may be supposed to have been deplorable enough on the return of peace, and that they little needed the aggravation of being thrown for their support entirely upon their own members, when these were impoverished by the length of the war, and rendered by it incapable of doing much for the Church, however well disposed to make sacrifices in her cause. But an extract from the distinguished author to whom I have so often had occasion to refer, will give a clearer idea of the state of things than I can :

being arrested in 1776, been continued until 1783. But in the gloomy years that followed the Revolution, the Episcopal Church continued prostrate, and felt the loss of her establishment most severely. Then did it seem as if nothing short of her utter ruin would satisfy the resentment of her enemies. She had, indeed,. in the day of her power, been exclusive, domineering, and persecuting; her own sins had brought upon her this severe visitation. From her case, as well as from all past experience, persecuting churches should learn that a Church that oppresses, will one day be herself oppressed, and most likely by those on whose neck she had placed her foot.

But let us turn to a brighter page. "The Lord, after he hath afflicted, delighteth to heal." So it was with the Episcopal Church in Virginia. He had some good thing in reserve for her, and had been preparing her for it by the discipline of His rod. She gradually emerged from her difficulties. Her people learned by degrees to trust in themselves, or, rather, in God, and began to look to their own exertions rather than to a tobacco-tax for the support of their churches and pastors. Faithful ministers multiplied; an excellent bishop was elected and consecrated; benevolent soci

"On the 19th of April, 1783, precisely eight years after the first effusion of blood at Lexington, peace was proclaimed to the American army by order of the commander-in-chief. Time was now afforded to men to direct their attention to the permanent establishment of such institutions, civil and religious, as might comport with their desires or views of duty. Much was to be done; and rejoicing with thankfulness, as now we may, in the present prosperity of the Church in Virginia, it is well to look back on its condition as it emerged from the Revolution, and by a contemplation of the difficulties which stood in the way of its resuscitation, be moved to the exercise of gratitude. When the colonies first resorted to arms, Virginia in her sixty-one counties, contained nine-eties began to spring up; a theological ty-five parishes, 104 churches and chapels, and ninety-one clergymen. When the contest was over, she came out of the war with a large number of her churches destroyed or injured irreparably, with twenty-three of her ninety-five parishes extinct or forsaken, and of the remaining seventy-ted them to have been at the commencetwo, thirty-four were destitute of ministerial services; while of her ninety-one clergymen, twenty-eight only remained, who had lived through the storm, and these, with eight others who came into the state soon after the struggle terminated, supplied thirty-six of the parishes. Of these twenty-eight, fifteen only had been enabled to continue in the churches which they supplied prior to the commencement of hostilities; and thirteen had been driven from their cures by violence or want, to seek safety or comfort in some one of the many vacant parishes, where they might hope to find, for a time at least, exemption from the extremity of suffering."*

school was planted within her borders, where many youths of talent and piety have been trained under excellent professors to preach the unsearchable riches of Christ. And although the ministers and parishes are not now so numerous as we have sta

ment of the war of the Revolution, yet. their number is considerable, and constantly increasing. There are ninety-five ministers, and more than one hundred churches. But, above all, I do not think it possible to find a body of ministers of equal number, in any denomination, who, in point of theological education, prudent zeal, simple and effective eloquence, general usefulness, and the esteem in which they are held by the people, can be regarded as superior to the Episcopal clergy of the present day in Virginia.* What a change! How wonderfully has all been overruled by God for good! Instead of perpetual

This is a dark enough picture, but it * This eulogy will not be thought extravagant by must be borne in mind that the evils it rep- I have had the privilege, as well as the happiness, of any one that has had opportunities of knowing them. resents were almost wholly owing to the making the acquaintance of many of them, and have Revolutionary war and its consequences, known many more by character through sources worand could not have been much alleviated thy of entire confidence. The late excellent Bishop had the Church Establishment, instead of Moore was beloved by all who knew him. The present bishop, Dr. Meade, enjoys the confidence and denominations was inconsiderable. The Presbyte-esteem both of Christians and the world, in a higher rians probably suffered more in their church edifices, degree than perhaps any other minister of the Gosfrom being far more obnoxious to the resentment of pel in America. The assistant bishop, Dr. Johns, the enemy, as the English were considered to be at is a distinguished and excellent man. The professthe time. ors in the diocesan Theological Seminary, the Rev. Drs. Lippitt and Sparrow, are widely known and highly esteemed by all who know them.

