Co-operation of Church and State - Part I
In American Legislation
by Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J.
Secularist leaders in growing numbers are telling the people that America
needs an entire separation of Church and State. 
Organizations like the American Humanist Association and Protestants and Other
Americans United for Separation of Church and State are symptomatic of this
frame of mind which, if sufficiently articulate, would threaten the juridical
status of Catholicism in the United States. It is recommended, for example,
that the public school, nonpartisan, nonsectarian, efficient and democratic,
should be obligatory for all of the children of all the people. 
In answering these radicals we can argue from theoretical principles,
showing a priori that a complete dichotomy between Church and State
would remove the moral basis of human authority and consequently destroy the
fabric of civil society. Another approach is the existential method of examining
the history of our country to see what evidence there is for harmony between
Church and State which has contributed to the peace and prosperity of America
in the past and should, therefore, promote the same results in the future.
Following the historical method, we shall examine the outstanding
evidences of Church and State cooperation in the United States from the origin
of the republic to the present day. With such a broad field to cover, it
seemed best to limit the study to three major areas of public interestlegislation,
the courts and education, and further to confine these to religio-civil collaboration
on a national scale, whether emanating from a national body like the American
Congress, or affecting the whole nation, like the decisions of the Supreme
Court. Subsequent articles will treat the judiciary and educational phases
of the question.
Church and State alliance in the field of legislation has taken
on a variety of forms. It may have begun with some action by a minority religious
body successfully brining pressure on the government to enact laws which catered
to its own sectarian prejudices and needs; or the initiative was taken by
religious groups in general, and sometimes by religious-minded men in the
government, who effectively influenced national legislation for the spiritual
welfare of this country, without looking to the specific interest of any of
Sectarian Influence on National Legislation
1. Anti-Lottery Crusade
The campaign against public gambling on a national scale began as an organized
opposition to the Louisiana lottery which was chartered by the state legislature
in 1868 for twenty-five years. Church forces succeeded in preventing a renewal
of the franchise in 1893; but the lottery interests were so powerful and widespread
that nothing short of a stringent national law was considered adequate to
curb this dangerous socially entrenched activity. Spearheaded by the clergy
of Boston, the anti-lottery crusade enlisted the cooperation of the highest
church officials in the country, including thirty-eight bishops of the Episcopal
Church. Passed by the Senate, the bill was held up in the House until an
intensive propaganda in the religious press of the country finally succeeded
in having the Anti-Lottery Act passed by Congress in 1895. The opening clause
of the Act forbids any paper, purporting to be a ticket
the event of a lottery
offering prizes dependent on lot or chance
to be brought
into the United States, or carried by the mails of the United
States or transferred from one State to another, under heavy penalties of
fine and imprisonment. 
It is said there has been no event our history where the influence of the
Churches and their clergy has been more effectively secured in the interests
of wise social legislation. 
In 1902 the United States Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the
Act and thus laid the basis for later legislation which excludes obscene literature
from interstate commerce.
2. Protection of Christian Science
The legislative debate over Christian Science began shortly after Mrs. Baker
Eddy published her textbook, Science and Health with a Key to the Scriptures,
in 1875. According to Mrs. Eddy, sickness is unreal, and healing is accomplished
by spiritual understanding, without medicine or surgery. Doctors opposed
the doctrine as harmful to their profession and a danger to society. But
the Scientists defended themselves so successfully in the courts that by 1949
all the States in the country had legalized the public practice of Christian
Science as a healing art. Depending on the legal stand of their opponents,
the followers of Mrs. Eddy introduced a variety of bills in the legislature,
but always with a single end in view: legal immunity from prosecution for
rejecting medical treatment and relying only on healing through the mind.
A typical federal law for the District of Columbia (1928), regulating the
practice of medicine, states, The provisions of this Act shall not be construed
to persons treating human ailments by prayer or spiritual means,
as an exercise of enjoyment of religious freedom. 
