Separation of church and state has always been considered one of the central dogmas of American democracy, yet at the time of our nation's conception, such separation was hardly commonplace. In fact, we were among the first to implement it. One wonders what exactly was so unique about America that made it an ideal breeding ground for such a revolutionary idea. Many factors contributed to the development of the church and state in America, including the inherent benefits for both entities, our religious diversity, and our unique past of religious persecution.

The primary reason America and those that followed so readily adopted separate status for religion and government was the many benefits inherent in the arrangement for both entities. The two organizations are so different for one another that "the more widely and completely they are separated, the better it is for both." (doc. E) Mainly, this is because they rule different and unique aspects of people's lives: religion has domain over the spiritual, government the concrete. If the same people are responsible for making decisions about both these domains, issues important to one will be bogged down and mixed in with those important to the other. An excellent historical example is the iconoclastic controversy which split the Roman Catholic Church in the 8th century AD. Rome at that time was completely integrated; the emperor was head of both church and state. When issues began to rock the church side, he served as a conduit to unnecessarily convey this instability to the state. Eventually controversies such as this one resulted in the split of the Catholic church, and therefore Rome. Had religion and government been separated, both entities would have found it easier to get through conflicts without the repercussions being felt in the other. As we can see, "United with government, religion never rises above the merest superstition; united with religion, government never rises above the merest despotism," in effect always catering to the lowest common denominator and never the best interests of anyone (doc. E).

Yet another element in America's choice was a result of the unique conditions of its formation. The main reason people came to America was not the desire for any material goods, but in actuality the desire for freedom, freedom from religious persecution. English Puritans disagreed with the Anglican Church and sought to escape its influence; Quakers were being brutally mistreated throughout the Old World; foreign immigrants could have been seeking escape from any number of conflicts and repressions. While each group was unique in their beliefs, they all had "a common aspiration" that transcended other differences (doc. F). Everyone understood in some way what it was like to be on the receiving end of persecution; many had been "hurt, molested, or restrained in his person, liberty, or estate, for worshipping God in the manner and season most agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience" to the extent they felt they must specifically protect against such injustices (doc. B). The only way to do this completely was to remove the body responsible for making and enforcing civil law, namely the state, as far away from the church as possible so that it could not become entangled in prejudices connected with the latter. As Alexis de Tocqueville aptly put it, "The complete separation of church and state . . . I met nobody, lay or cleric, did not agree about that." (doc. D) The simple reason was that they had all had experience with injustices that they did not want repeated.

Closely related to America's freedom-driven conception was its religious diversity. As there were many groups being prosecuted in Europe, there were many different groups fleeing prosecution in the New World. The Founding Fathers, facing the task of unifying these varied and often contradictory views, recognized that it would be impossible to do so in a body so all-encompassing as the government. The number of different cultures and perspectives was overwhelming; "There were Puritans who hated the Episcopalians, and Episcopalians who hated the Catholics, and the Catholics who hated both, while the Quakers held them all in contempt." (doc. F) If all groups tried to make decisions together, nothing would ever get done, since they agreed on so few things. However, if one group was placed in charge, the others would grow restless and generate instability and insurrection. To make matters worse, there was no clear choice for a leading group. Congregationalists (Puritans) may have outnumbered any other group, but were hardly the majority of the population, and the Anglican and Presbyterian factions were close behind in strength. There was no choice, if they were to be unified under one state. "They were of every sort, and color and kind . . . how was it that they came together?" (doc. F) They simply left such differences, connected to religion, out of the picture.

While the germination of the separation of church and state in America appears at first glance to be complicated and cluttered, it resolves into three distinct elements upon closer examination. The separation is ideal for both sides under any circumstances; ideal in America in particular because there were many different groups who had to be united under a common government. Fortunately, all these groups had experienced persecution in the past and would go to any lengths, even giving up the possibility of controlling the state, to avoid future incidents of that sort. With this decision made, they could lead the way in a revolution that resulted not just in independence for America, but the acceptance of the idea of separate status for church and state everywhere.