|
bloody_peasant
Skeptic Friend
USA
139 Posts |
 Posted - 05/23/2005 : 10:37:15
|
Benjamin F. Underwood: The Practical Separation of Church and State (1876)
This is a long read, but well worth it I think. So many of the things he spoke on resounds today. Too many parallels so its kinda chilling to me.
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/tnppage/uwood.htm
Some key points:
#1. A union of evangelical Christians formed to attack Liberalism is threatening religious liberty.
#2. There are 3 classes of individuals in this coalition
1) The highly religious and uneducated "whose education the principles of morality have been subordinated to the dogmas of theology" and "support measures that they think will promote the interests of their faith, without regard to the personal or legal rights of those who cannot adopt their views ". These form the majority.
2) A more intellectual group that favors the union of church and state for the sake of both. These would also be the "leaders" of those in group one and the most dangerous. Individuals such as Dobson, Falwell, Robertson, Kennedy, etc. come to mind today. "If Christ died for this, can they be true followers of him (they argue) if they allow any mere theories of religious liberty "
3) The politicians who play on groups 1 & 2 to garner votes, hmmm who could this be today? "These are men to be ranked among the enemies of all reforms in their inception, and their influence with the masses makes them formidable foes of progress. Morally, they are most despicable men... "
#3 There were many examples then of "small" transgressions between the wall of church and state that mirror or actually are the same ones we have today. These are acclaimed customary practices and do no harm. "There are persons, now indifferent to its religious character, who justify it on the plea of custom alone."
#4 This seems to only embolden the anti-separatist and them they want Constitutional changes to support their religion, "Not content, however, with these unjust discriminations in favor of believers in the Christian religion, some of them now demand that such changes be made in the Constitution and in the government as shall be necessary to make the main dogmas of this religion part of the organic law."
#5 WRT to justices and politicians who think all legislative authority comes from God (e.g. Scalia) "The incorporation of their dogmas in the Constitution means the legislative and executive enforcement of them by governmental authority. To be consistent, the government will have to give directions in regard to the worship of God, and see that the citizens make their conduct conform to the revealed will of God, which is to be the authority from which no appeal can be made ."
#6 From the general conference of the Methodist church "to the members of the Church ... use every just and proper means to Place in all the civil offices of our government only such men as are known to Possess and maintain a true Christian character and principles." How so similar to the words from the Religious Right today.
#7 Strange how little some things have changed, "When they declare that God is displeased with the omission of his name from the national Constitution, and that it is his requirement that this government recognize Jesus Christ as "Ruler among nations," we accept these statements as evidence that those who utter them, however sincerely, see the spread of those liberal sentiments that are gradually undermining their spiritual authority, and that they feel the necessity of securing the aid of the civil power to guard against the innovations of scepticism and science ."
#8 A lot more on the claim that morality comes from Christianity, thus the state must endorse it.
Overall this is so parallel of today even over 125 years ago.
|
|
Topic Locked
