Which form of government is the best?
#41
(09-08-2013, 10:27 AM)PeterII Wrote:
(09-08-2013, 09:38 AM)devoutchristian Wrote:
(09-08-2013, 05:06 AM)PeterII Wrote:
devoutchristian Wrote:If a private court tried to seize my money in a judgment, I would use lethal force in self defense, which is why the court system must be public.

Nothing prevents you from doing that against a public court.  Crazy is as crazy does. 

The difference is that a private court has no authority to seize money, and as such any money it tried to seize would amount to theft.

Anybody has authority from God to seize back that which you stole to give it to the rightful owner.  It's natural law. 

The logical outcome of that statement is complete anarchy.

If I have the right to commit violence against my neighbor to recover what in my judgement he unjustly acquired either from me or a third party, then this makes the judgement individual, not social.

Thus, it makes every man his own judge of his own cause. If I feel I have been unjustly treated then I can strike back in revenge.

Somehow that does not seem to be what Our Lord recommended ("Render to Caesar ...") or what he did by example.
Reply
#42
(09-08-2013, 01:25 PM)dark lancer Wrote: In a democratic republic, social values can and are changed at the whims of the voters.  This is why America allows abortion and there's so much support for same-sex "marriage."

In a free country where social values are guaranteed to be unchangeable, this wouldn't happen.

It was a democratic republic long before abortion and same-sex marriage became acceptable.  It happened because the hearts of Americans have changed.  I don't think a country can really be free if social values are locked in stone.  At any rate, if abortion and same-sex marriage were social values that were guaranteed unchangeable, then there would be no hope to change back.  Only a democratic republic prevents a permanent totalitarianism.
Reply
#43
(09-07-2013, 11:00 PM)PeterII Wrote: The qualities the State possesses are arbitrary and unnecessary.  Defence, law enforcement, and courts are things that can be privatized, and often were throughout history. The most dangerous enemy in fact is the State itself, since it uses organized violence against innocent people to achieve its ends.

Actually we have a very clear view from Leo XIII among others as to why the State exists and what qualities it has.

Quote:Leo XIII, Immortale Dei, 3-4 (emphasis mine):

3. It is not difficult to determine what would be the form and character of the State were it governed according to the principles of Christian philosophy. Man's natural instinct moves him to live in civil society, for he cannot, if dwelling apart, provide himself with the necessary requirements of life, nor procure the means of developing his mental and moral faculties. Hence, it is divinely ordained that he should lead his life-be it family, or civil-with his fellow men, amongst whom alone his several wants can be adequately supplied. But, as no society can hold together unless some one be over all, directing all to strive earnestly for the common good, every body politic must have a ruling authority, and this authority, no less than society itself, has its source in nature, and has, consequently, God for its Author. Hence, it follows that all public power must proceed from God. For God alone is the true and supreme Lord of the world. Everything, without exception, must be subject to Him, and must serve him, so that whosoever holds the right to govern holds it from one sole and single source, namely, God, the sovereign Ruler of all. "There is no power but from God."

4. The right to rule is not necessarily, however, bound up with any special mode of government. It may take this or that form, provided only that it be of a nature of the government, rulers must ever bear in mind that God is the paramount ruler of the world, and must set Him before themselves as their exemplar and law in the administration of the State. For, in things visible God has fashioned secondary causes, in which His divine action can in some wise be discerned, leading up to the end to which the course of the world is ever tending. In like manner, in civil society, God has always willed that there should be a ruling authority, and that they who are invested with it should reflect the divine power and providence in some measure over the human race.

Thus, the State is of divine institution because man's nature requires it. He is unable to adequately provide for himself without society, and society demands some ruler or government (i.e. the State).

Further, the Church prefers no particular form of government, except that it work for the true good of society, which is to provide the material supports to help people best get to heaven.

And from Paragraph 6:

Quote:For one and all are we destined by our birth and adoption to enjoy, when this frail and fleeting life is ended, a supreme and final good in heaven, and to the attainment of this every endeavour should be directed. Since, then, upon this depends the full and perfect happiness of mankind, the securing of this end should be of all imaginable interests the most urgent. Hence, civil society, established for the common welfare, should not only safeguard the well-being of the community, but have also at heart the interests of its individual members, in such mode as not in any way to hinder, but in every manner to render as easy as may be, the possession of that highest and unchangeable good for which all should seek. Wherefore, for this purpose, care must especially be taken to preserve unharmed and unimpeded the religion whereof the practice is the link connecting man with God.

