Religion or Religious States versus Secular Societies

A state religion (also called an official religion, established church or state church) is a religious body or creed officially endorsed by the state. Practically, a state without a state religion is called a secular state. The term state church is associated with Christianity, and is sometimes used to denote a specific national branch of Christianity. Closely related to state churches are what sociologists call ecclesiae, though the two are slightly different.

State religions are examples of the official or government-sanctioned establishment of religion, as distinct from theocracy. It is also possible for a national church to become established without being under state control. The first national church was the Armenian Orthodox Church which was established in 301 A.D.

Types of Churches: The degree and nature of state backing for denomination or creed designated as a state religion can vary. It can range from mere endorsement and financial support, with freedom for other faiths to practice, to prohibiting any competing religious body from operating and to persecuting the followers of other sects. In Europe, competition between Catholic and Protestant denominations for state sponsorship in the 16th century evolved the principle [cuius regio eius religio - "states follow the religion of the ruler"] embodied in the text of the treaty that marked the Peace of Augsburg, 1555.

In England the monarch imposed Protestantism in 1533, with himself taking the place of the Pope, while in Scotland the Church of Scotland opposed the religion of the ruler. In some cases, a state may have a set of state-sponsored religious denominations that it funds; such is the case in Alsace-Moselle in France under its local law, following the pattern in Germany.

In some communist states, notably in North Korea and Cuba, the state sponsors religious organizations, and activities outside those state-sponsored religious organizations are met with various degrees of official disapproval. In these cases, state religions are widely seen as efforts by the state to prevent alternate sources of authority.

State church and State religion: There is also a difference between a “state church” and “state religion”. A “state church” is created by the state, as in the cases of the Anglican Church, created by Henry VIII or the Church of Sweden, created by Gustav Vasa. An example of “state religion” is Argentina’s acceptance of Roman Catholicism as its religion.

In the case of the former, the state has absolute control over the church, but in the case of the latter, in this example, the Vatican has control over the church.

Sociology of state churches: Sociologists refer to mainstream non-state religions as denominations. State religions tend to admit a larger variety of opinion within them than denominations. Denominations encountering major differences of opinion within themselves are likely to split; this option is not open for most state churches, so they tend to try to integrate differing opinions within themselves.

Many sociologists now consider the effect of a state church as analogous to a chartered monopoly in religion.Where state religions exist, it is usually true the majority of residents are officially considered adherents; however, much of this support is little more than nominal; many members of the church rarely attend it. But the population’s allegiance towards the state religion is often strong enough to prevent them from joining competing religious groups.

A denomination’s status as official religion does not always imply that the jurisdiction prohibits the existence or operation of other sects or religious bodies. It all depends upon the government and the level of tolerance the citizens of that country have for other religions.

Some countries with official religions have laws that guarantee the freedom of worship, full liberty of conscience, and places of worship for all citizens; and implement those laws more than other countries that do not have an official or established state religion.

———————————————————————-

Disestablishment: is the process of depriving a church of its status as an organ of the state. Supporters of retaining an established church call themselves “antidisestablishmentarianists”, meaning Secular state status

Canada: Section Two of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees freedom of religion. Progressively, case law has led to the overturning of specific laws that reflected religious observances (essentially Christian). Notwithstanding this, Roman Catholic schools are constitutionally protected and funded by taxes in some provinces.

England: In late-19th-century England there was a campaign by Liberals, dissenters and nonconformists to disestablish the Church of England which was viewed, in the period after civil Chartist activism, as a discriminatory organisation placing employment and other access disabilities on non-members.

The campaigners styled themselves “Liberationists” (the “Liberation Society” was founded by Edward Miall in 1853). Though their campaign failed, nearly all of the legal disabilities of nonconformists were gradually dismantled.

The campaign for disestablishment was revived in the 20th century when Parliament rejected the 1929 revision of the Book of Common Prayer, leading to calls for separation of Church and State to prevent political interference in matters of worship.

In the late 20th century, reform of the House of Lords also brought into question the position of the Lords Spiritual. Another issue of controversy is the Act of Settlement 1701 which determines succession to the British monarchy, under which the head of state is also the head of the Church of England.

Scotland: Despite some official documentation (marriage registrations being a common example) describing the Church of Scotland as the “Established Church” the Kirk has always disclaimed that status. This was eventually acknowledged by the United Kingdom government within the Church of Scotland Act 1921. Since it has thus never been legally Established it cannot be disestablished.

Wales: In Wales, four Church of England dioceses were disestablished in 1920, becoming separated from the Church of England in the process and subsequently becoming the Church in Wales.

Ireland: In Ireland (then part of the United Kingdom and where the majority of the population were Roman Catholic) the (Anglican) Church of Ireland was disestablished in 1869 (effective 1871).

United States of America: The First Amendment to the US Constitution explicitly forbids the U.S. federal government from enacting any law respecting a religious establishment, and thus forbids either designating an official church for the United States, or interfering with State and local official churches which were common when the First Amendment was enacted.

It did not prevent state governments from establishing official churches. Connecticut continued to do so until it replaced its colonial Charter with the Connecticut Constitution of 1818; Massachusetts retained an establishment of religion in general until 1833.

The Massachusetts system required every man to belong to some church, and pay taxes towards it; while it was formally neutral between denominations, in practice the indifferent would be counted as belonging to the majority denomination, and in some cases religious minorities had trouble being recognized at all.

The Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution, ratified in 1868, makes no mention of religious establishment, but forbids the states to “abridge the privileges or immunities” of U.S. citizens, or to “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law”. In the 1947 case of Everson v. Board of Education, the United States Supreme Court held that this later provision incorporates the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause as applying to the States, and thereby prohibits state and local religious establishments.

