Quote Originally Posted by mamouth View Post
my intention is to initiate a discussion on 'understanding theologiocracy'. this is an attempt to understand the nature of working of religion, especially in the modern era. how does religion function in society once it has been confined to the domain of personal belief by secularism and democracy? the concept theologiocracy is brought in in order to characterise the working of religion affecting/influencing the power equilibrium and equations in various aspects of socio-cultural life of people in a post-theocratic society. by saying secularism is the logic of religion, i did not mean that it became another religion. it means only that secularism only provides a convenient logic for the functional division between religious and civil institutions in a democracy. but the argument given for this division cannot be based on viable separation between religion and social. since a radical isolation or dismissal of religion is not possible in relation to socio-cultural affairs, secularism cannot be taken as a non-religious, or anti-religious doctrine.
I think the study of what happens to religions when they lack the advantages of establishment and the power to control what is said about them as well as lacking the ability to control how they change within social context is certainly interesting, and I wish you luck with it.

But I gather that you are seeing then secular society not as another religion but as the framework in which the religions will be acting and which they will be working to modify.

If that's the case, I think you have a problem because you are treating all non-theological governments as a single kind of government and that doesn't hold too well. The manners in which religions work in dictatorships usually involve either trying to win over dictators or supporting revolutions. Whereas in Republics they usually try to influence parties to push their agendas.

You may need to divide the course of study by government type.