When Was The Theocratic State at its height and When Did It End?

Windowshopper

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 14, 2011
Messages
8,704
The Queen is also the the Monarch of Canada, Australia and New Zealand, as well other countries. Are they theocracies?
No, they don't have state churches. Even so I think there is a distinction between a state church and theocracy. In someways it's the opposite, the state controlled the churches rather than vice versa.
 


GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,741
Is she the head of both an established church and the state in those countries? If so, yes they are.
Away with you. The Uk is most definitely not a theocracy.

In England ever since Henry VIII appointed himself Head of the Church of England the aim has been to keep the Church firmly under the control of the Crown, Parliament and politicians
 

Franzoni

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2010
Messages
16,327
Away with you. The Uk is most definitely not a theocracy.

In England ever since Henry VIII appointed himself Head of the Church of England the aim has been to keep the Church firmly under the control of the Crown, Parliament and politicians

Henry II twigged it years before when he put Becket in as Archbishop....:)..except Becket wouldn't play ball....
 

Strawberry

Moderator
Joined
Jul 13, 2014
Messages
18,357
Away with you. The Uk is most definitely not a theocracy.

In England ever since Henry VIII appointed himself Head of the Church of England the aim has been to keep the Church firmly under the control of the Crown, Parliament and politicians
That doesn't make it not a theocracy as Sir Thomas More would no doubt agree. In this day and age the UK is only a theocracy on paper, largely because the crown has been stripped of most of its power.

Ireland, by contrast, has never been a theocracy on paper but has at times operated as if it were a theocracy because in a democracy with 90% + of the population belonging to one religion, politicians will be very beholden to the wishes of the dominant religion's clergy.
 

Cruimh

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2010
Messages
83,450
If by Theocratic State you mean the servile attitude of the offices of the State to the wishes of the Church then the beginning of the end was 1960

The Intoxicating Liquor Bill 1959 which became the 1960 Act, in response to the 1957 Intoxicating Liquor Commission report - for the first time Invocation of canon law no longer ended discussion in Dáil. Lemass countered it. Gradualist approach followed reclaiming control from Church and opening hours were changed.

See John Charles McQuaid Ruler of Catholic Ireland, John Cooney, p 334 on
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,741
Henry II twigged it years before when he put Becket in as Archbishop....:)..except Becket wouldn't play ball....
Only England has an established Church, and it is totally meaningless.

The Supreme Court ruled in 2011 that the UK is a secular state and that its law is based on universal human rights, whatever the f*cuk they are, but in any case the country never was a theocracy or remotely like one. Even Cromwell established a Republic which did not owe its legitimacy to a theological underpinning.
 

Franzoni

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2010
Messages
16,327
One thing we can look back with some pride is we banned corporal punishment in schools much earlier than the Brits....

The Tories only lost the vote 231-230 because some of the MP's claim they were held up in traffic because of a royal wedding and Thatcher herself couldn't vote as she was having dinner with Nancy Reagan...
 

Lumpy Talbot

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
34,522
Twitter
No
Hmm... probably the height of the theocratic state in Ireland for me was when a serving Taoiseach declared himself 'catholic before Irish' which to me was a statement which should have seen him sacked if not charged with being a self-declared traitor.

As for the low point I doubt that has yet to be reached but it is approaching.
 

Barroso

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2011
Messages
6,035
I was speaking the other day to a Loughrea Native approaching the 60 mark and he said by the 1960s it was well on the way! But I certainly recall it being well and truly alive in the West of Ireland as a teenager -

Women treated like shyte.
Children battered around classrooms.
Gay people having a frothing at the mouth hatred directed towards them.
Rednecks subjected people including children to criminal level psychosexual abuse in confession boxes!
Those insane referendums.
Contraception only fully legalised in 1985 in reality.
The women having the Magdellan Concentration camps
at the backs of their genetic memories, even if it was not a practical reality - in fairness a Jewish Person living in Israel would have had more of a right to use the shoah as an excuse to control their lives than them!

I think oddly enough, The 8th amendment was the start of the end of it, because it forced a positive change in attitudes towards single women who had children in general!
Also I have only ever heard 2 people use the term 'illegitimate child', both sociopaths, one who is laughably at the level where he is an extreme fúcktard who thinks. he's an alpha male!

Mind you, the recent insane clause 4 of Fitzie's Sexual Offences Bill might indicate that they haven't gone away, you know!:mad:

Another superb thread closely related to this -

http://www.politics.ie/forum/cultur...ed-our-more-relaxed-attitude-towards-sex.html

I would say it was at its height at the foundation of The Taig Republic, with The Blueshirts getting Church support during the civil war, then 1932 and then Dev's Handiwork in the constitution!
It was certainly still strong with Jockey Boys, Casey and Cleary welcoming Pope JP2 and Marchinkus over in 1979!

So when was it at its zenith and when did it fall?
A lot of what you've written (in bold) was common to other countries in W. Europe N. America, Oz and NZ.

I'd say the 1950s were the high point, but the conditions for its demise had already been well-sown.
The fall-off in religious vocations began probably in the 50s, with greater opportunities for employment in the 60s they dropped like a stone.

But again, all of this was common to other countries in our socio-political environment. Very little of it was specifically Irish.

Where we go wrong is that we tend to compare Ireland to the major cities such as NY, London, Paris, forgetting that they were out of sync with their own hinterlands to a great extent; and also forgetting that the same struggles were going on in those countries too.

