The Pennsylvania State University the Graduate School College of The
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Pennsylvania State University The Graduate School College of the Liberal Arts THE POLITICS OF FAITH: RELIGIOUS AUTHORITY AND POLITICS DURING THE AMERICAN CIVIL WAR A Dissertation in History by Timothy L. Wesley © 2010 Timothy L. Wesley Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy August 2010 The dissertation of Timothy L. Wesley was reviewed and approved* by the following: William A. Blair Professor of American History and Director, Richards Civil War Era Center Dissertation Adviser Chair of Committee Amy S. Greenberg Professor of American History and Women‘s Studies Nan E. Woodruff Professor of Modern U. S. History Stephen H. Browne Professor of Communication Arts and Sciences Carol Reardon George Winfree Professor of American History Director, Graduate Studies in History *Signatures are on file in the Graduate School. ii ABSTRACT This dissertation examines the political involvement of denominational preachers, both black and white and in both the North and South, during the Civil War. Wartime ministers were often gravely conflicted, torn between patriotic impulses and a desire to maintain the inviolability of their sacred pulpits. Churchmembers and lay people however often expected the clergy to lead home front campaigns to sustain their respective war efforts and were unwilling to abide clerical apathy or recalcitrance. Most in the Union believed in fact that religious propriety did not discourage, but actually compelled, preachers to rhetorically toe the Union line. In the South, where political preaching was in theory an abomination but was in reality an established fact of life by the beginning of the Civil War, preachers became important agents of Southern nationalism and arbiters of Confederate loyalty. And as directed by the leaders of the foremost independent black denominations, the politicized wartime leadership of the African American clergy was characterized by both an emphasis on racial uplift and a persistent level of disagreement among its members. In looking at conventional denominationalists who resisted the politicization of their offices and not, as a rule, pacifist or Peace Church leaders, this project reveals a degree of individuality and self-determination among members of the mainstream wartime clergy that has not been identified before. The categorization of ministerial thought featured in this dissertation is predicated on the truism that spirituality was as salient as Copperheadism in the formation of clerical attitudes during the war and thus likewise challenges the dominant historiography. And by showing the ways in which the greater society---including elements of state and local governments and the national government, denominational hierarchies, and local populations---proscribed ministerial speech during the war, this dissertation seminally posits that the war marked the first meaningful campaign to check the clergy‘s freedom of speech in the nation‘s history. In the end, what emerges in this study is a wartime America different, in terms of the conflation of religion and politics, policing of dissent, and consensus among members of the ministerial class, than most imagine today. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION … 1 Chapter 1. Preachers and Late Antebellum Politics … 12 Chapter 2. The Power and Place of the Wartime Northern Ministry … 42 Chapter 3. Partisanship and Potential Damage: Why Americans Feared ―Disloyal‖ Preachers … 63 Chapter 4. The Assault on Disloyalty in the Wartime Northern Ministry … 88 Chapter 5. What the Preachers Thought: Political Preachers in the Civil War North … 142 Chapter 6. The Confederate Ministry … 185 Chapter 7. Confederate and Unionist Religious Life Under the Gun … 214 Chapter 8. The Gospel Horse Begins to Paw: Black Church Leaders and Politics in the Civil War … 257 Epilogue … 304 Bibliography … 317 iv For Linda, the love of my life and my biggest fan. For Mom and Pop, who always believed in me. For Joyce, Sue, Tammy, and Mark, for setting my mind at ease. And for my friend the Chief, to whom I owe a great big ―deduct box‖ full of gratitude. v The Politics of Faith: Religious Authority and Politics During the American Civil War -Introduction- “We find many clergymen again taking to politics, vainly imagining they can sway the public mind. Henry Ward Beecher has made a noise in the world, and others are at work to imitate him. These clergymen are made of and flattered. The women say soft things to them, and they are petted to death, and their heads cannot stand the fire. The result is, that all the labor of disinterested parties, who work and build a church edifice and society, and their labor lost and unproductive because the minister refuses to conform to the enlightened age in which we live, but must needs become a sensationist or political preacher.” Boston Investigator, December 4, 1861 “Can the church be rightfully indifferent to the question of loyalty or disloyalty? If it can---on what grounds? Dr. Rice‟s [New York Presbyterian N. L. Rice] answer is: „That ministers and churches, as such, cannot settle those moral questions, which depend upon secular, civil, and political questions.‟ And as they cannot „settle‟ them, he implies that they have nothing to do with them. But the principle is false, and the conclusion pernicious…. It was just so in the time of the Revolution. Ought ministers and churches to have kept silent then? If not, why now?” The American Theological Review, January 1862 This dissertation examines political preachers, an aspect of the debate over the separation of church and state during the American Civil War.1 In the pages that follow I chronicle how American ministers and laypeople alike felt about clerics who preached on political topics. The war brought to the forefront a controversy that had grown in the prewar North over whether ministers had the right to exhort congregations to adopt political positions. While the antebellum question revolved around the issue of slavery, in the wartime context questions of loyalty and disloyalty became more important. Northern ministers did not constitute a monolithic group of cheerleaders for the nation, a position still dominant in the literature. Nor did ministers abandon en masse their long- 1The terms ―denominational Christianity‖ and ―denomination‖ are used in this study to refer to both any recognized branch of Christianity (Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Anglican, Protestant, etc.) and/or to any of the distinct subgroups of Protestantism that do not maintain a common and unifying theology or recognize a common earthly leader or hierarchy of authority. The main categories of consideration in this work, then, will be Protestant groups of various organizational scopes and Catholic groups divided into organizational units (diocese, archdiocese, etc.). 1 held religious ideas about the need to keep the pulpit separate from secular affairs. While numerous preachers saw the war in religious terms and imagined for themselves a pronounced political role in its successful execution, other patriotic men of faith struggled to meet the demands of a people at war while honoring the apolitical dictates of their creed. And plainly, some Northern preachers were patently disloyal. No matter their motives, I uncover scores of ministers who drew the punitive attention of national, state, and local authorities through their perceived unpatriotic declarations in sermons and other forms of worship. And the story doesn‘t end with government intervention. Disloyal or otherwise politically discordant ministers also found themselves squarely in the sights of denominational leaders and members of their own congregations. Of course the story changes when looking at the Confederate South. There, slavery‘s clerical champions never came under fire---although almost all Southern clerics inveighed against political preaching even as they engaged in the act itself. But over the course of decades Southern preachers effectively rendered the South‘s central political concern, slavery, a domestic affair. The enslavement of four million people became a way of life, a ―peculiar‖ but familial institution that ministers during the Civil War were obligated to defend from Northern assault. Consequently, members of the Confederate clergy became wartime agents of Southern nationalism, monitoring Southern allegiance and often overseeing the proper wartime participation of their denominational memberships. And as their churches became targets for Union soldiers who occupied enemy territory, Confederate ministers actively fomented various kinds of political resistance. 2 Ultimately, my work suggests three primary conclusions. First, America‘s largest denominations were not somehow co-opted by the state during the Civil War. Many churchmembers and religious leaders were ardent flag wavers, but in most cases their zeal did not represent the compromise of their religious principles. To the contrary, Christians imagined themselves patriots because of---and not in defiance of---their religious beliefs. The recognition of such self-determination within America‘s churches requires an acknowledgement that the same kind of devout sincerity prompted other loyal Americans to nevertheless resist the politicization of their church, including many in mainstream traditions and not just those in peace churches and pacifist sects. Second, by the time of the Civil War the separation of church and state was less pronounced than we imagine today. The death of established churches