Religious freedom

  • Thread starter Thread starter stanley123
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

stanley123

Guest
It appears that after Vatican II, the Church teaching on religious freedom contradicts previous Church teaching on religious freedom. For example, according to Dignitatis Humanae, Pope Paul VI, December 7, 1965:
"
2. This Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom. This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits.

The council further declares that the right to religious freedom has its foundation in the very dignity of the human person as this dignity is known through the revealed word of God and by reason itself.(2) This right of the human person to religious freedom is to be recognized in the constitutional law whereby society is governed and thus it is to become a civil right."

However, according to Pope Pius IX, “Qui Pluribus” 1846:
" Especially fatal to the salvation of souls is that erroneous opinion that liberty of conscience and liberty of worship is the proper right of every man. By our Apostolic authority, we condemn this evil opinion."
Are these two teachings (1)Dignitatis Humanae and (2) Qui Pluribus - contradictory or not ?
 
40.png
stanley123:
It appears that after Vatican II, the Church teaching on religious freedom contradicts previous Church teaching on religious freedom. For example, according to Dignitatis Humanae, Pope Paul VI, December 7, 1965:
"
2. This Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom. This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits.

The council further declares that the right to religious freedom has its foundation in the very dignity of the human person as this dignity is known through the revealed word of God and by reason itself.(2) This right of the human person to religious freedom is to be recognized in the constitutional law whereby society is governed and thus it is to become a civil right."

However, according to Pope Pius IX, “Qui Pluribus” 1846:
" Especially fatal to the salvation of souls is that erroneous opinion that liberty of conscience and liberty of worship is the proper right of every man. By our Apostolic authority, we condemn this evil opinion."
Are these two teachings (1)Dignitatis Humanae and (2) Qui Pluribus - contradictory or not ?
Click to expand...
I could be wrong but I think Qui Pluribus was addressing the issue of relgious practices which are contrary to Natural Law. This is probably what is also meant by the words, “within due limits”, found in Dignitatis Humanae.
An example that comes to my mind which violates the due limits clause is a religion where unwilling human victims are sacrificed.
 
Actually, the entire ordinary infallible magisterium of the pre-Vatican II church roundly, firmly, solemnly, and emphatically condemned the notion that freedom of religion was a right of every man. They made no bones about it. I have been reading the old papal encyclicals on this issue, and they couldn’t be more clear.
Love, Jaypeeto3
 
No, I disagree.

There is no contradiction…the first encyclical dealt with situations in which liberty was being twisted to include license… you cannot take one paragraph out of an encyclical and claim it “proves” that is contradicts another.
 
I’m not speaking of mere paragraphs, I am speaking of entire encyclicals dedicated to this very topic. While we’re at it,
the pre-Vatican II infallible ordinary magisterium also condemned ecumenism in the severest of terms also. Today, Pope Benedict XVI says that Catholics **do not ** practice the “ecumenism of the Return, namely, that (the Protestants) return to the Catholic Church” But the infallible pre-Vatican II magisterium taught emphatically that the ONLY valid form of ecumenism was the ecumenism of the RETURN of the schismatics and heretics (the Orthodox and the Protestants) to the one True Roman Catholic Church that their forefathers never should have left in the first place. Read Pope Pius XI’s MORTALIUM ANIMOS, for example. You can find it online by doing a google search.
Love, Jaypeeto3
 
Fellas and Ladies:

I think we need to bring in the heavy artillery here…a real catholic theologian, just to get it from the horse’s mouth. We may be missing a key concept somewhere. Interesting find JPII3.

in XT.
 
I think we need to bring in the heavy artillery here…a real catholic theologian, just to get it from the horse’s mouth.

I couldn’t agree more. I myself simply cannot reconcile the current teachings with the pre-Vatican II teachings, and I have tried very hard to do so. It’s very frustrating.

Love, Jaypeeto3
 
40.png
stanley123:
It appears that after Vatican II, the Church teaching on religious freedom contradicts previous Church teaching on religious freedom. For example, according to Dignitatis Humanae, Pope Paul VI, December 7, 1965:
"
2. This Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom. This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits.

The council further declares that the right to religious freedom has its foundation in the very dignity of the human person as this dignity is known through the revealed word of God and by reason itself.(2) This right of the human person to religious freedom is to be recognized in the constitutional law whereby society is governed and thus it is to become a civil right."

