Freedom of Religion, Not Freedom From Religion

The U.S. Constitution had the Bill of Rights, ten Amendments, added so that all of the states would accept the new federal form of government. The First Amendment begins: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Then it specifies freedom of speech and freedom of the press, which are impossible without freedom of belief. The framers of the Constitution, especially James Madison, believed that "a republic without religious freedom was impossible. Religious freedom was essential for political freedom and academic freedom."

My ancestor Roger Sherman was the only man to sign all four founding documents of the United States: the Declaration of Independence, Articles of Confederation, U.S. Constitution, and Bill of Rights. Madison, Wisconsin, where we lived and raised our family, is named after James Madison, who is also my ancestor. So I'm historically very much inclined to favor the free exercise of religious liberty.

Many people today have a distorted view of religious freedom. Some think it only means the freedom to attend whatever church, synagogue, mosque, etc. you choose. But this view omits "the free exercise thereof." If we are only able to listen and agree to a pastor's sermon, but not exercise in public what we believe, the supposed religious freedom is hardly any freedom at all. And recent laws against pastors mentioning any particular political position in their sermons undercut even further our free exercise of religion. When the state claims control over every social institution - education, healthcare, the press, etc. - then everything becomes "political," and thus to say anything that is "politically incorrect" becomes illegal.

Other people have the opinion that the First Amendment stipulates the separation of church and state, quoting Thomas Jefferson's phrase: "a wall of separation between Church & State." Jefferson wrote this in a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in Connecticut, defending the free exercise of religion and echoing the language of the founder of the first Baptist church in America, Roger Williams, who had written in 1644 of "[A] hedge or wall of separation between the garden of the church and the wilderness of the world." The courts, however, have twisted it to claim that the state must not allow any expression of a particular religion in governmental institutions, which nowadays include public schools, universities, hospitals, clinics, the military, etc. that receive any federal funds: "You can believe anything in general, but nothing in particular." This has forced military and hospital chaplains to dispense only bland, general religious pablum, not anything specific. But the clear intent of the First Amendment's two religion clauses is to promote, not to limit, our free exercise of religion.

It was the USSR's constitution, not America's, that contained the words "separation of church and state." The First Amendment phrase "make no law regarding an establishment of religion" clearly means not creating any one particular religious establishment, that is, a state church such as the founders had experienced in Europe. The phrase in the U.S. Constitution is "an establishment of religion" in particular, not "the establishment of religion" in general. So the United States of America should not have a state church, but rather the people should be free to choose and practice whichever religion they believe is correct, or none at all. The First Amendment does not require or specify "freedom from any religion at all," as some advocate.

And yet, our current "Great Leader" has stated, "No, you can't deny women their basic rights and pretend it's about 'religious freedom.' If you don't like birth control, don't use it. Religious freedom doesn't mean you can force others to live by your own beliefs." (This sounds strikingly similar to - "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.") Do you see the word games he's playing here?

First of all, "their basic rights" is a right newly-invented by five unelected Supreme Court Justices for women to kill their unborn babies at any time up to and including at birth (so-called "partial birth abortions"). Is that right?

Second, we religious conservatives aren't forcing others to live by our beliefs - others can buy the Pill or procure an abortion on their own dime elsewhere; instead, we believers are being forced to pay for the Pill and abortion-inducing drugs through our taxes, and Christian doctors, nurses and pharmacists are even forced to provide the drugs and perform the abortions that are contrary to the free expression of their religious beliefs.

This twisted logic is now also being extended to florists, bakers, photographers, and owners of wedding chapels or any business open to the public. They must now provide their services for homosexual "marriages" and other glaringly pagan celebrations. It is only a short matter of time until pastors will be required to perform homosexual weddings if they want to retain their license to perform any civil wedding ceremonies at all. If the free exercise of religion means anything, it must mean that people cannot be forced to contribute their skills to, participate in or perform pagan ceremonies that contradict Christian teachings.

What can we do about it? First of all, we must have the courage to speak up and write about it to our congresspersons, our newspaper and magazine editors, TV and radio stations, to our friends and neighbors. Print up some flyers and hand them out on the street corners! Write to the political candidates and clearly express your beliefs about the free exercise of religion in the public square. Silence means consent, so speak up!

Secondly, whenever a politician or candidate voices the idea that "religious freedom" merely means the right to worship within the four walls of your church or synagogue, we must remind them that the First Amendment clearly provides for the free exercise of religion in our day-to-day lives, not just on Sunday morning for an hour or so. If we don't speak up, it will signify that we passively agree with them.

Thirdly, be on guard against any "anti-terrorism" and/or "anti-extremism" language and especially legislation that encroaches on our peaceful and free exercise of religion. The press and politicians are spreading the notion that conservative Christians are "religious fanatics" or "right-wing extremists" right along with Islamist terrorists who blow themselves and others to pieces with their suicide vests. Whenever we read or hear such "guilt by association" language, we need to immediately rebut those false arguments.

