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.
Author: Gannett, Ezra S. (Ezra Stiles), 1801-1871
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.


*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "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." ***


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.



BY EZRA S. GANNETT,

Junior Pastor of the Federal St. Church in Boston.



Boston:
DUTTON AND WENTWORTH, PRINTERS TO THE STATE.
1842.



Commonwealth of Massachusetts.


                           HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, JAN. 6, 1842.

  _Ordered_, That Messrs DUGGAN, of _Quincy_,
                         GREELE, of _Boston_, and
                         READ, of _Pawtucket_,

be a Committee to present the thanks of the House to the Rev. EZRA S.
GANNETT, for the able and eloquent Discourse, delivered by him
yesterday, before the Government of the Commonwealth, and to request a
copy thereof for publication.

                                            L. S. CUSHING, _Clerk_



SERMON.

1 CORINTHIANS, x. 31.

    WHETHER YE EAT OR DRINK, OR WHATSOEVER YE DO, DO ALL TO THE
    GLORY OF GOD.


The solemnities of this occasion belong to a Christian people. By them
religion is solicited to throw her protection and authority around the
institutions of the State. The citizen and the magistrate recognise
their common relation to a higher Power than the functionary or the
State, and in such recognition exchange the pledge of a mutual
fidelity. The custom which this day renews comes to us from the
founders of the Commonwealth--men of strong faith and religious
hearts, who erected their political fabric as a temple in which to
worship God, and inscribed over its front the name of the one Master
whom they honored, even Christ. The place to which our legislators and
rulers have come upon entering on their official duties is the house
of prayer and Christian instruction. Every thing that distinguishes
the occasion seems to point out the course of remark in which he who
addresses this audience should invite his hearers to follow him. The
relation of religion to politics--the religion of political life--is
the subject to which he is unequivocally directed; and of which it is
my purpose to treat, at such length only as the limits of the occasion
will allow, but with such plainness of speech as should alone be used
before freemen by one as free as they when speaking on their common
duties.

There is however what may be called a political side to this subject,
on which it would be improper for me to introduce any remarks at this
time. The bare mention of religion and politics in connexion alarms
some minds, who fear lest the liberties of the people be invaded by
zealous religionists, or the public affairs of the time be handled by
honest or ambitious preachers--in either case wandering beyond their
appropriate limits. Let me at the outset disclaim all intention of
touching questions to which a temporary interest only can belong, or
of assailing the order of our civil state. It is higher ground which I
hope to occupy as I examine the religious aspects of citizenship. When
I speak of the religion of political life, I mean that religion should
control men in the exercise of their political rights as it should
control them in all their other relations and concerns. The religion
of politics is nothing else than the application of religious
principles to political action, whether it be the action of a
statesman or a private citizen, of an individual or of the community.
The politician should respect these principles as much as any other
man. Political opinion, political discussion, political life should be
brought under the influence of religious convictions. This is the
ground which I take, and which I shall endeavor to prove is the only
ground on which a Christian can consistently stand.

Religion should govern all political sentiment and action. Why not?
Why should such a claim on behalf of religion be accounted
extravagant, or meet with any other than a unanimous assent? Is not
religion the supreme law; so acknowledged by the people of this land,
at least by the thoughtful and sober part of the people? We but repeat
one of the common-places of the pulpit, which however disregarded no
one thinks of denying, when we say that the influence of religion
should be paramount in every department of life. We but adopt an
illustration with which every one is familiar, when we speak of it as
a spiritual atmosphere, that must enclose the institutions and
movements of society, and insinuate itself into every form of personal
existence. The authority of religion, its right to exercise sway over
human wills and human hearts, is admitted on all sides. It is not
monks and nuns, nor religious teachers and their families, upon whom
in these days it is believed that the command to fear God and work
righteousness expends its force; it is not men on sick beds and in
dying moments alone, of whom it is said, that they ought to think of
the duty which devolves on them in view of their relations to God and
eternity; but men and women full of life, in the midst of life's
cares, temptations and labours--the young, the vigorous, the
busy--merchants in their traffic, farmers in the fields, scholars in
their studies, mechanics in their workshops, the wife and mother in
her domestic occupations, the daughter of toil at her needle--the
rich, the poor--the wise, the simple--all should be religious,
heartily, truly, constantly religious. This is the doctrine of the
present time; or if it is not, it should be. This is the democratic
doctrine about religion, and this is the Christian doctrine about
religion. It includes all men under one law, and all sinners under one
condemnation. Now why shall the politician be released from the demand
made upon every one else? Why shall political life form an episode in
the history traced by successive generations on the tablet of the
ages, which shall have not only its own rules of composition, but its
own principles of moral interpretation? Shall mercantile life be
required to cover itself with the sanctity of moral obligation, shall
the demand of the age be for a Christian literature, shall there be a
general lamentation over the want of faith and virtue; and yet an
exception be made in favor--no, not in favor, but to the disadvantage
and disgrace--of one class of engagements, in which all the people of
this country participate? Such injustice will not bear a moment's
examination. Away with it forever!

