“So, I read James Madison’s
first inaugural address today.” That was my offering to the family at dinner
last week. That led to speculation about what exactly Dolley Madison saved when
the British invaded Washington D.C. in 1814...well, that’s what the
wife and children discussed. I contributed a few thoughts about Dolly Madison
snack cakes. It was a productive discussion. The family figured out it was a
portrait of George Washington. The snack company went out of business a few
years ago.
The “Father of the Bill of
Rights,” in that inauguration speech, didn’t say much...it was three pages long
(brevity, the best sort of politician’s speech). But the fourth president of
the United States of America still managed to describe the foundational ideals
that guided him, including religious liberty: “Assuring myself, that under
every vicissitude, the determined spirit and united Councils of this nation,
will be safeguards to its honor and its essential interests, I repair to the post
assigned me, with no other discouragement, than what springs from own
inadequacy to its high duties. If I do not sink under the weight of this deep
conviction, it is because I find some support in a consciousness of the
purposes, and a confidence in the principles which I bring with me into this
arduous service...to hold the Union of the States as the basis of their peace
and happiness; to support the Constitution, which is the cement of the Union,
as well in its limitations as in its authorities; to respect the rights and
authorities reserved to the States and to the people, as equally incorporated
with, and essential to the success of, the general system; to avoid the
slightest interference with the rights of conscience, or the functions of
religion so wisely exempted from civil jurisdiction...the source to which I
look for the aids which alone can supply my deficiencies, is in the well tried
intelligence and virtue of my fellow Citizens, and in the Councils of those
representing them, in the other Departments associated in the care of the
national interests. In these my confidence will, under every difficulty be best
placed; next to that which we have all been encouraged to feel in the
guardianship and guidance of that Almighty Being whose power regulates the
destiny of nations, whose blessings have been so conspicuously dispensed to
this rising Republic, and to whom we are bound to address our devout gratitude
for the past, as well as our fervent supplications and best hopes for the
future” (March 4, 1809).
Prior to the ratification of
the Bill of Rights, then-U.S. Representative (Virginia) Madison wrote against taxation of
Virginians in support of religious congregations. The tax he opposed was
mandatory, even though the citizens could designate which church was supported
by the monies. After seeing the persecution of Baptists in Virginia by the
established church (Anglican), Madison remained consistently opposed to any
civil involvement in religion, be it supposedly positive (financial support of
the church) or negative (government oppression of particular religions). “It is
the duty of every man to render to the Creator such homage and such only as he
believes to be acceptable to him. This duty is precedent, both in order of time
and in degree of obligation, to the claims of Civil Society. Before any man can
be considered as a member of Civil Society, he must be considered as a subject
of the Governor of the Universe...we maintain therefore that in matters of
Religion, no man’s right is abridged by the institution of Civil Society and
that Religion is wholly exempt from its cognizance...if Religion be exempt from
the authority of the Society at large, still less can it be subject to that of
the Legislative Body...the preservation of a free Government requires not
merely, that the metes and bounds which separate each department of power be
invariably maintained; but more especially that neither of them be suffered to
overleap the great Barrier which defends the rights of the people. The Rulers
who are guilty of such an encroachment, exceed the commission from which they
derive their authority, and are Tyrants” (“Memorial and Remonstrance Against
Religious Assessments,” June 20, 1785).
The fruit of this conviction
became foundational to this nation a few years later: “The Conventions of a
number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution,
expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers,
that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as
extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure
the beneficent ends of its institution... Congress [this was back when the
government and the people knew who made the laws in this nation] shall make no
law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise
thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of
the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress
of grievances...” (“Bill of Rights,” ratified in 1791).
While we should all be
thankful that religious liberty was a conviction of Madison ’s, it certainly wasn’t new: “God
alone is Lord of the conscience, and hath left it free from the doctrines and
commandments of men which are in any thing contrary to his word, or not
contained in it. So that to believe such doctrines, or obey such commands
out of conscience, is to betray true liberty of conscience; and the requiring
of an implicit faith, an absolute and blind obedience, is to destroy liberty of
conscience and reason also” (1689 Baptist Confession of Faith, 21.2 – the
Baptists eliminated the clause found in the Westminster Confession of Faith of
1646 which called upon the civil magistrate to be involved in maintained order,
unity, and discipline in the churches).
Neither is this conviction
concerning religious liberty an old one: “God alone is Lord of the conscience,
and He has left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men which are
contrary to His Word or not contained in it. Church and state should be
separate. The state owes to every church protection and full freedom in the
pursuit of its spiritual ends. In providing for such freedom no ecclesiastical
group or denomination should be favored by the state more than others. Civil
government being ordained of God, it is the duty of Christians to render loyal
obedience thereto in all things not contrary to the revealed will of God. The
church should not resort to the civil power to carry on its work. The gospel of
Christ contemplates spiritual means alone for the pursuit of its ends. The
state has no right to impose penalties for religious opinions of any kind. The
state has no right to impose taxes for the support of any form of religion. A
free church in a free state is the Christian ideal, and this implies the right
of free and unhindered access to God on the part of all men, and the right to
form and propagate opinions in the sphere of religion without interference by
the civil power” (Baptist Faith & Message 2000, 17).
Religious liberty. May it
continue in this nation and spread throughout the world in the generations to
come. This is, I believe, the apostle Paul’s chief concern as he tells the
church to pray.
“First of all, then, I
urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on
behalf of all men, for kings and all who are in authority” (1 Timothy 2:1,2a). Sometimes we stop there in
our reading, interpreting Paul to mean that we pray for civil leaders either
for their own sake or for the good of the nation. What the apostle says
afterwards should refine our understanding of his command to pray.
“...so that [what follows is the reason for the command to
pray] we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and
dignity. This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, Who
desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For
there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ
Jesus, Who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony given at the proper
time. For this I was appointed a preacher and an apostle (I am telling the truth,
I am not lying) as a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth” (2:2b-7).
We pray for civil leaders so
that we may lead a peaceful life, but even this is not the end of Paul’s
reasoning (his concern isn’t for our comfort). This peaceful life is for the
sake of the spread of the Gospel of Jesus Christ to “all men.” The
same God Who has ordained this in the current Gospel Age is the One Who calls
preachers, missionaries (apostles), and teachers to proclaim Jesus. 1 Timothy
2:1-8 is about religious liberty for the sake of missions/evangelism.
The apostle closes out this
section by returning to his original command in a tidy book-end: “Therefore
I want the men in every place to pray, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and
dissension” (2:8).
Religious liberty. We pray
for it and work for it, not primarily for our own personal freedom, but for the
sake of the spread of the Gospel to those who have yet to hear it proclaimed.
Our primary motivator for advocating religious liberty is the desire of “God
our Savior” to have Christ, the “one mediator...between God
and men” proclaimed everywhere.
This also means that if we
aren’t focused on missions and evangelism, we are wasting this most rare and
precious of freedoms.
Keep it at the forefront of
your prayers, Church. Work hard at preserving it as your birthright and
inheritance, U.S. citizens.
By the way...after telling my kids about religious liberty, they tried to discuss the War of 1812 and I tried to tell them about snack cakes. Seriously. Someone's got to be the adult.
By the way...after telling my kids about religious liberty, they tried to discuss the War of 1812 and I tried to tell them about snack cakes. Seriously. Someone's got to be the adult.
No comments:
Post a Comment