Editing Separation of church and state (section)

==History of the concept and term==
The precise origin of the term itself dates to Jefferson and his correspondence with religious denominations, however, the entanglement of religion with government and the state dates back to antiquity when state and religion were often closely associated with one another.<ref name=Jefferson11>{{cite web| url = https://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html| title = Jefferson's Letter to the Danbury Baptists| access-date = 2006-11-30| last = Jefferson| first = Thomas| date = 1802-01-01| publisher = U.S. Library of Congress| archive-date = 2019-10-04| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20191004225307/https://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html| url-status = live}}</ref>

===Antiquity and late antiquity===
[[File:Carlo Crivelli - St. Augustine - Google Art Project.jpg|thumb|upright|''St. Augustine'' by [[Carlo Crivelli]]]]
The entanglement of religion with the state has a long history dating back at least to the prosecution and conviction to death of Socrates for impiety in ancient Athens.<ref>Plato, ''[[The Death of Socrates]]''.</ref>

An important contributor to the discussion concerning the proper relationship between Church and state was [[Augustine of Hippo|St. Augustine]], who in ''[[City of God (book)|The City of God]]'', Book XIX, Chapter 17, examined the ideal relationship between the "earthly city" and the "city of God". In this work, Augustine posited that major points of overlap were to be found between the "earthly city" and the "city of God", especially as people need to live together and get along on earth. Thus, Augustine held, opposite to the separation of church and state, that it was the work of the "temporal city" to make it possible for a "heavenly city" to be established on earth.<ref>Feldman (2009)</ref>

===Medieval Europe===
{{Main|Church and state in medieval Europe}}
For centuries, monarchs ruled by the idea of [[divine right of kings|divine right]]. Sometimes this began to be used by a monarch to support the notion that the king ruled both his own kingdom and Church within its boundaries, a theory known as [[caesaropapism]]. On the other side was the Catholic doctrine that the [[Pope]], as the Vicar of Christ on earth, should have the ultimate authority over the Church, and indirectly over the state, with the forged [[Donation of Constantine]] used to justify and assert the [[Investiture Controversy|political authority of the papacy]].<ref name="EMA">Vauchez, Andre (2001). [[iarchive:encyclopediaofmi0001unse z7y7/page/444/mode/2up|''Encyclopedia of the Middle Ages'']]. Routledge.  p. 445. {{ISBN|978-1579582821}}.</ref> This divine authority was explicitly contested by Kings, in the like of the, 1164, [[Constitutions of Clarendon]], which asserted the supremacy of Royal courts over Clerical, and with Clergy subject to prosecution, as any other subject of the English Crown; or the 1215 [[Magna Carta]] that asserted the supremacy of Parliament and juries over the English Crown; both were condemned by the Vatican.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Shameful and Demeaning: The Annulment of Magna Carta|url=https://blogs.bl.uk/digitisedmanuscripts/2015/08/shameful-and-demeaning-the-annulment-of-magna-carta.html|access-date=2021-10-14|website=blogs.bl.uk|language=en|archive-date=2021-10-24|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211024171731/https://blogs.bl.uk/digitisedmanuscripts/2015/08/shameful-and-demeaning-the-annulment-of-magna-carta.html|url-status=live}}</ref> Moreover, throughout the Middle Ages, the [[Pope]] claimed the right to depose the Catholic kings of Western Europe and tried to exercise it, sometimes successfully, e.g. 1066, [[Harold Godwinson]],<ref>{{Cite web|title=1066: Pope Alexander II|url=https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/learn/teaching-resources/story-of-1066/collectible-2/|access-date=2021-10-14|website=English Heritage|archive-date=2021-10-09|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211009212721/https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/learn/teaching-resources/story-of-1066/collectible-2/|url-status=live}}</ref> sometimes not, e.g., in 1305 with [[Robert the Bruce]] of Scotland,<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Hill|first=Rosalind M. T.|date=1972|title=Belief and practice as illustrated by John XXII's excommunication of Robert Bruce|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/studies-in-church-history/article/abs/belief-and-practice-as-illustrated-by-john-xxiis-excommunication-of-robert-bruce/6EDFF5DBD6F9C3E70CAAD7E88A5DD842|journal=Studies in Church History|language=en|volume=8|pages=135–138|doi=10.1017/S0424208400005477|s2cid=170796943 |issn=0424-2084|access-date=2021-10-14|archive-date=2021-10-29|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211029003547/https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/studies-in-church-history/article/abs/belief-and-practice-as-illustrated-by-john-xxiis-excommunication-of-robert-bruce/6EDFF5DBD6F9C3E70CAAD7E88A5DD842|url-status=live}}</ref> and later [[Henry VIII of England]] and [[Henry IV of France|Henry III]] of [[Navarre]].<ref>{{cite book |url=https://archive.org/details/delineationroma01elligoog |title=Delineation of Roman Catholicism: Drawn from the authentic and acknowledged standards of the Church of Rome|publisher=Lane & Scott |first=Charles|last=Elliott|year=1877|page=[https://archive.org/details/delineationroma01elligoog/page/n169 165] |orig-date=1851}}</ref> The [[Waldensians]] were a medieval sect that urged separation of church of state.<ref name="Sabuco Waithe Vintro Zorita 2010 p. 156">{{cite book | last1=Sabuco | first1=O. | last2=Waithe | first2=M.E. | last3=Vintro | first3=M.C. | last4=Zorita | first4=C.A. | title=New Philosophy of Human Nature: Neither Known to Nor Attained by the Great Ancient Philosophers, Which Will Improve Human Life and Health | publisher=University of Illinois Press | year=2010 | isbn=978-0-252-09231-2 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=9S7GrKO69p0C&pg=PA156 | access-date=2023-03-23 | page=156}}</ref>