It seems impossible to misunderstand the language of Christianity on
this subject. Undeniably it affirms its right to exercise universal
dominion. It takes cognisance of all human action, extends its
scrutiny to motives and feelings, and allows no condition, employment
or exigency to raise a barrier against its entrance as the messenger
of God to deliver and enforce his commands. It has one and the same
instruction for all men, whether they live in palaces or wander
houseless, whether they are versed in tongues or are rude of speech,
men of science or men of handicraft, subjects of a monarchy or
citizens of a republic; to them all it says, Hearken and obey--walk by
faith--lead holy lives--fulfil all righteousness. Even if this be
called by the unbeliever the pretension or the arrogance of
Christianity, he must admit that the claim which it sets up is as
broad as human existence. Wherever the religion of the New Testament
can reach a man, over him it asserts its authority. No place so
public, no spot so private, no situation so humble, no office so high,
that Christianity will not rise to its eminence, descend to its depth,
penetrate its seclusion, occupy its position, and still reiterate the
same language,--speaking as one having authority, because it speaks in
the name and in behalf of the Almighty. From the first has it advanced
this claim of unlimited empire; its prerogatives change not with the
mutations of society. It still shows a charter of "divine right" for
the sovereignty at which it aims. It still claims, as it always has
demanded, and ever will demand till it shall acquire, dominion over
all classes,--from the slave of toil to the heir of a throne, from the
pauper whom the charity of the State supports to the Ruler by whom the
majesty of the State is represented.

It is important however that we have right conceptions of the nature
of this dominion. Christianity, as we have noticed, aims at exerting a
control over the motives, feelings and unseen life. It asks not for
outward deference, but for inward submission. The conscience, the
heart, the will must bow to its authority. A respect which lies on the
surface only of the character, or which glides from the tongue like
the schoolboy's recitation of a few well-conned sentences, is not what
the Christian owes to his religion, nor what it will accept in place
of that homage of the soul which is the only proof of an insight into
its nature. Strange that men should ever think to deceive God by
playing the parrot or the hypocrite! There are many who make the fatal
mistake of substituting profession for reality; and in a community who
hold religion in high regard there may be politicians who will take
this course in the hope of winning their fellow-men. If they succeed,
they only effect a selfish purpose; they do not illustrate the
influence of religion.

Neither is it an attention to forms, however sincere, nor a use of
institutions, however constant, that will satisfy the demands of
Christianity. It requires something more than reverence for the means
by which it binds its power upon the disciple. The age in which faith
terminates in the _means_ of religion is the precursor of an age of
unbelief. Ceremonies are but the ghosts of dead professions, unless a
living faith convert them into ministers of goodness. Forms are
needed, institutions are all but essential; but they are only the
garments in which the Divine spirit of religion must be clad for its
exposure to a cold and ungenial world. Many are there who look with
profound respect upon the dress, but think not whether it covers a
divinity or a fiction. How have men--great statesmen and small
politicians as well as others--praised the Established Church of
England, and actually stood in awe of its majesty, when the thought of
its spiritual relation to themselves or any one else had perhaps never
crossed their minds.

It is not reverence at certain times--a periodical service--by which
men are required to prove themselves disciples of Christ.
Righteousness, holiness, is not confined to any hour or place. The
sanctuary whose walls the hands of labour have raised, is not the only
house of God. There is a temple which the Divine Architect has reared,
whose walls are immortal, in which his worship must be maintained by
faculties ever conscious of his presence. There is an altar, the altar
of the heart, on which a perpetual sacrifice must be presented.

That sacrifice too must be a whole burnt-offering. The man must give
himself to God, "a living sacrifice," in body and in soul, which is
but his "reasonable service." I pause not from my original purpose, to
show how reasonable; but I insist upon the truth that a partial
obedience, in whatever sense it be partial, will not meet the
requisitions of Christianity. It is neither a part of human nature,
nor a part of human life, which must be devoted to religion; but the
whole--the whole of life, the whole of man. The man must be
thoroughly, habitually, entirely religious. His loftiest purposes and
grandest conceptions, his most familiar exercises and meanest
employments, his whole impulse, energy and activity must be sanctified
by faith--faith in God and his will, in Christ and his revelations.
"Whether he eat or drink, or whatever he do, he must do all to the
glory of God." _Whatever he do._ Mark the words. They leave room for
no exception. Whatever be the nature of one's engagements, public or
private; wherever he be, in the house or the street; whenever his
course be examined, on Sunday or week-day, morning, noon, or night; he
must be found living to God's glory,--through faith, I repeat, and
through the obedience which is the consequence of faith. _Character_
is the service which he must render.

A character of which the principle is indicated by the words of the
Apostle, will obtain a twofold development, as it shall seek the
direction on the one hand of piety, and on the other of morality. Each
of these forms of growth will proceed from an idea as its germ; the
one from the idea of God, the other from the idea of man. The idea of
God,--the Supreme, Eternal, Infinite Being, whose will nothing can
overrule, but whose unimpeachable perfection is a guarantee for the
rectitude of his government.

        God, the mighty source
  Of all things, the stupendous force
        On which all things depend;
  From whose right arm, beneath whose eyes,
  All period, power, and enterprise
        Commence and reign and end.

