Catholic morality and non-Catholics

[mathematoons]

My mom says we don’t have the right to impose our view of morality on non-Catholics, because that’s as bad as them telling us we can’t have our beliefs. I say, because of natural law, some of our rules are binding on all people, not just Catholics, so we must look at them by our own standards. Who’s right?

 

[Godith]

Christian ‘rules’ of morality are binding on all people, in that everyone, Christian and non-Christian, suffers the consequences equally when they go against God’s plan and design for us.

However, I don’t believe we Christians have a right to impose our morality on others, simply because God doesn’t impose it. He offers us the possibility of relationship with Him, and everything that means, but He doesn’t force anyone to take up that offer. He’s left us all with free will, and the ability to choose. Christians have a right, and a duty, to explain our position, and tell people about Jesus, but that’s not the same as imposing our views on people.

 

[Apryl]

My mom says we don’t have the right to impose our view of morality on non-Catholics, because that’s as bad as them telling us we can’t have our beliefs. I say, because of natural law, some of our rules are binding on all people, not just Catholics, so we must look at them by our own standards. Who’s right?

I happen to agree strongly with your mother that Catholics should not expect Non-Catholics to live Catholic lives, and be bound by Catholic morality

The easy thing is that Catholic morality is usually right in line with logic.

So, to say it’s’ Anti-Catholic to kill someone is a moral thing, sure, but if we kill one another, who is to decide it’s ok to kill, and how are they determined to be appropriate to make that call.

Sure, Catholics say to marry just ONE person, and never any one else, but if we make promises and then don’t adhere to them later, what is the point of making the promise? Doesn’t that dilute what a ‘promise’ is? If you VOW to do somethinglnd then don’t, why should any one take your word for anything else?

The Catholic church teaches a lot of stuff… but what’s really annoying for most folx is, we’re right. Oh, well

 

[Catholic1954]

My mom says we don’t have the right to impose our view of morality on non-Catholics, because that’s as bad as them telling us we can’t have our beliefs. I say, because of natural law, some of our rules are binding on all people, not just Catholics, so we must look at them by our own standards. Who’s right?

You are.

 

[EasterJoy]

A citizen of a democracy is going to bring his or her beliefs to the public forum. No one has to apologize for speaking his or her piece in a free society. Nobody has any right to expect us to give away or attenuate our power to vote or to enter the world of political rhetoric because we are Catholic.

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Note that the 1st Amendment does not prevent voters from voting their conscience when their consciences are informed by their religion. It forbids establishing the religion itself and forbids laws that impede the free practice of religion.

Every time a law is written or stricken down, someone’s idea of morality is being advanced. This is why we have a Bill of Rights. According to a well-formed conscience, we have to duty not only to advance laws that reflect moral law, but also to advance them according to principles that can be fairly applied to us as we’d apply them to others. Having said that, there is no reason that a voter ought to have to self-censor concerning that which the Bill of Rights does not protect.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Some of the problem comes with the assumption that certain moral issues are ‘only’ associated with some groups, as if the fact that it’s part of Catholic teaching means that it only pertains to Catholics and not to ‘non-Catholics’.

Which is nonsense.

Catholic teaching is universal. It’s truth, and truth is universal, whether some people at some point in time accept it as truth or not.

“Abortion” for example is a human rights issue, not simply to be relegated as ‘only Catholic morality’.

Unfortunately, many in the world want to ignore truthful teaching. They want to change it, they want to claim it only applies to ‘some of the people’, and oh how they want to have things ‘their way’.

“Catholic morality” includes such things as not murdering innocent people, not stealing, not lying. Funny, most people would be quite indignant if they were being mugged, robbed, in danger of being killed, or had people lying about them, and we responded to their pleas for help with “I’m terribly sorry but I don’t want to inflict my Catholic morality on you.”

 

[Christopher68]

My mom says we don’t have the right to impose our view of morality on non-Catholics, because that’s as bad as them telling us we can’t have our beliefs. I say, because of natural law, some of our rules are binding on all people, not just Catholics, so we must look at them by our own standards. Who’s right?

We live in a pluralistic society. The role of government is to protect individual rights.

Your mother is right.

