The Ohio Constitution of 1803, Jefferson’s Danbury Letter, and Religion in Education

That all men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of conscience; that no human authority can, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience; that no man shall be compelled to attend, erect or support any place of worship or to maintain any ministry against his consent; and that no preference shall ever be given by law to any religious society or mode of worship and no religious test shall be required as a qualification to any officer of trust or profit.

But, religion, morality and knowledge being essentially necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of instruction shall forever be encouraged by legislative provision, not inconsistent with the rights of conscience.

Introduction

These statements come from the Ohio Constitution of 1803. They are from Section 3, the religion section of Article VIII, the Bill of Rights.¹ It is the contention of this article that these words express widely held attitudes regarding church and state, religion and education in the early days of the United States.

This last sentence of Section 3, which addresses education, is taken directly from a statement in the Northwest Ordinance, passed by the Continental Congress on July 13, 1787, which provided the framework for the admission of Ohio to the Union.² It provides an argument for interpreting early intent as allowing some accommodation to religion in the public sector because it was assumed that “good government” is fostered by religion.³

What gives added support to this argument is the political background of those who pushed for Ohio statehood and led the Constitutional Convention at the territorial level and those who supported statehood and approved the work of the convention at the national level. At both levels the Republican Party, the party of Thomas Jefferson, was in the majority. Statehood came to Ohio by congressional vote and approval by President Jefferson on February 19, 1803.

The reason to attach importance to the political setting of the drafting and approving of the Ohio Constitution is that shortly before—in January 1802—Jefferson had written a letter to the Danbury Baptists of Connecticut interpreting the absence of religious establishment at the national level as a “wall of separation between church and state.” Such a wall, according to the letter, was to protect individuals from government interference in matters of faith and worship. Specifically, of course, Jefferson was referring to the First Amendment, which forbids Congress from enacting laws respecting an establishment of religion.⁴

This article addresses the extent to which Jefferson’s support for the Ohio Constitution implies a lessening of the significance of his Danbury letter as an interpretation of original intent regarding the relationship of church and state, religion and education. The education statement in the religion article of the Ohio Constitution does not seem to provide for a wall of separation between government, education, and religion.

The article first examines a major United States Supreme Court case—the 1948 McCollum case. In McCollum, the court rejected arguments defending the constitutionality of allowing a limited accommodation for religion in schools. The arguments by the defendant school district show the persistence of attitudes associated with the education statement in Section 3, Article VIII of the 1803 Ohio Constitution 145 years after its adoption, and 159 years after the First Congress under the new constitution in 1789 adopted in toto the Northwest Ordinance of 1787.⁵ The article then examines the background for the inclusion of this provision into the Northwest Ordinance, the issues associated with the movement toward the adoption of the 1803 Ohio Constitution, the politics surrounding the Danbury letter, and the noncontroversial nature of the education provision of the 1803 Ohio Constitution. Together the existing scholarship on these topics suggests that the Ohio Constitution well represents a consensus regarding religion, state, and education in the early days of the Republic.

Early Intent: The Wall of Separation or the Ohio Constitution?

The current fame of the Danbury letter stems from the adoption...