Lines Crossed: Separation of Church and State
Has the Obama Administration Trampled on Freedom of Religion and Freedom
of Conscience?
US House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform (16 February, 2012)
Testimony of C.
Ben Mitchell, Ph.D.
Graves Professor of Moral Philosophy,
Union
University
[PDF
File]
Good morning Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. I am C. Ben
Mitchell, Graves
Professor of Moral Philosophy at Union University in Jackson, Tennessee
and an ordained
minister and former pastor in the Southern Baptist Convention. I am also
a consultant on
biomedical and life issues for the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission
of the Southern
Baptist Convention.
I am both honored and humbled to testify in support of the protection of
religious freedom and
liberty of conscience. I am honored because I have the privilege of
following in the legacy of my
Baptist forebears who were such stalwart defenders of religious freedom.
I am humbled because
many of those forebears suffered and died so that you and I could live
in a nation with religious
freedom from state coercion.
I stand in the rich legacy of individuals like Roger Williams (c.
1603-1683), a one-time Baptist
and the founder of Providence Plantation which later became the state of
Rhode Island, who
declared in no uncertain terms that the violation of a person's
religious conscience was nothing
less than "the rape of the soul."1 Williams understood that forcing a
person through the power of
the state to violate his or her own conscience is a monstrous harm.
Moreover, every American is a legatee of the freedoms secured in our
Constitution partly
through the influence of the Reverend John Leland (1754-1841), who was a
Baptist minister in
Massachusetts and Virginia and who became a friend of James Madison,
Thomas Jefferson, and
other American founders. It was Leland who helped frame the free
exercise clause of our First
Amendment.
In a sermon Leland preached in 1791, he proclaimed, "Every man must give
an account of
himself to God, and therefore every man ought to be at liberty to serve
God in that way that he
can best reconcile it to his conscience. If government can answer for
individuals at the day of
judgment, let men be controlled by it [government] in religious matters;
otherwise let men be
free." He continued, "religion is a matter between God and individuals,
religious opinions of
men not being the objects of civil government nor any way under its
control."2
Finally, I must appeal to a 20th century Texas Baptist minister, George
W. Truett (1867-1944),
pastor of the historic First Baptist Church of Dallas. In a sermon
preached from the steps of the
U. S. Capitol on May 16, 1920, Reverend Truett recounted a discussion at
a London dinner
between an American statesman, Dr. J. L. Curry, and a member of the
British House of
Commons, John Bright. Mr. Bright asked Dr. Curry, "What distinct
contribution has your
America made to the science of government?" Curry responded immediately,
"The doctrine of
religious liberty." After a moment's reflection, Mr. Bright offered a
reply, "It was a tremendous
contribution."3
I have two reasons for citing these historical examples. On the one
hand, it is to remind us that
what American University law professor Daniel Dreisbach and his
co-editor Mark David Hall
have called "the sacred rights of conscience," which we Americans enjoy,
were secured at an
extraordinary cost. On the other hand, it is to remind us that as Truett
said later in his sermon,
religious liberty was, at least largely, "a Baptist achievement," for
the common good. Every
American is a beneficiary of this legacy; we are all freeloading on
their sacrifice.
That is why I am here to decry the contraception, abortifacient, and
sterilization mandate issued
by the Department of Health and Human Services on January 20, 2012. The
policy is an
unconscionable intrusion by the state into the consciences of American
citizens. Contrary to
portrayals in some of the popular media, this is not only a Catholic
issue. All people of faith-
and even those who claim no faith-have a stake in whether or not the
government can violate
the consciences of its citizenry. Religious liberty and the freedom to
obey one's conscience is
also not just a Baptist issue. It is an American issue that is enshrined
in our founding documents.
The Obama Administration's most recent so-called "accommodation" for
religious organizations
is no accommodation at all. It is a bait and switch scheme of the most
egregious sort.
Notes
1. Roger Williams, "The Bloudy Tenent of Persecution," in Daniel L.
Dreisbach and Mark David Hall (eds), The
Sacred Right of Conscience: Selected Readings on Religious Liberty and
Church-State Relations in the American
Founding (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2009), p. 151.
2. John Leland, "The Rights of Conscience Inalienable," in Political
Sermons of the American Founding Era: 1730-1805, 2 vols. Foreword by Ellis Sandoz , 2nd ed. (Indianapolis: Liberty
Fund, 1998), Vol. 2. For a profile of John
Leland see the PBS series, God in America.
https://www.pbs.org/godinamerica/people/john-leland.html
3. George W. Truett, "Baptists and Religious Liberty," reprinted in
Baptist History and Heritage, 33, no. 1 (Winter
1998) , p. 69.