And fourthly, we must always "speak the truth in love." Don't express hate or condemnation for other persons. Remember what our Lord Jesus Christ said to the woman who was caught in adultery - "Neither do I condemn you: go and sin no more." He didn't say "go and sin some more" - He didn't condone the act, but He also didn't condemn the person. Remember that there are many other kinds of sin that we have likely committed - greed, gluttony, lying, laziness... even if we haven't committed certain sexual sins. We all need to say, "Lord, have mercy on me, a sinner!"

(Linked to www.Hosken-News.info of 30 Jul. 2016.)

"Sloppy Agape" - Phony Love, Part 2

You've no doubt known people who have an artificial smile plastered on their face and say - "I'm fine!" or "That's OK by me!" or other pleasantries and niceties, while deep down inside they are angry or depressed or hate you. In my previous essay I quoted Romans 12:9 - "Let love be genuine. Abhor what is evil; hold fast to what is good." At times we need to stop pretending that everything is just fine, and say - "Enough of this phony inclusivism!"

In Ephesians 4:15 we read - "...but speaking the truth in love, we may grow up in all things into him, who is the head, Christ." Often people take this to mean we should be kind and gentle when telling another person the truth that might be hard to hear. Of course, that's part of the meaning, but we should look at the whole context of that verse. St. Paul begins by reminding the believers in Ephesus to preserve the unity of the faith (v. 3). Then he continues:

"He gave some to be apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers to equip the saints to do the work of ministering to the building up of the body of Christ; until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a full grown man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; that we may no longer be children, tossed back and forth and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in craftiness, after the wiles of error; but speaking the truth in love, we may grow up in all things into him, who is the head, Christ; from whom all the Body, being fitted and knit together through that which every joint supplies, according to the working in measure of each individual part, makes the Body increase to the building up of itself in love." (Eph. 4:11-16)

We see here that apostles (and bishops, their successors), evangelists, pastors and teachers are agents of truth, to pass on the unity of the faith, true doctrines, to the next generation. They do this by equipping the saints to do the work of ministering. That is, they don't try to "run the whole show" all by themselves, but rather they are to train others and delegate responsibility to them to build up the Body of Christ, the Church. So in this context, the laypeople in the Church also become agents of truth, speaking the truth in love, so that the Body of Christ, the Christian community, is built up in love. This shows the societal impact that our words and actions should have. But some will object...

"Shouldn't love simply be the rule? Some old saint said we can just love God and do as we please." There is a kernel of truth in that saying, because if we truly love God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength, we will most likely also love our neighbor as ourselves. But some people might be taking this as an excuse to just "do as we please." They may understand "love" as an unstructured, warm and gooey feeling, or just an emotion of sexual attraction.

This kind of thinking often limits our decision to "either-or" - either we love everybody, or we're hard-nosed legalists. But that is called "antinomianism" - "against law-ism" - because it opposes setting rules of behavior. It's simplistic thinking, because at times the emphasis should be on love, and at other times the emphasis should be on truth, doing what is right. And the two are not mutually exclusive, opposed to each other. "Speaking the truth in love" means that the two can be combined.

The Apostle John recorded the words of Christ (John 14:15): "If you love Me, keep My commandments." Christ didn't teach that love and rules are opposed to each other. If we really love Him, we will keep His commandments. There are several commands in the Ten Commandments that we shouldn't forget: don't steal, don't lie, don't commit sexual immorality, don't covet. Christ continued this emphasis on love being combined with obedience: "If a man loves Me, he will keep My word. My Father will love him, and We will come to him, and make Our home with him. He who doesn't love Me doesn't keep My words. The word which you hear isn't Mine, but the Father's who sent Me." (John 14:23-24)

So let's not practice "Sloppy Agape," being sloppy in our "either-or" thinking. Sometimes it should be "both-and" or perhaps "some of this and a little of that." If we really love Christ, we will obey Him too!

(Linked to www.Hosken-News.info of 16 Jul. 2016.)

"Sloppy Agape" - Phony Love

It's become rather common these days for preachers - and lots of other people - to say that we should all just "love one another" and "love your neighbor as yourself." Of course, these are good and true teachings by our Lord Jesus Christ. In fact, He taught His disciples that loving our neighbor is equal to the command to love God with all our being:

"Jesus said to him, 'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.' This is the first and great commandment. A second likewise is this, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' The whole law and the prophets depend on these two commandments." (Mat. 22:37-40) 

- and -

"A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, just like I have loved you; that you also love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another." (John 13:34-35)

Our love for God and our neighbor should be unconditional: God sends His rain on the just and the unjust alike, He bestows His grace on sinners like me who don't deserve it, so we should love even our enemies. But should a Christian ever hate? Our love should not be indiscriminate: "Let love be without hypocrisy. Hate that which is evil. Cling to that which is good." (Rom. 12:9) Some things and activities must be avoided: sexual immorality, greed, filthy language, just plain stupid talk, making fun of others, idolatry, etc. -

