It’s a real pleasure to be here, especially following Walter Meade, who has been one of the prominent voices in American foreign policy for many years. I appreciate Marc inviting me to speak on the subject of the Christian theological basis for religious freedom, a topic I don’t often get to address in public. Today, I want to discuss the profound reasons for religious freedom, particularly its Christian roots that extend beyond Christians to all people. I believe that the theological foundation for international religious freedom, including its positive impact on international security, is deeply rooted in Christian theology. Last year marked the 500th anniversary of the Protestant Reformation, which highlighted the theology of religious freedom from reformers like Luther and Calvin. This theology, rooted in the scriptures and the early church fathers, also influenced the American Founding.
My experience as a diplomat over 21 years has shown me the secular nature of diplomacy. Madeleine Albright noted the reluctance among diplomats of her era to engage with religion, a sentiment that still persists to some extent. However, this secularism has sometimes hindered our efforts to promote International Religious Freedom effectively. There is a hesitancy in institutions like the State Department and USAID to support religious minorities, such as Iraqi Christians and Yazidis, despite acknowledging their plight as victims of genocide. This reluctance is a tactical and, in some cases, an anti-Christian stance that ignores the foundational Christian roots of religious freedom.
While Christianity has historically contributed to concepts of freedom and dignity, modern perceptions often paint it as irrational and illiberal. This view complicates efforts to advocate for religious freedom both domestically and internationally. Despite historical instances of Christian intolerance, the rich tapestry of Christian teachings on human dignity and freedom underpins modern ideas of self-government. The early Christian understanding of human freedom, rooted in the scriptures, emphasized the equality and freedom inherent in being created in God’s image. This theological framework evolved through centuries of persecution and theological reflection, influencing concepts like natural law and individual conscience.
Medieval contributions such as the church’s assertion of freedom from secular authority and the idea of individual conscience laid the groundwork for modern religious freedom. The Protestant Reformation further emphasized individual conscience and the authority of scripture over church doctrine, contributing significantly to the American understanding of religious liberty. In the American Founding, religious freedom was enshrined as a core principle, rooted in the belief in the value of religion for individual flourishing and social order. The First Amendment’s guarantee of religious freedom reflects this commitment to protecting the rights of conscience and religious communities.
Note that when the Protestant founders considered wording for what became the First Amendment, one option was protecting the rights of conscience. They chose instead to protect the free exercise of religion. Scholar Michael McConnell argues they chose the phrase “the free exercise of religion” because they wanted to protect the public rights involved in free exercise. Conscience is an interior matter, not just those private rights of conscience. Equally important, they were protecting, said McConnell, the rights of religious communities, not just individuals in the free exercise of religion.
Many believe that the First Amendment’s ban on establishment was to keep religion out of our public life. The purpose of the Establishment Clause, however, is precisely the opposite of that perception. Our founders intended it to keep government out of religion’s realm, thereby limiting government’s power and ensuring the moral vibrancy of the American people. These ideas, rooted deeply in Catholic and Protestant Christian thought, were designed to protect everyone, not just Christians.
In my view, the essence of the American understanding of religious freedom should guide our foreign policy. This means ensuring equal protection in law and culture for the free exercise of religion. Since 1998, we’ve had a statutory requirement to advance religious freedom through the International Religious Freedom Act. Unfortunately, our foreign policy establishment has often strayed from the founders’ understanding of religious freedom, hindering our impact globally.
Despite these challenges, recent efforts such as those under Ambassador-at-Large Sam Brownback and events like the ministerial have shown progress. As Christians and American citizens, we have a responsibility to support policies that promote religious freedom globally. Here are five ways Christians can act: stand up for persecuted believers with love and compassion, pray for those suffering for their faith, influence our government to prioritize religious freedom, reclaim the traditional understanding of religious freedom for all, and live openly as Christians in a secular world.
These actions are crucial not only for defending religious freedom but also for upholding Christian values in an increasingly secular and sometimes hostile society. We must not hide our faith but shine as examples of Christ’s teachings, particularly in areas like the sanctity of life and sexual morality. By doing so, we fulfill our Christian duty and contribute positively to our nation’s moral fabric. Let’s not diminish our faith under societal pressures but boldly live out our beliefs.
Thank you very much for the discussion here. I wanted to revisit the patristic foundation for religious freedom or freedom of conscience. This is crucial to emphasize not only to a Christian audience but also to secular audiences. The historical narrative often reflected in works like Mark Lilla’s “The Stillborn God” or similar pieces highlights a perceived separation during the 17th century that aimed to remove religion from public life.
Prior to this, the Middle Ages were characterized as largely theocratic and oppressive, often attributed, in large part, to the Catholic Church. However, this narrative overlooks significant theological reflections from early Christians living under persecution. These early Christians, though a minority, began developing foundational beliefs centered on Jesus Christ and the formation of religious doctrine.
Thomas Jefferson, for instance, drew inspiration from early Christian thinkers like Tertullian and Lactantius when drafting religious freedom laws in Virginia. Although I intended to bring specific references from our work at the Religious Freedom Institute, I regrettably forgot them today. Our institute’s two-volume project, “Christianity and Freedom,” includes insightful chapters, such as those by esteemed scholar Robert Louis Wilken from the University of Virginia.
It’s important to note that while Enlightenment thinking is often credited with modern concepts of religious freedom, its roots trace back further into Christian antiquity. This contrasts sharply with secular arguments that advocate for keeping religion out of public life, viewing it as superstitious and divisive. Understanding this historical context is crucial, especially when discussing the intentions behind the Establishment Clause.
Moving forward, discussions about Libertas ecclesia in medieval Europe are pertinent. This concept doesn’t seek to eliminate all jurisdiction over conscience but rather to protect the Church’s jurisdiction from state interference. This historical perspective challenges simplistic views that equate religious freedom solely with secular ideas of individual autonomy.
The Catholic Church’s stance on conscience underscores its belief in being the custodian of religious truth. This position has evolved, particularly since the Second Vatican Council, to emphasize individual conscience formation without claiming coercive power over secular authorities. This nuanced approach navigates complexities surrounding religious freedom while upholding fundamental Catholic teachings.
Regarding Saudi Arabia and broader Arab nations, there are significant challenges in advancing religious freedom. Saudi Arabia, for instance, poses substantial obstacles despite geopolitical cooperation. The approach to promoting religious freedom in such contexts requires careful consideration of diplomatic strategies that balance national interests with human rights advocacy.
In conclusion, American foreign policy must transcend rhetorical gestures and reactive measures in promoting religious freedom globally. Utilitarian arguments, alongside moral imperatives, can potentially persuade nations to adopt policies that respect religious minorities. This dual approach aims not only to enhance economic growth and stability but also to foster genuine societal change.
Coercion is not effective in changing the religion of people; military force may kill, but it’s not a viable solution. Instead, I’ve spent the last decade developing utilitarian arguments. These arguments, not the Christian spiritual ones we’ve discussed today, question why atheists, Chinese atheists, Saudi Imams, or Iranian Grand Ayatollahs need religious freedom.
Western notions of religious freedom are often viewed with suspicion in these contexts. Advocating for religious freedom can also be framed in terms of self-interest. For example, promoting stability and economic growth can appeal to nations like Saudi Arabia, despite challenges in advocating for democracy in the Arab world.
This is a complex issue with no simple solution. Those interested in these topics or seeking internships can visit the Religious Freedom Institute’s website. We have action teams in various regions, including the Middle East, South Asia, Southeast Asia, and North America. Whether you seek religious or moral arguments or utilitarian ones, we offer diverse perspectives to engage with these global challenges.