"He is Governor among the nations; but justice and judgment are the
habitation of his throne." "Thine, O Lord, are the greatness, and the
power, and the glory, and the victory, and the majesty; for all that
is in the heaven and in the earth is thine; thine is the kingdom, and
thou art exalted as Head above all. Both riches and honour come of
thee, and thou reignest over all: and in thine hand is power and
might, and in thine hand it is to make great and to give strength unto
all." Worthily, so far as language could go, did the greatest of
Israel's monarchs, and one of the first of human bards, in these words
celebrate the majesty of Him who is Higher than the highest, the
Maker, Guardian, and Sovereign of the universe. Religion adopts this
description as the groundwork of its sentiments and exercises. With
God it begins, to Him it returns, in Him it rests. To Him it traces
all blessing, from Him receives direction concerning the aim and
course of life, and as its first and last and central principle
aspires to "do all things to his glory." Led to Him as the Creator by
his works, which it contemplates, reminded of Him as the Almighty
Ruler by his providence, the aspects of which it reverently studies,
and taught to call Him the Father by Christ, to whose instructions it
yields a joyful obedience, it revolves around the Supreme Being as its
light and security, through its relation to whom it is safe amidst the
world's commotions and blessed in life's decay.

The idea of man--this is the other point of departure from which
religion will seek its appropriate issues; of man in those attributes
which are the universal endowment of our race, and not in the
artificial prerogatives which distinguish a part of mankind--one
nation, or one class in society; of man the partaker of a common
humanity, before whose indestructible capacities, rights and destinies
the distinctions of colour, wealth and office fade away, as the glare
of night-lamps which shed illumination over a few feet of space before
the beams of the sun which enwrap the whole land in their brightness.
This idea of man, as everywhere the creature of God, and therefore
dependent, everywhere the child of God, and therefore in his nature
proclaiming himself of a nobler lineage than if he could show an
ancestral register bearing the names of half the monarchs of the
earth, as everywhere the _same_ in virtue of his indefeasible
possession of reason, conscience and immortality, and therefore
entitled to fraternal treatment from his fellow-men,--this idea whence
came it? Where did our fathers learn that men were "born free and
equal"? From the religion of the New Testament, for centuries a sealed
book, and from whose truths when opened the darkness of ages did but
slowly disappear. "Equal;" not "free" only,--this latter word might
seem to be used with some license of speech,--but _equal_, in the
essential gifts and purposes of existence. Christianity by addressing
the common nature and unfolding the immortal destiny of mankind has
shown a broad ground, on which all may meet and lift up the chorus of
a united and acknowledged brotherhood. The framers of our Declaration
of Independence thought they were proclaiming a political axiom, when
they republished one of the great revelations of the Gospel, the full
meaning of which can be learned only through sympathy with him who
came to save the lost and reconcile the estranged. "The common
people," it is said, "heard him gladly." And the people it is who
should welcome his religion, which condemns the selfishness alike of
the tyrant and of the demagogue, and rebukes at once the arrogance of
an aristocratic and the meanness of a servile spirit by its pregnant
charge to "honor all men." All men? What, of every class and
condition? Yes, men of every name, rank, and complexion. Hear it, ye
slaves, and ye masters of America. Hear it, ye nobility, and you the
starving millions of Britain. Hear it, ye rulers, and ye defrauded and
oppressed subjects of Continental Europe. Aye, hear it, ye nations of
the East, where first the blessed words were spoken, though since long
buried in oblivion. Words of righteous and joyful import to those to
whom false opinion and unjust institutions have denied the place which
by the will of their Creator they are entitled to hold,--standing
erect by the side of their fellow-men, and not crouching submissively
at the feet which trample or spurn them. Alas! how few yet comprehend
the law, on which the morality of every Christian people, and every
Christian believer, should be built--"Thou shalt love thy neighbour,"
be he who he may, thou shalt love him "as thyself."

It must now appear in what sense I use the expression, the religion of
politics. We sometimes hear of the _morality_ of political life, but
the term is not comprehensive enough for my purpose. I do not indeed
acknowledge a morality that is not based on faith in God, whose will
is the only standard, as from his government must be derived the
sanctions, of virtue. But a compliance with the requisitions of
morality is not all that should be demanded of him who enters
political life, or of any one in the discharge of his functions as a
citizen. He should remember what is due to God, as well as what is due
to man. Let us see how the principles which we have laid down will
affect political action.

First, a man must carry into political life a sense of God as the
Source of power and privilege. The air and the light are not more
truly his gifts than are the civil institutions which we enjoy. We are
fond of describing the virtues and deeds of our ancestors; our
grandsires are regarded with mingled admiration and gratitude. It is
well that we turn back to those days of fortitude and energy, and seek
there the springs of our present prosperity. But our gratitude must
not rest in the men of that period. They were but the instruments of a
higher will, the agents of a mightier strength than their own. Those
patriots of the revolution, and their progenitors who planted the seed
of liberty wherever they took up their habitation on this soil, were
the last men to have claimed for themselves the praise, as if in their
own self-derived wisdom or force they had achieved the works which
history will connect with their names. "Not unto us, not unto us,"
would have been their cry, if they could have foreseen the sentiments
of their posterity, "but to thy name, O Lord, be the glory." Nay, such
_was_ their language. The Pilgrims, with all their faults--for
faultless they were not--were men of an ardent piety, whose faith rose
up to heaven with an almost profane confidence and laid hold on the
arm of God as their sustaining and guiding power. The heroes of the
revolutionary struggle--that struggle which began long before blood
was shed on yonder height--looked up to Heaven to approve their cause,
and when He whom they invoked had crowned it with success poured out
their thanksgiving at his altars. And shall we, their sons, forget the
God whom our fathers acknowledged? It is a good thing to celebrate
their deeds and keep their memories hung round with fresh tributes of
love; but let them not receive our final homage. Oh no! Let that pass
beyond them to the Eternal Fountain of good, from whom our liberties
and our institutions have been received through these channels which
his Providence selected. Look abroad, my hearers, upon this great
land, with its spreading population. See what a country is
yours,--washed by two oceans, and stretching from the arctic to the
torrid zone. Note its immense resources; its mountains reaching to the
skies, its vallies nestling in the bosom of sunshine, its rivers on
which a nation's traffic may be borne, and its lakes on which the
navies of the earth might ride. Mark its capacities in their as yet
incipient state of development; its various fertility, its mineral
wealth, its gigantic promise of support for future generations. Survey
the people of this Union, pursuing their several branches of
enterprise and industry, with none to hinder or molest. Ponder the
statistics of your country's growth. See the iron rods of
communication along which the electricity of life will be transmitted
from the Atlantic shores to the distant West. Examine the architecture
of that social order under whose security you live, simple, yet firm,
a model for other communities in its principles, and a blessing to
ourselves in the protection it extends over us,--all the protection
(but no more) that a freeman needs. And when you have filled your
contemplation with the spectacles presented by your own beloved
Republic, then bless the Lord for his goodness and his wonderful
loving-kindness; for it is He who has given us this ample heritage. If
ever men were bound to own that God is good, it is the people of these
United States. If ever a community on earth should be distinguished by
religious sensibility, it is this of which we are a part.

