Free to Believe: The Battle Over Religious Liberty in America

by Luke Goodrich

2019 Book of the Year - The Gospel Coalition (Public Theology & Current Events)  2019 Book of the Year - WORLD Magazine (Understanding America)     A leading religious freedom attorney, the veteran of several Supreme Court battles, helps people of faith understand religious liberty in our rapidly changing culture--why it matters, how it is threatened, and how to respond with confidence and grace.

Many Christians and others are concerned about rising threats to religious freedom. They feel the culture changing around them, and they fear that their beliefs will soon be marginalized as a form of bigotry. Others, younger Christians in particular, are tired of the culture wars, and they wonder whether courtroom battles are truly worthwhile, or even in line with the teachings of Jesus. Luke Goodrich offers a reasoned, balanced, gospel-centered approach to religious freedom. He applies biblical understanding to a number of the most hot-button cultural issues of our day. He also offers practical steps Christians can take to respond to religious freedom conflicts in an informed, responsible, and graceful way.

Genres: Politics, Christian, Nonfiction, Religion, Law, History, Christianity

288 pages, Kindle Edition

First published October 22, 2019

About the author

Luke Goodrich is a nationally recognized expert on religious freedom, winner of multiple Supreme Court victories, and frequent commentator in the national media. He currently works as the vice president and senior counsel at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, where he has won four Supreme Court victories for clients like the Little Sisters of the Poor and Hobby Lobby. He frequently discusses religious freedom on networks such as Fox News, CNN, ABC, and NPR, and in publications like the Wall Street Journal, USA Today, and Time magazine. Goodrich also teaches an advanced course in constitutional law at the University of Utah law school. Goodrich graduated with high honors from the University of Chicago Law School where he was a member of the University of Chicago Law Review and was elected to the Order of the Coif. After graduating, Goodrich clerked for Judge Michael W. McConnell on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. He currently lives in Utah where he enjoys exploring the outdoors with his wife and children and serving in their local church.

Reviews

[Matt · Rating 4 out of 5]

First and foremost, a large thank you to NetGalley, Luke Goodrich, and WaterBrook and Multnomah for providing me with a copy of this publication, which allows me to provide you with an unbiased review.

At a time when religious freedoms are being questioned and pushed through the courts, Luke Goodrich has penned this interesting piece that mixes some legal analysis with a plea to let those who have religious beliefs from being treated as outcasts. The topic of religious freedom—in America and around the world—is nothing new, but it would seem that there is a new birth of entitlement on both sides that their beliefs are enshrined in constitutional documents and legal precedents. Luke Goodrich begins by trying to help the reader understand the role of rights and freedoms in American jurisprudence before tackling anything more complex. What would seem straightforward is constantly revised and reinterpreted, making discussion of the topic all the murkier. With an understanding of what the Founding Fathers felt as they wrote the US Constitution and some of the Supreme Court precedents on the topic, the reader is ready to wade into the depths of religious beliefs and how they stand up to the law. Goodrich effectively argues that there is a place for beliefs without violating the law, as long as both sides understand the rules and roles involved. Citing cases related to abortion, employment based on religious beliefs, and same-sex marriage, Goodrich explores the perspective of the devoutly religious, both individuals and institutions, before trying to parse through current legislation and court precedent. This permits the reader to better understand the battle taking place, presuming there is a general understanding of the person feeling aggrieved by actions from the aforementioned devout group. Taking that ‘battle’ analogy a little further, Goodrich devises the ‘conscientious objector’ role, whereby those who are not violating laws in a sinister manner ought to be protected from prosecution. One example is the pharmacist who does not want to dispense the ‘morning after pill’ because of their religious beliefs, but is happy to direct customers to another pharmacy. There is no inherent judgment about the client seeking the medication, but also not a requirement to go against one’s personal beliefs in order to allay financial or legal punishment. Goodrich pushes the argument further to include religious freedoms outside of those tied to the Christianity he mentions throughout the tome. In an era when many beliefs are making their way into mainstream society, there’s a conscious need not to be hierarchical, as long as there is a clear understanding of the limits. In the latter portion of the book, Goodrich shows how the Bible makes mention of many early examples of religious persecution and defence of those beliefs. It is telling to see how the arguments can be made and scriptural passages presented without bringing the fire and brimstone coming from each page. Goodrich makes his point effectively and keeps the arguments sound, while not denying his bias on the subject at hand. Recommended to those who enjoy an open-minded discussion about one of the hot button issues of today, as well as the reader who finds legal topics of interest.

When I saw this piece on offer, I knew that I would have to give it a try. While certain provincial governments in Canada flex their muscle about religious limitations, Luke Goodrich makes strong arguments about the larger themes that have certainly affected many national governments around the world. Religious freedoms have grown over the years as courts re-evaluate views and inherent rights of all people. While Goodrich cites some horrible limitations on religious sentiment from decades past, the hyper-vigilant citizen is quick to call for unfettered freedoms. Two parties claiming freedom from opposing sides cannot always find solace in the law, but Goodrich seeks to find the happy medium, based on his years litigating in cases of this nature. The reader will not only see some of the arguments he made, but also the level-headed approach to the law when religious sentiment enters the debate. There is a happy medium, though it will require both sides to relax their vehemence. The tome is laid out effectively so as to offer the reader a clear path to understand the arguments, the triggers, and the solutions to the various issues. Goodrich is clear in his explanations, peppering the text with some Scripture where it helps substantiate his point, but not shying away from legal matters either. While the focus of the book is on Christian beliefs, there is a great chapter exploring Islamic freedoms and how they cannot be dismissed without creating a double standard. While some readers may want something more academic or detached, Goodrich effectively makes his points and is able to sway a sometime skeptic like me to see the larger picture. I can accept many of the arguments being made without suspending by own belief system, though I can see how many may not feel this same luxury. With poignant topics and well-argued chapters, Goodrich adds to the discussion without vilifying any side.

Kudos, Mr. Goodrich, for this wonderful piece. I am pleased I took the time to read it and hope to find other publications to enrich my knowledge on the subject.

Love/hate the review? An ever-growing collection of others appears at:
http://pecheyponderings.wordpress.com/

A Book for All Seasons, a different sort of Book Challenge: https://www.goodreads.com/group/show/...

[Jeanette · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is a 4 star by the core of its definitive nature. And the author uses analogies that are helpful to the reader's comprehension of/for layers of meaning- to those who are NOT lawyers. Some of them (I'm a pilgrim, absolutely not a martyr) were 5 star excellent. BUT- and this is the big BUT for my read- it's density of lawyer "eyes" throughout. It's a difficult, and at points dry read.

The first sections geared more to the novice for knowledge of USA law stances concerning certain issues that most readers of commonality (religious believers or not) will be able to comprehend with some excellent inroads to understanding that freedom of religion is not at all only the prime core of being able to have a belief without punishment. At least not censure or punishments or tenets that would disallow for it.

But that's just a tip of an humongous iceberg, because for most religious believers of any group / community/ communal church structure- there are 100's (maybe 1000's) of other applications for how that is embedded in their lives. And can also be a total opposition stance from those druthers in which government dictate reigns. So keeping the "things that are Caesar's" separately? It's desirable but with changing religious ideas for popularity or not of a God figure? Or if majority has absolutely no god belief or faith at all? It's happening more all the time, the domination of one "rules" over the other. Increasingly so. Domination and oversee bottom line law being NOT separation at all as far as I can view it. And the cross hatches between them are increasing for a person who is embedded within their faith which is core to their role model and reaction, personality, nugget of being. All of which can be 180 degrees from "law for all" dictate.

So this, IMHO, is written far more to the person of a faith than to those who are not. Others seem to disagree about this (I've read some of the reviews). But I find, as this author does, that all the law courts and state and supreme courts will have authoritarian dictates which have already occurred which are actually extremely troublesome to this "separation" which is so often quoted as preamble to any other tact. What government and some majority states want is not a freedom of religion at all. To me, it is far closer to a complete freedom FROM religion. Which is quite different, and in some ways 180 degrees from what the founders, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights affirm.

It's dry law read in great tracts of test cases. And the ones to employee hire and fire or equivalencies judgments- those were the most interesting to me. And when religious community breaks the laws or incites violence- or have prime base beliefs that negate other humans as their central pillar of tenets.

This is not anything in great majority of subject matter than I thought it was from the title. And in many taxing and compliance issues I can see the courts being filled with more multiples and multiples of these issues every year. Some of them seem to have nothing to do with religion as explained here or as we formerly understood were "Religious Liberty" concerns. But I certainly understand how they are now. I don't think I ever understood the concept of "Religious Liberty" before reading this book. Now, maybe half understand it. I wouldn't attempt this book unless you are Judeo-Christian. Most of the faith embedded to Scripture and dogma or historical reference, you will not equate to the definitive Goodrich attempts. Just my opinion, but I think it is a valid one.

Up is down and down is up. We live in very interesting times as the Chinese describe them. This book will help you lift the rocks to see the underside to vast "we think" governmental autonomy.

