scardella Posted July 5, 2005 Posted July 5, 2005 [quote name='JeffCR07' date='Jul 5 2005, 10:33 AM']The question was intended to ask about civil law. [right][snapback]632122[/snapback][/right] [/quote] So, why are peeps talking about canon law?
scardella Posted July 5, 2005 Posted July 5, 2005 Oh, I guess this begs the question: Is participation in its services a necessary and proper function of religion? What about anti-religion? If so, is it a good thing to mandate it by law?
qfnol31 Posted July 5, 2005 Posted July 5, 2005 I believe Canon Law only reiterates what Divine Law says. It's okay by Divine Law to require all to attend Mass each week, so if we want to be that literal, yes. dairygirl, did you mean civil law by authorities or any law?
Semperviva Posted July 5, 2005 Posted July 5, 2005 [quote name='JeffCR07' date='Jul 4 2005, 08:16 PM'] not improper theology, just improper phrasing. [right][snapback]631772[/snapback][/right] [/quote] not trying to be pernicious, but, isin't that what material heresy sometimes consists of...(as well as sometimes us being just out-right wrong in our theology at times, as with origens material heresies)....but improper theology sometimes comes from improper phrasing it seems, even if you had the proper idea... just one preposition off...and...it can be like the telescope aiming into outer space...one degree off ....and you'll never reach the intended target in space...just wanted to point out the connection between proper phrasing and proper theology, or, that they [i]are connected[/i] at least
Guest JeffCR07 Posted July 5, 2005 Posted July 5, 2005 [quote name='Semperviva' date='Jul 5 2005, 11:43 AM']not trying to be pernicious, but, isin't that what material heresy sometimes consists of...(as well as sometimes us being just out-right wrong in our theology at times, as with origens material heresies)....but improper theology sometimes comes from improper phrasing it seems, even if you had the proper idea... just one preposition off...and...it can be like the telescope aiming into outer space...one degree off ....and you'll never reach the intended target in space...just wanted to point out the connection between proper phrasing and proper theology, or, that they [i]are connected[/i] at least [right][snapback]632183[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Yep, I would say most material heresy comes from improper phrasing. But in this case, nothing I said even comes close to material heresy.
Guest JeffCR07 Posted July 5, 2005 Posted July 5, 2005 (edited) [quote name='scardella' date='Jul 5 2005, 10:56 AM']So, why are peeps talking about canon law? [right][snapback]632150[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Really im not sure. I think someone felt it important to point out that Canon law makes it obligatory for catholics to attend Mass every sunday, but, while true, it really doesn't pertain to the topic, which was clearly intended to discuss civil legislation. So, back on topic: should the civil government enact laws which would make it mandatory for everyone to attend Mass each week? Edited July 5, 2005 by JeffCR07
dspen2005 Posted July 5, 2005 Posted July 5, 2005 the requirement by civil law for one to attend sunday church services would make religion pharisaical.... a mere legal chore that every citizen must perform, rather than a moral assertion, statement of belief, or an active moral judgement....
Cam42 Posted July 5, 2005 Posted July 5, 2005 Where in the heck does dairy say anything about civil law v. canon law. She asked if it should be required by law. IT IS....Yes, I am a smart guy....and with that being the case, the differentiation is important. The only person who has dismissed canon law in this thread so far is you, Jeff. [quote]So, back on topic: should the civil government enact laws which would make it mandatory for everyone to attend Mass each week?[/quote] That is your implication. Incidentally, I am not the one who started nit-picking this thread, that would be you. So, don't ask if I have issues with you, you should look in the mirror. Reread the thread.
Aloysius Posted July 5, 2005 Posted July 5, 2005 Cam, it is clear by context that dairy was asking a question about civil law, apparent from her other posts about gay marriage et cetera... she's probing into how far the state's authority to impose things goes. She's not Catholic and is not asking if Catholics should be required to go to Mass, but if everyone should be required to go to Mass. you're turning this into like... sport-rhetoric... taking the first post as the resolution, then manipulating it so that you win. while that's always fun, this isn't a formal debate and the first post is not a resolution. it is an informal question and it is clear to most everyone what dairy was asking. you've made your point, Catholics are required by canon law to attend mass every sunday. now as this is the interfaith dialogue center let's expand the discussion to what dairy intended. sheesh... I know we're Roman and all... but Cam's a little bit too roman even for me here!
Cam42 Posted July 5, 2005 Posted July 5, 2005 [quote]Cam's a little bit too roman even for me here! [/quote] And that is a compliment. Thank you. Is there any other way to be?
Aloysius Posted July 6, 2005 Posted July 6, 2005 lol well yeah... I suppose... but it can be taken too far you know
Guest JeffCR07 Posted July 6, 2005 Posted July 6, 2005 so [i]is[/i] there anyone who thinks that mandatory Mass attendence should be legislated by the civil government? I'd be interested to hear arguments for such a thing, even if I don't agree.
Semperviva Posted July 6, 2005 Posted July 6, 2005 (edited) [quote name='JeffCR07' date='Jul 6 2005, 06:30 AM']so [i]is[/i] there anyone who thinks that mandatory Mass attendence should be legislated by the civil government? [right][snapback]632995[/snapback][/right] [/quote] that idea is not in line with catholic social teaching, free will or vatican 2, lol..so nobody should think that ... hey but argue away if u will...lol Edited July 6, 2005 by Semperviva
Semperviva Posted July 6, 2005 Posted July 6, 2005 [quote name='JeffCR07' date='Jul 5 2005, 11:47 AM']Yep, I would say most material heresy comes from improper phrasing. But in this case, nothing I said even comes close to material heresy. [right][snapback]632187[/snapback][/right] [/quote] never called [i]you[/i] one..just said yer on yer way there...haha..
scardella Posted July 6, 2005 Posted July 6, 2005 [quote name='Cam42' date='Jul 5 2005, 04:06 PM']Where in the heck does dairy say anything about civil law v. canon law. She asked if it should be required by law. IT IS....Yes, I am a smart guy....and with that being the case, the differentiation is important. The only person who has dismissed canon law in this thread so far is you, Jeff. That is your implication. Incidentally, I am not the one who started nit-picking this thread, that would be you. So, don't ask if I have issues with you, you should look in the mirror. Reread the thread. [right][snapback]632425[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Actually, I was the one who started nit-picking. The way it was asked, it would seem to imply civil law. However, we haven't gotten any clarification from dairygirl. I think for most people on this board, it's clear that canon law requires it. What isn't certain is if it should be part of civil law, or if it is a requirement of religion "per se".
Guest JeffCR07 Posted July 6, 2005 Posted July 6, 2005 [quote]that idea is not in line with catholic social teaching, free will or vatican 2, lol..so nobody should think that ... hey but argue away if u will...lol[/quote] lol, well I'm certainly not going to argue it, im just saying it would be fun if someone did. [quote]never called you one..just said yer on yer way there...haha.. [/quote] never!
Didacus Posted July 6, 2005 Posted July 6, 2005 I believe the church law should be abided to above a nation's law, thus it should be law to go to church.
Semperviva Posted July 6, 2005 Posted July 6, 2005 [quote name='Didacus' date='Jul 6 2005, 02:08 PM']I believe the church law should be abided to above a nation's law, thus it should be law to go to church. [right][snapback]633448[/snapback][/right] [/quote] ...vatican 2 rox...i ferget the doc. but one does say.....that's explicetly against human dignity...man is made with free will to choose the good freely for its own sake.......... not because its a law
Recommended Posts