What is Religious Liberty?
“Religious liberty” refers to the concept and principle that individuals have the right to freely choose, practice, and express their religious beliefs without interference or coercion from the government, institutions, or other individuals. It encompasses the idea that every person has the freedom to follow their own religious convictions, or to choose not to adhere to any religion, without facing discrimination, persecution, or legal penalties.
Key aspects of religious liberty include:
The Basic Premise of Religious Liberty – God does not force Himself on others
As the nation of Israel was being founded, Moses commanded his hearers:
19 I call heaven and earth as witnesses today against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore choose life, that both you and your descendants may live; 20 that you may love the Lord your God, that you may obey His voice, and that you may cling to Him…
Deuteronomy 30 :19-20
Genuine worship can never be coerced. The unified message of the 66 books of the Bible written by 40 authors, is that God invites us to come to Him. Nowhere is there a hint that He forces himself on others or that His people should do likewise. The reality is that forced faith is not faith at all. Forced faith produces outwards observances but does nothing to change the inward heart condition of a person. God is all about the heart condition, the root, the inner workings, not the external observances, rituals, words said to impress others, demonstrations of piety etc.
His universal appeal throughout all history is that He loves us, wants the best for us, and wants us to opt-in to become part of His family for all eternity. He presents His appeal and leaves us to choose. This is not to say His appeal isn’t strong (John 3: 16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life), but it’s always down to our free will to choose.
Liberty and Suffering – Understanding Why is there so much Suffering in the World
It can be argued there’s a flip side to this approach. One aspect of us being made in the image of God is our ability to have free will and to choose, to reason and respond. If we were however programmed only to follow the will of our creator, it wouldn’t be possible for us to respond to Him in love, to choose Him. It’s like the difference between a forced marriage, and a marriage where a man and a woman have fallen in love and have chosen to commit to each other, unconditionally. The flip side of our given free will is that what happens in the world, by and large, is the result of human choice. When people make bad choices, bad things happen. If on the other hand God didn’t respect the free will He has given us, He would be constantly overriding people’s choices with His divine intervention. Consider the command to, “love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength” (Deuteronomy 6:4). With this in mind, the majority of us wouldn’t even make it out of bed in the morning before having our wills over-ridden.
Jesus exemplified religious liberty during His earthly ministry. Jesus spoke many things that were hard to accept because their meaning and fulfilment would only become apparent following His death and resurrection. One instant is recorded in the Gospel of John whereby many of His wider followers left Him. Jesus freely let them do this. There was no emotional tirade, no compulsion, no threats of revenge. Jesus even asked His own 12 disciples, “do you also want to go away?”. In response the Apostle Peter said, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life” (John 6:68-69).
The reality is that forced faith is not faith at all.
The Devine Intention of Government
The Bible is clear that authority structures on Earth are necessary and are appointed by God. These structures are there to enforce the rule of law, and to provide a framework so that all can prosper. These structures are not intended to be independent of God, but rather subject to Him. The Apostle Paul, writing to the church in Rome during the Roman period stated:
1 Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. 4 For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil. 5 Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath but also for conscience’ sake. 6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for they are God’s ministers attending continually to this very thing.
Romans 13: 1-6, Submit to Government
The key here is that governments are to be “God’s ministers” (minster is another word for servant) who execute God’s laws and standards in the land. So, we are to be subject to all authorities as they are a type of representative or worker from God.
However, where governments do not consider themselves subject to God, the norm is for some level of interference in the life of the individual that is not sanctioned by Him. This interference can be in varying degrees, from over taxation and stifling of free enterprise, to programs of de-Christianisation and restricting religious liberties, through to utter dominance (inc. imprisonment, murder) as per communist states. At whatever level of interference, the Christian is to pay honour and respect, to value the perpetrator as ones made in the image of God, but also to speak forth truth and reason as a means of pulling governments back in line with God’s ideal. Additionally, when governments break their God-ordained mandate to govern with His laws and be in subjugation to Him, it is God, not the government who is to be obeyed.
