Historical Background on Religious Test for Government Offices

prev | next

Article VI, Clause 3:

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

England historically required public officeholders not only to swear an oath of loyalty to the Crown, the head of the state-sponsored Church of England, but also to take communion in that church.1 Religious test oaths were initially required in the colonies, as well, as part of the legal framework supporting state-established churches.2 The Constitution Annotated discusses the features of historic state-sponsored religions, known as religious establishments, in the context of the Religion Clauses.3 Looking specifically at religious tests, early Puritans and other colonists believed oaths requiring conformance to Christian values were necessary to ensure that officials were of good moral character.4 These arguments held particular force for colonies seeking to establish religiously pure communities.5 Religious minorities protested these oaths, some because of general religious objections to taking oaths, and others because the oaths elevated specific religious views.6

As the movement to disestablish state-sponsored religion gained traction in the years following the Revolution,7 some Founders argued a person’s religious beliefs should no longer disqualify them for public office.8 At the federal constitutional convention, on August 20, 1787, Charles Pinckney introduced a prohibition on religious tests.9 His proposal read: “No religious test or qualification shall ever be annexed to any oath of office under the authority of the U.S.” 10 Pinckney explained that this provision was expected in “a System founded on Republican Principles.” 11 He stressed that the new democracy stemmed from the Enlightenment movement,12 a philosophy that emphasized individual reasoning over central state dogmas and led to more religious toleration.13 Opposing Pinckney’s proposal, Roger Sherman believed the provision was unnecessary because the “prevailing liberality” towards religious beliefs would itself provide “sufficient security” against religious tests.14 The convention voted to adopt the final version of Pinckney’s proposal on August 30, 1787, with the journal recording the vote as unanimous, and James Madison’s notes recording North Carolina as the only “no” vote on the Article as a whole.15

The constitutional prohibition on religious tests engendered some controversy during state ratification debates, particularly given that most states still retained some form of religious test for public officeholders.16 Some delegates to state ratification conventions opposed the provision on the grounds that it would allow non-Christians to obtain public office.17 One Massachusetts delegate claimed, for example, “that a person could not be a good man without being a good Christian.” 18 Delegates favoring the provision believed it helped secure religious liberty by preventing government persecution of disfavored sects and government interference in matters of private conscience.19 One delegate pointed out that requiring a religious test oath would not necessarily ensure officeholders would be of good morals, since “unprincipled and dishonest men will not hesitate to subscribe to any thing” for their advancement.20 That same delegate argued “that there are worthy characters among men of every other denomination . . . and even among those who have no other guide, in the way to virtue and heaven, than the dictates of natural religion.” 21 Ultimately, not only did the states ratify the Constitution’s “no religious test” clause, many states removed or loosened their own religious test oaths between 1789 and 1796.22

In the 1800 presidential contest between Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, a New York minister named William Linn published a pamphlet opposing Jefferson on the basis that he “reject[ed]” the “Christian Religion” and openly professed “Deism.” 23 Acknowledging that the Constitution did not prevent non-Christians from serving, Linn nonetheless argued that Jefferson should “set his name to the first part of the apostle’s creed” in order to prove his character.24 Linn and like-minded ministers argued that voters should impose their own religious test—a voluntary restriction that would be all the more “striking” given the lack of a constitutional provision requiring Christianity.25 Voters rejected these arguments and elected Jefferson president.26 Adams attributed his electoral loss to popular opposition to a religious establishment, noting presumably false claims that Adams would have “introduce[d] an Establishment of Presbyterianism.” 27 In his view, a number of voters “said Let Us have an Atheist or Deist or any Thing rather than an Establishment of Presbyterianism.” 28

1: See Test Act, Encyclopedia Britannica, https://www.britannica.com/topic/test-act (last visited July 13, 2022); Leo Pfeffer, Church, State, and Freedom 252 (rev. ed. 1967). For more discussion of English test oaths, see Amdt1.2.2.2 England and Religious Freedom.
2: See Amdt1.2.2.3 State-Established Religion in the Colonies. Cf., e.g., Pfeffer, supra note 1, at 252–53 (noting that “for a short time Rhode Island was an exception” in not requiring religious tests and giving examples of the oaths required by early state constitutions).
3: Amdt1.2.2.1 Introduction to the Historical Background on the Religion Clauses.
4: See, e.g., Frank Lambert, The Founding Fathers and the Place of Religion in America 250 (2003); John Witte, Jr. & Joel A. Nichols, Religion and the American Constitutional Experiment 50 (4th ed. 2016).
5: See, e.g., Lambert, supra note 4, at 236–37.
6: See, e.g., Witte & Nichols, supra note 4, at 50.
7: See Amdt1.2.2.5 Virginia’s Movement Towards Religious Freedom; Amdt1.2.2.8 Early Interpretations of the Religion Clauses.
8: See, e.g., Pfeffer, supra note 1, at 253; see also, e.g., Letter from Benjamin Franklin to Richard Price (Oct. 9, 1780), >https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Franklin/01-33-02-0330 (expressing his opposition to religious tests and his hope that states would move further away from them).
9: 2 The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, at 342 (Max Farrand ed., 1911).
10: Id.
11: 3 The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, at 122 (Max Farrand ed., 1911).
12: Id.
13: See generally, e.g., Shane J. Ralston, American Enlightenment Thought, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, https://iep.utm.edu/american-enlightenment-thought/ (last visited Aug. 15, 2022).
14: 2 The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, at 468 (Max Farrand ed., 1911).
15: Id. at 461, 468.
16: See, e.g., Pfeffer, supra note 1, at 254.
17: Letter from James Madison to Thomas Jefferson (Oct. 17, 1788), (noting this view disapprovingly); see also, e.g., XXX The Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution and the Adoption of the Bill of Rights 403 (eds. John P. Kaminski et al. 2009) (statement of Mr. Abbot) [hereinafter Documentary History of Ratification].
18: VI Documentary History of Ratification, supra note 17, at 1377 (statement of Col. Jones).
19: See, e.g., VI Documentary History of Ratification, supra note 17, at 1421–22 (statement of Rev. Backus); X Documentary History of Ratification, supra note 17, at 1531 (statement of Mr. Johnson); XXX Documentary History of Ratification, supra note 17, at 404–05 (statement of Mr. Parsons). Accord A Landholder VII, reprinted in III Documentary History of Ratification, supra note 17, at 498–500.
20: VI Documentary History of Ratification, supra note 17, at 1376 (statement of Rev. Shute).
21: Id.
22: Witte & Nichols, supra note 4, at 50–51.
23: William Linn, Serious Considerations on the Election of a President 4 (1800).
24: Id. at 32.
25: Id. at 28; see also Lambert, supra note 4, at 276–78.
26: Lambert, supra note 4, at 280–81.
27: Letter from John Adams to Mercy Otis Warren (Aug. 8, 1807), https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/99-02-02-5203.
28: Id.