|
In
this letter, Madison comments on Reverend Adams' sermon
relating Christianity to Civil Government. Madison begins
with the oft-stated premise that both religion and civil
government can exist independently of one another. In
support of this proposition, Madison resorts to history
as the great teacher. History is replete with examples
of where government and religion are combined in varying
degrees. Throughout Europe, the prevalent opinion was
that religion and civil government could not be preserved
or supported without some alliance between them. Yet,
as Madison points out, the practice in America of separating
religion from civil government has been established
with resounding success. In every state where establishment
was once embraced and then abolished, both religious
zeal and governmental support have flourished. Even
in states where establishment still exists, such as
could be found in England, relaxation of those laws
has not proved to be detrimental to either religion
or good government. The best way to guard against usurpations
of power or influence on either side is to avoid all
government interference whatever in matters of religion,
other than what is necessary to preserve the liberty
of religion of each sect against trespasses by others.
RJ&L
Religious Institutions Group
CHIC.
HIST. SOC. MSS. 1832.
private
TO
REV. — ADAMS
Charleston,
S.C.
I
recd in due time the printed copy of your Convention
sermon on the relation of Xnity to Civil Govt
with a manuscript request of my opinion on the subject.
There
appears to be in the nature of man what insures his belief
in an invisible cause of his present existence, and anticipation
of his future existence. Hence the propensities & susceptibilities
in that case of religion which with a few doubtful or individual
exceptions have prevailed throughout the world.
Waiving
the rights of Conscience, not included in the surrender
implied by the social State, and more or less invaded by
all religious Establishments, the simple question to be
decided is whether a support of the best & purest religion,
the Xn religion itself ought not so far at least
as pecuniary means are involved, to be provided for by the
Govt rather than be left to the voluntary provisions
of those who profess it. And on this question experience
will be an admitted Umpire, the more adequate as the connection
between Govts & Religion have existed in
such various degrees & forms, and now can be compared
with examples where connection has been entirely dissolved.
In
the Papal System, Government and Religion are in a manner
consolidated, & that is found to be the worst of Govts.
In
most of the Govts of the old world, the legal
establishment of a particular religion and without or with
very little toleration of others makes a part of the Political
and Civil organization and there are few of the most enlightened
judges who will maintain that the system has been favorable
either to Religion or to Govt.
Until
Holland ventured on the experiment of combining a liberal
toleration with the establishment of a particular creed,
it was taken for granted, that an exclusive & intolerant
establishment was essential, and notwithstanding the light
thrown on the subject by that experiment, the prevailing
opinion in Europe, England not excepted, has been that Religion
could not be preserved without the support of Govt
nor Govt be supported witht an established
religion that there must be at least an alliance of some
sort between them.
It
remained for North America to bring the great & interesting
subject to a fair, and finally to a decisive test.
In
the Colonial State of the Country, there were four examples,
R. I. N. J. Penna and Delaware, & the greater
part of N. Y. where there were no religious Establishments;
the support of Religion being left to the voluntary associations
& contributions of individuals; and certainly the religious
condition of those Colonies, will well bear a comparison
with that where establishments existed.
As
it may be suggested that experiments made in Colonies more
or less under the Controul of a foreign Government, had
not the full scope necessary to display their tendency,
it is fortunate that the appeal can now be made to their
effects under a compleat exemption from any such controul.
It
is true that the New England States have not discontinued
establishments of Religion formed under very peculiar circumstances;
but they have by successive relaxations advanced towards
the prevailing example; and without any evidence of disadvantage
either to Religion or good Government.
And
if we turn to the Southern States where there was, previous
to the Declaration of independence, a legal provision for
the support of Religion; and since that event a surrender
of it to a spontaneous support by the people, it may be
said that the difference amounts nearly to a contrast in
the greater purity & industry of the Pastors and in
the greater devotion of their flocks, in the latter period
than in the former. In Virginia the contrast is particularly
striking, to those whose memories can make the comparison.
It will not be denied that causes other than the abolition
of the legal establishment of Religion are to be taken into
view in accountg for the change in the Religious
character of the community. But the existing character,
distinguished as it is by its religious features, and the
lapse of time now more than 50 years since the legal support
of Religion was withdrawn sufficiently prove that it does
not need the support of Govt and it will scarcely
be contended that Government has suffered by the exemption
of Religion from its cognizance, or its pecuniary aid.
The
apprehension of some seems to be that Religion left entirely
to itself may run into extravagances injurious both to Religion
and to social order; but besides the question whether the
interference of Govt in any form wd
not be more likely to increase than controul the tendency,
it is a safe calculation that in this as in other cases
of excessive excitement, Reason will gradually regain its
ascendancey. Great excitements are less apt to be permanent
than to vibrate to the opposite extreme.
Under
another aspect of the subject there may be less danger that
Religion, if left to itself, will suffer from a failure
of the pecuniary support applicable to it than that an omission
of the public authorities to limit the duration of their
Charters to Religious Corporations, and the amount of property
acquirable by them, may lead to an injurious accumulation
of wealth from the lavish donations and bequests prompted
by a pious zeal or by an atoning remorse. Some monitory
examples have already appeared.
Whilst
I thus frankly express my view of the subject presented
in your sermon, I must do you the justice to observe that
you very ably maintained yours. I must admit moreover that
it may not be easy, in every possible case, to trace the
line of separation between the rights of religion and the
Civil authority with such distinctness as to avoid collisions
& doubts on unessential points. The tendency to a usurpation
on one side or the other, or to a corrupting coalition or
alliance between them, will be best guarded agst
by an entire abstinance of the Govt from interference
in any way whatever, beyond the necessity of preserving
public order, & protecting each sect agst
trespasses on its legal rights by others.
I
owe you Sir an apology for the delay in complying with the
request of my opinion on the subject discussed in your sermon;
if not also for the brevity & it may be thought crudeness
of the opinion itself. I must rest the apology on my great
age now in its 83d year, with more than the ordinary
infirmities, and especially on the effect of a chronic Rheumatism,
combined with both, which makes my hand & fingers as
averse to the pen as they are awkward in the use of it.
Be
please to accept Sir a tender of my cordial & respectful
salutations.
Letter
from James Madison to Reverend Adams (1832), in 9 The Writings
of James Madison, 1819-1836, at 484 (Gaillard Hunt ed.,
1910).
|
