by David Barton
In Emmons’ two-hour sermon he compared the wise and Godly leader Solomon (whom he likened to John Adams) with the wicked and nefarious leader Jeroboam (whom he asserted was Thomas Jefferson). He then chastised voters for choosing Jefferson, telling them:
Solomon [John Adams] did a great deal to promote the temporal and eternal interests of his subjects; but Jeroboam [Jefferson] did as much to ruin his subjects both in time and eternity. . . . It is more than possible that our nation may find themselves in the hand of a Jeroboam who will drive them from following the Lord; and whenever they do, they will rue the day and detest the folly, delusion, and intrigue which raised him to the head of the United States.18
Years later, during the War of 1812, long after Jefferson had retired from his two terms as president, Emmons still couldn’t let go of his hatred. In fact, he directly blamed Jefferson for the war. In an 1813 sermon he continued the odious tone of his sermon from more than a decade earlier, still chiding voters with a denunciation of their stupidity for having chosen the “wicked” Jefferson:
[W]hen [the nation] neglected their best men and chose the worst [Jefferson], their glory departed and their calamities began. Against the solemn warning voice of some of the best patriots in the Union, they committed the supreme power into the hands of Mr. Jefferson, who had publicly condemned the federal Constitution. This they did with their eyes wide open. . . . We deserved to be punished.19
Publicly condemned the Constitution? Jefferson? The War of 1812—a war that occurred years after Jefferson left office—was America’s “punishment” for electing Jefferson? Such was the loathsome tone of sermons and publications of that era, and such was the caliber of lies issued against Jefferson by leading Federalist ministers. As Jefferson lamented:
[F]rom the [Federalist] clergy I expect no mercy. They crucified their Savior, Who preached that their kingdom was not of this world; and all who practice on that precept must expect the extreme of their wrath. The laws of the present day withhold their hands from blood, but lies and slander still remain to them.20
Early Jefferson historian Claude G. Bowers affirmed:
[I]n New England States, where the greater part of the ministers were militant Federalists, he was hated with an unholy hate. More false witness had been borne by the ministers of New England and New York against Jefferson than had ever been borne against any other American publicist.21
Noted political historian Saul Padover agreed.
They accused Jefferson of everything. If the sermons of the clergy were to be believed, there was no crime in the calendar of which Jefferson was not guilty and no unspeakable evil which he had not committed.22
With these types of reprehensible charges coming from Federalist clergy, it should not be surprising that the comments Jefferson made about these specific Federalist ministers might indeed seem anti-clergy. But the modern errant conclusion that then imputes those comments against all clergy instead of just Federalist ones can be reached only through Minimalism (ignoring complex situations in order to present an exaggeratedly simplistic conclusion). Minimalists, Academic Collectivists, and Deconstructionists regularly ignore Jefferson’s scores of letters praising other clergymen. They also universally dismiss the countless Anti-Federalist (Republican) ministers and clergy who supported Jefferson with a zeal and fervor equal to that of the hatred shown him by the Federalists.
Among the many ministers and clergy who vociferously supported Jefferson was the Reverend John Leland of Massachusetts. Before the American Revolution Leland moved to Virginia where he pastored Baptist churches and became a good friend of Jefferson, working closely with him to disestablish the Anglican Church in the state. In 1788 Leland was selected as a Virginia delegate to ratify the US Constitution. In 1792 he moved back to Massachusetts, and in 1800 became a significant leader in organizing the Evangelicals in New England to support Jefferson for president.23
Following Jefferson’s successful election Leland preached a sermon in which he effused:
Heaven above looked down and awakened the American genius. . . . This exertion of the American genius has brought forth the Man of the People, the defender of the rights of man and the rights of conscience to fill the chair of state. . . . Pardon me, my hearers, if I am over-warm. I lived in Virginia fourteen years. The beneficent influence of my hero was too generally felt to leave me a stoic. . . . Let us then adore that God Who has been so favorable to our land and nation.24
Leland made a special trip from Massachusetts to the White House to bring his friend Jefferson a special gift: a giant cheese.
