of the manner in which religion in the united states avails itself of democratic tendencies

i have laid it down in a preceding chapter that men cannot do without dogmatical belief; and even that it is very much to be desired that such belief should exist amongst them. i now add, that of all the kinds of dogmatical belief the most desirable appears to me to be dogmatical belief in matters of religion; and this is a very clear inference, even from no higher consideration than the interests of this world. there is hardly any human action, however particular a character be assigned to it, which does not originate in some very general idea men have conceived of the deity, of his relation to mankind, of the nature of their own souls, and of their duties to their fellow-creatures. nor can anything prevent these ideas from being the common spring from which everything else emanates. men are therefore immeasurably interested in acquiring fixed ideas of god, of the soul, and of their common duties to their creator and to their fellow-men; for doubt on these first principles would abandon all their actions to the impulse of chance, and would condemn them to live, to a certain extent, powerless and undisciplined.

this is then the subject on which it is most important for each of us to entertain fixed ideas; and unhappily it is also the subject on which it is most difficult for each of us, left to himself, to settle his opinions by the sole force of his reason. none but minds singularly free from the ordinary anxieties of life—minds at once penetrating, subtle, and trained by thinking—can even with the assistance of much time and care, sound the depth of these most necessary truths. and, indeed, we see that these philosophers are themselves almost always enshrouded in uncertainties; that at every step the natural light which illuminates their path grows dimmer and less secure; and that, in spite of all their efforts, they have as yet only discovered a small number of conflicting notions, on which the mind of man has been tossed about for thousands of years, without either laying a firmer grasp on truth, or finding novelty even in its errors. studies of this nature are far above the average capacity of men; and even if the majority of mankind were capable of such pursuits, it is evident that leisure to cultivate them would still be wanting. fixed ideas of god and human nature are indispensable to the daily practice of men's lives; but the practice of their lives prevents them from acquiring such ideas.

the difficulty appears to me to be without a parallel. amongst the sciences there are some which are useful to the mass of mankind, and which are within its reach; others can only be approached by the few, and are not cultivated by the many, who require nothing beyond their more remote applications: but the daily practice of the science i speak of is indispensable to all, although the study of it is inaccessible to the far greater number.

general ideas respecting god and human nature are therefore the ideas above all others which it is most suitable to withdraw from the habitual action of private judgment, and in which there is most to gain and least to lose by recognizing a principle of authority. the first object and one of the principal advantages of religions, is to furnish to each of these fundamental questions a solution which is at once clear, precise, intelligible to the mass of mankind, and lasting. there are religions which are very false and very absurd; but it may be affirmed, that any religion which remains within the circle i have just traced, without aspiring to go beyond it (as many religions have attempted to do, for the purpose of enclosing on every side the free progress of the human mind), imposes a salutary restraint on the intellect; and it must be admitted that, if it do not save men in another world, such religion is at least very conducive to their happiness and their greatness in this. this is more especially true of men living in free countries. when the religion of a people is destroyed, doubt gets hold of the highest portions of the intellect, and half paralyzes all the rest of its powers. every man accustoms himself to entertain none but confused and changing notions on the subjects most interesting to his fellow-creatures and himself. his opinions are ill-defended and easily abandoned: and, despairing of ever resolving by himself the hardest problems of the destiny of man, he ignobly submits to think no more about them. such a condition cannot but enervate the soul, relax the springs of the will, and prepare a people for servitude. nor does it only happen, in such a case, that they allow their freedom to be wrested from them; they frequently themselves surrender it. when there is no longer any principle of authority in religion any more than in politics, men are speedily frightened at the aspect of this unbounded independence. the constant agitation of all surrounding things alarms and exhausts them. as everything is at sea in the sphere of the intellect, they determine at least that the mechanism of society should be firm and fixed; and as they cannot resume their ancient belief, they assume a master.

for my own part, i doubt whether man can ever support at the same time complete religious independence and entire public freedom. and i am inclined to think, that if faith be wanting in him, he must serve; and if he be free, he must believe.

perhaps, however, this great utility of religions is still more obvious amongst nations where equality of conditions prevails than amongst others. it must be acknowledged that equality, which brings great benefits into the world, nevertheless suggests to men (as will be shown hereafter) some very dangerous propensities. it tends to isolate them from each other, to concentrate every man's attention upon himself; and it lays open the soul to an inordinate love of material gratification. the greatest advantage of religion is to inspire diametrically contrary principles. there is no religion which does not place the object of man's desires above and beyond the treasures of earth, and which does not naturally raise his soul to regions far above those of the senses. nor is there any which does not impose on man some sort of duties to his kind, and thus draws him at times from the contemplation of himself. this occurs in religions the most false and dangerous. religious nations are therefore naturally strong on the very point on which democratic nations are weak; which shows of what importance it is for men to preserve their religion as their conditions become more equal.

