About That ‘Separation’ Of State From Church

Gloria Tarver

As of Sunday, October 30, 2011

This is in response to the Rev. Don Welch’s sermon/column of Oct. 23, headlined “Church, State: A Failed Marriage.”

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is not about the “separation of church and state.” Rather, it prevented the new government from ever establishing a state church as England had, and it protected denominations from being discriminated against.

The term “separation of church and state” originated with Thomas Jefferson in a letter to the Danbury Baptists.

There is, however, one national constitution that embraced the separation of church and state. It is found in Article 124 in the Constitution of the former USSR, and it reads, “The church in the USSR is separated from the state, and the school from the church.” It was in the 1918 constitution, and after numerous constitutional revisions, it was still there in 1936.

“Our birthright of religious freedom is under attack, and the wall of separation between church and state is being eroded,” Mr. Welch said.

Congress never erected a wall of separation, nor did our Founding Fathers ever intend to wed church and state. Their public words and prayers, and their writings show that most relied upon divine guidance and protection.

Most Christians see a pattern of godlike character and leadership that led America to become a giant among nations. They also see the pattern established in the past 50-plus years where we’ve lost our spiritual moorings and are afloat on a sea of moral, cultural and economic decline.

Mr. Welch said, “A recent lesson is seen in the tragic surrender of the German state to Adolf Hitler by the Church in Germany simply because Hitler neither smoked or drank.” Does Mr. Welch really believe German Christians of that era were that spiritually naive or lacking?

It was more likely the German Christians took their focus off their real Savior and put it on an earthly savior instead. Many German Christians stood firm against the evil taking place around them.

If only more of them had taken a stand, how differently things might have turned out.

Mr. Welch states that “some Christians are not only uncomfortable but extremely frightened by the rapid changes in our culture and moral climate over the past four decades.” If people aren’t a bit frightened with the direction our country has been going in the past four or five decades, with rampant crime, drugs, gangs, porn, corruption, abortion on demand, family breakdown, sexually transmitted diseases, etc., then they’re in denial or out of touch with reality.

Most Christians take seriously the Scripture that tells them they’re to be “salt and light” in the world. I take that to mean we’re not to retreat and hand over schools, government and institutions to secular humanists and progressives, many of whom are God-haters.

The preface to the Humanist Manifesto says, “Humanism is a philosophical, religious, and moral point of view.” The Supreme Court acknowledged in Torcaso v. Watkins, June 19, 1961, that Secular Humanism is one of the “religions” that doesn’t teach a belief in the existence of God.”

Humanists basically believe that man is the measure of all things, and man will save us, and not God. These humanists are the same people with their godless “religion” that have made huge inroads into shaping our current culture of chaos, and Christians are supposed to stay inside their churches and not work to affect positive, life-affirming values and change? I don’t think so.

And when Christians do get involved, they’re not trying to usher in a theocracy. No, there wasn’t an attempt to wed church and state in 1776, and Christians aren’t attempting to do so today. There are untold numbers of non-Christians who also treasure and defend America’s traditional values. May we never forget this past century and its landscape that was littered with the carnage that godless despots wreaked upon their fellow man.

“We are ripe for totalitarianism in both the church and politics,” Mr. Welch wrote. In politics, maybe, but in the “Christian” church, no.

Why not? Because true Christians don’t put their faith in people, politicians, and yes, even in ministers and priests, because they know men can and will fail them. They also know that the Author and Finisher of their faith will never fail them.

Mr. Welch referenced Christ before Pilate, and he quoted Christ when he said, “My kingdom is not of this world.” This was the same Christ who, before he ascended in the heaven, commissioned believers to “go ye into all the world. ...”

Gloria Tarver lives in Southern Pines.

More like this story

geoffcutler 1 year, 6 months ago

And I thought we'd heard the last word on phantom Christians infiltrating American politics from Rev. Welch. Guess not! Good article, Gloria.

JimHeim 1 year, 6 months ago

If Christians aren't interested in establishing a theocracy, why can't I buy a bottle of wine on Sunday morning to serve with dinner? How does Christian Sharia differ from Muslim Sharia?

geoffcutler 1 year, 6 months ago

Why don't you think ahead and buy an extra bottle on Saturday?

MikeNC 1 year, 6 months ago

geoffcutler 4 minutes ago Why don't you think ahead and buy an extra bottle on Saturday?

Because it would be gone before dinner on Sunday??....Mike

geoffcutler 1 year, 6 months ago

Maybe...but I'm pretty sure it can even be bought by the case. Could be wrong...

dustyrhoades 1 year, 6 months ago

That whooshing sound is the point going over your heads.

mstone 1 year, 6 months ago

More Christian misinformation. To deny that the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides for a “separation of church and state” is just plain silly.

There is no god to hate or love. Religious superstition has no place in enlightened society. The Christian church has proven to be morally bankrupt over and over again. Bigots and bullies take refuge in Christianity in order to promote an anti-gay agenda that drives children to suicide and has ruined the lives of countless human beings.

Christianity consistently promotes a backward, anti-science, anti-intellectual agenda that only hinders human progress.

Christianity and other religious superstitions are a threat to the survival of humanity and should be recognized as such. Those who actually believe that some god speaks to them or answers prayers should be recognized as being mentally ill and be treated as such.

