Understanding the concept of Separation of Church and the State from a Historical Perspective Essay Example for Free

Understanding the concept of Separation of Church and the State from a Historical Perspective Essay Controversy, disputes, and misconceptions surround the public’s understanding of the concept of the separation of the church and the state.   Most people think that this concept is a modern invention of man which started in the 18th Century.   They say that Thomas Jefferson is â€Å"the primary architect of the American tradition of separation of church and state.† (Thomas Jefferson and the Separation of Church and the State† 1) It must however be stressed that the concept of separation of church and the state had its origin in the Bible.    The New Testament says â€Å"render to Caesar the things that are Caesars and to God the things that are Gods.   During the Medieval era, it was believed that God metaphorically handed down two swords as a symbol of authority: the spiritual sword and the temporal sword. The spiritual sword was bestowed upon the Pope while the temporal sword was entrusted to the civil magistrates such as the emperors, kings and dukes.   It was believed that the civil law was subordinated to the ecclesiastical rule and the purpose of the separation is to protect the church’s eminence against the intrusions of the state.   Thus, Pope Boniface VIII in 1302 states that: â€Å"We are taught by the words of the Gospel that in this Church and in its power there are two swords, a spiritual, to wit, and a temporal. [B]oth are in the power of the Church, namely the spiritual and [temporal] swords; the one, indeed, to be wielded for the Church, the other by the Church; the former by the priest, the latter by the hand of kings and knights, but at the will and sufferance of the priest. For it is necessary that one sword should be under another and that the temporal authority should be subjected to the spiritual† (John Whitte Jr. 3)      During the 17th Century, however, the public had become witnesses to the religious conflict and incessant bickering between different religions, or more particularly, Protestants and Catholics.   Because of this ‘War of Religion’ a crisis of authority had developed.   The public did not know what to believe and whom to believe anymore. As a result, Locke advocated the principle of Separation of the Church and the State which will later on be considered as ‘the source for the founding principles of the United States’ (Chuck Braman 1).   Locke came to the conclusion that the prevailing conflict was due to the religious dogmatism which was imposed and adopted by the State.   He argued that the proper response on this problem was not the imposition of a single religion to be dictated by the State and the suppression of other religions also by the State. Locke proposed that the State should confine itself to civil concerns and leave the matters of religion to the church.   He advocated religious neutrality on the part of the state and vice versa.   He argued that the state’s function should be confined to the protection of life, liberty and property.   This function is especially important when man tries to go against the State of Nature, which is a state of equality between individuals and tries to impose themselves against the other. Locke also proposed that the church must make itself separate and distinct from the state.   In his â€Å"Letter Concerning Toleration†, Locke thought that the church is simply a voluntary society of men joining themselves together of their own accord in order to the public worshipping of God in such manner as they judge acceptable to Him, and effectual for the salvation of their souls.† (John Whitte Jr 4) At present, the concept of separation of church and the state is based on the principle of respect between the two powerful institutions.   The separation is not one of hostility but an understanding that their union will only lead to the destruction of the state and the degrading of the church.   Separation of the Church and the State is now guaranteed under the Free Exercise Clause and the Establishment Clause. The Free Exercise clause renders unconstitutional any act of the government that prohibits a particular religion.   The Establishment Clause, on the other hand, protects against any act of the state that promotes a particular religion.   The religious freedom has for its purpose â€Å"the protection of liberty of conscience of the public, freedom of religious expression, and religious equality.† (John Whitte Jr., 12) Conclusion Our present understanding of the Separation of Church and the State has completely evolved. If in the past, the church advocated the principle of separation because of the competing interest between the two powerful institutions.   Nowadays, the principle of separation is essentially based on respect and it has been extended to include protection of the faithful. Thus, the concept of separation of church and state has been expanded to include the prohibition against the state allocating government funds for the establishment or support a particular religion, the prohibition against requiring the teaching of a particular religion in schools or imposing religious tests in the exercise of civil and political rights and the prohibition against religious officials utilizing on government sponsorships or funding for their religious exercises   Cited Works Braman, Chuck.   The Political Philosophy of John Locke and Its Influence on the Founding   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Fathers and the Political Documents They Created. 1996. 13 June 2008.     Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   http://www.chuckbraman.com/Writing/WritingFilesPhilosophy/locke.htm. â€Å"Thomas Jefferson and the Separation of Church and State.† 13 June 2008.     Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   http://candst.tripod.com/tnppage/qjeffson.htm Whitte, John Jr.   Facts and fictions about the history of separation of church and state.   Journal   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   of Church and State. 1 January 2006.   12 June 2008.