Separation of Church and State

The above title is not only a major theme of political theology, but the title of a book published in 2002 by Philip Hamburger, a Law Professor in Chicago.

Hamburger analyses the history of the doctrine in America from the seventeenth century and Roger Williams, through the Jefferson years and the nineteenth century, to the mid twentieth century and the Supreme Court decision, Everson v Ewing Board of Education, in 1947, which first ruled that this principle was a constitutional principle, contained in the First Amendment.

Hamburger's starting point is that there is a difference between separation of church and state, and constitutional freedom from a religious establishment, which is what the First Amendment explicitly protects. He demonstrates that the dissenters who were against establishments were not demanding separation of church and state in anything like the modern form. They recognised that there was a necessary and valuable connection between religion and government and few were agitating for separation of church and state until the mid nineteenth century. Thomas Jefferson certainly spoke of a 'wall of separation' in a letter to Baptists in Connecticut in 1802 but even the Baptists did not take him up on this.

The real agitation for separation of church and state was a reaction against Roman Catholicism in the mid 19th century, when an alliance of Protestants and liberal thinkers began to speak of it as a necessary principle, the motive force being a fear of the political ambitions of Roman Catholics and the nature of their Church. Even then there were big differences between what Christians and secular forces wanted to make of this 'separation'. There were attempts to get an amendment to establish it in the Bill of Rights, which indicates that it was by no means assumed that it was already contained within the First Amendment. When this failed, it was then argued that the principle of separation was included already in that Amendment. But it was not till 1947 that it was so ruled by the Supreme Court.

Hamburger illustrates how Jefferson was really a 'passing figure' in this debate, more important for what much later generations made of his words than for any impact they had at the time, and much less important than the social and ideological changes in America through the 19th C. The separation of church and state was a principle that suited Protestants (of all stripes, as well as Ku Klux Klansmen and other groups) afraid of Catholicism, and Liberals who did not want the influence of religion in politics.

Prominent among the influences at play was the growth of the three trends of individualism, the ideal of personal liberty, and 'specialisation' in society, particularly the compartmentalisation of religion from other aspects of life. Throughout the debates run the opposing arguments of those who believed religion to be essential to public life and those who feared the institutional power of any church.

Hamburger concludes by pointing out that separation of church and state and union of church and state are opposite poles of a long continuum, 'over-generalisations between which there lies very much middle ground'. The metaphor of a 'wall of separation' in Jefferson's letter, (earlier used though in a different sense by Williams) now etches the idea on generation after generation of Americans without the reality being analysed. It can be a nose of wax, moulded to suit the passing philosophies of an age. It is the way in which America has come to understand its religious liberty, having forgotten that originally it was understood in terms of anti-establishment.

This is not a theological book and does not examine the arguments from a biblical perspective, but is a fascinating and largely compelling account of how the debate moved from the late 18th C to the present day, when the principle of separation is used to crush any expression of Christian faith in the public square. Any principle, even if it is a biblical one in essence, is always going to be victim to exploitation by the society in which it operates.