• Als Spam markieren
• Beitrag melden

• 
  Diese Gruppe Alles

• Archiv
• RSS-Feeds

• Kontakt
• Hilfe
• Impressum
• Datenschutz

Separation of Church and State

Separation of Church and State

"Separation of church and state" was a familiar Western principle,
especially among Protestant writers. Martin Luther, for example, had spoken
of "a paper wall . . . between the spiritual estate [and] the temporal
estate."85 John Calvin had argued that the "political kingdom" and
"spiritual kingdom" must always be "considered separately." For there
is "a
great difference between the ecclesiastical and civil power" and it would
be "unwise to mingle these two which have a completely different nature."86
Such early Protestant views were repeated in New England Puritan writings
and laws.87 European Anabaptist writers had also spoken of the necessary
separation between the fallen world and the redeemed church. Such views
recurred in Roger Williams's image of "a wall of separation between the
garden of the Church and the wilderness of the world" and were repeated by
later Evangelical writers in the eighteenth century, notably Isaac
Backus.88

The principle of separation of church and state also had solid grounding in
political sources that appealed to American Enlightenment and Republican
writers. James Burgh, for example, a Scottish Whig who was popular among
several American founders, pressed for the principle in his influential
writings of the 1760s and 1770s.89 Burgh lamented the "ill consequences" of
the traditional "mixed-mungrel-spiritual-secular-ecclesiastical
establishment." Such conflations of church and state, said Burgh, lead to
"follies and knaveries," and make "the dispensers of religion despicable
and odious to all men of sense, and will destroy the spirituality, in which
consists the whole value, of religion." "Build an impenetrable wall of
separation between sacred and civil," Burgh enjoined. "Do not send the
graceless officer, reeking from the arms of his trull [i.e., prostitute],
to the performance of a holy rite of religion, as a test for his holding
the command of a regiment. To profane, in such a manner, a religion, which
you pretend to reverence, is an impiety sufficient to bring down upon your
heads, the roof of the sacred building you thus defile."90

Tunis Wortman, a Jeffersonian, also wrote boldly:

It is your duty, as Christians, to maintain the purity and independence of
the church, to keep religion separate from politics, to prevent an union
between the church and the state, and to preserve the clergy from
temptation, corruption and reproach. . . . Unless you maintain the pure and
primitive spirit of Christianity, and prevent the cunning and intrigue of
statesmen from mingling with its institutions, you will become exposed to a
renewal of the same dreadful and enormous scenes which have not only
disgraced the annals of the church, but destroyed the peace, and sacrificed
the lives of millions. . . . Religion and government are equally necessary,
but their interests should be kept separate and distinct.91

Such quotes, from both theological and political sources, reflect the
central understanding of the principle of separation in the founding era:
The offices and officers of the churches and states must break their
traditional alliances. "Upon no plan, no system," wrote Wortman, "can they
become united, without endangering the purity and usefulness of both-the
church will corrupt the state, and the state pollute the church."92

On the one hand, separation of church and state guarantees "ecclesiastical
purity and liberty"-the independence and integrity of the internal
processes of religious bodies. Elisha Williams spoke for many churchmen
when he wrote: "[Every church has [the] right to judge in what manner God
is to be worshipped by them, and what form of discipline ought to be
observed by them, and the right also of electing their own officers"
without interference from political officials.93

On the other hand, separation guarantees "political and social
stability"-the protection of individual rights and social cohesion. James
Madison put this well in discussing church and state:

Their jurisdiction is both derivative and limited. It is limited with
regard to the co-ordinate departments; more necessarily is it limited with
regard to the constituents. The preservation of a free government requires
not merely, that the metes and bounds which separate each department of
power be invariably maintained; but more especially that neither of them be
suffered to overleap the great barrier which defends the rights of the
people.94

The principle of separation of church and state was also readily
under-stood by the founders as a means to protect the liberty of conscience
of the religious believer. Thomas Jefferson, for example, in his famous
1802 letter to the Danbury Baptist Association, tied the principle of
separationism directly to the principle of liberty of conscience:

