nELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Church Government
also to be found certain documentary indications of the germs of a second and divergent theory; not one, however, that reaches backward toward the pastoral form of church government, but one out of which, in favoring circumstances, a presbyterialsynodal polity might have grown. There is here in mind, above all, that fundamental principle of Protestantism, the common priesthood. For even though it be true that this principle was conceived by the Reformers only as a religious 7. Influ- principle (so that things were carried ence of the too far when in earlier times it was Idea of the attempted to derive from this basis Common independent administration and con- Priesthood, gregational tenets, and set these up as express doctrines of the Reformation), it is none the less an overshooting of the mark on another side when modem writers like Sohm (ut sup., p. 510) and Rieker (ut sup., p. 79) profess to credit this thought with no influence at all upon the constitution of the Evangelical Church (cf. E. Sehling, in ZKR, 1894, p. 229, and Kirehengesetzgebung unter Moriz von Sachsen, Leipsic, 1898, pp. 3 sqq.). If, conformably to the well-known doctrine of the Lutheran confessional writings (cf. the same collected with the pertinent citations in 0. Mejer, Lehrbuch des Kir chenr edits, Gottingen, 1869), the congregation of believers is bound by the obligations of faith to see to it that sufficient provision is made at all times for the rightful administration of word and sacraments, and if, furthermore, this congregation is charged with responsibiUty before God in this matter (Apol., p. 292, and elsewhere), it follows that the congregation as a congregation must see to it that this divine commission is properly exercised by those whom it appoints to this end. Upon such bases a presbyterial-synodal church government might very well be constructed. But these ideas were not developed, because, as above set forth, they were thrust aside and suppressed by the system of territorial sovereignty that governed the Church. Or, slightly changed, they were introduced into the territorial system by the teaching that since each member of the congregation is bound to contribute according to the measure of his ability toward the maintenance of a rightful and adequate administration of the word and sacraments, and since the territorial sovereign possesses an especially high measure of such abiUty (in virtue whereof he is designated as membrum ecclesice prcecipuum), he must accordingly apply all his power entrusted to him by God toward the satisfaction of that obligation. By this process the government of the Church might practically fall into the hands of the territorial sovereign alone; because the means at his disposal are so vastly superior to those of all other church-members that these, in comparison, find nothing further to do (Luther's Bedenken von 1530. Erlangen ed.,liv., p. 179; Art. Schmal.,p. 350; Mejer, ut sup., pp. 109 sqq., cf. 27, 36, 46). The idea of membrum ecclesice prcecipuum, to be sure, is agam and again obscured by subsequent absurd usage; but it always carries the assumption that the territorial sovereign has the power to apply his governing rights to the furtherance of eccle-
siastical ends. This was the case in the Reformation period and in general so long as his rights were regarded and exercised aa operative private rights. According to the civil law of to-day, however, the governing rights of the territorial sovereign are in the nature of public powers, which reach no further than their corresponding official obligations. The doctrine of membrum ecclesice prcecipuum is therefore antiquated, and has no significance in present praxis. On the other hand, conjointly with the custodia prioris tabulce, it constituted, down to the middle, or thereabout, of the nineteenth century, the principal foundation upon which the territorial sovereignty rule of the Church was declared to be a part of the territorial governing office, and as such was regarded as an adjunct of state supremacy.
Meanwhile, after some beginnings of changing views that were even earlier apparent, since the middle of the eighteenth century the point of view according to which church government is administered by the State has changed more and more.
In place of the purpose to uphold the 8. Modern first table of the Ten Commandments, Develop- there intervened, as Territorialism ment of (q.v.) came into power, the humani- German tarian-political aim to make the State Church religiously a unity, to the end that Government, quiet and peace, the supremo ends of the State, be achieved; and when a subsequent further evolution of things brought the tolerance principle into play, for this aim was substituted one deriving from freedom of conscience, which determines state activity on this side to-day. The theory of the Church was next changed by the natural right school; the Church is not an institution founded by God, but a society, an association within the State. But several equally legitimate churches standing side by side in the State can be treated by the state government only as church associations which govern themselves; and if among them there is a Lutheran Church, its status does not differ from that of any other, and the right of the State in its government becomes a mere Kirchenhoheit {jus circa sacra), which is essentially the police control of associations. This appears the more equitable since the new constitutional progress has brought matters to such a pass that the popular representatives have acquired directly or indirectly a determining influence in legislation and certain other specific rights of government, indeed the entire sphere of operation; since, further, all representatives in the Diet have equal voice — the Reformed, the Roman Cathohc, and the non- Christian members the same as the Lutherans — and this equality of influence on the part of nonadherents of the Lutheran Church is inconsistent with its constitutional parity. Accordingly there are projects on every side in the direction of a logical transformation of the territorial sovereignty form of church polity into corporate self-government. It has been previously remarked that the Reformers' theology opened the way to progress in this direction; and that the example of the Calvinistic Reformed Church was not far removed, even though the latter's dogmatic tenets were not here to the purpose. And in fact it is true that.
Church History