{"collection":"philosophy-ethics","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_31490/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_31490","id":"gutenberg_31490","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/31490","summary":null,"tags":["Category: History - American","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Politics","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Election sermons -- Massachusetts"],"text":"Produced by Bill Tozier and the Online Distributed\nProofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net\n\n\n\n\n\nTHE RELIGION OF POLITICS.\n\n\n\nA SERMON DELIVERED BEFORE HIS EXCELLENCY JOHN DAVIS, GOVERNOR, HIS\nHONOR GEORGE HULL, LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, THE HONORABLE COUNCIL, AND THE\nLEGISLATURE OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT THE ANNUAL ELECTION, JANUARY 5, 1842.\n\n\n\nBY EZRA S. GANNETT,\n\nJunior Pastor of the Federal St. Church in Boston.\n\n\n\nBoston:\nDUTTON AND WENTWORTH, PRINTERS TO THE STATE.\n1842.\n\n\n\n\nCommonwealth of Massachusetts.\n\n\n                           HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, JAN. 6, 1842.\n\n  _Ordered_, That Messrs DUGGAN, of _Quincy_,\n                         GREELE, of _Boston_, and\n                         READ, of _Pawtucket_,\n\nbe a Committee to present the thanks of the House to the Rev. EZRA S.\nGANNETT, for the able and eloquent Discourse, delivered by him\nyesterday, before the Government of the Commonwealth, and to request a\ncopy thereof for publication.\n\n                                            L. S. CUSHING, _Clerk_\n\n\n\n\nSERMON.\n\n1 CORINTHIANS, x. 31.\n\n    WHETHER YE EAT OR DRINK, OR WHATSOEVER YE DO, DO ALL TO THE\n    GLORY OF GOD.\n\n\nThe solemnities of this occasion belong to a Christian people. By them\nreligion is solicited to throw her protection and authority around the\ninstitutions of the State. The citizen and the magistrate recognise\ntheir common relation to a higher Power than the functionary or the\nState, and in such recognition exchange the pledge of a mutual\nfidelity. The custom which this day renews comes to us from the\nfounders of the Commonwealth--men of strong faith and religious\nhearts, who erected their political fabric as a temple in which to\nworship God, and inscribed over its front the name of the one Master\nwhom they honored, even Christ. The place to which our legislators and\nrulers have come upon entering on their official duties is the house\nof prayer and Christian instruction. Every thing that distinguishes\nthe occasion seems to point out the course of remark in which he who\naddresses this audience should invite his hearers to follow him. The\nrelation of religion to politics--the religion of political life--is\nthe subject to which he is unequivocally directed; and of which it is\nmy purpose to treat, at such length only as the limits of the occasion\nwill allow, but with such plainness of speech as should alone be used\nbefore freemen by one as free as they when speaking on their common\nduties.\n\nThere is however what may be called a political side to this subject,\non which it would be improper for me to introduce any remarks at this\ntime. The bare mention of religion and politics in connexion alarms\nsome minds, who fear lest the liberties of the people be invaded by\nzealous religionists, or the public affairs of the time be handled by\nhonest or ambitious preachers--in either case wandering beyond their\nappropriate limits. Let me at the outset disclaim all intention of\ntouching questions to which a temporary interest only can belong, or\nof assailing the order of our civil state. It is higher ground which I\nhope to occupy as I examine the religious aspects of citizenship. When\nI speak of the religion of political life, I mean that religion should\ncontrol men in the exercise of their political rights as it should\ncontrol them in all their other relations and concerns. The religion\nof politics is nothing else than the application of religious\nprinciples to political action, whether it be the action of a\nstatesman or a private citizen, of an individual or of the community.\nThe politician should respect these principles as much as any other\nman. Political opinion, political discussion, political life should be\nbrought under the influence of religious convictions. This is the\nground which I take, and which I shall endeavor to prove is the only\nground on which a Christian can consistently stand.\n\nReligion should govern all political sentiment and action. Why not?\nWhy should such a claim on behalf of religion be accounted\nextravagant, or meet with any other than a unanimous assent? Is not\nreligion the supreme law; so acknowledged by the people of this land,\nat least by the thoughtful and sober part of the people? We but repeat\none of the common-places of the pulpit, which however disregarded no\none thinks of denying, when we say that the influence of religion\nshould be paramount in every department of life. We but adopt an\nillustration with which every one is familiar, when we speak of it as\na spiritual atmosphere, that must enclose the institutions and\nmovements of society, and insinuate itself into every form of personal\nexistence. The authority of religion, its right to exercise sway over\nhuman wills and human hearts, is admitted on all sides. It is not\nmonks and nuns, nor religious teachers and their families, upon whom\nin these days it is believed that the command to fear God and work\nrighteousness expends its force; it is not men on sick beds and in\ndying moments alone, of whom it is said, that they ought to think of\nthe duty which devolves on them in view of their relations to God and\neternity; but men and women full of life, in the midst of life's\ncares, temptations and labours--the young, the vigorous, the\nbusy--merchants in their traffic, farmers in the fields, scholars in\ntheir studies, mechanics in their workshops, the wife and mother in\nher domestic occupations, the daughter of toil at her needle--the\nrich, the poor--the wise, the simple--all should be religious,\nheartily, truly, constantly religious. This is the doctrine of the\npresent time; or if it is not, it should be. This is the democratic\ndoctrine about religion, and this is the Christian doctrine about\nreligion. It includes all men under one law, and all sinners under one\ncondemnation. Now why shall the politician be released from the demand\nmade upon every one else? Why shall political life form an episode in\nthe history traced by successive generations on the tablet of the\nages, which shall have not only its own rules of composition, but its\nown principles of moral interpretation? Shall mercantile life be\nrequired to cover itself with the sanctity of moral obligation, shall\nthe demand of the age be for a Christian literature, shall there be a\ngeneral lamentation over the want of faith and virtue; and yet an\nexception be made in favor--no, not in favor, but to the disadvantage\nand disgrace--of one class of engagements, in which all the people of\nthis country participate? Such injustice will not bear a moment's\nexamination. Away with it forever!