How a Very Religious Nation Produced the First Secular State
As the end of the twentieth century races toward us, its
hard to escape the feeling that history is about to turn
a very significant corner. One of the compelling questions
that many people ask is, Is this the end of the age?
Several Christian writers and radio preachers have recently
announced the date of Christs return, and many more
will offer their opinions as the millennium proceeds. But
one of the most overlooked mysteries of the end of the age
is the reuniting of Christianity with a one-world government.
Roger Williams
Three hundred years ago Roger
Williams had remarkable insight into the relationship of the church
and the state. More than anyone else in history, he was the one
who took a stand and would not allow church and state to blend
in some unholy alliance that would eventually turn and persecute
anyone who could not, for conscience sake, capitulate to its demands.
This had been the pattern over and over in European history, and
Williams was determined that it would not happen where he governed
in the infant state of Rhode Island.
We hope in this paper to begin
to unfold the mystery of Williamss insight into why the
separation of church and state must be upheld. Only then can the
necessary forces
grow and develop which will culminate in the apocalypse that brings
Christ back and that ushers in the Millennial Kingdom.
Since colonial times, prophecy about the "last days"
has been the fertile ground from which hundreds of millennial
sects have arisen, each freshly applying the patterns and
prophesies of the apocalypse to the events of its day.
Inevitably, peoples fears and expectations of what
the Bible predicts have made their mark on American politics.
The Promised Land
The first of the American millennial sects was the Pilgrims.
They came in hope of finding the "promised land",
a place where the righteous could live in peace and bring
in the 'kingdom of God'. The Pilgrims thought they were
establishing a New Israel and almost voted in Hebrew as
their national language. Many who settled here thought they
were the descendants of Abraham. They had come to this land
in faith, looking for "a city with foundations, whose
architect and builder was God."
The combination of a sense of prophetic destiny and the
need for an ordered society brought about a unique relationship
between church and state. In fact, it is because of the
strength of this relationship between American politics
and religion that the founding fathers formally disestablished
religion to produce the first secular state in history.
Author and political observer
Garry Wills makes this very point:
In the middle of the seventeenth century, Rhode Island had given
greater protection of freedom of religion than any other government
in what was then known as Christendom. Nor was this an aberration.
The process by which those zealous for religion separated it from
government presented in microcosm the process that would be worked
out in America over the next centuries. The secular state came
from the zeal of religion itself. It was the most religious community
[Rhode Island] that produced the most religiously neutral state,
just as a century later it would be a very religious
nation that produced the first secular state. This [occurred]
because they were following the logic of the position that Roger
Williams, with his genius, had arrived at by way of Augustinian
reflection on the world, the gospel, and government. Those reflections
were not as distant from the later arguments of Jefferson and
Madison as scholars have made them.
The Stone Kingdom
The insight of Roger Williams is important in three very
significant areas: First, he saw more clearly than anyone
else of his time the significance of the Stone Kingdom that
the prophet Daniel predicted would come about "in the
days of those [ten] kings".
Second, he saw that the restoration of the true church would
come about when true apostles would once again raise up
the foundation of the early church and bring to full maturity
what had begun in the first century.
Third, he saw that the end-time church could only flourish
in a "pre-Constantine" political structure where
the affairs of the civil government were completely separate
from the affairs of the church.
According to Daniel 12:4, the
prophecies concerning the Stone Kingdom were to be sealed up until
the last days. This is why Roger Williams, in the seventeenth
century, was unable to understand them completely. However, for
us at the end of the twentieth century, the picture is coming
into focus and we are able to interpret more clearly what Williams
could only sense back then.
Even though Roger Williams didnt see everything clearly,
he nevertheless was the one who had the greatest insight
in how the relationship between church and state should
be. He believed that no state government should ever interfere
with an individuals private acts of belief. To him
these acts were private matters between the individual and
the Spirit of God. He believed that true belief grew out
of an inner conviction that no man could force upon another.
