In 1801 the Danbury Baptist Association wrote a
letter to the newly elected President Jefferson to complain of their
states lack of a new constitution. Connecticut was still operating under
it's original charter of 1639. That charter founded a democratically
represented (congregational) church and then a civil government. The
king of England signed off on the charter making Connecticut an
independent republic not subject to England's rule so this had already
been an independent country for a century. This was a very stable
government that no one in Connecticut wanted to change until some
unscrupulous men started to use membership in the congregational church
to disenfranchise some of those who belonged to other churches. That is
what the Danbury Baptist wrote the newly elected president about. In his
letter the president answered that an "act of the whole American people
which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an
establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,
thus building a wall of separation between Church & State." The modern
question being: Are these letters meant to convey exactly what they say
or is that sentence taken out of the context of these letters
meant to convey what a rouge Supreme Court declared in 1947? That
Religious principle or expression has no place whatsoever in any public
entity according to the courts dictates?
The address of the Danbury Baptists Association
in the state of Connecticut, assembled October 7, 1801.
To Thomas Jefferson, Esq., President of the
United States of America.
Sir,
Among the many million in America and Europe who rejoice in your
election to office; we embrace the first opportunity which we have
enjoyed in our collective capacity, since your inauguration, to express
our great satisfaction, in your appointment to the chief magistracy in
the United States: And though our mode of expression may be less courtly
and pompous than what many others clothe their addresses with, we beg
you, sir, to believe that none are more sincere. Our sentiments are
uniformly on the side of religious liberty--that religion is at all
times and places a matter between God and individuals--that no man ought
to suffer in name, person, or effects on account of his religious
opinions--that the legitimate power of civil government extends no
further than to punish the man who works ill to his neighbors; But, sir,
our constitution of government is not specific. Our ancient charter
together with the law made coincident therewith, were adopted as the
basis of our government, at the time of our revolution; and such had
been our laws and usages, and such still are; that religion is
considered as the first object of legislation; and therefore what
religious privileges we enjoy (as a minor part of the state) we enjoy as
favors granted, and not as inalienable rights; and these favors we
receive at the expense of such degrading acknowledgements as are
inconsistent with the rights of freemen. It is not to be wondered at
therefore; if those who seek after power and gain under the pretense of
government and religion should reproach their fellow men--should
reproach their order magistrate, as a enemy of religion, law, and good
order, because he will not, dare not, assume the prerogatives of Jehovah
and make laws to govern the kingdom of Christ. Sir, we are sensible that
the president of the United States is not the national legislator, and
also sensible that the national government cannot destroy the laws of
each state; but our hopes are strong that the sentiments of our beloved
president, which have had such genial effect already, like the radiant
beams of the sun, will shine and prevail through all these states and
all the world, till hierarchy and tyranny be destroyed from the earth.
Sir, when we reflect on your past services, and see a glow of
philanthropy and good will shining forth in a course of more than thirty
years we have reason to believe that America's God has raised you up to
fill the chair of state out of that goodwill which he bears to the
millions which you preside over. May God strengthen you for your arduous
task which providence and the voice of the people have called you to
sustain and support you enjoy administration against all the
predetermined opposition of those who wish to raise to wealth and
importance on the poverty and subjection of the people. And may the Lord
preserve you safe from every evil and bring you at last to his heavenly
kingdom through Jesus Christ our Glorious Mediator. Signed in behalf of
the association, Nehemiah Dodge Ephraim Robbins Stephen S. Nelson
In this letter
the Baptist Association clearly acknowledges that the federal government
is not the national legislator and as such cannot abolish the law of the
states. Nor are they asking for that. What they are asking for is that
Thomas Jefferson throw his moral authority behind their efforts to seek
justice. In their case it would mean a constitution similar to what the
other states had written for themselves. Below was Jefferson's answer.
Mr. President:
To messers Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, &
Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the
state of Connecticut. Gentlemen
The affectionate
sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express
towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the
highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit
of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are
persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes
more and more pleasing. Believing with you that religion is a matter
which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none
other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of
government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with
sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared
that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment
of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a
wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression
of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience,
I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments
which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no
natural right in opposition to his social duties. I reciprocate your
kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and
creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious
association assurances of my high respect & esteem.
(signed) Thomas Jefferson Jan.1.1802.
Like it
or not Jefferson's answer placed that wall of separation in between the
federal government and the state governments. State and local
government was the place the whole of the American people had chosen and
secured the right to express their
religious sentiments but there
was a big wall around Washington DC to keep the federal government
away from them. Further than this though the sentiment of
the whole of the American people who were in fact quite religious was to
give the federal government no say so in the matter at all. However what Jefferson was hoping for was that
the sentiment of the whole of the American people for how the federal
government would conduct it's business would some day extend into all
the state governments also. Well it never did. The people through local
government and their states stayed religious as was fitting, and as a
God given right they expressed those religious principles to varying
degree's in the varying states until a radical minority of progressives
got their comrades in the courts to declare it illegal in the last half
of the twentieth century. Hopefully these judicial decrees will soon go
the way of other infamous court rulings like the Dred Scott and Jim Crow
rulings.
