Theocracy

[FlaviusAetius]

Hey,

A lot of threads seem to have ended with the issue that because the secular government has no obligation to uphold Christian values those values are inevitably marginalized for ones that are secular.

So I ask this, would living in a Catholic version of Iran's Islamic Republic be a bad thing? Why or why not?

 

[TheOtherHockeyMom]

Depends...would it be a crime to not believe in God?

 

[FlaviusAetius]

Depends...would it be a crime to not believe in God?

I suppose like Iran it would be a crime but only enforced if you show this view publicly.

I'm sure Iran has homosexuals and atheists that aren't in jail at the moment. Their views and acts simply aren't allowed to be expressed in society.

 

[TheOtherHockeyMom]

I suppose like Iran it would be a crime but only enforced if you show this view publicly.

I'm sure Iran has homosexuals and atheists that aren't in jail at the moment. Their views and acts simply aren't allowed to be expressed in society.

What would the penalty be for expressing a lack of faith or a different faith publicly?

 

[FlaviusAetius]

What would the penalty be for expressing a lack of faith or a different faith publicly?

Guess that's the problem with a question like this, you have to build up the hypothetical society from the ground up.

I certainly don't think a Catholic version of a religious republic would be as harsh in their punishment as Iran's Islamic Republic.

Freedom of religion in Iran - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Interestingly enough Iran seems to have some toleration of religions outside of Shia Islam.

Still it's a rather dangerous road to give so much power to Catholicism. It may be inevitable that to uphold the moral standings of the State that tactics like imprisonment, harassment, and discrimination would have to be used.

Perhaps its better for the faith to just be on the ground without power, rather than up high with all the power...does that mean secular morality is superior to Catholic morality?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrimination

 

[Michie]

Guess that's the problem with a question like this, you have to build up the hypothetical society from the ground up.

I certainly don't think a Catholic version of a religious republic would be as harsh in their punishment as Iran's Islamic Republic.

Freedom of religion in Iran - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Interestingly enough Iran seems to have some toleration of religions outside of Shia Islam.

Still it's a rather dangerous road to give so much power to Catholicism. It may be inevitable that to uphold the moral standings of the State that tactics like imprisonment, harassment, and discrimination would have to be used.

Perhaps its better for the faith to just be on the ground without power, rather than up high with all the power...does that mean secular morality is superior to Catholic morality?

I don't think it means secular morality is better than Catholic morality. But Faith has a voice in the public square as well. I do not think giving any religious group should hold power to govern. I don't think Jesus intended that for the Church either.

 

[FlaviusAetius]

I don't think it means secular morality is better than Catholic morality. But Faith has a voice in the public square as well. I do not think giving any religious group should hold power to govern. I don't think Jesus intended that for the Church either.

Why not? When secular are in control in its ideal state everyone has a say and we only face marginalization because people agree with the governments universal tolerance and because we deny State granted rights to other groups we view as sinners and unfit to associate with our institutions. (Adoption, working in our schools, ect.)

Meanwhile if any religion takes control of the State it either means soft discrimination (basically secularism with favoritism toward x religion) or it becomes a hardline theocracy that commits human rights violation to maintain their established morality.

So what is good about our morality if when granted power it's inevitable for Christians to either abuse that authority or not enforce their morality and basically be secular.

 

[mark46]

While I agree with you, I'm not sure this interpretation has been that of the Church until recent centuries.

I don't think it means secular morality is better than Catholic morality. But Faith has a voice in the public square as well. I do not think giving any religious group should hold power to govern. I don't think Jesus intended that for the Church either.

 

[Nani-Day]

Considering what the last days will be like, Im sure that Christians were never suppose to have that much power. A catholic theocracy would be a nightmare for anyone who's not interested in catholicism, and it will probably push away potential converts who didnt have as much freedom to choose.

 

[Michie]

While I agree with you, I'm not sure this interpretation has been that of the Church until recent centuries.

I was not speaking for the Church. I was giving my opinion. Reading Scripture you can see that when power has a faith preference...it is never a good thing.

Faith was meant to be an influence on society/the world. It is not meant to be in a position of ruling society. in Christianity, that does not happen until the Lord's return. we are going t be battling the same things we always have since the beginning until He does return. We are still supposed to influence the world & leave our mark but ruling seems to be out of the question from my understanding.

 

[Michie]

Considering what the last days will be like, Im sure that Christians were never suppose to have that much power. A catholic theocracy would be a nightmare for anyone who's not interested in catholicism, and it will probably push away potential converts who didnt have as much freedom to choose.

Exactly.

 

[StevenMerten]

Hello Flavious,

Jesus is called King at His birth. Jesus will Rule the world with and through His Church, the Catholic Church.

God was King over Israel from the Exodus until 587 B.C.. The original plan was for God to Rule the world through Israel. Because of Israel's great multitude of sins, God handed His ruler-ship of the world over to secular power, king Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar was just as ruthless as Adolph Hitler.

Fallen Angel, Morning Star, Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon

There is a massive amount of apocalyptic scripture in Old and New Testament. The big event of the apocalypse is Jesus taking over as King and Ruler of the world. Jesus will Rule with and through His Church as God once Ruled with and through the priests, prophets and kings of Israel.

When the Seventh Trumpet Blows, God's Promise to Israel, God's Divine Plan, is Fulfilled!

Jesus will Rule, through His Church, using the 'keys to the kingdom', the binding and loosting of sins. Once Catholic Leaders put Christ's Laws into enforcement on earth, using auto-anathemas, Jesus will show His Power and Glory, three days latter. This means massive miracles done in His Name. The whole world will see the Power and Glory of our Lord and they will stream to Him through the gates of the Sacraments of Baptism and Reconciliation, to be with Him in His Kingdom Come. This will be the birth of Zion. Zion, God's Holy City, with be the, post Armageddon, Catholic Church, on earth.

