Baptist History and Theology

Church and State in the Birth of Canada

The relationship between the church and state in the history of Canada is an underlying part of the present condition of Canadian statehood. The Canadian nation has found part of its identity through the process of dealing with the relationship between the church and state. The formation of Canada, as a nation, was in part, a reflection of their English Protestant influence and their French Catholic influence. During the years of Canada’s emergence as a sovereign nation, both the Protestant and Catholic forms of Christianity favored a close relation to the state. The Protestants viewed Christianized lands as part of the kingdom of God, and felt it was the duty of the state to punish those who went against their beliefs. In addition, the Roman Catholic Church’s position on the duty of the state was just as sacral, a term meaning the merger of Church and State where the two are almost impossible to differentiate. Unlike the United States, Canada’s early nation-forming years lacked the Baptist influence in considering the role of the church in relation to the state. The Baptists viewed the state as a separate ministry of God to punish evildoers. However, the state, they believed, had no right to punish acts of liberty of consciousness. This Baptist view of liberty of consciousness, we shall see, was partly responsible for bringing forth a separation of church and state in America.

The English Protestant Influence

The English Protestant influence in the role of the church and state in Canada can be examined by looking at the period of the eighteenth and nineteenth century. The cultural differences and the sacral, political-religious stance of the established Anglican Church greatly shaped the role between the church and state in Canada. Canada’s close ties with the British Empire kept her dependent on the wealth, political influence, and the established church of the British. The prominence of Anglicans in Upper Canadian society is telling of how the Anglican Church was able to secure its powerful position in Canadian government.
Also, the Church of England still remained a dominant force in Canadian politics and society during the eighteenth century, in general. The Clergy Reserves, established by the Constitution Act of 1791, provided revenue from the leasing of one-seventh of all lands in Canada in order to support the Protestant clergy.[1] The special recognition of the Protestant Church by appropriating government funds to help support the clergy is reflective of the blurring of the separation of church and state in Upper Canadian society. While the United States was moving away from the intertwining bonds of the sacralism, Upper Canada was moving at full speed to implement the sacral, Protestant view of the church and state relationship. The creation of the Clergy Reserves reveals the English Canadian desire to establish the Anglican Church as the official church in Upper Canada.
A further look into the two major regions of Canada can be used to determine the position of Canada’s stance on the relationship of the church and state during the early part of the nineteenth century. By 1792, the Provinces of Upper and Lower Canada were self-governing colonies with legislatures.[2] Upper Canada was composed of English –speaking, Protestant settlers, and Lower Canada had a “population predominantly French by descent and language, Roman Catholic in religion, with laws (outside of the criminal law) based upon the Civil Law system.”[3]
The ruling oligarchy, the Family Compact, in Upper Canada held a great amount of power and influence in political and religious circles. According to Howard Adams, “the members of the Compact were aristocratic, conservative, and Anglican, subscribing to the inherent right of privileged rule.”[4] One can begin to see the possibility of a conflict of interest in the concerns of the church with those of the state. Bishop John Strachan, a prominent Anglican leader, advocated a government-subsidized educational system for the elite in Upper Canada. Strachan was well known for “several educational successes such as the increase in the number of common schools, the improvement of grammar schools, and the formation of King’s College in 1827.[5] However, Strachan called on the state to get rid of the Anglican Church’s competition from the Methodist, further reflecting his Erastainistic beliefs.[6] The political and public educational involvement of the Anglican Church’s elite in Upper Canada is an unavoidable consequence of the blurring roles between the church and state.
