I was trying to point out that it is virtually impossible to respect individual choice in matters of religion when we have both Bible reading and prayer as classroom exercises.
It has been said that the devil sends errors into the world in pairs. Those who reject the error on one side may be caught by going to far to the error on the other side.
Late Modernity and the Post-Modern era have been hallmarked by the opposed errors of individualism and collectivism. Western Liberal Democracy errs by exalting individual choice to a virtually insane degree. Totalitarianism is a response to the sickness and destruction that the over exaltation of individual choice creates. Totalitarianism places every good, individual or otherwise, at the service of the good of the political community, and thus is the opposite error.
The Church is the original truth that those two errors depart from, and in a certain sense what they are trying to replace.
Since this thread is specifically on the topic of western liberal democracy, I would say that the individualism of western liberal democracy and its over-emphasis on personal choice is in some ways better than totalitarianism, but as we are going to found out shortly, baring a miracle, the end result is the same. The end result will be the same because the social destruction and disintegration that results from western individualism will lead to a descent into anarchy. That can't be tolerated, and will eventually lead to some form of totalitarian control.
One of the core ideas that has been built into western society since the enlightenment is the idea that people are basically good, and if simply left alone, left to themselves, they will be fine and generally find some goodness and happiness.
This is false. The reality is that people have to be taught and trained in goodness. People do not naturally become good. Human nature is degenerative. Left completely to themselves, without outside forces directing them, people degenerate into wickedness and self-destruction.
IF a society hopes to have any longevity, or be good in any meaningful way, or produce any significant degree of human flourishing, that society MUST have a way of instilling correct values into its people.
If you completely elevate individual choice, over the necessity of instilling correct values, the society will destroy itself, the people will degenerate into insanity, and they will lose the capacity to choose anyway, as they become enslaved to their own passions.
This is a very important point as well. To be free to choose, doesn't just mean that you are not compelled by external forces like the government. It also demands that you have self-control. Self-control is only learned, virtually no one has it by nature. Our nature tends to the opposite. Thus even freedom to choose requires proper training.
As the old quote goes, "men of intemperate minds cannot be free, their passions forge their fetters."
Here is the whole quote, it's worth reading...
Men are qualified for civil liberty in exact proportion to their disposition to put moral chains upon their own appetites, — in proportion as their love to justice is above their rapacity,—in proportion as their soundness and sobriety of understanding is above their vanity and presumption,—in proportion as they are more disposed to listen to the counsels of the wise and good, in preference to the flattery of knaves. Society cannot exist, unless a controlling power upon will and appetite be placed somewhere; and the less of it there is within, the more there must be without. It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things, that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters.
Contrarily, if you over-balance from training and true education into indoctrination and coercion, it becomes impossible to teach true values, because true values are contradictory to the ideas of coercion etc. Balance is needed, but our society is not balanced. We are heavily tilted to one side.
You say that you don’t believe in separation of Church and State or object to “established” religion. Great Britain has an established church, a state church, the Church of England. Also, the Church of Scotland is established in Scotland. In practice, this means that these churches are largely captives of an irreligious government.
I have heard a Protestant evangelist from Belgium, where the Roman Catholic Church is the state church. One reason for being Protestant in Belgium is that with religion bogged down by an established church, the country is very secular, very non-religious. I had a conversation with a lady from Belgium. I asked her, “Is it true that the Catholic Church in Belgium is mostly a place for Christianings, weddings, and funerals?”
Her reply: “Most weddings are civil.” She went on to explain that since the priests are paid by the state, they don’t seem to care about getting people to church, or getting people to live better lives. They get paid either way.
It is true that no political system, nor even the Church is going to create utopia. Fallen human nature makes that an impossibility. The question is which system is best suited to the realities of human nature and the reality of the world God created. What system would work WITH the principles necessary to maintain a good society, and which systems work against those principles and undermines them. Our system, while it has a lot of good points, ultimately works against those principles and undermines them. Which is why our society has literally gone insane.
It is easy for us to sit here thinking that things aren't so bad, that this is "normal" because we are acclimatized to it. In reality, our society has gone totally insane, and has completely succumbed to moral idiocy.
The charge that the Bible brings against the days of Noah, when God was forced to kill all human life except Noah and his family, was that they were "eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage" even though the world around them had become so bad, that it was impossible for goodness to survive. We are not far off from that. Our western society is the biggest shedder of innocent human blood in history, bar none. We have killed more innocents than Hitler, Stalin, Mao, any of them. Yet even most Christians (including me) in their daily lives don't bat an eye-lash at it. We hardly ever even think about it. We still consider ourselves the good guys. And that is just one of the many issues we have.
Roman Catholics think a state church is a good idea because they believe that God established One True Church. I don’t believe that God set up One True Church. There is no sign that the seven churches in Revelation were governed by an Episcopal hierarchy, for instance.
Arius didn't believe that Jesus equal with the Father, and he didn't see that in scripture.
Marcion didn't believe that the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New Testament were the same God, he didn't see that in the Bible.
Korah and Dathan didn't believe that God had given Moses authority over Israel.
Absalom didn't believe that David was God's anointed King.
Pelagius didn't believe that we need Grace to be saved, he didn't see that in the Bible.
The list could go on, and it is ever growing.
Also, for the record, don't think that I just inherited a Catholic view and am sticking to what I was raised with.
I was a Protestant for more than 30 years. I'm the only Catholic in my family. I studied for 7 years before I finally was convinced that Catholic teaching was true. I have argued this stuff countless times.
I hold this view because I was convinced of it, largely because of the Bible, absolutely not in spite of the Bible.