CHURCH AND STATE

Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 81, 30 December 1920, Page 6

CHURCH AND STATE

1 FUNCTIONS NOT ANTAGONISTIC

SHOULD WORK TOGETHER

ADDRESS BY BISHOP SPROTT

The relationship between the Church and the State ,formed the subject of an address by Dr. Sprott, Anglican Bishop of. Wellington, at tho opening of the tenth annual conference of tho Church of England Men's Society, at. Croydou School, Day's Bay, on Tuesday. Dr. Sprott said that the question had been raised during the discussion in the House on the Marriage Act Amendment Bill, and one member, he understood, had said that ho did not know ivhat was tho relationship in New Zealand between Church and State, as it had never been stated or settled. His lordship suggested that the conference might try to cqfne to some conclusion on the subject. Dr. Sprott referred to those very famous and oft-quoted words of Our Lord: "Render unto Caesar the things that aro Caesar's and unto God the things that are God's" words which had been quoted by a member of Parliament to support his sido of the question. Perhaps there were no words which had suffered 60 much at tho hands of commentators and expositors as these. All epigramatic sentences were liable to be given certain meanings apart from original meaning; they were easily remembered and easily quoted and taken by themselves were capable of being used to convey other meanings than intended. His Lordship imagined the meaning that had been intended to be given by the quotation of the words in Parliament was that, human life and duty were divided into two compartments: on the one hand one owed a' set of obligations to the State (represented by Caesar), and which one did not owe to God; and on tho other hand another set of obligations which were not owing to the State but to God; that in fulfilling the obligations to the State it. was not- necessary to consider the pleasure or displeasuro of God, and similarly it was unnecessary to consider the displeasure of the State in carrying out obligations to God. This interpretation, when examined, was simply absurd and blasphemous.' God claimed to control the whole of life that He Himself had created, and which He sustained in-being. To understand tho meaning of the words, the circumstances under which they were first used must bo examined. '

A Different Theory, _ Certain porsona had asked Christ: "Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar?" They had meant by 'lawful': Was iti in accordance with Divine law? "Was it right to pay tribute whioh was the law of the land? The persona putting iu were really not honest; t/hey wished, to entrap the Master.' Nevertheless, the question waa one whioh honestly perplexed many people of that day. Our Lord replied, after putting one or thvo questions: "Pay back to) Caesar the thinga that belong to him/' If the reply had ended there it would' have been what was i'ermed an ad hominem argument— a reply based not upon reason but upon the practices of the persona asking the question, and in the nature of an evasion. But the reply did not stop there. The question before the Jewish people was: Shall we recognise and pay tribute to a foreign and heathen Government? W>6 it not disloyalty to God to pay tribute, to acknowledge a heathen ruler? The whole points was the identification ,of the Jewish idea of the Kingdom of God with the Jewish nationality. Christ's reply, in other, words, meant: There is no disloyalty to God in paying taxes, even to a. heathen Government!, whioh, under Providence, has subjected the Jews to its rule; you can discharge your dutioa to the Government under which you are at present living without interfering with your loyalty to God. 1

"We, therefore, derive quite a different theory from tho words," said the Bishop, "from what wag apparently in the. mind of my friend in • Parliament; and in a great many other' peoples' minds." Patriotism Svaß not the supreme and ultimate virtue. (Applause.) If country could be identical witih the Kingdom of God, then patriotism would be the supreme virtue. There could be no higher duty than to the State. The doctrine of t'he supremacy of the State wo had been fighting for over four years to overcome. The modern German held precisely the same belief as the ancient Jew; that there was nothing higher than the national Stat'e; and that .all other interests must give • way beforo it. (Applause.) The Gorman theory was more secularised than tho Jewish, which iden. tilled the national stat'e with the Kingdom of God.

Dr. Sprott said that we read them from Our Lord's words that the national State was not tho highest thing we knew, and that patriotism was not the supreme virtue. Thera was something higher: The Kingdom of God. It was possible for a man to fulfil all his obligations to God, and yet submit quietly to tho rule of England. Tho Bishop went on to correot any impression that, because'patriotism was not the supreme virtue, it was not a virtue at all. (Applause.) It was a very high virtue—in public life the highest but one. The highest was devotion to that potential Kingdom of God —the human race. Next to that was tho nation; and next to that the family. He enlarged upon this idea, and spoke of the duty of each to the nation. Ho did not think that anyone could love tho human race who did not love his own race. Ho showed tho great advantages each man must trace to his own nation. It must be remembered that it was the belief that tho Kingdom of God was idontical with tlio Jewish State that impelled the Jewish race 40 years after Christ's words were spoken, into a suicidal. war with Rome. That was what a spurious and base patriotism did —just as it impelled tho Germans to rush Into a war with the samo fatal end. Dealing With Human Conduct, There was one point at which Church and State met and on which it might seem impossible to separate them. Tlicy both claimed to dr/al with human conduct.' Roughly the function .of the Church was to hold tip tho moral idea —the conception of what life ought to be. This could not be done by force or coercion. The State dealt with the outward things; not with tho whole of our acts, but with thosd which largely camo within the scope of the machinery it had set up—of the magistrate, the policeman, and tho gaol. To take cognisance oi' the wliolo of our outward acts it would bo necessary lor tho State to chain a policeman to tho arm of everyone, and then it would require other policemen to watch each of them. It was a great mistake' to believe that the things tho State forbade wero the gravest of crimes. A man wan put in gaol for stealing a comparatively small thing, and yet another could go home and make his homo a hell. No sensible man would deny that the man who mado his family life unbearably unliappy was tlie wo.rso mail. But tho Stato "could not deal with this except nuder certain conditions. The machinery was too clumsy. A Stato could seldom or never realiso tho ideal in its legislation. Almost all legislation dealing with human conduct was in the nature of a comproinj.se between the better and the worst' Elements of a cbn'iinlmity. -This was often the utmost that tho highest-niinded legislators could do. The State, therefore, needed tho Church. But if tho Church were completely successful thore would be no need for Slate action at all. (Ap.vlau6e.) There would bo no need for the machinery for the application of the law if

the moral ideal wero in tho hearts of nIT the people. Judges would, of course, lie required . for arbitration oif. questions in which guidance was necessary. Moral progress was impossible unless there "WftW idssJs, &nd the Church put the ideals before the people. Thoso, then, were tho functions of the two. The two were not to be antagonistic, and should work together. Dr. Sprott concluded with tho following definition of the Christian Church, and, therefore, of the Christina man: "The Christian Church is a society pledged to a cortnin plan of life, and pledged to obedience to ono whom it regards as the Divine Leader of mankind,"