Dorothy Day

[fix]

And, please, don’t quote Jesus turning tables in the temple - He didn’t hurt, let alone kill anyone.

I have read this before and have a question. Does Scripture record that no one was hurt or killed? Is there evidence for this?

I ask because it seems self evident walking around using a whip and turning tables over is hardly a recipe for non violence and the chance of injury seems rather great.

 

[roymckenzie]

Wow.

I can’t believe what I just read.

I won’t comment…

For the love of…

Sigh.

Holy war? No such thing. Christianity knows no jihad in a corporal realm.
Turn the other cheek is catholic.
And, please, don’t quote Jesus turning tables in the temple - He didn’t hurt, let alone kill anyone.
A man, a very puny man and an infinitely lesser then The Lawgiver has no right to take a life. Circumstances may vary. Murder may not always be a mortal sin, but it still remains an objective evil.
And as such is a serious disorder.

I’m going to say again - turn the other cheek.

I think total pacifism is FULLY Christian.

The martyrs, who are the seed of the church certainly did NOT fight back to those who were massacring them by the hundreds.

I’m sorry, but the crusades have nothing to do with a just war. The intention may have been just - to protect the pilgrims, but it stops there.
Feudalism is the real deal behind it - the opportunity for getting new land and riches.

The behavior of the crusaders is… TOTALLY UNCHRISTIAN.

It just is.

I never cease to be amazed at blutters such as the crusades being holy.

War cannot be holy, for it is objectively evil.

Thou shall not murder.

To destroy Christendom?
Would you trust Christ saying that the gates of hell shall not prevail over the Church?

How, then, can something like that be suspected?

Sigh.

I just…

I’m sorry, but I’m left speachless when I read that someone says it’s OK to kill your islamistic brother, a creation of God.

“Well, God, I’m sorry, but I’m going to take matters into my own hand…”

That’s not the way it works.

Mt 21, 42
Mt 19, 18-20
Mt 7, 1
Mt 7, 12
Mt 5, 43-48
Mt 5, 10
Rom 12, 20-21

I’m not going to give more verses, for I fear I may have gone out of context with some of them, but the point remains.
And I don’t like shooting verses around, for any child can do that. It takes a lot more, however, to understand them.

So, please, don’t go to scripturecatholic.com or wherever to look for clues.

And yes, fully catholic.

And fully pacifist.

I am not sure about the debate technique where someone does something and then cautions others against doing the same thing. I think it is a valid technique to quote the New Testament especially Jesus own words.
Luke 22 35-38:

35
He said to them, “When I sent you forth without a money bag or a sack or sandals, were you in need of anything?” “No, nothing,” they replied.
36
He said to them, 12 “But now one who has a money bag should take it, and likewise a sack, and one who does not have a sword should sell his cloak and buy one.
37
For I tell you that this scripture must be fulfilled in me, namely, ‘He was counted among the wicked’; and indeed what is written about me is coming to fulfillment.”
38
Then they said, “Lord, look, there are two swords here.” But he replied, “It is enough!” 13

Also I believe the Catechism of the Catholic Church is an equally valid source.
CCC 2319-2321:

2319
Every human life, from the moment of conception until death, is sacred because the human person has been willed for its own sake in the image and likeness of the living and holy God.
2320
The murder of a human being is gravely contrary to the dignity of the person and the holiness of the Creator.
2321
The prohibition of murder does not abrogate the right to render an unjust aggressor unable to inflict harm. Legitimate defense is a grave duty for whoever is responsible for the lives of others or the common good.

Please pay particular attention to CCC 2321.

 

[RomanCrusader]

Wow.

I can’t believe what I just read.

I won’t comment…

For the love of…

Sigh.

Holy war? No such thing. Christianity knows no jihad in a corporal realm.

Well most Christians disagree with you, including this one here. I agree war itself is tragic and lamentable, but there are times when it is required and MANDATED.

Turn the other cheek is catholic.

