INSTRUCTIONS
Make sure to read Adler's How To Mark a Book and use the tips to annotate The Scarlet Letter. You will be able to use your annotated novel on the test when you return from summer break. Annotating texts is an important skill that will be utilized heavily throughout this school year so practice makes perfect!
This is the Scarlet Letter forum. For each group of chapters, there will be a series of questions of which you are to respond. You must also reply to at least one other student's original responses. I will continuously review responses and contribute to the discussion as the summer progresses. You must make at least two total responses per chapter (your original response and one reply) in order to receive full credit. The entire forum must be completed by July 31.
Here is a link to relevant notes on the authors background information. Please review the notes prior to reading the novel. Be prepared for a reading test on "The Scarlet Letter within the first week of school.
Nathaniel Hawthorn
This is the Scarlet Letter forum. For each group of chapters, there will be a series of questions of which you are to respond. You must also reply to at least one other student's original responses. I will continuously review responses and contribute to the discussion as the summer progresses. You must make at least two total responses per chapter (your original response and one reply) in order to receive full credit. The entire forum must be completed by July 31.
Here is a link to relevant notes on the authors background information. Please review the notes prior to reading the novel. Be prepared for a reading test on "The Scarlet Letter within the first week of school.
Nathaniel Hawthorn
1. What are some of the advantages of living in a society controlled by the church?
2. What are some of the disadvantages of living in a church-led society?
2. What are some of the disadvantages of living in a church-led society?
Time to get started 😃!
ReplyDeleteAdvantages of living in a society that is influenced by the church (weather the church in question be the Catholic Church or some other denomination) are a great many. Some would argue that having the church having a greater role in the lives of citizens leads them to be more moral and just group of people. People would be more pious and be apt to care for one another more, seeing everyone as a brother or sister in faith. Communities would be stronger Society would certainly be rid of a great number of its great evils, such as rape, discrimination, and murder, simply because they are against the teachings of the Church. Works of charity would most definitely be more common and laws would be passed in alignment with the doctrine of the church. However, a church-led society is certainly has its drawbacks. Humanity has a terrible tendency to be greedy, and cold-hearted to say the least, The human race has been known to use religion and twist scriptures to oppress and deny people their rights and their basic human dignity. Societies lead by a church are known to be almost fanatical in their oppression of those who they have disagreements with. Meaning , societies that are controlled by one church have often persecuted those who pledge their allegiance to another church, or have made certain life choices that go against what the church believes. Think about the oppression of Catholics during the late 16th and 17th century in England. Mass was forbidden to be practiced and those who were caught even having Catholic sympathies were tortured. England was eager to establish itself as a Protestant nation and used their power to opress Catholics. Another thought is that of the Magdalene Laundries in Ireland. During the 19th and 20th centuries, these workhouses were used to punish women for having sex outside of marriage. Make not mistake, these homes were not places women could go for help and guidance, as the Church preaches, these women were abused and exploited. The true teachings of Christ were twisted in that situation , which is a possibility when society is led by the church. Another possibility is that those who are politically ambitious might join the clergy to satisfy their ambitions, not their vocations. That increases corruption in Church circles, which only harms the people they are bound to serve. Many evils can occur when society’s led by the church.
ReplyDeleteOverall, I really like the points you make here. I like how you and I had the same thought process with the disadvantages and advantages of a society governed by the church. You paint a nice picture of the ideal society governed by the church and how much good could come from it if everyone were to live in harmony. I especially like the point you make about the teachings of the church being twisted for personal gain and the greed and corruption of humanity. I think that this can be true for past societies and the one we live in today. This leads to a lot of misunderstanding about the church’s teachings. I also think the point you make in your second last sentence about the joining of the politically ambitious to the is clergy really interesting. I’ve never really looked at it that way and how that can harm the individuals they interact with. That point made me think. In short, the opinions you express in your blog are very similar to my own personal beliefs and opinions.
DeleteWhile the Catholic Church is perfect, it is being run by humans who are sinners. So, I think when we get to heaven, God willing, we will discover that life could have been so very easy, if we had just loved one another fully. You make some good points in this piece. I think of two bible quotes, the one about putting on the yoke and the other about giving to Caesar what is Caesars etc.
DeleteI strongly agree with the point you made about humanity having a tendency to fall into greed. You made very good points on topics of past situations in which society was led by the church and leaders strayed from church teaching. When society is run by the church, leaders disregard various basic teachings of God. In particular, I believe you summed up this argument in your sentence that stated that people who are politically ambitious may join the clergy to satisfy their political ambitions. I strongly agree with your opinions on both the advantages and disadvantages of having a society run by the church.
DeleteLiving in a society controlled by the church can have many advantages as well as disadvantages. First and foremost, a society that is governed by the church can bring a society together in numerous ways. With the church governing a community, it would eventually strengthen it as all of the members would already willingly follow the laws in accordance to their faith. The members of the society would also be strengthened together as a whole because their like minded beliefs. There would be less religious condemnation and disputes, therefore less violence for at least a short while. A society governed by the church would also show people to look to morals for guidance as opposed to our society now that tells us to do whatever makes us happy. Increased value of morally right actions would get rid of a great number of problems our society faces today such as racism, murder, drugs, and spousal or child abuse. There problems would not be as apparent because all members of society would recognize them as morally wrong before they are done. A society lead by the church would also eliminate the problems of a corrupt government because the government would be the church and it would be acting on the teachings of church doctrine. However, a society governed by the church unfortunately does more harm than good. History has shown that this simply cannot work with such a magnitude of people. A society lead by the church might work for awhile, but then the members will eventually become dissatisfied with the religion and feel forced to believe it. Take seventeenth century France for example. The people of that time period were forced to believe the religion of the king, which happened to be Catholicism. Despite the fact that there was a king, French society was really controlled by the Pope and the popes of this time period were more involved with politics than teaching the faith. Therefore, the pope was rather corrupt. This is a clear disadvantage to a society governed by religion. However, as Protestantism was spreading to France during this time, the French monarchy began to persecute the known Protestants out of fear. These kind of uprisings can only be expected when a society is governed by the church. It’s just simple human psychology- people will disagree with the laws and look to new ones that favor personal preference when forced to beleve in something, in this case being religion. It is in this way that a church lead society can turn against the desired effects above. Instead of decreasing violence, it will only add to the disputes and unrest. I do believe that religion plays a huge part in ones life, but it cannot be forced. Otherwise it is unappealing and seems like a huge burden. Communities sharing one religion can work out perfectly, but one whole society being forced to believe one religion will only result in wars and violence. Looking at history again, the society and civilizations that practiced religious tolerance and freedom of religion are the ones that stood the longest.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your examples in that the Pope should not be involved with government and should preach the faith. On the other hand, the Catechism clearly states that morality and Catholic social justice teaching must influence politics to create a more moral society. Your examples are good, and they really help illustrate what you are meaning to show your audience.