\n\nIt seems impossible to misunderstand the language of Christianity on\nthis subject. Undeniably it affirms its right to exercise universal\ndominion. It takes cognisance of all human action, extends its\nscrutiny to motives and feelings, and allows no condition, employment\nor exigency to raise a barrier against its entrance as the messenger\nof God to deliver and enforce his commands. It has one and the same\ninstruction for all men, whether they live in palaces or wander\nhouseless, whether they are versed in tongues or are rude of speech,\nmen of science or men of handicraft, subjects of a monarchy or\ncitizens of a republic; to them all it says, Hearken and obey--walk by\nfaith--lead holy lives--fulfil all righteousness. Even if this be\ncalled by the unbeliever the pretension or the arrogance of\nChristianity, he must admit that the claim which it sets up is as\nbroad as human existence. Wherever the religion of the New Testament\ncan reach a man, over him it asserts its authority. No place so\npublic, no spot so private, no situation so humble, no office so high,\nthat Christianity will not rise to its eminence, descend to its depth,\npenetrate its seclusion, occupy its position, and still reiterate the\nsame language,--speaking as one having authority, because it speaks in\nthe name and in behalf of the Almighty. From the first has it advanced\nthis claim of unlimited empire; its prerogatives change not with the\nmutations of society. It still shows a charter of \"divine right\" for\nthe sovereignty at which it aims. It still claims, as it always has\ndemanded, and ever will demand till it shall acquire, dominion over\nall classes,--from the slave of toil to the heir of a throne, from the\npauper whom the charity of the State supports to the Ruler by whom the\nmajesty of the State is represented.\n\nIt is important however that we have right conceptions of the nature\nof this dominion. Christianity, as we have noticed, aims at exerting a\ncontrol over the motives, feelings and unseen life. It asks not for\noutward deference, but for inward submission. The conscience, the\nheart, the will must bow to its authority. A respect which lies on the\nsurface only of the character, or which glides from the tongue like\nthe schoolboy's recitation of a few well-conned sentences, is not what\nthe Christian owes to his religion, nor what it will accept in place\nof that homage of the soul which is the only proof of an insight into\nits nature. Strange that men should ever think to deceive God by\nplaying the parrot or the hypocrite! There are many who make the fatal\nmistake of substituting profession for reality; and in a community who\nhold religion in high regard there may be politicians who will take\nthis course in the hope of winning their fellow-men. If they succeed,\nthey only effect a selfish purpose; they do not illustrate the\ninfluence of religion.\n\nNeither is it an attention to forms, however sincere, nor a use of\ninstitutions, however constant, that will satisfy the demands of\nChristianity. It requires something more than reverence for the means\nby which it binds its power upon the disciple. The age in which faith\nterminates in the _means_ of religion is the precursor of an age of\nunbelief. Ceremonies are but the ghosts of dead professions, unless a\nliving faith convert them into ministers of goodness. Forms are\nneeded, institutions are all but essential; but they are only the\ngarments in which the Divine spirit of religion must be clad for its\nexposure to a cold and ungenial world. Many are there who look with\nprofound respect upon the dress, but think not whether it covers a\ndivinity or a fiction. How have men--great statesmen and small\npoliticians as well as others--praised the Established Church of\nEngland, and actually stood in awe of its majesty, when the thought of\nits spiritual relation to themselves or any one else had perhaps never\ncrossed their minds.\n\nIt is not reverence at certain times--a periodical service--by which\nmen are required to prove themselves disciples of Christ.\nRighteousness, holiness, is not confined to any hour or place. The\nsanctuary whose walls the hands of labour have raised, is not the only\nhouse of God. There is a temple which the Divine Architect has reared,\nwhose walls are immortal, in which his worship must be maintained by\nfaculties ever conscious of his presence. There is an altar, the altar\nof the heart, on which a perpetual sacrifice must be presented.\n\nThat sacrifice too must be a whole burnt-offering. The man must give\nhimself to God, \"a living sacrifice,\" in body and in soul, which is\nbut his \"reasonable service.\" I pause not from my original purpose, to\nshow how reasonable; but I insist upon the truth that a partial\nobedience, in whatever sense it be partial, will not meet the\nrequisitions of Christianity. It is neither a part of human nature,\nnor a part of human life, which must be devoted to religion; but the\nwhole--the whole of life, the whole of man. The man must be\nthoroughly, habitually, entirely religious. His loftiest purposes and\ngrandest conceptions, his most familiar exercises and meanest\nemployments, his whole impulse, energy and activity must be sanctified\nby faith--faith in God and his will, in Christ and his revelations.\n\"Whether he eat or drink, or whatever he do, he must do all to the\nglory of God.\" _Whatever he do._ Mark the words. They leave room for\nno exception. Whatever be the nature of one's engagements, public or\nprivate; wherever he be, in the house or the street; whenever his\ncourse be examined, on Sunday or week-day, morning, noon, or night; he\nmust be found living to God's glory,--through faith, I repeat, and\nthrough the obedience which is the consequence of faith. _Character_\nis the service which he must render.\n\nA character of which the principle is indicated by the words of the\nApostle, will obtain a twofold development, as it shall seek the\ndirection on the one hand of piety, and on the other of morality. Each\nof these forms of growth will proceed from an idea as its germ; the\none from the idea of God, the other from the idea of man. The idea of\nGod,--the Supreme, Eternal, Infinite Being, whose will nothing can\noverrule, but whose unimpeachable perfection is a guarantee for the\nrectitude of his government.\n\n        God, the mighty source\n  Of all things, the stupendous force\n        On which all things depend;\n  From whose right arm, beneath whose eyes,\n  All period, power, and enterprise\n        Commence and reign and end.\n\n\"He is Governor among the nations; but justice and judgment are the\nhabitation of his throne.\" \"Thine, O Lord, are the greatness, and the\npower, and the glory, and the victory, and the majesty; for all that\nis in the heaven and in the earth is thine; thine is the kingdom, and\nthou art exalted as Head above all. Both riches and honour come of\nthee, and thou reignest over all: and in thine hand is power and\nmight, and in thine hand it is to make great and to give strength unto\nall.