The Reverend Barry Lynn, Executive Director of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State (AU) will speak in Charleston on Sunday, April 15, at 5 P.M. at the Circular Congregational Church, 150 Meeting Street.
A question and answer session will follow Mr. Lynn’s presentation, concluding with a reception. The event is free and the public is invited.
The Reverend Lynn, who is also an attorney, writes prolifically and often appears in the national media discussing First Amendment matters. He has directed Americans United since 1992.
Founded in 1947 as a non-partisan movement to protect both freedom of as well as from religion–while opposing the “establishment” of any religion in our nation’s public life–in those days the organization’s focus was directed primarily in opposition to efforts on the part of Roman Catholic parochial schools seeking public funding. In fact AU’s original name was Protestants and Other Americans United for the Separation of Church and State.
It’s interesting that a similar concern has emerged recently surrounding the proposed federal health care mandate which includes a birth control provision. Even though a majority of Catholic women practice birth control, the Catholic hierarchy has joined forces with the political conservatism of Protestant fundamentalists to oppose this mandate.
Of the four current candidates vying to be the Republican nominee in this year’s presidential election, two are Roman Catholic and one is a Mormon. Americans United insists, of course, that one’s religion (or lack thereof), according to Article VI, paragraph 3 of the Constitution, does not disqualify anyone from seeking elective office at any level of government.
Ironically, one of the Republican presidential nominee candidates, Senator Rick Santorum, has denounced the late President John F. Kennedy–like Santorum, also a Roman Catholic–for Kennedy’s having affirmed the First Amendment’s insistence on the separation of religion and our nation’s public political life.
Despite this latest dust-up over birth control, in more recent years opponents of the First Amendment have been primarily Protestant Christian fundamentalists. Having apparently missed school the day they taught history, and therefore claiming that America was founded as an exclusively “Christian Nation”–specifically, “their kind” of Christianity–these folk (who are abundantly, if not excessively funded) continue to lobby on behalf of an extreme “Religious Right” political agenda.
This includes opposition to “freedom of choice” regarding abortion; the support of public funding for private schools; the promoting of discrimination against gay, lesbian, bi-sexual and trans-gendered persons; the teaching of so-called “creation science” in public schools; the advocating of public prayer (at least of a certain kind), as well as specifically Christian symbols and references to similar religious documents in public gatherings, facilities and settings; the teaching of a “revisionist history” in public schools, including the adoption of like-minded textbooks.
As president of the local chapter of Americans United, I–along with others who share a similar perspective–bring a particular Christian witness to the AU enterprise. Just as others, who claim to not be religious, who typically describe themselves as “secular humanists,” share as well in this effort.
That’s because, as devoted American citizens who abide by our nation’s Constitution, we respect both “clauses” of the First Amendment: 1) the protection of both freedom of or from religion; and 2) the principle that no religion should be “established” (even given preference) in our public life.
Moreover, as a Christian, generally, and a Baptist, particularly, I understand the “wall of separation” in the First Amendment from the historical and even theological perspective of my own faith heritage.
Since, historically–as hard as it may be to believe, at least for anyone living in the South–as religious groups go, Baptists were the most discriminated against, even persecuted (for not being the “right kind” of Christians) in 17th century England and in colonial America, most notably in Massachusetts and in Virginia, each of which was dominated by a specific “state church.” Hence, the influence of such “founding fathers” as Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in creating the First Amendment to the Constitution.
From an even wider Christian perspective, the “separation of church and state” presents as ironic. Since, for example–particularly in various European countries–wherever there is (or has been) a “state church,” the vitality of anything close to authentic Christian faith and witness is substantially diminished. Indeed, “theocracies” promote a kind of “civil religion” the Bible deplores. Coercive or imposed religion, certainly where Christian faith is concerned, is a contradiction. Or as St. Paul writes: “Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty” (II Corinthians 3: 17).
So then, my “secular humanist” friends are Americans United advocates for a different reason than am I. If they resist the cultural and political embracing (much less endorsing) of explicit religious values or symbols in our nation’s public life, I do as well. Except my opposition to such “theocratizing” is meant, ironically, to promote, as I’ve noted, the integrity of the particular theistic faith I embrace.
As a patriotic American, I support, for purely secular reasons, the First Amendment’s prohibiting of discrimination against or the exploitation of anyone on religious grounds, especially those considered minorities (such as, in America today, for instance, Muslims or atheists).
Even as my particular Christian values emphasize that the more secure one is regarding one’s “faith” (at least that which calls itself Christian), the less s/he will be threatened by and therefore need to promote one’s own faith expression at the expense of others who may hold to different values or perspectives, religious or otherwise. At least according to Jesus, in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 6): “Beware of practicing your piety in public . . . and when you pray . . . pray in secret.”
In this week we Christians call “Holy,” what I have here spoken to has found remarkable expression locally. It not only represents two of this world’s monotheistic religions at their best, it also reflects how our Constitution’s First Amendment calls us to live with one another as respectful, considerate, “neighborly” Americans.
If the Episcopal Church has been rooted deeply in the fabric of Charleston, South Carolina, for at least 300 years, it is also noteworthy that South Carolina was established, not as a “religious colony,” but as a secular commercial venture. Therefore, Charleston in particular has long been a beacon of a kind of “religious liberty” characteristic of cultural pluralism, including a vital Jewish presence among us. In fact, the local Kahal Kadosh Beth Elohim Synagogue is the oldest Reform congregation in America.
Hence, this worthy example. Recently, the impressive building that houses Charleston’s Grace Episcopal Church has been under repair, the result of extensive structural damage. Consequently, Grace Church has been forced to worship on Sundays at various times and places. Most notably, as Easter Sunday approaches, at Beth Elohim Synagogue, that Jewish congregation having so graciously and generously offered the use of their place of worship to their Christian brothers and sisters.
It’s how the human family is meant to live . . . certainly in America . . . at least according to our Constitution’s First Amendment.