[Joan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Like most Christians, I am poorly informed about religious freedom issues. I grew up in a nation where religious freedom was unquestioned. But the nation is changing. The culture is changing. Goodrich wrote this book so Christians like me could be informed and prepared for the future.

He informs us by exploring the roots of religious freedom. They are grounded in the Bible, not national documents. Goodrich also reviews a number of issues and court cases so we understand the challenges facing us today with respect to our current culture. He then give suggestions to how Christians can move forward.

I like how he explained religious freedom and how it relates to other freedoms. He gave an example where my religious rights might violate the property rights of someone else. The property rights would win. (28) It's a simple example of issues that get very complicated.

Goodrich helped me understand how the feelings toward Christianity have changed in the last decades. Recently, Christian beliefs were viewed as incompatible with culture but were tolerated. Now, many often view Christian beliefs as a threat to current culture. He looks at many issues and suggests that the conflict most threatening to religious freedom in the US today is the conflict between gay rights and religious freedom. (95)

What are Christians to do? I was surprised that Goodrich's first suggestion was that we shouldn't be thinking about winning. “Our primary concern is not defeating our enemies but loving them” (154) We are to be Christlike and that means suffering. We are to consider God's greater purposes for the world. But he also gives some very practical suggested for individuals and churches to be prepared to live faithfully as Christ followers.

I highly recommend this book to lay Christians and church leaders. It contains information every Christian would do well to understand.

I received a complimentary uncorrected proof from the publisher. My comments are an independent and honest review.

[Susan · Rating 4 out of 5]

“The Supreme Court has ruled …” when I hear or read those words, I tend to feel nervous and on-edge. Who knows, these days, which freedoms will be curtailed? What wacky decision is coming down next? It can feel kind of out-of-control.

“Free to Believe: The Battle over Religious Liberty in America” is a book that addresses those issues. The author is Luke Goodrich, and he is certainly well-qualified: he is a lawyer for Becket Law, which solely represents clients involved in religious freedom-related cases.

Why are there seemingly so many more religious freedom-related cases lately? Goodrich states that it’s due to our changing culture. These days, culture is hostile to claims of absolute truth — in other words, a claim that Jesus is the only way to salvation is viewed by the world as being discriminatory to other religions. A Christian club requiring that its officers be Christians is discriminating against non-Christians who might want to be officers, etc. “For the first time in American history, Christian beliefs are viewed as being incompatible with the prevailing culture.”

The author points out too that America is less religious than before, and therefore fewer people need religious protection claims. There’s much more religious diversity in America now, and these two facts lead to more challenges to and attacks on religious freedom.

Goodrich takes us through chapters on various religious freedom issues: abortion, gay rights, and Muslims in the US, to name a few. He suggests some ways to view conflicts. For instance, on abortion he suggests keeping the procedure legal, but providing an opt-out for doctors who are morally opposed to the issue. He refers to this as making religious freedom a matter of “both principle and pragmatism.” While acknowledging that such a compromise is not entirely satisfying to either side, it does enable those on both sides of the issue to live in relative peace.

Goodrich calls the conflict between gay rights and religious freedom “the most significant threat to religious freedom in the United States today.” He points out that everyone is better off when conscientious objectors are protected: “No same-sex couple in its right mind would want to be counseled by a counselor who believes that the couple’s relationship is fundamentally wrong.” This also applies in other situations — would someone seeking an abortion want to have the abortion done by a doctor opposed to the procedure?

Throughout the book, freedom is emphasized. It’s one of the great things about America, and should be preserved. Goodrich also points out the freedom God has given each of us. He doesn’t force anyone to accept or follow Him, so we should follow His example in not forcing others to accept our beliefs. He is a proponent of protecting all religions — not just Christianity — stating that, for example, preventing a mosque from being built will not lead Muslims closer to Christ; it may in fact harden them even more against Christianity.

Goodrich gives several examples of conflict in the Bible as models of how we can respond when our religious beliefs are threatened. There is not one single way to respond. He mentions Egyptian midwives who disobeyed when told to kill Israeli babies, and also states that fearing God doesn’t mean that we should pick every possible fight.

Above all, we should remember that God is in control and working through all events. He works in different ways: for Daniel, He closed the lions’ mouths. For Esther, He put her in a position of power where she influenced the King. For Stephen, He apparently stood aside while Stephen was stoned. There are no guarantees on how things will go, and in fact Jesus has said that Christians will suffer in this life. God’s purposes are larger than our perspectives.

The upside of this book is that it’s written by a lawyer, but that’s also the downside. It’s very detail-heavy and certainly not “light” reading in any way (although Goodrich makes this type of book as readable as is probably possible; there’s not a lot of unintelligible terminology). If you’re interested in issues of religious freedom today though, I recommend it.

[George P. · Rating 5 out of 5]

Religious freedom is one of America’s most cherished values. It is enshrined in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and protected by a thick web of statutory laws and judicial decisions. The same holds true at the state level.

Yet religious freedom is also one of our nation’s most contested values. Many American Christians believe religious freedom is under attack. According to Luke Goodrich, they’re not entirely wrong.

“We’ve long lived in a country where religious freedom was secure, and we didn’t need to give it much thought,” Goodrich writes in the Introduction to Free to Believe. “Now we’re realizing the country is changing and we might not enjoy the same degree of religious freedom forever. If we don’t start thinking about it now, we’ll be unprepared.”

Goodrich knows whereof he speaks. He is a lawyer with Becket Law, a leading nonprofit, public interest legal and educational institute with a mission to protect the free expression of all faiths — “from Anglicans to Zoroastrians,” as Becket lawyers like to say. He was part of the legal team that won four major Supreme Court cases in as many years:  Little Sisters of the Poor v. Azar ,  Holt v. Hobbs , Burwell v. Hobby Lobby , and  Hosanna-Tabor v. EEOC . He also is an evangelical Christian, and in Free to Believe, he aims to prepare Christian readers for “the battle over religious liberty in America,” in the words of the book’s subtitle. He does this by answering three questions:

1. What is religious freedom?
2. What are the most serious threats?
3. What can be done?

In Goodrich’s definition, “religious freedom means the government, within reasonable limits, leaves religion alone as much as possible.” It is, in other words, an expansive but not absolute right. As a general rule, government must leave religion alone; it should step in only “to protect other rights.” Just as the right to free speech does not entail the right to libel and defame others, for example, so the right to exercise religion does not license child sacrifice. Government must “balance many competing rights.”

Religious freedom is worth protecting, Goodrich argues, because it is a secular good. It “benefits society” through the promotion of good works, the protection of dissenting opinions, and the reduction of social tensions. It “protects our other rights” by limiting the scope of governmental action. And because it is “rooted in human nature,” it is a “fundamental human right,” intrinsically worth protecting.

But religious freedom is not merely a secular good. It is a spiritual good, too. Goodrich argues that religious freedom is “rooted in God’s original design for humanity — in the way God created us (for relationship with Him) and in the way God relates to us (giving us freedom to embrace or reject Him.” A genuinely loving relationship is non-coercive. Because even God does not coerce religious belief or practice, neither should government. Consequently, “religious freedom is a basic issue of biblical justice, rooted in the nature of God and the nature of man.”

Having defined what religious freedom is, Goodrich turns to the five most serious threats to it: religious discrimination, abortion rights, gay rights, Islam, and the naked public square. My guess is that you are probably acquainted with some of the current clashes revolving around these threats. These clashes center around questions such as:

* Can a religious organization use religious criteria for hiring and firing employees?
* If a law requires businesses to provide contraceptive coverage to employees, but religious business owners believe some of those contraceptives actually induce abortion, can they refuse to provide them?
* Can religious florists, bakers or photographers refuse to provide goods or services to an LGBT couple getting married?
* Should the law accommodate Muslim religious practices, and if so, to what degree?
* Are religious symbols permissible on public monuments or public property?

Goodrich argues that the answer to each question is, or should be, yes. He has litigated several cases before the Supreme Court that arrived at affirmative answers. But neither the Constitution nor federal and state laws guarantee that the religious freedom side will win every legal contest. Remember, religious freedom, while expansive, is not absolute, and U.S. courts must take up cases that involve balancing the rights of the religious with others who claim a contrary legal right.

The section on threats to religious freedom is the longest part of the book. I won’t further describe those threats here because you’re probably already acquainted with them. What these chapters will do is deepen and complexify your understanding of the relevant legal issues, even as they clarify the case for religious freedom in each instance.

This is essential reading for any Christian who is concerned with the state of religious freedom in America today. Indeed, I believe Free to Believe is the best Christian primer on American religious freedom currently available.

Knowing what religious freedom is and what threatens it, Goodrich concludes Free to Believe with suggestions about how best to advance its cause. He is a lawyer, so litigation is obviously on the table. But Goodrich is also an evangelical Christian, and it is as one Christian to others that he offers this important word of wisdom: “before we address what we’re going to do about religious freedom, we need to reconsider what type of people we’re called to be in the midst of religious freedom conflicts. Only if we become those people can we ‘win’ religious freedom fights in any meaningful sense.” In other words, “We’re called not to win but to be like Jesus.” Win or lose, we must imitate our Lord.

