The First Amendment does not contain "Separation of Church and State." This is the actual wording of the 1st Amendment:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
So where did this term come from. Actually, it has a long history. The Protestants in the reformation era, and subsequently the Baptists, have long supported Separation of Church and State; that being that the government needs to stay out of the affairs of the church. By no means was it ever meant to keep faith out of government. Rather, this nation was founded as a Christian nation. If you've never read the Mayflower Compact this is it:
In the name of God, Amen. We whose names are underwritten, the loyal subjects of our dread Sovereign Lord King James, by the Grace of God of Great Britain, France and Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith, etc.
Having undertaken, for the Glory of God and advancement of the Christian Faith and Honour of our King and Country, a Voyage to plant the First Colony in the Northern Parts of Virginia, do by these presents solemnly and mutually in the presence of God and one of another, Covenant and Combine ourselves together into a Civil Body Politic, for our better ordering and preservation and furtherance of the ends aforesaid; and by virtue hereof to enact, constitute and frame such just and equal Laws, Ordinances, Acts, Constitutions and Offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the general good of the Colony, unto which we promise all due submission and obedience. In witness whereof we have hereunder subscribed our names at Cape Cod, the 11th of November, in the year of the reign of our Sovereign Lord King James, of England, France and Ireland the eighteenth, and of Scotland the fifty-fourth. Anno Domini 1620.
This was written before they disembarked from the vessel onto the shores of the New World. The main reason for the Puritans, Pilgrims and other Separatists coming over to the New World was to have religious freedom. While in England they suffered persecution for practicing their faith, rather than adhering to the Church of England's Catholic/Anglican religion.
The founding fathers had suffered enough persecution from the King of England to make sure they put freedom of religion (which I believe to mean all religions) in our U.S. Constitution. Their main concern was to ensure the government did not establish or impose a national religion (or denomination), or otherwise meddle in the affairs of the church.
Upon Thomas Jefferson election, the Danbury Baptists were concerned that the Constitution did not guarantee their right to freedom of religion, and wrote this letter to him:
Among the many millions in America and Europe who rejoice in your election to office, we embrace the first opportunity to express our great satisfaction in your appointment to the Chief Magistracy in the United States. We have reason to believe that America's God has raised you up to fill the Chair of State out of that goodwill which He bears to the millions which you preside over. May God strengthen you for the arduous task which providence and the voice of the people have called you. And may the Lord preserve you safe from every evil and bring you at last to his Heavenly Kingdom through Jesus Christ our Glorious Mediator.
Our sentiments are uniformly on the side of religious liberty: that religion is at all times and places a matter between God and individuals, that no man ought to suffer in name, person, or effects on account of his religious opinions, [and] that the legitimate power of civil government extends no further than to punish the man who works ill to his neighbor. But sir, our constitution of government is not specific. Therefore what religious privileges we enjoy (as a minor part of the State) we enjoy as favors granted, and not as inalienable rights.
Jefferson responded on January 1st, 1802 with the following:
Gentlemen,
The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me on behalf of the Danbury Baptist Association give me the highest satisfaction. Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God; that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship; that the legislative powers of government reach actions only and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties. I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessing of the common Father and Creator of man, and tender you for yourselves and your religious association assurances of my high respect and esteem.
So, as you can see, Jefferson was a Christian, and he was in favor of keeping government out of the affairs of the church. This letter attests to that. Nowhere does it elude to keeping Christian values out of government. He obviously did not keep his faith separate from his Presidential appointment, nor did he apparently feel compelled to do so due to the 1st Amendment.
It was the courts that later took the phrase, out of context I might add, to declare the false governmental doctrine of Separation of Church and State. By the way, Jefferson was not involved with framing the 1st Amendment. A check of the Congressional Records (the documented discussions) from June 7 to September 25, 1789 would show this, as well as the fact that of the 90 founding fathers who did frame it, none of them ever mentioned the phrase "Separation of Church and State". Therefore, I do not believe this was ever their intent. Rather, I believe their intent was to ensure individual freedom of religion, without interference from the government, and to prohibit the government from establishing or imposing religion upon the people. It was not intended for the silencing of Christian values, or eliminating any and all references to Christianity in any form within public places, as we have seen this false doctrine evolve into.
And yes, this also applies to other religions, such as Muslim and Judaism, so please do not think I am concerned with maintaining only Christian rights. These rights are for all religions, though I do hope that Christianity will be more prevalent for the sake of my own personal beiefs.
I hope you have found this post informative and enlightening. There's plenty of sources online to research this further, but I mainly wanted to get down to the dirty facts, and try to dispel the false doctrine and misrepresentations of the Separation of Church and State crowd.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
brian,
Sorry but i have to disagree. you say this isn't only for christians but that is exactly how it is living out. Many people supported prayer in schools and argued as you did that there is nothing in the constitution that makes it illegal. But i have to believe that they wouldn't be willing to allow prayer to mecca in the schools. I reach this conclusion as they are the same people spouting that this country is christian-so why let prayer of a different faith exist. Same goes for the 10 commandments in courtrooms-should we put some pertinent quotes from the koran up along with sayings of buddha? Right wing christians would flip at those suggestions-so why is one ok and the other isn't if this doesn't only protect christians.
