The Secret of Our Power – Part 3

TimeWatch Editorial
September 22, 2016

As we have seen in our very last editorial, it was to prevent a repetition of such persecutions like the whipping of the Baptists and Quakers, and the banishing of Roger Williams, by the Puritans that the first amendment to the Constitution was added. Notice that the very first line of the First Amendment states that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. But what is the definition of the word “Religion?”

“Chief Justice Waite, who delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court in the United States, in the case of Reynolds vs. United States, in 1878, said: " The word ' religion ' is not defined in the Constitution. We must go elsewhere, therefore, to ascertain its meaning and nowhere more appropriately, we think, than to the history of the times in the midst of which the provision was adopted." This, most certainly, is the only way in which we can obtain the correct meaning of the word. And as the subject was a live question when the Federal Constitution was adopted, the documents of the times furnish us an accurate idea of the meaning intended by the use of the word “religion." In the Virginia “Declaration of Rights," adopted June 12, 1776, it is incidentally defined in the sixteenth section " that religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction not by force or violence; and, therefore, all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian forbearance, love, and charity towards each other." William Addison Blakely, Counselor at Law, “American State Papers Bearing on Sunday Legislation” Page 154

So the definition supplied here is “the duty which we owe to our Creator and the manner of discharging it.” So the intended meaning of the word addresses not just the identification of a belief system, but rather to the implementation of faith and practice as experienced by the individual. Mr. Blakely also says that the same definition of the word “Religion” was given to in the proposed Amendments guaranteeing religious rights in the Federal Constitution, by the State conventions of Virginia, North Carolina, and Rhode Island. Blakely further says that:

“In the Virginia "Memorial and Remonstrance," written by James Madison, it was distinctly stated that they meant religious equality to extend to all beliefs — not alone to sects of the Christian religion. Yet religious partisans resort to all kinds of subterfuges in their attempts to make it appear in some way or other that the Christian religion is a part of our common law, its institutions are entitled to especial regard by the government, etc., ad infinitum. Madison emphasized the idea of absolute religious equality for all in the religious amendment which he originally proposed, among nine others, to incorporate in the body of the Constitution, instead of in separate articles as they were finally adopted.” William Addison Blakely, Counselor at Law, “American State Papers Bearing on Sunday Legislation” Page 154

So it is clear that the establishment clause refers to all faiths and not just Christianity. That was Madison’s intent when the clause was written and that was the meaning when the Amendment was ratified. Philip Schaff, D.D., LL.D writing in his book “Church and State in the United States” published in the year 1888, addresses the matter in the following manner.

“The Constitution does not define "religion," nor limit "the free exercise thereof." But "religion” must, at all events, include all branches of the Christian Church which then existed in the various States, with their creeds, forms of government, worship, and discipline. They are all excluded from becoming a state-religion, but all can practice and enjoy “free exercise." This is much more than freedom of religious opinions; for this exists everywhere, even under the most despotic governments, and is beyond the reach of law, which deals only with overt actions. Freedom of exercise includes public worship, acts of discipline, and every legitimate manifestation of religion.” Philip Schaff, D.D., LL.D, “Church and State In The United States” page 35

Finally, Philip Schaff makes it clear as to the full intent of the establishment clause. He not only defines the restriction on the establishment of a religion, but further reveals the inability of the state to demand a religion of any kind of any person.

“The spirit of our government allows the widest latitude to this free exercise that is at all consistent with public safety. Hence even irreligion and infidelity have free play and scatter their poison wide and far by word and pen. The prevailing sentiment is that error may safely be tolerated where truth is free to combat it. Truth is mighty and must prevail in the end. Its triumph is all the more sure and lasting if it is brought about by its own merits, unaided by material force.” Philip Schaff, D.D., LL.D, “Church and State In The United States” page 35

It is clear that these men who were led to protect the liberty of conscience also were made aware of the fact that that liberty would be challenged. Their vision of the fact that as the nation grew older this challenge might even become stronger. William Addison Blakely describes it best.

“The framers of our government intended to separate absolutely and forever all connection between civil government and religion; but as years roll by, and the spirit of liberty that was so prominent a characteristic of the American people then, fades from the American mind, we see a revival of the demands for Sunday laws and their enforcement, and calls for the recognition of the Christian religion in our public documents. But as long as the integrity of the Federal constitution is preserved, no such laws can be enacted by the government of the United States of America. And any right that an individual has as a citizen of the United States, no State is allowed to abridge; for, according to the fourteenth amendment, “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States." William Addison Blakely, Counselor at Law, “American State Papers Bearing on Sunday Legislation” Page 155

What vision!

Cameron A. Bowen