The President’s Religious Liberty Commission has opened a formal public comment period, allowing individuals the opportunity to submit written feedback and express their concerns regarding the Commission’s work and recommendations. The deadline for submitting comments is July 13, 2026, making this a limited window to have your voices heard. Those who value the constitutional principle of the separation of church and state should prayerfully consider participating in this process.
Below is a sample letter prepared by Seventh-day Adventist attorney Jay Cameron that may be used as a guide when contacting the Religious Liberty Commission. You may personalize it if you wish. If you are concerned about preserving genuine religious liberty and protecting freedom of conscience for all people, please take a few moments to submit your comments before the July 13, 2026 deadline. Your voice can help maintain the constitutional safeguards that have long protected the religious freedom of all Americans.
TO: THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Via EMAIL: RLC@usdoj.gov
RE: RECOMMENDATIONS OF RELIGIOUS LIBERTY COMMISSION
Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback on the recommendations of the Religious Liberty Committee submitted to President Donald J. Trump on June 26, 2026. While we are mindful of the Committee’s labors, which resulted in the 12 recommendations released June 26, certain of which we agree with, we write to voice our concerns and objections to the Committee’s first and ninth recommendations [1] and its obviously insufficient consideration of the warnings of the Founding Fathers of the dangers of a union of church and state or the many lessons of history regarding same.
The Committee recommended that the Department of Justice “issue guidance clarifying the proper understanding of the Establishment Clause and separation of church and state.” [2] At the formal release of the Committee’s recommendations on the same day, Committee Chair Dan Patrick publicly stated that “the separation of church and state is not in the constitution” and that the phrase “has no constitutional basis.” [3]
As citizens and students of history, and as Christians, we are alarmed lest the flawed and unconstitutional view of the Chair of the Committee of the so-called “proper understanding of the Establishment Clause and the separation of church and state” prove influential or worse, instructive, to the Department of Justice. If the Committee’s opinion of the so-called “proper understanding” of the Establishment Clause is the same as that of its Chair, it is apparent that its understanding is not proper, but rather improper.
Founding Father, “Father of the Constitution”, and fourth President of the United States, James Madison, contradicted Chair Dan Patrick’s claim that the separation of church and state is not in the Constitution. Madison stated that “Strongly guarded as is the separation between Religion & Govt in the Constitution of the United States, the danger of encroachment by Ecclesiastical Bodies, may be illustrated by precedents already furnished in their short history.” According to James Madison, the separation of church and state is in the Constitution. As to whether James Madison, who is the principal author of the Establishment Clause, or Dan Patrick, is the greater authority on this subject, we think it not difficult for reasonably minded people to ascertain.
Certainly, the Founding Fathers were all aware of the persecution of the Baptists, Quakers, Jews, and others in some of the colonies. They had seen firsthand the ear croppings, whippings, imprisonment, and hangings in Massachusetts and other colonies.In Europe, the persecution of the martyrs is well documented. Today we take the Bible for granted but forget that William Tyndale was executed for translating the Bible into the English language, not by atheists but by religious bigots. It was a union of church and state that suppressed speech and the freedom of the press in England. It was a union of church and state that prohibited the work of translation of the Bible, which changed the world. It was a union of church and state that necessitated his flight to Europe. It was a union of church and state that killed him.
We respectfully ask that the Department of Justice, in considering the issue of public guidance of the separation of church and state, consider the history of William Penn, founder of Pennsylvania and early Founding Father, who was repeatedly jailed for his religious faith in England. The Pennsylvania Colony became a haven, not from atheist persecutors but from religious persecutors who did not believe in the separation of church and state. The same is true of Roger Williams, founder of the colony of Rhode Island, who was ordered arrested for declaring that the civil magistrate cannot enforce the first table of the Decalogue. We ask that the Committee take into account the brutal public whipping of President Abraham Lincoln’s five-time great-grandfather, Obadiah Holmes, in the Massachusetts colony, for the “crime” of religious dissent. Obadiah Holmes was not whipped by atheists. He was whipped by Puritan bigots who did not believe in the separation of church and state. We respectfully request that the Department of Justice consider this history in the issuance of public guidance on the subject.
We are concerned that the Committee neglected to take into account the impact of the separation of church and state on the other rights codified in the First Amendment. Free speech and freedom of the press, for example, owe their flourishing in the modern world in large part to the separation of church and state in America. Prior to the protections in the First Amendment, the Roman Catholic Church for centuries maintained a list of banned books called the Index Librorum Prohibitorum. The books were subject to confiscation, and the possession of them resulted in the punishment of the owner.
