On Religious Liberty

  • Thread starter Thread starter JSmitty2005
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I said no but really it is a qualified yes. A person can profess whatever faith he feels is true but the state is not required to guarantee him that right. Lumen Gentium speaks about religious freedom but in reading the commentary (Vorgrimler Commentaries) on the issue made by the current Pope who was a Bishop then states that in a Catholic country it is not necessary that religious freedom be granted because it is not necessary for a Catholic Country to tolerate the error of other religions.
 
40.png
mosher:
I said no but really it is a qualified yes. A person can profess whatever faith he feels is true but the state is not required to guarantee him that right. Lumen Gentium speaks about religious freedom but in reading the commentary (Vorgrimler Commentaries) on the issue made by the current Pope who was a Bishop then states that in a Catholic country it is not necessary that religious freedom be granted because it is not necessary for a Catholic Country to tolerate the error of other religions.
Would you rather live in a Catholic country, then?
 
40.png
JSmitty2005:
The complete quote would not fit, so I did my best to shorten it without losing the meaning. I put the full quote in post #1.
I would suggest that the meaning is lost without the “reason” phrase. The Syllabus, among other things, criticized the belief that unfettered human reason could alone determine truth, to wit, the third error:
  1. Human reason, without any reference whatsoever to God, is the sole arbiter of truth and falsehood, and of good and evil; it is law to itself, and suffices, by its natural force, to secure the welfare of men and of nations…
I would argue that the error you quoted cannot be fully understood without understanding the more basic point that underlies the quote: the criticism of pure reason as seen in error number 3.
 
40.png
dcdurel:
It is an ambigous statement, by itself, which needs clarification.

In relationship to God, of course not. No one has a moral right before God to reject the religion He founded and instead embrace man-made religions.

In relationship to the state, absolutely YES. No goverment has the right to force us to follow a particular religion.

This teaching from the syllabus of errors is used by dissidents, both on the right and left to say the Church changed her teachings in Vatican II
That is false. The original statement was in reference to our relationship with God. Vatican II was in reference to the state.

Two different subjects.
dcdurel seems to be saying that governments MUST grant religious liberty to its constituents even if it’s a Catholic government, but that between God and man, man does NOT have the right to follow any religion.
40.png
mosher:
I said no but really it is a qualified yes. A person can profess whatever faith he feels is true but the state is not required to guarantee him that right. Lumen Gentium speaks about religious freedom but in reading the commentary (Vorgrimler Commentaries) on the issue made by the current Pope who was a Bishop then states that in a Catholic country it is not necessary that religious freedom be granted because it is not necessary for a Catholic Country to tolerate the error of other religions.
mosher seems to be saying that governments need NOT grant religious liberty to its constituents if it’s a Catholic government, but that between God and man, man DOES have the right to follow any religion.

What does the Church teach? The interpretations above seem to be exact opposites. I was thinking more along the lines of dcdurel because we do NOT have the freedom to follow whichever religion we want. I get this idea not only from the condemned statement in the Syllabus but also JP2’s and B16’s definitions of freedom.

“Freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought.” -Pope John Paul II

“…freedom is not simply about enjoying life in total autonomy, but rather about living by the measure of truth and goodness, so that we ourselves can become true and good.” -Pope Benedict XVI

If we do have the right to do what we ought, then we don’t have the right to do what we shouldn’t (ie. - women don’t have the right to abort their children). This should also apply to our religion. There is only ONE religion that all men ought to follow. The only religion men are free to follow is Catholicism. Now, being that Christianity is a proposition (as compared to Islam which is an imposition), no person or government can force someone to be Catholic. This is also backed up historically because the Church has never forced anyone to be Catholic. Well, that’s my attempt at reconciling the Syllabus and the V2 documents. Someone correct me if I’m way off base.
 
40.png
JSmitty2005:
If we do have the right to do what we ought, then we don’t have the right to do what we shouldn’t (ie. - women don’t have the right to abort their children). This should also apply to our religion. There is only ONE religion that all men ought to follow. The only religion men are free to follow is Catholicism. Now, being that Christianity is a proposition (as compared to Islam which is an imposition), no person or government can force someone to be Catholic. This is also backed up historically because the Church has never forced anyone to be Catholic. Well, that’s my attempt at reconciling the Syllabus and the V2 documents. Someone correct me if I’m way off base.
You have done an excellent job of thinking thorough this topic. I wish I had a copy of the Vorgrimler commentaries on hand because your thinking is well in line with what the current Holy Father then wrote commenting on the docuements of Vatican II.
 
