The Separation between Church & State.

[polly.the.cat]

It has longed been a question that has matched the history of time, “The question of the Separation between Church & State”.  Should there be a clear separation between them both?

The answer is not in the question, nor is it as simple as a yes, or a no.

The two, Church & State, have been at War with each other since the times of the BC. Period.  Kingdoms were created by the Churches, others were toppled by the States.

Some, though, lived in harmony through the years. Wherever Church prevailed, the State was there also, why, because the state received their Taxes from the people.

A Tax Collector for the Roman Empire came to Jesus, a Jewish scholar, and asked him, “Is it Lawful to collect the Taxes for the Roman Empire ?” (Occupying the Land).

Jesus said to him, Show me a Tax Coin, (money coin), And Jesus said to them, “Whose likeness and inscription is this?” They said, “Caesar's.” Then he said to them, “Therefore render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.”  Matt.22:21-22

The first sign of answering this conundrum, As people under a Government, we are to pay our Taxes due, to whoever is in authority or rule over us.

Another asked, “Should we obey Caesar ?” ( The King at the time in question)  AD.

"Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God.” Rom.13:1

This passage makes it very clear that we are to obey the government God places over all of us. God created government to establish order, punish evil, and promote justice (Genesis 9:6; 1 Corinthians 14:33; Romans 12:8). We are to obey the government in everything—paying taxes, obeying rules and laws, and showing respect. If we do not, we are ultimately showing disrespect towards God, for He is the One who placed that government over us. When the apostle Paul wrote to the Romans, he was under the government of Rome during the reign of Nero, the most evil of all the Roman emperors. Though Paul still recognized the Roman government’s rule over him.

Rom 13:1-7

The State has therefore happily worked in with the Church to reap in the chest boxes of Taxes due from its inhabitants, or subjects.

We as Citizens of the Commonwealth of Australia have the ability and privilege to be able to Vote at our Local, State, and Federal Level at Election time. We then happily or not, accept whichever Political Party are Elected into Power in this Country.

We are to obey all the Laws of this Land, Civil, Legal, Marriage/Family Court, etc, our Rates, Taxes, Driving a Vehicle, etc. These we are subject to obey.

Whilst there has been a very old “English” UNDERSTANDING, from the time of even before King John 1, that Sanctuary could be “GIVEN” to those of the population who were homeless, were in terror of loosing their very life, or were in an area of conflict, that “protection” by the Church was only for a period of 40 Days. At the end of that time, said person, or peoples would have to leave the Sanctuary of the Church, or turn themselves into the Lawful authorities of the Day.

Are the “Churches of Today”, above the Law, No they are Not, as they themselves are Subject to the Laws and Rules of all Citizens, plus they are Subject to an even Higher Authority, their Father in Heaven, ….who also commands them to live at Peace with all.

To Separate Church from State, would have to be a very well thought out and very BRAVE Governing Elected Parliament, to achieve this, for as l have tried to show here, in most cases the State Support the Church, and the Church Supports the State.

Thank you for reading this, l hope that this has been useful to you.

[tasfleur]

     *Polly The Cat*

[johcaschro · Accepted solution]

The question of separation of church and state has a very long history .

The question for rulers, monarchs, autocrats, governments of any sort is "to whom do the people owe their primary allegiance; to their god (church) or to their State (country, nation, city-state, whatever)?"

There's a question of loyalty here. Without the support and the loyalty of the people, a government cannot govern effectively.

So what happens when clerics powerful in the Church recognise that their Church commands a large body of the population who give their allegiance to their God over and above their allegiance to their State?

What happens when church leaders actually teach and promote this idea?

The clerics, church high officials, priests, imams, whatever, find themselves in a position to influence government policy, commanding as they do a strong and powerful support group amongst the general populace.

Certain conditons must be met however; it's no good if there exists numerous religions all having a relatively small number of followers, because there's little political power to be gleaned from them.

Where there is a very prominent and powerful religious establishment which commands the adherence of a very large number of the people, then there exists political power in abundance for the church leaders.

What happens when one single religion is so predominant that it has almost a monopoly of political influence?

One thing it does is to put pressure on govts to ensure that legislation favourable to its establishment is enacted.

In the UK the monarch is also the head of the church (the Anglican church, anyway) and this could be an attempt to resolve the conflict except that it's only really a ceremonial role.

In some other countries there exists such a close relationship between church (the predominant religious establishment) and the State, that indeed civil law is subordinate to religious law and in a few cases, civil law fades away into powerless obscurity, such is the dominance of the "church" and those clerics who have obtained high office in it.

In some countries, the "church" has even made it illegal to decide to change one's mind and choose to follow a different religion.

In some countries the penalty is death for a breach of this law.

In that situation, a state of totalitarianism exists. The Law is the religious law and deviance is forbidden on pain of severe penalty.

I'm of the view that there should be a total separation of church and state powers and influence, but the realty remains that an institution which commands the respect and the loyalty of a significant portion of the community just cannot be denied some political influence.

I think that just how the leaders of the "church" choose to use this influence can be very instructive as to what they really hold as being valuable.

[polly.the.cat]

You have stated the nuts and bolts of the case, far better than l could in my ability to answer the question. Thank you, for your valued input.