One of the greatest burdens of the historian is knowing just how much has been sacrificed, just how much is at stake, and just how small his own life is compared to everything that’s preceded him; and, despite it all, knowing his duty to at least attempt to understand and transcribe the past, while coping with both the odds consistently stacked against the knowing and the fact that his own life will scarcely measure up to the great feats throughout a history he knows too well.
There is much confusion surrounding the concept of the “separation of church and state”; much of it likely born out of the steep secular decline in religious affiliation across recent generations, with particular emphasis among atheists and anti-deists. While many have hastened to leverage this language (“separation of church and state”) in order to condemn or censure religious values — particularly those which are Christian — where they have carried influence in public life (i.e. prayer in schools, teachers covering lessons from the Bible, government representatives appealing to God, coinage bearing the words “In God We Trust”), the truth is that this “separation” was never expected to completely eliminate religious practice or religious sentiment from all matter of public life. In fact, religion was so deeply enmeshed in American life during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries that the French magistrate and prison reformer Gustave de Beaumont, during his nine-month tour of A...
Comments
Post a Comment