i have neither the right nor the intention of examining the supernatural means which god employs to infuse religious belief into the heart of man. i am at this moment considering religions in a purely human point of view: my object is to inquire by what means they may most easily retain their sway in the democratic ages upon which we are entering. it has been shown that, at times of general cultivation and equality, the human mind does not consent to adopt dogmatical opinions without reluctance, and feels their necessity acutely in spiritual matters only. this proves, in the first place, that at such times religions ought, more cautiously than at any other, to confine themselves within their own precincts; for in seeking to extend their power beyond religious matters, they incur a risk of not being believed at all. the circle within which they seek to bound the human intellect ought therefore to be carefully traced, and beyond its verge the mind should be left in entire freedom to its own guidance. mahommed professed to derive from heaven, and he has inserted in the koran, not only a body of religious doctrines, but political maxims, civil and criminal laws, and theories of science. the gospel, on the contrary, only speaks of the general relations of men to god and to each other—beyond which it inculcates and imposes no point of faith. this alone, besides a thousand other reasons, would suffice to prove that the former of these religions will never long predominate in a cultivated and democratic age, whilst the latter is destined to retain its sway at these as at all other periods.

but in continuation of this branch of the subject, i find that in order for religions to maintain their authority, humanly speaking, in democratic ages, they must not only confine themselves strictly within the circle of spiritual matters: their power also depends very much on the nature of the belief they inculcate, on the external forms they assume, and on the obligations they impose. the preceding observation, that equality leads men to very general and very extensive notions, is principally to be understood as applied to the question of religion. men living in a similar and equal condition in the world readily conceive the idea of the one god, governing every man by the same laws, and granting to every man future happiness on the same conditions. the idea of the unity of mankind constantly leads them back to the idea of the unity of the creator; whilst, on the contrary, in a state of society where men are broken up into very unequal ranks, they are apt to devise as many deities as there are nations, castes, classes, or families, and to trace a thousand private roads to heaven.

it cannot be denied that christianity itself has felt, to a certain extent, the influence which social and political conditions exercise on religious opinions. at the epoch at which the christian religion appeared upon earth, providence, by whom the world was doubtless prepared for its coming, had gathered a large portion of the human race, like an immense flock, under the sceptre of the caesars. the men of whom this multitude was composed were distinguished by numerous differences; but they had thus much in common, that they all obeyed the same laws, and that every subject was so weak and insignificant in relation to the imperial potentate, that all appeared equal when their condition was contrasted with his. this novel and peculiar state of mankind necessarily predisposed men to listen to the general truths which christianity teaches, and may serve to explain the facility and rapidity with which they then penetrated into the human mind. the counterpart of this state of things was exhibited after the destruction of the empire. the roman world being then as it were shattered into a thousand fragments, each nation resumed its pristine individuality. an infinite scale of ranks very soon grew up in the bosom of these nations; the different races were more sharply defined, and each nation was divided by castes into several peoples. in the midst of this common effort, which seemed to be urging human society to the greatest conceivable amount of voluntary subdivision, christianity did not lose sight of the leading general ideas which it had brought into the world. but it appeared, nevertheless, to lend itself, as much as was possible, to those new tendencies to which the fractional distribution of mankind had given birth. men continued to worship an only god, the creator and preserver of all things; but every people, every city, and, so to speak, every man, thought to obtain some distinct privilege, and win the favor of an especial patron at the foot of the throne of grace. unable to subdivide the deity, they multiplied and improperly enhanced the importance of the divine agents. the homage due to saints and angels became an almost idolatrous worship amongst the majority of the christian world; and apprehensions might be entertained for a moment lest the religion of christ should retrograde towards the superstitions which it had subdued. it seems evident, that the more the barriers are removed which separate nation from nation amongst mankind, and citizen from citizen amongst a people, the stronger is the bent of the human mind, as if by its own impulse, towards the idea of an only and all-powerful being, dispensing equal laws in the same manner to every man. in democratic ages, then, it is more particularly important not to allow the homage paid to secondary agents to be confounded with the worship due to the creator alone.

another truth is no less clear—that religions ought to assume fewer external observances in democratic periods than at any others. in speaking of philosophical method among the americans, i have shown that nothing is more repugnant to the human mind in an age of equality than the idea of subjection to forms. men living at such times are impatient of figures; to their eyes symbols appear to be the puerile artifice which is used to conceal or to set off truths, which should more naturally be bared to the light of open day: they are unmoved by ceremonial observances, and they are predisposed to attach a secondary importance to the details of public worship. those whose care it is to regulate the external forms of religion in a democratic age should pay a close attention to these natural propensities of the human mind, in order not unnecessarily to run counter to them. i firmly believe in the necessity of forms, which fix the human mind in the contemplation of abstract truths, and stimulate its ardor in the pursuit of them, whilst they invigorate its powers of retaining them steadfastly. nor do i suppose that it is possible to maintain a religion without external observances; but, on the other hand, i am persuaded that, in the ages upon which we are entering, it would be peculiarly dangerous to multiply them beyond measure; and that they ought rather to be limited to as much as is absolutely necessary to perpetuate the doctrine itself, which is the substance of religions of which the ritual is only the form. *a a religion which should become more minute, more peremptory, and more surcharged with small observances at a time in which men are becoming more equal, would soon find itself reduced to a band of fanatical zealots in the midst of an infidel people.

