I‟d like to start my talk on the separation of church and state with a little survey. When you hear that phrase, how is it usually used? Do you hear it in the context of keeping religious expression out of the public square – or do you hear it in the context of keeping the government from passing legislation that would force religious expression on American citizens?
I can‟t recall hearing this phrase used in any way other than in the context of keeping morality and religious expression out of civic matters. For instance,
You can‟t pray in school today because of “the separation of church and state.”
You can‟t have a statue of the 10 commandments in a courthouse in Alabama because of “the separation of church and state.”
You can‟t have a nativity scene on the courthouse lawn in many communities because of “the separation of church and state.”
You can‟t have a Christmas concert in the school, it has to be a Holiday Concert – because of the separation of church and state.
To say that this phrase is greatly misunderstood is quite an understatement, so in our talk tonight I want to show you where this idea came from, emphasize where it did not come from, what freedom of religion means, what freedom of religion does not mean, and then we‟ll end by looking at early American history to see how our founding fathers felt about it all. Sound like a plan?
Where did this concept of separation of church and state come from? Most people think it is found in the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States. That is incorrect. The way the first amendment reads is, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . .” How many of you heard the phrase “separation of church and state” in that sentence?
Here is something we need to understand with great clarity. This phrase, “the separation of church and state” is not found in one single governing document of the United States! It isn‟t found in the Constitution, or the First Amendment, or the Declaration of Independence, or any other official document pertinent to the founding of our Country.
As I said, most Americans believe that it is actually taken from our constitution. Listen to this very sad conversation between the Christian historian David Barton, and a U.S. Congressman who was an accomplished attorney. They were discussing the importance of basic religious values in society, and the Congressman said, “We know these values are important; it‟s unfortunate that we can‟t do anything to promote them.” Barton responded, “Why not?” The Congressman replied, “We just can‟t.” Barton persisted, “Why not?” The Congressman answered, “Because of „separation of church and state.‟” Barton responded, “Separation of church and state? What about it?” He replied, “It‟s in the Constitution – the Constitution won‟t permit us to have religious values in public arenas.” Barton said, “That phrase is not in the Constitution!” Forcefully, the Congressman countered, “Yes it is!” “No it isn‟t!” “Yes it is!” They went back and forth until Barton produced a copy of the Constitution and asked, “Would you please find that phrase for me?” He replied triumphantly, “I‟d be happy to.” He immediately went to the First Amendment, read it – and became very embarrassed. He said, “I can‟t believe this! In law school they always taught us that‟s what the First Amendment said!” Amazed, Barton said, “You‟ve never read the Constitution for yourself?” He replied, “We were never required to read it in law school.” This is a pretty sad commentary on our law schools, and I‟m afraid that this particular Congressman who had never read the Constitution is not an exception to the rule.
So where does this phrase come from? To answer this question, we have to go back to the 1500‟s. On October 31, 1517, the Catholic Church was rocked by what is called today the Protestant Reformation. Three monks – Martin Luther in Germany, Ulrich Zwingli in Switzerland, and John Calvin from France – all broke with the Roman Catholic Church over issues like the authority of the Pope, the use of indulgences, and what they determined to be irreparable corruption.
There was another group of men at the same time, not quite as well known, who believed Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli didn‟t go far enough in their reform efforts. One of the primary issues at stake for these men was the relationship between the church and the state. In the 1500‟s, Catholicism made the state subservient to the church (cf. how the Pope crowned kings, Henry VIII), and Protestantism (Luther, Calvin, et al.) made the church and the state co-equal. This is why the king of the country was also the head of the church. This is why when a baby was baptized, that act made him not only a member of the National church, but also a citizen of the country.
Well, there was a group of men who strongly opposed this idea of the church and the state being so closely aligned. Men like Conrad Grebel, Felix Manz, Balthasar Hubmaier, Jacob Hutter (Hutterites), Jacob Ammann (the Amish), and Menno Simmons (Mennonites). These men and those who followed their teachings were know as Anabaptists.
The Anabaptists understood with great clarity that even though God and State were closely connected and even intertwined to a great degree, there was a very clear boundary that the state could not step over. Cf. story of Jesus and the poll tax. These Anabaptist paid very dearly for their insistence on this matter because their actions and beliefs were considered treason. Yet it this insistence on the clear boundary between the church and state that has marked Baptist thought for the last 500 years, which is why on Oct. 7, 1801, The Danbury Baptist Association of Danbury, CT, sent a letter to President Thomas Jefferson expressing their concern about this matter.
The essence of their concern was this. These Baptist pastors felt that freedom of religion was an inalienable right, it had been given to them by God, not granted to them by the state. And there is a big difference between those two concepts. They were concerned that since freedom of religion was mentioned in the First Amendment of the Constitution (“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . .”), that people would erroneously conclude that it was a freedom granted by the Government, and not by God. And if the Government can give us something, it can also take it away. They wanted Jefferson to clarify that freedom of religion was not something that the state could grant or suspend – it was an inalienable right.
Jefferson replied to this letter on Jan. 1, 1802 and said, “Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, . . . 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 and State.”