Aye, but that doesn’t mean let yourself and those around you be oppressed and brutalized.

And, please, don’t quote Jesus turning tables in the temple - He didn’t hurt, let alone kill anyone.

He made a holy whip. The purpose of a whip is to forcibly drive away beasts or people, and as a form of physical punishment.

I’m not saying anyone was hurt, but it is a possibility, as He had a holy whip.

A man, a very puny man and an infinitely lesser then The Lawgiver has no right to take a life.

If an outside force violently threatens me, my family, my country, my church, etc., then I will use whatever force necessary to stop it.

If that means shooting a murderer or terrorist in the head, then so be it. I just pray my aim is good and my gun working.

Circumstances may vary. Murder may not always be a mortal sin, but it still remains an objective evil.
And as such is a serious disorder.

Self-defense is not murder.

I’m going to say again - turn the other cheek.

I will turn my cheek, but I will not lay on the ground to be kicked and beaten.

I think total pacifism is FULLY Christian.

Then we would have been annihilated long ago.

The martyrs, who are the seed of the church certainly did NOT fight back to those who were massacring them by the hundreds.

What of St. Louis IX? He fought a crusade against the Muslims and he is a canonized Saint.

I’m sorry, but the crusades have nothing to do with a just war. The intention may have been just - to protect the pilgrims, but it stops there.
Feudalism is the real deal behind it - the opportunity for getting new land and riches.

The vast majority of crusaders were poor men who remained poor throughout. The mounted knights may have gained wealth, but the average crusader was there for one reason: to serve God.

The crusades were a holy endeavor to protect pilgrims and the Holy Land from a savage Jihadist menace. I honor our crusader ancestors and I wish you would do the same.

The behavior of the crusaders is… TOTALLY UNCHRISTIAN.

A few certainly, but I daresay the majoirty were well behaved.

I never cease to be amazed at blutters such as the crusades being holy.

War cannot be holy, for it is objectively evil.

So were the Israelites evil when they fought against pagans in the OT- at the command of Yaweh?

Thou shall not murder.

Is self-defense murder?

To destroy Christendom?
Would you trust Christ saying that the gates of hell shall not prevail over the Church?

How, then, can something like that be suspected?

Christ was correct. He foresaw His Church reigning in triumph for all ages, thanks to the actions of His flock.

Defending the Church is doing the Lords work.

I’m sorry, but I’m left speachless when I read that someone says it’s OK to kill your islamistic brother, a creation of God.

An al-quida terrorist is not my brother until he renounces his wicked ways. Until then he is my enemy and a servant of the devil.

“Well, God, I’m sorry, but I’m going to take matters into my own hand…”

That’s not the way it works.

When one justly defends themself or their community, it is doing the Lords will.

Would you stand by and watch your family be harmed or would you take action to defend them? I pray you would take action. We are the Church Militant, not the Church cowardly.

And yes, fully catholic.

And fully pacifist.

I do not question your faith and I respect your opinion, but I disagree with that opinion my friend.

 

[Hrvoje]

I have read this before and have a question. Does Scripture record that no one was hurt or killed? Is there evidence for this?

I ask because it seems self evident walking around using a whip and turning tables over is hardly a recipe for non violence and the chance of injury seems rather great.

Really?

Well, since before that Jesus stated that we should turn the other cheek, it would seem unlikely that he would hurt anyone.

But I’ll take your challenge

His intention was clearly to get the traders out of the Temple, for they were committing blasphemy. A great method is to turn tables - and whip around. You see, when you slash your whip, people tend to get out of harms way - same way when you have a stick and keep an aggressive dog off you. You don’t need to hit the dog. Just wave the stick around.

I know this, becouse a few years back, while going down the street in my hometown I came upon an unlawful crowd, gathered around two brawlers. It was, put commonly, a street fight.
I rushed in there and tried to separate them, and, when I saw that it didn’t produce much of an effect, I garbed a heavy branch (well, actually, someone tossed it to me - guess they thought I was joining in on the fun), and swung it between the two brawlers.
They stopped, not willing to get into the reach area of my “weapon”. Then, a few seconds later, I tossed the branch (more of a log, actually) away, and they cooled off.
I didn’t hurt anyone.
That’s the last thing I would do.

