[lurk2]

> The main component is driving sexual others into social service contract cults while severing ties to clan/family.

The implication being homo- and asexuals join the clergy because it obviates the expectation that they will marry? How does this lead to secularization?

Protestantism lacks a clerical tradition (reverends and ministers can still get married, and there are no monasteries to join), so how does your theory apply there?

[ashoeafoot]

It produces church bureaucracy which becomes state bureaucracy , the judge looks like a priest for a reason.

[lurk2]

That’s what I suspected you meant, but it doesn’t address my two other questions. What does this have to do with sexual others? How does it track with the Protestant tradition?

[ashoeafoot]

Protestant tradition was to declare sinful almost every expression of sexuality. Leading to a ton of supressed non normative sexuality.

Whose owners then migrated into state bureaucracy and public services . From prussia to the pentagon, the smithers clichee is very much alive and a byproduct of that culture.

And rules based and hierarchy based as such systems are, they develop a live of their own. Until a monarch as pope competitor appears, takes over or copies the machinery for the catholics, or a protestant develops rigor by internalizing the inquisition and deciding to dedicate his life to paperwork for jesuses justice and to escape temptation .