Transcripts For CSPAN3 Religion In America 20240712

The director of the john w hosted the experience of inflated african muslims in the 19th century, and Supreme Court decisions on religious issues after world war ii. The library of congress hosted this event. Study anotherg to that hasublic debate roiled the republic since its earliest days, how religion touches our daily life in washington and around the country. It wasnt that much noted in the media this morning as they were rushing to cover Todays Health Care vote, but its also a day in which President Trump is asking for or issuing an executive order that will relax the socalled johnson amendment, which was a law passed by Lyndon Johnson in 1964 prohibiting religious organizations from overt political activity for fear of tax consequences. That is also changing today. Day night was the National Today is the national day of prayer at the white house. Last night President Trump met with his evangelical advisory board. That is a group of people who only a year ago were not very happy with the candidacy of President Trump. These things change very quickly. In a meeting i went to this morning it was clear what we michael evangelical in the first decade of the republic was coming from new england and the supporters of then president john adams. It changes substantially from generation to generation. We are lucky to have three leading thinkers to help us consider three different moments when religion and politics intertwined. We will begin with sally beringer gordon, who will tell madison the way james was thinking about separation of church and state even before the famous First Amendment to the constitution. Sally is the professor of constitutional law and professor of history at the university of pennsylvania. An expert on religion and church and state. Especially how religious liberty developed over American History. Is current book project about the historical relationships among religion, politics, and law. I have not quite been able to announce this but she will soon be joining our community as a member of the kluge center. Speaking onwill be 1860 and the forgotten voices of american religious diversity. He is the curator of american religious history at the smithsonians Institution National museum of American History. He is the author of six books. I only just met peter but i feel an immediate can sit with him because during a fellowship he held in chestertown, maryland, he lived in my former house. We are lucky to have a member of our scholars counsel, john he will be speaking on the year 1947 and the Supreme Court and modern era constitutional religious freedom. Law andthe professor of distinguished professor and director of the center for the study of the law and religion at emory university. He is a specialist that legal history, marriage law, the author of 26 books and 220 articles. That is not a typo. 220. They have appeared in 12 linkages and has received honors around the world. Former holder of the and mcguire chair in ethics in American History. These panelists will speak for 21 its. At 4 20, we will take a five minute break then open it up to audience questions. Thank you again for being here today. Why dont we begin by welcoming sally beringer gordon to the stage. Thank you. [applause] sally oh yeah. Thank you so much. Is this too loud . Good . Ok. My talk today, and im sorry it is not about madison, but it is about religion and slavery in 1785. It does focus on virginia. Virginia, as many people know has long been considered the most important jurisdiction to this established early republic. I hope to persuade you that a single antislavery methodist and many proslavery presbyterians were actually crucial to this establishment in virginia. Streams ofwo activism among labor unions that have not previously been studied together. It centers on two preachers. Churchmen are not the only or even the only important actors in the story, but through their sermons, lectures, and journals we can learn about the common folks whose traces dont appear in the historical record. First is this guy, and upstart britt. Bornir a big little man into a prosperous english family in 1747, educated at oxford, ordained as a priest in the church of england in 1770. He came under the influence of john wesleys evangelical methodism in 1776. Fields,in preaching in a good sign in north america and a bad sign in britain. Influential person or subjected. A new priest was secretly hired. Whileas dismissed preaching on Easter Sunday and 1777. Likes wrong out of church, being drummed out of the military. He strolled down the center mobe and was greeted by a that was drunk on cider. But he rebounded. He became john wesleys confidant. September 1784, wesley ordained coke as a bishop for the rapidly growing American Branch of the movement. Americat quickly for when fellow clergy accused him of exercising undue influence over a senile wesley. 1784, he arrived in america and begin the work of organizing a new separate Methodist Church here. Drafted new5, coke rules for the church in a book of discipline. The rules were designed to eradicate slavery. He included provisions that copied virginias statute that allowed masters to free slaves in the commonwealth. That statute had been enacted in 1782. Produced and, had dedicated opposition from a proslavery majority. Coke took it a step further. He required all Church Members release their slaves within two years or be denied communion and eventually expelled. After the church was formed and discipline written, coke left on a preaching tour of virginia. 1785, heuary to april sermonized against slaveholding. He reported repeatedly he was greeted by outraged and violence. He pleased near north look, and im quoting for him, the high headed lady offered 50 pounds to anyone who would give that little englishman 100 lashes. At another house, coke debated slavery with a colonel bedford who used some threat. As his reputation spread doors were closed against him. He was indicted for sedition. One plan was formed to murder him. But he left the state and may before the law or the assassins could catch up with him. Antislaverynd and petition that he gave to methodist evangelists to carry around virginia. Coke called for the legislature to he argued that slaveholders acted against the most fundamental goal of christianity, the return of the messiah. He said that enslavement made it virtually impossible for a slave to receive the noble principles of the gospel, meaning that slaveholders actively prevented christian progress. The boldness of the claim might , because heproar argued anyone who owned a slave was antichristian. Added anothercook insult, a political one. As an englishman, he should have known his opinions on the American Revolution might not be well received in virginia. Etheless, his condition formally exercised over the states by great britain. These were fighting words and william graham, our second preacher, picked up the gauntlet. He was born in 1746 in pennsylvania. Irish,ily were scots presbyterians who still remembered the brutal british suppression of the scottish rebellion in the 17th century. Graham hated the british and antivigilante movement. Cooks opposite. He was not a gifted speaker. His service were monotonous and he was a strict disciplinarian. His congregations tended to be small. He excelled as a schoolmaster, where his discipline was imposed on less powerful objects. The school he founded was first known at the Liberty Hall Academy and now washington and lee university. Never successful, but it made him much money, which brings me to my next point. The question of ministers salaries and how the debate eventually it blended into the backlash against thomas cook. Patrick henry784, proposed a bill that would require each taxpayer to designate a portion of his taxes to a christian minister of his choice. Bill, asral assessment a was called, worried about decline in Church Attendance in the closing of schools maintained by the clergy, many of whose churches had been looted during the revolution and whose support had been suspended since 1776. By 1784, the church was in freefall. Presbyterians were actually sympathetic. Graham often wrote petitions for the General Assembly on behalf of the church and now he coauthored an endorsement of the assessment bill. Byham had been dismayed enlightenedism. But his income had suffered terribly during the revolution, even though he was an ardent patriot. He was so patriotic that one sunday sermon he is the call for volunteers to fight against the british and he wound up keying himself up so much he volunteered himself. But had sought Action Service to the revolution for the rest of his life. That impoverished him, because all of his students went off to fight in and cash and the end of the war only brought a deep recession. The general assessment bill gave him the prospect of a steady income. Learned that his congregants would not stand for a general assessment. They had been used to controlling salaries of objected thatthe he would free clergy from control. Graham was not known to back away from a fight. He might well have stood his ground on the general assessment bill, but slavery entered the picture. Cook appeared on the scene just after grams pro assessment petition was submitted. Cook was british, elite, arrogant. Cookhreat to slavery from affected graham directly. He owned six slaves, according to the census, into school also owned slaves. 