The Ohio Statute (1949) takes a different approach, but comes to the same
thing, providing that treatment of human ills through prayer alone by a practitioner
of the Christian Science Church, in accordance with the tenets and creed of
such church, shall not be regarded as the practice of medicine. 
3.The Volstead Act
Protestant opposition to alcoholic beverages goes back to John Wesley, the
founder of Methodism, who forbade his followers to drink, sell or even to
handle that liquid fire. Led by the Methodists, American churchmen promoted
the organization of a National Temperance Society (1865), and the National
Prohibition Party, committed to the total prohibition of the manufacturing,
importation and traffic of intoxicating beverages. 
Five years before the Volstead Act was passed, the liquor dealers of the country
publicly identified their chief opponents. It is only necessary, they said,
to read the list of those persons who are active in the present propaganda
for legislative prohibition to realize that it is the Methodist Church which
is obsessed with the ambition to gain control of the government. 
After prohibition was repealed, the Methodist Episcopal Church declared it
has accepted no discharge in the war for a saloonless nation free from the
denomination of legalized liquor. 
In its official statement of doctrine, the Methodist Church (membership 10
million) reasserts its long-established conviction that intoxicating liquor
cannot be legalized without sin
Therefore, to be true to itself the
Church must be militant in opposition to the liquor traffic. 
4.Pacifists and Conscientious Objectors
The legal status of conscientious objectors to military service shows the
extent to which the American government respects the religious convictions
of its citizens; it is also a graphic example of the power of organized churches
to influence legislation in their favor.
The Quakers were pioneers in concerted opposition to military
service. In 1865 they secured the incorporation of an exception clause into
the National Mandatory Enrollment Act, which seems to have been the first
recognition by the federal government of a religious scruple against war.
Section 17 of the Act provided that members of religious denominations, who
shall by oath declare that they are conscientiously opposed to the bearing
of arms, and who are prohibited from doing so by the rules and articles of
faith and practice of said religious denominations, shall when drafted into
the military service, be considered non-combatants, and shall be assigned
by the Secretary of War to duty in the hospitals, or to the care of freedmen,
or shall pay the sum of three hundred dollars to such person as the Secretary
of War shall designate to receive it, to be applied to the benefit of the
sick and wounded soldiers. 
After the Civil War, conscription was not considered necessary
until Americas entrance into World War I in 1917. At that time Congress
exempted the members of any well-recognized sect or organization whose existing
creed or principles forbid its members to be participate in war in any form,
but no person shall be exempted from service in any capacities that the President
shall declare to be non-combatant. 
While this clause was liberally interpreted, there had to be a limit to its
extension; and consequently those who refused to engage in non-combatant services
were court-martialed. It is estimated that 450 men were imprisoned on this
score, mainly members of religious groups which felt it was wrong to promote
the war effort in any capacity. A more serious objection against the law
was that it made no provision for individual pacifists in those denominations
which had not adopted a definite policy prohibiting participation in war.
Between the two World Wars, the Baptists, Methodists and others successfully
promoted a modification of the existing law. As it now reads, military conscription
does not require any person to be subject to combatant training and service
in the land or naval forces of the United States who, by reason of religious
training and belief, is conscientiously opposed to participation in war in
any form. 
5.American Representation at the Vatican
The history of American representation at the Vatican covers two periods:
from 1848 to 1867, when the United States had a fully-accredited diplomat
at the papal court, and 1939 to 1950, when Myron C. Taylor was President Roosevelts
personal representative to the Holy Father. Both periods are significant:
as indicating a certain degree of cooperation between this country and the
Holy See, but more pertinent to the present study, as an object lesson in
Protestant influence which cut short the American delegation.