\" Worthily, so far as language could go, did the greatest of\nIsrael's monarchs, and one of the first of human bards, in these words\ncelebrate the majesty of Him who is Higher than the highest, the\nMaker, Guardian, and Sovereign of the universe. Religion adopts this\ndescription as the groundwork of its sentiments and exercises. With\nGod it begins, to Him it returns, in Him it rests. To Him it traces\nall blessing, from Him receives direction concerning the aim and\ncourse of life, and as its first and last and central principle\naspires to \"do all things to his glory.\" Led to Him as the Creator by\nhis works, which it contemplates, reminded of Him as the Almighty\nRuler by his providence, the aspects of which it reverently studies,\nand taught to call Him the Father by Christ, to whose instructions it\nyields a joyful obedience, it revolves around the Supreme Being as its\nlight and security, through its relation to whom it is safe amidst the\nworld's commotions and blessed in life's decay.\n\nThe idea of man--this is the other point of departure from which\nreligion will seek its appropriate issues; of man in those attributes\nwhich are the universal endowment of our race, and not in the\nartificial prerogatives which distinguish a part of mankind--one\nnation, or one class in society; of man the partaker of a common\nhumanity, before whose indestructible capacities, rights and destinies\nthe distinctions of colour, wealth and office fade away, as the glare\nof night-lamps which shed illumination over a few feet of space before\nthe beams of the sun which enwrap the whole land in their brightness.\nThis idea of man, as everywhere the creature of God, and therefore\ndependent, everywhere the child of God, and therefore in his nature\nproclaiming himself of a nobler lineage than if he could show an\nancestral register bearing the names of half the monarchs of the\nearth, as everywhere the _same_ in virtue of his indefeasible\npossession of reason, conscience and immortality, and therefore\nentitled to fraternal treatment from his fellow-men,--this idea whence\ncame it? Where did our fathers learn that men were \"born free and\nequal\"? From the religion of the New Testament, for centuries a sealed\nbook, and from whose truths when opened the darkness of ages did but\nslowly disappear. \"Equal;\" not \"free\" only,--this latter word might\nseem to be used with some license of speech,--but _equal_, in the\nessential gifts and purposes of existence. Christianity by addressing\nthe common nature and unfolding the immortal destiny of mankind has\nshown a broad ground, on which all may meet and lift up the chorus of\na united and acknowledged brotherhood. The framers of our Declaration\nof Independence thought they were proclaiming a political axiom, when\nthey republished one of the great revelations of the Gospel, the full\nmeaning of which can be learned only through sympathy with him who\ncame to save the lost and reconcile the estranged. \"The common\npeople,\" it is said, \"heard him gladly.\" And the people it is who\nshould welcome his religion, which condemns the selfishness alike of\nthe tyrant and of the demagogue, and rebukes at once the arrogance of\nan aristocratic and the meanness of a servile spirit by its pregnant\ncharge to \"honor all men.\" All men? What, of every class and\ncondition? Yes, men of every name, rank, and complexion. Hear it, ye\nslaves, and ye masters of America. Hear it, ye nobility, and you the\nstarving millions of Britain. Hear it, ye rulers, and ye defrauded and\noppressed subjects of Continental Europe. Aye, hear it, ye nations of\nthe East, where first the blessed words were spoken, though since long\nburied in oblivion. Words of righteous and joyful import to those to\nwhom false opinion and unjust institutions have denied the place which\nby the will of their Creator they are entitled to hold,--standing\nerect by the side of their fellow-men, and not crouching submissively\nat the feet which trample or spurn them. Alas! how few yet comprehend\nthe law, on which the morality of every Christian people, and every\nChristian believer, should be built--\"Thou shalt love thy neighbour,\"\nbe he who he may, thou shalt love him \"as thyself.\"\n\nIt must now appear in what sense I use the expression, the religion of\npolitics. We sometimes hear of the _morality_ of political life, but\nthe term is not comprehensive enough for my purpose. I do not indeed\nacknowledge a morality that is not based on faith in God, whose will\nis the only standard, as from his government must be derived the\nsanctions, of virtue. But a compliance with the requisitions of\nmorality is not all that should be demanded of him who enters\npolitical life, or of any one in the discharge of his functions as a\ncitizen. He should remember what is due to God, as well as what is due\nto man. Let us see how the principles which we have laid down will\naffect political action.\n\nFirst, a man must carry into political life a sense of God as the\nSource of power and privilege. The air and the light are not more\ntruly his gifts than are the civil institutions which we enjoy. We are\nfond of describing the virtues and deeds of our ancestors; our\ngrandsires are regarded with mingled admiration and gratitude. It is\nwell that we turn back to those days of fortitude and energy, and seek\nthere the springs of our present prosperity. But our gratitude must\nnot rest in the men of that period. They were but the instruments of a\nhigher will, the agents of a mightier strength than their own. Those\npatriots of the revolution, and their progenitors who planted the seed\nof liberty wherever they took up their habitation on this soil, were\nthe last men to have claimed for themselves the praise, as if in their\nown self-derived wisdom or force they had achieved the works which\nhistory will connect with their names. \"Not unto us, not unto us,\"\nwould have been their cry, if they could have foreseen the sentiments\nof their posterity, \"but to thy name, O Lord, be the glory.\" Nay, such\n_was_ their language. The Pilgrims, with all their faults--for\nfaultless they were not--were men of an ardent piety, whose faith rose\nup to heaven with an almost profane confidence and laid hold on the\narm of God as their sustaining and guiding power. The heroes of the\nrevolutionary struggle--that struggle which began long before blood\nwas shed on yonder height--looked up to Heaven to approve their cause,\nand when He whom they invoked had crowned it with success poured out\ntheir thanksgiving at his altars. And shall we, their sons, forget the\nGod whom our fathers acknowledged? It is a good thing to celebrate\ntheir deeds and keep their memories hung round with fresh tributes of\nlove; but let them not receive our final homage. Oh no! Let that pass\nbeyond them to the Eternal Fountain of good, from whom our liberties\nand our institutions have been received through these channels which\nhis Providence selected. Look abroad, my hearers, upon this great\nland, with its spreading population. See what a country is\nyours,--washed by two oceans, and stretching from the arctic to the\ntorrid zone. Note its immense resources; its mountains reaching to the\nskies, its vallies nestling in the bosom of sunshine, its rivers on\nwhich a nation's traffic may be borne, and its lakes on which the\nnavies of