In the West the issue of the separation of church and state during the medieval period centered on monarchs who [[sphere sovereignty|ruled in the secular sphere]] but encroached on the Church's rule of the spiritual sphere. This unresolved contradiction in ultimate control of the Church led to power struggles and crises of leadership, notably in the [[Investiture Controversy]], which was resolved in the [[Concordat of Worms]] in 1122. By this concordat, the Emperor renounced the right to invest ecclesiastics with ring and crosier, the symbols of their spiritual power, and guaranteed election by the canons of cathedral or abbey and free consecration.<ref>{{cite book |last= Berman |first= Harold J. |title= Law and Revolution: The Formation of the Western Legal Tradition |url= https://archive.org/details/lawrevolutionfor0000berm |url-access= registration |publisher= Harvard University Press |year= 1983 |isbn= 0674517741 |oclc= 185405865 }}</ref>

===Reformation===
At the beginning of the Protestant [[Reformation]], [[Martin Luther]] articulated a [[doctrine of the two kingdoms]]. According to [[James Madison]], perhaps one of the most important American proponents of the separation of church and state, Luther's doctrine of the two kingdoms marked the beginning of the modern conception of separation of church and state.<ref>{{cite book |url=https://archive.org/details/lettersandother01madigoog |title=Madison to Schaeffer, 1821 |publisher=J.B. Lippincott & Company |pages=[https://archive.org/details/lettersandother01madigoog/page/n311 242]–243 |year=1865|last1=Madison |first1=James }}</ref>

[[Image:PapalPolitics2.JPG|left|thumb|''Antichristus'', a woodcut by [[Lucas Cranach the Elder]] of the pope using the temporal power to grant authority to a generously contributing ruler]]

Those of the [[Radical Reformation]] (the [[Anabaptist]]s) took Luther's ideas in new directions, most notably in the writings of [[Michael Sattler]] (1490–1527), who agreed with Luther that there were two kingdoms, but differed in arguing that these two kingdoms should be separate, and hence baptized believers should not vote, serve in public office or participate in any other way with the "kingdom of the world". While there was a diversity of views in the early days of the Radical Reformation, in time Sattler's perspective became the normative position for most Anabaptists in the coming centuries.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mhsc.ca/index.php?content=http://www.mhsc.ca/mennos/bchurchstate.htm|title=MHSC|website=www.mhsc.ca|access-date=2022-05-11|archive-date=2021-05-01|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210501010110/https://mhsc.ca/index.php?content=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mhsc.ca%2Fmennos%2Fbchurchstate.htm|url-status=live}}</ref> Anabaptists came to teach that religion should never be compelled by state power, approaching the issue of church-state relations primarily from the position of protecting the church from the state.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.christianitytoday.com/history/issues/issue-28/1525-anabaptist-movement-begins.html|title=1525 The Anabaptist Movement Begins|website=Christian History &#124; Learn the History of Christianity & the Church|date=October 1990 |access-date=2022-05-11|archive-date=2022-05-10|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220510124449/https://www.christianitytoday.com/history/issues/issue-28/1525-anabaptist-movement-begins.html|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://gameo.org/index.php?title=Church-State_Relations|title=Church-State Relations – GAMEO|website=gameo.org|access-date=2017-03-23|archive-date=2017-03-23|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170323145256/http://gameo.org/index.php?title=Church-State_Relations|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>Bender, H. S. "The Anabaptists and Religious Liberty in the Sixteenth Century." ''Mennonite Quarterly Review'' 29 (1955): 83–100.</ref>

