New ‘Declaration of Truths’ Affirms Key Church Teachings

[irenaeus1]

Changed circumstances, evolved understanding of human dignity, improved capacity to suppress and confine criminals was inconceivable so couldn’t be expressed in Church teaching.

The problem with what Popes John Paul II and Francis said, that the death penalty is not needed anymore, is that this is a matter of prudential judgment, not doctrinal teaching. The Church has no authority nor competency in determining the adequacy or inadequacy of a State’s penal justice system. The condition and advancement of a State’s prison system is not within the competency of the Church’s authority. And with regard to the dignity of the human person, this is not new to the Church. In fact, the Church has championed human dignity since its beginning. And besides that, God actually sanctioned the imposition of the death penalty PRECISELY because of human dignity (i.e., man made in the image of God), so if anything, that argument has already been taken in support of the death penalty by none other than God Himself. And I have visited prisons and dungeons in Europe… we have had the capacity to successfully confine criminals for millennia.

 

[irenaeus1]

Emeraldlady:
How does the Church know when and which country’s criminal justice systems are sufficiently advanced so as to make recourse to the death penalty inadmissible? What criteria did they use to arrive at their conclusion? How can this be applied globally considering some countries are decades if not 100s of years behind many first world nations? Why is Pope Pius XII, who spoke more about this subject than any other pope before or after him, totally ignored on this subject?

 

[Emeraldlady]

The problem with what Popes John Paul II and Francis said, that the death penalty is not needed anymore, is that this is a matter of prudential judgment, not doctrinal teaching. The Church has no authority nor competency in determining the adequacy or inadequacy of a State’s penal justice system. The condition and advancement of a State’s prison system is not within the competency of the Church’s authority.

It’s disingenuous to claim America is not as advanced as other western nations that have abolished the death penalty and basically that is every other western nation. The issue is that some quarters of American politics (and religion) reject the Christian obligation to withhold use of the death penalty for any reason whatsoever. It’s a ‘sovereignty’ thing. For Catholics to claim a sovereign right to kill MUST be corrected by the universal Church. Hence the wording of the Catechism.

And with regard to the dignity of the human person, this is not new to the Church. In fact, the Church has championed human dignity since its beginning. And besides that, God actually sanctioned the imposition of the death penalty PRECISELY because of human dignity (i.e., man made in the image of God), so if anything, that argument has already been taken in support of the death penalty by none other than God Himself.

Aquinas articulated the limitations of the death penalty.

“Our Lord forbids the uprooting of the cockle, when there is fear lest the wheat be uprooted together with it.” - STII II 108 Art3

Catholics turn to the universal Church for guidance on moral matters. Prudence is not a matter of opinion. It’s a moral judgement.

And I have visited prisons and dungeons in Europe… we have had the capacity to successfully confine criminals for millennia.

The humane treatment of prisoners is a fairly recent goal.

How does the Church know when and which country’s criminal justice systems are sufficiently advanced so as to make recourse to the death penalty inadmissible? What criteria did they use to arrive at their conclusion? How can this be applied globally considering some countries are decades if not 100s of years behind many first world nations?

The Church doesn’t operate as a civil government. She responds to false teaching to define doctrine.

 

[Malcolm]

Finally someone higher up had the courage to clarify TRUTHS about many issues horribly and unnecessarily confused by those who were supposed to have upheld those truths in the first place.

As far as I’m concerned the Declaration of Truths could be a litmus test of who is truly (a traditional) Catholic.

It’s not a vote or popularity contest it’s a question of what is or isn’t the deposit of faith and constant teaching of the church.

 

[Emeraldlady]

Finally someone higher up had the courage to clarify TRUTHS about many issues horribly and unnecessarily confused by those who were supposed to have upheld those truths in the first place.

As far as I’m concerned the Declaration of Truths could be a litmus test of who is truly (a traditional) Catholic.

It’s not a vote or popularity contest it’s a question of what is or isn’t the deposit of faith and constant teaching of the church.

I’m interested to hear you explain to me my problem and error. I was born Catholic and have faithfully practiced for 57 years. Never had sex before I married. Never took contraception. Never missed Mass intentionally. Read all the Church’s new encyclicals and pastoral letters without having doubt. Raised my children in the faith and support their continued faithful practice and involvement in the life of the Church as adults.

Pope Francis is a man of life long faith and devotion to the Church who has dealt with very difficult cultural problems and eras in his country of origin but always as a man of the Church.

I have discerned a godliness and wisdom in him, that is unafraid of the challenges of the 3rd millenia of the Church and the eschatological urgency to live the faith rather than proselytise from ivory towers.

Am I a hopeless lost, ignorant liberal who doesn’t recognise Burke and co as the new church? If so, I am prepared to die on that hill with Pope Francis.

 

[CilladeRoma]

Am I a hopeless lost, ignorant liberal who doesn’t recognise Burke and co as the new church? If so, I am prepared to die on that hill with Pope Francis.

I’ll be standing there with you!
A “traditional Catholic” supports the Holy Father, they don’t work against him.

 

[Emeraldlady]

Emeraldlady:

Am I a hopeless lost, ignorant liberal who doesn’t recognise Burke and co as the new church? If so, I am prepared to die on that hill with Pope Francis.

I’ll be standing there with you!
A “traditional Catholic” supports the Holy Father, they don’t work against him.

That’s it! We are the traditional Catholics. Those who believe that Christ gave us the Rock that is Peter to believe with faith. The cult of rejecting the authority of the Pope started with the 16th century protesters.

 

[KMG]

The pope’s authority is not unlimited.

 

[TMC]

The Church proposes the possibility that non-believers may be saved, so that is not a unique position of the Church for the Jews only.

Yes, the Church teaches that all non-believers may be saved, but also teaches that Jews are in a unique position. What is proposed in Cdr Burke’s document appears to be a form of supersessionism - the idea that the Covenant with the Jews is no longer in effect, because it was replaced by the New Covenant. The Church has rejected that idea.

Here is a good document from the Vatican discussing the Church’s teachings on Judaism, now and through history. It is not doctrinal in itself, but is a good discussion of doctrine from the Vatican:
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/p...i_doc_20151210_ebraismo-nostra-aetate_en.html

 

[TMC]

The pope’s authority is not unlimited.

Obviously true. Also obvious that the Pope’s authority exceeds that of the authors of this “declaration”.

 

[KMG]

The bishops who authored this letter said nothing that isn’t basic Catholic doctrine.

 

[Feanor2]

Looks like he’s got his cappa magna though!

Very fancy!

 

[Malcolm]

Am I a hopeless lost, ignorant liberal who doesn’t recognise Burke and co as the new church? If so, I am prepared to die on that hill with Pope Francis.

Burke (et al) are expressing solidarity with the doctrines of the old church irrespective of present personalities or preferences. The only new church will be one led from the very top into the great apostasy.

I would be very careful which one you choose to die for.

 

[CilladeRoma]

There is ONE, HOLY, CATHOLIC AND APOSTOLIC CHURCH and her leader is Pope Francis.

Any attempt, by any side, to undermine this, is not Catholic.

 

[KMG]

Stating basic Catholic doctrine is not undermining the Church.

 

[CilladeRoma]

When you do it with the presumption that it is being done because the “Boss” (Pope Francis) isn’t doing his job and is leading people into sin, then yes, you are undermining the Church.

 

[KMG]

Where exactly in the letter do the bishops say Francis is leading people into sin?

 

[TMC]

The bishops who authored this letter said nothing that isn’t basic Catholic doctrine.

Well, I disagree with that, and you have not explained how the statements in the “declaration” are consistent with the Church teaching that has been pointed to on this thread.

 

[CilladeRoma]

These Bishops/Cardinals believe that they are right and Francis is wrong. That they are upholding Catholic dogma while the Pope is not. It does not have to be spelled out in black & white to see what +Burke, et al, are doing.

They are undermining the authority of the Holy Father and using their “cult of personality” to sow discord among the faithful.

 

[TMC]

Where exactly in the letter do the bishops say Francis is leading people into sin?

The entire declaration is an implicit condemnation. But they were more explicit in the so called “explanatory note” accompanying the letter, which directly accuses the Magisterium of “lethargy,” as well as “non-compliance with the Apostolic Duty.”