The exact boundaries of this prohibition are still disputed, and are a frequent source of cases before the US Supreme Court, especially as the Court must now balance, on a state (similar, but not equivalent to province) level, the First Amendment prohibitions on government establishment of official religions with the First Amendment prohibitions on government interference with the free exercise of religion. School prayer resulted in a controversy in contemporary US politics.

All current U.S. state constitutions include guarantees of religious liberty parallel to the First Amendment, but eight (Arkansas, Maryland, Massachusetts, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas) also contain clauses that prohibit atheists from holding public office.

However, these clauses have been held by the United States Supreme Court to be unenforceable in the 1961 case of Torcaso v. Watkins, where the court ruled unanimously that such clauses constituted a religious test incompatible with the religious test prohibition in Article 6 Section 3 of the United States Constitution.

———————————————————————-

Predominant (more than 90 percent of the population) religion in states which are secular;

Roman Catholic – Poland, Italy, Luxembourg, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico, Venezuela and East Timor
Lutheran – Sweden and Finland
Islam – Azerbaijan, Gambia, Maldives, Mali, Senegal, Syria, Tajikistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan
Buddhism – Burma
———————————————————-

Present state religions: Currently, the following religions are recognized as state religions in some countries: some form of Christianity, Islam and Buddhism.

————————————————————————-

Christian countries: state church: The following states recognize some form of Christianity as their state or official religion (by denomination);

Roman Catholic: Jurisdictions which recognize Roman Catholicism as their state or official religion:

• Argentina
• Costa Rica
• Liechtenstein
• Malta
• Monaco

Some Cantons of Switzerland:

• Appenzell Innerrhoden (declared “religion of the people of Appenzell Innerrhoden”)
• Aargau
• Basel-Country
• Berne
• Glarus
• Graubünden
• Nidwalden
• Schwyz
• Thurgau
• Uri

—————————————————————-

Vatican City (Holy See) – Roman Catholic State
A number of countries give a special recognition to Catholicism in their constitution despite not making it the state religion include;

• Andorra,
• Dominican Republic,
• El Salvador,
• Italy,
• Indonesia,
• Haiti,
• Honduras,
• Paraguay,
• Peru,
• Poland,
• Portugal,
• Slovakia,
• Spain,

————————————————————-

Eastern Orthodox: Jurisdictions which recognize one of the Eastern Orthodox Churches as their state religion:

• Cyprus (Cypriot Orthodox Church)
• Greece (Church of Greece)
• Finland: Finnish Orthodox Church has a special relationship with the Finnish state. The internal structure of the church is described in the Orthodox Church Act. The church has a power to tax its members and corporations if a majority of shareholders are members. The church does not consider itself a state church, as the state does not have the authority to affect its internal workings or theology.
• Moldova
  ————————————————————–

Oriental Orthodox: Jurisdictions which recognize one of the Oriental Orthodox Churches as their state religion:
*Armenia (Armenian Apostolic Church)
——————————————————————————-
Lutheran: Jurisdictions which recognize a Lutheran church as their state religion:

• Denmark (Church of Denmark)
• Iceland (Church of Iceland)
• Norway (Church of Norway)
• Finland: Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland has a special relationship with the Finnish state, its internal structure being described in a special law, the Church Act. The Church Act can be amended only by a decision of the Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church and subsequent ratification by the parliament. The Church Act is protected by the Finnish constitution, and the state can not change the Church Act without changing the constitution. The church has a power to tax its members and all corporations unless a majority of shareholders are members of the Finnish Orthodox Church. The state collects these taxes for the church, for a fee. On the other hand, the church is required to give a burial place for everyone in its graveyards. The Finnish president also decides the themes for the intercession days. The church does not consider itself a state church, as the Finnish state does not have the power to influence its internal workings or its theology, although it has a veto in those changes of the internal structure which require changing the Church Act.
• Neither does the Finnish state accord any precedence to Lutherans or the Lutheran faith in its own acts.

—————————————————————————-

Anglican: Jurisdictions that recognise an Anglican church as their state religion:

   * England (Church of England)
————————————————————————

Reformed: Jurisdictions which recognize a Reformed church as their state religion:

• Scotland (Church of Scotland)
• Tuvalu (Church of Tuvalu)

———————————————————–
Old Catholic: Jurisdictions which recognize an Old Catholic church as their state religion:

Some cantons of Switzerland (Christian Catholic Church of Switzerland):

• Aargau
• Basel-Country
• Bern

————————————————————

Islam:

Political aspects of Islam, Sharia, Caliphate, Religious police and Islamism

Although the separation of church and state was first theorized by Averroes, most Muslim-majority countries recognize Islam as the state religion, but most of them do not place Sharia Law as the constitution itself.