Leland proposed that his flock should celebrate [Jefferson’s] victory by making for the new Chief Magistrate the biggest cheese the world had ever seen. Every man and woman who owned a cow was to give for this cheese all the milk yielded on a certain day—only no federal cow must contribute a drop. A huge cider-press was fitted up to make it in, and on the appointed day, the whole country turned out with pails and tubs of curd, the girls and women in their best gowns and ribbons, and the men in their Sunday coats and clean shirt-collars. The cheese was put to press with prayer, and hymn-singing, and great solemnity. When it was well dried, it weighed 1,600 pounds. It was placed on a sleigh, and Elder John Leland drove with it all the way to Washington, It was a journey of three weeks. All the country had heard of the big cheese, and came out to look at it as the Elder drove along.25
The massive cheese had Jefferson’s favorite motto etched into it: “Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to God.”26 Jefferson and Leland went inside the White House where Leland spoke in the East Room, declaring:
We believe the Supreme Ruler of the Universe, Who raises up men to achieve great events, has raised up a Jefferson at this critical day to defend republicanism.27
Leland’s visit to the White House occurred on Friday, January 1, 1802—the same day that Jefferson wrote Leland’s fellow Baptists in Danbury, Connecticut, assuring them that because of “separation of church and state,” they had nothing to fear from government limiting their religious practices or expressions. Two days later, on Sunday, January 3, Jefferson arranged for Leland to preach the sermon in the church at the Capitol. But didn’t Jefferson understand the “separation” doctrine that he had just penned? Of course he did, and he understood that separation prohibited the government from preventing a religious expression, which is why having church in the Capitol was completely acceptable.
Members of Congress such as the Reverend Manasseh Cutler, a Federalist minister and a member of Congress from Massachusetts, also attended that church service. Cutler was disgusted by the Anti-Federalist Leland, complaining:
Last Sunday, Leland the cheesemonger, a poor, ignorant, illiterate, clownish preacher (who was the conductor of this monument of human weakness and folly [the Republican cheese] to the place of its destination), was introduced as the preacher to both Houses of Congress.28
Cutler not only loathed Leland but was also revolted by his sermon. The text was:
“And behold a greater than Solomon is here” [Matthew 12:42]. The design of the preacher was principally to apply the allusion not to the person intended in the text, but to him who was then present [to Jefferson]. . . . Such an outrage upon religion, the Sabbath, and common decency was extremely painful to every sober thinking person present.29
Federalist ministers clearly did not like Anti-Federalist ministers doing to Jefferson the opposite of what they had inflicted upon him. But Jefferson was so moved by Leland’s visit that when Leland left Washington to return to Massachusetts, Jefferson “gave Rev. Mr. Leland, bearer of the cheese, $200.”30
Jefferson also arranged for other ministers to preach at the Capitol, including the Reverend James O’Kelly, another of his strong supporters. Originally a Methodist, O’Kelly later founded a movement known as the “Republican Methodists” because of the common beliefs they shared with Jefferson’s political movement. He twice visited Jefferson at the White House, and Jefferson twice arranged for him to preach in the chur
ch at the Capitol.31 Following one of those occasions, a newspaper editor reported that after O’Kelly’s sermon, “Mr. Jefferson arose with tears in his eyes and said that while he was no preacher, in his opinion James O’Kelly was one of the greatest preachers living.”32
Another Anti-Federalist evangelical minister with whom Jefferson was very close was his own pastor, the Reverend Charles Clay, an Anglican minister at St. Anne’s parish in Fredericksville, where Jefferson attended. Clay had been greatly influenced by the religious revival known as the Great Awakening and was a thoroughly energetic and evangelical preacher. He was also a strong patriot, ministering during the Revolution both to the American forces from the area and to the captured British forces imprisoned there. Clay was a neighbor of Jefferson, became a justice of the peace, and even acted as Jefferson’s attorney.
