Religious Liberty

After today's lesson in EQ, I thought I'd add a few external thoughts.

First, from Joseph Smith:

“The Saints can testify whether I am willing to lay down my life for my brethren. If it has been demonstrated that I have been willing to die for a ‘Mormon,’ I am bold to declare before Heaven that I am just as ready to die in defending the rights of a Presbyterian, a Baptist, or a good man of any other denomination; for the same principle which would trample upon the rights of the Latter-day Saints would trample upon the rights of the Roman Catholics, or of any other denomination who may be unpopular and too weak to defend themselves.

“It is a love of liberty which inspires my soul—civil and religious liberty to the whole of the human race. Love of liberty was diffused into my soul by my grandfathers while they dandled me on their knees. …

“If I esteem mankind to be in error, shall I bear them down? No. I will lift them up, and in their own way too, if I cannot persuade them my way is better; and I will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning, for truth will cut its own way.”

Then I saw a very cool article in the Wall Street Journal:

"[Madison] believed that the main reason to have separation of church and state was to help religion. He came to this view in part because of an unusual but crucial alliance he built with evangelical Christians of his day... They believed that not only was government repression bad but so was government help. Madison agreed and worked hand in hand with the evangelicals to press this point. In a crucial document called the Memorial and Remonstrance, Madison integrated the arguments of the Enlightenment intellectuals with the arguments of the evangelicals to create something much greater. Separating church and state would be better for both state and church.

This may be a concept that's a bit jarring to modern culture warriors. We've come to think that if you're pro religion you must surely want government to play a greater role in promoting religion. And if you're in favor of separation of church and state that you must want to reduce religion's role.

Madison and his evangelical allies had a completely different concept. They wanted to promote religion. They just believed that the best way to promote religion was for government to leave it alone.

This basic approach has made America one of the most religiously free and religiously vibrant nations in the world.

That last sentence reminds me of a podcast on Econtalk with Larry Iannoccone I heard awhile back. He talked about how in the US we have somewhat of an entrepreneurial approach to religion, and that accounts for a lot of why we have so much more church attendance than other countries. If you have a state-sponsored church, the effect will be a limited number of other churches from which people can choose. The fewer choices, the more likely a given choice won't be what you want. Obviously, the less satisfied you are with the religious service, the less likely you are to attend or participate. On the other hand, if you "let a thousand flowers bloom", there is a better chance that someone will come up with a religious experience that suits you, increasing the likelihood of your involvement.

The freedom to worship as we please really has made us quite a "religiously vibrant" nation. And for that I'm grateful.