Where the preamble [of the Statute of Virginia for Religious Freedom] declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our
religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting the words "Jesus Christ," so that it should read, "A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy
author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew
and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination. (Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography; from George Seldes,
ed., The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 363)
Our [Virginia's] act for freedom of religion is extremely applauded. The Ambassadors and ministers of the several nations of Europe resident at this court
have asked me copies of it to send to their sovereigns, and it is inserted at full length in several books now in the press; among others, in the new
Encyclopedie. I think it will produce considerable good even in those countries where ignorance, superstition, poverty and oppression of body and mind in
every form, are so firmly settled on the mass of the people, that their redemption from them can never be hoped. (Thomas Jefferson, letter to George
Wythe from Paris, August 13, 1786. From Adrienne Koch, ed., The American Enlightenment: The Shaping of the American Experiment and a Free
Society, New York: George Braziller, 1965, p. 311.)
The Virginia act for religious freedom has been received with infinite approbation in Europe, and propagated with enthusiasm. I do not mean by
governments, but by the individuals who compose them. It has been translated into French and Italian; has been sent to most of the courts of Europe, and
has been the best evidence of the falsehood of those reports which stated us to be in anarchy. It is inserted in the new "EncyclopŽdie," and is appearing in
most of the publications respecting America. In fact, it is comfortable to see the standard of reason at length erected, after so many ages, during which the
human mind has been held in vassalage by kings, priests, and nobles; and it is honorable for us, to have produced the first legislature who had the courage
to declare, that the reason of man may be trusted with the formation of his own opinions.... (Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison from Paris, Dec.
16, 1786. From Lloyd S. Kramer, ed., Paine and Jefferson on Liberty, New York: Continuum, 1988, pp. 87-88.)
... Justly famous among these important bills [written or revised by Jefferson for Virginia's legislature] in the revisal of 1770 was the Bill for establishing
religious freedom, a bill called by Julian Boyd "Jefferson's declaration of intellectual and spiritual independence." Unlike some of his other great bills, this
one was at long last enacted into law in 1786, the first piece of legislation ever to provide expressly for full religious freedom. In this contribution alone,
Jefferson advanced far beyond his revered John Locke whose philosophy of toleration "stopped short," as Jefferson said, of the full freedom required by
the independent intelligence and conscience of man. (Adrienne Koch, ed., The American Enlightenment: The Shaping of the American Experiment and a
Free Society, New York: George Braziller, 1965, p. 280.)
It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself. (Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782; from George Seldes, ed.,
The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 363)
Subject opinion to coercion: whom will you make your inquisitors? Fallible men; men governed by bad passions, by private as well as public reasons. And
why subject it to coercion? To produce uniformity. But is uniformity of opinion desirable? No more than of face and stature. (Thomas Jefferson, Notes on
Virginia, 1782; from George Seldes, ed., The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 363)
Is uniformity attainable? Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned;
yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half
hypocrites. To support roguery and error all over the earth. (Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782; from George Seldes, ed., The Great Quotations,
Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 363.)
No man complains of his neighbor for ill management of his affairs, for an error in sowing his land, or marrying his daughter, for consuming his substance in
taverns ... in all these he has liberty; but if he does not frequent the church, or then conform in ceremonies, there is an immediate uproar. (Thomas
Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782; from George Seldes, ed., The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 364.)
In the Notes [on the State of Virginia] Jefferson elaborated his views on government's keeping its distance from all religious affairs and religious opinions.
"The legitimate powers of government," he wrote, "extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there
are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." (Edwin S. Gaustad, Faith of Our Fathers: Religion and the New Nation, San
Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987, pp. 42-43. )
Life is of no value but as it brings us gratifications. Among the most valuable of these is rational society. It informs the mind, sweetens the temper, cheers
our spirits, and promotes health. (Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, February 20, 1784. From Adrienne Koch, ed., The American
Enlightenment: The Shaping of the American Experiment and a Free Society, New York: George Braziller, 1965, p. 305.)
[W]e have solved by fair experiment the great and interesting question whether freedom of religion is compatible with order in government and obedience
to the laws. (Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, December 16, 1786, according to Albert Menendez and Edd Doerr, compilers, The Great
Quotations on Religious Liberty, Long Beach, CA: Centerline Press, 1991, p. 47.)
