Separation Of Church And State Right Or

Separation Of Church And State: Right Or Wrong. Essay, Research Paper

Daniel Emerick

11-2-2000

English 111-11

Michael Guzman

P3- Final Draft

Separation of Church and State: Right or Wrong.

Separation of church and state is a very sensitive topic in today.s society. Most people see the phrase .separation of church and state. and think it is concrete, constitutional, proof that nothing religious should set foot in anything relating to government. The intent of this paper is to present an alternate view of separation between church and state. Through exploring this controversial issue, this paper will touch on the history of separation of church and state, the principles of separation of church and state, and the elementary solution to church and state relations.

Today.s Laws Concerning Separation of Church and State

Today.s laws concerning church and state relations are very strict. The laws today treat religious morals as if they are harmful, and are going to severely detract from whatever they come in contact with.

The notion that religion should be excluded from almost all facets of government related issues is a very new thought. The very first Supreme Court case taking any form of religion out of schools, (and therefore government,) was in 1962. In the Engel v. Vital Supreme Court case, prayer was taken out of schools. A year after this case, Bible reading was taken out of schools in the Murray v Curlett Supreme Court case. Seventeen years later, in 1980, the ten commandments were taken out of schools in the Stone v Grahm Supreme Court case. (Hall, .United States Supreme Court Decisions.) I have mentioned these court cases to show how recent this .new. view of separation of church and state re is. This new view of separation of church and state is called pluralism. The definition of pluralism is: law being decided by the majority or by the ruling group or individual apart from an objective morals. Today.s view is that the government should be tot neutral, and have no religious or moral prejudices when making laws. (Coyle, .Separation of Church and State.)

Founding Fathers View of Separation of Church and State

Society, until recent times, also supported separation of church and state. The only difference was that people in the past had a tot different view of this separation. Our founding Fathers. definition of separation of church and state was not pluralistic. They did not think religious morals should be tot separated from government. They solely viewed separation of church and state as a way to protect themselves from papalism and erastianism. Papalism is defined as the church taking the leading role in government. Our founding Fathers actu left Europe to get away from a Papalistic Catholic Church. Erastianism is just the opposite of papalism. Erastianism is the state becomeing all-powerful, and telling the church what and what not to do. Our founding Fathers wrote the First Amendment of the Constitution to guard against papalism and erastianism. (Coyle) They did not write the first amendment to completely separate religious values from government. In researching our founding Fathers. writings, one can see what a devout religious foundation this country originated from.

Origin of the Phrase .Separation of Church and State.

Most people think the phrase .separation of church and state. comes directly from the Constitution. This common misconception is very misleading. People repeat the phrase .separation of church and state. as if it is an authoritative Constitutional statement. This phrase is found nowhere in the United States Constitution. The phrase separation of church and state originated in a letter from Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association. The Baptists were concerned with a rumor they heard that the government was going to appoint a national religion. The Danbury Baptist Association wrote to the current President, Thomas Jefferson, to see if this was true. Thomas Jefferson wrote the Baptist association back and assured them that no such law was going to be passed by saying, .I contemplate with sovereign reverence that 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.. (Jefferson) In evaluating this quote from Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association, it can be seen that the now overused statement .separation of church and state. was to assure frightened citizens that they were not going to be subjected to papalism or erastianism.

Interpretation of the First Amendment

In the letter to the Danbury Baptists, Jefferson quotes part of the First Amendment, .Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…. Most people today will say that this proves their pluralistic view of separation of church and state. In fact, the only thing the First Amendment says is that Congress can.t make a national religion or denomination. This is a law against erastianism and papalism, not a law against having religions morals and presuppositions in government. (Coyle) Since the Constitution was written, the Supreme Court has interpreted the first amendment as a law against erastiani