That statement is not even close to being correct. See my post # 39. There is a plethora of notes and writings contemporaneous with the drafting and approval process in the Constitutional Convention committees themselves.
The American University Law Review has this 2017 paper, “Natural Born Citizen”, that goes into great depth with sources cited from natural law through the ages up until that time.
http://www.aulawreview.org/natural-born-citizen/
It seems odd that you write of Jefferson and Paine regarding the U. S. Constitution when neither of them were present in the United States at the time it was drafted.
And I didn't mention Jefferson regarding the Constitution; I metntioned his personal letter to the Danbury Ministers which history has given the imprimatur of defining the "wall of separation between church and state."
You rightly mention that Jefferson was not part of the drafting of the Constitution, yet his letter years later is taken as interpretative. Why is that, because people liked what he said? Because he wt the Declaration of Independence ? Because he was President?
Paine wrote Common Sense and The American Crisis, the former six months before Jefferson wrote the Declaration. Paine spent the War in France securing foreign funding. So why isn't Paine's interpretation treated similarly? Because parties don't like it? Because he himself wasn't born here?
-PJ