Introduction
During the early centuries of Christianity, an era of official persecution of the Christians, not only was the church and state separated, but also opposed. This essay will describe the connection that prevails between church and state from the ancient times in relation to the present times. In so doing, it will show the various shifts historically and in the current world of the state having influence over religion and religion having the upper hand over the state and the current attempts to bring a separation between the two parties. This sense of antagonism can be well edified with the earliest Christian saying which was, Jesus is Lord. As compared to the Roman declaration which was Caesar is Lord, that is, that he is supreme in this world. Several people are not aware of how significant and thorough the Christian statement was in the face of the Roman Empire. Asserting Jesus as Lord, therefore, had obvious political implications that could not comfort but sound treasonous to Roman rule.
The Separation
Around the fourth century, when Emperor Constantine embraced Christianity as his religion, the church and state began to collaborate discernibly. “It was through the issuance of the Edict of Milan, which legalized Christianity and criminalization of the Christians stopped. However, this is not the platform to be part of the controversial discussion as to whether Constantine’s conversion was honest or whether there was suitability for the church through the endorsement of Christianity”. In accordance to the lawful sanctioning of the Church by Constantine, it can be related to the present reasons, on the concern of the positive effects this had on the association between Church and state. Usually, it is through this, that a peaceful government, one that is focused on the developmental progress, looking out and providing for its citizens prevailed.
Charlemagne being made an emperor by Pope Leo III in 800 AD promoted the perception which the pope exemplified exclusive authority where the authority of the secular leaders was subordinated. The emerging of Holy Roman Empire went on with this notion. “The members of the elite class were given the positions of the priesthoods in the nation’s religion. There was no principle parallel to "separation of church and state" in ancient Rome”. In the era of the Roman Republic (509 BC-27 BC), the augurs and the pontiffs were the same people who served as the public officials. This was important because it showed how the government was considerate in the total inclusion in terms of employment. The augurs and pontiffs felt a sense of belonging in the leadership of the state. Consequently, the priests married, bore children, and their lives changed to be politically active. This change can be categorically explained when, a former Pontifex, Julius Caesar was elected and given the consul position, thereby showing a feeling of unbiased democracy, with no practice of nepotism.
On the other hand, with time and after some centuries, worrying concerns came into the picture, from the close correlation between the government and the church, inclusive of the initiatives such as Crusades. The authority of the state demanded the church to do away with the controversial persons. This meant persecution of Christianity. Regardless of the difficulties, the church went through; it became clearer in consideration of the modern perception, the close association between the church and state emerged to be viewed as not being reasonable and improper.
Going forth with the challenges the Church community experienced, it was in 1965, when there was a change in the alignment between the church and the state. It is the time when the 2nd Vatican Council took a new look between the two, and subtly declared the alienation of church and government during the Declaration on Religious Liberty”. The document, Declaration on Religious Liberty said that an individual is in need for liberty for the sake of integrity and the existence of religion. This meant that the church and state separation liberates the church members, and the stature of the church as a whole from the intimidating state’s authority for the existence and practice of Christianity as a religion is not hindered.
It is inappropriate for the authority of the state to compel people involuntarily into such through fear to acknowledge or revoke any religion. Not only did the document show a level of alienation of the church from the government but there were some biases in their rule and perception of the denominations. This can be seen when after the Reformation, there was a rule of ancient theology in which the Catholic faith was permitted not to the same level as the other denominations but a privileged status in any state. A church regardless of the denomination is should logically be regarded as one entity. A situation in which one denomination is regarded as being ‘superior’ to the others does not draw a picture of togetherness in the face of the Christianity.
Politically, the utmost power was the emperor. The emperor was occasionally perceived as a god and that embracing his authority was usually by the means of performing a religious ritual, for example, burning incense to his existence. “Jews had ‘special’ privileges that permitted them from performing this ritual, contrary to the Christians, especially when the Church was progressively comprised of Gentile converts.” This implies that for Romans, undertaking the rituals to the existence of the emperor had substantial importance than narrating the Pledge of Allegiance in recent times. Conversely, for the Christians, it was a practice of worshipping idols, giving to Caesar should be God’s. This meant that Jesus’ teaching resulted in the Church’s belief, that the state has its place but with limited authority. If for once, a person included this in the confession that Jesus as Lord, then it was a ticket for persecution in the power fixated rule in ancient Rome.
The separation establishes an unavoidable confrontation between the two parties by their suitable obligations. In some situations, one group have the upper hand, and in some other cases, it is the other. However, obtaining the proper balance between the two parties has been one of the driving forces of the Roman political tradition, one that was only made possible by the distinction between religious and secular authority that is found uniquely in the Christian tradition.
Limitations on Government
But if the Church brought restrictions to the authority of the state, it raises the likelihood that there are other scopes where also, the state also cannot rightfully infringe. This prospect resulted in the formation of civil society by which the establishment of intermediate institutions that exist between a person and the state. This variety from the natural existence of the family, which had been extensively acknowledged by Rome, to the emergence of societies, confraternities, and other charitable organizations business groups, schools, and much more especially from the medieval period and beyond.
The theory can form the basis of this argument is that this would ultimately manifest in the opinion of sovereignty. This means that the society is composed of a several of independent spheres that adequately control their matters. These include government, religion, family, education, business, labor, and others”. Though each of these aspects should manage its matters of concern, sometimes it becomes difficult: families collapse, schools fail to teach, unethical operations of businesses, corruption in the labor organizations. The significance of this is that the bait is for the government to be involved in coming up with solutions to the problem rather than to work to revive the failing aspects. The divide as well as the ideas of sphere sovereignty that emanate from it is, therefore, is a critical defense against the totalitarian and oppressive forces of government.
Conclusion
The Roman state viewed itself as the definitive authority and focus on law and allegiance with an Emperor, who claimed religion and anticipated to be worshiped. Christianity, which only came into the picture much later, with the inception of the Christian church acknowledged the need for the state in the adherence and maintenance of law and order. However, it did not have the ability to accept its assertions to be applied or to have power over ethics. Christianity has regarded itself as a bearer of the authority to decide what the law of the Almighty was all about. It is anticipated to be obedient to God and the Church before adhering to one’s obedience to the legislation of the country and the Emperor. This was prompted by the apostolic letters “On a second level of authority stood the apostolic letters, especially those of Paul.” The state and church each had their own, though contradicting, levels of influence on the people. One was progressive and the other spiritual. The Emperors had high authority over Church rule and discipline while attempting to apply Christian values to civil law.
The controversial topic regarding this separation often induces problems regarding matters ranging from school vouchers to property tax exemptions on the church and litigated decisions on pregnancy terminations. Conversely, above the particular issues, the wider perception of the parting of the church and civil government is reiterated in the convention's milestone debate of the opposing arguments of both sides. The discussion is not an accusatorial defense of limits and turf, but instead a venerated accolade to liberation and obligation. Vatican II demanded for the creation of "individuals who have respect for the ethical order, will observe the law, and be enthusiasts of true freedom"
Bibliography
Brownstein, A. "Democratic Authority and the Separation of Church and State [Monograph]." Journal of Church and State 54, no. 3 (2012): 445-47.
Fordham University. ‘Ancient.' n.d. http://legacy.fordham.edu/Halsall/ancient/asbook09.asp
Fordham University. ‘Christian Origins.' n.d. http://legacy.fordham.edu/Halsall/ancient/asbook11.asp
Fordham University. ‘Medieval Church.' n.d. http://legacy.fordham.edu/Halsall/sbook1s.asp
Fordham University. ‘Reformation.' n.d. http://legacy.fordham.edu/Halsall/sbook1y.asp
Scherer, Matthew. "Beyond the Separation of Church and State." Beyond Church and State Democracy, Secularism, and Conversion: 1-29.
Marty, Martin. “Christianity. Encyclopedia Britannica. Last Updated December 10. 2015. http://www.britannica.com/topic/Christianity
