The Jefferson Lies

by David Barton

  Clearly, Jefferson was very close to and supportive of many ministers. But if one reads only the instances in which he fired back with contempt against those ministers who either viciously attacked him or who supported state-established religion, then one could definitely (if wrongly) conclude that Jefferson was anti-clergy, at least toward “law religion” clergy. As Beliles affirmed:

  Some have mistakenly assumed . . . Jefferson’s all-encompassing anti-clericalism. But . . . it is more accurately identified as a response against mainly Federalist clergy in the northern and middle states (Congregationalists, Presbyterian, and Unitarian) who were attacking him during the presidential campaign. These attacks have now become far too emphasized and generalized in modern representations of Jefferson without mentioning the facts that would provide a more accurate view of his relationship with ministers throughout his life. Although still being opposed to a state church with state-empowered clergy, Jefferson was certainly not against clergymen or Christianity in general.53

  Critics have often wrongly interpreted an “all-encompassing anti-clericism” from reading many of Jefferson’s letters denouncing the clergy of Period II (the “Age of Apostasy” or “Age of Corruption”) and those in Period III who wanted to preserve state religious establishments.

  This is one of the reasons that Jefferson connected so well with Anti-Federalist ministers such as the Reverend John Leland: they all had common goals in jointly opposing “priest-craft” and “law religion.” The Reverend Leland took pains, however, to make clear that the term priestcraft (a term frequently used by Jefferson) did not encompass all clergy but only certain types:

  By Priest-Craft, no contempt is designed to be cast upon any of the Lord’s priest’s, from Melchizedeck to Zacharias, nor upon any of the ministers of Christ, either those who have been remarkably endowed with power from on high to work miracles, &c. or those of ordinary endowments who have been governed by supreme love to the Savior and benevolence to mankind. These, to the world, have been like the stars of night. But by priest-craft is intended the rushing into the sacred work for the sake of ease, wealth, honor, and ecclesiastical dignity. Whether they plead lineal succession or Divine impulse, their course is directed for self-advantage. By good words and fair speeches, they deceive the simple and [use] solemn threatening of fines, gibbets [the gallows], or the flames of hell to those who do not adhere to their institutes.54

  (Concerning the latter category, there were clergy during the American Revolution who actually threatened their parishioners with Hell if they helped the patriots.55)

  Those who generally fit the category of “priest-craft” as described by the Reverend Leland were largely based in New England. As Jefferson affirmed to his friend and fellow-signer of the Declaration Elbridge Gerry, one of Jefferson’s few supporters in Massachusetts:

  In your corner alone [i.e., in New England], priestcraft and law-craft are still able to throw dust into the eyes of the people.56

  When Jefferson is speaking of these types of negative religious leaders, he regularly uses terms such as priests, priest-ridden, or refers to those practicing priest-craft rather than terms such as ministers, pastors, or clergy.57 For example, in a letter to his friend Horatio Spafford, the father of the man who authored the classic Christian hymn “It Is Well with My Soul,” Jefferson declared:

  I join in your reprobation [disapproval] of our merchants, priests, and lawyers for their adherence to England and monarchy in preference to their own country and its constitution. . . . In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty; he is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own. . . . [T]hey have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man into mystery and jargon unintelligible to all mankind.58

  Jefferson’s context is clear: he was referencing only those clergy who had an “adherence to . . . monarchy in preference to their own country and its constitution.” Yet secularists lift a single line from this letter to claim that Jefferson was an opponent of all ministers. For example, Ferrill Till, atheist editor of the Skeptical Review, writes:

  Thomas Jefferson, in fact, was fiercely anti-cleric. In a letter to Horatio Spafford in 1814, Jefferson said, “In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.”59

  Clearly, that was not the context of Jefferson’s letter. Note also that in describing the narrow category of clergy to whom he was opposed, Jefferson often conjoins the term priests with kings, or priestcraft with kingcraft as he did in the letter above with priests and monarchy. He means to exclude those ministers who did not affiliate themselves with the state so as to force their specific religious tenets upon the public. Jefferson was not opposed to all clergy but only those who joined with kings and government to practice “law religion” to the detriment of human rights and liberties. He saw that harmful alliance still exerting a negative influence in far too many countries in his day. For example, he wrote of Spanish America:

  I fear the degrading ignorance into which their priests and kings have sunk them has disqualified them from the maintenance or even knowledge of their rights and that much blood may be shed for little improvement in their condition.60

  In reviewing political conditions in South America, he similarly lamented:

  Their people are immersed in the darkest ignorance and brutalized by bigotry and superstition. Their priests make of them what they please, and though they may have some capable leaders, yet nothing but intelligence in the people themselves can keep these faithful to their charge. Their efforts, I fear, therefore will end in establishing military despotisms in the several provinces.61

  For today’s critics to take Jefferson’s comments about “law religion” clergy and impute them to all clergy is like saying that the Founding Fathers who specifically condemned and denounced Benedict Arnold were actually condemning all military leaders. Yet this is what Deconstructionists and Minimalists regularly do with Jefferson’s comments about the specific practices of a particular type of clergy.

