# Nations With Official (or Unofficial) Theocratic Tendencies **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 27, 2009, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nations-with-official-or-unofficial-theocratic-tendencies/507921 "2009-08-27T16:17:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![HeyHomie](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heyhomie/32/207_2.png) [@HeyHomie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HeyHomie)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nations-with-official-or-unofficial-theocratic-tendencies/507921/1 "2009-08-27T16:17:28Z")
What are some nations that aren’t strictly theocracies (and FTR, wikipedia only lists two: Iran and Vatican City), but in which the church (or whatever) plays a not-insignificant role in government? I’ll posit two: 1. Ireland. An SDMB poster once mentioned that Ireland’s public schools are all run by the Catholic Church. He/she further went to say that if the schools are full, the Church may implement its right to only accept Catholic students, meaning that non-Catholic kids either have to get baptised Catholic, or enroll in a private school. 2. Greece. I have absolutely no cite to back this up, and I only have vague recollections about this, but ISTR reading somewhere (perhaps from a Greek poster here on the SDMB) that the Greek Orthodox Church has a lot more direct influence over the Greek government than either side is willing to admit. Again, no cite, that’s just a vague recollection. So where else? And for the sake of simplicity, let’s go ahead and get “Basically the entire Middle East” out of the way. ---
**Author:** ![psychonaut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/psychonaut/32/4655_2.png) [@psychonaut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psychonaut)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nations-with-official-or-unofficial-theocratic-tendencies/507921/2 "2009-08-27T16:52:10Z")
The UK’s head of state is also the head of the established church of one of its constituent countries. (However, both roles are largely ceremonial.) Also, 26 seats in the upper legislature (some 4% of its membership) are reserved for bishops of that established church. They do not normally vote on legislative matters, but may do so. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nations-with-official-or-unofficial-theocratic-tendencies/507921/3 "2009-08-27T17:07:31Z")
Tibet (before China invaded) was a theocracy, with the lamas basically ruling the country. ---
**Author:** ![HorseloverFat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8e8cbc/32.png) [@HorseloverFat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HorseloverFat)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nations-with-official-or-unofficial-theocratic-tendencies/507921/4 "2009-08-27T17:44:01Z")
Anywhere there are sharia courts that can impose punishments. So all of the middle east, Indonesia, Bangladesh, India, Philipines, and the UK. ---
**Author:** ![Rayne\_Man](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/df705f/32.png) [@Rayne\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rayne_Man)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nations-with-official-or-unofficial-theocratic-tendencies/507921/5 "2009-08-27T18:53:40Z")
> [@HorseloverFat](#): > > Anywhere there are sharia courts that can impose punishments. So all of the middle east, Indonesia, Bangladesh, India, Philipines, and the UK. In spite of what you might read in the _Daily Mail_ or _Express_ I wouldn’t take too seriously the statement that there is Sharia Law in the UK. True there are “Sharia Courts” but they are entirely voluntary and are only used as a sort of arbitration panel. Only UK law is binding in the UK. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nations-with-official-or-unofficial-theocratic-tendencies/507921/6 "2009-08-27T19:03:08Z")
> [@Rayne\_Man](#): > > In spite of what you might read in the _Daily Mail_ or _Express_ I wouldn’t take too seriously the statement that there is Sharia Law in the UK. True there are “Sharia Courts” but they are entirely voluntary and are only used as a sort of arbitration panel. Only UK law is binding in the UK. Quite, if that is the what’s required of a theocracy the US is also one, as the judgments of the [Beth Din](http://www.bethdin.org/) are considered binding in the US in areas such as divorce law (exactly the same as Sharia courts in the UK). Of course the UK also has Church of England ecclesiastical courts that have much more wide ranging powers, though its already been pointed out that, on paper at least the UK is a theocracy. ---
