Catholic Republics

  • Thread starter Thread starter jcobby37
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jcobby37

Guest
In this age of Republicanism, it seems that the Catholic faith has taken a far seat in the back in government. Is this Just, and should Catholics support republics that ignore Catholic morality?
 
Last edited:
jcobby37 said:
Is this Just, and should Catholics support republics that ignore Catholic morality?
Click to expand...
I believe that Freedom of Religion is a vital element of any free republic, and that any self-respecting citizen should respect this freedom when trying to impact government policy.

Based on that, a law should only be passed if it can be justified on a secular basis. For example, the Catholic morals of abstaining from theft and murder is enshrined in law because a strong secular argument can be made for why those things should be banned. Meanwhile something like same-sex marriage should not be illegal because there is no convincing secular arguments against it, only religious ones.

American Catholics especially should value Freedom of Speech considering how for a long time the Protestant Majority tried to force it’s morals and beliefs down the throats of faithful Catholics. If America stops valuing freedom of religion then the law won’t be guided by Catholic morals, but by protestant and evangelical ones.
 
But why should a Catholic care about what seculars think? Especially if they have the authority to tell them what to do and think?
 
I think that as Catholics, and really all Christians, when we consider governance it should come from a respected of faith based understanding.

This means we need to respect the God given human dignity and value that all men are created with. This is to say that good stewardship demands we care about those who may disagree, that we govern for all people, not just those of faith.
 
jcobby37 said:
But why should a Catholic care about what seculars think?
Click to expand...
Morally it’s matter of the golden rule; we wouldn’t want to be forced to follow the rules of another religion, so it would be selfish and hypocritical for us to try and force non-Catholics to follow catholic rules.

Pragmatically it’s a matter of being protected. Catholics aren’t the majority in the United States, and anti-Catholicism is still strong in the national population. When John F. Kennedy was running for President, in 1960, he had to assure the country he wouldn’t be a Vatican puppet because it wasn’t taken for granted. I’ll repeat myself; if freedom of religion goes away it’ll be Protestants who force their will on everyone else, not Catholics.
 
We need to work at remaining relevant and make our voices and votes not only count, but be noticeable to those in power. I am heartened that we have another practicing Catholic on the supreme court, as many challenges to freedom of religion and the protection of conscience will end up there.
 
Last edited:
jcobby37 said:
and should Catholics support republics that ignore Catholic morality?
Click to expand...
What do you understand by the term “support” in this context? For example, if an anti-Biden American Catholic should choose to withdraw his support from the United States next month, how would he do that, exactly?
Would he just stop feeling supportive, without telling anybody?
Would he tell a few people, “I no longer support the United States”?
Would he refuse to pay taxes?
Would he refuse to obey all laws?
 
I am a Catholic but I do not want to live in a Catholic theocracy. As a Catholic that may seem ideal but it is not. What would happen if you lived in a country, which I suspect you almost certainly do, where the majority of the population are not Catholics. Then if you lived in a theocracy it would not be a Catholic one, may be not even a Christian one.

I do not want the state telling me what I can and cannot do based on the morality of a religion. God gave us free will. As far as I’m concerned if God gave us free will no one, absolutely no one, is going to take it away.

I would like to convince non-believers to believe. I would like to convince non-Christians to be Christian. And, I would like to convince non-Catholic Christians to be Catholic. However, I would never, ever dream of trying to force them.

What should be one of the great things about the US Constitution is its clear separation of church and state. It means no particular religion can be forced upon you and you are free to practise the religion of your choice.

I live in a country (UK) where the state used to impose a religion and it was not Catholicism. Our history clearly shows what happens when one religion is forced on all.
 
BornInMarch said:
if freedom of religion goes away it’ll be Protestants who force their will on everyone else, not Catholics.
Click to expand...
Nah.
It will be the “woke” and the Hollywood types who get their own way.
 
Maybe. Either way Catholics can only stand to lose if Freedom of Religion is lost.
 
Well, of course.

Many of the US thirteen original colonies were founded by people who wanted to worship according to the dictates of their own conscience.

I predict a rough next few years for believers.
 
