Thomas Jefferson Quotes
... assertions that Christianity is a part of the common law. The proof of the contrary ... is incontrovertible; to wit, that the common law existed while the Anglo-Saxons were yet pagans, at a time when they had never heard the name of Christ pronounced, or knew that such a character existed.
Arguing against the relationship between Christianity and the common law as had been asserted by some English Jurists (see Matthew Hale and James Mansfield)
Thomas Jefferson, 1743-1826, 3rd President of the United States (Democratic Republican, VA), Letter to John Cartwright, June 5, 1824
Sourced by: Eigen's Political and Historical Quotations
Then, as now, there were some who claimed there should be a larger role for Christianity in American law and governance. One such view in the first half of the 19th century was that whatever was unspecified in the Constitution deferred to the common law. England had an official state Christian church and therefore Christianity must have been a part of English common law and hence should be a significant part of American law and governance. Jefferson was one of the many leaders who refuted the notion by pointing out that the common law in England predated Christianity.
See Matthew Hale for a concurring view and Thomas Jefferson for a contrasting one.
Flaccus
His reference was to an absence of very much religious language in American documents of the founding fathers. While some founding fathers were very religious, and all knowledgeable about religion, Meacham argues from the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, The Bill of Rights, the Federalist Papers, and many other documents of the founding of America that the absence of religious language that was present in much other literature, demonstrates a conscious effort to assure that there would be separation of church and state for they had seen the horrors of interreligious strife in Europe and were very cognizant about the problems caused in early Colonial America by established religions.
All modern legal systems conflict in some respects with a literal interpretation of the Koran which is the basis for the traditionalists view of Sharia—Islamic law. Therefore a student of modern law is learning things which go against Sharia as interpreted by fundamentalists. There was a time when Jewish and Christian American religious families were uncomfortable with studding modern law as there were contradictions with Biblical law. There are still a few.
William the Conqueror. This is one of the earliest government action separating some church functions from state functions.
A priest, friar or monk with this commission could and did, remove from the custody and control of the local judges, bailiffs and law enforcement officers clerics who had run afoul of the law. At the time the word “clerk” meant any churchman. The principle at the time was that the state could not judge or dispense justice or punishment to members of the church. Only the church could try and convict clerics and they did that persiant to cannon (religious) law. In theory, the bearer of this commission would take custody of an accused criminal who was a churchman, and bring him to the Bishop who would handle the case under Ecclesiastical Law. Often that meant, doing nothing or minor penitence for a crime that could even bring the death penalty under civil law. Historically there has been a major struggle in the West between the churches and civil governments that still goes on to this day in countries like Ireland. In America, the early 21st century saw the Roman Catholic bishops covering up crimes of sexual predation on the part of Priests. Many people were also outraged that the bishops did not report the Priests to the police, but this was unfortunately a throwback to this historical notion that the Church only can deal with the discipline and legal matters involving church personnel or property. Historically, reporting matters like this to civil authorities for handling is only about 200 years old, while the system illustrated by this quotation had been in place for about 1200 years before.
Note that in addition to getting rid of the authority of the King, New York—over a decade before the Bill of Rights and the First Amendment, provided for a ban on an established church or favoring one Christian sect over another. Even then New York was a multi religious and multi ethnic society with its strong Dutch tradition along with the English tradition. New York did not go as far as the First Amendment would do later in terms of freedom of religion. NY only mentioned Christian sects. However they did implement separation of church and state and an establishment clause. See {621429} for another clause that ensures separation of church and state.
_0_thumbnail_47x47.jpg "Statue of Robert Hall in Leicester."){kind=small}
Many of the founding fathers were aware of such views in England as the same issues were being debated in America in the debates on Ratification of the Constitution and the required inclusion of the Bill or Rights—specifically the First Amendment.
This was before the state had officially sanctioned and accepted the church. Most of the institutions were pagan and the kings had subjects of both religions with Christianity not yet dominant. Yet among Christians, the Church had government temporal power, even before the church was allied with the state.
Thomas Jefferson was an American statesman, diplomat, lawyer, architect, philosopher, and Founding Father who served as the third president of the United States from 1801 to 1809. He had previously served as the second vice president of the United States under John Adams between 1797 and 1801. The principal author of the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson was a proponent of democracy, republicanism, and individual rights, motivating American colonists to break from the Kingdom of Great Britain and form a new nation; he produced formative documents and decisions at both the state and national levels.
