Divyanshu67/squad_v2 huggingface dataset:
Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

In Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97 (1968), the Supreme Court considered an Arkansas law that made it a crime "to teach the theory or doctrine that mankind ascended or descended from a lower order of animals," or "to adopt or use in any such institution a textbook that teaches" this theory in any school or university that received public funds. The court's opinion, written by Justice Abe Fortas, ruled that the Arkansas law violated "the constitutional prohibition of state laws respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The overriding fact is that Arkansas' law selects from the body of knowledge a particular segment which it proscribes for the sole reason that it is deemed to conflict with a particular religious doctrine; that is, with a particular interpretation of the Book of Genesis by a particular religious group." The court held that the Establishment Clause prohibits the state from advancing any religion, and that "[T]he state has no legitimate interest in protecting any or all religions from views distasteful to them."

Question: When did the case of Epperson v. Arkansas take place?
Answer: 1968

Question: What did an Arkansas law make it a crime to teach the theory of?
Answer: that mankind ascended or descended from a lower order of animals

Question: Who wrote the court's opinion in Epperson v. Arkansas?
Answer: Justice Abe Fortas

Question: What did the Arkansas law violate the constitutional prohibition of state laws in respect to?
Answer: an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

Question: What does the State have no legitimate interest in protecting any or all religions from?
Answer: views distasteful to them

Question: When did the case of Ipperson v. Kansas take place?

Question:  What did an Arkansas law make it legal to teach the theory of?

Question:  Who wrote the court's opinion in Epperson v. Kansas?

Question: What did the Kansas law violate the constitutional prohibition of state laws in respect to?

Question: What does the State have legitimate interest in protecting any or all religions from?
Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

In Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971), the court determined that a Pennsylvania state policy of reimbursing the salaries and related costs of teachers of secular subjects in private religious schools violated the Establishment Clause. The court's decision argued that the separation of church and state could never be absolute: "Our prior holdings do not call for total separation between church and state; total separation is not possible in an absolute sense. Some relationship between government and religious organizations is inevitable," the court wrote. "Judicial caveats against entanglement must recognize that the line of separation, far from being a "wall," is a blurred, indistinct, and variable barrier depending on all the circumstances of a particular relationship."

Question: When was the case of Lemon v. Kurtzman?
Answer: 1971

Question: What state's policy was in question in Lemon v. Kurtzman?
Answer: Pennsylvania

Question: Whose salaries were being reimbursed in private religious schools?
Answer: teachers of secular subjects

Question: What did the state's policy violate?
Answer: the Establishment Clause

Question: What did the court's decision argue that the separation of church and state could never be?
Answer: absolute

Question: When was the case of Lime v. Kurtzman?

Question:  What state's policy was in question in Lime v. Kurtzman?

Question:  Whose salaries were being reimbursed in public religious schools?

Question:  What did the state's policy not violate?

Question: What did the court's decision argue that the separation of church and state could always be?
Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

Subsequent to this decision, the Supreme Court has applied a three-pronged test to determine whether government action comports with the Establishment Clause, known as the "Lemon Test". First, the law or policy must have been adopted with a neutral or non-religious purpose. Second, the principle or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion. Third, the statute or policy must not result in an "excessive entanglement" of government with religion. (The decision in Lemon v. Kurtzman hinged upon the conclusion that the government benefits were flowing disproportionately to Catholic schools, and that Catholic schools were an integral component of the Catholic Church's religious mission, thus the policy involved the state in an "excessive entanglement" with religion.) Failure to meet any of these criteria is a proof that the statute or policy in question violates the Establishment Clause.

Question: How many prongs is the Supreme COurt's test to determine if a government action comports with the Establishment Clause?
Answer: three

Question: What is the three-pronged test regarding the Establishment Clause know as?
Answer: "Lemon Test"

Question: To not violate the Establishment Clause, a law must be adopted with neutral or what purpose?
Answer: non-religious

Question: What much the primary effect of a law neither advance or inhibit?
Answer: religion

Question: Excessive entanglement occurs when a state policy results in a close relationship of what?
Answer: government with religion

Question: How many prongs is the Supreme COurt's test to determine if a government action comports without the Establishment Clause?

Question: What is the four-pronged test regarding the Establishment Clause know as?

Question: To violate the Establishment Clause, a law must be adopted with neutral or what purpose?

Question:  What much the primary effect of a law both advance and inhibit?

Question: Excessive entanglement occurs when a state policy results in a distant relationship of what?
Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

In 2002, a three judge panel on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that classroom recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in a California public school was unconstitutional, even when students were not compelled to recite it, due to the inclusion of the phrase "under God." In reaction to the case, Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, both houses of Congress passed measures reaffirming their support for the pledge, and condemning the panel's ruling. The case was appealed to the Supreme Court, where the case was ultimately overturned in June 2004, solely on procedural grounds not related to the substantive constitutional issue. Rather, a five-justice majority held that Newdow, a non-custodial parent suing on behalf of his daughter, lacked standing to sue.

