Let me address briefly the point Inkaneer raises regarding Protestant prejudice and immigration.
1. Probably 90% or more of the original Europeans to settle in the original colonies were Protestants. Only one of the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence was a Catholic. Yet, millions of Catholics were legally allowed to enter the USA between 1840-1940. If Protestants were so prejudiced why did they permit this to happen?
2. Today nine out of every ten Christians to enter the USA legally are Catholics. With Catholics a fourth of the population (and half of those 'cafeteria Catholics') does this suggest that Protestantism has stood in the way of Catholic immigration?
3, The problem with the influx of Hispanic immigrants today is that most of them are entering illegally, against the law. That is an entirely different circumstance. Does Inkaneer favor the breaking of the law or legal immigration?
4. Perhaps the most voficerous opponent of such mass illegal immigration is Pat Buchanan, who has written at least one book against it. Buchanan is an avid Catholic, even one who appears to favor the pre-Vatican II version of the faith. Even polls among legal Hispanic America seem to suggest that the majority of them also oppose illegal immigration.
5. Most of the main Protestant denominations (Methodists, UCC, Presbyterians, etc) have declared their support of fair immigration reform legislation. The main opposition comes from the right-wing, which seems to be supported by many of devote Catholic posters here.
6. There are other issues at stake here. I do not defend the new law enacted in Arizona, but it was in large part motivated by wholesale crime (including murders), drugs, and other problems associated with illegal immigration.
7. Yes, there has been Protestant fear of Catholicism, in large part because of the attitude exhibited by posters like Sir Knight and others. There has been a fear that a Catholic majority would bring about a form of religious totalitarianism per the "Syllabus of Errors' and other papal statements. Some of this Protestant opposition has been based on sheer prejudice, but much of it has been based on what often appears to be intense Catholic intolerance of other faiths. That form of Catholicism has troubled Protestants just as the Al Qaeda form of Islam worries all good Americans.
8. Yes, there also is a rather strong feeling among some Protestants when it comes to some Catholic beliefs. They may regard some of them as superstitions, relics from the Middle Ages, in contradiction to the Bible, etc. This is not the same as prejudice against Catholics. It is no different than Catholics who take issue with Protestantism. Are they against Protestants? I hope and assume not. I trust we all endorse the basics of American democracy and respect one another as much as we disagree on religion, politics, or whatever.
9. Protestant fear has faded away over the past half-century. Why? Several reasons, but especially these two. (a) The Catholic Church has adopted a much more tolerant attitude toward Protestants and others, starting especially with Vatican II. The old isolation that Catholicism practiced before that - e. g. it was a major sin for Catholics to even enter a Protestant church, etc. - has disappeared and Catholics and Protestants work together in various areas, such as soup kitchens, Church Women United etc. Catholic refusal to attend baptisms, weddings, funerfals, etc., in Protestant churches a generation or two ago caused considerable resentment against Catholicism. That has ceased. (b) It seems obvious to Protestants today that the hierarchy no longer controls the Catholic laity. Take the issue of artificial birth control. It has been condemned and forbidden by the church but millions - probably the large majority of Catholic adults - practice it. I heard on EWTN today that only about 35% of US Catholics believe in transubstantiation. So, whatever the stance of the Catholic church. most Protestants realize that now Catholic Americans accept or reject it as they choose. This is in large part because the democratic spirit has become well established among Americans of all faiths.
God bles those of every creed, color and country, and may religion become a bridge rather than a barrier.
apally-approved documents of ecumenical councils have a higher authority than do encyclicals. The three encyclicals…(Mirari Vos) are not infallible documents, never were claimed to be by the popes who composed them, and have not been considered to be infallible by most orthodox theologians**.This is not to deny their real authority **or accuracy, of course, but, as Pius XII wrote in Humani Generis, “such teachings belong to the ordinary magisterium,” not to the extraordinary.
), Pope Gregory quotes from Augustine in order to explain his meaning. In Augustine’s disputes with the Donatists, the basic point of contention relevant to this discussion was whether baptisms performed by heretics were valid and whether they should be repeated when coming back to the Catholic Church. The answer was that the baptism was valid and not to be repeated. But the baptism would not save the person in schism: not because the baptism was not valid, but because the person was in schism. Augustine’s point was that, in bringing schismatics and heretics back into the church, let us correct them where they are in the wrong and affirm them where they are in the right.
