U.S. Constitution Amendment I and the Influence The European Religious Wars
The creation of the U.S. Constitution was heavily influenced by the European Wars of Religion, the Thirty Year's War, the Peace of Westphalia, English Civil War, The Age of Enlightenment , The Virginia Declaration of Rights , and the rise of the Nation State. The Thirty Year's War, and the English Civil War directly or indirectly, decimated the populations of English and Europe in the 17th centuries. While scholars debate the exact numbers of dead due to war versus disease and famine, there is agreement that the number was significant and profoundly changed the way 17th century Europe viewed the relationship between church and state. The The Virginia Declaration of Rights is considered the precursor to the U.S. Constition. The The Age of Enlightenment shaped the thinking of the founders who were deists.
The wars of the 17th century Europe did not start as religious wars, but the vicious and bitter nature that characterized this time was fueled by the Protestant Reformation.
With an understanding the history that drove the Puritans to leave England, the The End State and Intent of the U.S. Constitution’s Amendment I becomes clear:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The Intent of Amendment I:
National Survival.
National survival is clearly the primary intent of the U.S. Constitution and the “Bill of Rights” as stated in the Preamble to the United_States_Constitution. How Amendment I serves the intent of the U.S. Constitution can only be understood by looking at the historical context in which Amendment I was written. The often cited Federalist Papers do give insights into the Intent of the Founders, but they assume that reader understands history (that is a brave assumption today) as does the The Virginia Declaration of Rights .
One of the documents that the “Bill of Rights” was modeled on was “The Virginia Declaration of Rights”. U.S. Constition’s Amendment I was clearly based on The Virginia Declaration of Rights Amendment 16 .
The Virginia Declaration
of Rights
Article 16
That religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator and the manner of discharging it, can be directed 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.
While Christianity was the religion of many Americans at the time of the Virginia Declaration of Rights was written, the amendment is clearly attempting to secularize the State. “[N]ot by force or violence” is a clear reference to the religious wars that wracked Europe in the 16th and 17th centuries culminating in the Thiry Year's War, and the English Civil War. America itself had within its borders numerous religious sects that had participated in Europe’s religious wars of the 16th and 17th centuries. The intent of this and all other text within the U.S. Constition can be viewed through the Preamble to the United_States_Constitution:
“We the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America”
A.K.A survival of the Nation State (the Untied States of America).
One of the triggers to the "Thirty Years War" was the "Revolt of the Netherlands" . The root of which was Catholic persecution of Protestants such as the inquistion by the Duke of Alva (Council of Blood). In other words, the established state church (Catholicism) used the state’s military, financial, and legal institutions to torture, rape, kill Protestants (not state approved Christians) under the guise of inquiring into a person’s heterodoxy or orthodoxy (Catholic/Protestant credentials depending on which faction was inquiring).
During the Thiry Year's War Protestant killed Catholic without mercy such that whole cities would be depopulated.
"Certain cities were hit very hard by war. Probably the best example was Magdeburg. In 1618, it had a population of 25,000 with a further 35,000 in the surrounding rural area. In 1635, there were only 400 homes left standing in the city and by 1644; its population had fallen to 2,464"
Population Statistics Thirty Year's War
The level of depopulation caused political instability and change. Which led to more war and more instability.
The Peace of Westphalia marks the end of open conflict. The treaty, among other things:
“Gave Calvenists legal recognition, [a]ll parties would now recognize the Peace of Augsburg of 1555, by which each prince would have the right to determine the religion of his own state, the options being Lutheranism or Catholicism (the principle of cuius regio, eius religio)”, and “[t]he Republic of the seven Dutch Republic (Protestant Netherlands) was offically recognized as an independent nation (before its rebellion a century earlier, it had been a possession of the Habsburg family and thus of Spain)”.
The significance of the treaty:
“[I]t marked the beginning of the modern system of nation-states (or "Westphalian states"). This interpretation comes from the treaty's role as the first acknowledgment of each country's sovereignty. Subsequent European wars were not about issues of religion, but rather revolved around issues of state.”
The Founder's had the lessons of the Thirty Year's War in mind when crafting the Amendment I, and prevention of a religious conflict was foremost. James Madison’s 1785 remonstrative on the “establishment of Religion” in “Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments” as proposed by a Bill entitled "A Bill establishing a provision for Teachers of the Christian Religion" (which would have provided monies to for the education of Christian teachers thru a property tax) is a very good example of the Founder’s views on giving any religion access to the power of the state (i.e. Establishment). Madison was opposed to even funding education of Christian teachers by the state despite the Bill’s written intent that “without counteracting the liberal principle heretofore adopted and intended to be preserved by abolishing all distinctions of pre-eminence amongst the different societies or communities of Christians”. The Bill in reality is attempting a multiple establishment of religion. This is where the state will support all (in this case, all Christian) religions.