From Paragraph 18:

Quote:18. In political affairs, and all matters civil, the laws aim at securing the common good, and are not framed according to the delusive caprices and opinions of the mass of the people, but by truth and by justice; the ruling powers are invested with a sacredness more than human, and are withheld from deviating from the path of duty, and from overstepping the bounds of rightful authority; and the obedience is not the servitude of man to man, but submission to the will of God, exercising His sovereignty through the medium of men. Now, this being recognized as undeniable, it is felt that the high office of rulers should be held in respect; that public authority should be constantly and faithfully obeyed; that no act of sedition should be committed; and that the civic order of the commonwealth should be maintained as sacred.

The authority of the ruler or ruling power in the State itself comes from God Himself. Thus, when this power is exercised within its proper bounds and no sin is commanded, it is God's Will expressed through human means. To refuse obedience in such a case would be a rejection of God's Will and therefore sinful.

From Paragraph 36:

Quote:36. This, then, is the teaching of the Catholic Church concerning the constitution and government of the State. By the words and decrees just cited, if judged dispassionately, no one of the several forms of government is in itself condemned, inasmuch as none of them contains anything contrary to Catholic doctrine, and all of them are capable, if wisely and justly managed, to insure the welfare of the State. Neither is it blameworthy in itself, in any manner, for the people to have a share greater or less, in the government: for at certain times, and under certain laws, such participation may not only be of benefit to the citizens, but may even be of obligation.

A further proof that the Catholic Church has no preferred form of government for the State.

In Paragraphs 23-35 the Pope discusses the Liberal errors as regards government. While he condemns the secularization of the States and the "sovereignty of the people" he does not reject the principles he has laid out in the first few paragraphs about the Christian concept of the State, and so even if in practice the states reject the Christian concept of government, it does not mean that Catholics can reject the Christian concept of what the State should be, and by nature is. It does mean that we do have not only the right but obligation to oppose the government when it works for ends incompatible with it's proper nature.

(09-07-2013, 11:00 PM)PeterII Wrote: For example, what possible reason would there be for a Bavarian Catholic farmer minding his business to go kill a French Catholic farmer minding his business?  None whatsoever. They could become great friends and benefit from trade. Yet the State through its magical authority has managed to pit them against each other in several wars. 

I have no idea what you are trying to get at here.

Are you trying to suggest that because the French and German powers abused their authority that the Christian concept of the State (which obviously by abuse they did not follow) is incorrect?

Because France and Germany didn't get along the Church is in error?
Reply
#44
The best societies all have a hierarchy of sorts with each person in a position of leadership possessing full authority within a limited sphere.  No bureaucrats, no committees, no figureheads and no bodies of useless, elected officials without real power.

In other words, a government needs to respect subsidiarity and each official must stay within his own bounds.  Anyone that holds an office of authority must actually possess the authority and not just the appearance of it.  No official should ever hide behind committees or figureheads but must take full responsibility for everything that happens in their allotted realm of rule.

Our US president and Congress apparently fail in every aspect.  Not only do they ceaselessly interfere in the private affairs of citizens (must buy our health insurance, must attend our schools, etc.) but every one of them also refuses to accept any responsibility for any of the problems that happen in their terms.


Take a look at any successful societal institution whether it be a family a business or a school and you will find they have something in common.  They all have authority figures that possess a firm hand who also make no attempt to hide from the public eye whenever things go wrong.  A ruler that hides behind a committee is inevitably a tyrant.
Reply
#45
MagisterMusicae Wrote:The logical outcome of that statement is complete anarchy.

If I have the right to commit violence against my neighbor to recover what in my judgement he unjustly acquired either from me or a third party, then this makes the judgement individual, not social.

Thus, it makes every man his own judge of his own cause. If I feel I have been unjustly treated then I can strike back in revenge.

Somehow that does not seem to be what Our Lord recommended ("Render to Caesar ...") or what he did by example.