• Afghanistan (Islamic state)
• Algeria
• Bahrain
• Bangladesh (Islamic state)
• Brunei
• Comoros
• Egypt
• Indonesia (Uses Islamic jurisprudence in private law; and in Aceh special territory as a basic law. Officially also recognize Roman Catholicism, Protestantism, Buddhism, Hinduism and Confucianism as religion, but they have much less influence in government and law).
• Iran (Islamic state)
• Iraq
• Jordan
• Kuwait
• Libya
• Malaysia (Not exactly an Islamic state but does have Sharia courts along with the secular courts)
• Maldives
• Mauritania (Islamic state)
• Morocco
• Oman
• Pakistan (Islamic state)
• Qatar
• Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic
• Saudi Arabia (Islamic kingdom)
• Somalia (the newly established coalition government announced in March 2009 that it would implement shari’a as the nation’s official judicial system.)
• Tunisia
• United Arab Emirates
• Yemen (Islamic state)

Sunni Islam States:

• Algeria
• Bangladesh
• Comoros
• Malaysia
• Maldives
• Mauritania
• Saudi Arabia (as state-sanctioned religion)
• Somalia
• Jordan
• Indonesia (Aceh Special Province Only)
  

 Shi’a Islam State:
    *Iran (as state-sanctioned religion)

———————————————–

Buddhism as state religion: Governments which recognize Buddhism, either a specific form of, or the whole, as their official religion:

Bhutan (Drukpa Kagyu school of Tibetan Buddhism)
Cambodia (Theravada Buddhism)
Kalmykia, a republic within the Russian Federation (Tibetan Buddhism – sole Buddhist entity in Europe)
Sri Lanka (Theravada Buddhism) – The constitution accords Buddhism the “foremost place,” but Buddhism is not recognized as the state religion.
Thailand (Theravada Buddhism)
Tibet Government in Exile (Gelugpa school of Tibetan Buddhism)

—————————————————————————-

Judaism:

Israel is defined in several of its laws as a “Jewish and democratic state” (medina yehudit ve-demokratit).

The term “Jewish“ is a polyseme that can relate equally to the Jewish people or religion. The debate about the meaning of the term Jewish and its legal and social applications is one of the most profound issues with which Israeli society deals.

At present, there is no specific law or official statement establishing the Judaism as the state’s religion.

However, the State of Israel supports religious institutions, in particular Orthodox Torah Judaism and recognizes the “religious communities” as carried over from those recognized under the British Mandate. These are:

• Orthodox Judaism  
• Christian (Eastern Orthodox,
• Latin [Catholic],
• Gregorian-Armenian,
• Armenian-Catholic,
• Syrian [Catholic],
• Chaldean [Uniate],
• Greek Catholic
• Melkite,
• Maronite,
• Syrian Orthodox)
• Islam: The fact that the Muslim population was not defined as a religious community as a vestige of the Ottoman period during which Islam was the dominant religion and does not affect the rights of the Muslim community to practice their faith. 

The Government has allowed adherents of not officially recognized groups freedom to practice. In 1961, legislation gave Muslim Shari’a courts exclusive jurisdiction in matters of personal status.

Three additional religious communities have subsequently been recognized by Israeli law;

• the Druze (prior under Islamic jurisdiction),
• the Evangelical Episcopal Church,
• the Bahá’í

These groups have their own religious courts as official state courts for personal status matters ( millet system).

The structure and goals of the Chief Rabbinate of Israel are governed by Israeli law, but the law does not say explicitly that it is a state Rabbinate.

Non-recognition of other streams of religions is the cause of some controversy. As of 2010, there is no civil marriage in Israel, although there is recognition of marriages performed abroad.

——————————————————————-
Hindu
Nepal was once the world’s only Hindu state, but has ceased to be so following a declaration by the Parliament in 2006.
——————————————————————————-
The Philippines is constituted as a de facto Roman Catholic-state with religious freedom guarantees.

In one region of the country is the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao, which composed of all the country’s predominantly Muslim provinces, the Regional Assembly is empowered to legislate on matters covered by the Shari’ah. Such legislation, however, applies only to Muslims.

Many countries indirectly fund the activities of different religious denominations by granting tax-exempt status to churches and religious institutions which qualify as charitable organizations. However, these religions are not established as state religions.
——————————————–
Ancient State Religions

Egypt and Sumer: The concept of state religions was known as long ago as the empires of Egypt and Sumer, when every city state or people had its own god or gods.

• Many of the early Sumerian rulers were priests of their patron city god.
• Some of the earliest semi-mythological kings may have passed into the pantheon, like Dumuzid,
• some later kings came to be viewed as divine soon after their reigns, like Sargon the Great of Akkad.
• One of the first rulers to be proclaimed a god during his actual reign was Gudea of Lagash,
• followed by some later kings of Ur, such as Shulgi.
• Often, the state religion was integral to the power base of the reigning government, such as in Egypt,
• Pharaohs were often thought of as embodiments of the god Horus.

———————————————————————-

 Persian Empire:

• Zoroastrianism was the state religion of the Sassanid dynasty which lasted until 651,
• 651 – Persia was conquered by the forces of Islam.

However,  Zoroastrianism persisted as the state religion of the independent state of Hyrcania until the 15th century.

The tiny kingdom of Adiabene in northern Mesopotamia converted to Judaism around 34 AD.
—————————————————————–

Greek city-states: Many of the Greek city-states also had a ‘god’ or ‘goddess’ associated with that city. This would not be the ‘only god’ of the city, but the one that received special honors.

• In ancient Greece the city of Athens had Athena,
• Sparta had Ares,
• Delphi had Apollo and Artemis,
• Olympia had Zeus
• Corinth had Poseidon,
• Thebes had Demeter

——————————————————————
Roman Religion and Christianity: In Rome, the office of Pontifex Maximus came to be reserved for the emperor, who was often declared a ‘god’ posthumously, or sometimes during his reign.

Failure to worship the emperor as a god was at times punishable by death, as the Roman government sought to link emperor worship with loyalty to the Empire.

Many Christians and Jews were subject to persecution, torture and death in the Roman Empire, because it was against their beliefs to worship the emperor.

In 311, Emperor Galerius, on his deathbed, declared a religious indulgence to Christians throughout the Roman Empire, focusing on the ending of anti-Christian persecution.

Constantine I and Licinius, the two Augusti, by the Edict of Milan of 313, enacted a law allowing religious freedom to everyone within the Roman Empire.