1785, coinciding with cooks. Our by the mid spring of 1785, grams aboutface on this establishment was so complete that presbyterians selected him once again to draw up a petition. For e a call establishment. Now we argue that patriots had fought against edition oppression in spiritual as well and it was a religious war. That continued establishment will be a fatal symbol of what he called object slavery erie for the first time, a religious organization directly called for passage of Thomas Jeffersons bill for establishing religious freedom, which had been kicking around in the legislature for years without much support. All, in 1785, Popular Support took off. Explanation is that smart parliamentary maneuvering by James Madison deserves credit. I wanted to think about another side of the story. The missing link is thomas cooks antislavery campaign, which convinced graham and others availing between proslavery and prodisestablishment or slavery and anti disestablishment. He explained how the separation of church and state would protect slavery. He also became the first clergyman and academic leader to speak out in favor of slavery and he did so clearly in response to cook. Ata lecture that graham gave liberty hall starting in the mid1780s, he explained why virginia must embrace both slavery and disestablishment and how each reinforced the other. Revolution been fought to secure slavery, he said, but now a tool of the british administration, meaning the american taken victory and hit his plot to destroy the country behind the veil of piety. In am altered cook religious register, the word of god, graham said, directly contradicted the methodists. As grams petition was carried petitione grahams was carried around, cooks petition was carried around by methodists. Graham and proslavery petitions growing 1500, evangelical signatures and dwarfing the few dozen on the antislavery petition. Proslavery petition grahams word for word. It did not condemn slavery and any attempt to interpret either the Old New Testament as antislavery would prefer the word of god. Instruction instructed that it in no way altered civil status, such as enslavement. The liberty conferred by Christian Faith was an internal freedom from sin and the devil, rather than any change in the believers outward condition. Pauls first letter to the corinthians establish that even christians slaves would remain loyal and obedient to their masters. Colonial statutes had written this into law as early as 1677. Conversion was not a ticket to emancipation. In other words, spiritual freedom and bodily coercion longed to two distinct fears. The first inward and religious and the second outward and political. Arguments were made with new force to counter the methodists, who charged that bondage affected the Spiritual Health of slaveholders and urged changes in the secular law. The danger to slavery was apparent and graham and others realized that antislavery religion had been let loose in virginia. Under the general assessment bill, tax dollars could well slow flow to antislavery ministers, either because the individual taxpayers directed the funds to preachers who opposed slavery or ministers who received tax funding acted at the behest of Church Leaders like cook. A religious establishment, therefore, posed a danger. Separation of church and state in virginia was built on this distrust of clarity who were not dependent directly on local congregations. Set them free from their congregant and who knows what will happen. Evidence for this overlap and commitment to slavery and disestablishment is found in the signatures on both sets of petitions. That is pro establishment and proslavery. We can trace the political actions through this unique resource. Five of the six counties memorialized in favor of slavery also sent prodisestablishment petitions. Common signatures are found in about 40 of the total, a remarkable convergence of religious and political activism. Religiousnvergence, conviction was painted as private and personal, while enslavement rested firmly on the political side, that is, with the legislature. One might think of this resolution as a kind of compromise. Proslavery evangelicals apparently believed they could buy peace by putting slavery in the political realm. They told themselves that they were neutral or apolitical on the question, even as their doctrines of division between religion and politics clearly protected a proslavery status quo. Worked. Em it silenced antislavery voices quickly and effectively. 1787s cook conceded in that it had been ill judged of him to preach antislavery from the pulpit. In 1791, the hanover presbyterian decided that enslaved persons could be married in the sight of god, even though the civil realm wasnt recognized. If one was sold away from the other, the marriage was dissolved as if the other was dead. Endorsed a removal standard, saying any other policy might yield unpleasant consequences. Potentiallyes were an enormous issue. One study concluded that one out of three slave marriages was terminated by the internal slave trade. Acceptance of the divide between freedom of the spirit and the physical coercion of slavery also spread among the methodists. By the mid1790s, they had backed away from their emancipatory rules, saying now they hoped Christian Faith would sweeten the bitter cup of bondage. Rejected,elicals including one minister in the 1790s who said that human laws cannot wash away the guilt of an act prohibited by the word of god. Methodistn, also a minister, became a slaveholder. So where does the story of freedom and coercion leave us . Ofs a different picture disestablishment, maybe a little less heroic, but believable in light of religious history and political reality. And there is the question of jefferson. What did he think . He was out of the country in 1785 but follow the debate closely. Did he accept the divide between freedom and coercion . It looks like he did 20 years later. Include from 1815 found in a letter he wrote to a man who sent him a book of servants by alexander macleod, called for preaching politics and opposition of slavery. In his letter, jefferson thanked his correspondent for the book but then said macleod had breached the contract that underlay religious freedoms by discussing Public Affairs on the pulpit. He advised ministers to avoid such topics, as the construction of government or the character or conduct of those administering it. Otherwise, they would violate the terms of disestablishment. We see in a similar debate today, right . Virginias outside importance of the early republic, it didnt actually control how other jurisdictions interpreted their own law. As it wasia model called in the 19th century, governed separation of church as thete perfectly proslavery christians hoped it would. Instead, the mandate and concerns about slavery to the political sphere began to create its own politics. Those who could not stand the constraint often left and many who had no other choice were sold away. Some found their way to freedom. Divideme, the strict between religion and slavery began to work its own undoing. The end of that story is beyond the scope of my talk today, but one way to summarize the trajectory is to note that the first wall of separation was all nott power, but it wound up being allpowerful. Thank you. [laughter] host thank you, sally. That was mind blowing. Thank you for the earlier introduction. It is wonderful to be here with you. My name is peter. I work down the road and am a curator of religious history. This is my first time speaking in a building where i have done a lot of research. It is an honor to be here. I would like to speak to you about religion in america before the civil war. One way in which the subject is often addressed his resident with sallys talk. As way of exploring the tensions among christians about slavery in scripture, how was it that some religious people saw it as an abomination while others argued as texas did in its causes for secession that african certitude was authorized and revealed by the revealed will of the almighty creator . That religion can be used to argue both sides of the issue will not be a surprise to anyone here today. Instead of pursuing that dimension, i would like to focus on a lesserknown aspect of religion in america in the middle of the 19th century, and that is the struggle and endurance of forgotten forms of religious diversity. The landscape of religious difference in the u. S. Changed dramatically in the 1860s. Some of this had to do with the war and some of it had to do with the ways in which the lines between religious traditions tend to blur over time. Before i get to my main topic, since this is my first time speaking in the library of congress, i cant resist telling you one of my favorite stories about a disagreement concerning religious differences in American History. It is a story that has to do with the founding of this great institution. As many of you will likely know, and as i heard a tour guide giving a tour about this as i was walking in, the finding collection of the library of congress came from monticello to years ago this spring come in the form of 6487 books that Thomas Jefferson has sold to the federal government near the end of the war of 1812. Congress had a reference collection before that, but it was a little less than half the size. Those we thousand books have gone up in smoke when the british burned washington in august of 1814. Those 3000 books had gone up in smoke when the british burned washington in august of 1814. Apparently, one of the first things he thought about when he learned of the destruction were all the books in the capital, all of that paper that fueled the fire, wondering what he might do about it and perhaps considering if this sad turn of events might also free up some space in his own overburdened bookshelves. Jefferson wrote to a friend on the committee and basically said, so, i hear you might need some books. It yep she wrote this, learned from the newspapers that the vandalism of our enemy has triumphed at washington over science as well as the arts by the destruction of the Public Library with the noble edifice in which it was deposited. I presume it will be among the