Reynolds v. United States 98 U.S. 145 (1879) – The Question of Polygamy

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…  Amendment I, U.S. Constitution 

 “I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between church and State.”   ~ Thomas Jefferson, letter to the Danbury Baptist Association, 1802 

 By: Christa Lasher  

Reynolds has the prestigious position of being the first case in the U.S. Supreme Court’s history involving either the Establishment Clause (Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…) or the Free Exercise Clause (…or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…).   Reynolds was the first Free Exercise case heard by the Supreme Court who would not agree to hear an Establishment case until 1947 with Everson v. Board of Education.  After Reynolds, the Court did not consider another Free Exercise case until 1940 with Cantwell v. Connecticut.  (That is not to say that lower courts did not hear and adjudicate other Establishment or Free Exercise cases.  In fact, they did.  The Supreme Court simply did not choose to hear any until about 60 years after Reynolds.)  Up until 1940, Reynolds was the only precedent involving religion decided by the Supreme Court.  The decision in that case still has effect today.  

Joseph Smith

I will spend very little time discussing the history surrounding this case and instead defer to Sarah Barringer Gordon’s The Mormon Question (2002) which carefully and thoroughly outlines not only the history of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as they journeyed from New York to the Utah Territory but also of the reaction to and debate about Mormonism and polygamy.  A brief survey of the highlights will do.  Joseph Smith, while living in upstate New York, claimed to have been guided by an angel to golden plates which he translated into the Book of Mormon in 1830.  He quickly attracted a good number of disciples who followed him through Ohio, Missouri, and Illinois.  In 1843, he received the “Revelation on Celestial Marriage,” (see LDS Doctrine and Covenant 132) which remained a secret held by Joseph Smith and his intimate circle for almost a decade after.  During the intervening years, Mormons met with discrimination and violence wherever they went.  In 1844, Smith was murdered by a mob that attacked the jail where he was being held awaiting trial.  Following his 

Mormon Temple

 death, faithful Mormons migrated to what would become the Utah Territory in 1847 with Brigham Young at the lead.  In 1850, Congress organized the Utah Territory, and two years later, the church acknowledged and read aloud the “Revelation on Celestial Marriage.”  After years of intense debate (polygamy was rhetorically connected to slavery, so states’ rights became an issue in the debate over polygamy as well), Congress passed the Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act of 1862.  In order to challenge this act, and the federal government’s right to interfere with local government (at the time, the federal government had little significant control over the states and other local governments), the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-day Saints (LDS) decided to get a member convicted of polygamy and appeal it all the way to the Supreme Court.  George Reynolds was a perfect candidate for this test case, for he was both a dedicated Mormon and yet of only modest standing within the Church.  In 1878, the Court heard the case, and in 1879, it handed down its decision. 

Chief Justice Waite wrote the decision of the Court, with no dissenting and only one concurring opinion.  He identified six questions before the Court, the first four of which were technical issues such as improperly excusing jurors or improperly admitting evidence.  The fifth question interests us here: “Should the accused have been acquitted if he married the second time, because he believed it to be his religious duty?”  The first four questions were dismissed – the court below had not acted improperly.  On this question about the exercise of religion Chief Justice Waite spent proportionally more time than any other question. 

This was the first time the Court adjudicated the significance of the First Amendment’s religion clauses, and so first, they set about defining religion.  Here, they used Thomas Jefferson’s understanding – the Jeffersonian interpretation of the wall of separation – to determine what religion and freedom of religion meant.  Quoting Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptist Association, the court determined that religion – at least that part of it which was to be protected – sat in the realm of opinion.  The letter, the Court stated, “may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the amendment thus secured.  Congress was deprived of all legislative power over mere opinion, but was left free to reach actions which were in violation of social duties or subversive of good order.”  That is, belief is protected absolutely according this decision, but action is not.  Reynolds may believe whatever he wishes about the importance of polygamy, but that did not mean he could necessarily act upon that belief.  The Court had then to tackle the issue of polygamy itself. 

Chief Justice Waite traced the history of marriage – monogamy versus polygamy – within Europe, declaring polygamy to be “almost exclusively a feature of the life of Asiatic and of African people.”  Polygamy had virtually always been a disagreeable and punishable offence in all European societies and their descendents.  Moreover, it was not just a “sacred obligation” but also a “civil contract” which could be regulated by law.   

