J
JSSebastianoP
Guest
I voted “no”. A good government would accept the Catholic Church as the One True Church.
- Status
M
MarysGirls
Guest
I voted no. But I do think that laws should be based on Truth and morals.
R
RonTheNewJew
Guest
As a Jewish brother, the real history of the Jewish people during the time before Christ was born, was that of a theocratic state all during those times when, as one mentioned in his post, the Jewish people rebelled against God and God’s Everlasting Covenant, given to Moses at Mount Sinai. The point I’m trying to make here is that if people are determined to be selfish and sinful, no amount of law, or punishment can stop them.
Just look at what “Christians” did to the Jewish people, all because the ancient Jewish people at the time of Christ were selfish and broke the very Law that God had given them, and then, on top of it all, their rabbi’s, who wanted to curry favor with the people (with the financial benefit that always seems to bring (cases-in-point, the late Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Jim and Tammy-Fay Baker, et. al.) The rabbi’s created what is today a body of rabbinical rules and laws called the Talmud. In many cases, it’s interpretations of the Torah cause people to actually brake the Ten Commandments and the Law which God spoke to Moses, and he wrote on parchment to hang “in the sides of the Ark,” not outside as many Christians attempt to say. Thus, the rabbi’s and pharisees, etc. misled the Jewish people into thinking that they could do religious or other works to earn salvation.
Working to earn salvation always causes freedom of conscience to be taken away from people by the “authorities.” The rabbi’s, and to a large degree the Aaronic and other priesthoods wanted Israel to be a nation-state with enforcement of the religion that God offered them as a choice. The Law of Moses is largely a statement of civil laws, with religious ones established in the Statutes and Judgements. But, again, God offered it free to any and all who would choose to obey them. God never forced anyone to obey His Law.
Thus, in spite of the existence of God’s Law, and the civil authorities who were beholden to the wealthier segments of society, unfairness, which is, itself, anathema to God as described in Torah, was enforced. This is what Jesus found so abhorrent. This is what the prophets before Jesus found so abhorrent. The unfairness of sinful, easily bought and paid for civil government leaders (judges and the like in O.T. times) was what led to the Jewish people’s rebellion against government, and the God they mistakenly saw as behind such sinful government. Then, the people stopped keeping God’s Sabbath and the annual festivals of precept (ie, the annual holy convocations that God had set up to guard the people’s obedience to His Ten Commandments.
The Sacred Torah, but without animal sacrifices and the Temple, etc., should be studied by religious people today. But, if it, or any other system of religious observances are enforced, that brakes God’s Torah right out front. Exemplary lives of human beings and praising and worshipping God, of freee choice only, is the way to get back to God. Force always works in the opposite direction.
The problem for the Jewish people was that they worshipped their religious system and saw that having a relationship with the Temple at Jerusalem, was their avenue to salvation. That was, and remains today, a reversal of salvation. Not a road to it.
Jesus said to Pilate, “My kingdom is not of this world. Were it of this world, My followers would join armies and fight.” Some versions just say “My followers would fight.”
The Jewish leaders in Jesus’ day saw him as a threat to their rule over the people, and the financial success that brought the Temple priests through the Temple tax. It was through that tax that the poor were thrown out of the Temple and not able to have access to salvation as a result. This taught the wealthy that they had earned salvation and that they could blame the poor for their lack of salvation.
Jesus came to overthrow all of that nonsense and persecution of the poor. When today’s church (I include all the Christian denominations) take to the streets as they did in the 1960’s in defense of the poor and homeless, and children, then there will be far less of abortion as a birth-control tool, murder, theft, one-parent homes with children, etc.
The Church needs to do as Jesus, Himself did when He walked the streets of Jerusalem and Capernaum, and many towns and villages throughout Israel. The Jewish Church failed before Christ. Jews who believed in the coming Messiah, as seen in the animal sacrifices, were, indeed, Christians whose sins have been forgiven.
In Yeshua’s (Jesus’) Name
The dark ages of the Christian era, were replete with examples of how religious and ethnic minorities were persecuted for their religious and ethnic cultural differences with the prevailing religious traditions and larger ethnic groups.