We also want to have our cake and eat it too-the government cant get involved in religion but religion can get involved in government.
Look beyond the letter of the law to the spirit. The founding fathers/pilgrims wanted a country where no faith was forced upon anyone. That is exactly what we do when we pass a law based on faith/post our statements of faith in court houses etc.
Picture being a citizen who is muslim and going to court. There in your face is the 10 commandments-not of your faith but of another. Not only of another but of the faith that ligitimized the holy crusades. The crusades are still seen by people in the holy lands as legalized rape and looting. There is still great tension in that area from the crusades.
So being this citizen of the us would you feel you are getting justice from a judge that portrays one faith's laws over all others?
Please-look at things with an open mind. If we were to keep things exactly as the founding fathers wrote it we would still have slavery, no right to vote for women, etc....
The laws of a country need to be fluid. Yeah it was ok to be a "christian country" in the 1700's and the imigrants were christian. Things have changed.
Try to look at it through the eyes of someone else.
I will give you an example. People are freaking out that schools no longer have a christmas holiday-it is called winter. Why is that bad? Is calling it Christmas the only thing keeping our kids in Christ? Please what you call the school holiday has no impact-it is what is going on the home that has impact on the soul of a child.
We need to get off our manifest destiny horse (as a country) and accept that we are only one of many equals.
Lastly let me say that the idea that our founding fathers were all christians makes me want to vomit. They were mostly if not all, slave owners many of which sired fathers by raping those slaves. No-calling yourself a christian means nothing-it is your actions that define you. (see jesus' talk about many will say lord lord and i will say i never knew you)
lastly lastly-is this really the most important issue of our time? People are starving all over the world, homelessness in the us is rising, genocide is being allowed (by our government taking no action-see rwanda/darfur/cambodia) but the need to get Christ back into the goverment is the paramount issue-that and antigay legislation?!!?!?!?!?!?!?
Sorry but i feel Jesus is going to kick our collective asses regarding how we as a church have spent our time and money in these desperate days.
I guess you missed my point. Christianity is being silenced by the false doctrine of Separation of Church and State.
No offense intended Tadd, but you use the same old tired line of "we can't have our cake and eat it too", while implying Christians are only concerned with advancing our cause. This is about religious freedom for all. I stated specifically that this applies to all religions. I do not, and would not, care if people prayed to Mecca in school, as long as Christians could also pray in Jesus' name, Jews to YHHW, and etc., and anyone has the right to "opt out"
Yes this important because it suppresses free speech and freedom of religion, while at the same time imposing the religions of Secular Humanism and Atheism, which does affect aspects of everyday life. Pro/anti-gay legislation affects society as a whole as well, as does abortion. The effects of Roe v Wade may not be apparent now (other than almost 50 million babies killed, and the emotional scars of those who choose to get the abortion), but over time, as we continue to allows babies to be legally killed, it will continue to move on to older people, like we already have with legal euthanasia in Oregon. Then how long is it before we deem it OK to control the population through these means? Does that sound anything like Hitler? I think it does.
not suprising i disagree. I am in favor of those who are dying and in pain having the right to end their life with dignity and in a way of their choosing. Why is that wrong?
If you truly would be ok with bowing toward mecca than you are in the minority in the christian right. Sorry brian but i remember the fight to allow prayer in school and i heard people say this exact argument:
1. we are a christian nation
2. prayer was in school's to start
3. so we need prayer now
where in this is the tolerance. To be honest i think you are full of crap. You stated flat out that you feel no need to be tolerant but then you claim you would be ok with prayer to mecca-BULL.
How is it suppressing your freedom of religion? You are free to worship in any way you want-just not to impose it on others. Noone is coming to your church putting you down or refusing you your rights (although we deny gay americans their rights)
Please be concrete-how does abortion and gay rights affect society. Oh and speaking of old sayings-don't hit me with that crap of eroding the moral fiber. There is no evidence that gay marriage erodes anything.
Finally it seems to be all or nothing. If we allow abortion then we automatically will turn into hitler huh? Sounds like the slippery slope theory of vietnam which was disproven-somehow we lost vietnam yet the entire region isn't communist. Somehow abortion has been legal for years and noone is going around killing the elderly against their will or lining up subgroups to be executed.
This is more of the same scare tactics-allow this to slide and we are done. It has been used all through history by dictators and cult leaders. Sorry but this cannot be what christ intended when he said do not judge. If only the church could put it's energy into solving issue instead of creating them. Just think of the money we have wasted on antigay marriage campaigns. Now think of the impact we could have if we took that and put it toward missions-WOW Dobson alone has spent tens of thousand politicking on this issue.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=77373
Post a Comment