Goodrich goes on to outline seven biblical principles that American Christians find difficult to live out, even though our brothers and sisters around the world do so in environments with far less religious freedom:

1. Expect suffering (Matthew 10:16–25).
2. Rejoice when it comes (Matthew 5:11–12).
3. Fear God, not men (1 Peter 3:14–15).
4. Strive for peace (Romans 12:18).
5. Continue doing good (1 Peter 4:19).
6. Love our enemies (Luke 6:27–28).
7. Care for one another (Hebrews 13:3).

As someone who is deeply committed to religious freedom, I believe we should be vigilant about threats to it in America and abroad. And to be honest, those threats often feel like they’re growing.

Even so, I believe Goodrich is right. The ultimate question is not how much religious freedom we have, but how well we freely use the religion we have. As the apostle Paul enjoined Christians at an earlier time and in another place, “You, my brothers and sisters, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh; rather, serve one another humbly in love” (Galatians 5:13).

If you’re looking for a long-term solution to America’s contests over religious freedom, I’d suggest that loving, humble service of others is the best place to start.

Book Reviewed
Luke Goodrich, Free to Believe: The Battle over Religious Liberty in America (Colorado Springs, CO: Multnomah, 2019).

P.S. If you liked my review, please click “Helpful” on my Amazon review page.

P.P.S. I wrote this review for the November-December issue of Influence magazine. It is posted here by permission.

[Bob O'Bannon · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an outstanding and highly recommended book for all Christians living in 21st century America. It’s good for those who underestimate the threat to religious freedom in our culture, but it’s also good for those alarmist Christians who think everyone is out to get them. Luke Goodrich, a lawyer for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, explains why religious freedom is important, why Christians should support religious freedom for all religions, and what are the specific threats to religious freedom over topics like discrimination, abortion, gay rights, and free speech.

Most impressive about this book is Goodrich’s clear and concise writing style. He avoids complicated legal jargon, even as he explains the details of many legal cases, and he is very effective at repeating his point just enough to get you to understand.

Goodrich is also realistic enough to acknowledge, particularly with regard to the battle over gay rights, that we are currently “entering a period of widespread conflict,” a time that is going to be “far more intense than anything Christians in the United States have experienced in the last century” (121), but he also cautions Christians not to view secular culture as if it wants nothing more than to destroy Christians. “It’s as if we get an odd sense of pleasure from complaining about how bad things are and predicting how bad they’re going to get.” (233)

Instead, Christians should seek to cultivate a more biblical attitude: “We’re not called to win but to be like Jesus; not to fear suffering but to fear God; not to be surprised at hostility but to expect it; not to complain when we lose but to rejoice; not to lash out at our opponents but to love them.” (182)

I was a little surprised that Goodrich did not talk about the threat to tax-exempt status for churches, and the Arminian theological assumptions sprinkled throughout made me a little suspicious, but these are minor quibbles. It’s a book that is very helpful for church leaders in particular, but simple and practical enough for lay people as well.

[Alyson Wills · Rating 5 out of 5]

I’ve intentionally read this in the few months preceding the election. Extremely level headed, Christian legal perspective on a lot of high conflict issues and ways to think through the legal/civil vs Christian perspective and how scripture can radically shape how we view these issues. Very thought provoking.

[Payne Walton · Rating 4 out of 5]

Learned a lot

[R.M. Archer · Rating 4 out of 5]

While I disagree theologically with one of Goodrich's foundational principles, his arguments for the importance of religious liberty still hold up. He repeats throughout the book that religious freedom is a God-given right "because God gives us the freedom to choose Him or not" (paraphrase), but as someone who believes in predestination I substituted that it's a God-given right "because God calls some to follow Him and enables others not to." Which I found to function just as well with everything Goodrich said.

This book explains what religious liberty means, why it's important, how to stand up for religious freedom, and how to avoid religious liberty conflicts where possible while holding to one's convictions. I found my view of religious liberty both bettered and expanded through reading this book.

[Nathan Albright · Rating 5 out of 5]

[Note:  This book was provided free of charge by Multnomah/Waterbrook Press.  All thoughts and opinions are my own.]

This is the sort of book that is easy to respect, even where I disagree with some of its points.  It is clear that this book is written for an audience that is mainstream and evangelical and that is used to being part of the dominant culture of the United States and is quite alarmed at the way in which serious and mainstream Christianity has been undermined by cultural changes among elites with the threat of hostility.  The author's advice is for such readers to get used to being a counterculture but to be savvy and wise i the way that Christianity is defended.  As someone who belongs to a more sectarian and outsider tradition, much of this book struck me as not particularly surprising and if somewhat alarming than at least nothing alarming that I was not already aware of and concerned about.  Other readers may in fact be surprised at the author's experience and perspective and may thus view this book as more surprising than I do, though.

This book is a relatively short one at 200 pages long and is divided into three parts and thirteen chapters.  The book begins with an introduction and promises a foreword that was not available in the review copy I read.  After that there are three chapters on the definition of religious freedom (I), including chapters on how Christians get it wrong (1), how they can get it right (2), and how to persuade others to respect religious freedom (3).  The bulk of the book discusses the threats to Christian freedom of religion (II), namely the question of whether Christians are under attack (4), is discrimination inherently evil (5), will abortion have to be accepted (6), the problem and solution of whether gay rights will trump religious freedom (7,8), will Muslims take over (9), and will God become a dirty word in the United States (10).  After that the author looks at what can be done in the mean time (III), tempering expectations of victory in the culture wars that creates bad blood with others (11), learning from scripture about the promise of persecution for those who follow God's ways (12), and preparing for the future (13), after which the book ends with acknowledgments and notes.

One of the underlying focal points of the author that he returns to over and over again is the way that the Christian defense of religious freedom and of liberty in general must be genuine and consistent and not only self-serving.  It is immensely difficult to defend freedom in a consistent manner, because a great many people are not always fond of the way that religious freedom looks from the point of view of Mormons or Sabbatarians or Jews or Muslims in the same way that they would look at it from the point of view of mainstream evangelical Protestants.  The author's broad experience in defending religious liberty helps him to see that it may be immensely wise for broader alliances to be made of people who support godly and biblical standards of morality than have traditionally been the case in the past, which would involve a friendly and mutually respectful dialogue with conservative (but not extreme) Jews, Catholics, and Muslims as well as more outlying Christian traditions than has often been the case.  The author's advice and counsel in these areas is wise, because he sees a prolonged period of religious tension and conflict within society, and it is clear that we need to be able to handle such matters wisely.

[Deverin Muff · Rating 5 out of 5]

Any Christian who has thoughts or concerns about the current or historical climate of religious rights in America should read this book. I enjoyed this book from cover to cover. The author, Luke Goodrich, does an excellent job in explaining in a very rudimentary way, how religious liberty works in this country.

[Barb · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was not at all certain that I would like this book, but I must say I really did! Honestly, Luke Goodrich had me already engrossed in the Introduction. He began by telling a story and it is my favorite kind of story, a true story. It is the story of a small Christian school in Michigan (which is my home state so of course that made it even more interesting to me). The school had a fourth grade teacher who became ill so the school had to hire a replacement for her. The teacher got better but the school felt it wasn't right to fire the replacement and asked give the first teacher her job back. She demanded they hire her and threatened to sue. The school was upset at the teacher's behavior and after failed reconciliation, they fired her. The teacher did ultimately sue the school and the case ended up going all the way to the Supreme Court. The case stands as crucial standard in religious freedom cases. Riveting stuff and Free to Believe is full of stories like it.

Author Luke Goodrich is an attorney with the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty and has tried may Supreme Court cases. He is a frequent guest on TV shows and in newspapers and magazines where he discusses religious freedom. Although he is obviously highly educated and intelligent, he is able to make the law relevant and interesting to a casual reader. He gives many examples of real cases and explains the repercussions of each case.

But more than just telling stories about legal cases, Goodrich details why religious freedom is so important in the United States and why Christians should care about it. He has great ideas on how Christians can respond to threats to their religious rights and presents solid Biblical arguments for those responses.

If you are interested in the current battles going on in the US over gay rights, abortion rights, Muslim law, or religious discrimination, then you'll certainly be fascinated by this book, as I was.

[Alicia · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great look at religious liberty, throughout history

[Heather · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a really great book that helps to explain clearly the importance of religious freedom and what we can do to protect this important right for everyone. My main takeaway is that we should care about and love everyone, be civil, and be loyal to God and truth. We can make laws that help to protect everyone and their freedom to believe as they choose. Luke Goodrich is a knowledgeable lawyer on this specific topic and teaches it well. He is obviously a Christian himself, but talks about these issues from a variety of perspectives that are helpful.

