A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
That’s a rather large exception.
The only theocracy with regard to Roman Catholicism has been Rome (and the area surrounding it).
Assuming we even accept your argument.
- Status
The only theocracy with regard to Roman Catholicism has been Rome (and the area surrounding it).
Assuming we even accept your argument.
D
Dakota_Roberts
Guest
And I’m referring to the article in the OP which the OP appears to have misunderstood
T
tafan
Guest
Its not a rather large exception, 1 country, thats it. And a very small country now.
As to accepting my argument, please point out any other examples of Catholic theocracies throughout history, or better yet point to even one papal document or council document which advocates government by the clergy.
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
2 come to mind (off the top of my head).
Franco Spain and Ireland (up until recently anyway).
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8
That’s a rather large exception.
The only theocracy with regard to Roman Catholicism has been Rome (and the area surrounding it).
Assuming we even accept your argument.
Because it was ruled by the Pope himself.
So that’s an endorsement of (Catholic) theocracy from the highest (Catholic) source.
That’s a rather large exception.
The only theocracy with regard to Roman Catholicism has been Rome (and the area surrounding it).
Assuming we even accept your argument.
It is a very very large exception (operating under the assumption it was an exception).
Because it was ruled by the Pope himself.
So that’s an endorsement of (Catholic) theocracy from the highest (Catholic) source.
T
tafan
Guest
the·oc·ra·cy /θiˈɒkrəsi/ Show Spelled[thee-ok-ruh-see] Show IPA
noun, plural the·oc·ra·cies.
- a form of government in which God or a deity is recognized as the supreme civil ruler, the God’s or deity’s laws being interpreted by the ecclesiastical authorities.
- a system of government by **priests **claiming a divine commission.
- a commonwealth or state under such a form or system of government.
Ireland? Well, from 1922 until 1937, Ireland was a constitutional monarchy. The titlar monarch was the King of England. Ireland had a two level parliament and an executive council. I have searched and found nothing with indicates any of their civil rulers were clergy in the Catholic Church. From 1949 until the present it has been a Republic and not part of the British commonwealth. Again, I find no evidence of clergy being the political leaders of the country.
Here is the wikipedia article on theocracy’s: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theocracy . Under the section historical christian theocracy’s it lists John Calvin and Geneva. The only Catholic example is 4 years of a priest ruling the city of Florence in the late 15th century.
Under present day theocracy’s there is the example of the Holy See.
Care to try again?
T
tafan
Guest
The Church has learned the hard way the dangers of Caesaropapism. It seems that temporal rulers cannot help but try to control the Church, given certain opportunities. Therefore, the Church certainly follows the policy that there cannot be a temporal ruler above the Pope.
This is by no means an general endorsement of the principal. As a matter of fact, we have recent examples of just the opposite:
Here in the United States, there was John McLaughlin, who rather than follow the Church’s order to abandon his political career (he ran for the Senate and was a speech writer for Nixon) he left the priesthood.
We also have the example of Ferando Cardenal, who was expelled from the Jesuits and laiticized for serving in the Cabinet of the Sandinistas of Nicaragua.
Again, as has been stated, the OP was confused with his terminology. The article the thread is about does not imply a theocracy. It is an absurd question to ask what an American Catholic Theocracy would look like because we have no historical examples of Catholic Theocracy’s outside of the Vatican.
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
Wikipedia is a lousy source for all but the most general of information.
In Ireland the Catholic Church runs the schools and the hospitals, and if you want your child to get into a good school you have to be officially Catholic.
Moreover it has a had a firm grip on the political system.
Keeping abortion outlawed and blasphemy laws on the books.
And keeping divorce illegal until 1995.
Source:
reuters.com/article/2010/07/08/us-ireland-church-idUSTRE6671PP20100708
P.S. the Irish system sounds fairly theocratic to me.
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
You appear to be using an extremely narrow definition of theocracy.