Just look at what “Christians” did to the Jewish people, all because the ancient Jewish people at the time of Christ were selfish and broke the very Law that God had given them, and then, on top of it all, their rabbi’s, who wanted to curry favor with the people (with the financial benefit that always seems to bring (cases-in-point, the late Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Jim and Tammy-Fay Baker, et. al.) The rabbi’s created what is today a body of rabbinical rules and laws called the Talmud. In many cases, it’s interpretations of the Torah cause people to actually brake the Ten Commandments and the Law which God spoke to Moses, and he wrote on parchment to hang “in the sides of the Ark,” not outside as many Christians attempt to say. Thus, the rabbi’s and pharisees, etc. misled the Jewish people into thinking that they could do religious or other works to earn salvation.
Working to earn salvation always causes freedom of conscience to be taken away from people by the “authorities.” The rabbi’s, and to a large degree the Aaronic and other priesthoods wanted Israel to be a nation-state with enforcement of the religion that God offered them as a choice. The Law of Moses is largely a statement of civil laws, with religious ones established in the Statutes and Judgements. But, again, God offered it free to any and all who would choose to obey them. God never forced anyone to obey His Law.
Thus, in spite of the existence of God’s Law, and the civil authorities who were beholden to the wealthier segments of society, unfairness, which is, itself, anathema to God as described in Torah, was enforced. This is what Jesus found so abhorrent. This is what the prophets before Jesus found so abhorrent. The unfairness of sinful, easily bought and paid for civil government leaders (judges and the like in O.T. times) was what led to the Jewish people’s rebellion against government, and the God they mistakenly saw as behind such sinful government. Then, the people stopped keeping God’s Sabbath and the annual festivals of precept (ie, the annual holy convocations that God had set up to guard the people’s obedience to His Ten Commandments.
The Sacred Torah, but without animal sacrifices and the Temple, etc., should be studied by religious people today. But, if it, or any other system of religious observances are enforced, that brakes God’s Torah right out front. Exemplary lives of human beings and praising and worshipping God, of freee choice only, is the way to get back to God. Force always works in the opposite direction.
The problem for the Jewish people was that they worshipped their religious system and saw that having a relationship with the Temple at Jerusalem, was their avenue to salvation. That was, and remains today, a reversal of salvation. Not a road to it.
Jesus said to Pilate, “My kingdom is not of this world. Were it of this world, My followers would join armies and fight.” Some versions just say “My followers would fight.”
The Jewish leaders in Jesus’ day saw him as a threat to their rule over the people, and the financial success that brought the Temple priests through the Temple tax. It was through that tax that the poor were thrown out of the Temple and not able to have access to salvation as a result. This taught the wealthy that they had earned salvation and that they could blame the poor for their lack of salvation.
Jesus came to overthrow all of that nonsense and persecution of the poor. When today’s church (I include all the Christian denominations) take to the streets as they did in the 1960’s in defense of the poor and homeless, and children, then there will be far less of abortion as a birth-control tool, murder, theft, one-parent homes with children, etc.
The Church needs to do as Jesus, Himself did when He walked the streets of Jerusalem and Capernaum, and many towns and villages throughout Israel. The Jewish Church failed before Christ. Jews who believed in the coming Messiah, as seen in the animal sacrifices, were, indeed, Christians whose sins have been forgiven.
In Yeshua’s (Jesus’) Name
The dark ages of the Christian era, were replete with examples of how religious and ethnic minorities were persecuted for their religious and ethnic cultural differences with the prevailing religious traditions and larger ethnic groups.
S
sedonaman
Guest
“The ‘wall of separation between church and State’ is a metaphor based on bad history, a metaphor which has proved useless as a guide to judging. It should be frankly and explicitly abandoned. – Justice William Rehnquist in Wallace v. Jaffree
R
RonTheNewJew
Guest
The idea that separation of church and state is based on bad history, depends on which side of history one is on.
Without separation between church and state, would the majority religion, or collective of religions, respect the rights of Jewish and Christian minorities? (Just as they have not done in the past, before separation of church and state).
