The Origins of the Separation of Church and State

can be found in Christianity.  I got into a conversation with some SSPXers, got a bunch of links and resources out in the course of answering their challenges to this notion, and figured I might as well make them usefully available to more people.  So--here we go.

The Enlightenment Is Over

According to this rather fascinating article.  The whole thing is well worth a read, but here we hit the thesis:

...What liberals have awoken to, and what many orthodox Catholics thinkers, unfortunately, have not, is that the Enlightenment is over. As Jurgen Habermas stated in his remarkable 2004 exchange with the former Cardinal Ratzinger, Western culture is now “post-secular.” Liberalism has finally recognized and accepted the contingent, particularist, historically and culturally conditioned, non-necessary, non-self-evident (pace Thomas Jefferson), and eminently debatable character of its first principles.

Vatican II's Teaching Authority

What authority hath Vatican II?  One answer.  Excerpts:

It is impossible ('for a Catholic') to take a position for Vatican II but against Trent or Vatican I. Whoever accepts Vatican II, as it has been clearly expressed and understood itself, at the same time accepts the whole binding tradition of the Catholic Church, particularly the two previous Councils. And that also applies to the so-called 'progressivism', at least in its extreme forms. It is likewise impossible to decide in favour of Trent and Vatican I, but against Vatican II. Whoever denies Vatican II denies the authority that upholds the other two Councils and thereby detaches them from their foundation. And this applies to the so called 'traditionalism', also in its extreme forms. Every partisan choice destroys the whole which can exist only as an indivisible unity.

Over against both tendencies, before all else, it must be stated that Vatican II is upheld by the same authority as Vatican I and the Council of Trent, namely, the Pope and the College of Bishops in communion with him, and that also with regard to its contents, Vatican II is in the strictest continuity with both previous councils and incorporates their texts word for word in decisive points." (The Ratzinger Report,1985)...

Together, the Pope and the bishops in assembly constitute the highest teaching authority of the Church, so you can probably deduce for yourself that wilfully to reject such authority would separate you from the Church in a very serious manner. At the conclusion of each document of Vatican II, there is a statement by Pope Paul VI emphasizing the collegial unity of the Pope and the bishops in approving the documents:

"Each and every one of the things set forth in this (here the type of document is named) has won the consent of the fathers. We too, by the Apostolic Authority conferred on us by Christ, join with the venerable Fathers in approving, decreeing, and establishing these things in the Holy Spirit, and we direct that what has thus been enacted in Synod be published to God’s glory…I, Paul, Bishop of the Catholic Church."

At the close of the Council, the following words read on behalf of Pope Paul VI convey the expected response from the faithful:

"We decide moreover that all that has been established synodally is to be religiously observed by all the faithful (our italics), for the glory of God and the dignity of the Church… we have approved and established these things, decreeing that the present letters are and remain stable and valid, and are to have legal effectiveness, so that they be disseminated and obtain full and complete effect..." (December 8, 1965)

The argument is sometimes put forward that no infallible pronouncements were made during Vatican II, and certainly the words of Pope Paul VI seem to support this:

"There are those who ask what authority, what theological qualification the Council intended to give to its teachings, knowing that it avoided issuing solemn dogmatic definitions engaging the infallibility of the ecclesiastical Magisterium. The answer is known by whoever remembers the conciliar declaration of March 6, 1964, repeated on November 16, 1964: given the Council’s pastoral character, it avoided pronouncing, in an extraordinary manner, dogmas endowed with the note of infallibility." (Paul VI, General Audience of January 12, 1966)

Even if we accept that the Council made no infallible pronouncements, however, it is still a serious act of disobedience, a sin in fact, to ignore or reject the Church's non-infallible teachings. When Pope Paul VI stated "that all that has been established synodally is to be religiously observed by all the faithful," he is reminding us that all the teachings and admonitions of the Church are worthy of reverence. The Catechism speaks of the assent required of all Catholics:

Divine assistance is also given to the successors of the apostles, teaching in communion with the successor of Peter, and, in a particular way, to the bishop of Rome, pastor of the whole Church, when, without arriving at an infallible definition and without pronouncing in a "definitive manner" (our italics),they propose in the exercise of the ordinary Magisterium a teaching that leads to better understanding of Revelation in matters of faith and morals. To this ordinary teaching the faithful "are to adhere to it with religious assent" (our italics) which, though distinct from the assent of faith, is nonetheless an extension of it (Catechism:892).

Again, it is important to focus on exactly what the Council wrote and actually intended, rather than to focus on certain interpretations of Council documents that you believe are unacceptable or damaging to the faith. No one is asking you to shut down your critical faculties, however, and you should feel free to express your views in a respectful manner as the need arises. Nevertheless, give the Council what theologians call assensus religiosus; that is, the religious assent of mind and will, trusting that Holy Mother Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, possesses "the fullness of the means of salvation." (The Second Vatican Council: Decree on Ecumenism)...

A Useful Reminder to us All

I love this description:

Novatianism, in the tests which it used, its efforts after a perfectly pure communion, its crotchetty interpretations of Scripture, and many other features, presents a striking parallel to many modern sects. [See Dict. Chr. Biog., Blunt, Sects and heresies, Ceillier, II. 427, etc.]

Don't let the perfect become the enemy of the good.