April 16, 2015 Version

RELC 4559  American Church-State Conflict (S’15)
TU & TH 12:30p – 1:45p in Gibson Hall 142

Instructor: Kathleen Flake, Gibson Hall 452
Best way to contact me:  kathleen.flake@virginia.edu
Office Hours: TU & TH 10a-12p and by appointment

The general objectives of this course are to review the historical context of and get one’s bearings on America's contemporary debates over the proper relation of church and state.  This means we will spend much of our time looking at the larger questions that bring coherence to an otherwise confusing array of seemingly contradictory court opinions. We will be asking such questions as what is the relevance of the Framers' original intent to contemporary circumstances; what has been the contribution of minority religions to the scope religious liberty; what is religion for the purposes of First Amendment guarantees; does religion have a special status vis-a-vis other interests and institution?. Developing expertise in analyzing and applying these large questions, not mastery of factual detail, matters most in this course. Specifically, the course goals are:

1.     To obtain knowledge of American church-state historic conflicts and enduring questions that have tested and contributed to America’s evolving understanding of the First Amendment guarantees of church disestablishment and freedom of conscience;

2.     To become adept at identifying and applying the theories of church-state relations that have informed political and jurisprudential discourse, as well as public debate; and

3.     To learn how to read court opinions and analyze their influence on the shape of religion in America.

We will pursue these three goals through reading and discussion, as well as the assignments described below.  The measures for success for each of these means are described in detail under the “Assignments” section of this syllabus.

Required Texts

·      Gordon, Sarah Barringer. The Spirit of the Law: Religious Voices and the Constitution in Modern America. Harvard Univ. Press, 2010.

·      Renaud and Weinberger. A Tale of Two Governments: Church Discipline, the Courts, and the Separation of Church and State. Dunrobin  Pub., 2012.

·      Sullivan, Winnifred F. The Impossibility of Religious Freedom. Princeton Univ. Press, 2005. 

·      Witte, John, and Joel A Nichols. Religion and the American Constitutional Experiment. Cambridge Univ. Press, 2011 (3^rd ed.) 

All other materials will be supplied on Collab under “Resources” or by internet links in the online syllabus.

Assignments

Successful completion of the course will require active participation in class discussions and completion of all assignments. Please see the appendices for details on the “Capture” and debate assignments not given immediately below.

I.      Class participation (15%)

A.     Comments in class which show:

1.              Close Reading (verbally demonstrates an understanding of the point of the reading);

2.              Critical Reading (makes and articulates the connections between one week's readings and previous assignments or other relevant source);

3.              Constructive engagement (builds upon comments of others or guides discussion in a productive direction).

B.      Discussable Question(s) for Sections 2 and 3 (Feb. 10 through Apr. 14 only and excluding Apr. 2, a debate day)

1.              Submitted on Collab “Chat” by 7 p.m. the evening before class

2.              By “discussable,” I mean the question is based on the reading; is open-ended, not susceptible to a single answer; and engages course themes and, over time, earlier readings and discussion.

3.              This requires including a sentence or two about your question, saying why it came to mind and its significance. But these entries need not be long; four or five sentences will do. Don’t hesitate to engage the comments of others you find on Chat, but be sure to move the discussion forward, adding your own insight, observations, curiosity and consternation.

Let me just add a personal note.  These comments and questions become an integral part of my approach to the material in class; so I appreciate any effort you can give them.
 

II.    One Exam (15%) in class on February 5.
 

III.  Writing Assignments (30%)

A.      “Capture” exercises (15%) for readings in Section 1 of the course.  For format, see Appendix 1.

B.      Editorial (15%)  Due April 25, 9 p.m.

1.              Topic: “Is Religion Special?” written as if for The Cavalier Daily

2.              Length: 1,600 words or approximately five pages, double-spaced

3.              Format and Approach:

a.            For help in how to write an editorial, see http://www.geneseo.edu/~bennett/EdWrite.htm.  Note, however, in order to ensure that you satisfy the analytic dimension of this assignment. please do not write the fourth type of editorial (“Praise”) identified in this description.

b.            Do not use a cover page. Rather, include your name, date and essay title on the first page of the essay.

c.            Use Times New Roman 12 pt font and one-inch margins. 

d.            Number all pages.

e.            Revise the editorial at least once after you think you are finished, proofreading carefully.

4.              Upload on Collab . Include your last name as the first word in the file name.

5.              Paper grading standards:

a.            Critical thinking (50 pts) – Supports assertions and conclusions with examples or by reference to recognized authorities; offers new ideas, connections or applications; and discusses overall implications.

b.            Addresses all parts of the assignment. (25 pts)

c.            Writing is clear. Argument is well developed and organized. No or very few grammatical, spelling or typographical errors. (15 pts)

d.            Completes assignment within the parameters described above. (10 pts)

e.            Timeliness: late papers will suffer a grade reduction of 5% per day.
 