But according to this definition (below) Ireland and Catholic Spain would qualify:
- A government ruled by or subject to religious authority.
- A state so governed.
thefreedictionary.com/theocracy
P.S. Because they were (and in Ireland’s case still are) subject to religious authority.
T
tafan
Guest
You and I will differ on Wikipedia, in my opinion it has developed into an excellent reference source. The vast majority of the articles are balanced, well research, well annotated. A wonderful place to start off research.
There is a HUGE difference between a theocracy and a government which has a state established religion. Yes civil governments with a state established religion is exactly what this thread should be about. Throughout history of state establishment have often enforced religious mores, for all types of religions. This the Church does not condemn, and historically has encouraged.
If you want my opinion on some of the issues on a state established religion in America, see my post #26 on this thread. But first, let us get our terminology correct, or else we will just go around in circles. I am not interested in debating any points with someone who speaks from a different dictionary. It will benefit neither of us in our understanding of each other.
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
As for the Franco regime, according to a study done for the Library of Congress:
The advent of the Franco regime saw the restoration of the church’s privileges. During the Franco years, Roman Catholicism was the only religion to have legal status; other worship services could not be advertised, and only the Roman Catholic Church could own property or publish books. The government not only continued to pay priests’ salaries and to subsidize the church, but it also assisted in the reconstruction of church buildings damaged by the war. Laws were passed abolishing divorce and banning the sale of contraceptives. Catholic religious instruction was mandatory, even in public schools. Franco secured in return the right to name Roman Catholic bishops in Spain, as well as veto power over appointments of clergy down to the parish priest level. In 1953 this close cooperation was formalized in a new Concordat with the Vatican that granted the church an extraordinary set of privileges: mandatory canonical marriages for all Catholics; exemption from government taxation; subsidies for new building construction; censorship of materials the church deemed offensive; the right to establish universities, to operate radio stations, and to publish newspapers and magazines; protection from police intrusion into church properties; and exemption of clergy from military service.
Link to Source:
countrystudies.us/spain/44.htm
P.S. The theocratic elements of the system described above should be obvious.
The advent of the Franco regime saw the restoration of the church’s privileges. During the Franco years, Roman Catholicism was the only religion to have legal status; other worship services could not be advertised, and only the Roman Catholic Church could own property or publish books. The government not only continued to pay priests’ salaries and to subsidize the church, but it also assisted in the reconstruction of church buildings damaged by the war. Laws were passed abolishing divorce and banning the sale of contraceptives. Catholic religious instruction was mandatory, even in public schools. Franco secured in return the right to name Roman Catholic bishops in Spain, as well as veto power over appointments of clergy down to the parish priest level. In 1953 this close cooperation was formalized in a new Concordat with the Vatican that granted the church an extraordinary set of privileges: mandatory canonical marriages for all Catholics; exemption from government taxation; subsidies for new building construction; censorship of materials the church deemed offensive; the right to establish universities, to operate radio stations, and to publish newspapers and magazines; protection from police intrusion into church properties; and exemption of clergy from military service.
Link to Source:
countrystudies.us/spain/44.htm
P.S. The theocratic elements of the system described above should be obvious.
T
tafan
Guest
And you use the most broad one. But Franco never considered himself subject to any religious authority. I do not think the govenment of Ireland did either.
A religious authority over government is not that the government follows the morals of a particular religion; it is that the ecclisiastical leaders of the religion rule the government.
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
I hope you realize that if I wanted to, I (or for that matter anyone else) could simply win the argument by changing the wiki page on theocracy.
T
tafan
Guest
Sorry, not obvious at all. Some of it is all standard form for tradition state-establihed religions and includes certain elements of state control over the Church (ie state payment of salaries and state selection of bishops). The latter example is the opposite of what would occur in a theocracy.
T
tafan
Guest
Actually, if you do any research on how wikipedia is put together, you would find that very difficult. There are hordes of reviewers to submissions to wikipedia. It will be flagged quite quickly if something is added that is not accurate. It would not last either.
