CHURCH, ABYSSINIAN. See ABTSsnriAir.
CHURCH AND STATE. 1. Pagan Natione.^ln the Pagan states the religions life has been, on the whole, part of the politicid, and religion an affair of the state. In general, the priestly dignity was vested in the chief of tiie state government In Athens and other Greek republics the popular assemblies had the final decision on religious afiSurs. In Rome the priest- ly dignity was originally'united with the person of the kings; after the establishment of the republic, the Senate had supreme control of religious a£BdEB ; on the
establishment of the em|rire, the emperor became Pom' tifex Maximut,
2. Among the Jewe, — ^Among the Jews, the whole government of the state was based upon the idea that Jehovah was the ruler of the people. All the national institutions were destined to promote the worship of the SJng of Israel, and to make the people obedient to his precepts as they were laid down in the Old Tes- tament God, the Idng of Israel, ruled the people through the organs which he ^pointed — through Mo- ses, Aaron and his descendants, Joshua and the judges, and the prophets. The demand of the Jews for a king was therslbre oensured by Samuel as a weakening of the perfect theocracy ; but even the king always re- mained in the Jewish law the earthly representative of Jehovah, and he had no right to give new laws, but simply to execute and enforce the laws given directly by Jdiovah. See Thxoobagt.
a Teaching (fChritt and the Apoeilei.--'Th9tetLciibig of Christ on tiie relation of the Church founded by him to the state was very plain. He distinctly recognised the absolute law-givhig power of the state govern- ments in all secular ai&iis, and enjoined upon his fol- lowers to obey the state laws in eveiything that was not opposed to the precepts of their religion. His re- ply to the Pharisees, " Render unto Ciesar the things which are Cttsar^s, and unto God the things that are God's" (Matt x^ 21), distinctly pronounces the separation between the Churph and the State. He de- clares the powers of the civU rulers to be of divine authority by saying to Pilate, "Thou couldest have no power at all against me except it were given thee from above." The apostles enjoin upon Christians obedience to the existing state governments: thus Paul, in the Epistle to the Romans (xiii, 1, 2), "Let every soul be subject to the higher powers. For there is no power but of God ; the powers that be are or- dained of God. Whosoever, tiierefore, resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God ; and they that resist shall receive unto themselves damnation." Sim- ilar precepts are given in 1 Tim. ii, 1, 2; 2 Titus iii, 1 ; 1 Pet iii 18. Only in case of demands directly con- trary to the Christian religion, obedience was to be re- fhsed. Thus Peter and the other apostles, when com- manded not to teach in the name of Jesus, answered, " We ought to obey God rather than men" (Acts v, 29).
4. Chrittianiiy m the Time of Contlantim. — ^In com- pliance with these teachings of Christ and the apostles, the first Christians conformed themselves to aU secular laws ; and only when things were demanded of them contiaiy to Christian law, such as the open renuncia- tion of thehr fidth, they refused obedience, but submit- ted to the penalties imposed upon them. The perse- cutions which the Christians had to suffer during the first three centuries arose not from any active opposi- tion on their part to the Roman laws, but chiefly from the application of the ancient laws, which forbade any Roman citizen to worship divinities not recognised by the state, and any conquered nation to propagate its religion in other parts of the empire. Hence the more the outward distinction of the Christians from the Jewti became apparent, the more they exposed themselves to the application of the Roman law. Most of the persecutions were, however, of short duration, and some of the emperors even showed themselves fiivora- ble to the Christians. As civU and military offices frequently brought tiie occupants into situations in which they had to pay some homage, direct or indi- rect, to the pagan state religion, the Christians natu- rally regarded it as dangerous to perform the duties of such offices. The fact however, that Christian sen- ators and Christian soldiers are mentioned in the early history of the Church, shows that the holding of such offices was, in itself, not deemed incompatible with the religious duties of a Christian.
5. Fr(m Conttantme to Charlemagne.^Anew era in the histoiy ot the relation between Church and Stste
CHURCH AND STATE
330
CHURCH AND STATE
begins with the reign of Gonstantine the Great. In the yean 312 and 818 fall freedom was gnaranteed to the Christian Church throughoat the empire. Soon imperial edicts granted many privileges to the clergy. They received the same immunities which were pos- sessed by the pagan priests, and soon were preferred to the latter ; the particular charches obtained the right of receiving le^u^es; the bishops received some kind of independent jorisdiction. The emperor, in confisr- ring these rights, acted from the old Roman stand- point of chief of the state in matters religions as well as secnlar. Thus the first exhibition of a Christian state chorchbm was a direct emanation from pagan views transferred to the Christian Church. The e peror retained the nmffnia and the name of PonHfix Maxknu. Gratian was the first who laid aside the nmgma, hot the name was retained much longer. On the coins Constantino placed the cross, as a s3rmbol of Christianity, by the side of the sun-god, as the repre- sentative of the old religion. The emperors thus from the start began to view themselves more as patrons than as members of the Christian Church, and the chiefs of the Church were, on the whole, weU pleased with the privileges which were coniSerred upon them, and thought little of disputing the influence which the emperor gradually claimed to exercise upon Church aflSidrs. In the East, this subjection of the ecclesias- tical authorities to the state governments went much further than in the West^ and has remained a charac- teristic of the Eastern churches up to the present day. The emperors convoked the synods, and claimed the right of sanctioning their resolutions. Even doctrinal formulas were sometimes drawn up by the emperors, and only promulgated by the bishops. The banish- ment of bishops for not concurring in the resolutions passed by synods convoked by the emperors, and fre- quently acting under the direct influence of the emper- ors, began even during the reign of Constantine.