Thomas Jefferson wrote of a Wall of Separation between the Church and State. But was this the equivalent of a cheap political stunt? Leading First Amendment scholars rise to the defense of the Founder against unfair and historically questionable charges. Jefferson remains one of the premier defenders of First Amendment rights.

Web Posted: July 31, 1998

t was composed nearly two centuries ago, but a letter penned by Thomas Jefferson continues to fuel controversy over the Founder's view of the "wall of separation" between church and state. And the latest twist involves a joint declaration to the Library of Congress signed by two dozen of the country's leading First Amendment scholars, taking issue with claims made in late July of this year, suggesting that Jefferson's motives in penning the famous communique were "political" rather than a reflection of his honest views concerning state-church separation.

    In 1802, while serving as President, Jefferson wrote a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association wherein he employed a phrase referring to a "wall of separation." Jefferson had already developed a reputation as a staunch separationist; indeed, he was referred to as a "miserable atheist" by his Federalist political opponents and others who suggested that he was too much of a rebel. He was the architect of the Act for Establishing Religious Freedom in Virginia which ended compulsory funding of so-called "established" religions. That 1786 Act states that "no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burdened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions of belief."

    In penning the letter to the Danbury Baptists, Jefferson's remained consistent in his commitment to the separation of state and church. He wrote, "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law regarding an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State."

   Echoing the resentment of earlier churches to the whole notion of disestablishment, modern day religious groups have attacked Jefferson's "wall of separation" reference. Christian Reconstructionists and others intent on legislating "Bible law" as the civil law of the United States grudgingly acknowledge the reference, simply insisting that it should be discarded. More politically adroit strategists, like David Barton of the Wall Builders group, have attempted to put "spin" on the Danbury Letter, advancing disingenuous claims that the "wall of separation" was meant to be "one directional," and not prohibit the influence of civil matters by organized religion.

BRICK BY BRICK...

    All of this squabble remained confined to history, or debates involving the claims of fundamentalists like Barton who sought a way of challenging 35 years of Supreme Court decisions protecting state-church separation in cases like MURRAY v. CURLETT, ENGEL v. VITALE and others. In July, however, two developments -- one on the political scene, the other taking place within the Library of Congress and the FBI's Forensic Laboratory -- intersected, igniting the present controversy...

• In March, 1998, the Religious Freedom Amendment cleared the House Judiciary Committee in a 16-11 vote, and was marked up for action by the full House. It was a high water point in the efforts to overturn years of state-church separation decisions, many of which continually cited Jefferson's "wall of separation" reference in the Danbury letter. The proposal would have viscerated the First Amendment, particularly the establishment clause, by legalizing a wide range of religious expression in public schools, government meetings and other secular venues. It also would have taken the giant step of qualifying faith-based groups for public funding, by making it illegal to deny churches, mosques, temples and other religious organizations a "benefit." The Religious Freedom Amendment was soon scheduled for quick debate and a vote on or about June 4, 1998.

  *

• With the vote on the RFA looming, what was an academic curiosity suddenly ignited into a national controversy, one linking Jefferson's letter with the upcoming ballot on the Religious Freedom Amendment. Media such as the New York Times and the Washington Times made public statements by Dr. James H. Hutson, Chief of the Manuscript Division at the Library of Congress concerning the Danbury letter. Hutson noted that an early draft of Jefferson's letter had sections crossed out with ink. What was under the cross outs? Hutson wondered. After consulting with James Billington, the Librarian of Congress, Hutson sent the draft over to the FBI Forensics Laboratory, which had developed techniques of highlighting inked-over sections on manuscripts. The technique had been employed successfully earlier in examining diaries penned by President Theodore Roosevelt.

    The results of the FBI examination were interesting. A inked-over portion revealed that Jefferson had made reference to a " wall of eternal separation" between government and religion. The Library of Congress report on this development, though, written by Hutson claimed that Jefferson invented the "wall" analogy as a means of fending off political attacks by his opponents. The news was gleefully reported in the Washington Times, which quoted Hutson as claiming that two days after penning the Danbury Baptist letter, Jefferson supposedly began attending weekly worship inside the House of Representatives. "That phrase about the wall doesn't mean much in light of his behavior, does it,?" Hutson remarked.

    Coincident with the revelations about the Danbury letter, Library of Congress also opened an exhibit entitled "Religion and the Founding of the American Republican."

ENTER PAT ROBERTSON & CO.

    The revelations about the Danbury letter, and the questionable spin reportedly made by Hutson, quickly attracted the interest of religious right groups which were in the midst of a last-minute pitch to build support for the Religious Freedom Amendment. Within 72 hours of the RFA vote, Pat Robertson's Christian Coalition swung into action; executive director Randy Tate issued a media statement claiming that the Library of Congress had "skewered (sic) the wall of separation" reference made by Jefferson. Tate also urged people to visit the Library's new exhibit on the role played by religion in American history. In an interview with AANEWS, Hutson expressed dismay that the Coalition was trying to capitalize on the Jefferson letter finds for political gain, and denied any agenda to use the Library of Congress in supporting the Religious Freedom Amendment. He also noted that it was odd that Mr. Tate could be endorsing and describing the exhibit, since it opened AFTER the Coalition press release was sent out. But the RFA fared well in the House, gaining a majority of votes -- thought still short of the necessary 2/3 margin for passage as a constitutional amendment.

LETTER TO THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

[text only]