Religious Liberty

Started by EliRotello, November 08, 2018, 03:29:24 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

EliRotello

If the civil authorities forced you to go to Catholic Church, would you be free to go to Catholic Church?
https://twitter.com/EliRotello

#20DecadeRosary
#LocalDiocesanParish

Kreuzritter

Insufficient information. "Free" and "forced" in what senses?

EliRotello

https://twitter.com/EliRotello

#20DecadeRosary
#LocalDiocesanParish

EliRotello

If a civil power compels you to go to the Catholic Church, do you have the Religious Liberty to go, thereby, in any which way, whatsoever?
https://twitter.com/EliRotello

#20DecadeRosary
#LocalDiocesanParish

Daniel

#4
Your question is still too vague.

"Religious liberty" (by a traditional Catholic interpretation) is defined as the "liberty" (i.e. the permission or allowance) to practice "religion" (i.e. the true religion, not false religions). If the Catholic religion is true, and if the police forcibly take you to a Catholic Church and make you attend Mass, then yes, you are free(/permitted/allowed) to practice religion, and yes, you have religious liberty. (In fact, in that sort of situation you have even more liberty, since the police are assisting you in your practice of religion.)

But by a secularist or a modernist interpretation, no, you wouldn't have "religious freedom". Because to them all "religions" (true religion as well as false religion) need to be regarded as equal, and "freedom" / "liberty" imply that you must have the option (or at least be permitted) to practice whichever "religion" you so choose. If the police force you to materially participate in Catholic worship, then you are no longer "free" to practice any "religion" which forbids its practitioners from material participation in Catholic worship.

Xavier

#5
Think of most Catholic countries before the 60s. Nobody was forced to go to a Catholic church. But the Protestant sects and the Communists etc were forbidden to proselytze Catholics - which is what Archbishop Lefebvre and Cardinal Ottaviani argued for. It would have benefited Latin America and all Catholic countries and the world to have made explicit declarations reiterating the Kingship of Christ and the Queenship of Mary and the duty of states to be confessionally Catholic. Those born in heresy or heathenism will not be denied freedom to live and work, in a Catholic State. They wil not, however, be given government support in proselytising.
Bible verses on walking blamelessly with God, after being forgiven from our former sins. Some verses here: https://dailyverses.net/blameless

"[2] He that walketh without blemish, and worketh justice:[3] He that speaketh truth in his heart, who hath not used deceit in his tongue: Nor hath done evil to his neighbour: nor taken up a reproach against his neighbours.(Psalm 14)

"[2] For in many things we all offend. If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man."(James 3)

"[14] And do ye all things without murmurings and hesitations; [15] That you may be blameless, and sincere children of God, without reproof, in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation; among whom you shine as lights in the world." (Phil 2:14-15)

Kreuzritter

#6
Case in point. Traddies of a Scholastic bent use the word 'freedom' in a very peculiar sense that doesn't signify the same concept or reality which most of us would understand by it but one which, again, comes from Stoicism, in which right willing is following the natural law, which is the law of reason that predetermines the world like an intelligible clockwork, and so in attempting to account for how disobedience of the will to the law is even possible within it, supposedly by error of personal reason induced by the passions, defines freedom in terms of knowledge of the natural law (how these are themselves possible leads them in a logical circle back to disobedience). Thus Chrysippus: "So one can call freedom the knowledge of that which is permitted and forbidden, slavery the ignorance of that which is allowed and not allowed". This is word-for-word Thomistic pseudo-dogma, lifted not from the Scriptures but from Greco-Roman philosophers whose thinking on these matters was regarded as authoritative.

(Not saying it's wrong or totally wrong either)

EliRotello

Quote from: Daniel on November 08, 2018, 11:01:31 PM
Your question is still too vague.

Basically, Daniel, I only want to address your first comment here.   I believe that my question, is, specific.  Those words mean something, in a literal sense, and in that literal sense, of, those words, I believe that my question is specific.  This is a modern, controversy, in the Church.  We are talking about, Religious Liberty.  Religious Liberty is in a council of the Church.  Religious Liberty, has been approved, by Pontiffs in Rome.  Liberty is a very wide, consideration.  Liberty is freedom.  Freedom is very open.  So I would like, you, to consider if you could address, this issue, in a purely philosophical way, using the literal sense, of the words, in the way in which they are commonly defined, by, both the Church, and the civil authorities.

There is a way in which this consideration is literal.  There is a way, in which this consideration is logical, and that, is what I would like to address, the logic, of Religious Liberty.
https://twitter.com/EliRotello

#20DecadeRosary
#LocalDiocesanParish

Kreuzritter

If "religious liberty", as in a liberty to believe and practice whatever one chooses, were a "right", the First Commandment would be a violation of it, as would it's enforcement by the state under the Modaic law. That is logic.

