Separation of Church and State: Good or Bad?

[minkymurph]

I’m not convinced Separation of Church and State is relevent to contemporary society. Depends what kind of State your talking about. When Europe was governed by Monarchies, this question was more straightforward. The ‘State’ today is not what it was when the ideology of the separation of Church and State evolved.

The Church by it’s nature cannot be ‘the State.’ The State is a human institution, the Church is not. The Church, by it’s nature would also have to be separate from a secular state because as I understand it, a seculare state if an atheistic state. Perhaps that explains the anti-secularism. If this is not the case, I’d be happy to be corrected.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

I was more referring to foreign Muslims, not domestic ones. “Embracing” the modern world is probably a poor choice of words. What I meant to express is that in many traditional Muslim societies, like Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates, they have maintained many aspects of traditional society while still understanding international trade, using the internet, sophisticated building, etc. So perhaps they have not embraced modernity, but they are certainly able to work within it.

While still retaining a man’s right to kill the women and girls in his life for little to no reason

 

[minkymurph]

As far on Islam goes, is there not great diversity in the Muslim world on interpretation of Sharia Law? There are Muslim countries that are more liberal than others.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

So tell me exactly what purpose Seperation of Church and State serves, if violence is inevidable with or without Church involvement ?

The short answer is that separation serves the purpose of keeping us from living in insane prison-like societies like Saudi Arabia and Iran. That alone makes it worth the price of admission for me. Violence and mistrust are not inevitable, nor are they the result of atheism. For all the hype, street violence is much lower now than it was 20 years ago. Everywhere. Our gang problems are not due to a lack of theocracy. They are the result of bad choices young people make each day, generations of people who have internalized our society’s low expectations of them, and the utter lack of any legitimate pathways to success in many inner cities.

The financial meltdown you speak resulted from a culture of predatory greed which was encouraged by many sectors of the Christian community, ie the notion of “prosperity Gospel.” Further, it was enabled by the legislative dismantling of all effective regulation and oversight, done by a political party which saw itself as Christ’s hammer and right hand on Earth. They also engineered a war which has killed probably three-quarters of a million people, most of whom had no prior terrorist aspirations against us. It was viewed by that administration, and by elements within our military, as a war to advance Christianity.

It should be noted that Somalia is one of the most lawless places on Earth, and that the people of Somalia are by all accounts fairly religious.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

You see -it was GREED that caused problems… Greed is NOT of God! Greed stems from athiesm.

If you think religious people cannot be greedy, you know nothing of religion or human nature.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

And modern-day Germany and Russia, though they follow different political paths, are even more secularist than ever. The problem gets worse, because the remedy of Holy Mother Church is still not being administered.
.

Russia is more secular than it was under the Soviet Union?

Do you have any idea how ridiculous that sounds?

 

[AngryAtheist8]

It bears repeating that ending the false and harmful separation between Church and State might have different solutions in different countries, depending on their histories. In this country, given that we were born after the rebellion, there might well be some kind of ‘synthetic’ amalgamation of values around the term Christianity that would strengthen marriage, weaken divorce, outlaw abortion and euthanasia, and possibly protect Sunday again; the contentious parts would be around the economy, because Catholicism and protestantism part company there, over unfettered capitalism and the so-called ‘free market.’ (By the way, the liberal economics being pushed by the progressive wing of Catholicism are inaccurately applied to our economy, when they were meant to be applied to a Catholic Confessional State–never to a secular one!)

The Church would have to teach us that this solution would be unstable and temporary (due to the nature of protestantism, that inevitably tends toward secularism, that inevitably tends toward atheism; I am summarizing encyclicals), but it still would be a tactical move that could save lives. And then the Church would have to step up evangelization to build toward a genuine stable Catholic state, the kind in which one’s duties as a citizen, when fulfilled, could lead one to heaven. That kind of state.

The kind of state where everything immoral (according to the Church) would be illegal?

 

[AngryAtheist8]

The best way for the West is the way of the Catholic Confessional state, the way of centuries of European Christian government before the chaos of the Reformation sowed the seeds that gave us secularism and chaos.

And the Industrial Revolution.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Duties of the Catholic State - excellent suggestion

We have a duty to see that the state insures moral principles and inspires social action with and through its laws. We cannot fulfill the Great Commission without the conversion of our entire way of life, including government.

According to what your saying here:
No good Catholic can be truly loyal to a non-Catholic state.

 

[JackVk]

The kind of state where everything immoral (according to the Church) would be illegal?

Not exactly. Remember, Catholics don’t believe in Sharia Law.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

RonTheNewJew;6206723:

Germany is now a good case in point. QUOTE]

I think Germany is extremely important in this debate, but we have to dig to the roots of German christianity and to the roots of the modern idea of a separation of church and state. The Apostles made it into Germany, and several other evangelizers in the early centuries with some success. St. Boniface (the evangelizer of Germany) was thrown out of Germany by a duke in the 8th century. Charles “the hammer” Martel slough the duke, allowing Boniface to evangelize Germany. Martel is credited with establishing the framework for the feudal system, by giving land rights to soldiers, in effect creating the first “middle class”. He also defeated the Moors at the Battle of Tours, preserving Christianity from utter annihilation according to most historians. He also established a balance of powers between the Church and state that would last until the Reformation. The feudal system dominated Europe until the Reformation, when capitalism began to take over during the beginning of the separation of Church and state as we know today, though it wasn’t truly tried in it’s full theory until America established it 1776.

