The Fragile Gift of Religious Liberty

A vivid example comes from Virginia. In the 18th century, Anglicanism dominated the colony and pushed back against groups like the Baptists. Baptist preachers were whipped, fined, and even imprisoned for preaching the Gospel. Their congregations gathered outside the jail to hear sermons through the window, because the imprisoned pastor could speak even when the people could not.

Patrick Henry defended these preachers. James Madison and Thomas Jefferson later played crucial roles in securing religious liberty in Virginia.

It was in these real lived experiences that the seed of religious freedom would begin to grow.

The framing of Religious Freedom

The Constitution of 1787 mentions religion only once: it prohibits religious tests for federal officeholders. Several states continued religious tests well into the 19th century.

Religious liberty came with the Bill of Rights in 1791:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

This language was stronger than earlier drafts that affirmed toleration. Toleration implies permission; liberty implies protection. Madison understood the difference and strengthened the wording accordingly.

The phrase “separation of church and state” does not appear in the Bill of Rights. The founders did not use it.

It comes from Thomas Jefferson’s 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptist Association. The Baptists congratulated Jefferson on his election but lamented that Connecticut denied them full religious freedom. Jefferson reassured them that Congress would not interfere with religious expression, describing a “wall of separation.”

A strong argument can be made that Jefferson was protecting the church from the government, not excluding religious influence from society.

Jefferson’s metaphor faded from public memory until 1947, when the Supreme Court resurrected it in Everson v. Board of Education. The Court ruled that reimbursing bus fare for parochial school students did not violate the Establishment Clause, but incorporated the clause to the states through the 14th Amendment.

This dramatically shifted the meaning of “separation of church and state,” leading courts and politicians to read into the Bill of Rights what was not there: that religious people should be sidelined in public life.

I believe that the founders were largely protecting the church from the government, creating a space where true religious liberty could thrive.

Modern errors regarding religious liberty

The experiment in freedom is still on-going. It must be continually reaffirmed, which means we must deal seriously with challenges to freedom, especially religious freedom.

Error #1: Sidelining People of Faith

Some argue the founders intended to remove religion from public life. Others claim all founders were deists. One historian even stated publicly that in no way was American founded on Christian principles.

But history is more complex. While the founders were not seeking a theocracy, religious thought was the air they breathed in the late 18th century. All of them would have been deeply influenced by the King James Bible (the primary text from which most of them would have learned to read), and it is estimated that one-third of all the quotes that they used in their writings came from the Bible.[1] Certainly the principles of freedom would have been born, at least in part, from their biblical reading.

Even the Declaration of Independence contains theological underpinnings:

“All men are created equal… endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights.”

While not explicitly Christian, they are making a profoundly theological argument that people are created and fashioned by a Creator, from whom came certain rights.

The founders freely used religious imagery and wording. Rev. Jacob Duche prayed at the Continental Congress. Franklin, Adams, and Jefferson proposed biblical imagery, including Moses dividing the Red Sea, for the national seal.

We should not be embarrassed to use religious language or symbolism in service to our nation. As people of faith, we can and should use our voice to be people of influence in the leading of our nation.

Error #2: Fusing Church and State (real Christian Nationalism)

The phrase “Christian Nationalism” is rarely defined and is often used as a scare tactic—applied broadly to describe basic conservative beliefs, especially on issues like abortion or marriage. This watered‑down use of the term actually obscures the real danger and gives cover to movements that truly seek to fuse Christianity and politics into a theocracy.

Real Christian nationalism is something different entirely. It advocates for a civil government explicitly ruled by Scripture, with the state enforcing religious doctrine as law. This is far from the founders’ vision. Historically, Christian theocracies have led to oppression, particularly of religious minorities, and have damaged both church and state.

For many who drift toward this ideology, the motivation may begin sincerely. They long for a moral society. They fear the rapid decline of Christian ideals in public life. But fusing church and state is not the answer. Whenever the state attempts to enforce belief or morality, both institutions become corrupted.

Vibrant Christianity needs no help from the state. Coerced morality never produces genuine faith, and coerced belief never produces lasting transformation. The answer is not more governmental control; the answer is a free, faithful, and spiritually alive church. Religious liberty creates the space where the Gospel can flourish, not through compulsion but through conviction.

The Gospel and the Republic

We should be thankful for the providence of God in raising up the founding generation and for the freedoms they secured. Those religious liberties have provided space for the growth of the church in America and the spread of the Gospel throughout the world. We do not ignore the nation’s failures, but we recognize God’s grace in what He has allowed to flourish.

But our ultimate allegiance is not to the state, but to God.

We should steward our freedom to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ to our nation and to the nations. The American experiment has provided unusual space for this mission, but it is not the source of our hope.

“If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.”

This is the hope we proclaim, not the hope of a nation, but the hope of the Gospel: the risen Christ.


[2] https://www.cslewisinstitute.org/resources/the-bible-and-the-american-founders