Separation of Church and State: Good or Bad?

[gamewell45]

As Catholics, we do not believe that full and proper morality can be achieved by anything less than full union with and submission to the teaching authority of the Church.

Yes, and any system that permits this to happen is invalid.

Then it makes no sense to state that our faith should not hold sway over secular governments. It is tantamount to saying that secularism is acceptable, that it is OK for God and His Faith to be kept out of certain parts of human life.

Our country was not founded on Christianity, Judaism, or any other religion. Our country was founded on Enlightenment era novelties, like secular government and the trammeling of religion. It didn’t take long for that to produce an utterly wicked and profligate modern culture, such as we have now.

Two things that divide men in this world; Politics and Religion. Think about it.

 

[gamewell45]

No where have I read where the Constitution says that the US is always supposed to follow Judeo Christian morals- or any morals of any religion for that matter. We can pursue what we choose to be it happiness with or without morals. I’m not saying this is right or wrong but the way it is. But I don’t want to wind up with a Theocracy which is why I find the seperation of church and state good - if the church was not seperate, people could be punished for things like not going to church - I think we saw when people were in a very religious based society, that people would wind up accused of many “wrongs” which had nothing to do with law as we have today but with religious “requirements” - that may sound good to some on here but what if those relgious requirements became Islamic or even Jewish? It’s fine as long as it’s Catholicism but when it’s another religon then I hear people saying “well that’s not my religion - that’s not right!” - but no matter who’s religion it used, there is no religious panacea that all can follow, respect and believe in. Melting pots have many different religions added.
God Bless
Rye

Rye,

I concur with you. I for one would openly rebel against any religion (including my own) dictating to me or others on how to live my life coming from a government level.

Others claim that “our founding fathers were God fearing Christians”. Bravo, bravo! Thats wonderful, but not everyone in this country believes the same as they did. Particularly the atheist’s in this world who worship no God. Religion must be kept out of the government.

 

[crazzeto]

What we have in this nation is absolutly not “seperation of Church and State”, this is as modern innovation on the clause that was written into the constitution which is the freedom of relgion. In fact, freedom of the press (& speech) is written into the very same amendment which grants freedom of religion, does anyone posting here beleive we have seperation of press and state? Seperation of speech and state (some times I wish we had this one)? If you do you’re wrong, the government does run press and media agencies, the government does do a whole lot of talking (much to our chagrin).

What all these have in common is that, there was never any thought or intention to say the government should exclude these idea’s from it’s self. Rather, the government has no right to control these things for the entire population. I.E. every session of congress can open with a Christian prayer, that’s fine. But the government can’t mandate that everyone in the nation be Christian, or observe Christian holiday or that everyone be a specific Christian Faith.

I think it’s time we as Catholics get educated with Constitutional law (and our own faith), and stop this current rather unfortunate attempt by a small minority to launch a philisophical coup.

As Pope John Paul The Great said, a Decomcracy which loses Christian idenity, becomes an Autacracy.

 

[ryecroft]

As Catholics, we do not believe that full and proper morality can be achieved by anything less than full union with and submission to the teaching authority of the Church. Then no one is moral unless they are Catholic? Don’t think so.

So you believe in a theocracy? I don’t. And the ten commandments had nothing to do with the founding of our country? Where did Jefferson, Franklin etc. find their ethics.? So everyone who is in governement must believe in the Sacraments, honor the Pope’s infallibility, believe in a Triune God? Of course the enlightenment played a great part in our goverment, individual liberty, freedom of speech, freedom of dissent??? Get real.

You said exactly what I was trying to say - I’m sorry to those that think it would be better with the Catholic Church in charge of all, but I think in the past we have seen that when ANY organization (including the Catholic Church as it is not made solely of God but of fallible men and women) - is given sole power, power will corrupt - people could start to be punished for not going to Mass - it would make the Church into something compulsory, and not voluntary. I don’t beleive that God really wants those that are forced to come to Him - He wants us to come to Him of our own free will.

Let me put it this way - for those parents out there (Since God is our Father) - hypothetically, let’s say your daughter lies to you about something. You tell her you want an apology - you wind up demanding it and she gives that apology grudgingly - is that apology really anything like the apology you would have gotten had she come to you and told you the truth and apologized because she felt bad? (and yes, I know this sound much like the difference between perfect and imperfect contrition). You would much rather have the latter but you accept the former because you demand it and you feel you are having her learn something.

