STATE AND CHURCH
It could be argued that it would be more
natural for the state to be independent of the church, as in
state-hegemonic/church-subordinate societies, but civilization only attains to
anything approaching a genuine culture when the state is subordinate to the
church, as in church-hegemonic/state-subordinate societies.
When the state is independent of the church, as
it tends to be in our own time, you have the separation, whether absolutely or
relatively, of politics from religion and the development, within the state, of
secular values, including economic and scientific freedoms.
The church, or various kinds of church, may
still exist, but not as the guiding light of society. Rather, either as a
leftover from a bygone age or as some kind of newfangled cult which functions
on the periphery, as it were, of a society characterized by secular values more
usually identified with freedom in the modern sense, meaning, among other
things, freedom from religious oppression.
This, however, is a comparative low-point of
civilization since, as noted above, closer to the natural-world-order of female
domination in which the meaning of life is interpreted solely in relation to
reproduction and, hence, adherence to the laws of nature which, no matter how
'dressed up', as in relation to the 'sanctity of the family', etc., always
revolve around the interests - and needs - of women.
In fact, women are never as free as when the
separation of state from church is so complete as to be enshrined in law and
considered one of the fundamental human rights, including not only the right to
life on a purely natural basis but also, should the female decide, the right,
equally, to terminate life in the womb as a kind of right- as opposed to
left-liberal freedom.
Either way, women are in control of their
destinies and society is going nowhere fast, least of all towards a cultural
standpoint, conditioned by ethnic considerations, in which civilization attains
to a kind of peak under male-hegemonic auspices and the female, even if not
capable of culture to any significant extent, is constrained to a civility
which defers to culture as to all that is best in civilization and most
opposed, in its metaphysical essence, to the barbarity of the free female under
the aegis of secular values through the separation of state from church in what
more usually amounts to state-hegemonic axial criteria.
But one could - and in my view should - regard
this as a kind of reculer pour mieux sauter, in that unless society steps back in order to
leap further forward, there is no way that the state can be used, in its
comparative freedom from church interference, as a springboard to a new and
higher order of church that will not only dovetail state responsibility into
itself ... but have the ability and moral justification to do away with the
older forms of church in the interests of a new order of religion consistent
with the Truth and therefore above and beyond petty state/church rivalries.