Copyright by James Carlson
Moses with the 10 Commandments
Above the U.S. Supreme Court Building (East Side)
The Ten Commandments, originally written in Hebrew and given to Moses from God, are the historic foundation of the religious freedoms we have in America. Instead of promoting a religion (like religious atheism - secularism), the 10 Commandments stand for religious freedom and are celebrated by many religions. What is under attack is our sense of reality as secular rationalist seek to utilize the Courts to affect their social political religious objectives in our country.
Court History
To gain a foundation, let us review a previous court opinion that referred to Jefferson’s famous Danbury Baptist letter of 1802. In this letter we have the famous dictum that there is a wall of separation between church and state that the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution’s two religious clauses erected.
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. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties. [Danbury Baptist Letter, Jefferson 1802, excerpt]
This letter by Jefferson to the Baptists in Danbury, Connecticut, was called by the U.S. Supreme Court, the leading document defining the meaning of the First Amendment’s religious clause against an establishment of religion.
In the words of Jefferson, the [First amendment] clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect ‘a wall of separation between church and State’….” [Everson vs. Board of Education 1947]
While the Supreme Court focused on the sentence in the middle of the above paragraph, they failed to recognize the meaning of both the introductory sentence and the closing sentence of this same paragraph. Let’s take a closer look into the history of this document leading us to discover more of what Thomas Jefferson was saying to the Danbury Baptists.
Thomas Jefferson was a fan of Roger Williams, a Baptist minister, who said they needed to erect a…
“...hedge or wall of separation between the garden of the church and the wilderness of the world.” [The Bloody Tenet of Persecution for Conscience Sake and Mr. Cotton's Letter Lately Printed, Examined and Answered in 1644.]
Jefferson wrote to the Baptist association in Danbury, CT, using William's phrase because he was the first person to allow the Baptist Church to settle in America in his colony of Rhode Island. Jefferson simply quoted the famous Baptist when writing to the Baptists, equating the First Amendment's protection of religious freedom with a wall of Separation between Church and State.
Roger Williams later applied the Calvinist principle of the 2 tablets of the 10 Commandments to explain the meaning of the separation principle
"…the Spirit handles the duties of the saints in the careful observation of the second Table, in their civil conversation or walking towards men, and speaks not at all of any point or matter of the first Table concerning the Kingdom of the Lord Jesus…" [The Bloody Tenet of Persecution for Conscience Sake and Mr. Cotton's Letter Lately Printed, Examined and Answered in 1644.]
Referring to Romans 13, Williams saw government's role limited to man's behavior and not involved with man's worship of God. To explain this Williams used the Calvinist idea of the 2 Tablets of the 10 Commandments.
The first tablet of the 10 Commandments represent man's duties to God (Commandments 1-4) whereas the second tablet of the 10 Commandments represent man's duties to mankind (Commandments 5-10). The separation of Church and State meant that government had authority based on the second tablet but not the first. Based upon the moral code of the second tablet, the separation of Church and State was never the separation of Morals and State. As this separation meant we had a right to be wrong religiously, it also meant we had not right to do what is wrong morally.
Jefferson understood what Williams was saying about religious freedom. When Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptists about 'church/state separation,' he began that paragraph saying,
"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..." [Danbury Baptist Letter, Jefferson 1802, excerpt]
Jefferson's use of the Separation of Church and State phrase of Roger Williams was prefaced with the Separation of Tablets principle that also came from Williams. Jefferson concluded this same paragraph saying,
"Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties." [Danbury Baptist Letter, Jefferson 1802, excerpt]
For Jefferson, the separation of Church and State did not allow people to excuse their public duties of morality, which is contrary to the modern secularist perspective. Jefferson understood the 2 Tablets argument of Williams and applied it in his letter to the Danbury Baptist Association as a definition of separation. Government is supposed to deal with behavior (2nd tablet) not beliefs (1st tablet). The separation of Church and State was never the separation of Morals and State.
Taking a page from the Court’s own decision in 1947 (Everson), we can now see that this letter from Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists shows that the 10 Commandments are not a violation of the Separation of Church and State but the means by which it is to be applied. Thus, the 10 Commandments are not promoting religion per se but religious freedom. The 10 Commandments represents the historic foundation of the principle of the Separation of Church and State, found within the Danbury Baptist letter.
Court Displays
So, we see that the display of the 10 Commandments is something established at the Supreme Court building itself. Past and present cases surrounding the display of the 10 Commandments in public spaces has long been in dispute but what is indisputable is that they are displayed inside and outside of the U.S. Supreme Court itself.
Display of a Frieze Inside the Supreme Court Chamber (South Wall)
Close Up of Moses with the 10 Commandments
Images on the Inside Doors of the Supreme Court Chamber
So, it is clear that it is not illegal for the display of the 10 Commandments on public buildings, public property, or other public places. If it is ok at the U.S. Supreme Court, inside and outside their own building, then it is ok elsewhere. And it is with these displays that we see not only the history of our legal foundations but the foundation of religious freedom in America.
Supreme Court Chamber with Curtain in Back
What is unclear is what is hidden behind the curtain in the back of the Court chamber. It has been rumored that the 10 Commandments are also back there.
Displays in Public Schools
Historic Documents in Mosaic with 10 Commandments
So, working with the Texian Christian Writers 20 years ago, I was able to put together a poster showing the history of religious freedom that included the 10 Commandments. This poster could be put into the classroom of any public school as it represented the history of ideas, the history of religious freedom, and a No Preference (No Establishment) stand on religion. This poster and a booklet are available to you for FREE.
Download Poster and Booklet for Free
Summary
Religious freedom is available to all, even religious atheists better known as secularists. Sadly, secularists try to use the Court to secularize government and society in violation of the No Establishment clause of the First Amendment while claiming others are doing the same thing.
As the Separation of Church and State represents a No Establishment principle (No Preference rule), so too does the history of religious freedom that is represented by the Separation of Tablets for the 10 Commandments.
The display of the 10 Commandments in Courts, other government buildings, public property, or public schools is not a violation of the Separation principle, it is a means of demonstrating the foundation of our shared religious liberty.
Comments