Introduction to Religious Liberty in America
How the nation's Founders came to the conclusion that religion must be
separate from government
By Bruce Murray
FACSNET Editor
Prelude to the First Amendment
http://www.facsnet.org/issues/faith/liberty2.htm
[ excerpt ]
"Truth is great and will prevail if left to herself, that she is the proper
and sufficient antagonist to error, and has nothing to fear from the
conflict, unless by human interposition disarmed of her natural weapons,
free argument and debate, errors ceasing to be dangerous when it is
permitted freely to contradict them."
– Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom, 1786
The United States is not only one of the most religious nations in the
developed world, but it is also the most diverse, with some 3,000 religious
groups. This scenario would not be possible but for "The First Liberty,"
the first 16 words of the First Amendment, according to religious historian
William Lee Miller in his book, The First Liberty: Religion in the American
Republic (Paragon House Publishers, 1988).
An important precursor to the drafting of the Bill of Rights, and its
adoption in 1791, took place in the Virginia Assembly five years earlier.
In 1785, James Madison, a 34-year-old member of the Virginia Assembly, led
the defeat of a proposed law that would have imposed a property tax for the
support of "teachers of the Christian religion." During the same
legislative session, Madison steered to passage the landmark Virginia
Statute for Religious Freedom, which Thomas Jefferson had authored 10 years
earlier while he was governor of Virginia.
No tolerance for toleration
"During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of
Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all
places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the
laity, in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution."
– James Madison, "Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments"
The First Amendment's Religious Liberty clauses have their roots in
Revolutionary Virginia. In 1776, Virginia statesman George Mason drafted
the landmark Virginia Declaration of Rights, in which he wrote that "all
men should enjoy the fullest toleration in the exercise of religion
according to the dictates of conscience."
"Toleration" rings nicely to the modern ear. Being tolerant is considered
an essential virtue in a pluralistic society. But for Madison, toleration
in the hands of government was another matter. "Mere toleration implied
condescension from some institution or belief in the superior position to
do the tolerating," Miller wrote.
Madison successfully pushed through an amendment, replacing Mason's
"toleration" clause with the following: "All men are equally entitled to
the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience."
Practice of religion in Virginia was now something that could not be taken
away at the discretion of any government or any church.
"Madison's amendment removed freedom of religion from the purview of what
lawyers today call ‘legislative grace' – with the implicit assumption that
what is thus given can be withdrawn by the power that grants it," Miller
wrote.
Madison would further develop this idea in his "Memorial and Remonstrance
Against Religious Assessments," in which he put forth the idea of religious
liberty as "unalienable" – a key idea behind the First Amendment.
"The Founding Fathers looked at liberty as inalienable: It can't be given;
it can't be transferred; it can't be taken away. It is a natural right.
Religious liberty was a guarantee through the right of nature to choose —
to choose to be different or to choose to be the same — whatever the choice
might be," Goff said.
Madison's deft maneuverings in Virginia politics were a coup d'état for
religious freedom in what was then America's largest and most wealthy
state, laying the groundwork for the First Amendment and the United States
Constitution – both of which Madison was a principal drafter. The free
exercise clause in the Virginia Declaration of Rights would be transferred
to the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. Madison's stake in the
heart of General Assessments would be codified in the First Amendment's
Establishment Clause, "Congress shall make no law respecting an
establishment of religion." The Free Exercise Clause and the Establishment
Clause – all of 16 words – guarantee religious liberty in the United
States.
The Free Exercise clauses might seem contradictory – "no establishment vs.
free exercise" – as if the two were at odds with one another. But the
clauses should be read as "no establishment AND free exercise."
"The Framers did not intend that the two religion clauses cancel each other
out," Haynes said. "Any interpretation of the Establishment Clause must
take into account the Free Exercise Clause and vice versa."