Jacob L. Martin, a Catholic convert, was appointed to the Roman legation
in 1848 after formal approval by Congress. There is one consideration,
his instructions read, which you ought always to keep in view in your intercourse
with the Papal authorities. Most, if not all, the Governments which have
Diplomatic Representatives at Rome are connected with the Pope as the head
of the Catholic Church. In this respect the Government of the United States
occupies an entirely different position. It possesses no power whatever over
the question of religion. All denominations of Christians stand on the same
footing in this countryand every man enjoys the inestimable right of worshipping
his God according to the dictates of his own conscience. Your efforts therefore
will be devoted exclusively to the cultivation of the most friendly civil
relations with the Papal government. 
Contrary to the expectations of critics, the twenty years of
American Vatican relationship passed without serious difficulty, and with
recognized benefits to the United States. The refusal by the Washington Monument
Association in 1852 of a block of marble for the monument sent by the Pope
was an exception to the general rule. Yet as early as 1850 sectarians in
the States protested against the restriction of Protestant worship in Rome,
and finally this issue terminated the American ministry to the Holy See.
Actually the papal authorities permitted non-Catholic services to be held
regularly on the American legation property. Later, when the number of worshipers
increased, apartments were leased outside the legation where, the United States
minister reported, our American fellow-citizens have assembled for public
without let or hindrance. 
But the facts were misrepresented in the secular press, so that in 1867 Congress
refused to appropriate any more money for the American delegation in Rome.
The more recent experiment in American-Papal relations is common
knowledge. One detail, however, which should be emphasized is the theoretical
basis for the Protestant opposition to Myron Tayors presence at the Vatican.
During the years in which the Federal Council of Churches protested against
the appointment, it insisted that we are not speaking against Roman Catholicism
as a form of Christian faith worship
But we find it necessary to make
a sharp distinction between the Roman Catholic religion and the political
power exercised by the Roman Catholic hierarchy for its own institutional
It was this unproved accusation of the Churchs political aims, backed by
thirty-odd million members in the Federal Council, which ended Americas second
diplomatic alliance with the Vatican.
As an anticlimax, on October 20, 1951, President Truman nominated
Gen. Mark W. Clark to be United States Ambassador to the Vatican, resuming
the formal relations which ended in 1868. This provoked a storm of protest,
from the successor of the Federal Council, the National Council of the Churches
of Christ, and from the American Jewish Congress. Clark withdrew after members
of Congress raised a legal technicality, that a man in military service is
not eligible for the post of ambassador.
Legislation Affecting the Spiritual Welfare of the Nation
1.The Churches and Slavery
It is a matter of history that the single largest influence in brining about
the abolition of slavery was the concerted action of a dozen religious denominations
during the first half of the nineteenth century. Feeling over the question
ran so high that it cause a permanent split among the Baptists (1845) and
the Presbyterians (1861), and a Methodist schism that lasted ninety-five years
(1844-1939) dividing the sects into Northern and Southern denominations.
As early as 1787 the Presbyterian Synods of New York and Philadelphia recommended
to all their people, to use the most prudent measures
in the counties
where they live, to procure eventually the final abolition of
slavery in America. 
The American Anti-Slavery Society was established in 1833 by representative
Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Methodists and Baptists, with the avowed
purpose of influencing Congress to abolish slavery. In 1835 the Quakers
petitioned Congress to outlaw domestic slave trade, which prompted Senator
Calhoun to complain that petitions do not come as heretofore, singly and
far apart, but in vast numbers from soured and agitated communities. 
About the same time a memorial, two hundred feet in length, was presented
to Congress, bearing the names of 3,050 New England clergymen and begging,
In the name of Almighty God, that slavery be abolished. In a few months
125 distinct remonstrances were sent by the ministers of New England. At
first the congressional reaction was unfavorable. A committee of the House
of Representatives recommended that all petitions relating
to the subject
of slavery or the abolition of slavery, shall, without being either printed
or referred, be laid upon the table, and
no further action whatever
shall be had thereon. 