**Author:** ![alphaboi867](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alphaboi867/32/3898_2.png) [@alphaboi867](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alphaboi867)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nations-with-official-or-unofficial-theocratic-tendencies/507921/7 "2009-08-27T21:24:35Z")
> [@HeyHomie](#): > > …1) Ireland. An SDMB poster once mentioned that Ireland’s public schools are all run by the Catholic Church. He/she further went to say that if the schools are full, the Church may implement its right to only accept Catholic students, meaning that non-Catholic kids either have to get baptised Catholic, or enroll in a private school… I’m not Irish, but my understanding that most schools in the Republic of Ireland are privately owned (mainly by churchs), but the state funds them if they teach a government approved curriculum (instead of the state running schools directly). So while most schools are run by the Roman Catholic Church, but there’s also some run by Protestants or even secular groups. Granted if you live in the country the local Catholic school is probally your only option. ---
**Author:** ![Apollyon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/apollyon/32/4238_2.png) [@Apollyon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apollyon)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nations-with-official-or-unofficial-theocratic-tendencies/507921/8 "2009-08-27T23:45:37Z")
> [@HeyHomie](#): > > What are some nations that aren’t strictly theocracies (and FTR, wikipedia only lists two: Iran and Vatican City), but in which the church (or whatever) plays a not-insignificant role in government? Are you excluding the US from your question? Because while I’d agree that officially the US is far from being theocratic – arguably is officially as non-theocratic as it is possible to be – practically speaking being an attending member of a religion (and one religion in particular) appears to be almost a pre-requisite for election to government. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nations-with-official-or-unofficial-theocratic-tendencies/507921/9 "2009-08-28T00:06:10Z")
> [@Apollyon](#): > > Are you excluding the US from your question? > > Because while I’d agree that officially the US is far from being theocratic – arguably is officially as non-theocratic as it is possible to be – practically speaking being an attending member of a religion (and one religion in particular) appears to be almost a pre-requisite for election to government. Indeed thats the irony of the US-vs-US comparison. On paper the UK is a theocracy, the head of state is the head of the established religion, and numerous state bodies are bound up with the established religion. In reality the US is FAR more close to a theocracy that the UK, and for all its checks and balances against “establishment of religion”, it does quite clearly have an “established religion”. ---
**Author:** ![MsRobyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/90ced4/32.png) [@MsRobyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MsRobyn)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 2:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nations-with-official-or-unofficial-theocratic-tendencies/507921/10 "2009-08-28T02:44:51Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > Quite, if that is the what’s required of a theocracy the US is also one, as the judgments of the [Beth Din](http://www.bethdin.org/) are considered binding in the US in areas such as divorce law (exactly the same as Sharia courts in the UK). > > Of course the UK also has Church of England ecclesiastical courts that have much more wide ranging powers, though its already been pointed out that, on paper at least the UK is a theocracy. AIUI, the beth din can only issue a _get_, or a religious divorce. The couple still has to go through the civil courts to have the marriage dissolved in the eyes of the civil law. I believe the _New York Post_ as much as I believe the Fleet Street press, but there is apparently a movement to require oversight of the beth din in New York by the civil courts to make sure the beth din’s decisions are in accordance with state law in addition to Jewish law. ---
**Author:** ![suranyi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e36b37/32.png) [@suranyi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/suranyi)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nations-with-official-or-unofficial-theocratic-tendencies/507921/11 "2009-08-28T03:11:34Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > Indeed thats the irony of the US-vs-US comparison. On paper the UK is a theocracy, the head of state is the head of the established religion, and numerous state bodies are bound up with the established religion. > In reality the US is FAR more close to a theocracy that the UK, and for all its checks and balances against “establishment of religion”, it does quite clearly have an “established religion”. On the other hand, there have been plenty of non-Christians elected to public office in the U.S. For example, neither senator from California is Christian. So the “established religion” doesn’t have complete control, as it would in a true theocracy. ---
**Author:** ![Jerseyman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/bbce88/32.png) [@Jerseyman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jerseyman)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nations-with-official-or-unofficial-theocratic-tendencies/507921/12 "2009-08-28T03:32:47Z")
I can’t imagine any American getting elected to high office without appeal to _Gawd_ and I can’t imagine any European being trusted as sane enough to elect with it (outside of maybe Ireland, Poland and Russia) ---
