religious freedom

[Warrenton]

I am all for His Majesty, King Louis XX, rightful king of France.

Montjoie!!! Montjoie! Montjoie!!!

 

[Warrenton]

The Great War was a direct result of the clash between the concept of autocracy and modern industrial nations that led to one of the greatest slaughters that the world has ever seen. The First World War was the event that broke the faith of Europe, all because the kaiser, the tsar and emperor Franz Joseph refused any kind of reform that would improve the lot of their subjects.

The Great War was the direct result of a series of financial developments, integral with the growth of the liberal state, that made peace impossible. No economy could afford to lose.

The amount of lending for war materiel was contingent on the nature and quality of international alliances. That is why the United States ultimately backed Great Britain. That is also why the United States was compelled to enter the war on the allies behalf.

France repeatedly denied any efforts at a peace based on the status quo ante, because her economic reality forced the issue, especially after it was clear that Russia would never make good her war loans.

The modern liberal state came into existence decades before the form of monarchy disolved.

 

[severus68]

This quote more than many others crystalizes the debate.

Flyying is right, but only part right.

People are also free to create a society of their choosing. This is the highest form of free expression.

Thus, Catholics were, and are, free to create a Catholic society. Once they achieve this, as once they did all over Europe, they are justified in protecting it. This is no different from any other society. Our democracy claims the right to kill Islamists who would impose non-democratic values upon it, and moreover, it acts on that claim of right.

Traditionalist Catholics maintain the right to create, or recreate, a Catholic society. Once created, they deny that non-Catholics have the right to de-Catholocise it. They maintain the right to defend it Catholic nature, even by force if need arise. Non Catholics have two rights vis a vis the Catholic society’s structural life: they can join, or they can leave.

It is interesting to note that this grants one more right than modern governments tend to grant.

Christianity is not a religion of violence. What you say is what extremist Muslims say, they will and do use violence to ‘protect’ Islam against all perceived threats and against anyone who disagrees…

 

[divinefaith]

Christianity is not a religion of violence. What you say is what extremist Muslims say, they will and do use violence to ‘protect’ Islam against all perceived threats and against anyone who disagrees…

that’s the mentality some Catholics hold. I recall a thread here about whether or not it was acceptable to burn heretics This, IMHO is sinful, but sad to see how murder is “ok” for some of those who dont tolerate.

 

[severus68]

that’s the mentality some Catholics hold. I recall a thread here about whether or not it was acceptable to burn heretics This, IMHO is sinful, but sad to see how murder is “ok” for some of those who dont tolerate.

To think that Catholics would even start a thread like that (‘burning of heretics’) horrifies me.

 

[Bl_Pope_Pius_IX]

To think that Catholics would even start a thread like that (‘burning of heretics’) horrifies me.

that’s the mentality some Catholics hold. I recall a thread here about whether or not it was acceptable to burn heretics This, IMHO is sinful, but sad to see how murder is “ok” for some of those who dont tolerate.

I was heavily involved in that thread. No one supported burning them.

~ Pius :knight1:

 

[Warrenton]

Christianity is not a religion of violence. What you say is what extremist Muslims say, they will and do use violence to ‘protect’ Islam against all perceived threats and against anyone who disagrees…

No, extremist Muslims say they have the right to use violence to advance Islam. This is different than protecting Islam. To the extent Muslims claim the right to use force to protect Islam in Islamic countries, they are correct from a standpoint of civil justice.

Christianity is not a “religion of violence,” but neither is it passive in the face of efforts to destroy it.

We are speaking of societies already Catholic, not non Catholic or heterogeneous societies.

 

[severus68]

I was heavily involved in that thread. No one supported burning them.

~ Pius :knight1:

I am glad no one did. I just wonder why it is even necessary to ask Catholics that.

 

[Bl_Pope_Pius_IX]

I am glad no one did. I just wonder why it is even necessary to ask Catholics that.

No one was asking that. The question was regarding Thomas Aquinas’ writings on that topic and a lot of people took it the wrong way and bashed it for condoning burning heretics.

~ Pius :knight1:

 

[divinefaith]

No one was asking that. The question was regarding Thomas Aquinas’ writings on that topic and a lot of people took it the wrong way and bashed it for condoning burning heretics.

~ Pius :knight1:

Ok I agree the intent of the question was not bad itself. I do recall seeing a bad message on at least one post though. It was enough to irritate me and show some intolerance does exist in the minds of a minority. Most of the thread was ok though.

 

[severus68]

No one was asking that. The question was regarding Thomas Aquinas’ writings on that topic and a lot of people took it the wrong way and bashed it for condoning burning heretics.

~ Pius :knight1:

Thank you for the explaination.

 

[someguy14]

James 1:27
Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.

Only by God alone, can religion be accomplished and religion from God is Love one another and Love God with our entirity. We have many ways that we worship God, but we do not force them upon people and threaten to follow the ways we worship God or go to hell.

The Holy Ghost teaches us and intercedes for us on how to worship God and each of us were created by God and are an art work of God, alone. God is the main focus. Love God and Love one another, this fulfills all the commandmenst and the laws.