 

[Hrvoje]

I’m not good with the quote function, so I’ll just state your words in italics.

Well most Christians disagree with you, including this one here. I agree war itself is tragic and lamentable, but there are times when it is required and MANDATED.

Really?
Well, I would disagree with any wore being mandated.
Passive resistance has proved itself on may occasions.
Now, I’m sure you’ll say what about Hitler and Stalin.
Well, what about them?
What about Nero?
Nothing about him.
The Christians offered no military resistance.
I know that what I’m saying is radical. I’m aware of that. I’m not even sure that I’m up to it. But the demand for perfection is radical itself.
I think Tolstoy has some good points about such “radical” pacifism - check it out if you have some spare time.

Aye, but that doesn’t mean let yourself and those around you be oppressed and brutalized.

No it doesn’t. But to take the right to kill a man is not ours.
*
He made a holy whip. The purpose of a whip is to forcibly drive away beasts or people, and as a form of physical punishment.*

He didn’t hurt anyone. Try this - make a whip out of rope, stand on a street and swing it around. People will stay a mile away from you, but none will get hurt. That’s what Jesus was doing.
I know this, trust me, I’ve trained marshal arts some years back, and am aware of the effect a weapon simply being present.

I’m not saying anyone was hurt, but it is a possibility, as He had a holy whip.

I don’t think the whip was holy. It would seem, then, that everything He made would be classified as holy (in terms of use, of course) - then, since he was a carpenter, He made holy tables.

Sorry, don’t mean to be ironic.
*
If an outside force violently threatens me, my family, my country, my church, etc., then I will use whatever force necessary to stop it.*

I agree. That force is Christs love and sacrifice.
Not military force.
It’s radical, way out of the reach of everyday life, but It’s Christ.

If that means shooting a murderer or terrorist in the head, then so be it. I just pray my aim is good and my gun working.

I wouldn’t shoot my brother in the head, I don’t care what he would do to me - why? Because I love my brother. How then, could I shoot any man, when we are made brothers in Christ?

Again, it’s very radical.
Demands much.
But such is the path of martyrs.
Self-defense is not murder.*

I would say to this that it is only a matter of nomenclature.

Don’t get me wrong - of course there are varying circumstances, but killing someone, no matter what, remains an objective evil.
I agree that self-defense is not a mortal sin, but a sin it most certainly is.

I will turn my cheek, but I will not lay on the ground to be kicked and beaten.

Christ did that.
He let himself be whipped till his flesh was covered in nothing but dry blood.
He let his hand and feet be nailed to wood.
He let the roman soldiers beat him, spit at him and mock him.
He let the servant in the temple slap him. He didn’t strike him back. His reply was a statement that the slap was unjust.
It stops there.
And countless martyrs followed this example.
If we chose to use violence, it may not be a mortal sin in some cases, but it is certainly far from the humility of the crucified God.
Pride or humility, I would ask here - which leads to sainthood.

*Then we would have been annihilated long ago.
*

Maybe, if you are reasoning from a secular perspective, but I think a far better position for a Christian would be to trust Christs words that the gates of hell shall not prevail against his Church.
“Fear not, little flock…”

What of St. Louis IX? He fought a crusade against the Muslims and he is a canonized Saint.

If the tools for our little debate would be examples of saints, then I think the position of martyrs greatly outweighs the examples of such as St. Louis IX.

The vast majority of crusaders were poor men who remained poor throughout. The mounted knights may have gained wealth, but the average crusader was there for one reason: to serve God.

Sorry, but that’s simply an unrealistic and very romantic idea.
The feudal Europe was a LOT and I mean a LOT more intricate system than that.
I’m not going to get into that, now, for it would take to much time. I would only suggest that you read more about medieval Europe, wars of the time and the spoils of such wars.