Upon it society may be said to be built, and out of its fruits spring social relations and social obligations and duties…  In fact, according that monogamous or polygamous marriages are allowed, do we find the principles on which the government of the people… rests.    

Marriage, according to this reading, is the base of the entire society.  From the marriage comes every other social relationship and institution, all the way up to the government.  Depending upon the type of marriage allowed the government is formed accordingly.  Polygamous marriage, the Court, and the larger culture, “fetters the people in stationary despotism.”  Only monogamous marriage could form the society necessary to support a democratic government.   

Still, was the government not required to give Reynolds – and the Mormons – an exemption because of religious belief?  No—certainly not.  “This would be introducing a new element into criminal law.”  After all, as the Court already determined, law may interfere with the practice of religion.  Suppose, the government asked, someone believed human sacrifice was a religious necessity?  Or the practice of sati?  Could these practices – central as they may be – be exempted from criminal law?  Absolutely not, according to Chief Justice Waite, “To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect, to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself.”  Law had to be the final authority.  The Free Exercise Clause, according to Reynolds, does not allow religion to exempt a citizen from criminal law.    

Reynolds was, and in certain cases, still is good law, according to the Supreme Court.  Until 1940 in Cantwell v. Connecticut, Reynolds was the only decision on Free Exercise, and the rule of law was this: Belief is protected absolutely by the First Amendment.  The government could not dictate to people their beliefs, nor make belief a prerequisite for benefits given to citizens, nor outlaw or punish citizens for their beliefs.  However, practice is not so absolutely protected.  A generally applicable law was constitutional even if it impinged upon a citizen’s free exercise. 

Reynolds was the first case—but case law is not static.  Cantwell v. Connecticut, the next opinion I intend to examine for Religion Nerd, will expand upon Reynolds and apply the First Amendment to the States.

Scientology: a Religion or a ‘Space Opera’?

By:  Heather Abraham

 

In response to Kenny Smith’s article, Gold’s Gym and Scientology in an Age of Authenticity, a Religion Nerd reader inquired as to the “doctrines and beliefs” of Scientology.  In response, I have compiled this brief but, hopefully informative article introducing the basics of Scientology to RN readers; welcome to Scientology 101. 

Founded by L. Ron Hubbard (1911-1986) in 1953, The Church of Scientology has continuously found itself embroiled in a sea of controversy both here in the United States and abroad.  Apart from its ufology connections, Scientology has no apparent religious antecedent and therefore has stood out, even among other new religious movements, as something unique and for some, worrisome.  Scientology’s foundations began in 1950 with the publication of Hubbard’s best selling self-help book Dianetics: Modern Science of Mental Health.  According to George Chryssides in New Religions: A Guide, 

Dianetics offers an analysis of the human self, which Hubbard called the ‘thetan.’  The thetan is distinct from both the mind and the body, and is the true immortal Godlike self. The body consists of matter, energy, space and time, (MEST) all of which lack independent reality and depend on the thetan.   

According to Hubbard’s teachings, the human mind consists of the analytical rational mind and the reactive irrational mind which responds to raw stimuli and stores traces of psychological and emotional trauma called engrams.  These engrams, the result of the countless traumatic events which accumulated over many lifetimes, are stored in the reactive mind and are the source of human anguish, sadness, depression, psychological disorders, anger, and a plethora of destructive human behaviors.  Simply put, engrams prevent humans from reaching their full potential.  In order to rid humans of engrams, Hubbard created a therapy system which allows pre-clear humans to bring engrams into awareness through the  process of auditing in which the pre–clear, over an extensive period of time and through many levels of auditing, rids his or herself of the engrams and eventually becomes clear.   

Auditing sessions are performed by trained auditors, within the Church of Scientology.  Auditors attach an e-meter (electropsychometer) to the pre-clear subject and encourage the pre-clear to recall traumatic experiences. Throughout the process of recalling, the e-meter measures electrical charges in the body and locates areas of stored spiritual distress, thus assisting the pre-clear in releasing the stored engrams.   

