It is obvious that the whole question of the relations of education to State, Church, community and culture is inextricably involved with fundamental issues which cannot be avoided however we may try to do so. Neither secularism nor Christianity necessarily involves persecution. But both of them can easily become intolerant, and whether they are tolerant or intolerant they are inevitably and in every field irreconcilable with one another. On the one hand we have the secular view that the State is the universal community and the Church is a limited association of groups of individuals for limited ends. On the other there is the Christian view that the Church is the universal community and that the State is a limited association for certain limited ends. The philosopher and the theologian may say that both are perfect societies with their own rights and their proper autonomous spheres of action. But this is only true juridicially speaking, not psychologically or morally. The Church is socially incomplete unless there is a Christian society as well as an ecclesiastical congregation, and the State is incomplete without some spiritual bond other than the law and the power of the sword. Ever since the loss of a living contact with the historic faith of Christendom modern society has been seeking to find such a bond, either in the democratic ideal of the natural society and its general will, or in the nationalist cult of a historic racial community, or in the Communist faith in the revolutionary mission of the proletariat. And in each case what we find is a substitute religion or counter-religion which transcends the juridicial limits of the political State and creates a kind of secular Church.
Christopher Dawson, The Crisis of Western Education, as quoted in The Great Tradition, ed. Richard M. Gamble.
So as 2Kers, we readily agree that “neither secularism nor Christianity necessarily involves persecution.” But is Gamble correct that antagonism between Church and State is as unavoidable as our fallenness?