* Dr. Hawks's "History of the Episcopal Church in Virginia," p. 153, 154,

wrangling with their parishioners and the | out ministers. At no period of its establishlaw officers about the taxes on tobacco levied for their support, as was formerly the case, they are supported in a way hereafter to be detailed; I do not say extravagantly or abundantly, but in general comfortably, by the contributions of their congregations. And instead of being disliked, to use no harsher term, I have reason to believe that they are universally respected, and even beloved, by the members of other churches.

ment by the State was the Episcopal Church of Maryland so prosperous as during some years back. Not that in all cases the clergy are supported as they ought to be, or as they were during the union of Church and State; but in point of talents and sound learning, combined with piety and other ministerial gifts, they are immeasurably superior to their predecessors before the Revolution.

In North and South Carolina, and in New-York, though the disestablishment of the Episcopal Church produced, as in other cases, a kind of syncope for a time, from this it ere long recovered, and its prosperity is now incomparably greater than it ever was when it was supported by the state. In the State of New-York it may be said to have entered on its present career of extraordinary prosperity with the election and consecration of the late Rev. Dr. John Henry Hobart, as bishop of the diocese, previous to which its churches and ministers were few in number compared with the present time. Seldom has a Church owed more to the energy and perseverance of one man.

In Maryland as well as Virginia, though in a much less degree, the dissolution of the union of Church and State produced serious embarrassments and long-continued difficulty. In none of the colonies had the established clergy received such an ample maintenance as in Maryland. Their stipends were in many cases most liberal and ample for those days, so that to throw them at once on the voluntary support of their parishioners was a hazardous step, and for the time led to many cases of hardship. When the Revolution broke out, there were twenty parishes on the eastern shore of the province, and twenty-four on the western; in all, fortyfour. Each of these had an incumbent, But in no part of the United States was though not always of the purest charac- the proposal to disestablish the Church reter," and at the close of the war in 1783, ceived with more serious apprehension there were about eighteen or twenty re- than in New-England. The language in maining.† But if this diminution were which the celebrated Dr. Dwight, president owing at all to the dissolution of the union of Yale College, and author of a very valuof Church and State, it was so in but a able system of theology, as well as other small degree. The fact is, that about two distinguished men of that state, deprecated thirds of the established clergy were op- the measure, is still extant in pamphlets posed to the war from its commencement, and in journals, and these have often been and refused to take the oath of allegiance quoted in England by the friends, in oppoto the new government, so that the great-sition to the opponents, of the Church Eser part of them left the country. On the return of peace, the Episcopal Church gradually recovered from its depression, and ever since it has made pretty steady progress, and been decidedly prosperous. The late Dr. Clagget was appointed its first bish-mistaken, and has not now found to be a op in 1792, its Convention was organized, and canons established, by which proper discipline was secured. The clergy were for a long time less numerous than before the Revolution; not so much, however, for want of the means of supporting them, as for want of suitable men. Some ministers did, indeed, leave their parishes, and the state itself, just after the war of the Revolution, and even so late as 1822, for want of support; but this was either be-tablished ministers of that state, I am not fore the churches had been sufficiently trained to the work of raising a mainte- * The author has often conversed on this subject nance for their ministers, or it arose from with the Rev. Lyman Beecher, D.D., who, when the the churches being really too weak for the change took place, was pastor of a church in Connecticut, but is now professor in a theological semiburden. Maryland had fifty Episcopal cler-nary at Cincinnati, Ohio. Dr. Beecher was as much gymen in 1827; this number had risen to opposed to the dissolution as Dr. Dwight was, and seventy-two in 1838, and a considerable both preached and wrote against it. But with charproportion of the churches were still with-acteristic candour, he hesitates not now to confess

* Dr. Hawks's "History of the Episcopal Church in Maryland." † Ibid., p. 301.

tablishment there. But it ought to be known that not a single surviver at this. day, of all who once wrote against the separation of Church and State in Connecticut, has not long since seen that he was

blessing what he once regarded as a calamity. And had not Dr. Dwight died just as the change came into operation, no doubt he, too, would have changed his opinion.* Twenty-seven years have now elapsed since that time, and although I have been much in Connecticut during the last fifteen years, know many of the clergy, and have conversed much with them on the subject, out of the 200 or 300 once es

that his apprehensions were quite unfounded. Few men rank higher in the United States than Dr. Beecher, whether as a preacher or as a writer.