John Quincy Adams denounced the House measure as a direct violation of the
Constitution of the United States, because it contradicted the provision
of the Bill of Rights guaranteeing the right of petition which, he said, is
coextensive with the liberty of speech. 
Nine days before the first Emancipation Proclamation (September 23, 1862),
Abraham Lincoln received a delegation of clergymen from Chicago who believed
that the country is now suffering under Divine Judgments for the sin of oppression,
and favored the adoption of a memorial to the President of the United States,
urging him to issue a decree of emancipation. 
In the light of its background; it is not surprising that the final proclamation
(December 18, 1865) was couched in religious terms, invoking the considerate
judgment of mankind and the gracious favor of Almighty God. 
2.Religious Observances Authorized by Congress
The number of religious observances proclaimed by the Presidents of the United
States and at least permitted by Congress runs to over a hundred. Especially
in times of crisis or national peril, Americans have come to expect the chief
executive to announce a special day of prayer or fasting for the entire nation.
During the cholera epidemic, for example, President Taylor ordered that all
business be suspended on a certain day (First Friday, August, 1849), and
recommended that the people assemble in their respective places of worship
to implore the Almighty
to stay the destroying hand which is now
lifted up against us. 
At a critical stage in World War II, President Roosevelt issued a proclamation,
setting aside September 8, 1940, as a day of prayer, and urging the people
of the United States to implore of God to grant to this land and to the
troubled world a righteous, enduring peace. 
The most significant of these religious proclamations because
of its long history and explicit authorization by Congress is associated with
Thanksgiving Day. A resolution to observe a national Thanksgiving Day was
introduced by Elias Boudinot in the first Congress after the adoption of the
Federal Constitution. After some opposition, a bill was passed by both Houses
authorizing President Washington to recommend to the people of the United
States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging
with grateful hearts the many signal favors of Almighty God. 
Breathing a deeply religious spirit, Washingtons proclamation (October 3,
1789) began with the observation that it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge
the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits,
and humbly to implore His protection and favor. In pursuance of the request
of Congress, he assigned a special day to be devoted by the people of these
States to the service of that great and glorious Being, who is the beneficent
Author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then
all unite in rendering unto Him our humble and sincere thanks
that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications
to the great Lord and Ruler of nations, and beseech Him to pardon our national
and other transgressions. 
From Washington to Eisenhower there was among the presidents
only one who was known as opposed to carrying out the wishes of the First
Congress for an annual Thanksgiving Day proclamation. For conscientious
reasons, Thomas Jefferson broke with the tradition of Washington and Adams
on the propriety of the Federal Governments establishing days of national
prayer and thanksgiving. His explanation:
I consider the government of the United States as interdicted by the Constitution
from intermeddling with religious institutions, their doctrines, disciplines,
I do not believe it is for the interest of religion to
invite the civil magistrate to direct its exercises, its discipline, or its
doctrines; nor of the religious societies, that the General Government should
be invested with the power of effecting any uniformity of time or matter among
them. Fasting and prayer are religious exercise; the enjoining them an act
of discipline. Every religious society has a right to determine for itself
the times for these exercise, and the objects proper for them, according to
their own particular tenets; and this right can never be safer than in their
own hands, where the Constitution has deposited it. 
It should be remembered that Jefferson was a confirmed Deist, who openly
denied the Christian revelation, although in his private life he showed a
high admiration for the person and teachings of Jesus, whom he regarded as
the greatest of all the reformers. 
Abraham Lincoln made Thanksgiving Day a permanent American institution,
in gratitude and praise to Almighty God, the beneficent Creator and Ruler
of the Universe, when the citizens of the country should reverently humble
themselves in the dust and from thence offer up penitent and fervent prayers
and supplications to the Great Dispenser of Events. 
The most recent legislation on the subject was a joint resolution of Congress,
approved December 26, 1941, designating the fourth Thursday in November of
each year as Thanksgiving Day.
