Separation of Church and State vs. A Christian Nation

One of the current arguments in our national conversation is the debate and divide over the concept of the separation of church and state, and the fact of the Christian world view being at the core of the founding of the United States.

Those representing the extremes of this divide deny the truth of both propositions, depending upon in which camp they reside.

Let us be clear. Both propositions are true. The United States was founded based upon truths found in the Christian world view. The founders thought that since the Creator endows mankind with His image, certain things flow from that: dignity, the right to be free and self determining, the right to pursue happiness, and that the Creator's absolutes as regards morality and responsibility were common to all, and applicable to all -- both governed, and governing. They also believed that since the Creator was above all, that He was the appropriate final court of appeal upon which they rested their case in the Declaration of Independence. This is not insignificant.

It is equally clear that the founders were wary of any state religion and the abuse of same experienced in England. This is the reason we have the first amendment in our Constitution.

What I think is clear is that while the founders assiduously avoided the possibility of creating a state religion, they easily acknowledged the Christian consensus as the foundation for the stated basic principles of the new nation.

What I also think may be inferred from this is that the founders could not foresee a time when the consensus would shift so far away from the Christian consensus that the basic principles upon which the nation was founded would be threatened. Nor could they see a time when secularism based in the notion that mankind is on the earth by an accident of time and chance, and the notion of survival of the fittest as the only true law of nature, would become a new national consensus.

I honestly wonder if they might have reconsidered their position on state religion had they been able to see far enough into our future. At the least we may have seen some tenets of behavior, morals, ethics, mankind's position in the world, codified as being from the Creator, and therefore immutable, woven into our Constitution in order to anchor the nation's basic tenets in something more solid than mere popular consensus. But there's no way to know for sure.

One thing is certain, what was once intended to keep the state from imposing a particular religion upon its citizens is now being used to proscribe any religious thought from being a valid argument for the conduct of state. In fact, any appeals to religious thought, morals, ethics, is now seeming ipso facto proof of some sort of violation of the church state barrier. I find this absurd on the face of it, but it has traction. My question to those who vigorously promote this view is, "From where should one receive their ideas of how the state should be governed?"

So where does that leave us? Depends on which camp you are in. For those of us who think there is something significant and unique in the Christian underpinnings of this country, it is bad news. What it means is that the country was designed in a way that allows for this consensus to be eroded and eventually eliminated, leaving nothing in its place that his higher than man himself to appeal to when 51% of the vote begins to eliminate the right to human dignity, freedom, self determination. Sorry folk, but that's the truth. And since the consensus has already shifted to this extent, we must just get over it and move on. Even if that moving on is merely to watch the United States decay into something completely secular and socialist. Too bad, so sad. Blame it on the founders.

To those in the other camp, it is the freedom to do whatever you may be able to garner 51% of the people to allow you to do. And to you I say, be careful what you ask for. Freedom that is vested only in the consensus of the masses is easily turned to tyranny.

Time will tell, but history is a good predictor of the future, and I for one am not optimistic as regards a thoroughly post-Christian United States.

Eschew Obfuscation...

I have had these two words on my license plate frame for about as long as I've been driving. I am continually amazed when people ask me what language it is, and what it means. When I say, "English!" I almost always receive dubious stares.

That the phrase is its own joke almost never dawns on people, once they do know what it means. I find this amusing. It also makes me a little sad.

Clarity is important. More important than most things. If we humans are to interact with one another in any meaningful way, we need to be clear in our communication. The parties communicating need to know that they've been understood in terms of what was intended, and what each party actually received. Much of the trouble in the world may be attributed to the confusion, misunderstanding and mistrust created when clarity is absent -- either accidentally, or intentionally.

As one popular radio talk show host often says, "I prefer clarity to agreement." He's quite right. It is much better that we understand one another clearly than it is to agree at any particular point. Clarity is the foundation for genuine communication, upon which agreement, or honest compromise, may be built -- or where irreconcilable differences may be acknowledged. Of course there are many barriers to clarity: language, culture, generational differences, world view, unrecognized presuppositions . . . the list could grow quite long. A critical ingredient in achieving clarity is "good will." If the participants are coming from a place of "good will," the barriers can be discovered, acknowledged, accounted for, and overcome.

I've come to believe that any hope we have of knowing one another truly rests on the pursuit of clarity bathed in good will.

And so, the name of this site is the guiding principle for what I share here. I will attempt, as a first order thing, to avoid confusion, or manipulation, in the discussion of issues I offer for your consideration and comment.