Theocratic states needed to bring morals back to Europe

[Crvena zvezda]

As all mamembers of this forum can see all of Europe is experience moral collapse and is becoming a land of degenerates, liberals and immigrants. To prevent the destruction of Europe we need theocratic revolutions in Europe.

[Erasmus]

Originally Posted by Crvena zvezda

As all mamembers of this forum can see all of Europe is experience moral collapse and is becoming a land of degenerates, liberals and immigrants. To prevent the destruction of Europe we need theocratic revolutions in Europe.

Agreed. The best kings of Spain were theocratic monarchs indeed. Rep for you, friend


CHARLES V, Holy Roman Emperor


PHILIP II OF SPAIN

BTW, welcome on board!

[Crvena zvezda]

Erasmus. Same goes for Serbia and for Montenegro. Montenegro used to be under a situation where there would be a civil administrator and a vladika (a religous administrator). Eventually the civil administrator was abolished and until the later stages of the 19th century Montenegro was ruled by Vladikas. Vladika Njegos (Petar II Petrović-Njegoš) is both the greatest Serbian and Montenegrin ruler of all time. Although the only problem for Europe if theocracies were to occur would be potential conflicts between the Orthodox, Catholics and Protestants who would likely fight between each other instead of putting differences aside to prevent the Muslim takeover of Europe.

[Susi]

But I don't want to be executed. ._.

[Crvena zvezda]

Originally Posted by Susi

But I don't want to be executed. ._.

Europe is mainly Christian. And Christianity unlike Islam does not call for executions of people. Second, it's rather obvious that a christian theocracy would look different from those of the muslim world since the bible unlike the barbaric qu'ran does not specify how the state should be run.

[Marcus Marulus]

Theocracy? It depends what is meant by this term. If you mean a country run by Christain principles, then I say wholeheartedly - yes!

But theocracy as a form of government in which priests would rule? No, thanks. It would be more akin to the Iranian mullahocracy than to Christian form of government. And it would be contrary even to the teachings of the Chrurch (I mean, all teaching of the Church, the traditional teaching included, not just the post-Second Vatican Council additions).

Originally Posted by Susi

But I don't want to be executed. ._.

There is no danger from that. Christians and pagans used to co-exist in Europe for much time.

It is true although that Charles the Great ordered massacre of some pagan Saxons (in today's Netherlands) and the forcible conversion of the rest, but that was rather exception than rule.

[svin]

We just need normal people in government. There is serious lack of them right now. And I don't much care if they are Christians or atheists.

[Theobald]

Originally Posted by prometheus

Theocracy? It depends what is meant by this term. If you mean a country run by Christain principles, then I say wholeheartedly - yes!

But theocracy as a form of government in which priests would rule? No, thanks. It would be more akin to the Iranian mullahocracy than to Christian form of government. And it would be contrary even to the teachings of the Chrurch (I mean, all teaching of the Church, the traditional teaching included, not just the post-Second Vatican Council additions).

I mostly agree, though these "Christian principles" should be Charles Martel's, Charlemagne's, Reconquista's principles (i.e. the European version of Christianity) and not the real teachings of Jesus ("If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also").

[Marcus Marulus]

Originally Posted by Theobald

I mostly agree, though these "Christian principles" should be Charles Martel's, Charlemagne's, Reconquista's principles (i.e. the European version of Christianity) and not the real teachings of Jesus ("If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also").

This Jesus' principle was not meant to promote cowardice.

For example, you don't have necessarily to hate your enemy if you want to combate him efficiently. Maybe a struggle without hatred can be even more efficient, because hatred is violent passion and such strong emotions may even make you more vulnerable.