Question: How many judges were on the panel which held the Pledge of Allegiance in California public schools was unconstitutional?
Answer: three

Question: When did the three judge panel make their ruling?
Answer: 2002

Question: What did both houses of Congress pass measures reaffirming their support for?
Answer: the Pledge of Allegiance

Question: Why was the case of Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow overturned?
Answer: procedural grounds

Question: What did the five-justice majority hold that Newdow lacked?
Answer: standing to sue

Question: How many judges weren't on the panel which held the Pledge of Allegiance in California public schools was unconstitutional?

Question: When did the three judge panel fail to make their ruling?

Question: What did neither house of Congress pass measures reaffirming their support for?

Question: Why was the case of Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow not overturned?

Question:  What did the six-justice majority hold that Newdow lacked?
Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

On December 20, 2005, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled in the case of ACLU v. Mercer County that the continued display of the Ten Commandments as part of a larger display on American legal traditions in a Kentucky courthouse was allowed, because the purpose of the display (educating the public on American legal traditions) was secular in nature. In ruling on the Mount Soledad cross controversy on May 3, 2006, however, a federal judge ruled that the cross on public property on Mount Soledad must be removed.

Question: When did the US Court of Appeals rule in the case of ACLU v. Mercer County?
Answer: December 20, 2005

Question: What was displayed in Kentucky courthouses?
Answer: the Ten Commandments

Question: Why were the displays of the ten Commandments allowed?
Answer: secular in nature

Question: When was a ruling handed down on the Mount Soledad cross controversy?
Answer: May 3, 2006

Question: What did a federal judge rule must be removed from public property?
Answer: the cross

Question: When did the US Court of Appeals not rule in the case of ACLU v. Mercer County?

Question:  What was not displayed in Kentucky courthouses?

Question:  Why were the displays of the ten Commandments disallowed?

Question: When was a ruling not handed down on the Mount Soledad cross controversy?

Question: What did a federal judge rule must be removed from private property?
Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

In what will be the case is Town of Greece v. Galloway, 12-696, the Supreme Court agreed to hear a case regarding whether prayers at town meetings, which are allowed, must allow various faiths to lead prayer, or whether the prayers can be predominately Christian. On May 5, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in favor of the Town of Greece by holding that the U.S. Constitution not only allows for prayer at government meetings, but also for sectarian prayers like predominately Christian prayers.

Question: What case is in regards to whether prayers at town meetings must allow various faiths?
Answer: Town of Greece v. Galloway

Question: When did the Supreme Court rule on Town of Greece v. Galloway?
Answer: May 5, 2014

Question: What was the Supreme Court's final vote in Town of Greece v. Galloway?
Answer: 5-4

Question: Who did the Supreme Court rule in favor of?
Answer: Town of Greece

Question: What did the Supreme Court rule the Constitution allowed for?
Answer: sectarian prayers

Question: What case is in regards to whether prayers at town meetings must not allow various faiths?

Question:  When did the Supreme Court not rule on Town of Greece v. Galloway?

Question:  What wasn't the Supreme Court's final vote in Town of Greece v. Galloway?

Question: Who did the Supreme Court not rule in favor of?

Question:  What did the Supreme Court rule the Constitution disallowed for?
Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

Some scholars and organizations disagree with the notion of "separation of church and state", or the way the Supreme Court has interpreted the constitutional limitation on religious establishment. Such critics generally argue that the phrase misrepresents the textual requirements of the Constitution, while noting that many aspects of church and state were intermingled at the time the Constitution was ratified. These critics argue that the prevalent degree of separation of church and state could not have been intended by the constitutional framers. Some of the intermingling between church and state include religious references in official contexts, and such other founding documents as the United States Declaration of Independence, which references the idea of a "Creator" and "Nature's God", though these references did not ultimately appear in the Constitution nor do they mention any particular religious view of a "Creator" or "Nature's God."

Question: What do some organizations disagree with the notion of?
Answer: separation of church and state

Question: What do scholars also disagree with about the way the Supreme Court has interpreted what?
Answer: constitutional limitation on religious establishment

Question: What do the critics argue the phrase misrepresents?
Answer: the textual requirements of the Constitution

Question: What do critics note were intermingled at the time the Constitution was ratified?
Answer: many aspects of church and state

Question: What do these critics argue couldn't have been intended by the framers of the constitution?
Answer: prevalent degree of separation of church and state

Question: What do some organizations agree with the notion of?

Question: What do scholars also agree with about the way the Supreme Court has interpreted what?

