A
AcolyteLector
Guest
Agreed, but I think there is broader support for the acceptance of religion into government than AA takes into account… irrespective of which religion is being accepted.
- Status
A
AcolyteLector
Guest
Exactly. Although that’s one of the more ‘politically acidic’ examples of religion entering government… or at least policy debate… that you could have chosen, lol.
K
Kaninchen
Guest
Perhaps the insertion of “from a Catholic perspective” before the ‘lol’ would be appropriate?
R
Reservoir_Dog
Guest
Only a much watered down version of any mainstream faith would find wide acceptance, and I don’t think anyone wants that.
W
Warrenton
Guest
Sure, but I note you are not restating what I wrote entirely accurately. For example, in Spain (!) in the middle ages, the Jews were a minority, plus they provided the majority of the doctors and overseas merchant traders. The Muslims tolerated them, as did the Christians, neither however, “loved” them. Nevertheless the Jews prospered. Yes, eventually they were expelled, but one cannot focus on that to the exclusion of 500 years of prosperity.Racism or bigotry doesn’t harm the minority its being applied to
Can you back up that statement in any way?
Perhaps more to the point of this thread were the Catholics of the early 20th century,
They were subject to bias, and the resulting insularity enabled them to found vibrant parishes, schools, hospitals and social networks many of which are still around. The result of inclusion, and identification with the majority has had at best mixed results. I don’t know many Catholics who are proud that Nancy Pelosi identifies herself as a RC.
R
Reservoir_Dog
Guest
Would I, as a non-Catholic, be barred from holding office in the new Catholic America?
W
Warrenton
Guest
The thread requires us to pretend to a degree. As can be seen from my posts, applying the thread to the USA, I don’t think any major changes are in the offing. The government ought to be able to exist for quite some time to come as it is, because this is such a prosperous country. Socially, the ethnic identities that we customarilly think of as “American” will continue to dissolve slowly, but steadily over the coming few generations.
Under the system I outline, no one “vets” candidates for Catholicity. If they are baptized, that’s enough. Naturally, some Catholics will be more aligned to the Church than others, some will even dislike the hierarchy. That is not necessarily a problem in the way that a Democrat hiding within the Republican party might be.
One thing to keep in mind about traditional Catholic political thought is that it takes a very long view. The kind of utopian dreaming that characterizes so much contemporary political rhetoric is absent: “Change is coming to Washington!”
W
Warrenton
Guest
If history serves as a precedent, the answer is that you would be precluded from some offices at the top of government, but not others. You would be able to serve in the military, certainly as a lawyer, even a magistrate or jp, but not as a high court judge. Remember, even in the Holy Roman Empire, protestants could - and did- hold high office, they were even electors. But they could not govern bishoprics and could not themselves serve as emporer.
The same was true in Britain even before the emancipation bill of the early 1800s. Branches of the Arundel family and the Howards stayed Catholic, and held their seats in the House of Lords and various councils. Those families had the right to conduct their manorial courts. They certainly led their regiments. But they could not, I think, hold offices that would permit them to interfere with the Protestant succession.
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
I would have just quoted you, but you badly misspelled some of the important words.
R
Reservoir_Dog
Guest
Great, I don’t have to disown my own service record. So I’ll just sign a piece of paper and convert. You’ll triple your Church’s numbers with paper Catholics (nee rice catholics in another place and time).
But how will you vet me? Who will make sure that I’m Catholic enough? As you know, the “trad catholics” are pretty had on the “liberal catholics” on this forum.
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
Probably, remember Franco Spain is being held up as an ideal.
R
Reservoir_Dog
Guest
I don’t have it in me to kill that many people.
K
Kaninchen
Guest
Given what was said about women on the other Franco thread and the fact that Jews are to be un-emancipated, I wonder what the position of Jewish women would be in this Brave New World? 
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
Then you would not be a ‘good’ Franco.
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
Nothing nice I would imagine.Given what was said about women on the other Franco thread and the fact that Jews are to be un-emancipated, I wonder what the position of Jewish women would be in this Brave New World?
Considering how Franco’s followers actually treated women (especially during and immediately after the Civil War) the thought of Japanese Comfort Women comes to mind.
W
Warrenton
Guest
RD, in this aspect, your are misapplying a mindset that is somewhat outside the mainstream of Catholic political behavior. Nobody really vets your orthodoxy at the seminary, it’s more or less assumed.
In contrast, back in the 1980s, anyone in intelligence was constantly getting interrogated for possible espionage activity. So much falls under the umbrella of the permissible that it would be pointless to try to “vet” it - the vituperation one sometimes reads here is a function of the lack that kind of discipline, other confessions just “split” over those disagreements.
But essentially, yes, Angry is not going to like it because he’s going to be an outsider in that kind of government. But an atheist overflowing with the milk of human kindness is an outsider everywhere, so there isn’t much we can do for him. Kanichen is not going to like it because (1) it isn’t European, very, although it would end up being more European than much of Europe will probably be. (I am still pondering what about Europe she really likes, btw. Maybe that quintessentially European monument, the Millenium Dome, or the fox hunting ban); and (2) the point of such a polity is to protect Catholics in their faith, and it us uncertain whether this is a goal she likes.
As to the status of Jews generally, the reality of a confessional state varies between something like Austria before the Great War, and perhaps Greece today, where Orthodoxy, though not required legally, is in reality all but required.
For semi charmed Anglicans, not to worry. You’ll love being a recusant!
R
Reservoir_Dog
Guest
I’m now a Reservoir Anglican.
Honestly, I wouldn’t want to be caught in the middle of who is Catholic enough fight.
K
Kaninchen
Guest
I’m a half-German, half-Italian who grew up in the UK, so ‘European, very’ seems rather descriptive. We’ve lived in the US (twice) but not with the intention of staying, it was very nice but not home.
I realize that you’re not really into the idea of people (especially women) being able to express their preferences but the idea of you pondering why a European would like being a European living in Europe does seem rather amusing.
Well, in the context of another poster’s suggestion that non-Christians would love your postulated utopia, I think he might be shocked at the lack of enthusiasm from Italian Jews for the idea of the return of the Papal States. Mind you, of course, the United Papal States would be on the other side of the Atlantic and somebody else’s problem.
W
Warrenton
Guest
I have passed most of my life in the US. I have found it many things, but “nice” has never been one of them. Glad you enjoyed it, though!
I don’t question that you are European, but one does not like something because of who she is, but because of the attributes of the thing in question. I would not find it surprising if you adored the fox hunting ban as much, or more so, as the finale at the Proms, but if you said you adored it because of its distinctly European flavour, then I would be perplexed.
Personally, I don’t advocate the idea of a confessional America as a utopia even for RCs, and certainly not a utopia for non-RCs. Some things, perhaps many things, will be worse than at present. The resumption of usury laws would seriously change the way many people live. Ideologically, they will hate it, one supposes. But they will like certain of its benefits, in the long run.
R
Reservoir_Dog
Guest
I’m glad there’s no coyote hunting ban.
- Status