The Separation of Church and State Fallacy

In the early 1600s, there was a considerable amount of religious persecution in Europe. Virtually all of the countries of Europe at that time had a state church that was politically connected to the government itself. There were those, however, who believed that the teachings of the state church were wrong, so they created “separatist” churches that did not answer to the hierarchy of the state church.

In many places this did not sit well with the religious powers, who then began to persecute those rebels. Rather than give up their faith, these independent minded Christians looked for ways to get around the persecution – many by fleeing their homeland in search of a place where they could freely worship God as their consciences dictated.

Many of these people traveled to America. Early on, there was no official European presence in America, so these religious exiles were able to worship as they pleased. However, over time, explorers from the European countries made their way to America, and created colonies. The most prominent of these was England. With the colonization of North America, the reach of the British Crown, along with its political dominance, was established. Along with that, the state church of England was also established on American soil with its desire to dominate the religious scene in the same way the British government dominated politics and economics.

Over time, the people of America grew to despise British domination and began a rebellion – which ultimately resulted in American independence. As the newly independent nation began to establish the principles by which it would be governed, those who craved religious freedom demanded that the state not establish a church, and that church be permitted to operate independent of state influence. This principle was ultimately enshrined in the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution. The part of the first amendment that deals with this topic reads: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

What is the Issue?
So why lead this article with that bit of history? The reason is, there is a widespread misconception in America today concerning the concept of the separation of church and state. A very large percentage of people believe that the 1st amendment to the Constitution prevents religious concepts and values from being used to order public life. They interpret the words, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” to mean that no religious notions can be present in the public square (and they totally ignore the last part of the amendment).

These people reason that there are many in modern society who are not religious, so to be fair to everyone, only secular beliefs should be used as the ordering principle for government. The result is an attempt to strip all “religious notions” out of public life. This has lead to in the elimination of prayer from schools, the removal of memorial crosses from public lands, the removal of displays of The Ten Commandments from public buildings, the elimination of chapels from public buildings, and the like.

However, this notion is a complete misinterpretation of the first amendment. The concept of separation of church and state does not relate at all to which values dominate the public square. Rather, it is called the “establishment clause” because it has to do with whether or not the state should have the ability to establish a state church. The last part of the amendment goes on to mandate that not only can the state not establish its own church, but also that the government cannot interfere in the operation of churches.

Those who try to use the idea of separation of church and state as a means of eliminating Christian values from the public square are actually not doing what they think they are. The truth is, the establishment of a state church is not even an issue in American society, and hasn’t been since the early days of our founding. What these people are really trying to create is a separation of “faith and state.” The only problem is, that can’t be done – it is impossible.

The Presuppositions of Conflicting Notions of Separation of Church and State
Biblical Theism
The original beliefs concerning the concept of the separation of church and state are based on the biblical Theism that emerges from the teachings of the Bible. More specifically, the founders believed that all of reality is subject to God’s direction. When looking at how that plays out in human societies, the belief was that the operation of a society should be based on the values God revealed in the Bible.

There are, obviously, numerous elements of society; for instance family, church (religion), business, government, media, education, and entertainment. Based on biblical thinking, each of these has its own place, and each should be expressed based on the values God has revealed. As it relates to the topic we are looking at here, the church has its place in God’s economy and is not to control what government does, while the government has its responsibilities and is not to control what the church does. This does not mean there is no influence from one to the other. There is. However, the influence is not based on control, but on the responsibilities God has given regarding the operation of the various institutions.

In the case of the state, it has the responsibility to maintain order in society. God has revealed that an ordered society is his will, and it is to do that by promoting justice and punishing those who are guilty of creating disorder. The notion of order, though, is not based on random ideas, or on values conceived by human beings. Rather, God himself has revealed the values that should govern its operation, and the leaders of the state are responsible to God for the way they conduct their work. Note the following Scripture passages that present this idea (quoted from the ESV).

