For God and Country, or Not...
12/19/2022
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion; or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"
The Constitution of the United States of America, Amendment 1, Line 1
The Facts on the Ground
- The relationship between church and state has been an issue from the founders' days.
- With the emergence of both the religious right and the atheist movements in America, this debate has heated up and become more contentious.
- An examination of the founders' intent, and our historical interpretation of these matters would be useful.
Overview
The argument that there is a separation between church and state is both popular and uninformed. The issue of the role of religion in the function of our country was of such importance to the founders that the first line of the Bill of Rights deals with that very issue. This issue goes to the very core of the principles that the country was created from and speaks to the freedom that we enjoy to this day.
The colonization of the United States is steeped in religion, and in escape from religious persecution, or the freedom to worship as one sees fit. The Massachusetts Colony was founded, as we all are taught, by the Puritans, who were persecuted in England, and sought refuge in the New World. The state of Connecticut was founded when Rev. Cotton Mather took issue with the Puritans of Massachusetts and moved his flock there to practice in the manner that they saw fit. Rev. Roger Williams later did the same and broke with Connecticut to form Rhode Island.
William Penn opened up the colony of Pennsylvania to the persecuted French Huguenots, and the German Amish. The Mormon Church, founded in Oneida NY, sought refuge in Salt Lake, Utah in the mid 1800's. In later times, the Catholics of Ireland, Italy and Poland came to take refuge in the cities of Boston, New York and Chicago and practice their faith as they see fit.
In modern times we see an influx of every type of faith from the world over because we allow each person to worship as his God speaks to him, without persecution. The words “In God We Trust” are infused on our currency, and one of our major legal national holidays is set aside for us to give thanks for our blessings in whatever way we worship. Every session of Congress opens in prayer, the President is sworn in on a Bible, as are witnesses giving testimony in most states. This is the most basic of all rights. We even make room for the non-believer to exist among the believers protected in his belief that there is no power superior to that of man.
There is a common misperception that many of the founders were atheists or found religion to be an oppressive force. To the contrary, there were a wide variety of religious beliefs represented. All of the signers of the Declaration of Independence claimed a religious affiliation (mostly Episcopal and Congregationalist), though both Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin leaned towards Deism (a belief that God exists in all of his creation). Presbyterians, Quakers and Unitarians made up the rest. Four of the signers were either current or former full-time preachers, and most were active churchgoers. The Constitutional Convention had a similar make-up, with additional representation by the Catholics, Methodists, Lutherans, and Dutch Reformed. It was in this diverse mix of denominations that the concern for the free practice of religion according to an individual’s beliefs was born.
The wording is specific. Congress does not have the power to makes laws respecting (with regard to) any establishment of religion, nor to interfere with any religion’s free exercise. This principle has been well applied over time and afforded to all religious faiths appearing on these shores. So how did we wind up in this confusing war of intolerance labeled the “separation of church and state.”?
The phrase goes back to a situation in Danbury Connecticut during the presidency of Thomas Jefferson. The Danbury Baptist Association (a minority) presented concerns to Jefferson that the legislature in Connecticut felt that religious liberties were not immutable, but were privileges granted by the state. Jefferson replied that on the national level Congress and the Executive had no business in making laws respecting the establishment of religion or it’s exercise, and that the people of Connecticut should see to it that their legislature also should respect that principle. He referred to this as “building a wall of separation between church and state.”
From that point until modern times there has been little interaction between the Federal government and the churches or faiths of the United States. Religious matters were considered to be of the same order of matters that would fall under local control, and “community standards”. Governing bodies were to be removed from rulings on religious matters unless a ‘rights” issue was brought up.
Two notable exceptions of the time were the introduction of the 14th amendment, which in addition to addressing slavery, introduced the concept that all federal rights applied at the state level; and the Reynolds v US case of 1878 heard before the Supreme Court which effectively outlawed polygamy as practiced by the Mormons. The case did not specifically address the religious “right” to multiple marriage, but held that religious duty is not a suitable defense for a criminal indictment.
In modern times, with increased communications, and an ever-shrinking planet, Americans were made familiar with concepts that were gaining hold throughout the world. The movements of communism and socialism, which frowned on organized religion, gained some foothold with the Union movement in the United States. After WWII, American GIs, who were exposed to varying philosophical movements in Europe (nihilism, the works of Nietzsche, Sartre, Jung, Kierkegaard, and the like); and a growing belief in mankind controlling its own destiny began questioning the religious foundations of American society.
The April 8, 1966 edition of Time Magazine asked “Is God Dead? More and more people both identified with the atheist movement or became more open in questioning the religious practice traditional to American life. Many suits were brought to the Supreme Court from the 1960’s on asserting that “atheists” were a protected minority entitled to their civil right to not engage in worship. Among the most famous were Murray v Curlett (1963) outlawing mandatory school prayer, Stone v Graham (1980), which prohibits posting of the Ten Commandments in schools, and Allegheny County v the ACLU (1989), which prohibits Nativity scenes inside government buildings.
This effort of the atheist / agnostic community rose in parallel to the growing religious right movement, with the atheists finding a home in the Democratic Party, and the religious right finding a home with the Republicans. Both sides have ratcheted up the arguments, invective and money to clog our court system with frivolous suits that seldom involve actual rights being violated. This “crusade” has also had the debilitating effect of drawing into government circles, things that have no business being there (abortion, assisted suicide, right to die, homosexuality, matters of self-esteem, and to a large extent the drug war).
What is the Way Forward?
The Founders sought to allow all to worship as they see fit, or not to worship at all. Religion has always been pervasive in America – several colonies were founded as havens for particular religious denominations. For many years, and some might argue to this day, the country is predominantly Christian.
The Founders have always intended for freedom of religion to extend to all faiths, as expressed by President George Washington’s letter to the 6 Jewish congregations in the United States in 1797. The intent of the Founders has always been one of inclusion, and of protection of rights for all citizens, including, in this case, atheists.
For many years common sense did rule through “community standards” – and the local communities made accommodation with the new and different faiths arriving. The atheists sought their accommodation as well. America is not to be at war with its faiths, or to sanitize them away.
As a people we are to celebrate them as a unifying affirmation that the freedom we enjoy comes from more than a king or a privileged class – it is a natural right inherent in our very being. It is time to come together as a community and celebrate this, rather than viewing each mention of a different faith as somehow a slight upon mine. This is not a zero-sum game. All voices add to the rich history of America – none should be silenced.