Robust religious freedom is under attack says Dr Ryan Messmore who gave this year’s Acton Lecture, an annual event defending religious freedom sponsored by the Centre for Independent Studies (CIS). Lord Acton is the 19^th century Christian historian famous for warning that “absolute power corrupts absolutely”.

More and more, Western societies appear to be settling for a weak version of religious freedom according to Messmore, who studied the place of religion in the public square in his six years at the Heritage Foundation thinktank in Washington DC.

“I want to consider a troubling possibility, that western societies only preserve religious freedom for one type of religion: A privatised religion.”

Messmore, who believes that religion is being squeezed out of the public square, quickly reached for an appropriate Lord Acton quote:

“The modern theory, which has swept away every authority except that of the state… is the enemy of that common freedom in which religious freedom is included.

“It condemns, as a State within the State, every inner group and community, administering its own affairs; and by proclaiming the abolition of privileges, it emancipates the subjects of every such authority in order to transfer them exclusively to its own.

“It recognises liberty only in the individual… Under its sway , therefore, every man may profess his own religion more or less freely; but his religion is not free to administer its own laws.”

Messmore’s message is that Lord Acton’s warning has come true.

“Lord Acton penned this warning in the 1860s” says Messmore. He predicted “freedom for individuals not institutions”.

“Freedom only for some sorts of religions. What appears to be denied is the more robust freedom of a religious institution to govern itself.”

Messmore describes the US scene: religious freedom is being reduced to the ability to attend church services, to sing religious songs on a Sunday morning or to pray, but not for a group to govern itself with its own laws.

“How a society views religion, shapes its view of religious freedom”, says Messmore.

“I want to examine the trend in modern western cultures towards the privatisation of religion.

“The missionary Lesslie Newbiggen claims that the decisive feature of our culture into the public and the private.

“The public is the arena of economics, politics and hard science. In contrast the private side is held to be the realm of personal opinion, art, music and religion.

“This dualism between faith and reason, science and humanities is where the average western citizen lives. This split helps explain why those who use religious language in public debates are accused of doing something wrong.”

The word “religion” has changed in meaning for our society, Messmore notes. While the word “religion” originally had to do with the ties between people, today the word is now often used to mean “the interior beliefs of an individual”.

“As religion has become privatised it has become increasingly narrowed in its focus… towards therapeutic spirituality.

“In many cultures today people understand religion as relating to a person’s insights and insides.”

Messmore believes that society should provide space for individuals and communities to act according to their religious conviction.

“The privatisation of religion shapes views about religion’s freedom. It applies to what people do on Sunday, but what about Monday afternoon? Are people genuinely free to carry out their business activities in freedom?

“In the US, unfortunately less and less so.”

Obamacare, the mandatory health care scheme that forms one of the debating points in the current presidential election, provides an example of Messmore’s contention that “Legal trends in the States threaten the ability of schools, hospitals and small businesses to operate within their teaching in their operation”.

Part of this legislation requires all employers to cover abortion and contraception in their employee’s health insurance. “This mandate forces many religious organisations to violate their religious conscience”.

“Over 330 organisations have been affected. These include (evangelical) Wheaton and Biola Universities, (the catholic) Notre Dame and (religious television) EWTN. Catholic groups face a (collective) $130m fine if they don’t provide health insurance.

“This is like government telling kosher delis they must sell bacon or face a fine”.

To be exempt an institution must be a tax exempt charity, primarily existing to teach religion and serve and employ mostly followers.

“This is the narrowest religious exemption in the United States’ history,” Messmore points out. “In other words the US government is prepared to protect religious institutions that preach about caring for the poor, but not religious organisations that actually care for them.

“This exemption reveals a view of religion that is only about doctrines and beliefs. It ignores… the social realities of religious faiths.”

Messmore’s thesis is, just as Acton warned, as the modern state has expanded in power it has recognised as a threat smaller groups which have their own authority. The state has sought to transfer people from the group’s authority (for example a church community’s  leadership) to the state’s authority.

“Throughout the 20th century the state has grown to take over the functions of smaller institutions like churches, family and civil associations. This is the state bearing a certain vision of the good, seeking to rescue its people. This is the state setting itself up as the church.”

The answer, according to Messmore is “Ladies and gentlemen we need a ‘more robust view of religion’”.

In his view, instead of being restricted to worship and the study of theology, religion should influence other areas of learning, including politics and economics.

This leads in turn to a more robust view of religious freedom.

“Churches and religious communities are not like the Post Office carrying out a narrow function of the state”.

Independent of the state, Christian congregations have often been at the forefront of addressing social and political need, such as opposing slavery, of engaging in charity. This has operated to society’s good, Messmore suggests.
In his vision, religious communities would be given room to set their own rules, and manage their own institutions. Governments would provide a framework of laws regarding public order and safety. There would be limits. In answer to a question from Peter Kurti (CIS Research Fellow, Religion and the Free Society Program) about Sharia law, Messmore made it clear that the State would impose limits. Society would work out the space for these institutions to work within: it would “not be a free for all.”  Governments should expect these institutions to carry out their work within public order and law.

“The problem today is not a handful of voices who want to cleanse the public square of religions,” Messmore concluded. “We face a more pernicious problem: the attitudes causing the public square to be cleansed of all but privatised religion”.

A video of the lecture will be available at cis.org.au in about a week.

Dr Ryan Messmore will become the president of Campion College in December. Campion is a Catholic Liberal Arts tertiary education institution in Toongabbie, Sydney. For the past six years he served at The Heritage Foundation, a conservative thinktank, in Washington, D.C. as a research fellow in religion and civil society.

Image: Lord Acton