DeleteI do agree with you stating that the community will be further unified through a like mined faith, but this doesn't include those who don't follow the "religious norm". Obviously, those who do not follow the norm will be segregated from the community and looked down upon. The argument that there will be less violence is somewhat correct because looking back to the European wars of religion and various other incidents when there was a conflict between the state and the church. Society as a whole doesn't tell us to do what makes us "happy" if this was the case then you'd go around stealing whatever you like because it makes you "happy". Society teaches us to follow what we're passionate at while using common sense, like pursuing a career that doesn't have a high annual income so you pick up a second job just to do what you're passionate about. There are instances where society tell you to follow your sexual passions, but by using common sense it should be a no brainer to avoid situations like those. The church has disagreed with itself many times and that's why the doctrines are in place, but heresy is always an issue and obviously there will be corruption because people follow bad passions looking for what they want, it's simple human nature to be the fittest to survive. "Communities sharing one religion can work out perfectly, but one whole society being forced to believe one religion will only result in wars and violence. Looking at history again, the society and civilizations that practiced religious tolerance and freedom of religion are the ones that stood the longest." I agree nearly in entirety with this quote but you're obviously forgetting that new religions will be built upon the previously standing religions such as Christianity off of Judaism, and thus creating conflict of whether or not your ideas or mine are correct. I believe that if it's going to be a community ruled through religion I think that it should be multiple religions working together rather than apart to make the society better and giving different perspectives on situations, like how a democracy should work.
DeleteThere are many advantages and disadvantages to being part of a society that is church-led. I, like many, am a child growing up in a faith-centered family and community. Growing up in these communities can create a bond between people who otherwise would not have connected. At the Catholic Churches in Saint Marys we have bake sales and family picnics that help show that we are all here as a community supporting our Church. We all have one thing in common, our appreciation for our practiced faith. Having faith is a chain that links us all together within the Church community. Having a group of people to lean on that support you is good and that is why growing up in a faith centered community is good. On the other hand, church-led societies can end up being flawed. People tend to hold fallible things in too high an esteem. It is not so much that it’s the Church’s fault as it is the people within the Church communities. People are sinners, we were born with Original Sin. The Church is not the problem in this situation. People start trusting in the wrong thing. People put their trust and their belief in other people, not the institution created by Christ. They hear whatever it is that they want to believe. They put their trust in priests, people, and not in the Word of God and the teachings of the Church itself. In the 1500s, for example, indulgences were bought and sold. The people trusted in the wrong things. In order to achieve a real indulgence, to get to heaven, one must go to confession, fast, pray, and live their faith. These imperfections do not lie in the Church, but instead they lie in the imperfections of people, the priests, bishops, etc. There is also the fact that not all communities are going to be faith-lead communities. Sheltering an individual in a community can result in a rude awakening when entering into the greater world. It’s hard when one makes the discovery that the whole world is not just like you and your community. The church communities are important but there are clearly some disadvantages as well that have shown itself multiple times throughout history.
ReplyDeleteYou make a great point about it not being the church’s fault that we were born with original sin. This statement leads to exactly why I strongly believe is why we cannot make the church our government. If the people all have their opinions and the church officials soon become corrupted by what the people believe you will soon see the Catholic church break. You will see groups break off with particular church leaders to form their own rules and live on them instead. Therefore, if we have a leader in the government who is not a church official but is considered with the “people”, the government could still turn into a Catholic based society. If that goveremt leader makes his decisions on what is morally correct in the church, the church can in no way fall. Instead it will be one person doing what they feel is best based on what they have learned growing up. This would be ideal because you then will always have a strong Catholic community, the church, to lean back on for support.
DeleteJust like anything, there are many advantages and disadvantages to having a society completely ran by the church. I must start with the advantages. In my opinion the first and most important advantage would be that the leaders of the society would go to God for a final decision. I find this very important because at a young age, and as a teen who does not dig deep into political news, I feel that today republicans and democrats tend to get into arguments and always be against the others opinion on most issues. Yet, if the society was ran by the church, it would allow them to look at what is accepted and what is not accepted in this faith and generally have a higher standard to constantly live up to. Therefore, I believe this would lead them all to making a morally right decision. Another very positive outcome is many people would unite in the Catholic faith. This statement could go two ways. If your society was being governed by a particular faith, you are most likely going to look into that faith and probably raise your children up as a Catholic. Unlike today, many other families would abstain from raising their children in a so called “faith” that is based off of immoral and heathen beliefs. The other outcome to this statement is that everyone uniting around this particular faith would lead to less war, crime, and disagreements as a whole.
ReplyDeleteSo this prompted me to think about the fact that our nation was established on Christian principals, but that the current misinterpretation of the division of church and state is what's making such a mess of things. We talk about and debate about this throughout the year. Good insights here.
DeleteThere are a few points you make that I find issue with. First, you seem to suggest in your statement "Yet, if the society was ran by the church, it would allow them to look at what is accepted and what is not accepted in this faith and generally have a higher standard to constantly live up to," that there are no disagreements between church officials and scholars. I can tell you right now, at the end of the year, there was a big debate in school about what exactly was meant by "a woman should submit fully to her man". There would still be arguments in a church lead society; the only difference between those arguments and the arguments in the current political spectrum is the subject.
DeleteYour next statements, "I believe this would lead them all to making a morally right decision," also suggests that simply because it is the church, it is impermeable to corruption and immoral decisions. This is simply not true. When you put any form of belief system into power, there will always be corruption, there will always be a fight for the moral high ground. There would be no difference between a church running the society, or a group of atheists from Wyoming, after a period of time.
