What is the Church's attitude on a Catholic State?

[RC_Sojourner]

Popes are human beings and they have been wrong at times and just like the rest of us, they are sinners too.

Were the Popes wrong, in this case though? Is this one of the times they were wrong, yes or no?

Who do I have to ask who has the answer?

Because, as I said before, while everyone loves to chime in on the matter of a Catholic State, if the Church still allows for it, then it doesn’t matter much what people think, does it?

And, I could be mistaken, but I’m pretty sure the Church has never ruled this out. If it did, someone on this thread, or any of the countless threads I’ve read on this would have quoted the Church denying their acceptance of this.

 

[RC_Sojourner]

Wait, what? Redraw the map of the world? What do you mean? Are you proposing that the Church could buy up part of a country somewhere and form its own state? I don’t think I understand what you’re suggesting.

The world map changes all the time. There’s this principle called “self-determination” which is still in force. The newest country is South Sudan which declared independence in June or July of 2011. Btw, one of the main reasons South Sudan wanted to separate from Sudan was that the vast majority of Sudan’s Christians were situated in the South, and they were being persecuted by the Muslims of the North.

If there is an absolute majority of people who demand to separate from a nation to form their own, then they have the right to do so. The people of Scotland may separate from the U.K. next year.

So, if there were a group of people, lets say all living on private land, 100% of them were Catholic, and they wanted to be their own separate nation, why couldn’t they?

Read the wikipedia article on Mount Athos. It is a peninsula in Greece, inhabited solely by Orthodox monks (and maybe some laymen who live with them). There are 20 monasteries on the peninsula.

The peninsula is not its own state, the monks want to be part of Greece so that they are protected by the Greek military for instance. However, it has a high level of autonomy. It is forbidden that anyone visit the peninsula except people the monks approve. Visitors must be males. The peninsula is entirely exempt from any “gender equality” laws that might be passed by the state of Greece. The only way women will ever be admitted is if the monks themselves decide to allow them (which is unlikely to ever happen).

Or, if you’re familiar with Fr. Z’s Blog. Then type in: “To which super-Catholic place would you go for self-exile?”

I really don’t understand what you’re suggesting. Do you think the Catholic Church isn’t powerful enough to buy up some land, somewhere on Planet Earth, and be able to get a Catholic State set up? Do you really think the Church couldn’t do that?

 

[RC_Sojourner]

At this point in history, the idea of a Catholic state is a silly pipe dream. Put that aside and focus on being holy. Holiness comes from within. It cannot be imposed by statute. God wants us to CHOOSE to know/love/serve him. Some of our greatest saints lived int he first centuries of Christian times under governments hostile to the faith. Today, we are blessed to live in a pagan world. This is a great opportunity to love and serve God by being steadfastly faithful and living with love for all - esepcially those who don’t share our faith or who are hostile to it. Are we up to this challenge which God has placed before us? Why should we want the easier softer way, one in which societal rules eliminate choice and make it easier to be Catholic?? This is an opportunity to holiness and not a cause for lamentation.

Why is it a silly pipe dream, exactly?

If a Catholic State is a silly pipe dream, then so are a lot of things which we know the Church definitively teaches.

The Catholic Church still rejects that divorce should be legal anywhere. Divorce is legal in every single country on Earth, except two: Vatican City, and the Philippines.

Do we forget that divorce is wrong? Do we put that aside and just focus on being holy, too?

I reject that living in a Catholic State would be “the easier softer way”. There is no reason that a Catholic State couldn’t have the goal of evangelism at its very core.

**Again, just look at the Papal States. The Papal States existed from 754 A.D. to 1870 A.D. Did the Papal States send out missionaries to evangelize the world? How responsible, during this time (of around one millennium), were the Papal States for the evangelization of the world?

That’s right, it looks like a Catholic Theocracy, under control of the Pope as its ruler, was at the very heart of evangelization in the history of our Church. So, why not repeat that? Why not follow that example?**

Or am I wrong? Are you saying that the Papal States didn’t focus on evangelizing others, and thought that imposing laws on people to be Catholic was the way to convert them? Were they isolated from non-Catholics?

Please. That’s terrible history, if you’re suggesting that.

 

[RC_Sojourner]

The suggestion that a Catholic State is merely for Catholics to retire to, and retreat from the world. A place to isolate themselves from ever interacting with non-Catholics is ludicrous, and it flies in the face of history.

