« PreviousContinue »
The definitions concerning the relation in which the church stands to the state, depend on those concerning the nature of the church. According to Bellarmine's definition, hefore mentioned, the Roman Catholic Church is a state quite as much as the Republic of Venice, etc. Accordingly, it is independent of every other (secular) state.—The Protestants also maintained that the church, as the kingdom of God, is independent of all secular power, and when they committed the government of the visible church more or less into the hands of the state, they had not the intention of founding for it that system of cesaropapacy subsequently established (in which the sovereign took the place of the pope). In the historical point of view, it was of the greatest importance, that the reformers, in an age so full of commotions, should endeavour to maintain the authority of secular power, as "an institution ordained by God,” first, by securing it against the pretensions of the hierarchy, which undermined the existence of every state; and, secondly, by an energetic opposition to the anarchical notions of the Anabaptists. Thus it happened that, in most confessions of faith, the article, De Magistratu, was laid down as a political and moral principle. And inasmuch as the reformers, at the same time, proceeded on the idea of a Christian magistracy (analogous to the theocratic kings of the Old Testament), some, e. g. Zwingle, were of opinion, that the exercise of ecclesiastical discipline (the "abolition of crimes”) might well be left to the magistrate, without making it necessary to have a distinct ecclesiastical court, while others, as Ecolampadius and Calvin, retained the ecclesiastical institution of excommunication, but reduced it to its primitive apostolical form. Comp. Schröckh, Kirchengeschichte seit der Reformation, iii. p. 84. Henry's Calvin, ii. p. 97, Schenkel, iii. 338 sq.—According to the first Confess. of Basle, Art. 7, the Christian Church inflicts thc punishment of excommunication only as a cor. rective, and gladly receives the excommunicated persons back into her fellowship, when they have amended their scandalous life.” For further passages from the symbolical books of the Protestant Churches, see Winer, p. 180. On the controversy begun by Thomas Erastus (Liebler) of Heidelberg and the disputation which took place A. D. 1568, seo Beckhaus, über den Heidelberger Katechismus, I. c. p. 90 sg. Athenæ Raur. p. 428. Vierordt, Gesch. der Reform. in Grossh. Baden, p. 474 sq. [J. R. Prettyman, The Church of England and Erastianism, Lond. 1854. Pusey, on Royal Supremacy, 1849. W. G. Gladstone, The State in its Relations with the Church, 2 vols., 4th ed.,, 1841. Comp. also the debates in the Westminster Assembly; and Hetherington's History of the same.] A question of practical importance arose on the point, how far the civil power should coöperate in the suppression of heresy or error ? While in the Wartburg Luther warned the Elector about staining himself with the blood of the false prophets. And he also tanght, that “heresy belongs to spiritual things, and can not be hewed with iron, or burnt with fire, or strangled in water” (see Köstlin, p. 187). To this was opposed the procedure of the governments in the case of the Anabaptists and Anti-Trinitarians (Servetus). And yet they were defended by theologians, particularly in the Calvinistic Church. See the discussions about it in Trechsel Servetus, p. 265 sq.
FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOCTRINE CONCERNING THE
Later Protestant theologians developed more fully the difference between ecclesia visibilis and ecclesia invisibilis (in addition to which the other distinction between ecclesia militans and ecclesia triumphans continued to be made). The ecclesia visibilis is either universalis (i. e. scattered through the world), or particularis (i. e. some church which has adopted a particular form). The particular churches are either opposed to, or stand on friendly terms with, each other.' As regards the organization of the visible church (ecclesia synthetica), the Lutheran divines made a distinction between the status ecclesiasticus, the status politicus, and the status æconomicus. Different views obtained among Calvinists ;' nor did they agree with the Lutherans as to the representation of the church (ecclesia repræsentativa). But these formal distinctions were of less importance than the new life which Spener brought into the church, by restoring the Protestant doctrine of a spiritual priesthood,' and the work which Thomasius performed by advocating the so-called territorial system. The mystics and enthusiasts offered, like the sects of the middle ages, a constant opposition to all ecclesiastical establishments, both Roman Catholic and Protestant.'
· The passages relative to this distinction are quoted from the works of the Protestant theologians by De Wette (Dogmatik p. 191, ss.), and Hase, Hutterus Redivivus, p. 320, ss.
• See Wendelin, Alsted, and Heidegger, quoted by De Wette, l. c. p. 195. -For the different forms of church government (e. g. the government of the church by consistories in the Lutheran Church), Presbyterianism, Independency, etc.), see the Canon law.