... shake off all the fears of servile prejudices under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal for
every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a god because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason
than that of blindfolded fear. You will naturally examine first the religion of your own country. Read the bible then, as you would read Livy or Tacitus. The
testimony of the writer weighs in their favor in one scale, and their not being against the laws of nature does not weigh against them. But those facts in the
bible which contradict the laws of nature, must be examined with more care, and under a variety of faces. Here you must recur to the pretensions of the
writer to inspiration from god. Examine upon what evidence his pretensions are founded, and whether that evidence is so strong as that it's [sic] falshood
[sic] would be more improbable than a change of the laws of nature in the case he relates.... Do not be frightened from this enquiry by any fear of it's [sic]
consequences. If it ends in a belief that there is no god, you will find incitements to virtue in the comfort and pleasantness you feel in it's [sic] exercise, and
the love of others which it will procure you. If you find reason to believe there is a god, a consciousness that you are acting under his eye, and that he
approves you, will be a vast additional incitement. If that there be a future state, the hope of a happy existence in that increases the appetite to deserve it; if
that Jesus was also a god, you will be comforted by a belief of his aid and love. In fine, I repeat that you must lay aside all prejudice on both sides, and
neither believe nor reject any thing because any other person, or description of persons have rejected or believed it. Your own reason is the only oracle
given you by heaven, and you are answerable not for the rightness but uprightness of the decision.... (Thomas Jefferson, letter to his young nephew Peter
Carr, August 10, 1787. From Adrienne Koch, ed., The American Enlightenment: The Shaping of the American Experiment and a Free Society, New
York: George Braziller, 1965, pp. 320-321.)
I am for freedom of religion and against all maneuvers to bring about a legal ascendancy of one sect over another. (Thomas Jefferson, letter to Elbridge
Gerry, January 26, 1799. From Gorton Carruth and Eugene Ehrlich, eds., The Harper Book of American Quotations, New York: Harper & Row, 1988,
p. 499.)
To preserve the freedom of the human mind then and freedom of the press, every spirit should be ready to devote itself to martyrdom; for as long as we
may think as we will, and speak as we think, the condition of man will proceed in improvement. (Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Green Mumford,
June 18, 1799. From Adrienne Koch, ed., The American Enlightenment: The Shaping of the American Experiment and a Free Society, New York:
George Braziller, 1965, p. 341.)
"I know," Jefferson had written, ... "that Gouverneur Morris, who pretended to be in his [George Washington's] secrets & believed himself to be so, has
often told me that Genl. Washington believed no more of that system [Christianity] than he himself did." (Paul F. Boller, George Washington & Religion,
Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press, 1963, p. 85. Jefferson's comments were written in his journal, Anas, in February, 1800, according to Boller,
p. 80.)
All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will, to be rightful, must be reasonable; that
the minority possess their equal rights, which equal laws must protect, and to violate which would be oppression. (Thomas Jefferson, "First Inaugural
Address," March 4, 1801; from George Seldes, ed., The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 364.)
... And let us reflect that, having banished from our land that religious intolerance under which mankind so long bled and suffered, we have yet gained little
if we countenance a political intolerance as despotic, as wicked, and capable of as bitter and bloody persecutions. ... error of opinion may be tolerated
where reason is left free to combat it. ... I deem the essential principles of our government . ..[:] Equal and exact justice to all men, of whatever state or
persuasion, religious or political; ... freedom of religion, freedom of the press, and freedom of person under the protection of the habeas corpus, and trial
by juries impartially selected. (Thomas Jefferson, "First Inaugural Address," March 4, 1801. From Mortimer Adler, ed., The Annals of America:
1797-1820, Domestic Expansion and Foreign Entanglements, Vol. 4; Chicago: Encyclopedia Brittanica, 1968, pp. 144-145.
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 prohibit the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state. (Thomas Jefferson, as
President, in a letter to the Baptists of Danbury, Connecticut, 1802; from George Seldes, ed., The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel
Press, 1983, p. 369)
I will never, by any word or act, bow to the shrine of intolerance, or admit a right of inquiry into the religious opinions of others. (Thomas Jefferson, letter
to Edward Dowse, April 19, 1803. From Gorton Carruth and Eugene Ehrlich, eds., The Harper Book of American Quotations, New York: Harper &
Row, 1988, p. 499.)
It behoves every man who values liberty of conscience for himself, to resist invasions of it in the case of others; or their case may, by change of
circumstances, become his own. (Thomas Jefferson, letter to Benjamin Rush, April 21, 1803. From Daniel B. Baker, ed., Political Quotations, Detroit:
Gale Research, Inc., 1990, p. 189.)