earliest objects of congress to recommence their collection. Jefferson was beating around the bush bit here. He was clearing his throat before making congress an offer he hoped they could not refuse. Hethen explained the books had available with the best in the land. They were the best because only he had had the resources and time throughout his life to do the kind of research and travel necessary to acquire significant collection. He probably noted that he spent much of his time as u. S. Minister to france shopping for books. While residing in paris, he said, he devoted every afternoon to examining all the principal bookstores, turning over every book with his own hands. Apparently unconcerned if anyone would wonder if he was also doing his job, jefferson sent this letter to washington and the 6487 books soon followed on 10 wagons that travel more than 100 miles over bumpy roads. But the journey from the virginia hilltop to capitol hill was far from simple. In between jeffersons letter in the fall and the loading of the wagons in the spring, his books became the focus of a remarkable debate. It raged in the press and in congress for months. Its subject was the possible of the men who had required it. It was said that they were full of ideas that might infect the nation if they were allowed into the halls of government. With the smoke of british arson lingering over washington, some members of Congress Even discussed burning the offending titles in jeffersons library to avoid potential spiritual contamination. This campaign was led by a federal representative from my home state of massachusetts, cyrus king, who argued that evidence in jeffersons collection container many books of tenancy could be fined not only the character of the man who assembled it, but in the fact he had done so in france. Other congressman found kings talk of running too much to take. A representative from vermont reminded his colleagues that king came from state once known for hanging witches and he wondered whether that practice might be reintroduced. Marylands representative, askingght, asking if you wanted to. He said he had no intention at least while this party was in the minority. Ruled end, Party Politics the day by a slim margin. The democratic republican majority approved the purchase. I mentioned the story as a reminder that americans have been struggling with overheated rhetoric surrounding religious for a very long time. Maybe we should count ourselves lucky that we dont hear much talk of hanging inches or burning books lately. The truly fascinating thing to me about this moment is this. While in washington, jeffersons taste is eclectic, it barely scratched the surface of the actual religious diversity that existed beyond the capital. While government was arguing over religious ideas, it was oblivious to many forms of religious practice then found in the u. S. For example, among the best known books included in that original jefferson collection which came to the library of congress was this one jefferson 1734 addition of the koranich is still which still exist today. On the one hand, it is appropriate to see it that way as he bought it as in men studying law and may read it as a way of making himself aware of islams influence on some of the worlds legal systems. Koranewing jeffersons only as an american engagement with faroff exotic beliefs obscures a crucial fact. Too many People Living then in jeffersons young nation, this book meant very much more. As jeffersons library rolled in north and his koran went with it , this man was a 45yearold resident of fayetteville, north carolina. In 1815, he had been in this country just eight years, all of them under the oak of a master he called under the cool yoke of a master he called an infidel. In an attempt to escape slavery, he was locked inside the county jail in carolina. By this point, it was no longer legal to directly import human beings from africa. So for many residents of fayetteville, it may been unusual to see a man retaining so many of the traditions in the land where he was born. While locked in his jail cell, he began to draw a crowd, first for his quiet and some said mysterious demeanor. And then for the strange way in which he prayed five times a day. And finally for the graffiti he began to put on his jail cell walls. Apparently he had found some coals from a warming fire that were large enough to write with and he began to fill his jail ,ell walls with arabic script most likely verses from the karen koran. It emerged he had once been a religious teacher. He had been 37 years old when he was captured in what is now senegal. After his time in jail, he became property of a prominent local political family, which encouraged him to convert to christianity and soon persuaded him to write an account of his life. Through the decades that followed, this family was successful in publicizing their successful conversion of their enslaved man and placed articles about him throughout the United States. In 1825, a philadelphia christian paper told the story of his time in jail, which recounted his filling walls with graffiti and also related how he had been fraught brought to his new faith. An article in the boston reporter held him as a convert and devoted to full columns to his christian virtues. In 1854, a reporter wrote that he had thrown aside the koran and now worships at the feet of the prince of peace. He was still enslaved and were no bonds but those of gratitude and affection. Toldy different story was by himself. Wrote the account of his experiences in arabic, which those taking credit for his conversion could not read very well. And in fact his original account for a full 17ated years after he wrote his account in arabic. If they had been able to read his original account, they would have seen his adoption of christianity stated sincerely but also in very practical terms. In freedom, he said, he prayed as a muslim. But now enslaved, he would say the lords prayer. He also filled his text with prophetic declarations directed at those who had enslaved him. Oh people of america, oh people of north carolina, he wrote in 1831, you have a good generation llah . Fears a even after his conversion, islam continued to shape his experience of his enslavement. In this he was not alone. An estimated 20 of the enslaved men and women brought to the americas were muslims. Some plantation owners made it a point to add muslims to the labor force, relying on their ,xperience the cultivation muslim names and titles appear in slave inventories and death records. And all of this was fairly Common Knowledge at the time. Andy so often in the 18th 19th century press, other muslims became celebrities of a sort, most often because they were discovered by white men who were struck either air addition struck by their. Who was enslaved in maryland in the 1730s after an escape attempt, he was put in a jailhouse. There he met a local judge who was so taken with him that he wrote a book about their encounter. This is the memoirs of the life of job. , he showed uprote on all occasions single veneration of the name of god and never pronounce the word cause. Ithout a peculiar they were very just in reasonable. The most famous of these enslaved muslims was probably. His man press, he came from an important family. His plight drew wide attention with newspaper stories written around the country. Eventually, several wellplaced supporters, including the secretary of state henry clay and John Quincy Adams help when his freedom and his eventual relocation to liberia. Before he left, he offered a pointed critique of religion in the country in which he had been enslaved for 40 years. As one newspaper account noted, he had read the bible and admired its precepts but added his principal objections are that christians do not follow them. The story of islam in early america is not merely one of isolated individuals, however. Even being conservative and counting the population, we are talking about tens of thousands of people. To compare them to other religious minorities, we might consider around 1800, there were some 40,000 catholics, for 5000 jews. It is entirely possible there were more individuals with a connection to islam at that point in American History than catholics and jews combined. Some of this Community Try to preserve the traditions in which they were raised in hope of establishing communities with the same beliefs and practices that had sustained them before enslavement. Evidence of this can be seen in this religious text written in erbil in georgia in arabic in georgia early in the 18th century. Is an exhibit that will feature this document with the story. Whoauthor of this document was born in west africa, most likely around 1770. He arrived in the americas in his 30s. He was purchased in Charleston South Carolina and brought to a cotton plantation of the georgia coast. He was multilingual and he wrote to a trusted position on the island, even being allowed to train other enslaved men with muskets for defense of the island during the war of 1812. He seems also to have played a role as a religious leader. This 13 page document was was was once thought to be his diary, or recent scholars say it outlines some of the basics of islamic practice. This is how we wash our hands before prayer. This is how we wash our feet before prayer and this is the times we pray. Omar, he became open to conversion, but against a lot he seems to have been part of a religious community. Not only were there other muslims on the island who looked to him as their leader, he had 12 sons and seven daughters, all of whom were said to pray by kneeling and bowing facing east on woven mats. It may have been for those 19 children that he wrote these instructions. A further note about these instructions, scholars who work with the document today suggest that the