The myth of church and state
I think it's time for a little history lesson, so kick back and relax - this is going to be long. The First Amendment states, and I quote, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". The Founding Fathers never thought that religion was bad, or that religion shouldn't be a part of the lives of public officials. They made a prohibition against the establishment of a national religion (such as the Church of England), and said that Congress would make no laws to restrict religious freedom.
This is seen when you look at the other documents of the time for context. In James Madison's first draft of the First Amendment, his wording was:
"The civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, or on any pretext, infringed."
His context was that there would be no more Salem witch hunts, no Inquisitions, etc. - not questioning the importance of religion as the basis of morality in our government, nor the applicability in government of the laws of God.
After much discussion, the House Select Committee, on August 15, 1789, proposed this version:
"No religion shall be established by law, nor shall the equal rights of conscience be infringed."
Noting that the words are subject to being interpreted out of context, Peter Sylvester, Representative of New York, objected to this version, saying on the floor,
"It might be thought to have a tendency to abolish religion altogether."
James Madison then proposed the insertion of the word "national" before "religion" but this was not agreed upon, so Madison offered this version:
"That Congress shall not establish a religion, nor compel men to worship God in any manner contrary to his conscience." Note the implication that of course men would worship God according to their conscience."
Again, a Congressman arose in concern. Congressman Benjamin Huntington, son of the Governor of Connecticut, protested:
"The words may be taken in such latitude as to be extremely hurtful to the cause of religion." (Little did he know.)
He then suggested that the Amendment be made in such a way as to secure the rights of religion, but not to patronize those who profess no religion at all.
Roger Sherman did not even want an amendment, realizing that the federal government was not to have any say in what was under the individual states jurisdiction.
James Madison realized that Congressman Huntington understood the meaning of the words to be that Congress should not establish a religion and enforce the legal observation of it by law, nor compel men to worship God in any manner contrary to their conscience.
Madison then responded agreeably to Congressman Huntington and Congressman Sylvester, that he (Madison) believed that the people feared one sect might obtain a pre-eminence, or two (Congregational and Anglican) combine and establish a religion to which they would compel others to conform. (This is in context with what the letter from the Danbury Baptists to Jefferson was about, which we will discuss in a minute.)
On August 15, 1789, Samuel Livermore of New Hampshire, proposed the wording:
"Congress shall make no laws touching religion, or infringing the rights of conscience."
Other subsequent versions coming during Senate debate included the following:
"Congress shall make no law establishing religion, or to prevent the free exercise thereof, or to infringe the rights of conscience."
"Congress shall make no law infringing the rights of conscience, or establishing any religious sect or society."
"Congress shall make no law establishing any particular denomination of religion in preference to another, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, nor shall the rights of conscience be infringed."
"Congress shall make no law establishing one religious society in preference to others, or to infringe on the rights of conscience."
The final Senate version was,
"Congress shall make no law establishing articles of faith or a mode of worship, or prohibiting the free exercise of religion."
A joint committee of both the House and Senate then finalized the wording of this part of the First Amendment as follows:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
On December 15, 1791, the Bill of Rights was finally ratified by the states. This was a declaration of what the Federal Government could not do, leaving the states free within the control of their own constitutions.
For further context, I refer you to the Northwest Ordinance. The Northwest Ordinance is ranked number four in importance relative to all Government documents, behind the Constitution, The Declaration of Independence, and the Articles of Confederation. Article III of the Northwest Ordinance reads as follows:
"Article III. Religion, morality, and knowledge being necessary in good government, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged."
This statement presumes that public schools are proper and necessary to teach religion and morality which they did for over 200 years.
The Founding Fathers stressed the need for religion as the basis of morality. The first amendment is not about repressing religion. The first amendment is a footnote about what the federal government cannot do respecting religion, and insisting that the biggest thing government and society cannot due is inhibit the free practice of religion.
The Ten Commandments were taught for over two hundred years in our public schools. There were federal designations of publicly observed Days of Thanksgiving to God for special favors from God. Our national day of Thanksgiving was proclaimed and there were designations of National Prayer Days -- all routinely established down through our history.
The First Amendment, written in the same year as the Northwest Ordinance, could not possibly have meant anything like what today's judiciary say it means.