aware of there being more than one Con- | pressed by writers on public and political gregational minister in the state who would law on the question, How far any governlike to see the union of Church and State ment has a right to interfere in religious restored in it. Indeed, the exception re- matters; but that such a right exists to a ferred to is probably the only one in the certain extent, is admitted by all of them. United States, among the Protestant min-Nor can it be otherwise so long as religion isters at least. Any others are most likely foreigners, who have not yet entered largely into the spirit of our institutions and our people. On no point, I am confident, are the evangelical clergy of the United States, of all churches, more fully agreed than in holding that a union of Church and State would prove one of the greatest calamities that could be inflicted on us, whatever it | may prove in other countries. This is the very language I have heard a thousand times from our best and ablest men when speaking on the subject.

shall be thought necessary to the well-being of society, and to the stability of government itself. It is essential to the interests of men, even in this world, that they should be neither ignorant of, nor indifferent to, the existence, attributes, and providence of one Almighty God, the Ruler of the universe; and, above all, a people that be-` lieve in Christianity can never consent that the government they live under should be indifferent to its promotion, since public as well as private virtue is connected indissolubly with a proper knowledge of its nature and its claims, and as the everlasting happiness of men depend upon its cordial reception.

On this subject it may be interesting to know the opinions of one of the most distinguished jurists in the United States, Mr. Justice Story, one of the judges of the Su

In Massachusetts, which was the last of the states to abolish the union of the Church and the Civil Power, the change was adopted from a conviction of the evils, on the one side, resulting from the union in that state, and of the advantages, on the other side, that would accrue from its dissolution: a conviction that led all the evan-preme Court: gelical denominations to combine for its overthrow. In fine, after twelve years' experience of the change, I apprehend not a single person of influence in all their ranks will be found to regret it.

"The real difficulty lies in ascertaining the limits to which government may rightfully go in fostering and encouraging religion. Three cases may easily be supposed. One, where a government affords aid to a And now, throughout the whole of the particular religion, leaving all persons free United States, Truth stands on its own im- to adopt any other; another, where it cremutable vantage ground. So far as the ates an ecclesiastical establishment for the Civil Power is concerned, there is not the propagation of the doctrines of a particular slightest interference with the rights of sect of that religion, leaving a like freedom conscience or with the religious worship to all others; and a third, where it creates of any one. Religious liberty, fettered by such an establishment, and excludes all no state enactment, is as perfect as it can persons not belonging to it, either wholly be. Nor is any sect or denomination of or in part, from any participation in the Christians favoured more than another. public honours, trusts, emoluments, priviAll depend, under God, for their support on leges, and immunities of the State. For the willing hearts and active hands of their instance, a government may simply declare friends, while the civil government, re- that the Christian religion shall be the relieved from the ten thousand difficulties and ligion of the State, and shall be aided and embarrassments which a union of Church encouraged in all the varieties of sects beand State would involve, has only to mete longing to it; or it may declare that the out justice with even scales to all the citi-Catholic or Protestant religion shall be the zens, whatever may be their religious opin-religion of the State, leaving every man to ions and preferences.

CHAPTER V.

WHETHER THE GENERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE
UNITED STATES HAS THE POWER TO PRO-

MOTE RELIGION.

the free enjoyment of his own religious opinions; or it may establish the doctrines of a particular sect, as of Episcopalians, as the religion of the State, with a like freedom; or it may establish the doctrines of a particular sect, as exclusively the religion of the State, tolerating others to a limited extent, or excluding all not belonging to it from all public honours, trusts, emolu

"Now there will probably be found few

It seems to be inferred by some that because the Constitution declares that "Congress shall make no law respecting an es-ments, privileges, and immunities. tablishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," "* the General Gov-persons in this, or any other Christian ernment can do nothing whatever to promote religion. This is certainly a mistake. A great variety of opinions has been ex

* First of the Amendments to the Constitution.

country, who would deliberately contend that it was unreasonable or unjust to foster and encourage the Christian religion generally as a matter of sound policy, as well as of revealed truth. In fact, every

