===Church Vs State===
"Church vs. State" refers to the principle of separating religious institutions from government, ensuring the state doesn't establish or favor religion, and individuals can practice freely, rooted in the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment (Establishment & Free Exercise Clauses) but interpreted differently, with debates on how much faith should influence public life versus maintaining a distinct boundary.
Key Concepts
The Establishment Clause prohibits the government from establishing a religion or endorsing one over others, creating a "high and impregnable" wall between church and state, as described by Justice Black. The Free Exercise Clause protects individuals' right to worship (or not) without government interference. The "Wall of Separation" is a metaphor from Thomas Jefferson, emphasizing government neutrality, though its exact meaning is debated.
Interpretations & Debates
Strict Separation argues for minimal government involvement, preventing any aid to religion and keeping faith out of public institutions. Accommodation believes the government can support religious groups in general, as long as it doesn't favor one over another (e.g., allowing religious schools to use public buses).
Influence vs. Control: Some argue the founders intended to stop government control over the church, not prevent faith from influencing public policy.
Historical Context
The idea emerged from Christianity, with Jesus's command to "Render unto Caesar...". The USA was the first nation built on this separation, recognizing mixing church and state harms both according to the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism. Debates continue over public funding for religious schools, prayer in public spaces, and religious symbols on government property. Examples include debates over COVID-19 restrictions on churches or whether religious organizations should receive public benefits, notes First Liberty Institute and Americans United for Separation of Church and State.
Key Concepts
The Establishment Clause prohibits the government from establishing a religion or endorsing one over others, creating a "high and impregnable" wall between church and state, as described by Justice Black. The Free Exercise Clause protects individuals' right to worship (or not) without government interference. The "Wall of Separation" is a metaphor from Thomas Jefferson, emphasizing government neutrality, though its exact meaning is debated.
Interpretations & Debates
Strict Separation argues for minimal government involvement, preventing any aid to religion and keeping faith out of public institutions. Accommodation believes the government can support religious groups in general, as long as it doesn't favor one over another (e.g., allowing religious schools to use public buses).
Influence vs. Control: Some argue the founders intended to stop government control over the church, not prevent faith from influencing public policy.
Historical Context
The idea emerged from Christianity, with Jesus's command to "Render unto Caesar...". The USA was the first nation built on this separation, recognizing mixing church and state harms both according to the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism. Debates continue over public funding for religious schools, prayer in public spaces, and religious symbols on government property. Examples include debates over COVID-19 restrictions on churches or whether religious organizations should receive public benefits, notes First Liberty Institute and Americans United for Separation of Church and State.
|
100 years after Scopes, debate over church, state continues The Scopes trial drew national attention to the concept of separation of church and state, and while 100 years has passed, Americans continue to debate: What role should religion play, if any, in public education, policy and politics? "As we mark the 100th anniversary of the Scopes trial, it's clear the fight to preserve the separation of church and state is far from over," Tennessee American Civil Liberties interim Executive Director Phyllida Burlingame said in an email. "In fact, it's becoming increasingly urgent." The separation of church and state is never explicitly named in the U.S. Constitution, but its basis come from the First Amendment, according to the establishment and free exercise clauses, which protect an individual's right to practice religion without government interference and prohibit government from establishing a religion. (Times Free Press 7/12/25) READMORE>>>>> |
January 27, 2025: Annie Laurie Gaylor wrote: Trump will bulldoze church-state separation. A good indication on how church-state issues will play out in Donald Trump’s second presidential term can be found in his shameless hawking of an “Inauguration Day Bible,” part of a merch promotion from which he’s personally receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars in royalties. In marketing this book ($69.99, not including shipping) Trump has insisted, “We must make America pray again.” This unsavory mix of church, state and personal hucksterism foretells how brazenly we can expect Trump to continue to exploit religion and pander to his base of white evangelicals, 82% of whom voted for him. |
IRS says churches can endorse political candidates in reversal of decades-long precedent
In a reversal of decades of legal precedent, the Internal Revenue Service said in court filings on July 7 that churches and other religious 501 c(3) organizations can endorse political candidates in certain circumstances.
The new position, made in a joint filing intended to end a lawsuit brought by a group of high-profile Christian organizations last year, carves out a narrow exception to the Johnson Amendment, which has banned political activity by churches since 1954. The rule was introduced by former President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1954 when he was serving as the U.S. Senate majority leader. It banned all tax-exempt organizations like churches and charities from “directly or indirectly” participating in politics, specifically in endorsement or opposition of candidates. (USA Today 7/9/25) READMORE>>>>>
In a reversal of decades of legal precedent, the Internal Revenue Service said in court filings on July 7 that churches and other religious 501 c(3) organizations can endorse political candidates in certain circumstances.
The new position, made in a joint filing intended to end a lawsuit brought by a group of high-profile Christian organizations last year, carves out a narrow exception to the Johnson Amendment, which has banned political activity by churches since 1954. The rule was introduced by former President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1954 when he was serving as the U.S. Senate majority leader. It banned all tax-exempt organizations like churches and charities from “directly or indirectly” participating in politics, specifically in endorsement or opposition of candidates. (USA Today 7/9/25) READMORE>>>>>
|
Matthew 22:21: Jesus says, "Therefore render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's".