So where does the current confusion come from? Most of the current arguments for the separation between church and state are based around Thomas Jefferson's famous comment about a 'wall of separation between church and state'. However, that statement has been taken out of context in the pursuit of ridding the government of all references to God. The statement was made in a letter to the Danbury Baptists in response to a letter from them.
The Danbury Baptist Association, concerned about religious liberty in the new nation wrote to President Thomas Jefferson, Oct. 7, 1801. The original letter from the Danbury Baptists reads as follows:
"Sir, Among the many millions in America and Europe who rejoice in your Election to office; we embrace the first opportunity which we have enjoyed in our collective capacity, since your Inauguration, to express our great satisfaction, in your appointment to the chief Majestracy in the United States; And though our mode of expression may be less courtly and pompious than what many others clothe their addresses with, we beg you, Sir to believe, that none are more sincere.
Our Sentiments are uniformly on the side of Religious Liberty -- That Religion is at all times and places a matter between God and individuals -- That no man ought to suffer in name, person, or effects on account of his religious Opinions - That the legitimate Power of civil government extends no further than to punish the man who works ill to his neighbor: But Sir our constitution of government is not specific. Our ancient charter together with the Laws made coincident therewith, were adopted on the Basis of our government, at the time of our revolution; and such had been our Laws & usages, and such still are; that Religion is considered as the first object of Legislation; and therefore what religious privileges we enjoy (as a minor part of the State) we enjoy as favors granted, and not as inalienable rights: and these favors we receive at the expense of such degrading acknowledgments, as are inconsistent with the rights of freemen. It is not to be wondered at therefore; if those, who seek after power & gain under the pretense of government & Religion should reproach their fellow men -- should reproach their chief Magistrate, as an enemy of religion Law & good order because he will not, dare not assume the prerogatives of Jehovah and make Laws to govern the Kingdom of Christ.
Sir, we are sensible that the President of the United States, is not the national legislator, and also sensible that the national government cannot destroy the Laws of each State; but our hopes are strong that the sentiments of our beloved President, which have had such genial affect already, like the radiant beams of the Sun, will shine and prevail through all these States and all the world till Hierarchy and Tyranny be destroyed from the Earth. Sir, when we reflect on your past services, and see a glow of philanthropy and good will shining forth in a course of more than thirty years we have reason to believe that America's God has raised you up to fill the chair of State out of that good will which he bears to the Millions which you preside over. May God strengthen you for the arduous task which providence & the voice of the people have cald you to sustain and support you in your Administration against all the predetermined opposition of those who wish to rise to wealth & importance on the poverty and subjection of the people.
And may the Lord preserve you safe from every evil and bring you at last to his Heavenly Kingdom through Jesus Christ our Glorious Mediator.
Signed in behalf of the Association.
Nehh Dodge
Ephram Robbins The Committee
Stephen S. Nelson"
To which, Jefferson replied:
"To messers. Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.
Gentlemen
The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.
I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem."
Th Jefferson
Jan. 1. 1802
Inferring that Jefferson was saying that the state can have nothing to do with religion is proven false when the comments are looked at in their original context. All he was establishing is that the Congregationalists in the state of Connecticut cannot by virtue of being a majority church in that state infringe in any way upon the freedom of practice of their religion by the Baptists.
Thomas Jefferson also said:
"I am for Freedom of Religion, and against all maneuvers to bring about a legal ascendancy of one sect over another..."
"A more beautiful or precious morsel of ethics I have never seen; it is a document in proof that I am a real Christian; that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus."
"Of all the systems of morality, ancient or modern, which have come under my observation, none appears to me so pure as that of Jesus."
"Had the doctrines of Jesus been preached always as pure as they came from his lips, the whole civilized world would now have been Christians." "I have always said, I always will say, that the studious perusal of the sacred volume will make better citizens, better fathers, and better husbands.
1. The doctrines of Jesus are simple and tend to the happiness of man
2. There is only one God, and He is all perfect.
3. There is a future state of rewards and punishment.
4. To love God with all the heart and thy neighbor as thyself is the sum of all. These are the great points on which to reform the religion of the Jews."
Among many other things, Jefferson in establishing the University of Virginia, not only encouraged the teaching of religion, but set aside a place inside the Rotunda for Chapel services.