My third issue with your response is with this statement: "Unlike today, many other families would abstain from raising their children in a so called 'faith' that is based off of immoral and heathen beliefs". This suggest, quite bluntly, families today do raise their kids on immoral and heathen beliefs. I'm curious as to what exactly you mean by this, because according to PEW research, 70.6% of American citizens surveyed said they identified as Christian and another ~20% Catholic. If I am correct in saying this statement was inspired by the recent spike in media coverage of violence, this leads back to my point that there will always be fringe groups and those do not represent the whole in the slightest.
Even in families that don't raise their children Catholic or Christian, or religious at all, it does not mean that they are absent of morals. Morals are not exclusive to a religion based around God, or any other subject. Morals are what is found to be right or wrong in a society at any given time. These will change from time to time but very little. Again, taking a the minority of fringe (insert religion/belief system here) and using it to represent a majority of said religion is factually and ethically wrong.
My final point is your use of quotations around the word "faith". If you are attempting to argue belief systems, I would urge you not to belittle somebodies "faith" by suggesting it isn't real.
Overall, I understand your points, but the need a little more thought. I appreciate your taking the time to write out your thoughts.
I find a bit of an issue with your statement about people raising their children in a "'faith' based off of immoral and heathen beliefs." I do not think you should say that a belief is wrong just because it is not the same as your belief. And I would urge you to recount the time where a group of people started to believe a faith that went against the society's beliefs of the time. This society was the Roman Empire, everyone there was raised and forced to obey the ways of their state religion, but some started to move away from that and led to the beginnings of modern day Christianity. Those people who raised their children in an "immoral and heathen" belief is what has led to the belief that we study and are led to follow. You said that the beliefs are bad when they go against the society except that unique opinions and practices are what lead to a diverse and well-balanced society. One where different angles of a problem can be considered and discussed by many rather than having a single way that everything and everyone needs to conform to.
DeleteLauryn, I agree that it would be much easier to look to God for final decision making, but this can also have negative effects on a community. In a perfect world, we would all view concepts the same way. This is not true although, and everyday there is struggle to agree and come to a decision point. So although banking all your choices on God can help you faithfully, it can lead you to blame God for your mistakes and sins.
DeleteUnfortunately, with good there is always bad. The disadvantages of having a society being completely ran by the church is that it could completely cave if the church officials fought for power, instead of the societies issues. I believe that since we have the Pope at the highest monarch, with Cardinals below, then to Archbishops, to Bishops, then onto priests and nuns, to the least important being deacons, that at some point they could all become hungry for power. Which could turn the tables if they do what the people want to see to become more liked in the society to be moved up in the monarchy. This would then lead to many arguments with the church officials who are trying to stick up for what the people are saying. In which I believe would allow the Catholic Church to begin to break off into different segments to make their own rules. This is where the church governing the society would fall.
ReplyDeleteYou have a wonderful view in both your advantage and disadvantage blogs, but saying deacons are the least important is rather low. Each member of the clergy throughout the world is very important in his own way.
DeleteThank you for pointing that out Stephen.
DeleteIn a society which is controlled by the church, many advantages are present. For one, because the church has a huge role in the society, there would be moral leaders. The church greatly affects each of the lives of those who are in charge of the society and of those who represent the church. Leaders could focus on what is right and just, rather than trying to be politically ahead of other societies. This would lead rulers to think about what is truly best for their subjects, based on the church’s teachings in opposition to pressure on how the rest of the world sees how a society should be run. Another advantage in a church led society can be seen on the side of the everyday people living within the society’s limits. Just as leaders within the society are affected in ways such as their morals based on the church, so does the church affect the morals of the people in the society as well. In this way, everyone will have the same beliefs and morals, which leads to peace throughout the society. Peace can lead to less crime than that of a non church led society. However, it is assumed that the church’s teachings are morally sound.
ReplyDeleteWith that being said, disadvantages can arise as well if one’s own religion is not morally sound, as well as if the church’s religion is different than someone’s within the society. First, if the church is not morally sound, many problems can arise in the society. In fact, there can be a somewhat opposite effect of some of the advantages. Instead of having moral leaders, there would be corruption. For example, Sharia law exists within the Islamic religion. Through this law, women are treated as property and do not have equal rights to men. Muslims also are not always tolerant of other religions and they see those people as infidels that need to be converted or killed. People living within the society may not believe the same things as the church that is leading the society. These citizens could be marginalized or punished in some way for their beliefs. These are just a few of the advantages and disadvantages that come within a church led society.
This is thoughtful and well written. I look forward to seeing what you think about the book.
DeleteI'm not entirely sure how to formulate a response in this format, so I'll divide it into categories to keep it clean.
ReplyDeleteAdvantages:
Advantages to having a church lead society vary widely. The most obvious result would be peace. When a group of people come together for a common good, a sense of peace and responsibility can be found in each individual. This leads to an increase to a certain moral integrity. The relative moral standing of each individual will increase because humans tend to mimic each other. These two results come together to form a society that parallels the height of the Roman Empire and the beginnings of the United States.
Disadvantages:
The most destructive issues of a church lead society differ in only the motives of those in other societies. When a society forms, it is most likely that all the members have identical mind sets. This mind set will remain the same for multiple generations, but it will start to crumble at the edges. Small groups of people will begin to resent the majority simply for the fact that they are the majority. This will create a division between the people, and this division can only lead to violence. Soon, the peace found in the beginning becomes the spark for violence. There will be an immense amount of hatred between the groups, simply for their ideas being different, regardless of who is right or wrong. If there is no outlet for the anger, the society will begin to collapse.
The second issues originates from the nature of a church. In general, a church is designed around asserting itself the moral high ground and working down from there to create its own form of peace. This peace tends to be an agreement between the members of a society to not harm each other. I believe that this creation of peace, if successful, would inhibit the development of the human race. If there is no battle to be fought, there is no need for weapons. Without struggle, there is no innovation. Innovation is the pinnacle of the human race. From the beginning, it has solved problem after problem. Removing the problem removes what it means to be human. While we may not like change, change is what keeps us moving, day after day. Without the change that conflict brings, there is no point in going on.
