Constitutional Issues - Separation of Church and State: Origins of the Phrase

NOT SEPARATION OF GOD FROM STATE by Fr. Bill McCarthy, MSA

(edited for brevity by this blogger; source: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/987191/posts,)

The First Amendment states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;…" While most recognize the phrase "separation of church and state," few know its source; but it is important to understand the origins of that phrase.

The process of drafting the First Amendment made the intent of the Founders abundantly clear.  When reviewing extensive discussions —recorded in the Congressional Records from June 7 through September 25 of 1789— it is clear that the Founders were saying: "We do not want in America what we had in Great Britain: we don’t want one denomination running the nation. We will not all be Catholics, or Anglicans, or any other single denomination. We do want God’s principles, but we don’t want one denomination running the nation." Later court rulings supported this intent.  For example, a 1799 court declared: "By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion; and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed on the same equal footing."

In 1801, the Danbury Baptist Association of Danbury, Connecticut, heard that the Congregationalist denomination was about to be made the national denomination. That rumor distressed the Danbury Baptists. Consequently, they sent a letter to President Thomas Jefferson. On January 1, 1802, Jefferson wrote back, assuring them that "the First Amendment has erected a wall of separation between church and state." His letter explained that they need not fear the establishment of a national denomination—and that while the wall of the First Amendment would protect the church from government control—there always would be open and free religious expression of all orthodox religious practices, for true religious expression of all orthodox religious practices would never threaten the purpose of government.

It was also agreed that the government would interfere with a religious activity that was a direct menace to the government or to the overall peace and good order of society. (Later Supreme Court identified potential "religious" activities in which the government might interfere: things like human sacrifice, bigamy or polygamy, the provocation of immorality or licentiousness, etc. If any of these activities were to occur in the name of "religion," then the government would interfere, for these were activities which threaten public peace and safety).

Today, all that is heard of Jefferson’s letter is the phrase, "a wall of separation between church and state," without either the context, or the explanation given in the letter, or its application by earlier courts. The clear understanding of the First Amendment for a century-and-a-half was that it prohibited the establishment of a single national denomination. National policies and rulings in that century-and-a-half always reflected that interpretation. For example, in 1853, a group petitioned Congress to separate Christian principles from government. They desired a so-called "separation of church and state" with chaplains being turned out of the congress, the military, etc. Their petition was referred to the House and the Senate Judiciary Committees, which investigated for almost a year to see if it would be possible to separate Christian principles from government.

Both the House and the Senate Judiciary Committees returned with their reports. The following are excerpts from the House report delivered on Mary 27, 1854 (the Senate report was very similar):  "Had the people, during the Revolution, had a suspicion of any attempt to war against Christianity, that Revolution would have been strangled in its cradle. At the time of the adoption of the Constitution and the amendments, the universal sentiment was that Christianity should be encouraged, but not any one sect [denomination]…. In this age, there is no substitute for Christianity…. That was the religion of the founders of the republic, and they expected it to remain the religion of their descendants." The Committees explained that they would not separate these principles, for it was these beliefs which had made us so successful—they had been our foundation, our basis.

During the 1870s, 1880s, and 1890s, another group challenged specific Christian principles in government before the Supreme Court. Jefferson’s letter had remained unused for years. But now—75 years later—in the case Reynolds v. United States, the plaintiffs resurrected Jefferson’s letter.  In that case, the Court printed a lengthy segment of Jefferson’s letter and then used his letter on "separation of church and state" to again prove that it was permissible to maintain Christian values, principles, and practices in official policy. For the next 15 years, the Supreme Court utilized Jefferson’s letter to ensure that Christian principles remained a part of government.

The original intent remained for the next 70 years until 1947.  In Everson v. Board of Education, the Court, for the first time, did not cite Jefferson’s entire letter, but selected only eight words from it. The Court announced: "The First Amendment has erected ‘a wall of separation between church and state.’ That wall must be kept high and impregnable." This was a new philosophy. Why would the Court take Jefferson’s letter completely out of context? In the years following, the Court began regularly to speak of a "separation of church and state," broadly explaining that, "This is what the Founders wanted—separation of church and state. This is their great intent." The Court failed to quote the Founders; it just generically asserted that this is what the Founders wanted.

The courts continued on this track so steadily that, in 1958, in a case called Baer v. Kolmorgen, one of the judges, tired of hearing the phrase, wrote a dissent warning that if the court did not stop talking about the "separation of church and state," people were going to start thinking it was part of the Constitution. That warning was in 1958! Nevertheless, the Court continued to talk about separation until June 25th, 1962, when, in the case Engle v. Vitale, the Court delivered the first ever ruling which completely separated Christian principles from education.

*********