Religious Education by the State.
By A. Delos Westcott
In a plea for religious instruction by the State, Rev. Geo. B. Cheever asks the following question:— “Shall God himself be intrusted with the dominion over the consciences of rational beings instructed by his own laws and providences, or shall the States, by majority of voters, uninstructed from infancy in the holy requisitions of God’s law, be the supreme governors of the human soul?” Here are really two questions; and of course Mr. Cheever intends that the first one shall be answered in the affirmative, and the second one in the negative. In this view, the questions contain the very essence of the doctrine always advocated by the AMERICAN SENTINEL, and are exactly opposed to the principles of so-called National Reform. For whenever religion is put into the hands of the State, an attempt is made to transfer “the dominion over the consciences of rational beings” from God to the State. There is no dodging this conclusion, because Mr. Cheever admits all through his article that this is emphatically a case of conscience. Our proposition is still further confirmed by Mr. Cheever’s second question. This question shows that in his mind the reason why the States should not “be the supreme governors of the human soul,” lies in the fact that the “majority of voters” are “uninstructed from infancy in the holy requisitions of God’s law.” Mr. Cheever must intend to convey the idea either that the majority of voters will always remain uninstructed “in the holy requisitions of God’s law,” and therefore the States can never become “the supreme governors of the human soul,” or else that the time may come when the majority of voters will be instructed in the requisitions of God’s law, and that when they are so instructed it will then be perfectly proper for the States to “be the supreme governors of the human soul.” Evidently the latter view is the one which he indorses; for the sole object of his lengthy argument is to show the necessity and utility of religious instruction provided by the State. Only let the States instruct “the majority of voters” “in the holy requisitions of God’s law,” and they will be eminently fitted to “be the supreme governors of the human soul,” says the Rev. Geo. B. Cheever, D.D. It is of course well understood that the SENTINEL has never indorsed this sentiment implied in Mr. Cheever’s second question. The friends of religious liberty are perfectly satisfied to intrust the Almighty “with the dominion over the consciences of rational beings;” and they forever deny the right of the States, no matter how well instructed their voters may be, to usurp that dominion, or constitute themselves “the supreme governors of the human soul.” And this is why they are opposed to having the State dictate to the people what they shall study, or what they shall practice, in matters of religion.