Furthermore, Bishop Strachan, reflecting the sacralism of the Anglican Church “spearheaded a movement for the establishment of exclusive schools for the ruling-class families of the Province.”[7] In 1807, with the help of Bishop Strachan, the Education Act was passed. This Canadian school act “established aristocratic, sectarian, grammar schools for the upper-class families of Upper Canada; few educational provisions were made for the masses.”[8] Also, the act established secondary education for the social elite.[9] This lopsided educational act reveals the problems that underscored sacralism in the Protestant Church in Upper Canada.
Unlike the U.S. Land Ordinances of 1785, which helped provide for the establishment of public schools in America, the Education Act of 1807 reflected the sacral influence of the Anglican Church in Upper Canadian society. The public school pursuit of the United States was not realized in Upper Canada, in part, because of the indistinguishable responsibilities of its church and state. The role of the church in the policy of education in Upper Canada is indicative of the blurring of responsibilities between the political powers and the Anglican Church.
Another example of Anglican involvement in the role between the church and state is its attempt, along with the state, to establish an official church in Upper Canada. As early as 1791 John Graves Simcoe, the first Lieutenant-Governor, endorsed a constitution which gave special rights and privileges to the Church of England with the hope of establishing the Anglican Church as the official state church.[10] The Upper Canadian religious leaders can be viewed as political lobbyists with the purpose of trying to establish the Anglican Church as the official state church.[11] The favoring of the Anglican Church in Upper Canada is indicative of the former, sacral policies of the Protestant Churches found in Europe. The province of Upper Canada found no room for other religions or churches to exist within the “christian nation.”
The Protestant influence in Lower Canada was just as effective as in Upper Canada. The Royal Institution for the Advancement of Learning, established by the Education Act of 1801, was responsible for the education of Lower Canada during the early years of the nineteenth century. Jacob Mountain, Anglican Bishop of Quebec, “served as President of their Board of Commissioners that had authority over administration of the schools, textbooks, curriculum, and rules.”[12] Mountain’s role in the education of Lower Canada and his influence with the political elite is another example of the Protestant view of the relationship between the church and state. “The object of the Institution was in the first place the proselytism of all to one belief (Anglicism), and secondly, to make it subservient to other civil and political views.”[13] The result was that only those who were members of a particular church received the benefits of the Education Act of 1801.[14] The Bishop’s direct involvement with the policies of the Upper Canadian government reveals the Anglican view of the role between the church and state.
The Protestant Church’s view of a Christianized nation, encompassing every citizen, is part of the driving force behind its desire to educate all of its citizens according to its Christian understanding. Both the church and state view social policies as their joint responsibility in a Christian nation. The result of the Education Act of 1801 and the establishment of the Anglican-backed Institution was the imposition it placed on French Canadian Catholics in Lower Canada and other denominations. It must have been a policy familiar to the French Canadian Catholics, a policy also employed by the Roman Catholic Church throughout the world and throughout its history.

