In Europe, the supremacy of the pope faced challenges from kings and western

emperors on a number of matters, leading to power struggles and crises of

leadership, notably in the Investiture Controversy of the eleventh century over the
question of who had the authority to appoint local bishops. The reason the kings
wanted to be involved was that the church owned and controlled vast areas of land
and so the bishops had great economic and thus political power. A see-saw battle
ensured during the succeeding centuries as kings sought to assert their
independence from Rome while the papacy engaged in various programs of reform
on the one hand and the exercise of considerable power against rebellious kings on
the other, through such methods as excommunication and interdicts.
In England there was a clash between church and state over the legal
jurisdiction. King Henry II wanted the clergy to be tried in civil courts and not church
courts on the basis that everyone should be judged by the same law and receive
the same punishment. The problem was that clergy who committed even crimes
such as murder were being judged very leniently by the ecclesiastical courts, which
was seen as unfair. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Becket disagreed as he
wanted to defend the independence of the church.
During the Renaissance, nationalist theorists began to affirm that kings had
absolute authority within their realms to rule on spiritual matters as well as secular
ones. Kings began, increasingly, to challenge papal authority on matters ranging
from their own divorces to questions of international relations and the right to try
clergy in secular courts. This climate was a crucial factor in the success of
the Protestant Reformation. In England Henry VIII established himself as head of the
Church of England. He went on to dissolve the monasteries and confiscate much
church land which he redistributed to his supporters. The result was the destruction
of the country's welfare provision.
Modern period
Protestant churches were just as willing as the Catholic Church to use the authority
of the state to repress their religious opponents, and Protestant princes often used
state churches for their own political ends. Years of religious wars eventually led to
various affirmations of religious toleration in Europe, notably the Peace of
Westphalia, signed in 1648. In England, after years of bloodshed and persecution on
all sides, John Locke penned his Essays of Civil Government and Letter Concerning
Toleration. These seminal documents in the history of church and state played a
significant role in both the Glorious Revolution of 1688 and later in the American
Revolution.
Locke wrote: "The care of souls cannot belong to the civil magistrate, because his
power consists only in outward force; but true and saving religion consists in the
inward persuasion of the mind, without which nothing can be acceptable to God."
Thomas Jefferson's Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom is considered a pioneering
model for modern religious freedom legislation.

John Lockes ideas were to be further enshrined in the American Declaration of

Independence, written by Thomas Jefferson in 1776. Another of Jefferson's works,
the 1779 Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, proclaimed:
No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or
ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in
his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or
belief
The French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789) likewise
guaranteed that: "No one shall be disquieted on account of his opinions, including
his religious views, provided their manifestation does not disturb the public order
established by law."
The U.S. Constitutions Bill of Rights, passed in 1791, specifically banned the
American government from creating a state religion, declaring: "Congress shall
make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise
thereof."
In practice, the French Revolution took a somewhat different attitude from its
American counterpart regarding the question of religious liberty. In the French case,
not only would the state reject the establishment of any particular religion, it would
take a vigilant stance against religions involving themselves in the political arena.
The American tradition, on the other hand, welcomed religious arguments in public
debate and allowed clergymen of various faiths to serve in public office as long as
they adhered to the U. S. Constitution. The French leadership, having suffered from
centuries of religious wars, was also deeply suspicious of religious passion and
tended to repress its public expression, while the Americans adopted a positive
attitude toward newer and smaller faiths which fostered a lively religious pluralism.
These two approaches would set the tone for future debates about the nature and
proper degree of separation between church and state in the coming centuries.