The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1869-09-22

movement" profess the war rI5ssS
the existence of Almighty God !ecSs Ssp
supreme authority Of on lord |ffist,
6Iadi sassh. TSey3 Nclaim, %
the Indignation Of mankind, that the Federal Gov
ernment, is, Judged by its organic law, both
atheistic and infde; and they would have this
scandal removed by a full preamble or other
declaration of our national dependence upon the
God of the Bible, and of our common appreciation
of the gospel plan of salvation as executed and
administered by the divine Redeemer.
There is nothing more plausible than the pro-
priety of these complaints, and seemingly nothing
more desirable than the procurement of such an
amendment as shall quiet the complainers. 1t
were indeed we'll if Christianity as understood and
explained in the light of orthodox scripture in
depreciation, should lie at the basis of all our laws
and be always scrupulously conformed to in that
| department of the government whose business it
is to execute them. In other words, it is highly
important to the country to be governed by Chris
tian men acting under sense of their accounta-
bility in view of the great truths of revelation. 1t
would be most happy state of things, truly, were
the whole population of our land so actuated by
reference to the divine law of human conduct, as
never to intrust political power to the hands of
their servants unless these hands be washed in the
innocency of saints. We ought, assuredly, to be
Christian people, actuated by intelligent zeal for
the glory of God and informed throughout by the
true spirit of gospel piety
1t would then matter little what might be the
of Nnpofitufiop xpbiob fba fahr of
our institutions is built, provided it contained
nothing which, directly or by implication is OPP
posed to the word of God. On the other hand,
were we to have Constitution whose every arti-
Gle is statement of some evangelical doctrine,
nothing would be gained in the way of elevating
the nation to the point where it might, Christian
body, shine before the world, unless the masses Of
its individual members were personally godly.
But, independently of all such considerations
there is no call for the amendment demanded, on
the simple ground that governments are not estab'
lished for either the formal recognition or pubca-
ton of religious truth This is manifestly the
Office of the Church; and until it can be shown
that the State is designed to aim at4he same OBJ
Jects with the Church, 1t must leave kotnq
the whole field of scripture DOCTRINE "a shown
which would carry with it this consequence among
others: that there must be union Of Church and
State as coordinate branches OF onesand the sam 3
divine institute In England this union has long
existed, with what confusing results we all know;
with what damage to the kingdom of Christ, we
have all deplored. The separate spheres in which
| the two are designed to move, we cannot better
define than by quoting few paragraphs from the
eloquent Address to all the Churches Of Jesus
Christ throughout the Earth" adopted by our
first General Assembly: 1.-The State is natural
institute, founded in the constitution of man as
moral and social and designed to realise the idea
of Justice. 1t is the society of rights The Church
is supernatural institute, founded in the facts Of
redemption and is designed to realise the idea Of
grace. 1t is the society of the redeemed. The
State aims at the social order; the Church at spir
itual holiness The State looks to the visible and
inward :. They are as planets moving in differ.
ent orbits, and unless each is confined to its own
track the consequences may be disastrous in the
moral world as the collision of different spheres in
the world of matter. 1t is true that there is a
point at which their respective Jurisdictions
to meet-in the idea of duty But even duty is
viewed by each in very different lights. The
Church epjoins it as obedience to God, and the
State enforces it as the safeguard of order"
| The reply to all this, on the part of those who
plead for the amendment in question, is that there
is no danger of the State, which avows its belief
in the attributes of God and its recognition of the
mediatoria character of Jesus Christ usurping the
prerogatves of the Church whose Office it is to en-.
force this belief by sanctions that appeal to the
conscience, and to persuade men of our Lord s
sovereign grace by motives that appeal to their
eternal welfare. But is there no such danger?-
Suppose the Constitution to contain all that these
men wish to see incorporated in it, it would not be
| long before these same persons or others more
logically consistent in their views of the duty the
| State owes to the CITIZEN would ask for further
recognition of the Holy Ghost as one Of the Trim
ty and Of his Office as the sanctifer of the human
heart; and, when the threefold personality of the
Godhead should thus be proclaimed as the object
of human worship and the conjoint Saviour of
men, it would be necessary to enter into those de-
tails of doctrine which show hoto it isAthat this
triune Jehovah has become the worlds Redeemer.
so making constitutional the standard of orthodox
faith The Unitarian has the same rights under
the Constitution that we have who believe in the
divinity of Christ; the Jew the same rights as the
Christian; the in6del the same as the holiest man
Of God even the pagan Chinaman, should citizen
ship be opened to him, as he who abhors iddatry !;
the very atheist the same claims to State, protec-
ton and to the State acknowledgment of his dark
negation of all divine rule over the world, as any
of his neighbors who most condemn his insanity
may have. Accordingly the Constitution as it now
stands declares that Congress shall makano law
respecting an establishment of religion, oIHohib-
iting the free exercise thereof" But such laws it
would be bound to make, if, ignoring the differ
ences of religious faith existing among the people,
the Constitution should insist upon recognising
Christianity as the only religion of the land
Whatever departed from Christianity as defined in
this, the organic law of the government, must be
brought back and whatever would not consent to be
thus brought back, must be an object for punish
ment.
In this article already too long, we have made
no attempt to discuss subject on which volume
could be written We have thrown out sugges.
tions only, for the purpose of showing that there
is brought to the notice of the people in the seem
are two sides to question, of which only one sidq
\