| Topic: |
Sociology > Education |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
02 May 2007 03:01:45 PM |
| Object: |
Sep C&S History lessons #8 |
THE AMERICAN IDEA OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM.
This essay was written in 1888 by a prominent Christian historian. It is an
excellent essay discussing the need for separation of church and state.
1888
THE AMERICAN IDEA OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM.
[Church and State in the United States. 1888.]
WHAT is the distinctive character of American Christianity in its
organized social aspect and its relation to the national life, as compared
with the Christianity of Europe?
It is a free church in a free state, or a self-supporting and
self-governing Christianity in independent but friendly relation to the
civil government.
This relationship of church and state marks an epoch. It is a new
chapter in the history, of Christianity, and the most important one which
America has so far contributed. It lies at
the base of our religious institutions and operations, and they cannot be
understood without it. . . .
The relationship of church and state in the United States secures
full liberty of religious thought, speech, and action, within the limits of
the public peace and order. It makes
persecution impossible.
Religion and liberty are inseparable. Religion is voluntary, and
cannot and ought not to be forced.
This is a fundamental article of the American creed, without
distinction of sect or party. Liberty, both civil and religious, is an
American instinct. All natives suck it in with the
mother's milk; all immigrants accept it as a happy boon, especially those
who flee from oppression and persecution abroad. Even those who reject the
modern theory of liberty enjoy
the practice, and would defend it in their own interest against any attempt
to overthrow it.
Such liberty is impossible on the basis of a union of church and
state, where the one of necessity restricts or controls the other. It
requires a friendly separation, where each power is
entirely independent in its own sphere. The church, as such, has nothing to
do with the state except to obey its laws and to strengthen its moral
foundations; the state has nothing to do
with the church except to protect her in her property and liberty; and the
state must be equally just to all forms of belief and unbelief which do not
endanger the public safety.
The family, the church, and the state are divine institutions
demanding alike our obedience, in their proper sphere of jurisdiction. The
family is the oldest institution, and the source of church and state. The
patriarchs were priests and kings of their households. Church and state are
equally
necessary, and as inseparable as soul and body, and yet as distinct as soul
and body. The church is instituted for the religious interests and eternal
welfare of man; the state for
his secular interests and temporal welfare. The one looks to heaven as the
final home of immortal spirits, the other upon our mother earth. The church
is the reign of love; the state is the
reign of justice. The former is governed by the gospel, the latter by the
law. The church exhorts, and uses moral suasion; the state commands, and
enforces obedience. The church punishes
by rebuke, suspension, and excommunication; the state by fines,
imprisonment, and death. Both meet on questions of public morals, and both
together constitute civilized human Society and
ensure its prosperity.
The root of this theory we find in the New Testament.
In the ancient world religion and politics were blended. Among the
Jews religion ruled the state, which was a theocracy. Among the heathen the
state ruled religion; the Roman emperor was the supreme pontiff (pontifex
maximus), the gods were national, and the priests were servants of the
state.
Christianity had at first no official connection with the state. .
.. .
For three hundred years the Christian church kept aloof from
politics, and, while obeying the civil laws and paying tribute, maintained
at the same time the higher law of conscience in
refusing to comply with idolatrous customs and in professing the faith in
the face of death. The early Apologists-Justin Martyr, Tertullian,
Lactantius-boldly claimed the freedom of religion as
a natural right.
THE AMERICAN SYSTEM COMPARED WITH OTHER SYSTEMS.
The American relationship of church and state differs from all
previous relationships in Europe and in the colonial period of our history;
and yet it rests upon them and reaps the benefit of them all. For history
is an organic unit, and American history has its roots in Europe.
1. The American system differs from the ante-Nicene or
pre-Constantinian separation of church and state, when the church was
indeed, as with us, self-supporting and self-governing, and so far free
within, but under persecution from without, being treated as a forbidden
religion by the then heathen state. In America the government protects the
church in her property and rights without interfering with her internal
affairs. By the power of truth and the moral heroism of
martyrdom the church converted the Roman Empire and became the mother of
Christian states.
