• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
MENUMENU
MENUMENU
  • Home
  • About
    • Contact Us
    • FlaglerLive Board of Directors
    • Comment Policy
    • Mission Statement
    • Our Values
    • Privacy Policy
  • Live Calendar
  • Submit Obituary
  • Submit an Event
  • Support FlaglerLive
  • Advertise on FlaglerLive (386) 503-3808
  • Search Results

FlaglerLive

No Bull, no Fluff, No Smudges

MENUMENU
  • Flagler
    • Flagler County Commission
    • Beverly Beach
    • Flagler History
    • Mondex/Daytona North
    • The Hammock
    • Tourist Development Council
    • Marineland
  • Palm Coast
    • Palm Coast City Council
    • Palm Coast Crime
  • Bunnell
    • Bunnell City Commission
    • Bunnell Crime
  • Flagler Beach
    • Flagler Beach City Commission
    • Flagler Beach Crime
  • Cops/Courts
    • Circuit & County Court
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • Federal Courts
    • Flagler 911
    • Fire House
    • Flagler County Sheriff
    • Flagler Jail Bookings
    • Traffic Accidents
  • Rights & Liberties
    • First Amendment
    • Second Amendment
    • Third Amendment
    • Fourth Amendment
    • Fifth Amendment
    • Sixth Amendment
    • Seventh Amendment
    • Eighth Amendment
    • 14th Amendment
    • Sunshine Law
    • Religion & Beliefs
    • Privacy
    • Civil Rights
    • Human Rights
    • Immigration
    • Labor Rights
  • Schools
    • Adult Education
    • Belle Terre Elementary
    • Buddy Taylor Middle
    • Bunnell Elementary
    • Charter Schools
    • Daytona State College
    • Flagler County School Board
    • Flagler Palm Coast High School
    • Higher Education
    • Imagine School
    • Indian Trails Middle
    • Matanzas High School
    • Old Kings Elementary
    • Rymfire Elementary
    • Stetson University
    • Wadsworth Elementary
    • University of Florida/Florida State
  • Economy
    • Jobs & Unemployment
    • Business & Economy
    • Development & Sprawl
    • Leisure & Tourism
    • Local Business
    • Local Media
    • Real Estate & Development
    • Taxes
    • Sponsored Content
  • Commentary
    • The Conversation
    • Pierre Tristam
    • Diane Roberts
    • Guest Columns
    • Byblos
    • Editor's Blog
  • Culture
    • African American Cultural Society
    • Arts in Palm Coast & Flagler
    • Books
    • City Repertory Theatre
    • Flagler Auditorium
    • Flagler Playhouse
    • Special Events
  • Elections 2026
    • Amendments and Referendums
    • Presidential Election
    • Campaign Finance
    • City Elections
    • Congressional
    • Constitutionals
    • Courts
    • Governor
    • Polls
    • Voting Rights
  • Florida
    • Federal Politics
    • Florida History
    • Florida Legislature
    • Florida Legislature
    • Ron DeSantis
  • Health & Society
    • Flagler County Health Department
    • Ask the Doctor Column
    • Health Care
    • Health Care Business
    • Covid-19
    • Children and Families
    • Medicaid and Medicare
    • Mental Health
    • Poverty
    • Violence
  • All Else
    • Daily Briefing
    • Americana
    • Obituaries
    • News Briefs
    • Weather and Climate
    • Wildlife

‘Rededicating’ US to God? Jefferson and Madison Would Not Approve.

July 3, 2026 | FlaglerLive | Leave a Comment

Many of the thousands of letters between the two founders attest to their deep commitment to religious freedom.
Many of the thousands of letters between the two founders attest to their deep commitment to religious freedom. (AlexanderZam/iStock via Getty Images Plus)

By Steven K. Green

Thousands of Americans prayed on the National Mall on May 17, 2026, during “Rededicate 250”: a day-long rally to “come together in prayer and worship ahead of the nation’s 250th birthday,” as organizers described it. U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson, one of many Republican politicians and conservative Christian leaders to speak, led a prayer to “rededicate the United States of America as one nation under God.”

Planned by Freedom 250, a public-private partnership, the rally prompted criticism that it blurred the lines separating church and state. According to the Pew Research Center, 73% of adults agree that religion should be kept separate from government policies, and only 19% of Americans say the United States should stop enforcing that principle.

But figures allied with the Trump administration have challenged the premise that the U.S. government should be – or was meant to be – separate from religion. In 2023, Johnson remarked that “The separation of church and state is a misnomer … it comes from a phrase that was in a letter that Jefferson wrote. It’s not in the Constitution. And what he was explaining is they did not want the government to encroach upon the church – not that they didn’t want principles of faith to have influence on our public life.”