Question:  What don't the critics argue the phrase misrepresents?

Question: What do critics note were intermingled at the time the Constitution was not ratified?

Question:  What do these critics argue could have been intended by the framers of the constitution?
Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

These critics of the modern separation of church and state also note the official establishment of religion in several of the states at the time of ratification, to suggest that the modern incorporation of the Establishment Clause as to state governments goes against the original constitutional intent.[citation needed] The issue is complex, however, as the incorporation ultimately bases on the passage of the 14th Amendment in 1868, at which point the first amendment's application to the state government was recognized. Many of these constitutional debates relate to the competing interpretive theories of originalism versus modern, progressivist theories such as the doctrine of the Living Constitution. Other debates center on the principle of the law of the land in America being defined not just by the Constitution's Supremacy Clause, but also by legal precedence, making an accurate reading of the Constitution subject to the mores and values of a given era, and rendering the concept of historical revisionism irrelevant when discussing the Constitution.

Question: Critics of modern separation of church and state note there was official establishment of what in several states at the time of ratification?
Answer: religion

Question: When was the passage of the 14th Amendment?
Answer: 1868

Question: What was recognized by the time the 14th Amendment passed?
Answer: first amendment's application to the state government

Question: What kind of theory is the doctrine of the Living Constitution?
Answer: progressivist

Question: What do some debates center on the law of the land not being just defined by the Constitution's Supremacy Clause but also by what?
Answer: legal precedence

Question: Critics of modern separation of church and state note there was unofficial establishment of what in several states at the time of ratification?

Question:  When was the passage of the 15th Amendment?

Question:  What wasn't recognized by the time the 14th Amendment passed?

Question:  What kind of theory is the doctrine of the Dead Constitution?

Question: What do some debates center on the law of the land being just defined by the Constitution's Supremacy Clause but also by what?
Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

The "religious test" clause has been interpreted to cover both elected officials and appointed ones, career civil servants as well as political appointees. Religious beliefs or the lack of them have therefore not been permissible tests or qualifications with regard to federal employees since the ratification of the Constitution. Seven states, however, have language included in their Bill of Rights, Declaration of Rights, or in the body of their constitutions that require state office-holders to have particular religious beliefs, though some of these have been successfully challenged in court. These states are Texas, Massachusetts, Maryland, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Tennessee.

Question: What clause are both elected officials and appointed ones covered by?
Answer: religious test

Question: What type of beliefs are not an allowed job qualification test for federal employees?
Answer: Religious

Question: How many states violate the religious test clause with language somewhere in their official policies?
Answer: Seven

Question: What do states violate the clause require state office-holders to possess?
Answer: particular religious beliefs

Question: What clause are neither elected officials and appointed ones covered by?

Question:  What type of beliefs are an allowed job qualification test for federal employees?

Question: How many states violate the religious test clause without language somewhere in their official policies?

Question: What don't states violate the clause require state office-holders to possess?
Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

The required beliefs of these clauses include belief in a Supreme Being and belief in a future state of rewards and punishments. (Tennessee Constitution Article IX, Section 2 is one such example.) Some of these same states specify that the oath of office include the words "so help me God." In some cases these beliefs (or oaths) were historically required of jurors and witnesses in court. At one time, such restrictions were allowed under the doctrine of states' rights; today they are deemed to be in violation of the federal First Amendment, as applied to the states via the 14th amendment, and hence unconstitutional and unenforceable.

Question: What do the non-permissible clauses require a belief in?
Answer: a Supreme Being

Question: What's one example in Tennessee's constitution?
Answer: Article IX, Section 2

Question: What language do some of the same states specify the oath of office include?
Answer: so help me God

Question: Requiring oaths invoking God are today deemed to be in violation of what?
Answer: federal First Amendment

Question: Because such oaths are in violation of the First Amendment, they're what?
Answer: unconstitutional and unenforceable

Question: What do the permissible clauses require a belief in?

Question:  What's not one example in Tennessee's constitution?

Question:  What language do some of the different states specify the oath of office include?

Question:  Requiring oaths invoking God are today deemed to not be in violation of what?

Question: Because such oaths are in violation of the Second Amendment, they're what?
Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

Relaxed zoning rules and special parking privileges for churches, the tax-free status of church property, the fact that Christmas is a federal holiday, etc., have also been questioned, but have been considered examples of the governmental prerogative in deciding practical and beneficial arrangements for the society. The national motto "In God We Trust" has been challenged as a violation, but the Supreme Court has ruled that ceremonial deism is not religious in nature. A circuit court ruling affirmed Ohio's right to use as its motto a passage from the Bible, "With God, all things are possible", because it displayed no preference for a particular religion.