  A final proof that Jefferson was not opposed to all clergy can found in his work on the Virginia constitution. The original 1776 state constitution contained a prohibition against clergy serving in the legislature.62 Jefferson had fully supported this provision at the time, explaining:

  The clergy are excluded because if admitted into the legislature at all, the probability is that they would form its majority, for they are dispersed through every county in the state; they have influence with the people and great opportunities of persuading them to elect them into the legislature. This body, though shattered, is still formidable, still forms a corps, and is still actuated by the esprit de corps. The nature of that spirit has been severely felt by mankind, and has filled the history of ten or twelve centuries with too many atrocities not to merit a proscription from meddling with government.63

  Recall that this was the early constitution in a state that by law had protected an official state denomination established for the previous century and a half. Jefferson believed that what had occurred in the previous 150 years when Virginia had persecuted ministers from other denominations might still continue in the new independent state, and he wanted that possibility precluded.

  Years later, however, Jefferson no longer supported that clause, explaining to the Reverend Jeremiah Moore:

  I observe . . . an abridgment of the right of being elected, which after 17 years more of experience and reflection, I do not approve: it is the incapacitation of a clergyman from being elected. . . . Even in 1783, we doubted the stability of our recent measures for reducing them [the clergy] to the footing of other useful callings [but i]t now appears that our means were effectual. The clergy here seem to have relinquished all pretension to privilege and to stand on a footing with lawyers, physicians &c. They ought therefore to possess the same rights.64

  In summary, many of Jefferso
n’s writings praise clergymen and their important work, they were among his close friends, and he regularly opened his pocketbook and exerted his influence to help them. The modern claim that Jefferson was anticlerical is another one of the many Jefferson lies that has penetrated deeply into American thinking today; it is yet another Jefferson lie that must be shaken off.

  LIE # 7

  Thomas Jefferson Was an Atheist and

  Not a Christian

  Jefferson’s own words and actions have proven many of the allegations against him are lies. But each has tended to exhibit a subtle nuance of one overarching theme: Jefferson was not religious. Or more to the point, he was not a Christian. Is this true? For modern writers the answer is simple:

  Jefferson hated religion. . . . [Professor Joseph] Ellis claims that “like Voltaire, Jefferson longed for the day when the last king would be strangled with the entrails of the last priest.”1

  Several of our founding fathers were deist and even hated Christianity . . . [including] Thomas Jefferson.2

  Jefferson hated organized religion.3

  Jefferson. . . . It’s very likely he was an atheist.4

  [His] writings clearly prove that he was not a Christian, but a Freethinker.5

  The term Freethinker may be unfamiliar to some, but it is the euphemism for atheist.6 Atheists believe that this name improves the public’s view of atheism. By definition, a Freethinker—an atheist—is:

  • one who believes that there is no deity7

  • anyone who does not believe in the existence of any gods8

  • a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings9

  As already demonstrated, Jefferson does not fit any of these definitions—not even remotely. To the contrary, his own writings make clear that many of his endeavors were inspired by a strong belief in God and in His first principles. Jefferson definitely was not an atheist, but was he a Christian?

  While Jefferson truly was a complex person, he was not confusing, obfuscating, or disingenuous. He was straightforward and truthful on the topics he addressed. And as with other subjects, Jefferson also spoke honestly about his personal faith and views of Christianity. But because he was so forthright on this topic, it is the most complicated area for historians to analyze.

  Across his long life Jefferson went through several phases regarding his own personal beliefs about specific doctrines of Christianity. There are times when he took a firm position on a particular Christian doctrine then perhaps twenty years later changed his view and then again two decades after that reverted back to his original view. For this reason, quotes can be selected to make Jefferson appear to be either a mainstream Christian or a pagan heretic, depending on the period of Jefferson’s life from which the statements are taken. This chapter will present Jefferson’s views on Christianity in each of those phases, identifying times that he slips into and out of traditional orthodoxy in regard to specific Christian doctrines.

  While there definitely were periods when Jefferson did challenge some specific doctrines, there never was a time when he questioned the overall value of Christianity to individuals or to a nation. And there never was a time when he was anti-Jesus or when he rejected Christianity. It is only in the nuances of some particular doctrines of Christianity that Jefferson’s personal faith becomes difficult to pin down or to draw a fixed and definite conclusion.

  Jefferson penned at least nineteen thousand letters during his lifetime. Of the scores of his letters that address the subjects of God, Christianity, and religion, only a handful, primarily from late in his life, raise concerns for traditional Christians. These few letters cannot, however, be dismissed out of hand simply because they represent such a tiny fraction of Jefferson’s otherwise positive declarations about Christianity. But neither can they be the only basis on which Jefferson’s faith is judged as many secularists and Jefferson critics do today.

