Democracy Is A Tool Of Satan

[Anomaly]

A great demonstration of why catholicsm is a farce, a joke, silliness.
Contrast the above with:

[quote] "Religious Liberty" is defined by Dignitatis Humanae as follows:

"Chapter 2...This liberty means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others WITHIN DUE LIMITS." {Emphasis added.}

Later in Chapter 7, these due limits are defined:

"7. The right to religious freedom is exercised in human society: hence its exercise is subject to certain regulatory norms. In the use of all freedoms the moral principle of personal and social responsibility is to be observed. In the exercise of their rights, individual men and social groups are bound by the moral law to have respect both for the rights of others and for their own duties toward others and for the common welfare of all. Men are to deal with their fellows in justice and civility.[/quote]

So what is it?

And the Faithful Catholics continue to argue...

[Era Might]

It is true that error has no rights. The Catechism touches on this:

[quote]The right to religious liberty is neither a moral license to adhere to error, nor a supposed right to error, but rather a natural right of the human person to civil liberty, i.e., immunity, within just limits, from external constraint in religious matters by political authorities. This natural right ought to be acknowledged in the juridical order of society in such a way that it constitutes a civil right.

--#2108[/quote]
If we are going to say that people must search for the truth, then we must respect their path on that search. Suppressing them because they have not come to the end of the path will not foster any legitimate search for truth in society; it will completely eliminate it. The Church becomes nothing more than a propaganda machine that cannot bear the presence of other religions. When the Church respects religious liberty, however, she respects the legitimate dialogue of truth in society, and also respects the common good, which would be dangerously upset by, basically, religious fascism. Error has no rights, but people in error do. In past centuries, it was a different social situation, because the world was mostly divided into certain sectors. Today, however, the world is truly a global community, and we all have live together, regardless of religion. It doesn't hurt the Church when, for example, a group of Jews gather publicly for prayer, or wear yarmulkas. If we do our job as a religious community, the our people should respond to that as Christians, and respect the conscience of other people. When we afford others the right to religious liberty, we ensure it for ourselves, and can freely engage the cause of evangelization.

Strictly speaking, if non-Catholics were not allowed public exercise of their religion, than sedevacantist and SSPX chapels would have to be shut down. Though they may believe themselves Catholic, they are not in communion with the Holy See, and as such, they would have no right to gather for Mass. But religious liberty ensures that right; it doesn't ensure their communion with the Holy See, but it ensures their right to their own religious exercise.

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1079553' date='Sep 29 2006, 05:20 PM']A great demonstration of why catholicsm is a farce, a joke, silliness.[/quote]
There is no need to disrespect my religion on a CATHOLIC website. If you do it again, you will be on my ignore list.

[Resurrexi]

Era, I think you are misinterpreting the quote from the Catechism. What it says is that you can't force someone to be Catholic. The quotes which I provided though, make up for the Catechism's ambiguity. So put together, the offocial teaching of the Holy Catholic Church is that you cannot force anyone to convert to Catholicism, though non-Catholics should never be allowed to pracitice their false religions publicly.

[goldenchild17]

How does being in a different era make an impact in this regard? If anything public practice of one's religion becomes even more dangerous now, because this practice by just one individual can be spread much farther than it could centuries ago. Back then one's public display of their faith would only impact those he was directly with or in view of. This view and contact becomes much larger now as people become active members of political parties, spread their influence on message boards and on websites viewable to millions. Such people can print and distribute materials far more than could be done centuries ago. If anything I think it's more dangerous to allow this now than in the past.

I guess I'm still a little bit confused about this "legitimate dialogue of truth" that everybody's talking about. Does Catholicism not have the fullness of the truth? Does the Church need to dialogue to discover more truth?

And yes, technically if this were in practice then my faith would not be able to operate on the public scale. I understand that, however it is my church that believes in this, not the other way around. So I'm not to worried about it happening.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1079557' date='Sep 29 2006, 04:25 PM']
There is no need to disrespect my religion on a CATHOLIC website. If you do it again, you will be on my ignore list.
[/quote] Save yourself the trouble and ignore me now. Within 45 minutes there will be a catholic disagreeing with you and then I'll make a pointed comment and we both already know what that's going to result in.

edit...

I should have said, 'within 4 to 5 minutes', not 'within 45 minutes'.

We got two winning posts. One that says you misunderstood the ambiguity of the catechism and the other saying your qualification about the current cultural circumstances is not applicable.

The catholic denomination is as effective as cracking a walnut with a marshmallow.

