Just by reading the Founding Fathers' writings directly, I highly doubt that most intended separation of church and state to take the form it often does today, namely removing faith from the public square altogether.
I read a story about a town that for many years had put up a Christmas tree on the courthouse lawn each December without any objection from anyone. The town grew in complexity over time, however, and one day the local synagogue asked if they could put up a Hanukkah display also. The town council had no objection. Then other groups asked if they too, could put up a display representing their religions for the holidays.
The council could hardly object. Soon their were three or four, though the Christmas tree remained the most prominent. Then one church complained that all these religions had displays on the courthouse lawn, but there was nothing for Christians. The council pointed out the Christmas tree. "Bah!" said the minister. "Christmas trees are more pagan than Christian. We don't approve of them. We want to see Jesus!" and wanted to erect a large Nativity Scene. The courthouse lawn was already getting crowded in December, and there were already arguments about how big the displays would be and who would get the best locations, and the council was now worried that it was only going to get worse. So they felt obliged to ban all religious displays from the courthouse lawn, and even the Christmas tree went away.
That’s a very real consideration-if you accommodate one, you must do it for all. I should have been clearer, I was thinking of the litigious types who get sue-happy around every December. I highly doubt that our wise Founders ever considered this as an outcome. In the same vein, I’m sure they would never have even thought someone would want to make a career in politics, either!
I think I know what you mean. Their views seem an odd mixture today. They wanted to minimize religious disputes while assuming that there would be always be a certain level of consensus on many matters.
The same year Virginia adopted the Statute for Religious Freedom, for which he was justly so proud, Jefferson also asserted the power of the governor to proclaim public days of thanksgiving or mourning, which ALL ministers of religion would be REQUIRED to observe with appropriate services or face penalties! Jefferson was certainly thinking that it was a power that would only be used in ways that would help unify the state, but I shudder to think how easily it could be abused.
John Quincy Adams was certainly pious and believe that religion was important, but he took is oath of office as president on a copy of the constitution, saying that swearing on a Bible was not in the spirit of the constitution. (There was a time when swearing on the Bible was taken seriously, and was not permitted to, let alone required of, people who did not regard it as Holy Writ. How would such an oath bind the conscience of someone who did not regard the book as sacred?) It came too close, in Adams' view, to a religious test for office, and an establishment of religion.
Most of the Founders were likewise pious, and had no hesitation to speak of God, but "In God We Trust" wasn't put on a coin until 1864, nor on all coins un 1938, nor did it become an official motto of the U.S. until the 1950s.
Many denominations of Christians did not observe Christmas in the 18th century, and federal law took no notice of it, so that postmasters and other government officers were expected to work on December 25 just as they would on any other day. Various states set it aside as a holiday for state employees, but it did not become a federal holiday until 1870. While official recognition of the Christian sabbath was taken for granted from the beginning.
Many things that were once thought unobjectionable now meet resistance, it is true; there are wrangles and controversies over things that once were matters of broad consensus.
But I certainly don't see any evidence that faith has been removed from the public square. It seems to me more prominent in that square now than ever before in my lifetime, intruding into places it once left alone, and stirring up a lot of battles over turf.
Just by reading the Founding Fathers' writings directly, I highly doubt that most intended separation of church and state to take the form it often does today, namely removing faith from the public square altogether.
I read a story about a town that for many years had put up a Christmas tree on the courthouse lawn each December without any objection from anyone. The town grew in complexity over time, however, and one day the local synagogue asked if they could put up a Hanukkah display also. The town council had no objection. Then other groups asked if they too, could put up a display representing their religions for the holidays.
The council could hardly object. Soon their were three or four, though the Christmas tree remained the most prominent. Then one church complained that all these religions had displays on the courthouse lawn, but there was nothing for Christians. The council pointed out the Christmas tree. "Bah!" said the minister. "Christmas trees are more pagan than Christian. We don't approve of them. We want to see Jesus!" and wanted to erect a large Nativity Scene. The courthouse lawn was already getting crowded in December, and there were already arguments about how big the displays would be and who would get the best locations, and the council was now worried that it was only going to get worse. So they felt obliged to ban all religious displays from the courthouse lawn, and even the Christmas tree went away.
That’s a very real consideration-if you accommodate one, you must do it for all. I should have been clearer, I was thinking of the litigious types who get sue-happy around every December. I highly doubt that our wise Founders ever considered this as an outcome. In the same vein, I’m sure they would never have even thought someone would want to make a career in politics, either!
I think I know what you mean. Their views seem an odd mixture today. They wanted to minimize religious disputes while assuming that there would be always be a certain level of consensus on many matters.
The same year Virginia adopted the Statute for Religious Freedom, for which he was justly so proud, Jefferson also asserted the power of the governor to proclaim public days of thanksgiving or mourning, which ALL ministers of religion would be REQUIRED to observe with appropriate services or face penalties! Jefferson was certainly thinking that it was a power that would only be used in ways that would help unify the state, but I shudder to think how easily it could be abused.
John Quincy Adams was certainly pious and believe that religion was important, but he took is oath of office as president on a copy of the constitution, saying that swearing on a Bible was not in the spirit of the constitution. (There was a time when swearing on the Bible was taken seriously, and was not permitted to, let alone required of, people who did not regard it as Holy Writ. How would such an oath bind the conscience of someone who did not regard the book as sacred?) It came too close, in Adams' view, to a religious test for office, and an establishment of religion.
Most of the Founders were likewise pious, and had no hesitation to speak of God, but "In God We Trust" wasn't put on a coin until 1864, nor on all coins un 1938, nor did it become an official motto of the U.S. until the 1950s.
Many denominations of Christians did not observe Christmas in the 18th century, and federal law took no notice of it, so that postmasters and other government officers were expected to work on December 25 just as they would on any other day. Various states set it aside as a holiday for state employees, but it did not become a federal holiday until 1870. While official recognition of the Christian sabbath was taken for granted from the beginning.
Many things that were once thought unobjectionable now meet resistance, it is true; there are wrangles and controversies over things that once were matters of broad consensus.
But I certainly don't see any evidence that faith has been removed from the public square. It seems to me more prominent in that square now than ever before in my lifetime, intruding into places it once left alone, and stirring up a lot of battles over turf.
I agree with you.