The Constitution

[qfnol31]

[quote name='CatholicforChrist' date='Oct 27 2004, 05:44 PM'] The Constitution is against Natural Law because it does not acknowledge God as the Supreme Head of the State. Read Saint Paul's Epistles, especially to the Romans.[/quote]

Be careful not to mix Divine Law and Natural Law. Thomas defines the latter as that which we can know (for certain) by reason, and God isn't something that's knowable through reason.

[quote]The fact is that the Church has condemned freedom of religion. It cannot be defended as a good or acceptable system, especially when the system was FOUNDED with so-called separation of Church and State.  The Constitution is the very document that instituted this separation. [/quote]

Separation of Church and state says that the state can't control the government, and the government can't control the state. This is actually pretty wise after what happened during the time in history when the Clergy were the highest in society, they were also the richest, etc.

[quote]To be soft on the heresies of the Constitution is to fall into the heresy of Americanism. We cannot defend the errors and heresies of America and the modern world. To do so is to fall into the heresy of Modernism.[/quote]

I'm not defending the heresies, but showing how the Constitution does not contradict Natural Law. The Constitution cannot say anything about Divine Law, for that would be improper. It would be out of place, and so it is better that it does not.

Edited October 27, 2004 by qfnol31

[CatholicforChrist]

qfnol, God can be known simply by use of reason. This is the very purpose of Apologetics--to prove the existence of God and some of his attributes through reason alone. Saint Thomas states that the existence of God is a part of Natural Law in Prima Pars of his Summa Theologiae. Read Question 2, Article 2. Question 2 concerns itself with the existence of God. Article 2 is titled "Whether it can be demonstrated that God exists" (meaning by reason). Here Saint Thomas illustrates the two ways of demonstrating a fact--a priori or a posteriori. He states that the existence of God is demonstrable (N.B., he had stated in Article 1 that it is not self-evident). While the existence of God is not self-evident, it is still demonstrable. It can be found here:
[url="http://www.newadvent.org/summa/100202.htm"]http://www.newadvent.org/summa/100202.htm[/url]

The Church has been clear on separation of Church and State. Read Pope Pius IX's Syllabus of Errors. Read propositions 55, 77, 78, 79, and 80. The most pertinent and irrefutable proposition is 55. It states:
55. The Church ought to be separated from the .State, and the State from the Church. -- Allocution "Acerbissimum," Sept. 27, 1852
Read the Syllabus of Errors here:
[url="http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9syll.htm"]http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9syll.htm[/url]

N.B., that website is a great source. It has all Papal Encyclicals and some Papal Bulls dating from Pope Honorius III. The website homepage is [url="http://www.papalencyclicals.net"]http://www.papalencyclicals.net[/url]

Like I said, read above to see that it contradicts Natural Law, positive Divine Law, and it is not compatible with Catholicism. It is the first time that the Church and State were ever separated in the history of the world in any culture...I think that says something for Natural Law in itself, but read above for the proof. God bless.

Johnny, it contradicts Divine Law in several ways. The fact that it does not promote the Catholic Faith, the one and only true Church is proof enough, but there are several ways in which it contradicts Divine Law other than that, especially in Amendment I, as I said.

[qfnol31]

[quote name='CatholicforChrist' date='Oct 27 2004, 05:58 PM'] qfnol, God can be known simply by use of reason. This is the very purpose of Apologetics--to prove the existence of God and some of his attributes through reason alone. Saint Thomas states that the existence of God is a part of Natural Law in Prima Pars of his Summa Theologiae. Read Question 2, Article 2. Question 2 concerns itself with the existence of God. Article 2 is titled "Whether it can be demonstrated that God exists" (meaning by reason). Here Saint Thomas illustrates the two ways of demonstrating a fact--a priori or a posteriori. He states that the existence of God is demonstrable (N.B., he had stated in Article 1 that it is not self-evident). While the existence of God is not self-evident, it is still demonstrable. It can be found here:
[url="http://www.newadvent.org/summa/100202.htm"]http://www.newadvent.org/summa/100202.htm[/url] [/quote]

That's some extraordinary reasoning, and so it's not reasonable to expect everyone to believe that.

[quote]The Church has been clear on separation of Church and State. Read Pope Pius IX's Syllabus of Errors. Read propositions 55, 77, 78, 79, and 80. The most pertinent and irrefutable proposition is 55. It states:
55. The Church ought to be separated from the .State, and the State from the Church. -- Allocution "Acerbissimum," Sept. 27, 1852
Read the Syllabus of Errors here:
[url="http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9syll.htm"]http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9syll.htm[/url][/quote]

I'd prefer have it separate in a non-Catholic society.

[quote]Like I said, read above to see that it contradicts Natural Law, positive Divine Law, and it is not compatible with Catholicism. It is the first time that the Church and State were ever separated in the history of the world in any culture...I think that says something for Natural Law in itself, but read above for the proof. God bless.[/quote]

Again Church falls under the line of Divine Law. I haven't seen anything in our Constitution or that you've stated that contradicts Natural Law.

[lifeteenchick527]

[quote name='CatholicforChrist' date='Oct 27 2004, 03:44 PM'] The Constitution is against Natural Law because it does not acknowledge God as the Supreme Head of the State. Read Saint Paul's Epistles, especially to the Romans. The fact is that the Church has condemned freedom of religion. It cannot be defended as a good or acceptable system, especially when the system was FOUNDED with so-called separation of Church and State. The Constitution is the very document that instituted this separation. To be soft on the heresies of the Constitution is to fall into the heresy of Americanism. We cannot defend the errors and heresies of America and the modern world. To do so is to fall into the heresy of Modernism. [/quote]
"I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

it mentions "ONE NATION UNDER GOD" i think that says that at least this when this counrty was started they knew that they needed God, also part of the reason this country is here is because of the religious persecution. although the people who came here were not Catholic (as far as i am aware) they were christians and believed in God.