way he uses language speaks of a person who is in the process of forgetting, who is fighting against that forgetting by writing what he can remember. There are short excerpts from known text. There are repeated lines, and he is trying to get down on paper for the following generations everything he could possibly remember. It is despite these best efforts to pass along traditions. Islam did not long indoor air or anywhere else. A clue to what has happened can be found in the words of a missionary traveling to the south to preach on slave plantations in the middle of the 19th century. Africans have found ways to accommodate islam to the new police being imposed upon them god say a they isllah and jesus christ is mohammed, Different Countries have different names. This visionary consent this missionary consider this to be muslims inability to recognize the important importance of religious truths but proves actually the opposite. They understood that the faith was important enough that they should listen for it everywhere. Even a country so distance with had months heard the call to prayer, even inundation work only nonmuslims Thomas Jefferson were able to own a koran. This mostly forgotten dimension of religious diversity changed dramatically around 1860. One reason for this is simply time. Of the four figures i mentioned who remained in this country both died around 1860. A number of dates has been given for each for the death, some before the war and some after, but it is clear that neither of them lived to see freedom. They were among the last of the enslaved with memories of their birth countries, so direct connection to the religious traditions they brought with them past with that generation. A second reason for the disappearance of muslims at this point in u. S. History has to do with the consequences of the civil war. After emancipation, establishment of black churches throughout the south begins in earnest. Houses of worship become focal points for newly liberated communities, while missionaries from free black denominations of the north arrived both to support provide support and convert those who are still outside of the church. Through the decades that follow, christianity becomes proudly and irrevocably of the most significant elements of africanamerican life. Too many, the religious expressions that have been brought together by slavery were now in a single faith. Yet the important thing to remember is that the disappearance of the traditions doesnt always mean the end of the influence we can hear echoes of early american islam in early american christianity and even today and even in the broader culture, particularly in musical known born of the ritual as the ring shout, the primary ritual expanse of africanamerican religious observance, which bear some resemblance to muslim ceremonies and is thought by some scholars to have contributed not just to the common style of worship, but to the blues and jazz. In conclusion, i would like to say that i focused on islam here because it provides a stark example of the way religious and cultural practices can be forgotten, even if they were once Common Knowledge, but we could tell similar stories of many other traditions. I would like to think that like here 6487 books that were and grown into a library of millions, we should believe and all theat the beliefs of our past, even those forgotten, are part of our common street. Thank you. [applause] back at theat to be library of congress and to learn ted and sally and peter and these wonderful lectures. I was instructed to give informal remarks, and i guess my distinguished colleagues heard the same instruction, but as good colleagues, they have given papers and ive come with mite tuba solo to talk with you about the period 19421947, which is the period in which the United States Supreme Court created the modern constitutional law of religious freedom on the strength of the First Amendment and its guarantees of no establishment of religion and no prohibition on its free exercise. Andre 1940, between 1791 1940, only 23 cases arising under the First Amendment religion clauses reach the United States Supreme Court and not one of those cases did the court find in this talisman of religion or violation of free thisise rates find in of religion or violation of free exercise rights. Protections of religious freedom, half of which were findings of violations of the establishment laws or the free exercise clause. Clearly something changed dramatically in the 1940s, and i would like to use a couple of been its informally to explore what changed, why it changed, how it changed, and what the significance of that is for us in the 21st century. Three main changes occur in this period from 1940 in cantwell versus connecticut, to 1947 and the Supreme Court case of emerson versus board of education. The first change is that the Supreme Court, for the first time, apply the First Amendment religion clauses directly to state and local governments and created a uniform and universal law of religious freedom and enforceable by the federal courts. Court readhe supreme the establishment clause guarantee and the free exercise andse guarantee rigorously attached rather substantial scrutiny to the actions of federal, state, and local government when they were challenged under either the establishment because of the free exercise establishment clause of the free exercise clause. That encourage more litigation in the federal courts. A third thing that happened is that the Supreme Court proved itself unusually select assist solicitous to marginal groups, highly unpopular religious groups, like witnesses and adventists and path service and found veryo little recourse and protection from the u. S. Congress as well. Three major changes. It is not accidental that these changes occurred in the 1940s, as we move toward the creation of a universal national law of religious freedom enforceable by the federal courts. In the first place, we are moving toward a National Project in the mid20th century. Already in the 1930s during the great depression, as congress and eventually gain United States Supreme Court after 1937 moved to try to create a national law on many questions of health, safety, welfare, and even morality, even in the face of state and local governmental concerns. Call of war and the underscore did National Consolidation project more, as congress and the white house and the Supreme Court together took the lead in reaching National Consolidation on the fundamentals that needed to be oforced, even in the face countervailing state and local interests. Theto religious freedom, 1940s discovery in horror of hitlers death camps and stalins gulags, wrought since of humanity and dignity were betrayed and recognition than local bigotry run amok and unchecked can yield that massive, barbaric treatment of a particular religious and cultural people, in particular the jews, but also gypsies and many others as well. In response, the United States of america and the International Collection of states in the universal declaration seized the idea that religious freedom is a universal good, a fundamental right to be enjoyed by every person, by every people, in all context around the world. It became one of the great for freedom that roosevelt lifted up and was considered essential to the organization of the good society and a democratic policy to have universal protection of religious freedom for all, especially for minorities, specially for those unpopular, especially those who held religious views that had been locally vilified. It was critical that especially the outsiders felt welcome and had constitutional protection of the First Amendment that they could call upon in the federal courts, and it was especially considered important that a person could be guaranteed the protection of the federal courts under the First Amendment, regardless of where he or she lived. We run foursquare into the constitutional protection of federalism, built into the u. S. Constitution itself with its division of enumerated powers amongst the federal government, but also the guarantee of reserved powers to the states, guaranteed in the 10th amendment and in article four, who century and athe half between 1791 to 1940. Furthermore, the First Amendment itself was problematic in this regard, because it singles out congress. It says Congress Shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, it says nothing about the states. Is not even in the passive voice like the second through ninth amendments, where we talk about there should be no illegal searches and seizures and no unjust taking of property which could be read generically to apply to any government, federal, or state. Here the congress was singled out by the First Amendment, Congress Shall make no law violating religious freedom. Whatever the intention of the drafters of the First Amendment religious clauses in 1789 happened to be are the rat fires in 1791 happened to be, that language was taken universally to mean that the First Amendment religious freedom guarantees applied only to congress and the federal government, leaving the 48 individual states to govern religion it in accordance to their own local state constitutions. Some states were generous in their protections of religious freedoms, but many states maintain arms of religious establishment, referencing particular forms of faith, putting in place policies that enacted by coercion certain forms of religious identity belief and practice, and at the same time put in place a number of encumbrances and sometimes deeply prejudicial actions toward a religious minority. So here was the problem. How to create a universal law of religious freedom when the text of the constitution itself and the very federalist structure of the constitution seemed to stand in the way. To accomplish that end, the