My recent efforts to answer lies and misunderstandings about the separation of church and state have been appreciated by readers of Report from the Capitaland by others. Certainly the likes of David Barton seem to be on a tear (featured on “The Daily Show” no less!) seeking to convince Americans that this is a Christian nation and that there should be no wall of separation between church and state.
So, I was delighted when an op-ed appeared in The Washington Post in April by David Sehat, a history professor at Georgia State University, titled “5 Myths about Church and State.” His piece appeared in many other papers and was an object of great interest on Facebook and other social media and the Internet generally.
Sehat’s myths differ from mine, but his efforts, with one correction, were on target and well reasoned. Let me respond briefly to what he had to say.
Click here to read the rest of the article.
These are the myths that he identified:
Myth 1: The Constitution has always protected religious freedom.
Sehat correctly points out that the First Amendment originally applied only to the federal government and, in that sense, did not “protect religious freedom” at the state level. Some states continued to provide financial benefits to religion or, at the very least, still tended to favor Christianity during the early decades of the 19th century. Of course, today, the First Amendment protects religious freedom at all levels of government (and branches within each level) against state-sponsored attempts to advance or inhibit religion.
Myth 2: The Founders’ faith matters.
Sehat makes the case that the Founders were not all devout evangelical Christians but, as sons of the Enlightenment, expressed a variety of religiosity. He correctly points out that whatever their religious views, Founders wanted to ensure against violations of religious liberty at the federal level, but preserve, at least for a while, the status quo in the states. He asserts, mistakenly in my view, that the Founders promised only to keep the federal government from preferring one religion over another or one Christian denomination over another. This is not true. The language adopted in the First Amendment, taken together with the Constitution’s no religious test clause in Article VI, indicates that the Founders did not want the federal government to get involved in or promote religion at all.
Myth 3: Christian conservatives have only recently taken over politics.
Sehat correctly debunks this myth. Conservative evangelicals — as well as religious liberals for that matter — have always been involved in politics. From fighting against slavery, for women’s rights, against wars, for civil rights and promoting economic justice, people of faith have advocated in the public square through out our history. He rightly points out these examples of public advocacy were just as divisive as debates we have today about the death penalty, abortion or gay marriage. Although some people of faith — notably those coming out of an Anabaptist tradition — have abjured politics, most have been willing to seek to transform culture by political engagement.
Myth 4: America is more secular than it used to be.
In many ways our culture seems to have coarsened in recent years. But Sehat correctly points out that the low point in American history for church membership, for example, was just before the American Revolution. Sociologists have estimated that church membership in the 1770s was no more than 20 percent of the population. Contrast that with contemporary American life where, at the turn of this century, 62 percent of the population belonged to religious institutions. Recent polls show that only 14 percent claims no religious affiliation at all. Not all of these are non-believers; many say they are “spiritual” while avoiding membership in a religious group. Moreover, the public expression of religion is clearly on the rebound. Unabashed talk of religion from American presidents, at least from President Jimmy Carter forward, attests to that fact. Maybe the biggest lie of all is that we have a “naked public square” when it comes to religion.
Myth 5: Liberals are anti-religious.
Sehat rightly points out that, whether you call them liberals or conservatives, those who advocate for a healthy understanding of the separation of church and state are not against religion; they are simply trying to preserve religious liberty for others as well as themselves. Insisting on voluntary religious choices and keeping government from meddling in religion one way or another are not acts of hostility toward religion, but gestures of sympathy for the importance of religion and the fragility of religious liberty.
Sehat’s article in the press and online has served our cause well by opposing those with theocratic ambitions and who, at a minimum, think the United States ought to privilege Christianity both culturally and legally. We need as many voices as we can muster to push back against such claims. Make sure you join in, too.