As a scholar of American legal and religious history, I have written extensively about the development of religious freedom in the U.S., and the origins of the separation of church and state.

Two of the Founding Fathers shaped American views on these topics more than any other: Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. Yet their views have also become lightning rods for controversy as the “wall” between church and state comes under scrutiny.

My 2024 book, “The Grand Collaboration,” seeks to answer several questions: What was Jefferson’s and Madison’s understanding of religious freedom? And why were they so deeply committed to that principle?

Bedrock of law – in Virgina and beyond

Jefferson wrote the Virginia Bill for Religious Freedom in 1777, the most comprehensive declaration of religious freedom at the time. The bill guaranteed freedom of conscience, protected religious assemblies from government oversight, prohibited government funding of religious institutions and boldly declared that religious opinions were outside the authority of civil officials.

An obelisk-shaped grave sits in a grassy area with trees.
Thomas Jefferson asked that his gravesite commemorate three of his accomplishments, including writing Virginia’s statute for religious freedom.
Christopher Hollis/Wikimedia Commons

Several years later, Madison guided these ideals into law. His “Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments,” a protest against a proposal to support Christian teachers with tax money, affirmed the values of church-state separation and religious equality. He helped defeat the proposal – and set the stage for Virginia to adopt Jefferson’s bill.

As president, Jefferson went on to pen a letter to a Baptist association in Connecticut where he immortalized the phrase “a wall of separation between church and state.”

The Bill of Rights contains two clauses about religion, both in the First Amendment: that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

What qualifies as “establishment of religion,” however, is open to debate.

In 1947, the U.S. Supreme Court embraced church-state separation as the guiding principle for interpreting the religion clauses, relying extensively on the two Virginians’ writings and actions. As Justice Hugo Black wrote, “In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect ‘a wall of separation between Church and State.’”

The duo’s documents served as the authority for the legal principle of church-state separation, and for more than five decades, their bona fides remained unquestioned in the law.

Shift at SCOTUS

Criticism of church-state separation intensified in the 1980s. As the religious right grew into a political force, commentators argued that the concept was anti-religious and did not represent the prevailing views about church and state during the founders’ time.

In recent decades, such arguments have attracted politicians and jurists, including members of the Supreme Court. Justice Clarence Thomas has written that the court’s earlier separationist interpretations of the Constitution “sometimes bordered on religious hostility.” Legal scholar Philip Hamburger has declared that “the constitutional authority for separation is without historical foundation” and “should at best be viewed with suspicion.”

Several recent Supreme Court decisions have rejected a separationist approach to church-state matters. For example, the conservative majority has allowed taxpayer dollars to be used at religious schools, the display of religious symbols on government property, and religious expression by public school employees.

In a 2022 dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor bemoaned that the court has turned the separation of church and state from a “constitutional commitment” to a “constitutional violation.”

The justices’ earlier reliance on Jefferson and Madison has borne the brunt of criticism that their views on church-state matters did not represent their peers, or that neither man was in favor of separation as he has been portrayed.

Exchange of ideas

To better understand Jefferson’s and Madison’s beliefs, I examined many of the 2,300 letters between the two on “Founders Online,” a National Archives website. I also looked at correspondence with other acquaintances.

Both founders had deistic leanings, meaning they believed in a supreme being, but thought science and reason were the best paths to understanding religion. They were only nominally observant Christians, but more protected from religious intolerance than other “dissenters” due to their high social standing and affiliation with the Anglican Church.

A formal portrait of a man staring at the viewer, with white hair, a white shirt with a high neck, and a black jacket.
Thomas Jefferson’s official presidential portrait, painted around 1800 by Rembrandt Peale.
White House History via Wikimedia Commons

All the more striking, then, that they worked throughout their lives to advance religious freedom.

Religious matters were never far from their minds. For instance, in Madison and Jefferson’s exchanges discussing the need for a bill of rights, freedom of conscience was invariably at the top of the list. Both were convinced that government should avoid supporting religion, even if no particular religion was given preference. They also insisted that people should have broad religious freedoms.

These views were clearly on the vanguard, but other religious rationalists and religious dissenters also advocated a comprehensive understanding of religious freedom.

Both men were committed to advancing religious freedom because they saw it as deeply entwined with freedom of inquiry and conscience. “Reason and free enquiry are the only effectual agents against error,” Jefferson wrote in 1784. Allowing people to investigate ideas freely “will support the true religion,” because “Truth can stand by itself.”

Similarly, Madison declared “the freedom of conscience to be a natural and absolute right.”

In their view, free inquiry was the fount of other rights. Religious freedom, for example, was a subset of freedom of conscience. And a healthy separation of church and state was key to ensuring those freedoms.

