Here in Denmark, the church and state is together , it means that we pay church tax.

But this also means that the church adapts to the state and its worldly values.

Martin Luther King said that: The church should not be the governments megaphone but its conscience.

Do the Worldly  maner also sneak slowly in your churches  ?

Views: 212

Replies to This Discussion

The answer to your question is Yes, but that's the answer semper et ubique. When the Church ran Europe, it had its worldly aspects. Where there is a high wall of separation, as in the US, the Church has its worldly aspects. Where the State has some control over the Church, the Church has its worldly aspects. Even when the government is hostile to the Church, the Church had its worldly aspects.

 

The legislature should establish true religion.

The legislature should establish true religion.

 

Is this what you really mean?  Can you explain further? 

Good one Rebekah. You managed to get Liam and I to get together, hold hands, sing Kumbaya and agree with each other.

 

What do you mean by "legislature should establish true religion"?

Aye.  Rebekah, what do you mean by "legislature should establish true religion"?

 

:)

Anglicans (like me) pray for our legislatures. We pray

MOST gracious God, we humbly beseech thee, as for the people of these United States in general, so especially for their Senate and Representatives in Congress assembled; that thou wouldest be pleased to direct and prosper all their consultations, to the advancement of thy glory, the good of thy Church, the safety, honour, and welfare of thy people; that all things may be so ordered and settled by their endeavours, upon the best and surest foundations, that peace and happiness, truth and justice, religion and piety, may be establish among us for all generations. These and all other necessaries, for them, for us, and thy whole Church, we humbly beg in the Name and mediation of Jesus Christ, our most blessed Lord and Saviour. Amen.

Or some variation. That's American, but the Prayer for Parliament in the Empire is almost exactly the same.

It gave me serious pause when I first read it in law school, 'cause, you know, the Constitution I was about to promise to "support" says "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion." I decided that whatever the Prayer Book means, it can't be contrary to the Constitution, 'cause some of the same people wrote them.

So, what does it mean? I take it to mean that the legislature should make laws that create an environment that fosters religion and piety. Our Founders believed that was best done without our federal legislature directly legislating about religion. I don't know if I agree with the Founders about the means (though if the US is to change its policy, it needs to amend the Constitution; I stick to my oath; and notably the Founders generally supported the Danish arrangement at the state level), but I agree with my Church.

 

I take your statement above "Legislature should establish true religion" - to mean either that legislature should define what a true religion is, legally. Or pick one to officially endorse as correct for its citizens. Neither of which really is in the spirit of the constitution (and the one gets into seriously sketchy philosophical waters).

If you really just mean that legislature should create an environment that allows for true religion ("create an environment that fosters religion and piety") - then I think you should rephrase. If you don't agree with the means currently employed (no direct legislating about religion) - then what do you think would be a reasonable improvement (with the understanding that it would require changing the constitution - e.g. How would you change it?).

Well, as I said, all I meant by the original line was the quoted text. I have more knowledge of the context, but it's just sixteenth century English. There's no magic code for interpreting it. Why don't you take a stab? What does it mean that "all things may be so ordered and settled by their endeavours, upon the best and surest foundations, that peace and happiness, truth and justice, religion and piety, may be establish among us for all generations"?

 

I don't know if I agree with the present means. I therefore don't know if I disagree with them. Your questions beg questions I'm not prepared to answer.

I take from that - that God would do the establishing. Or at least that the establishing would be the result of his imposed will - the legislature having been divinely guided to allow a foundation for religion(s) to flourish.

I don't think this equates to "Legislature should establish true religion."

I suggest phrasing it as: "Legislature should set the foundations, that allow for religion and piety (and truth, justice, happiness, peace, etc.) to be established." But still keeps them removed from doing any of the establishment of religion in any direct sense.

That is a fair interpretation.

 

My problem is that "establish" and "foundations" are words closely affiliated in meaning. I think that the prayer asks God that the endeavours of Congress would establish foundations of...Those good things describe the foundations Congress' endeavours are to establish.

