A problem faced in America is that the legal status of religious freedom has not been rightly interpreted, so confuses about addressing the personal needs of citizens. It has, to some degree, turned on those who are supportive of it. Religious freedom has been distorted in society in attempting: 1) -to get rid of religion, or reduce it, or find some elusive substitute; 2) -to make religion and the state conflicting entities of each other; 3) – to confuse mankind on the meaning of one God; 4) -to distort religion by the errors found in religions; and, 5) -to imply that religion may be nice, but not necessary. In general, freedom of religion ought to imply that there is an individual and voluntary acknowledgment of God, and failure to acknowledge God’s imminence ought to put the humanist in a neutral relationship with faith persons in matters relating to faith, if that faith is not in violence against the state. Righteousness is always a friend of the state, so exerts pressure for right in the state. Without God there is little real comprehensiveness to righteousness as a universal guide. God honors righteousness even if those doing the right do not acknowledge him.
Basic to human perception of genuine religion is the individual’s independence from all else than God. The separation of church and state recognizes that vital matter of the freedom of every individual beyond all of nature’s institutions – without violating them. When that is established, the individual takes oath to the nation (tribe, population) of which he or she is related. Thereafter believers in God try to live the culture of mankind and righteousness of faith in supportive context. We learn that righteousness exalteth a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people. The reproach, in this context, is not in the admission or the rejection of God, but the uses of righteousness, that includes a value system to all creation from God. Essentially this means that an individual is alone to make primary commitment, and move on from there, with the belief that he/she has found a way of life that is meaningful, and helpful to all others in whose lives persons carry influence. This provides a mine for the good of the person, the family, the community, the state, and the world. It provides a context for peaceful operations, for care and equity, for life and fulfillment. It is good for all. This underlies the effort on the part of Moses to govern the tribes of Israel, an effort joined by Aaron, the authority figure in the practice of the religion of Israel. We remember that when Aaron violated his responsibility in religion, Moses used the power of the state to renew the religious orientation.
Freedom of religion and the call to the individual to take self-responsibility implies the right of communicating that application. It does not violate human benefit, does not come in a form of violence – and is not resisted in violence. This is noted in Scripture, but, historically, has been violated, on occasion by human factors in church institutions. Apologies for that sin have come forth from Christians, and the church in freedom operates in a non-violent world order of its own. Islam has tended to adopt a different approach. Islamic nations tend to deny freedom of religion. The matter is taken away from the individual. Under the threat of incarceration or death, persons may not try to present their unapproved faith – to evangelize in any active way. To function in that governmental context was common for centuries in nations espousing the Christian religion. Although now docile in application, it remains on the books of a few nations. The belief that anything outside the parameters of the Islamic faith, is taken as so irreverent that for some it justifies warfare, punishment more severe than the crime indicates, and the resulting context of life takes away the main point of God with a person – the individual, not the laws of the state, must be the key to the work of God, and ultimately in the creation generally. To make a restrictive and national religion, implies that God can’t take care of himself – or that to be a citizen of the nation makes one a follower of a particular faith. To make faith an individual matter puts each person (not God or other power) in the dock to determine the individual’s future and morality. Wise persons then take time to consider the human self-spiritual duty. What hope is there for creation’s deeply flawed mankind? What may the individual do to survive in victory over: any enemy; any sin that violates God’s holiness; any impotence to care for self; and, any way we may find to glorify God, the Father? It takes all of each life to complete a formation period to immortality. Christians reach to form excellence in all things. *Mark W. Lee, Sr. — 2016, 2020