Innocent Persons Resisting Arrest

[Winchester]

[quote name='MithLuin' timestamp='1306245944' post='2245360']
Le roi est mort. Vive le roi!

So because we don't live in a monarchy, we don't have to recognize teh authoritay of the government? Doesn't seem like an authentic understanding of Catholic social teaching to me.....

And New Zealand is all commonwealth-y, so does it apply there?
[/quote]
So because a bunch of people get together and say you have to do something, you have to do it? What's the number on that? Shall I submit to slaughter by a warlord?

Your proof-text does not mention democracies. Go find a proof text that does.

Edited May 24, 2011 by Winchester

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='MithLuin' timestamp='1306239945' post='2245333']
Well, if one does have the right to resist lawful arrest, St. Peter at least advises Christians not to exercise this right.

So practically speaking, no, a Christian can [i]not[/i] justly resist arrest with deadly force, as such an action would cause scandal. As the rest of the first letter of Peter makes clear...we are strangers here, and our treasure is in heaven. No one will violate your rights there.

If some random stranger off the street tries to kidnap you, surely you can resist this lawless behavior. But if you are seeking to resist the police, you cannot disregard their rightful authority.
[/quote]


Lets look at the scripture you are quoting.

"Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority, or to governors as sent by him [b][i]for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right[/i][/b]. For such is the will of God that by doing right you may silence the ignorance of foolish men. Act as free men, and do not use your freedom as a covering for evil, but use it as bondslaves of God. Honor all people, love the brotherhood, fear God, honor the king"



Noone denies the authority of kings and goveners to punish evildoers and to praise those who do right, what is denied is that one must submit to the punishment of those doing right, as if they were evildoers.

Peter makes no prohabition on resistance to those punishing the rightous.

Further he instructs the reader to live a freemen, but you require freemen live as slaves.

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='MithLuin' timestamp='1306245944' post='2245360']
Le roi est mort. Vive le roi!

So because we don't live in a monarchy, we don't have to recognize teh authoritay of the government? Doesn't seem like an authentic understanding of Catholic social teaching to me.....

And New Zealand is all commonwealth-y, so does it apply there?
[/quote]


Well since you chose to find a scripture which tells one to obey the king and his agents, yes.

Specifically we do not have to recognize the authority of this government, because this government has no authority.... This government is NOT in keeping wit the Catholic requirements for a Legitement government.

[stevil]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1306239959' post='2245334']
It would depend on the situation, but someone taking my vehicle would cause a great deal of harm to my family. But I would not rule out lethal force to keep my vehicle from being stolen.
[/quote]
So possibly you are advocating the death penalty, without the inconvenience of a trial, for the crime of auto theft.
Is this only if the person is caught in the act and the victim gets a period of 30 seconds grace where they can be judge, jury and executioner?
Or does this extend to all auto thefts, should the government execute these people?

In my opinion if your life isn't threatened and you choose to shoot and kill someone then that is murder.

[stevil]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' timestamp='1306252329' post='2245385']
No one objects to gay people being in love, and Homosexual people have exactly the same marriage rights that Hetrosexual people do.
They can marry anyone of the opposite sex that they choose with whom there is no impedement to marriage.
[/quote]
What about marrage to the person that they love? Would that be worse than owning a gun?

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1306265885' post='2245439']
What about marrage to the person that they love? Would that be worse than owning a gun?
[/quote]
What about marriage to the person they love? Being in love with someone does not make it okay to marry them, see the sister example above.


Marriage in a religious context is not about romantic love, it is nice if you love who you are married to, but say not being inlove is not an impediment to marriage.

Love is not a good reason in and of itself to marry, nor is it enough to hold a marriage together.

Marriage in a civil context is silly, since bastards are no longer legally penalized, there is no point in having civil marriages at all.

THe government should get out of the marriage buisness.

[Don John of Austria]

For mithluin... Before you ask.


In order to be legitimate a government must conform to the Divine will, in that it cannot
A. legislate acts which are in direct contradiction to the well being of it's subjects
B legislate acts which seperate the Church from the state
C legislate acts which are in direct contradiction with the Reveled truths of God and promote or codify heresy
D deny that all authority comes from God and try to Justify its use of Power as coming from "the people" or from a book or anything else.
E make war on God, His Holy Name, His Honor, or His Chrurch
F. Not legislate acts which are outside the Authority of the State, or legislate acts arbitrarly
G be ruled by an excommunicate


On the contrary a legit government must
A defend the well being of all of its subjects without prejudice
B Submit to the Church, in matters over which the Church has dominion
C Accept that as all authority comes from God the use of Power by the State must be limited to those things which are within the States rights, ie. the State must accept its limitations
D defend the Holy Name of God, His Honor, and His Church

[MithLuin]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' timestamp='1306255582' post='2245393']
Lets look at the scripture you are quoting.

"Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority, or to governors as sent by him [b][i]for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right[/i][/b]. For such is the will of God that by doing right you may silence the ignorance of foolish men. Act as free men, and do not use your freedom as a covering for evil, but use it as bondslaves of God. Honor all people, love the brotherhood, fear God, honor the king"



No one denies the authority of kings and governors to punish evildoers and to praise those who do right, what is denied is that one must submit to the punishment of those doing right, as if they were evildoers.

Peter makes no prohibition on resistance to those punishing the righteous.

Further he instructs the reader to live as a freemen, but you require freemen live as slaves.
[/quote]

Actually, he instructs the slaves to be good slaves. And doesn't he? I don't think you are catching the point St. Peter is making here - that this world is not our home. That this life is not where we store up our treasures. And that this life is not where we find perfect justice. Just like we tell every teenager out there - life isn't fair; deal with it. For some reason, you didn't quote the rest of the full passage that I provided from 1 Peter; I think the next paragraph goes on to address this very issue:

[quote]Servants, be submissive to your masters with all respect, [b]not only to those who are good and gentle, but also to those who are unreasonable. For this finds favor, if for the sake of conscience toward God a person bears up under sorrows when suffering unjustly. [/b]For what credit is there if, when you sin and are harshly treated, you endure it with patience? [b][u]But if when you do what is right and suffer for it you patiently endure it[/u], this finds favor with God.[/b][/quote]


This states pretty clearly if you, an innocent person, are arrested unfairly, the right thing to do is to patiently endure it. That may not sit well with you, and may be ceding your natural rights in the situation...but it is clearly the Christian response.


[b]Winchester[/b] and [b]Don John[/b], I was unaware that the Vatican refused to recognize the legitimacy of the US government. I was under the impression that we enjoyed full diplomatic relations between these two nations. So...the burden is on you to demonstrate that Catholic teaching does not recognize the authority of the government of the United States of America -- in practice, or with specifics. Every US president since Dwight D. Eisenhower (including the current one) has visited the pope [i]at the Vatican,[/i] and surely at some point one of them would have found the opportunity to raise any questions the Catholic Church has concerning the legitimacy of the US government? Instead, the conversations have been about world peace and protecting the life of the unborn, mostly. Pope Paul VI, Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI have all paid official visits to the president of the US on American soil (New York and/or DC). I am not suggesting that the pope has approved of everything a particular president has done -- merely that they are not viewed as warlords who have seized power, but rather as the leaders of the American people.

[MithLuin]

Not every nation can be Liechtenstein, Monaco or Malta...but I'm pretty sure those aren't the only 3 world governments that have any temporal authority according to Catholic social teaching.

[Winchester]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1306265718' post='2245437']
So possibly you are advocating the death penalty, without the inconvenience of a trial, for the crime of auto theft.
Is this only if the person is caught in the act and the victim gets a period of 30 seconds grace where they can be judge, jury and executioner?
Or does this extend to all auto thefts, should the government execute these people?[/quote]
No. The death penalty is assessed to a person after he has committed a crime.

What I am doing is stopping someone from taking my property. It would cause me great harm to lose my vehicle and its contents. I can't afford to purchase a new vehicle, or to pay the portion I would have to pay along with insurance (and the possibly higher insurance rates). Are you arguing that someone should be able to take property with impunity, assured they will face no resistance? For you finish your argument that it would be murder and a fight can certainly end in death.

I would not execute him. Execution is out of the question. Once the fight is out of the man, I would stop. I would begin life saving measures, once I was certain it was safe to do so. The intent is to prevent harm to my family, and if you're so rich that the loss of your vehicle would not be a serious problem for you, then I am happy for you. That is not my situation.

What if I had cashed my paycheck and my pay was in there? Most of my life, I have lived paycheck to paycheck, with very little in savings--certainly not enough to carry me through to the next payday. I carry quite a bit of stuff in my vehicle, none of it can I afford to replace because someone decided to take it.


[quote]In my opinion if your life isn't threatened and you choose to shoot and kill someone then that is murder.
[/quote]
Well, for those of us who aren't rich, the loss of certain kinds of property is a threat to our way of life. I wouldn't shoot someone over taking my television, or the radio from my car. But the entire vehicle? I cannot afford that at all. It would hurt me and my family.