Unfortunately, the Committee makes no mention of the censorship in this context of Galileo and Kepler, Kant and Locke, John Milton and Maimonedes, John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham, David Hume and Edward Gibbon, and many others, all at the behest of the Roman Papacy, which is itself a union of church and state. Free speech in the Western world is the legacy of those who risked the wrath of a unified church and state, often at the cost of their lives. We would also ask that the Department of Justice consider the repeated modern calls from the papal power today for the censorship of the internet and the suppression of free speech, contrary to the First Amendment. [4] We have no doubt that the censorship of Galileo, Kepler, Milton, and others was prosecuted under the justification of the censorship of misinformation, also.
The Roman Church was not alone in this persecution, either. We would ask the Department of Justice in its formulation of public guidance on the separation of church and state to remember the religious persecutions carried out at the behest of John Calvin in Geneva against religious dissenters such as Michael Servetus, who paid with his life for his writings and teachings. Servetus was executed by a union of church and state. We are concerned at the public statements of those who would create such a system in America. [5]
Therefore, we respectfully ask, what proper guidance can the Department of Justice hope to give to the public on the “proper understanding of the Establishment Clause and the separation of church and state” if it is directed in its object by a Committee and a Committee Chair, who has neglected to more fully analyze the reasons for the separation of church and state, or the reasons why the United States codified the disestablishment of church and state in the First Amendment in the first instance?
The reference to the wall of separation between church and state is not only mentioned by President Thomas Jefferson in the letter to the Danbury Baptists, which, of course, it is. [6] What is often left out of the narrative is that Jefferson said that he personally believed that the principle of the separation of church and state is codified in the Constitution. Therein, Jefferson wrote: “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.” [7]
James Madison wrote, “It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. We hold this prudent jealousy to be the first duty of Citizens and one of the noblest characteristics of the late Revolution. The free men of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise and entangled the question in precedents. They saw all the consequences in the principle, and they avoided the consequences by denying the principle. We revere this lesson too much soon to forget it.” [8]
Lastly, we object to the recommendation of the Committee that the Johnson Amendment be removed. As followers of Jesus Christ, we are mindful of Our Lord’s words that we “render to Caesar what is Caesar, and to God the things that are God’s.” [9] Jesus Christ established the principle of the separation of church and state and taught that what belongs to God cannot be rendered to Caesar. The application of this teaching is that religionists, ambitious for civil power, and politicians, ambitious for their endorsement, are to be kept separate in the American system of politics, as the Constitution requires. The union of church and state results in the corruption of both, a result that neither should desire, and neither can afford.
Madison stated that “The number, the industry, and the morality of the Priesthood, & the devotion of the people have been manifestly increased by the total separation of the Church from the State.” [10] And he was right. If the Johnson Amendment is removed, religionists who want civil power will publicly stump and promise their votes and congregational dollars in exchange for political favors, and the politicians will be doubtless all too eager to reciprocate in the form of legislation that the religionists desire, provided they will aid their attempts to gain office.
In his anonymous treatise published in the Boston Gazette, John Adams, later the second President of the United States, wrote that canon law was a tyrannical form of government, as was feudal law, but that the worst of all forms of governments was a union of the two. [11] And it was Madison who stated that, “In the Papal System, Government and Religion are in a manner consolidated, & that is found to be the worst of Governments.”
We respectfully request, therefore, that the Department of Justice not adopt recommendations 1 and 9 of the Committee and that it adopt recommendation 1 of the Committee that it convene a public hearing, with written and oral submissions from the public, to more comprehensively study the question of the separation of church and state in history, and in American history in particular, a study which we would enthusiastically support.
We remain, Yours truly,
[THE UNDERSIGNED]
[1] https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/president-trumps-religious-liberty-commission-delivers-historic-report-draft
[2] Ibid, [Emphasis added].
[3] https://www.chron.com/politics/article/dan-patrick-church-state-constitution-viral-22323383.php
[4] https://reclaimthenet.org/pope-francis-calls-on-social-media-platforms-to-censor-more-misinformation;
[5] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pAUkMwlWYB8; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMBiPIfx-UA
[6] https://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html
[7] https://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html – Jefferson here is clearly referring to Congress. That Congress is prohibited by the Constitution from making a union of church and state.