However, according to Pope Pius IX, “Qui Pluribus” 1846:
" Especially fatal to the salvation of souls is that erroneous opinion that liberty of conscience and liberty of worship is the proper right of every man. By our Apostolic authority, we condemn this evil opinion."
Are these two teachings (1)Dignitatis Humanae and (2) Qui Pluribus - contradictory or not ?
Click to expand...
Yes, that does seem to conflict. Interesting.
 
Although I am not yet a Catholic, and attended a Protestant Bible College and Seminary, I think any argument against Catholicism that relies on things that simply are not true is a grave disservice to Catholics and Protestants alike.

I just read the entire “Qui Pluribus” of 1846 by Pope Pius IX
on 2 different sites:

ewtn.com/library/encyc/p9quiplu.htm
and
catholic-forum.com/saints/pope0255b.htm

and the quote below does not appear anywhere in it:

However, according to Pope Pius IX, “Qui Pluribus” 1846:
" Especially fatal to the salvation of souls is that erroneous opinion that liberty of conscience and liberty of worship is the proper right of every man. By our Apostolic authority, we condemn this evil opinion."

You’re debating a position the Pope never took, at least not in the work cited.
 
In the Vorgrimler Commentaries our current Pope then a new Bishop commented on the document concerning religious freedom (which he helped write) and pretty much stated that the idea is that the comments of Vatican II in this area are directed at states that do not allow for the freedom of the Church. He also said that conversley it is not incumbant on a Catholic State to allow other forms of religion. The allowance of religious freedom in secular or other states is the allowance of an error for the sake of the freedom of the Church in line with Pope Leo XIII who said that “error may be tolerated for the sake of the Church.” In this case approval is different that tolerance because this tolerance implies the eventual consumation of truth in time. This particular issue is a special project of mine as it is one of the thesis projects.
 
40.png
jdlgolfs:
Although I am not yet a Catholic, and attended a Protestant Bible College and Seminary, I think any argument against Catholicism that relies on things that simply are not true is a grave disservice to Catholics and Protestants alike.

I just read the entire “Qui Pluribus” of 1846 by Pope Pius IX
on 2 different sites:

ewtn.com/library/encyc/p9quiplu.htm
and
catholic-forum.com/saints/pope0255b.htm

and the quote below does not appear anywhere in it:

However, according to Pope Pius IX, “Qui Pluribus” 1846:
" Especially fatal to the salvation of souls is that erroneous opinion that liberty of conscience and liberty of worship is the proper right of every man. By our Apostolic authority, we condemn this evil opinion."

You’re debating a position the Pope never took, at least not in the work cited.
Click to expand...
It does appear that this may be a misquote, at least from its not appearing in the encyclical stated. The quote, along with a few others on religious liberty, appears on the following semi-schismatic website:
traditionalromancatholicism.com/invinibleignorant.html
 
40.png
jdlgolfs:
Although I am not yet a Catholic, and attended a Protestant Bible College and Seminary, I think any argument against Catholicism that relies on things that simply are not true is a grave disservice to Catholics and Protestants alike.

I just read the entire “Qui Pluribus” of 1846 by Pope Pius IX
on 2 different sites:

ewtn.com/library/encyc/p9quiplu.htm
and
catholic-forum.com/saints/pope0255b.htm

and the quote below does not appear anywhere in it:

However, according to Pope Pius IX, “Qui Pluribus” 1846:
" Especially fatal to the salvation of souls is that erroneous opinion that liberty of conscience and liberty of worship is the proper right of every man. By our Apostolic authority, we condemn this evil opinion."

You’re debating a position the Pope never took, at least not in the work cited.
Click to expand...
This does look like it was not quoted correctly. Further investigation leads me to an article by Father William Most posted on EWTN which discusses a few texts on religious liberty and conscience issued before Vatican II and which appear to contradict (“Dignitatis
humanae” of Vatican II. However, Father Most gives his explanations of why he believes that there is no contradiction. Please see:
ewtn.com/library/SCRIPTUR/LEFEBVRE.TXT
and also see a similar and closely related EWTN article at:
ewtn.com/library/DOCTRINE/RELLIB.TXT
 
To mosher :

Is there a link online to the Vorgrimler commentary in which Ratzinger said what you said?

Thanks!
God bless,
Jaypeeto4 (aka Jaypeeto3)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top