The issue of separation between church and state is a wholly modern creation. The Founders never intended to prohibit the practice of religion; in fact, they encouraged it, both publicly and privately.
This is seen when you look at the other documents of the time for context. In James Madison's first draft of the First Amendment, his wording was:
"The civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, or on any pretext, infringed."
His context was that there would be no more Salem witch hunts, no Inquisitions, etc. - not questioning the importance of religion as the basis of morality in our government, nor the applicability in government of the laws of God.
After much discussion, the House Select Committee, on August 15, 1789, proposed this version:
"No religion shall be established by law, nor shall the equal rights of conscience be infringed."
Noting that the words are subject to being interpreted out of context, Peter Sylvester, Representative of New York, objected to this version, saying on the floor,
"It might be thought to have a tendency to abolish religion altogether."
James Madison then proposed the insertion of the word "national" before "religion" but this was not agreed upon, so Madison offered this version:
"That Congress shall not establish a religion, nor compel men to worship God in any manner contrary to his conscience." Note the implication that of course men would worship God according to their conscience."
Again, a Congressman arose in concern. Congressman Benjamin Huntington, son of the Governor of Connecticut, protested:
"The words may be taken in such latitude as to be extremely hurtful to the cause of religion." (Little did he know.)
He then suggested that the Amendment be made in such a way as to secure the rights of religion, but not to patronize those who profess no religion at all.
Roger Sherman did not even want an amendment, realizing that the federal government was not to have any say in what was under the individual states jurisdiction.
James Madison realized that Congressman Huntington understood the meaning of the words to be that Congress should not establish a religion and enforce the legal observation of it by law, nor compel men to worship God in any manner contrary to their conscience.
Madison then responded agreeably to Congressman Huntington and Congressman Sylvester, that he (Madison) believed that the people feared one sect might obtain a pre-eminence, or two (Congregational and Anglican) combine and establish a religion to which they would compel others to conform. (This is in context with what the letter from the Danbury Baptists to Jefferson was about, which we will discuss in a minute.)
On August 15, 1789, Samuel Livermore of New Hampshire, proposed the wording:
"Congress shall make no laws touching religion, or infringing the rights of conscience."
Other subsequent versions coming during Senate debate included the following:
"Congress shall make no law establishing religion, or to prevent the free exercise thereof, or to infringe the rights of conscience."
"Congress shall make no law infringing the rights of conscience, or establishing any religious sect or society."
"Congress shall make no law establishing any particular denomination of religion in preference to another, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, nor shall the rights of conscience be infringed."
"Congress shall make no law establishing one religious society in preference to others, or to infringe on the rights of conscience."
The final Senate version was,
"Congress shall make no law establishing articles of faith or a mode of worship, or prohibiting the free exercise of religion."
A joint committee of both the House and Senate then finalized the wording of this part of the First Amendment as follows:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
On December 15, 1791, the Bill of Rights was finally ratified by the states. This was a declaration of what the Federal Government could not do, leaving the states free within the control of their own constitutions.
For further context, I refer you to the Northwest Ordinance. The Northwest Ordinance is ranked number four in importance relative to all Government documents, behind the Constitution, The Declaration of Independence, and the Articles of Confederation. Article III of the Northwest Ordinance reads as follows:
"Article III. Religion, morality, and knowledge being necessary in good government, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged."
This statement presumes that public schools are proper and necessary to teach religion and morality which they did for over 200 years.
The Founding Fathers stressed the need for religion as the basis of morality. The first amendment is not about repressing religion. The first amendment is a footnote about what the federal government cannot do respecting religion, and insisting that the biggest thing government and society cannot due is inhibit the free practice of religion.
The Ten Commandments were taught for over two hundred years in our public schools. There were federal designations of publicly observed Days of Thanksgiving to God for special favors from God. Our national day of Thanksgiving was proclaimed and there were designations of National Prayer Days -- all routinely established down through our history.
The First Amendment, written in the same year as the Northwest Ordinance, could not possibly have meant anything like what today's judiciary say it means.
So where does the current confusion come from? Most of the current arguments for the separation between church and state are based around Thomas Jefferson's famous comment about a 'wall of separation between church and state'. However, that statement has been taken out of context in the pursuit of ridding the government of all references to God. The statement was made in a letter to the Danbury Baptists in response to a letter from them.