3.Federal Approval of Chaplaincies
Among the clearest proofs that the State recognizes the importance of religion
in the lives of its citizens is the Federal Governments appointment of chaplains
for the Army and Navy, the Senate and House of Representatives. The practice
began during the Revolutionary War when the Continental Congress in 1775 provided
for the pay of chaplains, and the following year authorized the appointment
of ministers of the Gospel as chaplains in the army. In 1777 George Washington
succeeded in obtaining separate chaplains for individual regiments, instead
of one for each brigade, in order to give every Regiment an Opportunity of
having a chaplain of their own religious Sentiments. 
Writing from Valley Forge, he directed that Divine service be performed every
Sunday at eleven oclock, for to the distinguished character of a Patriot,
it should be our highest glory to add the more distinguished character of
a Christian. 
This spirit has remained substantially unchanged. The Army
Regulations issued by the War Department in 1937 instructed the chaplains
to hold appropriate religious services for the benefit of the command, to
serve as friends, counselors and guides without discrimination
of creed or sect, and strive to promote morality, religions and good order. 
In 1941 Congress appropriated the sum of $12,816,880 to build 604 chapels
in Army posts, camps and stations throughout the country, where members of
the armed forcesCatholic, Protestant and Jewishmight worship in a dignified
setting. Described as one of the most interesting cases of Church-State
co-operation in the United States, this appropriation met with practically
no opposition from any quarter.
Chaplaincies in Congress have an equally impressive history.
Jacob Duché, an Episcopalian, was the first chaplain elected by Congress (July
9, 1776), receiving a stipend of $150 for his services of opening congressional
sessions every day with prayer. In 1789 the Senate and House voted to appoint
one chaplain each, of different denominations. For several decades their
duties included a sermon in the Hall of Representatives on Sunday morning,
besides visiting the members detained from their seats by sickness, and
attending on the funeral solemnities in the event of a death among the members. 
By 1887 the Sunday sermon was dropped after the privilege was abused by certain
Apparently the only voice of criticism of congressional chaplaincies was
James Madison, who protested that such practice establishes a religious worship
for the national representatives, to be performed by Ministers of religion.
It is also a palpable violation of equal rights (since) the tenets of the
chaplains elected (by the majority) shut the door of worship against the members
whose creeds and consciences forbid a participation in that of the majority
Could a Catholic clergyman ever hope to be elected a Chaplain? 
Madison was a poor prophet because at least two Catholic priests have served
as chaplains to Congress, though one of them, Charles Pise, had to defend
his position against nativist opponents. I acknowledge no allegiance to
the Popes temporal power, Pise declared. I am no subject of his dominionsI
have sworn no fealty to his thronebut I am, as all American Catholics glory
to be, independent, devoted to freedom, to unqualified toleration, to republican
In current practice, each session of both Houses of Congress is opened with
prayer by the respective chaplain, invoking divine assistance on the subsequent
deliberations. An average length for the invocation is about 150 words, frequently
ending on a Christian note, e.g., Hear us (O God) in Christs name. 
The American governments respect for clerical rights and privileges goes
back to colonial times. Recent examples are the reduced clergy fares legalized
by the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887, and the O.P.A. exceptions for the
clergy as regards tire and gas restrictions in the 1940s. More significant,
however, because of its deep implications is the exemption of clergy and religious
from active military service.
As originally drafted in 1940, the Burke-Wadsworth Bill provided
only for the deferment of regularly ordained ministers of religion. Monsignor
(now Bishop) Michael J. Ready appeared before the House committee to protest,
stating that if conscription was necessary it should provide for a complete
exemption of the clergy, not a mere deferment, along with students for the
priesthood and members of religious communities. This was in contrast to
the general Protestant feeling that theological students as such should not
appeal to exemption, and a widespread opinion that ministers as ministers
should not be automatically exempted. A special problem arose as to whether
lay brothers in Catholic communities qualified as regular ministers of religion.