[8] James Madison, Memorial and Remonstrance against Religious Assessments
[9] Matthew 22:21
[10] James Madison, Letter to Robert Walsh, March 2, 1819.
[11] John Adams, Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law, 1765. https://www.masshist.org/publications/adams-papers/index.php/view/PJA01dg2
0
0
0
Thank you Mr. Jay Cameron for such a well thought out, deliberate, honest and powerful truthful declaration aided and guided by the holy spirit provided with numerous inspiring historical concrete facts as a witness and testimonial to let misguided, uninformed, inept, ignorant jesuit-trained people like Dan Patrick who intentionally abuse their positions of power for evil. God is in charge. Man is just a puny speck of dust here one day and gone the next, like the flowers and beasts that perish. God also knows who are his children and who are not. Halleluyah.
We are subject to God only and Sola Scriptural. Yes, the government has separate areas of control. But the key is separate. If not persecutions shall surely occur!
What people need to understand, especially the committee led by Dan Patrick, is that history buttresses the US Constitution’s Separation of Church and State a principle that is implied through: ”Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”
Dan Patrick’s sophistry is breath taking in its simplicity by standing on the basis of not having an explicit phrasing ” Separation of Church and State” somehow nullified it’s existence from the US Constitution.
The 30 Years War is the tragic context for the Enlightenment principles established in the American Revolution, which a product of the Enlightenment Age producing this Constitution. The contract with the people and it’s governors protects the citizenry from a myriad of abuses that stemmed mainly from the establishment of religion.
”Cuius regio, eius religio” translates to “whose realm their religion,” sparked major conflicts from the Bohemian revolt evolving into full fledged war. When one monarch such as Prince Ferdinand in Bohemia implemented this Ill-fated policy the stability of the region was at great risk and by extension the continent. The countless deaths and destruction from war, disease, famine and pestilence was a stark reminder for the philosophes focus on the importance for a new social arrangement that led to the Age of Revolution emblazoned by the 1776 US War of Independence.
The US Constitution did not exist from a vacuum. Each provision was created from the seared iron of the collective European experience that influenced a new way of governance between the powers, as representatives, and the governed.
I support this letter that requests the acknowledgement of the separation of church and state in the constitution of the United States and requests every effort to continue this separation.
For separation of church and state to work, the majority of individuals have to have a moral obligation to govern themselves. Start disciplining your children, get treatment fir alcohol and drug use, stop committing crimes or lock up habitual criminals, become responsible citizens. That’s how a free Democracy works. However our nation of peoples have gotten out of control and with the surge of population we have to tighten up our responsibilities.
I support this letter on separation of church and state
please your source of Jay Cameron is not verifiable . how did you establish it?
Essa comissão é da igreja adventista?
Thank you for spreading the word about this important issue!
Thank you Jay, for your willingness to be a voice for truth!! This letter is excellent support and an amazing template for us to share! Thank you for doing the work to compose it!!
Let not one who believes the truth, be silent now. None should be careless now; let all urge their petitions at the throne of grace, pleading the promise, “Whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do.” It is a perilous time now. If this land of boasted liberty is preparing to sacrifice every principle which enters into her constitution, making decrees to suppress religious freedom, and for the enforcing of papal falsehood and delusion, then the people of God need to present their petitions in faith to the Most High. There is every encouragement, in the promises of God, for those who put their trust in him. The prospect of being brought into personal danger and distress, need not cause despondency, but should quicken the vigor and hopes of God’s people; for the time of their peril is the season for God to grant them clearer manifestations of his power. We are not to sit in calm expectancy of oppression and tribulation, and fold our hands, doing nothing to avert the evil. Let our united cries be sent up to heaven. Pray and work, and work and pray. But let none act rashly. Learn as never before that you must be meek and lowly in heart. You must not bring a railing accusation against any, whether individuals or churches. Learn to deal with minds as Christ did. Sharp things must sometimes be spoken; but be sure that the Holy Spirit of God is abiding in your heart before you speak the clear-cut truth; then let it cut its way. You are not to do the cutting. GCDB April 13, 1891, par. 16
Concordo plenamente! Apoiado.
I am against state and religious going together
Thanks and May God bless.
I support this well documented research. and support the truth in this document.
Praise the Lord for this well prepared letter to confront error during the last days.
I Copied, signed and emailed to DOJ RLC.
May God have mercy. He is faithful and good.
