Wednesday, May 28, 2008

How St. Augustine backpedalled on state coercion

When Augustine enters the scene, Christianity's role the Roman government had expanded to the point that the State relied on bishops to serve as judges in some civic matters, the Church was more involved of the administration of the government, and the Church relied more on the State's coercive power to punish heretics and schismatics.  Augustine, however, did not initially support the state's role in the Church matters of discipline.  He felt that the protection offered by the State against those who do harm was sufficient enough; the Church did not need to resort to coercion against those who broke from the church.  Rather, the church should follow the example of Christ, Who “did nothing by force, but did everything by persuasion and warning.”  In his letter to Vincentius, Augustine summarizes his early view on State coercion as such: “For originally my opinion was, that no one should be coerced into the unity of Christ, that we must act only by words, fight only by arguments, and prevail by force of reason, lest we should have those whom we knew as avowed heretics feigning themselves to be Catholics.”

Augustine, as stated earlier, does not maintain his view of a passive State in religious affairs.  When he began to see a large number of Donatists being converted back to the Catholic Church, civil order being restored and the schism being overcome, he realized that his view was wrong.

But this opinion of mine was overcome not by the words of those who controverted it, but by the conclusive instances to which they could point … There were so many others which were mentioned to me by name, that, from facts themselves, I was made to own that to this matter the word of Scripture might be understood as applying: “Give opportunity to a wise man, and he will be yet wiser.”

Like the Donatists, who were not converted back to the Church through persuasion and appeals, so was Augustine not convinced about the use of State coercion through persuasion and argumentation; rather, Augustine saw the fruits of State-forced conversion - a large number of converted Donatists and their sincere change of heart - and believed that he, not other bishops, had been in the wrong.  Coupled with his new view was Augustine's realization of the lengths the Donatists would go to persecute the Church as a result of their convictions, further proof that his method of persuasion and argumentation was not working.  He now saw that coercion was the only means by which to restrain sinful man, for “the fear of punishment is the only safeguard of general peace and society.”  With the Church in the right for appealing to the State, Augustine called on Christian rulers, even the Emperor, to fulfill their Christian duty in utilizing their civic powers against the enemies of the Church.

The Christian Civic Ruler's Duty

Augustine's argument for the Christian civic ruler's responsibility to repress the Church's enemies follows from how he supports his argument for State coercion in Church matters.  When Augustine opposed coercion, he appealed to Scripture and the example of Christ and of God's fatherly love towards His children.  Likewise, in his new view, Augustine approached his argument from three aspects: Scripture, precedent and results.

Augustine's appeal to Scripture

Augustine appealed to a number of Scripture to support his view for State coercion; so numerous, that only a few will be considered here.  In his letter to Victorinius, Augustine refers to the parable of the Great Supper in which the host, when no one invited showed up to the dinner, ordered his slave to go out to the streets and compel any that he would find to attend.  Jesus Himself coerced Paul when Paul encountered the Lord on the road to Damascus.]

Again, in his letter to Victorinius, Augustine interprets Paul's reference in Galatians to Sarah and Hagar as justification for the Church's appeal to the State against her enemies:

Did not Sarah, when she had the power, choose rather to afflict the insolent bondwoman?

~ more... ~

No comments:

Post a Comment