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
and prayer. That is, that I should indirectly assume to the United States 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 less a law of conduct for those to whom it is directed? I do not believe it is in the best interests of religion to invite the civil magistrate
to direct its exercises, its discipline, or its 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 and prayer are religious exercises; the enjoining them an act of discipline. Every religious
society has a right to determine for itself the times of these exercises, and 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. (Thomas Jefferson, just before the end of his second term, in a
letter to Samuel Miller--a Presbyterian minister--on January 23, 1808; from Willson Whitman, arranger, Jefferson's Letters, Eau Claire, Wisconsin: E. M.
Hale and Company, ND, pp. 241-242.
But a short time elapsed after the death of the great reformer [Jesus] of the Jewish religion, before his principles were departed from by those who
professed to be his special servants, and perverted into an engine for enslaving mankind, and aggrandizing their oppressors in Church and State. (Thomas
Jefferson, in a letter to Samuel Kercheval, 1810; from George Seldes, ed., The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 370)
History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which
their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose. (Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to Baron von Humboldt, 1813;
from George Seldes, ed., The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 370)
The clergy, by getting themselves established by law and ingrafted into the machine of government, have been a very formidable engine against the civil and
religious rights of man. (Thomas Jefferson, as quoted by Saul K. Padover in Thomas Jefferson on Democracy, New York, 1946, p. 165, according to
Albert Menendez and Edd Doerr, compilers, The Great Quotations on Religious Liberty, Long Beach, CA: Centerline Press, 1991, p. 48.)
In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to
his own. It is easier to acquire wealth and power by this combination than by deserving them, and to effect this, they have perverted the purest religion
ever preached to man into mystery and jargon, unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer for their purposes. (Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to
Horatio Spofford, 1814; from George Seldes, ed., The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 371)
Are we to have a censor whose imprimatur shall say what books may be sold, and what we may buy? And who is thus to dogmatize religious opinions for
our citizens? Whose foot is to be the measure to which ours are all to be cut or stretched? Is a priest to be our inquisitor, or shall a layman, simple as
ourselves, set up his reason as the rule of what we are to read, and what we must disbelieve? (Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to N. G. Dufief, Philadelphia
bookseller, 1814, on the occasion of prosecution for selling De Becourt's "Sur le CrŽation du Monde, un Systme d'Organisation Primitive"; from
George Seldes, ed., The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 371)
If M. de Becourt's book be false in its facts, disprove them; if false in its reasoning, refute it. But, for God's sake, let us freely hear both sides, if we
choose. (Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to N. G. Dufief, Philadelphia bookseller, 1814, on the occasion of prosecution for selling De Becourt's "Sur le
CrŽation du Monde, un Systme d'Organisation Primitive"; from George Seldes, ed., The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press,
1983, p. 371)
I am really mortified to be told that, in the United States of America, a fact like this can become a subject to inquiry, and of criminal inquiry, too, as an
offence against religion; that a question about the sale of a book can be carried before the civil magistrate. Is this then our freedom of religion? (Thomas
Jefferson, letter to N. G. Dufief, April 19, 1814. From Gorton Carruth and Eugene Ehrlich, eds., The Harper Book of American Quotations, New York:
Harper & Row, 1988, p. 492.)
... If we did a good act merely from the love of God and a belief that it is pleasing to Him, whence arises the morality of the Atheist? It is idle to say, as
some do, that no such thing exists. We have the same evidence of the fact as of most of those we act on, to wit: their own affirmations, and their
reasonings in support of them. I have observed, indeed, generally, that while in Protestant countries the defections from the Platonic Christianity of the
priests is to Deism, in Catholic countries they are to Atheism. Diderot, D'Alembert, D'Holbach, Condorcet, are known to have been among the most
virtuous of men. Their virtue, then, must have had some other foundation than love of God. (Thomas Jefferson, letter to Thomas Law, June 13, 1814.
From Adrienne Koch, ed., The American Enlightenment: The Shaping of the American Experiment and a Free Society, New York: George Braziller,
1965, p. 358.)
Across the ages, clergy have been interested [according to Jefferson] not in truth but only in wealth and power; when rational people have had difficulty
swallowing "their impious heresies," then the clergy have, with the help of the state, forced "them down their throats." Five years later, he [Jefferson] wrote
of "this loathsome combination of church and state" that for so many centuries reduced human beings to "dupes and drudges." (Edwin S. Gaustad, Faith of
Our Fathers: Religion and the New Nation, San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987, p. 47. According to Gaustad, the first quotes are from a letter from
Jefferson to William Baldwin, January 19, 1810; the second source is a letter from Jefferson to Charles Clay, January 29, 1815.)
