Is civil disobedience a sin?

  • Thread starter Thread starter cho_pilo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

cho_pilo

Guest
Are bishops sinning when they urged the people to rise up in “civil disobedience” if the RH bill becomes a law.
After scheduling protest marches and caravans, Catholic bishops are readying another weapon against the Reproductive Health (RH) bill: civil disobedience.
The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) said at least two bishops have urged the people to rise up in “civil disobedience” if the RH bill becomes a law.
“We will have a civil disobedience. Those laws that are immoral, we will tell the people not to obey," Sorsogon Bishop Arturo Bastes said in an interview on Church-run Radio Veritas.
Bastes said the bishops will be not be cowed by any penalties under the law, saying it is their duty to promote morality.
“We bishops, are willing to be imprisoned, together with our priests, and protest the immoral things there (RH bill). To be firm with our teachings, let them imprison us," said Bastes.
READ MORE…
Jesus commanded to “give unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s.” 🤷
 
Are bishops sinning when they urged the people to rise up in “civil disobedience” if the RH bill becomes a law.

READ MORE…
Jesus commanded to “give unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s.” 🤷
Since when are issues of human life and morality Caesar’s?In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is therefore never licit to obey it, or to “take part in a propaganda campaign in favour of such a law, or vote for it”

John Paul II, Encyclical Evangelium Vitae, 73

** 399. *Citizens are not obligated in conscience to follow the prescriptions of civil authorities if their precepts are contrary to the demands of the moral order, to the fundamental rights of persons or to the teachings of the Gospel.[820] Unjust laws pose dramatic problems of conscience for morally upright people: * when they are called to cooperate in morally evil acts they must refuse.[821] Besides being a moral duty, such a refusal is also a basic human right which, precisely as such, civil law itself is obliged to recognize and protect. “Those who have recourse to conscientious objection must be protected not only from legal penalties but also from any negative effects on the legal, disciplinary, financial and professional plane”.[822]
  • It is a grave duty of conscience not to cooperate, not even formally, in practices which, although permitted by civil legislation, are contrary to the Law of God*. Such cooperation in fact can never be justified, not by invoking respect for the freedom of others nor by appealing to the fact that it is foreseen and required by civil law. No one can escape the moral responsibility for actions taken, and all will be judged by God himself based on this responsibility (cf.* Rom* 2:6; 14:12).
Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Catholic Church

2242 The citizen is obliged in conscience not to follow the directives of civil authorities when they are contrary to the demands of the moral order, to the fundamental rights of persons or the teachings of the Gospel. Refusing obedience to civil authorities, when their demands are contrary to those of an upright conscience, finds its justification in the distinction between serving God and serving the political community. "Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s."48 “We must obey God rather than men”:49

When citizens are under the oppression of a public authority which oversteps its competence, they should still not refuse to give or to do what is objectively demanded of them by the common good; but it is legitimate for them to defend their own rights and those of their fellow citizens against the abuse of this authority within the limits of the natural law and the Law of the Gospel.50

2243 Armed resistance to oppression by political authority is not legitimate, unless all the following conditions are met: 1) there is certain, grave, and prolonged violation of fundamental rights; 2) all other means of redress have been exhausted; 3) such resistance will not provoke worse disorders; 4) there is well-founded hope of success; and 5) it is impossible reasonably to foresee any better solution.
[bibledrb]Acts 5:29[/bibledrb]
I think it’s fairly apparent that if the faithful ***obey ***such a law, they are committing a gravely evil act.
 
My advice: Protest, but not to the level of getting arrested. A arrest can cause problems down the road; everything from getting a job to attempting to adopt.
 
My advice: Protest, but not to the level of getting arrested. A arrest can cause problems down the road; everything from getting a job to attempting to adopt.
NO!!! Protest until you get arrested!

Being arrested for protesting against evil causes less problems then allowing evil to take place.

“We bishops, are willing to be imprisoned, together with our priests, and protest the immoral things there (RH bill). To be firm with our teachings, let them imprison us,"

They Get it!
 
Since when are issues of human life and morality Caesar’s?In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is therefore never licit to obey it, or to “take part in a propaganda campaign in favour of such a law, or vote for it”

John Paul II, Encyclical Evangelium Vitae, 73

** 399. *Citizens are not obligated in conscience to follow the prescriptions of civil authorities if their precepts are contrary to the demands of the moral order, to the fundamental rights of persons or to the teachings of the Gospel.[820] Unjust laws pose dramatic problems of conscience for morally upright people: * when they are called to cooperate in morally evil acts they must refuse.[821] Besides being a moral duty, such a refusal is also a basic human right which, precisely as such, civil law itself is obliged to recognize and protect. “Those who have recourse to conscientious objection must be protected not only from legal penalties but also from any negative effects on the legal, disciplinary, financial and professional plane”.[822]
  • It is a grave duty of conscience not to cooperate, not even formally, in practices which, although permitted by civil legislation, are contrary to the Law of God*. Such cooperation in fact can never be justified, not by invoking respect for the freedom of others nor by appealing to the fact that it is foreseen and required by civil law. No one can escape the moral responsibility for actions taken, and all will be judged by God himself based on this responsibility (cf.* Rom* 2:6; 14:12).
Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Catholic Church

2242 The citizen is obliged in conscience not to follow the directives of civil authorities when they are contrary to the demands of the moral order, to the fundamental rights of persons or the teachings of the Gospel. Refusing obedience to civil authorities, when their demands are contrary to those of an upright conscience, finds its justification in the distinction between serving God and serving the political community. "Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s."48 “We must obey God rather than men”:49

