THE SEPARATION OF CHRISTIANITY AND THE STATE

         THE SEPARATION OF CHRISTIANITY AND THE STATE.

THE Greek theory of education adopted by the apostate Church led to the union

of Church and State, and the total ruin of the State. The principle of Christianity is the

total separation of religion and the State. Christianity recognizes the right of the State to

exist apart from the Church; and requires that the Church must exist apart from the State.

The Church and the State occupy two distinctly different realms. The realm of the

Church is the realm of morals; the realm of the State is the realm of civics. The realm of

the Church is the inner life of man, and the world to come: the realm of the State is the

outward life of man, and the world that is.

The State rightly constituted, and abiding within its own realm, never can

interfere with the affairs of the Church; and as a matter of fact, no State ever has

interfered with the affairs of the Church, except when it went outside of its proper realm,

and assumed to itself the garb of religion. The Church, abiding in its own realm, can

never interfere in any way with the interests of the State; and, as a matter of fact, the

Church has never done so, except where she left her own realm, ascended the throne of

civil power, and presumed to wield the sword of the State.

The State, within its own realm, and for itself, has a right to establish a system of

education, which in the nature of things must be only of this world. The Church, in her

own realm, must maintain Christian education.

The State, in establishing and conducting such system of education as may seem

to it best, can not ask that the Church shall abandon Christianity. The Church, in her own

realm, in maintaining Christian education, can not ask that the State shall abandon such

system of education as it may have adopted; and must not antagonize the State in its

chosen system of education, any more than in any other affair or act of the State within its

own realm.

The Government of the United States is the only one ever in the world that was

founded upon the principle announced by Jesus Christ concerning civil government -- the

total separation of religion and the State. "No one thought of vindicating religion for the

conscience of the individual, till a voice in Judea, breaking day for the greatest epoch in

the life of humanity, by establishing a pure, spiritual, and universal religion for all

mankind, enjoined to render to Caesar only that which is Caesar's. The rule was upheld

during the infancy of the gospel for all men. No sooner was this religion adopted by the

chief of the Roman Empire, than it was shorn of its character of universality, and

enthralled by an unholy connection with the unholy State. And so it continued till the new

nation -- the least defiled with the barren scoffings of the eighteenth century, the most

general believer in Christianity of any people of that age, the chief heir of the

Reformation in its purest forms -- when it came to establish a government for the United

States, REFUSED TO TREAT FAITH AS A MATTER TO BE REGULATED BY A

CORPORATE BODY, OR HAVING A HEADSHIP IN A MONARCH OR A STATE."

-- George Bancroft.

The men who made the United States, distinctly declared that in the matter of this

fundamental principle of the separation of religion and the State, they were acting "upon

the principles on which the gospel was first propagated, and the Reformation from

Popery carried on." They declared: "We hold it for a fundamental and undeniable truth,

`that religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it,

can be dictated only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence.' The religion,

then, of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man, and it is

the right of every man to exercise it as these may dictate. This right is in its nature an

inalienable right: it is inalienable, because the opinion of men depending only on the

evidence contemplated in their own minds, can not follow the dictates of other men. It is

inalienable, also, because what is here a right towards men is a duty towards the Creator.

"It is the duty of every man to render to the Creator such homage, and such only,

as he believes to be acceptable to Him. This duty is precedent, both in order of time, and

in degree of obligation, to the claims of civil society. Before any man can be considered a

member of civil society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor of the

universe; and if a member of a civil society who enters into any subordinate association

must always do it with a reservation of his duty to the general authority, much more must

every man who becomes a member of any particular civil society do it with a saving of

his allegiance to the universal Sovereign. We maintain, therefore, that in matters of

religion, no man's right is abridged by the institution of civil society; and that religion is

wholly exempt from its cognizance."

In the course of its existence, the United States has developed and established a

system of education. The principle upon which this system of education is founded is

acknowledged to be, in this respect, the principle upon which the nation was founded --

the separation of religion and the State: therefore religion must not be taught in the State

schools. This principle, though infringed in instances, has been generally adhered to on

the part of the State. But THE CHURCH has not adhered to this principle: indeed, she

has hardly recognized it at all. She has generally acquiesced in the State's adhering to the

principle, and refusing to incorporate religion, or the religious method, in its system of

education; but she has not at all adhered to the principle that the Church must not adopt

the secular method in education. But this story is so well told by the United States

Government itself that we need go no further in defining it.

In the Annual Report of the United States Commissioner of Education for the

school year 1896-7, the United States Government has made perfectly clear the

distinction between the secular method and the religious method in education: a

distinction strictly in accordance with the principles of Christianity, and with the

fundamental principles upon which the Government of the United States was founded.

First, as to the secular school: --

"The secular school gives positive instruction. It teaches mathematics, natural

science, history, and language. Knowledge of the facts can be precise, and accurate, and a

similar knowledge of the principles can be arrived at. The self-activity of the pupil is

before all things demanded by the teacher of the secular school. The pupil must not take

things on authority; but, by his own activity, must test and verify what he has been told.

He must trace out the mathematical demonstrations, and see their necessity. He must

learn the method of investigating facts in the special provinces of science and history.

The spirit of the secular school, therefore, comes to be an enlightening one, although not

of the highest order. But its enlightenment tends to make trust in authority more and more

difficult for the young mind."

Next, as to religious education: --

"Religious education, it is obvious, in giving the highest results of thought and life

to the young, must cling to the form of authority, and not attempt to borrow the methods

of mathematics, science, and history from the secular school. Such borrowing will result

only in giving the young people an overweening confidence in the finality of their own

immature judgments. They will become conceited and shallow-minded. It is well that the

child should trust his own intellect in dealing with the multiplication table and the rule of

three. It is well that he should learn the rules and all the exceptions in Latin syntax, and

verify them in the classic authors; but he must not be permitted to summon before him

the dogmas of religion, and form pert conclusions regarding their rationality."

