the right of any individual to hold office
who did not acknowledge his just inoral ac-
countability to the Supreme Being I hold
therefore, in perfect consonance with the
principle and spirit of the Constitution of
the United States, that no religious test
should be required. I hold that the en-
lightenment of the age endorses that senti-
ment; that the experience of the past confirms
the wisdom of it; and that no interest
ill the State would be imperilled by the
adoption of a provision of that kind in our
organic law.
There are people who believe precisely as
the Jews believe, yet who do not call themselves
Jews. There are a great many varie-
ties and shades of opinions upon this sub-
ject of religion. As * Christian man I ob.
ject to this indirect and constructive ming-
ling of the Church and the State. I do not
believe it is proper, by the faintest possible
recognition. to introduce into our Constitution
any recognition of any sect in particu-
lar; they should all be treated alike. Al-
though I bold the Christian religion to be
the highest possible moral and sublime the-
ory of religion, yet I am not willing to in-
troduce it into and engraft it upon our
Constitution, to the exclusion of all other
forms and theories of religion. I propose
to admit every man who believes in the
existence of God—the Great God who cre-
ated the Universe—and in a just moral
accountability to that God, either in this
world or in the world to come. And I want
to keep out of the Constitution every idea,
every species of language, which would in-
dicate that there was any particular sect or
creed, or any particular theory of religion,
that was to be preferred; or that was, by
the peculiar and special sanction and ap-
proval of this body, to be recognized as the
especial and peculiar religion of the State.
I hold that, although yon may not in so
many words establish any particular creed ;
may not in so many words establish any
peculiar rule of faith for the people and the
Government, yet you constructively estab-
lish one when you say that a man must
believe in a certain religious faith, or other-
wise be ineligible to office; you thereby,
indirectly and constructively, establish a
Government creed
Therefore, as a Christian man, a humble
and unworthy member of that profession
though I may be, I am opposed to the intro-
duction of any provision which recognizes
any sect, class or theory of religion, in the
Constitution, as the peculiar and preferred
religion and sentiment of the people or this
State. I have my peculiar theories upon
the subject of religion. I honestly and con-
scientiously believe the Christian religion to
be the only true religion. But I cannot
consent to fasten down, to chain down,
to bolt down, to bar down, the minds and |
sentiments of my fellow man, who entertain
his religious views as conscientiously as I
entertain mine. It is for this reason that I
am opposed to the introduction of these
words into the Constitution.
This matter of religion is a sacred matter ;
it is a peculiar matter; it is a matter be-
tween man and his God only; it is a spirit-
ual mutter; it is a matter of intercommu-
nion between the spirit of man and his God.
And every man ought to be left to the free
and independent exercise and enjoyment of
that inter-communion, and that sentiment.
And neither by direction nor indirection
ought there to be any attempt in our Con-
stitution to give character or color to any
peculiarities of religious sentiment, I pro-
pose, therefore, that these words that specify
a particular character of religious sentiment
shall not enter into our Constitution.
And, as my friend from Somerset has em-
bodied in an amendment which he has sug-
gested to me, the idea I desire to have
embodied in this Constitution, and as it is
in perfect consonance with the 35th article
which this House has just adopted, I will
substitute it for the one I have offered. It
is to strikeout the words—" in the Christian
religion, and if the party shall profess to be
a Jew, the declaration shall be of his belief,"
and 'insert the words—'' in the existence of
God, and," so that the clause shall read:
"and a declaration of belief in the existence
of God, and in a future state of rewards
and punishments." I submit that as my
amendment, in lieu of the motion to strike
out simply which I first submitted.
Mr. CLARKE. I do not know that that
really differs from the amendment which I
submitted.
Mr. JONES, of Somerset. it differs in this
respect only: the amendment submitted by
the gentleman from Prince Georges (Mr.
Clarke) provides two forms of declaration
of belief, either of which the party could
sign; the one a belief in the Christian reli-
gion; the other a belief in a future state of
rewards and punishment. This provides
but one form—a declaration of belief In the
existence of God, and in a future state of
rewards and punishments. It includes both
of the classes which would be embraced in
the amendment of the gentleman from Prince
George's; tor the man who believes in the
Christian religion, believes in the existence
of God, and in a future state of rewards
and punishments."
Mr. CLARKE. I am willing to accept that
amendment, and therefore I withdraw the
amendment I submitted.
The question wad upon the amendment of
Mr. Ridgely, to so amend the latter part of
article thirty-six, that it should read—" and
a declaration of belief in the existence of God,
and in a future state of rewards and pun-
ishments." |
