Recently, a man approached me with a three-fold statement regarding Christians who work for the government. The first argument was that those in public office were bound by the Constitution in a different way, primarily regarding the First Amendment. Second, this person made the argument that a Christian should step down from their government position if he/she cannot separate their personal beliefs from their responsibilities. Third, he claimed that Christians who work for the government cannot hold non-believing Americans to a biblical standard because Jesus did not condemn people for not holding to His personal beliefs.
Does the Constitution apply to Christians differently?
This man’s argument appears compelling, and all three of these points have become rather prevalent in church culture. But how should we really think about these things?
First, is it true that the Constitution applies in a different way for government employees? Are religious persons employed by the government — whether Christian, Buddhist, or Muslim — obligated to leave their religion at the door when they enter their place of employment? Of course not! The law applies to everyone equally. In 1215, a document was signed titled “The Magna Carta”; it was an influential document during the formation of the United States Constitution. In short, the Magna Carta declared that the king and the people would be held to the same legal standard — the king was not above the people. The entire premise of the American Constitution is that the government operates at the behest of the people; in other words, government officials are not above the Constitution.
Must Christians be religiously neutral as civil servants?
Second, is it true a Christian who cannot remain religiously neutral must step down from government employment? Think about that for a second: Are we really wanting to say this? That if a Christian cannot leave their Christianity at the door of their workplace, they must leave that place of employment? Do we really want an entire government system that is influenced by outright pagans? A pagan system is the result of all biblical Christians who live by a biblical worldview removing themselves from government positions. We, very specifically and historically, have, as a country, pursued Christians to be in government positions. Why? For the very purpose that they would be influenced by God and His Word. That’s why every election cycle Christians throughout America instinctively look for the candidate who upholds a biblical worldview — at least we should be! And now a large swath of the population believes that by being employed by the government, one must be religiously neutral or step aside. According to this thinking, you cannot be a government official if your Christianity is going to influence your life and your job.
This reminds me of when County Clerk Kim Davis, after becoming a Christian, denied multiple marriage licenses, some of which were to same-sex couples. Many Christians said she was out of line and needed to “check her Christianity” at the door, but we would not say the same of our Congressmen when we ask them to formulate law.
If a county clerk can’t apply her Christian faith to denying same-sex marriage licenses, can a Congressman apply his Christian faith to writing laws? I daresay nary a word would be said about a Muslim or a Budhhist who refused to grant a same-sex marriage license based upon their faith. This is truly a standard only American Christians are expected to uphold. Additionally, do we really want all of our government employees to be “religiously neutral”? Well, that’s a trick question because it’s actually impossible. There is no such thing as religious neutrality; everyone believes something, and that something will influence what laws they advocate for or uphold.
If John Adams believed the American people should be “a moral and religious people,” then the government, made up of American citizens who are held to the same standards as civilians, should also be moral and religious people. It is both a perversion of “separation of church and state” and historical ignorance to claim that our Founding Fathers who wrote our Constitution — maybe not entirely based upon personal relationships with Jesus, but at the very least greatly influenced by God’s Word — would require an individual to not live out their Christian beliefs within government service. In point of fact, James Madison wrote, “The religion, then, of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man: and it is the right of every man to exercise it as these may dictate.” A lesser-known founding father, Daniel Webster, wrote that moral habits come only from the foundation of religious principle, and no government can be secure which is not supported by moral habits. I conclude then that our Founding Fathers were directly opposed to a religiously neutral citizenry, civil servant or otherwise.
Would Jesus condemn people?
Third, Jesus wouldn’t condemn people for not holding to His personal beliefs. “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father but through Me” (John 14:6). That sounds a whole lot like, “If you don’t abide by my personal beliefs, you are condemned to eternal separation from God.” Yes, Jesus loved us and died for us while we were yet sinners, but He still condemns the sin and calls us to live lives of righteousness. “But these aren’t Christians, we can’t hold them to Christian standards!” Someone needs to go tell John the Baptist because he was beheaded for holding a pagan king to the standard of God. Oh, and Sodom and Gomorrah. Furthermore, all of our Constitution is the holding of pagans and Christians alike to a law higher than man’s law. The Declaration of Independence has thundered around the globe, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.” The government and the governed are equal, and God has given all men rights that are higher than man’s law and cannot be infringed upon by any government — and one of those rights is the freedom of religion. Not freedom from religion, but freedom of religion.
We are not free from the influence of religion nor free from other people’s religion; we have the freedom to practice religion without the government establishing a religion. That’s it. That’s the whole message. Founding Father Noah Webster wrote, “It is alleged by men of loose principles, or defective views of the subjects, that religion and morality are not necessary or important qualifications for public stations. But the Scriptures teach a different doctrine. They direct that rulers should be men who rule in the fear of God.” Webster went on to declare that neglecting the appointment of Christian men to public office leads to behavior that “tarnishes the character of our country and which disgraces our government.” How true that has proven to be.
Lastly, if more county clerks, such as the much-maligned Kim Davis, and more legislators, had stood up in 2015 and said, “We aren’t recognizing same-sex marriages no matter what man’s law says, because we hold to a higher law,” maybe we wouldn’t have same-sex couples purchasing babies through surrogacy for their degenerate sexual proclivities. And maybe if we had more men, both in and out of office, standing up in 1973 who said, “We aren’t recognizing a right to abortion no matter what man’s law says, because we hold to a higher law,” just maybe 60 million innocent lives would have been spared.
— Hannah Miller and her husband reside in Inman, S.C., where she homeschools their five children. She is a North Greenville University graduate, biblically trained counselor, and former radio talk show host. Currently, she stays busy teaching horse riding lessons, hosting a podcast titled “The Hannah Miller Show,” and serving as a member of Ridgewood Church in Greer.