Written by J. Brent Walker
Election season is upon us. I agree with Holly Hollman’s assessment that the relationship
between religion and politics will dominate our public discourse over the next several
months far more than discussions about constitutional issues concerning church and state.
As I have said before, the institutional separation of church and state does not compel a
segregation of religion from politics or strip the public square of religious voices. People
of faith may—indeed, I think, must—be involved in public life by speaking out,
organizing, voting and running for office.
One of the best pithy statements defining the ground rules for religious engagement of
civic life is found in a document called “A Shared Vision: Religious Liberty in the 21st
Century.” Originally drafted in 1994 and endorsed by more than 80 persons and six
religious organizations, including the Baptist Joint Committee, it was revised and
redistributed in 2002. It includes a variety of issues on which the endorsers find common
ground. The full statement can be read on the BJC’s Web site, but I include here the
section on “Religion and Politics.”
As concerned citizens, religious people can and do seek public office. Article VI of the
Constitution wisely provides that no religious test shall be required for public office.
As voices of conscience, religious organizations can and do seek to express their
prophetic witness by influencing moral values and public policy. Separation of church
and state does not mean the separation of religion and politics. Nevertheless, attempts at
affecting public policy should be tempered by tolerance for differing views and
recognition that a multiplicity of voices is crucial for the success of a democratic society.
While religious groups serve an important role in holding government accountable for its
actions, that role can be fulfilled only when a healthy distance is maintained between
religion and government.
Neither church nor state may control, dominate or subjugate the other. The idea that
America is a “Christian nation” violates the American commitment both to democratic
government and religious liberty. In the most religiously pluralistic nation in the world,
any government endorsement of religion inevitably will make some people feel like
outcasts in their own land.
Accordingly, we must:
· Defend the right of individuals and organizations to speak, debate and advocate
with their religious voices in the public square;
· Stand firm by the principle that government action without a secular purpose or
with a primary effect that advances or inhibits religion violates the separation of
church and state.
Similarly, we should:
· Discourage efforts to make a candidate’s religious affiliation or nonaffiliation a
campaign issue;
· Discourage the invoking of divine authority on behalf of candidates, policies and
platforms and the characterizing of opponents as sinful or ungodly.
May this widely embraced statement guide our words and deeds as we discharge this rite
and right of democracy while whole-heartedly affirming the relevance of religious
convictions to that sacred exercise.
This column originally appeared in the September 2006 edition of Report from the
Capital.