God Bless
Rye

I also have a question - do you really think women would be having all of the abilities to work with the church they now have (like helping to serve at mass, give out the Holy Blood and Holy Body of Christ, read at mass, take the Holy Body and Holy Blood to the sick) if there hadn’t been a women’s rights movement here? I certainly don’t - although there has been good that has come with this there has also been not so good (as with almost anything human) - I know it was off the subject but I just thought I’d mention it.

 

[portarica]

Remember as catholics we were prosecuted and persecuted in the south and midwest by the “official” baptists and their police henchmen in the KKK.

The ten commandments and crosses in the court houses and town halls didn’t mean what we think they mean today.

They were not only there to inspire but to intimidate and generate fear and cowering obedience.

The further the church stays away from the government and the further we keep the government from our faiths the better.

Peace

 

[elts1956]

I said full *and proper *morality. Unless you don’t believe the Catholic faith is a repository of anything unique or necessary for humankind’s moral development.

Yes. They’ve worked well in the past. Europe never did so well, culturally and spiritually, as when Europe was united under the Cross. What worked for Europe then will work for Europe now - and elsewhere.

It’s a benighted Catholic who thinks his religion should be subservient to a secularist state.

That’s the problem with the West today. We think we are so high and mighty because we live in a wealthy country with lots of material comforts, yet where God truly holds little to no sway. Who cares if our moral culture falls into the sewer and if we become profligate blasphemers? So long as the almighty state is never influenced by the wicked Church, it’s all good.

Nope. The founding documents of the United States prove that Christianity has nothing to do with America’s ideological foundations.

It’s ironic that God Bless America is sung when America has never blessed God.

Mostly, their ethics were shaped by Enlightenment-era thinking, namely Deism and similar trends. Their ethics were clearly shaped little by traditional European Christian thinking.

Of course - why should they not? Government is not a sacred institution wherein opponents of our Faith are justified in marginalizing even basic Christian ethics, as is the case today. Governments must adhere to Christian moral law, just like the rest of us.

This adoration of secularist governments is disturbing, but not surprising.

I am perfectly real, thank you. You, however, might benefit from a study of history from a perspective that is not riddled with anti-religious bias. I recommend Dr. Warren H. Carroll’s History of Christendom series (The Building of Christendom and The Glory of Christendom) and Regine Pernoud’s *Those Terrible Middle Ages! *if you want to see how good governments ought to be run.

People are too caught up in selfishness. It’s all about my rights, my liberties, *my *opinions. Me, me, me. Nary a thought for the common good of the nation as a whole or the direction a godless government is inevitably headed, much less for God and what He may think of His Church being marginalized and trammeled as it is. After all, Christ established a Church for us, and not secular government.

In a Catholic society, we’d have all the liberties and freedoms we needed, and we’d have a Catholic framework to build a moral and decent society to boot. That’s what we need, not self-righteous Enlightenment-era novelties.

So you are ready for a Holy War against all religions other than the Catholic Religion? I hope you never run for office.

 

[elts1956]

I said full *and proper *morality. Unless you don’t believe the Catholic faith is a repository of anything unique or necessary for humankind’s moral development.

Yes. They’ve worked well in the past. Europe never did so well, culturally and spiritually, as when Europe was united under the Cross. What worked for Europe then will work for Europe now - and elsewhere.

It’s a benighted Catholic who thinks his religion should be subservient to a secularist state.

That’s the problem with the West today. We think we are so high and mighty because we live in a wealthy country with lots of material comforts, yet where God truly holds little to no sway. Who cares if our moral culture falls into the sewer and if we become profligate blasphemers? So long as the almighty state is never influenced by the wicked Church, it’s all good.

Nope. The founding documents of the United States prove that Christianity has nothing to do with America’s ideological foundations.

It’s ironic that God Bless America is sung when America has never blessed God.

Mostly, their ethics were shaped by Enlightenment-era thinking, namely Deism and similar trends. Their ethics were clearly shaped little by traditional European Christian thinking.

Of course - why should they not? Government is not a sacred institution wherein opponents of our Faith are justified in marginalizing even basic Christian ethics, as is the case today. Governments must adhere to Christian moral law, just like the rest of us.

This adoration of secularist governments is disturbing, but not surprising.

I am perfectly real, thank you. You, however, might benefit from a study of history from a perspective that is not riddled with anti-religious bias. I recommend Dr. Warren H. Carroll’s History of Christendom series (The Building of Christendom and The Glory of Christendom) and Regine Pernoud’s *Those Terrible Middle Ages! *if you want to see how good governments ought to be run.

