Introduction
Leviathan was written by Thomas Hobbes in 1651 and since then the debates over this book have been taking place. People’s ideas regarding politics, religion, society, and the like matters always differ this is why there is no wonder that Hobbes’s book caused so many controversial opinions. The book consists of four main parts, namely Part I: Of Man, Part II: Of Commonwealth, Part II: of a Christian Commonwealth, and Part IV: Of the Kingdom of Darkness. All these parts have been written with regards to the events which were taking place in the United Kingdom in the 16th-17th centuries, the times when it experienced numerous changes in government and religious convictions.
The book does not directly describe these events, nor does it contain any concealed descriptions. Instead, Hobbes chose to deal with them in a way that makes the readers feel themselves a part of this history. Perhaps, of greatest importance is Part III of the book because it allows feeling the significance of changes which the United Kingdom was going through back then. The part of Leviathan entitled “Of a Christian Commonwealth” addresses such religious controversies of the 16th-17th- century United Kingdom as state and church relationships and establishment of Church of England’s position towards continental Protestants and Roman Catholic Church with Hobbes’s expounding the theory of the state supremacy over the church and demolishing the time-honored notions of a universal church, papal supremacy over the king, and papal infallibility.
State and Church Relationships
Though the idea of the state’s supremacy over the church is not predominant in Hobbes’ “Leviathan,” it still deserves thorough consideration. The relations between church and state of those times have been rather complicated for the reason that the latter constantly interfered with the clerical matters. The exacerbation of controversies between the church and the state led to the Civil War of 1642 –1651. The war started as an armed conflict between the Royalists and Parliamentarians with the tension between these two parties being gradually built for several years. Hobbes believed that the English Civil War was also partially caused by clergy ambitions and religious enthusiasm which was openly exploited: “Instead of calming and educating people, priests and vicars only stimulated their idolatrous and hence potentially seditious inclinations, based on a massive reification of what are merely figments of the mind”.
The war which followed only favored the development of these ambitions. According to two Acts of Supremacy which were passed far earlier than these events started taking place (in 1534 and 1559), the King was the head of the Church in England and the church existed under his supremacy. With the First Act of Supremacy, King Henry VIII obtained Royal Supremacy which allowed him to exercise control over every single sphere of the country’s life. Later he was confirmed as ahead of Church in England, which led to the official emerging of English Reformation. However, the primary purpose of the Act was not achieved. King Henry wished to have control over the church with the only reason, namely getting an annulment of his marriage. The acting Pope (Clement VIII) refused him in annulment. This resulted in the Treason Act, which the King passed in order to make any refusal to abide by the provisions of the Act of Supremacy illegal.
The Second Act of Supremacy was adopted to declare King Henry’s daughter Mary as ahead of the country and the church. Later, her sister, Elizabeth I ascended the throne and coined the term Supreme Governor instead of Supreme Head. The use of this term made the fact that Elizabeth I was a female church leader insignificant. It was under her order that the heads of the religious houses were made to take the Oath of Supremacy and the objection to do this was regarded as treason. This contributed to the worsening of the relations between the church and the state, making these two parties oppose to each other.
In general, the consolidation of the state and the church, which resulted from the Acts of Supremacy, led to the separation of these entities in the future. This concerns not only England, but the rest of European and even non-European countries. Thus, the supremacy of the state over the church led to numerous conflicts between them, which later resulted in the outburst of English Civil War. The war, in its turn, led to the execution of Charles I and served as a precedent to the establishment of the rule that the English monarch should get the consent of the Parliament before he can start ruling the country. Despite all this, Hobbes believed that separation of the church and the state was beneficial for both of them because it allowed them to avoid strife, which further contributed to maintaining of peace at any cost (which was Hobbes’s primary concern).
Universal Church
Another idea which Hobbes expresses in his Leviathan is the time-honored notions of the Universal Church. To be more exact, he demolishes these notions. This idea is also linked with the Civil War events and the country’s need in the sovereign who could rule the country and be ahead of the church at one and the same time. Hobbes presents his own definition of a church which he believes to be “a company of men professing Christian religion, united in the person of one sovereign, at whose command they ought to assemble, and without whose authority they ought not to assemble”. From this definition it follows, that Christ has founded not a single church, but many of them. Hobbes made it clear that his definition of church “makes the principle of church unity explicit” and “undermine(s) the claims of the Roman Catholic Church”. Since Hobbes kept to an idea that only names can be universal, he denied the notion of a universal church. He claimed that “there is on earth no such universal Church, as all Christians are bound to obey; because there is no power on earth, to which all other commonwealth are subject”. Taking this into account, Hobbes concluded that a sovereign could eliminate subordination of the church to the state or vice versa because such a ruler would have been able to control not only secular, but religious matters as well.
This was what England of those times lacked when the church and the state were united under the same ruler, King Henry VIII. The church did not change much legally and administratively after the King’s obtaining legal supremacy. Its administrative systems, courts, penalties, and even bishops’ authority remained the same. While earlier it was namely bishops’ authority that was destructive for the church, now the crown became the major root of controversy. The church turned into the Erastian one with its officials being mere servants to the crown. This Erastian church “was one ultimately subordinated to secular interests if not values, a church whose lodestar was not edification but prudence”. This contradicted to the Christian Church the purpose of which was namely edification:
The true church was often prosecuted and forever at risk; it was known not by its prelates but its martyrs. A prudential church was a contradiction in terms; carnal prosperity was the mark of Rome. Herein lay the danger of a state church: not that the worldly concerns of the prince would corrupt the church, but that in yielding to them the church would betray the state.