How many Protestants and non-Catholics did the Popes interact with on a daily basis from 754 A.D. to 1870 A.D.?

I bet probably not too many. But does that mean that they, and the people living in the Papal States didn’t evangelize? Of course not.

We all know that Rome, the priests and Bishops that it trained, and the Popes that ruled over it as sovereigns, were all very responsible for the evangelization of the world.

 

[Micael]

I do not know what the official position of the Church is on such a matter - but I would suggest that history teaches that it is not a good idea.

Peace
James

Tried it in the past didn’t work

???When in history has there*** truly ***been a Catholic Theocracy? The Church has held high positions in certain eras, but never truly held direct political power. Conversely it was the Secular Gov’ts which attempted to Usurp the Church or manipulate it to its advantage…beginning with Constantine.

 

[St_Francis]

Could we please keep the differentiation between a Catholic state (where most are Catholic and the government is along Catholic lines) and a Catholic theocracy (where the government is run by members of the hierarchy) separate? Because I am having trouble figuring out what people are proposing, defending, or advocating!

 

[KathleenGee]

When I see what is happening to our country, and I live in a neighborhood that has very low crime and people don’t trust each other because of the very dominant secular mindset, yes, I wish I lived in a more Catholic country.

I would like to live in SE Italy, but they would not accept me, even if I am Catholic, because I am an American.

I am drawn to mystics who say an era of peace is coming to our world and then I don’t have to deal with all the atheist progressive mindset and its results evident on our city streets here.

The Church doesn’t propose any certain type of government but only that its right to believe and express our faith is allowed. And we see our government gradually coming toe to toe vs our Catholic faith and practice. The Church is perceived as conservative and we know the IRS is still going after ‘conservatives’ of all make, and the IRS has hired foreign born people who do not have our sensitivity of tolerance for other personal beliefs.

So I am very drawn to wanting to learn more about the latest encyclical that came out of this past year regarding our faith. We are to seek renewal in Christ in the midst of this spiritual desert.

The saints say once you are in the desert, to not leave it. I woke up early this morning because I don’t like the part of town I live in, a known spiritual desert, the pastors don’t like outsiders …they appear to atleast…EWTN, my local Catholic radio have been a great consolation to me. I cannot go to church to pray on my time before the Blessed Sacrament so that is shot.

But as I continue to reflect, yes, I am living in a great spiritual desert, in a state that has little faith and a history of anti-Catholicism. Yet it is a place for potential growth and gifting to the universal church. I can see why the Lord calls us to persevere to the end of our faith.
The place has had a great, negative and destructive impact on my children, and I sensed some teachers in the Catholic school my youngest attended was some how subtly working on him to release him from the devotion I had to our Holy Father, Mary, and orthodoxy.

This encyclical is calling us to evangelize in spiritual and corporal works of mercy and this takes a renewed spiritual life. A parish mission is not focused on providing us alot of community life. It is to provide us the Mass and sacraments and instruction in faith…and that is better I think, because some times alot of parish activities can take us away from planting the seed of faith in the place God has placed us.

And finally, the encyclical touches on this very cross I have been growing through since leaving my native state and my former parish ‘home’. It states we are to live in the City of God. The Church today is on the path of eventually becoming the New Jerusalem that Christ will bring us for those who endure. It will wipe away every tear, injustice, rejection and personal loss and fill us with new life and new relationships that will last forever.

So the answer for me…is that we seek to live in the City of God that is everywhere, but needs the eye of faith and nurturance.

 

[PrayRosary]

Wouldn’t a Catholic state be the opposite of this:

Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit
Mt 28:19

But if there was a Catholic state, I would love to live there.

 

[Genesis315]

The ideal is for all people to be Catholic and that rulers should rule as good Catholics would, and the Church and State should work together in harmony. The Church still teaches this as the ideal and that we should seek to bring it about through evangelization. Socieity’s laws, structures, customs, and mores should be infused with Catholicism and consonat with it. See for example CCC 1205 and 2244.

That being said, whether this relationship is recognized by some sort of juridical arrangement (e.g. an “established” religion or Church) is a neutral thing that depends on the circumstances. The Church neither absolutely demands it, nor absolutely forbids it.

Wouldn’t a Catholic state be the opposite of this:

Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit

Not unless we were content with it being the only Catholic state! We don’t want just one Catholic nation, we want a Catholic world!

