DOES THE BIBLE SEPARATE CHURCH AND STATE?
Key Facts
The phrase “separation of church and state” originated from a letter that Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptist Association of Connecticut in 1802. [1]
The First Amendment to the Constitution states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” [2]
A recent Pew Research survey found “about half of Americans (49%) say the Bible should have at least ‘some’ influence on U.S. laws, including nearly a quarter (23%) who say it should have ‘a great deal’ of influence.” [3]
A 2019 Pew Research survey said that “nearly two-thirds of Americans… say churches and other houses of worship should keep out of political matters, while 36% say they should express their views on day-to-day social and political questions. And three-quarters of the public expresses the view that churches should not come out in favor of one candidate over another during elections.” [4]
Key Scriptures
Matthew 22:21 “Then he said to them, ‘Therefore render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.’”
John 18:36 “Jesus answered, ‘My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world.’”
Matthew 28:18 “And Jesus came and said to them, ‘All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.’”
Matthew 16:18-19 “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
Romans 13:1 “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.”
Acts 17:24-27 “The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man, nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything. And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, that they should seek God, and perhaps feel their way toward him and find him. Yet he is actually not far from each one of us.”
2 Corinthians 10:3-4 “For though we walk in the flesh, we are not waging war according to the flesh. For the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh but have divine power to destroy strongholds.”
Want to Know More?
The Gospel Coalition - The Relationship of Church and State
Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission - What does “separation of Church and State” actually mean?
TIME Magazine - The Real Meaning of the Separation of Church and State
Wall Builders - How to Respond to “Separation of Church and State”
Got Questions - How should a Christian view the separation of church and state?
Pew Research - 8 facts about religion and government in the United States
Application
The phrase “separation of Church and State” has been a frequent source of contention in the United States. How does religion fit into the public square? In the previous article, we addressed the history of separation of church and state. In this article, we will be looking at whether separation of Church and State is a biblical principle and to what degree our faith should inform our politics.
What Does the Bible Say?
In the Old Testament, the church and state were less separated than they are today. Israel began as a theocracy, a nation under God and governed by prophets like Moses. However, even within this structure, Moses governed civil affairs while the Levites were given the priestly duties (Exodus 18:1-27, Numbers 1:5), demonstrating some degree of separation of civic and religious duties. As time progressed, Israel was ruled by judges until the people demanded to be ruled by a king like the other nations around them (1 Samuel 8:5-6). However, these changes in leadership structure occurred because of Israel’s sin and unwillingness to obey God and be ruled by him directly. As God told Samuel when the Israelites asked for an earthly king, “Obey the voice of the people in all that they say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected me from being king over them” (1 Samuel 8:7). Although Israel enjoyed prosperity through the rule of righteous kings like David, Israel’s continual sin and rebellion against God eventually led to their destruction and exile.
One important distinction to make between Israel and contemporary nations is that Israel existed as a theocracy because God had entered into a covenant with Abraham and his descendants to make him a great nation, to multiply his descendants, and to give him land, with the goal of being a blessing to the world (Genesis 12:2-3, 17:4-8, 26:3-5, 28:13-15). This carried political consequences with it and required Israel to take national actions like making war. As we shall see, in the New Testament, Christians are under a new covenant.
In the New Testament, the Jews still longed for a political Messiah to free them from Roman rule. Instead the Messiah, Jesus, came to redeem his people from their sins (Matthew 1:21), not establish an earthly kingdom (John 18:36). Jesus even acknowledged a distinction between the rule of Caesar and the rule of God (Matthew 22:17-22, Mark 12:13-17), even though all authority (including governments) is ultimately derived from God (Matthew 28:18, John 19:11, Romans 13:1-2).
After his death and resurrection, the apostles’ instructions to the Church were to submit to the secular governing authorities (Romans 13:1-7, Titus 3:1, 1 Peter 2:13-17) rather than continuing to seek to establish an independent nation ruled by God or his direct representative. God’s new covenant with the Church established through Christ was no longer exclusive to one people group but open to all (Romans 10:11-13, Ephesians 2:18-22). The Church does not worry about establishing a political nation of their own, for Christians are promised an eternal kingdom in the new heavens and new earth (1 Peter 1:3-4, Hebrews 9:15). When Christ returns a second time, he will come as a conquering king to establish his kingdom on earth (Revelation 11:15).
How Does this Apply to Modern Christians?
Thus, under the new covenant, Scripture recognizes the Church and the State as separate institutions with different roles. God has given the power of the sword (the power to use force and inflict corporal punishment) to the State for the sake of establishing order and justice and as a means to punish evil (Romans 13:4, 1 Peter 2:14). The Church, on the other hand, is charged with preaching the gospel (Romans 10:14-15), making disciples (Matthew 28:19-20), being a pillar of the truth (1 Timothy 3:15), living as lights in a darkened world as ambassadors for his heavenly kingdom (Ephesians 5:8-10, 2 Corinthians 5:20), and enacting church discipline upon those in the church (Matthew 18:15-20, 1 Corinthians 5:1-13).