Preserve Religious Liberty
I concur.
There is no greater power than love, and love does not force. Forcing people to follow a certain religion or worship system is not love, and God is the source of love. Which means, forcing a nation to follow a certain worship way, even if it looks like God would want us to do that, does NOT come from God! It is not a work from God, it’s a work that the enemy wants to do.
If America wants to be blessed, America must remain to its principles that it is based on: Liberty of Worship, Liberty of Consciousness, Liberty of Speech! This is what makes this country stand out, so why take these principles away? For what reason would we think it’s a good idea to do that?
Let people decide for themselves who to worship and how to worship. It is the Holy Spirit that convinces us of our sins and redirects us to God. Using force and obligating people to change their ways is only going to make America more rebel than what it already is! Please, open your eyes!!!
God in His Word does NOT force anyone to follow Him, to obey Him. This only flows out of love for God, and that is something PERSONAL, it is not something that can be measured by knowing if everyone is going to church on Sunday, which is a man chosen worship day to worship their god Sun, not even to worship God.
If we really want people to follow God’s word, we should start living it instead of forcing it into others. That’s the only way the Word will have true effect and bring people to the feet of Christ❤️
I agree with this letter being sent. Thank you for the template.
I agree with these sentiments and pray that together we can maintain religious liberty for all!
Excelente Información hermano, Dios te bendiga
Appreciate your devotion to religious liberty & being our voice.
Sent the email to the dept of Justice
Religious Liberty Commission Recommendations
Religious freedom please
The separation of church and state must be preserved for religious freedom! History has repeatedly shown that, without it, there will be persecution! While the term is not used in Scripture, Jesus Himself endorsed it saying that our first allegiance is to GOD (Matthew 22:21; Mark 12:17; Luke 20:25)!
I stand against Dan Patrick’s claim that separation of church and state is not constitutional. From a historical view the persecution of millions at the hands of church and state combining is power taking our 1st amendment rights away speak volumes of the danger of such an idea from Dan Patrick
Let us rsise our voices now or never.
No to union of church and state.
I heartily agree with Jay Camaron and his historical observations regarding the high wall of separation between church and state established in our great nation, America, by our founding fathers. We must not allow the mingling of ecclesiastical and political concerns, but keep our regions freedoms intact.
This letter herein embodies the core tenants of what it is to have “religious freedom” as an American, free from the tyrannical oppression (and who wants to continue that freedom) of Government and Church combining efforts to “rule” the people. As such, my support in communicating these thoughts to the committee are affirmatively expressed!
Annie Simmons
July 12, 2026
I am fully in agreement that Urgent Appeal: Defend Religious Liberty Before July 13 document above remains the same as issued by the founding fathers. I am for no change to the Constitution or the First Amendment.
State does not need to medal in GOD’S affairs. Jesus is our KING. We need to get ready, He’s coming. Amen.
Kay Nolls
Thank you so much for the thoroughly researched and accurately documented statement on the need to keep church and state separated. I totally support it while recognizing it is most necessary for the well being of our country.
I oppose Church and State Coming Together, I am a 7th Day Adventist And I want to be able to Worship Freely on The True Bible Sabbath From Friday Sundown to Saturday Sundown! It’s the 4th Commandment Remember The Sabbath Day to Keep it Holy! It’s My Constitutional Right, Religious Freedom the First Amendment! God isututied That Day at the End of Creation Week, where He Sanctified And Blessed That Day the True Bible Sabbath! So Please don’t take away our Freedom’s to Worship Freely in this Country! That’s what America was founded on! Our Freedoms ! Thank You! 🙏🙏🙏😊
Thank you to Jay Cameron for his work in putting together the above article which details some of the many reasons why church/state separation is important, how it has been a part of our understanding of its inclusion in the Constitution, & the histories of abuses that have occurred when authorities impose their own ideas of religion on those who disagree. The Religious Liberty Commission must study the lessons of history lest they make the mistake of taking away the religious freedom we now enjoy, while believing they are doing a good work. Let our citizens continue to have freedom of conscience without fear
I appreciate the opportunity to provide public comment on the draft report. Religious liberty is a foundational principle of the United States and is protected by the First Amendment, which both prohibits the establishment of religion by the government and protects the free exercise of religion. As the Commission continues its work, I encourage careful consideration of the historical development of these constitutional principles, the diversity of scholarly perspectives on their meaning, and the practical importance of protecting the rights of people of all faiths and of those with no religious affiliation. Any recommendations should be consistent with the Constitution, established legal precedent, and the equal protection of religious liberty for every individual.