the earth might ride. Mark its capacities in their as yet\nincipient state of development; its various fertility, its mineral\nwealth, its gigantic promise of support for future generations. Survey\nthe people of this Union, pursuing their several branches of\nenterprise and industry, with none to hinder or molest. Ponder the\nstatistics of your country's growth. See the iron rods of\ncommunication along which the electricity of life will be transmitted\nfrom the Atlantic shores to the distant West. Examine the architecture\nof that social order under whose security you live, simple, yet firm,\na model for other communities in its principles, and a blessing to\nourselves in the protection it extends over us,--all the protection\n(but no more) that a freeman needs. And when you have filled your\ncontemplation with the spectacles presented by your own beloved\nRepublic, then bless the Lord for his goodness and his wonderful\nloving-kindness; for it is He who has given us this ample heritage. If\never men were bound to own that God is good, it is the people of these\nUnited States. If ever a community on earth should be distinguished by\nreligious sensibility, it is this of which we are a part.\n\nWith this recognition of the Divine power and goodness must be united\na sense of the responsibleness under which every one lies before God.\nThese privileges--many and great--of which we have spoken are\nentrusted to us by One, the righteous principle of whose government it\nis, that to whom much is committed, of them will much be required. Our\npolitical advantages lay on us a peculiar weight of obligation. We are\naccountable, we shall be held accountable, for the use we make of\nfreedom and of power. What is freedom? It is liberty to do\nright--nothing more than this; what more could an honest man desire?\nBut mark, the liberty imposes the duty. The freeman must do right, or\nhis immunities will enhance his guilt and deepen his condemnation. The\npower which is committed to the hands of every citizen of this\nCommonwealth--the power of controlling public sentiment through his\nspeech and of directing the public affairs through his vote--the power\nof national sovereignty in which he participates as one of the\nsovereign people--is a solemn trust. He by whom it is abused sins; he\nby whom it is neglected sins. His guilt may never come under the\nnotice of his fellow-men, but it will be established before a higher\ntribunal than any which they can erect. Every political act is a moral\nact, in view of the principle which we have expounded, that whatever\nwe do, all must be done to the glory of God. Through the force of this\nprinciple it acquires a religious or an irreligious character; is\nclothed with a fearful significance, as it indicates the condition of\nthe inward life; and is linked to everlasting consequences, as it\nforms part of the history of an immortal being. Whatever is done,\nwhether in public places or in secret chambers, is done in the sight\nof God. And over the least as well as the greatest of human actions\nhas He extended the law of duty. Duty! that word which expresses man's\nglory and his peril. God save us from disregarding its import!\n\nThe necessary consequence of entertaining this sense of obligation\nwill be the preservation of one's integrity, which is the next point\nthat claims our notice in considering the influence of religion upon\npolitics. A man who acts religiously will act conscientiously, unless\nhe grossly mistake the meaning of the former word. He will endeavour\nto maintain a clean heart and a clean tongue. Whatever would debase\nhis character he will avoid as he would shun a pestilence; he will\ndread moral disease more than natural death. Let such a man enter on\nthe performance of any service which devolves on him through his\nrelation to the State, and he will proceed as to a work demanding high\nand holy principle. He will esteem it treason to his country to let go\nhis own rectitude of soul. Temptation to sacrifice his uprightness to\ninterest will only make him more resolute. The persuasion of example\nwill be as vain as an open bribe. The question he will ask in each\ncase is,--not what will custom or public opinion allow, but--what\nought I to do. He will pursue this course of fidelity, alike to\nhimself and to the trusts which he is called to execute, because he\naccounts the obligations of righteousness to be immutable. And here\nhis judgment is according to the truth. There is no sphere or scene of\nlife which gives a man the privilege of doing wrong; no land of\nlicense, nor castle of power, where he is exempt from the authority of\nreligion. Neither the throne nor the senate-house, the secret conclave\nnor the popular assembly, can shield one from the force of that\nprimary law of human action--thou shalt not sin against thine own\nsoul. Purity of purpose and sincerity of conduct must preserve the\ncitizen from the taint of evil, or he will become corrupt, and if he\ndo not disgust, will corrupt others.\n\nI have intimated that justice should pervade both the sentiment and\nthe action of political life. I now add, that another element of the\nChristian character, love, must be brought into exercise. Selfishness\nmust be banished from this ground, as from every other. Need that\ncommandment of our religion, to which the command, to love God, alone\nhas precedence, be observed only under certain relations; or was it\nmeant to bind the individual, and the world, in any and all possible\nrelations of existence? May the law of brotherly love be virtually\nabrogated by the institutions or the habits of society? If not, then\nwe must consider the good of others as well as our own,--not only\nrespect their rights, but labor to advance their interests. The\nApostolic maxim should find place among the principles adopted by\npoliticians,--\"look not every man on his own things, but every man\nalso on the things of others.\" The \"charity that envieth not, that\nvaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, doth not behave itself\nunseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no\nevil, rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth\"--does it\nnot almost seem as if the portraiture was drawn in view of the\ncontrast often exhibited by men in their political relations?--this\ncharity must be preserved, its image unbroken, amidst all the struggle\nand competition of public or of private life.