Author Topic: Ideal Catholic state (Read 13847 times)

Catholic Samurai · « **Reply #15 on:** February 19, 2011, 01:02:36 PM »

Quote from: Canuk the Lionheart

I'm sure we'll find reason for increasing the average birth rate later.

I've got one...

How about the fact that people die every day, and the fact that more than half of the worlds population will die after the chastisement? And the fact that, unless we breed and multiply, Catholics are going to be a minority anyway.

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #16 on:** February 19, 2011, 01:45:47 PM »

The vast majority of the world is supposed to be Catholic in the post-Chastisement world. As for birth rate, a Catholic family, society, world, etc., will not seek to control it. It will be what it will be, according to God's providence and as a result of normal fidelity to the means and ends of marriage.

Canuk the Lionheart · « **Reply #17 on:** February 19, 2011, 01:48:10 PM »

The reason we need an average of 2.11 (lets say 3) children per family is becayse people die every day. This is enough to sustain a culture and replace the erlier generations while slowly increasing the total population. However we should not increase the birth rate to 8 children (like the non-European nations) until we have an economic model which can support thr population growth. Once we do have the economic model necessary, encourage the people to procreate with their spouses as much as possible. That way we will eventually have the large population, economic stability and thriving culture we will need for our state. That being said, we should NEVER discourage people from procreating, merely not make it our top priority at first.

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #18 on:** February 19, 2011, 02:11:39 PM »

I understand the math of it all.

My point is: Men have NO business trying to control such things, whether a country is absurdly wealthy or the poorest in the history of the world.

Just as what goes on in the marital chamber is none of the state's business, it is none of the state's business to set "baby goals" for married people. If the state does anything on this point, it should simply be to encourage marital fidelity and fruitfulness by enacting laws that are in accordance with the natural and divine laws. God (using married folks as His instruments) will take care of the rest.

Catholic Samurai · « **Reply #19 on:** February 19, 2011, 02:14:42 PM »

Quote from: gladius_veritatis

If the state does anything on this point, it should simply be to encourage marital fidelity and fruitfulness by enacting laws that are in accordance with the natural and divine laws. God (using married folks as His instruments) will take care of the rest.

That's actually all I would ever expect the state to do about it. Maybe even give tax incentives for each child...

Canuk the Lionheart · « **Reply #20 on:** February 19, 2011, 02:23:00 PM »

Quote from: Catholic Samurai

Quote from: gladius_veritatis
If the state does anything on this point, it should simply be to encourage marital fidelity and fruitfulness by enacting laws that are in accordance with the natural and divine laws. God (using married folks as His instruments) will take care of the rest.

That's actually all I would ever expect the state to do about it. Maybe even give tax incentives for each child...

Exactly, tax incentives is the only way a government can influence the birth rate. Actually, perhaps if we were creating this ideal Catholic state, the nation should have a system of honors for couples who produce X number of children, thus doing their duty to their nation and more importantly their G*d.

Catholic Samurai · « **Reply #21 on:** February 19, 2011, 02:26:37 PM »

Quote from: Canuk the Lionheart

The reason we need an average of 2.11 (lets say 3) children per family is becayse people die every day. This is enough to sustain a culture and replace the erlier generations while slowly increasing the total population. However we should not increase the birth rate to 8 children (like the non-European nations) until we have an economic model which can support thr population growth. Once we do have the economic model necessary, encourage the people to procreate with their spouses as much as possible. That way we will eventually have the large population, economic stability and thriving culture we will need for our state. That being said, we should NEVER discourage people from procreating, merely not make it our top priority at first.

I wouldnt worry at all about sustaining a large population without an ideal economic structure (not in the short term anyway), unless it was highly concentrated like it is in New York or Chicago. All a person needs to live is food and shelter. And in a state of desolation there really isnt much of an economy because all that is available is what you already have or whatever you can produce right then and there, and then your "market" is limited to whoever happens to live in your area. International trade will be out of the question for a considerable amount of time, so one need not worry about work being or resources being outsourced, even by the immigrant populations. Basically commerce and the distribution of produced supplies will be restricted to your town/city/province and your local economy will be forced to develop a self sustaining system.

It doesn't take forever to grow vegetables.

Catholic Samurai · « **Reply #22 on:** February 19, 2011, 02:28:19 PM »

Quote from: Canuk the Lionheart

Quote from: Catholic Samurai
Quote from: gladius_veritatis
If the state does anything on this point, it should simply be to encourage marital fidelity and fruitfulness by enacting laws that are in accordance with the natural and divine laws. God (using married folks as His instruments) will take care of the rest.

That's actually all I would ever expect the state to do about it. Maybe even give tax incentives for each child...

Exactly, tax incentives is the only way a government can influence the birth rate. Actually, perhaps if we were creating this ideal Catholic state, the nation should have a system of honors for couples who produce X number of children, thus doing their duty to their nation and more importantly their G*d.

I wouldnt go so far as to exalt people for doing something that is naturally good. Medals are for soldiers and heroes, not civilians doing their part.

Catholic Samurai · « **Reply #23 on:** February 19, 2011, 02:42:12 PM »

Quote from: Raoul76

Those who served the country well could be made lords and barons. All sorts of incentives should be given to get people into the military, it should be seen by all as a way to truly advance in life in an honorable way.