  To illustrate what might cause a period of change in Jefferson’s religious views, recall his earlier comments about David Hume. Hume had openly declared, “I expected in entering on my literary course, that all the Christians . . . should be my enemies.”10 Jefferson acknowledged that there was a time when he had voraciously studied and absorbed Hume’s writings and philosophy before eventually rejecting them:

  I remember well the enthusiasm with which I devoured [Hume’s work] when young, and the length of time, the research and reflection which were necessary to eradicate the poison it had instilled into my mind.11

  It would, then, not be surprising that during the time of Jefferson’s “enthusiasm” about Hume, one might find him making statements or writing letters on religion and government that would reflect Hume’s philosophy before he was finally able “to eradicate the poison it had instilled into [my] mind.”

  A spiritual change is also apparent in the period of Jefferson’s life surrounding his marriage to his wife, Martha. The twenty-nine-year old Jefferson married her in 1772, and those who knew her described her as “saintly.”12 At the time of their wedding, America was four decades deep into the national revival known as the Great Awakening. This revival dramatically impacted the nation, including both Martha and Thomas. In fact, throughout the time of the Great Revival and for well over a decade after it, Jefferson’s writings and statements on religious faith can be considered as nothing less than orthodox.

  For example, when elected as a vestryman in his Anglican Church in 1768, Jefferson promised “to conform to the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of England.”13 Anglican theological doctrine at that time completely embodied orthodox Christian tenets to which Jefferson swore his allegiance. And in 1776 (four years after his marriage to Martha) he penned his Notes on Religion in which he affirmed that Jesus was the Savior, the Scriptures were inspired, and that the Apostles’ Creed “contain[ed] all things necessary to salvation.”14

  Jefferson loved and adored Martha, and they had six children—five daughters and one son. Martha was his constant companion and closest friend, and they were devoted to each other. In fact, the children clearly recalled and spoke of the sweet and precious relationship between the two, including Martha’s “passionate attachment to him, and her exalted opinion of him.”15 But the two also shared much loss and grief over their dear children. Of the six, only two lived to adulthood; Martha saw three of her children die, and Thomas saw five of them buried.

  Martha’s tragic death occurred after only ten years of blissful marriage. It was a stunning blow to Jefferson, and he was emotionally devastated. As presidential biographer William Stoddard affirms:

  [H]e was utterly absorbed in sorrow and took no note of what was going on around him. His dream of life had been shattered, and it seemed as if life itself had lost its claim upon him, for no faith or hope of his reached onward and inward to any other.16

  Jefferson’s eldest daughter, Martha, named for her mother, was with him at the time of his wife’s death, and she was her father’s “constant companion” during “the first month of desolation which followed.”17 She recounted Jefferson’s frame of mind during that tragic period, recalling:

  A moment before the closing scene, he was led from the room almost in a state of insensibility by his sister Mrs. Carr, who with great difficulty got him into his library where he fainted and remained so long insensible that they feared he never would revive. The scene that followed I did not witness; but the violence of his emotion when, almost by stealth, I entered his room at night, to this day I dare not trust myself to describe. He kept [never left] his room three weeks, and I was never a moment from his side. He walked almost incessantly night and day, only lying down occasionally, when nature was completely exhausted, on a pallet that had been brought in during his long fainting-fit. My aunts remained constantly with him for some weeks—I do not remember how many. When at last he left his room, he rode out, and from that time he was incessantly on horseback, rambling about the mountain in the least frequented roads, and just as often through the woods.18
<
br />   Not long after Martha’s death, Jefferson was sent by the Continental Congress as a diplomat to France. During those years, with the deep impact and clear remembrances and grief over Martha still so real to him, many questions remained, unanswered, and his faith was shaken. This is reflected in his writings. But by the time he became president, he had returned to a stronger and more orthodox position.

  This was evident only four years into his presidency when he faced another personal tragedy. In 1804 his twenty-five-year-old daughter, Mary (Polly), was in poor health after giving birth to her third child. Her husband, a congressman, was away in Washington with her father, so Polly moved into Monticello where she could receive constant attention. As soon as the legislative session was over, Jefferson rushed home to help care for her, but only a few short weeks after he returned, his beloved Polly died. This left only his eldest daughter, Martha, and himself remaining from the family of eight. Martha’s daughter (Jefferson’s granddaughter) reported his reaction to the death of Polly:

  My mother [Martha] has told me that on the day of her sister’s death, she left her father alone for some hours. He then sent for her, and she found him with the Bible in his hands. He who has been so often and so harshly accused of unbelief, he, in his hour of intense affliction, sought and found consolation in the Sacred Volume.19

  While such events impacted Jefferson’s faith, the greatest influence on his personal religious views was the religious disposition of the community around him. In many ways Jefferson was a mirror that accurately reflected the spiritual condition of his cherished central Virginia region around Charlottesville, the region in which he grew up and lived and to which he retired after his presidency.