Freedom Of Speech

[picchick]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1889085' date='Jun 12 2009, 12:36 PM']And frankly I am amazed how quickly Catholics here will attack a fellow Catholic, Rex, using there same failed understanding of the middle/dark ages that anti-Catholics use to attack the Church.[/quote]

And frankly, I am amazed at how quickly you use the guilt tactic in so many of your debates.

If you look at some of Rex's posts from the Creed debate he fits your description just perfectly. A failed understanding of the Eastern Rite. But maybe you two share the same believe on that one too....

I have more to add on this top of Freedom of Speech but I have to go to work.

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1889212' date='Jun 12 2009, 05:09 PM']The Catechism of the Catholic Church [i]still [/i]says...[/quote]

I believe you that the Church teaches that authority required of moral order comes from God. But that doesn't mean that Church should be in the business of civil law. And separation of Church from State absolutely is a part of Church teaching.

No doubt the Church makes comment on civil law; and it should. Catholic moral teaching should form the conscience of the civil leadership; because all authority is a gift from God. But the Church doesn't pass civil law. And it shouldn't.

[indent]"The Church, because of her commission and competence, is not to be confused in any way with the political community ... The Church respects and encourages the political freedom and responsibility of the citizen." 2245 [/indent]

Maybe I am mistaken, so I want to be clear on your opinion. Are you suggesting that a Catholic State is a good idea and desirable. If so, then I totally disagree with you. As I see it, any theocracy is incompatible with human liberty.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='picchick' post='1889268' date='Jun 12 2009, 06:18 PM']And frankly, I am amazed at how quickly you use the guilt tactic in so many of your debates.

If you look at some of Rex's posts from the Creed debate he fits your description just perfectly. A failed understanding of the Eastern Rite. But maybe you two share the same believe on that one too....

I have more to add on this top of Freedom of Speech but I have to go to work.[/quote]

I am not perfect, I have faults, and so does Rex. I don't know about the Creed debate or do not remember. Was I too harsh in point out the unjust attacks? Perhaps, but none of this however justifies the use of anti-catholic logic by Catholics.

[KnightofChrist]

"That the State must be separated from the Church is a thesis absolutely false, a most pernicious error. … Hence the Roman Pontiffs have never ceased, as circumstances required, to refute and condemn the doctrine of the separation of Church and State."

ON THE FRENCH LAW OF SEPARATION : VEHEMENTER NOS, Encyclical of Pope Pius X promulgated on February 11, 1906.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Lounge Daddy' post='1889273' date='Jun 12 2009, 06:32 PM']Maybe I am mistaken, so I want to be clear on your opinion. Are you suggesting that a Catholic State is a good idea and desirable. If so, then I totally disagree with you. As I see it, any theocracy is incompatible with human liberty.[/quote]

And Bl. Pius IX disagrees with your claim that it would not be ideal for Catholicism to be the religion of the State.

[Vasilius Konstantinos]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1889299' date='Jun 12 2009, 07:27 PM']And Bl. Pius IX disagrees with your claim that it would not be ideal for Catholicism to be the religion of the State.[/quote]

And most definitely Protestants among others would revolt in a heartbeat, overthrowing the State if this were to occur, claiming simply on the grounds of an Anti-Christ on the throne of the Seat of Peter who would rule with an iron fist.

I would revolt too, only because the Libertarian in me would be screaming bloody murder if the Catholic Church was more political than it already is.

Edited June 13, 2009 by Vasilius Konstantinos

[Hassan]

[quote name='Vasilius Konstantinos' post='1889326' date='Jun 12 2009, 08:18 PM']And most definitely Protestants among others would revolt in a heartbeat, overthrowing the State if this were to occur, claiming simply on the grounds of an Anti-Christ on the throne of the Seat of Peter who would rule with an iron fist.

I would revolt too, only because the Libertarian in me would be screaming bloody murder if the Catholic Church was more political than it already is.[/quote]


Perhapse I'm ignorant but hasn't Byzantine Christianity historically been subsumed by the state?

I'm not saying that anything essential to the faith, I don't know, I've just always wondered how libertarians withing the traditional Christianities reconcile thier politics with the faith, which seems antithetical to the libertarian thesis.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Hassan' post='1889331' date='Jun 12 2009, 08:27 PM']Perhapse I'm ignorant but hasn't Byzantine Christianity historically been subsumed by the state?[/quote]

Constantinople was elevated to a patriarchite not because it was a see founded by an apostle, but because it was the new capital of the Empire.

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1889299' date='Jun 12 2009, 07:27 PM']And Bl. Pius IX disagrees with your claim that it would not be ideal for Catholicism to be the religion of the State.[/quote]

So would he disagree with the current CCC that I referenced?
[indent]"The Church, because of her commission and competence, is not to be confused in any way with the political community ... The Church respects and encourages the political freedom and responsibility of the citizen." 2245[/indent]

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='Vasilius Konstantinos' post='1889326' date='Jun 12 2009, 08:18 PM']I would revolt too, only because the Libertarian in me would be screaming bloody murder if the Catholic Church was more political than it already is.[/quote]

I would too. But I am keeping in mind that many of these quotes are from Popes and others who were aggravated at the end of the age of the monarchies, and upset at social change. Some were defining church/state separation as meaning that church has no business commenting on the affairs of the state; which is of course nonsense.

It's just as nonsensical as some here suggesting that past pope's criticisms of church/state separation amounts to actual recommendation of a Catholic Christian theocratic government within Catholic teaching. That's absolute horse-hocky.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Lounge Daddy' post='1889340' date='Jun 12 2009, 08:52 PM']So would he disagree with the current CCC that I referenced?
[indent]"The Church, because of her commission and competence, is not to be confused in any way with the political community ... The Church respects and encourages the political freedom and responsibility of the citizen." 2245[/indent][/quote]

He would not disagree with that at all. No-one is claiming that the Church [i]is[/i] the State. As long as one's political ideas are in accordance with Catholic doctrine, he has liberty to hold the political views he wishes.

