i 6. Chronological Tables: H. ti. Smith, History of the Church of Christ in Site Chronological Tables (New York, 1880); F. X. Kraus, Synchronistische Tabellen zur Kirchengeachichte (Trevea,
THE NEW SCHAFF HERZOG
1876); idem, Syttchroniatische Tabellen zur christlichen Kunstgeschichte (Freiburg, 1880); H. Weingarten, Zeittafeln and Ueberblicke zur Kirchengeachichte (6th ed., by C. F. Arnold, Leipaic, 1905). 7. Atlases: K. Heueai and H. Mulert, Atlas zur Kirchengeschichte, (i6 maps with 18 pages of introduction and index (Tiibingen, 1905). The general historical atlases of R. H. Labberton (14th ed., Boston, 1889), F. W. Putzger (24th ed., Bielefeld, 1900), and E. A. Freeman (accompanying his historical Geography of Europe, 3d ed., London, 1903) are also useful for church history.
The main activity in recent times in historical investigation and treatment has been devoted to the first three Christian centuries, including the work of Harnack, Funk, Kattenbuach, Lightfoot, Robinson, McGiffert, and many others. The Middle Ages are receiving an increasing amount of attention; names worthy of mention in this field are DSllinger, Ehrle, Denifle, Schwane, Kirsch; and Finks among Roman Catholics, and Karl Miiller, Hauck, DZirbt, Sabatier, Creighton, Stubbs, Lea, and others among Protestants.
(PHILIP ScaAlFt) D. S. SCHAFF.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: For fuller information cf. Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, i. 1 63, New York, 1882; and introductions to other general works on church history. Further, Schaff, What is Church History,* Philadelphia, 1848; W. G. T. Shedd, The Philosophy of History, Andover, 1861; H. B. Smith, The Nature and Worth of the Science of Church History, in his volume of essays, Faith and Philosophy, pp. 49 87, New York, 1877; J. De Witt, Church History as a Science, in the Bibliotheca Sacra, 1883; E. A. Freeman, The Me" of Historical Study, London, 1888; A. C. MeGitfert, The Study of Church History, in theBibliotheca Sacra, 1893; W. Bright, The Study of History, in Waymarka o/ Church History, London, 1894; Lord Acton, The Study of History. London, 1895; A. Harnack, Daa Chriatentum and die Geach%chte, Leipeio, 1895; K. Lamprecht, What la Hiatoryf travel. from the Germ. by E. A. Andrews. New York, 1905.
CHURCH ORDER (Ger. Kirchenordnung)
The general ecclesiastical constitution of a State. The early Evangelical Church attached less importance to ecclesiastical ritual than the preReformation Church had done. As early as 1526 Luther observes in Deutsche Messe and Ordnung files Gottesdiensts : " In sum, this and all other forma are so to be used that where they give rise to a misuse they should be forthwith set aside, and a new form be made ready; since outward forma are intended to nerve to the advancement of faith and love, and not to the detriment of faith. Where this they cease to do, they are already dead and void, and are of no more value; just as when a good coin is debased sad retired on account of its abuse, and issued anew; or when everyday shoes wax old and rub, they are not longer worn, but thrown away and new ones bought. Form is an external thing, be it ever so good, and thus it may lapse into misuse; but then it is no longer an orderly form, but a disorder; so that no external order stands and avails at all of itself, as hitherto the papal forma are judged to have done, but all forma have their life, worth, strength, and virtues in proper use; or else they are of no avail and value whatever " (1Verke, Weimar ed., xix. 72 aqq.). According to Lutheran ecclesiastical teaching (Formula of Con
cord, IL; Solids declaratio, x.; Apology, ziv.; Melanchthon's Loci, 2d redaction in CR, xxt. 555 556; the Saxon Visitationabuch of 1528; etc.) a uniform liturgy is requisite only in so far as it is indispensable to uphold proper doctrine and the administration of the sacraments; whereas in general the rightful appointment of the external functions of church officers and their sphere in the congregations is committed to the church governing board of the state authorities. The spontaneous development of church law, and especially the regulation of divine service, the sacraments, and discipline, as Luther ideally conceived it, proved impracticable, and gave place, though not invariably so, to definition on the part of temporal sovereigns. All these regulations, especially those of governments and cities, by means of which the canonical church forms that had previously prevailed in the land were modified in a reformatory direction, while the newly developing church system became progressively established, are called " Church Orders." Those of the sixteenth century are the most important (cf. E. Sehling, in ZKR, xxix., 1897, pp. 328 aqq., and introduction to his edition of the Church Orders, i., Leipaic, 1902).
A Church Order usually begins with a dogmatic
part in which the agreement of the State Church
with the general Lutheran confessions is set forth
with more or less of detail (Credettda); then follow
regulations concerning liturgy, the appointment of
church officers, organization of church government,
discipline, marriage, schools, the pay of church and
school officials, the administration of church prop
erty, care of the poor, etc. (Agenda, q.v.). A sys
tematic topical arrangement is by no means al
ways adhered to. As a rule, later compilations
have made use of earlier forms, and thus the Orders
are grouped in families. E. Sf;131.nsa.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: H. C. Kbnig, BibiioWuca apendorum, Zeller
feld, 1728; J. J. Mower, Corpus juris euangeliorum eccle
eiaatiCi, 2 vole., Z811ichsu, 1737 38; A. L. Richter, Die
euanpelisclun Kirchenmdnunpen dew 16. Jahrhunderta, 2 vole., Weimar, 1848.
CHURCH PATRON SAINT (patronus sanctus): The particular saint to whom a church is dedicated, and under whose protection it stands. The early Church in a great variety of ways put guardian saints in the place of the tutelary deities (dei titulares) known to the pagan religions in connection with specific objects and relationships. In primitive times church patrons were taken especially from the number of the martyrs, who were esteemed to be influential mediators with God. Then when the worship of saints had developed from the veneration of martyrs, the guardian patrons were selected from among the saints not only for separate churches, but also for countries, dioceses, orders, cloisters, cities, congregations, gilds, brotherhoods, etc. The possession of relics of a saint in a certain church often determined his choice as patron. When subsequently the custom arose of naming churches after some Christian mystery as, for instance, the Holy Trinity, the Holy Ghost, the Sacred Heart of Jesus it came about that a church might be commended to the protection of a saint without bearing his name, thus creating the distinction
101 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA Church Order
between a protective and a titular patron. In
accordance with its teaching as to the saints and
veneration of relics, the Roman Catholic Church
has developed a special doctrine concerning venera
tion, election, alteration, etc., of church patron
saints (cf. the decree confirmed by Urban VIII.,
Mar. 23, 1630, in L. Ferraris, Btbliothecs Prompts
caawnica, 11 vole., Venice, 1782 94, s.v. patroni
The Reformers and Protestants generally have
retained the old custom of designating churches after
saints and Christian mysteries for the purpose of
thus bestowing upon them a definite, distinguishing
name. In the choice of it, more or less deference
is shown to the preferences of the congregation and
the founder. E. S>,arrnto.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: M. E. C. Walcott. 6aarod ArdwTopy, av.
•' Patron," London, 1888.
Early Church Books (¢ 1). Medieval Registers (§ 2). The Beginnings of Modern Registers (§ 3). Contents and Character (¢ 4). Value for Other than Church Uses (¢ 6). Ecclesiastical and Civil Registers <§ 8). Collections of Church Registers (¢ 7).
The German word Ifirclaenlnich has different meanings. It refers to church books in the sense of " service books," and to parish books which recorded inventories, rents, income, ecclesiastical celebrations, and other matters referring to worship; but in modern times the word has generally taken the meaning of registers of sacramental acts, such as baptism, marriage ceremonies, confessions, and funerals.
An especially old and remarkable example of a " church book " in the older sense is that of Oldesloe, which begins before 1371 and contains a table for determining Quinquagesima Sunday, the pastoral epistle of Bertram, bishop of Lilbeck (1376), lists of pastors, also of tithes, income of pastors, donations, etc. Church books of another kind, but differing from modern church registers, are the cartularies of bishops in England, as, for instance, the Register of John Pontiesara (1282 1304) and the Registers of John de Sandals and Rigaud de Aeserio, bishops of Winchester, 1318 23 (London and Winchester, 1897). These books contain everything relating to the government of bishops.
The church book in the sense of a
:. Early register of ecclesiastical celebrations
Church is important for the history of modern
Books. registers, since in the sixteenth and
seventeenth centuries it was transformed into the church register of baptisms, marriages, etc., for instance in Mecklenburg and Holstein. Land registers and registers of taxation go back much farther in Germany into the fifteenth century, in England, France, Italy into the fourteenth or thirteenth, even earlier. Another source for the date of personal records are the church bills found in the older parish registers. A more thorough knowledge of the history, nature, sad importance of church registers began only when efforts were made to collect and test existing material. Church registers, or at least compilations
corresponding to them, are traceable to the civilized nations of the earliest times, for instance the Egyptians. The Hebrews had also their records of birth and genealogical tables. In the Roman empire registers of births may be traced back to the time of the kings; from the time of Augustus are found registers of marriages. As Christianity took its rise in the Roman empire, it accepted to a certain extent the existing elements of culture. The diptyches (see LIHER Vrrm; Saurrmoxis, CHR.IBTIAN) were adopted from the Romans, and adapted to Christian usages, the members of the congregation being registered not for military reasons or for the levying of taxes, but se citizens of the kingdom of God. Besides the dates of birth, there were also recorded dates of marriage and of death. These " sacred books and tablets " were important preeminently from a historical standpoint, as they contained the names of bishops, martyrs, and benefactors.
The diptyches did not develop into church registers of the modern kind, nor were they of any importance for the modern Church, owing chiefly to the degeneration of culture after the destruction of the Roman empire, and to a perverted tendency of the medieval Church. Instead of the diptyches of the deceased and living,
a. Medieval churches and monasteries adopted
Registers. necrologies and morilogiea, in which
were entered especially the names of
donors and benefactors. They were usually called
" books of life " (see LIBER Vim.>v). Besides
these, there were in existence church books in
the older sense, that is, registers of taxes, inven
tories, etc. On account of the lack of personal
registers, princes and lords had their own family
books, while the age of other people had to be
determined, even as late as the sixteenth century,
by the testimony of living persons. At the close
of the Middle Ages the census in the modern
sense was instituted in flourishing cities like Augs
burg and Breslau.
The Renaissance had a wholesome effect upon
the development of church registers, in France and
Italy as early as the beginning of the fourteenth
century. A register of baptisms from Cabriares
near Vaucluse dates from 1308, fragments of a
register of marriages and deaths in Middle France
from 1335 and 1336. In Italy the use of such
registers may be traced to the fourteenth century.
In Spain the famous cardinal Ximenez in 1497 at
the Synod of Toledo ordered the introduction of
baptismal and matrimonial registers; soon after
ward similar orders were issued in Portugal. In
Switzerland and Germany church
3. The Be registers go back to the time of the ginnings of Reformation. Earlier attempts had
Modern not been successful. The first bap
Registers. tismal register in Zurich dates from
1525, the register of marriages in
Strasburg from the same time. Church registers
in Constance began in 1531, and in Frankfort,
Thuringia, Saxony, and Bohemia about the same
time. In the imperial city of Nuremberg they
existed from 1524, in Silesia from 1534, under the
influence of the Silesian Reformer Hem; the other
Church 8e~ School iaters
THE NEW SCHAFF HERZOG
territories followed soon afterward, in the early sixties of the sixteenth century. The number of these registers, since the enormous losses resulting from the Thirty Years' War, especially in Electoral Saxony, can be estimated only approximately. There is reliable information of the existence of more than 150 registers dated 1522 83. The earlier introduction of church registers in Italy and France moat be ascribed to the independent influence of the classical renaissance, which became of i importance in Germany only after its union with the religious efforts of Luther. In the Netherlands the Reformation was for a long time suppressed and its confessors were exiled, but a synod in 1574 changed these conditions, and church . registers were soon generally introduced; but there are extant fragments of earlier date. From Germany the use of church registers penetrated the Scandinavian kingdoms at a comparatively late date. In Denmark they were introduced by royal order in 1646, in Norway in 1685, in Sweden in 1686. As in Germany, so in England, the general introduction of church registers followed separation from the Papal Church, by order of King Henry VIII. in 1538. In spite of this unevsngelical origin, the introduction of church registers in England was accompanied by immediate success. There have been preserved not less than 812 church registers from the year 1538, 1,822 from 1528 to 1558, and 2,448 from 1558 to 1600. From 1551 date the first evidences of church registers in Scotland; in Ireland their general introduction took place only in the nineteenth century. In transoceanic countries personal registers were used from settlement there by the civilized peoples of Europe. The earliest church register is that of the Dutch in Reciiff, Brazil, 1633. The East India House in London preserves church registers from Bombay from 1703, from Bengal dated 1713, from Madras dated 1743. Of Roman Catholic church registers there are only sporadic cases in Germany at the time of the Reformation. Their general introduction followed the decrees of the Council of Trent in 1563. These decrees referred only to registers of baptisms and marriages; records of funerals were introduced in 1614 by the Rituals Romanum.
During the Thirty Years' War church registers were sometimes taken away from the Evangelicals and continued by the Catholics, so that the supposed antiquity of some Catholic registers has no basis in fact.
The church registers did not consist solely of lists of baptisms, marriages, and funerals; a church register at Lehrbaeh in Hesse contains not less than twelve columns. The registers, especially those of the seventeenth century, are frequently a rich source for the history of church discipline. The registers of the catechumens and con
4. Contents firmed form a part of the church record and which is very important for the history Character. of Christian worship. They may be traced back to the first period of the Reformation. The moat curious church records are found among the so called family books. There the members of the congregations are arranged alphabetically according to families, and their resi
dences, with the religious acts performed on them, are given. In this way there originated chronicles of whole villages; so, for instance, the village of Dankerode in the Hartz mountains. Another noteworthy class is found in the so called ministerial books which were introduced after 1686 in Sweden. They consist of six different parts: Register (1) of births and baptisms; (2) of deaths and funerals; (3) of marriages; (4) of catechetical examinations, at home; (5) of newly admitted members; (6) of members who had moved to other parishes. The most interesting part is the fourth, which contained records of religious instruction, of examinations, and of attendance at the Lord's Supper, and notes on conduct and discipline before and after marriage.
After the church registers had become known and been generally introduced in all civilized states of Europe, about the end of the seventeenth and beginning of the eighteenth century, their value and importance began to be appreciated from other points of view, and they were used as sociological sources, first in England after the seventeenth century. After Natural and Political Annotations upon the Bills of Mortality, by John Graunt (London, 1666 and 1676), there followed a rich literature of similar character in England, France, Germany, Holland, Italy, and Sweden. It is true, many of these productions were merely sociological, but some of them included the theological aide, as, for instance, William Derham'a Physical Theology (London, 1713). This work formed the model for Die gbttliehe Ordnung in den g. Value for Veranderungen des menschlichen GeOther than schlechts, by Johann Peter Siisamilch
Church (1741, 3 vole., 1776), and Mohaen, a
Uses. physician, published in his work on
vaccination for the first time a history
of church registers of baptisms, and deaths. Thus,
a powerful influence was exerted upon them by the
rapid growth of sociology and statistics, and the
attention of large circles was called to them. After
the end of the seventeenth century extracts from
church registers were ordered to be made by the
pastors and superintendents of Brandenburg
Prusaia and sent to the government offices in
Berlin for purposes of vital statistics. The keeping
of church registers became dependent upon the
orders of civil authorities; this led to their general
adoption and to stricter enforcement of rules, but
at the same time the registers lost much of their
churchly character as they were used chiefly in
court and for purposes of taxation and for military
purposes. In conformity with the general law of
Prussia, every pastor had to make one copy of his
church register and send it to the local court.
Electoral Saxony and Austria issued similar orders.
In the course of time personal records were sep
arated altogether from the Church and entrusted to
the municipal authorities, civil lists taking the
place of church registers. This was due in France
in part to the Revolution, in part to the peculiar
development of the royal authority. King Francis
I. issued as early as 1539 an order making church
registers subject to the supervision of the munic
ipal courts. Under Louis XIV. the keeping of
Church and School
church registers was altogether due to himself and
the secular government, according to a decree of
1667. Further decrees were issued in
6. Ecclesi France in 1736 and 1792. They were
astical and received into the civil code of Napo
Civil loon, and with the Napoleonic con
Registeis. quests were carried over to Belgium
in 1796, then to Holland and to several
states of Germany. In Germany, the entire aep
aration of civil affairs from connection with the
Church was brought about especially by the revo
lutionary movement of 1848. The Prussian con
stitution of 1850 provided for the introduction of
provisions like those of the French in regard to
records of persons. This provision was made a
law in Prussia in 1874; accordingly, special civil
registry offices were introduced, and from that time
church registers lost their importance in public
affairs. In 1875 these same decisions were applied
to the whole German empire. Clergymen are not
eligible as registry officers. In 1895 civil registers
were introduced also in AustriarHungary. But
with the enactment of these laws church registers
did not disappear in Germany; nn the contrary,
they regained their original significance and were
given back to the Church. In place of the secular
authorities, the ecclesiastical leaders, in Prussia
the members of the consistories and of the Evan
gelical Superior Church Council, assumed the super
vision of the church registers. The kingdom of
God and the civil order of the State are two different
spheres with their own special aims and purposes.
Registration of baptisms and of admission into the
congregation, of marriages and funerals, of attend
ance at confessions and the Lord's Supper, and of
spiritual discipline are facts for the church regis
ters, while data concerning physical births and
deaths, matrimony from the civil point of view, to
gether with all facts concerning the physical and nat
ural being of man, area matter of the civil registry.
In modern times collections of church registers
have been undertaken; there is a genealogico
statistical center in Denmark, in the academy of
Sweden, and in state archives in Mecklenburg and
Oldenburg. But in case of such collections dupli
cate copies should always be made, because it is
essential that at least one copy of the
7. Collec church register remain with the local
tions of church. The collections should be
Church under the supervision of church author
Registers. ities and be deposited in church ar
chives, not in state archives or other
secular institutions. As a result of the French
Revolution and subsequent wars, the church rec
ords of Alsace Lorraine, the Netherlands, the Rhine
Palatinate, the Lower Rhine, and the duchy of
Berg are in state archives or in superior district
courts. In Prussia and German Austria Hungary
the church registers were left with the churches,
in spite of the introduction of civil registry offices.
Recently attempts have been made in Germany,
Denmark, Sweden, Austria, England, and Belgium
to consolidate the different collections of church
registers for statistical purposes. In Belgium a
general index for all old church registers was pre
pared in 1865. In Austria a statistical central
commission was instituted in 1882 for a similar purpose. In England au enormous amount 'of material has been collected in the Record Office, on the basis of the Parish Register Act of 1882.
B113WOGRAPHY: J. C. W. Auguati, Handbuch der chriatlichen
Archdolopie, iii. 890 730, Leipaic, 1837; J. 8. Burn, Riot.
of Parish Registers, also of the Registers of Scotland, Ire
land . . . London, 1882; J. Jastrow, Die Vnlkezahf
deutacher Stddte, Berlin, 1878; R. E. C. Waters, Pariah
Registers in England, London, 1883; A. Trusen, Daa
preuaeiachs Kirchererecht sin Berrichs der evanpeliachen
Landeskirche, Berlin, 1894; E. Friedberg, Lehrhurh des
eoanpeliachen and katholiechen Kirchenrec7Ua, Leipeie,
1895; Episcopal Registers of the Diocese of Winchester,
London, 1897; J. Gmelin, in Deutsche, lieachiehtabdltler, i
(1900), 55 170; Krieg, in Korreapondenablatt des (;eaa»u.
roereina der deutschen lleachichb and Alterlunuvereine,
1907, no. 25, pp. 192 195.
CHURCH AND SCHOOL.
Public Schools not Originally Maintained by the Church (§ 1).
Influence of the Reformation (§ 2).
Pietism (§ 3).
Compulsory Education (§ 4).
Religion and Coercion Exclusive (§ 5).
Compulsory Religious Instruction not Desirable ($ 6).
Position and Attitude of Teachers (f 7).
Denominational and Undenominational Schools 0 8).
Clerical Control of Schools (§ 9).
The question of the relation of Church and School did not become a burning one until after the Reformation, when the modern State began to recognize its duty to provide public elementary schools for its subjects and make school attendance obligatory. Since compulsory attendance was the necessary condition for the success of public elementary schools, the Church, from its very nature prevented from employing coercion, could not compete with the State in this field. It was necessary, therefore, for Church and State to come to an understanding, particularly as the latter never organized its achoolsystem de novo, but took over and developed the educational organization of the Church.
The proposition that the School is thedaughter of the Church is not confirmed by the history of the early Church. Religious education was considered the business of the family and the community; and education in any other sense was a private
matter. During the Middle Ages :. Public the Church maintained schools for Schools not future clerics and a few noblemen, and
Originally prepared children for confirmation. Maintained It was Charlemagne who gave the first by the great impetus to popular education.
Church. Even at the close of the Middle Ages
the writing schools in Germany were maintained either by the cities or by private individuals, not by the Church.
With the Reformation, the Church assumes a different attitude toward popular education. Luther insists on the establishment of schools; and Me
lanchthon declares that the union of s. Influence Church and School is necessary. Popof the Ref ular education is demanded for relig
ormation. ions reasons; but the right to provide
for the same is recognized as belonging to the State. The existing elementary schools in the towns were reorganized; and the introduction
Church and School
THE NEW SCHAFF HERZOG 104
Church and State
of religious instruction gave them the character of
public schools. Similar schools were founded in
the country villages. All these schools were quite
elementary in character, religion, reading, and
writing forming practically the only subjects of
instruction; but for more than two centuries they
offered the only educational opportunity to the
great majority of the population.
Even such schools could exist only under favor
able circumstances. Before the Thirty Years' War
there were not many of them left; and after the war,
when the ideas of Ratke and Comeniua began to be
effective, the tendency was to try something new,
rather than to reestablish the old
3. Pietism. system. In this movement the Piet
ista took the lead. The public school,
as revived by them in the interest of religious edu
cation, was introduced by various German states,
but first by Prussia in 1763. The State recognized
the service of the Church, and even entrusted the
supervision of these schools to the clergy, who
were regarded as officials of the State. The example
of Prussia was followed by Bavaria
.y. Compel (1802), Denmark (1814), Austria
sory Edu (1869), and France (1882), with the
cation. enforcement of school attendance.
Holland, England, and the United
States have attained all that is necessary by leas
incisive measures. In Italy and Spain education is
compulsory only from the sixth to the ninth year,
and wretched conditions prevail even to day in the
Roman Catholic states of South America. In
Russia attendance at an elementary school shortens
the period of military service.
Ever since the State took charge of elementary
education and made it compulsory there has beet
a movement in progress toward the emancipation of
the schools from the clergy; and for over a hun
dred years three questions have been in dispute:
(1) Is compulsory school attendance consistent
with religious instruction? (2) Ought the school
to be denominational or undenominational? (3)
Does the control of the school belong to the
clergy or to trained achoolmen?
In principle, religion and coercion exclude each
other. This i's a matter about which Protestantism
is now becoming more sensitive, and it is possible
that the present protest against compulsory religious
instruction may develop into a general protest against
all enforced culture. Of course, no similar protest
is heard from Rome. The Roman Church, accus
tomed to the maxim "compgl them to come in," is
striving for power, and, for this reason,
5. Religion seeks control of the schools. It is
sad Coer willing for the State to enforce .educa
tion Ex tion, so long as the Church is benefited
elusive. thereby. It has no feeling for the
inner conflict between compulsory
education and freedom of conscience, regarding
coercion as necessary in view of present social and
religious conditions. So much the stronger, how
ever, is this feeling in Protestantism. To be sure,
in the training of children a certain amount of
coercion is necessary, since the pathway of educa
tion leads through obedience to freedom. Par
ticularly in religious instruction, though, is it
desirable to keep the end in view and gradually diminish coercion as freedom is approached. The custom of the early Church to leave religious instruction to the family justified itself. Even if it is evident that the religious instruction of the family needs to be supplemented, still it is clear that the school can not replace the family, since the teacher always represents the law, while religion requires freedom. There have been many school teachers of large religious nature who have touched the hearts and consciences of their pupils without employing coercion; but still the fact remains that the prevalence of religion is not due to the religious instruction given in the public schools.
As regards the parents, even in modern states they can be compelled to send their children to schools where religious instruction is given. This is justified on the ground that the children are minors; and that whatever arbitrary control over the children the parents may lose is more than made up for by the mental growth of the children. But while the State can enforce education, the Church is prevented from doing this and moat, therefore, protest when its services are throat upon those who do not want them. An effort has been made to conceal the nature of this 6. Compel religious coercion by insisting that sory Re instruction in the Bible has to do with ligious In historical information only. While
struction such an argument might be applied not Desir to mere church history, it is inappliable. cable here. It involves a misunderstanding of the moat important part of the subject. Two methods have been employed to escape this difficulty. Either religious instruction has been banished from the school entirely; or an effort has been made to modify it to meet the needs of dissenters, which is impossible if they are atheists. If the Church is to exercise educational activity, provision must be made for it. For instance, one whole school day may be set apart each week for the instruction .of youth in religious subjects, as is the case in France. Also in Italy, Holland, England, and some states of the United States the state schools are non religious in principle. No cogent argument can be brought against such a system, for religious instruction is certainly not the business of the State. After all, the interests of Christianity are furthered by it. By assuming the responsibility of instruction in the usual school branches, the State makes it possible for the Church to concentrate its efforts in the religious field. It is not so much the mere separation of Church and State that seems objectionable as the severing of an old historical union that has richly justified its existence by its works.
This solution of the old problem would relieve the teacher of the embarrassment of teaching things that are possibly not an expression 7. Position of his own inmost convictions a and Atti difficulty often experienced by minis
tude of tern. The teacher should either be alTeachers. lowed to teach religious subjects in his own way, or else be relieved of the duty entirely. It must be added, however, that this separation of Church and State, in the manner in
108 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA Church and School
Church sad state
which it has been accomplished in Holland, France,
England, and the United States, has aroused oppo
sition in the ranks of the teachers. Conscious of
their high calling as educators, rather than as mere
instructors, they are unwilling to see religion ban
ished from the schools, however much they may be
opposed to the domination of the schools by the
Through modern emigration the various religious
sects have been mixed together, especially in the
cities. Practical considerations make it necessary
that the children of a community where
8. Denomi a number of confessions are repre
national sented shall all attend one school; and
and Unde thus originated the undenominational
nomina school. This arrangement gives chil
tional dren of a confession that is in the
Schools. minority the advantage of a larger
and better equipped school than they
could attend otherwise. Further, such schools
are favored by the spirit of tolerance and liber
alism now prevailing in religious matters, and
by the non religious character of the modern State.
Against undenominationalism it is urged that the
public school, as an educational institution, can
least of all dispense with religious instruction, which
forma the basis of all instruction; that religion,
which carries with it the literary and historical
studies, can not be separated from all other sub
jects and made an independent study; that the
personality of the teacher will of necessity make
such schools either Protestant or Catholic; and
that spies of the opposite confession will then under
mine the confidence between the children and the
teacher. The force of these objections can not be
denied. It is clear that a school that educates
moat have harmony among its pupils; but in this
view denominationalism in the school becomes a
postulate of pedagogy, not of the Church. There
is no question as to the importance of the Church
for education. The question is whether practical
theology or pedagogy is the better qualified to
dictate the method to be employed in using the
educative material contributed by the Church. It
is plain that theology needs pedagogy as badly as
pedagogy needs theology.
Among the reasons that have decided teachers
against the denominational school one remains to
be mentioned: the usual [in Germany], but not
necessary, supervision by the clergy.
g. Clerical Reasons alleged in favor of clerical
Control control are: the splendid pedagogical
of services rendered by the Church
Schools. through such men as Comenius,
Francke, Niemeyer, and Schleier
macher; the fine background of religious life
which the clergy bring to the school, and their
unselfishness in the work; the confidence expressed
in the clergy by the State in turning over to them
the public schools after the Reformation; and, not
least, the high culture of the clergy. Against such
control it is argued that the public school is only
following the higher institutions of learning in
emancipating itself from clerical guardianship;
that the uneducated teachers of the clerical regime
have been replaced with teachers trained scien
tifically in the theory sad practise of pedagogy; that the clergy have not kept abreast of the growing science bf education, and are, therefore, unprepared for the work; that this work is prejudicial to their high calling as ministers of the Gospel; and, finally, that clerical control benefits chiefly the ultramontanes. The clergy themselves are becoming less prejudiced in the matter and are beginning to admit the force of these arguments; and, on the other hand, their more prudent opponents recognize that it is the duty of the Church, not of the State, to keep a lookout over the religious and moral welfare of the public schools.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: On the theory of education in relation to Church and State consult: C. Diekmann, Der bibliecha
tachichtaunterrscht in der Vdkeechule, Leipeie 1878; ~. A. L. Baur, GrundzUpe der Eraiehunpalehre, Giessen, 1887; R. H. Quick, Remarks About Moral and Religious Education, in his Essays, London, 1887; G. A. Coe, Education in Religion and Morale, New York, 1884.
On the history of education consult: K. Schmidt, Geachichte der Pddagogik, KSthen, 1889; w. C. Grasby, Teaching in Three Continents, London, 1891; J. Payne, History of Education, ib. 1892; J. Bbhm, Geachichte der PrNuremberg, 1893; $. G. Williams, History o/ Modern Education . . . from the Revival of Learning to the Present, Syracuse, 1896; T. Davidson, History of Education, New York, 1900; E. G. Dexter, History of Education in the U. S., New York, 1904.
On the question of religious instruction in various countries consult in Germany: E. $achsse, Du Lehre von der kirchlichen Erziehung, Berlin, 1897; J. Beyhl, Die Befreiung der Volkaeehullehrer aua der peiatluhen Herracha/t, Berlin, 1903; F. Naumann, Der Street der Konfeasionen um die Schuk, Berlin, 1904. In France: L. Duchesne, Autonomies ecclEaiaatiquea. 0glisea e4par&a, Paris, 1905. In England: Of the Education Acts, 1870 91, there are discussions by A. E. $teinthal, London, 1891; C. w. A. Brooke, ib. 1897. Of those from 1870 to 1902, by Sir H. Owen, and by w. A. Casson and G. C. Whiteley, both London, 1903. On the Act of 1902 consult: C. E. Benham, H. H. Hanson, H. Mothersole, E. C. Rawlings, all London, 1903; also: w. H. Carnegie, Church and the Schools; Churchman's View of the Education Controversy, ib. 1905. In the U. $.: $. T. Spear, Religion and the State, New York, 1878; J. Conway, Respective Rights and Duties of Family, State and Church in Regard to Education, ib. 1890; J. H. Crocker, Religious Freedom in American Education, Boston, 1903.
CHURCH AND STATE.
I. General Treatment. Scope of Subject (¢ 1). Ancient Rome and the Eastern Empire (¢ 2). Rise of Papal Temporal Power (¢ 3). Subordination of Church to state (¢ 4). The Modern State (¢ 5). Relations with Rome (¢ 8). The Evangelical State Church (¢ 7). Tendency toward Separation (¢ 8). Decadence of Protestantism in Germany (¢ 9). Self Government for Church the Remedy (§ 10).
II. The United States. Philosophical Background (¢ I). Colonial Period (¢ 2). Conditions after the Revolution (¢ 3). Special Legislation (¢ 4).
I. General Treatment: Since the Christian community presents itself outwardly as a part of the social order, for the regulation of which the State exists, the question arises, What shall be the relation between Church and State ? From the point of view of the different confessions this quesstion might be variously answered. However,
Church and State
THE NEW SCHAFF HERZOG 108
disregarding minor distinctions, three answers are possible: The State may rule the Church and
administer ecclesiastical affairs for its z. Scope of own purposes; the Church may rule
Subject. the State and use the temporal
authority to further the interests of the Church; or Church and State may be completely separated, each confining itself to its own sphere, and neither exercising any authority over the other. As a matter of history, however, Church and State have seldom been completely independent of each other, the one . occupying itself solely with things spiritual, the other restricting itself to things temporal. The Roman Catholic Church still insists on having a voice in the control of temporal affairs, and the Protestant states of Europe usually claim a considerable share in ecclesiastical affairs. The difficulty of coordinating the ecclesiastical and the political authority as two distinct systems, or, indeed, of effecting any great innovation where the Church is concerned, is to be accounted for on historical grounds. The fundamental legal ordinances involved here are not made by act of will, but are passed along from one period to the neat, from one community to another. Laws and rights are inherited; and in no field is this so true as in that where religion is concerned. Even where new forces have effected the most complete changes, the effort is made to prove that each form links itself back on the old. The time of King Josiah, which saw the reconstruction of the Israslitic tradition in the spirit of the new law; the Pseudo Isidor, who represents the asserted increase in the power of the hierarchy as an old right; even the Reformation itself, which claimed so frequently to restore the primitive Church ill bear witness to the statement.
From the very beginning the relation between religious worship and temporal authority was a
most intimate one. The chief of
2. Ancient the tribe, as likewise the king of the
Rome and first community that could be called
the Eastern a state, united in himself the functions Empire. of judge, military leader, and priest.
He represented his people in their relations toward one another, toward their enemies, and toward God. Religion was an affair of the State. In the later development the ruler might transfer his priestly duties to a special class of priests, but the close relation between religion and rule remained. At the advent of Christianity into the world's history the Roman emperor, as pontifex Maximus, stood at the head of the religious system in the Roman Empire. It was not his object, however, to suppress the foreign gods worshiped in Roman possessions in the interest of the Roman deities whose high priest he was. In so far as these foreign gods had their states over which they ruled, ell, including Yahweh, were regarded juristically as free and equal, though Yahweh was deposed after the destruction of Jerusalem. The God of Christianity, on the other hand, having no visible kingdom, was not a deity in the Roman sense of the word. Hence the persecution of the Christians as atheists. With the advent of the Christian emperor the organization of the Church and its relation to
the State was definitely determined for centuries
to come. The position of pond fex Maximus which
Constantine united with his arbitrary authority
had not been depreciated by the decay of the old
Roman f: ith. He was the absolute head of the
Church. Even after the title of pontifex maximus
had been dropped, toward the end of the fourth
century, the office remained. The designation
episcopua uxiversalis is only a Christian translation
of the heathen expression. To be sure, the em
peror no longer performed the functions of a priest,
but he united in himself all ecclesiastical authority.
He appointed and disciplined the priests and exer
cised a protectorate over the legea regiee, those
duties toward God which were required of every
one. Laws and rights were created by the dictum
of the emperor. Thus the Church became, an
institution of the State, and at the same time a com
pulsory institution. The very persecution which,
in the name of religion, had formerly been directed
against Christianity was now employed to uproot
heathenism, as well as to put down dissent within
the Church. To be a citizen of the empire one had
to be an orthodox Christian. This system, which
was moat consistently developed in the Eastern
Empire, after its separation from Rome, became
the heritage of the Russian autocracy. Though
Russia has had its Holy Synod since the time of
Peter the Great, the Czar remains the only source
of authority in the Church, and uses the ecclesias
tical organization to strengthen the State. Con
sequently withdrawal from the state church is not
The second characteristic relation of Church to State was developed in the Western Empire.
While the temporal power in the West 3. Rise of gradually waned after the division of Papal Tem the empire, the ecclesiastical organizaporal Power. Lion remained intact; and, when the
ancient State disappeared, the pope virtually succeeded the emperor as pontifex mazimus and appropriated as much temporal authority as was consistent with his priestly character. This transition of authority may be said to have begun in the year 445, when Valentinian III. promulgated a law requiring obedience to the ordinances of the pope. Thus the religious dream of a civitas dei was fused with the Roman tradition of an imperium mundi. Over against this papal State stood the Germanic tribes. Their conversion had been accomplished without difficulty, but for
~i this very reason it had not been profound. Their indifference toward the Roman Church is explained by their relation to Arianism. Goths, Burgundians, and Vandals had their own churches, which were separate from those of the provincials. The bishops were representatives of the king, and the subjected Roman provincials were treated just as the Phanariota are treated by the Turks. Even the conversion of the Franks did not greatly improve the position of the Roman Church. The Frankish king suffered no foreign interference in ecclesiastical affairs, not even from the pope himself. Here material interests take precedence, and the Church assumes importance chiefly as a large property holder. In fact, it was the Franks
107 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA Church and State
who discovered the process of secularization. With the restoration of the Western Empire by Charlemagne Byzantine ideas came into play. The Roman idea of a papal imperium mundi was apparently dormant. When, therefore, Germany became the center of gravity of European history it was quite natural that the bishops should be advanced to the position of temporal princes, in the interest of the State. Otto the Great completed this innovation by taking under his protection the spiritual head of these princes, the pope himself. Thus the functions of the bishop were largely secularized. Investiture with property constituted his title, and his chief duty was to aid in carrying on the business of the empire. Without any premonition of the danger ahead of them, the Germanic people entered upon this fatal course.
It remained for Gregory VII. to lift the veil and show the Church in its character of a ruling power. With him begins the period of the so called spiritual universal state, which lasted for several centuries. Just as formerly the State had ruled the Church, so now the Church, to a large extent, ruled the State. The officials of the Church were brought under the authority of Rome, and such public interests as education, charity, care of the sick, and even legislation and the administration of justice, were made affairs of the Church. As against the powerful Roman hierarchy the State, crude, undeveloped, and split by dissensions, was practically helpless. It should be added, however, that not infrequently the State rebelled against having to take a subordinate position; and toward the close of this period it developed such legal institutions as placetum regium and reeursus ab abuse to curtail ecclesiastical authority. In view of this fact, the spiritual universal state must be regarded as theory, rather than 'reality, and the relation of Church to State during this period as one of legal coordination, but with the preponderance of competency on the aide of the Church.
The Renaissance brought a revival of the ancient idea of the State, and with this a transformation of the relation of Church to State. The
4. Subor new state made it its chief function to dination of advance the welfare, or happiness, of Church to its subjects, but, since preparation for
State. eternity was seen to be essential to
human welfare, the State now ex
tended its activities into the ecclesiastical field.
In short, to a greater or less extent, it took over
the organization of the Church and assumed re
sponsibility for the intellectual and spiritual well
being of the people. The famous sentence Dux
Cliviw est papa in suis terris, the reform program
of the Bavarian grand dukes, of George of Saxony,
of Louis XIV., of Joseph IL, and finally the Con
stitution civile du clergy of 1790 all these give
proof of the characteristic relation between Church
and State which had its origin in the Renaissance.
It was the fate of the Reformation to fall in the
midst of this political development. It was neces
sary that the new Christian community should have
an outward organization; but whence was this to
come? Considered juristically, that was a grave
question. For Luther, however, it presented no
difficulties. It was sufficient that means of grace be provided, and immaterial how this might be accomplished. In the end, it was found that the simplest arrangement was to entrust the care of the Church to the existing authorities. Thus arose the German state churches, as the mature product of the state of the sixteenth century. The Reformation did not recognize the necessity for an ecclesiastical organization distinct from that of the State. The Church was a homogeneous mass, and each temporal prince fostered that particular section which was conterminous with his temporal domain. With the appearance of dissent and the rise of other confessions, the inadequacy of this simple arrangement became manifest. The solution of the difficulty was offered by the theory of natural right, which was expounded by Hobbes (q.v.) and Rousseau. This is the view that the State is based upon an original agreement among the people, who delegate to the sovereign whatever authority he has. Every church, just as the State, is a community; but the State remains the supreme community, in which these other communities take their place. Thus the State again becomes secular in character. To be sure, the temporal prince retains his authority over the churches. This he no longer claims on Christian grounds, but , by right of jus territoriale. In this way the territorial system was developed (see TERRITOFLIALIBM). It should not be forgotten that this was the form in which tolerance first asserted itself. The next step in the development was Collegialism (q.v.), which is only a palliated territorialiam. The ruling prince remains the highest authority in the Church. The only result was that now a sharper distinction was drawn between jura circa sacra, rights which are naturally incident to the position of a sovereign, and jury in sacra, rights which are deduced from the Church. The fact that these rights are exercised through two sets of officials is merely incidental, being due to considerations of convenience. Prussia affords the classic example of this kind of relation between Church and State.
