Slappo Posted October 5, 2009 Posted October 5, 2009 [quote]For you well know, venerable brethren, that at this time men are found not a few who, applying to civil society the impious and absurd principle of "naturalism," as they call it, [b]dare to teach that "the best constitution of public society and (also) civil progress altogether require that human society be conducted and governed without regard being had to religion any more than if it did not exist; or, at least, without any distinction being made between the true religion and false ones." And, against the doctrine of Scripture, of the Church, and of the Holy Fathers, they do not hesitate to assert that "that is the best condition of civil society, in which no duty is recognized, as attached to the civil power, of restraining by enacted penalties, offenders against the Catholic religion, except so far as public peace may require."[/b] From which totally false idea of social government they do not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, most fatal in its effects on the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls, called by Our Predecessor, Gregory XVI, an "insanity,"2 viz., that "liberty of conscience and worship is each man's personal right, which ought to be legally proclaimed and asserted in every rightly constituted society; and that a right resides in the citizens to an absolute liberty, which should be restrained by no authority whether ecclesiastical or civil, whereby they may be able openly and publicly to manifest and declare any of their ideas whatever, either by word of mouth, by the press, or in any other way." But, while they rashly affirm this, they do not think and consider that they are preaching "liberty of perdition;"3 and that "if human arguments are always allowed free room for discussion, there will never be wanting men who will dare to resist truth, and to trust in the flowing speech of human wisdom; whereas we know, from the very teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ, how carefully Christian faith and wisdom should avoid this most injurious babbling."4 [/quote] Thats the whole quote from Quanta Cura... The bold is what Pius IX was condeming. Liberty of conscience and religious freedom are two different things IMO. Freedom of conscience... even the United States recognizes some sort of universal conscience/natural law. That is why we cannot murder (except for unborn in USA anyways), steal, etc. Pius IX was condemning that religion, specifically the Catholic faith be removed from the state and that no distinction be made between the True Church and the false ones. That doesn't mean you can't follow the false ones, it just means we're going to make sure you know that they're false. The Church continues to teach this. Even recently she repronounced protestants as separated brethren. Separated from what? The True Church. I don't see anything wrong with [b]religion[/b] being a civil right and at the same time rejecting liberty of [b]conscience[/b].
Slappo Posted October 5, 2009 Posted October 5, 2009 Man I had so many +1's to give out in this thread.. but only get one
Slappo Posted October 5, 2009 Posted October 5, 2009 BTW rexi, what do you think of my interpretation? I don't think Pius IX and Vatican II are even talking about the same thing...
Sojourner Posted October 5, 2009 Posted October 5, 2009 [quote name='Slappo' date='05 October 2009 - 01:29 PM' timestamp='1254763781' post='1978285'] BTW rexi, what do you think of my interpretation? I don't think Pius IX and Vatican II are even talking about the same thing... [/quote] So ... you're saying that sometimes looking at the broader context can bring clarity to an apparent discrepancy?
Laudate_Dominum Posted October 5, 2009 Posted October 5, 2009 Every town Has its ups and down Sometime ups Outnumber the downs But not in Nottingham I'm inclined to believe If we were so down We'd up and leave We'd up and fly if we had wings for flyin' Can't you see the tears we're cryin'? Can't there be some happiness for me? Not in Nottingham
StColette Posted October 5, 2009 Posted October 5, 2009 [quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='05 October 2009 - 02:20 PM' timestamp='1254766819' post='1978309'] Every town Has its ups and down Sometime ups Outnumber the downs But not in Nottingham I'm inclined to believe If we were so down We'd up and leave We'd up and fly if we had wings for flyin' Can't you see the tears we're cryin'? Can't there be some happiness for me? Not in Nottingham [/quote] I might have to go home and watch that now! lol
Nihil Obstat Posted October 5, 2009 Posted October 5, 2009 [quote name='Slappo' date='05 October 2009 - 12:28 PM' timestamp='1254763700' post='1978283'] Man I had so many +1's to give out in this thread.. but only get one [/quote] I still think you need a flag.
Slappo Posted October 5, 2009 Posted October 5, 2009 [quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='05 October 2009 - 11:45 AM' timestamp='1254768327' post='1978329'] I still think you need a flag. [/quote] I'm waiting for it... Dust told me I'd have scholar and that was 2 weeks ago or so now. I have a BA in Theology from FUS so...