In 1534, [[Henry VIII of England|Henry VIII]], angered by the [[Pope Clement VII]]'s refusal to annul his marriage to [[Catherine of Aragon]], decided to break with the Church and set himself as ruler of the [[Church of England]], unifying the feudal Clerical and Crown hierarchies under a single monarchy.<ref>{{Cite journal|url=http://www.britannia.com/history/monarchs/mon41.html|title=Henry VIII: 1509–47 AD|publisher=Britannia History|access-date=2008-03-26|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080320002225/http://www.britannia.com/history/monarchs/mon41.html|archive-date=2008-03-20|url-status=dead}}</ref> With periodic intermission, under Mary, Oliver Cromwell, and James II, the monarchs of Great Britain have retained ecclesiastical authority in the Church of England, since 1534, having the current title, ''[[Supreme Governor of the Church of England]]''. The 1654 settlement, under [[Oliver Cromwell]]'s [[Commonwealth of England]], temporarily replaced Bishops and Clerical courts, with a [[Commission of Triers]], and juries of Ejectors, to appoint and punish clergy in the English Commonwealth, later extended to cover Scotland. [[Penal law (British)|Penal Laws]] requiring ministers, and public officials to swear oaths and follow the Established faith, were disenfranchised, fined, imprisoned, or executed, for not conforming.

One of the results of the persecution in England was that some people fled Great Britain to be able to worship as they wished. After the American Colonies [[American Revolutionary War|revolted]] against [[George III of the United Kingdom]], the [[Establishment Clause]] regarding the concept of the separation of church and state was developed but was never part of the original US Constitution.

===John Locke and the Enlightenment===
[[File:John Locke by Herman Verelst.jpg|thumb|right|[[John Locke]], English [[political]] [[philosopher]], argued for individual conscience, free from state control.]]
The concept of separating church and state is often credited to the writings of English philosopher [[John Locke]] (1632–1704).<ref name=AFP>Feldman, Noah (2005).  ''Divided by God''. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, pg. 29 ("It took [[John Locke]] to translate the demand for liberty of conscience into a systematic argument for distinguishing the realm of government from the realm of religion.")</ref> [[Roger Williams]] was first in his 1636 writing of "Soul Liberty" where he coined the term "liberty of conscience". Locke would expand on this. According to his principle of the [[social contract]], Locke argued that the government lacked authority in the realm of individual conscience, as this was something rational people could not cede to the government for it or others to control. For Locke, this created a natural right in the liberty of conscience, which he argued must therefore remain protected from any government authority. These views on religious tolerance and the importance of individual conscience, along with his social contract, became particularly influential in the American colonies and the drafting of the [[United States Constitution]].<ref>Feldman, Noah (2005). ''Divided by God''. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, p. 29</ref>

In his ''[[A Letter Concerning Toleration]]'', in which Locke also defended religious toleration among different Christian sects, Locke argued that ecclesiastical authority had to be distinct from the authority of the state, or "the magistrate". Locke reasoned that, because a church was a voluntary community of members, its authority could not extend to matters of state. He writes:<ref>{{cite web |last1=Locke |first1=John |title=A Letter Concerning Toleration |url=https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/A_Letter_Concerning_Toleration |access-date=7 June 2021 |date=1689 |archive-date=13 April 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210413105812/https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/A_Letter_Concerning_Toleration |url-status=live }}</ref>

{{Blockquote|It is not my business to inquire here into the original of the power or dignity of the clergy. This only I say, that, whencesoever their authority be sprung, since it is ecclesiastical, it ought to be confined within the bounds of the Church, nor can it in any manner be extended to civil affairs, because the Church itself is a thing absolutely separate and distinct from the commonwealth.}}

