Joseph Viteritti’s book The Last Freedom. Religion from the Public School to the Public Square is a philosophical discussion about religion in the United States. The primary question is whether religion has a place in American government buildings and public schools? Viteritti prepares the reader to arrive at a solution by showing how the Supreme Court, the Congress, the Senate, and American citizens work together to “define the proper role of religion in American public life” (x).
The author acknowledges that solving the problem is difficult, requires that we face our fears, overcome our biases and appreciate the fragile freedom of religion. After all, a visit to the U.S. capitol will show that previous generations of Americans have successfully found a place for religion in tax-supported institutions.The book has nine chapters. Chapters 1 and 2 bring up the many objections to the presence of religion in government buildings and public schools.
Some people demonstrate a “genuine hostility towards” (4) religious people and argue that religion makes people closed-minded. Others say that Christians are irrational, uniformed and “a stupid lot” (6). Finally, some argue that politics and religion cannot work together and are irreconcilable which makes religion is divisive and dangerous. Thus, the objections leads us to the conclusion of John Dewey who stated that the goal of a public school is to “disengage children from the religious teachings of their parents” (34).
Viteritti carefully responds to the objections, noting that “Religious bias is rooted in fear” (4). Further, 69 percent of Americans agree that religion helps to build strong families and encourages good behaviors. Further, 90 percent of the population expresses a belief in God. Thus, it is a small group of citizens who hold the opinion that religion is repulsive and should not be available in government buildings and public schools.
Chapters 3 and 4 review the two major court cases in Tennessee and show the history of religion in American public schools. The 1925 Scopes case involved parents who objected to Mr. Scopes’ use of Darwin’s On the Origin of Species in his biology class at Rhea County High School in Dayton, Tenn. Fear and ignorance moved some citizens to conclude that the Tennessee parents were probably religious, closed-minded, and anti-science. Viteritti calmly points out that the Christian parents were intellectuals who lovingly wished to use a biology book that does not promote Darwin’s backward message about ‘The Preservation of Favored Races,’ or the messages about how there are inferior races of humans and that some people are “lower animals” (48). Christians in Tennessee were not fearful and ignorant but rather Christian and loving towards everyone as children of God.
The history of religion in American public schools has taken four general directions. In 1642 the Massachusetts Bay Colony required all parents to teach Christian principles. In 1779 Thomas Jefferson proposed a curriculum that included religion with the goal of a healthy democracy. In 1849 Horace Mann, the secretary of education in Massachusetts promoted the Bible as the best source of all moral teaching and required all students to read the Christian Scriptures. In 1920 John Dewey moved away from the vision of Jefferson and Mann and directed students to a secular worldview that “shows little tolerance for religious or philosophical pluralism” (73).
Chapters 5 shows how Dewey’s push for secularism has greatly influenced our contemporary public schools that have become weak at teaching religion and deficient at teaching science. Current studies show that religion in general and Christianity specifically is missing in the classroom discussion and almost half the states are not teaching evolution in an expert and appreciative way. Even though a “wall of separation between church and state” (110) does not exist, according to Justice Rehnquist, parents still have to pretend there is a wall and must go to court if they wish for their public school children to read Christian text books, learn about both evolutionism and creationism, hold Bible study meetings after school on campus and say prayers at a graduation ceremony.
The Supreme Court heard fifty-two Establishment Clause cases from 1947 to 1997, and Viteritti, who is a trustworthy and competent expert on Supreme Court case law, identifies three cases in Chapter 6 that supports the ‘wall of separation’ opinion. The “three-legged stool upon which secularist would build their legal wall of separation” include the 1947 Everson case that allows public school buses to transport private school children, the 1971 Lemon case that does not allow private school teachers to be paid by state tax money, and the 1973 Nyquist ruling that does not allow private school administrators to receive state tax money for maintenance. The Supreme Court cases about religion in public buildings seem to revolve around a problem so clearly summarized by a sign carried by a small boy during the 2002 Zelman case that read “My Parents Should Choose My School” (138).
Chapters 7 and 8 move the reader away from the “flawed reasoning” (124) in the courts toward the “sheer wisdom” (146) of the American Founders and the Quiet Faith of 94 percent of Americans. Viteritti reviews the instructions on politics and religion from Roger Williams, John Locke, Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison. Patrick Henry encouraged Virginians to direct a percentage of money from property taxes for the assistance of Christian teachers in the public schools. Viteritti’s review of several major surveys of Americans, such as Robert Putnam’s study of American civil society in 2000 and Mark Chavez’ National Congregational Study, enables the reader to arrive at a clear view of religion in the United States. “They believe in God and they go to church, but for the most part they live secular lives and see no problem doing so” (202).
Chapter 9 gives a philosophical look at the relationship between politics and religion. Both are identified as “values” (222) and the question becomes whether parents, religious leaders, public school teachers, Supreme Court justices or elected officials are the principal cause of a child’s values? It is better to have children worship God than to have them worship teachers and politicians.
A reader might notice a few weaknesses in the book, such as the lack of details surrounding each court case and a summary that does not list the author’s conclusions. However, I was able to quickly research the Supreme Court cases on-line and I made a list of the author’s conclusions while reading the book. The wisdom of the “founding generation” (145) is especially encouraging.
In sum, the book is a professional review of the relationship between religion and politics in America and provides both the observations and resources for the reader to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion of where to put religion in the public spaces and public schools.
Final remarks. It is clear from reading Viteritti’s book The Last Freedom that underneath the desire to exclude religion from administration offices and schools is an irrational a dislike of the Lord and a genuine fear of Catholicism.
© By Theodore Faulders, August 8, 2009.