 

[divinefaith]

No one was asking that. The question was regarding Thomas Aquinas’ writings on that topic and a lot of people took it the wrong way and bashed it for condoning burning heretics.

~ Pius :knight1:

I take back what I said. The thread on ‘burning heretics’ was not bad. It was based on the history of this practice and whether or not arguments were legit back in the days. Most said it was not acceptable but maybe a couple said considering the way Church and state were run that it was understandeable for their time.

I took it wrong way to think its a sign of contemporary intolerance but it was not.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Can we speak Religious Freedom and seperate that from Human and Civil Rights? Can we even speak of religious freedom anymore? Or is that ancient history?

When religious freedom means stoning a young adult for adultry is that Human? It may be Religious Freedom however it fairs terribly in Human/Civil Rights.

Is Religious Freedom being forced to cooperate with abortion on a heath-care, social-service level? How does this interact with Human/Civil Rights?

Is your body your body and do you have the right to choose to kill life within it? Than by the same token why are drug-addicts sentenced to prison for abuse, why is suicide not legal?

Because one cannot see the life as a human living body, does it mean the heatbeat through ultasound is not life, and just as valuable as the one’s whom stand around you?

Instead of the legal killing of life why are we not prosecuting those who cooperate with the killing of life? Or those who choose through ignorance or wanton acts to create life, then through those same means grant themself the right to kill life. This isn’t what we do with addicts or suicide? Isn’t this a double standard? How is this quantified?

Does Religious Freedom equate with Human/Civil rights here???

If we will protest mercy killing, suicide, self-abuse, self immolation etc…than why would we cooperate with Abortion? I fail to see the difference?

Human Rights must be tempered with Religious Freedom. Problem is we as a society have compromised our value’s of Human Rights very slowly over time, to where it now interfers with Religious Freedom. Now religious freedom and the very essense countrys such as the US were based on are at stake. They are becoming EXTINCT.

This was done slowly and over a long period of time and continues today with ideas of Federal Funding by Obama on stem cell reseach etc etc etc…

Are womens body their bodys and do they have the right choose and act against the same laws we uphold?

Who has the right to kill? And how long and how many do they have the right kill? Who is it than who has the right to stop killing? Is this for leaders of our country to decide? How are no-win wars compatible with the sanctity of life? If another country decides by their laws to kill, why do our laws have any meaning or value thus jurisdiction over their laws? Who is to decide when and where? If so why are Cuba and North Korea dictatorships today? Those countrys have been enslaved so long they believe its “normal” What makes Islam more or a concern than a country such as Cuba or North Korea?

Why is America concerned who’s killing where, when its own backyard is filthy with the genocide of abortion? There were more Americans killed on the streets of American than the entire middle-east conflict over this period of time. If we can’t clean our own backyard why are we worried about others?

Why don’t we mind our own business, instead of the world having to be like us? What if the majority of the world decides they want us to be like them???

What if your religion is no religion, what value then is your opinion as opposed to other religions? Is it of MORE vale? Apparently so since “religion” is not even allowed to be mentioned in public schools anymore.

I recently listened to young girl in 7th grade, student council, and part of the school paper, propose to write on Religious Freedom. She was immeditely told we can’t mention anything with “religion” in the paper. So what voice does religion have but one thats been silenced. And why then do those of religion cooperate with their own demise?

What was the foundation of America and religious freedom and human rights? It certainly isn’t what is was. In fact it cannot even be recognized anymore.

 

[Dan_Daly]

I** think that everyone is forgetting that the Syllabus of Errors is meant to be applied to a Catholic state. In a Catholic state, the separation of Church and State is condemned, but not in a non-religious constitutional republic**.

In effect, the Syllabus of Errors is something that has lost its meaning, since the only Catholic state in the world today is Vatican City and that isn’t likely to change any time soon. **To say that the separation of Church and state is condemned in America would mean that the American government would have to be a religious state (which would go against the founding precepts of the Constitution). ** How would that go since the majority of Americans are non Catholics?

The Syllabus of Errors has gone the same way as the Index of Forbidden Books.

What is lost on many people is that even though one might live in a religiously pluralistic society (like the United States), we should all be working, hoping, and praying that our state becomes a Catholic state. Not because we want to coerce or force anyone into the faith, but because we want to convert everyone. Why? Because there is no salvation outside of the Church and God instructed us to go forth, evangelize, and convert people.

Can we be loving and kind towards Protestants, Muslims, Mormons, etc?

Yes, absolutely, and we must be. Sometimes being loving means telling people that they are wrong and speaking hard truths to them.

While we love them, we should not simply accept that our society has many faiths and leave it at that. We must desire all people to be united in the Catholic Church.

Pax and God bless.

 

[NeelyAnn]

What is lost on many people is that even though one might live in a religiously pluralistic society (like the United States), we should all be working, hoping, and praying that our state becomes a Catholic state. Not because we want to coerce or force anyone into the faith, but because we want to convert everyone. Why? Because there is no salvation outside of the Church and God instructed us to go forth, evangelize, and convert people.