Everyone is free to embrace and profess whatever they’d like - doesn’t necessarily mean they’re right.
 
40.png
Prodigal_Son:
With all due respect, huh?
Just saying I agree with you- of course with respect, and a little humour
😉
40.png
Emly:
Is that includeing Satanism?
God gives us free will to choose; especially for or against him. Doesn’t he?
 
“The coming of the lawless one by the activity of Satan will be with all power and with pretended signs and wonders, and with all wicked deception for those who are to perish, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. Therefore God sends upon them a strong delusion, to make them believe what is false, so that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.”
2Thessalonians 2:9-12
For those who do not believe the truth, ALL will be condemned.

What does all of this mean? Let us summarize:
  1. We are all bound to search for the truth. 1Timothy 2:3-4
  2. Those who refuse to search for the truth will be met with the wrath of GOD. Romans 2:8
  3. Those who refuse to accept the truth, will be condemned. 2Thessalonians 2:9-12
  4. He who has refused to acknowledge the truth in life will be forced to confront it in death. Hebrews 9:27, Revelation 21:27
  5. Now who does all of this fit? It certainly does fit all of those who perpetuate false charges against the only Church which Jesus Christ founded, and who continue to do so, by refusing to go to the source for the truth of what the Catholic Church teaches.
  6. These are not my rules or ideas. They are the teaching of GOD through Holy Scripture.
“Have I then become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?”
Galatians 4:16
 
40.png
FightingFat:
God gives us free will to choose; especially for or against him. Doesn’t he?
We may have the ability to do such, but are we really free to do so? Think about it in terms of abortion. Is a woman free to choose simply because God gave her free will? I don’t think He granted any such freedom. Now, how much more with something so much more important - the religion we profess. I say this is more important because following a false religion can bring about an eternal spiritual death whereas abortion only destroys biological life.
 
If we cannot choose, how can the lesson be learned? Are we merely automatants? Is that what God wanted?
 
40.png
Prodigal_Son:
Why exactly would anyone claim they shouldn’t be? God gave us freedom of speech, so ought we give freedom of speech to one another.
No, actually freedom of speech is not a God-given right .
 
40.png
FightingFat:
If we cannot choose, how can the lesson be learned? Are we merely automatants? Is that what God wanted?
40.png
JSmitty2005:
Do you believe that every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true?
40.png
JSmitty2005:
this statement was **CONDEMNED ** by Pope Pius IX in his Syllabus of Errors.
 
So what are you trying to say here? It sounds to me that you are trying to say that all non-Catholics will burn in hell?
 
40.png
JSmitty2005:
No, actually freedom of speech is not a God-given right .
How do you figure?

If you want to, can you say whatever you choose? Could you say, “Gee, I don’t want to be Christian?” Will God kill you for it?

All signs point to the theory that God gives us freedom, and expects us to use our freedom wisely. The burden of proof that “freedom of speech is not a God-given right” lies on you.
 
40.png
Prodigal_Son:
How do you figure?

If you want to, can you say whatever you choose? Could you say, “Gee, I don’t want to be Christian?” Will God kill you for it?

All signs point to the theory that God gives us freedom, and expects us to use our freedom wisely. The burden of proof that “freedom of speech is not a God-given right” lies on you.
You are correct to say that God grants us freedom but the question here is not about that, I think, but rather the nature of freedom. We seem to have the idea that freedom is the ability to choose whatever we choose however this is not correct. Freedom is the ability to choose the good over evil. One never exercises freedom when they choose evil - rather the ability to choose either is license and not freedom.
 
40.png
FightingFat:
So what are you trying to say here? It sounds to me that you are trying to say that all non-Catholics will burn in hell?
If that’s the conclusion you draw from THE POPE’S INFALLIBLE WORDS, then so be it. However, the Church has never taught that, so you may need to reinterpret what you think he’s saying.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top