What would there be to limit the political power of a religion or collective of religious sets of doctrines, especially where tax-paying, law-abiding citizens who practice other, different religious doctrines are concerned?
It is at times when religious organizations are falling short on their fiscal budgets that sometimes leads their leaders to try to get people into their pews, even using the state’s legislative capacities in order to do so. Could that be the case at this time?
Without separation between church and state, would the majority religion, or collective of religions, respect the rights of Jewish and Christian minorities? (Just as they have not done in the past, before separation of church and state).
What would there be to limit the political power of a religion or collective of religious sets of doctrines, especially where tax-paying, law-abiding citizens who practice other, different religious doctrines are concerned?
It is at times when religious organizations are falling short on their fiscal budgets that sometimes leads their leaders to try to get people into their pews, even using the state’s legislative capacities in order to do so. Could that be the case at this time?
S
sedonaman
Guest
How can there be a “side of history”? History is what it is, the study of past events, unless you are a Leftist/liberal who thinks it started yesterday and/or one trying to re-write it.
R
RonTheNewJew
Guest
Well, let’s take a look at the JFK assassination, as just one historical event.
Would you say that you are a believer in the Warren Commission Report which blamed Lee Harvey Oswald as the “lone-nut assassin?” Or, would you say that you are a believer that either,
A. He was not alone in shooting President Kennedy, or
B. That he was not involved in shooting Kennedy, but had tried to “abort” the assassination.
There are other great historical events that one could choose. But, the JFK shooting is one of the more obvious cases where there is “room for disagreement.”
Would you say that you are a believer in the Warren Commission Report which blamed Lee Harvey Oswald as the “lone-nut assassin?” Or, would you say that you are a believer that either,
A. He was not alone in shooting President Kennedy, or
B. That he was not involved in shooting Kennedy, but had tried to “abort” the assassination.
There are other great historical events that one could choose. But, the JFK shooting is one of the more obvious cases where there is “room for disagreement.”
T
TEPO
Guest
Does the idea of breaking down the “seperation of Church and State” ABSOLUTELY mean that ones “right to practice their faith and doctrines as they see fit” will become jeapordized?
Or is this one of your tactics on derailing the topic?
I think the Western world as a whole has gotten the idea of protecting the civil rights of people… Its completely understood, and the Church openly supports that right. Any form of Church intervention would serve exclusively to repair the moral erosion of society, as the world has already been evangelized… The Church has no use in, and does NOT practice re-evangalization as you falsely claim.
Realistically speaking though, it would be nearly impossible to begin the process of moral repair from within the American State, as America seems to be the source of the problem…
The Church must influence from the top down… Its called the trickle-down effect…
The Church should influence the U.N. through doors such as environmentalism or healthcare in order to gain real ground… Perhaps there we can find hope in stunting the mass spread of moral-erosion throughout the world… We must stop the spread of addictions throghout the world including hyper-consumerism. Before the entire world becomes exactly like America is -addicted…
Maybe someday we wont see a liquor store on every corner in the ghetto… Maybe instead of failing attempts to gain wealth and fame, we will see people working together for the greater good… We will see communities working together… But to get to that point we need to repair the morals of the ones causing the damage first… The ones with all the money.
R
RonTheNewJew
Guest
J
jpk1313
Guest
Church and state is a double edge sword with both good and bad points. On the one hand there is moral accountablity for the state, the state would in theory take a more proactive role in the welfare of the poor and other social justice issues and in general people would have a stronger awarness of what is and is not moral. on the other hand what the church would deem immoral the state will stamp out with the sword (or gun) and limits the devlopment of art, science, philosophy ect (due to “heresy” being put down by the state). A theocracy would in theory be ideal but is not possible without a one world faith. if was a failure in europ due in part to different countries and faiths if it had been just one nation instead of many than it could of worked. Though it works to a fair degree in saudi arabia but even there the state is still to heavy handed. So while I would want a catholic state It is not going to happen.
