civil war, church, and state

7/28/2019 Civil War, Church, and State

1/3

The Civil War,Church,and StateBy Worth E. Woody Norman, Jr.

Current day spats over church-state rela-tions pale in comparison to the power-ful legal interventions by the United Statesgovernment in the southern churches dur-

ing and immediately following the Ameri-can Civil War, and the reactions these inter-ventions inspired. Take the case of a Uniongeneral and a southern Episcopal bishopwho squared off in Alabama in 1865.

Several denominations in the antebellumperiod splitoverthe political and moral issueof slavery. Southern Methodists separatedfrom their northern brethren, as did Bap-

tists. Presbyterians and Lutherans sufferedsimilar divisions. The Episcopal Diocese ofAlabama declared its own constitution nulland void at the diocesan convention of May1861, and laterthat year joined the other Epis-copal dioceses in the South to form theProtestant Episcopal Church of the Confed-erate States. Following the formation of anew nation, a new ecclesial structure and

constitution were likewise required.

8 THE LIVING CHURCH JULY 7, 2013


2/3

As northern troops advanced into the South, par-

ticularly in northern Alabama, the leaders of the Fed-

eral army understood the territories including

churches and their properties as regained for

northern institutional purposes. Of particular interestto military officials were the Methodist Episcopal

Church, South, and the Protestant Episcopal Church

which they blamed for the war. The military believed

that churches and their ministers should set an ex-

ample by fostering loyal sentiments to the govern-

ment. Seeing few loyal southern ministers and cer-

tainly no loyal bishops, the Secretary of War in

Washington, D.C., issued an order on Nov. 30, 1863,

awarding all Methodist churches in the South to a

Bishop Ames of the northern Methodist denomina-

tion. In another War Department order of Jan. 14,

1864,the militarywas directed to turn over all churches

belonging to the southern Baptists to the American

(northern) Baptist Home Mission Society, which the

government believed to have a loyal membership. A

similar order followed for the Presbyterians.

With military control of churches came attempts to

control worship and prayers. The military made it il-

legal for churches to pray for any government official

other than the President of the United States and

other federal officials. Criminality was thus assigned

to those who prayed for former Confederate govern-

ment officials.

The first Episcopal Bishop of Alabama, Nicholas H.Cobb (1844-61), opposed secession outspokenly.But Cobb died in 1861, reportedly one hour before se-

cession was announced. The diocese elected Virginian

Richard Hooker Wilmer, a Confederate sympathizer, to

succeed Cobb in the only election of a bishop held

within the Protestant Episcopal Church of the Confed-

erate States. Wilmer received his episcopal orders on

March 6, 1862, at Richmonds Monumental Church

through the laying on of hands by the Bishop of Virginia,

William Meade (1841-62), his assistant bishop John

Johns, and Stephen Elliott, Bishop of Georgia(1841-66).

Both Meade and Elliott served as presiding bishop ofthe short-lived Episcopal Church of the Confederate

States, each dying while serving in the capacity. Bishop

Meades death occurred eight days after Wilmers con-

secration. Wilmers church-state test would come at

wars end.

Once theConfederate government collapsed, Wilmer

directed his clergy in a pastoral letter (or circular) to

omit the Prayer for all those in Civil Authority from

the liturgy. Wilmer later wrote in a book for his grand-

children: I looked around and found no vestige of any

such authority. And the key term in his circular was

precisely civil authority, incorporating several legal

or canonical matters, in Wilmers judgment. When he

was consecrated a bishop Wilmer had not declared al-

legiance to or conformity with the constitution and

canons of the northern Episcopal Church because heconsidered only civil government (and not military oc-

cupation) lawful. The constitution and canons of both

the southern and northern Episcopal churches were

organized and ratified within the sphere of civil andnot

military governments.

The State of Alabama (known as the Department ofAlabama) fell under the jurisdiction of GeneralGeorge H. Thomas, commander of the Military Divi-

sion of Tennessee. Wilmers circular to his clergy went

unnoticed by military officials for several months but

was eventually brought to the attention of Thomas

who, due to antipathies toward Wilmer, ordered a sub-

ordinate general in Mobile to investigate the matter of

the directive inside Wilmers pastoral letter. Wilmer, for

his part, viewed Thomas, a Virginian, as a traitor to

their native state. When asked by a military officer

when he would release his clergy to pray for the Pres-

ident, Wilmer countered that he would not rescind his

pastoral directive at the instruction of military author-

ity. An exchange of communication between Bishop

Wilmer and military authorities ensued, the content of

which seems strange if not comical when judged by

the secular mindset of 21st-century America.