Notes:
I have just a few thoughts on what seems to be the theme of the majority of these posts as of 7/3. When talking about tha advantages, the assumption must be made that there will be no defectors in a given society. While it may be this way to start, I would like to reiterate my point that it will not remain this way for long, and the end result will be more destructive than anything before it. If an attempt was made to create a society entirely homogeneous in thought, or even to go as far as in appearance, anyone who even remotely deviates from the norm will be shunned, either blatantly or by some form of paranoia. I guess my point I'm trying to get across is, if you try to remove differences rather that compensate for them, you only create stronger and more dangerous differences.
I know most, if not all, of you did address that in your disadvantages, but I just wanted to touch on it for clarity.
I completely agree with your thoughts concerning the advantages and disadvantages of having a church lead society. Most importantly, I love the way you brought the human race into your thoughts and the way you bring about the idea of how removing the problem will only remove the human race. I enjoyed reading your thoughts.
DeleteI agree with your advantages, but have a problem with the idea of "Human race and Innovation"
DeleteAs I agree with this idea in some areas, I don't know if i agree with the idea of struggle between people leads to innovation. Yes, in some places it does lead to innovation, but usually struggles, whether war or a more political sturggle, will result in more loses than good come out of it. Look at the American civil war. As I know I might get some flak for this, I will propose the question "Did the ends justify the means?". Yes, if was huge in cultural diversity, but we lost so many humans lives, it poses the question was it worth it? Couldn't this have been done with political talks instead of total war? Yet this is only one example. Look at WWII, in this case also, the question can be applied, "Did the ends justify the means?". To put it simply, to me, it was worth saving a entire human race from genocide in this case. This did lead to innovation though, showing future societies what not to do, and to not fall for the lies of dictators.
@Anthony Gerg, to answer your first question, in the case of the Civil War, yes, the end did justify the means. You suggest that political talks could have quelled the war and solved the problem. This is false for two reasons. First, the beginning of the abolishing of slavery began in 1777, when Vermont outlawed slavery in its laws. The south seceded in 1860 with the election of Abraham Lincoln to president. If nearly a century of talking couldn't solve the problem, then something else has to be tried.
DeleteSecond, slavery was an essential piece of the south's economy. It was so crucial that the South seceded and started the war in the Battle of Fort Sumter. Furthermore, the abolishment of slavery was more than cultural equality. The end of slavery represented the end of legal oppression of minorities. The most obvious example of such laws eradicated is the Jim Crow laws, laws that mandated segregation of blacks and whites in all public spaces. So yes, the Civil War provided the best outcome with the options available at the time.
In regards to your WWII example, I will agree. World War II was beneficial in many was, in both the start of the war and the end of the war. The start of the United States involvement in WWII marked the end of the Great Depression for the US. This alone was a major boost to the economy both nationally and internationally. The end of the war brought about a new "Nuclear Age". This was the beginning of finding clean energy, something essential to the evolution of the human race. WWII was beyond a doubt necessary and beneficial.
One note I would like to make about asking the question, "Does the end justify the means?" This question is predicated on the understanding that there was a better option at hand during any given time. It is intellectually irresponsible to approach a problem with this mindset. Your first question "Couldn't this have been done with political talks instead of total war?", no, it couldn't have because the South disavowed the North and attacked with only one years delay. This is also the truth with WWII. The United States was attacked first. Generally, a good indicator of "Does the end justify the means?" is who makes the first move? This won't always be the way to approach a situation, and some will use it as an excuse to commit terrible acts against fellow man. One could even go as far as to say Nazi Germany used the Jews as an excuse to commit genocide. So the point is, loss of life doesn't equal poor means every time. It's situational, as is everything. Do not fall into absolutes, only the Sith deal in absolutes.
A society ruled by any church would have its various advantages and disadvantages that cannot be ignored. The church teaches theologians to be virtuous men and women working towards the common good of society. This would form a bond between people providing a sense of equality and pride within their work. When great bonds are formed relationships are bound to happen which could lead to unwanted pregnancy, but this would not be an issue in a society lead by the church because people would practice abstinence. Some religious authorities hold themselves to a higher authority and take a vow of abstinence, but because they're humans and they have a taste for power they at times abuse their power and break it. This brings us to the disadvantages of a society ruled by a church. There has always been and always will be scandals and corruption within the church. When humans have power and knowledge unknown to others they abuse it and don't know the proper uses for it like the story of Prometheus. Priests are given the power over their parish and what happens behind closed doors stays behind closed doors because the church does damage control, whether or not you're ignorant to this is up to you. This creates a sense of distrust that would be felt throughout the community whenever an issue arises and then suddenly disappears. I am sure that if another rape scandal was to happen under a society ruled by the church the story would never be told outside of the church. When people have power, they set themselves to a higher standard than others and misuse their power. There have been many instances where white men used bible quotes to suppress slaves to keep them from revolting. This oppression could be brought upon any person because quotes can be interpreted in many ways, which is why there is so much heresy today. There have been instances where popes such as Pope Urban II have made grand claims to get back what they want using their power. Urban called for the First Crusade claiming anyone who was slain would be instantly be accepted into heaven, which from a Catholic perspective would be incorrect because that is God's choosing on Judgement Day. What would stop church officials in a society strictly run by the church from doing the same thing costing thousands if not millions of lives? When it simply boils down to it, a society lead by the church would abuse their power because they're human. The founding fathers were correct in stating that there should be religious freedom and separation between church and state to avoid the hierarchy of the church.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you have said here. I didn’t even take into consideration the part where you said if a priest wants to hide something, he will. This made me realize that even if someone thinks there are no disadvantages it could be because they just don’t know about them. I like how you emphasised power here. I definitely agree that it is very easy for humans abuse power. However, I do not think that just because it’s a church-led society there would be less unwanted pregnancies. Humans are going to make mistakes no matter what type of society we’re living in. This is basically the only thing I disagree with you on but other than that I really liked the points you made here.
DeleteI very much agree with what you said here, especially about priests being given power of their parish , and about powerful people being held to a high standard. I recently watched the film, Spotlight, which I highly recommend, and one of the points made is that the reason that the child sex abuse that went on for as long as it did, was because of the damage control done by the various religious authorities, whose wishes were to be respected and not questioned in deeply religious communities. Again
Deletethis is an excellent post that makes many good points.
