This 2012 book is making the rounds again in paperback:
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51Mrh4OYIbL._AC_UL320_SR216,320_.jpg
I must admit that I did not read either edition, nor do I intend to; nevertheless, I feel qualified to comment on several of David Barton’s comments in this video and the accompanying article:
I’ll begin with David Barton’s interpretation of Jefferson’s separation of church and state:
Thomas Jefferson wasn’t a secularist, as he’s often portrayed, but an active supporter of religion who funded efforts by the federal government to spread Christianity.
“Separation of church and state” had a different meaning in his time.
Barton’s analysis fail’s to give any weight to two defining aspects of T.J. character:
1. T.J. understood that government is nothing more than an instrument for governing a free people as well as governing slaves. T.J. was too astute not to know that in order to govern Americans he and his brethren had to contain the freedom-killing strain that inherently runs through mankind. A strain that is always just beneath the surface of liberty. A contagion the First Amendment contains brilliantly rather than destroys.
2. Jefferson’s well-known distrust of priests cannot justify Barton’s conclusion that Jefferson acted on behalf of organized religion. If anything, Jefferson’s political philosophy rotated around preventing priest from coming to power. That is reaffirmed by this:
Barton also dismissed secularist claims of creeping theocracy.
“That means they don’t know what the word theocratic means, because as long as you have free elections, you cannot be theocratic,” Barton said. “Theocratic means you are ruled by an elite that hears from God and acts on behalf of the people.
Barton obviously associates theocracy with traditional organized religions while he totally ignores creeping Socialism which is a religion in every sense of the definition except worshiping God.
NOTE: Buddhism is the best-known of the non-theistic religions. Socialism is the only non-theistic religion that has complete access to the public purse regardless of the First Amendment’s prohibition.
“We’re big into people choosing their own leaders. If they choose leaders of faith and follow the Constitution, there’s no chance of them being theocrats. So what [secularists] do is they use these pejoratives, these ad hominems to accuse us of theocracy. I, for one, never am and never will be, because I’ll always be for the people choosing their leaders as designed by the Constitution. Which is inherently opposed to theocracy.”
Burton is apparently unaware of how the Socialist priesthood skillfully prevents their religion from being defined as a religion. Indeed, if Socialism gets any closer to being a theocracy he can kiss the Constitution goodbye.
Basically, it is impossible to support an organized religion without empowering its priesthood. So I cannot see how Barton makes the giant leap going from T. J. distrusting priests to his unbridled support for priests. Jefferson certainly did not give Christian priests keys to the public purse with these few policies:
“As president, he took federal funds to fund missionaries to Indian groups,” Jefferson said. “He helped fund Christian schools. He helped fund a lot of things, including Christian churches in the United States seat of government, Washington, D.C., not only in the Capitol but in the Treasury Building and the War Department. Nothing about Jefferson says secularist in any way, shape or form, although some of his doctrines from a Christian standpoint would be fairly heterodox.”
Barton hails President Jefferson’s handling of the Barbary Coast War, but once again fails to mention T. J.’s abiding hatred of priests that cannot be separated from theocracy:
However, Barton acknowledged theocracy is a real threat to the world. And he told Loudon the threat is coming from a source many leftists don’t want to confront – the religion of Islam.
“If you look at Iran, it certainly is [a theocracy],” said Barton. “If you look at where the Muslim Brotherhood has had great influence, it certainly is. And that has been a problem.”
But Barton said that as unlikely as it seems, it’s Thomas Jefferson himself who can serve as a model for how to respond to the challenge of radical Islam.
“It was Jefferson who fought the first war on terror,” said Barton. “Jefferson never believed [Islam] was a religion of peace. He did not believe we should fight terrorism by drawing back from it but by confronting it. Exactly the opposite of what we do today.”
Historian: Thomas Jefferson was pro-religion
Posted By -NO AUTHOR- On 01/18/2016 @ 10:20 pm
Historian: Thomas Jefferson was pro-religion
Be clear on one thing. Priests make the decisions for every religion. President Jefferson had no more trust for Islam’s clerics than he had for the priesthood in his own country. Whatever funds T. J. gave to Christian churches was not paid in tribute. This time the war against Islam might end differently.
