N
Purely Commentary
f The 'Separation' Principle
Co in the Michigan Tradition
The heated debates that have arisen over the
U. S. Supreme Court decision banning religious
prayers in public schools raised other issues related
to church-state problems. Opponents of the high
cs
court's ruling have expressed the view that this
; might affect also the daily . prayers that are offered
at the opening of both Houses of Congress, and
that the inclusion of the "Under God" phrase in
the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag may also be
considered unconstitutiondl.
When the late Congressman Louis C. Rabaut of
Detroit introduced the "Under God" proposal, which
c/a is now part of the Pledge of Allegiance,- your
it Commentator made lengthy comment on the subject.
Under date of April 1, 1954, Congressman Rabaut
inserted a two-page statement in the Congressional
Record, quoting this Commentator and his references
0 to the Study of the Separation Principle as a
Michigan Tradition made by Dr. Norman Drachler,
43 who is now assistant superintendent of the Detroit
Public Schools.
1 4'
. , 1
Under the heading "Does the Addition of the
p Phrase 'Under God' to the Pledge of Allegiance to
the Flag Endanger the First Amendment?" Con-
gressman Dingell inserted the following in the
Congressional Record of April 1, 1954:
Mr. RABAUT: Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend
my remarks and to include extraneous matter, I
am pleased to place in the Record some clippings
from The Jewish News, a weekly review of Jewish
events, ably published and edited by Philip Slomo-
vitz in Detroit, Mich.
In the March 5, 1954, issue of the Jewish News
there appeared an article by Mr. Slomovitz dealing
with a bill I have introduced to amend the pledge
of allegiance to the flag to include the phrase "under
God." Mr. Slomovitz's article pointed out what are
apparently believed by some to be conflicts between
the measure I have introduced and traditional
American principles of church-state relationships
as embodied in the letter and spirit of the first
amendment to the Constitution. His article dealt
at length with a study entitled The Influence of
Sectarianism, Nonsectarianism and Secularism Upon
the Public Schools of Detroit and the University of
Michigan, 1837-1900," prepared as a doctoral disser-
tation by Dr. Norman Drachler, of Detroit, in 1951.
Because of the highly important nature of this
problem, I took some pains in formulating a reply
to the article, and the pertinent portions of my
reply have been published in full by Mr. Slomovitz
in a subsequent issue. He is to be complimented for
his devotion to the principle of free discussion and
I wish to thank him for his sincere consideration
of my point of view.
Mr. Slomovitz's article and the published portion
of my reply follow:
Purely Commentary: Proposal To Add "Under God"
Phrase to Pledge to the Flag Raises Question
of Conflict With First Amendment—Issue Traced
to Early Days of Michigan History
(By Philip Slomovitz)
Three Michigan Members of Congress, Senator
Homer Ferguson and Representatives Charles G.
Oakman and Louis C. Rabaut, are sponsoring iden-
tical resolutions to amend the pledge of allegiance
to our flag to include the words "under God."
The proposed legislation would modify the
pledge to read as follows:
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United
States of America and to the Republic for which
it stands. one nation indivisible under God, with
liberty and justice for all.
Senator Ferguson has expressed the view that
such legislation would give meaning and action to
the spiritual defense of our Nation. Pointing out
that the words "In God We Trust" are inscribed
over the door of the Senate Chamber in Washing-
ton. Michigan's senior Senator stated that "those
words must have a real meaning in the heart of
every American," and added:
Our Nation was founded on a fundamental
belief in God and the first and most important
reason for the existence of our Government is to
protect the God-given rights of our citizens. Corn-
munism, on the contrary, rejects the very existence
of God.
"Spiritual values are every bit as important to
the defense and safety of our Nation as military
and economic values. America must be defended by
spiritual values which exist in the hearts and souls
of the American people."
Congressman Rabaut, who first introduced his
bill to add the words "under God" on April 20, 1953,
recalled that Abraham Lincoln used the words under
God in his Gettysburg address. He told the United
States House of Representatives:
"You may argue from dawn to dusk about dif-
ferent political, economic, and social systems, but
the fundamental issue which is the unbridgeable
gap between America and Communist Russia is
belief in Almighty God.
"From the roots of atheism stems the evil weed
of communism and its branches of materialism and
political dictatorship. Unless we are willing to affirm
our belief in the existence of God and his creator-
creature relation to man, we drop man himself to
the significance of a grain of sand and open the
flood gates to tyranny and oppression.
