October. 1784. Renewal of petition. Eternal vigilance the price of liberty. PRINCIPLES OF RELIGIOUS LIBERTY. MEMORIAL OF THE PRESBYTERY OF HANOVER TC To the Honorable Speaker and House of Delegates. GENTLEMEN: The united clergy of the Presbyterian church of Virginia, assembled in presbytery, beg leave to again address your honorable house upon a few important subjects, in which we find ourselves interested as citizens of this State. The freedom we possess is so rich a blessing, and the purchase of it has been so high, that we would ever wish to cherish a spirit of vigilant attention to it, in every circumstance of possible danger. We are anxious to retain a full share of all the privileges which our happy revolution affords, and cannot but feel alarmed at the continued existence of any infringement upon them, or even any indirect attempt tending to this. Impressed with this idea, as men whose rights are sacred and dear to them ought to be, we are obliged to express our sensibility upon the present occasion, and we naturally direct our appeal to you, gentlemen, as the public guardians of our country's happiness and liberty, who are influenced, we hope, by that wisdom and justice which your high station requires. Conscious of the rectitude of our intentions and the strength of our claims, we wish to speak our sentiments freely upon these occasions, but at the same time with all that respectful regard which becomes us when addressing the representatives of a great and virtuous people. It is with pain that we find ourselves obliged to renew our complaints upon the subject stated in our memorial last Perversion of spring. We deeply regret that such obvious grievances should exist unredressed in a republic whose end ought to be the happiness of all the citizens. Consciousness of rights. government. We presumed that immediate redress would have succeeded a clear and just representation of them; as we expect that it is always the desire of our representatives to remove real grounds of uneasiness, and allay jealous commotions amongst the people. But as the objects of the memorial, though very important in their nature and more so in their probable consequences, have not yet been obtained, we request that the house of delegates would be pleased to recollect what we had the honor to state to them in that paper at their last sessions; to resume the subject in their present deliberation ; and to give it that weight which its importance deserves. The uneasiness which we feel from the continuance of the grievances just referred to, is increased under the prospect of an addition to them by certain exceptionable measures said to be proposed to the legislature. We have understood that a comprehensive incorporating act has been and is at present in agitation, whereby ministers of the gospel as such, of certain descriptions, shall have legal advantages which are not proposed to be extended to the people at large of any denominationA proposition has been made by some gentlemen of the house of delegates, we are told, to extend the grace to us, amongst others, in our professional capacity. If this be so, we are bound to acknowledge with gratitude our obligations to such gentlemen for their inclination to favor us with the sanction of public authority in the discharge of our duty. But as the scheme of incorporating clergymen, independent of the religious communities to which they belong, is inconsistent with our ideas of propriety, we request the liberty of declining any such solitary honor should it be again proposed. To form clergymen into a distinct order in the community, and especially where it would be possible for them to have the principle direction of a considerable public Justice in sures peace. Unwise propositions. Ministers must be responsible to churches. All statechurchism injurious. estate by such incorporation, has a tendency to render them independent, at length, of the churches whose ministers they are; and this has been too often found by experience to produce ignorance, immorality, and neglect of the duties of their station. Besides, if clergymen were to be erected by the State into a distinct political body, detached from the rest of the citizens, with the express design of "enabling them to direct spiritual matters," which we all possess without such formality, it would naturally tend to introduce that antiquated and absurd system, in which government is owned, in effect, to be the fountain head of spiritual influences to the church. It would establish an immediate, a peculiar, and for that very reason, in our opinion, illicit connection between government and such as were thus distinguished. The legislature, in that case, would be the head of a religious party, and its dependent members would be entitled to all decent reciprocity, to a becoming paternal and fostering care. This, we suppose, would be giving a preference, and creating a distinction between citizens equally good, on account of something entirely foreign from civil merit, which would be a source of endless jealousies, and ' inadmissible in a republic or any other well directed government. The principle, too, which this system aims to establish, is both false and dangerous to religion, and we take this opportunity to remonstrate and protest against it. The real ministers of true religion derive their authority to act in the duties of their profession from a higher source than any legislature on earth, however respectable. Their office relates to the care of the soul, and preparing it for a future state of existence, and their administrations are, or ought to be, of a spiritual nature suited to this momentous concern. And it is plain from the very nature of the case, that they should neither expect nor receive from government any permission or Legislature should insist in religion. direction in this respect. We hope therefore that the House of Delegates shares so large a portion of upon freedom that philosophic and liberal discernment which prevails in America at present, as to see this matter in its proper light,- and that they will understand too well the nature of their duty, as the equal and common guardians of the chartered rights of all the citizens, to permit a connection of the kind we have just now mentioned, to subsist between them and the spiritual instructors of any religious denomination in the State. The interference of government in religion cannot be indifferent to us, and as it will probably come under consideration at the present session of the assembly, we request the attention of the honorable house to our sentiments upon this head. Should confine itself to tion. We conceive that human legislation ought to have human affairs as they relate to this world alone civil jurisdicfor its concern. Legislators in free states possess delegated authority for the good of the community at large in its political or civil capacity. The existence, preservation, and happiness of society should be their only object; and to this their public cares should be confined. Whatever is not materially connected with this lies not within their province as statesmen. The thoughts, the intentions, the faith, and the consciences of men, with their modes of worship, lie beyond their reach, and are ever to be referred to a higher and more penetrating tribunal. These internal and spiritual matters cannot be measured by human rules, nor be amenable to human laws. It is the duty of every man, for himself, to take care of his immortal interests in a future state, where we are to account for our conduct as individuals; and it is by no means the business of a legislature to attend to this, for THERE governments and states as collective bodies shall no more be known. Temporal affairs its sole sphere. Religious concerns be yond its prov ince. Religious Systems Religion, therefore, as a spiritual system, and its should be out ministers in a professional capacity, ought not to be under the direction of the state. side state control. Neither is it necessary to their existence that they should be publicly supported by a legal provision for the purpose, as tried experience hath often shown; although it is absolutely necessary to the existence and welfare of every political combination of men in society to have the support of religion and its solemn institutions as affecting the conduct of rational beings more than human laws can possibly do. On this account it is wise policy in legislatures to seek its alliance and solicit its aid in a civil view, because of its happy influence upon the morality of its citizens, and its tendency to preserve the veneration of an oath, or an appeal to heaven, which is the cement of the social union. It is upon this principle alone, in our opinion, that a legislative body has a right to interfere in religion at all, and of consequence we suppose that this interference ought only extent of state to extend to the preserving of the public worship of the Deity, and the supporting of institutions for inculcating the great fundamental principles of religion, without which society could not easily exist. Should it be thought necessary at present for the assembly to exert this right of supporting religion in general by an assessment on all the people, we would wish it to be done on the most liberal plan. A general assessment of the kind we have heard proposed, is an object of such consequence that it excites much anxious speculation amongst your constituents. Protection of religion the authority. Constitu tional provisions should be enforced. We therefore earnestly pray that nothing may be done in the case inconsistent with the proper objects of human legislation or the Declaration of Rights as published at the revolution. We hope that the assessment will not be proposed under the idea of supporting religion as a spiritual system, relating to the |