"You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor, and hate your enemy.' But I tell you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who mistreat you and persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the just and the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Don't even the tax collectors do the same?" (Mat. 5:43-46) 

- and -

"Walk in love, even as Christ also loved you, and gave himself up for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling fragrance. But sexual immorality, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not even be mentioned among you, as becomes saints; nor filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not appropriate; but rather giving of thanks. Know this for sure, that no sexually immoral person, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, has any inheritance in the Kingdom of Christ and God." (Eph. 5:2-5)

As we approach the end and society becomes worse and worse, those who follow Christ and strive to do what is right will come under increasing pressure. People will hate us precisely because we try to love them even when they do ugly and perverse things, but we must endure to the end, keep on loving the sinner while hating the sin:

"You will hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you aren't troubled, for all this must happen, but the end is not yet. For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; and there will be famines, plagues, and earthquakes in various places. But all these things are the beginning of birth pains. Then they will deliver you up to oppression, and will kill you. You will be hated by all of the nations for my name's sake. Then many will stumble, and will deliver up one another, and will hate one another. Many false prophets will arise, and will lead many astray. Because iniquity will be multiplied, the love of many will grow cold. But he who endures to the end, the same will be saved. This gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world for a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come. When, therefore, you see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains." (Mat. 24:6-16)

We must realize that the world has changed radically in our lifetimes, that there's been an inversion of society's value system:

"...we need to recognize that there has been an ideological culture war going on in this country for the last 40 years in an effort to control the path of history and the ultimate shape of American society. Many of the religious leaders have been engaged on the conservative side struggling to at least maintain the status quo. On the liberal side, this war has been spearheaded by Hollywood elites in two major ways: (a) In the messages propagated through the movies and TV programming beamed directly into every living room of every American household and around the world, and (b) through the lifestyles of the Hollywood stars, which the media gossip engines are constantly glamorizing.

"Thus, chipping away constantly on the moral conscience of the nation, they have set us all on a moral slippery slope. Promiscuity and sexual activity outside of marriage have moved on our moral gauge from unacceptable to being the norm. Divorce has become commonplace and a social inevitability for many of us. Substance abuse and addiction are now seen as part of the American lifestyle, and pornography has gradually taken the place of daily entertainment. In the meantime, the concepts of “marriage” and “family” are being drastically reshaped." (Is Gay Marriage Just About Civil Rights?)

People are distorting the Gospel, saying that if we just "love each other," we can do whatever we want. This is "sloppy agape" - phony love. We need to avoid such sloppy thinking that says love means the liberty to live however we choose, indulging our lusts: "For you, brothers, were called to liberty. Only don't use your liberty as an excuse to gratify the flesh, but serve one another through love. For the whole law is fulfilled in one word, in this: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.'" (Gal. 5:13-14)

"For, uttering great swelling words of emptiness, they entice in the lusts of the flesh, by licentiousness, those who are indeed escaping from those who live in error; promising them liberty, while they themselves are bondslaves of corruption; for by whom a man is overcome, by the same is he also brought into bondage. For if, after they have escaped the defilement of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein and overcome, the last state has become worse with them than the first. For it would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after knowing it, to turn back from the holy commandment delivered to them." (2 Pet. 2:18-21)

The Apostle Jude, stepbrother of our Lord Jesus, warned us against such people: "For there are certain people who crept in secretly, even those who were long ago written about for this condemnation: ungodly men, perverting the grace of our God into unbridled lust, and denying our only Master, God, and Lord, Jesus Christ." (Jude 1:4) This is a rather blunt statement: perverting "grace" and "love" into "lust" is a denial of our faith in Christ!

In "What Liberals Get Wrong About the Family" we read:

"Conservatives are wrong to accuse the liberals of relativism. They are not relativists, but have fanatical attachment to certain ideals, which conservatives often fail to understand. One such ideal is autonomy, which guides their entire sexual agenda. As I argue in 'The Obligations of Family Life: A Response to Modern Liberalism,' the Left’s understanding of autonomy does much damage to marriage and family life.

"At first glance, autonomy seems to reflect the traditional American notion that all human beings are created free and equal. For example, everyone believes that marriage begins in the consent of two people and that a married couple should be able to make the most important decisions about their common life without state interference. But autonomy, as today’s liberals understand it, is about a radical form of personal independence: Everything about a truly autonomous individual’s identity must come from their free choice.

"For example, this means one should not be limited by sex or one’s body — both being givens that one did not choose. In fact, nothing besides an individual’s choice should bind him. Should the reasons for a choice become defunct, those choices should not long bind the individual. This understanding of autonomy is in deep conflict with the core experiences of procreation, love and the family. Marriage and family life require unchosen, enduring obligations that autonomy advocates cannot understand."

So we see there's a good version of love, and an evil, twisted version of love. We need to be discerning and discriminate between the two. If we confuse the two, the consequences will be disastrous!

(Linked to www.Hosken-News.info of 02 Jul. 2016.)