With this recognition of the Divine power and goodness must be united
a sense of the responsibleness under which every one lies before God.
These privileges--many and great--of which we have spoken are
entrusted to us by One, the righteous principle of whose government it
is, that to whom much is committed, of them will much be required. Our
political advantages lay on us a peculiar weight of obligation. We are
accountable, we shall be held accountable, for the use we make of
freedom and of power. What is freedom? It is liberty to do
right--nothing more than this; what more could an honest man desire?
But mark, the liberty imposes the duty. The freeman must do right, or
his immunities will enhance his guilt and deepen his condemnation. The
power which is committed to the hands of every citizen of this
Commonwealth--the power of controlling public sentiment through his
speech and of directing the public affairs through his vote--the power
of national sovereignty in which he participates as one of the
sovereign people--is a solemn trust. He by whom it is abused sins; he
by whom it is neglected sins. His guilt may never come under the
notice of his fellow-men, but it will be established before a higher
tribunal than any which they can erect. Every political act is a moral
act, in view of the principle which we have expounded, that whatever
we do, all must be done to the glory of God. Through the force of this
principle it acquires a religious or an irreligious character; is
clothed with a fearful significance, as it indicates the condition of
the inward life; and is linked to everlasting consequences, as it
forms part of the history of an immortal being. Whatever is done,
whether in public places or in secret chambers, is done in the sight
of God. And over the least as well as the greatest of human actions
has He extended the law of duty. Duty! that word which expresses man's
glory and his peril. God save us from disregarding its import!

The necessary consequence of entertaining this sense of obligation
will be the preservation of one's integrity, which is the next point
that claims our notice in considering the influence of religion upon
politics. A man who acts religiously will act conscientiously, unless
he grossly mistake the meaning of the former word. He will endeavour
to maintain a clean heart and a clean tongue. Whatever would debase
his character he will avoid as he would shun a pestilence; he will
dread moral disease more than natural death. Let such a man enter on
the performance of any service which devolves on him through his
relation to the State, and he will proceed as to a work demanding high
and holy principle. He will esteem it treason to his country to let go
his own rectitude of soul. Temptation to sacrifice his uprightness to
interest will only make him more resolute. The persuasion of example
will be as vain as an open bribe. The question he will ask in each
case is,--not what will custom or public opinion allow, but--what
ought I to do. He will pursue this course of fidelity, alike to
himself and to the trusts which he is called to execute, because he
accounts the obligations of righteousness to be immutable. And here
his judgment is according to the truth. There is no sphere or scene of
life which gives a man the privilege of doing wrong; no land of
license, nor castle of power, where he is exempt from the authority of
religion. Neither the throne nor the senate-house, the secret conclave
nor the popular assembly, can shield one from the force of that
primary law of human action--thou shalt not sin against thine own
soul. Purity of purpose and sincerity of conduct must preserve the
citizen from the taint of evil, or he will become corrupt, and if he
do not disgust, will corrupt others.

I have intimated that justice should pervade both the sentiment and
the action of political life. I now add, that another element of the
Christian character, love, must be brought into exercise. Selfishness
must be banished from this ground, as from every other. Need that
commandment of our religion, to which the command, to love God, alone
has precedence, be observed only under certain relations; or was it
meant to bind the individual, and the world, in any and all possible
relations of existence? May the law of brotherly love be virtually
abrogated by the institutions or the habits of society? If not, then
we must consider the good of others as well as our own,--not only
respect their rights, but labor to advance their interests. The
Apostolic maxim should find place among the principles adopted by
politicians,--"look not every man on his own things, but every man
also on the things of others." The "charity that envieth not, that
vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, doth not behave itself
unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no
evil, rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth"--does it
not almost seem as if the portraiture was drawn in view of the
contrast often exhibited by men in their political relations?--this
charity must be preserved, its image unbroken, amidst all the struggle
and competition of public or of private life.