That's the same as saying an individual does not have the right to defend himself if being mugged, since only State "authorities" can truly judge the situation. 

"Render to Caeser..." is a very abused passage.  Caeser has a right to his private property, but not someone else's.
Reply
#46
(09-08-2013, 09:33 PM)PeterII Wrote:
MagisterMusicae Wrote:The logical outcome of that statement is complete anarchy.

If I have the right to commit violence against my neighbor to recover what in my judgement he unjustly acquired either from me or a third party, then this makes the judgement individual, not social.

Thus, it makes every man his own judge of his own cause. If I feel I have been unjustly treated then I can strike back in revenge.

Somehow that does not seem to be what Our Lord recommended ("Render to Caesar ...") or what he did by example.

That's the same as saying an individual does not have the right to defend himself if being mugged, since only State "authorities" can truly judge the situation. 

"Render to Caeser..." is a very abused passage.  Caeser has a right to his private property, but not someone else's.

Please quit prosltyzing liberalism.
Reply
#47
MagisterMusicae Wrote:Thus, the State is of divine institution because man's nature requires it. He is unable to adequately provide for himself without society, and society demands some ruler or government (i.e. the State).

Further, the Church prefers no particular form of government, except that it work for the true good of society, which is to provide the material supports to help people best get to heaven.

But the Church at the same time preaches subsidiarity, so true authority can only be claimed when found in its most effectively decentralized form.  Since everything can be effectively privatized, there is no need for a government body above the family level.  Anything larger should only be voluntarily agreed too, never coerced.

Wars between France and Germany happened because of centralized authority. 
Reply
#48
(09-08-2013, 10:25 PM)PeterII Wrote:
MagisterMusicae Wrote:Thus, the State is of divine institution because man's nature requires it. He is unable to adequately provide for himself without society, and society demands some ruler or government (i.e. the State).

Further, the Church prefers no particular form of government, except that it work for the true good of society, which is to provide the material supports to help people best get to heaven.

But the Church at the same time preaches subsidiarity, so true authority can only be claimed when found in its most effectively decentralized form.  Since everything can be effectively privatized, there is no need for a government body above the family level.  Anything larger should only be voluntarily agreed too, never coerced.

Wars between France and Germany happened because of centralized authority. 

You can continue with your pipe dream that everything in the world can be privatized, but the rest of us will stick to sane Catholic social teaching.
Reply
#49
(09-08-2013, 02:19 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(09-08-2013, 01:25 PM)dark lancer Wrote: In a democratic republic, social values can and are changed at the whims of the voters.  This is why America allows abortion and there's so much support for same-sex "marriage."

In a free country where social values are guaranteed to be unchangeable, this wouldn't happen.

It was a democratic republic long before abortion and same-sex marriage became acceptable.  It happened because the hearts of Americans have changed.  I don't think a country can really be free if social values are locked in stone.  At any rate, if abortion and same-sex marriage were social values that were guaranteed unchangeable, then there would be no hope to change back.  Only a democratic republic prevents a permanent totalitarianism.

Abortion and same-sex "marriage" were not sudden shifts in American society.  The conditions for their acceptance gradually developed from earlier shifts in society, such as women's suffrage, liquor prohibition, and feminism.  The same goes for the shift of America from a Christian to a secular nation.
Reply
#50
(09-08-2013, 10:55 PM)devoutchristian Wrote:
(09-08-2013, 10:25 PM)PeterII Wrote:
MagisterMusicae Wrote:Thus, the State is of divine institution because man's nature requires it. He is unable to adequately provide for himself without society, and society demands some ruler or government (i.e. the State).

Further, the Church prefers no particular form of government, except that it work for the true good of society, which is to provide the material supports to help people best get to heaven.

But the Church at the same time preaches subsidiarity, so true authority can only be claimed when found in its most effectively decentralized form.  Since everything can be effectively privatized, there is no need for a government body above the family level.  Anything larger should only be voluntarily agreed too, never coerced.

Wars between France and Germany happened because of centralized authority. 

You can continue with your pipe dream that everything in the world can be privatized, but the rest of us will stick to sane Catholic social teaching.

Please stop being a Socialist troll and calling it Catholicism. 
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)