In perhaps the first church-state confrontation fol-

lowing the Civil War, Major General Charles R. Woods

of Mobile issued General Order No. 381 on Sept. 20,

1865, which recited the history and details of Wilmers

pastoral letter and the reasons for omitting the prayer

for the President. Woods quoted Wilmers contention

that prayer for the President is altogether inappropri-

ate and inapplicable to the present condition of things,

when no civil authority exists in the exercise of its

functions. Hence, as I remarked in the circular, we

may yield a true allegiance to, and sincerely pray for

grace, wisdom, and understanding in behalf of a gov-

ernment founded on force, while at the same time wecould not in good conscience ask for its continuance,

prosperity, etc. But the general observed that Wilmers

circular, issued on June 20, 1865, not only forbade

prayer for the continuance of military rule but also de-

clined to pray for anyone in authority at all. Yet the

United States had a Cabinet, Supreme Court, and

many other civil officials when Wilmer issued his let-

ter, Woods noted, and Alabama subsequently acquired

a civil governor.

General Thomas, through General Woods, accord-

JULY 7, 2013 THE LIVING CHURCH

(Continued on next page)


3/310 THE LIVING CHURCH JULY 7, 2013

ingly suspended Bishop Wilmer and his clergy from

their ecclesiastical functions and they were forbid-

den to preach or hold services. And all of the Episco-

pal churches in Alabama were shut down and se-

cured. Once Wilmer and his clergy expressed proper

allegiance (with evidence) to the government of the

United States and took an amnesty oath they could re-

sume their normal functions.

Wilmer, however, maintained that neither civil nor

military leaders hadanyright or authority to interfere

in church matters. Prayer was religious, not political.

As he later wrote regarding the ruckus around the

Prayer for all those in Civil Authority: Some of the

generals of the Federal army were kind enough to

step forward, and attempt to solveallmy doubts upon

the question; but they did not succeed in settling my

difficulty. The fact that they had abrogated all the

sanctions of ourformer legislative, judicial, andexec-

utive government only increased the necessity for

more earnest prayers unto God that He would give

grace to thesesoldiers who held us under the bayonet

to execute justice, and maintain truth.

President Andrew Johnson reluctantly advisedGen. Thomas to revoke the suspension imposedon Episcopal clergyin Alabama. Thomas did so, while

offering a colorful chastisement of Wilmer, his fellow

Virginian an individual, wrote Thomas, who,

styling himself Bishop of Alabama, forgetting his mis-

sion to preach peace on earth and good will toward

men, and being animated with the same spirit which

through temptation beguiled themother of mento the

commission of thefirst sin thereby entailing eternal

toil and trouble on earth issued, from behind the

shield of his office, his manifesto of the 20th of June

last to the clergy of the Episcopal Church of Alabama.

This man in his position of a teacher of religion,

charity, and good fellowship with his brothers, whose

paramount duty as such should have been character-

ized by frankness and freedom from cunning, thus

took advantage of the sanctity of his position.

Three days later Bishop Wilmer directed his clergy to

use the prayer.

As post-war readjustments continued, the General

Councilof the Confederate Church determined in No-

vember 1865 that each southern diocese should de-

cide whether to rejoin the northern church. On Jan.

31, 1866, Bishop Richard Hooker Wilmer made his

declaration of conformity and the Diocese of Ala-

bama became the last to reunite with the Protestant

Episcopal Church of the United States.

The Rev. Worth E. Woody Norman, Jr., is a native

of Norfolk, Virginia and lives in Birmingham, Al-

abama. His biography of a former U.S. Ambassa-

dor to the Czech Republic is due this Fall.

Sources:Fleming, Walter L. Civil War and Reconstruction in Alabama.

New York: McMillan, 1905.

Perry, William Stevens. The History of the American Episcopal

Church 1587-1883. Boston: James R. Osgood and Company,

1885.

Whitaker, Walter Claiborne.History of the Protestant Episco-

pal Church in Alabama, 1763-1891. Birmingham: Roberts &

Son, 1898.

Wilmer, Richard Hooker. The Recent Past from a Southern

Viewpoint: Reminiscences of a Grandfather. New York:

Thomas Whittaker, 1887.

An exchange of communication between Bishop Wilmer and military

authorities ensued, the content of which seems strange if not comical

when judged by the secular mindset of 21st-century America.

(Continued from previous page)

civil war, church, and state

Documents