Is Benedict XVI contradicting Pius X & Leo XIII?

[Oik]

Brendan,

Remember that historically, America has been in a different place than Europe when it comes to the Pope dealing with Governments.

When Pope Leo XIII wrote the Encyclical Rerum Novarum, many of the concerns addressed the leftist and radical government dealings in Europe. When these so called same ideas showed up in America, they are thought be the same here as in Europe.

However, this proved not to be true. As you would find, historically, the situation was less radical here in America. So much so, that many of the concerns could not directly be addressed.

It's true, though, that Rerum Novarum was quite an Encyclical. As you probably know, it was celebrated by several susequent popes.

[Akalyte]

as for seperation of church and state, watch how fast we take over this government. Christ sent us out to change and convert the world. Nothing is going to "seperate" us from our mission.

[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllabus_of_Errors"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllabus_of_Errors[/url]


Some condemned statements

Some statements the encyclical condemned as false include:

* "human reason... is the sole arbiter of truth and falsehood, and of good and evil" (No. 3) "...hence reason is the ultimate standard by which man can and ought to arrive at the knowledge of all truths of every kind." (No. 4)
* "in the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship." (No. 77)
* "Protestantism is nothing more than another form of the same true Christian religion, in which form it is given to please God equally as in the Catholic Church" (No. 18).
* "the Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church." (No. 55)
* "every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true." (No. 15) and that "it has been wisely decided by law, in some Catholic countries, that persons coming to reside therein shall enjoy the public exercise of their own peculiar worship." (No. 78)
* "the Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization." (No. 80)

The condemned propositions had been previously discussed and condemned in papal documents, and the interpretation of the condemned statements was intended to take place in light of the contents of those previous statements, hence the reference to other documents after each proposition. Thus the often-cited eightieth thesis is to be explained with the help of the Allocution "Jamdudum cernimus" of 18 March, 1861. In this allocution the Pope expressly distinguishes between true and false civilization, and declares that history witnesses to the fact that the Holy See has always been the protector and patron of all genuine civilization; and he affirms that, if a system designed to de-Christianize the world be called a system of progress and civilization, he can never hold out the hand of peace to such a system. According to the words of this allocution, then, it is evident that the eightieth thesis of the Syllabus does not apply to all notions of progress.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

[quote name='fidei defensor' post='994962' date='Jun 1 2006, 07:00 PM']
No.
[/quote]

can you prove that?

[Socrates]

[quote name='Desert Walker' post='994542' date='Jun 1 2006, 09:34 AM']
The Founders set it up that way when they said "Congress shall make no law favoring one particular religion" (paraphrase).
[/quote]
Try directly quoting, rather than "paraphrasing."

From the First Amendment to the Constitution:
[quote]Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof[/quote]

This meant that Congress could not [b]establish[/b] a state religion by law (such as the Anglican Church in England).
Also citizens cannot be legally prohibited from practicing the religion of their choice.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

That has nothing to do with Church Law.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' post='995151' date='Jun 1 2006, 08:03 PM']
That has nothing to do with Church Law.
[/quote]
Never said it did - I was simply clarifying a point.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

Condemned Statments from the Syllabus of Errors:

"in the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship." (No. 77)

"the Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church." (No. 55)

"every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true." (No. 15) and that "it has been wisely decided by law, in some Catholic countries, that persons coming to reside therein shall enjoy the public exercise of their own peculiar worship." (No. 78)

[quote name='Socrates' post='995152' date='Jun 1 2006, 10:04 PM']
Never said it did - I was simply clarifying a point.
[/quote]


sorry.

i just don't like when Catholics (I'm not saying you) use the Constitution to justify relegious freedom

[Justified Saint]

"Is Benedict XVI contradicting Pius X & Leo XIII?"

Probably, so what is your point?

On the topic of Church and State, we ought to consider T.S. Eliot's insight -- that the tolerated Christian minority may have it worse off than the persecuted Christian who is outlawed by the State.

[brendan1104]

[quote name='Justified Saint' post='997096' date='Jun 5 2006, 12:49 AM']
"Is Benedict XVI contradicting Pius X & Leo XIII?"

Probably, so what is your point?

On the topic of Church and State, we ought to consider T.S. Eliot's insight -- that the tolerated Christian minority may have it worse off than the persecuted Christian who is outlawed by the State.
[/quote]

This "Justified Saint" has got to be a Lutheran. His signature is from Luther, his avatar is Luther. Someone 'phishy' him. If I am still a phishy for being a faithful Catholic, then this heretical schismatic apostate deserves a label too.

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

Actually (despite the name/signature), Justified Saint is a brilliant defender of the faith and I'm glad he's come back to Phatmass.

[Guest T-Bone]

[quote name='brendan1104' post='998870' date='Jun 6 2006, 04:25 PM']
This "Justified Saint" has got to be a Lutheran. His signature is from Luther, his avatar is Luther. Someone 'phishy' him. If I am still a phishy for being a faithful Catholic, then this heretical schismatic apostate deserves a label too.
[/quote]

You don't get the "Phishy" label (now "Seperated Bretheren") for being a faithful Catholic. If you're going to accuse someone of being unfaithful to the teachings of the Church, back it up with more than a sig line and an avatar (having neither of which violates any Church teaching).

[Justified Saint]

[quote name='brendan1104' post='998870' date='Jun 6 2006, 04:25 PM']
This "Justified Saint" has got to be a Lutheran. His signature is from Luther, his avatar is Luther. Someone 'phishy' him. If I am still a phishy for being a faithful Catholic, then this heretical schismatic apostate deserves a label too.
[/quote]

For the record that is a picture of Pascal NOT Luther. That looks nothing like Luther. LOL

And yes, the signature is from Luther -- again do you have a point?

[quote name='thedude' post='998893' date='Jun 6 2006, 05:42 PM']
Actually (despite the name/signature), Justified Saint is a brilliant defender of the faith and I'm glad he's come back to Phatmass.
[/quote]

Me, a "brillant defender?" How flattering, surely you jest!

[Guest Rick777]

Hmm....Why would you want to quote him?! Inquiring minds want to know.

[Justified Saint]

Well, it doesn't have much to do with Luther I imagine -- I just like the quote

I could change the sig author to anonymous since Luther probably never said it, but I like the provocation And it sounds a lot better than "heretical schismatic apostate".