wanted no part of it. And yet, the philosophy of idealism which guided
the thinking and the deeds of these men, the philosophy which had so
much to do with shaping the fortunes of this nation, was as Christian
as the Sermon on the Mount. It was the philosophy of humanism
and the dignity and integrity of the individual. It was the philosophy
of equality, brotherhood and freedom. It was the philosophy of the
Man of Nazareth.

A great French statesman and political scientist of the nineteenth
century, who wrote learnedly of the American experiment in democracy,
pointed out that it was religion that gave birth to what he called the
"Anglo-American Society. " He said that "in the United States re-
ligion is therefore commingled with all the habits of the nation and all
the feelings of patriotism, whence it derives a peculiar force. " In tracing
the roots of the American democracy to the teachings of Christ, he
said:

"That religion which holds that all men are equal in the sight of
the great Father will not refuse to acknowledge that all citizens are
equal in the sight of the law. "

I think the answer to our proposition clearly is that the Christian
philosophy and Christian ethics very strongly influenced the vital de-
cisions reached by our forefathers in erecting the framework of our
government. It follows, in my mind, that this same philosophy and
these same ethics should be used by us today in fashioning the policies
and decisions of government and politics.

From the point of view of the person engaged in politics, what
should be the relationship between religion and government—between
the church and the state? Religion and government, with the family
serving them both, are the fundamental institutions of our society.
Church and state deal with the same people, each rendering them a
vital and indispensable service, the one in law and order, the other in
moral and spiritual values. A high barrier separates their functions,
but not their mutual services. Ideally, they are the spiritual and tem-
poral poles of all human life. Each should show sympathy one to the
other, and, within the limits laid down by our federal and state consti-
tutions, each should cooperate with the other. Each should also be
jealous in the field of government and the church the rights in the field
of religion.

If organized religion interferes with the operation of government,
or if government intrudes in the field of religion, there is sure to be
trouble. But if each, operating in its own sphere, supplements the other

486