The crusades were a holy endeavor to protect pilgrims and the Holy Land from a savage Jihadist menace. I honor our crusader ancestors and I wish you would do the same.

Well, I pray for their souls, so that they end not in Hell.

Killing for God is a blasphemy against the fifth commandment.

I wish you would pray for their souls as well.

 

[Hrvoje]

*A few certainly, but I daresay the majoirty were well behaved.
*

That’s… well, historically incoherent.
The destruction of dalmatian towns for Venice in order to get transport is hardly knightly.
Nor is the destruction of Byzantium, when they realized they were tricked by the E. R. emperor.
A blast of rage, if there ever was any.

But let ask you this - have you ever lived trough a war?
My country has.
It is the most horrible thing any man can wish to another.
Satan himself must take over the soldiers who commit massacres as they always do in wars.
But people don’t know about that. People look at the TV for news on the war on terror, and see a politically correct news feed, cleared of all violent scenes.
Look at some footage from the war in Vietnam.

That is the true face of war.

Ungodly.
So were the Israelites evil when they fought against pagans in the OT- at the command of Yaweh?*

OT is… Again, a complicated theme, to long for me to go into.
I’ll just say here that the foundation of Christian moral is the NT.
If I have time, I’ll get into that later…
Is self-defense murder?*

Objectively? Yes.
A mortal sin? No.
A sin? Yes.
Evil? Yes.
*
Christ was correct. He foresaw His Church reigning in triumph for all ages, thanks to the actions of His flock. *

I would rather thank God.
I think the actions of his flock were disgraceful at times.
Sigh.
The malus malufactorum.
*
Defending the Church is doing the Lords work.*

Yes.
But not by force.
He didn’t incarnate to lead the Church into a glorious victory war against the pagans - an idea held by the Jews of the time, by the way, and one of the reasons they rejected the humble God - but to die for the Church.
So yes, go do apologetics, not killing.

An al-quida terrorist is not my brother until he renounces his wicked ways. Until then he is my enemy and a servant of the devil.

Well, Jesus died for him as well.
And that terrorist is my brother.
And you should pray for him and bless him. Like Christ did to his persecutors.
When one justly defends themself or their community, it is doing the Lords will.*

Not by violence.
Such a thing is not what Christ did nor wanted.

Would you stand by and watch your family be harmed or would you take action to defend them? I pray you would take action. We are the Church Militant, not the Church cowardly.

Yes, we most certainly are the Church militant. Militant by Love, by Agape, Charitas and Philios, not by arms.
*
I do not question your faith and I respect your opinion, but I disagree with that opinion my friend.*

We agree to disagree.

But I hold my case, for if Christ were to stand in front of you, in his glory, as He will on the day of Judgment, would you rather to have died a martyr or a soldier in a war, be it even just?

I hold the first.

God bless.

 

[bones_IV]

Dorothy Day and her Catholic Worker movement actively tried to undermine America’s fight for survival (of itself and the world) in World War II - a war, (should be) needless to say, that the USA didn’t start.

For she says “It is better that the United States be liquidated than that she survive by war.” - Dorothy Day

I think the Catechism of the Catholic Church disagrees with her.
2308 All citizens and all governments are obliged to work for the avoidance of war.
However, “as long as the danger of war persists and there is no international authority with the necessary competence and power, governments cannot be denied the right of lawful self-defense, once all peace efforts have failed.”

2309 The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration. the gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time:

• the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;
• all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;
• there must be serious prospects of success;
• the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. the power of modem means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.

These are the traditional elements enumerated in what is called the “just war” doctrine.
The evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good.