Here are some good quotes:

"The clergy has a crucial role to play in equipping the faithful and walking with them through difficult times. Yet to understand religious freedom at a deep level and to help prepare the church for the challenges ahead, we also need Christians who are steeped in the field of religious freedom (p. 5)."

"We need to take action. Our faith is not a set of abstract principles; it's a calling covering every aspect of our lives (p .7)."

"The court ruled that churches must be free to choose 'who will preach their beliefs, teach their faith, and carry out their mission. The decision stands as one of the greatest religious freedom victories the last fifty years (p. 7)."

"Hope is not rooted in any human institution. It is not rooted in fair laws, favorable election results, or friendly Supreme Court justices. It is rooted in a person: Jesus Christ. He has already conquered every enemy we'll ever face, and He has promised us an imperishable inheritance in heaven (p. 8)."

"Pilgrims believe religious freedom is a founding principle of our nation (p. 13)."

"All Pilgrims would say Christianity is right and true and it's wrong for the government to restrict it... For Pilgrims, the bottom line is that Christianity deserves a special place in our society because it's true and because we're a Judeo-Christian nation. Religious freedom is important because it allows Christianity to flourish and preserve the blessings of our Judeo-Christian heritage (p. 14)."

"Scripture teaches...we should expect to be persecuted; we should expect to be scorned; we should expect the lowest place (p. 15)."

"A government that promotes Christianity sounds good in theory but typically works out badly in practice. When the state supports the church--by giving it a privileged legal position and exclusive financial support--it inevitably tries to control the church (p. 16)."

"The Pilgrim view tends to turn religious freedom into a means of maintaining a privileged place in society for Christianity. That is not a sound view biblically or historically, and it is not good for religious freedom or for Christianity (p. 17)."

"Scripture does not teach that persecution is a good thing (p. 18)."

"Beginners tend to think religious freedom is important, but they may struggle to articulate why (p. 20)."

"Human beings are created for relationship with God, and God desires relationship with us. But a relationship with God can never be coerced. It must be entered into freely. So God Himself has given human beings freedom to embrace or reject Him (p. 21)."

"Over and over, God declared His desire for covenant relationship with Israel: 'You shall be my treasured possession' (Exodus 19:5, p. 25).'"

"Jesus Himself underscored the limits of government when He was asked about paying taxes to Caesar. After calling for a Roman coin, He pointed to Caesar's likeness and inscription and said, 'Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's' (Matthew 22:21, p. 29)."

"Out of obedience to God, Daniel broke the law and suffered the consequence--being thrown into a den of lions (p. 29)."

"The denial of religious freedom is a form of injustice in two respects: it is an attempt by the government to invade a realm that belongs only to God, and it is a denial of something that every human being deserves--the opportunity to freely embrace or reject relationship with God (p 30)."

"When God is king, a law prohibiting blasphemy or idolatry is not a case of Caesar demanding what belongs to God; it is a case of God demanding what belongs to God (p. 32)."

"The government shouldn't punish people who preach against Jesus any more than it should punish people who preach for Him (p. 33)."

"Religious freedom benefits society... Religious freedom protects other rights... Religious freedom is a fundamental human right (p. 38)."

"Religious freedom means the government, within reasonable limits, leaves religion alone as much as possible (p. 38)."

"Religious freedom allows religion to flourish, which produces the moral virtue necessary for democratic self-government (p. 40)."

"Self-government requires morally virtuous people (p. 40)."

"The positive effect of religion on society is also confirmed by empirical data (p. 41)."

"Religious freedom benefits society by reducing social conflict (p. 43)."

"Religious freedom imposes an essential boundary on the power of government, which ultimately protects all our other rights (p. 44)."

"Our conscience is responding to something higher than the government--the Creator (p. 44)."

"Religious freedom should be protected simply because it is a fundamental right rooted in our common humanity (p. 46)."

"We all desire truth, goodness, and beauty. That desire is written into human nature... Conscience is both an inner capacity to judge and an insistent urge to obey those judgments. And conscience demands action. It demands that we embrace the truth and goodness we have found and live our lives accordingly... In other words, we long for God (p. 46)."

"Even though personally we might think he's wrong, he is sincerely seeking transcendent truth and trying to live out the truth as he understands it (p. 49)."

"This view of religious freedom as a human right has several important implications. First, it means religious freedom is an issue of justice... When the government pressures someone to go against her conscience, it is treating her as less than fully human and is committing an injustice... Religious freedom is for people of all faiths (p. 50)."

"Christianity may be 'true for you,' but don't try to impose it on anyone else. Everyone needs to find his own truth (p. 59)."

"Conscientious objection to abortion used to be accepted as a common response to a controversial issue (p. 62)."

"Religion is playing a reduced role in American life (p. 64)."

"More religious diversity means a wider variety of religious practices, which in turn creates the potential for more religious freedom conflicts (p. 65)."

"Christian beliefs are viewed as a threat to the dominant culture (p. 67)."

"Good religion is tolerant and relativistic; it is accepting of other beliefs and doesn't tell other people they're wrong. And good religion is nondiscriminatory; it accepts people for who they are and doesn't condemn them for whom they love. Our culture likes good religion (p. 68)."

"Sometimes religious discrimination is wrong--like when the grocery store refuses to hire Jews. But other times it's not wrong at all--like when a Jewish school hires Jewish teachers... For religious groups, religion is often an essential part of the job (p. 71)."

"To treat people as fully human, the government must, within reasonable limits, let people seek and embrace transcendent truth as they understand it. This right is inherent in every individual human being (p. 73)."

"Religious groups have a right to determine their religious beliefs and doctrines... establish internal rules for governing themselves... choose their members and leaders in accordance with their beliefs (p. 73)."

"Can religious groups require their workers to follow religious standards of conduct (p. 81)?"

"Religious groups should have clear procedures for enforcing stands of conduct and should follow those procedures consistently (p. 83)."

"The right of conscientious objection to military service is widely accepted as a quintessential example of the right of the religious freedom (p. 90)."

"Religious freedom is worth protecting even when it's costly (p. 90)."

"Many doctors entered their profession while abortion was still illegal (p. 97)."

"Religions freedom extends beyond the four walls of our homes or churches and includes our ministries and businesses (p. 101)."

"As a matter of principle, it is simply wrong for the government to force conscientious objectors to participate in the destruction of human life, whether in war or abortion (p. 105)."

"Everyone is better off when conscientious objectors are protected (p. 125)."

"The right of free speech trumps the right to be free from discrimination (p. 140)."

"We don't force conscientious objectors to support same-sex relationships... we look for ways to protect both sides (p. 142)."

"Religious groups will face significantly more risk when they partner with the government in their ministries (p. 143)."

"Christians should care about the religious freedom of Muslims--and other non-Christians too (p. 148)."

"If we ignore religious freedom for Muslims, Native Americans, Jews, and others, we're undermining it for ourselves. And if we defend religious freedom for non-Christians, we're defending it for ourselves (p. 151)."

"We support religious freedom for Muslims not because we're relativists but because we believe a particular absolute truth: God created us for loving relationship with Him, and no one can enter that relationship via coercion (p. 156)."

"Empowering the government to suppress any religion it labels a dangerous ideology is itself dangerous (p. 159)."

"Treat religion as a natural part of the public square (p. 163)."

"'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion (p. 163).'"

"'The strongest support for disestablishment came from the most evangelical denominations (p. 169).'"

"Beware of government support for religion (p. 177)."

"Separation of church and state--rightly understood--is a good thing (p. 177)."

"We should aim for a public square that neither promotes religion nor suppresses it, but instead welcomes religion as an essential part of human culture (p. 177)."

"Expect to suffer for our faith (p. 183)."

"Sometimes religious freedom is gained not through political power but through patiently suffering and continuing to do good (p. 186)."

"Our primary concern is not defeating our enemies but loving them (p. 187)."

"Rather than quickly condemning fellow Christians who reach different conclusions on questions of moral complicity, we should try to build one another up, reason together frankly, and work together in community to discern how to love our neighbors as ourselves (p. 189)."

"A classic example of a religious freedom conflict: the government commands something that God forbids... Pharaoh...was pursuing a different goal--national security--through the killing of Hebrew boys (p. 195)."

"Reject fatalism... Seek justice even when it's risky... Consider where we put our trust... God rewards the pursuit of justice (p. 200)."

"God is far more powerful than any human authority... He can rescue us from any situation, no matter how desperate (p. 204)."

"Faithfulness in response to a religious freedom conflict can glorify God (p. 205)."

"God can protect religious freedom i a variety of ways (p. 208)."

"God rescued the apostles, but He also let them suffer (p. 210)."

"Violations of religious freedom often causes Paul to flee... But that doesn't mean Paul was afraid. He faced dangers countless times... He fled when he thought it was best for the spread of the gospel (p. 213)."

"There's no formula for responding to religious freedom conflicts (p. 216)."

"An important part of protecting religious freedom is remaining involved in the processes that shape these laws... Religious organizations should speak up when laws or regulations might affect them (p. 231)."