Messianic Reign, where Jesus Rules the world with and through His Church, the Catholic Church, will be awesome. Hallelujah! Let our Lord, God and Savior Rule!

 

[Rhamiel]

maybe the comparison to Iran is not the best comparison, we do not need modern Islamic nations to by our standard for a Catholic State

Iran is neither Western nor is it Christian, so their styles are understandably VERY different from our style.

a more reasonable comparison would be any Catholic Nation before the French Revolution.

Or if we wanted a modern comparison to an Islamic Nation, I would prefer the Kingdom of Morocco over Islamic Republic of Iran as for what our fictional "Catholic Nation" should be based off of.

Morocco is a constitutional monarchy, with the King having executive power a little greater then what the President of the USA has, there is also a Parliament and a Judiciary. Their laws are based explicitly off of Islamic Sharia law, people have freedom of religion and can convert to whatever religion they want, but evangelism of Muslims by non-Muslims is not allowed. Christians are allowed to have their own Churches, but I understand that like in many Islamic countries, it can be difficult to get building permits to build new churches. I have been to a beautiful Cathedral in Casablanca.

Homosexuality and Atheism are not illegal.
They are tolerated, but it is a tolerance, not an acceptance as a good thing.
But there is no so called "separation of church and state" or mosque and state in this case. The government freely gives money to religious institutions of a muslim nature and enacts laws to help support and spread this religion.

I see no reason why we could not have all the same things in a Catholic Country.

People do have a right to act in accord with their conscience, but non-Catholic religions should be tolerated in most cases, not encouraged, and we should not pretend that they are equal in truth, dignity, or authority to the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church founded by our Lord Jesus Christ and under the care of the Bishop of Rome and all Bishops in communion with him.
A government should support the Catholic religion in ways that it does not support other religions.
The true Catholic Faith should be taught in schools

while this would be very different then the secularist Liberal Democracies we are used to now, it would not necessarily be equal in tone or style to that of Iran.

It is not like something like this would be a mystery, for a good chunk of history every nation in Europe lived in similar conditions.

 

[Armoured]

Hey,

A lot of threads seem to have ended with the issue that because the secular government has no obligation to uphold Christian values those values are inevitably marginalized for ones that are secular.

So I ask this, would living in a Catholic version of Iran's Islamic Republic be a bad thing? Why or why not?

It's been tried before. Usually ends badly, at least by the standards of the modern day. Research Auto Da Fes and get back to us.

Not just Catholic Theocracy that's a bad idea either. ANY totalitarian state seems to go the same way.

 

[FlaviusAetius]

It is not like something like this would be a mystery, for a good chunk of history every nation in Europe lived in similar conditions.

Thank you for a more informed and moderate view on what a connection between Church and State would look like. To be honest I was interested because of the fact that Catholicism is holding less and less influence in Western society and the idea if theocracy would be superior came up.

 

[Rhamiel]

It's been tried before. Usually ends badly, at least by the standards of the modern day. Research Auto Da Fes and get back to us.

Not just Catholic Theocracy that's a bad idea either. ANY totalitarian state seems to go the same way.

yeah, Auto Da Fes of the Spanish Inquisition were an abuse of Religion and State power.

abuses happen with any system.

America has had Separation of Church and State (to one degree or another) since 1776, and we have also had
slavery
genocidal actions against the Indians
monopolies that harm worker and consumer rights
Japanese being thrown in internment camps.

every system has its good moments and bad moments
I am not calling for the Spanish Inquisition to come back

here is what I think a modern "Catholic Country" could look like, under a Constitutional Monarch or a Republic of some sort

the government to be able to give money to Catholic Charities without tying their hands about not preaching or stuff like that.

Catholic charities, schools, and other public programs run by the Church would be favored over those of other religions. So if the Baptists wanted a school, they could have it, but it would not get any tax payer support while public Schools would be basically Catholic Schools.

things that are clearly against the faith would be illegal, such as abortion and inappropriate contentography, prostitution.
It is VERY likely that there would be black market for these things, just as there is for prostitution now. How hard the government would want to go to enforce such laws is a matter of prudence, like other religions, it makes sense to tolerate a certain level of vice, the main thing is that the law is not used to protect or support such actions

Sunday rest for workers

a few other things, maybe a slightly stricter public decency laws.

 

[alton3]

The history of pre-modern Europe, from the crowning of Charlemagne (c. 800) to the Reformation, could be considered a study in Catholic theocracy.

 

[Rhamiel]

here is something to keep in mind
the medieval state had a balance of power

there was a Monarch, various Landed Noblemen, the Church, and various merchant or craft guilds.
all of them jockeying for power
if one got too influential, the others would knock them down.
the rise of the Monarch with Absolute power, came AFTER the Protestant Reformation.
The Protestant Reformation reduced the power of the Church to correct Monarchs.
If a Monarch did not like what the Church had to say, they could just leave, this led to an imbalance in the authority of Monarchies

 

[MikeK]

The history of pre-modern Europe, from the crowning of Charlemagne (c. 800) to the Reformation, could be considered a study in Catholic theocracy.

Indeed.

I wonder how many that advocate for a Catholic Theocracy would have joined the Papal Zouaves and given their lives to resist Italian unification?

 

[ebia]

maybe the comparison to Iran is not the best comparison, we do not need modern Islamic nations to by our standard for a Catholic State Iran is neither Western nor is it Christian,

And in particular Iran is very, very, Persian.