In 1988, marking the bicentennial of the United States Constitution and
Virginia's call for the Bill of Rights, a conference of leaders from a
broad cross section of American life signed the Williamsburg Charter, which
reaffirmed the principles of the First Amendment. The charter describes how
the Religious Liberty clauses operate together:
"The First Amendment Religious Liberty clauses are mutually reinforcing
provisions that act as a double guarantee of religious liberty, one part
barring the making of any law ‘respecting an establishment of religion' and
the other barring any law ‘prohibiting the free exercise thereof.' ... The
two clauses are essentially one provision for preserving religious liberty.
Both parts, No establishment and Free exercise, are to be comprehensively
understood as being in the service of religious liberty as a positive good.
At the heart of the Establishment clause is the prohibition of state
sponsorship of religion and at the heart of Free Exercise clause is the
prohibition of state interference with religious liberty."
The joy of sects
"If one religion only were allowed in England, the Government would very
possibly become arbitrary; if there were but two, the people would cut one
another's throats; but as there are such a multitude, they all live happy
and in peace."
– Voltaire, "Letters on England"
Crucial to Madison's early successes in securing religious liberty was the
already diverse religious landscape America. By the time of the Revolution,
the Anglican Church, formerly the established church of Virginia, had to
share space with Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists and other smaller
sects. It was in the interest of each group to have religious liberty for
their own empowerment. Madison worked this fact to his advantage, playing
one sect against another so that no one particular group, or coalition of
groups, would gain dominance and impose a state church.
Madison was fond of quoting Voltaire's quip: If only one religion were
allowed, the government would become despotic; but if there were many,
"they all live happy and in peace." Madison explained the application of
this philosophy in the Federalist Papers: "In a free government the
security for civil rights must be the same as that for religious rights. It
consists in the one case in the multiplicity of interests, and in the other
in the multiplicity of sects. The degree of security in both cases will
depend on the number of interests and sects," he wrote.
In drafting the U.S. Constitution, Madison applied this same theory to
republican government: The different branches of government, like different
religious sects, would provide a "check and balance" on one another and
prevent one single entity from gaining an overabundance of power.
"Ambition must be made to counteract ambition," Madison wrote in the
Federalist Papers. "It may be a reflection on human nature, that such
devices [checks and balances] should be necessary to control the abuses of
government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all
reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be
necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal
controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is
to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you
must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next
place oblige it to control itself."
American federalism, the arrangement between the states and the federal
government, is based on the same principle of the diffusion of powers among
competing interests. "By joining together Virginia and Massachusetts and
eleven others, with all of their diversities, the polity encompasses a
sufficiently multiple and complex variety of interests to prevent any alone
from dominating, to require combinations and compromise, and to allow
alteration by new combinations," Miller wrote.
"Thus," Miller continued, "the multiplicity of mutually balancing sects
furnished Madison his sample and analogy for these larger claims about the
realistic foundation of republican government in the nature of man and the
balancing of ambitions and of interests, which is the contribution to
political thinking for which he is best known, and which reverberates to
this day."
[ end excerpt ]
***************************************************************
You are invited to check out the following:
The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]
HRSepCnS · Hampton Roads SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
[Its not just Hampton Roads folks who are members]
For people in Hampton Roads you are also invited to join
NORFOLK/VA. B. SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE MEETUP GROUP
http://churchandstate.meetup.com/47/
Virginia Chapter Americans United for Separation of Church and State
http://au-va.org/
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
"Dedicated to combatting 'history by sound bite'."
Now including a re-publication of Tom Peters
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE HOME PAGE
and
Audio links to Supreme Court oral arguments and
Speech by civil rights/constitutional lawyer and others.
This site is a member of the following web rings:
Freethought Ring--&--Freethought, Religion & Beliefs Ring
The First Amendment Ring--&--The Church-State Ring
American History WebRing--&--The History Ring
Let Freedom Ring--&--Religious Freedom Ring
Law Issues Ring--&--Legal Research Ring
****************************************************************
.
|
