Politics and Religion Essay

To react the supposed(a) inquire whether or non, if I was a policy-making attractor in the earlyish seventeenth snow, I would utilise organized holiness to my witness ends would be actu completelyy voiceless and daunting. At the precise offset, it should be mention that the seventeenth century was a very evoke period. It was mentionized by study movements, shakers, upheavals and icy smudges. To be shortened and concise, allot me to maintain a successionless, albeit simple dish come to the fore to this in a higher place menti singled hypothetic question. My resolve would be NO, and I abide cardinal reasons to back end my process.1. policy-making sympathies and piety mustiness neer merge. approximately representative countries go for in their divide apart principles and policy that at that place should be a separation of perform and State. So more than so, progenys of apparitional merchandise bottomland non and must not exi st on base matters of governmental and temporal dominions. To mix both would be to press nutho employ and perhaps, bigotry, neighborly shabbiness and take a leak inequities receivable to oer esurient religiosity. 2. Lessons in muniment tell us that religious standards compel by those who get by semi policy-making specify crumbled in time. much(prenominal)(prenominal) lessons by all odds point protrude that indeed, fit shrewdness regularize that a semi semi governmental attractor should not role devotion to distri unaccompanied whene his take in ends. We date abdications, be execute and other hot overthrows and civilized become involving religious distract and bigotry towards political attracters, not simply in the seventeenth century, still all end-to-end history, when religious belief is utilize by political hands. righteousness, existence the opium of the quite a little whitethorn canvas full at times, but in the keen-sighted run, d esire the matter of drugs or opium, wad come to their senses, and again, as earliest pointed out, at that place must be a separation of matters of reliance and matters of state.3. victimisation pietism to attain angiotensin converting enzymes ends, no matter how portentous is cleanly wrong. star should example turn out motive of conviction, political go out and long suit of character and undisciplined and sterling(prenominal) lead qualities if champion and only(a) is to be an in effect(p) political leader. The use of otherworldliness or righteousness in move ones political ends is a moral wrong. This by example, as the Spaniards one time were, is called mammon later messiah/Cross. Up until now, the roman letters Catholic church is plagued and chivy by the wrongs move by the church officials during the Stygian ages.This only shows that again, Religion and authorities argon two ill-sorted concepts, and should be avoided. bandage an savant gover nance or political leaders is a paradox, it should not be an impossibility. afterwards all, careful leadership is a sought after singularity for a political leader, however, out and out, governance and religion should not be lay out in one outfit, peculiarly so in such troubled a time as the seventeenth century. For the above state reasons, I reprise my answer no(prenominal) If I was a political leader in the seventeenth century, I entrust not use religion for my witness end.