The main difference is in introducing legal changes - in many ways we have been not a few years behind other countries, but at least two to three decades behind them, and they tend to happen long after society as a whole has moved on.
 

Cruimh

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2010
Messages
83,450
That doesn't make it not a theocracy as Sir Thomas More would no doubt agree. In this day and age the UK is only a theocracy on paper, largely because the crown has been stripped of most of its power.

Ireland, by contrast, has never been a theocracy on paper but has at times operated as if it were a theocracy because in a democracy with 90% + of the population belonging to one religion, politicians will be very beholden to the wishes of the dominant religion's clergy.
Politicians like de Valera openly acknowledged that he put his religion ahead of his civic responsibilities - while carefully maneuvering to keep as much control as he could.

At this Ard Fheis the party revealed antipathy, even hostility, towards Ulster: de Valera might see himself as the realist attempting to educate an ill-informed party on the complexities of the Ulster question but his own Ulster policy was seen by the unionists as naïve, hostile, and,above all, irrelevant. Nor would they have been impressed by his repetition at one controversial point in the proceedings that his fundamental touchstone remained what it had been in 1917: ‘I declared that, if all came to all, I was a Catholic first [applause].’87

87 Irish Press,29 Oct. 1931.​


Page 107, De Valera and the Ulster Question 1917-1973, John Bowman​
 

Spirit Of Newgrange

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 4, 2010
Messages
4,602
Catholic Spain under Franco was a Theocracy - and ironically a republic.

The Saudi Arabia of Christianity.

try a visit to 1960's Madrid and look for abortion, divorce, porn, freedom of speech, contraception etc. They even dictated what names you gave to your kids based on a 365 'Saints day' rule.
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,741
That doesn't make it not a theocracy as Sir Thomas More would no doubt agree. In this day and age the UK is only a theocracy on paper, largely because the crown has been stripped of most of its power.

Ireland, by contrast, has never been a theocracy on paper but has at times operated as if it were a theocracy because in a democracy with 90% + of the population belonging to one religion, politicians will be very beholden to the wishes of the dominant religion's clergy.
No. A state religion is as far from a theocracy as you can get. Rather than the religion controlling government, government controls religion. At least nominally. Needless to say, the monarch’s control over Anglicanism is as theoretical as her control over civil government. Which has been the case for 300 years.

There are loads of reasons to criticise the UK but they really never ever bought into religion or one supreme religion. Anglicanism itself was an historic compromise between Catholicism and Lutheranism.
 

Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
59,709
Catholic Spain under Franco was a Theocracy - and ironically a republic.

The Saudi Arabia of Christianity.

try a visit to 1960's Madrid and look for abortion, divorce, porn, freedom of speech, contraception etc. They even dictated what names you gave to your kids based on a 365 'Saints day' rule.
Franco's Spain was officially called "Kingdom of Spain". Franco presented himself as the Regent. His title was "Caudillo". Franco was always a monarchist but the question was who would be king. Juan Carlos's father would have been king ordinarily but he was a liberal and had a blazing row with Franco in which the latter said he had more right to rule Spain than him.
 

Fritzbox

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2012
Messages
2,593
No. A state religion is as far from a theocracy as you can get. Rather than the religion controlling government, government controls religion. At least nominally. Needless to say, the monarch’s control over Anglicanism is as theoretical as her control over civil government. Which was has been the case for 300 years.

There are loads of reasons to criticise the UK but they really never ever bought into religion or one supreme religion. Anglicanism itself was an historic compromise between Catholicism and Lutheranism.
Britain seemed like a theocratic, religion obsessed place enough if you were living in Ireland in the 16th, 17th, 18th and 19th centuries.
 

Franzoni

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2010
Messages
16,327
Only England has an established Church, and it is totally meaningless.

The Supreme Court ruled in 2011 that the UK is a secular state and that its law is based on universal human rights, whatever the f*cuk they are, but in any case the country never was a theocracy or remotely like one. Even Cromwell established a Republic which did not owe its legitimacy to a theological underpinning.
Wasn't much of a Republic it only lasted eleven years.....:)

And Cromwell had the Army and wasn't afraid to use it when it suited him on any dissenters..if he had one theological underpinning it was to keep them well fed and well paid...
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,741
Britain seemed theocratic religion obsessed place enough if you were living in Ireland in the 16th, 17th, 18th and 19th centuries.
You were living then? Which laws were passed because the Bishops introduced them?

Can you really be so stupid as to think the British cared that the Irish were Catholic and not that they were rebels? After all they were perfectly OK with the Church of Scotland.....
 

Fritzbox

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2012
Messages
2,593
You were living then? Which laws were passed because the Bishops introduced them?

Can you really be so stupid as to think the British cared that the Irish were Catholic and not that they were rebels? After all they were perfectly OK with the Church of Scotland.....

Yes, they did care about Irish Catholicism, clown.
 

Fritzbox

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2012
Messages
2,593
After all they were perfectly OK with the Church of Scotland.....
They certainly had problems with the Calvinists in Scotland, and in Ireland the Presbyterians - who do you think helped lead the 1798 rebellion?
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,741
Yes, they did care about Irish Catholicism, clown.
Clown, do you think GB was a theocracy ever at any stage? because if you do, I cant waste my time on you.

The whole history of GB was bringing the Church and Monarchy firmly under parliamentary control.

Unlike Ireland, no British politician worth his salt would ever have put his personal religion before mastery of the House. They swapped faiths like pairs of knickers. :D
 


New Threads

Most Replies

Top Bottom