Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY
/
Observing the American experiment
Observing the American experiment
Apr 4, 2025 12:15 PM

The following essay is excerpted from Lord Acton: Historian and Moralist (Acton Institute 2017).

John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton placed liberty in the forefront of all goods, moral and political. Many people are aware that the great pleted project of his life was the writing of a history of freedom. He saw the evolution of liberty as the work of Providence, as the consequence, as he put it, of Christ’s being “risen on the world.” Achieved liberty is the fulfillment of the divine plan. It is forthis reason above all others that Acton so valued the American experiment.

Acton repeatedly noted that the Protestant Reformation and the wars of religion led to the establishment of absolutism rather than toleration and freedom. Royal power and bureaucratic administration, whether Catholic or Protestant, was substituted for the imperatives of conscience. Established churches used the power of the state to coerce the consciences of the subject. The Puritan revolution in England appealed to the higher law of conscience but then sank back into intolerance and repression. It was the sectarians, at first in England and then in America, who justified religious nonconformity by an appeal to conscience.

In one manuscript, Acton wrote: “The theory of conscience was full grown. It had assumed in one of the sects, a very peculiar shape: the doctrine of inner light. The Quakers not originally liberals. But the inner light struggled vigorously for freedom. In the very days in which the theory of conscience reached its extreme terms, Penn proclaimed conscience as the teaching of his sect. And it became the basis of Pennsylvania—Voltaire’s best government.”

He added in another manuscript, “Conscience understood in this way supplied a new basis for freedom. It carried further the range of Whiggism. The deeper Quakers perceived the consequences, Penn drew the consequences in the Constitution of Pennsylvania. It was the standard of a new party and a new world.”

The appeal was to conscience, a conscience which defied the laws of man in order to obey the law of God. It was but a step from an appeal to liberty in religion to an appeal to liberty in politics. The appeal to the higher law made by the framers of the Declaration of Independence was only a more abstract and universal conception of liberty than the appeal to conscience made in the name of religion. Acton noted, “America started with the habit of abstract ideas. Rhode Island, Pennsylvania. It came to them from religion and the Puritan struggle. So they went beyond conservation of national rights. The rights of man grew out of English toleration. It was the link between tradition and abstraction.”

The appeal to the higher law made by the framers of the Declaration of Independence was only a more abstract and universal conception of liberty than the appeal to conscience made in the name of religion. In his Cambridge University lecture (1901) on the American Revolution, Acton put the revolutionary shift from rights based on the fact that the colonists were Englishmen to rights based on a universal appeal to a higher law in this way:

Then James Otis spoke, and lifted the question to a different level, in one of the memorable speeches in political history. Assuming, but not admitting, that the Boston custom-house officers were acting legally, and within the statute, then, he said, the statute was wrong. Their action might be authorised by parliament; but if so, parliament had exceeded its authority, like Charles with his shipmoney, and James with the dispensing power. There are principles which override precedents. The laws of England may be a very good thing, but there is such a thing as a higher law.

Acton argued with great force that England’s colonial rule in America had been one of the mildest and most beneficentcolonial regimes in history. Americans were not rebelling against oppression. The American course was justified solely on the basis of our appeal to a higher law, justified solely by an appeal to the rights of political conscience. These were arguments Acton understood, approved, and applauded.

The foundation of the American republic was, Acton rightly understood, pleted with the successful termination of the American Revolution. The American Revolution created a political society in which the unchecked will of the people was paramount, state governments in which the tyranny of the majority would, sooner or later, lead to anarchy. The second great act of the founding, the making of the Constitution, was a conservative act which made the creation of a republic possible. The creation of the Constitution had two great objects in view, the prevention of the tyranny of the majority and the dispersion of centralized power. The framers of the Constitution achieved these objectives not through the enunciation of any new principles but promising contending tendencies and forces. The structure of the Constitution was like the structure of a medieval cathedral in which countervailing forces were employed in such a way as to hold the whole structure aloft. None of the great questions were resolved: states rights, federal power, the tariff, slavery. American federalism, which Acton reckoned one of the great inventions of the age, was based promise rather than principle. From the beginning this structure of republican liberty threatened to collapse. In spite of their great achievement, Acton viewed the work of the founders as plete and the Constitution as an imperfect instrument.

It is my considered judgment that Acton was the most knowledgeable foreign observer of American affairs in the nineteenth century. As a very young man he had made a trip to the United States and had traveled widely, but the mature Acton’s knowledge of America was based upon books rather than direct personal experience. No American, with the exception of Henry Adams, who was nearly his exact contemporary, knew American history more thoroughly than Acton. It is a pity that American historians so rarely read him.

