Thursday, January 21, 2010

The Absurdity of a Secular State

John Keble preached a sermon called "National Apostasy" in 1833. The Legislature of England and Ireland had just removed the religious test for membership so that the members were "not even bound to profess belief in the Atonement." The points of his argument against secularism run as follows:
  1. By separating church and state you don't exclude the church from the state, you turn the state into a "mere parliament church." This is because the state has to legislate morality with reference to itself.
  2. You cannot consider yourself a Christian nation if the civil realm is separated from the church. So realize what your giving up by embracing secularism.
  3. Where does the state get its basis for law if it does not recognize the moral authority of the church?
  4. Who are the King and Parliament under if they are not under the church's God?
  5. By separating the church from the state, the church and its theology are singled out as posing a danger to the state.
  6. Without the church, the state is left to follow a practical atheism. Legislating without reference to God is legislating as if he doesn't exist. So, practically speaking, there is no middle ground between a state religion and an atheistic state.
  7. Separating civil life from the church encourages a national apostasy of its citizens from their churches. This turns politics into an idol for the people to place before God.
  8. "One of the most alarming omens of an Apostate mind in a nation is the growing indifference ... to other men's religious sentiments." This reminds me of G. K. Chesterton's statement: "There's only one thing more absurd than executing a man for his religious beliefs, and that's saying that his religious beliefs don't matter." Thus the secular state is more absurd than Christendom, when it was at its worst.
  9. When the state declares the church out of bounds in Parliament doesn't it make it "impossible for them to be loyal to their Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier?"
To the extent that the state tells us to think in secular vs. sacred categories, aren't they telling Christians to think unChristianly? If so, mustn't we obey God rather than men.

4 comments:

Elizabeth Turner said...

I don't think the church and state necessarily can be separated. Like Dr. Heckel said, where does the state get its basic law if it does not refer to the church and its authority? In essence, the state law's basis is in the church's authority. You cannot state that their is no religion. Secularism, Atheism, etc. are all religions. If secularism is accepted and recognized, then so should Christianity. At the same time, if you recognize Christianity, other religions will want to be recognized as well. You cannot have one without the other. It goes both ways and we must decide as Christians, if we are willing to accept the fact that we will have to deal with the competition of other religions and ideas as well as our own. The answer should be yes since we were put on this earth to give glory to God and bring others to Him and part of that process is shining light on Christianity as a faith, not a religion and show the difference from other religions.

Matt said...

Good comments Elizabeth. I think secularism is failing like Keble predicted, but I'm not sure what needs to replace it.

St. Augustine argued that the city of man is under God and must point its citizens to the city of God. I'm just not sure how to get there from here.

Jacob Frost said...

I believe that the problem of the secular state lies not with the form of government, but with the general downfall of Christianity in today's culture.

When the founding fathers wrote the Constitution, they did not want a secular state. Even Thomas Jefferson, whom Christians often criticize for his beliefs, said that government without religion was fruitless. The First amendment to the Constitution says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." The amendment deals with the government's treatment of personal beliefs; it does not say that the government cannot be influenced by religion and use it in their decision-making.

Who, then, is responsible for the secular state? It is the people of the United States who have let down their guard and fallen away from the Christian faith and the principles this country was founded upon. No system of government is foolproof; we cannot put our trust in rulers or in Constitutions. The movement towards a better society must be made on the grassroots level, based on evangelism and nonconformism against today's immoral culture. To be a Christian is to be a warrior for Christ, and if we reject this calling then our society is doomed.

Matt said...

Isn't there a secularizing tendency in the Constitution when it forbids any religious test for office and disestablishes religion?

Isn't this another example of the Enlightenment impetus to marginalize the church? By refusing to respect a religion don't they in some sense disrespect all religion?