United States Supreme Court in its faithful set of cases from 1940 to 1947 reformed eight constitutional act that we lawyers call due process incorporation. Looked to the 14th amendment, passed in the aftermath of the civil war, ratified in 1868, which has as its first guarantee, no state shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. We call that the due process law. And the court said interpreting this term liberty, what is part of the body, the corpus . What is incorporated into the idea of liberty . The first place we will go is to look elsewhere in the constitutional text in the bill of rights other rights provisions set out in the instrument as a whole. Among other things, there is a guarantee in the 14th amendment of religious liberty and what does religious liberty entail . Entails no it establishment of religion and no prohibition on the free exercise of religion. That little proof you to start oof you just heard is that suddenly congress may shall make no law means federal, note, and local shall make establishment of religion and no prohibition of the free exercise of. Other branches of the federal government, the First Amendment applies indirectly to the 14th amendment due process clause to the state and local governments alike. Important . All of a sudden, not only have we structurally changed the first so that it becomes a universal law that seemed to be necessary in the 1940s in the face of local bigotry run amok in a highly civilized nation like germany, but we also now have rigorous interpretation of those two guarantees into the federal court conversation about religious freedom in a way that had never taken place in the prior century and half of the republic. Moving forward for the next half century was the rigorous law of no establishment of religion, separation of church and state being one of the organizing axioms as the Supreme Court addressed religious teachers in symbolsd ceremonies and , striking virtually all of them down as they as a violation of establishment norms, perhaps permissible under earlier state constitutions, but now under the glaring light of the establishment clause of the First Amendment, no longer tenable and a nation dedicated to religious freedom, through separation of church and state. Governments role in religious education, a traditional symbiosis now severed through a separation of church and state logic. Schools are permitted to exist and provide opportunities for education, but they must do this on their own without a without aid beyond accreditation. The free exercise clause and free speech clauses and sometimes additional constitutional provisions protect people, especially the unpopular, in their activities and public lives. Witnesses going door to door into public parks and public streets broadcasting the message of jesus christ seeking twin those over to their face s. Ith now they are accommodated under the free exercise clause. Amish living in small communities who did not want to subscribe fully to the mandatory School Attendance laws now in their distinctive identities and allowed to pursue their activities without encumbrances by the state. One can multiply examples. From 1940 to 1990, the United States Supreme Court put in place for the world a massive, massive record of how to protect religious liberty aggressively, zealously for all. And vindicating the idea that gandhi made popular that a nations dedication to religious freedom is measured by how it treats its most hated minorities. And in some states, that record of half century stood tall and remains an important source of inspiration and instruction to jurists and judges and courts around the world to this day. Interestingly, some would say sadly, the Supreme Court in the last decade or two has retreated thatantially from aggressive protection of religious freedom. The court has made it harder to press cases through tough for standing requirements, when you can stand at the bar to pressure case has gotten harder to achieve. The court has allowed splits in the lower federal circuits to Linger Longer with a great deal of confusion amongst parties as to how they are going to be protected in their religious freedom if they live in the Third Circuit versus the ninth circuit. The court has strongly encouraged state legislatures to take over religious freedom, questions through statutes and changing those statutes as needed in accordance with local political custom and ration paired court has shown Strong Political of customization. The court has shown strong separation. Have reduced free exercise and the no establishment clause to guarantees of neutrality on the face of the statute itself and an application of the statute. Since 1990 under the free exercise clause and since 2002 under the establishment clause, both of those constitutional guarantees are now wimpy. Thomas on the bench has suggested that these are all perhaps steps along the way to be incorporating the religion clauses from the 14th amendment. Four times, always in concurrence of dissent, Justice Thomas has said quite boldly, it is time for us to go back to a literal reading of the First Amendment, especially under the establishment clause, it says Congress Shall make no law respecting establishment of religion. We dont have jurisdiction to hear cases coming out of the state and local governments. So far, no justice has signed on to Justice Thomass opinion. I give you a small anecdote to single perhaps a danger. A few years ago, i was one of the lecturers at the fifth Circuit Court of appeals in alabama. Justice scalia was in the is his circus, and he was in the audience and we sat together at dinner. We had a nice long conversation about the original understanding of the First Amendment and fussed back and forth about text that he knows remarkable well, and we had a few drinks. In the course of the evening i said to him, justice scalia, is there anything to this argument of your brother on the court, Justice Thomas, that we are thinking of selectively d incorporating the religion clauses from the 14th amendment. He raised his glass and said, we votene boat away one away, which is interesting. It is also in my view deeply troubling. 1940s toeason in the worry about local bigotry run amok and there is a reason in the 21st century to worry about local bigotry run amok. We are now awash with xenophobia and nativism. We are now awash with antisemitism. Christians and nonchristians are facing enormous pressure about the propriety of their existence, special claims and religious freedom. There is a worry about leaving these things to statutes and to state legislatures. There is a worry about letting one of our universal goods of human nature simply disappear through political calculus. That from any person of good faith and goodwill is troubling. Thank you. [applause] thank you, john, peter, sally. I know i promised a five minute stretching right, what i would like to rescind that offer, because these eloquent words and thoughts are so in our minds now and i think we also would lose some organizational coherence if we all went out and stretched. If no one objects, i think we should talk a little to the panel for five or 10 minutes and then open it up to questions. I am sure you all have them. Three spectacular talks. I learned so much from each of them. I want to say a few question first and then i will keep talking. I want to end with a question for john. Thinklly, i will never about it the same way. Thank you. That was profoundly enlightening. I thought during our lecture about new england. I do not think the same paradigm holds in new england that they wanted enlightenment from the topic, but it seems to the extent there is proslavery in the pulpit in new england, more from the established urban churches and the radical evangelicals. They were antislavery. So that is something we might get into. With peter, i have done research in exactly this topic. I have looked at jeffersons copy of the koran, which is a theinating volume to hold, pages are so pristine that one comes away with some curiosity about whether he actually opened his copy of the koran, because it does not look like he did except the ownership markings. If new digital means of scholarship are helping you to find these littleknown you found newspaper clippings and we are seeing, we have seen it inside for sometimes but more in the humanities now, the power of very powerful searching tools throwing out more different types of data that dont fit with our base theories. Maybe we could come back to that. And with john we are starting to do this reverse order, we have learned so much about the 1940s freedomsand the four and those four freedoms have always been strong in my fine in my mind as a former president ial speechwriter. At the Clinton White house we looked at fdr and Eleanor Roosevelt as important examples, we are reliving a lot of the 50th anniversaries of events in the 1940s and i remember writing the remarks of the universal declaration of human rights. Im wondering, if a more scholarly question for the audience, did scholarly work on he was in arson, very positive light in these decades in the 1930s and 1940s, more so than the last 20 years. Thewithout affecting thinking of the Supreme Court, different further and brandeis in particular lead this of protection a different kinds of religion on the court . Was there some vestigial memory of the problems in the wake of . Orld war i the governmental heavy hand suppressing different minorities in the late teens and early 20s, did memories of those flavor the course thinking in the 1940s . Its been more than 20 years since those events but here in Washington People remember things for a long time. Can i begin with that question and i hope you two will jump in. I will defer to sally because she wrote a book on this. But i will say a word or two as she