Protecting church from the state

Editor:

Ever since the serpent convinced Adam and Eve that they should ignore God and his rules, men have been trying to destroy his influence on the world.

Notable examples have been Nero, Hitler, Stalin, Mao and the ACLU. Thus far, none of these has succeeded and, while they may have what appears to be some temporary degree of success, neither will the attempts of the 9th Short-Circuited Court of Appeals be successful in the long run.

The phrase, “wall of separation between Church and State” is rightly attributed to Thomas Jefferson, but, ever since the Supreme Court’s 1947 Everson case decision, it has been misconstrued, misused and misapplied.

In 1801, the Baptists Association of Danbury, Conn., wrote to President Jefferson their congratulations on his election to the presidency, but expressing, at the same time, their concern that the government might try to take away our freedom of religion.

He wrote back for them not to fear, the government would not meddle in church affairs as a great wall of separation existed between church and state.

So this “wall” was to protect the church from the state, not the reverse.

The First Amendment and the concept of separation was included in the Bill of Rights by Christians, not by atheists trying to shut the church out of the public arena.

The writings, speeches, and habits of the vast majority of the framers indicate plainly that their plan was for a neutrality toward one Christian denomination as opposed to another, not a neutrality tending to become a hostility toward religion as the ACLU and other anti-God forces choose to apply it today.

To insinuate otherwise is to ignore plain evidence.

William J. McChesney

New Galilee, Pa.