All this is an excellent reason as to why and how religion can not be taught in the

public schools: why religious education can not be adopted by the State. And it gives just

as excellent reason why the Church, in her education -- "religious education" -- can not

even borrow, much less adopt, the methods of the secular school.

(a) "The self-activity of the pupil is before all things demanded by the teacher of

the secular school." But in Christianity, instead of self-activity of the child or of the man,

it is self-surrender and self-emptying that is before all things demanded. "If any man will

be My disciple, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow Me." "Let this

mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus; who, being in the form of God, thought it

not robbery to be equal with God," "but emptied Himself."

(b) In the secular school, "the pupil must not take things on authority." But in

Christianity, in religious education, both the pupil and the teacher "must cling to the form

of authority." This, because God is the Author of the religious sense in man, and of

Christianity the only true complement of the religious sense; and the Word of God is the

authority of Christianity. And God is supreme in everything. When He has spoken, that

ends the matter. That is authority, the very ultimate of authority : not only because it is

the Word of God, but because it is essential truth. And essential truth is the highest

possible authority, and must be accepted as the authority which it is. Jesus Christ, who is

the Truth, "spake as One having authority, and not as the scribes." His word was as from

One having authority, not because he had any position of authority, but because of the

essential truth which was expressed in the Word which He spake. All authority in heaven

and on earth was given to Him, because He had all the truth in heaven and earth.

 (c) "The spirit of the secular school," though "an enlightening one," yet is not "of

the highest order;" while on the other hand, "religious education, it is obvious," gives "the

highest results of thought and life."

(d) The enlightenment of the secular school "tends to make trust in authority

more and more difficult for the young mind." Since, therefore, the enlightenment of the

secular school tends to make trust in authority more and more difficult for the young

mind: and since religious education must cling to the form of authority; it clearly follows

that to adopt the spirit of the secular school, or to borrow the methods of the secular

school, in religious education, is nothing less than to undermine the very citadel of

religious education.

(e) It is therefore in perfect wisdom that the United States Government has given

the counsel that in religious education there must be no "attempt to borrow the methods

of mathematics, science, and history from the secular school." And this, for the further

excellent reason that "such borrowing will result only in giving the young people an

overweening confidence in the finality of their own immature judgments. They will

become conceited and shallow-minded."

Every Christian desires that his children shall have a religious education. And

surely no Christian who has any wish for the welfare of his children would consciously

incorporate into their education that which would result in giving them an overweening

confidence in the finality of their own immature judgments, and which will cause them to

become conceited and shallow-minded. Surely, therefore, it has been in complete

unconsciousness of the principles involved, and of the disastrous results incurred, that the

Church leaders and teachers have, in education, taken precisely the course which the

United States Government declares must not be taken: that is, the borrowing of the

secular method in religious education. For that same report continues: --

"With the spectacle of the systematic organization of the secular schools and the

improved methods of teaching before them, the leaders in the Church have endeavored to

perfect the methods of religious instruction of youth. They have met the following

dangers which lay in their path: --

"First, the danger of adopting methods of instruction in religion which were fit

and proper only for secular instruction: secondly, the selection of religious matter for the

course of study which did not lead in the most direct manner toward vital religion,

although it would readily take on a pedagogic form.

"Against this danger of sapping, or undermining, all authority in religion, BY

THE INTRODUCTION OF THE METHODS OF THE SECULAR SCHOOL, which lay

all stress on the self-activity of the child, the Sunday-school has not been sufficiently

protected in the more recent years of its history. Large numbers of religious teachers,

most intelligent and zealous in their piety, seek a more and more perfect adoption of the

secular school methods.

"On the other hand, the topics of religious instruction have been determined

largely by the necessities of the secular school method. That method is not adapted to

teach mystic truth. It seeks everywhere definite and especially mathematical results. But

these results, although they are found everywhere in science and mathematics, are the

farthest possible from being like the subject matter of religion. Hence, it has happened

that in improving the methods of the Sunday-school, greater and greater attention has

been paid to the history and geography of the Old Testament and less and less to the

doctrinal matters of the New Testament."

(a) "The introduction of the methods of the secular school" in religious education

incurs the danger "of sapping or undermining all authority in religion." And against this

danger, even "the Sunday-school has not been sufficiently protected in the more recent

years of its history." What, then, of the religious education of the children of Christians in

the United States outside of the Sunday-school?

(b) "More and more perfect adoption of the secular school methods" has been

sought even in the religious education in the Sunday-school. What, then, of the religious

education of the children of Christians apart from the Sunday-school?

(c) "The topics of religious instruction, even in the Sunday-school, have been

"determined largely by the necessities of the secular school method," which method "is

not adapted to teach mystic truth;" and the results of which "are the farthest possible from

being like the subject matter of religion." What, then, of the topics and methods in the

religious instruction of the children of Christians apart from the Sunday-school?

When the professed Protestant Church has so far forsaken her own true Christian

ground in education, and has so far adopted the topics and methods of secular education,

has she not gone a long way in the course of the original apostasy in adopting the topics

and method of secular education in that day? And in so doing, has not the Protestant

Church in this day gone just that far on the way to the positive union of the Church and

the State which resulted in the like course in ancient time? And with all this, how can the

State here escape the certain ruin that must come from this apostasy and union of Church

and State, as certainly as it came from that apostasy and union of Church and State in

ancient time of which this is so exact a parallel and likeness?