The French Catholic Influence

The Roman Catholic Church, like the Protestant churches, believed in a policy where the distinctions of the church and state were almost impossible to differentiate. Also, like the Protestant churches, the sacral belief of church and state of the Catholic Church, was partly based on the writings of Augustine of Hippo. Augustine, in replying to the Donatists’ schismatic beliefs, called for a single Christian state under the teachings of the universal church.
The Roman Catholic Church, left unaided with the defeat of the French by the English, was still able to exert a certain amount of political influence in certain parts of Canada. Before France’s defeat to the English, New France was closely connected with the Catholic Church “with an identical membership.”[15] After Canada became a colony of the British, with the establishment of the Quebec Act of 1774, the province of Quebec was instituted with French civil law instead of English common law. Also, the act allowed the French Canadians to retain their Catholic religion. “This created the need for an educational system in Quebec able to accommodate groups that were significantly different and potentially antagonistic.”[16]
Under the French civil law system, the province of Quebec practiced a law concerning marriage that was based on the Roman canon law.[17] The Roman canon involved annulments of marriage of Catholics and non-Catholics and it was the marriage law for the province of Quebec. The possibilities of this unique provision would have allowed the Pope to be “a legislature capable of altering the civil law in Canada.”[18] Interestingly, the marriage law was not changed by the Canadian government until the Privy Council decided Despatie v. Tremblay in 1921.[19]
Like the Protestant church and state arrangement, the Catholic Church relied on the state to advance its teaching and influence in Canadian society. The French language and distinct culture made it possible for the Roman Catholic Church to maintain control over the French Canadians in Lower Canada.[20] The support for the Catholic Church also meant support for French Canadian political power in Lower Canada. The two institutions were almost impossible to differentiate for the French Canadians in Lower Canada.
Also, the Royal Institution for the Advancement of Learning which supported the Protestant teachings of the Anglican Church caused a stir among the French Canadians living in Lower Canada. A group of political reformers in the Legislative Assembly of Lower Canada pushed for changes in the educational system and opposed the Institution because it was a foreign establishment in French Catholic Lower Canada.[21] However, in 1829 The French Catholic clergy “accepted the offer from the Institution to serve as officials on the Board and gave their support and services.”[22] The Catholic clergy’s struggle to remain politically influential is reflective of their sacral thinking.
The history of the controversy surrounding the Institution is helpful in studying the sacral tendencies of both Protestant and Catholic Church. Both believed the church and state should be reflective of the same path from God. Both churches’ strong sacral beliefs kept them close together in dealing with the educational reforms desired by the Legislative Assembly in Canada.
In the early part of the nineteenth century, the Legislative Assembly seemed to be advocating a form of separation of church and state that ran contrary to the teachings of both the Protestant and Catholic Church. “Undaunted by the opposition of the Catholic Church, the Legislative Assembly passed, in 1829, an educational program first proposed by Assemblyman Dr. Blanchet. This Education Act established a common, secular school system for the province containing many features of contemporary free public schools including granting full responsibility for the education of their to the people themselves.”[23] Also, the new education system was successful in increasing the number of schools from 381 to 1,216 and the student enrollment increased from 14,000 to 60,000.[24]
Given the success of the new educational program one would expect this to be the last of the Institution’s role in the educational system in Lower Canada. However, the Protestant and Catholic Churches were able to secure their positions in the education system. Despite the success of the new education system, the Catholic Church chose to advocate a position that ran contrary to the will of the French Canadian people, many of whom were their own parishioners of Lower Canada. In 1837, the English social elites and the Protestant and Catholic Churches were able to reverse “the new democratic developments through military intervention.”[25] The two churches’ involvement in the affairs of the state’s role in education is a reflection of their sacralism in the province of Lower Canada.
The consequences of the failed attempt of a public school system strengthened the relationship between the Catholic Church and government of Lower Canada. After the new education reforms were stifled by the intervention of the established churches, a strengthening relationship developed between the Catholic Church and the state. In 1839 “the Governor-General issued a decree giving the priests of St. Sulpice full legal title and feudal tithes to several seigneurial holdings, most of which were to remain untaxed by the government.”[26]
The Education Act of 1841 furthered the close relationship between the province of Lower Canada and the Catholic Church. The act established two separate types of religious school systems for Catholic and Protestant churches. The result of the Education Act of 1841 was that a “separatist ethic developed that permeated Canadian society and persists to the present day.”[27] This separate, sacral system helped prevent the establishment of a school system not based on religious affiliation. The result of the act went well beyond the question of secular education and kept divided the nation of Canada into two separate groups, the English Protestants and the French Catholics.
The Education Act of 1846 pushed the Catholic Church into a greater realm of social control in Lower Canada. The new education act “gave the Catholic clergy considerable dominion over education. It became almost supreme commander of many of the social institutions in Lower Canada.”[28] The education act can be seen as a determining factor in the increasing blurring of the role of the church and state in Canadian society.
By 1856 “normal schools were established under the Catholic and Protestant supervision and supported by state funds.”[29] The sacral leanings of the Catholic Church in Lower Canada helped shape the direction of the educational policies and kept separate the two major provinces of Canada. The Education Act of 1869 “placed the school system under a Council of Public Instruction, composed of ex-officio and appointed members representative of the Catholic and Protestant elements of the population.”[30] This act was another continuation of the sacral leanings of the Catholic Church in Lower Canada.
The Act of 1875 increased the church’s grip in the educational system in Quebec. The act “constituted the Catholic and Protestant sections of the Council and gave to each the authority to function as a separate supervisory body with powers to prescribe curriculums and textbooks, to supervise examinations and teacher training, and to recommend teachers for certification.”[31] This act is indicative of the increasing support of the church in its undertaking of public education in Quebec. The sacral understanding of the roles of the church and state in Quebec helped determine the direction of its education system.