He believed that the Indians in New England could not and
should not be coerced into European beliefs "they
must judge according to their Indian or American consciences,
for other consciences it cannot be supposed they should
have."
Thus, Williams understood that any establishment of religion
by any government imposes the conscience of one person,
or one set of persons the ruler or his magistrates
on everybody else.
Williams knew that if religion and politics were not separate,
the church would continue to be corrupt in the New World
just as it had always been in Europe where the two had been
combined since the days of Constantine. He saw that, according
to the teachings of the Bible, the church was to be separate
and distinct from the society around it. He knew this was
the only way it could be a "light to the nations".
He also knew that what he saw around him in seventeenth
century America was not the church of the New Testament.
He believed that when the Roman emperor, Constantine, made
Christianity the state religion, the church lost its illumination
and ceased to be the church. To him, history proved through
all the bloodshed and disunity expressed in the name of
Christ, that Christendom is not the church and that it
never can be.
Prophetically, he saw that the
day would come when the God of heaven would raise up the righteous
root of the early church to demonstrate the life of the kingdom
to the whole earth. He believed the day would come when the God
of heaven would raise up apostles who would restore the pattern
and purity of the early church.
Roger Williams wanted to establish civil government that would
separate the spheres of authority of the church and the state
so that when that time of restoration would come, the true church
would not be polluted by any establishment of religion nor would
it be stamped out by the intolerance of government to something
radically different than the mainstream culture or religion of
the day.
Prophetic Destiny
The separation of church and state, so clearly understood
by Williams, Madison and Jefferson is what has allowed the
idea of a "prophetic destiny" to flourish and
develop to the present day in this country. Jefferson and
Madison did not believe that separation would lessen the
impact of Bible prophesy or religious expression on our
nation. "Churches freed from the compromises of establishment
would have greater moral force, they argued and in
this they proved prophets."
Neither did they believe that separation would lessen civil
governments ability to rule over the affairs of the
state. They believed the ability to rule would be enhanced
if the civil authorities would rule by natural law as dictated
by each mans conscience instead of being coerced into
running the affairs of government with legislated church
doctrines. Therefore, it seemed necessary to them that the
separation be maintained in order for civil government to
keep order and maintain peace and for the "prophetic
destiny" of America to be fully realized.
The Myth of Separation
There is a strong movement currently forming in America,
primarily from the evangelical Christian Right, to expose
what they call "the myth of separation" between
church and state and to bring this country back to its roots
as a "Christian nation" where politics and Christian
principles go hand in hand. This movement is a reaction
to the long-standing view from the left of strict separation,
a view which in many ways has robbed America of the fundamental
moral foundation of civil government that this country had
at its beginning. There are grave dangers to both positions
and both represent important elements of the forces at work
to bring about the climax of human history in this age.
In colonial times, the Christian religion was an integral
part of the culture of the people who settled in America.
Christian principles were voluntarily accepted by the dictates
of individual consciences. It was in this cultural context
that the people saw the danger of establishing any particular
denomination as a state religion. But increasingly today,
the culture is voluntarily rejecting the principles of Christianity
because of the inconsistencies, confusion, division and
hypocrisy in the church.
To quell this avalanche of moral breakdown, the "Reclaim
America" element of the Christian right is subtly advocating
establishing, not a particular denomination, but the Christian
religion. This, in effect would be a return to the same
type of establishment initially enacted by Constantine,
which Williams, Jefferson and Madison agreed was the beginning
of the fall of the Christian church from its purity.
How this movement to re-establish a Constantinian Christianity
fits into the prophesy of the end times is a primary subject
of this paper. It makes the understanding of government
proposed by Williams, Jefferson and Madison even more profound
and even more urgent as we have entered the new millennium.
The beast, the harlot, and
the Stone Kingdom.
Garry Wills, Under God, Religion and American Politics,
pp.20,24.
Hughes, American Quest for the Primitive Church,
pp. 42,46
David Barton, The Myth of Separation, p. 32