Freedom of Religion and Public Education

As the founding fathers were writing the Constitution, they believed that government needed to be secular in order to keep the peace between religious factions, and they went to great lengths to create a state without any religious aspirations. In accordance with this goal, as public education was spread through the nation, a law was passed to prohibit the use of public funds to support sectarian schools. Rather than teach religion, it became the task of schools to create good Americans. Over the course of the 20th century, a number of Supreme Court cases refined the relationship between public education and religious freedom. The public debate over this relationship continues today.

Keywords Common School; Democracy; Horace Mann; Proselytize; Public Education; Religion; Sectarian; Secular; Secularism; Secular Humanism; Separation of Church and State; Supreme Court

Overview

Freedom of Religion

Freedom of religion is the right to worship as one pleases, the right to choose (or not choose) a religion without fear of reprisal from government. As democracy spreads across the world, many evolving countries are incorporating this right into their government's foundation. Davis (2006) recognizes that, "the number of democracies worldwide has more than tripled (to 120) in the last 30 years…most democracies today are "liberal" democracies, which means that fundamental rights or liberties of the citizens are built into the legal structure of the regime" (Davis, 2006, para. 1). With the spread of democracy around the world, freedom of religion is becoming a basic human right.

The principle of freedom of religion is not new. Some of the first written evidence mankind has of this ideal appears on the Cyrus Cylinder, dated to around 539 BC. Cyrus, King of the Persian Kingdom, liberated Babylon from Nabonidus, by walking into the city and taking it. He wrote, "I took great care to peacefully (protect) the city of Babylon and its cult places. (And) as for the citizens of Babylon, whom Nabonidus had made subservient in a manner totally unsuited to them against the will of the gods, I released them from their weariness and loosened their burden" (Chavalas, 2006, para. 5). As Cyrus was taking over the famed city, he did so with toleration of its inhabitants and their holy places. This was done in order to keep peace with the citizens of Babylon.

American founding fathers in the 18th century addressed freedom of religion in the First Amendment of the Constitution. Within the outline for a new government, placing Freedom of Religion first showed how important the founding fathers knew this idea to be. The First Amendment says, in part:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…"

The Constitution without Religion

Religion played a central role in early American settlers' lives. By the time the Constitution was being written, there were many different Christian sects already well established in the new world. Some colonists came to American for religious freedom, but many more came for commercial opportunities and to establish profitable plantations and businesses for their benefactors back in England and continued to adhere to their own versions of Christianity.

As Jefferson, Madison, Hamilton et al. were writing the Constitution, they knew they could not get the widely varying sects in each colony to agree on which doctrine was the most proper and suited to govern all the inhabitants of the country. Forming a government based on one religion would be divisive at a time when the founders were trying to unite a nation together, so they solidly rejected the idea of a Christian state. They sought instead to create laws providing that the property and health of citizens not be hindered by fraud or violence and left religion out of it. They saw government as needing to be non-secular in order to keep the peace and they went to great lengths to create a state without any religious aspirations. The new government "would not serve the glory of God; it would merely preside over a commercial republic, an individualistic and competitive America preoccupied with private rights and personal autonomy" (Kramnic & Moore, 1996, p. 86).

Education in Early America

Prior to the establishment of the United States, the Constitution and the federal government, education in Colonial America was designed to create and sustain a Christian civilization. In the 1640's, Massachusetts and Virginia passed laws that required children receive some education. Massachusetts fared better than Virginia in this endeavor, as the Puritans placed a strong emphasis on learning. For more than 100 years, beginning around 1690, most school learning was done using the New England Primer, a textbook created by the Puritans, whose "great theme was God and our relationship to Him" (Nord, 1995, p. 65). The main purpose to sending children to school during this time was to learn their parents' and community's religious doctrine.

