University of Virginia Library

MEMORIAL AND REMONSTRANCE AGAINST RELIGIOUS
ASSESSMENTS.[43]

To the Honorable the General Assembly
of
the Commonwealth of Virginia.

A Memorial and Remonstrance.

We, the subscribers, citizens of the said Commonwealth, having
taken into serious consideration, a Bill printed by order of the
last Session of General Assembly, entitled "A Bill establishing a
provision for Teachers of the Christian Religion," and conceiving

that the same, if finally armed with the sanctions of a law, will
be a dangerous abuse of power, are bound as faithful members of
a free State, to remonstrate against it, and to declare the reasons
by which we are determined. We remonstrate against the said
Bill,

1.

• Because we hold it fora fundamental and undeniable truth,
  "that Religion or the duty which we owe to our Creator and the
  Manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and
  conviction, not by force or violence."[44] The Religion then of
  every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of
  every man; and it is the right of every man to exercise it as these
  may dictate. This right is in its nature an unalienable right. It
  is unalienable; because the opinions of men, depending only on
  the evidence contemplated by their own minds, cannot follow the
  dictates of other men: It is unalienable also; because what is
  here a right towards men, is a duty towards the Creator. It is the
  duty of every man to render to the Creator such homage, and such
  only, as he believes to be acceptable to him. This duty is precedent
  both in order of time and degree of obligation, to the claims
  

  ---

  185

  
  
  
  of Civil Society. Before any man can be considered as a member of
  Civil Society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor
  of the Universe: And if a member of Civil Society, who enters
  into any subordinate Association, must always do it with a reservation
  of his duty to the general authority; much more must
  every man who becomes a member of any particular Civil Society,
  do it with a saving of his allegiance to the Universal Sovereign.
  We maintain therefore that in matters of Religion, no man's
  right is abridged by the institution of Civil Society, and that
  Religion is wholly exempt from its cognizance. True it is, that
  no other rule exists, by which any question which may divide a
  Society, can be ultimately determined, but the will of the majority;
  but it is also true, that the majority may trespass on the rights of
  the minority.

2.

• Because if religion be exempt from the authority of the
  Society at large, still less can it be subject to that of the Legislative
  Body. The latter are but the creatures and vicegerents of
  the former. Their jurisdiction is both derivative and limited: it is
  limited with regard to the co-ordinate departments, more necessarily
  is it limited with regard to the constituents. The preservation
  of a free government requires not merely, that the metes
  and bounds which separate each department of power may be
  invariably maintained; but more especially, that neither of them
  be suffered to overleap the great Barrier which defends the rights
  of the people. The Rulers who are guilty of such an encroachment,
  exceed the commission from which they derive their
  authority, and are Tyrants. The People who submit to it are
  governed by laws made neither by themselves, nor by an authority
  derived from them, and are slaves.

3.

• Because, it is proper to take alarm at the first experiment
  on our liberties. We hold this prudent jealousy to be the first
  duty of citizens, and one of [the] noblest characteristics of the
  late Revolution. The freemen of America did not wait till
  usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled
  the question in precedents. They saw all the consequences in
  the principle, and they avoided the consequences by denying the
  

  ---

  186

  
  
  
  principle. We revere this lesson too much, soon to forget it.
  Who does not see that the same authority which can establish
  Christianity, in exclusion of all other Religions, may establish
  with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion
  of all other Sects? That the same authority which can force a
  citizen to contribute three pence only of his property for the
  support of any one establishment, may force him to conform to
  any other establishment in all cases whatsoever?

4.

• Because, the bill violates that equality which ought to be
  the basis of every law, and which is more indispensible, in proportion
  as the validity or expediency of any law is more liable to
  be impeached. If "all men are by nature equally free and independent,"[45]
  all men are to be considered as entering into Society
  on equal conditions; as relinquishing no more, and therefore
  retaining no less, one than another, of their natural rights. Above
  all are they to be considered as retaining an "equal title to the free
  exercise of Religion according to the dictates of conscience"[46] Whilst we assert for ourselves a freedom to embrace, to profess
  and to observe the Religion which we believe to be of divine
  origin, we cannot deny an equal freedom to those whose minds
  have not yet yielded to the evidence which has convinced us. If
  this freedom be abused, it is an offence against God, not against
  man: To God, therefore, not to men, must an account of it be rendered.
  As the Bill violates equality by subjecting some to peculiar
  burdens; so it violates the same principle, by granting to others
  peculiar exemptions. Are the Quakers and Menonists the only
  sects who think a compulsive support of their religions unnecessary
  and unwarantable? Can their piety alone be intrusted with
  the care of public worship? Ought their Religions to be endowed
  above all others, with extraordinary privileges, by which
  proselytes may be enticed from all others? We think too favorably
  of the justice and good sense of these denominations, to
  believe that they either covet pre-eminencies over their fellow
  citizens, or that they will be seduced by them, from the common
  opposition to the measure.