In the West, we have entered an accelerated period of increasing interference by Governments. The mere prospect of this was virtually inconceivable only a few decades ago. Religious liberty, biased against the Christian tradition is advancing with militant vigour.
Separation of Church and State
During Jesus’ ministry on Earth, religious and political elites of the day tried to trap Jesus with their questioning. One such example was regarding whether taxes should be paid to the State or not:
17 Tell us, therefore, what do You think? Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?”
18 But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, “Why do you test Me, you hypocrites? 19 Show Me the tax money.”
So they brought Him a denarius.
20 And He said to them, “Whose image and inscription is this?”
21 They said to Him, “Caesar’s.”
And He said to them, “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” 22 When they had heard these words, they marvelled, and left Him and went their way.
Matthew 22 :17-21
Here, Jesus made the point that there is a heavenly or spiritual realm (often referred to as the Kingdom of God in the Gospels) and there is an earthly realm, governed by a Caesar. Dues are to be paid to the State, and likewise, “the things that are God’s” are to be paid or rendered to God. The point being the two realms are distinct.
Furthermore, the two are separate and yet the earthly kingdom is subject to the heavenly kingdom because its endowed power is only by delegation. This lesson is fleshed out Jesus during His trial by Pontious Pilate prior to His crucifixion:
10 Then Pilate said to Him, “Are You not speaking to me? Do You not know that I have power to crucify You, and power to release You?” 11 Jesus answered, “You could have no power at all against Me unless it had been given you from above. Therefore the one who delivered Me to you has the greater sin.”
John 19:10-11
This principle of a healthy separation has served us very well in the West. It has prevented governments from having absolute control (tyranny) and from the Church becoming corrupted from the outside by those seeking positions of power and influence. If both Government and Church are rightly aligned with the intentions of the created order, both will flourish, and societies will prosper. History has many examples of states that have held this balance, respected religious liberty and have prospered as a result. The United States in the last century is a prominent example.
Understanding & Respecting the God-Given Spheres of Authority
That the State is answerable to God is fundamental. In the 2023 coronation of King Charles III the ceremony is opened with the declaration:
Your Majesty, as children of the kingdom of God we welcome you in the name of the King of Kings
The Coronation Order of Service.pdf (royal.uk)
(the King replies…)
In his name and after his example I come not to be served but to serve
Given that the UK State in practice has adopted secular beliefs, the above declaration may have felt uneasy for many. This is especially so as we are decades into a de-Christianisation program as homage is paid to the ideology of multiculturalism. However, given the ceremony is typically a once-in-a-lifetime event and that there is no opportunity to make small, virtually unnoticeable changes over time, the wording has nonetheless been conserved. Plus, we have to assume the threat of controversy of meddling with such deep heritage also scared off attempts at secularisation.
So, given the Created Order and the divine intention, the State is rightly answerable to God. If the State believes it is not answerable to God then that’s when the abuses start. There can be severalfold reasons why a State doesn’t consider itself answerable to God, that God doesn’t exist being one example, but primarily it is the adoption that the State considers its thinking as superior and liberating. These abuses can be gradual as per what we are seeing in the West, or somewhat instantaneous as per the communist revolutions of the twentieth century.
The Necessity of Respecting the Authority of the Family Unit
In addition to government authority structures, other divinely ordained structures exist. Primarily, these are:
The authority of the Church institution is to be more along the lines of holding out guiding principles to be wilfully adopted by those of the Christian faith rather than a dominating, “do this” or “do that” governance. Agreed, starting from the third century onwards there have been many aberrations of this as Church institutions were elevated to positions of power and those from the outside entered in to benefit from the levels of control they could impose on their subjects. The history of Papal Europe is a classic example. However, we would argue the strongest of all authority structures secondly only to the divine rule, is that of the family. The implication therefore is that societies that respect religious freedom also respect the authority structure of the family and do not seek to impose on it.