The abuses that were going on in Connecticut weren't really an
expression of religious differences playing out in it's government.
(They rarely ever are.) As usual it centered around the love of money
and covetous men using the congregational churches to give themselves an
unfair advantage. This was corrected by the state and the people.
Their new
constitution made in 1818 was still expressly religious to the point
of governing voluntary church membership. However this
all came at a price because blacks who had just come of age to vote
because Connecticut had put in statutory law the gradual end of slavery
were now disenfranchised under the new constitution. Under the charter,
technically anyway, they would have been able to vote if they met the
other requirements everybody else had to meet. Those other
"requirements" to vote were the issue in the writing of a new
constitution and not religious differences between churches.
During the founding era of the United States the entire population,
believers and non believers were of one opinion regarding Biblical based
religion, morality and principles. That a population without them could
not maintain freedom and government by the people and for the people.
This would certainly include Thomas Jefferson who was not a believer.
However there was absolute disagreement as to just what role civil
government could play in fostering that Biblically based religion,
morality and principle, (general Christianity in short.) The state
constitutions reflected not only the absolute consensus of the necessity
of religious principles and morality, a Bible literate culture as the
only real defense against tyranny and the only basis for good
government. These constitutions also reflected the disagreement among
them as to the role civil government could play in fostering the
necessary religious virtues. In that sense they could all be looked at
as experimental constitutions along the lines of the peoples religious
sentiments expressed in them. These constitutions were all modified as
time went on. Some because of impracticality, others because sentiment
changed and others to reflect the growing power of the forces of evil
that were fighting the tide of history by seeking to keep and expand
slavery. However the idea of the necessity of religious based principle,
morality and a Bible literate culture never left the nation. The lovers
of tyranny and the enemies of this nation have also recognized that they
could never subvert or conquer it without first destroying the virtue of
the people. It was not by accident that the radical minority who had
always opposed the very idea of the United States because they have
interests that it threatens conspired to destroy its virtue. Bible based
religion, mortally and principle have been in the crosshairs of that
conspiracy now for one hundred years.
The Democrat party, at first the party of slavery and
secession and segregation after the civil war slowly morphed into the
party of socialism. At first under President Woodrow Wilson and large
Democrat majorities in congress it embraced Darwin's race based
scientism and race based eugenics enthusiasts. They sought to
create a fascist America ordered under a military type discipline.
Wilson was the first academic to become President of the country and the
first to publicly express his disdain for the "outdated" constitution.
He created a three million man national civilian "security" force. (Do
those words sound familiar? The nations second academic to be elected
president has uttered a desire for this.) These were above the law, no
doubt filled with KKK members, and loosed on the American people to
suppress resistance to the fascist agenda. The head of that
"national security force" called the American Protective League was none
other than Franklin D. Roosevelt. Hitler actually modeled his Third
Reich after Wilsons foray into the darkness. The Democrat party won
those elections not because of that agenda but because the Republican
party split it's vote when the former Republican president Teddy
Roosevelt ran as an independent. These were dark days in America. For
the next 25 years the national and international socialists battled it
out on the streets of America and for the heart of the Democrat party
with the internationalist wing winning out because of WWII. When FDR won
the presidency because of the depression he put into practice the
lessons he learned in the Wilson Administration. It was at this point
shortly after his death with this radical minority that so captivated
the elites that the enemies of America from within and without struck a
blow designed to rid the nation of it's strength and character and pave
the way for it's enemies to conquer it. The Supreme court decreed
without any precedence, actually against all precedence, law and
any reason or right that there would be no expression of religious
principle, religion, religious based morality in any public entity in
the United States. From that time on the courts used that decree in an
attempt to rid the nation of it's religious heritage and the politicians
under the influence of the radical progressives in the Democrat party
have slavishly gone along with it. Here's
the decree.
To be able to grasp what this article is saying you will need to avail
yourselves of the content of the original state constitutions concerning
Christianity. Wordservice.org has a page that has separated all of this
content out of all of these constitutions so that it is easy to read.
Also the entire constitutions are available through hyperlinks. If you
have not read these prepare yourself for a shock. You cannot imagine the
magnitude of what this article just said until you read these. The
thinking of the last couple of generations on the subject is so
bastardized that one cannot in any way shape or form understand the
subject without reading these constitutions themselves and have some
kind understanding of what they meant and did not mean by the
"establishment of religion."
Here are
those constitutions.
|