Those were the times when the doctrine of divine right and passive obedience emerged with both of them establishing absolute supremacy of the crown. From these two Hobbes seemed to oppose the former most of all, because it meant that the monarchs’ right to rule derived directly from God. Hobbes considered this to be impossible because “He […] to whom God hath not supernaturally revealed that they [laws] are His[…] is not obliged to obey them by any authority but his whose commands have already the force of laws”. Therefore, Hobbes denied the possibility of a Universal Church, but believed in a sovereign who could be universal at least to some extent. This means that by proper uniting religious and civic authorities England of those times could have coped with religious and governmental problems which it faced.
Papal Supremacy and Infallibility
Finally, Hobbes’s Leviathan demolishes ideas of papal supremacy over the king and papal infallibility. Hobbes tried to refute the theory of papal supremacy, which is often regarded as his atheism. This, however, is not true for the reason that Hobbes’s denial of papal supremacy did not mean that he denied God or religion as such. The aim of Hobbes was to show that loyalty to the sovereign simply cannot be undermined by any content of the Christian belief. Despite the assertion that the absolute power is more likely to produce revolution, Hobbes still regarded monarchy as the best form of government. Hobbes did not state for sure that monarchy was more important than papacy, but he firmly believed that they cannot coexist until there is papal infallibility: “And thence while one side ground their knowledge upon the infallibility of the Church, and the other side on the testimony of the private spirit, neither side concluded that it pretends”. Hobbes denied papal infallibility because it could be applicable to England only, while the pope had absolutely no authority over other nationalities. This is why he admitted only monarchial infallibility. He was convinced that only the sovereign could be an infallible guide of a Christian nation and, according to the terms by which this sovereign is chosen, “the subject transfers to the sovereign the right to make decisions about everything that pertains to self-preservation, and that includes religious behavior”.
In this way (if presumed that the sovereign is a Christian), eternal salvation is guaranteed to the subject if he/she obeys to the sovereign. This was the theological solution which Hobbes offered to this problem. He simply shifted the responsibility (mostly the religious one) from the subject to the sovereign because “whatever the sovereign commands as regards religion is mere superstructure and cannot threaten the subject’s future existence”. By this Hobbes explained his conviction that the monarchy is the most beneficial form of government rule and that papal supremacy and infallibility should be demolished.
Just like Hobbes, the British government has also rejected the supremacy of the Pope and papal infallibility. Already in 1563 The Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion were established in the United Kingdom. By these articles the Church of England rejected papal infallibility and supremacy of papacy as such. They were meant to represent the official position of the Church of England on matters of discipline and doctrine. The tries to establish these standards have been numerous and started with Ten Articles which were published in 1536. With time, the articles have been extended, and their number grew to forty two; eventually, the number was reduced, and they were introduced to the society in 1563.
At first, however, “puritans accepted the doctrinal formulations but objected to the articles dealing with discipline. Efforts to require all clergy to subscribe to the articles were in part an effort to force puritans to conform and identify those who would not”. It should be mentioned, that these thirty nine articles were not a complete presentation of the Christian faith; their purpose was to show the Church of England’s position towards the Protestants and the Roman Catholic Church. The first eight articles deal with the Catholic faith and its position regarding the Holy Trinity. Another ten present the church’s personal religion and its view on sins, justification, and the like topics. Thirteen next ones talk about corporate religion and public expression of faith. The remaining eight articles contain different church traditions, excommunication, and other issues. Therefore, Hobbes’s and the Church of England’s view on papacy and papal infallibility were quite similar with their rejecting both of them.
Conclusion
When addressing such issues as the English Civil War, relations of the church and the state, and Church of England’s establishing its position in religion, Thomas Hobbes made a number of controversial claims which will always be discussed by people studying this topic. Though some of Hobbes’s arguments are often criticized, it still should be admitted that his position on each of these issues is absolutely clear and his denying of universal church, papal supremacy, and papal infallibility is well-grounded and convincing. Despite this, his arguments will be exposed to criticism as long as there are people interested in the history of the United Kingdom and its religious convictions.
Works Cited
Bremer, Francis J. and Webster, Tom. Puritans and Puritanism in Europe and America. London: ABC-CLIO, 2006.
Hobbes, Thomas. The Leviathan. Whitefish: Kessinger Publishing, 2004.
Martinich, Aloysius P. The Two Gods of Leviathan: Thomas Hobbes on Religion and Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
Martinich, Aloysius P. Hobbes: a Biography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
Quentin, Jean-Louis. The Church of England and Christian Antiquity: The Construction of a Confessional Identity in the 17th Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.
Springborg, Patricia. The Cambridge Companion to Hobbes’s Leviathan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
Wylie, James A. The History of Protestantism. New York: Hartland Publications, 2002.
Zaller, Robert. The Discourse of Legitimacy in Early Modern England. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 2007.