How would a country completely based on the Social Kingship of Jesus Christ would be?

[imo]

For those who thinks women should primarily work at home is not a Catholic position, read below our own supreme pontiffs:

“Mothers concentrating on household duties, should work primarily in the home or in its immediate vicinity. It is an intolerable abuse, and to be abolished at all cost, for mothers on account of the father’s low wage to be forced to engage in gainful occupations outside the home to the neglect of their proper cares and duties, especially the training of children.” Quadragessimo Anno, Pius XI.

“Women, are not suited for certain occupations…a woman is by nature fitted for home-work, and it is that which is best adapted at once to preserve her modesty and to promote the good bringing up of children and the well-being of the family.” Rerum Novarum, Leo XIII.

Don’t let modernism enters too deep on your minds that the Catholic position causes scandal.

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

A monarchy is kind of uneccessary. I’m not sure why there’s so much hype anyways.

 

[Annie]

Consider the very different time and lines of work that Pope Leo would have been thinking about. They did not have heavy machinery then, so occupations like coal mining would have been unsuitable for women.

Consider Proverbs 31, in which the good housewife has her own business.

On the other hand, consider the problems we have now with sexual harassment… I think we have less idea of it’s happening now than we did back then, so we don’t worry that our daughters will face that (and even our sons!) but it is a reality, just one that we are not as conscious of now as they were back then.

Overall, I don’t think that the situation today is comparable to that which Pope Leo was discussing, when 3-year-old children had to go to work to help the family make ends meet, or when there weren’t many daycares or schools, etc.

Overall, I do not think there would be draconian rules against women working the way you think.

 

[Pitcairn17]

niceatheist:

What if someone doesn’t want to be a mother? I get that you have no intention of imposing motherhood, but there’s an underlying sentiment here that most other “vocations”, like, say, wanting to be a doctor or a lawyer, are lesser goals that, if not discouraged, shouldn’t be encouraged.

My youngest daughter is in her mid-20s, single and just finishing up a second degree, and at least at this point has no desire for a partner or children. Is she lesser than a woman who wants to have kids? Just what would her position be in this ideal Catholic state, because from where I’m standing, I’d describe this state as a “mild Iran”.

Would “mild Iran”, mutatis mutandis, substitute Catholicism for Islam, be such a bad thing?

I have seen videos and street scenes of Tehran, showing people in their homes, living ordinary lives. It doesn’t look like a bad place to me. Quite pleasant, actually. Never been there, wouldn’t mind visiting.

In a Catholic society organized according to the social principles of the reign of Christ the King, motherhood would be encouraged, but women would have equal rights and could pursue any career they might wish to.

This little book might shed some light on what such a country would look like:

https://www.amazon.com/Star-Spangled-Crown-Simple-American-Monarchy/dp/1944339051

Note well: a Catholic social system would not necessarily have to be a monarchy. Might be helpful, but not absolutely needed.

Not sure what your definition of “mild” is, but as far as visiting this “pleasant place,” be sure to take in the public floggings for violations of the dress code, limb amputations for petty theft, and the occasional stoning - or hurling from tall buildings - of homosexuals. Have a nice trip. Be sure to bring your camera.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

Not sure what your definition of “mild” is, but as far as visiting this “pleasant place,” be sure to take in the public floggings for violations of the dress code, limb amputations for petty theft, and the occasional stoning - or hurling from tall buildings - of homosexuals. Have a nice trip. Be sure to bring your camera.

I didn’t know they did this in Iran. I thought that was Saudi Arabia. I thought we turned a blind eye to Saudi shenanigans because of oil and strategic military interests.

As I said, mutatis mutandis. None of the things you cite are Catholic.

 

[Emeraldlady]

Love and care for each other, especially the poorest and most vulnerable would be manifest.

However, the type of Catholics who support this idea of a Catholic State also seem to be highly motivated against systems that help the poor and vulnerable, such as affordable healthcare for everyone and welfare support.

 

[imo]

I think a Catholic State should, of course, help the poor and vulnerable, but those who really need, that are unable to work. For those who can do anything, the Catholic State should always provide work and then the person would meet their own needs. But the real welfare here would be universal employment.

 

[imo]

I don’t think we are opposed here. I think the Catholic State would promote and honour the moms and wives that stay home and take care of the family, the opposite of today, where these women are often ridiculed. I think a lot of women don’t choose this path anymore because of the enormous negative view of today modernist world. But a Catholic State would praise that and naturally, I think, the majority of women would voluntarily return to their homes, part time jobs or remote jobs. Anyway, those who still wants to work outside, in jobs that aren’t against the dignity of a Catholic lady, would of course be free to do so and would have all the rights to be respected in their workplace.

 

[mythbuster1]

Why would they be prevented from education? In feudal Europe, women worked about as much as the men.

 

[Annie]

. I think a lot of women don’t choose this path anymore because of the enormous negative view of today modernist world.

