cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/3377375

I read an essay by a christian a while ago that pointed out that the separation of church and state wasn’t about protecting the state from religion - it was about protecting religion from the state.

The gist of the argument was that religion should be concentrating on the eternal, and politics, by necessity, concentrates on the immediate. The author was concerned that welding religion and politics together would make religion itself political, meaning it would have to conform to the secular moment rather than looking to saving souls or whatever.

The mind meld of evangelical christianity and right wing politics happened in the mid to late 70s when the US was trying to racially integrate christian universities, which had been severely limiting or excluding black students. Since then, republicans and christians have been in bed together. The southern baptist convention, in fact, originally endorsed the Roe decision because it helped the cause of women. It was only after they decided to go all in on social conservatism that it became a sin.

Christians today are growing concerned about a falloff in attendance and membership. This article concentrates on how conservatism has become a call for people to publicly identify as evangelical while not actually being religious, because it’s an our team thing.

Evangelicals made an ironically Faustian bargain and are starting to realize it.

  • mwguy@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    All of them kept them. For example Mass had a state religion until 1833. Most kept them until the mid to late 1800s when the amount of Irish Catholic and German/Lutheran immigrants made it clear that if they kept a state religion that it wasn’t going to remain theirs.

    • fubo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Most of the state churches were disestablished before the Bill of Rights was ratified in 1791; Connecticut and Massachusetts being the exceptions.

    • Bramble Dog@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It appears 1833 is when Massachusetts formally adopted their state constitution, so that is likely the reason in.that case, hut I will look more into it.