People are too caught up in selfishness. It’s all about my rights, my liberties, *my *opinions. Me, me, me. Nary a thought for the common good of the nation as a whole or the direction a godless government is inevitably headed, much less for God and what He may think of His Church being marginalized and trammeled as it is. After all, Christ established a Church for us, and not secular government.

In a Catholic society, we’d have all the liberties and freedoms we needed, and we’d have a Catholic framework to build a moral and decent society to boot. That’s what we need, not self-righteous Enlightenment-era novelties.

When we separated Church from the state, the Church became marginalized and the state became immoral. It was one of the worst decisions Western civilization ever made.

Akallabêth, very very interesting. A totally different world.

 

[ryecroft]

Akallabêth, very very interesting. A totally different world.

Wow - I’m just shocked- do people really think if religion were to be involved completely with the state our America would be better? I’m sure there are some on here that believe that being a Catholic state would be great - but this is the melting pot - what are we to do with all the Jewish members? Should we kick them out and have another holocaust or should we just tell them they don’t belong here because this is a Catholic state now. Or better yet, we can have different religions have different states =- lets see - lets make the north east agnostic as it’s close to that with all the politicians anyway - we’ll let the South East with all the Bible thumping be Baptist/Protestant - we’ll let the South West with it’s proximity to mexico be catholic and the bishops who are down there can allow as many illegals in as they want - and we’ll leave the Northwest for 1/2 Jewish 1/2 Islamic -

whopps since it’s not going to be all Catholic, it’s not sounding so great anymore - and now you’re going to have people being displaced by religion - you really need to think before you make a certain place a theocracy or based on one religion - you’ll cause people to be displaced and you’ll have feeligs of superiority and littleness pop up. You can’t say the US is a melting pot then say - but wait we only want Christianity or Catholicism - this country can not handle just one religion - or lets say we could - but wait, there have been quite a few protestants in the government and they’ve decided it will be protestant instead of Catholic -whoops not what you were hoping for.

God Bless
Rye

 

[Schn]

Religion influencing law is just as bad as race influencing law. Simple discrimination.

 

[elts1956]

Wow - I’m just shocked- do people really think if religion were to be involved completely with the state our America would be better? I’m sure there are some on here that believe that being a Catholic state would be great - but this is the melting pot - what are we to do with all the Jewish members? Should we kick them out and have another holocaust or should we just tell them they don’t belong here because this is a Catholic state now. Or better yet, we can have different religions have different states =- lets see - lets make the north east agnostic as it’s close to that with all the politicians anyway - we’ll let the South East with all the Bible thumping be Baptist/Protestant - we’ll let the South West with it’s proximity to mexico be catholic and the bishops who are down there can allow as many illegals in as they want - and we’ll leave the Northwest for 1/2 Jewish 1/2 Islamic -

whopps since it’s not going to be all Catholic, it’s not sounding so great anymore - and now you’re going to have people being displaced by religion - you really need to think before you make a certain place a theocracy or based on one religion - you’ll cause people to be displaced and you’ll have feeligs of superiority and littleness pop up. You can’t say the US is a melting pot then say - but wait we only want Christianity or Catholicism - this country can not handle just one religion - or lets say we could - but wait, there have been quite a few protestants in the government and they’ve decided it will be protestant instead of Catholic -whoops not what you were hoping for.

God Bless
Rye

Are you speaking to moi? If so, you are speaking to the choir.

 

[scrapgirl81]

When our founding fathers framed this nation we were a bunch of colonies some founded for pure profit and others by zealots fleeing religious oppression in Europe but sadly all too willing to apply their own intolerance here.

It was a brilliant solution to create the concept of separation. It helped us avoid the bloodbaths Europe had already endured fighting for which faith would rule.

But we need to always remember that you can separate Church from State only in that you can keep the State from establishing an official faith and mandating that all it’s people follow that one faith. You can not separate an individual from their faith, or lack thereof, and ask them to participate in governing in some faith neutral manner.

So we must advocate always for our laws to reflect our moral beliefs and when we fail to persuade the vote in our favor we must not give in to the fantasy of a government solely influenced by what we see as the one true faith. After all God Himself has given us the freedom to choose to reject him. This is part of those inalienable rights at the very core of our national philosophy.

 

[Lycorth]

Interesting to read that so much of the criticism for a religious government comes from fear of what fallible humans may do in positions of power - as if secularists are not also fallible and furthermore unguided by even basic Christian morality and hence less fit to rule and govern than those who understand their obligation to follow moral law.

In other words, it’s OK for the government to regulate itself (as if it were an infallible institution) but not OK for even basic Christian morals to dare have any place in government.

