Have you ever heard the phrase, “separation of church and state”? If you have been denied public services or privileges extended to others because you are a minister or a representative of your church, you probably have, and often. It’s as insistent and annoying as that scratch on your favorite Beatles vinyl.
Usually, those who oppose, reject or deny your right to participate use two approaches. The first is to condescendingly explain how they simply can’t allow you, a faith or church representative, to present your views within or through municipal or government agencies (“state,” as they refer to it) because it is constitutionally prohibited. All the while unable to tell you what the establishment and prohibition clauses of the 1st Amendment even say. The other is to explain that, though they personally have no problem with you or your participation, their real fear is that someone might not agree or will be offended. You see, those who use the “separation of church and state” argument (Breaking News: not in the Constitution) are merely defending the Constitution, which they have such little knowledge of and genuine regard for, and are protecting that hypothetical person (“someone”) whose views might be challenged by you expressing yours. The irony? They reject the Judeo-Christian principles responsible for providing the rights that allow their rejection.
Imagine you are a Christian minister and you are a participant in a public forum. The topic is, say, education, gender roles, race relations, immigration, climate change, abortion or another hot-button topic of our day. In attendance is a teacher, a scientist, a historian, a politician and a doctor. Even though every participant’s world view is shaped by their particular expertise and life experience, which they rely on as vital to what they believe, in the case of the minister, his is likely to be suspect as subjective and biased, no matter how logical and practical to the issue at hand.
Don’t misunderstand. I am not advocating for a theocracy in America, as I am keenly aware of the dangers. But neither should Christians submissively accept the prevailing secularization of our society, secularization being defined as the process by which religious ideas, institutions and interpretations lose their social significance. What I am hoping to do is to encourage my fellow Christians to boldly insist that their views and beliefs be recognized when policies affect their lives, and the futures of their children, under circumstances when those in positions of authority aggressively attempt to reject and to silence.
When Jesus was on trial, he made a revolutionary statement, “All who follow me are on the side of the truth,” prompting Gov. Pilate to respond in typical politician form, “What is truth.” A statement! Sometime earlier, Jesus had said this, “I am the way, the truth and the life.” The truth does exist, it exists in Jesus Christ. But also I want to challenge my fellow believers. Why are some unwilling to engage the world around them? Could it be that many don’t really know what they believe, or are unable to confidently defend those beliefs? The One who claims to be the Truth is the One who, through His word, sheds a light on our way in a dark world, contains the answer to our deepest needs and sets forth the way to our eternal well-being.
The early church encountered severe persecution simply for living out their faith. We live in a society that guarantees our right to practice our faith and express it; indeed, the obligation to assert ourselves as equal participants in the arena of ideas and societal influence. Let us exercise those rights, proclaiming the Truth, boldly and confidently.