Vatican/Holy See, State, or not?

[CDNBear]

Can a case be made that the Holy See and by extension the Vatican, does not fit the definition of State, as defined by International Law?

The Vatican is a City State, with the borders of Italy. It is not recognized as an international State, by legal definition, nor by association.

The Holy See, an entity, not a physical State, is recognized for it's international status at the UN as an Observer Nation, because of it's political clout and relations with 177 nations.

This is the only part of the criteria for "State" that the Holy See has accomplished. It fails to fulfill the other necessary requirements under international law. I submit that the Holy See enjoys this status, simply on the grounds of its far reaching power, and not based on the fulfillment of the full criteria.

Furthermore, it can also be argued that the Holy See, as a recognized State, Observer member of the UN is in actual fact a "Failed State" as defined by the criteria to observe international law, where it pertains to acts outside the states boundaries.

As was used to define Afghanistan as a failed state, by NATO and later by the UN. The Holy See, can too be viewed as a failed state, for having willfully, both covertly and overtly circumventing International Law, under the Convention of the rights of the Child.

 

[karrie]

Can a case be made that the Holy See and by extension the Vatican, does not fit the definition of State, as defined by International Law?

The Vatican is a City State, with the borders of Italy. It is not recognized as an international State, by legal definition, nor by association.

The Holy See, an entity, not a physical State, is recognized for it's international status at the UN as an Observer Nation, because of it's political clout and relations with 177 nations.

This is the only part of the criteria for "State" that the Holy See has accomplished. It fails to fulfill the other necessary requirements under international law. I submit that the Holy See enjoys this status, simply on the grounds of its far reaching power, and not based on the fulfillment of the full criteria.

which requirements?

 

[gerryh]

which requirements?

I'm waiting with baited breath for his answer.

 

[CDNBear]

• Has space or territory which has internationally recognized boundaries (boundary disputes are OK).
• Has people who live there on an ongoing basis.
• Has economic activity and an organized economy. A country regulates foreign and domestic trade and issues money.
• Has the power of social engineering, such as education.
• Has a transportation system for moving goods and people.
• Has a government which provides public services and police power.
• Has sovereignty. No other State should have power over the country's territory.
• Has external recognition. A country has been "voted into the club" by other countries.

Country, State, Nation - Definition of Country, State, and Nation


Or you can do your own leg work at sites like duhaime.org, or the International Law Library.

 

[gerryh]

Ok, so which things do not apply, because I find the majority do apply.

 

[gerryh]

As for us doing the leg work, it isyou making the claim. YOU back it up.

 

[karrie]

Country, State, Nation - Definition of Country, State, and Nation


Or you can do your own leg work at sites like duhaime.org, or the International Law Library.

from what I see all of those apply to the Vatican.

 

[CDNBear]

Ok, so which things do not apply, because I find the majority do apply.

:roll:

As for us doing the leg work, it isyou making the claim. YOU back it up.

Asked and answered.

Now, given the predetermined position you and Karrie have, would it really matter?

 

[karrie]

Now, given the predetermined position you and Karrie have, would it really matter?

Predetermined? What makes you think my position was predetermined. I just don't see how those criteria don't apply to the Vatican.

• Has space or territory which has internationally recognized boundaries (boundary disputes are OK).
• check
• Has people who live there on an ongoing basis.
• check
• Has economic activity and an organized economy. A country regulates foreign and domestic trade and issues money.
• check
• Has the power of social engineering, such as education.
• check
• Has a transportation system for moving goods and people.
• check
• Has a government which provides public services and police power.
• check
• Has sovereignty. No other State should have power over the country's territory.
• check
• Has external recognition. A country has been "voted into the club" by other countries.
• check

You'd need to explain why you feel they don't meet those criteria for me to really go any further with the convo.

 

[CDNBear]

Predetermined? What makes you think my position was predetermined. I just don't see how those criteria don't apply to the Vatican.

• Has space or territory which has internationally recognized boundaries (boundary disputes are OK).
• check
• Has people who live there on an ongoing basis.
• check
• Has economic activity and an organized economy. A country regulates foreign and domestic trade and issues money.
• check
• Has the power of social engineering, such as education.
• check
• Has a transportation system for moving goods and people.
• check
• Has a government which provides public services and police power.
• check
• Has sovereignty. No other State should have power over the country's territory.
• check
• Has external recognition. A country has been "voted into the club" by other countries.
• check

You'd need to explain why you feel they don't meet those criteria for me to really go any further with the convo.

That's the Vatican City Karrie.

The Holy See is the recognized State, the Head thereof is the Pope. It is an entity, not a place, or tangible thing. The Vatican is not the body that is an Observer Nation at the UN.