[qfnol31]

The Natural Law by Thomas:

1. Do good and avoid evil.
2. Treat all men with dignity
3. Concrete moral norms
4. Application of conscience in certain circumstances.

Where does the Constitution do other than this? Four cannot apply.

Human Law must fall under Natural Law, but cannot encompass it all. To make a law that all men must believe in God is to make a Divine Law. This contradicts what Thomas says.

[Cure of Ars]

This article sheds some light on this subject.

[url="http://www.catholicculture.org/docs/most/getwork.cfm?worknum=209"]http://www.catholicculture.org/docs/most/g...cfm?worknum=209[/url]

[Socrates]

There is nothing in the original U.S. Constitution sanctioning abortion, homosexual unions, and the like, and no one in this country say it that way for almost 200 years! Twentieth-century activist judges have taken the original constitution and twisted it beyond all recognition!

The original framers would be horrified to see the Constitution perverted to justify such things. Even Thomas Jefferson (hardly a Catholic!) as Governor of Virginia recommended that sodomites be castrated!

The Constitution, as a human law, was quite wisely framed (though not perfect). In rejecting most of the principles of the original constitution, and twisting it beyond any conceivable reasonable reading of the original words, the American government has basically trashed the Constitution!

If the government would actually follow Constitutional principles, we would be a much juster, freer nation!

Unfortunately, people can ignore, or change any written law (such as the Constitution) when it does not suit their purposes.

[qfnol31]

The great thing about the Constitution is that it is one of the few human laws left that lie in the Natural Law the way it does. Why is it that all the progressives today want it to read more than it says. Human Law cannot go outside of the Natural Law or it becomes unjust, so why do so many people try to do so? I wonder if it helps them to justify that which they do.

[CatholicforChrist]

I would reply, but I would just be re-typing my last post. You did not disprove or even address most of my points. Instead you simply rejected the Syllabus of Errors and said you disagree... Also, concerning the Natural Law, you simply say you disagree that it is reasonable for people to believe in God by natural means but provide no evidence. Then, in my last part, I say that the Constitution opposes Natural Law and Divine Law, stating that it is incompatible with Catholicism (meaning, Divine Law). You then tell me that Church falls under Divine Law, not Natural Law (which I had already stated). Could you please address the actual argument?

[qfnol31]

But you haven't actually adressed how it denies Natural Law, have you?

[qfnol31]

[quote name='CatholicforChrist' date='Oct 27 2004, 05:44 PM'] The Constitution is against Natural Law because it does not acknowledge God as the Supreme Head of the State. [/quote]
That's Divine Law, not Natural Law. I don't have the text with me, but later I'll show you what I mean.

[quote]Read Saint Paul's Epistles, especially to the Romans. The fact is that the Church has condemned freedom of religion.[/quote]

Again, by reason alone we cannot know about religion towards God. At very most we can know there is a God. Therefore, this falls under Divine Law.

[quote]It cannot be defended as a good or acceptable system, especially when the system was FOUNDED with so-called separation of Church and State.  The Constitution is the very document that instituted this separation. To be soft on the heresies of the Constitution is to fall into the heresy of Americanism.[/quote]

Is this against Natural Law? I don't think so. Yes, it's wrong, it's against the Divine Law, but we cannot expect that to be known to all. We must first start with Natural Law.

Natural Law:

Do Good, avoid evil.
Treat people with Dignity.
Absolute moral norms.
Application of conscience in specific issues.

That's the Natural Law, where does religion come in? Where does God come in? He doesn't, though not separate from Natural Law, that is Divine Law. This is my point, I've given you Thomas' outline of Natural Law, upheld by quite a few Theologians. Where does religion have a place in this? Religion's job (the Church's job) is to teach us Divine Law (as well as Natural Law). However, to discuss the Church, you first begin with Divine Law (the Bible, the Magesterium, Revelation).

[quote]We cannot defend the errors and heresies of America and the modern world. To do so is to fall into the heresy of Modernism.[/quote]

Why can't we? Because of revelation -- Divine Law.


Be careful that you don't fall into heteronomy, and even maybe Calvinism. Read Peter Leithart on this issue. He may agree with you. Then I'll show you why Thomas disgarees with him.

Edited October 28, 2004 by qfnol31

[CatholicforChrist]

I apologize that I do not have time to reply to your post, but do you also think that the Declaration of Independence is aligned with Natural Law because clearly the Constitution is a document that is understood in light of the Declaration of Independence, but there are all kinds of errors in that. I can reply to your actual post when I am free (probably Monday). God bless.

[qfnol31]

Bump for CatholicforChrist.

I think there are many things that the Declaration of Independence is good on. I'll check, but off the top of my head I can't think of a reason it's against Natural Law.

[Iacobus]

Zachary, I cannot think of anything agaisnst Natural Law in the DoI off the top of my head, and seeing as only a 1/3 of it is real substance (the rest are "the reasons") and that 1/3 is probly my favorite part of all gov't documents and I know it pretty well. So I would say that your right.

[qfnol31]

The next question I have is if the Constitution isn't against the Natural Law, should we allow people to interpret it to be outside the Natural Law, which has been done today (and I think part of what CatholicforChrist may have a problem with).

Also, did you know that Pope Leo XIII said that the government should have little to do with economics? This is how our government was set up. It's not how it is today.

And did you also know that the founding fathers pushed for religion to be used by government officials? It may have not been Catholic necessarily, but then again, much of it used was by Catholic politicians. Why isn't this the case today?