Our nation’s historic separation of church and state gained a reprieve a couple of weeks ago when one of President Donald Trump’s appointees to the Supreme Court appears to have properly put personal ethics ahead of any desire to participate in a landmark vote.

The issue before the court was whether it is constitutional for state tax dollars to be used to operate a religiously affiliated school. Such funding has historically been banned in the U.S. In other words, whether tax dollars can be used to teach a particular religious doctrine.

This case arose in Oklahoma, where the Catholic Church attempted to open a religion-directed charter school using state tax dollars. The Oklahoma Supreme Court barred the use of tax dollars to support the school, and the matter went to the Supreme Court. 

When Justice Amy Coney Barrett declined to vote on the issue, the high court tied 4-4 and the Oklahoma Court’s decision was thus upheld, leaving the ban in place.

Justice Barrett didn’t explain her recusal, but she is a former professor at Notre Dame Law School, which represents the church school’s organizers, and it has been speculated that she felt voting would involve an ethical conflict. That certainly fits Justice Barrett’s performance since her elevation to the court. She appears to take ethics and a strict adherence to the law seriously, something that doesn’t seem to weigh all that heavily on some of the current nine.

While those of us who favor the nation’s historic separation of church and state may take comfort in the court’s failure to allow states to pour out tax dollars to churches, don’t expect it to be the final word on the question. Churches have salivated over using your taxes to fund religiously inspired teachings for years, and they will keep trying. Given the current makeup of the Supreme Court, the chance of this pivotal breach of the wall of separation occurring is quite likely.

It’s an issue that Virginians should find particularly meaningful, for it was here that the concept of separating church and state crystalized, as voiced in what has been described as one of the nation’s most important founding documents.

Up until the United States was created, state-sponsored religion was the norm throughout history. Those with even a passing knowledge of history know how tragic that connection has been. The religion blessed with state power has nearly always wanted to purge all others. Mass murders, deportations and, at a minimum, official ostracization had been the norm throughout history.

One of the key reasons our European ancestors came to America was to worship without interference from the government.

Thus, after the colonies gained their independence and became states, Thomas Jefferson lobbied the Virginia General Assembly to guarantee total independence of religious belief in the commonwealth. He wrote the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom. 

The statute, adopted in 1786, remains a vital part of the Virginia Code today. It declares, “No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief.”

The statute became the basis for the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, written a few years later, and is often cited as the underpinning for our tradition of separating government and religion. While the First Amendment isn’t as detailed as Virginia’s statute, it does say specifically that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” 

Up until now, that language has been sufficient to prohibit the use of tax dollars to fund a religious school. 

Tax dollars have been funneled through church organizations regularly, but not to teach religious doctrine. Church organizations have provided many of the volunteers driving the U.S. AID program, which was only recently gutted by Elon Musk and the president. Likewise, tax dollars have been used quite efficiently by church organizations that assist areas hit by natural disasters such as hurricanes. Churches, in short, have been efficient and cost-effective deliverers of services considered to be to the public’s benefit.

What’s being asked by the church schools is altogether different. They want to pay teachers with your taxes, and have those teachers teach that church’s doctrine to their students. 

Doing so would put us directly back into debates that followed the American Revolution, when some churches argued that everyone should pay a church tax that would then be divvied up to various denominations.

Thomas Jefferson saw the wisdom of letting churchgoers fund their own churches without anyone being taxed for that purpose. He felt, however, that tax dollars should be used to fund public education for all. That concept took another century to evolve, but it has worked to build the world’s freest nation and strongest economy. Undermining it now would be a mistake that can’t be undone.

 

John Edwards is publisher emeritus of The Smithfield Times. His email address is j.branchedwards@gmail.com.