a

[ in all religions there are some ceremonies which are inherent in the substance of the faith itself, and in these nothing should, on any account, be changed. this is especially the case with roman catholicism, in which the doctrine and the form are frequently so closely united as to form one point of belief.]

i anticipate the objection, that as all religions have general and eternal truths for their object, they cannot thus shape themselves to the shifting spirit of every age without forfeiting their claim to certainty in the eyes of mankind. to this i reply again, that the principal opinions which constitute belief, and which theologians call articles of faith, must be very carefully distinguished from the accessories connected with them. religions are obliged to hold fast to the former, whatever be the peculiar spirit of the age; but they should take good care not to bind themselves in the same manner to the latter at a time when everything is in transition, and when the mind, accustomed to the moving pageant of human affairs, reluctantly endures the attempt to fix it to any given point. the fixity of external and secondary things can only afford a chance of duration when civil society is itself fixed; under any other circumstances i hold it to be perilous.

we shall have occasion to see that, of all the passions which originate in, or are fostered by, equality, there is one which it renders peculiarly intense, and which it infuses at the same time into the heart of every man: i mean the love of well-being. the taste for well-being is the prominent and indelible feature of democratic ages. it may be believed that a religion which should undertake to destroy so deep seated a passion, would meet its own destruction thence in the end; and if it attempted to wean men entirely from the contemplation of the good things of this world, in order to devote their faculties exclusively to the thought of another, it may be foreseen that the soul would at length escape from its grasp, to plunge into the exclusive enjoyment of present and material pleasures. the chief concern of religions is to purify, to regulate, and to restrain the excessive and exclusive taste for well-being which men feel at periods of equality; but they would err in attempting to control it completely or to eradicate it. they will not succeed in curing men of the love of riches: but they may still persuade men to enrich themselves by none but honest means.

this brings me to a final consideration, which comprises, as it were, all the others. the more the conditions of men are equalized and assimilated to each other, the more important is it for religions, whilst they carefully abstain from the daily turmoil of secular affairs, not needlessly to run counter to the ideas which generally prevail, and the permanent interests which exist in the mass of the people. for as public opinion grows to be more and more evidently the first and most irresistible of existing powers, the religious principle has no external support strong enough to enable it long to resist its attacks. this is not less true of a democratic people, ruled by a despot, than in a republic. in ages of equality, kings may often command obedience, but the majority always commands belief: to the majority, therefore, deference is to be paid in whatsoever is not contrary to the faith.

i showed in my former volumes how the american clergy stand aloof from secular affairs. this is the most obvious, but it is not the only, example of their self-restraint. in america religion is a distinct sphere, in which the priest is sovereign, but out of which he takes care never to go. within its limits he is the master of the mind; beyond them, he leaves men to themselves, and surrenders them to the independence and instability which belong to their nature and their age. i have seen no country in which christianity is clothed with fewer forms, figures, and observances than in the united states; or where it presents more distinct, more simple, or more general notions to the mind. although the christians of america are divided into a multitude of sects, they all look upon their religion in the same light. this applies to roman catholicism as well as to the other forms of belief. there are no romish priests who show less taste for the minute individual observances for extraordinary or peculiar means of salvation, or who cling more to the spirit, and less to the letter of the law, than the roman catholic priests of the united states. nowhere is that doctrine of the church, which prohibits the worship reserved to god alone from being offered to the saints, more clearly inculcated or more generally followed. yet the roman catholics of america are very submissive and very sincere.

another remark is applicable to the clergy of every communion. the american ministers of the gospel do not attempt to draw or to fix all the thoughts of man upon the life to come; they are willing to surrender a portion of his heart to the cares of the present; seeming to consider the goods of this world as important, although as secondary, objects. if they take no part themselves in productive labor, they are at least interested in its progression, and ready to applaud its results; and whilst they never cease to point to the other world as the great object of the hopes and fears of the believer, they do not forbid him honestly to court prosperity in this. far from attempting to show that these things are distinct and contrary to one another, they study rather to find out on what point they are most nearly and closely connected.

all the american clergy know and respect the intellectual supremacy exercised by the majority; they never sustain any but necessary conflicts with it. they take no share in the altercations of parties, but they readily adopt the general opinions of their country and their age; and they allow themselves to be borne away without opposition in the current of feeling and opinion by which everything around them is carried along. they endeavor to amend their contemporaries, but they do not quit fellowship with them. public opinion is therefore never hostile to them; it rather supports and protects them; and their belief owes its authority at the same time to the strength which is its own, and to that which they borrow from the opinions of the majority. thus it is that, by respecting all democratic tendencies not absolutely contrary to herself, and by making use of several of them for her own purposes, religion sustains an advantageous struggle with that spirit of individual independence which is her most dangerous antagonist.