A professorship of Theology should have no place in our institution [the University of Virginia]. (Thomas Jefferson, letter to Thomas Cooper, October 7,
1814. From Gorton Carruth and Eugene Ehrlich, eds., The Harper Book of American Quotations, New York: Harper & Row, 1988, p. 492.)
I have ever judged of the religion of others by their lives.... It is in our lives, and not from our words, that our religion must be read. By the same test the
world must judge me. But this does not satisfy the priesthood. They must have a positive, a declared assent to all their interested absurdities. My opinion is
that there would never have been an infidel, if there had never been a priest. The artificial structures they have built on the the purest of all moral systems,
for the purpose of deriving from it pence and power, revolt those who think for themselves, and who read in that system only what is really there. (Thomas
Jefferson, letter to Mrs. M. Harrison Smith: Mrs. M. Harrison, August 6, 1816. From Gorton Carruth and Eugene Ehrlich, eds., The Harper Book of
American Quotations, New York: Harper & Row, 1988, p. 492.)
"I never told my own religion, nor scrutinized that of another," Thomas Jefferson once remarked, adding that he had "ever judged" the religion of others by
their lives "rather than their" words. (Richard B. Morris:Richard B., Seven Who Shaped Our Destiny: The Founding Fathers as Revolutionaries, Harper &
Row, 1973, p. 269. The Jefferson quote is from his letter to Mrs. M. Harrison Smith: Mrs. M. Harrison, 1816.)
He [Jefferson] rejoiced with John Adams when the Congregational church was finally disestablished in Connecticut in 1818; welcoming "the resurrection
of Connecticut to light and liberty, Jefferson congratulated Adams "that this den of priesthood is at length broken up, and that a protestant popedom is no
longer to disgrace American history and character." (Edwin S. Gaustad, Faith of Our Fathers: Religion and the New Nation, San Francisco: Harper &
Row, 1987, p. 49.)
In 1820 as he described his plans for the University of Virginia to his former private secretary, William Short, Jefferson acknowledged that his plan for the
first truly secular university would have opposition: weak opposition (in his view) from the College of William and Mary, but strong opposition from "the
priests of the different religious sects, to whose spells on the human mind its improvement is ominous." (Edwin S. Gaustad, Faith of Our Fathers: Religion
and the New Nation, San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987, p. 48. The letter to Short was dated 13 April 1820.)
Jefferson bemoaned the pattern of church life that gave the unenlightened and bigoted clergy "stated and privileged days to collect and catechize us,
opportunities of delivering their oracles to the people in mass, and of moulding their minds as wax in the hollow of their hands." Despite this enormous
advantage, however, Virginians are liberal enough, reasonable enough, to "give fair play" to a university [the University of Virginia] set free from
dogmatisms and fixed ideas. (Edwin S. Gaustad, Faith of Our Fathers: Religion and the New Nation, San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987, p. 48.)
This institution will be based on the illimitable freedom of the human mind. For here we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor to tolerate
error so long as reason is free to combat it. (Thomas Jefferson, to prospective teachers, University of Virginia; from George Seldes, ed., The Great
Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 364.)
If the freedom of religion, guaranteed to us by law in theory, can ever rise in practice under the overbearing inquisition of public opinion, [then and only
then will truth] prevail over fanaticism. (Thomas Jefferson, as quoted by Edwin S. Gaustad, Faith of Our Fathers: Religion and the New Nation, San
Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987, p. 49. Jefferson's words are, according to Gaustad, from his letter to Jared Sparks, 4 November 1820.)
And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a Virgin Mary, will be classed with the
fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter.... But we may hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will
do away [with] all this artificial scaffolding. (Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, 11 April 1823, as quoted by E. S. Gaustad, "Religion," in Merrill D.
Peterson, ed., Thomas Jefferson: A Reference Biography, New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1986, p. 287.)
... Jefferson expressed himself strongly on that larger apocalypse, the Book of Revelation, in a letter to Alexander Smyth of 17 January 1825: it is "merely
the ravings of a maniac, no more worthy, nor capable of explanation than the incoherences of our own nightly dreams." Apocalyptic writing deserved no
commentary, for "what has no meaning admits no explanation"; therefore, apocalyptic prophecies associated with Jesus deserved and would receive no
attention from Jefferson in his Life and Morals of Jesus. (E. S. Gaustad, "Religion," in Merrill D. Peterson, ed., Thomas Jefferson: A Reference Biography,
New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1986, p. 287.)