‘A pillar of support’

The letters reveal the extent to which Jefferson and Madison complemented and reinforced each other’s attitudes toward church and state. They also reveal the close intellectual and emotional affection that each man held for the other, and how much each man valued the other’s support.

A portrait of a man with white hair, a white shirt with a high neck, and a black jacket.
A portrait of James Madison by Chester Harding, painted around 1829, a few years before his death.
Daderot/National Portrait Gallery via Wikimedia Commons

In their final exchanges before Jefferson’s death on July 4, 1826, he implored Madison, “To myself, you have been a pillar of support thro’ life. Take care of me when dead, and be assured that I shall leave with you my last affections.”

Madison responded with similar affection: “You cannot look back to the long period of our private friendship & political harmony, with more affecting recollections than I do.”

Jefferson’s and Madison’s half-century of collaboration on behalf of religious freedom and equality is an important chapter in the nation’s founding history. I believe its legacy should be remembered and celebrated, not discarded.

Steven K. Green is Professor of Law and Director of the Center for Religion, Law & Democracy at Willamette University.

The Conversation arose out of deep-seated concerns for the fading quality of our public discourse and recognition of the vital role that academic experts could play in the public arena. Information has always been essential to democracy. It’s a societal good, like clean water. But many now find it difficult to put their trust in the media and experts who have spent years researching a topic. Instead, they listen to those who have the loudest voices. Those uninformed views are amplified by social media networks that reward those who spark outrage instead of insight or thoughtful discussion. The Conversation seeks to be part of the solution to this problem, to raise up the voices of true experts and to make their knowledge available to everyone. The Conversation publishes nightly at 9 p.m. on FlaglerLive.
See the Full Conversation Archives
Support FlaglerLive
The political climate—nationally and right here in Flagler County—is at war with fearless reporting. Your support is FlaglerLive's best armor. After 16 years, you know FlaglerLive won’t be intimidated. We dig. We don’t sanitize to pander or please. We report reality, no matter who it upsets. Even you. Imagine Flagler County without that kind of local coverage. Stand with us, and help us hold the line. There’s no paywall—but it’s not free. become a champion of enlightening journalism. Any amount helps. FlaglerLive is a 501(c)(3) non-profit news organization, and donations are tax deductible.
You may donate openly or anonymously.
We like Zeffy (no fees), but if you prefer to use PayPal, click here.
If you prefer the Ben Franklin way, we're at: P.O. Box 354263, Palm Coast, FL 32135.
 

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  • VERANDA BAY FLAGLER BEACH GATED COMMUNITY
  • politis matovina attorneys for justice personal injury law auto truck accidents
  • grand living realty
  • Conner Bosch law attorneys lawyers offices palm coast flagler county

Primary Sidebar

  • grand living realty
  • VERANDA BAY FLAGLER BEACH GATED COMMUNITY
  • politis matovina attorneys for justice personal injury law auto truck accidents

Recent Comments

  • Stephen Jan Playe on What, Then, Is An American?
  • Bill Boots on Truck Driver and Pedestrian Killed in Separate Crashes Within 35 Minutes on SR100 and in Palm Coast
  • Bill Boots on Truck Driver and Pedestrian Killed in Separate Crashes Within 35 Minutes on SR100 and in Palm Coast
  • commercial hvac on Full Text: Gov. DeSantis State of the State Address
  • Samuel L. Bronkowitz on Bryan Jackson, Deputy Who’d Accidentally Shot 11-Year-Old Boy, Resigns Ahead of Internal Affairs Sanctions
  • Tony Mack on CAIR Florida, the Muslim Advocacy Organization, Sues State Over ‘Unprecedented’ Terrorist Designation ‘Regime’
  • Deborah Coffey on What, Then, Is An American?
  • Skibum on The Daily Cartoon and Live Briefing: Friday, July 3, 2026
  • karmaliveson on Bryan Jackson, Deputy Who’d Accidentally Shot 11-Year-Old Boy, Resigns Ahead of Internal Affairs Sanctions
  • Jake From State Farm on What, Then, Is An American?
  • Atwp on July 3 and 4 Celebration of 250th Anniversary from Flagler Beach Parade to Palm Coast Fireworks at County Airport
  • Atwp on What, Then, Is An American?
  • James on DeSantis Vetoes Bill Regulating Ebike Speeds, Calling It ‘Overreach’
  • The dude on Bryan Jackson, Deputy Who’d Accidentally Shot 11-Year-Old Boy, Resigns Ahead of Internal Affairs Sanctions
  • The dude on Bryan Jackson, Deputy Who’d Accidentally Shot 11-Year-Old Boy, Resigns Ahead of Internal Affairs Sanctions
  • Steve on Truck Driver and Pedestrian Killed in Separate Crashes Within 35 Minutes on SR100 and in Palm Coast

Log in