Definition
Pertaining to a religious sect or denomination. In legal usage, the term most commonly appears as a limiting or prohibitory adjective in constitutional and statutory provisions — particularly those restricting public funds, public property, or government programs from being applied to the benefit of religious organizations or their activities. A "sectarian institution" is one that is affiliated with, controlled by, or operating for the advancement of a particular religious body. A "sectarian purpose" is one that serves religious indoctrination or denominational interests rather than a general public welfare objective.
The term is not generally used to define a cause of action or a legal status on its own. It functions as a qualifier — marking the boundary between permissible secular public expenditure and impermissible religious entanglement.
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): Of, relating to, or partial to a sect; dogmatic or partisan; parochial, narrow-minded, or bigoted.
Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): Pertaining to a sect or to sects; peculiar to a sect; bigotedly attached to the tenets and interests of a denomination.
In ordinary English, "sectarian" carries strong negative connotations of narrow-mindedness or fanaticism. In legal usage, the term is largely neutral and descriptive — it identifies religious affiliation or purpose without implying that the institution or activity is blameworthy. A Roman Catholic orphanage is "sectarian" in the constitutional sense not as a criticism but as a factual classification bearing legal consequences for public funding.
Common Confusion
"Sectarian" is sometimes conflated with "religious" generally, but legal provisions using the term typically distinguish between broadly religious purposes (such as general chaplaincy services) and specifically denominational or doctrinal purposes tied to a particular sect's tenets. An institution may have a religious character without being sectarian in the operative legal sense — or, conversely, may be formally non-denominational while still being sectarian in function. Courts applying "no-sectarian-funding" provisions have had to draw this line repeatedly, and the distinction matters enormously in research.
Do not confuse with "secular," which is the opposing concept — i.e., non-religious in character or purpose.
Why It Matters in Research
The term appears almost exclusively in constitutional law and public finance contexts, particularly in state constitutional provisions — sometimes called Blaine Amendments — that prohibit appropriations of public money for sectarian schools or institutions. These provisions exist in the constitutions of many states and were enacted largely in the latter half of the nineteenth century amid political controversy over public funding for Catholic parochial schools. Researchers working with state constitutional history will encounter "sectarian" as a term of art with specifically anti-Catholic political origins that are now constitutionally contested.
When reading nineteenth-century sources, note that "sectarian" could apply to Protestant denominations as well — early common school reformers characterized denominational Protestant instruction as sectarian in order to justify its removal from public schools. The meaning is therefore context-dependent: the same word describes both what reformers sought to exclude from public schools and what opponents of Catholic schools sought to bar from public funds.
Modern constitutional litigation under the First Amendment's Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses has significantly complicated the older sectarian/secular binary. Supreme Court decisions have limited the extent to which states may use "sectarian" classifications to exclude religious institutions from otherwise generally available public benefit programs. Researchers should not assume that a historical legal definition of "sectarian" maps cleanly onto current constitutional doctrine.
Corpus connections: Sources using "sectarian purposes," "sectarian institution," or "sectarian school" in nineteenth- and early twentieth-century American legal materials are almost always engaging with state constitutional funding limits or public school religion controversies. Later twentieth-century sources using the same language are increasingly likely to be engaging with federal Establishment Clause analysis.
Historical Dictionary Support
Anderson's Dictionary of Law and Bouvier's Law Dictionary are in close agreement on the foundational definition: a religious sect is a body of persons united in tenets but constituting a distinct organization by holding doctrines different from those of other sects or people. Both sources treat the term as primarily descriptive rather than pejorative in legal context.
Bouvier provides a concrete institutional application, noting that a Roman Catholic orphanage where pupils are instructed in church doctrine qualifies as a "sectarian institution" under a constitutional provision forbidding public funds for sectarian purposes. This is a useful illustration of how courts were applying the term to specific fact patterns — the question was not merely affiliation with a religious body but active instruction in denominational doctrine.
Neither historical dictionary engages with the political history of Blaine Amendments or with the tension between "sectarian" exclusions and religious liberty guarantees — a significant gap for any researcher approaching these sources expecting comprehensive constitutional analysis. Both entries reflect the period's assumption that sectarian exclusions were straightforwardly valid, an assumption that modern doctrine has substantially qualified.
Jurisdictional Note
Sectarian funding prohibitions are primarily creatures of state constitutional law, and their language and scope vary significantly across jurisdictions. Some state provisions are narrow (targeting direct grants to religious institutions); others are broad (covering any indirect benefit). Federal constitutional analysis under the First Amendment applies uniformly but intersects with state provisions differently depending on the state text. Researchers must examine the specific state constitutional language rather than relying on cross-jurisdictional generalizations.