Separation of Church and State

The phrase “separation of church and state” never appears in the constitution, even though it is upheld by this doctrine. As part of the first amendment’s establishment and free exercise clause, the constitution states, “congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Little did the writers of the 1787 document know what a profound impact these few words would have on public education.

Separation of church and state was not specifically addressed until five years after the constitution was drafted. In a letter to Danbury Baptist Church Association in Connecticut, Thomas Jefferson introduced the metaphor as a “wall of separation between church and state” in response to requests on making a religious public address around the Thanksgiving Holiday. Although Jefferson saw separation of religion and government as necessary, it took almost another 150 years for this phrase to permeate the field of public education.

In 1947, the U.S. Supreme court heard the case of Everson versus the Board of Education. Everson was filing a petition saying that tax-raised funding should not be used to pay for the busing of parochial school students. The Court, however, did not agree with Everson’s stance, stating “the state must remain neutral, not adversarial in its relation with religious groups….[although] the wall between church and state must be kept high and impregnable.” It was only after this landmark court case that this common phrase became mainstream. The caseload surrounding separation of church and state in public education since this time period has grown exponentially.

Much of the debate arises over how to respect individual religious rights under the umbrella of public education. As The United States becomes more religiously diverse, these cases are becoming more complex. In the past, America was a primarily Christian nation; however, the influx of several new cultures and religions over the years has forced citizens of the United States to expand their view on religious rights. It was not until recently, that any official guidelines on the role of religion in public education were established.

In 1995, after fifty years of controversy, President Clinton directed the U.S. Secretary of Education, Richard W. Riley, to develop a list of guidelines describing the extent to which religious activity and expression could be addressed in public schools. Riley highlights ten aspects of religion in public education and lays the foundation for what can and cannot be done in public schools. Riley works to “neither foster religion nor preclude it” in public schools. This document highlights courses of action for graduation and baccalaureate practices as well as student assignments and school literature. A diverse group of religious individuals, who were attempting to find common ground for religion in public education, influenced Riley. This group consisted of 37 different religious groups who established a canon, “Religion in Public Schools: A Joint Statement of Current Law,” which addresses a common concern: public education should be a “religion-free zone.” This document offers educators the knowledge of legally acceptable religious practices in public education.

These recent attempts to clear the murky waters of religion in public education have come after a long series of battles both for and against religious stances in education. Court cases have emerged on leading organized prayer, teaching evolution, and religious clubs. In most of these cases, an extremist, either for or against religion in education, attempts to levy his or her point of view at the Supreme Court level. It is the court’s place to help keep public education in balance with respect to the constitution, so that it neither endorses nor excludes a particular sect. Evolution, for instance, has been a heated topic in education. Extreme religious advocates would have taken the stance that evolution should be completely removed from the science curriculum in public education. However, extreme anti-religious sects would argue that evolution should be the only theory expressed in the science program of study. Both views need balance. Creationists need to leave room for the educational process in science, while evolution fanatics must also realize that their view is also only a theory.

Throughout the past sixty years of debate over the separation of church and state in public education, more steps have been taken to establish a balanced practice in schools. Students are permitted to be religious individuals, and faculty is responsible for ensuring students’ beliefs are not forced onto classmates. “Religious Expression in Public Schools” and “Religion In the Public Schools: A Joint Statement of Current Law” are two examples of the present documents aiding educators in establishing this balance.