Before the Civil War, schoolbooks accepted Christian accounts of the world almost certainly. Slowly, the movement for tax supported "common schools" began. Common schools were non-sectarian in design and begun for a variety of reasons. "Some scholars see the movement as a natural extension of democracy and liberalism…" (Nord, 1995, p. 71). It was an effort to create skilled workers in order to ensure America's economic status worldwide, or possibly to "accept the common values of order and discipline within a society" (Nord, 1995, p. 71). Public common schools were supported by tax dollars and educating children became mandatory in America.

Although they professed to be, common schools were not entirely without religion. Horace Mann, a Protestant, propagated the idea of a common school education stressing only those convictions upon which 'men of goodwill' agreed. The bible was to speak for itself without any of the nuances in Christianity that caused division along sectarian lines. At first, many Protestants protested this schooling idea. They felt their religion should be a central part of the education process. However, they began to rally around the idea as more Roman Catholics immigrated to America. Opinion shifted to be that children are better off in a school where the Bible is not interpreted than being educated by or under strict guidance of a Roman Catholic priest. Catholics revolted against this idea and created a huge parochial system of education, which still exists today. Then, because tax dollars supported common schools, Catholics argued for tax dollars to support their schools as well.

In 1875, Congress fell only a few votes shy of passing a constitutional amendment prohibiting the use of all public funds for sectarian education. Congress did, however, pass a law in 1876 stating all new member-states must provide means for creating public schools free from sectarian control. During this period, "many states adopted constitutional amendments prohibiting the use of state funds for sectarian schools" (Nord, 1995, p. 73).

Education without Religion

The largest motivational factor for outlawing sectarian schools, according to constitutional scholar Douglas Laycock, was "trace(ed back) not to any careful deliberations about constitutional principles of the proper relations of church and state. Rather it traces to vigorous 19th century anti-Catholicism and nativ(e) reaction to Catholic immigration" (as cited in Nord, 1995, p. 73). In order to keep the peace, educators at the time came to the same conclusion the founding fathers had: eliminate what is discordant. Take religion out of everyday classrooms and find another central purpose for educating youth. Rather than teach religion, it became the task of schools to create good Americans.

Schools began espousing ideas about America and Americanism rather than religion. Textbooks presented America as being the most prosperous, successful country in the world. This idea became more important as the country was flooded with immigrants. Public schools became "cultural factories of Americanization, transforming the raw material of foreign cultures into good American citizens" (Nord, 1995, p. 75). During this time, America's economy continued to grow and the middle class took more opportunity to shape and develop what was taught in schools. A major reason high school became popular was that businesses required a better-trained work force. In 1917, Congress passed the Smith-Hughes Act, the first act encouraging and funding vocational education.

First Supreme Court Cases

During the ensuing years, the Supreme Court viewed its role in public education as furthering the Jeffersonian principle of creating a "wall" between church and state. A host of Court decisions, laid out bit by bit, erected this wall high in the middle part of the 20th century. There were several cases within a 30 year span that helped build up this idea.

In 1940, Minersville School District v. Gobitis presented a case in which two young students were expelled from school for not participating in the Pledge of Allegiance. As Jehovah's Witnesses, they were forbidden by their religion to do so. The Court extended the opinion that the state can overrule individual freedoms of religion, stating, "The mere possession of religious convictions which contradict the relevant concerns of a political society does not relieve the citizen from the discharge of political responsibilities" (Minersville School District v. Gobitis, 1940). In essence, duty to the state comes before one's religious convictions. Seven years later in Everson v. Board of Education, Everson, a taxpayer, thought it inappropriate to use public funds to bus students to parochial schools. The Court agreed, with only one judge dissenting. The very next year, the McCollum v. Board of Education ruling denied release time during the school day for on-campus religious instruction.

In the case of Engel v. Vitale, the court ruled that "state officials may not compose an official state prayer and require that it be recited in the public schools of the State at the beginning of each school day - even if the prayer is denominationally neutral and pupils who wish to do so may remain silent or be excused from the room while the prayer is being recited" (Engle v. Vitale, 1962). The Court saw the act of praying in school equivalent to establishing religious beliefs therein. Because school attendance is compulsory, sponsoring prayer in school becomes, essentially, proselytizing to students.