 

We're probably both right. Liturgical texts are meant to have built-in ambiguity. The only reason I like mine better than yours is because it ruffles more feathers and I've been hanging with papist monarchists/theocrats too long.

Yes the world has also managed to  slip into the values of the church in a fair amount of the American churches too.  For us it is mainly in the form of the blasted "prosperity Gospel" which is a mix of the consumerism of the American Dream and the Gospel.  Somewhat of a God wants you rich, happy and healthy and if you are not something is wrong with you spiritually.  As long as Christians have a lot of growing to do I think there will always remain some aspect of worldliness within the church regardless of how much of it as we can see as it as the closer we grow to God the more we can see around us and within us that is not of God.  I'm not saying that we should blindly accept it just that we all need to realize that true spiritual growth takes time, although unlike physical growth spiritual growth is not automatic as we have to want it and be willing to work with God in order to grow in Christ. 
+1
Government and church together corrupts both.  This is not separation as is commonly expressed, meaning government restricting religion; that's not separation, but involvement.  Government should be religion-neutral, so we can be free, and church should have no authority but moral authority, so we can avoid corruption.

RSS

Latest Activity

Jack Bauer replied to Regular Joe's discussion THE WORLD'S MANLIEST TEA
"The European thing was a joke.  I don't drink hot tea because I'm from the South ... where its often hot, and we know that tea is properly consumed over ice.   I meant how does it taste iced?  Is it meant as a hot…"
4 minutes ago
Regular Joe replied to Regular Joe's discussion THE WORLD'S MANLIEST TEA
"European? I'm pretty sure there are literally millions more non-Euros drinking tea than Euros but whatever. ;)  I got it at a sushi place in my building but I suspect that anywhere that has a decent selection of tea will have…"
8 minutes ago
Daniel Offenbacher added a discussion to the group Addicted to pomade
Thumbnail

Best water based pomade for under $8?

I use Murray's, but it hasn't been holding well or giving me much height lately, due to the humidity. I live in Maryland and it is very humid, all year round. It doesn't work well because of that. I love Murray's because it lasts a while and it works well with my wallet. I have a minimum wage job that makes it hard for me to buy expensive products. So, what is the best water based pomade for under $8? I'm looking for one with high hold and low to medium shine.See More
9 minutes ago
Lucius Artorius Castus replied to David Johns's discussion Teen boys today
"But it would still be pointless, no?"
12 minutes ago
Jack Bauer replied to Regular Joe's discussion THE WORLD'S MANLIEST TEA
"Where do you get it?  And, how is it iced?  I don't drink hot tea.  Too European.JB"
12 minutes ago
Daniel Offenbacher joined Maximilian Hermann Reese's group
Thumbnail

Addicted to pomade

A group dealing with hair-pomade. Whether you've got a pomp, waves, or  a classic barbershop-style; You love pomade?- You're welcome.Come and join the discussion on pomade and all things related to pomade! See More
15 minutes ago
Daniel Offenbacher replied to Rob --'s discussion 22 year old wanting a style change?
"I can only answer for hairstyle. Go with an undercut (shaved on the sides and back, long on the top) and part it to the side with some product. I just got one myself and I love it. It's easy to manage and it looks good for all occasions. You…"
17 minutes ago
Regular Joe posted a discussion

THE WORLD'S MANLIEST TEA

I have tasted the world's manliest tea!It tastes like camp fire and leather! It's like the scotch of teas! Gents, meet lapsang souchong! Fun facts:It was invented by soldiersThe leaves are smoke-dried over pine wood fireTea dealers describe it as tasting like cigars and single malt whiskyWinston Churchill was a lapsang souchong drinkerMy wood-chopping abilities have increased by 267% after drinking this tea(4/5 of those statements are actually true.)So if you ever want to have scotch-like…See More
17 minutes ago

© 2014   Created by Brett McKay.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service