Washington decided in their favor after Cardinal Mooney certified that according
to Church Law, lay brothers are not only bound to the same obligations of
the clerical state, but they also enjoy the very same privileges as clerics. 
In its present form, the law provides that, regularly or duly
ordained ministers of religion
and students preparing for the ministry
who are satisfactorily pursuing full-time courses of instruction in
recognized theological or divinity schools, or who are satisfactorily leading
to their entrance into recognized theological or divinity schools in which
they have been pre-enrolled, shall be exempt from (military) training and
There has been a steadily wider application of the original basic
law. In 1940 the law exempted students for the ministry, provided they attended
divinity schools, recognized as such, for more than one year prior to 1940.
Eight years later, the one-year limit was removed. In 1954 not only divinity
students, but also those in pre-theological studies were exempted. After
litigation in the lower courts, the Jehovahs Witnesses were upheld by the
Supreme Court as ministers of religion, which means that nominally every member
of the Watch Tower Society is exempt from military service.
5.Religious Mottoes Legislated by the Government
The most publicized acknowledgment of the nations dependence
on God is the religious motto authorized by Congress for American coins, which
dates from the Civil War. The most recent, on another wide scale, is the
postal cancellation, Pray for Peace, approved by the 84th Congress
During the Civil War the government received so many urgings
from religious groups that the Secretary of the Treasury, Salmon P. Chase,
instructed the director of the mint that some device be prepared without
delay with a motto expressing in a few words the recognition of the trust
of our people in God. 
In 1864 the present motto, In God We Trust, appeared for the first time
on American coinsthe two-cent piece issued April 22. Its choice was suggested
by the director of the mint who reported to the treasury department that we
claim to be a Christian Nationwhy should we not vindicate our character by
honoring the God of Nations in the exercise of our political sovereignty as
a Nation? Our national coinage should do this. Its legends and devices should
declare our trust in Godin Him who is King of Kings and Lord of Lords. 
By Act of Congress dated March 3, 1865, it was enacted that In addition to
the devices and legends upon the gold, silver, and other coins of the United
States, it shall be lawful for the director of the mint, with the approval
of the Secretary of the Treasury, to cause the motto In God we trust to
be placed upon such coins hereafter to be issued as shall admit of such legend
Taken for granted for forty years, the motto raised a question
of principle when President Theodore Roosevelt ordered the removal of the
inscription, on the occasion of a new coin issue. When reproached for his
action by church leaders, he stated that there was no legal warrant for putting
the motto on the coins. This was a mistake, since it had been authorized
by Congress, though not made mandatory. Roosevelts reason was a religious
scruple, namely, my firm conviction that to put such a motto on coins
effect irreverence which comes close to sacrilege. Let it be inscribed
on our national monuments, in our temples of justice
wherever it will
tend to arouse and inspire a lofty emotion. But not on coins and postage
Finally the matter came before Congress which, by another Act, this time mandatory
(May 18, 1908), directed that, The motto In God We Trust
be inscribed upon all such gold and silver coins
as heretofore. 
During the past year the United States Senate concurred in a
previous approval by the House for the slogan cancellation, Pray for Peace,
to be used by every first and second class postoffice in the United States.
The bill authorizing this slogan was introduced by Representative Rabaut of
Michigan who also was the author of the amendment inserting the words under
God in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. Apart from its intrinsic value
as a national prayer for peace, the motto assumes special importance in view
of the opposition it had to overcome. Slogan cancellations presently in use
are paid for by interested organizations. Under the present bill, the federal
government was being asked not merely to permit the exhortation to prayer,
but to finance the production of the necessary dies. The postal department
opposed the bill on financial grounds, and perhaps also as a matter of principle.
Yet the bill was passed (June 11, 1956), and the government purchased the
cancellation dies, one each for 10,000 post offices throughout the country.