The Edict of Milan cited that Christians may openly practice their religion unmolested and unrestricted, and provided that properties taken from Christians be returned to them unconditionally.

Although the Edict of Milan allowed religious freedom throughout the empire, it did not abolish nor disestablish the Roman state cult (Roman polytheistic paganism).

The Edict of Milan was written in such a way as to implore the blessings of the deity.

Constantine called up the First Council of Nicaea in 325, although he was not a baptised Christian until years later.

Despite enjoying considerable popular support, Christianity was still not the official state religion in Rome, although it was in some neighboring states such as Armenia and Aksum.

Roman Religion (Neoplatonic Hellenism) was restored for a time by Julian the Apostate from 361 to 363. Julian does not appear to have reinstated the persecutions of the earlier Roman emperors.

Catholic Christianity, as opposed to Arianism and other heretical and schismatic groups, was declared to be the state religion of the Roman Empire on February 27, 380 by the decree De Fide Catolica of Emperor Theodosius I.
————————————————————————–
Han Dynasty Confucianism
In China, the Han Dynasty (206 BC – 220 AD) advocated Confucianism as the de facto state religion, establishing tests based on Confucian texts as an entrance requirement into government service.

The “Confucianism” advocated by the Han emperors may be termed as Confucian Legalism or “State Confucianism”.

Confucianism continued to be regarded by the emperors, with a few notable exceptions, as a form of state religion from this time until the overthrow of the imperial system of government in 1911.

There is a debate over whether Confucianism (including Neo-confucianism) is a religion or purely a philosophical system.
———————————————————————–
Empire of Japan
From the Meiji era to the first part of the Showa era, Koshitsu Shinto was established in Japan as the national religion.

According to this, the emperor of Japan was an arahitogami, an incarnate divinity and the offspring of goddess Amaterasu.

As the emperor was, according to the constitution, “head of the empire” and “supreme commander of the Army and the Navy”, every Japanese citizen had to obey his will and show absolute loyalty.
——————————————————————————-
States without any state religion: These states do not profess any state religion, and are generally secular or laique. Countries which officially decline to establish any religion include:

• Albania
• Australia (Forbidden under the Constitution of Australia)
• Azerbaijan
• Brazil all states since 1988
• Bolivia
• Canada
• Chile
• Cuba
• People’s Republic of China
• Republic of China (Taiwan)
• East Timor
• Ecuador
• France
• Germany
• Hungary
• India
• Ireland
• Israel (which considers itself a “a Jewish and democratic state”, although “Jewish” might be construed to refer to the people rather than the religion)
• Italy
• Jamaica
• Japan (Shinto until end of WWII)
• Kosovo (Independence partially recognised)
• Laos
• Lebanon (although by custom the president is a Maronite Catholic, the prime minister a Sunni Muslim and the speaker of the parliament a Shi’a Muslim.)
• Mexico
• Montenegro
• Nepal (declared a secular state on May 18, 2006, by the newly resumed House of Representatives)
• Netherlands
• New Zealand
• Nigeria (federally secular, but allowing for the institutionalization of Islam and sharia in the predominantly-Muslim northern states)
• North Korea
• Philippines (forbidden explicitly under Article III Section 5 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, however the Roman Catholic Church is a de facto state religion in the country)
• Poland
• Portugal
• Romania
• Russia
• Serbia
• Slovenia
• Singapore
• South Africa
• South Korea
• Spain
• Sweden (Lutheran (Church of Sweden) until December 31, 1999.)
• Turkey
• United States (forbidden explicitly under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, as well as implicitly in Article VI of the same document.)
• Puerto Rico (forbidden explicitly under Article II Section III of the Constitution of Puerto Rico. Also forbidden explicitly under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, as well as implicitly in Article VI of the same document. Puerto Rico is a Commonwealth of the United States).
• Uruguay
• Venezuela
• Vietnam

————————————————————————————-
Established or dominant religions within the populations and former state religions