IV.  Two Debates (40%) on April 2 and April 16.

A.       These debates will provide opportunities to engage major issues in the contemporary scope of the First Amendment religion clauses. We will discuss topics, structure and expectations for the debates in class, but see also the appendices below for detailed instructions.

B.       Teamwork -- You will be expected to prepare thoroughly for these debates, to work collaboratively in teams, and to participate actively and imaginatively during the class presentation.

C.       Report

1.              By presenters:  No later than 48 hours after your presentation, submit a 2-3 page (typed, double-spaced, 12-pt font, 1 inch margins) statement of your position in response to the proposition and your efforts on the team to advance its presentation.

2.              By observers (judges): No later than 48 hours after the presentation, submit a 2-3 page statement of your decision for against the proposition.

3.              Late reports will suffer a grade reduction of 5% per day.

Persons with diagnosed disabilities or handicapping conditions that inhibit the full performance of these requirements should notify me immediately and accommodations will be made gladly.  Delaying such notification until immediately prior to or after the due date of an assignment will result in no accommodation until subsequent assignments.  Of course, the University’s honor code applies to all work done in this course. 

 

Reading Schedule and Assignments

 

Jan. 13            Introduction: What do judges do?

Kohm, “The People’s Law versus Judge Judy Justice: Two Models of Law in American Reality-Based Courtroom TV”
 

Section 1: Formation and Early Evolution of Religious Liberty

Jan. 15            Freedom
Witte & Nichols, 1-20: “The American Experiment in Historical Context”
Excerpt from Roger Williams, “The Bloody Tenent of Persecution” (1644) http://www.wwnorton.com/college/english/nael/17century/topic_4/williams.htm

Jan. 20            Founding Principles and People Part 1
Witte & Nichols, 21-40: “The Theology and Politics of the Religion Clauses”
Excerpt from John Locke, “Letter Concerning Toleration.”
Capture #1: Witte & Nichols, Theology and Politics”

Jan. 22            Founding Principles and People Part 2
Witte & Nichols, 41-70: “The Essential Rights and Liberties of Religion”
Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Statute For Religious Freedom (1786)
Capture #2: Witte & Nichols, Essential Rights”

Jan. 27            Ordering Church and Conscience in Relation to State
Witte & Nichols, 71-108: “Forging the First Amendment Religion Clauses”
Browse Witte & Nichols, “Appendix One: Drafts of the Federal Religion Clauses”
Capture #3: Witte & Nichols, “Forging”

Jan. 29            Christian State
Witte & Nichols, 109-130: “Religious Liberty in the States Before 1947”
Handy, “Protestant Quest for a Christian America, 1830-1930” (1953)
Browse 19^th-century Religious Clauses in State Constitutions at http://www.constitution.org/primarysources/state.html
Capture #4: Handy, “Protestant Quest”

Feb. 3              Religion in the States
Gordon, “Blasphemy and the Law of Religious Liberty in Nineteenth-Century America”
People v. Ruggles (NY 1811) and Updegraph v. Commonwealth (PA 1824)
Capture #5: Gordon, “Blasphemy”

Feb. 5              The Problem of Christian Pluralism 

Witte & Nichols, 131-142: “Free Exercise of Religion” (Part 1: 19^th Century)
Fessenden, “The Nineteenth-Century Bible Wars and the Separation of Church and State”

Section 2: Defining Free Exercise Legally, Legislatively and Politically
Begin submitting questions on Chat. Due by 7 p.m the day before each class.

Feb. 10            Exam on Section I  

Feb. 12            Conduct and Belief
Flake, Politics of American Religious Identity, 12-81

Feb. 17            The Other Religious Test
Flake, Politics of American Religious Identity, 82-108 and 138-177
(Pages 109 to 137 are recommended for Religious Studies Majors)

Feb. 19            Religious Expression
Witte & Nichols, 143-159:  “Free Exercise” (Part 2: 20^th Century)
Gordon, “The Worship of Idols,” 15-55

Feb. 24            Neutrality
Witte & Nichols, 159-163 “Free Exercise” (Part 3: late 20^th Century)
Case: Employment Div. v. Smith (1990) – only pages 1-26, but note the appendix.

Feb. 26            Impossibility of Neutrality?
Sullivan, 1-88:  The Trial

Mar. 3              Impossibility of Defining Religion?
Sullivan, 89-159: The Reasoning

Section 3: Disestablishment: Degrees Of Separation
Continue submitting questions on Chat up to and including Apr. 14

Mar. 5                         Overview of Disestablishment Tests
Witte & Nichols, 169-180: “Modern Establishment Law” – Strict Separation
Martin Marty, “Widening Gyres of Religion and Law” (1996)

Mar. 10 & 12  Spring Recess

Mar. 17                       Experimenting with Alternatives
Witte & Nichols, 181-187: “Modern Establishment Law” – Not so Strict
Witte & Nichols, 191-198: “Separationist Cases, 1948-1987
Liptak,“19 Years Later, Article by Kagan Echoes at the Supreme Court,” NYT (Jan. 5, 2015) Everson v. Board of Education (1947)