Now please explain to me how you understand "That the State must be separated from the Church is a thesis absolutely false, a most pernicious error." (Pope St. Pius X, [i]Vehementer nos[/i] 3)

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1889349' date='Jun 12 2009, 09:09 PM']Now please explain to me how you understand "That the State must be separated from the Church is a thesis absolutely false, a most pernicious error." (Pope St. Pius X, [i]Vehementer nos[/i] 3)[/quote]

I would consider that a response to those who define church/state separation as something that means the Catholic church has no business commenting on civil law -- which is baloney. After all, if all authority is a gift from God it should be used appropriately; and the Church has a duty to comment on error when she sees it.

Maybe we actually agree more than we disagree. Perhaps we are defining our terms slightly differently?

[Hassan]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1889338' date='Jun 12 2009, 08:51 PM']Constantinople was elevated to a patriarchite not because it was a see founded by an apostle, but because it was the new capital of the Empire.[/quote]


The Russian Church, during the tsarist era, often acted as a de facto agent of the state.

As I recall there were periods in which Russian Orthodox Priests were required to report crimes they learned of in the confessional. While there are many things I like about Byzantine Christianity, the historic Church State relationship isin't one of them.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Lounge Daddy' post='1889354' date='Jun 12 2009, 09:32 PM']I would consider that a response to those who define church/state separation as something that means the Catholic church has no business commenting on civil law -- which is baloney. After all, if all authority is a gift from God it should be used appropriately; and the Church has a duty to comment on error when she sees it.

Maybe we actually agree more than we disagree. Perhaps we are defining our terms slightly differently?[/quote]

It seems to go a bit futher than just that.



-------------------


"That the State must be separated from the Church is a thesis absolutely false, a most pernicious error. [b]Based, as it is, on the principle that the State must not recognize any religious cult, it is in the first place guilty of a great injustice to God; for the Creator of man is also the Founder of human societies, and preserves their existence as He preserves our own. We owe Him, therefore, not only a private cult, but a public and social worship to honor Him. Besides, this thesis is an obvious negation of the supernatural order.[/b]

It limits the action of the State to the pursuit of public prosperity during this life only, which is but the proximate object of political societies; and it occupies itself in no fashion (on the plea that this is foreign to it) with their ultimate object which is man's eternal happiness after this short life shall have run its course. But as the present order of things is temporary and subordinated to the conquest of man's supreme and absolute welfare, it follows that the civil power must not only place no obstacle in the way of this conquest, but must aid us in effecting it. The same thesis also upsets the order providentially established by God in the world, which demands a harmonious agreement between the two societies. Both of them, the civil and the religious society, although each exercises in its own sphere its authority over them.

It follows necessarily that there are many things belonging to them in common in which both societies must have relations with one another. Remove the agreement between Church and State, and the result will be that from these common matters will spring the seeds of disputes which will become acute on both sides; it will become more difficult to see where the truth lies, and great confusion is certain to arise. Finally, this thesis inflicts great injury on society itself, for it cannot either prosper or last long when due place is not left for religion, which is the supreme rule and the sovereign mistress in all questions touching the rights and the duties of men. Hence the Roman Pontiffs have never ceased, as circumstances required, to refute and condemn the doctrine of the separation of Church and State. Our illustrious predecessor, Leo XIII, especially, has frequently and magnificently expounded Catholic teaching on the relations which should subsist between the two societies. "Between them," he says, "there must necessarily be a suitable union, which may not improperly be compared with that existing between body and soul.

- Quaedam intercedat necesse est ordinata colligatio (inter illas) quae quidem conjunctioni non immerito comparatur, per quam anima et corpus in homine copulantur."He proceeds: "Human societies cannot, without becoming criminal, act as if God did not exist or refuse to concern themselves with religion, as though it were something foreign to them, or of no purpose to them.... As for the Church, which has God Himself for its author, to exclude her from the active life of the nation, from the laws, the education of the young, the family, is to commit a great and pernicious error. - Civitates non possunt, citra scellus, gerere se tamquam si Deus omnino non esset, aut curam religionis velut alienam nihilque profuturam abjicere.... Ecclesiam vero, quam Deus ipse constituit, ab actione vitae excludere, a legibus, ab institutione adolescentium, a societate domestica, magnus et perniciousus est error."[1] "

VEHEMENTER NOS, Encyclical of Pope Pius X
Source:http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_x/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-x_enc_11021906_vehementer-nos_en.html

[picchick]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1889275' date='Jun 12 2009, 06:39 PM']I am not perfect, I have faults, and so does Rex. I don't know about the Creed debate or do not remember. Was I too harsh in point out the unjust attacks? Perhaps, but none of this however justifies the use of anti-catholic logic by Catholics.[/quote]

There were no unjust attacks. There were disagreements and reasons to that disagreements.

No one said, "Rex, you idiot....yadda yadda yadda."

They said in so many words that the Middle ages is not the greatest time on earth. You believe as does Rex, that there were some of the greatest times.

I disagree. Is that an attack? My reaons are that the people of that time followed blindly without understanding the esstentials of the faith. They followed without being able to explain what it is that the believed. Of course women were not objectified as they are today. They were considered subordinate. The poor of the day lived in a state of poverty.

Who knows...you don't even know...were the people Catholic because they were afraid of being anything else? I do not think that this is an anti-Catholic sentiment. Instead this could be a truth. Under fear of torture or death they could have been Catholic. Why not have people come to the faith out of their own understanding and love of the faith.

Wait.... did I attack you by that?