Christianity doesn’t need protection from the state

Young, conservative Christian voters increasingly want government to protect their faith. They shouldn't.

In an opinion piece in today’s New York Times, history professor Daniel K. Williams writes the following about the political preferences of Gen Z conservative Christians:

“Today’s young Christian right voters may be less interested in specific matters of policy than in tribal identity. When the Republican Party abandoned its 40-year commitment to a national abortion ban last year, a few conservative Christians complained, but evangelical support for Mr. Trump remained as strong as ever.

Political activism is less about getting a specific policy outcome and more about electing the candidate who is believed to be on God’s side. And in determining who is on God’s side, what counts is not so much a candidate’s faith or moral virtue but rather the person’s willingness to protect those seen as God’s people — that is, conservative Christians.”

This was new to me. I hadn’t fathomed that some Christian voters may be less concerned with a candidate’s values than with who they see as more likely to protect Christianity—or a certain expression of Christianity—in the public square.

But is it beneficial to the health, integrity, and spreading of the faith (which is the principal aim of evangelical Christianity) to have the nation’s leaders actively “protecting” Christianity? What should a president do to protect Christians and Christianity in America?

Honestly? Absolutely nothing.

I don’t think we want a President to be in the business of protecting Christianity—or any faith—more than the First Amendment already protects the free exercise of religion. Because Christianity doesn’t need the backing or protection of the state to thrive. Historically, Christianity spread with most fervor when it was persecuted. Look at the early Church and what the first disciples endured: most of them were killed and yet the faith spread rapidly across continents. In fact, it was partly because of such horrific persecution by the empires of the time that the message of the early Church took hold. When people are willing to face death or jail for what they believe, others are compelled to confront what could inspire such faith. Combine that with Christianity’s message of radical love, and you have something truly powerful.

We thank God that America is a country where everyone is free to practice their religion of choice. That is a foundational principle of this nation, the only protection Christianity needs, and the only protection a president should promise when it comes to religion. The First Amendment reads: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” That’s all we ought to be: a country where you are free to worship God passionately and openly. And so is your Muslim neighbor. So is your Christian neighbor with their different denominational practices. Amen to that.

Every serious presidential contender in American history has claimed to be a Christian. They would likely say that their faith was not due to some state-sanctioned prayer, but because of who Jesus is and what he means to them. That God so loved the world he sent his only son to take on human flesh, to walk among us, and die for us — all so that our sins could be forgiven. So that we could be freed from the eternal weight of our mistakes. That he would do this for me, the greatest of all sinners. That he would do this for all of us, no matter where you’re from or what you’ve done. That is the greatest story ever told, and that story does not need any protection or promotion from the state to spread like wildfire.

When states get behind religion—when religion cozies up to power—the message loses its integrity, loses its special sauce. When the state commands a religion, do the people of that country believe because of the convictions in their heart, or do holy rituals lose their sacredness?

In our love for God and wanting Jesus to be known more, we risk trying to leverage the state to create a culture of Christianity that can only come from individual free will. Christianity will not spread when we force people to say “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance. It will not gain followers because we put up the Ten Commandments in public buildings or have teachers lead their students in prayer at the start of the school day. That will have the opposite effect: turning our beloved faith into something coerced and associated with all the problems of a federal government that will never be fully “Christian”. Most of us didn’t become followers because our parents dragged us to church (though their faith and prayers likely played an important role). We found Christ after we had a radical and transformative encounter with him. We felt the Holy Spirit in our hearts. We came to know the love of God. Nothing the state can do will ever foster faith more than the actions of God, and the actions and prayers of loving Christian neighbors.

Jesus never once asked the authorities to protect his faith and his followers. Instead, he knowingly risked his life by upsetting leadership of all stripes—Jewish and Roman alike—by challenging them about all the ways their actions did not reflect God. We should do the same. But Jesus was quite clear about one thing: we are to love our neighbor, whoever they are, whether we consider them an enemy or not. That’s the story of the Good Samaritan, and that’s the story that best reflects what God did for us. No matter how many times we turn away or say we don’t need God, he still loves us so much that he died for us. After telling the story of the Good Samaritan, Jesus turns to his audience and says, “Go and do likewise”. That right there is all we need. That’s the commission for all of us as disciples of Jesus: to go and love as he loved. No action from the state can do more to protect or promote Christianity than that.