I think they don’t choose it because life costs a lot of money. It’s not just to keep up with the Joneses, either. We used to manage without cell phones because there were payphones. Now there are no payphones.

And it goes on.

 

[imo]

Of course not. But women’s education would be different, conceived to help them with their more natural vocation of taking care of the household, healing, etc… Men and women would have different educations, both with the same dignity, but different, as God created them different. Equal in value, but different.

 

[0Scarlett_nidiyilii]

“Women, are not suited for certain occupations…a woman is by nature fitted for home-work, and it is that which is best adapted at once to preserve her modesty and to promote the good bringing up of children and the well-being of the family.” Rerum Novarum, Leo XIII.

What would he have thought of St Mother Theresa and
St Gianna Molla and St Edith Stein?

 

[Emeraldlady]

I think a Catholic State should, of course, help the poor and vulnerable, but those who really need, that are unable to work. For those who can do anything, the Catholic State should always provide work and then the person would meet their own needs. But the real welfare here would be universal employment.

In a Catholic State, would the hierarchical structure of the Church still be recognised. Say for example in matters of the faith… if the Catholic State decided to abolish or severely restrict the Ordinary form of the Mass in favour of the EF, would the ruling of the Magisterium prohibiting this policy be accepted by the State?

 

[Emeraldlady]

Note well: a Catholic social system would not necessarily have to be a monarchy. Might be helpful, but not absolutely needed.

If not a monarchy, would there be general elections or would it operate as a dictatorship?

 

[Emeraldlady]

I think a Catholic State should, of course, help the poor and vulnerable, but those who really need, that are unable to work. For those who can do anything, the Catholic State should always provide work and then the person would meet their own needs. But the real welfare here would be universal employment.

A vital law would have to govern wealth distribution so that it is possible for the government to micro manage employment to that end.

 

[PennyinCanada]

My youngest daughter is in her mid-20s, single and just finishing up a second degree, and at least at this point has no desire for a partner or children. Is she lesser than a woman who wants to have kids? Just what would her position be in this ideal Catholic state, because from where I’m standing, I’d describe this state as a “mild Iran”.

The Church has unmarried women with no children as saints.
The Catholic way is that whatever your state in life, is that we love God and love neighbor. To grow in holiness and bring down a blessing upon the world.

In the Church’s long history, men and women who have responded to the call of Christ, have contributed to the building of civilization, with education, schools, universities, medicine, hospitals, as well as the arts and music. Taking care of the sick, helping the handicapped and widowed and orphaned, are all good works done for centuries when no institutions existed to manage these things. Now that the government has taken our taxes to take these things on, we seem to think the Church is some old fossil that needs to be buried. The reality is, we still need to grow in loving our neighbor. We still need that message of the dignity of the human person.

 

[imo]

The elementary mandatory education (until high school) would include all the regular subjects (math, languages, etc) but there would be a part of the curriculum that would be specific for each sex, let say 25% of all the studying hours. College education would not be mandatory and each person could choose what to study, so, yes, a woman could study anything if she wants. This would be not be promoted by the State, nevertheless.

 

[hvizsgyak]

You would be kindly tolerated. You could speak your beliefs but know the law will never change because if they are based on Jesus’ teachings then they are perfect and no change would be needed. And I believe, you would continue speaking your mind for the rest of your life and we would have to still kindly tolerate it because we love you.

 

[Margaret_Ann]

Excerpt from The Mystical Body of Christ in the Modern World:

The Programme of Christ and The Plans of Satan

Firstly

Our Lord’s Mystical Body, the Catholic Church, Supernatural and Supranational, which all States and Nations are called upon to acknowledge, has been established by God as the One Way for the ordered return of human beings to Him. Into it all men of all Nations are called to become members.

(Our Lord’s Programme) Secondly

And as a consequence, States and Nations are called upon to acknowledge the right of the Catholic Church, by the voice of the Pope and Bishops, to decide what favours or hinders our most real life, namely, our life as Members of Christ. This right of the Catholic Church is known as the Indirect Power. It belongs to the Catholic Church as the sole divinely-appointed Guardian of the whole Moral Law, natural and revealed.

(Our Lord’s Programme) Thirdly

The Unity and Indissolubility of Christian Marriage symbolize the union of Christ and His Mystical Body. This is the foundation of the Christian Family.

(Our Lord’s Programme) Fourthly

Our Lord wants children educated as Members of His Mystical Body, so that they may be able to look at everything, nationality included, from that standpoint, and observe the order following therefrom in relation to God, themselves and others. This is true personality developed.

 

[twf]

A good Catholic King would be bound to care for the poor…open hospitals and such. Medieval lords were expected to feed the poor on feasts and a good Catholic Lady always cared for the poor among the people… I don’t understand why so many “traditionalist” Catholics are so deadset against social welfare programs. I think it’s probably just an America thing, where we are seeing American conservative values rather than traditional Catholic values.