Writing Assignment 5.

Signature Series Cluster

Chapter 4 – Religion and American Founding

Bellevue University

March 25, 2009

RESTORING RELIGION BACK INTO OUR NATION

This week’s assignment requires us to consider the role of religion in the government and in the public spheres as well as

in our public lives as it pertains to the separation of church and state.

A nation or a government has many building blocks or pillars. It was a concept sometimes referred to as “the eternal

triangle of first principles” – a set of three interlocking and interdependent ideas that were viewed as absolutely

fundamental for sustaining freedom (Simon, 2000). Religion is one of these pillars, without it, nation will not be able to

perform to the full extent and eventually fall. The three legs of this triangle are liberty, virtue, and religion. The promise is

that each leg requires the other so that simply stated: liberty requires virtue, virtue requires faith, and faith requires liberty

(Simon, 2000). The third leg of the triangle is the principle that religion requires liberty. Here and not in the separation of

powers, is where our framers were perhaps most original and most daring (Simon, 2000).

Jefferson firmly believed that the first amendment, with its metaphoric “Wall of separation”, prohibited religious

establishments by the federal government only (Dreiscach). If Thomas Jefferson were to be alive today, it is my firm

belief that he will be appalled at what our nation has become, especially at how we have misconstrued his “Wall of

separation between church and state.”(Dreiscach). Secular separationists are using this statement twisting its true

intentions to fit their own agenda, systematically eradicating all religious influences from public life(Dreiscach). I wish for

the benefit of our nation that Jefferson never made the “wall of separation” comment or in the least have been more

specific about what function the wall was supposed to perform. To this effect, we must rely on Dreiscah’s analysis of
Jefferson’s wall. Jefferson never envisioned the wall to be a wall to set up to eradicate religion from the public realm, by

the means of the “high and impregnable” wall that the 20th and 21st century supreme court has set up” contributing this

type of wall to Jefferson(Dreiscach). Most Americans have been conditioned to believe and to assume that the First

Amendment to the U.S. Constitution requires a “wall of separation between Church and State” this concept is seldom

challenged today, but it is not actually a part of the Constitution or any of its Amendments; it did not become generally

accepted until well into the 20th Century(Patton). Jefferson’s wall was a wall erected between the national (ie., federal)

and state governments on matter concerning religion, and not between the church and ALL civil government. Jefferson’s

eight word phrase, “a wall of separation between Church and State,” has become the defining metaphor for today’s

misinterpretation of the First Amendment (Patton).

For generations we have interpreted the first amendment to mean that religion has no business in politics and a complete

separation between church and state. It is our misconception of the First Amendment that has caused so many dilemmas

in the “church-state jurisprudence”. The purpose of the First Amendment was not to protect Americans, its institutions, its

leaders, or the “public arena” from religion; it was to protect religion from government intrusion! It was a one-way wall.

This understanding or view is in full and obvious accord with the raison d’être of the Bill of Rights itself: to limit the federal

government’s power and thereby secure the freedoms of individuals and the rights of the states. They Bill of Rights was a
declaration of what the federal government could not do(Patton). The intent of the First Amendment could never have

been to separate Church and State in the sense of keeping religion and morality out of the halls of government(Patton)

The founding fathers felt that there needed to be a separation of church and state. Founders being in opposition of the

establishment of a national church much like the Church of England (Spalding). As it can be seen from “Congress shall

make no law respecting any establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise” of religion (Patton). Very simply

the federal government was prohibited from establishing a single national denomination above all others, such as the

Great Britain had done with the Church of England, whereby a particular religion or denomination was endowed with

public funding, special privilege, and/or penalties imposed on other faiths that opposed the doctrines of the “official

church” of the nation. Secondly, the free exercise clause simply meant the federal government could not interfere with

the individual’s right and conscience to freedom of worship (Patton).

At the founding of America, this nation formed a covenant with God in a way asking God to protect them and their libery if

rely firmly on the Divine providence of God(Novak). Dwight Eisenhower said, “Without God, there can be no American
form of government, nor an American way of life”(Simon, 2000). President Reagan warned that, “if America ever ceases

to be a nation under God, we will simply become a nation gone under” (Simon, 2000). In eradicating religion from the

public domain, we are committing grave injustice to our nation’s founding, and to our nation’s morality. Regardless of all

these facts, what is so clear today is that Americans today have “abandoned” the Framers’ position.