The blueprint of the family unit
Genesis is the Biblical book of blueprints. In Genesis 2:24 we read that, A man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. Marriage is the joining of a man and woman to form a new entity, a new unit. Elsewhere in the Bible there are numerous references to the importance of the family authority structure. Even the 10 Commandments Exodus references the family unit, “Honor your father and your mother” Exodus 20:12. Its importance is implied as this commandment is grouped with “do not murder”, “do not give false testimony”, “do not steal” etc.
What this means specifically is that parents are the final authority over their children. This comes with great responsibility as this means it is the parent’s responsibility to bring up their children in love, in safety, to provide for them, to foster an environment in which they can thrive. What it doesn’t mean is that the State can usurp control and overrule parental authority. As with all authority structures, there is a blending of divisions so the matter isn’t a “one size fits all” approach. With regards to governments, the Biblical instruction is to give them honour unless they start to deviate from their divine mandate to rule within the confines of Biblical teaching (as “God’s ministers”). A Christian cannot therefore take up issue with the State if he or she is reprimanded for stealing. But a Christian can take up issue with the State if it says you can’t go to Church on Sunday. The same blending of divisions is true of family. If a child is in an abusive home and their very existence is under threat, a civilised society with Christian roots would rightly remove that child from the environment if all other initiatives have failed. But, if the State dictates you can’t remove your child from school classes that invite them to explore all manner of sexual experimentations, there is then a conflict with the divine order and the family authority is right to bring a challenge. In such cases, the State should rightly back down.
The Marxist Attack on Religious Liberty via the Attack on Family
As we have written elsewhere (TAG link to New Marxism), our institutions in the West are slowly but surely being taken over by New Marxism. The process is like the proverbial frog that is placed in a pan of water on a stove whereby the realisation of what is really going on only comes at a point that the frog’s options are limited.
On the political left, there have been decades of smearing of the nuclear family (father, mother, plus children). Political parties that have been historically on the right have, under the great pressure of leftist-aligned media and the desire to put votes ahead what is right, have quietly gone along with the narrative. The phrase, “families come in all shapes and sizes” is part of the subtle messaging that seeks to normalize family” life away from that of the nuclear family.
What’s the connection with Karl Marx? In the Marxism playbook, decay of the family is to be brought about by intentional planning (aka social engineering). Karl Marx stated in the Theses on Feuerbach that, “the earthly family is discovered as the secret of the holy family, the former must itself be theoretically and practically destroyed’. In other words, he thought that if you are going to move people away from commitment to God, the most effective way to do that was to target and destroy the family. In, “How the West Really Lost God: A New Theory of Secularization” (Mary Eberstadt, 2013), the point is expertly made, backed by hard data, that as the family collapses, as fathers become absent, as there is a decay in the life of the family, people stop believing in God.
In conclusion then, given the globalist embrace of Marxist thought, the family is being intentionally attacked and this is, by implication, an assault on our religious freedom.
Multiculturalism and Religious liberty
In the name of multiculturalism, as a means of promoting pluralistic and relativistic thought (“your truth”) there is a shutting down of religious debate under the banner of “hate” speech. Where debate is not shut down, biases are permitted or even openly encouraged. Given the climate of Marxist thought, culture is being conditioned into being increasingly pro-Islam. By permitting Islamist causes (e.g. aggressive public displays of support for militant Islamists via the guise of human rights abuses or similar), or possibly even preferring Islamic immigration, States and public bodies are normalising the West away from our heritage founded on Judeo-Christian values.
