"Few would have predicted two hundred years ago that the authoritarian Roman
Catholic Church and the democratic government of the United States could coexist without
constant turmoil and recriminations against one another; yet in no place in the world have
Catholics felt more secure in practicing their faith than in America, and in only few places
have relations between Church and state been as stable." [Cogley, 200].  In these lines, John
Cogley has captured the essence of what America truly is.  We live in a society that, according
to the first amendment of the Constitution, guarantees us freedom of speech, and freedom of
religion.  Cogley continues, "If today the United States is truly a pluralistic nation, it is only
because earlier generations of Protestants were finally impelled by their devotion to religious
liberty to permit other faiths, particularly Roman Catholicism, to take solid root in  Protestant'
soil." [Cogley, 200].  This country was built by Protestant immigrants tired of the persecution
they faced in their own countries, and looking for a better life.  Thus, when America was
founded, it would only be natural that the freedoms denied to these people in their mother
countries would be guaranteed under our current political experiment.  Cogley describes this
country as being built on Protestant soil, but we can take this one step further and say that this
country was built on Christian soil, and as such this country has always had strong ties to
Christianity.
     Fifty six men signed the Declaration of Independence, putting their full faith and credit
on something that only existed in their minds, freedom from Great Britain and freedom under
God. "These [men] were not wild eyed, rabble-rousing ruffians.  They were soft spoken men
of means and education.  They had security, but they valued their liberty more.  Standing tall,
straight and unwavering, they pledged,  For the support of this declaration, with a firm
reliance on Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other, our lives, our fortunes, and
our sacred honor." [Harris, 22]  Because of their beliefs and their trust in God, these men
succeeded and America was born.
     But, the question then came up, where does religion fit in this new country.  Returning
back to early colonial times, views of religion and religious freedoms varied throughout the
colonies.  According to M.W. McConnell, four basic structures of church and state existed
within the colonies:
     The first structure existed within the colonies of New England, where dissenters settled
after being persecuted in England.  Here, the Puritan dissenters set up a society and
government that would be "directed by the revealed word of God."  Each town constituted a
congregation, which then elected a minister to lead the town.  According to McConnell, this
system, "maintained that authority in the system was decentralized and [thus] genuinely
democratic."
     On the other hand, the second structure of church and state in the colonies was
completely different.  In Virginia, which was officially decreed a colony by England, the
Church of England was firmly established as the central authority by the government.  As
McConnell says in discussing these two systems, "Although Virginia and New England both
maintained religious establishments, the two systems were in a more profound sense
opposites.  The New England establishment arose from a grassroots movement born of the
conviction that religious truth should control all of society, while the Virginia establishment
was imposed from above and dedicated to governmental control over religion." [McConnell,
56]
     The third approach to church and state in the colonies was one of "Benign Neglect." 
McConnell describes it as being complete religious tolerance, a structure assembled simply
because there was large religious diversity in the areas where it arose.  No main religious
group was firmly established as the head of the state, and so the issue of religion was simply
neglected.
     The fourth and final approach was one of religious freedom, but in addition to this
there being an established religion of the state.  This was the case in our own state of
Pennsylvania, set up as a haven for Quakers by William Penn, but also providing a home for a
variety of other peoples of varying religions.
     Any of these systems could have been possible as the model for the American system. 
But, ultimately, the founding fathers saw what government could do to people, and so they
decided that a decentralized government, with regulation coming from local authorities,
would work best.  But as quick as the Articles of Confederation was born, such did it crash
and burn in the fiery demands of the people for a stronger centralized state.  The Constitution
of the United States, our second political experiment, was born from the ashes of the Articles. 
It took over ten years after the Declaration of Independence, in 1788 when the Constitution
was ratified, that a system was set up that would be pleasing to the new country.  Yet, even
then, the issue of church and state remained hotly contested.  It wasn't until 1791, when the
Bill of Rights was ratified, that religious freedom was established.  The exact line of the Bill
of Rights known as the Establishment Clause, says, "Congress shall make no law respecting
an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."  Saye and Allumns put
the situation we are faced with beautifully when they say, "A complete separation of Church
and State is impossible in a community of religious people." [Saye, Allums, 70]As such, many
debates about church and state have continued to prevail through our history.
     A lot of controversy in the earlier part of this century came from the emergence of the
ideas of Charles Darwin in Natural Selection.  One of the greatest trials of this century came
in 1925, in the now famous Scopes Trial.  The trial centered around a Dayton, Tennessee
"schoolteacher, John Scopes, who had taught the biological theory of evolution to his pupils
in defiance of a state law prohibiting the teaching of doctrines contrary to the Bible."  Scopes
was ultimately found guilty and fined $100. [Funk, ed, 305]
     As the second half of this century approached, attitudes began to change towards
theology, especially when it came to theology in schools.  Goldberg elaborated on the end of
school prayer in schools in his article "The Church, The State, and The Constitution."  "[In
1963] the supreme court held oral argument in...a case involving a family named
Schempp...[According to a] Pennsylvania statute:  Any child shall be excused from...Bible
reading upon the written request of his parent or guardian.' ...But the Schempps argued that
they should not be put in the position of having to single out their children for special
treatment and perhaps reprisals.  As they did not want their children to hear readings from the
Bible, nobody should be permitted to hear them.  The court held eight to one that the reciting
of Bible passages in a public school was an unconstitutional establishment of religion."
[Goldberg, 175.]
     A similar case came up also in 1963, in Murray vs Curlett, and a similar ruling was
found there.  "Since then," as McCleganhan says in his book American Government, "the
supreme court has found [the following] practices to be unconstitutional [First] a Kentucky
law that required that copies of the Ten Commandments be posted in all public school
classrooms, Stone v. Grahm, 1980. [Then] Alabamas  moment of silence law' [was ruled as
unconstitutional in] Wallace v Jaffree, 1985.  That law provided for a one minute period of
silence, for  meditation or voluntary prayer,' at the beginning of each school day."
[McClenaghan, 492]
     But, perhaps the most defining issue for Catholics in modern America has been the
issue of abortion.  The court case that legalized abortion was Roe versus Wade, and was
decided in 1973.  In it, "A Texas woman challenged a State law forbidding the artificial
termination of a pregnancy, saying that she,  had a fundamental right to privacy.'  The Court
upheld a womans right to choose in this case, noting the States  important and legitimate
interest in protecting the potentiality of human life,' became  compelling' at the end of the
first trimester... The decision struck down State regulation of abortion in the first three months
of pregnancy." [McClenaghan, 768] The issue has divided many Catholics politically, creating
two distinct groups within the United States.  Those Catholics that support the liberal
movement support the social and economic reforms begun by John F Kennedy, our nations
only Catholic president, and try to overlook the pro-choice stance of many supporters of the
liberal movement.  On the other hand, Conservative Catholics support the often staunch pro-life views of most Conservatives, as well as the social and moral ideas proposed by the
Conservative Movement.  For many Catholics, though, modern politics leaves them feeling
like bizarre chimeras, unable to completely support one cause, and looking to the Church for
answers.  We shall now study these two modern American political movements, and leave you
to make your own decision.