"When was the last time we prayed for the gay couple in a religious freedom dispute? When was the last time we tried to do something good for someone who was hostile to us? When was the last time we went out of our way on social media to say something kind to someone we sharply disagreed with (p. 234)?"

"If we really believe religious freedom is a matter of justice, rooted in how God created us and interacts with us, then we should care about religious freedom for everyone (p. 235)."

"There would be no religious freedom if there weren't people who sought transcendent truth and tried to live their lives accordingly (p. 238)."

[Mykolas Lozoraitis · Rating 4 out of 5]

When we talk about freedom of religion today, there are a lot of misunderstanding even among Catholics themselves. It‘s common to imagine that freedom of religion is freedom to freely profess one's religion without hiding it, that members of other faiths are persecuted and punished by the state in countries that do not recognize religious freedom, but it‘s not the case. Almost all states, regardless of its regime, recognize the right of their people to practice their chosen religion. This was most clearly proved by the exception of so-called "Islamic State", which has begun to force Christians to choose between conversion to Islam or the death penalty. The fact that such repressions began in Syria and Iraq, which had long been ruled by Muslims, is the clearest evidence that in the past the right of Christians to practice their religion was not restricted even in the absence of religious freedom. Then what does "freedom of religion" mean? Depending on the perspective from which we look at it - from state‘s or individual‘s view - freedom of religion can be defined positively and negatively. For the state, the principle of freedom of religion means that the adoption of its laws is free from the monopoly of the influence of any one religion. The state is governed by protection from the influence of one religion (or in a more radical form, all religions) when it comes to political decisions. It‘s so called positively understood freedom of religion. Meanwhile for an individual, freedom of religion means the freedom not to be forced by the state to act against one’s religious beliefs. This is a negative understanding of religious freedom. As the history of the Western world in the last half century has shown, these two concepts of religious freedom are moving separately, taking on different scales in different states and eventually degenerating into the most unexpected forms. In 1965, the Church recognized the principle of religious freedom as one of the documents adopted by the Second Vatican Council, the Dignitatis Humanea, a non-binding declaration. While this was and is a debatable provision, every Catholic was encouraged to recognize the truth of this principle in his personal life as well. Today, when the freedom of religion, which has long been considered a Catholic protection against the aggression of the secular state (especially in the Soviet Union), is less and less respected, the principle of protecting Catholics itself must be evaluated. To do this, we inevitably have to separate at least two issues. First, how reasonable and just is the principle of religious freedom. Second, what political consequences did its adoption had and have for Catholics in societies that have recognized religious freedom. The first question, on the validity of religious freedom, is extremely broad, complex, ambiguous and from the point of view of political theory, its an absolutely erroneous principle, in direct conflict with many other principles of the Church's teaching and the text of Scripture. Viewing from a historical point, the freedom of religion recognized by the Second Vatican Council, is at the same time a recognition that the Church erred for almost two thousand years in demanding that Christ the King be ruler not only of the heavenly kingdom, but also of the earthly kingdom. In the ancient world wrong religion, perceived by the Gentiles, was impermissible and punishable by death. As Christianity became the state religion of the Roman Empire, the practice of pagan religions also became punishable, though no longer to death. Saint Pope Leon the Great wrote to the Roman emperor in 451 before the Ecumenical Assembly of Chalcedon: "You must understand without hesitation that earthly authority has been given to you, not only to govern earthly affairs, but first and foremost to protect the Church". The same was written to Theodosius II by Saint Pope Celestine. Summa summarum, the protection of a just religion and the repression of heresy under the Church was the duty of the state. The Catholic Church never supported forced conversions to Christianity, but forbade the state to tolerate the public practice and spread of other religions. The idea of a religiously neutral state in a world, where the government had divine legitimacy, would have meant suicide for the state itself - a renunciation of divine legitimacy. In the Middle Ages, Jews and Muslims had the right to privately worship their gods and perform religious rites, it was tolerated to prevent persecution, insurrection, and similar things. However, the public expression of their faith was not tolerated, as well as the idea that the state could distance itself from the arguments of the only true religion by making decisions on the norms of law binding on all. In modern, especially after the French Revolution, this has changed significantly. Throughout the 19th century, the Church stuggled to find way to combat anti-Catholic ideologies for the salvation of human souls. All of 19th and 20th encyclicals on the connection between religion and the state were guided by the Thomistic assumption that the state must achieve goals that lead to earthly prosperity, but its highest goal and duty is the pursuit of the bliss (salvation) of the citizens of the state. In carrying out this duty, the state cannot tolerate false faith, as this would abandon the souls of the citizens who have entrusted it with power. It was believed that a religiously neutral state was impossible: as Leon XIII taught in the second half of the 19th century, if a state does not commit itself to Catholicism, it commits itself to error. These provisions were set out in many 19th century papal encyclicals and was a consistent and integral part of the Magisterium, fully compatible with previous teachings. A possible question is, why is the salvation of soul is an essential aspect in assessing religious freedom? It‘s necessary to understand the logic behind the neglection of other religions. It was understood that in matters of the salvation of souls the state must submit to the authority of the only true faith, Catholicism, that is the Church. If Catholicism is the only true faith that leads to salvation, it could not afford the recognition of religious freedom, because it would mean condemning souls to destruction, allowing erroneous things to be established as norms. Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani, former head of the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, said: “Justice forbids harming citizens and harm inevitably stems from the indifference of the state. The state, which treats all religions equally, as well as sects, acts against the welfare of the people, as it encourages teachers of error and puts citizens at risk of losing the highest good for all”. Interestingly, the Declaration of Freedom of Religion on Dignitatis Humanea in some ways makes no sense. In essence, this document states that everyone has the right to practice a true religion (Catholicism) and also has the right to practice a false religion as long as it does not violate the common good. But what is the common good? Pope John XXIII answered this question in the encyclical Pacem in Terris in 1963: “the common good is something which affects the needs of the whole man, body and soul. That, then, is the sort of good which rulers of States must take suitable measure to ensure. They must respect the hierarchy of values, and aim at achieving the spiritual as well as the material prosperity of their subjects“. This leads to a clearly consistent interpretation that considering an existing teaching as a whole - the Church cannot accept freedom of religion. Despite all that has been said, the Church today in the form of the Dignitatis Humanea Declaration, seems to have endorsed freedom of religion. Moreover, the Church increasingly sees freedom of religion as a protection for the Catholics themselves and as a last resort from anti-Catholic regimes. Clergy and popes publicly demand respect for the freedom of the Catholic religion in the first place. Therefore, we can simply state this fact. Then what are the consequences of recognizing religious freedom and how to live with it? Such issue should surprise most Catholics, as none usually pays attention to it. It‘s more common to ask the opposite: “How to preserve the freedom of the Catholic religion?” This is a valid question, as this freedom is increasingly restricted in secular democracies. The more aggressively the state becomes secular, the more Catholics cling to religion and appeal to the protection of religious freedom. But the question of whether or not the recognition of religious freedom itself was the root that gave rise to the current restriction and denial of Catholic religious freedom is somehow out of the question. Exactly the recognition of religious freedom on behalf of the Catholic Church became a necessary precondition for the subsequent consistent denial of Catholic religious freedom. Freedom of religion, by its assumptions, is an expression of a completely anti-Catholic modern individualist mindset. In fact, it‘s the freedom for each individual to establish their own conception of God. If classical thinking, therefore the Church too, is based on the assumption that all people are differently successful, but still seek the same salvation through the same one objectively existing God, then modern thinking states that a man himself is the source of reality and he can create not only the environment, but also oneself (as evidenced by the diverse and constantly emerging “rights” of choice of identity) and God (as evidenced by the state-protected right to believe what one wants and wishes). Modern relativism argues that there is no clear enough authority or source to say that one religion is true and others are wrong. There are opinions, and all individuals generally choose the Absolute or the attitude to its existence at their own discretion, thus at the same time creating their own world. In essence, the recognition of religious freedom means that in the eyes of the state, all religions are only opinions - neither of them can claim to be objectively correct and the other cannot be considered wrong. It‘s way more difficult for the church to take such position. It proclaims a particular religion itself, so by allowing freedom of religion, it has to admit that it allows the state to treat truth and error equally. The whole Western world has indeed equated truth and error by telling states to treat all religions equally before the law. In practice, freedom of religion means, or at least should mean, the provision that the state may not, without the need to coerce a citizen, act against its religious beliefs. This negative notion of religious freedom has long been particularly clearly expressed and dominant in the United States. However, in the United States in particular, this principle is increasingly ineffective today, and this "inaction" is spreading steadily across Western societies, increasingly restricting the freedom of Catholic religion itself and forcing them to act against their beliefs by law. The first stage in America was called political liberalism, and in the post-Soviet countries it was called worldview politics. It is an idea that Catholics cannot follow their own beliefs and religious arguments when passing state laws. As John Rawls taught, all decisions should be made on the basis of arguments that are understandable to all members of society and therefore not philosophical and non-religious. Such arguments of course, have been dictated first and foremost by modern science, which is also valued. Such provision essentially meant that Catholics were deprived of their positive freedom. Positive freedom in a general sense is the freedom to participate in decisions about what will be the norms of conduct that will be binding on society. It‘s the positive freedom that Catholics are deprived of by introducing a worldview-free policy. The believer, not necessarily a Catholic, finds himself in a worse position than an atheist. The atheist can follow all the arguments that determine his opinion, meanwhile the believer must confine himself to those, that are suitable for the atheist. Believers are forced to play by forced to follow rules of modern thinking. This is evident in moral disputes - the concepts of family, abortion, or euthanasia are turned into discussions about the potential benefits and harms of such decisions for the individual and society. An educated Catholic is able to win such debates, but according to the idea of non-secular politics, a Catholic politician must make decisions by voting and rejecting the arguments, dictated to him by religion and thus voting against his beliefs. Freedom of religion is to blame here, since all religions are equal before the state and the law, they are all opinions and none is objective truth. Representatives of different religions do not understand and cannot agree on each other's "opinions", so religion has no place in politics and law-making at all. This is the logic of societies that have recognized religious freedom. The second pre-programmed stage, which restricted freedom of religion, was the beginning of demands on Catholics not to follow religious beliefs in their private or economic activities. In business, work, or private relationships, Catholics are required to take actions that are directly contrary to Catholic beliefs. This is a direct restriction of freedom of the now negative religion. Negative freedom is the freedom to make private decisions without state interference. Catholics can no longer do this by interacting with people in society and in the marketplace. For instance it‘s forbidden to state publicly that homosexuality is a sin, even though it‘s taught by the Church. Catholics are forced to serve homogeneous "marriages" - to provide them with cakes, rings, flowers, premises, wedding planning. In both France and the United States, civil servants have been sentenced to prison for refusing to marry homosexual couples public individuals lose their jobs on television after speaking in accordance with Church teaching, teachers are forced to teach against Church teaching, doctors are forced to perform abortions and so on. All of this violates the principle of ensuring that the state does not use violence against people for their religious beliefs. Exactly the freedom of religion is the key problem here - since all religions are considered just opinions and none of them claim to be objective truth, opinion cannot be more important and therefor considered less important than the postmodern human rights. Barack Obama said this very directly: the rights of the LGBT movement are more important than freedom of religion. If religion is merely an opinion, though very important to the believer, the opinion may be sacrificed for securing secular, supposedly "understandable" rights for all.

