Michigan healthcare freedom community forum

Notifications
Clear all

4 Facts Busting the Myth of Thomas Jefferson as a Secularist Hero

3 Posts
1 Users
0 Reactions
53 Views
Abigail Nobel
(@mhf)
Member Admin
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 1387
Topic starter  

About half of the 10 Commandments are easy to translate into public policy. Murder, theft, adultery, and perjury are obviously intolerable in any society.

Beyond that, most well-catechized Christians find it difficult to extract biblical principles of good governance. It is oh, so tempting to stray into more familiar doctrinal debate. Nowhere is that more apparent than in the blanket condemnation that "Jefferson was a Deist."

By the same token, anti-Christian activists like to cherry-pick Jefferson's work to exclude faith from the public square.

An intrepid Daily Signal journalist takes this topic to a deeper level.

https://www.dailysignal.com/2026/07/04/4-facts-busting-myth-thomas-jefferson-secularist-hero/

4 Facts Busting the Myth of Thomas Jefferson as a Secularist Hero

Tyler O’Neil    |    July 4, 2026

Those who wish to purge Christianity and the Bible from American public life often trumpet the third president, Thomas Jefferson, as a champion of the “wall of separation between church and state.”

Yet Jefferson was far from a secularist hero.

As America celebrates the 250th anniversary of his most influential work, the Declaration of Independence, it seems fitting to revisit Jefferson’s relationship with public religion.

1. The Letter to Danbury Baptists

On Jan. 1, 1802, Jefferson wrote the phrase secularists love to quote.

In referring to the First Amendment’s religion and establishment clauses, Jefferson wrote, “I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature would ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between church & state.”

The “establishment” of religion forbidden in the First Amendment applied to the federal government, not the states—many of which had established churches long after the Constitution’s ratification. This “establishment” involved directing tax money to support churches, and forbidding it did not mean excising references to the Bible from public places.

Furthermore, the letter itself reveals a religious motivation for this declaration.

Jefferson wrote, not intending to purge the public square of religion, but intending to protect the Baptists’ religious freedom. Immediately before the “separation” passage, the president stated his belief “that religion is a matter which lies solely between man & his God, that he owes account to none other for this faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions.”

He ended the letter by stating, “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.”

Jefferson did not intend to force religion out of public life—he explicitly grounded his respect for the establishment clause in his own high esteem for God and religion, and he stated his intention to pray for the Baptists.

2. Church Service in the Capitol

Two days after Jefferson sent that letter, he attended a Christian worship service at the U.S. Capitol. Rep. Manasseh Cutler, a Federalist member of the House of Representatives, noted Jefferson’s attendance in a Jan. 4, 1802, letter to Joseph Cutler.

Margaret Bayard Smith, a writer and social critic, wrote that “Jefferson during his whole administration was a most regular attendant” of Capitol worship services.

Whatever Jefferson meant by the “separation of church & state,” he took no objection to the notion of worship services in federal government buildings.

3. The Declaration of Independence

Any close reader of the Declaration of Independence would not come away with the opinion that its author wanted religion excised from the public square.

The declaration doesn’t just mention God four times; it credits God for giving the moral foundation of good government.

The declaration cites “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God” for the notion that Americans have the right to assert their independence from Great Britain.

The document states that “certain unalienable Rights” are “endowed” by our “Creator.”

The signers appeal to “the Supreme Judge of the world” to vouch for their righteous intentions, and declare their “firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence.”

Jefferson wrote the document to represent the members of the Second Continental Congress, so he doubtless made compromises to represent the entire group, but he still grounded America’s fundamental rights in God, not in government.

4. The Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom

Jefferson wrote the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, which the Old Dominion’s General Assembly passed in January 1786. While the statute disestablished the Church of England in Virginia, it explicitly grounded the right of religious freedom not in secular government but in man’s duty to God.

The statute declares that “Almighty God hath created the mind free” and that “all attempts to influence it by temporal punishment… are a departure from the plan of the Holy Author of our religion, who, being Lord both of body and mind, yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either.”

In fact, the document frames the disestablishment of Anglicanism as a way to protect religion, warning that establishing a religion “tends only to corrupt the principles of that religion it is meant to encourage, by bribing, with a monopoly of worldly honors and emoluments, those who will eternally profess and conform to it.”

No Secularist Hero

As an American Christian, I am grateful to Jefferson for stating the principles that founded our country. I also acknowledge that Jefferson was hardly an example of Christian orthodoxy—he did cut up the Bible to remove passages describing miracles, after all.