Mar. 19           Strict Separation: Praying and Paying
Gordon, 56-95: “The Almighty and the Dollar”

Mar. 24           Popular Constitutionalism Part I: Prison Liberty
Gordon, 96-132: “Faith as Liberation”
Video – “Shave and a Haircut: Prisoner Grooming and RLUIPA”     http://www.scotusblog.com/media/shave-and-a-haircut-prisoner-grooming-and-rluipa/
Case: Browse handwritten Writ of Certiorari & in Forma Pauperis motion in Hobbs v. Holt (2014)          http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Muhammad-Cert-Petition.pdf

Mar. 26           Popular Constitutionalism Part II: Culture Wars
Gordon, 133-168: “Holy War”
Recommended:  PBS Frontline, “Intelligent Design on Trial”                        http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/evolution/intelligent-design-trial.html   

Mar. 31           Equality of Religion
Witte & Nichols, 198-205, “Equal Access Cases, 1981-2001”
Witte & Nichols, 223-239: “Religion and Public Life”
Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of Univ. of Virginia  (1995)       https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/515/819/#annotation

Apr. 2              In-Class Debate:  Religious Neutrality and All Comers Policies

Apr. 7              Religious Organizations and the Law
Witte & Nichols, 241-260: “Religious Organizations and the Law” 
Laycock, “Hosanna-Tabor and the Ministerial Exception”

Apr. 9             Immunities & Exemptions: Clergy Malpractice
Renaud & Weinberger. A Tale of Two Governments, 75-138
Savage, “Court Ruling That Freed Clergy From Liability for Advice  . . .,” LATimes (Apr. 4, 1989)           http://articles.latimes.com/1989-04-04/news/mn-952_1_supreme-court  
Hamilton, "The Boston Grand Jury Report on Catholic Clergy Sexual Abuse" (2003)        http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20030731.html

Apr. 14                       Popular Constitutionalism Part III: Same-Sex Marriage
Gordon, 169-207: “Covenants of Love”
Kitchen v. Herbert (10^th Cir., 1014)

Apr. 16            In-Class Debate: Church Autonomy

Apr. 21            Is Religion Special?

Apr. 21   Is Religion Special?

Leiter, “Foundations of Religious Liberty: Toleration or Respect”
Koppelman, “How Shall I Praise Thee -- Brian Leiter on Respect for Religion” 

Assignment:  Write a Capture for either Leiter or Koppelman, depending on which is most helpful you in writing your editorial.

Apr. 23 International Context: the French and the Veil

Witte & Nichols, 263-286: “International Context”
Gordon, “Why Is There No Headscarf Affair in the United States?”

Apr. 28 Last Thoughts
 

Appendix:  Capture Exercise Instructions. 

Please write a summary of the assigned reading in one to two pages; no more. Use whatever format is most helpful to you for grasping the text's essence: an outline, paragraphs, flow-chart or concept map, etc., but identify the four parts of the assignment with the labels used below. Be prepared to share your findings in class.

    1. Thesis (3 points): What is the central claim of the essay? What exactly is the point, the essence, the main idea the author wants you to know from all that he or she has said? Restate that point simply in one or two sentences. 

     2. Argument (5 points): What are the author's arguments in support of the thesis? Or, in other words, what reasons does he or she give to convince the reader of the thesis? These reasons will generally appear as the topic sentences of paragraphs and are the premises on which the conclusion rests. 

     3. Evidence (4 points): What evidence supports the author's thesis and arguments? Evidence can include documents, events, statistics, or any other concrete fact and information marshaled to show the basis for the essay's several points, but especially its thesis. 

     4. Significance (3 point): What does the article teach us?  Or, why does the author write the article? How does this relate to what people are saying on the subject or what else we have read in the course? Sometimes this is most easily seen in terms of against what or whom the author arguing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The general objectives of this course are to review the historical context of and get one’s bearings on America's contemporary debates over the proper relation of church and state. This means we will spend much of our time looking at the larger questions which bring coherence to an otherwise confusing array of seemingly contradictory court opinions. We will be asking such questions as what is the relevance of the Framers' original intent to contemporary circumstances; what has been the contribution of minority religions to the scope religious liberty; what is religion for the purposes of First Amendment guarantees; does religion have a special status vis-a-vis other interests and institution? Developing expertise in analyzing and applying these large questions, not mastery of factual detail, matters most in this course. Specifically, the course goals are:

1.     To obtain knowledge of American church-state historic conflicts and enduring questions that have tested and contributed to America’s evolving understanding of the First Amendment guarantees of church disestablishment and freedom of conscience;

2.     To become adept at identifying and applying the theories of church-state relations that have informed political and jurisprudential discourse, as well as public debate; and

3.     To learn how to read court opinions and analyze their influence on the shape of religion in America.