The ultimate objective of these auditing sessions is for the pre-clear to extinguish the reactive mind becoming clear and to eventually achieve the tenth level of an operating thetan (OT).  Although there is no charge for these auditing sessions, The Church of Scientology does request an obligatory ‘donation’ which increases as the subject moves from 1^st to 10^th levels of OT.  This process of successfully completing one level and moving to another is referred to in Scientology speak as the Bridge to Total Freedom.  Once a Scientologist reaches the higher OT levels he/she will begin to acquire almost super human abilities.  Those who reach OT level eight and above are considered to be the most brilliant and creative souls on earth.  In Scientology 8-8008, first published in 1952, L. Ron Hubbard describes the fully rehabilitated thetan’s extraordinary abilities.

A thetan who is completely rehabilitated and can do everything a thetan should do, such as move MEST[matter, energy, space, and time] and control others from a distance, or create his own universe… is able to create illusions perceivable by others at will, to handle MEST universe objects without mechanical means and to have and feel no need of bodies or even the MEST universe to keep himself and his friends interested in existence.

Because the teaching material can be dangerous to those who have not achieved appropriate OT levels, Scientology enforces close scrutiny of any who may come in contact with higher level resources.  Accordingly, the higher the OT level the more restricted the teaching material becomes to outsiders.  According to Chryssides,

The OT material is strictly confidential and, it is said, can cause mental or even physical harm if it is divulged to those who are unauthorized to receive it….From official Scientology literature, however, it seems likely that OT material relates to ‘body thetans’- the remains of thetans [souls] who lost their bodies many millions of years ago as a result of a gargantuan explosion.  These beings devoid of their bodies, continue to latch onto the bodies of others, and it is incumbent on those who progress through OT levels to help release them from this situation. 

These body-thetans are said to have been ‘killed’ in a vast explosion instigated by the galactic tyrant Xenu many millions of years ago.  In New Religions: A Guide, Andreas Grunschloss classifies Scientology as a “non apocalyptic Ufology” movement based on the teachings of L. Ron Hubbard.  Religious ufology movements are religions that incorporate

a basic ancient astronauts myth and conceives of earthly human beings primarily as (extraterrestrial) ‘thetans’ who have to access their ‘bridge to freedom’-a belief about the soul that has strong similarities with typical ufological notions of ‘star seeds’ or ‘walk-ins’ who had been planted in this earthly garden for spiritual growth. According to Scientology’s secret mythology, a fierce intergalactic ruler named ‘Xenu’ carried the thetans [souls] to earth.

Hubbard referred to these “astronaut myths” as space operas; actual historical events involving extraterrestrial civilizations throughout the galaxy.  Interestingly, Scientology has recently instituted a vague stance on the role ufology plays within their tradition.   In a 2009 interview with Martin Bashir, Tommy Davis, Director of Scientology’s Celebrity Center International in Los Angeles, refused to either acknowledge or disavow the existence of the Xenu myth as part of Scientology’s advanced teachings.  Bashir, respectful throughout the interview, pushed Davis for an explanation—causing Davis to angrily walk off the stage in mid interview.  Although Hubbard’s writings on Xenu have been disseminated to the public via the internet and court records, an official Scientology position has not yet been offered.  A quick search for Xenu on http://www.scientology.org/ resulted in a “your search yielded no results” response. 

Although most people are familiar with the Church of Scientology through its association with Hollywood stars such as Tom Cruise, John Travolta, and Kirstie Alley.  Scientology attracts a diverse group of adherents from the world over.  It is estimated that in the United States members of the Church of Scientology number between 50,000-100,00.  According to Scientology’s official website (www.scientology.org) their movement is rapidly expanding across the globe. 

Since the establishment of the first Church of Scientology in 1954, the religion has grown to span the globe. Today, more than 8,500 Scientology Churches, Missions, related organizations and affiliated groups minister the religion to millions of parishioners in 165 countries. And those numbers are constantly growing. In fact, they are growing more now than at any time in the religion’s history.  Scientology’s rapid emergence within the world’s changing religious community has led many to ask what kind of religion it is, how it compares with other faiths and in what ways it is unique.  As the only major worldwide religious movement to emerge in the 20th century, Scientology generates immense public interest.

I look forward to following this unique and intriguing new religious movement with RN readers and I hope that this brief albeit complex narrative provides a foundation for future explorations in Scientology events and controversies to come.

See complimentary article by Kenny Smith entitled Gold’s Gym and Scientology in an Age of Authenticity in archives or at: http://wp.me/pRtFA-8X

• Official Scientology website:  http://www.scientology.org/
• Video of Tommy Davis –http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUiUyVqOuJI
• Full Interview Martin Bashir and Tommy Davis (45 min) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLG3teVnszQ
• Auditing video from Scientology – http://www.youhtube.com/watch?v=01lljemjh9o

Identity: Religion, Ethnicity, Language…..?

