Separation of Church and State

There has never been, in the history of the United States, a more damaging phrase than the "separation of church and state." This phrase has been used as a tool of nation-wide destruction of human value and a lever for the wielding of injustice across this great country for over two centuries. Five words have slowly deteriorated America by providing an escape route for immorality and a growing and continued excuse for an unjust and reprobate society.

These results would be justified and perhaps exactly what America deserves, if they had been the intent and design of the founders of this nation. However, the truth is that these five words were not included as part of the United States Constitution.

The fear of the dominance of one denomination, perhaps formed and funded by the government of the new country, such as was remembered from the country from which its founders forefathers had fled, was avoided in the writing. However, to stretch the inference from the desire to avoid a single denomination controlled by a monarchy to the belief that they did not want to have the country under the influence of religion could only be justified by scholars who have grown to love rebellion again the God who created them. Still, there was a continued fear that the British monarchy had designs on the new land, so citizens, including the founders were on guard against that possibility and kept it ever tucked in the back of their minds.

The facts, and history of the founders, show that these men and the new society were heavily steeped in the Christian faith, though of diverse denominations, and wanted no other major religion or single denomination to pervade their new land. We see this fact in the early design of their common schools, their primers (schoolbooks), the dominance of the Christian Bible in their schools and their lives, and the denomination of all Christian churches in their towns. The public supported with words, deeds, and money the Christian Bible-based schools and saw great value in their children's indoctrination in the scriptures. We also see the proclamation of the Christian faith, and even the reference to Jesus Christ, in the writing of the individual state constitutions and within the creeds of most of the universities founded in that early time. So, it would be quite ignoring these factors to read, in any way, into the United States Constitution that in that encompassing endeavor the founders decided to reverse their thinking and basic beliefs to state that the government should have nothing to do with religion. What is more absurd, in light of what we know, is the idea that founders felt that though they demanded it in every other area of their life, religion should not influence or be used to govern the government or the nation.

However, in the false fear that the government might be considering a reversal to the ways of the Catholic-led and monarchy-controlled England, the Danbury Baptist Association of Danbury, Connecticut, wrote to President Jefferson. Jefferson and other statesmen had already made it quite clear that, in the design of the Constitution, no one Christian denomination would be allowed to dominate the country. The Danbury Baptists were hoping to be assured of the fact and asked Jefferson to address the point. So, Jefferson hoping to quiet the unrest of these people made the fatal mistake of writing a letter to them to explain that they had nothing to fear and that all were aware of the problem of a single Christian denomination coming into dominance. Unfortunately, the wording that Jefferson used in this letter, though it may have satiated the Danbury Baptist, opened the door for atheism within America that has grown in astronomical proportion up through the courts to as high as the Supreme Court of the land. The poor choice of words were a lit cigarette in a forest ready for burning and has spread exactly like wildfire, out of control, across our whole nation. Nothing sacred has been spared or saved.

In his letter, Jefferson simply assured: "I contemplate with solemn reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State." The first part, not to mention the rest of his letter, has been conveniently overlooked for these last five words penned by Jefferson. In the mind of those who have hoped to be free from law and order or any restraints that might interfere with their choice of immoral lifestyle, the words in Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptist, namely "a wall of separation," frees them to do whatever they would like, live as debased from moral decency as they please, form cults of any type, promote atheistic societies and form independent unions to challenge the Christian-based foundations of this nation, and to laugh in the face of justice. Perhaps the worst of all is that the poorly-chosen, non-discerning Supreme Court Justices of this land either could not see or politically chose not to see the meaning behind those words of Jefferson's ambiguous letter. The phrases "wall of separation" and "separation of Church and State" became an erroneous precedent for decisions on matters of grave importance to our nation. The longer the discrepancy held and was used as a precedent in the courts the deeper the country moved into moral and ethical decay. One travesty today lies in the fact that this lie has gone on so long that, say it were realized today, reversal of the damage done to this nation, would take a generation.

It is still amazing to read where people in the several media, the common citizens of this society, diplomats, statesmen, and even Supreme Court Justices are touting the words "as is stated in the Constitution of the United States" in reference to the phrase "separation of Church and State" concerning a defense or point they are trying to make. The fact is that neither the words "separation" nor "Church and State" are anywhere in the Constitution. This is purely something that has been falsely claimed several times and has, only through word of mouth, become the truth to many. People who are familiar with the Christian Bible, being familiar with what it says, are often amazed to hear people quote phrases said to be from the Bible, only to find that they are quotes from Benjamin Franklin. An example would be "God helps those who help themselves." In the same way, over time, people want to claim that the Constitution, especially the First Amendment, says and guarantees certain rights. Just as some people would prefer to rewrite the Bible to fit their way of life, so too would some prefer to rewrite the Constitution. Over the years, there have been several attempts at amendment of both.

No doubt, some will say that Jefferson wanted the Danbury letter to be taken and used the way its intent is being mistranslated. Perhaps they, as many others today, including the Supreme Court, have overlooked or ignored the following of Jefferson's statements concerning the First Amendment:

1. "No power over the freedom of religion [is] delegated to the United States by the Constitution." (from the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798)

2. "In matters of religion I have considered that its free exercise is placed by the Constitution independent of the powers of the General (federal) Government" (from Jefferson's Second Inaugural Address, 1805)

3. "I consider the government of the United States as interdicted [prohibited] by the Constitution from intermeddling with religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline, or exercises. This results not only from the provision that no law shall be made respecting the establishment or free exercise of religion, but from that also which reserves to the States the power to prescribe any religious exercise, or to assume authority in religious discipline, has been delegated to the General Government. It must then rest with the States, as far as it can be in any human authority. (a letter to Samuel Miller, 1808)

Unfortunately, the same Court that chose to use Jefferson's Danbury letter to set precedent in innumerable cases, also conveniently chose to ignore the previous example statements and letter of Jefferson's intent. During the case of Emerson v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court decided to turn around 150 years of established legal practice under the Constitution that gave the individual States the right to rule in the matters of religious practice. Such reverse and contrary thinking made it possible to pass laws that removed voluntary prayer and Bible reading, the use of the Ten Commandments, and other great deterrent against immorality from the public (compulsory) school system. However, strangely enough, when the Mormons decided it was time (during the case of Reynolds v. United States in 1978) for them to be permitted under law to practice polygamy, the Court decided (out of the blue) that the "separation of Church and State" law pertained to denominational differences and not to basic Christian principles. This way, and for this reason only, the Court could rule polygamy a violation of the Constitution because it was a violation of basic Christian principles. Here, for the first time, the Supreme Court redefined their meaning of "separation of Church and State" to mean a separation of basic religious principles from public arenas. Finally, it could get at the plan it had from the very beginning, which was to remove Christianity from public affairs. As soon as this was established, the Courts began striking down the laws in many states that had decided it a good, sound, and promising idea, as did the founding colonies and states of our great country, to allow Christian principles in public affairs.

It is interesting and haunting to find that, even though the phrase "separation of Church and State" is not found in the United States Constitution, it is found in the Constitution of the Soviet Union:

"Article 124: In order to ensure to citizens freedom of conscience, the church in the USSR is separated from the state, and the school from the church."

We must stop signing up to everything that we believe the Constitution was meant to say, based on what we want it to say, and begin reading what it does say. Perhaps we should reexamine the decisions that have been made based upon the misinterpretation of Jefferson's Danbury letter and right the multitude of wrongs that have demoralized our country. Maybe, if we examine the history of how this separation phrase was used to make essential decisions in time, we would be able to determine an agenda against the principles of the founding fathers.

Excerpted from David Barton's book The Myth of Separation.