warms up her answer. Bench,he justices on the justice black is perhaps the one that was most enamored of the story of jefferson. Justice jackson as well. Black and jackson, in different ways, were reading jefferson and the letter to the Baptist Association and were reading and of the 10 gender some of the narratives of jefferson of the day. And saw him, saw the virginia story told by sally gordon as prototypical of and indeed historicative of the amendment. Had theice black majority opinion and repeated opinions over the next 25 years repeats that virginia story and sees an emblematic necessity of a new way of thinking about the establishment clause as a strict separation of church and state guarantee and a new way of thinking about the federal courts role in ensuring the separation of church and state, even at the microlevel of a local School Boards decision. It was quite clearly thought to be a necessary condition for the protection of religious freedom. Its complementary guarantee the free exercise clause, which at the same time was being rigorously protected. Not to forget that the bill for the establishment of religious freedom is mostly about free exercise protection, freedom of conscience and freedom of expression and movement from all manner of coercion. And that side of the jeffersonian puzzle is also part of the jurisprudence. Justice brandeis is an important figure justice black is one person at story. Justice brandeis is important to. We threes we see three cases using jeffersonian free exercise religiousthe Business People in a direct debate back and forward where justice black got his separatism, whether jefferson is simply window dressing for preconceived ideas that he received as a member of the ku ofx klan, where separation church and state was a mantra. People worry a little about some of the nativist inspiration for that appetite for separatism and the anticatholic ways it was being directed. There is no evidence in justice blacks opinions to warrant those suspicions. But there is a lot of speculations in the biography about them was Philip Hamburger separation of church and state as a good recent example of that. Which makes folks a little the easy story told about black ever since the separation is project. Will havesor gordon Better Things to say. I dont think so, that was pretty amazing. The smoke going up as blacks children burned his papers after his death at his instruction has always raised suspicion. But i totally agree with what john said. The thing that i would add is that frankfurter was not especially solicitous of religious minorities. Quite the opposite. And his opinions and a jehovahs witness case in the 1940s was , he was so worried about making americans cynically theied that he tossed jehovahs witnesses under the bus. Several witnesses died in concentration camps in germany, and austria, and three years later when the majority decision in the first case was reversed and in opinion by justice jackson, frankfurter was brilliant. He wrote a list of the stuff that was going to be on the table if we allowed theology to change the way we ran the legal prayer, bible readings, you can go through a laundry list and he got it all right. 1990, he quoted frankfurters dissent in the , extensively, for justifying throwing this back to politics. So its interesting to watch the way a lot of cost and world war ii played out in the Supreme Court and going in such radically different ways. Offbase in thing about the memory of postworld war i dissent . Is not to distance distant to memory in the 1940s . Jackson and the biographers of jackson make clear that he was inspired to do something constitutionally in response. And in Justice Cardozo subsequent cases before 1940 set the groundwork for cantwell and its progeny. He was concerned about protecting fundamental liberty against these national and local intrusions, and he adduces, especially in a paul opinion, some of these instances of oppression, even by the national government. Clearly as we are thinking postincorporation case law, it was not uncommon in amicus briefs and direct argument to remember the travesty against the outsiders. And the internment camps in hawaii and elsewhere which were not necessarily part of the national register, but theres no political favor in bringing those up, but they were part of the inspiration. Bigotry was not theoretical concern driving the court. It was real and palpable and it was not going to be countenanced in the United States. Peter could you repeat the question . I asked and i did not give you a chance to answer. How are you finding these incredibly interesting newspaper articles and stories . Wrote, one that i nation under god as you can tell American History from the point of view of those minorities. The beginning of my Research Process were newspaper archives, particularly digital because you could find an incredible amount of material compared to microfiche. I love to come to the library of congress but its more convenient to find these things at home. That was the beginning of my reading through the 18th and 19th century. I mentioned in my closing statement that you can find many other stories similar to the story of islam in early america. And the newspapers are a great place to start. They were often not stories being written with future scholarship in mind. So theres a lot of reading between the lines that needs to be done but you can find these accounts and individual lives and build out. So in addition to finding a great deal of information about celebrity early muslims in america, i found what i believe is the first dedication of the chinese temple in 1852. During the research of that book, for the first time i saw this, and you cannot find that unless you go back and read history as it was written at the time in the press. So really for my work, i could not do it without it. Both in the written work and the work that i do for the museum. And so many resources are fully digital now, including the wonderful collection at the library of virginia where i was able to find the famous virginia 10,000 name petition. And then make arrangements to include that in our upcoming exhibits. Be on theed to library of Congress Website and they migrated about six months ago. Devastating. Did you begin your research chronicling newspapers . Its americas historical newspapers. Database,far as the and i began that at Washington College. Fortune ofthe good meeting Patrick Henry as a writing fellow in Washington College and i was able to fully devote myself to researching that book. [indiscernible] [indiscernible] there is a microphone. Thank you so much for the contributions, i am enjoying them immensely. , i want to set this conversation in a lighter comparative perspective. I would actually flip the coin on misrepresentation, i would argue that in spite of the its and division not as troubling when you set it in a comparative set up, sudan, not seengeria, i have enough blood and killing, its not messy enough. And i would recommend when we set this conversation and then comes the next one, whats driving what . The way the conversation is set up is [indiscernible] are driving the religion, not the religion dragging the politics. Argument thate that kind of division is problematic because we cannot do it that way. Issue is how, when we set it in a comparative india ande from , they attribute the success of this country to the values of religion and language. In the way we live it from the other side. That this place is successful because theres a commonality around the use of english, and its much easier to bring an american around the notions of some kind of religious consensus which you do not find in say, nigeria. We that is a way we. It. N the way we frame [indiscernible] there is a consensus that you are speaking to. There is a template for capitalism to function. There is a template for the nationstate to function. There is a template for the leader system to function. [indiscernible] i am trying to take your data and look at it from the other side of the coin. For youryou very much comments and inviting us to be messier when we take things into a lighter perspective. We extraordinarily underestimate the luxury that we have in this country to be able to broker our hardest disputes through generally peaceable legal means. When we have fundamental questions at stake, we have authorities to whom we can turn to help resolve those disputes, and messages by with reconciliation can be achieved and parties can go on. We take that for granted in a way that many places around the world, even sophisticated ancient of much greater pedigree do not have that same luxury. World, 110 to the 198 nationstate and independent territories have high levels of religious persecution, whether christians or muslims or have 149s peoples, we civil wars. Many never reached the headlines of the national papers, little in the International Papers of people being savaged. Your point is well taken and we have an extraordinary luxury we should not underestimate. But should also recognize that one of the critical foundations for the protection of democratic order, constitutional law, democratic governance more generally is that we protect religious freedom not just for christians, but for all. And in some way, religious freedom once protected provides the foundation for many other kinds of freedoms for individuals and groups. And this is after various associational rights a person can have in the protection of a religious group, christian or nonchristian, provides the foundation for other protections. And its critical that we recognize religious freedom as a foundational freedom. Whose evaporation, in some sense, is a chiseling away at the cornerstone of many other Constitutional Rights we enjoy. The third thing i would say is, with due respect, we have never privileged christianity. Its interesting we have the establishment called thats says no establishment of any religion, and we have pluralism as in some sense the genius of the american experience. And a recognition that even at the time of the founding, that , protestants and jews and others who had slaughtered decadeser in prior were brought into the ratification of the bill of rights and welcome in the deliberation about what religious freedom means in the courts. There are registered religious groups in the United States, they are increasingly diverse in their nonabraham inform. That is to be celebrated, not lamented. Whatpart of the genius of the american experiment has released, constitutionally. But the luxury that we have with the consequences of 200 years of infighting where the 30 years war was just as bloody is what was going on in the sudan. I have two points, one has to do with jefferson. He was very important in 1943 because it was the 200th ofiversary, and the memorial the title basin was built with great democratic support and fdr was in love with jefferson. 