Question: Why have perks like relaxed zoning rules and special parking privileges been allowed for churches?
Answer: beneficial arrangements for the society

Question: What is the national motto "In God We Trust" officially known as?
Answer: ceremonial deism

Question: What has the Supreme Court ruled about ceremonial deism?
Answer: not religious in nature

Question: What state uses as a motto a passage from the Bible?
Answer: Ohio

Question: Why was Ohio allowed to use a biblical passage as its motto?
Answer: because it displayed no preference for a particular religion

Question: Why have perks like relaxed zoning rules and special parking privileges been disallowed for churches?

Question:  What is the national motto "In God We Trust" unofficially known as?

Question:  What has the Supreme Court not ruled about ceremonial deism?

Question:  What state doesn't use a passage from the Bible?

Question:  Why was Ohio disallowed from using a biblical passage as its motto?
Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

Jeffries and Ryan (2001) argue that the modern concept of separation of church and state dates from the mid-twentieth century rulings of the Supreme Court. The central point, they argue, was a constitutional ban against aid to religious schools, followed by a later ban on religious observance in public education. Jeffries and Ryan argue that these two propositions—that public aid should not go to religious schools and that public schools should not be religious—make up the separationist position of the modern Establishment Clause.

Question: When do Jeffries and Ryan that the modern concept of separation of church and state dates from?
Answer: mid-twentieth century

Question: What was the central point of the rulings of the Supreme Court's rulings?
Answer: constitutional ban against aid to religious schools

Question: What was later banned in public education?
Answer: religious observance

Question: How many propositions make up the separationist position on the Establishment Clause?
Answer: two

Question: When don't Jeffries and Ryan that the modern concept of separation of church and state dates from?

Question: What was the non-central point of the rulings of the Supreme Court's rulings?

Question: What was later not banned in public education?

Question:  How many propositions make up the separationist position on the Non-Establishment Clause?
Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

Jeffries and Ryan argue that no-aid position drew support from a coalition of separationist opinion. Most important was "the pervasive secularism that came to dominate American public life," which sought to confine religion to a private sphere. Further, the ban against government aid to religious schools was supported before 1970 by most Protestants (and most Jews), who opposed aid to religious schools, which were mostly Catholic at the time. After 1980, however, anti-Catholic sentiment has diminished among mainline Protestants, and the crucial coalition of public secularists and Protestant churches has collapsed. While mainline Protestant denominations are more inclined towards strict separation of church and state, much evangelical opinion has now largely deserted that position. As a consequence, strict separationism is opposed today by members of many Protestant faiths, even perhaps eclipsing the opposition of Roman Catholics.[citation needed]

Question: What position do Jeffries and Ryan argue was the reason for support from a coalition of separationists?
Answer: no-aid

Question: What type of secularism came to dominate American public life?
Answer: pervasive

Question: Who supported the ban against government aid to religious schools before 1970?
Answer: most Protestants (and most Jews)

Question: What diminished after 1980?
Answer: anti-Catholic sentiment

Question: What is opposed today by members of many Protestant faiths?
Answer: strict separationism

Question: What position do Jeffries and Ryan argue wasn't the reason for support from a coalition of separationists?

Question:  What type of secularism came to dominate Non-American public life?

Question: Who supported the unban against government aid to religious schools before 1970?

Question:  What diminished after 1981?

Question:  What is opposed today by members of no Protestant faiths?
Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

Critics of the modern concept of the "separation of church and state" argue that it is untethered to anything in the text of the constitution and is contrary to the conception of the phrase as the Founding Fathers understood it. Philip Hamburger, Columbia Law school professor and prominent critic of the modern understanding of the concept, maintains that the modern concept, which deviates from the constitutional establishment clause jurisprudence, is rooted in American anti-Catholicism and Nativism.[citation needed] Briefs before the Supreme Court, including by the U.S. government, have argued that some state constitutional amendments relating to the modern conception of separation of church and state (Blaine Amendments) were motivated by and intended to enact anti-Catholicism.

Question: What do critics of the concept of separation of church and state argue it's untethered to?
Answer: anything in the text of the constitution

Question: What is the profession of Philip Hamburger?
Answer: professor

Question: What school is Philip Hamburger associated with?
Answer: Columbia Law school

Question: What does Hamburger feel the modern concept of separation of church and state is rooted in?
Answer: American anti-Catholicism

Question: What are state constitutional amendments relating to separation of church and state known as?
Answer: Blaine Amendments

Question: What do critics of the concept of separation of church and state argue it's tethered to?

Question:  What isn't the profession of Philip Hamburger?

Question:  What school is Philip Hamburger disassociated with?

Question: What does Hamburger feel the modern concept of separation of church and state is not rooted in?