2. The American system differs from the hierarchical control of the
church over the state, or from priest government, which prevailed in the
Middle Ages down to the Reformation, and
reached its culmination in the Papacy. It confines the church to her proper
spiritual vocation, and leaves the state independent in all the temporal
affairs of the nation. The hierarchical theory was suited to the times
after the fall of the Roman Empire and the ancient civilization, when the
state was a rude military despotism, when the church was the refuge of the
people, when the Christian priesthood was in sole possession of learning
and had to civilize as well as to evangelize the
barbarians of northern and western Europe. By her influence over
legislation the church abolished bad laws and customs, introduced
benevolent institutions, and created a Christian state controlled by the
spirit of justice and humanity, and fit for self-government.
3. The American system differs from the Erastian or C saro-Papal
control of the state over the church, which obtained in the old Byzantine
Empire, and prevails in modern Russia, and in the Protestant states of
Europe, where the civil government protects and supports the church, but at
the expense of her dignity and independence, and deprives her of the power
of self-government. The Erastian system was based on the assumption that
all citizens are also Christians of one creed,
but is abnormal in the mixed character of government and people in the
modern state. In America, the state has no right whatever to interfere with
the affairs of the church, her doctrine,
discipline, and worship, and the appointment of ministers. It would be a
great calamity if religion were to become subject to our ever-changing
politics.
4. The American system differs from the system of toleration, which
began in Germany with the Westphalia Treaty, 1648; in England with the Act
of Toleration, 1689, and which now prevails over nearly all Europe; of late
years, nominally at least, even in Roman Catholic countries, to the very
gates of the Vatican, in spite of the protest of the Pope. Toleration
exists where the government supports one or more churches, and permits
other religious communities under the name of sects (as on the continent),
or dissenters and nonconformists (as in England),
under certain conditions. In America there are no such distinctions, but
only churches or denominations on a footing of perfect equality before the
law. To talk about any particular
denomination as the church, or the American church, has no meaning, and
betrays ignorance or conceit. Such exclusiveness is natural and logical in
Romanism, but unnatural, illogical, and
contemptible in any other church. The American laws know no such
institution as "the church," but only separate and independent
organizations.
Toleration is an important step from state-churchism to
free-churchism. But it is only a step. There is a very great difference
between toleration and liberty. Toleration is a concession, which may be
withdrawn; it implies a preference for the ruling form of faith and
worship, and a practical
disapproval of all other forms. It may be coupled with many restrictions
and disabilities. We tolerate what we dislike but cannot alter; we tolerate
even a nuisance, if we must. Acts of
toleration are wrung from a government by the force of circumstances and
the power of a minority too influential to be disregarded.
In our country we ask no toleration for religion and its free
exercise, but we claim it as an inalienable right. "It is not toleration,"
says Judge Cooley, "which is established in our
system, but religious equality." Freedom of religion is one of the greatest
gifts of God to man, without distinction of race and color. He is the
author and lord of conscience, and no power
on earth has a right to stand between God and the conscience. A violation
of this divine law written in the heart is an assault upon the majesty of
God and the image of God in man. Granting
the freedom of conscience, we must, by logical necessity, also grant the
freedom of its manifestation and exercise in public worship. To concede the
first and to deny the second, after the manner of despotic governments, is
to imprison the conscience. To be just, the state must either support all
or none of the religions of its citizens. Our government supports none, but
protects all.
5. Finally-and this we would emphasize as especially important in
our time,-the American system differs radically and fundamentally from the
infidel and red-republican theory of
religious freedom. The word freedom is one of the most abused words in the
vocabulary. True liberty, is a positive force, regulated by law; false
liberty is a negative force, a release
from restraint. True liberty is the moral power of self-government; the
liberty of infidels and anarchists is carnal licentiousness. The American
separation of church and state rests on respect for the church; the infidel
separation, on indifference and hatred of the church, and of religion
itself.
The infidel theory was tried and failed in the first Revolution of
France. It began with toleration, and ended with the abolition of
Christianity, and with the reign of terror, which
in turn prepared the way for military despotism as the only means of saving
society from anarchy and ruin. Our infidels and anarchists would renact
this tragedy if they should ever get
the power. They openly profess their hatred and contempt of our
Sunday-laws, our Sabbaths, our churches, and all our religious institutions
and societies. Let us beware of them! The American
system grants freedom also to irreligion and infidelity, but only within
the limits of the order and safety of society. The destruction of religion
would be the destruction of morality and
the ruin of the state. Civil liberty requires for its support religious
liberty, and cannot prosper without it. Religious liberty is not an empty
Sound, but an orderly exercise of
religious duties and enjoyment of all its privileges. It is freedom in
religion, not freedom from religion; as true civil liberty is freedom in
law, and not freedom from law. Says Goethe:
"In der Beschr nkung erst zeigt sich der Meister,
Und das Gesetz nur kann dir Freiheit geben."