2310 Public authorities, in this case, have the right and duty to impose on citizens the obligations necessary for national defense.
Those who are sworn to serve their country in the armed forces are servants of the security and freedom of nations. If they carry out their duty honorably, they truly contribute to the common good of the nation and the maintenance of peace.The Dorothy Day quote as it stands is nonsense. For example to have refused to take on and defeat Nazism and Communism aggression would have been immoral and a dereliction of moral duty on the part of the U.S. government. I’m sorry but anyone who supports that statement isn’t fit, I’m sad to say, for citizenship.

 

[RachelsAlumni]

… she says “It is better that the United States be liquidated than that she survive by war.” - Dorothy Day
… I’m sorry but anyone who supports that statement isn’t fit, I’m sad to say, for citizenship.

The US Bill of Rights would disagree:

Bill of Rights
Amendment I

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.

Now let’s try putting that quote from Dorothy Day in context:

Why is THE CATHOLIC WORKER opposed to UMT and to war? Because we are Communists? No! For we were opposed to World War II when the Communists were for it. Because we are indifferent to the fate of the Church? No! For she is our Mother, the Bridegroom of Jesus Christ. But she is more than real estate, she is more than temporal power, her spirit is not the spirit of the world* and she has no need to be defended by the arms of the world. No more than her Divine Master who refused such defense.

We are against war because it is contrary to the spirit of Jesus Christ, and the only important thing is that we abide in His spirit. It is more important than being American, more important than being respectable, more important than obedience to the State. It is the only thing that matters. We are against Universal Military Training because it is preparation for sin, For the sin that is war. That it is better that the United States be liquidated than that she survive by war. - Dorothy Day (catholicworker.org/dorothyday/daytext.cfm?TextID=466))

*Now we have received not the spirit of this world, but the Spirit that is of God; that we may know the things that are given us from God. Which things also we speak, not in the learned words of human wisdom; but in the doctrine of the Spirit, comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

But the sensual man perceiveth not these things that are of the Spirit of God; for it is foolishness to him, and he cannot understand, because it is spiritually examined. But the spiritual man judgeth all things; and he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that we may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ. (1 Corinthians 2:12-16)*

I think Dorothy Day considered herself first and foremost a citizen of Christ’s Kingdom, a “follower of Jesus of Nazareth, Prince of Peace, in the way of non-violence, in love for all mankind!”

This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you. (John 15:12-15)

 

[RomanCrusader]

Didn’t Dorothy Day have an abortion as well?

 

[Bill_Samuel]

Didn’t Dorothy Day have an abortion as well?

Yes, she had an abortion before her conversion. See Dorothy Day’s Pro-Life Memories.

Dorothy Day was an advocate of the consistent life ethic long before the term was widely used. She opposed all forms of violence, including war, abortion and the death penalty.

As President of Consistent Life, I can tell you that many Catholic Worker communities and individuals in the movement remain solidly committed to the consistent life ethic today.

 

[bones_IV]

The US Bill of Rights would disagree:

Which shows you didn’t read the bill of rights.

Why is THE CATHOLIC WORKER opposed to UMT and to war? Because we are Communists? No! For we were opposed to World War II when the Communists were for it. Because we are indifferent to the fate of the Church? No! For she is our Mother, the Bridegroom of Jesus Christ. But she is more than real estate, she is more than temporal power, her spirit is not the spirit of the world* and she has no need to be defended by the arms of the world. No more than her Divine Master who refused such defense.

We are against war because it is contrary to the spirit of Jesus Christ, and the only important thing is that we abide in His spirit. It is more important than being American, more important than being respectable, more important than obedience to the State. It is the only thing that matters. We are against Universal Military Training because it is preparation for sin, For the sin that is war. That it is better that the United States be liquidated than that she survive by war. - Dorothy Day (catholicworker.org/doroth…fm?TextID=466)

War is against the spirit of Jesus Christ? ROFTL… the Catechism disagrees with you. Using your logic we should let the whole world burn.