There are numerous advantages that could come from living in a society controlled by the church. One advantage would be a greater sense of connection. It would bring the community closer together by giving everyone something in common; the church. Another advantage would be the ability to live without fear. Less people would have to worry about being persecuted due to their faith. There would be more acceptance. People would not have to hide their faith out of fear of being judged. Lastly, everyone would strive to do better. Everyone would strive to make better decisions and overall make the world a better place.
ReplyDeleteHowever, there is one big disadvantage that comes to mind. A society controlled by the church would have potential to be amazing but regardless of what would happen, humans would still be in charge. Humans are by nature sinful and that’s not going to change. So even if everyone lived perfect lives and loved one another we would still be connected by our sins. No matter what we are going to sin, and we can ask forgiveness and become better people but sin is still present and that’s not going to change. These are just some of the advantages and disadvantages that would come from living in a church-led society.
You have awesome point of views, Lake! Your perspective and intake on these two questions opened my eyes to other possible answers. The topics you mentioned were well thought out, clear, and easy to understand. Exquisite job!
DeleteI agree with your points made here. Everything was thought out and taken into consideration. I especially like your comment about humans being sinful by nature, since we cannot do anything to fix or change that.
DeleteWithin every argumentative topic, there are always going to be two different sides to every story. Thus brings each debater to the action of picking and pulling out pros and cons, advantages and disadvantages.
ReplyDeleteAs Mother Teresa once expressed, “I can do things you cannot, you can do things I cannot; together we can do great things.” This excerpt highlights the most colossal advantage that a Church-controlled society could possibly pertain, union. Unity is a preeminent advantage because everyone will not only be under the same rule, but the same religion. However, this also brings along the disadvantage of people not being welcome to unification. Some people wholeheartedly believe in their own denomination and do not want any system of change to take place.
In addition, another advantage of living in a society controlled by the church would be the exemtion of the majority of sin and religion-based arguments. Under the rule of a divine system, people would begin to understand that pornography, rape, adultery, abortion, etc. are unjustifiable. Also, the common dispute about the Pledge of Alligance would not be a matter of issue. In contrast, the belief that debate and argument actually builds character and strengthens a personality is typically a very common topic of discussion. This would signify as a disadvantage.
In conclusion, it is nearly impossible to govern a society without having some sort of controversy. Every civilization is going to have its advantages and disadvantages, and that is unavoidable.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSome of the advantages of living in a society controlled by the church are that each individual person is able to grow, knowing that he or she is equal, yet so amazingly unique in the eyes of God, not having to worry about the opinions of others. And as each person is living with the same set of morals, there would not be an extreme amount of activity going on in which society would be able judge another person on in a moral perspective. A society run by the church also leads for more chances of people making it back to heaven. People working together to make society a safer, more comfortable environment makes it clear that we are all trying to achieve one chief goal, and that is, as stated in the sentence before, to make it back to heaven.
ReplyDeleteAs a government being controlled through a Christian perspective moves along, its people see themselves as independent in the eyes of a loving God who will forgive them no matter what they do. (i will talk more about that in the disadvantage question.) This independence is sometimes a good thing, as we all have the free time necessary for praying and helping the needy. Prayer could help play a major part in church-ruled government. If everyone were to pray as a whole for the guidance of God to be with their leader, the government officials would be guided with the grace of the Holy Spirit.
some of the disadvantages of the government being ruled by the church is that each person feels as though they are being told they are not allowed to be who they truly are. Being yourself is one of the most important aspects of a well functioning society. Unfortunately their will always be the people who judge before thinking that everyone has differences and it is between that person and God only. This concept might also drive families out of society either because they feel unaccepted or they ant to raise their children in an unchristian way.
ReplyDeleteAs talked about in my previous blog, their are people who continue to do bad actions day in and day out, but know that God will forgive them no matter what they do. As a matter of fact, God will forgive you, but he knows who is trying to take advantage of the fact that he is loving and forgiving, and who is honestly trying to get away from their bad habits. Say if you go to confession and confess one of your sins, and you leave the confessional and commit that sin over and over without trying to quit, there is no point in confessing it if you know you will leave only to commit the sin again. So if there are so many of these people who continue to perform bad actions, knowing that they will be forgiven, the society will become a dangerous, perhaps uncomfortable place.
I agree with the thought that people feel as though they are truly not allowed to express themselves. It is important people just be themselves and not who people always want them to be.
DeleteLiving in a society that is influenced by the church has various advantages and disadvantages. I strongly believe that the catholic church brings equality, unity, love, and holiness to each individual that desires to live their life as a follower of Christ. Although I do not know much about other religions and their churches, I continue to believe that the church leads the people together as one and allows each individual to be themselves and practice their religion freely and openly together. I also trust that living in a society controlled by the church leads the people to work together to make their community an overall better place, and helps them grow closer to Christ. A church based society also pushes people to fight for their final destination and is a holy place of trust and unity as a whole.
ReplyDeleteComparable to all topics everywhere in life, their are regularly disadvantages as well as the advantages. Disadvantages to living in a society controlled by the church can include disagreement, falsehood, and a troublesome adjustment. The people could all be living under the same morals and begin to live the same lives and have the same behavior, however, there will always be disagreement and there will always be mistakes. People often make mistakes and go to confession and never change their ways. It would be difficult for all people of the church to change their ways without portions of people getting offended with the way something is taught or brought about. Although possible, it is hard to change a person who lies, does not attend mass, and is a cheater, into someone who is obedient, kind, and respectful. Lastly, a disadvantage to living in a society controlled by the church is trying to change the human race into perfection. We are taught that no one is perfect except Christ and to be ourselves and spread the goodness of God.
In conclusion, I strongly feel that living in a society controlled by the church can have its benefits and its hardships. The church should bring peace and unity to all people, however, sometimes that is taken advantage of.
There are many evident advantages and disadvantages that result from living in a society controlled by the church. The foundation of laws given to us by God gives a basis of strong values and morals to be abided by. Moral leaders may enforce these laws, leading to an efficient society. The strong foundation from the Bible lends a straightforward basis of laws. If followed, a society run by the church could be advantageous.
ReplyDeleteHowever, when religion and politics mix, human downfalls, such as greed, appear. Leaders become hungry for more power, and therefore lose sight of the beliefs of the church. These imperfections of leaders is inevitable, as sin itself is inevitable. When a society is run by the church, leaders may lose sight of religious matters, and fall into the extensive web of political problems. While the church has a strong basis of laws to be abided by, there will always be rebellion and human imperfection.
