• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Throne and the Altar

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
@Vouton, thank you for such a well-researched and informative post. I was fascinated to learn how secularism rose from the drinking habits of Gregory VII to dominate Western European political thought.

The rise of the ideology of secularism -- and hence the dismantlement of the ideology of theocracy -- is like seeing a frog dissected. The frog of theocracy, dissected in the course of a few hundred years. The history is so revealing of the details of how the original city-states must have forged the union of throne and altar.

Yet I could not escape the thought that the victory of secularism is never final, but rather the battle goes on, even today, and especially in the United States. It is chilling to reflect on what would be involved in a successful resurgence of secularism. Your history makes amply clear we would soon enough have tyrants, and those tyrants would be ordained of God.
 

Vouthon

Dominus Deus tuus ignis consumens est
Staff member
Premium Member
Yet I could not escape the thought that the victory of secularism is never final, but rather the battle goes on, even today, and especially in the United States

Excellent observation.

I think it is a fragile, eternally incomplete victory and even today one largely confined to Westernized regions of the world. In point of fact, many Westerners themselves fail to recognise just how delicate this precious arrangement that we've inherited from our forebears really is. We take it for granted or - in some cases, as with "In God We Trust" laws in the United States and Orbanism in Hungary - even militate against it, unmindful of what the alternative would be if we played with that fire.

Sacral monarchism / a theocratic compact between throne and altar is the oldest form of human political ordering, as you have very cogently outlined in your OP. (i.e. in terms of how critical it proved to the actual emergence of settled, urban and agricultural society). It may be the case that Gobekli Tepe testifies to an even earlier precursor or variant, whereby (formerly) egalitarian hunter-gatherers bands on the cusp of the Neolithic Revolution 11,500 years ago embraced the first hierarchies under priest-rulers/shaman-rulers to mobilise workforces for temple-construction.

Secularism, essential though it has been in enabling Western (and Westernized) peoples to conduct lives of freedom that would scarcely have been conceivable to our ancestors, has only existed to some degree for a couple of hundred years and surfaced for reasons that were in some sense accidental - that is, because Pope Gregory VII had the insane, heretical idea one day of implementing a political Augustinian programme and fighting a revolutionary campaign to deny the Holy Roman Emperor his traditional "sacral", religiously sanctioned function that every king had boasted since time-immemorial. Gregory was then succeeded by the Protestant Reformers some four hundred years later and their daring articulation of the "two kingdoms" doctrine and the Catholic Jesuits with their papal-sanctioned ideological crusade against the divine rights of kings and royal absolutism, which culminated in the Puritan victory of the Parliamentarians during the English Civil War in the 1640s and their trial-execution of their self-declared "god-appointed" monarch for crimes against his own people, followed just over a century later by the American Revolution in 1770s and the world's first purely secular constitutional republic.

Secularism is not the fruit of 'Christianity' (the Byzantine Empire and modern Putinist Russia puts paid to that notion) but rather the product of developments particular to Western Christianity after the Papal Revolution of the 1073-1122. Its founding fathers are Gregory VII, the Protestant Reformers, divine-right opposed Jesuit priests, the Levellers and Puritans of the 17th century and the American liberal revolutionaries, culminating in the ascent of rationalist, public irreligion during the French Revolution (1789-1799). It is a profoundly revolutionary ideology that overturned millennia of human assumptions regarding the interrelationship between society, throne and altar. And ironically its earliest antecedents - its intellectual precursors - are found among the ranks of Catholic Papalists, Jesuits and Calvinist Puritans, without whom it would not exist (fact!).

If a hypothetical time-traveller, desirous to see the effect of the grandfather paradox on modern civilization, were to go back and assasinate Pope Gregory VII or Martin Luther or Oliver Cromwell or George Washington before their careers began, where would we be today?

It also demonstrates, in my opinion, that the Marxist-mechanistic reading of history errs in failing to consider the agency of individuals alongside the determinism of material-sociological trends which extend beyond human volition. The collapse of Communism in most countries in 1989-1991 evidenced that no societal outcome - i.e. the 'victory' of proletarian, post-capitalist planned economics to make way for a stateless utopia without private ownership - is 'etched in stone' and certain to transpire after a particular stage of development. We are more like blind-watchmen standing on the shoulders of giants with their feet balanced on egg-shells, just like we are ourselves the product of generations of men and women deciding to have sex with one another (any one of them may have not have done so, thus resulting in no 'me' or 'you'!).

And I think that is a rather humbling and sobering reflection.
 
Last edited:
Top