**Author:** ![Apollyon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/apollyon/32/4238_2.png) [@Apollyon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apollyon)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nations-with-official-or-unofficial-theocratic-tendencies/507921/13 "2009-08-28T03:40:12Z")
> [@suranyi](#): > > For example, neither senator from California is Christian. Both of whom are Jewish? I wonder if there is a list available of US Senators by religion… hehe… gotta love [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_affiliation_in_the_United_States_Senate): 87% Christian, 14% Jewish (guess there’s some rounding in there), and 0% No Religion/Atheist/Agnostic. I can’t find a similarly plain list for Congress but this wiki page on [Congress religious demographics](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Members_of_the_111th_United_States_Congress#Religious_demographics) claims an historical total of one Atheist congress member… ever. 🙂 > [@](#): > > So the “established religion” doesn’t have complete control, as it would in a true theocracy. True, but the OP asked for nations where “the church … plays a not-insignificant role in government”, which I think arguably fits the US well. (And why I asked if the US was excluded by OP fiat). ---
**Author:** ![suranyi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e36b37/32.png) [@suranyi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/suranyi)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 3:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nations-with-official-or-unofficial-theocratic-tendencies/507921/14 "2009-08-28T03:46:39Z")
> [@Apollyon](#): > > Both of whom are Jewish? I wonder if there is a list available of US Senators by religion… hehe… gotta love [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_affiliation_in_the_United_States_Senate): 87% Christian, 14% Jewish (guess there’s some rounding in there), and 0% No Religion/Atheist/Agnostic. I can’t find a similarly plain list for Congress but this wiki page on [Congress religious demographics](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Members_of_the_111th_United_States_Congress#Religious_demographics) claims an historical total of one Atheist congress member… ever. 🙂 And he happens to be my congressman. So with two Jewish senators and an atheist congressman, I don’t feel like I’m dominated by Christians. I guess I live in fairly unique part of the country. Among other things, the biggest ethnic group here is Asians. ---
**Author:** ![runcible\_spoon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9fc29f/32.png) [@runcible\_spoon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/runcible_spoon)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 3:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nations-with-official-or-unofficial-theocratic-tendencies/507921/15 "2009-08-28T03:52:42Z")
> [@Apollyon](#): > > Both of whom are Jewish? I wonder if there is a list available of US Senators by religion… hehe… gotta love [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_affiliation_in_the_United_States_Senate): 87% Christian, 14% Jewish (guess there’s some rounding in there), and 0% No Religion/Atheist/Agnostic. I can’t find a similarly plain list for Congress but this wiki page on [Congress religious demographics](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Members_of_the_111th_United_States_Congress#Religious_demographics) claims an historical total of one Atheist congress member… ever. 🙂 > > True, but the OP asked for nations where “the church … plays a not-insignificant role in government”, which I think arguably fits the US well. (And why I asked if the US was excluded by OP fiat). Well, the argument could certainly be made that there’s a difference between religion and the church. Religion certainly plays a much bigger part in politics in the US, but I don’t think churches really do. I guess to me it’s the difference between being a member of a church, and being a priest. The US has lots of church members involved in government, but not so many priests. At least not officially, and not in a particularly systematic way. ---
**Author:** ![panache45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/panache45/32/64_2.png) [@panache45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panache45)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 3:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nations-with-official-or-unofficial-theocratic-tendencies/507921/16 "2009-08-28T03:54:44Z")
> [@suranyi](#): > > So the “established religion” doesn’t have complete control, as it would in a true theocracy. But the OP is not referring to “true theocracies.” It would be hard to deny the power that Judeo-Christian religion has in U.S. politics. ---