*Now we have received not the spirit of this world, but the Spirit that is of God; that we may know the things that are given us from God. Which things also we speak, not in the learned words of human wisdom; but in the doctrine of the Spirit, comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

But the sensual man perceiveth not these things that are of the Spirit of God; for it is foolishness to him, and he cannot understand, because it is spiritually examined. But the spiritual man judgeth all things; and he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that we may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ. (1 Corinthians 2:12-16)*

I think Dorothy Day considered herself first and foremost a citizen of Christ’s Kingdom, a “follower of Jesus of Nazareth, Prince of Peace, in the way of non-violence, in love for all mankind!”

I really don’t understand people who treat the Catholic faith like it only exists in her social doctrine.

This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you. (John 15:12-15)

A verse blown out of context.

 

[Dale_M]

As President of Consistent Life, I can tell you that many Catholic Worker communities and individuals in the movement remain solidly committed to the consistent life ethic today.

Thank you for posting a link to your organization. I think it has an important mission and knowing it exists is refreshing - one more thing for which to be thankful this holiday season (and year round, too).

bones_IV:

Using your logic we should let the whole world burn.

I think that not all people have the same calling. That some feel called to pacifism seems very clear to me. Its not my calling, but I honor it in those who embrace it out of love of Christ. Their voice is not to be ignored, even if we do not fully agree with it. As we struggle for justice in this world, their message should not be forgotten.

 

[filsdefournet]

Didn’t Dorothy Day have an abortion as well?

I’m not sure that’s any of your business, nor would I be too quick to cast stones, as I’m sure you have failed in many ways yourself, as we all have.

I will pose a question: can one love one’s enemy by slaughtering them?

 

[RomanCrusader]

I will pose a question: can one love one’s enemy by slaughtering them?

I’ll love Al-Quida terrorists after they are turned into a mound of blood and dust from a tomahawk missile

 

[filsdefournet]

I’ll love Al-Quida terrorists after they are turned into a mound of blood and dust from a tomahawk missile

Then you should question the sincerity of your devotion to Christ Who taught that there was more reward in loving those who persecute you than in loving your own family.

I ask again – can you love an enemy by slaughtering them, considering the emphasis Christ placed on loving them?

Dorothy Day was emphatic about treating enemies the way that the Sermon on the Mount prescribes – as brothers.

 

[RachelsAlumni]

Which shows you didn’t read the bill of rights.

bones, I not only read it I posted it for you and anyone else to read. The Bill of Rights does not deny citizenship to those who exercise their right to free speech, on the contrary, the Bill of Rights defends a citizens right to free speech.

War is against the spirit of Jesus Christ? ROFTL… the Catechism disagrees with you.

I read your earlier post and I don’t think you’ve shown in the least that the CCC disagrees with Dorothy Day’s statement “We are against war because it is contrary to the spirit of Jesus Christ, and the only important thing is that we abide in His spirit.”

In fact, here are a few quotes from the Catechism that confirm this type of opposition to war:

2304 Respect for and development of human life require peace. Peace is not merely the absence of war, and it is not limited to maintaining a balance of powers between adversaries. Peace cannot be attained on earth without safeguarding the goods of persons, free communication among men, respect for the dignity of persons and peoples, and the assiduous practice of fraternity. Peace is “the tranquility of order.” [St. Augustine, City of God 19, 13,1] Peace is the work of justice and the effect of charity. [Cf. Is. 32:17; cf. Vatican II, Gaudium et spes #78, 1-2]

2305 Earthly peace is the image and fruit of the peace of Christ, the messianic “Prince of Peace.” [Is. 9:5] By the blood of his Cross, “in his own person he killed the hostility,” [Eph. 2:16; cf. Col. 1:20-22] he reconciled men with God and made his Church the sacrament of the unity of the human race and of its union with God. “He is our peace.” [Eph. 2:14] He has declared: “Blessed are the peacemakers.” [Mt. 5:9]

2306 Those who renounce violence and bloodshed and, in order to safeguard human rights, make use of those means of defense available to the weakest, bear witness to evangelical charity, provided they do so without harming the rights and obligations of other men and societies. They bear legitimate witness to the gravity of the physical and moral risks of recourse to violence, with all its destruction and death. [Cf. Vatican II, Gaudium et spes 78, 5]