The Holy See is a theological entity. How can it poses any of the criteria, other then recognition?

 

[gerryh]

What I think is happening is that those that oppose the RCC are grasping at straws to try and bring down the Church. The Batican has been recognized as being an independent state with the Pope as it's head for decades if not longer.

 

[Icarus27k]

I'm going to dispute your link a little and say that I always thought of "country" as a somewhat relative term. There are a lot of examples that uncontroversially fit the definition of "country". But I can see how places like Greenland, Puerto Rico, and Hong Kong can be countries if one is using the term broadly.

So yes, Vatican City is a country because I use the term broadly.

Edit: Upon second read, you're asking whether Vatican City is a state or not. The defining characteristic of a state seems to be self-goverance, and Vatican City does have that.

 

[CDNBear]

What I think is happening is that those that oppose the RCC are grasping at straws to try and bring down the Church. The Vatican has been recognized as being an independent state with the Pope as it's head for decades if not longer.

Gh, you know full well that is not my premise and certainly not my intent.

This is merely a discussion. Please don't try finding words between the lines.

The Lateran Treaty granted sovereignty to the Holy See, but not the City State of the Vatican.

Up until 2008, the Vatican automatically adopted all Italian laws. Considering that the Vatican still collects financing by taxation, via otto per milli. It is not IMHO a state either.

 

[karrie]

That's the Vatican City Karrie.

The Holy See is the recognized State, the Head thereof is the Pope. It is an entity, not a place, or tangible thing. The Vatican is not the body that is an Observer Nation at the UN.

The Holy See is a theological entity. How can it poses any of the criteria, other then recognition?

Ah, okay, I see the hairs you are splitting. To me it's about the same as trying to separate a monarchy from a country.

 

[CDNBear]

Ah, okay, I see the hairs you are splitting. To me it's about the same as trying to separate a monarchy from a country.

I'm not splitting hairs, that is the set up as laid out in accordance to treaty and international law. It has nothing to do with my opinion.

Seeing as the Holy See, a theological entity, is the Internationally recognized State. It does not meet the criteria. Furthermore, even if I were to concede. By act in contrary to International Law that it is an observer of, it has entered the same failed state status as Afghanistan. No?

 

[karrie]

I'm not splitting hairs, that is the set up as laid out in accordance to treaty and international law. It has nothing to do with my opinion.

Seeing as the Holy See, a theological entity, is the Internationally recognized State. It does not meet the criteria. Furthermore, even if I were to concede. By act in contrary to International Law that it is an observer of, it has entered the same failed state status as Afghanistan. No?

I don't know Bear... how do you differentiate between the state being a failure and the leader being one when they're so intertwined? I think the office is fine, it's the man in it that's the issue. And most of the policies and actions contrary to international law weren't committed while he was Holy See. They were issues from when he was in his previous office.

 

[CDNBear]

I don't know Bear... how do you differentiate between the state being a failure and the leader being one when they're so intertwined?

Karrie, a tough question, that I don't have an easy answer to. I look for justice here. In the process of obtaining that justice a greater injustice may be perpetrated, and I find myself torn.

I am quite cognizant of the far reaching implications of an arrest of the Pope, would have. My only suggestion is, that the body of the Church, demand his removal from the seat of power, and upon the the placement of a new Pope. He be handed over to the authorities and tried.

If justice is not sought here Karrie. It will be a black eye on the Church in, pardon the pun, biblical proportions. IMHO, it would make the Spanish Inquisition look like a fairy tale.

I think the office is fine, it's the man in it that's the issue. And most of the policies and actions contrary to international law weren't committed while he was Holy See. They were issues from when he was in his previous office.

I agree, but by virtue of his post, he can direct the whole of the body to continue the travesty. His very position within the Church, perverts justice and decency. Hence my earlier suggestion.

Karrie, this is not something I came to on a whim. I have been mulling this over since the first time you and I chatted about it. Which is why I phrased the OP as delicately as I could.

 

[wulfie68]

I'm a little confused on what exactly is meant by the Holy See. If we're referring to the administrative body of the Roman Catholic Church, then is it not the gov't ruling Vatican city, and not necessarily a nation but the government of one?

 

[AnnaG]

As far as I can tell, the Vatican City is a sovereign nation and the See is simply the episcopal jurisdiction for that state forming the "gov't" of the RCC and not a state by itself. I have always viewed it as an entity existing inside the Vatican City.

 

[AnnaG]

I'm a little confused on what exactly is meant by the Holy See. If we're referring to the administrative body of the Roman Catholic Church, then is it not the gov't ruling Vatican city, and not necessarily a nation but the government of one?

Vatican: the Holy See