In recent months, lawmakers in many of these red states have seriously tested the limits of the wall between church and state. Their actions have raised a necessary and fruitful debate about the purpose of faith in public life. This change makes the United States an outlier even among other former Eastern Bloc nations. In those countries, religious engagement has always been less. For context, only about 29 percent of Americans report praying several times daily. Just over 7% go to religious services more than weekly. Regardless, 16% of adults, the highest number ever, report that religion is not an important part of their lives.
This week, the IRS dropped a huge piece of news! They are doing this by rolling back the ability of religious congregations to endorse political candidates without fear of losing their tax-exempt status. This move could further blur the lines between church and state, raising questions about the implications for both religious organizations and civic engagement.
Historical Context and Modern Implications
The United States has a long, complicated history between religion and government. As Thomas Jefferson famously understood, we must guard against the corrosive effects of religious doctrine on our civil governance. According to Mike Johnson, a prominent figure in this discourse, “The Founders wanted to protect the church from an encroaching state, not the other way around.” This foundational perspective has shaped American political culture, emphasizing the separation of church and state as enshrined in the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
As today’s political realities play out, the spirit, if not the letter, of these timeworn tenets come under fire. The share of Americans who are deeply religious has held steady over the last few decades. There’s a mounting worry that deeper government support might, ironically, make religious participation withering.
This is not just a United States phenomenon. As we compare the data with other nations—in particular many of those in the former Soviet sphere—there is a clear trend. Government interference often delegitimizes the religious institutions within these countries. In fact, nearly all ethnic Russians practice the Orthodox Christian faith. Their close historical alignment with the state has always resulted in that very politicization, which many faith leaders assert harms authentic faith.
Comparative Analysis with Eastern Bloc Countries
We’ve seen how, in Hungary and Russia, populist leaders have manipulated religion to serve their political interests. The Communist Party in Czechoslovakia used to pay clergy salaries to keep them loyal. In doing so, they powerfully turned religious influence to their advantage with state dollars. Similarly, the government-sponsored Catholic churches in Hungary were severed from Vatican oversight, leading to questions about their authenticity and authority.
Earlier this year, Open Doors commissioned a study that surveyed the other 54 Christian-majority countries. In short, it found that when governments fund religious institutions, their adherents usually view them as less legitimate. This perspective highlights a significant concern: when faith becomes intertwined with politics, it risks losing its foundational purpose.
“very important” – Pew Research Center
Such trends highlight the need for critical analysis of the direct and indirect effects of government aid on religious institutions. U.S. officials should not relax political freedoms for religious entities. If so, they should use the opportunity to focus on important lessons learned from abroad.
Current Developments and Future Considerations
All these developments in U.S. policy around religious endorsements point to a key moment for faith-based organizations. The more states that take similar steps, the more these time-worn norms between religion and state will be tested in new and unprecedented ways. This shift may embolden religious groups to engage more actively in political processes, raising concerns about potential ramifications for societal cohesion.
In this changing world, Americans still wrestle with what it means to be religious. Though most of them continue engaged prayer lives and spiritual practices, church attendance is still on the low side. This disconnect invites significant conversation about how faith is called to respond to the current cultural moment.
Debate around these topics has become incendiary. Now, more than ever, policymakers and religious leaders—including those active in the faith-based organizing movement—must think intentionally about how their work shapes the experiences of faith communities and civic life.