Madison knew that moral certitude would lead to abuse and conflict:
“We maintain therefore that in matters of Religion, no man's right is abridged by the institution of Civil Society and that Religion is wholly exempt from its cognizance. True it is, that no other rule exists, by which any question which may divide a Society, can be ultimately determined, but the will of the majority; but it is also true that the majority may trespass on the rights of the minority.”
- James Madison, Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments.
The above indicates Civil Society hold Religion “exempt from its cognizance”. By definition: Civil Society holds no knowledge of Religion. Civil in this case means the state. It also says that because the majority may ultimately impose its will on the minority, the majority may “trespass on the rights of the minority”. In the case of civil matters this may be bad, but it does not carry the certitude of faith (belief without proof). Therefore, the understanding is that in Civil matters, reason may (or may not) be brought to bear on questions that “divide a Society”, while in questions of Religion, faith not reason will be used. This inevitably leads to questions in which parties may never reconcile.
James Madison recognized that the fires of religious conflict had not been fully extinguished when the constitution was written. I believe that the reason Amendment I is the first is avoid the possibility of a religious war. This was not an unlikely course of action at the time (and maybe even today) in that there were numerous Christian sects that had been involved in religious conflict. In “Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments” James Madison argued against the “establishment of Religion” (i.e. Disestablishment) as proposed by a Bill entitled "A Bill establishing a provision for Teachers of the Christian Religion" (i.e. establishment):
‘11. Because it will destroy that moderation and harmony which the forbearance of our laws to intermeddle with Religion has produced among its several sects. Torrents of blood have been split in the old world, by vain attempts of the secular arm, to extinguish Religious discord, by proscribing all difference in Religious opinion. Time has at length revealed the true remedy. Every relaxation of narrow and rigorous policy, wherever it has been tried, has been found to assuage the disease. The American Theatre has exhibited proofs that equal and complete liberty, if it does not wholly eradicate it, sufficiently destroys its malignant influence on the health and prosperity of the State. If with the salutary effects of this system under our own eyes, we begin to contract the bounds of Religious freedom, we know no name that will too severely reproach our folly. At least let warning be taken at the first fruits of the threatened innovation. The very appearance of the Bill has transformed "that Christian forbearance, love and charity," which of late mutually prevailed, into animosities and jealousies, which may not soon be appeased. What mischief’s may not be dreaded, should this enemy to the public quiet be armed with the force of a law?’
- James Madison, Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments.
The scenario for conflict revolves which sect will hold the power of the state. Since the word of God is final and each sect leader claims divine insight, then who speaks for God? The conflict will occur on when one sect leader holds a different view than another sect leader, and since they both claim divine insight then there is no compromise position. Ergo, war without quarter.
One of the realities to emerge from the Thirty Year's War was that the means to make wars was becoming the exclusive domain of the state. As state becomes more powerful to meet its obligation to provide security, the danger also increases that a state’s power may be used for personal and/or religious gain. In the case of state power being used for a religious gain/agenda, since the state power is absolute then the religion will be corrupted absolutely. The protestant versus catholic conflict of the Thirty Year's War combined the power of state, the morale certainty of religion, and the ambitions of men to create a long and bloody conflict. Peace of Westphalia ended the Thirty Year's War and gave the Protestants (Calvinists are a Protestant sect) the same rights and recognition as the other Christian sects (Catholics and Lutherans).
The Thirty Year's War ended with the Peace of Westphalia which
"The followers of John Calvin were at last to be considered followers of the Augsburg Confession, and thus receive the same rights under the Imperial constitution as the Catholics and Lutherans."
How do we prevent another religious war? The solution: disestablishment (the separation of church and state).
“That religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator and the manner of discharging it, can be directed by reason and conviction, not by force or violence;”
The Virginia Declaration of Rights Amendment 16
“[A]ll 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.”
As noted above in “Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments” by James Madison on the question of establishment:
“We maintain therefore that in matters of Religion, no man's right is abridged by the institution of Civil Society and that Religion is wholly exempt from its cognizance.”
The only answer is disestablishment.
Recently, arguments have been made that U.S. must acknowledge that the roots of our judicial system is based on the Christian religion, that the Founders intended that we use Christianity as the basis for legal opinions, and that the Judiciary must use their Christian beliefs in any legal opinion rendered. In other words, establish Christian truths as the basis for resolving legal issues.
In “Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments” James Madison argued against the against the use of religious truth as a basis for legal opinion:
“Because the Bill implies either that the Civil Magistrate is a competent Judge of Religious Truth; or that he may employ Religion as an engine of Civil policy. The first is an arrogant pretension falsified by the contradictory opinions of Rulers in all ages, and throughout the world: the second an unhallowed perversion of the means of salvation.”
“Torrents of blood have been split in the old world, by vain attempts of the secular arm, to extinguish Religious disscord, by proscribing all difference in Religious opinion.”
