Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1870-10-26
For the Freeman.
Religion and the State.


ment which is so often urged, though with
less holiness, in favor of government baseC
upon religion and having religious aim
In other words, he claimed that necessit,
compels a state establishment of religion.
Of course, in this age of enlightenment, Mr.
Brastow does not claim to desire a stat,
church in the ordinary sense of the term
but he does substantially argue that every
government must have some religion, and
that Protestant Christianity is to be fostered
by our government, and all other religions
only tolerated within certain limits. Is
this true, or have we all the time been mis-
taking tho theory upon which our institu-
tions are based ? That government is based
upon rellgion-that all power comes from
Gods doubtless true in a measure. Every
thing that is proper and necessitated by the
laws OF nature which cause men to provide
for their comfort and convenience is based
upon religion.
A railroad company has it's foundation in
religion, for by close study of the laws
which God has made for the harmonious
movements of the great universe, diligent
and devout students have discovered the i'm
mense power of steam, and applied it to
machinery in such way as to greatly in
crease the comforts and convenience of man
kind. They have added to the means of
advancing the civilization and the morality
and the religion of the world. But does it
follow that railroad company should be
obliged to foster Protestant Christianity?
God creates everything, and everything has
its own appropriate work to do. He has not
ordained that beasts shall fly in the air, or
that birds shall swim in the sea. He has
not provided that the carpenter shall occupy
the sacred desk which he has constructed, or
that the clergyman shall construct the church
edifce in which he ministers. Is it neces-
sary to suppose that because the Divine
stituted governments, he has ordained that
they alone of all his works shall have every
kind of labor committed to them ?
Does the learned clergyman claim that
governments are ordained by God in any diff
ferent sense than are other institutions of
men? This theory has doubtless been held
in other ages and other countries, but we
doubt whether any American would desire
to advance it. If the government which
ruled this country prior to l776 was espe-
cially and peculiarly instituted by God, and
its kings ruled by divine right las King James
claimed, the American Revolution was
rebellion against God. Does the gentleman
claim this?
As matter Of fact, in this country, all
power given to the government comes d.
rectIg from the people. All rights which
the people possess now, were possessed in a
larger degree before the establishment of the
government At that time, in order to Sc
cure better protection Of life, liberty and
property, a portion of those rights were
yielded to the government. The government
was created for the purpose which we have
named, and it can have no more duties or
powers than those which the people have
established. Now, among the absolute rights
which belong to every man is the right to
think as he desires-the right to worship
Almighty God according to the dictates Of
his reason and faith-in other words complete
and absolute liberty Of conscience IN i0hich no
man can interfere. The general theory of
our nation-a theory which the flames of
have never been able to eradicate !
from the human mind-has been that this
right of conscience shall never be yielded
that therefore governments are instituted to
attend to secu lar matters, and not to control
the souls of men but unquestionably the
people would have the Por0er to yield this
liberty, and to have given the state religious
as well as secular duties. Have they done
so, is the only question which we need to
discuss
And it is well to remark that the fact that
either the state or the national government
has sometimes violated religious liberty can
not be adduced as an argument by the gen
tleman. any more than it would have been
proper for him to have argued few years
since that this country was not intended and
ought not to be a government of cirl liberty
because civil liberty had never been in fact
allowed to portion of our people.
Mr. Brastow contends that government
beings, and that it must therefore deal with
mans entire nature. 1t must attend to the
culture of the soul as well as the mind and
the body This, in fact, supposes the people
to have given powers to the government
which we have just denied. But suppose
that the state has this power what immense re-
sponsibilities have we entrusted to the state
If it is the duty of the state to look after
the souls of the people, of course, it must
see that these souls are supplied with the
truth and kept from error The gentleman
claims that it must teach Protestant Chris
tianity. Must it not also shield the people
from that which is opposed to Professionalism?
Must it not also keep Protestants themselves
from hereses In a religious point of view,
is the distance between a Catholic and
Protestant any greater than that between
those who believe Jesus fallible man, and
the majority who believe him very God?
Must we not accept the argument of the in
qusitors of Spain that it is better that the
souls of the people be kept pure from error
rather than the consciences of few be re-
spected? Must not, indeed, the state teach
all religious truth if it attempts to teach
any, and establish state church? The ar
gument can logically reach no other con-
clusion.
But Mr.. Cooley in his very valuable work
on Constitutional Limitations says, " He who
shall examine with care the American con-
situations will find nothing more fully or
more plainly expressed than the desire of
their trainers to preserve and perpetuate re-
ligious liberty, and to guard against the
slightest approach towards inequality of civil