01/29/2026
This is a letter I wrote to our Senators to encourage them to vote for SB388, the Robert Aitken Bible for Schools bill and to clear up the misconception about how this would violate the false claim of separation of church and state.
I am writing in support of SB 388 and to address claims that it violates the “separation of church and state.” While this phrase is frequently invoked in modern debate, it bears clarifying that the words “separation of church and state” do not appear anywhere in the United States Constitution.
The First Amendment provides two specific and limited restrictions on government action regarding religion: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” These clauses were intended to prevent the establishment of a national church while protecting the free expression of religious belief, not to expel religion from public life, public education, or historical instruction.
The oft-quoted “wall of separation” phrase originates from a private 1802 letter written by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association, written years after the First Amendment’s ratification. Importantly, Jefferson’s letter was meant to reassure religious citizens that the federal government would not interfere with their faith—not to prohibit religious expression or historical discussion in public settings.
This understanding is consistent with long-standing U.S. Supreme Court precedent.
In Abington School District v. Schempp (1963), while the Court ruled against state-mandated devotional Bible readings, it made an essential distinction that remains controlling today. The Court explicitly stated that the Bible and religion may be studied objectively in public schools as part of history, literature, or culture, noting that such study is “entirely permissible” and consistent with the Constitution. The Robert Aitken Bible is an historical artifact object lesson that teaches American history content standards of congress, culture, economics, embargo, and immigration.
Likewise, in Engel v. Vitale (1962), the Court prohibited government-composed prayer but did not bar religious references, instruction, or historical materials. These decisions draw a clear line between religious indoctrination, which is prohibited, and academic instruction about religion, which is allowed.
The Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed that acknowledging religion’s role in American history does not violate the Establishment Clause. In Marsh v. Chambers (1983), the Court upheld legislative prayer based on historical practice. In Van Orden v. Perry (2005), the Court ruled that a Ten Commandments monument on government property was constitutional due to its historical and cultural significance. More recently, in American Legion v. American Humanist Association (2019), the Court emphasized that historical religious symbols and references enjoy a strong presumption of constitutionality when tied to national heritage.
This precedent is directly relevant to Senate Bill 388 and the discussion surrounding the Robert Aitken Bible.
The Aitken Bible, printed in 1782, was the first English-language Bible printed in America and was formally endorsed by the Continental Congress, which recommended it “to the inhabitants of the United States.” This congressional action occurred during the Revolutionary period and reflects the Bible’s undeniable historical importance in early American life, education, and civic culture. The first ever Catholic Bible was not recommended and approved by Congress for the American people during the revolution and therefore should not be included in this bill.
When used in a classroom as a historical artifact, the Aitken Bible is no different than other primary source documents from the founding era, such as the Declaration of Independence, early colonial charters, or George Washington’s public addresses. Its inclusion for instructional purposes does not establish religion, compel belief, or promote worship. Instead, it helps students understand the intellectual and moral framework of the American founding.
The Supreme Court has consistently held that neutral, objective instruction about religion as part of history is constitutional. Senate Bill 388 aligns with this settled law. It does not mandate religious exercise, favor one denomination, or suppress differing beliefs. Rather, it allows educators to teach American history honestly and comprehensively.
Finally, it must be emphasized that the First Amendment protects not only against establishment, but also guarantees the free exercise of religion. Americans do not surrender their faith when they enter public life. Religious expression in the public square—whether by individuals, historical displays, or academic instruction—remains constitutionally protected.
For these reasons, Senate Bill 388 does not violate the separation of church and state. It reflects the Constitution’s original meaning, Supreme Court precedent, and the historical reality of America’s founding. The bill also states that these Bibles are to be purchased with private funds and not tax payer dollars. They are not forced on any teacher or student, but made available as a teaching tool for American history.
Thank you for your careful consideration and for your service to the people of West Virginia. I strongly encourage you to vote yes on this bill. Have a great day and God bless.
Sincerely,
Pastor Bo Burgess
Jordan Baptist Church
2430 Clendenin Pike
Gallipolis Ferry, WV 25515
jordanbaptistchurchwv.org
cell: 304-377-2328
PLEASE CONTACT YOUR SENATORS AND KINDLY ENCOURAGE THEM TO VOTE YES ON THIS BILL. THEY WILL VOTE ON IT TODAY, THURSDAY, JANUARY 29, DURING THE 11AM SESSION.