It is actually quite fascinating how wikipedia works, and it works very, very well.
H
Hadrianus
Guest
Angry Atheist,
Code:
By your extremely broad definition of theocracy, every country in Europe,whether Catholic or Protestant was a theocracy until fairly recent times. Napoleon's Frabnce was then a theocracy. The first non theocracy, by this extraordinary definition would have been the French Third Republic. Great Britain remains a theocracy because the Church of England and Church of Scotland are both by law established, and Religious Education is taught in the state schools.
Of course, this is not a definition of theocracy as the term is generally used. Incidentally, Vatican City follows the civil code of the Italian Republic.
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
I honestly think that most goverments throughout history have been theocratic to one degree or another. The principal of secularism and valuing freedom as a ideal are all relatively new (in historical terms).
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
Originally Posted by AngryAtheist8
As for the Franco regime, according to a study done for the Library of Congress:
The advent of the Franco regime saw the restoration of the church’s privileges. During the Franco years, Roman Catholicism was the only religion to have legal status; other worship services could not be advertised, and only the Roman Catholic Church could own property or publish books. The government not only continued to pay priests’ salaries and to subsidize the church, but it also assisted in the reconstruction of church buildings damaged by the war. Laws were passed abolishing divorce and banning the sale of contraceptives. Catholic religious instruction was mandatory, even in public schools. Franco secured in return the right to name Roman Catholic bishops in Spain, as well as veto power over appointments of clergy down to the parish priest level. In 1953 this close cooperation was formalized in a new Concordat with the Vatican that granted the church an extraordinary set of privileges: mandatory canonical marriages for all Catholics; exemption from government taxation; subsidies for new building construction; censorship of materials the church deemed offensive; the right to establish universities, to operate radio stations, and to publish newspapers and magazines; protection from police intrusion into church properties; and exemption of clergy from military service.
Link to Source:
countrystudies.us/spain/44.htm
P.S. The theocratic elements of the system described above should be obvious.
As for the Franco regime, according to a study done for the Library of Congress:
The advent of the Franco regime saw the restoration of the church’s privileges. During the Franco years, Roman Catholicism was the only religion to have legal status; other worship services could not be advertised, and only the Roman Catholic Church could own property or publish books. The government not only continued to pay priests’ salaries and to subsidize the church, but it also assisted in the reconstruction of church buildings damaged by the war. Laws were passed abolishing divorce and banning the sale of contraceptives. Catholic religious instruction was mandatory, even in public schools. Franco secured in return the right to name Roman Catholic bishops in Spain, as well as veto power over appointments of clergy down to the parish priest level. In 1953 this close cooperation was formalized in a new Concordat with the Vatican that granted the church an extraordinary set of privileges: mandatory canonical marriages for all Catholics; exemption from government taxation; subsidies for new building construction; censorship of materials the church deemed offensive; the right to establish universities, to operate radio stations, and to publish newspapers and magazines; protection from police intrusion into church properties; and exemption of clergy from military service.
Link to Source:
countrystudies.us/spain/44.htm
P.S. The theocratic elements of the system described above should be obvious.
You don’t see how giving the Church powers such as the right to censor any material it finds offensive is theocratic
T
tafan
Guest
No. The right to censor was given by the state to the church. This is by definition NOT theocratic. This is not just semantics. Words have meaning, a discussion on the article in question cannot be had if the author’s intent is going to be represented as something misleading. You may have your own idea that theocracy and state-established religion is the same thing. But VERY few others do, therefore any discussion will be confisuing and misleading to almost everyone else reading it.You don’t see how giving the Church powers such as the right to censor any material it finds offensive is theocratic
Tell me, is refusing to follow simple logic a common trait amoung angry atheists? Times have certainly changed since Chesterton wrote “A Ball and a Cross” as far as the atheist side of the argument goes.
Good day, I will give you the last word. There is little reason to continue.
- Status