Some 1800 years ago, two massive statues of standing Buddhas were carved into the shear cliffs in the Bamiyan area of Afghanistan.  These statues – one 114 feet, the other 165 feet tall – were made during the 2^nd or 3^rd B.C. during Afghanistan’s days as a key stop on the ancient Silk Road.

In March 2001 – in spite of a world-wide outcry to save them – the Taliban ordered the destruction of both of these statues (image) in an attempt to “cleanse” Afghanistan of perceived “Hindu heresy”.

Some 60 years ago, a 29-foot concrete cross was erected atop a 25 foot base near the summit of Mt. Soledad in the Dan Diego area of California.  This cross was later incorporated into a memorial to American troops killed in the Korean War (image).

Last month – in spite of a wide-spread outcry to save it – a judge ordered its removal in an attempt to “save” the public from a perceived violation of both the State and Federal constitutions.  He ordered the city of San Diego to pay a fine of $5000 per day until the cross is removed.

Yesterday, however, President Bush signed a bill – overwhelming passed by the House and unanimously by the Senate – for the Federal government to acquire the concrete cross and the park around it to prevent its destruction.  But since both state and federal judges have ordered the cross removed, it may yet share the fate of the Bamiyan Buddhas.

“But” you say, “Surely as a freeborn American, you know that the Constitution requires a ‘separation of church and state’.  The judge was right, the cross must be destroyed.”

Actually, religion is mentioned only twice in the U.S. Constitution.  The first is Article VI, Section 3 which states: “No religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”  Obviously, no relevance to this case.

The only other mention of religion is in the First Amendment – the very first article in the Bill of Rights – which guarantees such freedoms as that of religion, speech, assembly.

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

As explained in the Preamble, these are “declaratory and restrictive clauses” requested by “a number of the States. . . to prevent misconstruction or abuse of [the new government’s] powers”.

In the case of religion, there is not only the “Free Exercise Clause” but also the “Establishment Clause”. 

The Founding Fathers clearly had England in mind when they prohibited the federal government from establishing a religion or dictating religious practices, or taxing the people to support particular denominations whose tenets they may not even believe.

But the cliché, “separation of church and state” is never mentioned – in fact, it is never mentioned in the entire Constitution, or the Bill of Rights, or any of the other Amendments.  It was first penned by Thomas Jefferson less than a year after he took office as the third President.

A little history is intriguing. . .

The presidential campaign of 1800 was perhaps more bitter than even those of recent years.  Candidates themselves didn’t campaign, thinking it unsavory.  But supporters of the incumbent, John Adams, spread rumors that should Jefferson be elected, he would confiscate and burn all bibles – public and private – that could be found. 

To the horror of some, Jefferson was indeed elected.  Upon hearing this shocking news, some people actually hid their family Bibles by burying them in their kitchen gardens.  Others lowered them into wells for safe keeping.

In the midst of the continuing controversy, a group of Baptists from Danbury, Connecticut sent Jefferson a letter of congratulations.  In actuality, they had an ulterior motive.  The Congregationalist church had long been the legally established church in Connecticut, and the Danbury Baptists were outsiders.  (All of the states except Rhode Island had a state sponsored religion – unaffected by the restrictions of the Federal Constitution.)  They were asking for influence from the newly elected President.

“Sir, we are sensible that the president of the United States is not the national legislator, and also sensible that the national government cannot destroy the laws of each state; but our hopes are strong that the sentiments of our beloved president, which have had such genial effect already, like the radiant beams of the sun, will shine and prevail through all these states and all the world, till hierarchy and tyranny be destroyed from the earth.” (full letter)

Jefferson responded with a carefully written, and later edited, letter that he knew had the potential gaining wide public attention.  He was sympathetic to their situation, but gave no encouragement to any thought of influencing state government. (full letter)

The crux of the whole controversy is found in the following excerpt from his reply:

“Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.” (emphasis mine)

In this one paragraph, Jefferson restricts his reply to the still-new Federal Government; quotes the relevant passages of the First Amendment – the Free Exercise Clause and the Establishment Clause; and states his opinion that this “wall of separation” prevents the Federal Government from thus establishing or restricting religion.

Today, Jefferson’s very words of assurance are being so twisted they are now used as a club against all religious, moral, and spiritual expression.  His “wall of separation” has been used to prohibit a 5-year old kindergartner in New York from saying grace before snack time; ban the placing of crosses at the sites of traffic deaths; forbid an 8-year old Florida girl from singing “Kum Ba Yah” at a talent show; ban the playing of Christmas music from the bell tower at Bloomsburg University in Pennsylvania; censor secular Christmas trees from city property in Eugene, Oregon; deny the use of public buildings from faith-based charities while offering them to pro-abortion groups; withhold education vouchers from children attending parochial schools; confiscate Bibles given as gifts at a school Easter party in Houston Texas; attempt to prevent President Bush from using a Bible to take the oath of office in Washington D.C.; and another attempt to stop a moment of silence during the national mourning following the attacks of 9/11.

Are these attacks on religion, and is the proposed destruction of the Soledad Cross so different than the Taliban’s demolition of the Buddhas?

The Founding Fathers did not want protection from Religion, but rather protection of religion. 

Thomas Jefferson himself wrote that…

“No nation has ever yet existed or been governed without religion.  Nor can be.  The Christian religion is the best religion that has ever been given to man, and I as chief Magistrate of this nation am bound to give it the sanction of my example.”

God save us from those who seek to “save” us!