• Anhalt – Evangelical Church of Anhalt, Lutheran 1918
• Armenia - Armenian Apostolic Church, Oriental Orthodox 1921
• Austria - Roman Catholic Church 1918
• Baden - Roman Catholic Church and the Evangelical Church of Baden Catholic and Lutheran 1918
• Bavaria - Roman Catholic Church 1918
• Bolivia – Roman Catholic Church  2009
• Brazil - Roman Catholic Church  1890
• Brunswick – Lüneburg Evangelical Lutheran, State Church of Brunswick Lutheran 1918
• Bulgaria – Bulgarian Orthodox Church, Eastern Orthodox 1946
• Chile – Roman Catholic Church 1925
• Cuba - Roman Catholic Church  1902
• Cyprus – Cypriot Orthodox Church,  Eastern Orthodox 1977
• Czechoslovakia - Roman Catholic Church 1920
• Denmark - Church of Denmark, Lutheran
• England - Church of England,  Anglican
• Estonia – Church of Estonia , Eastern Orthodox 1940
• Ethiopia – Ethiopian Orthodox Church, Oriental Orthodox 1974
• Finland – Lutheran [see notes]
• France  – Roman Catholic Church 1905
• Georgia - Georgian Orthodox Church, Eastern Orthodox 1921
• Greece - Greek Orthodox Church, Eastern Orthodox
• Guatemala - Roman Catholic Church 1871
• Haiti - Roman Catholic Church 1987
• Hesse - Evangelical Church of Hesse and Nassau Lutheran 1918
• Hungary – Roman Catholic Church 1946
• Iceland - Lutheran Evangelical Church, Lutheran
• Ireland – Church of Ireland Anglican 1871
• Italy – Roman Catholic Church 1984
• Lebanon – Maronite Catholic Church/Islam Catholic/Islam
• Liechtenstein - Roman Catholic Church 
• Lippe - Church of Lippe Reformed 1918
• Lithuania - Roman Catholic Church 1940
• Lübeck - North Elbian Evangelical Church, Lutheran 1918
• Luxembourg - Roman Catholic Church 
• Republic of Macedonia – Macedonian Orthodox Church Eastern Orthodox
• Malta - Roman Catholic Church
• Mecklenburg - Evangelical Church of Mecklenburg Lutheran 1918
• Mexico - Roman Catholic Church 1874
• Monaco – Roman Catholic Church 
• Mongolia - Tibetan Buddhism  1926
• Netherlands - Dutch Reformed Church Reformed 1795
• Norway – Church of Norway Lutheran
• Oldenburg – Evangelical Lutheran Church of Oldenburg Lutheran 1918
• Panama – Roman Catholic Church 1904
• Paraguay - Roman Catholic Church 1992
• Philippines - Roman Catholic Church 1898
• Poland – Roman Catholic Church 1947
• Portugal - Roman Catholic Church 1910
• Prussia - 13 provincial churches Lutheran 1918
• Quebec,Canada - Roman Catholic Church 1960
• Romania – Romanian Orthodox Church, Eastern Orthodox 1947
• Russia – Russian Orthodox Church Eastern Orthodox 1917
• Thuringia – Evangelical Church in Thuringia Lutheran 1918
• Saxony – Evangelical Church of Saxony Lutheran 1918
• Schaumburg-Lippe - Evangelical Church of Schaumburg-Lippe Lutheran 1918
• Scotland – Church of Scotland, Presbyterian 1638.
• Serbia - Serbian Orthodox Church Eastern
• Spain – Roman Catholic Church 1978
• Sweden - Church of Sweden, Lutheran 2000
• Switzerland - none since the adoption of the Federal Constitution (1848) 
• Turkey-  Islam 1928
• Uruguay – Roman Catholic Church 1919
• Waldeck - Evangelical Church of Hesse-Kassel and Waldeck Lutheran 1918
• Wales - Church in Wales, Anglican 1920
• Württemberg - Evangelical State Church in Württemberg Lutheran 1918

—————————————————————————

Additional Notes:

Finland’s State Church was the Church of Sweden until 1809. As an autonomous Grand Duchy under Russia 1809-1917, Finland retained the Lutheran State Church system, and a state church separate from Sweden, later named the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland, was established. It was detached from the state as a separate judicial entity when the new church law came to force in 1870.

After Finland had gained independence in 1917, religious freedom was declared in the constitution of 1919 and a separate law on religious freedom in 1922.

Through this arrangement, the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland lost its position as a state church but gained a constitutional status as a national church alongside with the Finnish Orthodox Church, whose position however is not codified in the constitution.
—————————————————-
In France the Concordat of 1801 made the Roman Catholic, Calvinist and Lutheran churches state-sponsored religions, as well as Judaism.
——————————————————-
In Hungary the constitutional laws of 1848 declared five established churches on equal status: the Roman Catholic, Calvinist, Lutheran, Eastern Orthodox and Unitarian Church. In 1868 the law was ratified again after the Ausgleich.

In 1895 Judaism was also recognized as the sixth established religion

In 1948 every distinction between the different denominations were abolished.
——————————————–
The Polish March Constitution - Article 114 of 1921 declared the Roman Catholic Church to hold “the principal position among religious denominations equal before the law” (in reference to the idea of first among equals). The article was continued in force by article 81 of the April Constitution of 1935.
————————————————————-
The Soviet-backed PKWN Manifesto of 1944 reintroduced the March Constitution, which remained in force until it was replaced by the Small Constitution of 1947.
—————————————————————–
The Church in Wales was split from the Church of England in 1920 by Welsh Church Act 1914; at the same time becoming disestablished.
——————————————-

The term evangelical has its etymological roots in the Greek word for “gospel” or “good news”:(evangelion), from eu- “good” and angelion “message.” In that sense, to be evangelical would mean to be a believer in the gospel, that is the message of Jesus Christ.

There is considerable dispute over how to even characterize the various segments of the evangelical theological and political spectra, and whether a singular discernible rift between “right” and “left” is oversimplified. However, to the extent that some simplifications are necessary to discuss any complex issue, it’s recognized that modern trends like focusing on non-contentious issues and downplaying hot-button social issues tend to be key distinctives of the modern “evangelical left” or “emergent church” movement. In conclusion it is evident the evangelicalism movement is  involved in political activism globally; inclusive of Israel and the Holy Land and countries of the Middle East.

Evangelicalism is a Protestant Christian theological stream which began in Great Britain in the 1730s. Most adherents consider its key characteristics to be:

• A belief in the need for personal conversion (or being “born again”)
• Some expression of the gospel in “effort”
• A high regard for biblical authority
• An emphasis on teachings that proclaim the death and resurrection of Jesus.

These four distinctive aspects conversionism, activism, biblicism, and crucicentrism, together form a quadrilateral of priorities that is the basis of Evangelicalism.”

By the English Middle Ages the term had been expanded to include not only the message, but also the New Testament which contained the message, as well as more specifically the four books of the New Testament Bible in which the life, death and resurrection of Jesus are portrayed. The first published use of the term evangelical in English was in 1531 by William Tyndale, who wrote “He exhorteth them to proceed constantly in the evangelical truth.” One year later, the earliest recorded use in reference to a theological distinction was by Sir Thomas More, who spoke of “Tyndale [and] his evangelical brother Barns.”

