SIXTY-THREE years before Christ, Julius Caesar became head of the State religion of Rome, the director of the worship of the Roman deities, empowered by authority of the State to punish, banish, or put to death those offending against the laws of the realm in matters of religious practise. In short, the State and its officials were the ultimate authority in affairs of religion; State and Church were united; patriotism and religion were one; consequently, to refuse homage to the gods was unpatriotic as well as irreligious. Thus could the Roman Senate declare sacred the person of Caesar, and make it an act of sacrilege to show him disrespect in any way, no matter of what unworthy deed he might be guilty; for by the votes of the people he was "Caesar the Demi-god," "The Invincible Deity."
In such a system of government, religious liberty was a thing unknown. The subject of such a government was the property of that government—its slave—in each and all its functions. Did he have mental and physical abilities? they existed for the ends and purposes of the State, and for it alone. Did he have religious aspirations, reachings out after God? the ownership and directorship of these, too, were the legal property of the State that owned him. Under such a government as this the worship of Jehovah became permissible only because the laws of Rome made the gods of a subject nation a part of the deities of the realm, and Palestine was such a nation.
This was the condition of the world when the Son of Joseph, the Carpenter of Nazareth, proclaimed His mission in Galilee of Judea. Tho others before Him had asserted their own individual liberty in matters of conscience, Jesus Christ was the first to proclaim openly the emancipation of all mankind in this regard:—
"If any man hear My words, and believe not, I judge him not; for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world." John 12:47.
Christ Himself heralded the liberation of the soul from the prison-house of a State religion; and He Himself went to the cross a victim of the religious intolerance of the Jews, a criminal under the laws of the Hebrew nation, tho spotless under the laws of God. That was but the beginning of the persecution of Jesus Christ. He has been slain and burned and racked and scourged and imprisoned and banished in the person of His followers from then till now. And that He knew all this would come to those who would follow in His footsteps is shown in His words again and again:—
"And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul." Matt. 10:28.
"But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another." Matt. 10:23.
"Behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes; and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogs, and persecute them from city to city." Matt. 23:34.
"The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted Me, they will also persecute you." John 15:20.
"They shall put you out of the synagogs; yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service." John 16:2.
"Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for My sake. Rejoice and be exceeding glad; for great is your reward in heaven." Matt. 5:11, 12.
There was no waiting time between the utterance of these prophetic words of Christ and their fulfilment. They began to be fulfilled at once, and are being fulfilled still even in the United States of America. Christ had not left the tomb before the wrath of the Jews was being poured out upon His apostles. As a result of this they were gathered in a room with the doors closed "for fear of the Jews" on the evening of the day of Christ's resurrection. The stoning of Stephen fulfilled the words of Christ's prophecy, as did also the intolerant career of Saul, till the glory of Christ's presence smote him on his last tour of persecution, and Saul, the persecutor, became Paul, the apostle of peace.
Following this the history of the early church is a history of persecution sustained at the hands of Jew and heathen alike. So firm a hold had intolerance in religion secured upon the world that we have no record of real religious liberty by government or people (except in the dominion of Theodoric the Goth ) toward those holding differences of religious belief until after the Reformation, only as the true followers of Christ exercised it toward those who differed from them. It is true that the fires of persecution were allowed to cool at times, but only to be renewed later with the same cruel malignity.
When Christianity had succeeded in winning converts from heathenism and Judaism alike to such an extent as to attract the attention of the Roman Government and be recognized as a new religion, apart from the religion of the Jews, the heavy hand of Roman law fell upon it in an attempt to crush it out. The bloody work of Nero (A.D. 64) is familiar to all, carried on in part to please the populace, and in part to turn away their anger from himself; but all made possible because it was in harmony with the cruel intent of the laws of the time. According to Milman there was a modified form of religious toleration in the city of Rome from the time of Nero's notorious slaughter of the Christians until the reign of Decius 249-251. But during this time persecution was going on continually in some part of the Roman Empire. During the reign of Trajan, A.D. 98-117, there seems to have been a lightening of the skies for the Christians so far as the emperor himself was concerned. In his instructions to Pliny the Younger, governor of Bithynia, Trajan said: "These people are not to be sought for; but if they be accused and convicted, they are to be punished." This is the law which he was to enforce: "No man shall have for himself particular gods of his own; no man shall worship by himself any new or foreign gods, unless they are recognized by the public laws."—Cicero.