Germany has a rich and deep Christian history, even Martin Luther was from there. Could someone please explain to me how this country with deep Christian roots could decay into the birthplace of Nazism? I’ll bluntly say it was precisely due to the separation of Church and state, that the state was unchecked and allowed to run free into oppression. I’ve never been to a jewish country, but I think I could greatly respect their laws. Certainly I would dream and hope of a Christian country to live in, but I could far more respect it to a society that openly embraces atheism, and relativism and openly allows devil worship and witchcraft. I have been to Islamic countries and was humbled by my visit. They don’t have the separation we have in the west. Justice lives there, so you don’t break the law. They have no Fifth Amendment, and a rational mind has to ask why we would have one if we wanted to find the truth? I don’t believe in their religion, but as a Christian I can respect their form of government and the respect they have for their religion to give it a place in society, not brush it into a corner where it can only be talked about in church buildings on a Sunday before the appex of the afternoon football game.

I find it odd that there is so much love on a Catholic forum for Muslim countries that regularly stone women to death for things like immodesty and adultery, and kill their own citizens for converting to other religions (such as Catholicism).

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Well said! The so-called “dark ages” are nothing more than a myth created by anti-Christian and specifically anti-Catholic polemicists to discredit the most glorious age of Europe, when the Church was strong and just and noble rulers submitted to it with wondrous results.t

What WONDROUS results?

 

[AngryAtheist8]

No, we need to take lessons from the past, where we built a great civilization upon one single religion, not a confused hodgepodge that ultimately leads to moral apathy.

A ‘great’ civilization?

In Catholic medieval Europe most people were illiterate peasants (just one or two steps above slaves), and warfare was constant. Kings and nobles could abuse the common folk with impunity. Moreover famine and disease (such as the Black Death) were constant dangers.

How is that great?

 

[AngryAtheist8]

That is false. Theocracies can thrive regardless of economic conditions. I suggest you purchase and read Regine Pernoud’s Those Terrible Middle Ages! at the very least in order to get a real handle on what Medieval practices were really like; you will be surprised to find that the real barbarity is found now, not then.

It is also based on the patently false assumption that the Medieval era was rife with ignorance. Learning was in fact common in the Middle Ages, literacy was widespread (but because it was literacy in the vernacular as opposed to proficiency in Latin people assume illiteracy was common), and both feudal subjects and feudal lords were bound together in a mutually beneficial relationship that arose out of necessity when the Roman Empire collapsed and could no longer enforce order. Feudalism was in fact one of history’s truly grassroots efforts in which all strata of society banded together and cooperated for survival, and succeeded beyond mere surviving.(QUOTE.)

Do you have any proof of this (other than citing a little known book)?

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

.

The Catholic Church is not and never has been power hungry.

The Papal States engaged in wars of conquest, your statement is an obvious falsehood.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

JPII made too many concessions to enemies of the Church. He was a great man to combat Marxism but entirely too soft on the other problems of the Church. No matter, for he has gone on to his eternal rest and a wiser traditionalist now sits in the Chair.

:

You claim to be a traditional Catholic, but here you are criticizing a pope and questioning his decisions. Which makes you appear rather like a liberal Catholic.

 

[Cat_Herder]

.
The Papal States engaged in wars of conquest, your statement is an obvious falsehood.

The Papal States engaged in wars of defense such as the Crusades and the Ottoman-Venetian wars (both of which were fought against militant Islamic invaders), various Italian wars against invading city-states, the Italian War of 1521 and War of the First Coalition (fought against invading Republican/Napoleonic France), and so on.

Here’s the list of wars involving the Papal States. Show us one war started by the Papal States for the purpose of gaining territory (a war of conquest).

 

[Cat_Herder]

What WONDROUS results?

Compare the average yearly war body count in Europe before the Reformation and after.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Actually, if we were honest, the only real “prisoners” in these societies are women. However, even then, I saw an interesting moving called Persepolis, true story of a girl name Marjane Satrapi living before and after the fall of the Shah in Iran. She noted some of the strictest enforcers of the new way, including the veil, were the women themselves

And some Black people owned slaves of their own and supported the Confederacy during the American Civil War. Moreover, there were Jews who helped the Nazis during World War II.

Does the existence of such traitors (to their own kind) make these kinds of abuses any less horrible?

 

[Cat_Herder]

A ‘great’ civilization?

In Catholic medieval Europe most people were illiterate peasants (just one or two steps above slaves), and warfare was constant. Kings and nobles could abuse the common folk with impunity. Moreover famine and disease (such as the Black Death) were constant dangers.

How is that great?

The Byzantine Empire was also Catholic during the time frame in question and was not poor, illiterate, constantly at war (except against militant Islam), abusive of its people, or plagued with disease.

I thought atheists didn’t believe in myths…