Was the original intention of the Founding Fathers to separate all government from religion or only the Federal Government through the first amendment?
This quote for Thomas Jefferson seems to that the state governments can make all the religious laws it wants:
I guess this doesn’t matter after the 14th amendment, but what was the original intention?
“…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.” _ T. Jefferson
Interesting quote, Homer. I wonder what "acknowledged by the several religious societies." meant?(Bolding mine.) Source: http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/jefferson/quotations/jeff1650.htm
You will find quotes from Jefferson, with attributions, concerning freedom of religion at the above link. The quote you provided (from Jefferson’s second inaugaral address in 1805) is also listed in the subject area Government Intermeddling in Religion. You may wish to read the entire section so as to not take the quote out of context.
Keep in mind that James Madison was the principal author of the First Amendment, and has opinions as well on the subject:
“[T]he number, the industry, and the morality of the Priesthood, & the devotion of the people have been manifestly increased by the total separation of the Church from the State.” – Letter to Robert Walsh, March 2, 1819
“The Constitution of the U.S. forbids everything like an establishment of a national religion." – “Detached Memoranda”
“Is the appointment of Chaplains to the two Houses of Congress consistent with the Constitution, and with the pure principle of religious freedom? In strictness the answer on both points must be in the negative. The Constitution of the U.S. forbids everything like an establishment of a national religion. The law appointing Chaplains establishes a religious worship for the national representatives, to be performed by Ministers of religion, elected by a majority of them; and these are to be paid out of the national taxes. Does not this involve the principle of a national establishment, applicable to a provision for a religious worship for the Constituent as well as of the representative Body, approved by the majority, and conducted by Ministers of religion paid by the entire nation.” - “Detached Memoranda”
“The settled opinion here is that religion is essentially distinct from Civil Govt. and exempt from its cognizance; that a connexion between them is injurious to both; that there are causes in the human breast, which ensure the perpetuity of religion without the aid of the law; that rival sects, with equal rights, exercise mutual censorships in favor of good morals; that if new sects arise with absurd opinions or overheated maginations, the proper remedies lie in time, forbearance and example; that a legal establishment of religion without a toleration could not be thought of, and with toleration, is no security for public quiet & harmony, but rather a source of discord & animosity; and finally that these opinions are supported by experience, which has shewn that every relaxation of the alliance between Law & religion, from the partial example of Holland, to its consummation in Pennsylvania Delaware N.J. [etc.] has been found as safe in practice as it is sounds in theory. Prior to the Revolution, the Episcopal Church was established by law in this State. On the Declaration of independence it was left with all other sects, to a self-support. And no doubt exists that there is much more of religion among now than there ever was before the change; and particularly in the Sect which enjoyed the legal patronage. This proves rather more than, that the law is not necessary to the support of religion.” - Letter to Edward Everett, March 19, 1823
“(I)t is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties…Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other Religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other Sects? that the same authority which can force a citizen to contribute three pence only of his property for the support of any one establishment, may force him to conform to any other establishment in all cases whatsoever?” – From the “Memorial and Remonstrance,” 1785
Note that Madison wrote this two years before the Constitutional Convention and 17 years before Jefferson wrote his famous letter to the Danbury Baptists:
“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.”
(Bolding mine.)
It is important to note that the free exercise clause is not the same thing as the establishment clause. The government is not allowed to infringe on the freedom of exercise of religion (unless drugs are involved…). The government is not allowed to establish, favor, or provide funding for, religion–this is the establishment clause. It appears as though Jefferson is discussing the free exercise clause. He says that government shouldn’t interfere with “its free exercise” and says that that should be left state or church authorities. State authorities? Well, the 14th amendment hadn’t been passed yet, so that makes sense, as the 1st amendment didn’t apply to the state governments at that time. Was jefferson for state governments establishing religions? No more so than he was for state governments passing laws abridging the freedom of speech.
Well, there’s no question that the Fourteenth Amendment radically changed the rules regarding church-state separation in the U.S. There were states with formal established churches until the 1820’s. This does not mean that “the Founding Fathers” necessarily thought this was a good idea–bearing in mind that “the Founding Fathers” disagreed among themselves pretty strongly on all sorts of things–and in fact men like Jefferson and Madison did fight for separation of church and state at both the federal level and in their own states.
Of course, before the Fourteenth Amendment,not only was there no bar in the federal constitution to a state having an established church, there was nothing the federal government could have done to prevent a state from persecuting non-adherents to that state church–and censoring the press, prohibiting criticism of the state government, and quartering troops in people’s houses in time of peace. And, of course, there was nothing to prevent a state government from protecting the “property rights” of some inhabitants of the state to own other inhabitants of the state, the end of which was of course what the Fourteenth Amendment was all about.