"This country was founded on theistic beliefs,
on belief in the worthwhileness of the individual
The Separation Pririciple and the 'Under God'
Phrase in the Pledge to the Flag
human being which in turn depends solely and
completely on the identity of man as the creature
and son of God. The fraudulent claims of the Com-
munists to the role of champions of social, economic,
and political reform is given the lie by their very
own atheistic materialist concept of life and their
denunciation of religion, the bond between God and
man, as the opium of the.people.
"It is, therefore, most proper that in our salute
to the flag, the patriotic standard around which we
rally as Americans, we state the real meaning of
that flag. From their earliest childhood our children
must know the real meaning of America. Children
and Americans of all ages must know that this is
one nation which under God means liberty and
justice for all."
Congressman Oakman, in a message to his con-
stituents, asserts, "We profess our faith in a Su-
preme Being on our coins marked "In God we trust.'
It seems more appropriate to me to recognize the
Deity in our spiritual dedication to the flag, the
symbol of our God-given freedom. Our belief in
God highlights one of the fundamental differences
between us and the Communists."
THE TRADITION ON COINS
There is an interesting tradition backing up these
beliefs. On May 18, 1908, Congress approved this
statute:
"Be it enacted, etc., That the motto 'In God we
trust,' heretofore inscribed on certain denominations
of the gold and silver coins of the United States of
America, shall hereafter be inscribed upon all such
gold and silver coins of said denominations as here-
tofore."
Nevertheless, there may be valid arguments
against the proposed measures on the ground that
it may conflict with the first amendment which
provides the guaranty that "Congress shall make no
law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON'S VIEW
A strong opinion exists that it is contrary to
our constitutional guaranties for Congress to legis-
late on religious questions.
In his famous speech on the question of release
time for Bible studies in our schools, in the Mc-
Collum case. United States Supreme Court Justice
Robert Jackson expressed this view:
"The day that this country ceases to be free for
irreligion it will cease to be free for religion —
except for the sect that can win political power.
The same epithetical jurisprudence used by the Court
today to beat down those who oppose pressuring
children into some religion can devise as good
epithets tomorrow against those who object to pres-
suring them into a favored religion."
THE MICHIGAN TRADITION: DR. NORMAN
DRACHLER'S STUDY
In view of the fact that all the . sponsors of the
bills to effect changes in the pledge to the flag are
from Michigan, our legislators undoubtedly will be
interested in the background of our own State's
traditional policies favoring separation of church
and state and the original aim of the framers of
our state constitution to eliminate from it ' all
references to the Deity.
A comprhensive study, entitled "The Influence
of Sectarianism, Nonsectarianism and Secularism
Upon the Public Schools of Detroit and the Univer-
sity of Michigan, 1837-1900," formed the dissertation
for his degree of doctor of philosophy, earned from
the U. of M. by Dr. Norman Drachler, of Detroit,
in 1951. This study outlines in detail the various
debates on the question of secularism in the schools
and enlightens us on the battles that marked the
framing of Michigan's constitution. Religious liberty
guarantees were incorporated in the State document
in 1835.
Dr. Drachler relates that a delegate to the State
constitutional convention proposed an invitation to
clergymen, "alternately one from each denomina-
tion," to open convention sessions. But an opponent
of the proposal insisted that the mere presence of
clergymen would exert sectarian influence upon the
delegates. The resolution calling for prayers at the
convention was defeated. But of far greater im-
portance was the proposal to include in the constitu-
tion recognition of a Supreme Being and a belief
in a future state of rewards and punishments. The
resolution was rejected. Dr. Drachler, in his thor-
ough review and study, quotes the following striking
"denunciation of the move to give the State a theistic
nature by a delegate, Willard":
"Sir, I protest against the adoption of such an
article into our constitution. I protest against it
because it is anti-Republican, anti-Democratic, anti-
do-as-you-would-be-done-by, anti-the-will-of-the-people.