Bottom line: Two centuries after the Barbary Coast War, the United Nations made Islam’s clerics strong enough to demand ——— and get —— tribute.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/cartoons/images/2016/01/15/chip_bok_chip_bok_for_01152016_5_.jpg
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51Mrh4OYIbL._AC_UL320_SR216,320_.jpg
I must admit that I did not read either edition, nor do I intend to; nevertheless, I feel qualified to comment on several of David Barton’s comments in this video and the accompanying article:
I’ll begin with David Barton’s interpretation of Jefferson’s separation of church and state:
Thomas Jefferson wasn’t a secularist, as he’s often portrayed, but an active supporter of religion who funded efforts by the federal government to spread Christianity.
“Separation of church and state” had a different meaning in his time.
Barton’s analysis fail’s to give any weight to two defining aspects of T.J. character:
1. T.J. understood that government is nothing more than an instrument for governing a free people as well as governing slaves. T.J. was too astute not to know that in order to govern Americans he and his brethren had to contain the freedom-killing strain that inherently runs through mankind. A strain that is always just beneath the surface of liberty. A contagion the First Amendment contains brilliantly rather than destroys.
2. Jefferson’s well-known distrust of priests cannot justify Barton’s conclusion that Jefferson acted on behalf of organized religion. If anything, Jefferson’s political philosophy rotated around preventing priest from coming to power. That is reaffirmed by this:
Barton also dismissed secularist claims of creeping theocracy.
“That means they don’t know what the word theocratic means, because as long as you have free elections, you cannot be theocratic,” Barton said. “Theocratic means you are ruled by an elite that hears from God and acts on behalf of the people.
Barton obviously associates theocracy with traditional organized religions while he totally ignores creeping Socialism which is a religion in every sense of the definition except worshiping God.
NOTE: Buddhism is the best-known of the non-theistic religions. Socialism is the only non-theistic religion that has complete access to the public purse regardless of the First Amendment’s prohibition.
“We’re big into people choosing their own leaders. If they choose leaders of faith and follow the Constitution, there’s no chance of them being theocrats. So what [secularists] do is they use these pejoratives, these ad hominems to accuse us of theocracy. I, for one, never am and never will be, because I’ll always be for the people choosing their leaders as designed by the Constitution. Which is inherently opposed to theocracy.”
Burton is apparently unaware of how the Socialist priesthood skillfully prevents their religion from being defined as a religion. Indeed, if Socialism gets any closer to being a theocracy he can kiss the Constitution goodbye.
Basically, it is impossible to support an organized religion without empowering its priesthood. So I cannot see how Barton makes the giant leap going from T. J. distrusting priests to his unbridled support for priests. Jefferson certainly did not give Christian priests keys to the public purse with these few policies:
“As president, he took federal funds to fund missionaries to Indian groups,” Jefferson said. “He helped fund Christian schools. He helped fund a lot of things, including Christian churches in the United States seat of government, Washington, D.C., not only in the Capitol but in the Treasury Building and the War Department. Nothing about Jefferson says secularist in any way, shape or form, although some of his doctrines from a Christian standpoint would be fairly heterodox.”
Barton hails President Jefferson’s handling of the Barbary Coast War, but once again fails to mention T. J.’s abiding hatred of priests that cannot be separated from theocracy:
However, Barton acknowledged theocracy is a real threat to the world. And he told Loudon the threat is coming from a source many leftists don’t want to confront – the religion of Islam.
“If you look at Iran, it certainly is [a theocracy],” said Barton. “If you look at where the Muslim Brotherhood has had great influence, it certainly is. And that has been a problem.”
But Barton said that as unlikely as it seems, it’s Thomas Jefferson himself who can serve as a model for how to respond to the challenge of radical Islam.
“It was Jefferson who fought the first war on terror,” said Barton. “Jefferson never believed [Islam] was a religion of peace. He did not believe we should fight terrorism by drawing back from it but by confronting it. Exactly the opposite of what we do today.”
Historian: Thomas Jefferson was pro-religion
Posted By -NO AUTHOR- On 01/18/2016 @ 10:20 pm
Historian: Thomas Jefferson was pro-religion
Be clear on one thing. Priests make the decisions for every religion. President Jefferson had no more trust for Islam’s clerics than he had for the priesthood in his own country. Whatever funds T. J. gave to Christian churches was not paid in tribute. This time the war against Islam might end differently.
Bottom line: Two centuries after the Barbary Coast War, the United Nations made Islam’s clerics strong enough to demand ——— and get —— tribute.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/cartoons/images/2016/01/15/chip_bok_chip_bok_for_01152016_5_.jpg
