CmjRCH AND STATE
332
CHURCH AND STATE
w«n imited, more or Un closely, antO after the Rer- olntion. At the decUntlon of independence, the United States established the abeolttte separation of Ghnrch and Stats, and the legal equality of all forms of be- lief, as fundamental institations. The United States have always remained tme to this principle, and in the several states of 4he Union it is now practically carried out. The prosperous growth of the free Amer- ican churches, and their influence upon society, has had great eflbct upon opinion in the Old World. The experience of America has largely added to the num- ber of the friends of free churches in Europe. The number of dissenting churches which claim absolute independence of the state is everywhere on the in- crease, and with them sympathise a large political party of Radicals, who make entire separation between Church and State a part of their political platform. In lS4Sy the principle of separation of Church ajid State was formally acknowledged in the new coni&titn- tions of France, Austria, Prussia, and other states. This triumph of the American principle was of only short duration ; but none of the European countries have since ceased to have a large political party which aims at conforming legislation on Church afikirs to that of the United States, and at carrying through the princi- ple of entire separation between Church and State. It is a very remarkable tact that even men like Dr. Pusey have of late shown themselves fkvorable to the separa- tion of Church and State, in order to put an end to the servile condition of the Church. One of the most prom- inent Protestant statesmen and writers of France, Count de Gasparin, speaks on the subject as follows: *' Let no one be surprised at the extreme importance I attach to the separation of Church and State. For two centu- ries past the Church and society have been at war. In abolishing the unjust and worn-out pretences of both Church and State, their separation would give both to the Church and to society the peace they require. It would seem nowaday as though the citizen and the Christian were two different persons, having different rights and diffsrent duties. The Christian is taught to curse liberty as the poisonous fruit of philosophy and revolution ; the citizen is taught to look upon the Church as the natural enemy of modem institutions. Thus arises a sullen enmity, a deep-rooted anxiousness in the minds of the people, and, so to speak, two nations within the same socfety. Tet nothing would be more erroneous than this distinction. Christianity is so fiff from being the enemy of free institutions, that these institutions have never existed but in Christisn coun- tries ; the nations which obey the law of Brahma, of Buddha, and of Mohammed, know of no other form of government than despotism. Liberty is the fhiit of the Gospel ; it proceeds from the only religion which intrusts the individual with the care and the salvation of his own soul ; materialism kills it, faith makes it live; and, in return, by an intimate and mysterious connection, despotism kills fkith, liberty nourishes it. What is this opposition which divides the Church and society? Nothing but a misunderstanding, whose mist shall disappear before the sun of liberl^. The ideal of the Christian b also the ideal of the citizen. The state would gain no less than the Church by their mutual independence. We never attempt with impu^ nity to rule that which God has created to be fboe. For two centuries the state has dragged on the Church, or has been dragged by it ; the result was mutual suf- fering and mutual servitude. Separation restores each to its proper place. The state has no longer but citi- zens to deal with ; it has no longer to fear the mur- murs of conscience, or those, invisible enemies which sap and weaken its foundations. Free in its action, authority gains both in strength and in respect; the vestry-quarrels, which are the plague of all state re- ligions, are at an end. Union made the Church the enemy of the state, separation makes them friends. 'Conscience revolts against the hand of the state, it
loTW a power which gnaraateas it freedom.^ See
TOLXBATIOir.