By the time of the Reformation, theologians began to embrace the term evangelical as referring to “gospel truth”. Martin Luther referred to the evangelische Kirche or evangelical church to distinguish Protestants from Catholics in the Roman Catholic Church. In Germany, Switzerland and Denmark, and especially among Lutherans, the term has continued to be used in a broad sense. This can be seen in the names of certain Lutheran denominations or national organizations, such as the Evangelical Lutheran Church.

Current usage: The contemporary North American usage of the term is influenced by the evangelical/fundamentalist controversy of the early 20th century. Evangelicalism may sometimes be perceived as the middle ground between the theological liberalism of the mainline denominations and the cultural separatism of fundamentalism. Evangelicalism has therefore been described as “the third of the leading strands in American Protestantism, straddl[ing] the divide between fundamentalists and liberals.” However, according to Christianity Today, “The emerging movement is a protest against much of evangelicalism as currently practiced. It is post-evangelical in the way that neo-evangelicalism (in the 1950s) was post-fundamentalist. It would not be unfair to call it postmodern evangelicalism.”

While the North American perception is important to understand the usage of the term, it by no means dominates a wider global view, where the fundamentalist debate was not so influential. By the mid-1950s, largely due to the ecumenical evangelism of Billy Graham, the terms evangelicalism and fundamentalism began to refer to two different movements.

While most conservative evangelicals believe the label has broadened too much beyond its more limiting traditional distinctives, this trend is nonetheless strong enough to create significant ambiguity in the term. As a result, the dichotomy between “evangelical” and “mainline” denominations is increasingly complex, particularly with such innovations as the “emergent church” movement.

John C. Green, a senior fellow at the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, used polling data to separate evangelicals into three camps which he labels as traditionalist, centrist and modernist.

The traditionalists, characterized by high affinity for Protestant Christian beliefs, (e.g. penal substitutionary atonement, justification by faith, the authority of scripture, priesthood of all believers, etc.) which, when fused with the highly political milieu of Western culture (esp. American), has resulted in the political disposition that has been labeled the Christian right, whose most visible spokesmen have been figures like Jerry Falwell and the television evangelist Pat Robertson.

Centrist evangelicals are described as socially conservative, mostly avoiding politics, who still support much of traditional Christian theology.

Modernist evangelicals are a small minority in the movement, have low levels of church attendance, and “have much more diversity in their beliefs.”

Religious reform movements between 1730 and 1790 such as Puritanism, Pietism, and Methodism, fueled by dissatisfaction with the established church in England, mark the earliest roots of modern evangelicalism. In the United States, Jonathan Edwards and George Whitefield were considered early leaders in evangelicalism. John Wesley had a similar role in England. This period also saw the First Great Awakening.

The start of the 19th century saw an increase in missionary work and many of the major missionary societies were founded around this time. The Second Great Awakening which began in 1790, was primarily an American revivalist movement and resulted in substantial growth of the Methodist and Baptist churches. Charles Grandison Finney was an important preacher of this period.
Evangelicals were also concerned with social reform during this period, in England the Clapham Sect included figures such as William Wilberforce who successfully campaigned for the abolition of slavery. John Nelson Darby was a 19th century English minister considered to be the father of modern Dispensationalism, an innovative Protestant movement significant in the development of modern evangelicalism. Cyrus Scofield further promoted the influence of this theology through his Scofield Reference Bible. Other notable figures of the latter half of the 19th century include Charles Spurgeon and Dwight L. Moody.

Evangelicalism in the early part of the 20th century was dominated by the fundamentalist movement, which rejected liberal theology and focused on separation from the world. The Azusa Street Revival in 1906 began the spread of Pentecostalism.

In the post-World War II period, a split developed amongst evangelicals, as they disagreed among themselves about how a Christian ought to respond to an unbelieving world. The evangelicals urged that Christians must engage the culture directly and constructively, and they began to express reservations about being known to the world as fundamentalists. As Kenneth Kantzer put it at the time, the name fundamentalist had become “an embarrassment instead of a badge of honor.”

The term neo-evangelicalism was coined by Harold Ockenga in 1947 to identify a distinct movement within self-identified fundamentalist Christianity at the time, especially in the English-speaking world. It described the mood of positivism and non-militancy that characterized that generation. The new generation of evangelicals set as their goals to abandon a militant Bible stance. Instead, they would pursue dialogue, intellectualism, non-judgmentalism, and appeasement. They further called for an increased application of the gospel to the sociological, political, and economic areas. Not all conservatives are pleased with the new direction. One author has termed it “the apostasy within evangelicalism.”

The self-identified fundamentalists also cooperated in separating their opponents from the fundamentalist name, by increasingly seeking to distinguish themselves from the more open group, whom they often characterized derogatorily, by Ockenga’s term, “neo-evangelical” or just evangelical.

The fundamentalists saw the evangelicals as often being too concerned about social acceptance and intellectual respectability, and being too accommodating to a perverse generation that needed correction. In addition, they saw the efforts of evangelist Billy Graham, who worked with non-evangelical denominations, such as the Roman Catholics (which they claimed to be heretical), as a mistake.

The post-war period also saw growth of the ecumenical movement and the founding of the World Council of Churches, which was generally regarded with suspicion by the evangelical community (Evangelical Protestant views on ecumenism). In England, John Stott and Martyn Lloyd-Jones emerged as key leaders in evangelical Christianity.

The charismatic movement began in the 1960s and resulted in Pentecostal theology and practice being introduced into many mainline denominations. New charismatic groups such as the Association of Vineyard Churches and Newfrontiers trace their roots to this period (British New Church Movement). The closing years of the 20th century saw controversial postmodern influences entering some parts of evangelicalism, particularly with the emerging church movement.

