Revolution against the State

  • Thread starter Thread starter Proletarian
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Proletarian

Guest
Hi everyone!

I’d be very interested to know what everyone thinks about the matter of revolution against an established State. From what I’ve read the position of the Gospel and the Church seems to be quite clear on the issue. Both are opposed to violent revolution, and demand respect for our rulers regardless of the atrocities they may commit against their own people.

Romans 13:1-7
Let every person be subordinate to the higher authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been established by God. Therefore, whoever resists authority opposes what God has appointed, and those who oppose it will bring judgment upon themselves. For rulers are not a cause of fear to good conduct, but to evil. Do you wish to have no fear of authority? Then do what is good and you will receive approval from it, for it is a servant of God for your good. But if you do evil, be afraid, for it does not bear the sword without purpose; it is the servant of God to inflict wrath on the evildoer. Therefore, it is necessary to be subject not only because of the wrath but also because of conscience. This is why you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, devoting themselves to this very thing. Pay to all their dues, taxes to whom taxes are due, toll to whom toll is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due.

And then this from Quod Apostolici Muneris, Pope Leo XIII…

And if at any time it happen that the power of the State is rashly and tyrannically wielded by princes, the teaching of the Catholic church does not allow an insurrection on private authority against them, lest public order be only the more disturbed, and lest society take greater hurt therefrom. And when affairs come to such a pass that there is no other hope of safety, she teaches that relief may be hastened by the merits of Christian patience and by earnest prayers to God. (paragraph 7)

I can’t help but think of the late John Paul II and his support for the revolutionary solidarity movement in Communist Poland. What do you think about the matter of revolution against the State, considering that most of us live in a society formed out of revolution (particularly those of you within the US)
 
Hi Prol,

Here is the teaching of the Church as recorded in the Catechism of the Catholic Church :

http://javascript<b></b>:openWindow('cr/2243.htm');
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.

Verbum
 
Proletarian said:
Hi everyone!

I’d be very interested to know what everyone thinks about the matter of revolution against an established State. From what I’ve read the position of the Gospel and the Church seems to be quite clear on the issue. Both are opposed to violent revolution, and demand respect for our rulers regardless of the atrocities they may commit against their own people.

Romans 13:1-7
Let every person be subordinate to the higher authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been established by God. Therefore, whoever resists authority opposes what God has appointed, and those who oppose it will bring judgment upon themselves. For rulers are not a cause of fear to good conduct, but to evil. Do you wish to have no fear of authority? Then do what is good and you will receive approval from it, for it is a servant of God for your good. But if you do evil, be afraid, for it does not bear the sword without purpose; it is the servant of God to inflict wrath on the evildoer. Therefore, it is necessary to be subject not only because of the wrath but also because of conscience. This is why you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, devoting themselves to this very thing. Pay to all their dues, taxes to whom taxes are due, toll to whom toll is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due.

And then this from Quod Apostolici Muneris, Pope Leo XIII…

And if at any time it happen that the power of the State is rashly and tyrannically wielded by princes, the teaching of the Catholic church does not allow an insurrection on private authority against them, lest public order be only the more disturbed, and lest society take greater hurt therefrom. And when affairs come to such a pass that there is no other hope of safety, she teaches that relief may be hastened by the merits of Christian patience and by earnest prayers to God. (paragraph 7)

I can’t help but think of the late John Paul II and his support for the revolutionary solidarity movement in Communist Poland. What do you think about the matter of revolution against the State, considering that most of us live in a society formed out of revolution (particularly those of you within the US)
Click to expand...

Disclaimer: I’m not from the US. Traitors (including spies) should be executed, without exception. Peaceful strikes are another matter entirely; but when Hitler had the July Plotters executed, he was doing no more than any head of state would have done.​

Rebels & traitors put themselves outside the society against which they rebel - so they cannot complain if it puts them to death without mercy. In fact, they don’t even deserve a trial. If they are canonised - they can’t be Saints: Saints do not do the work of the devil, but these people do. Jesus did not rebel; no Apostle committed treason. It is a crime of the utmost seriousness, because it harms the entire state. 😦

That’s MO
 
Gottle_of_Geer said:

Disclaimer: I’m not from the US. Traitors (including spies) should be executed, without exception. Peaceful strikes are another matter entirely; but when Hitler had the July Plotters executed, he was doing no more than any head of state would have done.​

Rebels & traitors put themselves outside the society against which they rebel - so they cannot complain if it puts them to death without mercy. In fact, they don’t even deserve a trial. If they are canonised - they can’t be Saints: Saints do not do the work of the devil, but these people do. Jesus did not rebel; no Apostle committed treason. It is a crime of the utmost seriousness, because it harms the entire state. 😦

That’s MO
Click to expand...
So… St. Thomas More is not a saint?
 
