Church and State - Essay Example

Module Module ID: Religion: Church and The current study is interested in elaborating the nature and scope of the association between the church and state from the early Modern Era onward in the light of the views and beliefs expressed by the Renaissance, Reformation, Seventeenth century and Enlightenment era philosophers and intellectuals in their respective works. One of the most imperative objectives behind exploring the topic above-mentioned includes seeking the answer to the question whether or not there appears any need for the formulating of the new phase of relations between the church and state in the best interests of the masses at large. Hence, the present paper will provide an insightful outlook of the topic under-examination by seeking support from the works created by the scholars. The fast and continuous alterations being witnessed in the contemporary era all over the world have forced the thinkers and political and social scientists to re-determine and review the role of church or institution of religion in order to avoid and escape the extremism that appears to be challenging the peace and harmony of the social establishments on the one side, and adding their share in widening the gulf of hatred and conflict among the cultures following the divergent religious belief systems within their respective political jurisdictions on the other during the contemporary era. Consequently, the world looks reflecting the scenario of chaos and disorder even after the advent of marvelous scientific and technological advancements making the life peaceful, comfortable and luxurious one in general. There was a time when the entire Europe used to be submitting to the decrees issued by the church. The establishment of the Holy Roman Empire was also the outcome of the dominance influence of church on state and all its institutions. While elaborating the position of church and state in his remarkable “The Prince”, distinguished Italian philosopher Machiavelli strongly demands the separation of church from the political affairs of government and state (2010, p.45). It is partly due to the very reality that the ecclesiastical principalities or religious rules are unable to cope with the historical patterns altogether. Since the church lays stress upon specific mode of worship as well as leading the life in a standardized manner, the same could not be observed practically in any region of the entire globe. One of the most dominant reasons behind the same is this that the people belonging to divergent faiths, factions and sects co-exist in one and the same socio-political establishment; and if the (Catholic) church representing just one faction of one single faith looks for the masses’ strict observing of the Catholic code of laws, there will be bright probabilities of conflict and clashes in society, leading to anarchical state of affairs in the country subsequently. Rousseau refutes the implementation of religious and social laws by stating that man was born free, but everywhere he is in chains (2008, p.15). Hence, he does not appear to be surrendering before the heavy burdens of laws, which challenge the human liberty in one way or the other. Taking the precedent of the contemporary era rigid orthodox states of Afghanistan and Pakistan, it becomes evident that the nefarious extremist deoband sect of Muslims has made the life of the non-Muslim and peaceful Shiite Muslims miserable and pathetic one by inflicting pains and sufferings upon them with the aim of forcing them to adopt their religious policies and ways at any cost. Such a condemnable religious prejudice has destroyed the efficiency of the political institution on the one side, and has caused the ruination of social fabrics on the other. It is therefore, Machiavelli’s arguments (2010, pp. 47-8) with regards to separation of church and state still carry weight even nearly five centuries after its first publication in 1532. In addition to this, the undue and unnecessary interference observed by the church may create two parallel governments in one state, where both the clergy and royalty would attempt to get their words to be implemented, hence putting the stability of the state into grave jeopardy subsequently. Furthermore, the historical records vehemently endorse the corruption, excesses and irregularities frequently committed by the church in the sacred name of faith. As a result, whenever the church got the opportunity of capturing the political powers by rising at the helm of administrative affairs, it abruptly attempted to clip the liberty and freedom of the masses at large. It is because of witnessing the same tyranny at the hands of the church, Luther had emphatically advocated in favor of the freedom of the masses from the rigorous and ruthless clutches of the influential and dictatorial church during his “Address at the Diet of Worms” (1521, pp.1-2). In other words, since the church looks determined to enforce the codes of its choice without taking the whims and wishes of the public into slightest consideration, separating the religious institutions from the state affairs would turn out to be highly supportive one for the smooth running of the political matters on the one side, and for the liberty and freedom of though and action associated with the masses on the other. Though the philosophers look for negating the effective role of the church into the political matters, and appear to be determined to confine the religious practices within the four walls