As Christians, we should not confuse the power of the sword given to the State with the sword of the Spirit (Matthew 26:52, Ephesians 6:17, Hebrews 4:12). As Russell Moore states, “The kingdom of God is ultimately a global rule as well, but it advances in a different way: not with the sword of steel but with the sword of the Spirit. It advances not through coercion but through persuasion.” Jonathan Leeman puts it another way, saying, “God has given the power of the sword to governments and the power of the keys to churches, and he intends for them to work separately but cooperatively toward the greater end of worship.” By “power of the keys,” (Matthew 16:19, 18:18) Leeman means the ability of the church to faithfully judge correct gospel doctrine and to judge those who are living faithfully in accordance with the gospel. However, the Church should not physically punish those who do not obey God’s Word or to try and force them to believe in Christ. Likewise, the State does not judge matters of doctrine in the Church or compel its citizens to espouse certain beliefs, but concerns itself with the punishment of wrongdoing.
What “Separation of Church and State” Does Mean
Defined properly, separation of church and state aligns with biblical teachings. It keeps the Church and State as separate institutions and protects their respective God-ordained purposes from infringing on one another.
On a political level in the United States, the First Amendment outlines a healthy separation of church and state. The Establishment Clause (“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”) says that the government cannot have an official religion and should remain neutral towards religion and nonreligion. The Free Exercise Clause (“...or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”) protects the ability of churches to practice their religion as their conscience sees fit. Of course, as with all First Amendment rights, there are limits to religious freedom as well. For example, religious groups could not engage in human sacrifice under the guise of “religious freedom” as this violates the sanctity of human life.
What “Separation of Church and State” Does Not Mean
While the separation of church and state (properly understood) is a very good thing, secular thinkers have distorted it to mean something neither the Scriptures nor the Founding Fathers would have intended.
First, it does not mean that we can’t practice our faith in public. Under the Constitution, Christians and every other religion should have the freedom to practice and express their faith outside the four walls of their religious buildings. Faith should not be confined solely to one day a week or only on church property because genuine faith informs the entirety of the Christian life. Even if the government didn’t allow for it, Christians have a duty to proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ and live their lives in a way which reflects that gospel.
Second, it does not mean separating morality from public policy. Making laws by its very nature requires moral principles to base those laws on. Without a moral framework, the state would lack adequate justification to force people to do one thing or another.
Third, it does not mean separating public policy from religiously informed arguments. Public officials are told that they have to “check their religion at the door” when they write laws. In other words, they are told that their religion should not inform the way they think. But this is wrongheaded. Anyone who makes laws draws from their worldview or moral framework in order to decide what is the right or wrong law to make. Jonathan Leeman writes,
“All the earth, in other words, divides between those places where Christ’s rule is accepted and places where it is resisted (see Psa. 2:1-3). There are no “neutral” spaces, not in the public square, not elsewhere, as popular as the idea of religious “neutrality” may be in the democratic West. The public square, in fact, is nothing more than a battleground of gods, which everyone enters on behalf of their God or gods, whether the god’s name is Jesus or Allah, sex or the stock market.”
Thus, everyone who seeks to influence public policy seeks to advance their own worldview, whether it is secular or religious. Christians or other religious individuals should not be told to check their faith at the door simply because their worldview is religious. This is discriminatory and wrongly presumes that secular reasoning is neutral while religious reasoning is biased. In some sense, pushing secularism over religion violates separation of church and state by prioritizing non-religion over religion. Separation of church and state, rightly understood, remains neutral towards religion and non-religion.
On the other hand, allowing our faith to inform our thinking does not mean that every aspect of our faith will be legislated into law. It simply allows the laws that we create to be morally and soundly constructed. As Christians, we know that secular reasoning fails to account for the intrinsic worth and value of a human being as created in God’s image (Genesis 9:6). Likewise, secular reasoning cannot account for a transcendent moral framework that applies equally to everyone. Without a transcendent lawgiver (like God), secular reasoning can only appeal to whatever the majority says is right. This is why, in some way, having a religious worldview is helpful to constructing good laws.
Conclusion
Properly understood, separation of church and state is a biblical principle which keeps the Church and State institutionally separate while simultaneously guarding their respective God-ordained duties. However, it is often misconstrued to try and keep Christians and other religiously informed individuals from influencing public policy or public opinion. Neither the Bible nor the authors of the First Amendment would have supported such a notion. Christians should be engaged in politics and should let their faith inform how they think about political issues. However, we should not confuse the Church with the State or distort what each is meant to do. Sometimes, where we draw this line is not always clear, and we should always seek God’s wisdom in discerning where those proper boundaries are.