Question: What are state constitutional amendments relating to separation of church and state never known as?
Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

J. Brent Walker, Executive Director of the Baptist Joint Committee, responded to Hamburger's claims noting; "The fact that the separation of church and state has been supported by some who exhibited an anti-Catholic animus or a secularist bent does not impugn the validity of the principle. Champions of religious liberty have argued for the separation of church and state for reasons having nothing to do with anti-Catholicism or desire for a secular culture. Of course, separationists have opposed the Catholic Church when it has sought to tap into the public till to support its parochial schools or to argue for on-campus released time in the public schools. But that principled debate on the issues does not support a charge of religious bigotry"

Question: Who is the Executive Director of the Baptist Joint Committee?
Answer: J. Brent Walker

Question: What does Walker feel does not impugn the validity of the principle of separation of church and state?
Answer: supported by some who exhibited an anti-Catholic animus or a secularist bent

Question: Who have argued for the separation of church and state for reasons having nothing to do with a desire for a secular culture?
Answer: Champions of religious liberty

Question: Separationists opposed the Catholic church when it sought to do what?
Answer: tap into the public till to support its parochial schools

Question: What does a principled debate on the issues not support a charge of?
Answer: religious bigotry

Question:  Who is the former Executive Director of the Baptist Joint Committee?

Question: What does Walker feel does impugn the validity of the principle of separation of church and state?

Question:  Who have argued for the separation of church and state for reasons having everything to do with a desire for a secular culture?

Question: Separationists agreed with the Catholic church when it sought to do what?

Question: What does a principled debate on the issues support a charge of?
Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

Steven Waldman notes that; "The evangelicals provided the political muscle for the efforts of Madison and Jefferson, not merely because they wanted to block official churches but because they wanted to keep the spiritual and secular worlds apart." "Religious freedom resulted from an alliance of unlikely partners," writes the historian Frank Lambert in his book The Founding Fathers and the Place of Religion in America. "New Light evangelicals such as Isaac Bachus and John Leland joined forces with Deists and skeptics such as James Madison and Thomas Jefferson to fight for a complete separation of church and state."

Question: What did evangelicals want to keep apart?
Answer: the spiritual and secular worlds

Question: What did religious freedom result from?
Answer: an alliance of unlikely partners

Question: What profession does Frank Lambert have?
Answer: historian

Question: What is the name of Lambert's book?
Answer: The Founding Fathers and the Place of Religion in America

Question: What did Deists and skeptics join together to fight for?
Answer: a complete separation of church and state

Question:  What didn't evangelicals want to keep apart?

Question:  What didn't religious freedom result from?

Question:  What profession doesn't Frank Lambert have?

Question:  What is the name of Mambert's book?

Question:  What did Deists and skeptics join together to fight against?
Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

Robert N. Bellah has in his writings that although the separation of church and state is grounded firmly in the constitution of the United States, this does not mean that there is no religious dimension in the political society of the United States. He used the term "Civil Religion" to describe the specific relation between politics and religion in the United States. His 1967 article analyzes the inaugural speech of John F. Kennedy: "Considering the separation of church and state, how is a president justified in using the word 'God' at all? The answer is that the separation of church and state has not denied the political realm a religious dimension."

Question: What does Bellah say the separation of church and state is grounded firmly in?
Answer: constitution of the United States

Question: What does Bellah use the term "civil religion' to describe?
Answer: the specific relation between politics and religion

Question: Whose speech does Bellah's 1967 article analyze?
Answer: John F. Kennedy

Question: What word does Bellah ask how a President is justified to use?
Answer: God

Question: What has the separation of church and state failed to deny the political realm of?
Answer: a religious dimension

Question: What does Bellah say the separation of church and state is not grounded firmly in?

Question:  What doesn't Bellah use the term "civil religion' to describe?

Question:  Whose speech does Bellah's 1977 article analyze?

Question:  What word does Bellah ask how a President is justified to not use?

Question: What has the separation of church and state failed to approve the political realm of?
Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

Robert S. Wood has argued that the United States is a model for the world in terms of how a separation of church and state—no state-run or state-established church—is good for both the church and the state, allowing a variety of religions to flourish. Speaking at the Toronto-based Center for New Religions, Wood said that the freedom of conscience and assembly allowed under such a system has led to a "remarkable religiosity" in the United States that isn't present in other industrialized nations. Wood believes that the U.S. operates on "a sort of civic religion," which includes a generally-shared belief in a creator who "expects better of us." Beyond that, individuals are free to decide how they want to believe and fill in their own creeds and express their conscience. He calls this approach the "genius of religious sentiment in the United States."