... our fellow citizens, after half a century of experience and prosperity, continue to approve the choice we made. May it be to the world, what I believe it
will be, (to some parts sooner, to others later, but finally to all,) the signal of arousing men to burst the chains under which monkish ignorance and
superstition had persuaded them to bind themselves, and to assume the blessings and security of self-government. That form which we have substituted,
restores the free right to the unbounded exercise of reason and freedom of opinion. All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general
spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their
backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately, by the grace of God. These are grounds of hope for others. For ourselves,
let the annual return of this day [Fourth of July] forever refresh our recollections of these rights, and an undiminished devotion to them.... (Thomas
Jefferson, letter to Roger C. Weightman, June 24, 1826 [Jefferson's last letter, dated ten days before he died]; from Adrienne Koch, ed., The American
Enlightenment: The Shaping of the American Experiment and a Free Society, New York: George Braziller, 1965, p. 372.)
Jefferson wrote voluminously to prove that Christianity was not part of the law of the land and that religion or irreligion was purely a private matter, not
cognizable by the state. (Leonard W. Levy, Treason Against God: A History of the Offense of Blasphemy, New York: Schocken Books, 1981, p. 335.)
So much is Jefferson identified in the American mind with his battle for political liberty that it is difficult to entertain the possibility that he felt even more
strongly about religious liberty. If the letters and activities of his post presidential years can be taken as a fair guide, however, he maintained an unrelenting
vigilance with respect to freedom in religion, and an unrelenting, perhaps even unforgiving, distrust of all those who would seek in any way to mitigate or
limit or nullify that freedom. (Edwin S. Gaustad, Faith of Our Fathers: Religion and the New Nation, San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987, pp. 46-47.)
... Jefferson, who as a careful historian had made a study of the origin of the maxim [that the common law is inextricably linked with Christianity],
challenged such an assertion. He noted that "the common law existed while the Anglo-Saxons were yet pagans, at a time when they had never yet heard
the name of Christ pronounced or that such a character existed .... What a conspiracy this, between Church and State." (Leo Pfeffer, Religion, State, and
the Burger Court, Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books, 1984, p. 121.)
... The most revealing writings concerned the commonly repeated maxim that Christianity was part of the common law. In two posthumously published
writings, an appendix to his Reports of Cases Determined in the General Court and a letter to Major John Cartwright, Thomas Jefferson took issue with
the maxim. He traced the erroneous interpretation to a seventeenth-century law commentator who, Jefferson argued, misinterpreted a fifteenth-century
precedent. He then traced the error forward to his favorite bte noire, Lord Mansfield, who wrote that "the essential principles of revealed religion are
part of the common law." Jefferson responded with a classic, positivistic critique: Mansfield "leaves us at our peril to find out what, in the opinion of the
judge, and according to the measures of his foot or his faith, are those essential principles of revealed religion, obligatory on us as part of the common
law." (Daniel R. Ernst, "Church-State Issues and the Law: 1607-1870" in John F. Wilson, ed., Church and State in America: A Bibliographic Guide. The
Colonial and Early National Periods," New York: Greenwood Press, 1986, p. 337. Ernst gives his source as Thomas Jefferson, "Whether Christianity is
Part of the Common Law?")
It was what he did not like in religion that gave impetus to Jefferson's activity in that troublesome and often bloody arena. He did not like dogmatism,
obscurantism, blind obedience, or any interference with the free exercise of the mind. Moreover, he did not like the tendency of religion to confuse truth
with power, special insight with special privilege, and the duty to maintain with the right to persecute the dissenter. Ecclesiastical despotism was as
reprehensible as despotism of the political sort, even when it justified itself, as it often did, in the name of doing good. This had been sufficiently evident in
his native Virginia to give Jefferson every stimulus he needed to see that independence must be carried over into the realm of religion. (E. S. Gaustad,
"Religion," in Merrill D. Peterson, ed., Thomas Jefferson: A Reference Biography, New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1986, p. 279.)
... If this [extending religion's influence on the basis of "reason alone"] is the path chosen by Omnipotence and Infallibility, what sense can there possibly be
in "fallible and uninspired men ... setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible"? No sense at all, argued Jefferson, who
found compulsion in religion to be irrational, impious, and tyrannical. If such compulsion is bad for t |