However, the idea that Jefferson would have championed the secularist removal of symbols such as the Ten Commandments from government buildings is utterly contrary to his documented history.

Let’s set the record straight: Jefferson was no secularist hero, and his “separation of church & state” is a far cry from the modern secularist agenda.

For Christians, the short version may be:

You can view government as God, or you can view it as under God.

The Bible is very clear which view is correct. 


This topic was modified 2 weeks ago by Abigail Nobel

   
ReplyQuote
Abigail Nobel
(@mhf)
Member Admin
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 1387
Topic starter  

In this intriguing excerpt from his 1824 letter to Henry Lee, Jefferson's views on party seem grounded in a conviction, if not that God is sovereign, at least that man is not.

Note that he uses "wise" in the old English sense of "educated."

https://rotunda.upress.virginia.edu/founders/default.xqy?keys=FOEA-print-04-02-02-4451

I am no believer in the amalgamation of parties, nor do I consider it as either desirable or useful for the public; but only that, like religious differences, a difference in politics should never be permitted to enter into social intercourse, or to disturb its friendships, its charities or justice. in that form, they are censors of the conduct of each other, and useful watchmen for the public. men by their constitutions are naturally divided into two parties. 1. those who fear and distrust the people, and wish to draw all powers from them into the hands of the higher classes. 2dly those who identify themselves with the people, have confidence in them cherish and consider them as the most honest & safe, altho’ not the most wise depository of the public interests. in every country these two parties exist, and in every one where they are free to think, speak, and write, they will declare themselves. call them therefore liberals and serviles, Jacobins and Ultras, whigs and tories, republicans and federalists, aristocrats and democrats or by whatever name you please; they are the same parties still and pursue the same object. the last appellation of artistocrats and democrats is the true one expressing the essence of all.


This post was modified 2 weeks ago by Abigail Nobel

   
ReplyQuote
Abigail Nobel
(@mhf)
Member Admin
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 1387
Topic starter  

The purpose of the Declaration of Independence, as given by Jefferson in 1825, is to express enduring principles, common sense, and public opinion. In other words, the "new thing" was the country, not the reason for founding it.

https://founding.com/founders-library/american-political-figures/thomas-jefferson/letter-to-henry-lee/

But with respect to our rights, and the acts of the British government contravening those rights, there was but one opinion on this side of the water. All American whigs thought alike on these subjects. When forced, therefore, to resort to arms for redress, an appeal to the tribunal of the world was deemed proper for our justification. This was the object of the Declaration of Independence. Not to find out new principles, or new arguments, never before thought of, not merely to say things which had never been said before; but to place before mankind the common sense of the subject, in terms so plain and firm as to command their assent, and to justify ourselves in the independent stand we are compelled to take. Neither aiming at originality of principle or sentiment, nor yet copied from any particular and previous writing, it was intended to be an expression of the American mind, and to give to that expression the proper tone and spirit called for by the occasion. All its authority rests then on the harmonizing sentiments of the day, whether expressed in conversation, in letters, printed essays, or in the elementary books of public right, as Aristotle, Cicero, Locke, Sidney, &c. The historical documents which you mention as in your possession, ought all to be found, and I am persuaded you will find, to be corroborative of the facts and principles advanced in that Declaration.



   
ReplyQuote
Q

Get MHF Insights

News and tips for your healthcare freedom.

We never spam you. One-step unsubscribe.

 

Name(Required)
Zip Code(Required)
This field is hidden when viewing the form

Sponsors

J & DE Family Charitable Fund

Friends
of MHF

Kelly Grotendiek

Philip Harbach

Dale Johnson

Drs. Jeffrey and Joni Jones

Vickie Kahle

Tammy Kipen

Marlin & Kathy Klumpp

Melanie Kurdys

Ruth Nobel

Patrick Peterson

Stephanie Poortenga

Jeanne Smit

Ben and Hope Staal

John Tuinstra

Jacki VanHuis

Sandy Walker

Sign Up for MHF Insights to keep up on the latest in Michigan Health Policy

Name(Required)
Zip Code(Required)
This field is hidden when viewing the form

5 great non profit logos 2021 - 2025
Michigan Healthcare Freedom Candid

Click here to join the MHF Community Forum!

Grow the community on our social media pages.

Social media & sharing icons powered by UltimatelySocial