Bflat 1 year, 6 months ago

Wow,,,,who's going to check into an end room first? The whoosh sound went by too fast.

geoffcutler 1 year, 6 months ago

Which "enlightened society" did you like the best? Hitler's Germany...Stalin's Russia...Pol-Pot's Cambodia? Yeah...you liberal secularists sure know your enlightened societies, alright. Too bad millions of "bad seeds" were exterminated before this enlightenment could be fulfilled...only to then fail anyway.

Roorke 1 year, 6 months ago

And lets not leave out Castro's and good old dead Che Geavera's paradise down in Cuba. I think they locked up those homosexuals as mentally ill, those they didn't shoot. They get to drive around in all those great 1950's cars, live in the run down buildings and eat some rationed food each day.

JimHeim 1 year, 6 months ago

Geoff, you evaded the question. Why should I have to reschedule my life to accommodate Christian ideology? Yes, I could buy the wine on Saturday, but why is my ability to govern my life being overruled for religious reasons that have no meaning to me? If you don't believe in consuming alcohol on Sunday, don't. But don't tell me I can't and then say your not trying to run a theocracy.

JimHeim 1 year, 6 months ago

Understand this: Anytime a government meeting starts with a prayer specifically naming Jesus Christ, every Jew, Muslim, Buddhist, atheist, and a long list of believers in other religions know that they are being excluded from full participation.

Feel free to tell me how the founders would view that.

geoffcutler 1 year, 6 months ago

My understanding is the founders would have invoked God whenever they felt the need. But if people of other religions wanted to invoke their God also, our founders would have been fine with that, too. See the difference? How's the wine problem...got that solved yet? Hope so, good football games today.

Yukonjohn 1 year, 6 months ago

Yes, Jim, you are exactly right. The same Amendment that protects the Baptist protect the muslim and the buddist. I am sure they feel discarded and left out when they hear some in a government setting praying to Jesus. Also, to those that want prayer back in school....how would you feel if your child was told to face Mecca and kneel and pray five times a day?? I thought so.

MikeNC 1 year, 6 months ago

Heim: you may want to read Chief Justice Earl Warren's decision by the majority of Supreme court judges concerning alcohol on Sunday and the Blue Law decision. If you do need a bottle of whiskey on Sunday, join the service and hit the Class 6 on Sunday after Noon. Diane

geoffcutler 1 year, 6 months ago

The nation's varied blue laws are more the result of states governments trying to intervene on behalf of orphaned and destituted wives and children every Sunday because pops was in the pubs spending his week's wage. No doubt the church was supportive of these moves towards temperence. TR very interesting on the subject. He discussed it at length in his autobiography when he was police commissioner of NY.

JimHeim 1 year, 6 months ago

Why Sunday? Why not Saturday or Monday. Trying to make these laws secular is simply insulting. Face the facts: These laws are a reflection of religious values and have no place in a free country.

It's amusing that alcohol is available after noon. It used to be 2:00 pm. I wonder why they changed it...

geoffcutler 1 year, 6 months ago

I'll agree with you Jim that the Blue laws are archaic, but it's not a separation issue. Still and all, you got to pre-po, man.

JimHeim 1 year, 6 months ago

Yeah, to accommodate the dominant (pretty much official ) religion, I have to change my buying habits. Please do not insult me by calling the US a free nation; it's a religious state. Call it what it is, Christian sharia.

geoffcutler 1 year, 6 months ago

Oh Jim... C'mon... you got a freer nation you like better? How long do you think you'd last in Iran? I'll give you a day before they lock your ass up. "Religious state," America? Don't be a party pooper! Get your wine on and chill out!

MikeNC 1 year, 6 months ago

Not necessarily a state issue, Geoff. The U S Government decided it was a good idea for families to spend Sunday together and rest, according to Justice Warren. Warren agreed that many of the blue laws were archaic and Puritan oriented, but when it came to alcohol, well there was a bit of a back pedal by the U S Government. Diane

geoffcutler 1 year, 6 months ago

Diane... there are a myriad of different temperance issue causes that have contributed to today's Blue laws, State, Federal and religious. The argument that because you can't buy a bottle of wine on Sunday means we're a Theocracy, is a nice try, but a joke nonetheless. I agree with Heim we should be able to buy booze on Sunday, but not because I think we're a Theocracy.

But more importantly, I get a kick out of the "hate America first crowd" who wouldn't last a minute in these other nations they think are so allied with their Liberalism. They'd be spouting their allegiance on the way to a cell, and wouldn't even know it until the door slammed behind them. Useful idiots!

JimHeim 1 year, 6 months ago

It's not "hate America first," and you should be ashamed of yourself for saying it. It's about defending our freedoms, something conservatives should start caring about. There's more in the Constitution than the second amendment.

I don;t care whether you worship Jesus or the great cosmic muffin. Just don't use my tax money to support your religious beliefs and don't use the government to make me obey your religious tenets.

I'm quite capable of running my own life.

S	M	T	W	T	F	S
28	29	30	1	2	3	4
5	6	7	8	9	10	11
12	13	14	15	16	17	18
19	20	21	22	23	24	25
26	27	28	29	30	31	1