---

187





5.

• Because the bill implies either that the Civil Magistrate is a
  competent Judge of Religious truth; or that he may employ Religion
  as an engine of Civil policy. The first is an arrogant
  pretension falsified by the contradictory opinions of Rulers in all
  ages, and throughout the world: The second an unhallowed
  perversion of the means of salvation.

6.

• Because the establishment proposed by the Bill is not requisite
  for the support of the Christian Religion. To say that it
  is, is a contradiction to the Christian Religion itself; for every page
  of it disavows a dependence on the powers of this world: it is a
  contradiction to fact; for it is known that this Religion both existed
  and flourished, not only without the support of human laws,
  but in spite of every opposition from them; and not only during
  the period of miraculous aid, but long after it had been left to its
  own evidence, and the ordinary care of Providence: Nay, it is
  a contradiction in terms; for a Religion not invented by human
  policy, must have pre-existed and been supported, before it was
  established by human policy. It is moreover to weaken in those
  who profess this Religion a pious confidence in its innate excellence,
  and the patronage of its Author; and to foster in those who
  still reject it, a suspicion that its friends are too conscious of its
  fallacies, to trust it to its own merits.

7.

• Because experience witnesseth that ecclesiastical establishments,
  instead of maintaining the purity and efficacy of Religion,
  have had a contrary operation. During almost fifteen centuries,
  has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What
  have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence
  in the Clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both,
  superstition, bigotry and persecution. Enquire of the Teachers
  of Christianity for the ages in which it appeared in its greatest
  lustre; those of every sect, point to the ages prior to its incorporation
  with Civil policy. Propose a restoration of this primitive
  state in which its Teachers depended on the voluntary rewards of
  their flocks; many of them predict its downfall. On which side
  ought their testimony to have greatest weight, when for or when
  against their interest?

---

188





8.

• Because the establishment in question is not necessary for
  the support of Civil Government. If it be urged as necessary for
  the support of Civil Government only as it is a means of supporting
  Religion, and it be not necessary for the latter purpose, it
  cannot be necessary for the former. If Religion be not within
  [the] cognizance of Civil Government, how can its legal establishment
  be said to be necessary to civil Government? What influence
  in fact have ecclesiastical establishments had on Civil
  Society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a
  spiritual tyranny on the ruins of Civil authority; in many instances
  they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny;
  in no instance have they been seen the guardians of the
  liberties of the people. Rulers who wished to subvert the public
  liberty, may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries.
  A just government, instituted to secure & perpetuate it, needs
  them not. Such a government will be best supported by protecting
  every citizen in the enjoyment of his Religion with the same
  equal hand which protects his person and his property; by
  neither invading the equal rights of any Sect, nor suffering any
  Sect to invade those of another.

9.

• Because the proposed establishment is a departure from
  that generous policy, which, offering an asylum to the persecuted
  and oppressed of every Nation and Religion, promised a lustre to
  our country, and an accession to the number of its citizens.
  What a melancholy mark is the Bill of sudden degeneracy? Instead
  of holding forth an asylum to the persecuted, it is itself a
  signal of persecution. It degrades from the equal rank of Citizens
  all those whose opinions in Religion do not bend to those of the
  Legislative authority. Distant as it may be, in its present form,
  from the Inquisition it differs from it only in degree. The one is
  the first step, the other the last in the career of intolerance. The
  magnanimous sufferer under this cruel scourge in foreign Regions,
  must view the Bill as a Beacon on our Coast, warning him to seek
  some other haven, where liberty and philanthrophy in their due
  extent may offer a more certain repose from his troubles.

10.

• Because, it will have a like tendency to banish our
  Citizens. The allurements presented by other situations are
  

  ---

  189

  
  
  
  every day thinning their number. To superadd a fresh motive to
  emigration, by revoking the liberty which they now enjoy, would
  be the same species of folly which has dishonoured and depopulated
  flourishing kingdoms.

11.

