Mormon Church

Mormons believe strongly in religious freedom. Many of the early settlers who came to the United States came because they needed the freedom to practice their religions. While some of them weren’t practitioners of freedom of religion for others, this longing for the free practice of a given religion eventually led to increased respect for other religions. By the time the Mormons were establishing the restored gospel, the world was somewhat prepared to allow such a faith to develop. Of course, there were challenges and many people attempted to block religious freedom for Mormons and for some other religions, but in general, the country was well-suited for such an enterprise.

Following are thoughts from Mormon leaders on religious freedom:

Separation of Church and State:

“Unfortunately, good culture alone is not strong enough to cause good culture to endure in perpetuity. Additional strength is needed from the power of theistic conviction. For this reason, a policy to separate completely church and state could become completely counterproductive. Theistic forces would be erased and atheistic forces would be allowed to flourish unopposed in the public square. The theistic and noble concept of “freedom of religion,” could be twisted and turned to become an atheistic “freedom from religion.” Such an unbalanced policy could sweep out theistic forces for societal success and leave the field wide open to atheistic ideology, secularism, suffering huge losses for all.” (See Apostle Talks Religious Freedom to Boston Youth for more information on this talk by Russell M. Nelson.)

Religious Exclusion

Our government is succumbing to pressure to distance itself from God and religion. Consequently, the government is discovering that it is incapable of contending with people who are increasingly “unbridled by morality and religion.” A simple constitutional prohibition of state-sponsored church has evolved into court-ordered bans against representations of the Ten Commandments on government buildings, Christmas manger scenes on public property, and prayer at public meetings. Instead of seeking the “national morality” based on “religious principle” that Washington spoke of, many are actively seeking a blind standard of legislative amorality, with a total exclusion of the mention of God in the public square.

Such a standard of religious exclusion is absolutely and unequivocally counter to the intention of those who designed our government. Do you think that mere chance placed the freedom to worship according to individual conscience among the first freedoms specified in the Bill of Rights—freedoms that are destined to flourish together or perish separately? The Founding Fathers understood this country’s spiritual heritage. They frequently declared that God’s hand was upon this nation, and that He was working through them to create what Chesterton once called “a nation with the soul of a church.” (Richard John Neuhaus, “A New Order for the Ages,” speech delivered at the Philadelphia Conference on Religious Freedom, 30 May 1991.) While they were influenced by history and their accumulated knowledge, the single most influential reference source for their work on the Constitution was the Holy Bible.

(M. Russell Ballard, “Religion in a Free Society,” Ensign, Oct 1992, 64)

There seems to be developing a new civil religion. The civil religion I refer to is a secular religion. It has no moral absolutes. It is nondenominational. It is nontheistic. It is politically focused. It is antagonistic to religion. It rejects the historic religious traditions of America. It feels strange. If this trend continues, nonbelief will be more honored than belief. While all beliefs must be protected, are atheism, agnosticism, cynicism, and moral relativism to be more safeguarded and valued than Christianity, Judaism, and the tenets of Islam, which hold that there is a Supreme Being and that mortals are accountable to him? If so, this would, in my opinion, place America in great moral jeopardy.

For those who believe in God, this new civil religion fosters some of the same concerns as the state religions that prompted our forefathers to escape to the New World. Nonbelief is becoming more sponsored in the body politic than belief. History teaches well the lesson that there must be a unity in some moral absolutes in all societies for them to endure and progress. Indeed, without a national morality they disintegrate. In Proverbs, we are reminded that “righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people.” (Prov. 14:34.) The long history and tradition of America, which had its roots in petitions for divine guidance, is being challenged.

The new civil religion is different from that envisioned by Benjamin Franklin, who seems to have first used the term “civil religion.” (M. Marty, Pilgrims in Their Own Land, 1984, pp. 155–66.) Franklin’s “civil religion,” as I understand it, was envisioned to replace the state religions of Europe, with their forced taxation and oppression. Franklin no doubt envisioned that this vacuum would be filled with a patriotism reflected by national symbolism, pride, ethics, values, and purpose. His eloquent statement concerning divine intervention in the Constitutional Convention clearly indicated he was not opposed to religiosity.

(James E. Faust, “A New Civil Religion,” Ensign, Oct 1992, 69)

Quoting George Washington

In January 1793, in a letter to members of New Church of Baltimore, President George Washington made the following observation which seems so very pertinent now:

“We have abundant reason to rejoice that in this Land the light of truth and reason has triumphed over the power of bigotry and superstition, and that every person may here worship God according to the dictates of his own heart. In this enlightened Age and in this Land of equal liberty, it is our boast that a man’s religious tenets will not forfeit the protection of the Laws, nor deprive him of the full respect and rights of citizenship to which he is entitled.”

(See The Threatened Demise of Religion in the Public Square – Talk Given by Elder Lance B. Wickman at J. Reuben Clark Law Society.)

Interfaith Cooperation to Protect Religious Freedom

Members of our church often join with other like-minded citizens, regardless of religious persuasion, in support of worthy causes and humanitarian projects. This can be done without losing independent identity and strength. We are mindful of history’s lesson that attempts of interfaith groups to unify through theological blending have not always been successful. Indeed, when divine doctrines are compromised to accommodate social pressures, religious institutions become no more relevant in their mission than other agencies of good intent. At the same time, we should be models of tolerance of others whose sacred beliefs may differ from our own. We recognize that if one religion is persecuted, all are attacked.

We need to safeguard the proper relationships of religion to governments and to the people we serve. We are under obligation to take a strong stand on moral issues in order to preserve a wholesome and ethical environment. As religious leaders, our participation in the political process may be needed to protect precious religious liberty. This is particularly important in countries of the earth whose citizens, until recently, have been deprived of freedom of religious expression and practice. Many of those nations are now shaping laws to allow freedoms that citizens of other countries have long enjoyed. These developing democracies deserve support.

Selected humanitarian projects can be pursued independently or cooperatively. We can promote education regarding moral values, the arts, service to humanity, and the value of education itself. We can give encouragement for family life, knowing that patience, righteousness, and love will be rewarded with joy.

Russell M. Nelson, “Combatting Spiritual Drift—Our Global Pandemic,” Ensign, Nov 1993, 102–8

Tags: freedom of religion, religious freedom, religious liberty

This entry was posted on Monday, June 21st, 2010 at 7:24 am and is filed under Array. You can follow any responses to this entry through the http://mormonchurch.com/1666/religious-freedom/feed feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.