# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_2016_S128 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) But then we’ve also seen a change of religion internally. We saw the collapse of the mainline churches. And Neuhaus’s phrase “the mainline became the old line, which became the sideline.” Obviously, your community is one of the few that resisted that collapse. But you can see some of your neighbors, other congregations, which have caved, one by one by one on the issues that I’ve discussed today. We’ve seen a splintering within my own communion, the Catholic Church. We’ve seen the splintering between the so-called spirit of Vatican II Catholics and the John Paul II generation, which severely weakened the Catholic witness in the United States. Now we’re seeing a disengagement from young evangelicals — young evangelicals who don’t want to be seen engaged on these controversial cultural war questions. The result is what the Notre Dame sociologist Christian Smith calls “moralistic, therapeutic deism.” The average young person, the average person of my generation, believes in the moralistic, therapeutic God in the sky who wants them to be happy and doesn’t want you to be mean. And those are the only two characteristics of that god. He wants me, the believer, to be happy, and he wants you to not be a jerk. The second historical change that we’ve seen is a change in the state. If the American founders were to come back today and hear about the Little Sisters of the Poor Supreme Court case, the first thing they’d say wouldn’t be, “Well, the First Amendment protects them.” The first thing they’d say is, “What is the Department of Health and Human Services, and why are they issuing a mandate to an order of nuns to cover abortion and contraceptive devices?” What gives the federal government jurisdiction to be regulating the health-care plan of Roman Catholic nuns? Or the evangelical owners of Hobby Lobby? Or the Mennonite owners of Conestoga Wood? The growth of the state means it regulates more aspects of our lives, which means it has a greater likelihood of infringing upon freedom. Religious freedom, in particular. We once had an ecosystem of freedom in the United States, where the presumption was that a citizen was free to pursue his or her own goals according to his or her best judgment. Now we have a presumption of government regulation, and we have to justify our exemption. So rather than the 128 | UPON THIS ROCK government justifying why it has to burden the nuns, the nuns have to go to court to justify their exemption from this regulation. It’s turned our relationship between the citizen and the state upside down. And then lastly, we’ve had a change in sexuality. At one point, Christian teaching about sexuality was the public understanding of sexuality, so that we can see that Thomas Jefferson, the least religious of the American founders, could say that the God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time and those things went together. The American founding wasn’t the French Revolution, where Diderot says, “Man will never be free until the last king is strangled by the entrails of the last priest.” Religion and freedom at loggerheads. That wasn’t our founding. And it wasn’t our tradition until the sexual revolution pitted sexual freedom at odds with ordered liberty. The founders would have viewed the sexual revolution’s understanding of liberty as license. It’s not the ordered liberty that the founders talked about. It was the license that they said couldn’t exist in an ordered republic. So if you put these pieces together, you can answer this question: Why is it that the ACLU is only against religious freedom when it’s a conservative Christian pharmacist who doesn’t want to dispense the morning-after pill? Or a conservative Christian baker who doesn’t want to bake a same-sex wedding cake? Or a conservative Christian adoption agency that wants to find children homes with moms and dads? The ACLU has no problem with the Muslim inmate growing a half-inch beard. It has no problem with the Native American ingesting peyote. The ACLU has no problem with the Amish who want to homeschool their kids. The ACLU’s problem only touches on contraception, abortion, same-sex marriage, transgender issues. So in my closing remarks, I want to suggest that’s where we need to place our focus. That it’s not just an isolated baker over there, a photographer over there, an adoption agency in Massachusetts, a school in Salt Lake City. When you add all of these pieces together, what you are seeing is that there is an entire new vision of the human person. What’s at stake here are two different anthropologies. To a certain extent, the history of the Christian Church is a response to heresy. Heresy pops up and then orthodoxy springs into action. And that’s how we develop richer understandings of orthodoxy. “Special Presentation”