R
RonTheNewJew
Guest
jpk1313. I agree with your balanced analysis of the issue. I suppose, if I were to think about it, I might, in some less than positive mood, want a Jewish theocratic state, with Christianity combined with it, being that I am Messianic Jewish by faith. But, then, Jews have the advantage of having thousands of years longer history to look at, and what they did to each other, and to others who came to see what the religion of the one God was all about, all during O.T. times. Human beings, because they are so inherently selfish, just cannot, as Germany exemplified after WW1. when it felt it was unfairly treated by the Treaty of Versailles, saying it could not have an empire like Britain and France had, they were unable to handle being in second position behind the others. That is where Adolph Hitler rose to power.
He swore he would do for Germany what the Treaty would not do. Greed is the problem. That is why laws protecting one’s right to practice one’s particular faith, and laws to protect the racial and ethnic groups from dominating the others, and laws to protect women from attacks by men, and children from attacks by anyone, etc. are so necessary.
He swore he would do for Germany what the Treaty would not do. Greed is the problem. That is why laws protecting one’s right to practice one’s particular faith, and laws to protect the racial and ethnic groups from dominating the others, and laws to protect women from attacks by men, and children from attacks by anyone, etc. are so necessary.
C
Colgate
Guest
Lycorth/
I hope you know that your views for a Catholic state would be a minority opinion, even within the Catholic circles. Jesus would certainly reject your idea. Ever heard of this quote?
'“Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s”
A very famous Jewish person around 2,000 years ago said it. We know him as Jesus. Maybe you’ve heard of him.
I can see a country having a certain religion as the ‘state religion’ - but ruling out other religions? Now that’s intense.
I actually prefer a Church working under the shadows of a non-Catholic state, relatively without power and therefore able to direct its attentions to its divine callings - helping the weak, poor and the fearful - to a Church that is all-powerful, riding on the wings of a Catholic state.
I hope you know that your views for a Catholic state would be a minority opinion, even within the Catholic circles. Jesus would certainly reject your idea. Ever heard of this quote?
'“Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s”
A very famous Jewish person around 2,000 years ago said it. We know him as Jesus. Maybe you’ve heard of him.
I can see a country having a certain religion as the ‘state religion’ - but ruling out other religions? Now that’s intense.
I actually prefer a Church working under the shadows of a non-Catholic state, relatively without power and therefore able to direct its attentions to its divine callings - helping the weak, poor and the fearful - to a Church that is all-powerful, riding on the wings of a Catholic state.
L
Lycorth
Guest
Yes. Money and military power do not make a society great.
I am aware. It does not make them any less true, not lessen my obligation to support such views.
Many American Catholics believe in abortion, birth control, and attend Mass twice a year. Should I support that, too? Just because the majority go one way, doesn’t make it right.
No, He wouldn’t. Christ, through the Church, has taught the concept of the Catholic state from day one. Western civilization was greatest when it was Catholic from the top down.
Yes, and that is my point; God and God’s laws must govern society, not secularism.
Furthermore, that quote was about taxation. Throwing around Bible verses does not add credibility to an untenable position.
Sarcastic much?
Christ also presided over the rise of the Catholic Church, His one and only Church, and saw to the beautification of Western civilization under exclusively Catholic religious dominance.
Jesus was not some carefree hippie preaching pseudo-buddhism.
It’s not even remotely “intense”. I understand modern Americans can’t envision anything else but a moral free-for-all, and I used to be like that myself, but history didn’t begin in 1777. Thank God.
Then you prefer an emasculated church that cannot help the poor, preach the Gospel, or secure a moral society for the necessary edification of humanity, for that is the “Church” we have now - a powerless, toothless shadow of its former self.
A powerful Church can help the poor, as history teaches to us, as well as see to it that the state makes law in accordance with Christian moral teaching. Secularism leads to amorality, apathy, and the marginalizing of the Faith and all that it offers us. If it were not so, secularist America would be a Catholic powerhouse, not an immoral source of perversity as per the entertainment industry and the millions who worship whatever comes out of it.
C
chessmane4e5
Guest
And it seems that you have missed what Christ came to this world to do. He did not come to help the poor. He did not come to feed the hungry. He did not come to cure the sick. While He was here, He did do those things, but that is not WHY He came.
He came to die on the Cross, so that our sins may be forgiven.
