Apotheoun Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 (edited) lolwut? You just made my point...one can, in fact, accept the authority of a heretic, even if they don't accept individual laws or actions. Actually, and I don't blame you for not knowing much about your own Western tradition (catechesis has been terrible for decades), but a Catholic does not obey a heretical ruler; instead, he obeys the directives issued by such a person as long as they conform to the moral law. So the heretic, if he issues directives that conform to the moral norm is "obeyed" only in the sense that a given directive is good and true. Or to put it more precisely it is the directive (i.e., the law - and in this case the natural and immutable moral law) that is motivating the obedience and not the person who issues the directive, who may be an utter and complete heretic or moral deviant (the latter case can even apply to Catholic rulers who have privately deviated from the moral law). As long as the positive law conforms to the moral norm a Catholic is bound to obey it. Conversely if the law enacted is contrary to the moral law, not only is a Catholic duty bound to not observe it, he is also require to work for its abolition. Edited July 24, 2013 by Apotheoun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anselm Posted July 24, 2013 Author Share Posted July 24, 2013 Can you send me a copy of your moral law? It'd be terribly handy to have around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 So which laws do you believe contravene your personal interpretation of the moral law? Abortion laws, and laws that support euthansia. Also laws that recognize "gay marriage." It is not hard to determine the "laws" that contravene the primary precepts of the moral law. It becomes more difficult when positive laws affect the secondary or tertiary precepts of the moral norm. That is where the guidance of the Church is indispensable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 G.W. Bush, a lot to live up to? If he wants to be a war-mongering half-wit, yes. I don't understand why they didn't name him Barrack Hussein, after our own illustrious king, modern messiah, hope of mankind, and flawless model for rulers everywhere. Let the flame wars commence! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 Hey, don't pick on him, Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize, and he has the honor of being the first Peace Prize winner with a kill list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 lolwut? Sounds like a form of secular donatism, only the pure and righteous can wield power legitimately. Actually, it's long-standing Catholic moral teaching that we are not bound to obey laws that are inherently unjust or immoral. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anselm Posted July 24, 2013 Author Share Posted July 24, 2013 Well this thread went off topic in record time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 (edited) Abortion laws, and laws that support euthansia. Also laws that recognize "gay marriage." It is not hard to determine the "laws" that contravene the primary precepts of the moral law. It becomes more difficult when positive laws affect the secondary or tertiary precepts of the moral norm. That is where the guidance of the Church is indispensable. That's just, like, your opinion, man. Never mind the teachings of the Catholic Church - if it's supported by the Democratic Party, or by those people in England, it's all okay. If you disagree, you're just a religious crazy, like those "Pope" guys. Edited July 24, 2013 by Socrates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatherineM Posted July 25, 2013 Share Posted July 25, 2013 I don't think the monarchs are powerless. She still reads every piece of paper the parliament puts out and meets an hour a week, privately with the Prime Minister. Blair described it as a weekly therapy session. Do you really think none of them ask for advice? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnneLine Posted July 25, 2013 Share Posted July 25, 2013 Well this thread went off topic in record time... Yes it did, Anselm, but we can bring it back.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatherineM Posted July 25, 2013 Share Posted July 25, 2013 Hey, don't pick on him, Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize, and he has the honor of being the first Peace Prize winner with a kill list. Arafat might have had one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dymphnamaria Posted July 25, 2013 Share Posted July 25, 2013 George Alexander Louis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lilllabettt Posted July 25, 2013 Share Posted July 25, 2013 and it came to pass that they named the moon baby George Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnneLine Posted July 25, 2013 Share Posted July 25, 2013 And thus it happened, that George came Fourth! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anselm Posted July 25, 2013 Author Share Posted July 25, 2013 Fourth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now