Untitled article by G. W. McCREADY

Pacific Press Publishing Company · New York · March 17, 1892

FromThe American Sentinel, Vol. 7, No. 11

The Charter of Religious Liberty,

By G. W. McCREADY

AS ASSURED BY HER MAJESTY’S ROYAL

PROCLAMATION OF 1858.

PROCLAMATION.—Firmly relying ourselves on the truth of Christianity, and acknowledging with gratitude the solace of religion, we disclaim alike the right and the desire to impose our convictions on any of our subjects. We declare it to be our Royal will and pleasure that none be in anywise favored, none molested or disquieted, by reason of their religious faith or observance, but that all shall alike enjoy the equal and impartial protection of the law; and we do strictly charge and enjoin all those who may be in authority under us, that they abstain from all interference with the religious belief or worship of any of our subjects, on pain of our highest displeasure. How often in the history of nations have the peace and good order of society been disturbed by some real or fancied injustice or oppression, until the agitation that followed has led to armed resistance, open revolt, and bloodshed; while the governing power has been called upon first to quell the rebellion, and then to investigate the cause that led to it. Thus it was in the older provinces of Canada a little over half a century ago, under the inequitable rule of Church and State, until Lord Durham’s report brought to light such an array of facts as led to the removal of the grievance, and the supposed guarantee of equal rights to her Majesty’s subjects in the provinces. And thus it was again in India about twenty years later, when the Sepoy soldiers remonstrated in vain against the military requirement respecting the cartridges greased with pork. As believers in the Koran, how could they submit, at every loading of their rifles, to bring in contact with their lips, tongues and teeth, that which their Prophet had so solemnly forbidden? Hence their revolt was only the result of that inward revolt of their consciences against an act which their religion taught them was an abomination and a sin against God. And when the investigation which followed the suppression of the rebellion, showed in its true light how their religious convictions had been trampled upon,—how seasonable and appropriate was Her Majesty’s Royal Proclamation of Religious Liberty, which has since won from their hearts a right loyal allegiance to the “Empress of India.”

And we, her Canadian subjects, have an equal claim to all that is assured in that proclamation. In declaring her “Royal will and pleasure that none be in anywise favored, none molested or disquieted . . . but that all shall alike enjoy the . . . protection of the law,” it is obvious that the gracious assurance is to all within the limits of her jurisdiction, and to the exclusion of none within those limits. Here is the necessary limitation and extent of the terms used in the proclamation.

The opening of the proclamation assures us that her Majesty professes to be a Christian sovereign, and yet she freely disclaims the desire to impose her convictions on any of her subjects. This was surely good news to her Mohammedan subjects whose religious convictions had been disregarded. But the jubilee trump of emancipation has the clear ring in the words: “We disclaim the right thus to treat . . . any of our subjects.” And if Queen Victoria has no such right over any of her subjects, and is thus free to declare it, by what inherent or derived right are those actuated who seek to oppress the loyal subjects of their sovereign in their conscientious convictions, even those who profess the same religious faith as her Majesty?

Who then are they, whether ecclesiastics or laity, who are rushing to the front on the platform and through the press, and seeking to enlist the higher powers of Parliament, that they may be specially “favored . . . by reason of their religious faith and observance,” which her Majesty has expressly declared to be contrary to her “royal will and pleasure?” And against the same declaration a systematic combination has been going on, especially for the last two years, to secure such power to the aspiring majority through parliamentary enactments, that others, who are only a small minority, “by reason of their religious faith and

observance,” might not only be “disquieted or molested,” but even fined and imprisoned, for the same reason. What RIGHTS—which her Majesty emphatically disclaims—have those individuals or combinations to the exercise of power over the consciences or religious convictions of any, to whom the above proclamation pledges “the equal and impartial protection of the law?”

And how solemn is the charge in the closing sentence, to “all those who may be in authority under” her, not to interfere with “the religious belief or worship of any of her subjects!” The dignitaries here addressed must include both Houses of the Imperial Parliament, as well as all Colonial Parliaments and Legislatures throughout her wide dominions,—all of whom have taken the solemn oath of allegiance to Her Majesty,—and the several executive officers of every rank, who are without exception charged and enjoined, “on pain of her highest displeasure,” not to violate this solemn interdict! The assertion that any have violated it would be a fearful charge for any subject to make.

For thirty-four years, since that proclamation was issued, it is not claimed that the Imperial Parliament has been disloyal to the throne; nor is our Canadian Parliament to this day charged with any such oppressive religious enactment [for which the B. N. A. Act gives no authority], although hosts of misguided zealots have combined to secure such legislation.

May Her Majesty’s Royal Proclamation ever remain—second only to the Bible—the charter and bulwark of our religious liberties in Canada! G. W. McCREADY, President Religious Liberty Association of Canada.