182
PERSECUTION
PERSECUTION
of Home persecuted solely on leliKions grounds — whether in the interest of tlie heretic, or to stamp ont heresy. The doctrine embodied in the words 'extra ecclesiani nulla salus' does not fully account for the attitude of Rome. It must he remembered that the 'Holy Roman Empire' inherited the traditions of its pagan predecessor. It also inherited the Imperial passion for universal dominion. But the Imperialism of the Church was partly, if notcliietly, religious. In the background of the papal mind was the belief in the univer.sality of the gospel. It was a superb scheme — one great Empire, uniform in belief and worship — and for a time the idea was practically realized. The Roman Church repressed heresy no less in the interest of Imperial solidarity than in the interest of truth. Persecutions on purely religious grounds, i.e. for heresy, are found in connexion with religious denominations which possess rigidly deHned con- fessions of belief and which are independent of the secular autliurity.
9. Persecution in Protestant countries. — The doctrine that the State was supreme, as well in religious as in secular afi'airs, was universally accepted in Western Europe at the time of the Reformation, with the result that repressive measures with a view to securing religious uni- formity were general. The supremacy of the State was the only adequate safeguard against papal interference, and in most lands the Reforma- tion was exploited by princes or kings as a means to an end. It was currently accepted that the prince or sovereign possessed tlie right to determine the religion — creed and cult — of the Stateor province over which he ruled. The principle adopted by the various Germanic States was tersely expressed in the words 'cujus regio, ejus religio.' Each State, in the person of the central authority, determined its own religion, but there was no religious freedom for tlie individual. His alterna- tives were submission or emigration. Tliis doctrine of the absoluteness of the State was an inheritance from the past, and it was inevitable under the circumstances which then obtained in Western Europe that it should be emphasized. From about A.D. 1200 until the middle of the 16th cent, the Pope exercised complete dominion among the nations of Western Europe. But the rise of distinct nationalities, with diS'erent interests and ideals, produced a desire for national liberty. National sentiment became a powerful force in the life of nations. The longing for political liberty on the part of nations was no less genuine than the desire on the part of individuals to enjoy intel- lectual and religious freedom, and civil rulers took advantage of this powerful sentiment to secure their own freedom from papal interference. The history of the Reformation in England is a case in point. In its initiation it was neither more nor less than the rejection by the monarch of the supremacy of the Pope or of his right of interfer- ence in English — and, in fact, in the king's — afi'airs. Henry VIII. appointed himself as sole and supreme head of the Church of England. The terrors of the Interdict were things of the past. But whereas the nation was free from papal supremacy, the individual had no freedom in his religious beliefs or exercises. When Dissent appeared, as it in- evitably did in all lands where the right of private judgment and liberty of conscience had been affirmed, the secular authority met such dissidence with persecution.
It may be pointed out in passing that there are three ways in which the problem of the relationship between the Church and the State may be solved. (a) The State may dominate the Churcii, or (A) the Church may govern the State, or (c) their respective spheres and functions may be delimited and mapped
out, and the two estates may be separate and independent of each other. Under the second and third regime we lind persecutions for purely re- ligious reasons.
The State may be su|)reme, and determine the conduct of the citizens in reli":ious no less than in civil matters. There is no liberty of belief or worship. The religious life of the individual, as far as external acts are concerned, must follow the lines laid down by the central authority. He must fall in with the oflicial religion, and his submission applies to creed as well as to cult. The State exercises the right to formulate its theology and to draw up its mode of worshi|), and to impose them on all subjects of the realm. If there are diflerent religious bodies within the State, as in many Western countries after the Reforma- tion, the State may recognize or establish one form of religion, with the result that we liave not a State religion but a State Church, whilst other religious bodies are subject to various political disabilities until religious equality is secured. The State may grant complete religious freedom to all denomina- tions, and religious communities may formulate their own creed and elaborate their own mode of worship in complete independence of the secular authority. This is separatism, and obtains, for instance, in the United States, and is being gener- ally accepted, as the solution of the problem, in Great Britain.
The history of religion in Great Britain especi- ally illustrates the gradual abandonment of the doctrine of the absoluteness of the State and of its right to decide the religion of its subjects, and of the gradual adoption of the doctrine of separatism.