Whatever may be characteristic of the present position of the Church in its relations to the State has not been brought about by any
g. The essential change in the Church, but by
Modern the wonderful development of the
State. modern State and the rapid growth
of constitutional government. The
State, as the political organization, holds the su
preme authority, which can not be modified or
limited, except by the State itself. Such a self
limitation, however, is the striking characteristic
of the modern constitutional State. The people
have been given a voice in the government. In
sharp contrast to the police state, which absorbed
everything, has been the fostering care exercised
by the government over private organizations for
the conduct of affairs of public interest. This new
position taken by the State has been particularly
favorable to the manifestations of religious life.
Religious liberty is now generally secured to all by
state constitutions. At the head of the various
societies, or organizations, which now enjoy a cer
Church and State
THE NEW SCHAFF HERZOG
tain independence under the law, stand those great religious communities called churches. Legally they occupy a very high position; ' and the reason for this is clear. Their functions are not merely of a private nature; from time immemorial the interests of the Church have been regarded as national and ethically equal with the affairs of the State itself. In a word, religion is a matter of public interest, and is recognized as such by the State. To be sure, the Church is subject to the State; otherwise the sovereignty of the State would be a fiction. On the other hand, the modern German state waives its right to take the Church so closely under its control as did the old policestate. In fact, the constitutional state regards it as essential that the independence of the Church be maintained. This principle has been often proclaimed, e.g., in the Frankfort Grundrechte and in the Prussian Constitution. Thus the Church is quite properly given the position of a separate community, existing under the State and working for the public weal. The legal terminology employed to characterize this relation of Church to State recognizes self government as the essential feature. The French law, which has.beeome typical, speaks of tulles reeonnus, not as a juristic person, but as a part of the public authority, and calls the local organizations dablisaements publiquea, analogous to political communities. Hence the protection and aid rendered to the Church by the civil government.
While theoretically the State may subordinate the Church completely to itself, in practise it does not do it. The degree of authority 6. Relations exercised varies, as does also the with Rome. degree of independence enjoyed by the Church. In view of the fundamental conception of the State, the Roman Catholic Church is given too much latitude in Germany and the Protestant Church too little. In reality, the Roman Catholic Church is not simply a selfgoverning state church, holding itself subject to the State. It remains that same remarkable worldpower which in the Middle Ages chased with the State the functions of government. If the power of Rome has been greatly diminished in the modern State, this has been accomplished only by force. In principle, the Roman Church has yielded nothing. The manner in which the present organization of the Roman Catholic Church in Germany came into being is characteristic. The German states entered into agreements with the Holy See just as they world make treaties among themselves regarding secular things (see CONCORDATS AND DELIMITIN(f Bums). France led the way in the Napoleonic Concordat. The necessity of restoring the lost equilibrium at once manifested itself, and, too, in a curious manner. All the states, on their own initiative, proceeded to supplement the treaty with Rome by promulgating laws to give them a certain supervision over the Roman Catholic Church. Here the articles organiquea furnished the model. Of course, such restrictions have never been recognized by the pope; and the fact that they are directed against him only serves to emphasize his position as a temporal ruler. In following such a cousae, the State puts itself in the
position it occupied during the Middle Ages, when it sought to assert its authority against Rome by means of the now obsolete placetum regium, recursus ab abuau, nominatio regia, and by the exclusion of personae minus grate (see PreoET; NoarnseTto RE(#IA). That the State is unable to substitute for these ancient institutions something more in accord with present political ideals and conditions can be due only to a lack of confidence in its own sovereignty. The inner contradiction between the theory and practise of the State in the matter of exercising its authority toward the Roman Catholic Church is strikingly shown in, cases where the pope is actually invoked to curb some Romanist official who is attacking state institutions. Thus, through the force of tradition, the modern German state has been placed in this false and extremely objectionable attitude toward Rome.
Quite different in this regard is the position of the Evangelical Church. In contrast to the Roman
Catholic Church, which claims such a y. The large interest in the control of external Evangelical affairs, the Protestant body, whose
State interests are spiritual rather than
Church. temporal, would be satisfied to occupy
the modest position of a self governing body within, the State. As a matter of fact, however, the Evangelical Church in Germany has never attained to that measure of freedom and independence which the constitutional state recognizes to be its right. Despite all the assurances on the side of the government, the old territorial system, the administration of church affairs by the State, continues to thrive. It is futile to assert that it is not the State, but the sovereign in person, who rules the Church; for, in public affairs, the person of the ruler can not be separated from the State. In Germany it seems to be taken as a matter of course that the Evangelical Church ought to be, and must be, ruled by the State. Of course, the Church enjoys a certain academic freedom; also the provision is maintained that the State shall exercise its rule here through separate authorities. It was a further step in this direction when the preselit synodal system was introduced in the last century. The local parishes have their administrative boards, and send their representatives, clergy and laymen, to the Synod. The General Synod, the highest representative body, cooperates with the sovereign in the matter of ecclesiastical legislation. The logical outcome of this process of development should have been complete self government for the Church; but such has not been the case. Indeed, this entire movement is only a phase of that more general movement whose object has been to develop and strengthen the State. The Church is organized along parallel lines with the State, and church administration remains state administration. Just as in things temporal the sovereign remains supreme, despite local self government and popular representation, so in things ecclesiastical.
The present relation between the State and the Roman Catholic Church is recognized as unsatisfactory, and on both aides there has been a tendency to change it. To be mentioned particularly is that significant modern movement on the
109 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA Church and State