History shows that the relationship between religious and political (Church and State) authority has taken many forms and shape of persecution. There are numerous well-documented cases in which union of church and state contributed to the persecution of religious minorities, dissenters, or political opponents. Some examples include:
• Spanish Inquisition (1478–1834): Established with royal approval, it investigated and punished people accused of heresy, including converted Jews and Muslims suspected of secretly practicing their former faiths. It became a symbol of religious coercion.
• Thirty Years’ War: A complex conflict driven by both religion and politics. Alliances between rulers and established churches contributed to widespread violence, displacement, and persecution in parts of Europe.
• Church of England in the 16th and 17th centuries: Under different monarchs, Catholics, Puritans, and other dissenters were at various times fined, imprisoned, or executed depending on the official religion of the state.
• Massachusetts Bay Colony: Civil authorities enforced religious conformity. Individuals such as Roger Williams and Anne Hutchinson were banished for religious dissent, and Quakers were persecuted.
These historical experiences influenced later advocates of religious liberty. Roger Williams argued for a separation between the institutions of church and civil government, believing that this protected both religion and civil society. Likewise, the Danbury Baptist Association expressed concern about religious establishment, prompting Thomas Jeffersonto write his famous 1802 letter referring to “a wall of separation between Church & State.”
Base on proving negative results of union between church and state, church and state should not be united.
The U. S. Constitution keeps government and religion separate through two key clauses in the First Amendment: the Establishment Clause, which bars Congress from making any law “respecting an establishment of religion,” and the Free Exercise Clause, which protects the right to practice faith without government interference. It safeguards religious groups from political control, allowing them to flourish independently. By keeping state power out of religious doctrine and religious authority out of lawmaking, the Constitution ensures equal treatment for believers and nonbelievers alike, preserves individual liberty of conscience, and reduces the kind of sectarian conflict that shaped much of early American history.
As a Christian, I firmly support the protection of religious liberty and freedom of conscience for every person.
The Bible teaches that worship must be a free choice of the heart and should never be compelled by the government. Jesus said, “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s” (Matthew 22:21). This establishes a clear distinction between the role of civil government and the authority that belongs to God alone.
When human authorities attempted to interfere with obedience to God, the apostles declared, “We ought to obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29). This affirms that every person’s conscience belongs to God and should never be controlled by the state.
Scripture also teaches that genuine faith cannot be forced. God invites people to choose freely: “Choose you this day whom ye will serve” (Joshua 24:15). True worship and obedience come from a willing heart, not from coercion.
For these reasons, I respectfully urge our leaders to continue protecting religious liberty and freedom of conscience for all people, without government favoritism toward or against any religion. A free society safeguards the right of every individual to worship according to their convictions—or not to worship at all—without government pressure.
May God grant wisdom to our nation’s leaders as they uphold justice, protect individual liberty, and preserve the fundamental right of every person to follow the dictates of conscience.
If God be for us, who can be against us! Romans 8:31
Dios en su palabra no lo aconseja
Advent Messenger
News and commentary from a Biblical world view on current events, top stories, social trends and political and religious events.
Urgent Appeal: Defend Religious Liberty Before July 13
July 7, 2026 by Andy Roman 7 Comments
The President’s Religious Liberty Commission has opened a formal public comment period, allowing individuals the opportunity to submit written feedback and express their concerns regarding the Commission’s work and recommendations. The deadline for submitting comments is July 13, 2026, making this a limited window to have your voices heard. Those who value the constitutional principle of the separation of church and state should prayerfully consider participating in this process.
Below is a sample letter prepared by Seventh-day Adventist attorney Jay Cameron that may be used as a guide when contacting the Religious Liberty Commission. You may personalize it if you wish. If you are concerned about preserving genuine religious liberty and protecting freedom of conscience for all people, please take a few moments to submit your comments before the July 13, 2026 deadline. Your voice can help maintain the constitutional safeguards that have long protected the religious freedom of all Americans.
TO: THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Via EMAIL: RLC@usdoj.gov
RE: RECOMMENDATIONS OF RELIGIOUS LIBERTY COMMISSION
Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback on the recommendations of the Religious Liberty Committee submitted to President Donald J. Trump on June 26, 2026. While we are mindful of the Committee’s labors, which resulted in the 12 recommendations released June 26, certain of which we agree with, we write to voice our concerns and objections to the Committee’s first and ninth recommendations [1] and its obviously insufficient consideration of the warnings of the Founding Fathers of the dangers of a union of church and state or the many lessons of history regarding same.