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between a
man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his
worship, that the [legitimate] powers of government reach actions only, and
not opinions, I con-template with sovereign reverence that the act of the
whole American people which declared that their 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. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in
behalf of the rights 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 has no natural right in opposition to his
social duties.95

Separatism thus assured individuals of their natural, inalienable right of
conscience, which could be exercised freely and fully to the point of
breaching the peace or shirking social duties. Jefferson is not talking
here of separating politics and religion altogether. Indeed, in the very
next paragraph of his letter, President Jefferson performed an avowedly
religious act of offering prayers on behalf of his Baptist correspondents-.
"I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessing of the
common Father and Creator of man."96 This was consistent with a number of
his other political acts in support of religion, both as governor of
Virginia and as president of the United States.97

NOTES:

85. Martin Luther, To the Christian Nobility of the German Nation (1520),
in Three Treatises, 2d rev. ed. (Philadelphia, 1986), 1-112, at 12, 16.
Luther went on to shred this "paper wall" of the Catholics in favor of his
own understanding of two kingdoms. See my Law and Protestantism: The Legal
Teachings of the Lutheran Reformation (Cambridge, 2000), chap. 2.

86. See John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion (1559), bk. 3.,
chap. 19.15; bk. 4., chap. 11.3; bk. 4, chap. 20.1-2. See discussion and
other sources in my "Moderate Religious Liberty in the Theology of John
Calvin," Calvin Theological Journal 31 (1996): 359-403, at 392ff.

87. See references in Daniel L. Dreisbach, "'Sowing Useful Truths and
Principles': The Danbury Baptists, Thomas Jefferson, and the 'Wall of
Separation,'" Journal of Church and State 39 (1997): 455-501, at 481-486.

88. Roger Williams, Letter to John Cotton (1643), in The Complete Writings
of Roger 'Williams, 7 vols. (New York, 1963), 1:392. See further references
in Chapter 2, notes 19-28.

89. See sources and discussion in Dreisbach, "'Sowing Useful Truths,'"
486-490.

90. James Burgh, Crito, or Essays on Various Subjects (London, 1767),
2:117-119 (emphasis removed).

91. Tunis Wortman, "A Solemn Address to Christians and Patriots (New York,
1800),"   reprinted  in  Sandoz,  ed.,  Political Sermons,   1477-1528,  at
1482, 1487-1488.

92. Ibid., 1488.

93. Williams, Essential Rights and Liberties, 46.

94. Madison, "Memorial and Remonstrance," sec. 2.

95. The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, ed. H. Washington, (Washington, DC,
1853-1854), 8:113 (emphasis added). The Washington edition of the letter
inaccurately transcribes "legitimate" as "legislative." See a more
accurate
transcription in Dreisbach, "'Sowing Useful Truths,'" 468-469.

96. The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, 114. For the original drafts of the
letter and the political machinations at work in its drafting and revision,
see James Hutson, "'A Wall of Separation': FBI Helps Restore Jefferson's
Obliterated Draft," Library of Congress Information Bulletin 57 (June
1998): 136-139, 163.

97. See Thomas E. Buckley, "The Political Theology of Thomas Jefferson," in
Peterson and Vaughan, eds., The Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom,
75-108.

***************************************************************
You are invited to check out the following:

The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm

American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.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 · Historical Reality SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/

***************************************************************
. . . 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)
. . .
****************************************************************
James Veverka wrote:
One of the ways to counter the attack on American Constitutional principles
by the religious right is to address their revisionism, misinformation and
distortions.

****************************************************************
USAF LT. COL (Ret) Buffman (Glen P. Goffin) wrote

"You pilot always into an unknown future;
facts are your only clue. Get the facts!"

That philosophy 'snipit' helped to get me, and my crew, through a good
many combat missions and far too many scary, inflight, emergencies.

It has also played a significant role in helping me to expose the
plethora of radical Christian propaganda and lies that we find at
almost every media turn.

*****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE

http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html

****************************************************************

Antworten