Trajan was not desirous of persecuting the Christians; but there stood the established Roman law, and when any were accused of its violation and convicted, he must instruct that the punishment provided for such violation be carried out. This the emperor did, coupling with his instruction the advice not to seek for or encourage accusation against them. This instruction may be regarded as discouraging rather than encouraging religious persecution—as a faint glimmering of religious liberty; and it was nothing but the union of the Church and the State that restricted such men as Trajan and Alexander Severus from granting religious liberty, and gave free rein to such men as Nero and Caligula.
True Christianity, and the true humble followers of Christ, were unalterably opposed to the whole foundation principle of Church-and-State religion, and the growth of true Christianity was coextensive with the growth of the true principles of religious liberty. But there came a time when those who called themselves Christian were not such in truth. As the ranks of the Christians grew, it became less odious to bear the name, and multitudes joined the church whose hearts were wholly with the world.
Finally, after a terrible persecution under Valerian, Christianity was recognized as a legal religion. The subjects of Rome could be Christians if they would, without governmental interference. There was religious toleration for a time, if not religious liberty. This much of history is repeated in the persecution carried on during the reign of Diocletian, and continued until Galerius, who had instigated the persecution, smitten by a loathsome disease, granted toleration to the Christians and requested them to pray for his recovery.
Following this came the celebrated edict of Milan, drawn up by Constantine and Licinius in March, A.D. 313. By this edict freedom of worship was granted to all throughout the whole Roman realm. It ordained "that no freedom at all shall be refused to Christians to follow or to keep their observances or worship. But that to each one power be granted to devote his mind to that worship which he may think adapted to himself. . . . The privilege is also granted to others to pursue that worship and religion they wish." But this same Constantine was an idolater, a sun-worshiper, noted for the magnificence of his gifts to the gods, attempting to propitiate the God of the Christians and secure His favor by granting to Christians freedom of worship. Here is his own reason for issuing the edict of Milan: "That whatsoever divinity and celestial power may exist, may be propitious to us and to all that live under our government. . . . That the Deity may in all things exhibit to us His accustomed favor and kindness." He wanted the favor of all the gods, including the God of the Christians.
Under this emperor and through the influence of ambitious bishops the Church and State were reunited, with Catholic Christianity as the State religion, and protected from "pernicious adulteration," by imperial command. The religious liberty that had been enjoyed was now, and through centuries to follow, replaced by an intolerance more hateful than that which existed under pagan rule; for it was done in the very name of Him who was the Author of religious liberty. A counterfeit theocracy was established, with man sitting in the place of God, and true Christianity entered upon her struggle of twelve centuries. Under this false theocracy, Papal Rome, there never was and there never can be religious liberty. Space forbids to tell of what the adherents of true Christianity suffered during those dark and dreary years while millions of Christ's followers were giving their lives as the price of worshiping God according to "the dictates of their own consciences."
The idea of what constituted acceptable worship of God had become so debased that Augustine, one of the "church fathers," could say:—
"It is, indeed, better that men should be brought to serve God by instruction than by fear of punishment or by pain. But because the former means are better, the latter must not therefore be neglected. Many must be brought back to their Lord, like wicked servants, by the rod of temporal suffering."
And of this "church father" the historian Neander says:—
"It was by Augustine, then, that a theory was proposed and founded, which . . . contained the germ of that whole system of spiritual despotism, of intolerance and persecution, which ended in the tribunals of the Inquisition."