1947, it was black and firsttime uses jeffersons word no, 1879. Doesnt use it in 47 . Yes, it gets picked up. I have a question for sally, the situation in the 80s and early 90s is more ambiguous than you are making. Theres a lot of proslavery ,hinking among the lower orders but at the elite level i will give you one piece of evidence which is very confusing, the in 1791, toitors the college of william and mary office offers an Honorary Degree to granville shar, the leading abolitionist at the time. Why would all the slaveholding planters honor him in that way . And after the haitian revolution everything changes. Up into the early 90s, a lot of planners are aristocratic slaveholders. If only i could point to the stuff on the cutting room floor. Behindthe key elements was the distrust of the church of england. Specially Granville Sharp of somerset, somerset was taken from virginia by his owner, stuart. That was personally felt. Second gave this amazing 1783,lavery filament in that was reprinted everywhere and were genuine. Problem was that they thought he was a church of ,ngland priest, which he was and he also became a methodist bishop, which made him a anyway, andmber very definitionally they did not trust the church of england. And of course william and mary and Granville Sharp were anglicans. The wall of separation was also used in the 17th century by roger wilson in are not yet a state. Well it comes out of the bible, the wall of separation in everyg history american sediment. Phrase invented. Hes using it to try to define as a legal manuel . Ell quite i want to thank all of you for this incredible panel which shows how wonderful this scholarship can be in a time ien scholarship is doubted convey,mall point to the comment used in europe usually, while americans had systemed an important comprehensively of progressing protecting religious 9 religious minorities. Life, context of everyday and Political Institutions and civic life, but not so much protecting the right to have no. Eligion to declare oneself atheist and not have any religious practice. Sometimes violently attacking. , which isto atheism majority of the population of so respected in america because the by definition america has always been a religious country from the beginning of American History. This what of this . We are very generous in respecting the religious freedom of all, but there are certain that we vilify, native american indians, scientologists, wiccans , increasingly today. , intermittent episodes of antisemitism and antijudaism. We have a laundry list of social pariahs and sometimes the courts. Re blind to their plight i will say with respect to atheism, the Supreme Court rather early in the case of 1961 upheld the free exercise rights of an atheist to refuse to swear. N oath to god he could give an alternative form to demonstrating his veracity and did so on the strength of the free exercise right of the individual. And this is the establishment of theism through which he would be a victim. And in the thinking of the western con traditional values of protecting atheism and its a hard sell when the cold being thewas about as great christian nation and those atheist, the communist, are doing their thing. In these gets lost ensuing decades of cold war logic. The early sign posts of generosity for those of faith and no faith and the protection should enjoy, and increasingly in the 21st century, it comes to recognize demographically, the nuns are getting bigger and bigger, especially with the younger generation. And their plight and the protection of their plight is going to be an important part of our story going forward. Question we would have to face is whether atheism and nuns are the same thing. Its one thing to have an affirmative belief in the nonexistence of god as an atheist has. Its another thing to be simply abstaining from any religious participation. And the European Court of human rights has, under pa under the European Convention the notion of thought conscious belief. Its a grab bag that allows for the religion of atheism and the none should be combined. We dont have that textural luxury in the United States. We have religion and we are jealous about protecting said senior sincere good faith. But there is a presumption of faith. ,nd the hard question becomes is the protection of religious freedom, as jefferson himself said to madison, is the protection of religious freedom as soon as you establish one form of safety you automatically begin to disenfranchise those of nonfaith. And the analogous questions emerge, that the privileging of those who have faith inevitably ,egin to compromise the status the rights, the entitlements of those who have no faith to not enjoy. Theres a couple of answers. One is that free exercise of religion rights are also balanced by a no establishment guaranteed. We cannot establish religion but we can establish none. There is freespeech endocrine an association and liberty faith which folks of no can enjoy, and folks of faith can enjoy them as well. And the question is that those who do not have is that enough . Those are Big Questions we will have to face in the next 25 and 30 years as we think through the valences of free exercise our religious freedom. Has the lit rt to make those questions these statutory rights. The religious freedom restoration act in the 21 states could have their own acts. And there is more fuzziness. And we are politicizing the question. On the veracity of sources, John Quincy Adams was the only one who did not put his hand on the bible, he is the constitution. A great history book, the village atheist, its about the history of persecution and protection in the u. S. And on the note of the nones, the phenomenon of the religiously unaffiliated, a part of it is that we are in a moment of shifting categories. If you look at the pews numbers. N the nones many believe in god. I often wonder if they should be called to of this and some of the and that, they are in process of redefining the affiliation they were chosen they were choosing. And what comes of that, we will know in a generation. Thank you so much for a great panel. I have a more specific question. Was there any discussion of this establishment or for exercise during the 14th amendment . Today those debates when discussing the due process in the 1940s, were there discussions in congress and the ratification debate . Or was this not part of the discussion . It did not appear, there were tons of concerns about women voting, lifting the veil of the marriage bed, all kinds of things. No, life, liberty and property were not infused with religion. Its really interesting. Great question. Era and then some samira. Thank you. I dont need the mic. Thank you for a wonderful panel. [indiscernible] i would suggest primary association [indiscernible] the clergyve been during the 1790s, especially in the president ial campaign. That would have been the deeply felt frame of reference. Truees, it is certainly that the grendel sharp Honorary Degree is fascinatingly complicated question. And there were ideas percolating in the 1780s. And a few years ago, there was when virginia became close to abolishing slavery in the 1780s. I think thats been chipped away at, recently. And there is work on the subject which really casts this into doubt. Not the least because the dimensional class and social hierarchy coordinated with religious affiliation. I dont think youre going to be able to say they were anywhere near abolishing slavery if the account you have given today is become more widely known. I wanted to thank you for that and ask for any comments. In addition to the new england clergy, i would add new york, pennsylvania, some parts of maryland i think there are many people outraged not only by his infidelity, his lack of faith, but also his relationship with sally hemmings. Thats really widely known by the early 19th century and you cobwebs all kinds of bibles being reopened again. Its really remarkable how deep that was and how deeply wounded jefferson. Terms of the abolition of , the work do think that has been done recently by pauly brewery and lynn taylor and even Claire Preece in the law field has very definitely shown that the statute produced a more compliant population because people were hoping to be and rarely were. That one ofo true the reasons that cook could cause so much trouble was that he would appear in town and some people would start. Was because some people were by the fact that they were percent preventing the return of the messiah, and many more reacted violently against that. So yes i think i am feeling my way along with the rest of the historiography. I have been thinking about the newman when clergy this week , im trying to imagine their shock, we cant project for thinking into the