Recall that in 1774 because of the Boston Port Bill Jefferson had introduced and the legislature had passed a call for a statewide day of prayer, which included a call for attendance at a special legislative religious service. In addition to that service, Jefferson reported:
We returned home, and in our several counties invited the clergy to meet assemblies of the people on the 1st of June to perform the ceremonies of the day and to address to them discourses [sermons] suited to the occasion.33
The Reverend Clay was a prominent part of the local service that Jefferson attended, offering both its sermon and the prayers.34
By 1777 the board of Reverend Clay’s church had stopped paying his salary—perhaps because of his overt patriotism or possibly because of his evangelical tendencies. After being unable to secure the back pay, Jefferson worked with a group of citizens to start a new church that the Reverend Clay would pastor—the Calvinistic Reformed Church, which Jefferson called the Protestant Episcopal Church. Jefferson explained that they started that church in order to “derive to ourselves . . . the benefits of Gospel knowledge and religious improvement” and to “support those who have qualified themselves by regular education for explaining the Holy Scriptures.”35
Jefferson and the others personally pledged the financial support necessary for the Reverend Clay and the new church. In fact, Jefferson himself drafted the public announcement setting forth the reason they were supporting Clay and how they planned to do it:
Whereas by a late act of General Assembly, freedom of religious opinion and worship is restored to all, and it is left to the members of each religious society to employ such teachers as they think fit for their own spiritual comfort and instruction and to maintain the same by their free and voluntary contributions. . . . [A]pproving highly the political conduct of Revd. Charles Clay, who early rejecting the tyrant and tyranny of Britain, proved his religion genuine by its harmony with the liberties of mankind, and conforming his public prayers to the spirit and injured rights of his country, ever addressing the God of battles for victory to our arms (while others impiously prayed that our enemies might vanquish and overcome us), do hereby oblige ourselves, our heirs, executors, and administrators to pay to the said Charles Clay of Albemarle, his executors, or administrators the several sums affixed to our respective names.36
Of the many who signed that pledge in 1777, Jefferson was by far among the most generous financial contributors.
Two years after starting this church Jefferson also wrote a public letter of commendation for the Reverend Clay in case he should ever seek employment at another church:
The Reverend Charles Clay has been many years rector of this parish and has been particularly known to me. During the whole course of that time, his deportment has been exemplary, as became a divine, and his attention to parochial duties unexceptionable. . . . As he has some thought of leaving us, I feel myself obliged, in compliance with the common duty of bearing witness to the truth when called on, to give this testimonial of his merit that it may not be altogether unknown to those with whom he may propose to take up his residence.37
Jefferson also wrote such letters for other ministers, including the Reverend James Fontaine, recommending him for a place in state government.38 He also penned a letter of enthusiastic praise for the Rev. Mr. Glendye, who was moving to Baltimore.39
Jefferson closely attended many sermons of his republican clergy friends, and those sermons helped directly shape his political philosophy. For example, Jefferson was a close follower of the Reverend Clay’s sermons. It is therefore not surprising to find that Jefferson’s political language paralleled the language of Clay’s sermons. As Jefferson scholar Dr. Mark Beliles noted:
Given the close friendship and identification that Jefferson publicly made with Clay and his sermons, the language therefore that is found in these sermons is important because of its similarities with much of Jefferson’s terminology in his public writings. The phrase “Providence” or “Divine Providence,” used 34 times in [Clay’s] sermon on The Governor Among the Nations, is similar to the closing phrase in the Declaration of Independence which declared reliance “on the protection of Divine Providence.” . . . Clay also referred to “God as the Author of Nature,” “God the Supreme ruler,” “God the Fountain of All power,” “the Supreme Governor of the World,” “the Supreme Universal King and Lord,” “the Governor among the Nations,” and the “Great Governor of the World, the King of Nations.” These terms were common to the sermons of the day, and to the common prayer books, and therefore if Jefferson used such language in his writings, it would not be accurate to assume that he derived it from enlightenment or deistic sources.40
Writers today regularly ignore the fact that the religious terms Jefferson used in his political writings were also commonly used by evangelical ministers, including not only the Reverend Charles Clay but many others.41 They wrongly claim that Jefferson’s use of such terms proves he was a deist,42 but if such language proves Jefferson to be a deist, then it similarly proves many evangelical ministers of the day were also deists—clearly an unsustainable assertion. Such logic is a product of Modernism, which wrongly insists that since the words Jefferson used two centuries ago are not the words Evangelicals use today then Jefferson must not have been religious.