At the same period of the 17th century, [[Pierre Bayle]] and some [[Fideism|fideists]] were forerunners of the separation of Church and State, maintaining that faith was independent of reason.<ref name=Bayle11>{{cite book |last=Tinsley |first=Barbara Sher|title=Pierre Bayle's Reformation : conscience and criticism on the eve of the Enlightenment|year=2001|publisher=Susquehanna University Press |location=Selinsgrove, Pa. |isbn=1575910438}}</ref><ref name=Bayle22>{{cite book |last=Bayle |first=Pierre |year=2000 |orig-date=1st ed 1682 |title=Various Thoughts on Occasion of a Comet |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=UueopQAmgzUC&pg=PR23 |publisher=SUNY Press |page=332 |isbn=978-0791492734 |access-date=2016-08-14 |archive-date=2020-08-20 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200820001204/https://books.google.com/books?id=UueopQAmgzUC&pg=PR23 |url-status=live }}</ref> During the 18th century, the ideas of Locke and Bayle, in particular the separation of Church and State, became more common, promoted by the philosophers of the [[Age of Enlightenment]]. [[Montesquieu]] already wrote in 1721 about religious tolerance and a degree of separation between religion and government.<ref name="DarienMcWhirter">{{cite book|last=McWhirter|first=Darien|title=Exploring the separation of church and state|year=1994|publisher=Oryx Press|location=Phoenix, Ariz.|isbn=978-0897748520|url-access=registration|url=https://archive.org/details/separationofchur00mcwh}}</ref> [[Voltaire]] defended some level of separation but ultimately subordinated the Church to the needs of the State<ref>{{cite book |last=Masters|first=Voltaire. Transl. by Brian|title=Treatise on tolerance [and other writings]|year=2000|publisher=Cambridge Univ. Press|location=Cambridge [u.a.]|isbn=978-0521649698}}</ref> while [[Denis Diderot]], for instance, was a partisan of a strict separation of Church and State, saying "''the distance between the throne and the altar can never be too great''".<ref>{{cite book |last=Mason |first=Denis Diderot. Ed. by John Hope |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=LdUHUTTq_l8C&q=the+distance+between+the+throne+and+the+altar+can+never+be+too+great&pg=PA83 |title=Political writings |author2=Wokler, Robert |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=2005 |isbn=0521369118 |edition=Reprint |location=Cambridge |page=225 |author-link2=Robert Wokler |access-date=2020-11-21 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210312045522/https://books.google.com/books?id=LdUHUTTq_l8C&q=the+distance+between+the+throne+and+the+altar+can+never+be+too+great&pg=PA83 |archive-date=2021-03-12 |url-status=live}}</ref>

===Jefferson and the Bill of Rights===
{{Main|Establishment Clause|Free Exercise Clause}}
[[File:Thomas Jefferson by Rembrandt Peale, 1800.jpg|thumb|right|[[Thomas Jefferson]], the third [[President of the United States]], whose letter to the Danbury Baptists Association is often quoted in debates regarding the separation of church and state]]

In English, the exact term is an offshoot of the phrase, "wall of separation between church and state", as written in [[Thomas Jefferson]]'s letter to the [[Baptists in the history of separation of church and state#American Baptists|Danbury Baptist Association]] in 1802. In that letter, referencing the [[First Amendment to the United States Constitution]], Jefferson writes:

<blockquote>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 and State.<ref name=Jefferson11/></blockquote>

Jefferson was describing to the Baptists that the [[United States Bill of Rights]] prevents the establishment of a national church, and in so doing they did not have to fear government interference in their right to expressions of religious conscience. The Bill of Rights, adopted in 1791 as ten amendments to the [[Constitution of the United States]], was one of the earliest political expressions against the political establishment of religion. Others were the [[Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom]], also authored by Jefferson and adopted by Virginia in 1786; and the French [[Declaration of the Rights of the Man and of the Citizen of 1789]].

The metaphor "a wall of separation between Church and State" used by Jefferson in the above quoted letter became a part of the First Amendment jurisprudence of the U.S. Supreme Court. It was first used by Chief Justice Morrison Waite in ''[[Reynolds v. United States]]'' (1878). American historian [[George Bancroft]] was consulted by Waite in the ''Reynolds'' case regarding the views on establishment by the framers of the U.S. constitution. Bancroft advised Waite to consult Jefferson. Waite then discovered the above quoted letter in a library after skimming through the index to Jefferson's collected works according to historian Don Drakeman.<ref>{{cite web |author1=Mark Movsesian (Director of the Center for Law and Religion at St. John's University) |title=How the Supreme Court Found the Wall {{!}} Mark Movsesian |date=13 February 2013 |url=https://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2013/02/how-the-supreme-court-found-the-wall |publisher=[[First Things]] |access-date=June 16, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200220144157/https://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2013/02/how-the-supreme-court-found-the-wall/ |archive-date=February 20, 2020}}</ref>