This article is the introduction to the Religious Freedom Reframed series, which is exploring perspectives on religious freedom that have historically been left out of public discourse, as well as implications for individuals, institutions, and society overall. In this series, authors will use a public justice framework to explore narratives that are traditionally left out of the conversation on religious freedom. This series is designed to introduce fresh perspectives, feature new voices, and examine historical and present injustices in the application of religious freedom. The Center for Public Justice, a Christian faith-based organization with a strong commitment to religious freedom, has intentionally invited authors from diverse faith traditions and perspectives on religious freedom to share their insights and experiences of religious freedom in the United States.
BY JOSHUA SEIERSEN AND CHELSEA LANGSTON BOMBINO
Religious freedom in the United States, for both individuals and institutions, is commonly seen as an issue belonging to majority faith communities — namely, those which are predominantly white and Christian. The experiences of minorities — both racial and religious — have been largely excluded. This leads to an incomplete and harmful understanding of what religious freedom actually is or has the potential to be. A proper view of religious freedom, in its individual and institutional capacities, reveals its connections with racial equity and its pertinence to societal well-being. The conversation surrounding religious freedom must be reframed to bring these truths to light.
This article is the first in Shared Justice’s Religious Freedom Reframed series, which will explore perspectives on religious freedom that have historically been left out, as well as implications for individuals, institutions, and society overall. This series aims to reframe religious freedom—and particularly institutional religious freedom—as integral to our shared flourishing, as individuals who exist not in a vacuum but in relationships and communities where we live out our God given roles. The series will explore questions such as: What is the proper role of government in promoting societal flourishing, specifically with regard to religious freedom and racial equity? In what ways are those two mutually interdependent? What is the unique role of civil society — and faith-based organizations in particular — in this vision of flourishing?
PUBLIC JUSTICE PRINCIPLES
Religious Freedom Reframed will explore several foundational public justice principles and explore how they bind together seemingly disparate concepts such as the roles of government, civil society, and individuals in addressing religious freedom and racial equity.
The Unique Role of Government. In a public justice framework, government has a responsibility to pursue the common good of all citizens. That means it must promote flourishing in its diverse forms by upholding the rights of individuals and civil society, particularly regarding religious freedom. Government should be guided by interrelated principles such as distributive, retributive, and restorative justice. This means ensuring justice for individuals and groups when free market forces do not do so on their own. Government must attend to the competing freedoms of individuals and institutions, as well as to the unique ways minority communities are impacted by their minority status (such as unequal access to government support). Government is tasked with promoting flourishing and actively seeking religious and racial equity, especially since these two are so interconnected.
The Unique Role of Civil Society. Part of the government’s responsibility in upholding the common good is to create space for civil society institutions. These institutions serve a diverse society by taking a variety of forms. They tend to be formative for participants, impactful for the recipients of services, and often act as a collective conscience of society. That means civil society institutions should respect the beliefs of minority religious groups. The legal system, because it was framed from a particular, limited viewpoint of what religious freedom consists of, sometimes fails to protect the religious rights of minority religious groups. Civil society can support and carry out minority perspectives on religious freedom even before government protects these faith communities. The diversity of civil society institutions and beliefs can also support minority faiths by bringing the needs of these communities to the attention of government.
Institutional Pluralism. Human dignity requires us to respect one another’s ability to act on religious and spiritual beliefs in the public square, whether as individuals or as institutions. Institutional pluralism occurs when a diversity of institutional structures (such as families, schools, houses of worship, businesses, etc.) cohere with and are animated by a diversity of beliefs, such that, together, these pieces contribute to the well-being of society in irreplaceable ways. When faith-based institutions’ religious freedom is protected, they are able to serve communities in distinct and diverse ways, often providing whole-person centered benefits that integrate a spiritual lens. It is therefore essential, for the well-being of both faith-based organizations (FBOs) and those in need, that institutional pluralism is embraced. When government funds are involved, this means not excluding religious and spiritual organizations in competitive processes for government partnerships.
Racial Equity. Public justice calls for citizens of a political community to pursue the enactment and enforcement of laws that are just. According to CPJ’s Principles for Racial Justice in Policing, the “injustice of structural racism in law and law enforcement is always a violation of the norm of justice within the political community.” Justice demands that citizens are treated equally. Additionally, “the existence and application of unjust laws and policies always require our work to restore justice.” This can take the form of policy reform, nonviolent protests to increase awareness, or the removal from office of those who fail to uphold racial justice. These principles call for government to work to remove barriers that are the result of past discrimination, and for civil society to advocate and act responsibly in pursuit of racial justice.