Commenting on the motto, Postmaster General Summerfield declared that it epitomizes
the highest aspirations of the American people. I believe that by repeating
this message on millions of letters
we will reaffirm our faith in prayer
to achieve the Nations most cherished hopeeverlasting world peace. 
The question of Church and State in America is complicated by
the wide divergence in religious opinions, which prevents the Churches from
offering a united front on matters of vital importance to the nations spiritual
welfare. It is further harassed by the agitation of a vocal minority which
appeals to the Constitution to secularize the American way of life. Both
problems find at least a partial solution in the past and current history
of our governments legislation, which has been remarkably successful in protecting
the interests of even the most erratic sects, and whose tradition of dependence
on God and appeal to His aid is a ready answer to the godless secularist.
Scottish Rite News Bulletin, June, 1956, p. 8.
Ibid. In this connection, also read Father Virgin Blums Should the
POAU Be Unopposed (The Homiletic and Pastoral Review, October, 1956, pp.
Samuel H. Woodbridge, The Overthrow of the Louisiana Lottery, 1921
(Supplement pp. 1,2.
Anson P. Stokes, Church and State in the United States, New York.
1950, Vol. II, p. 38???
Table of Statutory Provisions Favorable to Christian Science or to Freedom
Concerning Health, Boston, p. 10.
Stokes, op. cit., p. 325.
Luther A. Weigle, American Idealism, New Haven, 1928. p. 208.
H.U. Faulkner, The Quest for Social Justice, 1898-1914. New York,
1931. p. 224.
Doctrines and Disciplines of the Methodist Episcopal Church, 1936.
Discipline of the Methodist Church, 1952. p. 639.
Carl Zollman, American Church Law, St. Paul, Minn., 1933, p.
Federal Council Bulletin, September, 1940, p. 6.
Selective Training and Service Act of 1940, Sec. 5-g.
Leo F. Stock, United States Ministers to the Papal States, Washington,
1933, pp. 2-3.
Federal Council Bulletin, January, 1945.
Robert E. Thompson, History of the Presbyterian Churches in the United
States, New York, p. 363.
S. E. Morison and H.S. Commager. The Growth of the American Republic,
New York, 1936. p. 110.
Gilbert H. Barnes. The Anti-Slavery Impulse, 1830-1844. New York,
1933, p. 110.
Ibid., pp. 110, 124.
Charles B. Swaney, Episcopal Methodism and Slavery, Boston, 1926.
Stokes, op. cit., p. 235.
Ibid. Vol. III, p. 184.
Annals of Congress, September 25, 1789, quoted by Stokes, Vol. I, p.
Writings of Washington, Vol. XII, p. 155.
Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. XI, 428-430.
Adrienne Koch and William Peden, The Life and Selected Writings of Thomas
Jefferson, New York, 1944, p. 694.
James D. Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents, Washington,
Vol. V, p. 3430.
American Army ChaplaincyA Brief History, 1946, p. 6.
Stokes, op. cit., Vol. I. P 272.
Army Regulations, No. 60-5, August 20, 1937.
Lorenzo D. Johnson, Chaplains of the General Government, New York,
1856, p. 48.
J. M. ONeill, Religion and Education under the Constitution, New York,
1949, pp. 106-107.
E. Stacy Matheny, American Devotion, Columbus, 1940, p. 119.
Congressional Record, June 27, 1956, p. 10048.
New York Times, February 2, 1941.
Selective Service System, Sec. 6-g.
Stokes, op. cit., Vol, III, p. 601.
U.S. Statutes at Large, Vol. XIII, p. 518.
Joseph B. Bishop. Theodore Roosevelt and His Time. New York. 1930.
Vol. II, pp. 72-73.
Stokes, op. cit., p. 604.
Record, June 27, 1956, p. 10078.
Homiletic and Pastoral Review
Vol. 57 - #4, January 1957, pp. 309-319
Copyright © 1998 by Inter Mirifica