I need go no farther in detailing the influence which religion should
have on politics;--on its theory and its practice. On its theory, by
banishing whatever is inconsistent with the Divine will or with the
welfare of the whole human race. On its practice, by causing every one
to act under a sense of God's goodness and his own responsibleness,
with uprightness of soul and in the spirit of Christian love. The
principles of political action should harmonize with the principles of
a perfect character, and no single act be allowed that would offend
these principles. The consistent politician in a Christian land is he
who can invite the scrutiny of Omniscience upon his motives, while his
outward life is shaped by his inward purposes. See you a man who in
the heat of a political conflict, or the toil of public service, keeps
himself humble, pure and disinterested; who never violates his
conscience, and never forgets his God; who never lets the prospect of
loss or the hope of advantage lure him from the straight course of
duty; who illustrates in his own example the fine motto of the knight
of chivalry--"without fear and without reproach;" who scorns to
compass an end, though noble, by unworthy means, and would reject with
loathing a proposal to substitute expedients for principles; see you
such an one? Honour him, be his station what it may; take him for your
model; give him office, if he will accept it; give him your hearts, if
he refuses your votes. The _Christian_ politician! one of the noblest
specimens of humanity; who can tread dark and perilous ways, and not
stumble; can serve his fellow-men without degrading himself or
offending his Maker. The Christian citizen! who asks God's blessing
upon his discharge of the functions that belong to him as the
inhabitant of a free country; who appreciates the worth of his
privileges, and feels the solemnity of his duties; who forms his
opinions carefully, and expresses them manfully, though candidly; who
when he helps to elect a fellow-citizen to take charge of the
interests of the town, the Commonwealth, or the land, is impressed
with the sacredness of his own act; who upholds good institutions
because he wishes to see them prosper, and not for any sinister end;
who supports the measures which his understanding and conscience
approve, and will have nothing to do with any other institutions or
measures;--such a man, though his hands be callous with labour or his
clothes threadbare through poverty, deserves the respect of the
community. I would rather be such a man than a second Napoleon cutting
Europe into kingdoms and tossing crowns to his favorites.

All that I have now said, I trust, approves itself to the minds of
those whom I address. I have raised no structure of requisition for
which I had not first secured deep and broad foundations. If the views
we have taken of the authority and extent of the Divine government as
expounded by Christianity are just, it follows that men should be
devout, upright and benevolent everywhere; that is, in all situations
as well as in all places; in the State-house in Boston, and in the
Capitol at Washington, in a President's Cabinet, and in a Governor's
Council-chamber, in a political caucus, and at the freeman's
ballot-box. Religion must control and sanctify the whole life of the
individual and of the nation. And yet this doctrine is repudiated; yes,
openly and in high places. And _this_ doctrine of repudiation,--not a
birth of yesterday, but as old as civil government,--is that which
should be most indignantly rejected by honest men and good citizens.
It is said, that men need not be as scrupulous in their public as in
their private relations. There is a morality for the public man, and
another for the private citizen. There are two standards of conduct
even for the same person, in his private and in his public capacity. I
have heard it said by those who knew him well that an individual of
great influence, who had been placed in the most elevated offices
within the people's gift, was a man of strict integrity and the
mildest character in his private connexions, though as a politician he
was distinguished for his disregard of truth, his violence, and his
use of any means to carry the ends which his party espoused. And on
the other hand we hear men whose private vices are notorious--profane,
profligate, unprincipled--commended for the consistency and purity of
their political course. Is not this wrong, is it not deplorable? Shall
we for a moment countenance this distinction between public and
private character, as if they were not subject to the same principles
of moral judgment? Shall they in whose veins Puritan blood runs freely
admit a doctrine, the bare mention of which would have made Winthrop
and Bradford and a thousand more like them tremble with horror? It
came not from them, it does not belong to the New England soil. It
came from the corrupt Courts of Europe, from ages when Christianity
was scarcely known, and from scenes where its influence was unfelt. To
the Old World let it be restored; to past ages be it consigned. And
let us no more hear the abominable doctrine--as irrational as it is
detestable--that what would be scandalous in private life may be just
and commendable in the management of political affairs. I reaffirm,
that religion should purify the currents of thought and control the
movements, whether secret or open, that belong to this part of human
agency. And if I needed other support for this assertion than is
furnished by the very terms in which it is expressed, I might quote
the words of Washington, who in his _Farewell Address_, after
remarking that "of all the dispositions and habits which lead to
political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable
supports," adds, "In vain would that man claim the tribute of
patriotism who should labour to subvert these great pillars of human
happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The
mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and
cherish them." "And let us," he further adds, "with caution indulge
the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion.
Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on
minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to
expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious
principle." Words worthy to be inscribed over every hall of
legislation and every place of public resort in this or any other
land.