Verbum said:
Hi Prol,

Here is the teaching of the Church as recorded in the Catechism of the Catholic Church :

http://javascript<b></b>:openWindow('cr/2243.htm');
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.

Verbum
Click to expand...
Hi Verbum,

Thanks for the link, thats right o the money. It seems like somewhat of a contradiction though, that Quod Apostolici Muneris (an infallible encyclical) states that armed resistance is completely unacceptable,

“And if at any time it happen that the power of the State is rashly and tyrannically wielded by princes, the teaching of the Catholic church does not allow an insurrection on private authority against them.” (paragraph 7)

yet the CCC allows for it in certain circumstances
 
rpp said:
So… St. Thomas More is not a saint?
Click to expand...

He was not a traitor - he was accused of it; which is not the same. He did not attempt - like the rebels of 1569-70 - to force Henry VIII to change his purpose, still less to dethrone him. And I can’t see any place in Christian faith for books defending regicide: a Spanish Jesuit wrote one in 1625; it was burnt by the executioner, AFAIR. Not surprisingly:​

  • it was extremely controversial in Catholic circles
  • it was seized on by those with no love for Rome as a Church or a political power
  • It brought or increased distrust for the Jesuits
Rebellion & intrigue may enjoy brief success, but they encourage the discontented to “go and do likewise”. It’s a cliché that revolutions swallow their own children. They are inherently destabilising.

Several of the Jesuits in Elizabethan England, in the 1580s, intrigued to bring in Philip II of Spain, the Queen’s brother-in-law, as her replacement :eek: - this was immensely divisive for the Catholic body in England, who already had to put up with the results of the 1569-70 rising, itself encouraged by her excommunication in 1570; & none of this did anything to clear Catholics of the suspicion that their religion made them traitors. And this was before the Gunpowder Plot.

Treason in the name of religion is - arguably - more horrible than any other kind, because religious faith is more excellent than other kind of obedience or communion, since it unites God with man; so when it becomes a means of evil-doing, its corruption is all the greater. Yet religious faith ought to make us loyal, for the sake of the obedience we owe to God Who is Lord of all kings & presidents & rulers & authorities. 😦 It’s an expression of faith - of seeing God’s authority in that of traffic-police, judges, presidents, queens, MPs, councillors & so on. What authority have they, that God is not the Source of ?

I think JP2 canonised someone who had been involved one of the Polish risings against Russia; such involvement is not easy to square with Romans 13 :eek:
and
Dante (notes on)
 
Hi Proletarian,
  1. An encyclical is not per se infallible
  2. one would have to see what “on private authority” means
Various popes’ political declarations may have been colored by the former status of the papacy as a state.

Verbum
 
Verbum said:
Hi Proletarian,
  1. An encyclical is not per se infallible
  2. one would have to see what “on private authority” means
Various popes’ political declarations may have been colored by the former status of the papacy as a state.

Verbum
Click to expand...
Cheers verbum,

I think I need to do some serious reading on Infallibility.

God bless
 
Armed rebellion in modern states is unlikely or is practically impossible, not to mention the laws on sedition. Voter rebellion, turning the rascals out through the ballot box, is today’s revolution.
 
Gottle_of_Geer said:

Disclaimer: I’m not from the US. Traitors (including spies) should be executed, without exception. Peaceful strikes are another matter entirely; but when Hitler had the July Plotters executed, he was doing no more than any head of state would have done.​

Rebels & traitors put themselves outside the society against which they rebel - so they cannot complain if it puts them to death without mercy. In fact, they don’t even deserve a trial. If they are canonised - they can’t be Saints: Saints do not do the work of the devil, but these people do. Jesus did not rebel; no Apostle committed treason. It is a crime of the utmost seriousness, because it harms the entire state. 😦

That’s MO
Click to expand...
Treason is not the same as rebelion.
 
Georgia said:
Armed rebellion in modern states is unlikely or is practically impossible, not to mention the laws on sedition. Voter rebellion, turning the rascals out through the ballot box, is today’s revolution.
Click to expand...
True. Not to mention strike action; particularly the idea of a peaceful general strike.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top