Versión de HTML Básico
social—was rendered less effective.”28 The same “old-fashioned par
son” complained of the tendency to substitute Prohibition for the
Gospel when he asked, “Are we to be content with a merely negative
religion? . . . These glad young folk do not like the thing which
they know as religion . . . from what they see of the reforming army
of the Lord, and they say . . . ‘We don’t want to be like them.’ ”
Thus, Carter declares, the dry leaders contributed greatly to the
“secularist bias of the rising generation by causing it to associate the
Church simultaneously with a joyless legalistic morality and with
dubious ethical practices” used by some in order to achieve the suc
cess of The Cause.29
These dangers, of course, are not peculiar to the championing of
Prohibition or temperance; but they are implicit in the championing
of any single issue in such a way as to divert attention from other
equally important or more fundamental ones. In Jesus’ day it was the
Sabbath laws and ceremonial requirements. In a day that is not
altogether gone in this country it is sometimes blue laws. In the
’thirties it was “peace at any price” in Europe. Frequently it is some
form of peace and prosperity at home—to distract attention from our
obligations abroad.
THEY MISUNDERSTAND THE DOCTRINE OF THE SEPARATION OF
c h u r c h
a n d
s t a t e
.
The founding fathers of our country wisely
provided that there should be no established church on the national
level. The first step in this direction was taken with the adoption of
the original Constitution which stipulated that “no religious test shall
ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under
the United States” (Article VI, Section 3). There was an immediate
demand, however, that this provision be supplemented by a more
explicit guarantee of religious freedom. Accordingly, the First Amend
ment, which constituted part of the Bill of Rights, provided that
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” This amendment meant that
no one church could be given preferential status or government sup
port at the national level through the levying of taxes for its support
or through the requirement of attendance at its services and the im
position of penalties for nonattendance. It also meant that Congress
26 Ibid.,
p. 41.
29
Ibid.,
p. 44.
338
Biblical Faith and Social Ethics