BornInMarch said:
If America stops valuing freedom of religion then the law won’t be guided by Catholic morals, but by protestant and evangelical ones.
Click to expand...
Good points. You must remember though that the Catholic Church was virtually non-existent in the US until about 1850. I suspect it had something to do with having a foreigner as its head. The Church of England had/has the same problem.
 
What do you mean by support? While the civil power’s authority comes from God, it is not contingent on the faith of those wielding the power. In that sense, one can and should/must certainly give obedience to the lawful authorities in all their just commands, whether they are Catholic or not. Julian the Apostate wielded the same authority as Constantine.

On the other hand, the Church teaches that the true religion should animate both public and private life and that rulers are subject to the same truths (Caesar is not exempt from giving to God what is God’s). Public authority’s vision of the common good motivating its coercive power is going to be inspired by some ideology or another–why not the Catholic faith which alone shows us our true good? (all quotes below from CCC):
2244 Every institution is inspired, at least implicitly, by a vision of man and his destiny, from which it derives the point of reference for its judgment, its hierarchy of values, its line of conduct. Most societies have formed their institutions in the recognition of a certain preeminence of man over things. Only the divinely revealed religion has clearly recognized man’s origin and destiny in God, the Creator and Redeemer. The Church invites political authorities to measure their judgments and decisions against this inspired truth about God and man:

Societies not recognizing this vision or rejecting it in the name of their independence from God are brought to seek their criteria and goal in themselves or to borrow them from some ideology. Since they do not admit that one can defend an objective criterion of good and evil, they arrogate to themselves an explicit or implicit totalitarian power over man and his destiny, as history shows.51
Click to expand...
In fact, it is the vocation of the laity to make sure this happens.
898 "By reason of their special vocation it belongs to the laity to seek the kingdom of God by engaging in temporal affairs and directing them according to God’s will. . . . It pertains to them in a special way so to illuminate and order all temporal things with which they are closely associated that these may always be effected and grow according to Christ and maybe to the glory of the Creator and Redeemer."431

899 The initiative of lay Christians is necessary especially when the matter involves discovering or inventing the means for permeating social, political, and economic realities with the demands of Christian doctrine and life.
Click to expand...
There’s nothing that says this can’t include religious freedom for all, but the extent of such freedom in particular circumstances must considered in relation to the common good understood according to the true religion:
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...
 
Last edited:
You’re forgetting Maryland. Archbishop John Carroll was the first US archbishop —in 1790.

And you’re forgetting California, New Mexico, Arizona, Louisiana and Florida although they were not US states when the Spanish Catholics settled some areas as early as the early 17th century (Santa Fe and St. Augustine) and the French Catholics others. There was also a Catholic presence in Vermont since 1609, in the Mohawk Valley and other areas in New York (think St. Isaac Jogues et al), and Maine (1604).
 
Yes, let’s remember that in 1929 the Pope reached an agreement with the state of Italy to form Vatican City. The Popes held out hope, and even asked the faithful to pray at every Mass for the temporal power of the Papacy. That was less than 100 years ago. Church teaching has not been clear on the matter of politics. Catholics are not obligated to support ‘Republicanism’ as you say, or democracy. But that strain of thought won out.

Has it been worth it? It doesn’t seem so to me. Almost every country has abortion to some extent (except the Muslim countries, many of which aren’t democratic). That should be enough right there. Almost every democratic country murders their own children, which the Church doesn’t support. The Church doesn’t support abortion even in cases of rape or incest. So, is this the way? Are we going to be perpetually fighting for pro-life in every country?

We are not living at a time where things are going to get politically better for us, unfortunately. We must preach the Gospel to the millions of people who are spiritually poor. I’ve heard some Catholic philosophers call our secular neighbors ‘barbarians’. We may have the internet now and technology, but really some people are as pagan as the people that St. Patrick preached to. Or any number of the great saints who were evangelizers. That’s what we have to do again, bring the Gospel to the pagans.
 
My point was that they are Christians. It’s secular society (in Ireland) thats more of a worry. I find as a Catholic, I have more in common with the Protestants in N.Ireland than I do with my neighbours when it comes to beliefs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top