Avoiding war

2307 The fifth commandment forbids the intentional destruction of human life. Because of the evils and injustices that accompany all war, the Church insistently urges everyone to prayer and to action so that the divine Goodness may free us from the ancient bondage of war. [Cf. Vatican II, Gaudium et spes 81, 4]** All citizens and all governments are obliged to work for the avoidance of war.**

Dorothy Day’s statement “We are against Universal Military Training because it is preparation for sin, For the sin that is war. That it is better that the United States be liquidated than that she survive by war.” is obviously a reference to the following words of Jesus Christ in the infallible teaching of the Gospel.

'And if thy hand may cause thee to stumble, cut it off; it is better for thee maimed to enter into the life, than having the two hands, to go away to the gehenna, to the unquenchable fire (Mark9:43)

 

[bones_IV]

bones, I not only read it I posted it for you and anyone else to read. The Bill of Rights does not deny citizenship to those who exercise their right to free speech, on the contrary, the Bill of Rights defends a citizens right to free speech.

Of course she had a right to freedom of speech. What I said was an expression.

I read your earlier post and I don’t think you’ve shown in the least that the CCC disagrees with Dorothy Day’s statement “We are against war because it is contrary to the spirit of Jesus Christ, and the only important thing is that we abide in His spirit.”

And we also have the right to defend ourselves.

In fact, here are a few quotes from the Catechism that confirm this type of opposition to war:

2304 Respect for and development of human life require peace. Peace is not merely the absence of war, and it is not limited to maintaining a balance of powers between adversaries. Peace cannot be attained on earth without safeguarding the goods of persons, free communication among men, respect for the dignity of persons and peoples, and the assiduous practice of fraternity. Peace is “the tranquility of order.” [St. Augustine, City of God 19, 13,1] Peace is the work of justice and the effect of charity. [Cf. Is. 32:17; cf. Vatican II, Gaudium et spes #78, 1-2]

2305 Earthly peace is the image and fruit of the peace of Christ, the messianic “Prince of Peace.” [Is. 9:5] By the blood of his Cross, “in his own person he killed the hostility,” [Eph. 2:16; cf. Col. 1:20-22] he reconciled men with God and made his Church the sacrament of the unity of the human race and of its union with God. “He is our peace.” [Eph. 2:14] He has declared: “Blessed are the peacemakers.” [Mt. 5:9]

2306 Those who renounce violence and bloodshed and, in order to safeguard human rights, make use of those means of defense available to the weakest, bear witness to evangelical charity, provided they do so without harming the rights and obligations of other men and societies. They bear legitimate witness to the gravity of the physical and moral risks of recourse to violence, with all its destruction and death. [Cf. Vatican II, Gaudium et spes 78, 5]

Avoiding war

2307 The fifth commandment forbids the intentional destruction of human life. Because of the evils and injustices that accompany all war, the Church insistently urges everyone to prayer and to action so that the divine Goodness may free us from the ancient bondage of war. [Cf. Vatican II, Gaudium et spes 81, 4]** All citizens and all governments are obliged to work for the avoidance of war.**

There’s no such thing as just war doctrine and this is not binding on Catholics.

Dorothy Day’s statement “We are against Universal Military Training because it is preparation for sin, For the sin that is war. That it is better that the United States be liquidated than that she survive by war.” is obviously a reference to the following words of Jesus Christ in the infallible teaching of the Gospel.

The next time the terrorists attack I won’t defend you does that sound fair to you?

'And if thy hand may cause thee to stumble, cut it off; it is better for thee maimed to enter into the life, than having the two hands, to go away to the gehenna, to the unquenchable fire (Mark9:43)

your point?