Two things that divide men in this world; Politics and Religion. Think about it.

So? Christ Himself stated that He came to bring the sword and cause division. Should we marginalize Christ Himself from our lives because He might be “divisive”?

So you are ready for a Holy War against all religions other than the Catholic Religion? I hope you never run for office.

Since I never stated nor implied that I want to declare any kind of holy war against other Christians, I’ll thank you not to cast aspersions on me.

Funny how advocates of democracy treat opponents of democracy most undemocratically.

Akallabêth, very very interesting. A totally different world.

Ah, trying to imply that because I cite my location as “the Akallabeth” that I live in a different world than the real one. If you can’t attack the argument, attack the man. You’d make a fine politician; the art of ad hominem is not lost on you.

Right on Lycorth. Pope pius lX condemmed this view as erronous and wrong in his sylabus of errors. It was number 55 on the list. Here is what he said:

Pope Pius lX “The Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church.”[Condemmed.

Also:

Pope Pius X condemned the separation of Church and state in France in his encyclical Vehementer Nos, writing: “That the State must be separated from the Church is a thesis absolutely false, a most pernicious error. … Hence the Roman Pontiffs have never ceased, as circumstances required, to refute and condemn the doctrine of the separation of Church and State.”[

Also:

Pope Leo Xlll: wrote in his encyclical Libertas Praestantissimum: “There are others, somewhat more moderate though not more consistent, who affirm that the morality of individuals is to be guided by the divine law, but not the morality of the State, for that in public affairs the commands of God may be passed over, and may be entirely disregarded in the framing of laws. Hence follows the fatal theory of the need of separation between Church and State. But the absurdity of such a position is manifest. Nature herself proclaims the necessity of the State providing means and opportunities whereby the community may be enabled to live properly, that is to say, according to the laws of God. For, since God is the source of all goodness and justice, it is absolutely ridiculous that the State should pay no attention to these laws or render them abortive by contrary enact menu.”[59]

So all those that are arguing for it, hold a much different opionion than many of the Holy Fathers.

Thank you, Aaron. Defense of a secular state is a modernist novelty, unsuited to the construction of a moral society. Modern society is not gravely irreligious and immoral for no good reason, and the civilizations of old were not thoroughly Christian by accident. The state has to work with the Church, and in submission to its moral guidance, if a moral society is to be built.

I suppose secular society will have to fall apart first before that is seen more widely. It’s on its way.

 

[portarica]

Interesting to read that so much of the criticism for a religious government comes from fear of what fallible humans may do in positions of power - as if secularists are not also fallible and furthermore unguided by even basic Christian morality and hence less fit to rule and govern than those who understand their obligation to follow moral law.

In other words, it’s OK for the government to regulate itself (as if it were an infallible institution) but not OK for even basic Christian morals to dare have any place in government.

So? Christ Himself stated that He came to bring the sword and cause division. Should we marginalize Christ Himself from our lives because He might be “divisive”?

Since I never stated nor implied that I want to declare any kind of holy war against other Christians, I’ll thank you not to cast aspersions on me.

Funny how advocates of democracy treat opponents of democracy most undemocratically.

Ah, trying to imply that because I cite my location as “the Akallabeth” that I live in a different world than the real one. If you can’t attack the argument, attack the man. You’d make a fine politician; the art of ad hominem is not lost on you.

Thank you, Aaron. Defense of a secular state is a modernist novelty, unsuited to the construction of a moral society. Modern society is not gravely irreligious and immoral for no good reason, and the civilizations of old were not thoroughly Christian by accident. The state has to work with the Church, and in submission to its moral guidance, if a moral society is to be built.

I suppose secular society will have to fall apart first before that is seen more widely. It’s on its way.

Many societies fell apart that were theocracies. The Holy Roman Empire was one of them.As for morality, having a state aligned with a church is no guarantee that immorality will be absent.

History has also shown us that the religious institutions are also susceptible to the allure of sharing power with the temporal state. This has even been the case with our church.

It is better to be in opposition to the government than to be in bed with it.

Peace

 

[Lycorth]

Many societies fell apart that were theocracies. The Holy Roman Empire was one of them.As for morality, having a state aligned with a church is no guarantee that immorality will be absent.

Oh, certainly not. Sin will always be a problem, whether or not a state accepts its obligation to cooperate with the Church and help build a Christian civilization.

However, the devil is in the details here, and despite the sinfulness of humans who lived during the days of the Holy Roman Empire (or in other Christian states), it cannot even be argued that common culture was orders of magnitude more moral and decent than today’s secularized societies. The past shows us what happens when honest people (those who govern as well as those who are governed) place the Lord first in their lives and the rich, beautiful, innately noble cultures that arise as a result.