[Nolan · Rating 5 out of 5]

The author penned this prior to the outbreak of COVID-19, and that makes me wonder whether it would have been different in scope and tone had he written it after. Probably not, by and large. This is one of the most positive and hopeful books I’ve read about religious freedom. I loved it. It mostly mirrors my perspective on the topic. The concept he emphasizes, and the one that I most treasure, is the idea that religious freedom for a follower of Islam is as essential as is religious freedom for a Christian. Indeed, what’s good for one can be as good or better for another. He is critical of those who think Christianity ought to be privileged and pampered, even promoted by government. He insists that the promotion of any religion by government never ends well. Need an example of that? Look no farther than Iran.

Goodrich, an attorney who has won numerous cases on religious liberty, says those who truly favor it will both win and lose cases. He insists the best way to win is for that group or individual to press forward in peace, not in the spirit of obliterate the bad guys. He points out ways in which religious freedom for all benefit society. That government which leaves religion alone enables its adherents to propagate the kind of morality that allows a nation to govern itself. He points out the founders new and understood this concept. Sinful selfish people, he writes, cannot govern themselves. But a moral and virtuous people can. So where does morality and virtue thrive best? In a climate where religion is free. He credits religious fervor with the abolition of slavery and even the expansion of civil rights. The humanitarian efforts of religious organizations have done much to alleviate suffering. He quotes Robert Putnam whose study points out that those who give most, and volunteer best are also those most intricately connected to a religious community. He sites a Georgetown University study that says religious organizations contribute more than a trillion dollars annually to U.S. society in various forms.

Religious freedom protects the right of descent. That, in turn, protects diversity. He says freedom of religion can reduce social conflict, and he points to historical nightmares in Europe where government promoted specific religions over others, which brought about brutal conflicts. He points out ways in which government noninterference meant the end of social conflict. Massachusetts residents had a serious hate jones for Quakers in the 1600s. Massachusetts authorities beat them, fined them, imprisoned them, and physically brutalized them. Government authorities did nothing, and the social conflict became so tiresome that the combatants ultimately gave up. In the fall of 1838, the governor of Missouri decreed that all members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints must die or leave Missouri. It was legal to kill members of that faith, based on that order. The national government did nothing, and the conflict ended when members of the church crossed the Mississippi River en masse and found temporary refuge in Illinois. Had a national governmental force gotten involved, the conflict surely would have escalated, and the result would have been a far higher number of lives lost. In other words, Goodrich points out that religious freedom protects conscientious objectors. He insists you don’t have to believe in the Bible to believe in the benefit provided by religious freedom.

He says religion, not just Christianity, but all religion, comes under increasing attack if others see it as a threat. Because our culture has changed in recent years, those things that weren’t threatening before have since become so. Ours is now a culture that delineates between good religion and bad religion. Good religion is the kind that you practice privately and quietly inside your home. It doesn’t force its beliefs on others, and it stays out of the marketplace of ideas. It never tells anyone their behavior is wrong. Bad religion is public. It makes demands on all aspects of life. Bad religion proclaims absolute truth, and it denounces certain behaviors as wrong or unacceptable. Our culture views bad religion as a threat.

The author insists those seeking religious freedom won’t gain it if they go at this with vengeful hearts or with the idea that this is a culture war that they must win. He advocates positive approaches that include an outreach of love toward those with whom we disagree. The author insists that a desire foremost to win creates climates of hostility and fear and anger. Instead of breathing fire and insisting on winning, Christians and others whose religious liberties are threatened should behave more like Jesus. We need to learn to rejoice when we lose, he says, and we need to expect persecution, not be surprised by it. It’s more important that Christians and others determine what kind of people they want to be than that they determine to win at all costs. Seeking to live in peace with those around us, including those who would threaten and persecute, is one way to win in the long term. Those who strive for peace instead of violence will gain credibility even with those who vehemently disagree with them in many instances. He points out that American Christians have become entitled, assuming that they have some special privilege that should prevent others from threatening them or disagreeing with them and winning in the courts. He warns against that kind of complacency. “In short,” he says, “we don’t try to win a culture war. We try to glorify God by being like Christ.”

The real magic of this book, if I may put it that way, is that Goodrich indeed draws on caselaw to make his points. But he isn’t afraid to draw heavily on scripture to further shore up is perspectives. That combination of caselaw and scripture makes this book unique indeed.

Finally, I was impressed by the author’s highly readable writing style. This is a topic that could have been either deadly dull or the domain of the unthinking crazed writer who seeks to make the point that his pint is the only one worth entertaining. Goodrich does neither. Instead, you get a look at all aspects of religious freedom, and he offers scriptural solutions for those times when you believe your rights are under threat.

[Tanya · Rating 5 out of 5]

When I started reading "Free to Believe", I did not know that Luke Goodrich is an experienced attorney defending religious freedom for people of all faiths. I have heard about some of the cases he has done, but attorneys are not always on the front page of the newspapers to be recognizable. He has offered a very different approach to presenting the state of religious freedoms today in the United States than anything I have ever read about it before. Using his personal experiences in court and different outcomes, he proves that religious persecution exists today in our society, and it actually does destroy people's lives. These people do not lose their life literally (yet), but they lose everything they have, they are chastised by the mainstream media, they receive death threats. Luke Goodrich brings up a very good point about provision for conscientious objectors in our laws, it is a genius solution to our problem! I do not understand why it has not been proposed in Washington D.C. yet to vote on!

This book is great, it has a lot to think about and learn from, it has a lot of factual information.

[Jerome J. · Rating 5 out of 5]

Free to Believe was a breath of fresh air and a tutorial in Constitutional studies around the question of religious freedom. Mr. Goodrich is clear and concise in his explanation of the cases dealing with religious freedom, and deeply respectful of the people on both sides of the issue. I plan to share this book with everyone I associate: family, friends, colleagues, religious, non-religious, and most importantly anyone who feels they have lost hope around this vital situation of our time.

[Jeff Elliott · Rating 3 out of 5]

Goodrich's lawyer arguments come through very clearly and made me think some things through more deeply and also brought some encouragement regarding religious liberty. However, I was really hoping to find a convincing argument for why religious liberty is necessary or essential for the propagation of the gospel. He does make an attempt (although unconvincing to me) to explain that the right to practice our faith was given by God and is inherent in the hearts of all men. I fail to see how government restrictions of any sort can influence a personal relationship with God. There is an argument to be made however for how the limitations of our acts/practice of worship (gathering together) could prevent us from practicing freely. Goodrich's book deals more with what Christians would be forced to do against their religious beliefs rather than what they would be stopped from doing.

I do greatly appreciate his wisdom and Biblical guidance on the Christian's response to perceived suffering. (See quote from p. 182)

Some quotes and thoughts:
p. 21-Simply put, human beings are created for relationship with God, and God desires relationship with us. But a relationship with God can never be coerced. It must be entered into freely. So God Himself has given human beings freedom to embrace or reject Him.

p. 38-religious freedom means the government, within reasonable limits, leaves religion alone as much as possible.

p. 48-It means that when the government tries to coerce us into embracing its version of truth--or forbids us from embracing our own--it is going against our very nature as human beings. It is treating us as less than fully human. It is, in short, violating a human right.
That's why religious freedom matters: it is a fundamental part of what it means to be a human being. And when the government violates religious freedom it is doing something intrinsically wrong.

p. 50-When the government pressures someone to go against her conscience, it is treating her as less than fully human and is committing an injustice. Just as imprisoning someone without cause is unjust, forcing someone to violate her conscience without cause is unjust. Not surprisingly, Scripture and reason bring us to the same conclusion.

p. 58-In the 1900's, states expelled Jehovah's Witnesses from public schools for refusing to salute the flag.

p. 182-We're called not to win but to be like Jesus; not to fear suffering but to fear God; not to be surprised at hostility but to expect it; not to complain when we lose but to rejoice; not to lash out at our opponents but to love them. We're called not to avoid losing at all costs but to glorify God at all costs.

p. 204-...the most dramatic religious freedom conflicts in Scripture. Most didn't end so miraculously [as Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego]. Just ask Jeremiah, after he was beaten and imprisoned, or John the Baptist, who was beheaded.

Examples Goodrich uses from Scripture about reactions to government:
-Exodus 1:8-22-Pharoah's midwives refuse to kill
-Jeremiah commits treason
-Daniel refuses the king's food
-Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego refuse idolatry
-Esther and Mordecai rescue the Jews
-The Apostles keep preaching -Acts 4
-Paul flees, flourishes and fights Acts 17, 18 24-26
p. 208-these stories demonstrate that God can protect religious freedom in a variety of ways. In the midwives' case, He let them deceive Pharaoah. In Jeremiah's case, he raised up an Ethiopian eunuch to advocate for freedom. In the case of the king's food, He gave Daniel favor so he could negotiate a compromise. In the case of the fiery furnace, He miraculously intervened. And in Esther's case, He put her in a position of power, which she used to rescue her people.

[Jeff · Rating 2 out of 5]

Decent Start. Before I get into this review, it is probably important that you - *my* reader - understand the perspective I'm coming from. And that is that of the "Doorkeeeper" of Sam Shoemaker's somewhat famous poem "I Stand At The Door". So look that up and you'll understand why I'm approaching the rest of this the way I am.

For those "deep inside", they will probably rate this book around 4* or 5*. From that perspective, it is solid but might step on a few toes here and there - and they're not always going to like its slightly-more-pragmatic-than-many-of-them approach to its reasoning.

For the "far outside" crowd, they're probably going to rate this thing much closer to 1*, though the more objective among them might hit it at 2*. There are just so many issues with the book, and this crowd will likely judge them more harshly than I'm about to.

So that is the range I would expect depending on where a particular reader falls on the scale of "deep inside" Christendom - particularly its American version - vs "far outside" of it. Standing at the door, I note that I deduct 1 star immediately the instant I see prooftexting, which is the practice of citing random Bible verses out of context in support of some point or another.

The fact that the prooftexting herein is so rampant - from the ending of the first chapter until nearly literally the last words of the text - and so invidious - several times very obviously taking verses *far* from their original context and meaning by any even semi objective reasoning and often times taking as little as a single word from a particular verse - means that I can't rate this any higher than 3*. And we haven't even gotten to the other issues yet.

The other issues being factual errors and logical fallacies, mostly strawmen but also a few others. This, from a lawyer that boasts of his perfect US Supreme Court record! Factual errors include claiming that a factory is a "typical" work environment in the US. It hasn't been for many years now. Similarly, the author claims that "many" doctors were practicing while abortion was still completely illegal in the US, pre-Roe v Wade, which was decided nearly 37 yrs before the publication of this book. How many professionals - of any stripe - do you know who are still working after 4o years?

The strawmen primarily involve abortion, gay rights, and public spaces - which form 4 of 7 chapters in the biggest section of the book. Here, it becomes evident - particularly in the author's discussion of gay rights - that his closeness to the issue from his professional work becomes as much a hindrance to what he is willing to speak to as a help in pointing out various legal aspects of the circumstances.

It is because of these final two issues that I had to drop my own rating from 3* to 2*.

There is much good to be found here, and at minimum it can help even non-Christians see what prominent Christian legal scholars are thinking. But the issues are simply too rampant to allow me to rank it any higher. Recommended, but should be read with an eye to what is not said as much as what is.

[Jeff Klick · Rating 5 out of 5]

I loved this book! Free to Believe by Luke Goodrich is one of the best books I have read in a long, long time.

Well written and extremely informative, get this book and read it. Now. Today.

Some authors prattle on about what they think they know, and while their thoughts may have limited value, this author writes as an expert and it shows. Well documented and backed up by actual experience, Luke Goodrich does an outstanding job of outlining the current and future battles we all face in the cause of religious liberty.

Consider some of these thoughts to catch a flavor of the book:
• We fully acknowledge the evil in the world even as we hope in the Savior of the world and join
in His work in the world.
• Rightly or wrongly, nonbelievers see Christians as more interested in fighting for their rights
than in laying down their lives.
• For the first time in American history, common Christian beliefs are viewed as incompatible
with the prevailing culture.
• The conflict between gay rights and religious freedom is the most significant threat to religious
freedom in the United States today.
• It’s difficult to find any historical examples of governments that claimed the power to stand
put dangerous belief systems and then wielded that power well.
• Scripture, however, calls us to a radically different approach. We’re called not to win but to be
like Jesus; not to fear suffering but to fear God; not to be surprised at hostility but to expect it.
Not to complain when we lose but to rejoice; not to last out at your opponents but to love them.
We’re called not to avoid losing at all costs but to glorify God at all costs.

There are hundreds more, but the last one should cause us to stop and think a bit. The author has successfully argued multiple cases before the supreme court, yet winning isn’t everything; glorifying God is!

The author is not afraid to enter into controversial discussions ranging from gay rights, abortion, Muslims and Christians relationships, prayer in school, and persecution. I found his comments to be balanced and insightful on all of the topics and many of them caused me to stop and pray.

While clearly describing the current issues, the author remains optimistic about the future of the Church and this in itself is a refreshing change. Get the book and read it and then pass it along to someone else. It is excellent.

The book was provided by Multnomah Publishing in exchange for an honest review.
Dr. Jeffrey A. Klick.

[Laura · Rating 4 out of 5]

Much of America’s pilgrims came to the new world as an escape from religious persecution, They sought refuge in a country to practice their religion in freedom.  Today, many of the ideas of religious freedom are being challenged. Luke Goodrich, author of the book Free to Believe: The Battle Over Religious Liberty in America  offers his book to educate and inform his readers of the religious changes in America and the courts. I gratefully received this book as an advanced uncorrected copy from Waterbrook & Multnomah as a member of the launch team for an honest review. 

Goodrich is a lawyer with Becket Law, a non profit legal institute that represents religious cases of various faiths. Goodrich has presented cases in both the Circuit and Supreme Court level. “Goodrich was part of the Becket legal team that won four major Supreme Court cases in four years: Little Sisters of the Poor v. Burwell, which protected nuns from being forced to violate their faith, Holt v. Hobbs, which protected the right of a Muslim to practice his faith in prison; Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, which protected family business owners from being forced to violate their faith; and Hosanna-Tabor v. EEOC, which protected the right of churches to select their ministers. The Wall Street Journal called Hosanna-Tabor one of “the most important religious liberty cases in a half century”(Luke). https://www.becketlaw.org/staff/luke-... 

Goodrich’s definition of religious freedom follows: “religious freedom means the government, within reasonable limits, leaves religion alone as much as possible.” After defining religious freedom, Goodrich begins to discuss some of the most threatening topics to that freedom, he includes abortion rights, gay rights, the Muslim religion and religious representation in public areas. Goodrich illustrates his topics with thought provoking questions.  The reader is challenged to explore how the change in our culture is affecting the freedoms of the religious institutions. As a Christian myself, I acknowledge how easy it is to become complacent about the freedoms we enjoy in America. Though not an easy read due to the detailed information and depth of the topics presented, I do think it is a powerful tool to examine the current political and governmental climate and the effect on religious freedoms. 

“Luke Goodrich.” Becket, 23 Oct. 2019, https://www.becketlaw.org/staff/luke-....

[Faith · Rating 5 out of 5]

Luke Goodrich of Becket gives a comprehensive course on religious freedom and what it means to defend it for all.