From the late 20th century onwards, such conservative Protestant Christians, and their churches and social movements, have often been called evangelical to distinguish them from Protestants who have a tendency towards more liberal Christianity.

Evangelicals held the view that the modernist and liberal parties in the Protestant churches had surrendered their heritage as evangelicals by accommodating the views and values of “the world.” At the same time, they criticized their fellow fundamentalists for their separatism and their rejection of the social gospel as it had been developed by Protestant activists of the previous century. They charged the modernists with having lost their identity as evangelicals and the fundamentalists with having lost the Christ-like heart of evangelicalism. They argued that the gospel needed to be reasserted to distinguish it from the innovations of the liberals as well as the fundamentalists.

Evangelicals are often concerned with their own failure to live up to Christian standards in contrast to the world. The evangelical church mirrors the dysfunctions of secular society, from premarital sex stats to divorce rates to buying habits. Hardly a light to the world, nor an icon of the abundant, transformed life.

Renewal of evangelicalism: the new evangelicals sought to engage the modern world and the liberal Christians in a positive way, remaining separate from worldliness but not from the world — a middle way between modernism and the separating variety of fundamentalism. They sought allies in denominational churches and liturgical traditions, disregarding views of eschatology and other “non-essentials,” and joined also with Trinitarian varieties of Pentecostalism.

They believed that in doing so, they were simply re-acquainting Protestantism with its own recent tradition. The movement’s aim at the outset was to reclaim the evangelical heritage in their respective churches, not to begin something new; and for this reason, following their separation from fundamentalists, the same movement has been better known merely as “evangelicalism”. By the end of the 20th century, this was the most influential development in American Protestant Christianity.

Global demographics: On a worldwide scale evangelical churches (together with Pentecostals) allege to be the most rapidly growing Christian churches. The two often overlap, in a movement sometimes called transformationalism. Churches in Africa exhibit rapid growth and great diversity in part because they are not dependent on European and North American evangelical sources. An example of this can be seen in the African Initiated Churches.

The World Evangelical Alliance is “a network of churches in 127 nations that have each formed an evangelical alliance and over 100 international organizations joining together to give a worldwide identity, voice and platform” to an estimated more than 420 million evangelical Christians. The Alliance was formed in 1951 by evangelicals from 21 countries. It has worked to support its members to work together globally.

Types of evangelicalism: Toward the end of the 20th century, some have tended to confuse evangelicalism and fundamentalism, but as noted above they are not the same. The labels represent very distinct differences of approach which both groups are diligent to maintain, although because of fundamentalism’s dramatically smaller size it often gets classified simply as an ultra-conservative branch of evangelicalism. Both groups seek to maintain an identity as theological conservatives; evangelicals, however, seek to distance themselves from stereotypical perceptions of the “fundamentalist” posture of antagonism toward the larger society and advocate involvement in the surrounding community rather than separation from it.

However, despite the differences, some people, particularly those with a non-denominational background, may consider themselves both evangelical and fundamentalist because they believe in the engaging practices of evangelicalism and take a fundamental view of the Bible.

On the political spectrum, evangelicals traditionally fall under socially conservative activists. Based on the biblical position that marriage is defined as only between one man and one woman, they tend to oppose state recognition of same-sex marriage and polygamy. Also, based on the principle that the life of a child begins at conception and that a baby’s right to live should take precedence over a wish to terminate an unwanted pregnancy, evangelicals tend to oppose laws permitting abortion.

While evangelicals may have conservative cultural values and lifestyles, they rarely seek to actually restrict private behavior of others except where they believe it infringes the rights of others (such as with abortion). While they oppose governmental endorsement of same-sex marriage, regarding it as actively promoting an opposing worldview, hardly any evangelicals seek to actually criminalize private sexual behavior.

Post-evangelicalism: British author Dave Tomlinson characterizes post-evangelicalism as a movement comprising various trends of dissatisfaction among evangelicals. The term is used by others with comparable intent, often to distinguish evangelicals in the so-called emerging church movement from post-evangelicals and anti-evangelicals. Tomlinson argues that “linguistically, the distinction [between evangelical and post-evangelical] is similar to the one that sociologists make between the modern and postmodern eras”.

There persists considerable and inevitable confusion as to how best to classify the non-traditional/non-conservative forms of evangelicalism. Some call the emerging church movement a version or manifestation of post-evangelicalism, whereas others distinguish both under the broader umbrella of the “evangelical left” movement. As such developments are still relatively new, it remains to be seen how the categories and semantics will settle.

U.S. Evangelicalism Demographics: The 2004 survey of religion and politics in the United States identified the evangelical percentage of the population at 26.3 percent while Roman Catholics are 22 percent and mainline Protestants make up 16 percent. In the 2007 Statistical Abstract of the United States, the figures for these same groups are 28.6 percent (evangelical), 24.5 percent (Roman Catholic), and 13.9 percent (mainline Protestant.) The latter figures are based on a 2001 study of the self-described religious identification of the adult population for 1990 and 2001 from the Graduate School and University Center at the City University of New York.

A 2008 study showed that in the year 2000 about 9 percent of Americans attended an evangelical service on any given Sunday. The National Association of Evangelicals is a U.S. agency which coordinates cooperative ministry for its member denominations.

