Essay Example on Church and State: Two Separate Entities

The church and state are two entities with different objectives, and they should be treated as such. In the recent past, President Donald Trump has promised to restore the place of religion in society. However, the constitution has outlined clearly that the state should not favor any religious body; neither will it make any law interfering with the freedom of worship. In the past, the joining of church and state brought persecution and killings of many people by religious bodies like the Roman Catholic Church. Therefore, President Donald Trump may have good reasons for the inclusion of church and previous decisions to separate past experiences, and facts may have also informed the two bodies. Thus, separation of church and state has many effects on both the state and the church

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Thomas Jefferson was the first to use the term separation of church and state in his letter to Danbury Baptist Association in 1802. Bennett (2019) says that America was established by people who were running away from religious persecution in France and Germany. The immigrants found land in America, where they could worship without any interference. Therefore, when the immigrants came to the United States of America, they decided to make laws which will not interfere with the freedom of worship. According to Bennett (2019), article six of the first amendment of the constitution says that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Separation of church and state narrows down the religious beliefs to individuals' beliefs. Miserandino (2019) says that before the separation of church and state, the country made laws on how people should worship and what they should believe. Thus, people prayed what the church and the state wanted but not what they wanted. Therefore, people were sad and questioned the belief system. Miserandino (2019) argues that with the separation of church and state, the government cannot make any law that dictates how people should worship. Therefore, whatever someone believes is informed and fulfilling.

People are elected in the public office because of their capabilities rather than through divine appointment. In the past, many prophets arose and claimed that a particular person is a leader. While this may be true to some extent, some people took advantage of the belief and elect incompetent leaders. According to Sortino (2017), sometimes people elected through divine appointment could have bad leadership until people started to question the divine appointment theory. The separation of the church allows people to be chosen in offices because of their leadership qualities and not because of their religious affiliation. Also, people could not hold a public office in the past if they did not have any religious affiliation, no matter their leadership skills. Thanks to the constitution, any person can hold a public office.

Through the separation of church and state, the country can make its own decision without consulting the church. In the past, the government had to ask the religious bodies affiliated to it before making any decision. Miserandino (2019) comments that the church could not approve any resolution that was against its beliefs. For example, the church could not support issues like birth control and the death sentence. Currently, the government can make a law that it sees fit for its citizens. However, this separation of church and state seems to be losing power in the current government. For example, Donald trump banning homosexuals from joining the military is an act favoring the church Hodson (2017). It is the church that defines homosexuality, and any action revolving such a subject supports the church.

Separation of church and state gives room for personal choice. The law allows any person to join any registered religion as long as it respects human life. The government censors no person because of joining a particular religion. Also, the person is allowed to participate in religious activities according to their church. This freedom has not always existed in the country. Before the separation of the two institutions, the church and state banned people from joining certain religions. Hodson (2017) argues that the only religion that was allowed was Roman Catholic. The church termed many faiths as a cult, and people who joined them were persecuted.

Separation of church and state enables the criminalization of any violence committed to an individual by the church leadership. A church member or any other person has the right to report to the court of law any crime committed to them by the church. Priest and other leaders have been accused of rape cases and other forms of abuse. Bennett (2019) comments the court takes such matters seriously, and they are punishable regardless of who has committed the crime. The court separates the accused from their leadership position and treats them as a suspect. When there was no separation of church and state, the priests and other church leaders occupied positions in the government, such as in the court and the police service. Therefore, it became hard for people to report any violence since they will find the same people that abused those holding offices.

Separation of church and state allows people to exercise their freedom of speech. The law gives people the freedom to speak freely on any matter as long as it does not infringe on other human rights. People can, therefore, criticize the church and point out any issue which they feel is not right. For example, if an individual thinks that the church is in error or that it is violating human rights, one is at liberty to say. Miserandino (2019) comments People were not allowed to say anything against the church in the past. Anyone who went against the church was considered as heretics, and they were punished by burning, throwing them to caged wild animals, or hanging in public squares.