Yes, the words are "in" Vatican 2. Now go read the relatio for the text.

EliRotello

Would you please send me a link to the relatio?  I can't find it online.
https://twitter.com/EliRotello

#20DecadeRosary
#LocalDiocesanParish

St.Justin

Quote from: EliRotello on November 09, 2018, 08:34:46 AM
Quote from: Daniel on November 08, 2018, 11:01:31 PM
Your question is still too vague.

Basically, Daniel, I only want to address your first comment here.   I believe that my question, is, specific.  Those words mean something, in a literal sense, and in that literal sense, of, those words, I believe that my question is specific.  This is a modern, controversy, in the Church.  We are talking about, Religious Liberty.  Religious Liberty is in a council of the Church.  Religious Liberty, has been approved, by Pontiffs in Rome.  Liberty is a very wide, consideration.  Liberty is freedom.  Freedom is very open.  So I would like, you, to consider if you could address, this issue, in a purely philosophical way, using the literal sense, of the words, in the way in which they are commonly defined, by, both the Church, and the civil authorities.

There is a way in which this consideration is literal.  There is a way, in which this consideration is logical, and that, is what I would like to address, the logic, of Religious Liberty.

Everyone has a right to do what is morally good. No one has a right to do evil. It is really pretty simple.

EliRotello

Is your right to do the moral good a Religious Liberty, in any which way whatsoever?  Is that way true?  Is thereby Religious Liberty true, in any which way whatsoever?
https://twitter.com/EliRotello

#20DecadeRosary
#LocalDiocesanParish

Michael Wilson

Quote from: EliRotello on November 09, 2018, 12:28:32 PM
Is your right to do the moral good a Religious Liberty, in any which way whatsoever?  Is that way true?  Is thereby Religious Liberty true, in any which way whatsoever?
Religious Liberty as understood by the Liberals, means that one is free to worship(or not) God in the manner that one thinks is the best. The Popes in their documents before V-II condemned this doctrine. The Catholic term as used by the Popes "Freedom of Religion"; by this term they meant that the Catholic Church, which is the only true religion, should be free to propagate and practice its doctrines to the exclusion of all other religions. 
"The World Must Conform to Our Lord and not He to it." Rev. Dennis Fahey CSSP

"My brothers, all of you, if you are condemned to see the triumph of evil, never applaud it. Never say to evil: you are good; to decadence: you are progess; to death: you are life. Sanctify yourselves in the times wherein God has placed you; bewail the evils and the disorders which God tolerates; oppose them with the energy of your works and your efforts, your life uncontaminated by error, free from being led astray, in such a way that having lived here below, united with the Spirit of the Lord, you will be admitted to be made but one with Him forever and ever: But he who is joined to the Lord is one in spirit." Cardinal Pie of Potiers

St.Justin

Quote from: EliRotello on November 09, 2018, 12:28:32 PM
Is your right to do the moral good a Religious Liberty, in any which way whatsoever?  Is that way true?  Is thereby Religious Liberty true, in any which way whatsoever?

Of course a right to do what is morally good is  a religious liberty in the sense that a person is free to act in a morally good way with no moral punishments such as hell or sin. Free will is a different animal. You are free to not do a moral good and to do immoral thing but there is a punishment for choosing the evil way where there is no punishment and even a reward for doing the good.

Heinrich

Quote from: Michael Wilson on November 09, 2018, 02:19:53 PM
Quote from: EliRotello on November 09, 2018, 12:28:32 PM
Is your right to do the moral good a Religious Liberty, in any which way whatsoever?  Is that way true?  Is thereby Religious Liberty true, in any which way whatsoever?
Religious Liberty as understood by the Liberals, means that one is free to worship(or not) God in the manner that one thinks is the best. The Popes in their documents before V-II condemned this doctrine. The Catholic term as used by the Popes "Freedom of Religion"; by this term they meant that the Catholic Church, which is the only true religion, should be free to propagate and practice its doctrines to the exclusion of all other religions.

Michael, you lived a bit in Spain under Generalissimo Franco? A person once gave anecdotes as to how all other "religions" were allowed to practice. In the respective embassies. This person, a "conservative" decried the lack of religious freedom that existed there.
Schaff Recht mir Gott und führe meine Sache gegen ein unheiliges Volk . . .   .                          
Lex Orandi, lex credendi, lex vivendi.
"Die Welt sucht nach Ehre, Ansehen, Reichtum, Vergnügen; die Heiligen aber suchen Demütigung, Verachtung, Armut, Abtötung und Buße." --Ausschnitt von der Geschichte des Lebens St. Bennos.