For nonestablishment

In the introduction to this essay, the editor notes that "Christian nationalists... [contend that] the antidote to declining religiosity and deteriorating morals is a state-established church (either tacitly established or more formally)." On the contrary:

...Walker made the case that when a state declares itself the arbiter and defender of religion, the results are both predictable and regrettable. “The historical record is unbeaten,” he concluded, “in nationalized Christianity corrupting true religion.” A far better scenario, Walker suggests, is religious nonestablishment.

A Baptist theologian critiquing state religion is not exactly newsworthy: Baptist support for religious nonestablishment is, after all, a rich tradition. It’s no coincidence that when Thomas Jefferson wrote to assure a group of religious minorities that government should erect “a wall of separation between church and state,” he was writing to a group of Baptists. ....

This struck me for a couple of reasons. First, it runs counter to everything I believe as a Christian about the ideal relationship between church and state. To be clear, I am not a strict separationist. I believe the First Amendment protects religious individuals and groups, allowing them to engage the public square without government interference. And the best method for guaranteeing a thriving relationship between church and state is a robust and generous nonestablishment of religion, inasmuch as it keeps the government far away from religious traditions and institutions.

But the second reason—and why I’m writing this essay—is that it runs counter to everything I know as a social scientist about why and when religion flourishes in a given society. ....

...[N]onestablishment provides more benefits for American religion than any establishment regime ever could. Conservatives should grasp this more easily than anyone, with our healthy (and justified) skepticism of government power and influence over the lives of its people. We should cheer legal decisions that keep the state out of the business of religious traditions, denominations, and worshippers. Cultural pressures, real and disruptive as they are, are nothing new to the church and its history of resilience in proclaiming the gospel. .... (more)

Daniel Bennett, "A State Church Isn’t a Panacea for Cultural Problems," The Dispatch, April 26, 2026.