\n\nI need go no farther in detailing the influence which religion should\nhave on politics;--on its theory and its practice. On its theory, by\nbanishing whatever is inconsistent with the Divine will or with the\nwelfare of the whole human race. On its practice, by causing every one\nto act under a sense of God's goodness and his own responsibleness,\nwith uprightness of soul and in the spirit of Christian love. The\nprinciples of political action should harmonize with the principles of\na perfect character, and no single act be allowed that would offend\nthese principles. The consistent politician in a Christian land is he\nwho can invite the scrutiny of Omniscience upon his motives, while his\noutward life is shaped by his inward purposes. See you a man who in\nthe heat of a political conflict, or the toil of public service, keeps\nhimself humble, pure and disinterested; who never violates his\nconscience, and never forgets his God; who never lets the prospect of\nloss or the hope of advantage lure him from the straight course of\nduty; who illustrates in his own example the fine motto of the knight\nof chivalry--\"without fear and without reproach;\" who scorns to\ncompass an end, though noble, by unworthy means, and would reject with\nloathing a proposal to substitute expedients for principles; see you\nsuch an one? Honour him, be his station what it may; take him for your\nmodel; give him office, if he will accept it; give him your hearts, if\nhe refuses your votes. The _Christian_ politician! one of the noblest\nspecimens of humanity; who can tread dark and perilous ways, and not\nstumble; can serve his fellow-men without degrading himself or\noffending his Maker. The Christian citizen! who asks God's blessing\nupon his discharge of the functions that belong to him as the\ninhabitant of a free country; who appreciates the worth of his\nprivileges, and feels the solemnity of his duties; who forms his\nopinions carefully, and expresses them manfully, though candidly; who\nwhen he helps to elect a fellow-citizen to take charge of the\ninterests of the town, the Commonwealth, or the land, is impressed\nwith the sacredness of his own act; who upholds good institutions\nbecause he wishes to see them prosper, and not for any sinister end;\nwho supports the measures which his understanding and conscience\napprove, and will have nothing to do with any other institutions or\nmeasures;--such a man, though his hands be callous with labour or his\nclothes threadbare through poverty, deserves the respect of the\ncommunity. I would rather be such a man than a second Napoleon cutting\nEurope into kingdoms and tossing crowns to his favorites.\n\nAll that I have now said, I trust, approves itself to the minds of\nthose whom I address. I have raised no structure of requisition for\nwhich I had not first secured deep and broad foundations. If the views\nwe have taken of the authority and extent of the Divine government as\nexpounded by Christianity are just, it follows that men should be\ndevout, upright and benevolent everywhere; that is, in all situations\nas well as in all places; in the State-house in Boston, and in the\nCapitol at Washington, in a President's Cabinet, and in a Governor's\nCouncil-chamber, in a political caucus, and at the freeman's\nballot-box. Religion must control and sanctify the whole life of the\nindividual and of the nation. And yet this doctrine is repudiated; yes,\nopenly and in high places. And _this_ doctrine of repudiation,--not a\nbirth of yesterday, but as old as civil government,--is that which\nshould be most indignantly rejected by honest men and good citizens.\nIt is said, that men need not be as scrupulous in their public as in\ntheir private relations. There is a morality for the public man, and\nanother for the private citizen. There are two standards of conduct\neven for the same person, in his private and in his public capacity. I\nhave heard it said by those who knew him well that an individual of\ngreat influence, who had been placed in the most elevated offices\nwithin the people's gift, was a man of strict integrity and the\nmildest character in his private connexions, though as a politician he\nwas distinguished for his disregard of truth, his violence, and his\nuse of any means to carry the ends which his party espoused. And on\nthe other hand we hear men whose private vices are notorious--profane,\nprofligate, unprincipled--commended for the consistency and purity of\ntheir political course. Is not this wrong, is it not deplorable? Shall\nwe for a moment countenance this distinction between public and\nprivate character, as if they were not subject to the same principles\nof moral judgment? Shall they in whose veins Puritan blood runs freely\nadmit a doctrine, the bare mention of which would have made Winthrop\nand Bradford and a thousand more like them tremble with horror? It\ncame not from them, it does not belong to the New England soil. It\ncame from the corrupt Courts of Europe, from ages when Christianity\nwas scarcely known, and from scenes where its influence was unfelt. To\nthe Old World let it be restored; to past ages be it consigned. And\nlet us no more hear the abominable doctrine--as irrational as it is\ndetestable--that what would be scandalous in private life may be just\nand commendable in the management of political affairs. I reaffirm,\nthat religion should purify the currents of thought and control the\nmovements, whether secret or open, that belong to this part of human\nagency. And if I needed other support for this assertion than is\nfurnished by the very terms in which it is expressed, I might quote\nthe words of Washington, who in his _Farewell Address_, after\nremarking that \"of all the dispositions and habits which lead to\npolitical prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable\nsupports,\" adds, \"In vain would that man claim the tribute of\npatriotism who should labour to subvert these great pillars of human\nhappiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The\nmere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and\ncherish them.\" \"And let us,\" he further adds, \"with caution indulge\nthe supposition that morality can be maintained without religion.\nWhatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on\nminds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to\nexpect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious\nprinciple.\" Words worthy to be inscribed over every hall of\nlegislation and every place of public resort in this or any other\nland.\n\nThe principles which have now been presented must not be confined to\nindividual action. They should also control the associated energy\nwhich makes politics the scene of its efforts. Political parties\nshould respect these principles. Any organization or enterprise in\nwhich they are disregarded should meet with instant rebuke. The\nexistence of parties may not be regretted. They are useful, and they\nare inseparable from any system of government which gives to the\npeople an interest in the management of public affairs, or which even\npermits discussion upon public measures. Where men form and express\nopinions, variety of opinion will be sure to spring up; discussion\nwill elicit sympathy and enkindle debate. Here we have at once the\nelements of party. Its advantages, in the more thorough examination to\nwhich measures of general or local importance are subjected, and in\nthe restrictions which reciprocal vigilance imposes upon the use of\npower or opportunity, are as great as they are obvious. It is, then,\nboth foolish and useless to inveigh against parties as in themselves\nevil. Let them be formed on correct principles, and conducted in a\nright spirit, and they will be found among the best securities of\nliberty and the most effectual means of intelligence. But let them be\nformed on unsound principles, or without principle, or let them be\nconducted in a greedy or vindictive spirit, and they will become