Although the wall between education and religion had been firmly put into place by the Constitution, the Supreme Court was careful not to say that religion is not worth studying. In 1963, in School District of Abington Township v. Schemp the Court opinion read, "…one's education is not complete without a study of comparative religion or the history of religion and its relationship to the advancement of civilization. It certainly may be said that the Bible is worthy of study for its literary and historic qualities." In this specific case, however, the high court failed to allow the continuation of Bible readings during school time, going on to say, "In the relationship between man and religion, the State is firmly committed to a position of neutrality" (Abington Township v. Schemp, 1963).

Further Insights

Is Neutral Really Neutral?

The secularization of pubic schools has been determined by some on the religious right to be "suppression not only of the teaching of religion, but also of religiously grounded moral values" (Blum, 1987, p. 101). Blum (1987) also believes that this suppression "teach(es) that these (moral) values are false, or at least irrelevant to man's affairs" (p. 101). This particular theory assumes that values can only be taught within the context of religious training and teaching. Dr. Paul Vitz, a professor of psychology at NYU, took an empirical look at textbooks given to students in public schools to determine what, if any, values are taught in American classrooms. He found that religious values were being left out of textbooks, "16 of 22 textbooks contain no reference to God, Christianity or Judaism" (as cited in Blum, 1987, p. 102). Blum calls the omission of religion censorship, saying

censorship occurs most often in those courses that are most important - on both intellectual and imaginative levels - in shaping the moral values of the students.

The argument continues that without religion in the classroom, students are led to believe it is an unimportant part of daily life:

When we teach our children that religion is to be omitted from their education, we destroy the very foundations of our moral values… (Blum, 1987, p. 105).

Boller (1987) noted that,

ultra-fundamentalists reject the possibility that secular institutions can uphold moral values…any values that fail to conform to its own values are dubbed 'immoral.' They condemn the public schools for not teaching their specific religious doctrines or promoting their political interpretations of the world (Boller, 1987, p. 112).

When the Vitz study came out during the Reagan Administration, religious fundamentalists thought they found their proof that the educational system was devoid of morals and values. But upon further study of the source, scholars such as Doerr have found "his work sloppy, and Vitz himself has an axe to grind; he dislikes public education in principle and favors tax support of sectarian private schools" (Doerr, 1987, p. 111).

The practice of teaching that man can solve problems on his own, through math, science and literature and without God, has been compared to proselytizing "secular humanism" as a religion. In March, 1987, Judge Brevard Hand of Alabama ruled that 44 textbooks should be banned from schools because, by omitting reference to religion, they were in fact teaching secular humanism, thereby giving preference to that religion over others. A federal appeals court later overturned this judgment.

Continuing the Debate Today

School systems land in court over religion every day. In the case of Skoros v. City of New York (2007), the City school system allowed Christmas trees, menorahs, Santa Claus decorations and Islamic star and crescent symbols within the school, but not the crèche, which displays the newborn Jesus. This case involves Andrea Skoros, a Roman Catholic who sued because "to (not) allow crèches while permitting Jewish and Islamic religious symbols "conveyed the impermissible message of disapproval of Christianity" and violated the First Amendment's prohibition against a government establishment of religion, as well as her family's free-exercise-of-religion right" (Walsh, 2007). A federal district court and the U.S. Court of Appeals upheld the school system's argument as having a "valid secular purpose" because their school "policy barred any display of deities, and that it did not allow religious displays for Jewish holidays such as Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur that had not attained secular significance" (Walsh, 2007).