66

American colony, from its foundation down, worship of God, and of public instructions to the Revolution, with the exception of in piety, religion, and morality, therefore, Rhode Island (if, indeed, that state be an to promote their happiness, and to secure exception), did openly, by the whole course the good order and preservation of their of its laws and institutions, support and government, the people of this commonsustain, in some form, the Christian reli-wealth have a right to invest their Legislagion, and almost invariably gave a pecu-ture with power to authorize and require, liar sanction to some of its fundamental and the Legislature shall from time to doctrines. And this has continued to be time authorize and require the several the case in some states down to the pres-towns, parishes, &c., &c., to make suitable ent period, without the slightest suspicion provision, at their own expense, for the that it was against the principles of public institution of the public worship of God, law or Republican liberty.* Indeed, in a and for the support and maintenance of republic, there would seem to be a pecu- public Protestant teachers of piety, religion, liar propriety in viewing the Christian re- and morality, in all cases where such proligion as the great basis on which it must vision shall not be made voluntarily.' Afrest for its support and permanence, if it terward there follow provisions prohibitbe, what it has ever been deemed by its ing any superiority of one sect over antruest friends to be, the religion of liberty. other, and securing to all citizens the free Montesquieu has remarked, that the Chris- exercise of religion. tian religion is a stranger to mere despotic Probably, at the time of the adoption power. The mildness so frequently rec- of the Constitution, and of the amendment ommended in the Gospel is incompatible to it now under consideration, the general, with the despotic rage with which a prince if not the universal, sentiment in America punishes his subjects, and exercises him- was, that Christianity ought to receive enself in cruelty. He has gone even far-couragement from the State, so far as was ther, and affirmed, that the Protestant re- not incompatible with the private rights of ligion is far more congenial with the spirit conscience and the freedom of religious of political freedom than the Catholic, worship. An attempt to level all religions, 'When,' says he, the Christian religion, and to make it a matter of state policy to two centuries ago, became unhappily divi- hold all in utter indifference, would have ded into Catholic and Protestant, the peo-created universal disapprobation, if not ple of the North [of Europe] embraced the universal indignation. Protestant, and those of the South still ad- "It yet remains a problem to be solved hered to the Catholic. The reason is plain. in human affairs, whether any free governThe people of the North have, and ever will ment can be permanent where the public have, a spirit of liberty and independence worship of God, and the support of religion, which the people of the South have not constitute no part of the policy or duty of and, therefore, a religion which has no the State in any assignable shape. The visible head is more agreeable to the inde- future experience of Christendom, and pendency of climate than that which has chiefly of the American States, must setone. Without stopping to inquire wheth- tle this problem, as yet new in the history cr this remark be well founded, it is cer- of the world, abundant as it has been in tainly true that the parent country has act-experiments in the theory of government. ed upon it with a severe and vigilant zeal; "But the duty of supporting religion, and in most of the colonies the same rigid and especially the Christian religion, is jealousy has been maintained almost down very different from the right to force the to our own times. Massachusetts, while consciences of other men, or to punish she has promulgated, in her BILL OF RIGHTS, them for worshipping God in the manner the importance and necessity of the public which they believe their accountability to support of religion, and the worship of Him requires. It has been truly said, that God, has authorized the Legislature to re-religion, or the duty we owe to our Creaquire it only for Protestantism. The language of that Bill of Rights is remarkable for its pointed affirmation of the duty of government to support Christianity, and the reasons for it. 'As,' says the third article, ‘the happiness of a people, and the good order and preservation of civil government, essentially depend upon piety, religion, and morality, and as these cannot be generally diffused through the community but by the institution of the public

* Kent's "Commentaries," sect. xxxiv., p. 35-37.

Rawle "On the Constitution," chap. x., p. 121, 122.

† Montesquieu, "Spirit of Laws," b. xxiv., c. iii. Ibid., chap. v.

tor, and the manner of discharging it, can be dictated only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence."* Mr. Locke himself, who did not doubt the right of government to interfere in matters of religion, and especially to encourage Christianity, at the same time has expressed his opinion of the right of private judgment, and liberty of conscience, in a manner becoming his character as a sincere friend of civil and religious liberty. 'No man, or society of men,' says he, have any authority to impose their opinions or inter

* Virginia Bill of Rights. 1 Tucker's Blackstone's Commentaries, Appendix, p. 296.