On Friday, August 13, 1965, a small, beat-up cargo ship set sail from Calcutta. In addition to the crew, one passenger, A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami, disembarked in New York City with 40 rupees, a three-month visa, and a mission to bring Krishna consciousness to the Western world.
60 years later, thanks to vigorous public engagement, widespread distribution of religious literature, and the highly visible practice of chanting “Hare Krishna” in public spaces, the success of Bhaktivedanta Swami’s mission can be seen in the many hundreds of temples and centers established around the globe, the many millions of books distributed, and the thousands of festivals held around the world every year.
A well-timed liberalization of US immigration laws helped, but the one essential thing that made it possible for His Divine Grace, A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, to come to the United States of America and plant the seed for the worldwide Hare Krishna movement that we have the privilege of participating in today is the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which says:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
The first section of this Amendment, known as “the Establishment Clause,” is particularly significant for members of the Hare Krishna Movement. Thanks to the First Amendment, Srila Prabhupada could freely speak to anyone and everyone about Krishna consciousness, chant the holy names in public spaces, and establish ISKCON under New York’s Religious Corporation Law.
The political circumstances that provided a legal foundation for the humble origins and phenomenal growth of the Hare Krishna movement clearly illustrate how spiritual movements exist within political contexts. This means that caretakers and proponents of spiritual movements have a duty to respond meaningfully to surrounding political conditions.
When it was adopted in 1791, the First Amendment was only applied to Federal law. In 1925, the United States Supreme Court ruled that it also applied to states, and, in 1947, the Court drew on Thomas Jefferson’s metaphor of “a wall of separation between church and State” for its decision in a landmark case, Everson v. Board of Education.
This decision stands as one of the most influential rulings on the intention of the Establishment Clause insofar as our government’s relationship with religion is concerned. Listen to the clear and comprehensive language Justice Hugo Black used in writing the majority opinion:
“The ‘establishment of religion’ clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions or prefer one religion over another. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa.”
The separation between church and state, clearly defined in this decision, was the necessary political condition for Srila Prabhupada to come to the United States and preach the message of Lord Chaitanya.
What if the wall of separation between church and state were to be dismantled?
This is not a rhetorical question because it’s actually happening right now. Lawmakers across the country are working very hard to demolish the wall of separation between church and state in the United States.
For example, in Oklahoma, the state school superintendent ordered public schools to incorporate the Bible into lessons for grades 5 through 12. The order made it clear that adherence to the mandate was compulsory and strict compliance was expected, adding that “The Bible is an indispensable historical and cultural touchstone. Without basic knowledge of it, Oklahoma students are unable to properly contextualize the foundation of our nation.”
This last phrase clearly implies a connection between church and state that contradicts the intention of the First Amendment’s “Establishment Clause.”
This past November, a federal judge temporarily blocked a Louisiana law requiring every public school classroom to display a specific, state-approved version of the Ten Commandments commonly used by Protestants that also happens to match the version used in the 1960 movie, “The Ten Commandments” starring Charlton Heston in the role of Moses.
Comments