Three things to remember about this: First - this phrase, “a wall of separation between Church and State” is a phrase taken from Thomas Jefferson‟s personal correspondence to a group of Baptist pastors, not some kind of official statement. Secondly, Jefferson was simply reaffirming that the U.S. Government has no right to establish a religion for the entire nation (like the church of England of that day, or the church of Scotland of that day, etc.), or to involve itself in religious disputes, as did the European states. The “wall of separation” was for the purpose of keeping the state out of religious matters (the presence of Christ in communion). To quote him, “religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God.” The third thing to take from Jefferson‟s statement is that he was not saying, nor does the First Amendment advocate that religious matters or expressions have no place in the public square or in government. Yes, he mentions a wall between the two institutions, but that wall only stops influence in one direction! From state to church, not from church to state.
How do we know this? Because of our history and architecture. Listen to these quotes and facts that demonstrate how closely intertwined religious expression and public life was in the early days of our country. If you have ever wondered how our founding fathers felt about religious expression, here it is.
John Adams, in a letter to Thomas Jefferson on June 28, 1813 said, “The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were . . . the general principles of Christianity.” Works, Vol. X p. 45
On Oct. 11, 1789, John Adams in a speech to a group of officers in the Massachusetts Militia said, “We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion . . . Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. Works, Vol. IX p. 229
Robert Winthrop, a Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives in the 1840‟s said, “Men, in a word, must necessarily be controlled either by a power within them or by a power without them, either by the Word of God or by the strong arm of man, either by the Bible or by the bayonet.”
In George Washington‟s Farewell Address, he said, “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness – these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them.”
On the very first day after George Washington became the commander in chief of the American forces in the Revolutionary war, he issued this order: “The General most earnestly requires and expects a due observance of those articles of war established for the government of the army, which forbid profane cursing, swearing, and drunkenness. And in like manner he requires and expects of all officers and soldiers, not engaged in actual duty, a punctual attendance on Divine service, to implore the blessing of Heaven upon the means used for our safety and defense.”
Thomas Jefferson - “In our village of Charlottesville, there is a good degree of religion, with a small spice only of fanaticism. We have four sects, but without either church or meeting-house. The court-house is the common temple, one Sunday in the month to each. Here, Episcopalian and Presbyterian, Methodist and Baptist, meet together, joining in hymning their Maker, listen with attention and devotion to each others‟ preachers, and all mix in society with perfect harmony.”
As you walk up the steps to the building which houses the U..S Supreme Court you can see near the top of the building a row of the world's law givers and each one is facing one in the middle who is facing forward with a full frontal view ... It is Moses and he is holding the Ten Commandments! As you enter the Supreme Court courtroom, the two huge oak doors have the Ten Commandments engraved on each lower portion of each door. As you sit inside the courtroom, you can see the wall, right above where the Supreme Court Judges sit, a display of the Ten Commandments! There are Bible verses etched in stone all over the Federal Buildings and Monuments in Washington , D.C.
James Madison, the fourth president, known as 'The Father of Our Constitution' made the following statement: “We have staked the whole of all our political Institutions upon the capacity of mankind for Self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to The Ten Commandments of God.”
So what has happened over the last 100 years is that there has been an evolution of thought in our country. It has been fueled by an activist Supreme Court, and public opinion has swung from “government not being able to establish a national religion,” to “government not permitting religious expression in the civic arena.” As Dave Barton says, “The result is that the First Amendment is now used to prohibit the very religious activities that the Founders themselves once encouraged under the same Amendment.”
Alexis de Tocqueville was a French jurist who visited the US in 1831, and he was so impressed with what he saw that he went home and wrote one of the best studies of American culture and Constitutional system that had been published up to that point. His book was called Democracy in America, and listen to his first impression of our country in the early 1800‟s. “On my arrival in the United States the religious aspect of the country was the first thing that struck my attention; and the longer I stayed there, the more I perceived the great political consequences resulting from this new state of things.”
He goes on to say, “Religion in America takes no direct part in the government of society, but it must be regarded as the first of their political institutions . . . . I do not know whether all Americans have a sincere faith in their religion – for who can search the human heart? – but I am certain that they hold it to be indispensable to the maintenance of republican institutions. This opinion is not peculiar to a class of citizens or to a party, but it belongs to the whole nation and to every rank of society.”
“I sought for the greatness and genius of America in her commodious harbors and her ample rivers, and it was not there; in her fertile fields and boundless prairies, and it was not there; in her rich mines and her vast world commerce, and it was not there. Not until I went to the churches of America and heard her pulpits aflame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and power. America is great because she is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.”
Let me close with another quote, similar to de Tocqueville‟s, also by a famous person, but with a very different slant. “America is like a healthy body, and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within.” Guess who said it? Joseph Stalin! It behooves us as patriots to be aware of the enemy‟s agenda. And this misapplication of the first amendment to our Constitution is not coincidental – it is part of a deliberate plan to weaken and eventually destroy our great country.
For a list of the resources I consulted for this presentation, please email me and I’ll get them for you.