 

[RC_Sojourner]

Could we please keep the differentiation between a Catholic state (where most are Catholic and the government is along Catholic lines) and a Catholic theocracy (where the government is run by members of the hierarchy) separate? Because I am having trouble figuring out what people are proposing, defending, or advocating!

Well, I would love to live in either/or. Or, to use some Church language, I will gladly discuss the pros of both/ and.

I would love to live under land which is controlled by the Vatican, ie: a Catholic theocracy, but also under a Catholic state which has its own government. I think both are about equally as possible. The first one probably moreso in the short term.

And as I said before, discussing pros/ cons is just our opinions. If the Church has a teaching on this, and anyone knows it, please do provide it.

 

[RC_Sojourner]

Wouldn’t a Catholic state be the opposite of this:

Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit
Mt 28:19

But if there was a Catholic state, I would love to live there.

Well, I stumbled upon a line of argument, that I made very forcefully in posts #63 and #64 (if you haven’t read them already).

The Papal States was a Catholic State that was very involved in evangelism, and the carrying out of the Great Commission, which you cite.

Can I just say, that personally, I feel called to participate in the New Evangelization. And, I am all about the Catholic Church evangelizing again. I just don’t think that the perception of a Catholic State as one which doesn’t evangelize is right.

The U.S. doesn’t base its foreign policy on the plight of Christians in the Middle East for example. A Catholic State would probably base its foreign policy on the plight of Christians in persecuted countries. Foreign aid that it gave would have strings attached, that it be given to bolster the Church in places like Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Indonesia, etc.

 

[M-Dent]

Does the Church teach against it? Or, does Church teaching allow for it, at the present time?

I thought Pope Benedict XVI summed up this question – that the Church has no interest in starting (or promoting) a “Catholic” State in particular – though promotes all States adhering to the truth.

The Church does not have technical solutions to offer and does not claim “to interfere in any way in the politics of States.” She does, however, have a mission of truth to accomplish, in every time and circumstance, for a society that is attuned to man, to his dignity, to his vocation. Without truth, it is easy to fall into an empiricist and sceptical view of life, incapable of rising to the level of praxis because of a lack of interest in grasping the values — sometimes even the meanings — with which to judge and direct it. Fidelity to man requires fidelity to the truth, which alone is the guarantee of freedom (cf. Jn 8:32) and of the possibility of integral human development. For this reason the Church searches for truth, proclaims it tirelessly and recognizes it wherever it is manifested. This mission of truth is something that the Church can never renounce. Her social doctrine is a particular dimension of this proclamation: it is a service to the truth which sets us free. Open to the truth, from whichever branch of knowledge it comes, the Church’s social doctrine receives it, assembles into a unity the fragments in which it is often found, and mediates it within the constantly changing life-patterns of the society of peoples and nations.

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20090629_caritas-in-veritate_en.html

 

[Tarpeian_Rock]

Well, I would love to live in either/or. Or, to use some Church language, I will gladly discuss the pros of both/ and.

I would love to live under land which is controlled by the Vatican, ie: a Catholic theocracy, but also under a Catholic state which has its own government. I think both are about equally as possible. The first one probably moreso in the short term.

And as I said before, discussing pros/ cons is just our opinions. If the Church has a teaching on this, and anyone knows it, please do provide it.

My understanding of a pure theocracy is that in such a state, religious law - for our purposes, Canon Law - effectively becomes civil law, with certain additions – for example, Canon Law doesn’t currently have any traffic regulations.

I can’t imagine living in such a state. Missed Mass? Off to court with you. Level of church contributions questionable? In comes the religious equivalent of the IRS. “Bedroom crimes?” The mind boggles. Posters on every street corner encouraging the reporting of “liturgical abuses.” (Look how popular that is around here.) It would become the Catholic equivalent of Sharia. Look how well that’s working out in Iran. “Morality police” enforcing “modesty” in clothing. On and on it would go.

 

[Tom_Baum]

My understanding of a pure theocracy is that in such a state, religious law - for our purposes, Canon Law - effectively becomes civil law, with certain additions – for example, Canon Law doesn’t currently have any traffic regulations.

