Nine times out of ten, when you hear someone play the “Separation of Church and State” card, they’re doing so believing that they’ve insulated themselves from having to defend their platform simply by declaring your position an illegal and inappropratiate assertion of your belief system…
Abortion.
Homosexuality.
It can be anything that is addressed specifically in Scripture. However clarifying the Bible can be in defining the difference between right and wrong, it is an unwelcome Presence in the mind of somone who prefers to declare themselves as their own moral absolute.
“You can’t force your beliefs on me…”
“Not everyone feels that way…”
(sarcastically) “You ever hear of the ‘Separation of Church and State?'”
It’s a signature tactic of the person who has something to hide as opposed to having something to say. By posing as a victim, they can sidestep any direct line of questioning because you can’t be critical of someone who’s in pain without immediately being labeled cruel and intolerant.
It’s brilliant.
There are several things wrong with their argument, though.
First of all, from a historical standpoint, they’re taking that phrase completely out of context and applying it in a way that has absolutely nothing to do with same sex marriage or taking the life of your baby before it’s born.
Secondly, what they’re attempting to do is philosophically impossible. Every government that’s ever been conceived by human kind has been based on a “church” of some sort. It’s here where you can see the true purpose of those who are asserting the “separation…” argument in that they’re not trying to “separate” anything as much as they’re attempting to establish a new god, a new church and a new morality.
But how do you refute what they’re saying? How can you “argue” if they’ve secured themselves behind a wall reinforced by the kind of pity that is due to someone who’s been wounded? How do you make your point if they’re not willing to listen and instead are just waiting for you to stop talking so they can proceed in telling you how intolerant you are?
What we’re going to do is unpack all this by posing a couple of questions that you can ask the person who’s pointing their philosophical pistol at you and compel them to make your point for you with the responses they’re logically obligated to give.
Here we go…
What is the Common Book of Prayer?
It’s part of the legislative package passed by Parliament in 1558 as part of the “Act of Uniformity” which Queen Elizabeth initiated as part of relieving the tension between Catholics and Protestants. It positioned her as the head of the church and imposed a collection of state-sanctioned directives that dictated the way you were to pray, how you were to condut a church service and even imposed a fine should you decide to not attend church on any given Sunday.1
What is a Puritan?
A Puritan is someone who wanted to “purify” the Anglican Church – the church created by Henry the VIII and then later legally mandated by his daughter Queen Elizabeth with the Act of Uniformity. They wanted to distance themselves from a doctrine that was dictated by the crown and instead based on the Authority of God’s Word. The Puritans were among the first settlers of the New World along with the Pilgrims who didn’t want to “purify” the Church of England as much as they wanted to remove themselves completely from having to answer to any government interference with one’s faith.
Why did the British refer to the Revolutionary War as a “Presbyterian Rebellion?”
In the aftermath of the Great Awakening, 75-80% of the colonies were actively involved in church.2 Preachers like George Whitfield and Jonathan Edwards had successfully re-introduced the Truth of how one’s relationship with Christ was not facilitated by a liturgy or a religious institution, but was instead based solely on a personal decision to follow Him.
With that awareness came a new perspective on how one’s rights were not a king’s to dispense as much as they were God’s to guarantee.
It wasn’t just “taxation without representation,” it was the way the motherland was attempting to control church government, the way in which you to pray (which included a mandate to swear allegiance to the king) and a directive to ordain ministers, not according to the New Testament, but according to a format approved by the Church of England.
Many Americans were quoted as saying, “We have no governor but Jesus Christ.”3
This is why many redcoats and Englishmen were prone to refer to the Revolution as a Presbyterian Rebellion.4
How many times to Congress call for a National Day of Prayer, Fasting and Humiliation during the Revolutionary War?
Sixteen. And these were not generic “moments of silence.” These were specific admonishments to appeal to Christ for the forgiveness of sins and wisdom in the way the United States was to prosecute its war with England.5
Bear in mind too that the verbiage of these Proclamations were written by many who would later serve in the Constitutional Convention.
Tomorrow…Part II
1. “The Act of Uniformity” was conceived in 1558 and passed by Parliament in 1559. Its purpose was to regularize prayer, worship and the administration of sacraments in the Church of England. In addition, all persons had to attend Anglican worship services once a week or be fined 12 pence which amounted to about three days wages. (“Act of Uniformity 1558”, “Wikipedia”, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Act_of_Uniformity_1558, accessed May 20, 2023)
In 1662, the scope of “The Act of Uniformity” was enhanced to include the mandate that all ministers be ordained according to an Episcopal format and anyone who held an office within the church was to swear allegiance to the monarchy. (“Act of Uniformity 1662” “Wikipedia”, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Act_of_Uniformity_1662, accessed May 20, 2023 | “Act of Uniformity”, “Encyclopedia.com”, https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/modern-europe/british-and-irish-history/act-uniformity, accessed May 20, 2023
2. “Religion and the Founding of the American Republic”, https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel02.html, accessed April 5, 2023
3. “Directory of National Biography, Vol XXV”, Harris – Henry I, Smith, Elder and Company, London, 1891, p68 (also read “The Black Robe Regiment” to learn more about the Presbyterian element that was perceived by the British)
4. “Public Statutes at large of the United States of America, from the Organization of the Government in 1789 to March 3, 1845, Volume VI”, “https://books.google.com/books?id=Opt0L-PDdPAC&pg=PA116&lpg=PA116&dq=%22that+the+duties+arising+and+due+to+the+United+States+upon+certain+stereotype+plates%22&source=bl&ots=p2xVUkIfub&sig=ACfU3U3N9AeyAcd_E0QqZfiXJlHQXbKGTA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjq8oSY0__9AhV6mWoFHduzBy0Q6AF6BAgDEAM#v=onepage&q=%22that%20the%20duties%20arising%20and%20due%20to%20the%20United%20States%20upon%20certain%20stereotype%20plates%22&f=false”, accessed March 28, 2023
5. To read a list of all sixteen proclamations as they’re documented in the Library of Congress, head out to http://muscularchristianityonline.com/forum/the-finish-line/