Question: Who has argued the United States is a model for the world in separation of church and state is a good thing?
Answer: Robert S. Wood

Question: What does having no state-run or state-established allow a variety of religions to do?
Answer: flourish

Question: Where is the Center for New Religions located?
Answer: Toronto

Question: What does Wood believe the U.S. operates on?
Answer: a sort of civic religion

Question: What does Wood call the approach of allowing individuals the freedom to decide what they want to believe?
Answer: genius of religious sentiment in the United States

Question: Who hasn't argued the United States is a model for the world in separation of church and state is a good thing?

Question: What does having no state-run or state-established allow a variety of non-religions to do?

Question:  Where did the Center for New Religions leave?

Question:  What does Wood believe the U.K. operates on?

Question:  What does Wood call the approach of allowing individuals the freedom to decide what they don't want to believe?
Protestantism

The second main principle, sola fide (by faith alone), states that faith in Christ is sufficient alone for eternal salvation. Though argued from scripture, and hence logically consequent to sola scriptura, this is the guiding principle of the work of Luther and the later reformers. Because sola scriptura placed the Bible as the only source of teaching, sola fide epitomises the main thrust of the teaching the reformers wanted to get back to, namely the direct, close, personal connection between Christ and the believer, hence the reformers' contention that their work was Christocentric.

Question: What is the second principle of Protestantism?
Answer: sola fide (by faith alone)

Question: What was Luther's main principle?
Answer: sola fide (by faith alone)

Question: What principle made the Bible the one source for teaching?
Answer: sola scriptura

Question: What did reformers considered their beliefs to be, in terms of focus?
Answer: Christocentric

Question: Faith can bring what eternal benefit?
Answer: salvation
Protestantism

Following the excommunication of Luther and condemnation of the Reformation by the Pope, the work and writings of John Calvin were influential in establishing a loose consensus among various groups in Switzerland, Scotland, Hungary, Germany and elsewhere. After the expulsion of its Bishop in 1526, and the unsuccessful attempts of the Bern reformer William Farel, Calvin was asked to use the organisational skill he had gathered as a student of law to discipline the "fallen city" of Geneva. His Ordinances of 1541 involved a collaboration of Church affairs with the City council and consistory to bring morality to all areas of life. After the establishment of the Geneva academy in 1559, Geneva became the unofficial capital of the Protestant movement, providing refuge for Protestant exiles from all over Europe and educating them as Calvinist missionaries. The faith continued to spread after Calvin's death in 1563.

Question: Who condemned the Reformation?
Answer: the Pope

Question: Who wrote the Ordinances of 1541?
Answer: John Calvin

Question: What city became the unofficial capital of the Protestant movement?
Answer: Geneva

Question: What type of missionaries were taught in Geneva?
Answer: Calvinist

Question: When did John Calvin die?
Answer: 1563
Protestantism

Protestantism also spread from the German lands into France, where the Protestants were nicknamed Huguenots. Calvin continued to take an interest in the French religious affairs from his base in Geneva. He regularly trained pastors to lead congregations there. Despite heavy persecution, the Reformed tradition made steady progress across large sections of the nation, appealing to people alienated by the obduracy and the complacency of the Catholic establishment. French Protestantism came to acquire a distinctly political character, made all the more obvious by the conversions of nobles during the 1550s. This established the preconditions for a series of conflicts, known as the French Wars of Religion. The civil wars gained impetus with the sudden death of Henry II of France in 1559. Atrocity and outrage became the defining characteristics of the time, illustrated at their most intense in the St. Bartholomew's Day massacre of August 1572, when the Roman Catholic party annihilated between 30,000 and 100,000 Huguenots across France. The wars only concluded when Henry IV of France issued the Edict of Nantes, promising official toleration of the Protestant minority, but under highly restricted conditions. Roman Catholicism remained the official state religion, and the fortunes of French Protestants gradually declined over the next century, culminating in Louis XIV's Edict of Fontainebleau which revoked the Edict of Nantes and made Roman Catholicism the sole legal religion once again. In response to the Edict of Fontainebleau, Frederick William I, Elector of Brandenburg declared the Edict of Potsdam, giving free passage to Huguenot refugees. In the late 17th century many Huguenots fled to England, the Netherlands, Prussia, Switzerland, and the English and Dutch overseas colonies. A significant community in France remained in the Cévennes region.

