Bishops holding political office

[otjm]

With the fall of Rome, the Church was the only institution surviving with enough reach, education, and lack of empire building to step into the vacuum. However, it never seemed to be able to build the wisdom that political affairs were not its mandate or purpose. as time passed, and as more and more of the hierarchy became involved in politics, bishops fell err to the use of political influence and corruption set in. I do not suggest the whole of the Church was corrupted, but plenty of individuals over time were.

And I still maintain that the Church has no business in politics; it has a duty to speak in the public square on matters that are moral, but bishops, priests and deacons have no business per their office and anointing to engage in political office. Politicians are not in the business of saving souls, and politics is not about saving souls. It can and does get into matters which are immoral, and the Church needs to take a clear stand against that; but that is not accomplished by running for office.

And I don’t consider my comments a rant. Since you do, this discussion is ended. You are on ignore.

 

[Fets]

And I still maintain that the Church has no business in politics;

For the good of the thread, you can maintain that. But, as I’ve said, the Church doesn’t teach that. The Church could in the future have just as much temporal power as she did at the height of her temporal power. Because there’s no teaching against it. Merely opinions of the present clergy, but they’re not binding or authoritative on this matter.