the\noccasions of incalculable mischief. When falsehood and violence are\nthe weapons which one party provokes another to adopt; when the\npassions of men are addressed, and their prejudices are fostered\ninstead of being enlightened; when the aim is not to serve the country\nso much as on the one side to get, and on the other to retain power;\nwhen recourse is had to means for baffling an opponent or securing a\ntriumph, which the very men who guide the party would be ashamed to\nuse as private individuals; when excitement is made the great\ninstrument of success, and the people are carried along blindfold by\nsympathy, like a herd of animals, moved by an impulse which they are\nunable to explain and care not to understand; when office is the prize\nthat stimulates exertion, and worldly gain the object which lies at\nthe heart of party strife; then is that which might be a blessing\nconverted into a curse. Vice and ruin are its fruits. A despotism\ncould not inflict on a country greater evils than must result from the\naction of parties born of selfishness and nursed in injustice. It is\nsad to believe--yet who can deny--that political parties in this\ncountry bear too much the character which we have described. Oh! for a\nparty that shall plant itself upon principle, shall appeal to the good\nsense and candid judgment of the people, shall look not at reward, but\nat duty, and shall adopt no measures but such as virtue can approve\nand on which religion can invoke the benediction of a righteous God. A\nparty composed of good men and true patriots, each of whom should\ninterpret the charge which the Roman Senate gave to the Dictator whom\npublic emergencies called into office as applicable to himself and as\nindicating the aim which he must pursue, let the cost to himself or\nthe consequence to his party be what it may,--\"see that the Republic\nsustain no harm,\"--such a party would be the salvation and glory of\nour land.\n\nSentiments are advanced which contradict this view of duty. Maxims of\npolitical action have been promulgated,--not only in the fierce\nstruggle that attends an election, but in calmer moments,--which shock\ncommon sense as well as religious feeling. It is said, but by no one\nit may be presumed who has any sense of character, that all is fair in\npolitics; as if success were the only thing to be regarded. But I need\nnot stop to expose such an atrocious rule of action, which would\njustify whatever is base or criminal. It is urged, however, in\nvindication of methods of acquiring influence which offend a\nclear-sighted conscience, that if a party cannot prevail but by using\nthe weapons with which it is attacked, it must resort to these means\nof self-preservation. What is this but another way of expressing the\ndoctrine on the enormity of which we have just remarked?\nSelf-preservation should not be the object most studied by a party.\nThe preservation of a character which will stand the test of moral\nprinciple should be far dearer. If a party cannot live without\nadopting what it condemns, let it perish; let falsehood and\nshamelessness triumph. It will be only for a season. From the ashes of\na party that has fallen a sacrifice to its own rectitude will arise\nanother phenix of political virtue, with fresh vigour and immortal\nhope. It is sometimes contended, that a man must go with his party,\nthough it be against his conscience. Mischievous and infamous\nlanguage. What! a man put himself into chains, that he may plead\ncaptivity as an excuse for sin? Shall the partisan with his own hand\nefface the prerogatives of his humanity, and dare to trample on the\nlaws of God, though he has not, and _because_ he has not, the courage\nto break the leash in which he is led along like a hound watching his\nmaster's eye? No. Every one of us is bound by higher obligations than\nthose which connect him with a party. If the higher and the inferior\nobligations come in conflict, let the true man snap the latter, as if\nthey were bands of tow and not fetters of iron.\n\nThe most powerful instrument that a political party can use for the\naccomplishment of its ends, whether good or bad, is the press, and\ntherefore this should be placed under the control of moral and\nreligious conviction. A press which violates the sanctity of truth and\nlends itself to unrighteous uses, is a disgrace to the community which\ngives it support, and which cannot long endure its presence without\nfeeling its disastrous influence. If men sit beneath the shade of the\npoison-tree, they cannot but inhale its noxious atmosphere. The press\nshould be consecrated to intelligence and virtue; but if, instead of\nthe service which it may render to the highest interests of man, it\ncondescends to become the pander of his prejudices and the slave of\nhis passions, to do the scavenger-work of a party in the unclean ways\nof falsehood and calumny, it deserves only scorn and reprobation. An\nindependent press is a blessing to a land; but a vagabond or a\nhireling press is a nuisance. The independence of the press! much\ntalked about, but little exemplified, and probably little understood.\nIt does not consist in recklessness of assertion, or violence of\nlanguage, in gross misrepresentation, and grosser assault on\ncharacter; but in maintaining itself above the fluctuations of opinion\nin the serene heaven of truth and principle, in trying political\ntheories and measures by the standard of a pure morality, in breasting\nthe current of popular or party sentiment when it runs towards evil,\nand in advocating the right though it have few to speak on its behalf.\nWhy cannot we have a press that shall exhibit this character? Ought it\nnot to exist in a Christian nation? Now, with honorable exceptions,\nour public journals give no evidence that the conception of such a\ncharacter was ever entertained, or at best indicate that it is\nregarded as an ideal excellence, about which practical men need not\ntrouble themselves. The tone of a large portion of the political press\non the eve or during the progress of an election--and in our country\nbut little time falls without this description--is unchristian,\nimmoral, barbarous. Strange as it may sound, I believe that the words\nwith which the birth of the Redeemer was celebrated by the heavenly\nhost, \"Glory to God in the highest; on earth peace, goodwill among\nmen,\" express the aims which the press should adopt and the spirit in\nwhich its labours should be pursued.\n\nThe same great principles of conduct which we have traced in their\napplication to the private offices of citizenship should be adopted by\npublic men, and by these principles should their course be judged.\nThey should act under a sense of their relations to God and their duty\nto their fellow-men. The common remark is, that they are responsible\nto their country. But there is a higher responsibleness than this,\nwhich they must not forget. They act in the sight of God, and on each\none of them devolve the obligations of personal fidelity, which\nrequires that they never compromise their uprightness nor relinquish\ntheir hold on a virtuous character. Let the conduct of statesmen in\nall ages be brought to this standard, and how will it bear the test?