By:  Heather Abraham

  

This past Sunday, Teo and I attended the 5^th annual Atlanta Arab Festival.  Sponsored by the Alif Institute and the Arab American Women’s Society of Georgia, the festival afforded attendees a wonderful mélange of Arabic food from Morocco, Syria, Israel, Palestine, and Lebanon as well as Arabic music, arts and crafts, games, shopping at a charming souk, and several exhibits focusing on past and present Arab intellectual achievements and Arab history in the United States.  

Helen & Widad with Religion Nerd

After having a fabulous lunch of Moroccan and Palestinian fare, Teo and I wondered around the festival talking to the many festival goers and organizers.  We spent some time at the dessert booth relishing in the decadent array of Arabic sweets and talking to Helen and Widad—members of the Arab American Women’s Society of Georgia which was responsible for the fabulous assortment of popular Arabic sweets.   I was particularly taken with the homemade basbousa, a semolina cake soaked in sweet syrup and kissed with a delicate essence of rose water.   

You may be wondering why I am writing about this festival and what it has to do with religion? Well bear with me and let’s enjoy the rest of the tour before getting to the serious stuff.  After dessert (I bought some basbousa to go), Teo and I went to see the exhibits located inside of the Alif Institute building.  Upon entering, we immediately encountered wall posters listing prominent American-Arabs such as Salma Hayek, Ralph Nadar, Tony Shalhoub, George Mitchell, John Sununu, Spencer Abraham, Helen Thomas, Marlo Thomas, Bobby Rahal, Paul Anka, Paula Abdul, and Shakira.   The exhibition also provided a historical tour of Arab achievements in science, math, and technology, along with examples of the fine Arabic artwork from various countries.  Beautiful glassware from Iraq, Eastern Orthodox Christian Icons from Lebanon, and inlaid furniture from Syria were prominently on display.  One of the most poignant exhibits honored the four generations of the Najjar family who had proudly served in the U.S. military.  Aside from the exhibits, the Alif Institute provided a range of learning activities for children and adults.  

During the tour of the exhibit, as I spoke to many of the attendees, it occurred to me that in celebrating Arab history and culture, this festival had managed to transcend the religious  conflict that so often grasps our attention on the nightly news.  I was surrounded by Muslim, Christian, and secular Arabs who had put aside their religious differences to celebrate their cultural/ethnic identity.  Americans are often unaware of the religious and ethnic diversity that exists in the Arab world but fortunately, the Alif Institute did an amazing job organizing and presenting this diversity to festival goers, Arab and non-Arab alike.  According to the festival program, the Alif Institute determines Arab identity according to spoken language—not ethnicity.   

Arabs are diverse peoples who live in 22 nations:  Algeria, Bahrain, Comoros, Djibouti, Egypt, Iraq, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco,, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, and Yemen. The word “Arab” embraces more than 300 million multiethnic and multiracial Arabic-speaking peoples living in these countries.  In addition to language, Arabs are unified by cultural and historical roots traceable to Abraham and Shem, the eldest of Noah’s three sons, as well as the great Semitic migrations originating from the Arabian Peninsula that led to the rise of the Assyrians, Arameans, and Canaanites.  

Of course, Arab identity is much more complicated and cannot simply be defined by a common language.  Arabs almost always hold multiple identities at once such as:  Syrian, Israeli, Palestinian, Egyptian, Lebanese, Muslim, Christian, Druze, Shia, Sunni, Catholic, Melkite Catholic, Coptic, Jewish, and secular Arab. Collective identity can be accessed not only through language but via religion, stories, history, tradition, politics, ideology, commemoration of events, or a simple celebration of one identifying factor which temporarily overrides religious, ideological, or political differences.   The Atlanta Arab Festival drew Christian, Muslim, and secular Arabs together to celebrate the rich tapestry of Arab identity and achievements.   I applaud their efforts and look forward to attending next year’s event.   

Teo & Nerd

This brings me to the questions of the day:  As the United States is most probably the most ethnically, racially, religiously, and linguistically diverse country in the world; what factors form our cohesive identity?  Or—is the political and religious divisiveness so prominent in America today emblematic of a lack of unifying factors?