About 20 years ago, I began to question my belief in the Judeo-Christian tradition that I had been taught as a child. I decided to explore the origins of those beliefs in search of what they really meant to me as an adult. I read many source materials regarding Christianity, including historical records and authors like Elaine Pagels. I also spent a summer reading the entire Bible, which was a slow and often tedious self-assignment. I came away from my explorations with a strong sense of discomfort with the reported actions, ideas and attitudes of both the Old Testament and New Testament God, and with the character called “Jesus,” which led me to atheism.
From that perspective I began exploring, and became actively involved with, the issue of separation of church and state, which led me to join Americans United, the Freedom From Religion Foundation and the Military Religious Freedom Foundation. Joining the Louisville, Ky., chapter of AU, I eventually became the chapter’s representative to AU’s National Advisory Council for three years, an experience I thoroughly enjoyed.
Over decades of being involved in church-state issues, I have observed how Christian Nationalists, in all of their manifestations have insisted that our nation’s Constitution, Bill of Rights and other founding documents are tied to Christianity. Since a good portion of our citizens are not well versed in constitutional history, Christian Nationalist false claims and outright lies made by fake historian David Barton and others of like mind have made headway into the church-state views of Americans. These observations prompted me to write a submission to Church & State.
Unfortunately, Christian Nationalists have been very successful in pulling much of the public discussion on church-state separation into an arena of their own devising — an arena that routinely insists religion and government are not, and should not be, separate.
So how should we address this duplicity? I have especially come to believe that we should not counter anti-church-state separation arguments with religious or theological discussions or arguments, as do many pro-separation Christians. In my experience, theologically framing one’s case for church-state separation further enables the other side’s claims that theology is paramount. Rather than taking place within Christian theology, church-state separation discussions are better conducted within the facts of constitutional history and law-making.
While many feel that Christian Nationalists generally have an erroneous take on true Christian theology, this view can only be based on opinion. What is based on fact, however, is that they have a totally inaccurate view of our nation’s history and the premises of our founding concepts of separation of religion and government. I do not believe the general public can be persuaded to accept the importance of church-state separation by arguing from the opinion that half of the Christian public has the wrong take on Jesus, or anything else in the Bible for that matter.
The reality is that the Bible does not endorse constitutional separation of religion and government, civil rights, many human rights or a representative form of government. Constitutionally savvy lawyers do not go to court and argue before a judge that separation of church and state should be upheld because of the Sermon on the Mount.
Currently, I am reading James Madison’s notes on the Constitutional Convention. The Founders not only failed to reference any religious scriptural sources when crafting language for the constitutional “No Oaths” religious test for elected office, they made a distinct effort to avoid religious discussions — and prayers — and instead concentrated on creating a secular Constitution.
Can you imagine what would have happened if the delegates to the Convention tried to tie the structures of the Constitution to ideas about this or that saying of Jesus, sayings often in conflict with one another? Theology — such as the nature of Jesus — is a matter of faith only, not legal edicts or governance.
In short, if we are aiming to make headway in keeping religion and government separate in this country, success will be elusive if our advocacy discussions are framed within a theologically circular set of arguments (which are ancient in nature and totally unresolvable), instead of historical, constitutional facts and law.
Linda Allewalt is a retired educator and former docent at the Fermi National Accelerator Lab in Illinois. She has been an activist/op-ed writer for separation of church and state and women’s reproductive rights for many years, and she hopes to continue her activism as long as possible. (This article represents the personal views of the author and does not necessarily represent the views of Americans United.)