Edited September 29, 2006 by Anomaly

[Era Might]

Thomas,

You are wrong, as the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council explains:

[quote]There is a further consideration. The religious acts whereby men, in private and in public and out of a sense of personal conviction, direct their lives to God transcend by their very nature the order of terrestrial and temporal affairs. Government therefore ought indeed to take account of the religious life of the citizenry and show it favor, since the function of government is to make provision for the common welfare. However, it would clearly transgress the limits set to its power, were it to presume to command or inhibit acts that are religious.

--Declaration "Dignitatis Humanae"[/quote]

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1079571' date='Sep 29 2006, 05:33 PM'] Save yourself the trouble and ignore me now. Within 45 minutes there will be a catholic disagreeing with you and then I'll make a pointed comment and we both already know what that's going to result in.[/quote]
Will do.

God bless.


goldenchild,

I'll save my response for when we discuss this privately.

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1079573' date='Sep 29 2006, 05:38 PM']goldenchild,

I'll save my response for when we discuss this privately.
[/quote]

Seeing how this has gone so far, good idea.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1079573' date='Sep 29 2006, 04:38 PM']
[quote]Save yourself the trouble and ignore me now. Within 45 minutes there will be a catholic disagreeing with you and then I'll make a pointed comment and we both already know what that's going to result in.

edit...

I should have said, 'within 4 to 5 minutes', not 'within 45 minutes'.

We got two winning posts. One that says you misunderstood the ambiguity of the catechism and the other saying your qualification about the current cultural circumstances is not applicable.

The catholic denomination is as effective as cracking a walnut with a marshmallow.[/quote]
Will do.

God bless.[/quote]Did you mean that 'God bless' as a heart-felt and sincere wish that I might enjoy God's love, or did you mean it as a dismissive 'May God have mercy on your soul as it sends it to hell in flames'?

Meanwhile, back to cracking walnuts...
I think you were called out with the Vat-2 reference, Tom.

[Resurrexi]

[quote]There is a further consideration. The religious acts whereby men, in private and in public and out of a sense of personal conviction, direct their lives to God transcend by their very nature the order of terrestrial and temporal affairs. Government therefore ought indeed to take account of the religious life of the citizenry and show it favor, since the function of government is to make provision for the common welfare. However, it would clearly transgress the limits set to its power, were it to presume to command or inhibit acts that are religious.[/quote]

Era, you are misinterpreting this. All this says is that the government cannot prohibit Catholics from adoring God in public and private, but they can prohibit non-Catholics from adoring their false idols in public. The Syllabus of Errors fills in where this paragraph was left in ambiguity saying that they not only can prohibit non-Catholics from praciticing their religion in public, but must.

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1079586' date='Sep 29 2006, 05:44 PM']God bless.Did you mean that 'God bless' as a heart-felt and sincere wish that I might enjoy God's love, or did you mean it as a dismissive 'May God have mercy on your soul as it sends it to hell in flames'?

Meanwhile, back to cracking walnuts...
I think you were called out with the Vat-2 reference, Tom.
[/quote]

From what I know about him, it was sincere. No need to look for inferences that aren't there.

Edited September 29, 2006 by goldenchild17

[peach_cube]

[quote name='StThomasMore' post='1079543' date='Sep 29 2006, 06:14 PM']
The following are [b]condemned[/b] as [i][b][color="#CC66CC"][u]ERRORS[/u][/color][/b][/i] by Pope Pius IX:
[/quote]

[img]http://internal.tbi.net/~max/snap017.jpg[/img]

Sorry...I couldn't help myself.

[avemaria40]

My view, God gave us free will, why don't we give each other that? (as long as of course, everyone's safety and happiness is protected.)

[Resurrexi]

The saftey of the soul is even more important that the safety of the body.

[aalpha1989]

Your poll question is flawed. Democracy CAN be a tool of Satan, just like monarchies, republics, dictatorships and any other type of government. Democracy isn't evil in and of itself. It can be used in evil ways, legalized abortion for instance. But evil laws or lack of good laws is not dependant on the type of government, it is dependant on those governing, whether chosen to govern or otherwise. It is not a government's job to regulate its citizen's spiritual health, that is why we have the Church. Just because there are some bad laws does not condemn a whole system. Get over it. Just because we have some bad priests does not condemn a whole Church either. It's the same thing.

[Resurrexi]

I believe that Democracy is errored and evil in itself, and I have a right to hold that opinion becuase it is not against Church teaching.