 

[EasterJoy]

We live in a pluralistic society. The role of government is to protect individual rights.

Your mother is right.

The role of government is not all about the individual, but also about our collective welfare:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. Preamble to the Constitution

Perfect Union: Obviously not purely about individual rights
Justice: Not purely about individual rights
Domestic Tranquility: Not purely about individual rights
Common Defense: Not purely about indivdidual rights
General Welfare: Definitely not purely about individual rights
Blessings of Liberty: If liberty is to be a blessing, it is not just about individual rights.

It is telling that there are even Catholics who think that we are a country established to protect the Almighty ME. We are not, and we cannot be, or we are doomed to fail as a nation.

OP, show your mom the Preamble to the Constitution, and ask how we can realize that ideal without morals.

 

[Contra_Mundum_1]

The role of government is not all about the individual, but also about our collective welfare:
QUOTE]

Why does the government have to enter this at all? It is a way of regulating society. And quoting what applies to the USA does not help the OP in this discussion. God and the church are a completely different thing and what applies in one country should not be taken as some kind of proof that things should be addressed in a certain way.
The question remains whether Catholic morality applies just to us or to all, regardless of the political system we live in.

 

[Christopher68]

The role of government is not all about the individual, but also about our collective welfare:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. Preamble to the Constitution

Perfect Union: Obviously not purely about individual rights
Justice: Not purely about individual rights
Domestic Tranquility: Not purely about individual rights
Common Defense: Not purely about indivdidual rights
General Welfare: Definitely not purely about individual rights
Blessings of Liberty: If liberty is to be a blessing, it is not just about individual rights.

It is telling that there are even Catholics who think that we are a country established to protect the Almighty ME. We are not, and we cannot be, or we are doomed to fail as a nation.

OP, show your mom the Preamble to the Constitution, and ask how we can realize that ideal without morals.

A “society” or “group” does not have rights, other than the rights of the individuals that comprise that group. Whenever I hear someone speaking about “collective welfare” I know that someones individual rights are going to violated.

 

[Bluegoat]

Both of you are right in a sense, but your mom has practical experience on her side to a degree.

You are correct that many things are evident through natural law. And Catholics are correct, and free to argue those points in public forums. And really, all people accept most of those things.

There are a few that might be less obvious than you think though. Some people would argue that gay marriage is against natural law. But when you take away a particularly Christian view of marriage, that isn’t nearly so clear an argument. Not to say it can’t be made, but the Christian view of marriage is not all made on natural law - some of it is based on revealed ideas. I think often people think natural law will get them a lot further than it will.

Other things do not make sense to require from non-Catholics - like going to confession, or church. And any time you would resent a requirement by society, it is a good bet you should not require that of others, or something similar. How would you feel if Muslims wanted to ban the sale of alcohol in your town? God gives us the privilege and responsibility of developing a relationship with him and responding to him as individuals, and so we cannot take that from people without a really good reason.

But also - if a person is a non-Christian, even if they ought to do something, it often practically makes more sense to look to convert them rather than change their mind on the secondary issue. Say you don’t want your non-Christian child to be living with a girl or boy friend outside of marriage. Well, really what is a better plan is to help your child find or deepen his relationship with God. Then other behaviors will logically fall into line with what that reveals to them - maybe they will move out, or marry. At the level of the individual it usually makes the most sense to start with the most fundamental things - you need a foundation before you try to build a house.

 

[smichhertz]

My mom says we don’t have the right to impose our view of morality on non-Catholics, because that’s as bad as them telling us we can’t have our beliefs. I say, because of natural law, some of our rules are binding on all people, not just Catholics, so we must look at them by our own standards. Who’s right?

Hey again mathematoons!

YOU are right.

I can believe all I want that recreational heroin use is good for me, but it’s not, regardless of my beliefs. Similarly, it makes no sense for someone to believe that something is harmful for people, but then not try to discourage their friends from doing it.

However, I do agree that sometimes people take it to far, and push people to extremes. I think this is why Jesus compared evangelizing to a harvest. There is a “ripening” that has to take place with each person. We all play a part in bringing them to God, but that doesn’t mean we just try and push it all at once on them.