Another minister who strongly supported Jefferson was the Reverend Lorenzo Dow, one of the best known figures of the national revival known as the Second Great Awakening. Dow was originally associated with the Methodists; in 1794 he began traveling on horseback and preaching, often up to twenty times a week. Like the Reverend George Whitefield, he traversed the vast expanse of the nation preaching everywhere he went, including countries abroad.
On one occasion while speaking at a Baptist church near Jefferson’s home, Dow praised Jefferson for disestablishing the Anglican church in Virginia. He also asserted that Jefferson’s overall willingness to everywhere disestablish “law-religion” (or the state establishment of a particular denomination) was the real reason that Federalists so fiercely opposed Jefferson and called him an “infidel.” (During the time that Jefferson was working for religious freedom, nearly every New England Federalist State had an official state established denomination.) Dow explained:
Jefferson, seeing the evil of law religion, &c., had those barbarous laws . . . repealed. . . . These things procured the epithet “Infidel!” for a mark of distinguishment. . . . But religious venom of all things is the worst! From those circumstances arose the prejudice of the clergy of different societies who would be fond of a law religion as the ground of their animosity and ambition against him, because their hopes of gain are stagnated by it.43
Jefferson also believed this was the reason for most of the attacks against him. During the presidential election he had told his close friend Benjamin Rush:
[T]hey [the Federalist clergy] believe that any portion of power confided to me will be exerted in opposition to their schemes—and they believe rightly, for I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. But this is all they have to fear from me; and enough, too, in their opinion. And this is the cause of the
ir printing lying pamphlets against me. . . . But enough of this. It is more than I have before committed to paper on the subject of all the lies which have been preached and printed against me.44
Years later Jefferson remained convinced that his position against state religious establishments had been the source of the religious attacks against him, explaining:
The priests indeed have heretofore thought proper to ascribe to me religious, or rather anti-religious sentiments of their own fabric, but such as soothed their resentments against the act of Virginia for establishing religious freedom. They wished him to be thought atheist, deist, or devil, who could advocate freedom from their [state-established] religious dictations.45
But numerous Bible-centered Evangelicals strongly supported Jefferson, including the Reverend Samuel Knox, a Presbyterian minister from Maryland and a vocal anti-Unitarian, who not only wrote A Vindication of the Religion of Mr. Jefferson in 1800 but who also worked for the Anti-Federalist (Republican) cause.46 Others included the Reverend Samuel Miller, a Presbyterian minister from New York and New Jersey;47 the Reverend Elias Smith, a Baptist minister in New Hampshire;48 and many more. And the ministers who had worked hand in hand with Jefferson to introduce and pass religious liberty legislation in the Virginia legislature were also ardent Jefferson supporters, including the Reverends John Todd, William Irvin, Billy Wood, Jeremiah Moore, and others.
Another indication of Jefferson’s strong overall support for churches and ministers is seen in his own financial records. He gave generously not only to churches he attended but also to many other churches, including the “German church,” Gloria Dei Church, a local black church, the “Rev. Chambers church,” a Methodist church, an Episcopal church at the Navy Yard in Washington, and others.49 And he contributed to the construction of several new churches, including three Baptist, two Presbyterian, and two Episcopalian churches, a church in Louisiana, and so on.50 He also financially supported missionaries51 and contributed liberally to the support of many ministers, including the Reverends W. Coutts, Matthew Maury, John Leland, David Austin, Stephen Balch, Thomas Cavender, Jacob Eyerman, Andrew McCormick, John Bausman, and others.52
