Separation Between Church And State

The separation between church and state is a debate that continues to grow with tension as the culture of America rapidly polarizes. A long-standing claim that America was founded on Christian doctrine is a common argument in favor of the church and state to remain together, yet the most commonly used metaphor explaining what the “Separation of Church and State” contextually means in today’s terms is simply that government and religion should not coincide with one another in any capacity. Evidence of this is true today with pre-game prayer being removed from the beginning of school sanctioned sporting events, and churches denying the censorship of doctrinal belief by the government. The ideas of Roger Williams were the first to challenge

Roger Williams was one of the first men to place a definition on what these elements of freedom meant in a modern day understanding. He believed that all men should be free to express his religion under no limitations nevertheless he extended this idea of founding Providence, Rhode Island, which was the first government in the western world to bestow absolute religious freedom (Barry, 24). What makes William’s position interesting on church and state is that he was a disciplined Puritan Minister when he moved to Boston however he was also “America’s first rebel” (Barry, 24). He challenged the belief that the government’s authority was set in place by God, and declared that the people were not created to serve the government, but the government was created to serve the people (Barry, 24). Williams was adamant in keeping the church pure by rejecting that the government should be an adversary to the church. This situation demands a human judgment, which to Williams meant that an imperfect person cannot judge a perfect God. When politics begin to use religion as a means of authority the religion loses the core principles that construct its theology. Williams had first-hand experience with this issue when he lived in England for that is why he sailed to Boston.

In addition to his recognition for tolerance in a diverse setting, Derek Davis points out that he also heavily acknowledged that civility is the key to humans coexisting under a simple frame of honorable laws (692). Civility doubles as the unwavering foundation that humans build their relationships upon, and a humility that sustains a cooperative attitude in society. In summary, all of the ethical similarities, humans have with one another are a conduit to advancing “the common good” (Davis, 692). Williams concluded “that human beings have a natural capacity for civility”, and that “Civility is a subset of that natural morality with which God endows all human beings...” (693). His conclusion contradicted the well-known Puritan John Cotton’s, who believed that only Protestant Christians were capable of operating in a civil manner. Williams widened the doors to civility by including non-Christians as a group that can share the same values as everyone else. He theologically believed that salvation only came through Christ, yet understood “that one did not need to be a religious person to be a good moral citizen” (Davis, 694). A society that grows in diversity must be willing to become more tolerant of the differences between one another so that civility can be maintained, if not, the consequences can range from social persecution to genocide. Williams knew