Question: What was the nickname for French Protestants?
Answer: Huguenots

Question: What did the French find alienating about Catholicism?
Answer: the obduracy and the complacency of the Catholic establishment

Question: When were French nobles converted to Protestantism?
Answer: the 1550s

Question: Whose death caused an increase in the French civil wars?
Answer: Henry II

Question: When was the St. Bartholomew's Day massacre?
Answer: August 1572
Protestantism

The political separation of the Church of England from Rome under Henry VIII brought England alongside this broad Reformation movement. Reformers in the Church of England alternated between sympathies for ancient Catholic tradition and more Reformed principles, gradually developing into a tradition considered a middle way (via media) between the Roman Catholic and Protestant traditions. The English Reformation followed a particular course. The different character of the English Reformation came primarily from the fact that it was driven initially by the political necessities of Henry VIII. King Henry decided to remove the Church of England from the authority of Rome. In 1534, the Act of Supremacy recognized Henry as the only Supreme Head on earth of the Church of England. Between 1535 and 1540, under Thomas Cromwell, the policy known as the Dissolution of the Monasteries was put into effect. Following a brief Roman Catholic restoration during the reign of Mary I, a loose consensus developed during the reign of Elizabeth I. The Elizabethan Religious Settlement largely formed Anglicanism into a distinctive church tradition. The compromise was uneasy and was capable of veering between extreme Calvinism on the one hand and Roman Catholicism on the other. It was relatively successful until the Puritan Revolution or English Civil War in the 17th century.

Question: Under whose reign did the Church of England part from Rome?
Answer: Henry VIII

Question: When was the Act of Supremacy passed?
Answer: 1534

Question: Who was made the Supreme Head of the Church of England in 1534?
Answer: King Henry

Question: What made Anglicanism into a more distinct tradition?
Answer: The Elizabethan Religious Settlement

Question: In what years were the Dissolution of the Monasteries carried out?
Answer: Between 1535 and 1540
Protestantism

The success of the Counter-Reformation on the Continent and the growth of a Puritan party dedicated to further Protestant reform polarised the Elizabethan Age. The early Puritan movement was a movement for reform in the Church of England. The desire was for the Church of England to resemble more closely the Protestant churches of Europe, especially Geneva. The later Puritan movement, often referred to as dissenters and nonconformists, eventually led to the formation of various Reformed denominations.

Question: The growth of Puritanism happened during what age?
Answer: the Elizabethan Age

Question: The Puritan movement worked on reforming what church?
Answer: the Church of England

Question: What did the Puritans want the Church of England to emulate?
Answer: the Protestant churches of Europe

Question: What was another name for the later Puritan movement?
Answer: dissenters and nonconformists

Question: What did the later Puritan movement create?
Answer: various Reformed denominations
Protestantism

The Third Great Awakening refers to a hypothetical historical period that was marked by religious activism in American history and spans the late 1850s to the early 20th century. It affected pietistic Protestant denominations and had a strong element of social activism. It gathered strength from the postmillennial belief that the Second Coming of Christ would occur after mankind had reformed the entire earth. It was affiliated with the Social Gospel Movement, which applied Christianity to social issues and gained its force from the Awakening, as did the worldwide missionary movement. New groupings emerged, such as the Holiness, Nazarene, and Christian Science movements.

Question: When was the Third Great Awakening?
Answer: the late 1850s to the early 20th century

Question: What denominations did the Third Great Awakening affect?
Answer: pietistic Protestant denominations

Question: What movement was affiliated with the Third Great Awakening?
Answer: the Social Gospel Movement

Question: What other movement gained its force from the Third Great Awakening?
Answer: the worldwide missionary movement

Question: What new groups were formed as a result of the Third Great Awakening?
Answer: the Holiness, Nazarene, and Christian Science movements
Protestantism

In Europe, there has been a general move away from religious observance and belief in Christian teachings and a move towards secularism. The Enlightenment is largely responsible for the spread of secularism. Several scholars have argued for a link between the rise of secularism and Protestantism, attributing it to the wide-ranging freedom in the Protestant countries. In North America, South America and Australia Christian religious observance is much higher than in Europe. United States remains particularly religious in comparison to other developed countries. South America, historically Roman Catholic, has experienced a large Evangelical and Pentecostal infusion in the 20th and 21st centuries.

Question: What direction has Europe moved towards?
Answer: secularism

Question: What caused the spread of secularism?
Answer: The Enlightenment

Question: What areas have a higher rate of Christian observance?
Answer: North America, South America and Australia

Question: What country is more religious than other developed nations?
Answer: United States

Question: When did South America show an increase in Evangelicals?
Answer: the 20th and 21st centuries
Protestantism

In the view of many associated with the Radical Reformation, the Magisterial Reformation had not gone far enough. Radical Reformer, Andreas von Bodenstein Karlstadt, for example, referred to the Lutheran theologians at Wittenberg as the "new papists". Since the term "magister" also means "teacher", the Magisterial Reformation is also characterized by an emphasis on the authority of a teacher. This is made evident in the prominence of Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli as leaders of the reform movements in their respective areas of ministry. Because of their authority, they were often criticized by Radical Reformers as being too much like the Roman Popes. A more political side of the Radical Reformation can be seen in the thought and practice of Hans Hut, although typically Anabaptism has been associated with pacifism.