The reasoning for the school district is that, "Because a significant number of New York City schoolchildren or their parents are immigrants, sometimes from countries that place little value on either diversity or tolerance, city schools play a particularly important role in teaching these essential elements of pluralism to future generations of Americans," according to the opinion of Judge Reena Raggi for a 2-1 majority of the (New York) 2nd Circuit court. "The fact that they do so … through cheerful multicultural holiday displays rather than formal textbook assignments does not diminish the importance of the lesson, much less call into question its actual secular purpose" (cited in Walsh, 2007). In other words, it's the job of schools to create Americans, knowledgeable of customs and tolerant of each other's differences. It's not the job of the schools to place deities of any religion into the schools.

Doerr argues that, "teaching about religion and promoting ethical or moral values are two different things and pose different sets of problems for educators" (Doerr, 1987, p. 111). Public schools teach honesty, fairness, decency, good citizenship and integrity every day. These are moral values, and yet they have nothing to do with religion. The decision the public schools face is the difference between teaching about religion and not teaching religious doctrine. Until now, educators and textbook publishers were not willing to take a chance on the distinction and have left religion out of the curriculum,

But rather than being the result of some dark conspiracy against or hostility toward religion, the slighting of religion in public schools stems from a justifiable fear on the part of educators and textbook publishers of handling a very controversial issue, from lack of a real demand for academic study of religion, and from simple lack of agreement as to precisely what should be taught (Doerr, 1987, p. 111).

Viewpoints

The Path Forward

…(W)hat's at stake is the future of public education in this country - the kind of education we want to have. Do we want to have education with sectarian strife - split and fragmented schools in which teachers and administrators can't present a wide diversity of ideas, where the pluralism of American culture can't come together and be exposed? (Crane, 1987, p. 118).

It would be hard to present a fair and balanced view about religion, without proselytizing various doctrines, in a classroom setting.

Are churches ready to have students learn about religion and how religion has shaped the world? Historically, religion is responsible for millions of deaths around the world, from the beginning of time right up to today. It is also responsible for scientific facts taking an inordinate amount of time to be allowed into mainstream thought. The Catholic Church placed Galileo under house arrest for the last 8 years of his life because he dared to say the earth revolved around the sun and not the other way around. In modern times, Christian groups are vehemently opposed to stem cell research. Should classes

…describe a few religious holidays, list a few religious 'heroes,' and say a few pleasant things about the Pilgrims, the Quaker abolitionists, Martin Luther King, Mother Teresa, Thomas Paine, Annie Besant, Avicenna, and Gandhi? Or do we also teach about the Inquisition, religious wars, persecutions and pogroms, heresy trials, terrorism, and the fact that, for every Christian abolitionist, there were many more who used the Bible to justify slavery? Do we present static pictures of a few of the "mainstream" religions, or do we also acquaint students with religious dissent, freethought, humanism, and religious liberalism? (Doerr, 1996, para. 5).

Coming together to agree upon what is taught would be very difficult. In light of this, it is perfectly understandable that textbooks and educators stay away from religion in the classroom.

If it is still the goal of schools to create good citizens able to vote and perpetuate democracy in America, a question we as a society face is whether educational facilities are doing a disservice to students by not incorporating religion into classrooms. However, "(v)ery few teachers are adequately or properly trained to teach appropriately about religion. There are no standards for teacher certification." There aren't any textbooks "on the market that (are) adequately balanced, objective, and neutral" (Doerr, 1996, para. 5). And yet, in present times, voters are asked to weigh in on stem-cell research, abortion, euthanasia, and same-sex marriage. Coincidentally, these topics are highly controversial on a religious level, as morally right or wrong. If schools are not taking part in teaching about religion, are they truly preparing students to make educated decisions that will shape the way our country, our natural resources, our sciences and our society continue?

Although it strayed from the curriculum, religion is a topic that has never strayed too far from the peoples' conscience. Religion may have a place in the education of America's youth. "However, constitutional requirements of objective presentation within a secular curriculum must be rigorously honored" (Branch, 2007, p. 1473). It remains for teachers and school administrations to address the best ways to inculcate religion into America's classrooms without alienating anyone within them.

