Wall of Misconception: Does the Separation of Church and State Mean the Separation of God and Government?

by Peter A. Lillback

How often have you heard it stated on TV, in the press, or by an acquaintance that the wall of separation between church and state are words taken right out of the US Constitution? In fact, the First Amendment to the Constitution - what is popularly referred to as the establishment clause, the only part of the US Constitution that even deals with religion and faith contains no reference whatsoever to a wall of separation, or, for that matter, any sort of wording including the phrase separation of church and state. The only words in the US Constitution concerning this topic are found in the First Amendment, where it is Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof... That s it. Yet these sixteen words have been elaborately interpreted by some as having a meaning that has no basis in the founders intentions or historic record. Where then has this mountain of contention come from, resulting in a wall of misconception between church and state, and indeed between God and government? The phrase wall of separation was coined by Thomas Jefferson in his private 1802 letter of response to the Danbury Baptist Association, wherein he reaffirmed the federal government s intention to protect the public s rights of conscience to believe and practice their faith without fear of interference from government. Several prominent citizens rights organizations will contend that this purported wall is being routinely breached by people of faith, yet others will assert that any action by the government to impede an individual s right to pray in school or at a public event, to display a Christmas tree in public or to say one nation under God in the Pledge of Allegiance is itself a violation of the First Amendment. In Wall of Misconception, Dr. Peter Lillback examines our nation's historic understanding of and the founding fathers intention in the relationship of our Constitution to matters of faith, ethics, and morals, taking into account the historical and biblical context as well as the concept s relation to today s culture. This is both the layman's and professional's definitive guide to the separation of church and state and, indeed, the separation of God and government.

Genres: History, Politics

207 pages, Paperback

First published October 1, 2007

About the author

Peter A. Lillback is an American theologian who serves as President and Professor of Historical Theology and Church History at Westminster Theological Seminary in Pennsylvania. He is also President of the Providence Forum and a senior editor at Unio cum Christo. Ordained in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, he holds credentials as a teaching elder in the Presbyterian Church in America. Lillback earned degrees from Cedarville University, Dallas Theological Seminary, and Westminster Theological Seminary. He is the author of George Washington’s Sacred Fire.

Reviews

[Jerry · Rating 4 out of 5]

For those wondering why the words of the Bible and prayers to God the Father of Jesus Christ are all over the public history and historical documents of our nation, this is a good resource. The founding fathers believed in separation of state and church which is very different from separation of state and religion.

[Stan Crader · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book began as a letter from Dr. Lillback to another minister regarding Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists. And it reads as such. It's a very direct explanation of Jefferson's intention with the letter, which is much different than is espoused today. Read this book regardless of your view of faith and government.

[Vicky · Rating 5 out of 5]

The information presented in this book ought to be put back into all of our schools' curriculum. What did our founders want for our nation, what were they trying to prevent? These questions are paramount to understanding how our current government should rule. Thank you, Dr Lillback, for discussing the meaning of our 1st Amendment. Liberty means so much more that our individual desire to choose for our selves. It demands that our government not make those decisions for us. It is because of the Judeo-Christian concept of free will, the endowment from our creator that we be given the ability to choose to worship that creator or worship other things, our founders wanted us, the citizens of the United States, to have the ability to make that same choice of our own free will. The Europe their fathers left was a land where many were forced to bow to the will of a king, or confess Christianity or die. As this book demonstrates, our founders were careful to allow all to worship as they may, be it Presbyterian, Baptist, Catholic, etc. It was also good to read how our founders were also aware that a moral citizenship would be necessary for the Republic. Without a people personally bound to a code of ethics, such as the 10 Commandments, the Republic would and will fail. Thank you, Dr Lillback, for compiling this book. It remains necessary as much now as when it was first written.

[Tom · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dr. Lillback did thorough research in providing lengthy quotes and passages from many founding fathers. There is no doubt that these men understood the standard upon which our nation needed to be built. Even so, I didn’t always agree with his conclusions. For example, putting the 10 Commandments out in the public square as an expression of some type of civil religion seems to be a misapplication of the law. In short, you can’t have the second table of the law without the first table. Foundational to the outworking Of the Law In commands 5-10 is the inworking of laws 1-4 in the hearts. This can only be done by regenerate people.