The Establishment Clause

In 1802, Thomas Jefferson sent a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in re

sponse to a query from that body. In the following Library of Congress transcri
pt, Jefferson's spelling and punctuation have been retained as well as the brack
eted material which ultimately he deleted before sending.
---------
Mr. President
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 t
o 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 in
terests 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 contemplat
e with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared
that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religi
on, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separatio
n between Church & State.
[Congress thus inhibited from acts respecting religion, and the Executive author
ised only to execute their acts, I have refrained from prescribing even those oc
casional performances of devotion, practiced indeed by the Executive of another
nation as the legal head of its church, but subject here, as religious exercises
only to the voluntary regulations and discipline of each respective sect.]
Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the r
ights 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 ha
s no natural right in opposition to his social duties.
I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common fath
er and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious associatio
n assurances of my high respect & esteem.
(signed) Thomas Jefferson
Jan.1.1802.
----------
An anonymous writer claims that Jefferson's remarks echoes those of Roger Willia
ms, the founder of the first Baptist church in America, who wrote in 1644 of the
need for "[A] hedge or wall of separation between the garden of the church and
the wilderness of the world."
Whatever the case, Jefferson's expression of "a wall of separation between chur
ch and state" led to the shorthand phrase "Separation of church and state."
Although the phrase does not appear in our Constitution, the idea it embodies is
a governing principle of our culture. The phrase represents the essentialized
meaning of the opening passage of the First Amendment: "Congress shall make no l
aw respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise the
reof . . ." This is known as the Establishment Clause.
From the beginning of our nation, Americans recognized the principle of separati
on of church and state as a safeguard against religious intolerance and protecti
on of one's right to choose to believe, or not. Our courts followed suit.
In its 1879 Reynolds v. United States decision, the court allowed that Jefferson
's comments "may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope
and effect of the [First] Amendment."
In the Everson v. Board of Education 330 U.S. 1, 8 decision, Justice Hugo Black
wrote, "In the words of Thomas Jefferson, the clause against establishment of re
ligion by law was intended to erect a wall of separation between church and stat
e."
Supreme Court Justice Harry A. Blackmun wrote: "When the government puts its imp
rimatur on a particular religion it conveys a message of exclusion to all those
who do not adhere to the favored beliefs. A government cannot be premised on th
e belief that all persons are created equal when it asserts that God prefers som
e."
Another court stated that "A large proportion of the early settlers of this coun
try came here from Europe to escape the bondage of laws, which compelled them to
support and attend government-favored churches."
Because of the many different religions and the many different convictions of at
heists and agnostics that comprise our American culture, the separation of state
and church assures that no one elected to office can lawfully impose his partic
ular views as "the state religion." To further deflect such a danger, Article
VI of the Constitution specifies that "no religious Test shall ever be required
as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."
Today, however, some commentators question the validity of the separation of chu
rch and state, claiming "It's not in the Constitution; so, we can disregard it."
But a brief look at man's history underscores the need for such a separation.
The first forms of governments among men---Sumer and Ancient Egypt (c. 5000 BCE)
---were both centralized authorities, in which the ruler held both powers of kin
g and priest. The Pharaohs of Ancient Egypt, for instance, claimed they were th
e embodiment of "god-kings," or "priest-kings." They held both titles absolut
ely, sometimes appointing a priest class to perform various tasks, but always re
taining the prerogative of supreme authority over men's beliefs and actions.
For millennium nothing changed---except in Ancient Athens. Pericles (c. 495 - 4
25 BCE), for example, was an elected ruler whose leadership did not usurp that o
f Athenian priests. But in all other nation-states around the world and through
out time, absolute authority over both secular and religions affairs remained ex
clusively in the hands of the ruler.
For instance, during the Roman Empire, (c. 31 BCE - c. 284/313 AD) emperors were
treated as divinities and some declared themselves gods. During the Medieval p
eriod (c. 313 AD to c.1265 AD) the church dominated both secular and religious a
ffairs. Even the great, enlightened Elizabeth I (1533-1603)---alone among monar
chs finally to break with the Pope---while granting wider freedom to her subject
s nonetheless retained absolute control of her powers which included being the s
piritual head of the Church of England.
Cromwell (1599-1658) justified his religious intolerance, the use of force, mass
acres and cruelty as necessary to hold together the body politic. Louis 14th (1
638-1715) the "Sun King," imposed religious uniformity, persecuted the Huguenots
and revoked the Edict of Nantes, which led to the exodus of many Protestant mer
chants and skilled artisans, accelerating economic decline.
When Napoleon at his coronation (1804) grabbed the crown out of the hands of the
priest and placed it on his own head, he was declaring that no priest or priest
ly organization was superior to him and his rule.
Similarly, the Emperors of Japan and China were considered direct descendents of
the Gods, thus empowered as divine ruler on earth, supreme over all men's actio
ns and beliefs. The sheiks, caliphs, and ayatollahs of Arabia, India, Asia and
the East were no different.
And so it went. With few exceptions, leaders claimed total authority over both r
eligious and secular affairs---most clearly exemplified by "the divine right of
kings" and "the infallibility of the Pope." The result was fines, imprisonment
, torture and/or death levied on any that dared oppose the ruler's edicts. The
Inquisition was only one expression of such crimes against the mind of man. The
slaughter and mayhem of the Crusades was another. The arbitrary beheading, dis
memberment, disfigurement and proscribed suicides of dissenters or the disrespec
tful, was characteristic of the rulers of Africa, India, Asia and the East.
Then came the United States of America, an extraordinary achievement that broke
with all precedent and stunned the world with its Declaration of Independence an
d its Constitution, which are the fountainhead of the wealth that cascaded from
the minds and efforts of free men.
The Declaration of Independence identified man's individual rights. The Bill of
Rights---the first ten Amendments of the Constitution---secured those rights in
specific actions. But it was the formulation of the Establishment Clause that
addressed the difficult and complex issue of protecting man's convictions and be
liefs without intruding upon his right to believe as he chose, or not. The gove
rning principle of "a wall between church and state" was a stroke of genius that
protected the American citizen from the deadly juggernaut of combined political
and religious power.
The governing principle of a separation of church and state is without parallel
in man's history. The Founding Fathers gave us this nation, a child of the Enli
ghtenment, and surely Ancient Athens is our grandparent. As beneficiaries of su
ch a gift, it would behoove us all to refuse to allow our nation to fall to barb
arians---either foreign or domestic---by ignoring the lessons of undivided absol
ute power over our lives and nation.