The Committee recommended that the Department of Justice “issue guidance clarifying the proper understanding of the Establishment Clause and separation of church and state.” [2] At the formal release of the Committee’s recommendations on the same day, Committee Chair Dan Patrick publicly stated that “the separation of church and state is not in the constitution” and that the phrase “has no constitutional basis.” [3]
As citizens and students of history, and as Christians, we are alarmed lest the flawed and unconstitutional view of the Chair of the Committee of the so-called “proper understanding of the Establishment Clause and the separation of church and state” prove influential or worse, instructive, to the Department of Justice. If the Committee’s opinion of the so-called “proper understanding” of the Establishment Clause is the same as that of its Chair, it is apparent that its understanding is not proper, but rather improper.
Founding Father, “Father of the Constitution”, and fourth President of the United States, James Madison, contradicted Chair Dan Patrick’s claim that the separation of church and state is not in the Constitution. Madison stated that “Strongly guarded as is the separation between Religion & Govt in the Constitution of the United States, the danger of encroachment by Ecclesiastical Bodies, may be illustrated by precedents already furnished in their short history.” According to James Madison, the separation of church and state is in the Constitution. As to whether James Madison, who is the principal author of the Establishment Clause, or Dan Patrick, is the greater authority on this subject, we think it not difficult for reasonably minded people to ascertain.
Certainly, the Founding Fathers were all aware of the persecution of the Baptists, Quakers, Jews, and others in some of the colonies. They had seen firsthand the ear croppings, whippings, imprisonment, and hangings in Massachusetts and other colonies.
In Europe, the persecution of the martyrs is well documented. Today we take the Bible for granted but forget that William Tyndale was executed for translating the Bible into the English language, not by atheists but by religious bigots. It was a union of church and state that suppressed speech and the freedom of the press in England. It was a union of church and state that prohibited the work of translation of the Bible, which changed the world. It was a union of church and state that necessitated his flight to Europe. It was a union of church and state that killed him.
We respectfully ask that the Department of Justice, in considering the issue of public guidance of the separation of church and state, consider the history of William Penn, founder of Pennsylvania and early Founding Father, who was repeatedly jailed for his religious faith in England. The Pennsylvania Colony became a haven, not from atheist persecutors but from religious persecutors who did not believe in the separation of church and state. The same is true of Roger Williams, founder of the colony of Rhode Island, who was ordered arrested for declaring that the civil magistrate cannot enforce the first table of the Decalogue. We ask that the Committee take into account the brutal public whipping of President Abraham Lincoln’s five-time great-grandfather, Obadiah Holmes, in the Massachusetts colony, for the “crime” of religious dissent. Obadiah Holmes was not whipped by atheists. He was whipped by Puritan bigots who did not believe in the separation of church and state. We respectfully request that the Department of Justice consider this history in the issuance of public guidance on the subject.
We are concerned that the Committee neglected to take into account the impact of the separation of church and state on the other rights codified in the First Amendment. Free speech and freedom of the press, for example, owe their flourishing in the modern world in large part to the separation of church and state in America. Prior to the protections in the First Amendment, the Roman Catholic Church for centuries maintained a list of banned books called the Index Librorum Prohibitorum. The books were subject to confiscation, and the possession of them resulted in the punishment of the owner.
Unfortunately, the Committee makes no mention of the censorship in this context of Galileo and Kepler, Kant and Locke, John Milton and Maimonedes, John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham, David Hume and Edward Gibbon, and many others, all at the behest of the Roman Papacy, which is itself a union of church and state. Free speech in the Western world is the legacy of those who risked the wrath of a unified church and state, often at the cost of their lives. We would also ask that the Department of Justice consider the repeated modern calls from the papal power today for the censorship of the internet and the suppression of free speech, contrary to the First Amendment. [4] We have no doubt that the censorship of Galileo, Kepler, Milton, and others was prosecuted under the justification of the censorship of misinformation, also.
