Theocracy, one of the many "ocracys"

By Abrahim Harb

"Theocracy is a form of government in which a god or deity is recognized as the state's supreme civil ruler, or in a higher sense, a form of government in which a state is governed by immediate divine guidance or by officials who are regarded as divinely guided. Human state, either in a personal incarnation or, more often, via religious institutional representatives (i.e., a church), replacing or dominating civil government. Theocracy should be distinguished from other secular forms of government that have a state religion, or are merely influenced by theological or moral concepts, and monarchies held "By the Grace of God." 

When I originally was given this topic to talk about in English class, I was baffled. I was not given the sufficient information to give a proper analysis of the situation and see both sides of the issue at hand. Publishing the original essay I had written would have simply been juvenile and ignorant. Hopefully this new essay will shed new light on the topic of theocracy.

After further research I discovered that some of the founding fathers had different beliefs; George Washington was a nominal Anglican, John Adams was a Unitarian, James Madison was a nominal Episcopalian, and Thomas Jefferson was a denounced Atheist. Also, the founding fathers never mention God in the Constitution. They spent endless hours creating this document that would be widely know as the Constitution of the United States Of America and inspected every line of it, making it secular, meaning that it would have no hint or implication of religion. If all these men, who were wise beyond their times could come together and write a piece of legislation, without their personal religious believes shining through the text, then how has it become such a issue in modern society?

With that being said, I am not attempting to belittle any religion, or saying that the president, along with other government officials should not be permitted to practice his or her religion. I am simply saying that the government and its officials should govern without the biases of their religion taking full reign, in the thought process. Also being applied to the citizens of the United States and other countries, not judging there officials for being a certain religion. Obviously, in one out of five cases, the persons beliefs must take the reign. But what should also be taken into consideration, are the thoughts of the general population that they represent, and in the presidents case, what would be a compromise for all parties involved. Going with just your opinion, does no justice to the power given to these officials, and stems up a new vine to climb up.

Even if, according to Theocracy is derived from the two Greek words Qeo/j (Theos) meaning "God" and kra/tein (cratein) meaning "to rule."….Champions of theocracy, call it a "christocracy"…Theocracy means God is in control, and you are not."

In the Middle Ages, theocracy was practiced through the majority of the world. My personal thoughts, along with philosophers, and researchers, that a deity or God ruling over the government and life can bring no harm. The God or deity that you believe in does things for a reason. Whether “it” takes something or someone out of your life that was dear to you, puts you in an uncomfortable situation, or allows praise to come upon you. All of this, leads up to my point being that if governing body, ruled over you and something went wrong; the government would get the blame for it, and it would be their error. If a God or deity did such a thing, a true believer, would see it as the deity/ God I believe in, can do no harm. Everything happens for a reason, no world can go around without it.

This is as far as I will dip into the topic for now. Final thought to ponder upon, is the theocratic government in Saudi Arabia too extreme, or are they staying close to their roots, leaving no room for modernization?