And the Inquisition was the direct and necessary working out of the principle of religious intolerance under a Church-and-State government; and in that iniquitous institution we have a history of the most disreputable transactions this earth has ever seen. The Inquisition is the very antithesis of religious liberty—it is religious intolerance worked out.
Against the mystery of iniquity Martin Luther set his hand in the sixteenth century, and the key of his success was the spirit in which he did it. "It is by the Word that we must fight. I am unwilling to employ force against the superstitions or unbelieving. None ought to be constrained. Liberty is of the essence of faith. . . . I have never drawn the sword, nor called for vengeance. I have committed all to God, and awaited His strong hand. It is neither with the sword nor the musket that Christians fight." These principles were the headlight of Luther's work; but when Lutheranism, still professing the principles laid down by Luther, became the State church of Prussia and the Scandinavian countries, it denied its right to the title, and might well be likened to a great express train bearing along in the darkness with its headlight pointing backward rather than forward. What the Lutherans have done in these countries, Zwingli was instrumental in accomplishing in Switzerland. Calvinism in Geneva8was of the same type, and citizens were compelled to swear to the confession of faith. Scotland suffered under the same system, and religious liberty in England, France, and Ireland was overridden by the decrees of Henry the Eighth, first head of the Church of England.
Out of all this wilderness of intolerance came the early settlers of the Western Hemisphere, fleeing from the persecutions of the Old World, and bearing with them its pestilential seeds, to propagate in the home they sought that same wickedness from which they fled. And they pruned and cultivated it well, and saturated the soil in which they planted it with the blood of those who differed from them in matters of faith and conscience. Instance, John Cotton teaching in Massachusetts Colony the blessedness of persecution; the banishment of Roger Williams and William Cartright for teaching religious liberty, and the banishment of scores of others for practising it; the mutilation of Quakers by cutting off their ears, boring their tongues with a red-hot iron, whipping at the cart's tail, and, finally, the death sentence passed upon them and executed; the whippings and other persecutions of the Baptists; the "blue laws" of Connecticut, and similar legislation and persecution in Pennsylvania, Maryland, Georgia, and Virginia.
In the midst of this religious oppression stood the little State of Rhode Island, with a liberty-loving, Christian governor, an exile for Christ's sake from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Rhode Island stood among the States as a star of hope, lighting the path to religious liberty in the nation. The policy of her governor in this respect is declared in these words: "Any breach of the civil law shall be punished, but the freedom of different consciences shall be respected." "But whatsoever fortune may befall, let us not be compelled to exercise any civil power over men's consciences."
Thus came the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States. The glorious flower of religious liberty had bloomed among the thorn trees planted by the first settlers of the country. Religious liberty, instead of a State religion, was established in the New World. The great truth of the equality of man and his unalienable rights was set before the world, and protection guaranteed to all in worshiping according to the dictates of conscience, or in not worshiping at all. Congress was forbidden to establish a religion, or make laws in regard thereto. In short, all were equal before the law in all particulars; and thus did America become a city of refuge, an asylum, for the oppressed of every land.
But even this government did not go far enough. The States were not forbidden to legislate in religious matters, and, as a result, every State in the Union, save two only, has a Sunday law, and conscientious Christians, against whom no fault in temporal affairs is found—no fault save in the law of their God—are to-day condemned to imprisonment, to fines, and to working in chain-gangs. And the situation, instead of growing better, is fast growing worse. In 1892 the Supreme Court of the United States declared this to be a Christian nation, which virtually established the Christian religion, and paved the way for the passage of a religious law in the following year—the law closing the gates of the World's Fair on Sunday, thus committing itself to the principle of religious legislation.
Now the whole country is stirred by those working in behalf of the enforcement of existing Sunday laws and the enactment of more stringent ones, and the most powerful religious orders in the country (numerically) are throwing the weight of their influence in favor of such legislation. In view of all the sickening persecutions of the past, in this country and the world at large, have not the people of this age seen enough of religious legislation? and has not the purchase of religious liberty been dear enough? Has it not paid its pound of flesh? or must Shylock have the heart as well?
C. M. SNOW.