The Roman Church was not alone in this persecution, either. We would ask the Department of Justice in its formulation of public guidance on the separation of church and state to remember the religious persecutions carried out at the behest of John Calvin in Geneva against religious dissenters such as Michael Servetus, who paid with his life for his writings and teachings. Servetus was executed by a union of church and state. We are concerned at the public statements of those who would create such a system in America. [5]
Therefore, we respectfully ask, what proper guidance can the Department of Justice hope to give to the public on the “proper understanding of the Establishment Clause and the separation of church and state” if it is directed in its object by a Committee and a Committee Chair, who has neglected to more fully analyze the reasons for the separation of church and state, or the reasons why the United States codified the disestablishment of church and state in the First Amendment in the first instance?
The reference to the wall of separation between church and state is not only mentioned by President Thomas Jefferson in the letter to the Danbury Baptists, which, of course, it is. [6] What is often left out of the narrative is that Jefferson said that he personally believed that the principle of the separation of church and state is codified in the Constitution. Therein, Jefferson wrote: “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.” [7]
James Madison wrote, “It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. We hold this prudent jealousy to be the first duty of Citizens and one of the noblest characteristics of the late Revolution. The free men of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise and entangled the question in precedents. They saw all the consequences in the principle, and they avoided the consequences by denying the principle. We revere this lesson too much soon to forget it.” [8]
Lastly, we object to the recommendation of the Committee that the Johnson Amendment be removed. As followers of Jesus Christ, we are mindful of Our Lord’s words that we “render to Caesar what is Caesar, and to God the things that are God’s.” [9] Jesus Christ established the principle of the separation of church and state and taught that what belongs to God cannot be rendered to Caesar. The application of this teaching is that religionists, ambitious for civil power, and politicians, ambitious for their endorsement, are to be kept separate in the American system of politics, as the Constitution requires. The union of church and state results in the corruption of both, a result that neither should desire, and neither can afford.
Madison stated that “The number, the industry, and the morality of the Priesthood, & the devotion of the people have been manifestly increased by the total separation of the Church from the State.” [10] And he was right. If the Johnson Amendment is removed, religionists who want civil power will publicly stump and promise their votes and congregational dollars in exchange for political favors, and the politicians will be doubtless all too eager to reciprocate in the form of legislation that the religionists desire, provided they will aid their attempts to gain office.
In his anonymous treatise published in the Boston Gazette, John Adams, later the second President of the United States, wrote that canon law was a tyrannical form of government, as was feudal law, but that the worst of all forms of governments was a union of the two. [11] And it was Madison who stated that, “In the Papal System, Government and Religion are in a manner consolidated, & that is found to be the worst of Governments.”
We respectfully request, therefore, that the Department of Justice not adopt recommendations 1 and 9 of the Committee and that it adopt recommendation 1 of the Committee that it convene a public hearing, with written and oral submissions from the public, to more comprehensively study the question of the separation of church and state in history, and in American history in particular, a study which we would enthusiastically support.
We remain, Yours truly,
I totally agree and support this letter acknowledging separation of church and state which is in the constitution of the United States, and I request that this separation must be uphold and to be continued without any amendments or changes to it.
For all followers of Christ, who Himself, simply bade us follow Him, faith is important, even further free practice of that faith is all encompassing. Thank you for this timely and insightfully profound historical ‘religious liberty,’ defense review. May The Lord continue to be with you, your family, us and our family as we all seek to follow Him!
Thank you. This information is great. We must not be silent on this matters.
I could not improve upon the letter written by Mr Jay Cameron and agree with it wholeheartedly! We have thanked God for the United States position on keeping separate religion and politics. History demonstrates positions contrary to this results in persecution. I agree with our countries founders that each individual be free to follow their conscience in religious matters.
I stand for freedom of conscience, as GOD assigned to man from the moment of Creation!
The separation of church and state helps protect one of our most precious God-given freedoms—the freedom of conscience. Every person should have the right to worship God, or choose not to, according to their own beliefs. Throughout Scripture, God invites people to follow Him but does not force anyone to worship or serve Him. Likewise, no government should compel or prohibit religious belief or practice. Protecting religious liberty means preserving the constitutional rights that allow people of all faiths, or no faith, to live according to their convictions. Leave the Constitution alone and continue to safeguard the freedoms it was designed to protect.
Beverly Peck
I could not have said anything better than what has already been said about this situation. This is the top priority in our family that we continue to have separation of the government from our individual worship practices. For those who are considering signing a change , please talk to god about it first.
May God fill the minds of these people to the truth according to His scriptures and let’s remember all those who gave there life for freedom and how it all began