Cardinal Blase Cupich plans gradual reopening for Chicago Roman Catholic churches

  • Thread starter Thread starter ProVobis
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
ProVobis said:
Excerpt: “People do have freedom of religion, the right to worship and so on. And yet, it’s not an absolute right if the public good, and public health, is jeopardized as a result,” Cardinal Cupich said.
Click to expand...
This statement concerns me, because it could become an “elastic clause” to set precedent for collaborating with / caving in to government attempts to suppress religious practices / beliefs that whoever is in power may disagree with.

Free exercise of religion is the FIRST of the freedoms listed in the Bill of Rights.
 
Last edited:
So what happens to public safety? Do you have a problem with weapon detectors at airports and sports arenas, for example, though it appears this violates the 2nd Amendment?
 
Norseman82 said:
40.png
ProVobis:
Excerpt: “People do have freedom of religion, the right to worship and so on. And yet, it’s not an absolute right if the public good, and public health, is jeopardized as a result,” Cardinal Cupich said.
Click to expand...
This statement concerns me, because it could become an “elastic clause” to set precedent for collaborating with / caving in to government attempts to suppress religious practices / beliefs that whoever is in power may disagree with.

Free exercise of religion is the FIRST of the freedoms listed in the Bill of Rights.
Click to expand...
Can on really appreciate the rights and freedoms they have if they are terrified that around every corner they’ll lose them? It’s like the fruitless state of the Cold War era.
 
Norseman82 said:
This statement concerns me, because it could become an “elastic clause” to set precedent for collaborating with / caving in to government attempts to suppress religious practices / beliefs that whoever is in power may disagree with.

Free exercise of religion is the FIRST of the freedoms listed in the Bill of Rights.
Click to expand...
Speaking from Catholic principles (which I assume Cardinal Cupich is), and not those of the Constitution, religious liberty can be limited according to the needs of the common good. From the Catechism:
2109 The right to religious liberty can of itself be neither unlimited nor limited only by a “public order” conceived in a positivist or naturalist manner.39 The “due limits” which are inherent in it must be determined for each social situation by political prudence, according to the requirements of the common good, and ratified by the civil authority in accordance with "legal principles which are in conformity with the objective moral order."40
Click to expand...
However, it’s important to know what is included in the “good” of the common good. That good must be judged according to the truth (can’t be “positivist”), including revelation, and include man’s supernatural good and end (it can’t be “naturalist.”).

The Catechism describes the elements of the common good as such:
1924 The common good comprises “the sum total of social conditions which allow people, either as groups or as individuals, to reach their fulfillment more fully and more easily” (GS 26 1).

1925 The common good consists of three essential elements: respect for and promotion of the fundamental rights of the person; prosperity, or the development of the spiritual and temporal goods of society; the peace and security of the group and of its members.
Click to expand...
St. John XXIII elaborated on this in his encyclical Pacem in Terris:
  1. In this connection, We would draw the attention of Our own sons to the fact that the common good is something which affects the needs of the whole man, body and soul. That, then, is the sort of good which rulers of States must take suitable measure to ensure. They must respect the hierarchy of values, and aim at achieving the spiritual as well as the material prosperity of their subjects.(42)
  2. These principles are clearly contained in that passage in Our encyclical Mater et Magistra where We emphasized that the common good "must take account of all those social conditions which favor the full development of human personality.(43)
  3. Consisting, as he does, of body and immortal soul, man cannot in this mortal life satisfy his needs or attain perfect happiness. Thus, the measures that are taken to implement the common good must not jeopardize his eternal salvation; indeed, they must even help him to obtain it.(44)
Click to expand...
All that being said, I get your concern. The above is all good when public authority is measuring its decisions according to the true religion (see CCC 2244). Generally, in our pluralistic society, we generally agree the common good is best served by giving broad freedom to all, rather than risk having the good unreasonably suppressed by a government ignoring such truth.
 
Last edited:
What I’m concerned about is when “the common good” will be a pretense for either punishing the Church simply for teaching its teachings (such as under cover of “hate speech” laws) or when the Church may be required to participate in immoral things (such as providing birth control or the CT plan B fiasco from 2007). Will we oppose, cower, or be collaborators?

In the present situation, I have no problem with the fact that the Church is trying to be safe about this and is being a “team player”. In fact, I’ve been asked by my parish to be part of the reopening plan and will be taking the training webinar later tonight.

I like the way one of our deacons put it when we conversed last night: we don’t want to be the cause of a second outbreak. So, if the statement were phrased as my deacon put it, it would not have raised concern.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top