He advanced his views in his work entitled: Das geistliche Priesterthum, aus göttlichem Wort kürzlich beschrieben und mit einem einstimmigen Zeugnisse gottseliger Lehrer bekräftigt, Frankf., 1677, 8 (arranged in questions and answers). P.7, Qu. 11 : “Does the title of priest belong to none but preachers? Answ. No; preachers are not properly speaking, priests, nor is that title applied to them in the New Test.; but they are called servants of Christ, stewards of the mysteries of God, bishops, presbyters, servants of the gospel, of the Word of God, etc. The name priest is rather a name common to all Christians, nor does it belong to ministers in a different sense from that in which it belongs to other Christians.” 12. “But are not the priests alone the 'Geistlichen ?'” (the word “ Geistlichen" has a twofold signification, i. e., one who is spiritually minded, and, clere gymen.] Answ. “No; for this title also belongs to every Christian (Rom. viii. 5.)—Sacrificing, praying, and blessing, are priestly offices which every Christian may perform, and concerning which Christ alone possesses the dignity of high priest."— Nevertheless Spener admitted, like all Protestants, the necessity of the ministry. Qu. 26. “ Are all Christians ministers, and are all called upon to preach ?" Answ. “No; it requires a particular vocation to fulfil the ministerial duties in the congregation before all, and over all, its members ; therefore he who of himself assumes such powers over others, and encroaches upon the rights of the minister, commits sin; hence teachers and hearers are different persons," etc, (On the other hand, the laity possess the full right of searching the Scriptures. See § 243, note 7).
• According to Thomasius, the reigning prince possesses the right of regulating the ecclesiastical affairs of his country, of banishing persons who disturb the peace of the church, etc. But he himself cannot be subject to ecclesiastical discipline. Thomasius, however, did not give his unqualified assent to the principle of Hobbes : Cujus regio, illius religio. Comp. his treatise : Von dem Recht evangelischer Fürsten in Mitteldingen oder Kirchenceremoniem; it appeared 1692, in Latin, and was afterwards translated into German; compare also the treatise entitled : Das Recht evangelischer Fürsten in theologischen Streitigkeiten, 1696; and other works, referred to by Schröckh, Kirchengeschichte seit der Reformation, vii. p. 541, and Luden, I. c.
* Böhme, Kuhlmann, Gichtel, Labadie, Anna Schurmann, Poiret, and others, vied with each other in attacks upon the established church and its ministers. Poiret called the theology of the latter, Theologia adulatoria seu culinaria : see Arnold iii. p. 166. J. Böhme, heaped reproaches upon the priests of Baal.
ADORATION OF SAINTS AND IMAGES.
The reformers combated the invocation and adoration of saints, but the theologians of the Roman Catholic as well as the Greek Church retained the practice, and endeavored to defend it with the arguments brought forward at an earlier period by the scholastics,' or to vindicate it against the charge of idolatry, by making use of idealising interpretation. The same may be said with regard to the adoration of images and relics, as well as ecclesiastical ceremonies in general. In all these particulars Calvinists carried their opposition farther than Lutherans.
· The Protestants did not teach that there are no saints at all, but only rejected their invocation. See Marheincke, Symbolik, iii. p. 439. Conf. August. Art. 21 : De cultu Sanctorum docent, quod memoria Sanctorum proponi potest, ut imitemur fidem eorum et bona opera juxta vocationem. Sed Scriptura non docet invocare Sanctos sen petere auxilium a Sanctis, quia unum Christum nobis proponit mediatorem, propitiatorium, pontificem et intercessorem : hic invocandus est et promisit so exauditurum esse preces nostras, et hunc cultum maxime probat. Comp. Apol. p. 223.-The Articles of Smalcald use much stronger terms, p. 310 : Invocatio Sanctorum est etiam pars absurda errorum Antichristi, puguans cum primo principali ar ticulo et delens agnitionem Christi.-Similar principles are laid down in the confessions of faith adopted by the Calvinists, Arminians, and Socinians; see Winer, p. 47. [Bp. Ridley, Treatise on Image Worship, in Tracts of Anglican Fathers, vol. ii.; Abp. Wake, on Idolatry, in Gibson's Preservative, vol. vi.; Freeman, Claggett, and Whitby, on Worship of Saints, ibid., vol. vii.]
* Conc. Trid. Sess. 25: (Doceant episcopi) Sanctos una cum Christo regnantes orationes suas pro hominibus Deo afferre, bonum atque utile esse, *
* Hence the invocation of saints is not made a necessary condition of salvation
suppliciter eos invocare et ob beneficia impetranda a Deo per filium ejus Jesum Christum, qui solus noster redemtor et salvator est, ad eorum orationes, opem auxiliumque confugere; illos vero, qui negant, Sanctos æterna felicitate in cælo fruentes invocandos esse, aut qui asserunt, vel illos pro bominibus non orare, vel eorum, ut pro nobis etiam singulis orent, invocationem esse idololatriam, vel pugnare cum verbo Dei adversarique honore unius mediatoris Dei et hominum Jesu Christi, vel stultum esse, in cælo regnantibus voce vel mente supplicare, impie sentire.-Concerning the angels, the Catech. Rom. 3, 2. 10. asserts : Invocandi sunt, quod et perpetuo Deum intuentur et patrocinium salutis nostræ sibi delatum libentissime suscipiunt.
