Dear Editor: Columnist George Weigel (Dec. 17) wrote compellingly of young peoples’ ignorance of American history and civic institutions. Interestingly, in her report on the return of the Christmas spirit to Grand Army Plaza that appeared in the same issue, Antonina Zielinska evinced the very thing Weigel was bemoaning. In explaining why a manger at Grand Army Plaza might face scrutiny, Zielinska chalked it up to “city regulations on separation of church and state and all.”

It should be noted that the phrase “separation of church and state”originated with the Founding Fathers in explaining the intent and function of the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. It is not a city regulation. It is not something to be dismissed casually with the phrase “and all.”

But it is something that Donald Trump, when he places his hand on the Bible in January to be sworn in as President of the United States will pledge to uphold. I trust you will clarify for impressionable readers who are easily confused the importance of this principle to United States democracy. There is too much misinformation being spread these days to let such a misrepresentation stand without correction or elucidation.

Certainly, as a journalistic endeavor, The Tablet (and DeSales Media) is well aware of the protections afforded by the First Amendment. If The Tablet (or DeSales Media) is advocating for a challenge to the constitutionality of any part of that amendment, including the Establishment Clause or Free Exercise Clause, I look forward to an editorial laying out its reasoning.

DOMINIC PREZIOSI

Carroll Gardens

Editor’s Note: The Tablet certainly upholds the principle of separation of church and state. We take it to mean that the government will not interfere in the practice of religion and that the state will not establish an official religion.