The Naturalization of Douglas Clyde Macintosh, Alien Theologian

The Naturalization of Douglas Clyde Macintosh, Alien Theologian RONALD B. FLOWERS On May 25,1931, the Supreme Court ofthe United States decided the case of United. States v. Macintosh.1 It was one of the most famous cases of its era. The Christian Century compared it to the infamous Dred Scott case.2 In the same editorial, it said the decision “outrages the na­ tion’s conscience,” and called it “incredible,” “monstrous,” “the inevitable death of spiritual re­ ligion.”3 Who was Douglas Clyde Macintosh, why did he have a case before the Supreme Court, and why did a liberal Protestant magazine become so exercised about it? Douglas Clyde Macintosh was bom in Canada in 1877 and received his undergraduate de­ gree from McMaster University in Toronto. In 1904 he became a graduate student at the Uni­ versity of Chicago. He was ordained to the ministry of the American Baptist Church in 1907. That same year he returned to Canada to teach in a small college. In 1909, the same year he completed his Ph.D. at the University of Chicago, he was invited tojoin the faculty of Yale Di­ vinity School.4 At the time of his case, he was Chaplain of the Yale Graduate School and Dwight Professor of Theology in the Divinity School, one of the luminaries of the faculty. In 1925 Macintosh filed with the U.S. District Court in New Haven, Connecticut, a declaration of intent to become a citizen. On March 18, 1929, he filed his application for naturalization. As part of that process, an ap­ plicant had to complete a form that provided pertinent information for the application. Question 20 on that form asked, “Have you read the following oath of allegiance?” which was then quoted. After the quotation the form asked: “Are you willing to take this oath in be­ coming a citizen?” Macintosh answered both halves of this question “Yes.” Question 22 asked: “Ifnecessary, are you willing to take up arms in defense of this country?” Macintosh answered the question: “Yes, but I should want to be free tojudge of the necessity.”5 This was not an acceptable answer to the government. Some background is necessary to understand why. The Naturalization Act of 244 JOURNAL OF SUPREME COURT HISTORY 1906, operative at the time of Macintosh’s ap­ plication, required that an applicant for citi­ zenship take an oath in which one promised to “support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States against all enemies, for­ eign and domestic, and bear true faith and alle­ giance to the same” and demonstrate that one was “attached to the principles ofthe Constitu­ tion of the United States, and well disposed to the good order ... of the same.”6 Conse­ quently, the actual oath of naturalization read: I hereby declare, on oath, that I abso­ lutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state or sovereignty, and particularly to _______________ , of whom I have heretofore been a subject; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; and that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same.7 This oath appeared as Question 20 on the pre­ liminary form. The applicant was asked if he/she was willing to take the oath to become a citizen. Macintosh answered “Yes.” So it was not his response to the oath that got him in trouble, but his desire to qualify his answer about bearing arms. Prior to Macintosh’s application for citi­ zenship, the Supreme Court had already de­ cided a case. United States v. Schwimmer, in which the applicant for naturalization was not willing to promise to bear arms in defense of the country.8 Rosika Schwimmer was an inter­ nationally known feminist and pacifist. When she was confronted with the naturalization questionnaire, she answered Question 22 “I would not take up arms personally.” She ex­ panded on her refusal to fight in war by saying “I am an uncompromising pacifist for whom even Jane Addams is not enough ofa pacifist. I am an absolute atheist. I have no sense...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.