CHALLENGES WITH CURRENT CONCEPTIONS OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
The prevailing understanding of religious freedom in the United States, for individuals as well as institutions, falls short in damaging ways. This series aims to address that shortcoming by focusing on the following:
How majority conceptions of religious freedom have resulted in — and even been used to create — harmful racial and religious inequities;
How religious freedom cannot be rightly understood, nor justly advanced, without first understanding these injustices;
How religious freedom encompasses legal claims and protections as well as enactments of religious belief, and therefore is a necessary precondition for social change;
How, when properly understood, religious freedom can be a force for social cohesion across difference for both individuals and institutions; and
How the size, scope, and variety of contributions made by faith-based institutions make them — and institutional religious freedom — essential to societal well-being.
First, it is essential to note the harms that have resulted from the careless or malicious use of religious freedom. Religious freedom in the United States is commonly seen as an issue belonging to majority faith communities — namely, those which are predominantly white and Christian. These voices have shaped the discussion over time. Religious freedom protections were formed with the beliefs of majority faith communities in mind, privileging those groups above others, and sometimes even enabling them to discriminate against members of racial or religious minorities. Jacqueline C. Rivers, Ph.D., Executive Director of the Seymour Institute for Black Church and Policy Studies and a lecturer in Sociology and African American Studies at Harvard University, notes that “whites have used their religious freedom to the great detriment of Blacks,” such as, for example, justifying “hostile actions against Blacks with claims of religious freedom.”
Second, because religious freedom has contributed to and been used to perpetrate such harms, it has fallen from grace in public discourse. Dr. Rivers goes on to explain that, due to the injurious ways religious freedom has been used in the United States, the Black Church is “now slow to identify with religious freedom, threatening the loss of a valuable partner in maintaining religious rights in America.” Whatever potential religious freedom has to be a force for good in society can only be justly considered with these harms and abuses in mind. Otherwise, religious freedom will not only fail to resonate with marginalized groups that have experienced these harms firsthand, but will also perpetuate the same injustices and inequities. It is incumbent upon religious and racial majorities—specifically, those groups which have been privileged by religious freedom protections in the past—to listen carefully to the corresponding religious and racial minorities regarding what is needed to equitably advance religious freedom.
Third, although most of the discussion centers around legal controversies, such as those regarding birth control, baking, and bathrooms, the essence of religious freedom extends beyond merely legal claims. Indeed, religious freedom encompasses a wide variety of religiously and spiritually motivated or influenced actions, both of individuals and institutions. Dr. Rivers calls this enacted religious freedom, defining it as “acting in a manner consistent with faith commitments even when appeals to religious freedom are not expressly articulated by the actors.” Any action undertaken as a result of one’s faith commitments thus presupposes religious freedom, making it an exercise in enacted religious freedom. Churches that provide services to people in need according to their convictions are enacting religious freedom in the same vein as the religiously influenced Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s. American society is replete with such examples. Religious freedom, when seen from this vantage point, is a necessary precondition for social change.
Fourth, religious freedom can be a force for social cohesion across difference. Religious individuals and institutions express themselves in a wide variety of forms. Some of these expressions are protected by the American legal system, and others are not. By standing up for others’ religious freedom rights, these individuals and institutions — though they may differ in religious belief or in expression of that belief — are actually reinforcing their own rights. In that way, religious freedom encourages cooperation and cohesion across difference — without minimizing or glossing over that difference.
Fifth and finally, with the aforementioned issues in mind, it is worth pointing out the impact of religious groups in society. Faith-based organizations make significant contributions to the health of society by providing diverse and holistic services, facilitating charitable giving and volunteering, and allowing for individuals to put their faith in action. These groups are trusted by their communities and intimately aware of the issues their communities face. Religious organizations depend on religious freedom to administer their services in unique, faith-based ways. This practice is not only essential to minority congregations and their missions, but also closely intertwined with societal well-being.
This series aims to elucidate these issues in order to reframe religious freedom and lead to more productive conversation. Religious freedom contributes much to society and is integral to any vision of societal flourishing. However, it will continue to be limited in concept, and harmful in application, without addressing long-standing inequities and injustices. This series is designed to introduce fresh perspectives, feature new voices, and examine injustices that tend to escape the public eye.
Chelsea Langston Bombino is a believer in sacred communities, a wife, and a mother. She serves as a program officer with the Fetzer Institute and a fellow with the Center for Public Justice.
Joshua Seiersen graduated with a BA in political science from Whitworth University in 2021 and now works for A Tiny Home for Good to provide affordable, stable, and supportive housing to formerly homeless individuals in Syracuse, NY.
WANT TO GET INVOLVED?
1. Sign up to receive Shared Justice's monthly newsletter and stay up to date on the latest content, resources, and highlights.
2. Write for us! Email sjsubmissions@cpjustice.org for more information.
3. Form a Political Discipleship group and advocate for religious freedom in your community. The Center for Public Justice’s Political Discipleship is a guide for active Christian citizenship, designed to empower people with skills and tools to shape policy and address inequality and injustice in their communities. To learn more about starting a group, visit our website or contact katie.thompson@cpjustice.org