Jesus could have feed the entire world, not just the 5,000. Jesus could have cured every sickness, not just those people who had faith. But these are things of this world, when what is more important is following God’s Law.
100% Jesus would approve of a Catholic Government. Could anyone be so merciful, so just, as the Catholic Church? People might disagree with that the Church teaches, but that does not make it any less true. The world would be a much better place if everyone were Catholic and actually followed God’s will. There would still be problems in this world, it will never be a utopia here on Earth, but things would be better than what we have now.
M
mjakemccoy
Guest
Certainly life wasn’t perfect in the middle ages, but we’ve seen that before in the OT. But that is a peculiar use of words when you think about it. If Christ was the light of the world, why were the “dark ages” after Him but before the Reformation and the separation of Church & state, while the “enlightenment” came shortly there after? Was this done out of a great respect for the light our Lord and Savior brought into the world?
The compilation of the Bible we all use today relied heavily on the balance of power between Church & state. Certainly it was God’s grace that gave us this compilation of books, but he used many different parts of His one Body to do this. For 300 years Rome sought to destroy Christianity, and they actually did a pretty good job. There are limited writings from this era of persecution, but Christ was faithful to the Church he started, and it was maintained. There was great debate over which Gospels were canonical until Irenaeus first declared the 4 we all follow today as canonical in the 2nd century. But Emperor Constantine, after a miraculous cross appeared to him in the sky at the Battle of Mylvian bridge, allowed Christians to gather publicly in 313 in the edict of Milan. In 325 Constantine called for the Council of Nicea, the Church maintained the doctrine but Constantine got them all together to sort out the Arian heresy (denied the divinity of Christ). Being a good leader(his personal life can be debated in another forum) he noticed the cost to the empire of division in the Church, so he helped to establish the first Ecumenical Council. Athanasius was the first to mention all 27 books of the NT Christians follow today in 327 AD. Today we trust Ireneaus & Athanasius’ choice of books, so all Christians should be able to find common ground with these 2 early fathers. But it wasn’t until 382 at the Council of Rome that the canon of the Bible was finally established. It was reaffirmed at the Synod of Hippo 393 and the Council of Carthage 397. So one could certainly make a strong argument that had Christians not been allowed to gather publicly the canon of the Bible may have taken alot longer. After the Council of Nicea, Arius was forced by Constantine to sign the Nicean Creed. He did so, and Constantine forced bishop Alexander to allow him back into the Church after he signed it. Alexander felt Arius was not sincere, but he did allow him in the Church reluctantly. This would appear to be a gross violation of the separation. But the story isn’t finished. On his way to Church the following Sunday, Arius doubled over in pain, and died before communing with the Church. This was credited as the will of God by none other than Athanasius who was mentioned earlier. I’ve never looked at the Creed the same since hearing that.
This is some important history, and precedents for all Christians to understand. Yes, if everyone lived like Christ we would have a perfect world. I absolutely agree we need to live more like Christ, me definitely, but is that to say there should not be law enforcers (police, courts, military, etc.). If there are to be law enforcers, should we as Christians not try to enforce the Law that has been entrusted to us? May Christ be our guide in these times, and lead us to unity in His Body.
L
Lycorth
Guest
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. Those who wish to focus solely on and inaccurately amplify the negative aspects of the Medieval era are at the heart of such erroneous terms as “Dark Ages” - the actual Dark Ages are now, in a world without moral guidance, a world with a marginalized and emasculated Church, and a civilization that suffers as a result.
T
TEPO
Guest
Thanks for asking…
The Holy Father has called for “reform” of the U.N. to manage the global economy with God-Centered ethics… It is a top-down method which influences those with the money and power first… The Pope has called for “Charity in Truth”.
vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20090629_caritas-in-veritate_en.html
Also, it is the obligation of every Catholic to do the good-works of the Holy Catholic Church… We must follow our Lord Jesus Christ who has given direct instructions to Pope Benedict XVI here on earth… American Catholics can help here in leading by example… We need to understand the fact that America has no plan for the future… The current plan is growth…
which does no good for the human soul… Once we understand that there is no plan, we will be open to ask God what we can do to help. We can all work together as one Body in Christ.Todays mission is a call for Charity in Truth…
R
RonTheNewJew
Guest
Of the differences between the rabbinical writings contained in the Talmud, and God’s written and spoken words to Moses, much of the Talmudic writings were for specific situations and times. They did not come from God, as the rabbi’s attempted to say. Those that were written by Moses, which became known as the Torah, were given verbally by God to Moses to fully instruct them, and by continuation, to us today.