**Author:** ![Apollyon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/apollyon/32/4238_2.png) [@Apollyon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apollyon)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nations-with-official-or-unofficial-theocratic-tendencies/507921/17 "2009-08-28T04:04:23Z")
> [@suranyi](#): > > And he happens to be my congressman. So with two Jewish senators and an atheist congressman, I don’t feel like I’m dominated by Christians. That’d be cool – on my visits to the US (and brief period of living there) the strong religiosity was I think the most foreign thing about the experience. (Well, except for the aisles of guns in a sports store). 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 4:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nations-with-official-or-unofficial-theocratic-tendencies/507921/18 "2009-08-28T04:08:38Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > On paper the UK is a theocracy, Wrong. On paper–and in reality–it’s a constitutional monarchy. > [@](#): > > the head of state is the head of the established religion, The head of state is the monarch. Being the titular head of the established church is just one of the so-called duties of that particular position. > [@](#): > > and numerous state bodies are bound up with the established religion. Which would those be? > [@](#): > > In reality the US is FAR more close to a theocracy that the UK, and for all its checks and balances against “establishment of religion”, it does quite clearly have an “established religion”. What would that established religion be and how is the government sponsoring it? ---
**Author:** ![Cunctator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/43a26b/32.png) [@Cunctator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cunctator)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 4:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nations-with-official-or-unofficial-theocratic-tendencies/507921/19 "2009-08-28T04:34:51Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > Of course the UK also has Church of England ecclesiastical courts that have much more wide ranging powers What are they? Do they affect non-members of the C of E? ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 4:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nations-with-official-or-unofficial-theocratic-tendencies/507921/20 "2009-08-28T04:40:29Z")
> [@Apollyon](#): > > Are you excluding the US from your question? > > Because while I’d agree that officially the US is far from being theocratic – arguably is officially as non-theocratic as it is possible to be – practically speaking being an attending member of a religion (and one religion in particular) appears to be almost a pre-requisite for election to government. Odd that. When the Atheists want to show a list of great atheists, they often include many US Presidents. Quite a few US President- while not perhaps “atheists” were not regular churchgoers or perhaps “deists”. Here’s a cite: > **[Religious affiliations of presidents of the United States](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_affiliations_of_United_States_Presidents)** > > This is an accepted version of this page > > > Religious affiliations can affect the electability of the presidents of the United States and shape their stances on policy matters and their visions of society and also how they want to lead it. While no president so far has ever openly identified as an atheist, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and William Howard Taft were speculated to be atheists by their opponents during political campaigns; in addition, a survey during the first presidency of Do... \*The irreligious In some cases there is a paucity of material that suggests that religion was important to certain presidents. For example, next to no evidence exists for Monroe’s personal religious beliefs. This may be a consequence of his destruction of most of his personal correspondence, in which religious sentiments may have been recorded. Franklin Steiner lists four presidents as “not affiliated” and six others as “religious views doubtful”: ``` * James Madison * James Monroe * Martin Van Buren * William Henry Harrison * John Tyler * Zachary Taylor * Andrew Johnson * Ulysses S. Grant * Rutherford B. Hayes * Chester Arthur ``` As with claims of deism, these identifications are not without controversy. Deism and the founding fathers Deism was a religious philosophy in common currency in colonial times, and some founding fathers (most notably Thomas Paine, who was an explicit proponent of it) are identified more or less with this system. Nevertheless a number of early presidents are sometimes identified as holding deist tenets, though there is no president who identified himself as such. The following Presidents are often identified as having some degree of deistic beliefs:[6] ``` * George Washington * Thomas Jefferson * James Madison * James Monroe * John Tyler * Abraham Lincoln ``` Note, however, that most of these identifications are controversial. … Four presidents are positively affiliated with Unitarian churches, and a fifth (Jefferson) was an exponent of ideas now commonly associated with Unitarianism. - There are also around 13 (of 50) US Senators who are listed as Jewish, a couple who are Unitarian, and one Unspecified. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nations-with-official-or-unofficial-theocratic-tendencies/507921.md?page=2)