Can wicked rulers be allied with you, those who frame injustice by statute? They band together against the life of the righteous and condemn the innocent to death. Psalm 94:20-21

It is an abomination to kings to do evil, for the throne is established by righteousness. Proverbs 16:12

A ruler who lacks understanding is a cruel oppressor, but he who hates unjust gain will prolong his days. Proverbs 28:16

When the righteous increase, the people rejoice, but when the wicked rule, the people groan. Proverbs 29:2

When Samuel became old, he made his sons judges over Israel. The name of his firstborn son was Joel, and the name of his second, Abijah; they were judges in Beersheba. Yet his sons did not walk in his ways but turned aside after gain. They took bribes and perverted justice. 1 Samuel 8:1-22

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience. Romans 13:1-7

As regards the role of the church (religion), its purpose is to be a moral compass for society. God has revealed right values, and it is the role of the church to teach those values to society at large, and to speak that truth as a form of moral guidance to the state. We see examples of this as Jesus confronted the religio-political leadership of his day, time and again, to let them know that they were not following the revealed truth of Scripture (see Matthew 22:15-22, Mark 2:3-12, and many others). Peter did this also, as he confronted those same leaders with their wrongs (see Acts 5:27-29).

Thus, based on biblical teachings, the church is not to dominate the state and the state is not to dominate the church, but each is to carry out its own God-given function based on the values God has revealed to mankind concerning each.

Naturalism
The point of view that promotes what is often called “secularism” is established upon an entirely different foundation. It is based on naturalistic beliefs – which is the notion that the natural universe is all that exists. With that as a starting point, there is no God, so there is no moral law giver who has the ability to reveal objective values that are applicable to all mankind. In fact, since Naturalists believe human beings are the only living creatures capable of even thinking in moral terms, we must make up our own moral values. And, since there is no moral basis for even doing that, there is no choice but to do it based on what individuals (or social groups) consider to be best for themselves or for the collective.

Based on this secularist view, while Christian values may be good for some social groups, there is nothing about them that compels anyone to follow those values. Ultimately, a “law of the jungle” approach is the bottom line basis for all morality under a naturalistic system – those with the power make the rules.

Is the Secularist View of Separation of Church and State True?
So the question arises, which basis for moral values is true. Since the biblical and secularist beliefs literally contradict one another, it is impossible for both to be true. So, does the secularist approach reflect reality?

The simple answer is, “No!” While most secularists truly believe that their view is most fair because it is the one that does not push religion on people, the truth is, secularism is, itself, a religious belief. As we have already seen, it is based on naturalistic presuppositions – the belief that the natural universe is all that exists.

Of course, there is no science whatsoever to back up that point of view – it is a religious belief. Thus, when secularists try to eliminate Christian values from the public square, they are not eliminating religion, they are merely attempting to replace one set of religious values with another.

The truth is, secular values do not reflect reality. Based on nothing but their own personal preferences, secularists misstate the nature of ultimate reality by: 1) asserting that nothing exists but the natural universe, 2) misstating the nature of man by promoting values that are impossible for man to follow, and 3) misrepresenting the ultimate that can be accomplished in human life by promoting values that destroy, rather than build up, humanity.

What is the Answer?
There will be some set of moral values that serve as the foundation for a government system. The one that most closely reflects the true nature of reality is the one that will build people up rather than tear them down – one that will promote cohesion in society rather than anarchy. Naturalistic beliefs simply do not reflect reality in that way, and are incapable of creating the utopia it promises. One only need look at any communist or socialist society throughout history to see what a society based on naturalistic beliefs looks like.

In truth, church and state are not the same. Each has its God given work to do in his economy. This does not mean, though, that the church should not influence the state. In fact it should provide a moral compass that helps those who serve in government do their work based on values that reflect God’s purposes. When God’s purposes are carried out based on the values that he has revealed to man, church and state will be separate institutions, but both will work together in ways that create the best possible earthly society, and accomplish God’s purposes in the world.

© 2019 Freddy Davis