JVD:
The Church has NEVER revoked a dogma. All she has done in some cases is give deeper exposition on existing dogma or updated the language to clarify it for more modern times since we are afterall 2,000 years old and the vernacular secular languages all have drifting semantics (why ecclesial Latin is our formal internal language).
James
As we say in South Georgia, “That dog won’t hunt”
Have a look at these (note the cites at the end!)
Bill, do you realize that by referencing the propaganda materials of a liberal feminist cult who call themselves Catholics (even as they attack the Church leadership with their tripe) you are playing right into these groups’ agenda? As a Catholic are you sympathetic to these wackos? These are the same women who are ordaining themselves and trying to split the church up with yet another new denomination - that group is a coven of lesbians and bisexuals who reject Catholic moral teaching and want to remake the church in their own image. These are putting their own spin on the church history to try to extort the church to change its teachings to their own disordered ends.
As for 'this dog not hunting" - I mentioned dogmas - no dogs or anything else. None of the things you blindly parroted here are dogmas. These are in some cases opinions and in other cases judgements and proclamations about what is proper with respect to obeying or disobeying established secular laws; or else are establishing cannon laws to LIMIT and moderate the degree of slavery for conditions of war and criminal punishments - as a mercy to the death penalty or as just punishments. This is classic revisionist history. Just because the Church spoke out to moderate a wide spread historical practice it is projected anachronistically by enemies of the church as an endorsement of slavery. NO!
Think about this: If a person sells himself into slavery to further his own temporal needs that is HIS business just as it is YOUR business to mortgage your life and your family to the slavery of a 30 year tread mill to own a house; and just as it was the middle-age serfs’ personal decision in to agree to indenture themselves as slaves to their Lords for life. The Church does not enslave its members to dogmas that supercede one’s own right to enslave themselves except in the case of forbidding one from enslaving themselves to sin least they suffer eternal punishment and excommunication. Would you also consider excommunication from the Church liberation or slavery?
Historical context is very important here. My statement stands - there have been NO changes to dogma.
Just to calibrate you - neither Jesus nor St. Paul, nor any other Biblical figure is recorded as saying anything in opposition to the institution of slavery. Slavery was very much a part of life in Judea, Galilee, and in the rest of the Roman Empire during New Testament times.
Although slavery is now universally condemned as a crime against humanity, it was customary in antiquity, and taken for granted as part of the economy and society of the early times. The Bible does not regard it as an abomination. It only regulates its practice, and occasionally compels the enslavement of others. Thus The Church has always taught that slaves should be treated humanely and justly. The Church developed her teachings here over time as society progressed. The insistence of the higher universal standard of freedom for all men was gained as she won moral persuasion and influence in the world. How does this become a negative here in this discussion? Only by twisting history and through a desire to denigrate the church is how…
There are many NT references to scripture and neither Jesus nor an apostle condemned this practice when the subject comes up. Quite the contrary the message is often to be obedient: Matthew 18:25, Mark 14:66, Luke 12:45-48, Ephesians 6:5-9, Colossians 4:1, 1 Timothy 6:1-3, 1 Corinthians 12:13, Galatians 3:28, Colossians 3:11.
Just for the record:
Catholic teaching began to seriously and decisively turn towards the abolition of slavery beginning in 1435 and culminating in three major pronouncements against slavery by Pope Paul III in 1537. A number of Popes issued papal bulls condemning enslavement and mistreatment of Native Americans by Spanish and Portuguese colonials. But we can go back to as far as St. Patrick who himself was an escaped slave in 415-493 AD to see how the Church started forming its germinating opposition to slavery as Patrick argued for the abolition of slavery among the peoples of his time. Also, the seventh century Saint Eloi used his vast wealth to purchase British and Saxon slaves in groups of 50 and 100 in order to set them free.
I don’t have the time to go through each of these items you list and discuss them further. But in general I can say that the church has never condoned outright revolution against the existing civil laws established by valid civil authorities for law and order. That’s not how the Church operates. Rather the Church appeals to reason via Catholic morality to motivate the peaceful change of secular laws where there are clear abuses of fundamental human rights and freedoms. We change hearts by persuasion and let humanity rise up to the Catholic standard. It is because of the success of Catholic Church and God’s grace working through her that we have today a general advancement of humanity with a largely universal condemnation of slavery by most secular and religious authorities.
QED:
NO changes to dogma under this topic. But this here is starting to take the flavor of a strawman to promote radical agendas.
James