For the framers, liberty was not just a form of negative freedom—a freedom “from”; rather, it was positive freedom—a

freedom “for”, or freedom “to be”(Simon, 2000). Much like Senator Lieberman argued, “we have a freedom of Religion”

and not “freedom from religion”(Silverman). In eradicating religion from the public domain, we are committing grave

injustice to our nation’s founding, and to our nation’s morality. National morality cannot prevail in exclusion of religious

principle(Washington, 1796). Some atheists like Silverman, have argued, “to understand the Universe, and solve human

problems, American must be a country committed to the application of reason, science, and experience (not religion) – a

country where our deeds are more important than our creeds”(Silverman). Religious freedom then becomes freedom

from religion instead of freedom from religion instead of freedom for religion. Public life becomes a “religion-free zone” so

that religion is considered inviolably private and public life inviolably secular(Simon, 2000).
The story of religious liberty in America began with the religious persecution in the old world(Spalding). Religious liberty

is liberty vital for all citizens. Religion in America is far from an inviolably private issue; essentially, it is a national issue.

So, why does America need religion? It is not too much to say that as faith goes in America, so goes freedom(Simon,

2000). If the Framer’s reliance on democracy or the separation of powers was not absolute, then what is the missing

piece of the puzzle? (Simon, 2000). “Framers believed that a strong constitution is not sufficient because human nature

left to its own devices would eventually subvert the constitution itself” (Simon, 2000) . How did the Founders see the role

of the church or religion to be in our democratic republic? In Novak’s quoting of Thomas Jefferson’s anecdote, Jefferson

states the importance of the church in a nation(Novak). In saying that “no nation has ever yet existed or been governed

without religion” Jefferson shows that the founders felt that without religion, liberty is non-existent. “Founding fathers

believed the religion to be the way not only to freedom but also―and equally important―to sustain freedom. The United

States would therefore be a free republic that would remain free”(Simon, 335).

In conclusion, we should reinstate religion into the public realm, and while at it, offer up a prayer for the nation: Lord God

have mercy on our nation, as we have turned away from you into the “wide gate and broad way that leads to destruction”

(), in the public and private domains, with it we have weakened religious participation and abandoned traditional moral

norms taught by religion. Restore on to our nation a true and a just faith in God.
REFERENCES
Dreiscach, D. L. The Mythical "Wall of Separation": How a misuded Metaphor changed Church-

State Law, Policy & Discource. In E. A. Rachut (Ed.), Kirkpatrick Signature Series Reader (pp.

315-322). Bellevue, NE: Bellevue University Press.

Loconte, J. Why Religious Values Support American Values. In E. A. Rachut (Ed.), Kirkpatrick

Signature Series Reader (pp. 358-361). Bellevue, NE: Bellevue University Press.
Novak, M. Faith & American Founding: Illustrating Religion's Influence. In E. A. Rachut (Ed.),

Kirkpatrick Signature Series Reader (pp. 304-310). Bellevue, NE: Bellevue University Press.
Patton:, J. W. The "Wall of Separation" between Church & State. In E. A. Rachut (Ed.), Kirkpatrick

Signature Series Reader (pp. 330-331). Bellevue, NE: Bellevue University Press.
Silverman, H. American Religion Undermines American Values. In E. A. Rachut (Ed.), Kirkpatrick

Signature Series Reader (pp. 323-325). Bellevue, NE: Bellevue University Press.
Simon, J. W. (2000). Why America Needs Religion. In E. A. Rachut (Ed.), Kirkpatrick Signature

Series Reader (pp. 335-338). Bellevue, NE: Bellevue University Press.

Spalding, M. Meanding of Religious Liberty. In E. A. Rachut (Ed.), Kirkpatrick Signature Series

Reader (pp. 312-314). Bellevue, NE: Bellevue University Press.

The Gospel of Matthew. In E. A. Rachut (Ed.), Kirkpatrick Signature Series Reader (pp. 332-334).

Bellevue, NE: Bellevue University Press.

Tocqueville, A. (1835). from Democracy in America, Chapter 5: How Religion in the United States

Avails Itself of Democratic Tendencies. In E. A. Rachut (Ed.), Kirkpatrick Signature Series

Reader (pp. 326-329). Bellevue, NE: Bellevue University Press.

Washington, G. (1796). From Farewell Address. In E. A. Rachut (Ed.), Kirkpatrick Signature Series

Reader (p. 311). Bellevue, NE: Bellevue University Press.