I agree with your statements, Bailey! They were clearly well-thought out and you even opened my eyes to other possibilities of disadvantages that I never considered.
DeleteI like the points you made in your statement. When you were mentioning the advantages and disadvantages, they relied heavily on whether the leader was moral or not. You could have also added the insight of the people living in the society. Overall, I think you have a well written essay with valid points.
DeleteLiving in a society that is completely controlled by the church would have several advantages present. Essentially, the society could be brought together by virtuous leaders. Leaders who are righteous and fair would have a positive impact on society, instead of immoral, corrupt leaders who use their influence for the sake of political gain. Under a positive influence, citizens would be more gracious and honest, and would see others as their brothers and sisters, united as children of God. It can only be assumed that a society would thrive through love and happiness under the church and citizens would have the same values and virtues. Innocent babies would not be aborted, false gods would not be believed in, murder and adultery would be nonexistent, and society would be rid of many other evils, because it is known that they are against our beliefs.
ReplyDeleteHowever, the disadvantages can, understandably, be just as plentiful. It is not set in stone that a church will be morally sound, which can have an opposite impact than intended. Some leaders or citizens may not be as deeply rooted in their faith as others may be, which can sadly result in greed and corruption. Similarly, just because someone is raised under the influence of the Catholic Church, that does not necessarily mean they will believe in all of the values they are taught to believe. They may even identify with a completely different religion.
For example, the country of Yemen is based on a theocracy with Islamic sharia law at the heart of dictation. Recently, there has been much political debate between two religious groups, nearly leading to a civil war. The Houthis, Shis-led Muslims, and loyalists of Abdrabbuh Mansour Hadi were the two combatants who became examples of a what could unfortunately happen when a society is controlled by the church.
I believe some great points were said here. I especially agree with you on the fact of moral leaders leading to less corruption in a society. Also, adding onto that, I agree with moral leaders becoming more likely to care about the people in the society, rather than just wanting to grow more powerful. I think you have a great insight on this topic.
DeleteI think that some advantages to having a church-based society would be the amount of people that are similarly minded which would probably lead to less disputes and an overall better feelings of togetherness. Having church and state as one would allow a smooth-running political office where there would not have to be as many conflicting views or agendas. However, as we have seen in the past with the Great Schism, the church having mass amounts of political influence could also lead to a bad state where the church becomes more focused on their political gain to spread their beliefs to others that they forget that their faith should come first. I also think that having a church based society would suppress some beliefs if they do not follow the society. The idea of technology and innovation has shown to be very good for dealing with the ever changing state of reality. Any good belief should consistently change to the current environment if it wants to stay relevant. Christianity itself has changed an immense amount since its conception. This change, or dare I say, evolution, could not have happened if the society held on to its one original belief.
ReplyDeleteLiving in a society run by the church has many advantages, but with positives comes negatives. One of the major benefits of a church run society would be peace. Every member of the society would be striving to follow the Commandments and obtain the same reward of Heaven. When everyone in a group has the same mindset it allows for work to be done more efficiently. In a church run society people would also feel a sense of safety. In this faith based society people would be following Jesus’ teachings, and Jesus taught to love one another. This would allow for kids to run free and houses and cars would not always have to be locked. St. Marys, a society that is greatly influenced by the Catholic Church, is a great example of this. When people work together and achieve goals together a sense of peace is given off to the community.
ReplyDeleteA church run society would greatly influence the way of life of the community, but there would be a few disadvantages. One of the main disadvantages would be the lack of diversity. Diversity is how we grow as a church, the imperfections are what make us perfect. The ability to stand up to the faith is what makes us stronger. In a church run society there would not be this. The society would be stuck where it is and not be able to advance. The outside knowledge from other people would not be able to be obtained and the society would remain stuck in time.
It seems as if religion and politics go hand in hand throughout agreements and conflicts of history, even in today’s society. A church-based society contains evident advantages, just as it contains disadvantages as well. A substantial advantage to a church-based society includes a well-rounded belief system. If everyone in the society has the same beliefs, it is more likely to be morally and politically correct in both terms. The community would be less ill-mannered in a way that there would not be as high of a crime rate and more of a family feel to it. Unification under one God brings people to believe that there is a brother and sister bond, since God is the Father. This unifying bond brings leaders closer to the public and gives them a sense of security. Unfortunately, not all people respect the positive aspects of a church-based society. Disadvantages of having a society run by the church include a power hungry leader portraying the image of God. The sort of dictatorship involved could result in fighting and less cohesiveness. The position would be abused and lose its true message of leadership and guidance. In addition, a person who refuses to follow the belief system could be forced to leave or secluded from the society. Any other opinion or word of difference relating to religion could result in a negative way, since it is frowned upon. They would not be able to act upon their different views and beliefs. A church-based society contains just as many positives as it does negatives.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with your outlook on this topic, especially your point where you mentioned that a society controlled by the church would create a trusting environment because of their similar beliefs. I also strongly agree with you when you mentioned that although a society may have faith in their church, the church officials could very easily become hungry for more power. This obviously would result in conflicts. Therefore, I agree that there are just as many positive and negative impacts a church can have on a society.
DeleteThe Church is made up of an incredible network of people who have the aim of creating a perfect Christian society and “heaven on earth.” There are numerous advantages to living in a church-led society for these reasons. The Catholic Church is constantly searching for ways to try to help people better themselves for the sake of reaching eternal life with God. With a community organized by the Church, good morals and virtues would be highly valued, which would help create peace. Crime would also be infrequent with a society full of Catholic organizations and charities to provide financial aid to the less fortunate. If everyone lived in a Christian-led society, church participation would be significantly greater. The greater participation would create better ties between families who would come to recognize and know the faces of the people around them. The coming together every Sunday mass to consume the Body and Blood of Christ would create a unity among everyone in the society, no matter race, color, age, or sex. There would be many advantages to having a church-led society.
ReplyDeleteAlthough there are many advantages to a church-led society, there are some complications. One of the most prominent problems is that not everyone is a Christian. If the Church claimed authority over a community, it could cause the non-Christian population to revolt, causing much chaos. A community that requires religious conformity does not allow many individuals to find their personal purpose and identity, either. Division among people with different religious ideas would be inevitable. Even though a church-led society would be great, it would not be ideal.
