, dropping around 15 feet onto the concrete below. The young boy ran to the balcony railing and began leaning over the edge to see where the darts had landed. As his weight shifted forward, his feet began to leave the ground and he began to tumble over the edge. Brad saw his son begin to lose his balance and instantly ran over to him, trying to grab his waist or legs, but it was too late. His son’s momentum was pulling them both over the railing.    Brad was no stranger to risky situations. He had been in the military and had advanced in the ranks to become an officer. His training had prepared him to act quickly and decisively without considering the possible consequences to his own body. After leaving the army, Brad didn’t ...
Read more