of church premises; nevertheless, they have never demonstrated any displeasure or abhorrence for the institute of religion altogether. On the contrary, the imperative significance of church with regards to spiritual and moral aspects is vehemently advocated and supported by the thinkers. Distinguished philosopher of all times Thomas Hobbes in his Leviathans (1653) has defined the role of church in governmental matters by stating that it is the (Christian) faith and church that through which man learns to perform his duties and obligations. Hobbes is of the opinion that the rulers aptly display mercilessness and cruelties towards the masses as well as towards the weak and frail neighboring states out of the power and prestige they enjoy (Leviathans, 1996, p.60). However, the sense of being responsible to some Supreme Being teaches the individuals at the helm of a government to display justice and mercy towards the masses and to keep away tyranny and injustices while issuing the orders and decrees on different matters. As a result, the role plays by the church by laying its direct influence on the state helps the rulers to abide by moral laws in their real meaning (Leviathans, 1996, pp.63-4). Famous twentieth century moralist Lord Devlin has also presented the similar notion by making arguments that strict and absolute adopting of religious and moral values are necessary in order to protect the society from the individual and collective harm (1965, pp. 181-82); and it is the institution of religion that provides the ethical code of leading a chaste and pious life. As a result, the significant role played by the church cannot be confined to the boundary wall of church altogether. On the other hand, Mill in his utilitarianism perspective argues the involvement of the individuals in the pleasure-seeking activities provided they do not hurt or harm other members of society (Mill, 1872, p.15). In other words, Mill has laid stress upon freedom of thought and action for all members of society without discrimination, and has refused the possibility of restrictions to be imposed upon them by the state or religion. The same wave of seeking civil rights could also be found in the work produced by Montesquieu, where he firmly demands for the unrestricted and uninterrupted liberty for the people without the existence of any hurdle or obstacle on the way to human liberty (1989, p.192). In addition to this, Montesquieu also supported the separation of all bodies of state i.e. political or administrative/government, judicial and religious in the best interest of the state. Hence, he votes in favor of the independence of the state from the influence of the church. Political systems and religious beliefs, according to Montesquieu, partly reflect the climate and physical environment of a society; as a result, separate sets of law and political systems should be introduced in different areas and regions of the globe (1989, p. 460). The insistence of church to remain an essential part of the administrative affairs will always result into the collapse of the entire socio-political establishment due to the very fact that the clergy having their vested financial and political interests in governmental affairs will drag the churchmen far away from the true spirit of the religion, which will ultimately corrupt the church and peoples’ trust in the religious institution will observe a destructive blow eventually (1989, p. 479-80). Not only this that the church will attempt to get the individuals of their choice appointed at political positions, but also the clergy is sure to get indulged into the activities that are sharply against their real responsibilities i.e. teaching and preaching the sacred message of God. To conclude, it becomes evident that all political thinkers and intellectuals have supported the notion of permanent separation between the church and state for the collective good of the people and political and social institutions. By bonding the people under the yoke of both church and state will simply cause the ruination of their individual liberty, in the wake of the rise of clash of interest between the state and church eventually (Rousseau, 2008, p.47). It is therefore Locke maintains that in order to comprehend with the right of enjoying the political power, the nature of the status, role and powers of the individuals associated with divergent institutes and professions, which decide and determine the activities and responsibilities of the individuals by granting them civil liberty in society within the bounds of the law of nature, without asking leave, or depending upon the will of any other man (Locke, p.130).? Works Cited Devlin, Lord Patrick. Morality and the Criminal Law. 1965 177-190. Web. Hobbes, Thomas. “Leviathan: Instrument of Government” 1653 New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Print. Locke, John. Two Treatises of Government New York: C. and J. Rivington, 1824/2007. Print. Luther, Martin. "Here I Stand": Address at the Diet of Worms. 1521 1-2 My Eport Web. Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Prince. Second Edition New York: University of Chicago Press 2010 44-52 Print. Mill, John Stuart. Utilitarianism Edition 4 New York: Longmans, Green, Reader, and Dyer, 1871. Print. Montesquieu, Charles de Secondat baron de. Spirit of the Laws; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1989. Print. Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. The Social Contract New York: Cosimo, Inc., 2008. Print. Read More