I completely agree with your ideas. Having a society filled with Catholics sounds good in theory, but the reality would not be ideal. I like how you mentioned the minorities of the society, and the greater possibility that they would revolt. These riots would then out weigh the positives and peacefulness of a Church-based society.
DeleteA society that is led by the Church presets many advantages, along with disadvantages. With a church led society, the amount of disputes between those people living in that society would be lowered, because of the beliefs that everyone shares throughout as a whole. The political leaders of the society would be fair and righteous to those living there, and work to enforce the Commandments given to us by God. With that being said, the rate of any and all crime would decrease significantly, because of the way they are to live and how they follow Christ. All members of society would believe in one God in three persons, and all believe that He died for us. The participants of amy activities led by the Church by said society would increase positively, which would definitely have an impact on the society for the better.
ReplyDeleteAlthough said advantages may are definitely the best, with anything, disadvantages arise. If right now, St Marys was to convert to a society that was under the Church, there would be many people who wou undoubtedly be very unhappy with that result. Those said people would most like riot and/or cause so much chaos for this small town. Also, many people would not be able to express who they actually are and their true identities which many causes an uproar between those with different beliefs.
A church-based society has many advantages. For example, when living in a society with the same reigious ideals, people tend to be morally similar. People with similar morals typically tend to have less arguments and less of a chance for political disputes. In many people’s lives, religion is at the center. An advantage of combining church and state would be that many people would not have to worry about people trying to persuade them to alter their own beliefs. Many times we see in today’s society that when people get older they tend to lose their faith but in a church based society people would remember to keep their faith at the center. They would not have to worry about as many outside forces bombarding them with alternate beliefs that would create doubt in their own faith. When having similar beliefs, people tend to be more productive in accomplishing tasks because they are working toward the same goal. People would work together to get more people to church, more prayer services would occur, and overall more people would just be trying to live out God’s will.
ReplyDeleteAlthough a church based society would lead more people to a happy life there would definitely be people who would be unhappy. This unhappiness would be the result of the disadvantages of a church based society. In a church based society, some people may feel like their freedom to make their own religious decisions is taken away. When this happens, people sometimes lash out and revolt in an effort to try to get their freedom restored. We have seen in the past that people will do whatever it takes to make their ideas heard and carried out. In some case people have started religious wars such as the crusades.
ReplyDeleteAs living in a church society has many advantages that would make it thrive like the Byzantine Empire and the Holy Roman Empire. Yet, at the same time, they can have disadvantages that can destroy and inhibit the empire. This wullbe easier if I put them in there own category's.
ReplyDeleteAdvantages:
When you have a society that is tied together by religion, it can balloon into a huge empire. A large advantage to this would be that everyone has similar ideas, and similar morals. Having this is important, as it can make people more tolerant and understanding of other people. The society is more efficient as a side effect of that, allowing for building and forwarding the society and easier task. Another plus is that there is peace among everyone and there is no fighting among people about ideas and thoughts. This goes back to tolerance of other people and it helps with overall happiness of the society.
Disadvantages:
There could as be a lot of places that aren't excatly helped by a theocracy. One of these areas is the progression of certain areas of learning. This is very big and is quite important. You can be a large empire, but if your not technologically and scientifically advanced, you will struggle to be more than just a simple empire. Science in certain areas, like evolution and other areas(depending on the religion) won't be taught at all. That factor alone could be huge and lead to the destruction of the society. Another factor that could inhibit an destroy is that there could be a split in thoughts. It has happened before, particularly in Christianity with the Protestant Reformation. With this, it could split the empire or society in two and maybe even end in a civil war with the destruction of the empire completrly, leaving that for new empire/societies to be made from the ashes of that empire.
As all of those factors matter, every empire and society, at some time, will fall in the end. Only the ones with solid foundations and good leaders will last for very, very long times.
There are many advantages to living in a society based purely off of a church’s rules. Depending on the religion and it’s beliefs, the effects can vary. Having a strong belief in a God, or gods in other cases, can lead to a strong happiness and joy in a persons life. For example, the Catholics, including myself, try to lead their best lives with purity and holiness. They fight for their personal beliefs and keep their own lives in what could be considered a happy state. Their God gives them miracles every day and leads them each to the path of righteousness. Having a church-controlled society can also lead to a safe and comfortable environment. The believers of God also practice love and kindness. When a person is in need, they sacrifice certain aspects in their lives to help someone. These actions can be small and seems to effect only one, but others effect many and can lead others to do the right things in life. Those controlled by the church can also stay out of trouble. By following Gods commandments, people learn to avoid situations that would maybe be frowned upon or even cause them to be outcasts. Keeping a stronghold in faith can lead to good actions that have good consequences. A church-controlled society has many characteristics that are an advantage to those within the community.
ReplyDeleteTo say there are only advantages to a church based society would be incorrect. Although having a strong faith in a God or gods can be very well to one person, it can effect another in a negative way. Those who do not have a belief in a religion may take others religious advice as rude or demanding. They may become angry with the community for setting their beliefs onto their shoulders. This can cause the person to lead a life that goes against everything their peers believe in. While this may not personally effect the said person, it can cause others to disown them or view them as a disgrace. A church-controlled society can also lead to arguments concerning the “rules” of the religion. Those who believe different concepts within their religions can cause uproars within the church and community. Their personal opinions may go against beliefs of others and lead to an enraged town. One last negative effect of a church ruled society is people becoming ignorant to their faith. As a society grows, people become more involved in other aspects in life. They soon push aside religion and forget their moral standards. This can lead to inappropriate actions and a community of sinners. Having a church ruled society can lead to negative consequences.
ReplyDeleteLiving within a society that is solely controlled by the church initially seems to be a peaceful way of life. This is because if an entire community is not only controlled by a single church, but everyone within the society also has a similar belief system under the church, then the morals of the society would prove to be similar. With a similar belief system, morals would be comparable. Basically, there would be few disagreements concerning morals and religious belief if the citizens were controlled by their church.