When citizens are under the oppression of a public authority which oversteps its competence, they should still not refuse to give or to do what is objectively demanded of them by the common good; but it is legitimate for them to defend their own rights and those of their fellow citizens against the abuse of this authority within the limits of the natural law and the Law of the Gospel.50

2243 Armed resistance to oppression by political authority is not legitimate, unless all the following conditions are met: 1) there is certain, grave, and prolonged violation of fundamental rights; 2) all other means of redress have been exhausted; 3) such resistance will not provoke worse disorders; 4) there is well-founded hope of success; and 5) it is impossible reasonably to foresee any better solution.
[bibledrb]Acts 5:29[/bibledrb]
I think it’s fairly apparent that if the faithful ***obey ***such a law, they are committing a gravely evil act.
Mark - thank you for quoting the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition”.
All Catholic homes, and non-Catholics who are interested in what the Church really teaches, must have a copy.
 
Depends. Are you just engaging in a quiet civil protest, or are you causing people to not be able to go to work and feed their families? If you protest an abortion clinic in the middle of the road, throwing rocks at people and burning stuff, yes, that is sinful. If your just on the sidewalk protesting, that’s fine.

I’ve engaged in several civil protests, and as long as you keep it down to a dull roar, it’s fine.
 
Obviously civil disobedience can take many forms but the kind that tends to make a real is that kind that forces the news to take notice AND shows the opposition in a negative light.

Those who went to the Roman arenas for their beliefs of One god, in Love and in Peace, eventually wore down the Roman resistance.
Peaceful Protests in India where the British attemped to break it by force showed the brits in a bad light.
Sit-Ins in the Southern US where police used dogs and fire-hoses on blacks, brought home the unfairness of segregation.

These are three poor examples of where civil disobedience won great victories.

If people are to apply civil disobedience it must be clear and forceful without being violent. It must force the opposition to use physical and legal force AND it must be reported. In this way, support will grow for those “unjustly” imprisoned for their beliefs.
This kind of civil disobedience takes great courage and great fortitude and great Love for it walks a very fine line between “peaceful non-cooperation” and “violent protest”. It also requires stout, firm and charismatic leadership.

Peace
James
 
Depends. Are you just engaging in a quiet civil protest, or are you causing people to not be able to go to work and feed their families? If you protest an abortion clinic in the middle of the road, throwing rocks at people and burning stuff, yes, that is sinful. If your just on the sidewalk protesting, that’s fine.

I’ve engaged in several civil protests, and as long as you keep it down to a dull roar, it’s fine.
Civil disobedience by not paying their taxes once it is passed into law.
 
Obviously civil disobedience can take many forms but the kind that tends to make a real is that kind that forces the news to take notice AND shows the opposition in a negative light.
Yeah, perhaps if the CBCP will ask for civil disobedience in moral grounds to protect the Catholic faithfuls from the legislated murder which may be endorsed by the government.
I’m not sure if it is high time to sift the wheats from the weeds. 🤷
 
Philippine President calls civil disobedience over reproductive health bill ‘sedition’
MANILA, Philippines, May 13, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) - President Benigno Aquino told reporters today that groups threatening or calling for a tax boycott or other forms of civil disobedience if the controversial Reproductive Health bill is passed are courting sedition charges.
“I can’t believe anybody would air such a call publicly,” the president said. “That’s a serious offense,” he added, mentioning the specific charge of sedition.
Abigail Valte, a spokeswoman for President Aquino, added, “If they don’t want to pay their taxes, they better talk to [Internal Revenue] Commissioner [Kim] Henares.”
Early this week, leaders of the Catholic Church declared an “all-out war” against the passage of the RH Bill, after the Catholic Bishops’ Conference (CBCP) pulled out of talks with the government.
Archbishop Ramon Arguelles of Lipa said the talks were “doomed to fail” because Aquino has long been a supporter of the bill, UCA News reported.
“We are going to have a total war now against the RH bill … I said it before that the dialogue is useless … I know the president was not really open for a dialogue because of his fixed decision to push the RH bill,” said Archbishop Arguelles.
In mid-April, President Aquino, speaking to students at a university conference, said that he was prepared to risk excommunication over the bill.
“In the end I must listen to my conscience and do what is right,” Aquino said.
The CBCP has repeatedly sought to persuade the government that the legislation, which would authorize condom and birth control pill distribution campaigns, as well as incorporate sex education into school curricula, would seriously compromise the morals of Philippine citizens, especially the youth.
Bishop Deogracias Iñiguez Jr. of Kalookan said that though the Church is not advocating civil disobedience “for now,” Catholics should not be forced to obey any law that violates their faith.
“Eventually if the measure becomes law, Catholics will not obey it. If the state orders something contrary to your faith, you are obliged not to follow it,” said Bishop Iñiguez, head the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines’ (CBCP) public affairs commission.
In a pastoral letter released in January the Philippine Bishops noted that President Aquino rallied the country with an election campaign based on elimination of corruption.
“As religious leaders we believe that there is a greater form of corruption, namely, moral corruption which is really the root of all corruption. On the present issue, it would be morally corrupt to disregard the moral implications of the RH bill,” the bishops stated.
“Simply stated the RH Bill does not respect moral sense that is central to Filipino cultures. It is the product of the spirit of this world, a secularist, materialistic spirit … “
“We call upon our legislators to consider the RH bill in the light of the God-given dignity and worth of human life and, therefore, to shelve it completely as contrary to our ideals and aspirations as a people,” the bishops concluded.
Source: lifesitenews.com/news/philippine-president-calls-civil-disobedience-over-reproductive-health-bill

Pathetic !!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top