The separation will ensure that the state will not support the church in punishing religious offenders. Due to the separation of the two organizations, each can make their own rules, and the other party will not interfere with the decision. The state will not support the church to punish or persecute people who do not follow specific rules. Throughout history, the church has used the state as a tool to punish and persecute those individuals who not follow certain religious practices. Hodson (2017) notes that the church uses the government to make laws that will favor its agendas. For example, the upcoming meeting between the pope and world leaders is against the constitution. The gap and the responsibility of the two institutions are getting weaker.

The separation allows the family institution to make its own decision on how to worship and raise children. Without the use of the law by the church to teach children in schools, families can form their faith based on reasoning. According to Hodson (2017), the children will not be punished in school for not saying the creed, nor will the families be prosecuted for not allowing their children to attend the mass. Also, the separation gives the family the full responsibility of knowing what their children will believe. The idea is against the past, where children were supposed to attend all religious rites.

On the other hand, the separation of church and state has affected the functioning of the two institutions. The government can take advantage of the separation to make unjust laws. Due to the fear of divine judgment, the church ensures that the law favors human life and dignity. Sortino (2017), comments that When the church is exemplified from the process, the government is left to make laws which may be harmful to human beings. For example, the church has put more effort to fight against abortion laws. When you compare between church and state, the church is likely to make fair laws than the state. The theory is due to the fear of a supreme being who hates evil.

The church can also take advantage of the separation to influence its members against the state. When there is a separation of the two institutions, each organization is left to rule their members. According to the constitution, each person has the right to practice their religious beliefs, either privately or publicly Miserandino (2019). When the government makes a law that goes against the church, it becomes hard to implement because the church can influence its members not to support such legislation. For example, Catholics may influence their church members to oppose the government's advice of using birth control methods. When such a thing happens, the government becomes handcuffed because the constitution allows people to exercise their faith.

The separation of church and state is a limitation to personal freedom. Due to this separation, an individual is forced to choose their allegiance between the church and the nation. A Christian public officer cannot maintain his job while he still professes to be a Christian. The thing that goes on in a public office requires one to take sides, and each decision has its consequences. Hodson (2017) argues that the separation of church and state means that the state functions as a separate entity, and no religious body or belief should interfere with its functioning. Thus, a public officer is forced to put their religion down when in a public office, especially during decision making. For example, a catholic will have a hard time implementing a birth control policy, as suggested by the government.

Separating church and state encourages permissiveness in society. There is a sharp difference between the current community and the society where there was no separation of church and state. Nowadays, society is full of people who do not care about others. Hodson (2017) explains how in the early years, children were taught in public and in private schools on how to behave, how to treat each other with respect, and how to live in peace as the teacher pointed them to a loving God who wanted them to live happily. After the separation of church and state, the responsibility of teaching children some Christian values was left with the family. Bennett (2019) explains that the marriage ties are not as strong as before due to divorce and busy life seen in today' s society. Therefore, parents have not time to order their children in the right way. Thus there is a lot of lawlessness in the community since there is no one to direct people on the right path.

The constitution does not clearly explain what the separation of the two institutions means, thus leaving a lot of loopholes. Sortino (2017), argue that the law clearly shows that there is a separation of power and state. They take advantage of the clause to prevent the church from participating in public affairs. The separation of church and state was included in the constitution to protect the church. Therefore, there is no actual separation between the two institutions. Thus the church can still participate in public affairs.

Conclusion

In summary, the paper has discussed the impact pf the separation of church and state. in the early years, people suffered in the hands of the church and state as the church used the government to punish those who opposed her. When these religious freedom fighters immigrate to America, they ensured to, first of all, make a rule that will protect them from religious persecution, and that marked the beginning of the separation of church and state. Since then, the separation has enabled people to worship freely without persecution, to report any abuse for religious leaders, and raise to join a religion that supports their faith. On the other hand, the separation of the two institutions has resulted in the exploitation of power and a reckless society.

Works Cited

Bennett, John C. Christ...