ReplyDeleteHowever, for a society to be church-led, the various church officials would have to be selfless in order for there not to be a struggle of power. Also, politics can often get very complicated and when politics mix with religious belief, many topics can become controversial. When this happens the struggle to find a solution becomes near to impossible. An example, of politics clashing with religion today is the topic of abortion. This topic is so contentious that even many households with the same religion can’t speak of this topic without coming upon argument. Therefore, living in a society led by the church has disadvantages as well as advantages.
I can clearly see your thoughts are well planned out and written nicely. Great job on pointing out that a combination of religion and politics can start controversy.
DeleteA church controlled society would come with various advantages and disadvantages dependant upon each individual. The advantages to a single government controlled by the Church allows for conformity between the modern separation of the two bodies. Laws concerning morals embodied by the church would be parallel with those implemented by the governing force in the nation. This is an advantage because there would be no blurred lines between morals and state law. Also, the society can embark upon different challenges as a nation. These challenges can include famine, invasion, and infrastructure. With each advantage however, there is a opposite disadvantage.
ReplyDeleteOne disadvantage that results directly from the advantage of religious conformity is opposing beliefs. When groups of people begin to band together their own sets of beliefs conflict can ensue because of the vast majority of faith in the current belief system. Civil war is a result of clashing faiths and is a disadvantage of a church led society. Under a single government however, vices begin to appear in leaders in place of the faithless service this kind of government needs. Greed, lust, and other desires can stray leaders from serving their nation, and instead serving themselves. Overall, a society led by the church has its apparent pros and cons. If run correctly, this type of theocracy has many pros but leaders can take advantage of their power and lead to the disadvantages.
With regards to your examples of disadvantages of a church-led society, I completely agree with you. You stressed the fact that there is and always will
Deletebe an opposing belief, which I personally believe is spot on.
I somewhat agree with you on the advantages, however. Yes, there would be some conformity between the two bodies, but I do not think that morals should affect laws; unless I interpreted your third and forth sentences wrong. I think that religion and politics should be separate.
Living in a society controlled by the church has some advantages, but along with that comes disadvantages. One advantage is the belief that all human life is sacred. This would put an end to the controversy revolving around abortion. Another advantage that comes to mind is the churches belief of “black lives matter” or “black supremacy.” In Gods eyes everyone is created equal no matter the race or sex of that individual. We are all children of God. However, the government and other people in society seem to think different. Being in a chruch controlled society would eliminate the thought of not everyone being equal. A church controlled society would not “mock” anyone with disabilities, as we have seen President Trump do. Which again would promote equality, as the church says everyone was created equal.
ReplyDeleteThere is also some disadvantages that go along with the advantages. Being in a society controlled by the church you are expected to follow a certain set of laws, some of which are totally unrealistic. For example, eating fish on fridays is unnecessary. Nowhere in the bible does it say we need to eat fish on fridays. The churches rule of abstinence is unrealistic, and is not followed by many. As it was not followed by Sodom and Gomorrah and is still not followed today. It is a natural form of an expression when one person and another care about each other deeply. We need to find a balence between church and state.
A church controlled society has many benefits. Guidelines are introduced for all people to abide by. It not only provides structure for a society but it can also bring out the best qualities in all, including a life of purity and obedience. Not only affecting behavior, it can also bring society on the correct path to God. Without a church controlled society one can experience chaos and no clear path to follow. Often times in a heavily church controlled society everyone is able to feel much more united and bonded. People begin to conform to a specific mold comparable to those around them. In conclusion the morals and the bonds are strong throughout the whole society, or at least this is the intention.
ReplyDeleteA disadvantage regarding religion as the basis for society is when its views are so strong it causes people to stray away. This is one of the main reasons we have problems in our world today and since the beginning of time. People desire and are entitled to their own opinions and when they feel like it is taken away it makes them feel compelled to disagree. People often feel pressure to live up to the person they are expected to be. When not being the ideal person, people are ridiculed and looked down on. Another conflict is the potential to not agree exactly with the views or what the religion entails. In conclusion, the desire or thoughts against what is taught creates issues within your beliefs and behavior.
Whenever religion is intertwined with politics, there are benefits to the society as a whole, but also disadvantages to specific parties.
ReplyDeleteTypically, the most prominent advantage of a church-led society would be a uniformity of peoples. Everybody would have the same moral standards and mindful upbringings. For a short period of time, there could be a state of peace throughout the whole society. Civilians could live in harmony with each other due to the laws placed by the government and the level of understanding everybody would have.
On the contrary, many disadvantages can arise as a result of a state ruled by religion. A common situation that occurs when a religion is used to guide a society is an uprising by opposing theological beliefs. An example of someone not content with the current status of the church and wanting to reform it is Martin Luther, not the civil rights activist. Martin Luther was not happy with how the Protestant faith was handling religious conflicts and felt there needed to be change. Thus, he created his own “religion” Lutheranism. Martin Luther gained many followers because they also were not pleased with the situation of the church and its moral and political differences. There were no major civil wars when Martin Luther started his religious rebellion, but in today’s world there could easily be one if religious matters and politics are combined. There is no way a society can obtain perfection with or without religion because there is always an opposing party to an argument.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteGabe, I was very pleased with how you related Martin Luther and his creation of Lutheranism into your discussion. It opened a whole new door in this controversial topic of religions. This aspect made your discussion very intriguing.
DeleteIn the world that we live in today, religion plays a major role in just about everything that takes place. This statement is true whether we as a society can realize it or not.
ReplyDeleteThe advantages of living in a society controlled by the Church are pretty much only beneficial to those who are believers of these mentioned religions. For example, people who may not believe in the ideas of the teachings that are accompanied by the Church will feel as if everything is at a disadvantage to them. Therefore, the topic of advantages and disadvantages could very well be opinionated. However, for the sake of the members of the Church, advantages such as a “people first” mentality can go a long way in keeping as much peace as possible in today’s world. Also, a Chruch-led society would focus on the aspects in our society that the higher ups in the world don’t focus on. Aspects such as poverty, depression, and social status among different cultures.
However, along with advantages there are always plenty of disadvantages with having a Church led society. These disadvantages occur due to the fact that religion is one of the most controversial topics in today’s world. Division of different views, hate groups, riots, and protests are all major disadvantages that could occur solely due to a Church led society. In a topic like this, it is very crucial to weigh out all the pros and cons of having this such society.