Seperation of Church and State?

[M.2]

"Separation of Church and State"

I have heard this phrase many many times now, but I still do not know what it means exactly. Actually, apart from the Germanic World, I have never heard it anywhere else. But Americans seem to have a particular care for such matters.

- What does separation of church and state mean? What is "church", what is "state"?

-What does Mr.Molyneux mean when he says that it is one of the great achievements of western civilisation?

- When was the idea invented, and what was before the invention?

- Why does the Germanic World, and within that the USA have a special obsession with it?

- Why is separation of church and state better than not being so?

[Donnadogsoth]

I have heard that "separation of church and state" was in part to protect the church from the state and not vice versa, to give the church its freedom from being tied to state control.

[Siegfried von Walheim]

13 minutes ago, Mishi2 said:

"Seperation of Church and State"

I have heard this phrase many many times now, but I still do not know what it means exactly. Actually, apart from the Germanic World, I have never heard it anywhere else. But Americans seem to have a particular care for such matters.

In the case of Germany there was the Thirty Years War waged between the Protestants and Roman Catholics, and when we Americans rebelled against the English (or however you want to phrase it) there was a desire to unhook English Protestantism from the English King, who was the "Pope" of his own Church (and technically still is).

 

 

13 minutes ago, Mishi2 said:

- What does seperation of church and state mean? What is "church", what is "state"?

The Church is a group with texts that wishes to promulgate it and the State is the government. Their separation means, more or less, that governmental policy ought not to be influenced by religious policy, and also religious leaders should not hold legal authority over others. 

For example, a society in which both the church and state are one would be the Holy Roman Empire, and nowadays ISIS. In the H.R.E. the Pope was nominally the supreme autocrat and the Kaiser was his "deputy" or "representative". Priests could (and sometimes would) wield political power for their own ends and priests often had legal authority over others. When the Thirty Years War came to an end Church and State were officially separated, i.e., priests no longer held special legal privileges, special legal powers, and the governments of the H.R.E. no longer (at least on paper) wages war against one another based on religious differences.

In the case of America it is fairly similar as the King of England was (and still is) the "God Head" of English Protestantism and the American founders wanted religion to be secular (i.e. not a political weapon or a guarantee for special legal privileges). 

 

13 minutes ago, Mishi2 said:

-What does Mr.Molyneux mean when he says that it is one of the great achievements of western civilisation?

Although it didn't affect too much immediately, in the long run civil wars waged with the casus beli being based over religious differences dramatically decreased. Politicians couldn't buy pardons from the Church; church leaders could no longer abuse their position to extort money from citizens and be legally protected and aided in doing so, and much much more (that I can't think of and that's probably a good sign of its effectiveness).

 

13 minutes ago, Mishi2 said:

- When was the idea invented, and what was before the invention?

Essentially before it was "invented" (it's exact origins I do not know) the priests would say politician X was blessed by God and therefore people should support him; politician Y is a blasphemer and charlatan who ought to be hanged; and politician Z is a changed man after paying his dues etc. etc.

Also wars over religious differences were far more common.

 

13 minutes ago, Mishi2 said:

- Why does the Germanic World, and within that the USA have a special obsession with it?

Because Germany lost a quarter of its population as a result of the Thirty Years War, and was utterly exhausted with centuries of religious in-fighting and political involvement. America had for most its history a very large German population and most modern Americans today are at least part German. Plus there is the Church of England and the King is the Pope link I mentioned before.

 

 

13 minutes ago, Mishi2 said:

- Why is seperation of church and state better than not being so?

Theoretically if the Church and State were merged then people could be punished arbitrarily based on highly interpretive grounds (X ought to be hanged because he is a sinner; sinning is whatever we consider to be against our interests and therefore has a vague definition; and therefore X falls under our desired interpretation of sinning at the time for us to want X dead) and that could lead to some seriously corrupt law enforcement.

 

 

[M.2]

Ok, I understand the issue of the Americans. But how separate is religion from the government really? I mean... has anyone seen the presidential inauguration speeches, or the way that americans still say their oaths with a hand on the bible? What about the executive order that the president signed allowing tax-exempt churches to politicise?

Did the Thirty years war not end with simply allowing the principalities to choose their own state religions?
Prussia was the first country in the World to take over the traditional duties of the church, like Education, population documentation, healthcare. Is that separation of church and state?
Modern day Germany is the only country in the World to enforce a church tax, meaning they force people to support their state-recognised churches. How is that separation of church and state?

[ofd]

Quote

meaning they force people to support their state-recognised churches. How is that seperation of church and state?

If you are a member of a church, you pay the tax. If you are not, you don't pay the tax. 

[M.2]

2 hours ago, ofd said:

If you are a member of a church, you pay the tax. If you are not, you don't pay the tax. 

I knew that, but thanks for clarifying. Either way, it is still absurd and coercive.

[Siegfried von Walheim]

6 hours ago, Mishi2 said:

Ok, I understand the issue of the Americans. But how seperate is religion from the government really? I mean... has anyone seen the presidential inauguration speeches, or the way that americans still say their oaths with a hand on the bible? What about the executive order that the president signed allowing tax-exempt churches to politicise?

Well, there is a big difference between doing something in the name of God, and using religious buzzwords to stir up the voting or fighting population, it's another when (as I said before) priests have political power and governmental affairs are tied with religious affairs. 

Of course I wouldn't call the tax-exemption and political silencing pf churches to be parts of what is traditionally meant by "Separation of Church and State", but rather state-favoritism/persecution of various churches.

 

 

6 hours ago, Mishi2 said:

Did the Thirty years war not end with simply allowing the principalities to choose their own state religions?

Basically the North was Protestant and the South Roman Catholic. Although many citizens in North Germany were Roman Catholic, and they in particular faced potential persecution as a result. Theoretically the governments would get their noses out of their citizenry's religion but religious conflict on the local level continued for centuries. Even Hitler mentioned how he had a hard time giving speeches when Roman Catholics and Protestants were in the same room because one word about religion and they were likely to start a fight.

 

 

6 hours ago, Mishi2 said:

 

Prussia was the first country in the World to take over the traditional duties of the church, like Education, population documentation, healthcare. Is that seperation of church and state?
Modern day Germany is the only country in the World to enforce a church tax, meaning they force people to support their state-recognised churches. How is that seperation of church and state?

Governments assuming the responsibilities of the priesthood has nothing to do with the separation of church and state but rather the displacement of the church's role as chief indoctrinator/healer in order to get the populace more attached and dependent on their governments (which must be paid off) compared to the voluntarily supported churches.