future, but to no that a major speech was given this week on the subject of religious pluralism and separation of church and state by the head of the Roman Catholic church, who gave an important speech in cairo a few days ago which would been inconceivable to the new england worldview in the 18th or 17th centuries. Our last question . First i want to say, regarding peter and johns comments about the religious nones. I somebody who has spent time studying multiple religious belonging and a growing population, yes, rod rock ra ra, thats deafly way to think about it, if not all nones, many of them. And im curious to see how that works out in the legal framework. If youll excuse me for asking a question about the cultural historian of American Religion moving into thinking about religion and law for my second project. Im wondering, john, if you could say a couple of things about disestablishment in terms and howit looks like debates about it have functioned . Im thinking about when i started graduate school a little more than 10 years ago, georgia was having a terrible drought and our governor had prayer meetings on the front steps of the capital to pray for rain. Im sure this came up in your classes as it did in mine. What is that . How does that relate to legal understanding of disestablishment . And this question of government versus corporation. We see the religious freedom of the individual changing as corporate personhood is allowed to exert power. I understand the difference between government and a large corporate entity. Im wondering about practical ramifications in terms of the american citizen and what the legal precedent around those rights are likely to be, given the cases still pending and of the last couple of years. Thats a lot, i will let peter jump in and i will ask sally to work on disestablishment because shes really the expert. Peter . Been struck in my own work on the socalled nones. It seems to me that, in what i have done i have tried to make a ofallel with earlier moment personal disestablishment and the desire of individuals not to be associated with any particular religious institution. There is a wonderful sermon by george whitfield, where he is preaching in philadelphia and channeling the voice of father asking areheaven, there lutherans there . Methodists . Anglicans . Abraham says through whitfield we dont know those names here. Thats an early moment of talking about noneness. None of those things. I wonder when we look back at this moment, the disaffiliated and, that the word i wanted, personal disaffiliated, will it look like something similar . We realize this is another moment called an awakening by future generations, because giving rise to a new set of categories that we cannot study yet. I really enjoy her question and i would love to talk about corporate personhood, also on the nones. Im starting work now on this very Important Movement in the late 1830s. And i have to think of another name because they call themselves the come outers. Mean something so different now. But by the tens of thousands they left organized religion over their silence on slavery. Saw, forapidly example, schisms appearing in baptists and methodists, from whom many of these people had come out because they became more concerned that if they did not embrace a more negative attitude toward slavery they would lose the rest of their people. Tens of thousands of just methodists in new york. Its worth thinking about the of ain which peters point massive shift in attitude may be , andssed and disaffiliated yet be deeply religiously motivated. The only other thing i wanted to say before learning from john is that i have also been so interested by the fact that the first really common nongovernment corporations in American History were religious corporations. Those were the first general incorporation statutes which was written in 1784 four religious organizations. So one of the things to think about is the longstanding and deep relationship between corporate status and all kinds of religious entities. You cannot hold properly securely as a religious organization unless you incorporate it. And that has been true for more than 200 years. Its interesting how deep that goes. Thinking to your role of religious ceremony. Right in the middle of the heyday of the strict separation of church and state, there was a poster that appeared in a California Public school, in the event of an air attack, the prohibition against prayer in Public Schools will be temporarily suspended. It speaks to the question about the role of religious ceremony and authentic religious ceremony in some instances in times of crisis. And the recognition that when 9 11 occurs we go to the National Cathedral and we hear religious officials pray and discourse about fundamentals. And there is new cooperation between religious and political officials in seeking to alleviate those who have suffered. In times of great crisis, like the Civil Rights Movement when we are seeking to bring our africanamerican friends into full communion in american. Initicians and clerics are walking towards the achievement of some good. There is some power in that, the power of civil religion, called the necessary religious elements of communal life. Court, ine supreme fits and starts over the last 40 years, has come to realize that the establishment clause cannot rise to or descend to intrusion or a reinvestigation on those kinds of forms of what the court because calls ceremonial theism. There is a place for this and the establishment clause is not designed to secondguess or third guess that, in order to give the individual dissenter from that religious expression a hecklers veto that would stymie the expression of those forms of religious ceremony. Sometimes authentic and rich in texture and their expression. I happen to find that a congenial read. I happen to think that they got this right and it speaks to the ideas that Benjamin Franklin had in his discussions in public religion when he is thinking through the necessity of having some kind of common belief or atopn values which sits the particular expressions of values in the corporations around them. Saids chief Justice Burger in lynch v donnelly. Its too late in the day to impose such a crass reading of the establishment clause which would allow the Supreme Court to unearth those preferences. I think on that one, the chief got it right. Thank you for an extraordinary panel. [laughter] each week, american artefacts takes you to museums and Historic Places to learn about American History. Heres a brief look at what is airing this sunday night. We travel 15 miles northwest of washington, d. C. To the Visitor Center a false tavern where we will take a book ride to learn about the history of the chesapeake and ohio canals. [horn blowing] i would like to introduce myself, im cassondra, im a seasonal park ranger at the chesapeake and ohio can now. As you can see, they are obviously not horses, i have a mule. They are a combination of horses and donkeys. Its a very special combination. The male is going to be the donkey, the female is going to are. He mayor m thats how you get a mule. If you did it the other way aound with a male course and female donkey, that something called a henney and they dont have the same kind of working genes that we want the mules to have on the canal. We decided the mules would be a benefit for us. But all through history there have been a lot of uses of horses. You have the pony express and they were used throughout history for various things. The question that usually comes up is why are mules used instead of horses. And there are various reasons for that. Tell and the ears make them aware of their surroundings. You can see these different this allowsred to them to know where they are placing their foot at all times. They are not very skittish like horses. Whereas horses, the side of anything, will rear up. Whereas the mules know where they are placing their feet. They are not as jumpy. So there are snakes that would fall and with a horse they would rear up and you would have to wait for it to calm down. But the meal would stop because they know where they are placing their foot and they see that its a snake and they would wait for you to move it so that would not cause any harm to itself. Smart. E also very mules are smarter than horses are. With a horse, you can work a horse to death. They are there to please their master and want to do nothing more than to make you happy. If you had a horse you could run it dead into the ground. Where is mules, im sure you have heard the saying stubborn as a mule. Take it as a compliment. ,hey are saying youre smart not stubborn. With a mule, we cannot work it to death. After about six hours its good to stop working. Because i am not trying to hurt myself and you cannot push me any further. Im going to stand here until you change me out. Our meals today are dolly and eva. They are two of our youngest mules. Dolly is 11, eva is 10. They are connected together by two chains in the middle of them. Has a tree, which is not really a tree, but is a metal bar and they are currently pulling us. At the rate of about two Miles Per Hour. They could pull us a little faster. But we dont usually want to go any faster than this. Back then they could not go faster than this because there was a speed limit of four Miles Per Hour. It seems crazy theres a good reason why. If you look at the side of the canal, you can see some spots are covered with rocks, the most of the time there are no rocks covering the now. If we had of boat that went any faster, we would call it a week. That, you would end up causing the wake on the side of the canal. This would go ahead and sink the size of our now and damage the canal and make it not last. So at four Miles Per Hour this was enforced. The big nominating conventions go to polica