• Because, it will destroy that moderation and harmony which
  the forbearance of our laws to intermeddle with Religion, has
  produced amongst its several sects. Torrents of blood have been
  spilt in the old world, by vain attempts of the secular arm to
  extinguish Religious discord, by proscribing all difference in Religious
  opinions. Time has at length revealed the true remedy.
  Every relaxation of narrow and rigorous policy, wherever it has
  been tried, has been found to assuage the disease. The American
  Theatre has exhibited proofs, that equal and compleat liberty, if
  it does not wholly eradicate it, sufficiently destroys its malignant
  influence on the health and prosperity of the State. If with the
  salutary effects of this system under our own eyes, we begin to
  contract the bonds of Religious freedom, we know no name that
  will too severely reproach our folly. At least let warning be
  taken at the first fruits of the threatened innovation. The very
  appearance of the Bill has transformed that "Christian forbearance,[47]
  love and charity," which of late mutually prevailed, into
  animosities and jealousies, which may not soon be appeased.
  What mischiefs may not be dreaded should this enemy to the
  public quiet be armed with the force of a law?

12.

• Because, the policy of the bill is adverse to the diffusion
  of the light of Christianity. The first wish of those who enjoy
  this precious gift, ought to be that it may be imparted to the
  whole race of mankind. Compare the number of those who have
  as yet received it with the number still remaining under the
  dominion of false Religions; and how small is the former!
  Does the policy of the Bill tend to lessen the disproportion?
  No; it at once discourages those who are strangers to the
  light of [revelation] from coming into the Region of it; and
  countenances, by example the nations who continue in darkness,
  in shutting out those who might convey it to them. Instead of
  

  ---

  190

  
  
  
  levelling as far as possible, every obstacle to the victorious progress
  of truth, the Bill with an ignoble and unchristian timidity
  would circumscribe it, with a wall of defence, against the encroachments
  of error.

13.

• Because attempts to enforce by legal sanctions, acts obnoxious
  to so great a proportion of Citizens, tend to enervate the
  laws in general, and to slacken the bands of Society. If it be
  difficult to execute any law which is not generally deemed necessary
  or salutary, what must be the case where it is deemed invalid
  and dangerous? and what may be the effect of so striking an
  example of impotency in the Government, on its general authority.

14.

• Because a measure of such singular magnitude and delicacy
  ought not to be imposed, without the clearest evidence that it is
  called for by a majority of citizens: and no satisfactory method
  is yet proposed by which the voice of the majority in this case
  may be determined, or its influence secured. "The people of the
  respective counties are indeed requested to signify their opinion
  respecting the adoption of the Bill to the next Session of Assembly.
  "But the representation must be made equal, before the
  voice either of the Representatives or of the Counties, will be
  that of the people. Our hope is that neither of the former will,
  after due consideration, espouse the dangerous principle of the
  Bill. Should the event disappoint us, it will still leave us in full
  confidence, that a fair appeal to the latter will reverse the sentence
  against our liberties.

15.

• Because, finally, "the equal right of every citizen to the
  free exercise of his Religion according to the dictates of conscience"
  is held by the same tenure with all our other rights. If
  we recur to its origin, it is equally the gift of nature; if we weigh
  its importance, it cannot be less dear to us; if we consult the
  Declaration of those rights which pertain to the good people of
  Virginia, as the "basis and foundation of Government,"[48] it is
  enumerated with equal solemnity, or rather studied emphasis.
  Either then, we must say, that the will of the Legislature is the
  only measure of their authority; and that in the plenitude of this
  

  ---

  191

  
  
  
  authority, they may s\veep away all our fundamental rights; or,
  that they are bound to leave this particular right untouched and
  sacred: Either we must say, that they may controul the freedom
  of the press, may abolish the trial by jury, may swallow up the
  Executive and Judiciary Powers of the State; nay that they may
  despoil us of our very right of suffrage, and erect themselves into
  an independant and hereditary assembly: or we must say, that
  they have no authority to enact into law the Bill under consideration.
  We the subscribers say, that the General Assembly of this
  Commonwealth have no such authority: And that no effort may
  be omitted on our part against so dangerous an usurpation, we
  oppose to it, this remonstrance; earnestly praying, as we are in
  duty bound, that the Supreme Lawgiver of the Universe, by
  illuminating those to whom it is addressed, may on the one hand,
  turn their councils from every act which would affront his holy
  prerogative, or violate the trust committed to them: and on the
  other, guide them into every measure which may be worthy of his
  [blessing, may re]dound to their own praise, and may establish
  more firmly the liberties, the prosperity, and the Happiness of
  the Commonwealth.