The interplay between religion and state in the United States is complex, if anything. The rules that comprise the American system of church-state relations—rules dictated mostly by judicial interpretations of the First Amendment's religion clauses, but also embracing tradi tions that the High Court chooses not to interfere with—are frequently criticized as inconsistent and confusing. A common criticism, for ex ample, is that students in public schools cannot have prayers in their classrooms or at their football games, but the U.S. Congress may have its own chaplains to lead its daily prayers. Another is that the Ten Commandments cannot be posted in public school classrooms, yet the U.S. Supreme Court chamber in Washington, D.C. is decorated with a representation of Moses holding the Ten Commandments. And how is it that ordained preachers like Pat Robertson and Jesse Jackson can run for president of the United States in the face of the constitutional re quirement of separation of church and state? On their face, these seemingly contradictary rules and practices seem rather odd, even bi zarre. But understood in the broader, elaborate American framework in which religion and state interact, these apparent consistencies can be understood, even justified. It is suggested here that the American system must be understood as embracing three distinct, yet interrelated sets of rules: separation of church and state, integration of religion and politics, and accommoda tion of civil religion. All of the various rules, customs, and practices that shape the unique relationship between religion and state in America can be assigned primarily, though not always exclusively, to one of these three categories. Each category is essential to the overall American public philosophy, each one part of a nuanced, intercon nected system that has as its goal the Good Society. And, as will be argued in this essay, without some appreciation of these three catego ries, their interrelationship, and the way in which they combine to pro mote democratic principles, one is certain to become hopelessly confused by the apparent contradictions in the overall system.