(M. Clark) wrote:
:|This is the point I've been trying to make Larry. Until a couple of
:|months ago, I understood that Jefferson meant for his famous
:|church/state separation writing to apply in an absolute sense. That is,
:|church state separation was meant to apply to both Federal and State
:|governments.
:|
:|But then I came upon some lesser known
There isn't a damn thing lesser known about them, except maybe by you.
Scholars and students of Jefferson and of church state history know about
them all along
:|writings of Jefferson's that
:|showed me that Jefferson did not mean church/state separation in an
:|absolute sense.
Incorrect.
:\In these writings Jefferson clearly reflected that the
:|1st and 10th Amendments were meant to work together to give the States
:|the power to address religious issues. See for yourself:
:|
:|-----
:|"I consider the government of the United States as interdicted by the
:|Constitution from intermeddling with religious institutions, their
:|doctrines, discipline, or exercises. This results not only from the
:|provision that no law shall be made respecting the establishment or free
:|exercise of religion, but from that also which reserves to the states
:|the powers not delegated to the United States. Certainly, no power to
:|prescribe any religious exercise or to assume authority in religious
:|discipline has been delegated to the General Government. It must then
:|rest with the states, as far as it can be in any human authority."
:|--Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Miller, 1808. ME 11:428
:|
Now for the entire letter which you never post:
The Letters of Thomas Jefferson: 1743-1826
http://grid.let.rug.nl/~usa/P/tj3/writings/brf/jefl183.htm
RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
To Rev. Samuel Miller Washington, Jan. 23, 1808
SIR,
-- I have duly received your favor of the 18th and am thankful to you for
having written it, because it is more agreeable to prevent than to refuse
what I do not think myself authorized to comply with. I consider the
government of the U S. as interdicted by the Constitution from
intermeddling with religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline, or
exercises. This results not only from the provision that no lawshall be
made respecting the establishment, or free exercise, of religion, but from
that also which reserves to the states the powers not delegated to the U.S.
Certainly no power to prescribe any religious exercise, or to assume
authority in religious discipline, has been delegated to the general
government. It must then rest with the states, as far as it can be in any
human authority. But it is only proposed that I should recommend, not
prescribe a day of fasting & prayer. That is, that I should indirectly
assume to the U.S. an authority over religious exercises which the
Constitution has directly precluded them from. It must be meant too that
this recommendation is to carry some authority, and to be sanctioned by
some penalty on those who disregard it; not indeed of fine and
imprisonment, but of some degree of proscription perhaps in public opinion.
And does the change in the nature of the penalty make the recommendation
the less a law of conduct for those to whom it is directed? I do not
believe it is for the interest of religion to invite the civil magistrate
to direct it's exercises, it's discipline, or it's doctrines; nor of the
religious societies that the general government should be invested with the
power of effecting any uniformity of time or matter among them. Fasting &
prayer are religious exercises. The enjoining them an act of discipline.
Every religious society has a right to determine for itself the times for
these exercises, & the objects proper for them, according to their own
particular tenets; and this right can never be safer than in their own
hands, where the constitution has deposited it.
I am aware that the practice of my predecessors may be quoted. But I have
ever believed that the example of state executives led to the assumption of
that authority by the general government, without due examination, which
would have discovered that what might be a right in a state government, was
a violation of that right when assumed by another. Be this as it may, every
one must act according to the dictates of his own reason, & mine tells me
that civil powers alone have been given to the President of the U S. and no
authority to direct the religious exercises of his constituents.
I again express my satisfaction that you have been so good as to give me an
opportunity of explaining myself in a private letter, in which I could give
my reasons more in detail than might have been done in a public answer: and
I pray you to accept the assurances of my high esteem & respect.
:|"In matters of religion, I have considered that its free exercise is
:|placed by the Constitution independent of the powers of the general
:|government. I have therefore undertaken on no occasion to prescribe the
:|religious exercises suited to it; but have left them as the Constitution
:|found them, under the direction and discipline of State or Church
:|authorities acknowledged by the several religious societies." --Thomas
:|Jefferson: 2nd Inaugural Address, 1805. ME 3:378
:|
:|Also applicable:
:|
:|"Our citizens have wisely formed themselves into one nation as to others
:|and several States as among themselves. To the united nation belong our
:|external and mutual relations; to each State, severally, the care of our
:|persons, our property, our reputation and religious freedom." --Thomas
:|Jefferson: To Rhode Island Assembly, 1801. ME 10:262
:|-----
:|
:|I am now convinced that,
That is because you haven't a clue.
:|somewhere along the line, the Supreme Court
:|also misunderstood Jefferson's thoughts on church/state separation and
:|consequently steered the country on an unconstitutional tangent with
:|respect to deciding church/state separation issues, essentially robbing
:|the States of their power to address religious issues.
:|
:|M. Clark
And you are full of *****
Putting things, including Jefferson in context, something you never do:
Christian Orthodoxy And The Founders
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/orthodox.htm
.
|
