The Constitution

[qfnol31]

Is our Constitution founded upon Natural Law?

If so, why try to get away from the principles today?

[heyyoimjohnny]

If our Constitution was founded on Natural Laws, people wouldn't be free to break them.

[qfnol31]

What do you mean?

[heyyoimjohnny]

I mean if the Constitution was founded solely on Natural Law, it has been perverted from it's original purpose. Otherwise abortions, homosexual relations, ect. wouldn't be legal. Sure, sounds harsh. But the constitution allows people to be free to do what they want as long as it functions within human laws; Natural Laws don't seem to be a large part of it.

[qfnol31]

The Constitution doesn't allow for those, and I bet the founding fathers would be appalled today.

What's wrong with the Constitution is the same thing that's wrong with Vatican II. People try to interpret it based on what they want and not the original intent.

By the way, I think there's nothing wrong with Vatican II.


And also, all human laws [i]must[/i] follow natural law, otherwise it's unjust and our duty to go against it.

[heyyoimjohnny]

Ok. So it's not the constitution, it's the people?

[qfnol31]

Yep.

[CatholicforChrist]

Qfnol, you say that the same things are wrong with the Constitution as with Vatican II. I agree. You then say that there is nothing wrong with Vatican II. Do you mean that there is also nothing wrong with the Constitution (in and of itself)? If so, this is flawed. The Bill of Rights is included as part of the Constitution because it was the cause that allowed the Constitution to be ratified. There are several errors in just the First Amendment. I choose this one part of the Constitution not because the Articles of the Constitution are acceptable nor because the other Amendments are acceptable but simply because there are so many things in Amendment I alone that are condemned by the Church. The ideas of free religion, free speech, free press, etc, and also the idea that the State shall make no law establishing a religion are all condemned. See the Syllabus of Errors for appropriate condemnations, especially 55, 77, 78, 79, and 80. God bless.

[qfnol31]

Freedom of speech is better defined in the Second Vatican Council, and was granted to France by the Pope around 1800 A.D.

The Constitution is not against the moral law is what I say, and it's true. Religion falls under Divine Law.

[CatholicforChrist]

Okay, I was just making sure you didn't think the Constitution in itself was acceptable or compatible with Catholicism because many of its teachings are condemned by the Church as heresy. Also, the Pope gave free speech to France because the country was very anti-Catholic and even more strongly anti-clerical after the French Revolution. This action ensured that Catholicism would have a voice (which, while permitting 'free speech' is better than the alternative). God bless.

[CatholicforChrist]

The Constitution is against natural law but not necessarily against moral law, depending what you consider the Constitution to be and what you consider moral law to be.

[qfnol31]

[quote name='CatholicforChrist' date='Oct 27 2004, 05:33 PM'] The Constitution is against natural law but not necessarily against moral law, depending what you consider the Constitution to be and what you consider moral law to be. [/quote]
Where is the Constitution against Natural Law?

[qfnol31]

[quote name='CatholicforChrist' date='Oct 27 2004, 05:32 PM'] Okay, I was just making sure you didn't think the Constitution in itself was acceptable or compatible with Catholicism because many of its teachings are condemned by the Church as heresy. Also, the Pope gave free speech to France because the country was very anti-Catholic and even more strongly anti-clerical after the French Revolution. This action ensured that Catholicism would have a voice (which, while permitting 'free speech' is better than the alternative). God bless. [/quote]
I think that's the exact same for the US Constitution as well. And France actually was given freedom of religion, and because our country is not Catholic, I think this is best for our society as well.

We have freedom of speech, but that does not include profanity, etc.

[CatholicforChrist]

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.

[heyyoimjohnny]

It is my understanding that:

Men think too much and don't listen to God, who speaks through their hearts. As a result, complications come from man's interpretation.

I have a strong aversion to all things political, and techical regarding to law, because I see it as complications from the human thought process.

Until a few minutes ago, I regarded the Constitution as one of these complications, opposed to Natural Law and it's beautiful simplicity.

More beautifully simple is Divine Law. I'm seeking an opinion here; or perhaps factual evidence. Does the Constitution in any way contradict Divine Law? Or are any contradictions simply more complications? I don't mean to change the subject. But I'm wondering.

[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.