Stephen Tonsor is a professor emeritus at the University of Michigan.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY
On the Resilience of Ideology
Those of us who have a reached a certain age remember the time when a popular cliché declared the “end of ideology.” The idea was first formulated in 1960 in a book of the same title by Harvard sociologist Daniel Bell.1 For the next few decades, the idea that ideologies were a phenomenon of the past, and that they were fading away, remained popular among intellectuals. It seemed to find its final confirmation in the collapse of the Soviet...
The Tower of Babel: The Problem of Devarim Achadim
In the 16th century, Belgian artist Pieter Bruegel the Elder painted one of the most famous renderings of the Bible’s Tower of Babel. He portrayed the tower as a gargantuan edifice of bricks and mortar, under construction, with its top above the clouds, reaching toward the heavens. The project’s royal leader is in the foreground with workmen at his feet feigning subservience. Within the painting itself, construction seems to be proceeding methodically, but pletion is noticeably in doubt—perhaps reflecting...
An Awkward Alliance: Neo-Integralism and National Conservatism
Conservative Christian Americans currently face a challenge from an insurgent group of scholars and activists calling themselves “post-liberals” or “neo-integralists.” They are largely scholars. Some are theologians, like Chad Pecknold (Catholic University of America) and Fr. Edmund Waldstein, O. Cist. (Stift Heiligenkreuz, a Cistercian abbey in Austria). Others are political scientists, such as Gladden Pappin (University of Dallas) and Patrick Deneen (University of Notre Dame), or law professors like Adrian Vermeule (Harvard Law School). Others are popular authors like...
In the Liberal Tradition: Steven Horwitz
The classical liberal movement lost one of its strongest voices when economist Steven Horwitz passed away after a long fight with cancer on June 27, 2021. “I still believe the world is getting better and better and more awesome. I’m just not going to see as much of it as I thought I would.” When Horwitz spoke those words on the Free Thoughts podcast in 2019, he was about two years into his battle with multiple myeloma—a disease that...
What I Saw at the National Conservatism Conference
“So are you with that conference upstairs? Is it political? We’re both kind of into politics.” I had finally made my escape after my first full, long day at the National Conservatism Conference and was sitting just outside the Orlando Hilton beside an open fire pit with a drink, trying to wrap my mind around just what “National Conservatism” meant. In November of 2021, scores of speakers, activists, politicians, and just plain fans descended on the Orlando Hilton to...
Thinking in an Age of Ideology
We live in an age of ideology. The world plex and hard to understand, so we look for a theory that can help make sense of things. This is understandable. Throughout history, people made sense of the world through cultural and religious traditions. But as the world has e simultaneously more connected and more secular, as our awareness plexity has increased while religious and cultural traditions have weakened, people now exist with a heightened sense of uncertainty. Many of...
Playing to Angels
The Honorable Henry Hyde, in a speech to the National Right to Life Committee, reminded the Committee of something I hope you will never forget. He said that we are not “playing to the gallery, but to the angels, and to Him who made the angels.” Ponder that for a moment. If there is one insidious idea that we have worked to inoculate you against during your time with us, it is this tendency, all too prevalent, to play...
The Church’s Overdue Reconciliation with Liberalism
In his social encyclical Rerum Novarum (1891), Leo XIII condemned socialism for rejecting private property and instigating class warfare. But the historical evolution of the concept made it necessary to nuance this view. Already by 1931, Pius XI distinguished between revolutionary socialism, which he continued to condemn outright, and reformist socialism that accepted participation in democratic life—though even the latter remained, in his judgment, patible with the Christian faith. A new distinction was introduced by John XXIII and John...
Profit and Responsibility
The standard critique of woke capitalism is that woke ideas are ruining business. Instead of engaging in political panies should focus on turning a profit by creating superior goods and services. In his book, Woke Inc., Vivek Ramaswamy takes a different approach to the argument. He argues that “woke capitalism” isn’t wrong because it’s ruining business, but because woke business is ruining the foundations of our democracy. When businesses engage in political and social activism, they undermine the way...
Opening the Mind
It is rare to find in a single work a carefully documented intellectual history of Islam as well as a cri de coeur for contemporary reforms—or at least it is rare to find both tasks done well. Mustafa Akyol’s Reopening Muslim Minds, however, impressively achieves both feats with substance and elegance in a work that deserves to be acclaimed and widely read. Akyol, a Turkish journalist and senior fellow at the Cato Institute, has devoted his career to this...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved