School Bible mandate undermines freedom & faith
(This essay was adapted for the Oklahoman on September 30, 2024)
In June, Superintendent Ryan Walters issued a memo requiring the Bible be taught in Oklahoma public schools, citing its value for historical context and moral virtue. As a Christian and conservative, I believe this approach is misguided for three reasons: It uses state power to promote religious texts, mislabels Christianity’s byproduct as its core value and seeks secular power for Christian ends.
First, Mr. Walters’ mandate flirts with First Amendment violations by edging too close to government endorsement of a religion, a cavalier treatment of the Establishment Clause to say the least. The separation of church and state, championed by figures like Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, is vital to ensure religious freedom for all. Promoting one religion risks alienating fellow Oklahomans of other faiths and creates a climate of preference that undermines religious liberty.
But legal concerns aside, there’s a deeper irony here: the Bible itself doesn’t support the Superintendent’s actions. In his memo, while denying the desire to convert students, Mr. Walters states the Bible will teach “moral virtue.” America has a long history of using Christian teachings to encourage harmonious conduct in attempts to maintain civil order. But it’s difficult to overstate how much this sole objective misunderstands the core truth of Christianity.
While moral virtue is a result of Christianity, the Bible’s core message is about a transformative relationship with God offered through faith in Jesus’ death and resurrection (Ephesians 2:8-9). Moral virtue is a byproduct of this spiritual transformation that changes our conduct from the inside out, not vice versa. To elevate the byproduct of Christianity yet give it the same name tragically misconstrues its significance by implying that good behavior is the ultimate aim of the religion rather than a result of it.
If Mr. Walters’ aim is simply to promote moral virtue, other historical figures, such as Confucius, Socrates and Nelson Mandela would suffice. These men taught moral values conducive to a flourishing civil society without conflating a spiritual authority with secular norms.
Finally, if Mr. Walters’ true goal is to promote Christianity through government channels, his mandate is a nod to Christian nationalism – a growing but dangerous movement whereby Christians inappropriately intertwine the mission of the church with political power. Christian nationalism is not grounded in any New Covenant biblical standard and directly contradicts the teachings of Jesus who said, “My kingdom is not of this world” (John 18:36).
Comingling Christian aims with the practical powers of secular government is a profound misunderstanding of Christ’s mission for his church. The church grows through heart transformation, not compelled obedience or state mandates. Jesus’ own ministry was compassionate and gentle with unbelievers, focused on inner change but not forcing obedience for its own sake (John 4:4-42). In contrast, Jesus’ harshest words were reserved for those within the church who used the law self-righteously to strongarm others. Alternatively, if the Superintendent is not motivated by Christian nationalism, he’ll also need to include the teachings of other influential philosophies and religious views from our nation’s history, such as deism and Enlightenment thinking, which were embraced by many of the Founding Fathers.
The value of Bible teaching is immeasurable, but it belongs in the hands of the church, family and other non-governmental institutions. Mandating its teaching in public schools distorts both Christianity and democracy. Let’s leave religious instruction where it belongs – outside of the realm of state control.