Christian right: Evangelical influence was first evident in the late 19th century and early 20th century movement of prohibition. In recent decades, one of the most prominent issues that tends to be associated with conservative evangelicals’ political activism is abortion. Conservative evangelicals generally believe it to be the taking of an innocent life, although the theological bases underlying this belief vary, from specific Bible verses purportedly about when life begins, to the more generalized ban on murder. Critics believe that any legal restrictions based on such a worldview amount to imposing religion, whereas adherents claim that it is as legitimate as seeking protection for any other oppressed class through religiously-motivated activism (many of which causes are now non-controversial). Abortion abolitionists trace some of their lineage through the history of English common law, which for centuries had purported to implement fundamental Christian principles of justice into its legal system.

Abortion was not deemed criminal until the “quickening” of the fetus under common law. It was not until England’s Offences Against the Person Acts of 1837 and 1861 that abortion was fully criminalized there and even then it was not legally classified as murder. There remains today a wide divergence of opinion within the American religious right as to precisely how abortion should ideally be classified and/or punished; exactly whom would be prosecuted; and other logistical matters of implementing an outright ban. There are also internal disagreements about whether and which exceptions to any ban should be entertained.

Modern opponents of the Christian right assert that Roe v Wade, the Supreme Court decision rendered in 1973 preventing states from making laws that prohibit abortion, was not the most significant landmark of a new era of conservative evangelical political action. They maintain that it was not until 1980 that the evangelical movement came to oppose abortion. They cite Green v. Connally a.k.a. Coit v. Green and President Jimmy Carter’s support of the decision, which ruled that any segregated institution was not charitable and thus not tax-exempt, as having galvanized conservative evangelicals.

Almost no conservative evangelicals agreed with this characterization, regarding it as an attempt to portray them in a negative light. They widely contend that racial segregation has long been a minority view among evangelicals and dismiss portrayals to the contrary as defamatory from what they regard as a hostile media.

The mass-appeal of the Christian right and its success in rallying resistance to certain social agendas, is sometimes alleged as an attempt to impose a theocracy on an otherwise secular society. There are indications that the belief is widespread among conservative evangelicals in the USA that Christianity should enjoy a privileged place in American public life in accordance with its importance in American life and history. Evangelicals often strenuously oppose the expression of other faiths in schools or in the course of civic functions.

While the United States was founded on the sacred principle of religious freedom for all, that liberty was never intended to exalt other religions to the level that Christianity holds in the country’s heritage. The USA’s founders expected that Christianity and no other religion would receive support from the government as long as that support did not violate peoples’ consciences and their right to worship. They would have found utterly incredible the idea that all religions, including paganism, be treated with equal deference.

Conversely, many on the Christian right contend that they merely seek freedom from the imposition of an equally-subjective secular worldview, and feel that it is their opponents who are violating their rights. They suggest that on many hot-button issues, other than abortion, they rarely seek to actually criminalize the behaviors of others; and often it is the other way around. While most in the religious right criticized the Supreme Court’s Lawrence v. Texas decision striking down state laws prohibiting homosexual conduct, it was also emphasized that the reasons for disagreeing with the ruling were more about process than substance; much like dissenting Justice Scalia, who noted that were he a legislator he would oppose such laws, but he just didn’t believe that they were actually unconstitutional. Even the most ardent opponents of legally-recognized same-sex marriage almost never seek to reinstitute any bans on homosexual conduct.

The Christian right: is not made up completely of evangelical Christians. The implication of these findings is that Bush’s moral majority is not, composed of a bunch of right-wing evangelical Christians. Rather, it consists of traditionalist and observant church-goers of every kind; Catholic and mainline Protestant, as well as evangelicals, Mormons, and Sign Followers. Meanwhile, modernist evangelicals tend to be Democratic. Although evangelicals are currently seen as being on the Christian right there are those in the center as well.

A major distinction between traditional/conservative evangelicals and others is a conviction that a truly “biblical worldview” compels certain social and cultural (and thus political) positions among professed followers. To the extent that traditional evangelicals find common ground with conservative segments of other religions, especially other forms of Christianity, alliances inevitably form, sometimes ironically against the more moderate or liberal strains of evangelicalism with whom there may still be more theological overlap.

Some evangelicals have sought to expand their movement’s social agenda to include poverty, combating AIDS in the Third World, and protecting the environment. This is highly contentious within the evangelical community, since more conservative evangelicals believe that this trend is compromising important issues and prioritizing popularity and consensus too highly. Personifying this division were the evangelical leaders James Dobson and Rick Warren, the former who warned of the dangers of a Barack Obama victory in 2008 from his point of view, in contrast with the latter who declined to endorse either major candidate on the grounds that he wanted the church to be less politically divisive and that he agreed substantially with both men. Indeed many are not sure how to characterize Rick Warren on the evangelical spectrum; despite his avowed centrism he recently supported California’s controversial Proposition 8 (2008), which is regarded by critics as a right-wing position.

The Christian left: Typically, members of the evangelical left affirm the primary tenets of evangelical theology, such as the doctrines of Incarnation, atonement, and resurrection, and also see the New Testament Bible as a primary authority for the church. A major theological difference, which leads to many of the social/political differences, is the issue of how strictly to interpret the Christian Bible, as well as what particular values and principles predominantly constitute the “biblical worldview” believed to be binding upon all followers. Inevitably, battles over how to characterize each other and themselves ensue, with the evangelical left and right often hyperbolically regarding each other as “mainline/non-evangelical” and “fundamentalist” respectively.

Unlike conservative evangelicals, the evangelical left is generally opposed to capital punishment and supportive of gun control. In many cases, evangelical leftists are pacifistic. Some promote the legalization of same-sex marriage or protection of access to abortion for the society at large without necessarily endorsing the practice themselves.

For further reading realte to the various sects of evangelicals and religions on this web site.