A Gift that Kept on Giving
- Jun 1, 2007 - 3
The Divided States of America by Richard Land
On the bookcase behind the desk of North Carolina Supreme Court Justice Edward Thomas Brady sits a bright red and blue book, a gift from a new acquaintance.
That book, The Divided States of America? by Richard Land, served as more than a kind gesture this month when Brady and his fellow justices looked at the text in ruling on a case involving a Carolina church’s First Amendment rights.
Land gave copies of his new book as a gift to Justices Paul Martin Newby and Edward Thomas Brady after his visit to the North Carolina General Assembly this March. The Divided States of America? outlines the proper relationship between church and state, with a substantial look at the role of religion in American history.
Less than two months after the visit, the court ruled not to become involved in the local church dispute, instead deferring to its members in the case of Harris v. Matthews. The case called into question an examination of the church’s staff, as well as their authority and management.
Recognizing the First Amendment rights of Saint Luke Missionary Baptist Church, Justice Newby wrote in the majority opinion, “Because a church’s religious doctrine and practice affect its understanding of each of these concepts [staff, authority, etc.], seeking a court’s review of the matters presented here is no different than asking a court to determine whether a particular church’s grounds for membership are spiritually or doctrinally correct…”
Justice Brady wrote the concurring opinion for the case and cited The Divided States of America? as a reference, as well as citing a number of the historical documents that are also included in the book.
Brady addressed the phrase of “a wall of separation between church and state,” originally penned by Thomas Jefferson.
In his opinion, Brady writes, “Even a brief review of the exchange between Thomas Jefferson and the Danbury Association of Baptists demonstrates that the metaphor ‘separation between church and state’ has been wrenched torturously out of context in many circumstances….”
Brady concludes, “… no religious right is more precious than the right to form one’s own religious opinions without interference from the civil government.”
Further Learning
Learn more about: Citizenship, Christian Citizenship, Church and State, National, Religious Liberty
3 comments (post your own) feed
1 On Jun 1st, 2007, at 7:16am, Todd Laubenthal wrote:
WOW
2 On Jun 1st, 2007, at 8:17am, Vivian wrote:
RE: Gift that Kept on Giving article. This is outstanding, Dr. Land, that your book was so persuasive to these Justices! Now if we could just get the more liberal members of our Supreme Court to read it! I can pray for that to happen. I know you will, too, and probably already have been praying for that.
3 On Jun 20th, 2007, at 8:21pm, Eric Pendleton wrote:
This is wonderful news! While I prefer strict constructionist on the Court, this case demonstrates that all we really need are men and women who understand the law and the foundations of law in these United States. Political opinion has little place in the Court, I wish to be judged by the rule of law and not by the whims of man’s opinion. Obviously, Mr Justice Brady and Mr Justice Newman understand this and the need to protect religious practice from government interference. This is the purpose of the First Amendment to keep government out of the church house and not to prevent conscientious men and women from speaking their convictions. Even with their faults, three cheers for the founding fathers, and one great big hurrah for the Father of All!