I can’t imagine living in such a state. Missed Mass? Off to court with you. Level of church contributions questionable? In comes the religious equivalent of the IRS. “Bedroom crimes?” The mind boggles. Posters on every street corner encouraging the reporting of “liturgical abuses.” (Look how popular that is around here.) It would become the Catholic equivalent of Sharia. Look how well that’s working out in Iran. “Morality police” enforcing “modesty” in clothing. On and on it would go.

One of the things that I have said many times is that it is a good thing that Jesus rose from the dead because if He hadn’t, He would be rolling around in His grave seeing some of the things that people are doing or trying to do in His name.

As I said earlier in this, I say again, Jesus never, ever asked us to set up a theocracy in His Name and I, personally, think/believe that setting up or attempting to set up a theocracy in Jesus’s Name goes against everything that Jesus taught or at least attempted to teach us.

As my namesake said quite a while ago, “These are hardheaded and stiff necked people”.

“When the Son of Man comes, will He find faith?”, looks to me that He might have a hard time finding faith but no trouble at all finding religion.

Faith, in my opinion, comes from the inside; religion, at least from what quite a few seem to look at it as, is imposed from the outside.

 

[RC_Sojourner]

I thought Pope Benedict XVI summed up this question – that the Church has no interest in starting (or promoting) a “Catholic” State in particular – though promotes all States adhering to the truth.

Thank you for referencing Caritas in Veritate. I’ll have to definitely read it.

I think I’ll just have to drop this at the moment. But, I’ll be sure to ask clergy about it in the future.
Tarpaien Rock:

My understanding of a pure theocracy is that in such a state, religious law - for our purposes, Canon Law - effectively becomes civil law, with certain additions – for example, Canon Law doesn’t currently have any traffic regulations.

I can’t imagine living in such a state. Missed Mass? Off to court with you. Level of church contributions questionable? In comes the religious equivalent of the IRS. “Bedroom crimes?” The mind boggles. Posters on every street corner encouraging the reporting of “liturgical abuses.” (Look how popular that is around here.) It would become the Catholic equivalent of Sharia. Look how well that’s working out in Iran. “Morality police” enforcing “modesty” in clothing. On and on it would go.

Well, I can imagine living in such a state. Or, at least I can read the history of the Papal States, and I can look at Vatican City today. You’re warning is just the fruits of being purely hypothetical and theoretical.

In practice, no one knows what a Catholic State would be like. You can condemn it from your theoretical armchair, and I can laud it from my theoretical armchair… but

Lastly, I take offense at you comparing Catholicism to Islam. “Catholic equivalent of Sharia”… wow. For shame sir, for shame. Sharia law cuts peoples arms and heads off.

Here’s my advice to you: the Catholic Church doesn’t have anything to learn from that false religion. Nothing. Take it or leave, that’s my advice.

P.S. So, you live in the People’s Republic of Massachusetts? You’re obviously not pleased with your state government, where would you prefer to live?
Tom Baum:

As I said earlier in this, I say again, Jesus never, ever asked us to set up a theocracy in His Name and I, personally, think/believe that setting up or attempting to set up a theocracy in Jesus’s Name goes against everything that Jesus taught or at least attempted to teach us.

And, as I said before, it looks like you disagree with what the Popes did for over 10 centuries in the Papal States.

 

[thistle]

Thank you for referencing Caritas in Veritate. I’ll have to definitely read it.

I think I’ll just have to drop this at the moment. But, I’ll be sure to ask clergy about it in the future.

Well, I can imagine living in such a state. Or, at least I can read the history of the Papal States, and I can look at Vatican City today. You’re warning is just the fruits of being purely hypothetical and theoretical.

In practice, no one knows what a Catholic State would be like. You can condemn it from your theoretical armchair, and I can laud it from my theoretical armchair… but

Lastly, I take offense at you comparing Catholicism to Islam. “Catholic equivalent of Sharia”… wow. For shame sir, for shame. Sharia law cuts peoples arms and heads off.

Here’s my advice to you: the Catholic Church doesn’t have anything to learn from that false religion. Nothing. Take it or leave, that’s my advice.

P.S. So, you live in the People’s Republic of Massachusetts? You’re obviously not pleased with your state government, where would you prefer to live?

And, as I said before, it looks like you disagree with what the Popes did for over 10 centuries in the Papal States.

What Popes have done in the past has not necessarily been what the Church teaches.
Can you point us to a Church doctrine that states there should be a Papal State?

 

[Caitliceach]

Much of Europe is majority Catholic in populace, the power-brokers are anything but though.