To the liberal elites, it is a horror to consider that a Christian would engage in debate with those of other faiths with a view to “proselytising”. This really is hypocrisy of the highest order. Consider the very existence of academic liberals. That they are able to freely think and debate is as a result of a Christian heritage. Those supporting Judeo-Christian values are to keep quiet and shouldn’t seek to change others. Whereby the liberals have given themselves permission to, “challenge and inform” according to their doctrine. This is often funded by the taxpayer who is not always in agreement with them. Frequently where they cannot convince, perhaps because of their defiance of science and logic (e.g. a person’s gender is governed by what the individual says he or she is, not by their biological sex), the pattern is that they seek to shut down the debate (aka cancel culture) or subversively lobby government with the help of globalist billionaire donors to get the statute books changed.
Hearing from the Other Side – Vishal Mangalwadi
Vishal Mangalwadi is an Indian convert to Christianity who became aware of the tremendous positive impact that Christianity had on the West. He argues that “A state that hinders conversion is uncivilised because it restricts the human quest for truth and reform” (Vishal and Ruth Mangalwadi, Carey, Christ and Cultural Transformation, Authentic, 1997, p67). In another book, he relays the thoughts of another friend, “Ro” who came to Christianity after a brutal religious upbringing in North East India:
Ro believes that only exceptionally callous people would say that his tribe should have been left alone in its (imagined) “pristine way of lie”.
The Book that Made your World: How the Bible Created the Soul of Western Civilization, Thomas Nelson, 2011, p358
The doctrine of religious pluralism says that all paths lead to God and that all faiths are equally valid. This value is an essential tenant in the methodology to de-Christianise the West and is simply not the truth.
Is Neutrality of Belief Possible for a State or Political Structure?
Many in the West would hold the view that as we embrace secularism and move away from our Christian tradition, that we are forming governments and institutions that are religiously neutral. What in the World is Going On and our fellow thinkers believe it is impossible for any institution not to have a set of beliefs from which their out workings flow. If we take away the belief that all people are made in the image of God and that we are answerable to him, the State will sooner or later want to assume the role of being your (almighty) guardian.
You cannot have an absence of beliefs. Secularism for example, is a belief system. The EU, UN, WHO, State political parties etc. all have their belief sets that they have generated to propagate their ideals. This apparent neutrality of belief has plunged the West into some of its greatest moral challenges. Liberals would argue that school children as young as five need to be taught to question their gender identity within school, paid for by public taxes. They would argue that the scientific fact of biological sex is oppressive and that if we dare to speak up against this, we are bigots. The values of the UN and WHO support this. Words fail to describe the level of abusive harm minority groups, supported by intranational institutions, are subjecting our children to as the State (in the main) turns the other way.
Furthermore, militant secularists are demanding that legislation is made against the Christian message such that people cannot be called to repentance as it is deemed “abusive” that someone is asked to change their ways away from their self-imposed, “identity”. These requests are not from minority groups in North Korea or some third world socialist-leaning state, these are coming from nations in the West. These requests are supported by IDE doctrines that promise tolerance to believe anything you like so long as it lines up with their beliefs. Similar to Henry Ford’s comment about Model-T customer choices, “Any customer can have a car painted any colour that he wants so long as it’s black” – it’s no choice at all. No need to expound on the hypocrisy integral to liberal IDE values, it’s in plain sight for many. If nothing else, this concludes that the supposed neutrality of belief embraced by the West is anything but neutral.
Western Christianity has not got involved in the direct affairs of the State for decades. Often, the thinking was that Christians shouldn’t get involved in politics. Given the intrusion into Church life by the State, the Church now has to regroup to preserve her religious liberty otherwise we will end up as per the majority of States around the world. This time, Christians need to do a much better job of opposing secularisation and paganisation that than of their 1930s German predecessors. In our favour this time is that the current approach taken is a gentler fascism (more about words and less about violence, but no less hateful), executed with a slowly-slowly does it approach. We have to effectively mobilise now to turn the tide before the present fascism-lite lifts its mask to execute its will via force and law-making to get the non-aligned masses (aka the “deplorables” once referred to by the American political Left) to comply.