- James Madison, “Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments”.
Madison is very clear on what he thinks of the idea of the Judiciary using “Religious Truth[s]” as a basis for resolving legal issues. Further, he is clear on what the consequences are of using “Religious Truth[s]” as a basis for Jurisprudence (“Torrents of blood”).
In FEDERALIST No. 10, Madison says "the most common and durable source of factions has been the various and unequal distribution of property", however, the first listed cause is "A zeal for different opinions concerning religion".
"The latent causes of faction are thus sown in the nature of man;
and we see them everywhere brought into different degrees of
activity, according to the different circumstances of civil society.
A zeal for different opinions concerning religion, concerning
government, and many other points, as well of speculation as of
practice; an attachment to different leaders ambitiously contending
for pre-eminence and power; or to persons of other descriptions
whose fortunes have been interesting to the human passions, have, in
turn, divided mankind into parties, inflamed them with mutual
animosity, and rendered them much more disposed to vex and oppress
each other than to co-operate for their common good. So strong is
this propensity of mankind to fall into mutual animosities, that
where no substantial occasion presents itself, the most frivolous
and fanciful distinctions have been sufficient to kindle their
unfriendly passions and excite their most violent conflicts. But
the most common and durable source of factions has been the various
and unequal distribution of property. Those who hold and those who
are without property have ever formed distinct interests in society.
Those who are creditors, and those who are debtors, fall under a
like discrimination. A landed interest, a manufacturing interest, a
mercantile interest, a moneyed interest, with many lesser interests,
grow up of necessity in civilized nations, and divide them into
different classes, actuated by different sentiments and views. The
regulation of these various and interfering interests forms the
principal task of modern legislation, and involves the spirit of
party and faction in the necessary and ordinary operations of the
government."
The Same Subject Continued
(The Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and
Insurrection)
From the New York Packet.
Friday, November 23, 1787.
MADISON
The remedy proposed is what we call "diversity".
"In a free government
the security for civil rights must be the same as that for
religious rights. It consists in the one case in the
multiplicity of interests, and in the other in the multiplicity
of sects. The degree of security in both cases will depend on
the number of interests and sects; and this may be presumed to
depend on the extent of country and number of people comprehended
under the same government."
FEDERALIST No. 51
The Structure of the Government Must Furnish the Proper Checks
and Balances Between the Different Departments
From the New York Packet. Friday, February 8, 1788.
HAMILTON OR MADISON.
Ed Yodel in his article “False Prophets” identifies” deistic influences" on our church-state relationship. However, as indicated above deists were rational and their motives are clearly the long term survival of the country. This can be seen in FEDERALIST No. 9 "The Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection", for the Independent Journal, HAMILTON, and FEDERALIST No. 10 "The Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection", from the New York Packet, Friday, November 23, 1787, MADISON. Both papers address the structure, scope and power of the Federal government with respect to that government's survival (i.e. "[t]he utility of a Confederacy, as well to suppress faction and to guard the internal tranquility of States, as to increase their external force and security", FEDERALIST No. 9)
The clear intent of the Founders was to preserve the Nation State. To this end they put into the U.S. Constitution a “Bill of Rights” of which Amendment I is a separation of church and State. An appreciation of the historical context during which Amendment I was written leads us to why Amendment I was written: to prevent religious conflict. Further, the Founders understood that diversity is the mechanism by which civil as well as religious rights are secured. The separation of church and State was intended as an adamant wall between the absolute power of the State and the righteous certainty of religion.
Currently, there is a movement in America by the Evangelical Right to attribute the intent of Amendment I to be: That the State may not establish a state church; the State may (and should) support their (the Evangelical Right) religious beliefs based on the premise that the founders were all Christians and that they intended that this should always be a “Christian Nation”; the State may (should) codify Christian beliefs into law. They have cited FEDERALIST No. 9, and FEDERALIST No. 10 as proof that their interpretation is appropriate.
A reading of FEDERALIST No. 9 and FEDERALIST No. 10 and James Madison’s arguments in “Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments” indicates that historically the Evangelical Right is wrong. The U.S. Constitution was written by Deists living in the Age of Enlightenment, men who remembered Europe’s religious wars of the 16th and 17th centuries, men who sought to prevent the same religious conflict from destroying this young nation, and men who knew first hand that the power of a nation state married to religious certainty would lead to evil and corruption.
==================================
"Evil occurs when individuals or groups embrace codes of conduct or
Standards of behavior for their own personal well-being and social approval,
yet violate those very same codes or standards to undermine the personal
well-being an social approval of others.
"Corruption occurs when individuals or groups for their own benefit, violate
codes of conduct or standards of behavior that they profess, or are expected
to uphold."
-- Col. John Boyd, USAF, "The Strategic Game of ? And ? ".
====================================