The principles which have now been presented must not be confined to
individual action. They should also control the associated energy
which makes politics the scene of its efforts. Political parties
should respect these principles. Any organization or enterprise in
which they are disregarded should meet with instant rebuke. The
existence of parties may not be regretted. They are useful, and they
are inseparable from any system of government which gives to the
people an interest in the management of public affairs, or which even
permits discussion upon public measures. Where men form and express
opinions, variety of opinion will be sure to spring up; discussion
will elicit sympathy and enkindle debate. Here we have at once the
elements of party. Its advantages, in the more thorough examination to
which measures of general or local importance are subjected, and in
the restrictions which reciprocal vigilance imposes upon the use of
power or opportunity, are as great as they are obvious. It is, then,
both foolish and useless to inveigh against parties as in themselves
evil. Let them be formed on correct principles, and conducted in a
right spirit, and they will be found among the best securities of
liberty and the most effectual means of intelligence. But let them be
formed on unsound principles, or without principle, or let them be
conducted in a greedy or vindictive spirit, and they will become the
occasions of incalculable mischief. When falsehood and violence are
the weapons which one party provokes another to adopt; when the
passions of men are addressed, and their prejudices are fostered
instead of being enlightened; when the aim is not to serve the country
so much as on the one side to get, and on the other to retain power;
when recourse is had to means for baffling an opponent or securing a
triumph, which the very men who guide the party would be ashamed to
use as private individuals; when excitement is made the great
instrument of success, and the people are carried along blindfold by
sympathy, like a herd of animals, moved by an impulse which they are
unable to explain and care not to understand; when office is the prize
that stimulates exertion, and worldly gain the object which lies at
the heart of party strife; then is that which might be a blessing
converted into a curse. Vice and ruin are its fruits. A despotism
could not inflict on a country greater evils than must result from the
action of parties born of selfishness and nursed in injustice. It is
sad to believe--yet who can deny--that political parties in this
country bear too much the character which we have described. Oh! for a
party that shall plant itself upon principle, shall appeal to the good
sense and candid judgment of the people, shall look not at reward, but
at duty, and shall adopt no measures but such as virtue can approve
and on which religion can invoke the benediction of a righteous God. A
party composed of good men and true patriots, each of whom should
interpret the charge which the Roman Senate gave to the Dictator whom
public emergencies called into office as applicable to himself and as
indicating the aim which he must pursue, let the cost to himself or
the consequence to his party be what it may,--"see that the Republic
sustain no harm,"--such a party would be the salvation and glory of
our land.

Sentiments are advanced which contradict this view of duty. Maxims of
political action have been promulgated,--not only in the fierce
struggle that attends an election, but in calmer moments,--which shock
common sense as well as religious feeling. It is said, but by no one
it may be presumed who has any sense of character, that all is fair in
politics; as if success were the only thing to be regarded. But I need
not stop to expose such an atrocious rule of action, which would
justify whatever is base or criminal. It is urged, however, in
vindication of methods of acquiring influence which offend a
clear-sighted conscience, that if a party cannot prevail but by using
the weapons with which it is attacked, it must resort to these means
of self-preservation. What is this but another way of expressing the
doctrine on the enormity of which we have just remarked?
Self-preservation should not be the object most studied by a party.
The preservation of a character which will stand the test of moral
principle should be far dearer. If a party cannot live without
adopting what it condemns, let it perish; let falsehood and
shamelessness triumph. It will be only for a season. From the ashes of
a party that has fallen a sacrifice to its own rectitude will arise
another phenix of political virtue, with fresh vigour and immortal
hope. It is sometimes contended, that a man must go with his party,
though it be against his conscience. Mischievous and infamous
language. What! a man put himself into chains, that he may plead
captivity as an excuse for sin? Shall the partisan with his own hand
efface the prerogatives of his humanity, and dare to trample on the
laws of God, though he has not, and _because_ he has not, the courage
to break the leash in which he is led along like a hound watching his
master's eye? No. Every one of us is bound by higher obligations than
those which connect him with a party. If the higher and the inferior
obligations come in conflict, let the true man snap the latter, as if
they were bands of tow and not fetters of iron.

The most powerful instrument that a political party can use for the
accomplishment of its ends, whether good or bad, is the press, and
therefore this should be placed under the control of moral and
religious conviction. A press which violates the sanctity of truth and
lends itself to unrighteous uses, is a disgrace to the community which
gives it support, and which cannot long endure its presence without
feeling its disastrous influence. If men sit beneath the shade of the
poison-tree, they cannot but inhale its noxious atmosphere. The press
should be consecrated to intelligence and virtue; but if, instead of
the service which it may render to the highest interests of man, it
condescends to become the pander of his prejudices and the slave of
his passions, to do the scavenger-work of a party in the unclean ways
of falsehood and calumny, it deserves only scorn and reprobation. An
independent press is a blessing to a land; but a vagabond or a
hireling press is a nuisance. The independence of the press! much
talked about, but little exemplified, and probably little understood.
It does not consist in recklessness of assertion, or violence of
language, in gross misrepresentation, and grosser assault on
character; but in maintaining itself above the fluctuations of opinion
in the serene heaven of truth and principle, in trying political
theories and measures by the standard of a pure morality, in breasting
the current of popular or party sentiment when it runs towards evil,
and in advocating the right though it have few to speak on its behalf.
Why cannot we have a press that shall exhibit this character? Ought it
not to exist in a Christian nation? Now, with honorable exceptions,
our public journals give no evidence that the conception of such a
character was ever entertained, or at best indicate that it is
regarded as an ideal excellence, about which practical men need not
trouble themselves. The tone of a large portion of the political press
on the eve or during the progress of an election--and in our country
but little time falls without this description--is unchristian,
immoral, barbarous. Strange as it may sound, I believe that the words
with which the birth of the Redeemer was celebrated by the heavenly
host, "Glory to God in the highest; on earth peace, goodwill among
men," express the aims which the press should adopt and the spirit in
which its labours should be pursued.