I do verily believe that nine-tenths of the people of
Michigan do not wish to proscribe a fellow being on
account of his religious or irreligious belief; and I
do know that a very large majority of my constitu-
ents do not wish it. * • *
"I go the whole hog for having every free white
male citizen of the age of 21 years, who shall have
resided in the. State a certain stipulated length of
time, a voter, and every voter eligible to any office
the people may think proper to bestow upon him,
whether he believe in one God, twenty gods, or no
god. * * *
"Suppose a man's head is so thick and brainless
(if you choose to call it so) that no evidence can be
beaten into it which is sufficiently strong to con-
vince, him of the existence of an. uncaused first
cause—of an unorganized, yet intelligent, immaterial
By Philip
Slomovitz
Being, who existed from all eternity, in nothing,
on nothing, and who 'did nothing until about 6,000
years ago, at which time He created not only this
vast globe and all that it inhabits, but also myriads
of worlds and living creatures. Suppose, 'I say, a
man's head is so thick and brainless that he cannot
comprehend nor believe in such an existence, and
has the moral courage and honesty to acknowledge
it when interrogated; shall he be debarred from
testifying in courts of justice, and from holding an
office of profit and trust, which his equally - thick-
headed and skeptical neighbors may wish to bestow
upon him? Forbid it justice. Forbid it ye freeborn
sons of Michigan. Palated be the tongue to him who
shall advocate such doctrine, and perish the hand
that shall put a vote in the ballot box in favor of
him who shall do so. Mistake me not. I would
equally imprecate him who should attempt to de-
prive the most credulous fanatic that ever disgraced
human nature, of the least of his inalienable rights
and privileges. No, sir, let us have no proscriptive
laws, either in favor of or against religion, unless
we mean to make liars and hypocrites of our poster-
ity. Let religion stand or fall without the proscript-
ive intolerance of law. If it be of God, ye cannot
overthrow it, but if it be of man, it will surely
come to naught. * * * In the name of mental
liberty—in - the name of unborn millions of- our
posterity—in the name of all that is near and dear
to us, the liberty of conscience, I protest against the
resolution."
At the convention of 1850, we learn from Dr.
Drachler, ministers of religion were invited to open
daily sessions with prayers, but the delegates per-
sonally paid for these services.
At the convention of 1867, an attempt was made
to have the Convention Preamble emboay recogni-
tion of the Almighty and acknowledge "the Lord
Jesus Christ, who is author of Christianity and has
revealed God to man." The objection was raised
that this was sectarian. Delegate Nind called it a
concept contrary to other faiths and that "this would
not be the case with the Hebrews, the Unitarians,
not saying anything about the atheists whom some
gentlemen may consider as outlaws."
While the terms Almighty God and Sovereign
Ruler were accepted, the words "Christian govern-
ment" and "Lord Jesus Christ" were omitted from
the state document.
Commenting on the changing attitudes between
conventions and at subsequent sessions, Dr. Drachler
makes this interesting point:
"A glance back at the conventions of 1835 and
1850 reveals that separation of church and state
was more clearcut in those days."
But this is true of the country at large. The
Founding Fathers of this Republic, especially Jef-
ferson and Madison, were deeply concerned that
there should be no legislation respecting the estab-
lishment of religion. But there have been changes in
our own time. The study of the Bible is being intro-
duced in many States, with a similar move on foot
in Michigan. There are mores and new trends—all
in a direction that may be interpreted as leading
away from the first amendment.
It will be interesting to watch developments
in Washington. Are there traditionalists who will
share the view of the framers of Michigan's first
constitution and the opinions of Jefferson and Madi-
son who will object to the proposals of Michigan's
senior Senator and his two associates in the House
of Representatives? Their bills raise a most interest-
ing issue.
CONGRESSMAN RABAUT DEFENDS IDEA OF
"UNDER GOD" PHRASE IN FLAG'S PLEDGE
(Editor's Note—In a lengthy letter in which he
expresses his views on the Jewish News commen-
tator's recent article dealing with Dr. Norman
Drachler's study of the Influence of Sectarianism
on Public Schools, and the commentator's review
of the subject, Representative Louis Rabaut, of
Michigan's 14th Congressional District, makes the
following observations:)
My first reaction to such claim is to think of
one of the most glorious documents in American
history, the Declaration of Independence. In four
distinct places in that document there are references
to the Supreme Being: "Nature's God," the "Creator
of Men," "The Supreme Judge of the World," and
"Divine Providence." We fought a war to make the
independence thus declared a fact and it was a
constitutional convention born of that struggle which
wrote the Constitution.
Your article poses the question whether tradi-
tionalists who share certain views of Madison and
Jefferson and the views of some of the delegates
to Michigan's early constitutional conventions will
object to the "under God" addition to the pledge.
It seems apparent that Dr. Drachler's conclusions
as to the attitude of the framers of Michigan's early
constitutions, which may well not have been the
attitude of the people of these days, is not shared
by the people of Michigan today. The present consti-
tution of our State reads: "We, the people of the
State of Michigan, grateful to Almighty God for the
blessings of freedom * * * etc." I think it hardly
could be said that this religious connotation, which
appears in the constitutions of other States as well,
has endangered the security of the first amendment,
in Michigan or elsewhere.
Further, two prominent commentators on the
Constitution of the United States shed valuable
(Continued on Page 32)