James Wilson
Quoting James Wilson (Signer of the Constitution):
Far from being rivals or enemies, religion and law are twin sisters, friends, and mutual assistants. Indeed, these two sciences run into each other. The divine law, as discovered by reason and the moral sense, forms an essential part of both. (Source: James Wilson, The Works of the Honorable James Wilson (Philadelphia: Bronson and Chauncey, 1804), Vol. I, p. 106.)
Filed under: Christianity, Constitution, Culture, Education, Founding Fathers, Freedom, Government, History, Worldview | Tagged: Constitution, Constitutional Law and Civil Rights, Freedom, Government, History, Justice, Law, Legal Information, New York City, Philadelphia, President, United States, Wilson Thomas Woodrow, Wisconsin |
Samuel at Gilgal 
[…] James Wilson On Religion And Law (via Samuel at Gilgal) Posted on July 11, 2011 by loopyloo305 Quoting James Wilson (Signer of the Constitution): Far from being rivals or enemies, religion and law are twin sisters, friends, and mutual assistants. Indeed, these two sciences run into each other. The divine law, as discovered by reason and the moral sense, forms an essential part of both. (Source: James Wilson, The Works of the Honorable James Wils … Read More […]
LikeLike
“Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.” -Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814
I can quote founding fathers, as well. :)
LikeLike
These are two different contexts in which you might assume at first glance the author (Jefferson) is refuting James Wilson. Wilson actually does not even mention “common law” in that specific statement. Wilson’s purpose was to make the point that “law” and “religion” have something in common.
Jefferson was considering “common law” as derived from “natural law”.
LikeLike
I realize that the contexts are different. The point I was trying to make is that quoting historical figures does nothing for the validity of the argument.
LikeLike
This is a quote that is given verbatim. It stands alone as an observation by an astute historical individual. I do believe that history plays an important role in establishing the validity of an argument. However, the only point of view being given here is that of James Wilson. I also happen to agree with Wilson’s statement (which, of course, is why I quoted it). However, no argument was made based on the content of the quote – as if it were used in an article. If you believe the very publication of the quote on this blog does, in fact, imply an argument – then by all means address the argument that Wilson makes and tell us your reasons why you believe he is incorrect.
For instance: I concider the quote to be educational as well as true. Most people have never been taught that both the Constitution in general, and specifically the concept of Federalism—were based upon the Founding Fathers’ concept of Biblical “Covenant.” The Constitution comes from a tradition of American colonial charters and documents of political theory prior to 1787 – such as the Mayflower Compact, the Fundamental Orders of Connecticut, the Rode Island Charter of 1663, and the first state constitutions. The Constitution is largely largely based on Protestant interpretations of Judeo-Christian concepts secularized into political agreements and incorporated into state constitutions and bills of rights. There are also aspects of English common law and English Whig theory. Individual writers were also influential, such as Montesquieu, Locke, Blackstone, and Hume. Given this background you might well understand why Wilson viewed the law and religion as twin sisters.
Oscar:
I want to express my thanks to you for participating in a discussion on Samuel at Gilgal. I haved scanned your blog and find it to be interesting. Please feel free to comment here anytime. If, from time to time, you have questions on my views please feel free to ask and as time allows I look forward to responding.
Samuel
LikeLike