The same great principles of conduct which we have traced in their
application to the private offices of citizenship should be adopted by
public men, and by these principles should their course be judged.
They should act under a sense of their relations to God and their duty
to their fellow-men. The common remark is, that they are responsible
to their country. But there is a higher responsibleness than this,
which they must not forget. They act in the sight of God, and on each
one of them devolve the obligations of personal fidelity, which
requires that they never compromise their uprightness nor relinquish
their hold on a virtuous character. Let the conduct of statesmen in
all ages be brought to this standard, and how will it bear the test?
The very principles on which statesmanship has proceeded--the
principles of crooked policy and exclusive national advantage--are
fatal to purity of character. It is related of Lord Stanhope, one of
the ministers of George I. that one day, after musing some time in
company, he started up and said as to himself, "It is impossible!" and
being asked what it was that was impossible, he replied, "It is
impossible for a minister to be an honest man." Was there not sad
truth as well as keen satire in this remark of one whose experience
must add weight to his opinion? Still, not truth enough to justify
despair; for it is not "impossible," that men in the most conspicuous
and dangerous positions should hold fast their integrity. There have
been those who have passed through the ordeal unharmed. Washington
alone might prove that public station and personal excellence may be
maintained together. And besides other names that our own annals might
supply, he whom the providence of God removed from the highest office
in this nation when he had but just crossed its threshold was, if we
may believe various and positive testimony, an example of moral and
religious character worthy of universal imitation. By the consent of
all parties, the late President Harrison was a _good_ man; and now
that he has gone to the judgment where there is no respect of persons,
who does not feel that this is a better title than he could have won
by the most splendid administration of our government? Impressive is
the lesson of his departure, and sincere was the mourning that
followed him to his grave; but the remembrance of his inflexible
though modest worth will abide in the firmament of public life, a
bright star sending down its calm influence through the interval of
years and ages. Let the people demand of their rulers that they copy
this example. Let them say to the candidate for public office,--We
require moral principle, we desire religious faith, in those to whom
we commit the trusts that are at our disposal; we wish for something
on which we can rely, and the only thing on which we can rely is
character. Let them say to the representatives of the nation's dignity
on the floors of Congress,--Conduct yourselves like men of principle;
pollute not these chambers by invectives that would disgrace a
dramshop nor by broils that belong to scenes of midnight riot; attend
to the business for which we sent you to the national halls, and make
us not ashamed of ourselves that we have chosen men, whom we cannot
respect, to be our legislators.

And finally, the same principles which should sway individuals in all
the relations of life are applicable to nations in respect to both
their internal and their foreign affairs. The same principles of
reverence, justice and generosity. Of reverence; for the Divine
providence and government embrace within their oversight the largest
empire as well as the humblest man, even as the same care guides a
planet that shapes a drop. That prayer which the civil authority of
the State puts into the mouths of the ministers of religion, "God save
the Commonwealth of Massachusetts," is not a mere form of words. It
has a meaning, which the hearts of the people should confess. Of
justice; for a community, be it larger or smaller, in its action but
expresses the aggregate or the preponderance of certain human wills,
every one of which should be subject to the law of rectitude, and
whose combined force must therefore represent the prevalent morality
of the members. Nothing can be more preposterous, than to maintain
that a community is not bound by the laws of moral obligation. If this
be the fact, then the most enormous wickedness may be perpetrated,
fraud and injustice execute their projects and cruelty bathe its hands
in blood, and no one be guilty; Heaven be defied, and earth be
stained, but no one culpable! A State is bound to keep good faith as
much as an individual. It is bound to deal righteously and glorify
God, to "eschew evil and do good." The doctrine broached in some
quarters, that legislation may be dishonest and yet reproach not
cleave to the State which suffers it, is as false as it is base. They
by whom it is promulgated are enemies nurtured at the bosom of the
Republic. Their

                            "dishonour
  Mangles true judgment, and bereaves the State
  Of that integrity which should become it;
  Not having the power to do the good it would,
  For the ill which doth control it."

Of generosity; for the sentiment of love may warm a nation's breast.
Political institutions need not engender exclusiveness. Nations should
treat one another honestly and openly, discarding that maxim on which
the international relations of the world have in past ages been
conducted, that the prosperity of each must be promoted by the
obstacles thrown in the way of the rest. This is neither a Christian
nor a sound maxim. Men are beginning to open their eyes upon the fact,
that it is unsound and pernicious; yet how slow are they in coming to
the real truth, that the nation which pays the most sincere respect to
the rights, and shows the most liberal spirit in regard to the
interests, of other nations, will most effectually secure its own
rights and advance its own interests. It is time that the old Pagan
notion of patriotism should be displaced by more just ideas. Love of
country was once interpreted to mean hatred of all other people,--in
days when virtue had no other meaning than courage, and he was thought
to show the most lofty patriotism who bound the greatest number of
captives to the car of victory. It is time that the more modern
conception of national glory as identical with national superiority,
if not in arms, in some other class of achievements, should give place
to a right appreciation of the end for which a nation should labour.
This end is neither aggrandizement nor superiority, but virtue. To
what should a nation make all its laws and institutions and the whole
action of its government subservient? To the improvement of the
people; to their intellectual and moral elevation; to their individual
and social advancement. As this improvement takes place, they will
rise to a nobler conception of the service they may render to mankind,
and patriotism will be found to harmonize with philanthropy. Then will
the miserable jealousies which have been cherished and the execrable
policy which has been pursued disappear before the progress of
Christian sentiment. Then will governments extend to each other an
open, and not a closed or mailed, hand. Then will war stand forth
before their view in all its hideousness, its features distorted by
rage, and its garments dripping with blood,--a mournful and a fearful
spectacle. Oh! when shall the time come, that the true character of
War--its horrors, its vices, its crimes, unredeemed by a single trait
properly its own,--shall be understood. Almost nineteen centuries ago
was the Prince of Peace born into the midst of the woes of
humanity,--this the greatest of them all,--that he might drive them
from the earth; and still war ravages the globe like a wild beast
furious with hunger. No; I have spoken hastily. Rather should I have
said, like one who feels that decay has taken hold of his strength.
There is promise of a better period, when men shall be the demon's
prey no longer. Oh God, hasten that time for thy goodness' and thy
mercy's sake!