The point is that we can do better than what we have now, and we have before, so persisting in failure will never bring success.

History has also shown us that the religious institutions are also susceptible to the allure of sharing power with the temporal state. This has even been the case with our church.

Power-sharing is not the problem; the Church needs to have a voice and leverage in how civil officials govern, or else the Church will not be heeded and her moral guidance ignored. Western civilization was never perfect, of course, but it was infinitely better when the Church could rein in secular profligates with the tools of excommunication, interdict, and the last resort of papal absolution of oaths of allegiance.

They’re a little pricey, but Warren H. Carroll’s second and third volumes of his History of Christendom series are very well worth the read on this matter. He does a much better job of explaining the details and the facts of good Catholic government better than I ever could; I’d have to plagiarize the man otherwise.

It is better to be in opposition to the government than to be in bed with it.

Certainly, which is what I’m getting at with all my bluster.

Don’t misunderstand me; I am not at all suggesting the state should have any power over the Church. To be in bed with the state would mean to suggest that the civil authority is an authority unto itself that needs no guidance or control. I am suggesting, instead, that Catholic teaching be applied to government and enforced by the Church, following the models of old. The government is the servant of the people, not the master of them, but a government without proper Christian moral authority at its head as both a matter of law and of custom will eventually turn reckless and govern exclusively for its own ends, with Christian teaching marginalized and later, wholly done away with - as is the case with American society.

In all our modern attempts to rein in government and define its limits and its scope, where we have failed is in removing its Christian limitation. Separation of church and state was the worst idea modern politics has had.

 

[gamewell45]

I am suggesting, instead, that Catholic teaching be applied to government and enforced by the Church, following the models of old. The government is the servant of the people, not the master of them, but a government without proper Christian moral authority at its head as both a matter of law and of custom will eventually turn reckless and govern exclusively for its own ends, with Christian teaching marginalized and later, wholly done away with - as is the case with American society.

How about we replace the word “Catholic” with “Baptist”?

 

[portarica]

How about we replace the word “Catholic” with “Baptist”?

That would be great , to get a job with the gov all we would have to do would be to take a bath .
Also renounce the antichrist B16 and swear allegiance to the family.

Peace

 

[Lycorth]

How about we replace the word “Catholic” with “Baptist”?

I’m not a Baptist and believe its particular teachings to be heretical, but in a case like here in America, Christians of all sects can work together to produce a basic Christian government, at least in theory.

Ideally, a future state should be Catholic, as I believe the Church holds the fullness of faith and moral teaching, as well as serves as the only real, temporal check and balance against secular power. The Baptists can’t offer up a single, united organization that can offer the same, which is where Catholics have an advantage. Though this is predicated on some major housecleaning in the Catholic Church before time, if she is to return to her rightful place as guide and check of secular rulers - another matter entirely. I’m aware that, as a Protestant, you’re possibly offended by this, but my stance remains.

But I’d rather work with Protestants (and Orthodox) to establish a basically Christian government, especially if it came to that in America. Infinitely preferable to what we have now.

 

[Schn]

Seems to be moral enough. Police do a pretty good job, and judges aren’t too bad either. I guess the only people who want to push over freedom from religion are those in the majority religion. I wonder whether you would advocate an Islamic government, as I am sure they, as you, would like it if they had popular majority, and not Chrisitanity.

 

[gamewell45]

I’m aware that, as a Protestant, you’re possibly offended by this, but my stance remains.

No, I’m not offended in the slightest. I’m very tolerant of others who view things different then I do.

 

[elts1956]

When our founding fathers framed this nation we were a bunch of colonies some founded for pure profit and others by zealots fleeing religious oppression in Europe but sadly all too willing to apply their own intolerance here.

It was a brilliant solution to create the concept of separation. It helped us avoid the bloodbaths Europe had already endured fighting for which faith would rule.

But we need to always remember that you can separate Church from State only in that you can keep the State from establishing an official faith and mandating that all it’s people follow that one faith. You can not separate an individual from their faith, or lack thereof, and ask them to participate in governing in some faith neutral manner.

So we must advocate always for our laws to reflect our moral beliefs and when we fail to persuade the vote in our favor we must not give in to the fantasy of a government solely influenced by what we see as the one true faith. After all God Himself has given us the freedom to choose to reject him. This is part of those inalienable rights at the very core of our national philosophy.

:tiphat::tiphat: