that beginning with the Enlightenment and accelerating with industrialization we see the political domination of politics by religion disappearing? Christiandom was the existing state of affairs before the enlightenment, but they sure circumscribed what they thought were allowable areas of analysis and which weren't. And really, coming from you I had to smile when you cited bureaucracy and taxes as "advanced". o_O

not just the TYW but also things like the Dutch revolt against Spain, the French Wars of Religion, and the English Civil War was a big, big part of it.  A century of bloodletting definitely meant that most of the Christian churches had lost their coercive power and would never really get it back.

each other in the Somme and [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Passchendaele]Passchendaele[/url] at the apogee of "Christendom" was not what we non-Christians, who wanted entry to the world of Christendom, found edifying.

Not to speak of the rapid conversion of good Christian soldiers into [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einsatzgruppen]approval of the work of Heydrich and others of his ilk.[/url]

[quote]The only time that Manstein ever saw fit during the war to complain about the actions of the Einsatzgruppen occurred in a 1941 letter to Otto Ohlendorf, when Manstein complained that since his men were so helpful with assisting Ohlendorf's men with murdering Jews it was really unfair that the SS should insist upon keeping all of the wrist-watches of murdered Jews for themselves instead of sharing with the Army.[/quote]

Also, seeing what Christians did to their own valued civilisational treasures in Rotterdam and Dresden, perhaps those treasures - there and in other places - weren't really worthwhile enough?

the US constitution, a wholly secular document, predates the French revolution.

And challenging the RCC is challenging Christiandom as a single entity. Multiple sects leads to multiple heresies and the lack of any single organizing principle, as the religious wars that followed show pretty clearly.

because it was a huge concern for secular leaders.  I defer to Andrew for the particulars.

as another organization, to begin with.  It saw itself as the bride of Christ, as living members of His mystical body, and as such, the ideal was that it should be governed by the Holy Spirit and being governed by the Holy Spirit meant that offices in the Church should be chosen by the clergy, not simply passed down from father to son.  They opposed clerical marriage and the consequent hereditary nature of a priesthood for the same reason that they opposed the selling of Church offices and the appointment of clerical personnel by laypeople. 

As a sort of fun fact, there were plenty of moral theologians as late as the late twelfth century who thought that clerical celibacy was a terrible idea.

...is solely through the belief in Christ.

In fact, belief is all that is necessary....there is no doctrine of Making Merit as there is in Buddhism.

All the rest is folderol & an excess of self delusion ....Christ would not have this problem.

Nor would he approve.

Traveller

I'm far from understanding why you think the way you do. A month without modernity, as in indoor plumbing, reliable heat, modern medicine, electricity, etc. would be long enough for me. I think the past, especially pre-19th century, is far too romanticized.