 

[bones_IV]

RachelsAlumni. Dorothy Day and her Catholic Worker movement actively tried to undermine America’s fight for survival (of itself and the world) in World War II - a war, (should be) needless to say, that the USA didn’t start. Not that it made much of a dent, thankfully. (this is the amoral nature of pacifism - it’s hit and miss, opposing America’s fight in WWII was immoral, the same done in Germany would have been moral).

The CTA and VOTF types co-opt Day into their own purposes. She opposed any kind of support of America’s fight in World War II, not just active military but also factories, war bonds, and so forth. I’m certainly not saying she was altogether awful, I just think her activism in World War II was loathsome. It doesn’t take intellectual or moral genius to support fighting the Nazis and Imperial Japan. Nor is it particularly bright to “oppose” a war that is thrust upon you. Mohandas Gandhi right up there in hype with Che Guevara. Violence suited him quite well if it furthered his cause and he was very willing to sacrifice countless people for “the cause”.

 

[RachelsAlumni]

There’s no such thing as just war doctrine and this is not binding on Catholics.

Actually there is such a thing as Just War doctrine, you even quoted it earlier from CCC 2309 here in post #27

I don’t know why you think that the teaching of the Universal and Ordinary Magesterium on faith & morals is not binding. The morality of war is, in fact, morals.

Our Father in heaven commanded, Lev 19:18 “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”

Jesus repeated, Mt 22:39 “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” Jn 15:12 “as I have loved you,”

All that we do related to our love for one another is morals.

So I think you may be quite mistaken about this and direct you to look up CCC 891. I won’t go into that here since it’s entirely irrelevant to the topic. Dorothy Day didn’t argue Just War doctrine. She was against all war.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RachelsAlumni View Post
'And if thy hand may cause thee to stumble, cut it off; it is better for thee maimed to enter into the life, than having the two hands, to go away to the gehenna, to the unquenchable fire (Mark9:43)

Dorothy Day’s statement “it is better that the United States be liquidated than that she survive by war.” is a reference to '… it is better for thee maimed to enter into the life, than having the two hands, to go away to the gehenna, to the unquenchable fire".

Dorothy Day and her Catholic Worker movement actively tried to undermine America’s fight for survival

Interesting, Pope John Paul II has received the same criticism/condemnation by secularists and neoconservatives for his opposition to the Iraq war, and his insistence on Peace. There is a long list of saints and servants of the church who actively strived as peacemakers, too numerous to even go into here. I believe these peacemakers, Dorothy Day & Pope John Paul II were more concerned with the salvation of souls and obeying the great commandment than they were with the opinions of this world. That makes them more like saints than traitors in my mind.

 

[bones_IV]

Actually there is such a thing as Just War doctrine, you even quoted it earlier from CCC 2309 here in post #27

I don’t know why you think that the teaching of the Universal and Ordinary Magesterium on faith & morals is not binding. The morality of war is, in fact, morals.

All that we do related to our love for one another is morals.

So I think you may be quite mistaken about this and direct you to look up CCC 891. I won’t go into that here since it’s entirely irrelevant to the topic. Dorothy Day didn’t argue Just War doctrine. She was against all war.

Dorothy Day’s statement “it is better that the United States be liquidated than that she survive by war.” is a reference to '… it is better for thee maimed to enter into the life, than having the two hands, to go away to the gehenna, to the unquenchable fire".

Interesting, Pope John Paul II has received the same criticism/condemnation by secularists and neoconservatives for his opposition to the Iraq war, and his insistence on Peace. There is a long list of saints and servants of the church who actively strived as peacemakers, too numerous to even go into here. I believe these peacemakers, Dorothy Day & Pope John Paul II were more concerned with the salvation of souls and obeying the great commandment than they were with the opinions of this world. That makes them more like saints than traitors in my mind.

I hate bust your bubble but peace doesn’t necessarily mean the absence of war.

This is not just war doctrine nor has ever been declared as such:

2309 The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration. the gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time:

• the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;
• all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;
• there must be serious prospects of success;
• the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. the power of modem means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.

There is no evidence that Pope John Paul II opposed the Iraq war.