When Jesus told the pharisees and other leaders, “Why do you break the commandment of God by your traditions,?” He was speaking of the rabbinical writings in which some of them actually nullified God’s Laws as contained in the written Torah. Those are the Ten Commandments, the ordinances, civil laws, Statutes and Judgements, collectively.I do not say pay no attention to the Talmudic writings. What I do say is that, a.) they did not originate with God, and b.) some of them were written in selfishness by rabbi’s, the “sages” who, it appears, wanted more to make a “name for themselves,” than anything to do with giving day-to-day type instructions to people which would point them back to what Moses had written in the book of the Law of God, the Torah.
American freedom is only as perfect as are it’s people. But freedom is a far sight better than what protestant historians and researchers kept records of, or dug up in researching the past.
I recall seeing Pope John-Paul 11 shaking the hand of American folkmusic legend, Bob Dylan back in around 1997, or sometime near that time-frame. I keep remembering Dylan’s famous song of conscience, “Blowing In The Wind,” where the plaintive cry from the past is based in a question: “How many times must the cannon-balls fly before they’re forever banned?” In verse 3, it says, “How many deaths will it take 'til he knows that too many people have died?”
State persecution of religious minorities goes on in a number of countries in the world today. The governments that operate theocracies, such as in India, and other places, should be a good example of why we in America stoutly defend the separation of church and state. If the religion is based on the Law of the O.T. and Christ’s deliverance in the N.T., and the leaders are preaching both to their congregations, then there should be no need for even considering mixing civil government with state legislative and enforcement capacities.
When Jesus told the pharisees and other leaders, “Why do you break the commandment of God by your traditions,?” He was speaking of the rabbinical writings in which some of them actually nullified God’s Laws as contained in the written Torah. Those are the Ten Commandments, the ordinances, civil laws, Statutes and Judgements, collectively.I do not say pay no attention to the Talmudic writings. What I do say is that, a.) they did not originate with God, and b.) some of them were written in selfishness by rabbi’s, the “sages” who, it appears, wanted more to make a “name for themselves,” than anything to do with giving day-to-day type instructions to people which would point them back to what Moses had written in the book of the Law of God, the Torah.
American freedom is only as perfect as are it’s people. But freedom is a far sight better than what protestant historians and researchers kept records of, or dug up in researching the past.
I recall seeing Pope John-Paul 11 shaking the hand of American folkmusic legend, Bob Dylan back in around 1997, or sometime near that time-frame. I keep remembering Dylan’s famous song of conscience, “Blowing In The Wind,” where the plaintive cry from the past is based in a question: “How many times must the cannon-balls fly before they’re forever banned?” In verse 3, it says, “How many deaths will it take 'til he knows that too many people have died?”
State persecution of religious minorities goes on in a number of countries in the world today. The governments that operate theocracies, such as in India, and other places, should be a good example of why we in America stoutly defend the separation of church and state. If the religion is based on the Law of the O.T. and Christ’s deliverance in the N.T., and the leaders are preaching both to their congregations, then there should be no need for even considering mixing civil government with state legislative and enforcement capacities.
T
TEPO
Guest
What about the persecutions here in America? How full will the prisons get before we realize a need for moral guidance… And why is it that when they are let out, they are banned from good employment because of their record ? Why are some freedoms OK while others are meaningless— because there is no Charity, no truth, no trust?
T
TEPO
Guest
Yes selfishness… I said earlier in the thread that atheism = selfishness… By the very act of denying Gods laws one gives birth to selfishness / athiesm…
So now we have leaders legalizing homosexual marriage… Even though God AND the majority of Americans disapprove… Could this be athiesm / selfishness again?
- Status