The Religious Test Clause Debated during the Ratification Process

Among the devout, there were several clauses of the Constitution that generated wide discussion. In Article VI among provisions that addressed matters of oaths and allegiance, there was a clause that stipulated that “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public trust under the United States.” This was unique in that eleven out of thirteen states had some sort of religious test requirement for officeholders (pdf). For the national constitution to have such a prohibition led one observer to conclude that “the Constitution was de(i)stical in principle and in all probability the cumposers had no thought of God in the consultations.” Isaac Backus, a Baptist pastor from Massachusetts viewed the clause differently since “the imposing of religious tests hath been the greatest engine of tyranny in the world. And I rejoice to see so many gentlemen who are now giving in the rights of conscience.…” Others saw a religious oath as necessary, since without it, “it appears as if we are to depend on the honor of infidles.” Despite the fact that the Articles of Confederation had no oath requirements for officials, the prohibition of religious oaths in the Constitution was important during the ratification debates. Many Americans had difficulty imagining how, under the proposed Constitution, leaders could be civically virtuous without such an oath being requisite to public service. The matter was particularly prominent in the first North Carolina Ratification Convention meeting at Hillsborough.

The selections below provide a mixture of opinion regarding the issue. Many of the arguments found in the documents below foreshadow contemporary discussions about the meaning of the establishment clause of the First Amendment.