That there is a problem. While I think anyone with enough sense to fill such offices would consider them such, I dont think it should be advertised as an incentive. Those positions are for those strong enough to fight and bleed to earn them. That is how they have always been earned. They are not vacant posts to be filled by elections. An aristocracy, as much as I think we need it, is something I will leave totally up to God to set up.

Canuk the Lionheart · « **Reply #24 on:** February 19, 2011, 04:07:32 PM »

Quote from: Catholic Samurai

Quote from: Canuk the Lionheart
Quote from: Catholic Samurai
Quote from: gladius_veritatis
If the state does anything on this point, it should simply be to encourage marital fidelity and fruitfulness by enacting laws that are in accordance with the natural and divine laws. God (using married folks as His instruments) will take care of the rest.

That's actually all I would ever expect the state to do about it. Maybe even give tax incentives for each child...

Exactly, tax incentives is the only way a government can influence the birth rate. Actually, perhaps if we were creating this ideal Catholic state, the nation should have a system of honors for couples who produce X number of children, thus doing their duty to their nation and more importantly their G*d.

I wouldnt go so far as to exalt people for doing something that is naturally good. Medals are for soldiers and heroes, not civilians doing their part.

I have to disagree with you here, any mother who gives birth to multiple children and then proceeds to raise them in the Faith and with good morals is a role model for future generations and deserves recognition.

Canuk the Lionheart · « **Reply #25 on:** February 19, 2011, 04:15:10 PM »

Quote from: Catholic Samurai

Quote from: Raoul76

Those who served the country well could be made lords and barons. All sorts of incentives should be given to get people into the military, it should be seen by all as a way to truly advance in life in an honorable way.

That there is a problem. While I think anyone with enough sense to fill such offices would consider them such, I dont think it should be advertised as an incentive. Those positions are for those strong enough to fight and bleed to earn them. That is how they have always been earned. They are not vacant posts to be filled by elections. An aristocracy, as much as I think we need it, is something I will leave totally up to God to set up.

Before we go on further, we need to decide if we want a monarchy or republic. Judging from the fact we are using the titles lord and baron, I am assumig moarchy right? If it was a monarchy, an aristocracy would be a necessity. The aristocracy would be along with the Church the ultimate supporters of the monarch. The selection of lord and barons should go along the following lines; grant military men fiefdoms along the boarders, and close relatives who are also skilled in military matters lands at strategic positions further in the nation. Loyal men skilled in matters such as organizing agriculture and city planning should be granted lands in the nations heart.

Kailyn · « **Reply #26 on:** February 19, 2011, 05:26:58 PM »

Quote from: Canuk the Lionheart

An average of 2.11 children per family are needed to sustain a culture, I saw the statistic on a youtube video (origionally put out by the BNP I think). However in this scenario we are just in the first steps of creating our nation. I'm sure we'll find reason for increasing the average birth rate later.

No no no. The period of human birth is comprehended in a number in which first increments by involution and evolution (or squared and cubed) obtaining three intervals and four terms of like and unlike, waxing and waning numbers, make all the terms commensurable and agreeable to one another. The base of these (3) with a third added (4) when combined with five (20) and raised to the third power furnishes two harmonies; the first a square which is a hundred times as great (400 = 4 × 100), and the other a figure having one side equal to the former, but oblong, consisting of a hundred numbers squared upon rational diameters of a square (i.e. Omitting fractions), the side of which is five (7 × 7 = 49 × 100 = 4900), each of them being less by one (than the perfect square which includes the fractions, sc. 50) or less by two perfect squares of irrational diameters (of a square the side of which is five = 50 + 50 = 100); and a hundred cubes of three (27 × 100 = 2700 + 4900 + 400 = 8000). If you don't follow this geometric figure, you'll have bad births.

But in all seriousness, don't you think you need to go back further, to first principles?

Canuk the Lionheart · « **Reply #27 on:** February 19, 2011, 07:33:27 PM »

Quote from: Kailyn
But in all seriousness, don't you think you need to go back further, to first principles?[/quote

Wow, you're right, our new (hypothetical) nation dosen't even have a name yet :cry: Any sugestions?

Lybus · « **Reply #28 on:** February 19, 2011, 10:31:14 PM »

We should name it after Saint Thomas Moore.

Lybus · « **Reply #29 on:** February 19, 2011, 10:51:01 PM »

As for first principles, remember how I said the best, or ideal government would be the one that most resembles an image of the trinity? Well, instead of going through all those abstractions, we could cheat and simply use a system of government that the Holy Ghost himself instituted, and that would be the Catholic Church.

The Catholic Church is basically a monarchy, except that it elects its own rulers. It has a system of government that is actually quite personalized, as it is broken up into diocese. Each bishop has close to full authority over his own diocese, with the priests under him. A bishop is not going to interfere in another diocese (at least not directly), so each one is sort of personal to that region (kind of like a republic, in that it is more approachable to normal people). Then we have the Pope, who spends most of his time functioning as a bishop would (at least, back before Vatican II), the main difference between him and a bishop being that he was the final say on disputes concerning faith and morals.

So, I say we have a system of government that resembles how the Catholic Church runs. We would have semi-rulers, who had jurisdiction over their own lands, with a ruler at the top that was elected by these semi-rulers.