I wasn't sure what to expect when reading this book, as books of a political nature can sometimes veer to the extreme, but this book exceeded my every preconceived notion. Hailed by World Magazine as one of the books of the year, this book lives up to its high praise. Mr. Goodrich starts by defining religious liberty, and that it is for everyone. Outlining how supporting and showing respect/tolerance to other faiths, infact strengthens our witness as Christians and paves the way for winning legal conflicts in the public arena.



Mr. Goodrich effectively uses real legal case examples from his impressive repertoire, drawing on his experience and Christian faith to show a fair, balanced approach to how we as Christians should consider responding to these conflicts. I really liked how he acknowledges that each conflict is unique and there are multiple ways to respond that could be right, and every Christian has differing levels of conviction. I also was encouraged by how he used Biblical examples of religious persecution to show that what we currently face is nothing new under the sun, using the examples of Paul, Jeremiah, Esther and more.



Overall, a must read for everyone! It is balanced and a middle of the road godly response in a midst of a very polarized world, perfect for anyone who follows the news on religious freedom cases (which should be everyone). This book did a great job of explaining why we should all care about religious liberty as well as many things that Christians should consider in business and our witness. Highly recommend.



I received a complimentary copy of this book. Opinions expressed in this review are completely my own.

[Maya · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a timely and important book on what religious freedom is, why it is important (for everyone, not just to those who believe in a transcendent truth, but for atheists as well), and how to strive for it. The author is clearly an excellent lawyer, and he is also a great writer. He repeats his points multiple times, but I didn't find it repetitive, I appreciated the reiteration. He provides many examples of cases throughout the book that demonstrate different facets of the debate over religious freedom.

One of the main points of the book is that times are changing. While in 1990 there was overwhelming bipartisan support for the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), and many states shortly adopted its state level equivalent, in 2015 Indiana faced staunch opposition for trying to adopt their state level RFRA - even by states that had their own RFRA in place! Conscientious objection to abortion used to be respected, while now it is viewed as something to be eradicated. Christian morals used to be compatible with the prevailing culture, while today they are seen as a threat to be dealt with.

While these changes should give us pause to think and assess our own hearts, they should not lead to despair. Goodrich provides multiple Scriptural examples that give us principles for how religious conflicts are to be handled Biblically. To sum it up, instead of desiring to win at all costs, the Biblical response to the current atmosphere is that we should expect suffering, rejoice when it comes, fear God and not man, strive for peace, continue doing good, love our enemies, and care for one another.

Overall, he has a positive outlook for the future (although he incorrectly predicted the Supreme Court would not stretch the definition of the word sex), and reminds us that our trust is not in laws and courts, but in the Almighty God.

[Nancy · Rating 5 out of 5]

The Threat to Religious Freedom in America

One of our most important freedoms as Americans is religious freedom. Our country was founded by groups fleeing their homelands because of religious persecution. They wanted America to be a place where they could practice their religion without fear.

Today many Christians believe their religious freedom is under attack from abortion rights to gay rights to the Muslem religion. The discussion of these problems in the government and news media sometimes leave Christians feeling that it’s a hopeless case to continue to keep the country moral. Although sometimes the prospect is discouraging, the author presents a number of ways Christians can be proactive in dealing with the secular community and telling others why religious freedom is
important.

This is a book that all Christians should read. One point that struck me forcefully is that the government, and particularly the courts must balance a number of freedoms in making decisions. We cannot have things all our way. A second point I felt was very important and one that it’s hard to keep in mind when we live in an affluent society where so many of our needs and wants are met is that Jesus told Christians to be like him. This did not mean that they would not be persecuted or that they would not suffer. Part of being a Christian is keeping your faith through the difficult times and trying to see another’s point of view.

I highly recommend this book. It is an encouraging look at how to hold to your religious beliefs through this period of cultural change.

I received this book from Waterbrook Multnomah for this review.

[Cindy Navarro · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was an interesting read concerning several hot-topic issues that stay in our headlines. Worldviews continue to evolve, some for the good, some not, and our courts are not in agreement in how individual cases should be settled. Goodrich lays out several cases to bring clarity to the legal ramifications of how decisions are reached.

Goodrich says there are 3 major categories of Christian thought, although there are varying degrees of thought in between.

1. Pilgrims believe America was founded on religious freedom and that the Christian faith should be favored.
2. Martyrs believe that 'religious freedom' is an excuse to retain cultural dominance and is a luxury.
3. Beginners believe religious freedom is important but are not sure why or what it should look like.

Goodrich wrote this book to respond to adherents of each of the groups above... and to those who fall in between. I found myself viewing some things slightly differently after reading the thought process and legalities, and other times my point of view was enforced. I recommend the book for those who wish to understand why there is even some doubt on how some cases are handled. You may agree or disagree with his explanations but I enjoyed looking at some opinions from a slightly different angle from a logical, legal perspective.

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received this book free as part of WaterbrookMultnomah’s “Free to Believe” Launch Team. The opinions expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”

[Michelle · Rating 4 out of 5]

Free To Believe is a Christian Living/ Social Issues book by author Luke Goodrich. I wanted to read this book to be informed of what is happening to America’s religious freedom. I have heard about some of the issues presented and surprised about others. The reason the author wrote this book is simple: our culture is changing, religious freedom is not as secure as it once was, and the church is unprepared. (p.4)

The book talks about three different major thoughts among Christians. (Pilgrims) believe religious freedom is a founding principle of our nation, (Martyrs) believe religious freedom is an excuse for trying to maintain a position of cultural dominance and just one more front in the culture war, and (Beginners) are unsure what to think about religious freedom or haven’t given it much thought but are beginning to (p.16)

Even though this book is written by an attorney he does his best to open awareness of what is happening to our religious freedom. I believe this book works well with the information given and would make a great group read. I also recommend it to readers interested in today’s social issues.

Disclaimer: I receive complimentary books from various sources, including, publishers, publicists, authors, and/or NetGalley. I am not required to write a positive review and have not received any compensation. The opinions shared here are my own entirely. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255

#PRHpartner

[Amanda Anger · Rating 5 out of 5]

As a Christian school principal, reading Free to Believe: The Battle over Religious Liberty in America was very enlightening and encouraging. I tend to focus on the cultural attacks that Christians seem to be experiencing and the media loves to cover and then I get discouraged. But Luke Goodrich, who has argued several recent religious liberty cases before the Supreme Court, explains how our history, laws, and case decisions have actually strengthened our freedom to live out our
conscience and religion. His chapter about the much-abused term, “discrimination,” gave a helpful explanation about how it is not evil but rather necessary.

In the culture war today, long-held Christian beliefs are viewed as a threat to the dominant culture. Goodrich explains the fronts where this war is now being waged – abortion, LGBT rights, and growth of the muslim religion in America. The final section of the book lays out helpful strategies for Christians to deal with the increasing opposition.

I appreciated that Goodrich included documentation about relevant cases, but did not get bogged down in legalese and lawyerly arguments. His book was easy to read and understand by laymen. Above all, it was encouraging to see the big picture and realize that religious liberty is still alive and well in America!

This advance-reader copy was provided to me as a Waterbrook Multnomah partner, in exchange for my honest review.

[Jill · Rating 4 out of 5]

"Free to Believe" by Luke Goodrich is one of the most important books you will read this year.  It is one of the most-needed books for Christians today who are concerned about religious freedom.  Can you define religious freedom without identifying it with Christianity? Can you explain why religious freedom is so important? You might think so but, according to Goodrich, you would probably be incorrect--at least slightly.

Goodrich has done an excellent job covering this hot topic and the many subtopics involved in religious freedom such as the LGBTQ agenda and abortion as well as several others.  Goodrich certainly dotted the i's and crossed the t's by providing in-depth information and giving practical advice on how to prepare for the future.

There were several issues that I had with the book that bears mentioning. First, he did take several scripture verses out of context and he discusses court cases assuming people have heard of them and doesn't go into as much detail as he probably should. Fortunately, an Internet search can provide background.

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received this book free as part of Waterbrook Multnomah’s “Free to Believe” Launch Team. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”

[Joshua Prince · Rating 5 out of 5]

I really enjoyed Prof. Goodrich’s book, and I recommend it to everyone. One minor thought. I remain largely unpersuaded by his argument that one of the reasons that we afford religious liberty to Muslims is because if we allow them to practice their religion, they will see our good will and through it, they might eventually convert to Christianity. To be sure, the book does not include that as a top reason, or even as a motivating one, for defending free-exercise rights. But I find that it slightly—though undoubtedly unintentionally—undercuts the importance of religious freedom as a societal good in its own right. We afford Muslims and other people of faith religious liberty because it is the right thing to do, not because at some point our kindness might lead them to convert. Overall, this is a minor grievance. I know that Goodrich and I are in agreement on the transcendent importance of allowing men and women of faith to live in accordance with that faith, so the overall message of the book (which forcefully defended religious liberty as a society right) is important and timely. I greatly enjoyed learning about his courageous attempts at defending our first freedom with the great men and women of Becket. If you are interested to learn how First Amendment litigation plays out in the courts and to further your understanding of the Constitutional right to freely exercise religion, this book should be near the top of your list.