"Christofascism"

On Metaphysical Presuppositions

There has been much confusion lately on the matter of the “separation of Church and State,” so I write here to provide a detailed analysis that points to a very specific conclusion.

With the recent SCOTUS decisions that include one in favor of the football coach who developed a practice of prayer, with students voluntarily joining in, before games, as well as on abortion and other issues, the American left is in full meltdown with accusations of “American theocracy,” and “Christofascism.”

One can be – at least remotely – sympathetic to these ideas which proceed fairly logically from a doctrine of "separation of Church and State.” However, that phrase can be found nowhere in the Constitution. Nor can any phrase with that meaning be found in American founding documents. Notably, the word “God,” “Creator,” and the concept of Natural Law can be located therein.

So, what does the Constitution actually say about “Church,” and its relation to “State?” From the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, Bill of Rights, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;…” The second portion, that government is prohibited from interfering with “the free exercise [of religion]” is fairly clearly why the football coach in the above case was vindicated by SCOTUS (note, you may say “it just says “Congress,” not “government,” but the founders understood Congress to be the initiator of all government action in this respect, so, here, “Congress” is synonymous with “government”).

What does it mean to make a law “respecting an establishment of religion?” This can be traced directly to the disastrous experience the founders had with the Church of England, and their resolve to prohibit the formation of a State-Church in the United States. It is not really that difficult to decipher: Congress may not designate an official religion, or back a religion (or “Church”) in an official capacity such as funding.

Where, then, does “separation of Church and State” come from? It’s simply from a poorly worded (and misconstrued) letter written by Jefferson. It is not law, and it is not a guide on how to interpret the First Amendment.

The founders knew something that we have forgotten over the past near-century of secularism: that you cannot do away with metaphysics, and presuppositions about the fundamental (theological) nature of existence. Secular Humanism (a branch-off of Marxism, and Marx’s “Social Man”) made clever inroads into American culture by denying the existence of metaphysics, and making faith taboo, all while hiding its own religion nature as a system of metaphysical presuppositions. Secularists believe (see: faith) in the big bang, structural determinism, social constructivism, dialectical Gnosticism, and so on. These are, by definition, metaphysical items, but we are not supposed to notice.

Over this course of time these secularists – themselves highly religious and particularly zealous – swapped out the metaphysics of their Marxian Gnosticism with those of the American founding. Make no mistake: the American founding was based on the ideas, metaphysics, and ethics of the Protestant Reformation and English Enlightenment, and as such American law has always been ultimately rooted in Natural Law: that law of nature and nature’s God: the God of Scripture. This should be immediately obvious in the founders invocations of “God,” “nature’s law,” “Creator,” and so on. They obviously weren’t referencing the God of the Koran, nor that of Hegel.

This is an inconvenient fact for modern “moderates.” They, still being part of “the club,” see proper Christianity as uncouth. They prefer to pretend the ideas of the American founding were a result of spontaneous generation, less they admit that there is an ultimate authority over the Constitution. But, there it is, plain as day, and in print.

Now, this does not mean that American is properly seen as a “theocracy.” It is most certainly not. America is a Constitutional Republic undergirded by the metaphysics of Reformation Theology that prohibits, plainly, the institution of a State-Church.

What is being confused, then, is that, when properly interpreted and asserted, the Constitution has the effect of shaking off the parasitic metaphysics of secularism instituted from the Progressive era forward. You see, it was the Progressives, and their cousins the Cultural Marxists, who, in violation of the Constitution, managed to establish a State-Church of Secularism in America over the last century. They, being zealots, see any attempt at reasserting the Constitution, and casting off their State-Church, as “Christofascism.” This is once again merely a case of projection: they are accusing their opposition of what they have been doing.

Properly interpreted, then, the American Republic is prohibited from officially backing any Church or establishing any State religion. Also, properly interpreted, America is a nation founded upon a foundation laid by Christianity – and, particularly, Reformed theology – and Judaism before it, and holds those values up through the founding documents.

This is not a Theocracy. This is America.