As to the beliefs of (some of) “the Founding Fathers” on the proper relation of religion and government:
“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.” – Thomas Jefferson, letter to the Baptists of Danbury, Connecticut, January 1, 1802
“And I have no doubt that every new example, will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Gov’t. will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.” – James Madison, letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822
“As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion, as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen, and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.” – Article XI, Treaty of Peace and Friendship with Tripoli, November 4, 1796 (unanimously ratified by the U.S. Senate and signed by President John Adams)
Just so people who don’t know what a “Musselman” is, they mean “Muslim.”
Neither, really. In fact, the Supreme Court invoked Jefferson’s famous letter to the Danbury Baptists only once priort to 1947. Unlike nowadays, when only Jefferson’s brief “separation of church and state” phrase is typically mentioned, the Supreme Court cited his entire letter and summarized Jefferson’s intent as,
That same Court declared that they could acts against “actions which were in violation of social duties or subversive of good order” based on Jefferson’s letter (including religious acts that endangered the community) but did not claim to separate government from religion.
Jefferson likewise said,
Now, one might argue about whether the current extent of church-state-separation is legitimate or appropriate. That is a legitimate issue to raise. However, the current prevalent interpretation does go considerably beyond what Jefferson himself outlined.
See http://www.wallbuilders.com/resources/search/detail.php?ResourceID=9[/url for further details.]
Madison’s statements are actually rather conflicted on this subject.
A little primer on the Virginia Statute of Religious Freedoms, which was authored by Jefferson:
Just a side note to JThunder here:You do realise that Wallbuilders and David Barton have been busted for and forced to issue public retractions of false historical quotes on this matter before.Barton himself had to apologise and retract a dozen or so false quotes attributed to the likes of Madison, Adams, and Jefferson a few years back…quotes which became so widespread that they were being cited by senators and other politicians to support all sorts of theocratic nonsense.
Wallbuilders is a less than credible source.
I have a question to those who seem to think that there should not be a wall of seperation between church and state:Do you think that God can hear your prayers and no your intent and character, even when you are not vocalising your prayers?If so then why does Bush and his cronies NEED to have ministers and the like leading public officials in public prayers when they are acting in an official capacity(on OUR time, as OUR elected representatives) and urging all citizens to pray every time disaster strikes?
I’m fully aware of that allegation; in fact, it is discussed quite extensively here and here. As the first of those sources explains,
Those quotes were already in widespread use, which is exactly why David Barton cited them in his article – to emphasize that their origins are questionable!
Moreover, note that the texts which I cited do not make use of any of those contested quotations. So even if you grant that the quotations used were erroneous, there is still a wealth of evidence which shows that the Founding Fathers did not use “separation of church and state” in the manner and extent that we apply it today.
In fact, the article on [url=“http://www.wallbuilders.com/resources/search/detail.php?ResourceID=70”
James Madison cited numerous counter-examples, easily corroborated by early secular works. For example, before taking his oath of office, George Washington [url="requested a Bible and then swore on it, adding the words “So help me God.” His inaugural address was rife with religious references, after which he and Congress proceeded to St. Paul’s chapel for church service. (Washington Irving, Life of George Washington, p. 475 (New York: G. P. Putnam & Co., 1857); Mrs. C. M Kirkland, Memoirs of Washington, p. 438 (New York: D. Appleton & Company, 1870); Charles Carleton Coffin, Building the Nation, p. 26 (New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers, 1882); Richardson, Messages and Papers, pp. 51-54 (April 30, 1789); 1 Annals of Congress, p. 29 (April 30, 1789)).
RE: Washington’s religous beliefs and practices
This article
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/franklin_steiner/presidents.html
gives a well-documented analysis of Washington’s religious beliefs and practices (or more accurately, lack thereof).
Not that I’m trying to prove a point, but what does the 14th amendment have to do with separation of church and state? I’m sure it’s been discussed in depth on a regular basis but I just wanted the 3 sentence explanation. No Tolstoys please.
Oh God please protect me from the onslaught of unintended rebutal.
Magiver, I suggest looking up in any of the easily available on the internet resources the concept of “selective incorporation” of the rights protected by the first 8 amendments into the meaning of the due process clause of the 14th amendment. It isn’t too hard to understand, though goodness knows many who debate here don’t seem to comprehend it… 
due process is only mentioned in article one. From THAT, the supreme Court ruled any reference to religion out of public display? Yeesh. Going to have to do some reading. Thanks.