Money for Missionaries: Rethinking Establishment Clause History

94 Pages Posted: 14 Feb 2019 Last revised: 3 Mar 2019

See all articles by Nathan S. Chapman

Nathan S. Chapman

University of Georgia School of Law

Date Written: February 13, 2019

Abstract

In Everson v. Board of Education (1947), the Supreme Court stated two principles that continue to animate Establishment Clause doctrine. The first is that courts should look to founding-era history—especially the history of "religious assessments," or taxes used to fund churches—to interpret the Establishment Clause. The second is that, based on this history, the government may provide limited secular goods to religious schools, but the Establishment Clause prohibits the government from directly funding religious education.

What Everson ignored, and what subsequent legal scholarship has likewise overlooked, is that the founding-era government did directly fund religious education: from the Revolution to Reconstruction, the federal government partnered with Christian missionaries to "civilize" American Indians. Initially ad hoc, this practice was formalized with the Civilization Funds Act of 1819, which authorized the government to distribute $10,000 per year to "persons of good moral character" to educate and "civilize" the tribes. For over fifty years, the government funded Christian missionaries who incorporated religious instruction and worship into their curricula. Curiously, no one ever raised a constitutional objection.

This Article is the first to provide a thorough analysis of the government-missionary partnerships and to explore why no one objected to their constitutionality. The evidence strongly suggests eighteenth and nineteenth-century Americans supported them because of a shared view of social progress that merged Christianization, education, and civilization. They simply could not have imagined separating Christianity and education. This evidence reshapes the conventional narrative of the historical development of non-establishment norms in the United States, especially the centrality of the Jeffersonian "taxpayer conscience" objection to religious assessments.

This history also has important implications for Establishment Clause doctrine. The challenge is ascertaining a constitutional principle from a practice that itself went unquestioned. The history does, however, suggest that the government may directly fund general education, even when that education entails incidental voluntary religious instruction. This principle complements the theoretical norm of "substantive neutrality" and supports the Supreme Court's current doctrinal trajectory of easing restrictions on government funding of religious education.

Keywords: Establishment Clause, constitutional law, law and religion, Everson v. Board of Education, religious education, American Indians, missionaries, Civilization Funds Act of 1819, Christianity, government-missionary partnerships, foreign affairs, establishment of religion, republican virtues, secular

JEL Classification: K19

Suggested Citation

Chapman, Nathan S., Money for Missionaries: Rethinking Establishment Clause History (February 13, 2019). University of Georgia School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2019-10. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3334148 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3334148

Nathan S. Chapman (Contact Author)

University of Georgia School of Law ( email )

225 Herty Drive
Athens, GA 30602
United States
(706) 542-5235 (Phone)

HOME PAGE: http://www.law.uga.edu/profile/nathan-s-chapman

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
105
rank
250,924
Abstract Views
648
PlumX Metrics