RELIGIOUS LIFE

Southland Times, Issue 23544, 25 June 1938, Page 21

RELIGIOUS LIFE

CHURCH AND STATE: (1) THE ANGLICAN VIEWPOINT

[SPECIALLY WRITTEN FOR THE SOUTHLAND TIMES]

By ARCHDEACON LUSH, St. John’s Church (Inver cargill), and the Rev. H. FALLOWS (Lumsden) This is a very immediate and important subject. It has a^ ay L^?X? nproblem. Milton in his time wrote: “This has cuased all the wars in Chr dom, to wit, that the civil magistrate and the church other’s jurisdiction.” In the early days of the Christian church the »sue for many years was Christ or Caesar, not Christ and Caesar. Clearly•the aim should b t make it Christ and Caesar, in the hope that something greater will appear, a hope for which there is warrant in Holy Scripture. _ it is Before the subject, relation of Church and State, is approached, it necessary to clear the ground somewhat. What is the State. It a PP® a F? . f an organization of the inhabitants of a particular territory for the certain services through a particular method. All the tbl e have to belong to this organization. Behind the State all the time is pulsion-in a well ordered State, not the sort of computeion. * a t pomes _to surface very often. This force or compulsion is used only m acc .? r f a ?^,/j? at law. That of course may mean anything, because you can make the law what you like; but it is an essential characteristic of almost any State, that it wie force only in accordance with the rule of law. attitude What is the Church? On the answer to this question depends the attitude of people towards the problem of Church and State. The late H. B. Swale D.D. has written as follows in a book “The Ascended Christ : The estim men form of the Church, and their sense of the privilege and res P? n “P“ membership in that great body, vary according to the vividness or the etai ness of vision with which they realize the ascension of the Church s Head, is not strange that persons who take little interest mthe heavenly le Jesus Christ regard the Church as a merely human society, or a 3™“?* of the State—a force to be respected and supported as it makes good °rde and public morality, but possessing no supernatural powers or aul ®ority, and, apart from the law of the land, or the obligation of a volu^ ary claim upon the submission of the human mmd and will. . . The Church, atone among human societies, has a Head in heaven, and thus dj « 1“?* w hich eternal and infinite. She has, it is true, an earthly side and outward ch place her in relation with the world; and allowance must .be made fop these in her attitude towards society and the State.” . - thnt What is written here is from the point of view of one who.believes that the Church is a Divine Society, not a human institution. All true forms ot State or community life exist for the pursuit of a common good.. It foUows that in principle the church can co-operate with any form of State which seeks to achieve that end. In fact, in so far as the church is a social institution, it is likewise concerned with the same ideal. The church, however, is more than a society. It is an “organism” whose life is inspired and maintained by God. Whatever may be said of the ideals and principles of Church and State, it :.s in their practical application of them that problems arise. Difficulties arise m the interpretation of the word “good.” Further difficulties appear when attempts are made to pursue and secure a common good, in which all members of: th community may share. The church’s idea of the good is comprehensive. It is concerned with man’s spiritual, as well as moral and physical welfare. If a State sets before its individual members a materialistic or humanistic ideal, which ignores or denies the Christian belief in God, and mans spiritual destiny, a conflict at once arises between Church and State. It was interesting to read that someone in New Zealand was of opinion that the idea of the “deification of the State” was gradually growing. Whether true or not, it shows that the human mind could imagine such a growth taking place m our. midst. The chief problefns that such conflict involves are problems of conscience, tor the church possesses a legitimate claim upon the allegiance of its members. Christianity is a positive and revealed religion of which the church is custodian. Statecraft contains much that is experimental, even at times, revolutionary, it has been truly said that in the Dark Ages the only citizenship that remained to a man was his membership of the Church. . , A further factor in the life of a. State or community is the necessity ot some sort of authority. The problem as it effects the church today is the old question of God or Caesar. Our modern world is witnessing various experiments in the matter of authority, as exemplified in Nazism, fascism and communism. Any form of the totalitarian State which demands from its members; that solute allegiance, which Christianity teaches should alone be offered to viod, must produce a conflict between Church and State. There is a modern tendency to regard the State as everything, and material values as the supreme good.” Dean Inge writes: “The evil is that men should pay divine honours to any human institution, making its claims absolute and unchangeable. On the whole, the larger the group, the worse it behaves. Of all aggregates states are the most shameless in their conduct, when they act as states. _ To worship the State is to worship a demon, who has not even the redeeming quality ot being intelligent.” Thus we see we are faced with the fact of two Empires, All are aware they are members of one Empire, the State —all are compelled to be members. This cannot be said of the other Empire, the Church; yet as writes, “The spiritual world has a supreme and independent quality: this is the cornerstone of Christianity.” In the end it would appear that the whole argument lests upon the doctrine of the immortality of the soul, and the relations or man’s spirit to God. “Here we have no continuing city.” The solution to problems between Church and State is not a church-directed State, nor a Statecontrolled Church. St. Paul said that the “powers that be are ordained of God. If that could be accepted by all with a deep sense of responsibility and. stewardship, the problem would in time solve itself. Both Church and State have their respective spheres. Ideally the Church is the nation under its spiritual aspect. Unfortunately the Church’s chief weakness lies in the impotence caused by its many unhappy divisions. Thus no single denomination is capable of acting or influencing, as the complete embodiment of religion, the life of the nation as It would appear therefore that prohlexns between Church and State will continue to exist; so long as the State lacks the guidance of an undivided voice of Christendom, which would lead it to recognize that the Church exists to promote the highest possible life among its citizens. The report of the Oxford Conference on Church, Community, and State (1937); called The Churches Survey Their Task,” is very interesting. In one of the reports we read: The Church as the trustee of God’s redeeming Gospel, and the State as the guarantor of order, justice, and civil liberty have distinct functions in regard tc society. The Church’s concern is to witness to men of the realities which outlast change because they are founded in the eternal will of God. The concern of the State is to provide men with justice, order, and security in a world of sin and change. As it is the aim of the Church to create a communitj founded on divine love, it cannot do its work by coercion, nor must it compromise the standards embodied in God’s commandments by surrender to the : necessities of the day. .... ... j * “The State on the other hand has the duty of maintaining public order and therefore must use coercion, and accept the limits of the practicable. The ; distinctive character of the Church’s activity is the true operation of grace anc • love. The distinctive character of the State’s activity, whatever its construc- ; tive function in the cultural and social life may be, is the power of constraint i legal and physical. In consequence there are certain social activities whicl ■ clearly belong to the Church, others which clearly belong to the State; then , are however, still others which may be performed by either Church or State , In this area tension is unavoidable, and solutions will vary in varying historica : circumstances. Whatever the choice may be, the Christian must always i whether as a member of the Church or as a citizen, obey the will of God.”