Terms & Concepts

Common School: Term coined by Horace Mann, indicating a school that serves individuals of all faiths, regardless of religion, and without religious doctrine.

Proselytize: To induce one to convert to another's way of thinking or religion.

Sectarian: Relating to a particular sect or religious belief.

Secular: Separate from religion.

Separation of Church and State: Concept that government and religious organizations remain free from each other in all dealings.

Bibliography

Allen, B. (2006). Moral minority: Our skeptical founding fathers. Chicago: Ivan R. Dee Publisher.

Blum, V. C. (1987). Secularism in public schools. In Religion and politics: Issues in religious liberty. Hudson: Gary E. McCuen Publications, Inc.

Boller, D. (1982). Liberty and justice for some: defending a free society from the radicalright's holy war on democracy. In Religion and politics: Issues in religious liberty. Hudson: Gary E. McCuen Publications, Inc.

Branch, C. E. (2007). Unexcused absence: Why public schools in religiously plural society must save a seat for religion in the curriculum. Emory Law Journal. 56 , 1431-1474. Retrieved September 29, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=26163150&site=ehost-live

Chavalas, M. (Ed). (2006). Translation: The ancient near east. Retrieved September 14, 2007, from British Museum: Cyrus Cylinder http://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/highlights/article_index/c/cyrus_cylinder.aspx

Crane, D. (1987). CNN "Take Two." In Religion and politics: Issues in religious liberty. Hudson: Gary E. McCuen Publications, Inc.

Davis, D. H. (2006). The evolution of religious liberty as a universal human right. Retrieved September 14, 2007, from US Department of State: Democracy Dialogues: Freedom of Religion http://usinfo.state.gov/dd/eng_democracy_dialogues/religion/religion_essay.html

Doerr, E. (1987). Religion in public education. In Religion and politics: Issues in religious liberty. Hudson: Gary E. McCuen Publications, Inc.

Doerr, E. (1996). Teaching about religion in public schools. Humanist, 56 , 42-43. Retrieved September 16, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=9608302706&site=ehost-live

Engel v. Vitale. (1962). Retrieved September 22, 2001, from FindLaw http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=370&invol=421

1st Cir. rebuffs Establishment Clause challenge to N.H.'s pledge law. (2011). School Law News (LRP Publications), 39, 7. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=57287410&site=ehost-live

Fusarelli, B.C., & Eaton, L.E. (2011). A day of silence, a day of truth, and a lawsuit. Journal of Cases in Educational Leadership, 14, 35-48. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=66335739&site=ehost-live

Kramnick, I. & Moore, L. R. (1996). The Godless constitution: The case against religious correction. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.

Minersville School District v. Gobitis (1940). Retrieved September 21, 2007 from FindLawhttp://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=310&invol=586

Nord, W. A. (1995). Religion and American education: Rethinking a national dilemma. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press.

School District of Abington Township v. Schempp. (1963). Retrieved September 19, 2007 from FindLaw. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=374&invol=203

Walsh, M. (2007). Justices decline appeal on holiday school display. Education Week, 26 , 23. Retrieved September 17, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=24186135&site=ehost-live

Suggested Reading

Glenn, C. L. (1987). Curriculum in public schools: Can compromise be reached?" In Religion and politics: Issues in religious liberty. Hudson: Gary E. McCuen Publications, Inc.

Nord, W. A. (1995). Religion and American education: Rethinking a national dilemma. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press.

Saperstein, D. & Bergstrom, C. (1987). Banning books isn't the answer. In Religion and politics: Issues in religious liberty. Hudson: Gary E. McCuen Publications, Inc.

Wang, C. (2013). Fostering critical religious thinking in multicultural education for teacher education. Journal of Beliefs & Values: Studies in Religion & Education, 34, 152-164. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=90430344&site=ehost-live