John 18:36: Jesus says, "My kingdom is not of this world". Romans 13:1-7: Paul acknowledges that earthly government is established by God. Matthew 18:15–20: Christ gives the church the power to discipline and bind and loose in spiritual matters. |
First Amendment
The First Amendment's careful phrasing ensures the "free exercise" of religion. It also says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion". |
Catholic Bishops Defy New US State Law To Report Child Abuse
Catholic bishops in Washington state are rejecting a new law that requires clergy to report child sexual abuse revealed during the sacrament of confession—setting up a constitutional clash between church doctrine and state law. The law requires clergy of all faiths and traditions throughout Washington to come forward about child abuse, including priests who are told about abuse during confession. However, a priest who reveals anything told to him during confession will be excommunicated from the Church, even when it comes to a crime being committed within their congregation. (Newsweek 5/9/25) READ MORE>>>>>
Catholic bishops in Washington state are rejecting a new law that requires clergy to report child sexual abuse revealed during the sacrament of confession—setting up a constitutional clash between church doctrine and state law. The law requires clergy of all faiths and traditions throughout Washington to come forward about child abuse, including priests who are told about abuse during confession. However, a priest who reveals anything told to him during confession will be excommunicated from the Church, even when it comes to a crime being committed within their congregation. (Newsweek 5/9/25) READ MORE>>>>>
Retired Justice Souter, Advocate for Civics and Church-State Split, Dies at 85
Souter was a strong proponent of a strict separation when it came to government embrace of religion in public education or state aid to religious schools.ted state and federal laws prohibiting government funding of religious institutions. In a 1992 decision, Lee v. Weisman, Souter joined the 5-4 majority that ruled clergy-led graduation prayers at a middle school violated the First Amendment’s prohibition against government establishment of religion. “When public school officials, armed with the state’s authority, convey an endorsement of religion to their students, they strike near the core of the establishment clause,” Souter wrote in a concurrence.
(Education Week 5/9/25) READ MORE>>>>>
Souter was a strong proponent of a strict separation when it came to government embrace of religion in public education or state aid to religious schools.ted state and federal laws prohibiting government funding of religious institutions. In a 1992 decision, Lee v. Weisman, Souter joined the 5-4 majority that ruled clergy-led graduation prayers at a middle school violated the First Amendment’s prohibition against government establishment of religion. “When public school officials, armed with the state’s authority, convey an endorsement of religion to their students, they strike near the core of the establishment clause,” Souter wrote in a concurrence.
(Education Week 5/9/25) READ MORE>>>>>
Supreme Court set to hear case on religious freedom vs. separation of church and state
The U.S. Supreme Court is set to hear a pivotal case that could redefine the boundaries between church and state, as it considers whether religious institutions should receive public funding through charter school programs. The case, originating from Oklahoma, involves St. Isidore of Seville, an online Catholic school that applied to become a publicly funded charter school. The Oklahoma Statewide Virtual Charter School Board initially approved the application, but the decision was challenged by Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond. Drummond argued that the approval violated state and federal laws prohibiting government funding of religious institutions. (Baltimore Sun 2/4/25) READ MORE>>>>>
The U.S. Supreme Court is set to hear a pivotal case that could redefine the boundaries between church and state, as it considers whether religious institutions should receive public funding through charter school programs. The case, originating from Oklahoma, involves St. Isidore of Seville, an online Catholic school that applied to become a publicly funded charter school. The Oklahoma Statewide Virtual Charter School Board initially approved the application, but the decision was challenged by Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond. Drummond argued that the approval violated state and federal laws prohibiting government funding of religious institutions. (Baltimore Sun 2/4/25) READ MORE>>>>>
School voucher bill raises oversight, church-state separation concerns
The Wyoming House passed a bill that would funnel significant public education funding to private and religious charter schools. It expands an existing voucher program. Under the current program, established during last year’s legislative session, certain families can receive $6,000 per child to cover tuition at a charter school.
This year’s House Bill 199 would remove the program’s income limit and boost the payment to $7,000. Students at charter schools receiving state money would no longer have to be tested on state proficiency standards.
On the House floor, Rep. Steve Harshman (R-Casper) said removing accountability measures was a bad idea.
“It’s going to be the wild, wild west of waste, fraud and abuse,” he said. “And the experiment we’re going to pull on our kids? It isn’t going to work.” (KHOL 2/3/25) READ MORE>>>>>
The Wyoming House passed a bill that would funnel significant public education funding to private and religious charter schools. It expands an existing voucher program. Under the current program, established during last year’s legislative session, certain families can receive $6,000 per child to cover tuition at a charter school.
This year’s House Bill 199 would remove the program’s income limit and boost the payment to $7,000. Students at charter schools receiving state money would no longer have to be tested on state proficiency standards.
On the House floor, Rep. Steve Harshman (R-Casper) said removing accountability measures was a bad idea.
“It’s going to be the wild, wild west of waste, fraud and abuse,” he said. “And the experiment we’re going to pull on our kids? It isn’t going to work.” (KHOL 2/3/25) READ MORE>>>>>