[Don John of Austria]

[quote]Actually, he instructs the slaves to be good slaves. And doesn't he? I don't think you are catching the point St. Peter is making here - that this world is not our home. That this life is not where we store up our treasures. And that this life is not where we find perfect justice. Just like we tell every teenager out there - life isn't fair; deal with it. For some reason, you didn't quote the rest of the full passage that I provided from 1 Peter; I think the next paragraph goes on to address this very issue:[/quote]

I didn't quote it because it was adressed to slaves, and we are not discussing slaves, we are discussing the actions of freemen. Who as I said, you want to act as slaves.


[quote]This states pretty clearly if you, an innocent person, are arrested unfairly, the right thing to do is to patiently endure it. That may not sit well with you, and may be ceding your natural rights in the situation...but it is clearly the Christian response.[/quote]

No it doesn't it instructs slaves to be obidiant to thier masters and endure thier unjust punishment. Further, no one has said that selfless endurance is not morally permissable or even laudable, no one has denied that their may be reat merit in being unjustly imprisoned and suffering unjust punishment. We have said that morally you are not obliged to, something you have failed to bring any counter arguement against.
[quote]
[b]Winchester[/b] and [b]Don John[/b], I was unaware that the Vatican refused to recognize the legitimacy of the US government. I was under the impression that we enjoyed full diplomatic relations between these two nations. So...the burden is on you to demonstrate that Catholic teaching does not recognize the authority of the government of the United States of America -- in practice, or with specifics. Every US president since Dwight D. Eisenhower (including the current one) has visited the pope [i]at the Vatican,[/i] and surely at some point one of them would have found the opportunity to raise any questions the Catholic Church has concerning the legitimacy of the US government? Instead, the conversations have been about world peace and protecting the life of the unborn, mostly. Pope Paul VI, Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI have all paid official visits to the president of the US on American soil (New York and/or DC). I am not suggesting that the pope has approved of everything a particular president has done -- merely that they are not viewed as warlords who have seized power, but rather as the leaders of the American people.[/quote]

The Vatican has only had diplimatic relations withte US since Regan, 2 popes,.The Pope enjoyed diplimatic relations with the Nazis, even making Concordates with them, does that mean that the Nazi's were a legitement government? Can you name a concordate with the US? certianly having relations does not mean on is legitement.

As far as I know, the only recognition given to America for the first 200 years of existance by the papacy was to Jefferson Davis as President of the Confederacy.

The Founders were indeed wrlords who seized power, and the Rule of the mob has only increased over time since then.

The Church's history is full of documents explaining these requirments, that excommunication or a sovriegn disolves one of obediance and fealty was common knowledge for a 1000 years.
THat heritics have no right to rule is so common in Church history I can hardly believe anyone versed in Church documents would challenge it.


Seperation of Church and Stae as an acceptible position has been explicitly condemned as heresy.
Show me a document which says Governments are legitement even when they do this things.

Edited May 24, 2011 by Don John of Austria

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='MithLuin' timestamp='1306268741' post='2245456']
Not every nation can be Liechtenstein, Monaco or Malta...but I'm pretty sure those aren't the only 3 world governments that have any temporal authority according to Catholic social teaching.
[/quote]


Well your wrong.

According to the teachings of the Church for 1500 years on requirments of just Government, one must meet those criteria, if there are only 3 governmets worthy of allegence, only 3 that are truely legitement, so be it.

[Amppax]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' timestamp='1306271767' post='2245469']
Well your wrong.

According to the teachings of the Church for 1500 years on requirments of just Government, one must meet those criteria, if there are only 3 governmets worthy of allegence, only 3 that are truely legitement, so be it.
[/quote]

Cool!! I can do whatever I want

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='Amppax' timestamp='1306287833' post='2245578']
Cool!! I can do whatever I want
[/quote]


The American government not having a legitement claim to Authority does not exactly mean that you can do whatever you want.



Nor, unfortunately, does it diminsh the governments considerable Power to impose its will upon you.


Power and Authority are not the same thing.

[Amppax]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' timestamp='1306290117' post='2245588']
The American government not having a legitement claim to Authority does not exactly mean that you can do whatever you want.



Nor, unfortunately, does it diminsh the governments considerable Power to impose its will upon you.


Power and Authority are not the same thing.
[/quote]

I know, I was being a snarky teenager