Republican institutions in the hands of a virtuous and God-fearing
nation are the very best in the world, but in the hands of a corrupt and
irreligious people they are the very worst, and the most effective weapons
of destruction. An indignant people may rise in rebellion against a cruel
tyrant; but who will rise against the tyranny of the people in possession
of the ballot-box and the whole machinery of government? Here lies our
great danger, and it is increasing
every year.
Destroy our churches, close our Sunday-schools, abolish the Lord's
Day, and our republic would become an empty shell, and our people would
tend to heathenism and barbarism. Christianity is the most powerful factor
in our society and the pillar of our institutions. It regulates the family;
it enjoins private and public virtue; it builds up moral character; it
teaches us to
love God supremely, and our neighbor as ourselves; it makes good men and
useful citizens; it denounces every vice; it encourages every virtue; it
promotes and serves the public welfare; it
upholds peace and order. Christianity is the only possible religion for the
American people, and with Christianity are bound up all our hopes for the
future.
This was strongly felt by Washington, the father of his country,
first in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen";
and no passage in his immortal Farewell Address is more truthful, wise, and
worthy of constant remembrance by every American statesman and citizen than
that in which he affirms the inseparable connection of religion with
morality and national prosperity.
SOURCE OF INFORMATION: The American Idea of Religious Freedom, by Philip
Schaff This essay was written in 1888 by a prominent Christian historian.
It is an excellent essay discussing the need for separation of church and
state. http://www.xmission.com/~gastown/revival/religfre.txt
***************************************************************
You are invited to check out the following:
The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]
HRSepCnS · Historical Reality SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
USAF LT. COL (Ret) Buffman (Glen P. Goffin) wrote
"You pilot always into an unknown future;
facts are your only clue. Get the facts!"
That philosophy 'snipit' helped to get me, and my crew, through a good
many combat missions and far too many scary, inflight, emergencies.
It has also played a significant role in helping me to expose the
plethora of radical Christian propaganda and lies that we find at
almost every media turn.
*****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************
.
|
|
| User: "M_P" |
|
| Title: Re: Sep C&S History lessons #8 |
02 May 2007 03:06:58 PM |
|
|
On May 2, 3:01 pm, wrote:
This essay was written in 1888 by a prominent Christian historian.
Did this alleged "prominent Christian historian" have a name?
It is an excellent essay discussing the need for separation of church and
state.http://www.xmission.com/~gastown/revival/religfre.txt
Broken link.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Sep C&S History lessons #8 |
04 May 2007 04:59:00 AM |
|
|
M_P <m_p@rocketmail.com> wrote:
:|On May 2, 3:01 pm, wrote:
:|
:|> This essay was written in 1888 by a prominent Christian historian.
:|
:|Did this alleged "prominent Christian historian" have a name?
:|
You can't read?
SOURCE OF INFORMATION: The American Idea of Religious Freedom, by Philip
Schaff This essay was written in 1888 by a prominent Christian historian.
It is an excellent essay discussing the need for separation of church and
state.
***************************************************************
You are invited to check out the following:
The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]
HRSepCnS · Historical Reality SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
USAF LT. COL (Ret) Buffman (Glen P. Goffin) wrote
"You pilot always into an unknown future;
facts are your only clue. Get the facts!"
That philosophy 'snipit' helped to get me, and my crew, through a good
many combat missions and far too many scary, inflight, emergencies.
It has also played a significant role in helping me to expose the
plethora of radical Christian propaganda and lies that we find at
almost every media turn.
*****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Josh Miles" |
|
| Title: Re: Sep C&S History lessons #8 |
02 May 2007 04:57:39 PM |
|
|
M_P wrote:
On May 2, 3:01 pm, wrote:
This essay was written in 1888 by a prominent Christian historian.
Did this alleged "prominent Christian historian" have a name?
Philip Schaff.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