The Baptist View of the Church and State

The Baptist view of the separation of church and state is a distinctive not found in the theology and teachings of the Catholic and Protestant denominations. The Anabaptists, the precursor of the modern Baptists, believed in a separation of church and state not found in the teachings of Protestant churches in Europe. It is a belief that is taken for granted in our modern American understanding of the role of the church and state.
The Catholic and Protestant churches abhorred the voluntaryism doctrine of the Anabaptists. According to Leonard Verduin, the American freedom to believe and disbelieve is “the fruitage of the vision for which the Stepchildren (Anabaptists) agonized; it is, as even foreign observers have noted, ‘not the progeny of the Enlightenment but rather the ripe fruit of the Freechurchism of the Left-wing reformers’.”[32] Also, “there is a widespread notion among Protestant groups that the separation of Church and State, and thus religious liberty was but the logical development of the principles held by all the reformers. Just where this notion arose is difficult to say, and no reputable historian of our times would endorse it, the fact is that the rise of Protestantism was accompanied by an unprecedented outburst of intolerance.”[33] This Catholic and Protestant understanding of the sacral role of the church and state is essential in order to appreciate the distinct Baptist view of the church-state relationship.
The Baptist beginnings in America start with Roger Williams (1603-1683), founder of the colony of Rhode Island. Williams, founder of the first Baptist Church in America, used the term “wall of separation” between church and state a century before Thomas Jefferson.[34] Also, Rhode Island is considered the first government to establish full liberty of conscience and religion. Here is where the Catholic and Protestant views and practices of the church-state relationship depart from the liberty of conscience view of the Baptists. The state support of a certain church, as in the case of Canada, destroys the individual’s ability to experience an authentic liberty of conscience and religion. The example of the church’s involvement in the education system in Upper and Lower Canada is what helped prevent Canada from establishing a society under a liberty of conscience and religious freedom during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.
Another leading figure in the cause for the separation of church and state in America during this time was the Baptist preacher, Isaac Backus. Backus fought for the concept of the separation of church and state in Massachusetts. In 1773, Backus wrote An Appeal to the Public, which stated “It appears to us that the true difference and exact limits between ecclesiastical and civil government is this, That the church is armed with light and truth to pull down the strongholds of iniquity and to gain souls to Christ and into his Church to be governed, while the state is armed with the sword to guard the peace and civil rights of all persons and societies and to punish those who violate the same. And where these two kinds of government, and the weapons which belong to them are well distinguished and approved according to the nature and end of their institution, the effects are happy, and they do not interfere with each other. But where they have been confounded together no tongue nor pen can fully describe the mischiefs that have ensued.”[35] It is apparent that Backus understood the dangers and injustices that are associated with a sacral church-state relationship.
Still another leading figure in the cause for the separation of church and state in America was the Baptist leader, John Leland. Leland, along with other Baptists in Virginia, was able to get James Madison to agree upon a provision in the Constitution that would guarantee religious freedom.[36] Leland wrote “Let every man speak freely without fear, maintain the principles that he believes, worship according to his own faith, either one God, no God, or twenty Gods; and let the government protect him in doing so.”[37] The efforts to help establish a separation of church and state in America by Leland, Madison and others, is found missing in the history of the development of the Canadian government.
In conclusion, the sacral teachings of both the Catholic and Protestant churches have helped prevent Canada from reaching the level of religious freedom found in the United States. The English Protestant leaders in Upper Canada were determined to enlist the help of the state in order to continue to be an important authority in Canadian society. The French Catholics leaders in Lower Canada were just as determined to remain a significant force in Canadian society. The Baptistic view of the separation of church and state is what helped shape our American vision of religion freedom.















Notes

[1] Gordon Barkwell, “The Clergy Reserves in Upper Canada: A Study in the Separation of Church and State, 1791-1854.” Church History 24, no. 4 (December 1955): 371.

[2] John S. Ewart. “The Canadian Constitution.” Columbia Law Review 8, no. 1 (January 1908): 27.

[3] William Renwick Riddell, “Constitutional Amendments in Canada.” The Yale Law Journal 28, no. 4 (February 1919): 317.

[4] Adams, 36.

[5] D.S. Woods, “The History of Education in Canada.” Review of Educational Research 6, no. 4 (October 1936): 380.

[6] Christopher Adamson, “God’s Continent Divided: Politics and Religion in Upper Canada and the Northern and Western United States, 1775 to 1841.” Comparative Studies in Society and History 36, no. 3 (July 1994): 442.

[7] Adams, 36.

[8] Adams, 36.

[9] Woods, 380.

[10] Adamson, 432.

[11] Adamson, 443.

[12] Adams, 37.

[13] Adams, 37.

[14] Adams, 37.

[15] Herbert A. Smith, “Church and State in North America.” The Yale Law Review 35, no. 4 (February 1926): 461.

[16] Woods, 379.

[17] Smith, 462.

[18] Smith, 467.

[19] Smith, 467.

[20] S.D. Clark, “Religion: The Religious Factor in Canadian Economic Development.” The Journal of Economic History 7 (1947): 92.

[21] Adams, 38.

[22] Adams, 38.

[23] Adams, 38.

[24] Adams, 39.

[25] Adams, 39.

[26] Adams, 39.

[27] Adams, 40.

[28] Adams, 40.

[29] Woods, 380.

[30] Woods, 380.

[31] Woods, 380.

[32] Leonard Verduin, The Reformers and Their Stepchildren, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1964), 92.

[33] Verduin, 93.

[34] Dr. William P. Grady, What Hath God Wrought! (Knoxville, TN: Grady Publications, 1996), 172.

[35] H. Leon McBeth, A Sourcebook for Baptist Heritage (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1990), 175.

[36] John T. Christian, A History of the Baptists (1926; online edition, Providence Baptist Ministries, 2005), (April 28, 2005).

[37] John Leland, The Writings of John Leland, ed. L.F. Greene (New York: Arno Press, 1969), 184.