
We talk about the “Separation of Church and State.” What does that mean? What is the Church? What is the State? Why does there have to be a separation between these two.
The phrase “Separation of Church and State” was not a part of our Constitution or other legislation when forming this nation, but in a letter by Thomas Jefferson to a Baptist group in 1802. Jefferson used the phrase to assure them that the government would not interfere with their religious freedom, asthe First Amendment prohibits any law “respecting anestablishment of religion.”
In the European countries where the colonist had come from, each country had established their own state religion like the Lutheran for Germany, the Anglican for England, the Catholic for Ireland, and so on. This had already been happening in the colonies such as Pennsylvania was Quaker, Massachusetts was Puritan, and Jefferson’s colony of Virginia, where the Anglican Church had long been the established church.
In Jefferson’s letter he didn’t want states or the new United States to follow the example of Europe where only one religion was allowed in a state or in the entire United States. Because that was the very reason why many colonists had left Europe to have freedom to worship in the first place.
What is a church? The word, “church” comes from the ancient Greek word, “ecclesia” which was “the assembly of the citizens in city-states.” Which means that the state and federal Congress would be an ecclesia. A social club such as the Lions and the Masons would be an ecclesia. Even a group of atheists who assemble together with similar ideas and beliefs in any state of our United States is an ecclesia.
The Greek term was first used in Matthew 16:16-18, when Peter answered Jesus that “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Jesus replied in verse 18, “I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it.” Peter’s Great Confession became the cornerstone of an “assembly of citizens in city-state” who believed in Jesus Christ. But the term could also apply to “assembly of citizens in city-state” who believe Satan as their Lord or Master. Or an “assembly of citizens in city-state” called materialist who believe that there is no god or supreme being that governs them therefore they make up their own beliefs.
Therefore, “assembly of citizens in city-state” who do not believe there is a God is just as much a Church or ecclesia as another “assembly of citizens in city-state” who believe there is a God. Which would mean that the belief that man evolved from a one celled organism for one “assembly of citizens” is the same as the belief that man was created by a Superior Godby another “assembly of citizens.” For one “assembly of citizens” to believe there is no life after death is just as much part of their ecclesia as the other “assembly of citizens” who believes there is eternal life. For one “assembly of citizens” to believe that babies can be aborted because they have no rights as a human until they are born is their ecclesia belief as the Christians ecclesia beliefs that life begins at conception.
This means that if it is unlawful for Christians to teach their religious beliefs in public schools then it is also unlawful for atheists to teach their materialistic beliefs of evolution and abortion which are also man-made beliefs.
If our children cannot be indoctrinated with religious beliefs from one ecclesia, then they also cannot be indoctrinated with atheistic beliefs from the other ecclesia. The materialistic or humanistic beliefs also comes from their own ideas of the non-existences of God in the same way the Christian’s beliefs come from their ideas of an existent God. This would be the same as not allowing the Democratic to have their political party and force everyone to be Republicans or vice versa.
For too long the phrase “Separation of Church and State” has been interpreted as the Christian Church and the Governmental State. But it also means the Materialistic Church and the Governmental State. If the ideas or philosophy of one can be taught in our schools, then in our Republic the other also has to be allowed. This would allow the student to hear both or multiple sides of the same argument and then they decide which one they believe in.
For one group of people to be denied the right to state and teach their ideas because the other side only want their ideas and teaching to be known is a dictatorship and not a republic. This is what communism and Nazism enforces with the people they control. This is what is happening on many college campus and public forums where the radical liberals will have people disrupt presentations of speakers on the conservative side because they don’t want their ideas heard by the public. Only allowing liberal ideas while denying free speech and exploration of conservativeideas is not “freedom of speech” but “suppression of speech.” This can happen with political views, religious views, social views, or anything else. This is enslavement not freedom. If the liberal ideas are so superior to the conservative ones, then why don’t they debate their views against the conservative views instead of screaming and disrupt the meetings when the conservative views are presented? Or do they already know that they will lose the debate therefore they must disrupt rather than debate.
If the government is going to use the argument of Separation of Church and State when it comes to Christian beliefs, then the same applies to the beliefs of all other beliefs held by other “ecclesias” or “assembly of citizens in city-state” that are not Christian.
By Pastor Terry L. Henke
Comments