\nThe very principles on which statesmanship has proceeded--the\nprinciples of crooked policy and exclusive national advantage--are\nfatal to purity of character. It is related of Lord Stanhope, one of\nthe ministers of George I. that one day, after musing some time in\ncompany, he started up and said as to himself, \"It is impossible!\" and\nbeing asked what it was that was impossible, he replied, \"It is\nimpossible for a minister to be an honest man.\" Was there not sad\ntruth as well as keen satire in this remark of one whose experience\nmust add weight to his opinion? Still, not truth enough to justify\ndespair; for it is not \"impossible,\" that men in the most conspicuous\nand dangerous positions should hold fast their integrity. There have\nbeen those who have passed through the ordeal unharmed. Washington\nalone might prove that public station and personal excellence may be\nmaintained together. And besides other names that our own annals might\nsupply, he whom the providence of God removed from the highest office\nin this nation when he had but just crossed its threshold was, if we\nmay believe various and positive testimony, an example of moral and\nreligious character worthy of universal imitation. By the consent of\nall parties, the late President Harrison was a _good_ man; and now\nthat he has gone to the judgment where there is no respect of persons,\nwho does not feel that this is a better title than he could have won\nby the most splendid administration of our government? Impressive is\nthe lesson of his departure, and sincere was the mourning that\nfollowed him to his grave; but the remembrance of his inflexible\nthough modest worth will abide in the firmament of public life, a\nbright star sending down its calm influence through the interval of\nyears and ages. Let the people demand of their rulers that they copy\nthis example. Let them say to the candidate for public office,--We\nrequire moral principle, we desire religious faith, in those to whom\nwe commit the trusts that are at our disposal; we wish for something\non which we can rely, and the only thing on which we can rely is\ncharacter. Let them say to the representatives of the nation's dignity\non the floors of Congress,--Conduct yourselves like men of principle;\npollute not these chambers by invectives that would disgrace a\ndramshop nor by broils that belong to scenes of midnight riot; attend\nto the business for which we sent you to the national halls, and make\nus not ashamed of ourselves that we have chosen men, whom we cannot\nrespect, to be our legislators.\n\nAnd finally, the same principles which should sway individuals in all\nthe relations of life are applicable to nations in respect to both\ntheir internal and their foreign affairs. The same principles of\nreverence, justice and generosity. Of reverence; for the Divine\nprovidence and government embrace within their oversight the largest\nempire as well as the humblest man, even as the same care guides a\nplanet that shapes a drop. That prayer which the civil authority of\nthe State puts into the mouths of the ministers of religion, \"God save\nthe Commonwealth of Massachusetts,\" is not a mere form of words. It\nhas a meaning, which the hearts of the people should confess. Of\njustice; for a community, be it larger or smaller, in its action but\nexpresses the aggregate or the preponderance of certain human wills,\nevery one of which should be subject to the law of rectitude, and\nwhose combined force must therefore represent the prevalent morality\nof the members. Nothing can be more preposterous, than to maintain\nthat a community is not bound by the laws of moral obligation. If this\nbe the fact, then the most enormous wickedness may be perpetrated,\nfraud and injustice execute their projects and cruelty bathe its hands\nin blood, and no one be guilty; Heaven be defied, and earth be\nstained, but no one culpable! A State is bound to keep good faith as\nmuch as an individual. It is bound to deal righteously and glorify\nGod, to \"eschew evil and do good.\" The doctrine broached in some\nquarters, that legislation may be dishonest and yet reproach not\ncleave to the State which suffers it, is as false as it is base. They\nby whom it is promulgated are enemies nurtured at the bosom of the\nRepublic. Their\n\n                            \"dishonour\n  Mangles true judgment, and bereaves the State\n  Of that integrity which should become it;\n  Not having the power to do the good it would,\n  For the ill which doth control it.\"\n\nOf generosity; for the sentiment of love may warm a nation's breast.\nPolitical institutions need not engender exclusiveness. Nations should\ntreat one another honestly and openly, discarding that maxim on which\nthe international relations of the world have in past ages been\nconducted, that the prosperity of each must be promoted by the\nobstacles thrown in the way of the rest. This is neither a Christian\nnor a sound maxim. Men are beginning to open their eyes upon the fact,\nthat it is unsound and pernicious; yet how slow are they in coming to\nthe real truth, that the nation which pays the most sincere respect to\nthe rights, and shows the most liberal spirit in regard to the\ninterests, of other nations, will most effectually secure its own\nrights and advance its own interests. It is time that the old Pagan\nnotion of patriotism should be displaced by more just ideas. Love of\ncountry was once interpreted to mean hatred of all other people,--in\ndays when virtue had no other meaning than courage, and he was thought\nto show the most lofty patriotism who bound the greatest number of\ncaptives to the car of victory. It is time that the more modern\nconception of national glory as identical with national superiority,\nif not in arms, in some other class of achievements, should give place\nto a right appreciation of the end for which a nation should labour.\nThis end is neither aggrandizement nor superiority, but virtue. To\nwhat should a nation make all its laws and institutions and the whole\naction of its government subservient? To the improvement of the\npeople; to their intellectual and moral elevation; to their individual\nand social advancement. As this improvement takes place, they will\nrise to a nobler conception of the service they may render to mankind,\nand patriotism will be found to harmonize with philanthropy. Then will\nthe miserable jealousies which have been cherished and the execrable\npolicy which has been pursued disappear before the progress of\nChristian sentiment. Then will governments extend to each other an\nopen, and not a closed or mailed, hand. Then will war stand forth\nbefore their view in all its hideousness, its features distorted by\nrage, and its garments dripping with blood,--a mournful and a fearful\nspectacle. Oh! when shall the time come, that the true character of\nWar--its horrors, its vices, its crimes, unredeemed by a single trait\nproperly its own,--shall be understood. Almost nineteen centuries ago\nwas the Prince of Peace born into the midst of the woes of\nhumanity,--this the greatest of them all,--that he might drive them\nfrom the earth; and still war ravages the globe like a wild beast\nfurious with hunger. No; I have spoken hastily. Rather should I have\nsaid, like one who feels that decay has taken hold of his strength.