- The Roman Catholics also retained the distinction made by the scholastics between invocatio and adoratio.-For the symbols of the Greek Church see Winer, p. 44-46.
This was done e. g. by Bossuet, Exposition de la Doctrine de l'église catholique, Pag. 19: The Church, in teaching us the utility of addressing prayers to the saints, commands us to invoke them in the same spirit, and in accordance with the same law of society, which induces us to seek assistance from our brethren upon earth....Pag. 27 : It is in this manner that we honor the saints, in order to obtain by their intercession all the graces of God; the principal grace which we hope to obtain is that by which we shall be enabled to imitate them ; to this we are also excited by the contemplation of their admirable examples, and by the honorable mention of their blessed memory which we make before God. Those who will consider the doctrine which we propound, will be compelled to acknowledge that we neither take from God any of those perfections which are essential to his infinite essence, nor ascribe to created beings any of those qualities or operations which belong to none but God himself; there is therefore such a great difference between us and idolaters, that it is difficult to perceive why our opponents give us that name....Pag. 30. And, lastly, no Roman Catholic (?!) ever thought that the saints of themselves know our wants, nor even the desires on account of which we address to them secret prayers. The Church has been content to teach, in accordance with all antiquity, that such prayers are very useful to those who offer them, whether the saints may hear of them by the medium of the ministry and intercourse of the angels, who, according to Scripture, know what happens among men.... whether God himself makes known our wishes to them by means of a particular revelation, or, lastly, reveals to them our secret desires in his infinite essence, which comprehends all truth. Thus the Church has decided nothing as to the different means which God may be pleased to use for this purpose.
• Comp. Winer, p. 47, ss., where the passages bearing upon this point are quoted from the symbolical writings.
• Luther's sermon against the Iconoclasts of Wittenberg.—Similar principles to those adopted by Luther were defended by Schmid in the disputation of Zurich ; but his views were not adopted. During the period of the Interim, the Lutheran Church returned to many of the ceremonies of the Romish Church, which gave rise to the Adiaphoristic controversy.—The minor sects followed the example of the Reformed Church.
The doctrine of seven sacraments, which both the Greek and Roman Churches adopted,' was rejected by the reformers, who admitted (after some wavering), as scriptural only two sacraments'. -viz., those of Baptism and of the Lord's Supper.' These two, together with the Word of God, constitute, in the Protestant view, the means of grace (adminicula gratiæ) which profit only believers ;' on the contrary, the theologians of the Roman Catholic Church asserted the efficacy of the sacraments ex opere operato. But both Roman Catholics and Protestants agreed to the necessity of sacraments (in opposition to Quakers),' and their higher significance as the medium by which spiritual blessings are communicated in opposition to Arminians, Mennonites, and Socinians, who regard them as mere ceremonies). Only the strict Zwinglian theory limited the sacraments to the idea of a mere symbol of duty."
· Conc. Trid. Sess. 7, can. 1 : Si quis dixerit sacramenta sacræ legis.... esse plura vel pauciora quam septem, videlicet baptismum, confirmationem, eucharistiam, pænitentiam, extremam unctionem, ordinem et matrimonium, aut etiam aliquod horum septem non esse vere et proprie sacramentum : anathema sit.— The reasons why the number seven is fixed upon are more fully developed in Catech. Rom. ii. 1, 20, quoted by Winer, p. 123, where their respective dignity is also determined, ii. 1, 22 : Sacramenta non parem omnia et æqualem necessitatem aut dignitatem habent, atque ex iis tria sunt, quæ, tametsi non eadem ratione, tamen præ ceteris necessaria dicuntur, baptismus, pænitentia, ordo; verum si dignitas in sacramentis spectetur, eucharistia sanctitate et mysteriorum numero ac magnitudine longe cæteris antecellit. Conf. Orth. p. 154 : Επτά μυστήρια της εκκλησίας, τα οποία είναι ταύτα το βάπτισμα, το μύρον τού χρίσματος, η ευχαριστία, η μετάνοια, η ιερωσύνη, ο τίμιος γάμος και το ευχέλαιον" ταύτα τα επτά μυστήρια αναβιβάζονται εις τα επτά χαρίσματα του αγίου πνεύματος. The Greeks, however, considered baptism and the Lord's Supper the principal sacrameuts, to which some added penance. Comp. Winer, p. 124.
• At first Melancthon even doubted about the propriety of making use of the word sacrament (which is not found in the Bible); see his Loci Communes, 1521 (in the Corpus Ref., ed. Bretschneider, p. 210): Quæ alii sacramenta, nos signa adpellamus, aut, si ita libet, signa sacramentalia, nam sacramentum ipsum Christum Paulas vocat.
• The two Catechisms of Luther and the Confession of Augsburg treat only of two sacraments, baptism and the Lord's Supper, without excluding the other five. Melancthon would have allowed ordination and marriage to be sacraments (see Thiersch, ii. p. 206), and he even admitted absolution. (Apol. p. 167): Absolutio proprie dici potest sacramentum. But comp. the