I will not detain this assembly to examine at length the objections
that may be brought against the doctrine advanced and applied in this
discourse. It may be said, that much of what has been spoken is the
language of fanaticism, with which your ears should not have been
wearied. But no sentiment nor word that I have uttered can be justly
stigmatized as fanatical, if the positions which I took at first, and
from which I apprehend that no one dissented, were correct, and if the
results to which we have been led are the legitimate consequence of
taking those positions. It may be said, that this is another weak
attempt on the part of the clergy to regain an influence which they
have irrecoverably lost. The absurdity of the idea is its sufficient
refutation. It may be said, that this is the first step, feebly put
forth indeed, towards a union of Church and State. Church and State!
words of wonderful power over our fears and our imaginations. But who
can for a moment seriously believe that such a purpose is entertained
by one who loves, or by one who understands, American institutions? A
State religion does any one dread? I should think there was just now
more danger of almost any thing else. It is not a national
Christianity, but a Christian nation, which I desire to see; and if
this wish betray an unfriendly feeling towards republican principles,
then I must bear the reproach, but I shall not bear it alone.
Thousands and thousands of hearts wish the same, and pray for it
morning and night, year after year; and if the answer to that prayer
come not before they die, they will have taught it to another
generation, who will not fail to repeat it,--I trust, with a hope
brightened by the nearer prospect of its fulfilment. It may be said,
that our demands are unreasonable, and our aims impracticable. But our
demands only include the righteousness of the land, and our aims are
addressed to the sanctification of the people by means of that
religion which has shown that it is fitted to exercise universal
dominion, by the triumphs it has secured in every condition of society
and every situation of life. It may be said, that things are in a
sufficiently good state; that the country is at peace, though some men
and some writers are doing their utmost to involve it in war; that our
public men succeed in keeping the wheels of government in motion,
though they sometimes discover a deplorable lack both of skill and of
principle; and that the people are, on the whole, virtuous and perhaps
religious, if they do not connect their religion with their politics.
I do not believe that those whom I address will say that this
description satisfies their desires in behalf of the American
Republic. And if it do not, what is our duty but to contribute all the
influence we can bestow, by speech or example, to introduce a change?
It may be said yet again, that a change is going on; the world is
growing better, and if we will only be patient, we shall grow better
too, because we belong to the world and cannot be left behind. Once
more I say in reply, that I am not content with no greater progress
than the old States of Europe, burthened with the institutions of dark
ages and tottering with infirmity, are able to make. It is for us to
encourage them, by the spectacle of what may be accomplished by young
and unshackled energies. It is for us to do the world a greater
service than it has yet received through achievements wrought on this
soil. We have asserted the principles of political _liberty_, and
established them above the reach of overthrow. It remains for us to
vindicate the principles of political _virtue_. We have placed the
sceptre in the hands of freedom; let us enthrone religion in still
loftier state. American patriotism! be it such as the world has never
yet seen. American statesmanship! be it such as mankind shall wonder
at, till their admiration subsides into imitation. American character!
be it such as Christian sires would rejoice to see worn by their
posterity, and unborn generations shall receive as the most precious
inheritance that could be transmitted to them. Be morality and piety
the guardians of our public welfare; and as the years roll on, may
they extend a more visible protection over our interests, till the
guidance which Jehovah granted of old to the people of Israel in the
pillar of flame and cloud, shall be more than realized in the presence
of the Lord our God with us and our children.

       *       *       *       *       *

To you, Sir, who have again been called by the voice of this
Commonwealth to preside over its concerns, I cannot doubt that the
sentiments of this discourse will be as acceptable as they are
familiar. If they seem but the echo of your own long-cherished
purposes and habits, I need not on that account regret the course my
remarks have taken. Permit me to congratulate myself, and my
fellow-citizens, on the occupancy of the chair of State by one who has
proved himself in various situations an upright politician and a
Christian statesman; and let me hope that the year of public service
on which you have now entered may still further illustrate the force
of moral principle, and the beauty of religious character.

To him who is associated with the Chief Magistrate as his nearest
adviser, and to the other members of his Council, I may be allowed to
express my conviction, that in the discharge of their public functions
they will maintain consciences "void of offence towards God and towards
men," and will prove themselves worthy of the confidence which has been
reposed in them by their fellow-citizens and fellow-christians.

To the members of both branches of the Legislature I beg leave to
extend my congratulations, on the opportunity afforded them of
exhibiting the connexion of the highest truths with the most important
offices of life. With them it remains to show how religion and
politics can be united, without marring the sanctity of the one, or
impairing the freedom of the other. And in closing the remarks, to
which, if I could, I would frame an apology for compelling them so
long to listen--but my only apology must be my interest in the
subject--I know not how I can better express my gratitude for their
attention, or my desire for their greatest good, than by indulging the
mingled hope and belief, that they will, in the discharge of their
official duties, show themselves to be "able men, such as fear God,
men of truth, hating covetousness," and, whatever they do, doing "all
to the glory of God."





*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "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." ***

Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.