\nThere is promise of a better period, when men shall be the demon's\nprey no longer. Oh God, hasten that time for thy goodness' and thy\nmercy's sake!\n\nI will not detain this assembly to examine at length the objections\nthat may be brought against the doctrine advanced and applied in this\ndiscourse. It may be said, that much of what has been spoken is the\nlanguage of fanaticism, with which your ears should not have been\nwearied. But no sentiment nor word that I have uttered can be justly\nstigmatized as fanatical, if the positions which I took at first, and\nfrom which I apprehend that no one dissented, were correct, and if the\nresults to which we have been led are the legitimate consequence of\ntaking those positions. It may be said, that this is another weak\nattempt on the part of the clergy to regain an influence which they\nhave irrecoverably lost. The absurdity of the idea is its sufficient\nrefutation. It may be said, that this is the first step, feebly put\nforth indeed, towards a union of Church and State. Church and State!\nwords of wonderful power over our fears and our imaginations. But who\ncan for a moment seriously believe that such a purpose is entertained\nby one who loves, or by one who understands, American institutions? A\nState religion does any one dread? I should think there was just now\nmore danger of almost any thing else. It is not a national\nChristianity, but a Christian nation, which I desire to see; and if\nthis wish betray an unfriendly feeling towards republican principles,\nthen I must bear the reproach, but I shall not bear it alone.\nThousands and thousands of hearts wish the same, and pray for it\nmorning and night, year after year; and if the answer to that prayer\ncome not before they die, they will have taught it to another\ngeneration, who will not fail to repeat it,--I trust, with a hope\nbrightened by the nearer prospect of its fulfilment. It may be said,\nthat our demands are unreasonable, and our aims impracticable. But our\ndemands only include the righteousness of the land, and our aims are\naddressed to the sanctification of the people by means of that\nreligion which has shown that it is fitted to exercise universal\ndominion, by the triumphs it has secured in every condition of society\nand every situation of life. It may be said, that things are in a\nsufficiently good state; that the country is at peace, though some men\nand some writers are doing their utmost to involve it in war; that our\npublic men succeed in keeping the wheels of government in motion,\nthough they sometimes discover a deplorable lack both of skill and of\nprinciple; and that the people are, on the whole, virtuous and perhaps\nreligious, if they do not connect their religion with their politics.\nI do not believe that those whom I address will say that this\ndescription satisfies their desires in behalf of the American\nRepublic. And if it do not, what is our duty but to contribute all the\ninfluence we can bestow, by speech or example, to introduce a change?\nIt may be said yet again, that a change is going on; the world is\ngrowing better, and if we will only be patient, we shall grow better\ntoo, because we belong to the world and cannot be left behind. Once\nmore I say in reply, that I am not content with no greater progress\nthan the old States of Europe, burthened with the institutions of dark\nages and tottering with infirmity, are able to make. It is for us to\nencourage them, by the spectacle of what may be accomplished by young\nand unshackled energies. It is for us to do the world a greater\nservice than it has yet received through achievements wrought on this\nsoil. We have asserted the principles of political _liberty_, and\nestablished them above the reach of overthrow. It remains for us to\nvindicate the principles of political _virtue_. We have placed the\nsceptre in the hands of freedom; let us enthrone religion in still\nloftier state. American patriotism! be it such as the world has never\nyet seen. American statesmanship! be it such as mankind shall wonder\nat, till their admiration subsides into imitation. American character!\nbe it such as Christian sires would rejoice to see worn by their\nposterity, and unborn generations shall receive as the most precious\ninheritance that could be transmitted to them. Be morality and piety\nthe guardians of our public welfare; and as the years roll on, may\nthey extend a more visible protection over our interests, till the\nguidance which Jehovah granted of old to the people of Israel in the\npillar of flame and cloud, shall be more than realized in the presence\nof the Lord our God with us and our children.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nTo you, Sir, who have again been called by the voice of this\nCommonwealth to preside over its concerns, I cannot doubt that the\nsentiments of this discourse will be as acceptable as they are\nfamiliar. If they seem but the echo of your own long-cherished\npurposes and habits, I need not on that account regret the course my\nremarks have taken. Permit me to congratulate myself, and my\nfellow-citizens, on the occupancy of the chair of State by one who has\nproved himself in various situations an upright politician and a\nChristian statesman; and let me hope that the year of public service\non which you have now entered may still further illustrate the force\nof moral principle, and the beauty of religious character.\n\nTo him who is associated with the Chief Magistrate as his nearest\nadviser, and to the other members of his Council, I may be allowed to\nexpress my conviction, that in the discharge of their public functions\nthey will maintain consciences \"void of offence towards God and towards\nmen,\" and will prove themselves worthy of the confidence which has been\nreposed in them by their fellow-citizens and fellow-christians.\n\nTo the members of both branches of the Legislature I beg leave to\nextend my congratulations, on the opportunity afforded them of\nexhibiting the connexion of the highest truths with the most important\noffices of life. With them it remains to show how religion and\npolitics can be united, without marring the sanctity of the one, or\nimpairing the freedom of the other. And in closing the remarks, to\nwhich, if I could, I would frame an apology for compelling them so\nlong to listen--but my only apology must be my interest in the\nsubject--I know not how I can better express my gratitude for their\nattention, or my desire for their greatest good, than by indulging the\nmingled hope and belief, that they will, in the discharge of their\nofficial duties, show themselves to be \"able men, such as fear God,\nmen of truth, hating covetousness,\" and, whatever they do, doing \"all\nto the glory of God.\"","title":"The Religion of Politics: A Sermon Delivered Before His Excellency John Davis, Governor, His Honor George Hull, Lieutenant Governor, The Honorable Council, And The Legislature Of Massachusetts, At The Annual Election, January 5, 1842.","tradition":"philosophy-ethics","translated_text":null,"word_count":9643}