Question: Which reformation was seen as not being effective enough?
Answer: the Magisterial Reformation

Question: What did Karlstadt call Lutheran theologians?
Answer: new papists

Question: What is another name for magister?
Answer: teacher

Question: What were reform movement leaders compared to?
Answer: Roman Popes

Question: What has been linked with pacifism?
Answer: Anabaptism
Protestantism

Protestants can be differentiated according to how they have been influenced by important movements since the Reformation, today regarded as branches. Some of these movements have a common lineage, sometimes directly spawning individual denominations. Due to the earlier stated multitude of denominations, this section discusses only the largest denominational families, or branches, widely considered to be a part of Protestantism. These are, in alphabetical order: Adventist, Anglican, Baptist, Calvinist (Reformed), Lutheran, Methodist and Pentecostal. A small but historically significant Anabaptist branch is also discussed.

Question: What is another name for denominational families?
Answer: branches

Question: What are the major branches of Protestantism?
Answer: Adventist, Anglican, Baptist, Calvinist (Reformed), Lutheran, Methodist and Pentecostal

Question: What small branch of Protestantism will also be discussed?
Answer: Anabaptist

Question: What created the differentiation of Protestant branches?
Answer: how they have been influenced by important movements since the Reformation

Question: What do some branches share in common?
Answer: lineage
Protestantism

Baptists subscribe to a doctrine that baptism should be performed only for professing believers (believer's baptism, as opposed to infant baptism), and that it must be done by complete immersion (as opposed to affusion or sprinkling). Other tenets of Baptist churches include soul competency (liberty), salvation through faith alone, Scripture alone as the rule of faith and practice, and the autonomy of the local congregation. Baptists recognize two ministerial offices, pastors and deacons. Baptist churches are widely considered to be Protestant churches, though some Baptists disavow this identity.

Question: According to Baptists, who should have baptisms?
Answer: professing believers

Question: What type of baptism do Baptists conduct?
Answer: complete immersion

Question: What two offices do Baptists have?
Answer: pastors and deacons

Question: What type of churches are most Baptists churches considered to be?
Answer: Protestant

Question: What is another term for soul competency?
Answer: liberty
Protestantism

Soteriologically, most Methodists are Arminian, emphasizing that Christ accomplished salvation for every human being, and that humans must exercise an act of the will to receive it (as opposed to the traditional Calvinist doctrine of monergism). Methodism is traditionally low church in liturgy, although this varies greatly between individual congregations; the Wesleys themselves greatly valued the Anglican liturgy and tradition. Methodism is known for its rich musical tradition; John Wesley's brother, Charles, was instrumental in writing much of the hymnody of the Methodist Church, and many other eminent hymn writers come from the Methodist tradition.

Question: Methodists believe that Christ achieved salvation for whom?
Answer: every human being

Question: What do Methodists believe that one must do to receive Christ's salvation?
Answer: exercise an act of the will

Question: What is Methodism known for, as far as music goes?
Answer: its rich musical tradition

Question: Who wrote most of the Methodist hymns?
Answer: John Wesley's brother, Charles

Question: What Calvinist doctrine is focuses on salvation?
Answer: monergism
Protestantism

There are many other Protestant denominations that do not fit neatly into the mentioned branches, and are far smaller in membership. Some groups of individuals who hold basic Protestant tenets identify themselves simply as "Christians" or "born-again Christians". They typically distance themselves from the confessionalism and/or creedalism of other Christian communities by calling themselves "non-denominational" or "evangelical". Often founded by individual pastors, they have little affiliation with historic denominations.

Question: What do some groups of people who believe in basic Protestant principles identify as?
Answer: "Christians" or "born-again Christians"

Question: What denomination do these small groups belong to?
Answer: "non-denominational" or "evangelical"

Question: How much affiliation do these small groups have with historical denominations?
Answer: little

Question: Who has founded these small groups of Christians?
Answer: individual pastors
Protestantism

It gained great momentum in the 18th and 19th centuries with the emergence of Methodism and the Great Awakenings in Britain and North America. The origins of Evangelicalism are usually traced back to the English Methodist movement, Nicolaus Zinzendorf, the Moravian Church, Lutheran pietism, Presbyterianism and Puritanism. Among leaders and major figures of the Evangelical Protestant movement were John Wesley, George Whitefield, Jonathan Edwards, Billy Graham, Harold John Ockenga, John Stott and Martyn Lloyd-Jones.

Question: What period saw a large upswing in Evangelicalism?
Answer: the 18th and 19th centuries

Question: Methodism is part of what movement?
Answer: Evangelicalism

Question: Where did the Great Awakenings increase interest in Evangelicalism?
Answer: Britain and North America

Question: What man is associated with the beginnings of Evangelicalism?
Answer: Nicolaus Zinzendorf