Can we be loving and kind towards Protestants, Muslims, Mormons, etc?

Yes, absolutely, and we must be. Sometimes being loving means telling people that they are wrong and speaking hard truths to them.

While we love them, we should not simply accept that our society has many faiths and leave it at that. We must desire all people to be united in the Catholic Church.

Pax and God bless.

Exactly.

 

[mrld20]

What is lost on many people is that even though one might live in a religiously pluralistic society (like the United States), we should all be working, hoping, and praying that our state becomes a Catholic state. Not because we want to coerce or force anyone into the faith, but because we want to convert everyone. Why? Because there is no salvation outside of the Church and God instructed us to go forth, evangelize, and convert people.

Can we be loving and kind towards Protestants, Muslims, Mormons, etc?

Yes, absolutely, and we must be. Sometimes being loving means telling people that they are wrong and speaking hard truths to them.

While we love them, we should not simply accept that our society has many faiths and leave it at that. We must desire all people to be united in the Catholic Church.

Pax and God bless.

American is a state with a Constitution that forbids a state Church genius!

Have you also noticed that the vast majority of our founding fathers were quakers, dethiests, agnostics, unitarians, and Anglicans?

I oppose your efforts to do this. Religious freedom is supported by the Church and Vatican two… Can the Catholic faith being a moral guide to the secular America on issues such as abortion and marriage? Yes… But it is not your place to say that Catholics must convert the “pagans” i.e. Every other world religion. they all have a right to exist, practice their faith unhampered.

Should we be allowed to convert people? Yes… But should they be allowed to convert catholics? Yes… We scream religious intolerance every darn time someone criticizes the Church… But according to your views only Catholicism should be allowed in the end.

I will not let people like you destroy the Church and everything it stands for! In the spirit of Vatican II you need to stop with these outrageous statements! I will pray for you!

 

[Warrenton]

But should they be allowed to convert catholics? Yes… We scream religious intolerance every darn time someone criticizes the Church… But according to your views only Catholicism should be allowed in the end.

Let’s look at this more closely.

Non Catholics should only be allowed to convert Catholics as a method of maintaining civil peace. In other words, Catholics “tolerate” religious pluralism. It is not optimum.

What is optimum is everyone on eath being Catholic.

There is no moral reason why non Catholics should be permitted to convert Catholics, because to permit this runs the risk of losing the convert’s soul.

 

[mrld20]

If someone wants to become an apostate and separate from the Church there should be no penalty other than that person risking their soul in the end… That’s between them and God…

The inquisition ended several hundred years ago for people like that…

Human rights law states freedom of religion is essential.

If someone wants to join the Church they should be welcomed.

If someone wants to leave we cannot stop them no matter how much we disagree with them.

In the end on a positive note many who leave the Church as apostates find their way back on their own!

It’s between a believer and God and that’s the way it should remain.

 

[guestseeking]

So people please don’t jump down my throat over this… This is a sincere question and I’m sorry If it offends people.

It’s just every time there’s a thread on something like the Society of Pius X or the Jews; it would seem it gets shut down before any dialogue can begin.

I’m just really curious to hear a traditionalist on religious freedom. I mean I do accept that we are the “one holy catholic apostolic church.”

But at the same time I recognize it is our duty as Christians to at least acknowledge other people’s beliefs and accept that we can peacefully co-exist without trying to forcibly convert each other or refute each other’s beliefs.

I personally am friends with many protestants, jews, muslims, and buddhists.

What are everyone’s thoughts on religious freedom and ecumenical outreach?

there is no religous freedom without conforming to Christ. if post and threads are taken down that are not in accordance with Christ and also his delivernce of sinners, then i am sorry that you mean to not offend. why worry now if you offend people, why not be concerned if your opinons and your lack of desire to evangelize those who do not have Christ in abundance could perhaps offend God himself? if you mean to be friends with everyone, and you forget the One friend you should have Loyalty to what good are your complaints? how can you offend no one if you do not offend God? that i think is the main consern we must all look within out motives and see ourselfs as we are in truth. i have an athiest friend, but i pray for her soul, and I would not care if she is offended by my faith, she has many times been offended that i have belief she doesnt understand to “not touch the fire when the Father says do not” she doesnt know God, would i worry about if she be offended by what i know and have more loyalty to her who is so in need of Christ, and offend the one who is Christ, and not be a true friend to my Jesus? that is the greater complaint, that you take such care to not offend anyone or convert anyone, look at Christ’s compassion, he did not worry about those who were offended by him, He gave his life and rose again for Ours and thier hope that even believe on his miracles let alone who believe in Him. where is the shame in offending someone who doesnt know Jesus? muslims athiets people in cults? what is the greater concern a post bieng removed or Our Loyalty bieng displaced?

Again I am not trying to start a fight here. I am really curious and looking for answers. I don’t want to offend or upset anyone here. No one put me up to this to bash traditionalist Catholics.

I am not anti-traditionalist in anyway. I have no problem with the old liturgy or traditions. I’m just trying to learn