Separation of Church and State is NOT Separation of God and Country: God is NOT Church


                                                                     ‑ M. LaClair

 623 words

Separation of church and state does not mean separation of God and country.

May it be remembered that this country was founded by people who left their homes and crossed the seas in order to get away from “anti‑religion”; away from kings who had lost their “fear of God”; away from kings who put their own mentality above that of God’s laws (secular humanism of today); and away from kings who punished people who spoke out against the ruling establishment. (Sir Thomas Moore), etc.

Anyone who has read the “Virginia Papers” (adopted on June 27, 1788) would know that separation came about, not as “anti‑religion” vs “religion” as they would have us think, but as an effort that no one church be favored above others. It was definitely looking for “equal favor” not “equal disfavor”. Today’s people seem to errantly interchange the words church and religion. Historical papers (Proposed First Amendment from the Virginia Ratifying Convention June 27, 1788) actually openly acknowledge and state:

“That religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence…”

These are active, positive words; not any passive, negative words that some people of today would have us think. Separation of church and state, yes; separation of God and country, religion and country, no; not according to this country’s founding documents of basic Christian principles.

How many of those liberal separatists, of God and country, are trying to take out the one ingredient that made this country what it has been? Who, when following a recipe, would leave out the egg or the baking soda? When you take God out of this country, all you will get is an equally unpalatable mess on a national scale. This nation needs to return to the standards upon which it was founded. This nation needs to again openly acknowledge our Creator and recognize that we have a duty to Him, and discharge that duty by reason and conviction ‑‑ if we are to hold on to that which has made us great.

Taking creationism out of the schools but not taking out evolutionism; imprisoning Operation Rescue non‑violent, non‑forceful (no weapons except that of reason) demonstrators; taking Christian events off the ‘secular menu’ while allowing gross indigestion on open cultist diets; removing the generic prayer and all mention of God from schools, removing Ten Commandments monument from a Federal Courthouse, even allowing one man’s frivolous challenge to æunder God’ in our national pledge…  these are ways in which we recognize “the duty we owe our Creator”?, and, “the manner of discharging it”?  Can we be surprised if we fall?

Alexis de Tocqueville, a Frenchman who came to America in the early 1800’s to determine the “secret” of our successful democracy, wrote,

“Upon my arrival in the United States, the religious aspect of the country was the first thing that struck my attention. Religion in America … must be regarded as the foremost of political institutions of that country.”

And yet, those who would see the demise of what was once a great nation, know that all they have to do is remove that one ingredient to see us fall; religion ‑‑ duty to our Creator.  Not church, but religion and God, which is the background for the churchesàchurches, plural, as opposed to the singular Church of England.

Our forefathers may have clearly intended separation of church and state in order (i.e.) (not to show favoritism to Methodists over Lutherans), but church is not God and they did not intend any kind of separation from God or intend any separation from Godly Christianity. By their example, their words and their documents, they certainly did not intend separation of God and country. Rather, the joining of God and Country is the proven ingredient which had brought us so far.

To deny this would be to implement Pogo’s words:  “We have met the enemy and he is us!”