The Danbury Baptist Association, concerned about religious liberty in the new nation wrote to President Thomas Jefferson, Oct. 7, 1801. The original letter from the Danbury Baptists reads as follows:
"Sir, Among the many millions in America and Europe who rejoice in your Election to office; we embrace the first opportunity which we have enjoyed in our collective capacity, since your Inauguration, to express our great satisfaction, in your appointment to the chief Majestracy in the United States; And though our mode of expression may be less courtly and pompious than what many others clothe their addresses with, we beg you, Sir to believe, that none are more sincere.
Our Sentiments are uniformly on the side of Religious Liberty -- That Religion is at all times and places a matter between God and individuals -- That no man ought to suffer in name, person, or effects on account of his religious Opinions - That the legitimate Power of civil government extends no further than to punish the man who works ill to his neighbor: But Sir our constitution of government is not specific. Our ancient charter together with the Laws made coincident therewith, were adopted on the Basis of our government, at the time of our revolution; and such had been our Laws & usages, and such still are; that Religion is considered as the first object of Legislation; and therefore what religious privileges we enjoy (as a minor part of the State) we enjoy as favors granted, and not as inalienable rights: and these favors we receive at the expense of such degrading acknowledgments, as are inconsistent with the rights of freemen. It is not to be wondered at therefore; if those, who seek after power & gain under the pretense of government & Religion should reproach their fellow men -- should reproach their chief Magistrate, as an enemy of religion Law & good order because he will not, dare not assume the prerogatives of Jehovah and make Laws to govern the Kingdom of Christ.
Sir, we are sensible that the President of the United States, is not the national legislator, and also sensible that the national government cannot destroy the Laws of each State; but our hopes are strong that the sentiments of our beloved President, which have had such genial affect already, like the radiant beams of the Sun, will shine and prevail through all these States and all the world till Hierarchy and Tyranny be destroyed from the Earth. Sir, when we reflect on your past services, and see a glow of philanthropy and good will shining forth in a course of more than thirty years we have reason to believe that America's God has raised you up to fill the chair of State out of that good will which he bears to the Millions which you preside over. May God strengthen you for the arduous task which providence & the voice of the people have cald you to sustain and support you in your Administration against all the predetermined opposition of those who wish to rise to wealth & importance on the poverty and subjection of the people.
And may the Lord preserve you safe from every evil and bring you at last to his Heavenly Kingdom through Jesus Christ our Glorious Mediator.
Signed in behalf of the Association.
Nehh Dodge
Ephram Robbins The Committee
Stephen S. Nelson"
To which, Jefferson replied:
"To messers. Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.
Gentlemen
The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.
I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem."
Th Jefferson
Jan. 1. 1802
Inferring that Jefferson was saying that the state can have nothing to do with religion is proven false when the comments are looked at in their original context. All he was establishing is that the Congregationalists in the state of Connecticut cannot by virtue of being a majority church in that state infringe in any way upon the freedom of practice of their religion by the Baptists.
Thomas Jefferson also said:
"I am for Freedom of Religion, and against all maneuvers to bring about a legal ascendancy of one sect over another..."
"A more beautiful or precious morsel of ethics I have never seen; it is a document in proof that I am a real Christian; that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus."
"Of all the systems of morality, ancient or modern, which have come under my observation, none appears to me so pure as that of Jesus."
"Had the doctrines of Jesus been preached always as pure as they came from his lips, the whole civilized world would now have been Christians." "I have always said, I always will say, that the studious perusal of the sacred volume will make better citizens, better fathers, and better husbands.
1. The doctrines of Jesus are simple and tend to the happiness of man
2. There is only one God, and He is all perfect.
3. There is a future state of rewards and punishment.
4. To love God with all the heart and thy neighbor as thyself is the sum of all. These are the great points on which to reform the religion of the Jews."
Among many other things, Jefferson in establishing the University of Virginia, not only encouraged the teaching of religion, but set aside a place inside the Rotunda for Chapel services.
The issue of separation between church and state is a wholly modern creation. The Founders never intended to prohibit the practice of religion; in fact, they encouraged it, both publicly and privately.
posted by Rob at
11:43 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home