Slappo Posted October 5, 2009 Posted October 5, 2009 [quote name='Terra Firma' date='05 October 2009 - 11:18 AM' timestamp='1254766688' post='1978308'] So ... you're saying that sometimes looking at the broader context can bring clarity to an apparent discrepancy? [/quote] Wait really? That's true? No way! Everything has to be read in the light of 2000 years of tradition... that's what's so cool about Catholicism And what makes it so hard to read Catholic theology
Laudate_Dominum Posted October 5, 2009 Posted October 5, 2009 [quote name='StColette' date='05 October 2009 - 02:36 PM' timestamp='1254767788' post='1978324'] I might have to go home and watch that now! lol [/quote] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjLL7jbevqM[/media]
HisChildForever Posted October 5, 2009 Posted October 5, 2009 [quote name='Stormstopper' date='05 October 2009 - 01:09 PM' timestamp='1254762586' post='1978272'] John the Baptist, ("ye brood of vipers"), John the apostle, ("liars" and "antichrists") and Paul (not a few times ) used some very strong terminology in HIS disputes. More importantly, Christ calls the scribes and Pharisees some unpleasant names no less than 16 times in Matt 23. They are "hypocrites" (7 times), "son of Hell" (once), "blind guides" (twice), "geniuses and blind" (3 times), "whited sepulchres" (once), "serpents" (once), and "offspring of vipers" (once). Since we agree that Christ was without sin, we may deduce by good and necessary consequence that name-calling or a "mild" assault on someone's character is not a sin either, but is rather, a virtue, when one perceives that the word of God is being mishandled. [/quote] Dear Small Fry, You made a ridiculous claim that Winchester uses his Bible as a coaster for alcoholic beverages. That is not a "virtue" but your ability to bilocate to Winchester's living room. Love always, "Chid"
HisChildForever Posted October 5, 2009 Posted October 5, 2009 [quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='05 October 2009 - 01:01 PM' timestamp='1254762069' post='1978266'] I was trying to be as general as possible, having been in a class at the time. [/quote] I was in class too.
Nihil Obstat Posted October 5, 2009 Posted October 5, 2009 [quote name='Slappo' date='05 October 2009 - 02:10 PM' timestamp='1254769857' post='1978337'] I'm waiting for it... Dust told me I'd have scholar and that was 2 weeks ago or so now. I have a BA in Theology from FUS so... [/quote] I keep forgetting. I did definitely know that!
Stormstopper Posted October 5, 2009 Posted October 5, 2009 [quote name='HisChildForever' date='05 October 2009 - 02:30 PM' timestamp='1254771052' post='1978344'] Dear Small Fry, You made a ridiculous claim that Winchester uses his Bible as a coaster for alcoholic beverages. That is not a "virtue" but your ability to bilocate to Winchester's living room. Love always, "Chid" [/quote] My child.....the point was to incite the man to check things out before making such bogus claims about the Lord Jesus Christ. You take things far too literally. Oh yes, I forgot, you're a Catholic, and when Jesus said to "Eat me", you don't want to discuss the massive amount of evidence that supports He was NOT speaking literally, --oh no, we can't have that. He said EAT ME, and the case is closed. But oh how quickly you abandon your literalism when we are told in no less than 5 places that ALL have sinned, and without blinking, you expect us to believe Mary was an exception. Thus, you are a disobedient "child" who is not believing her "parent".
Slappo Posted October 5, 2009 Posted October 5, 2009 [quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='05 October 2009 - 12:48 PM' timestamp='1254772122' post='1978349'] I keep forgetting. I did definitely know that! [/quote] Patience is not a virtue I've even come close to mastering though Even ask my fiancee... have to wait 8 more months. I keep telling her to leave school and come marry me next week
Laudate_Dominum Posted October 5, 2009 Posted October 5, 2009 The snivellin' grovellin' Measly weasely Blabberin' jabberin' Gibberin' jabberin' Blunderin' plunderin' Wheelin' dealin' Prince Jan, that phony king of England!
HisChildForever Posted October 5, 2009 Posted October 5, 2009 [quote name='Stormstopper' date='05 October 2009 - 04:12 PM' timestamp='1254773573' post='1978362'] My child.....the point was to incite the man to check things out before making such bogus claims about the Lord Jesus Christ. You take things far too literally. Oh yes, I forgot, you're a Catholic, and when Jesus said to "Eat me", you don't want to discuss the massive amount of evidence that supports He was NOT speaking literally, --oh no, we can't have that. He said EAT ME, and the case is closed. [/quote] I am not your child, but thanks for those nightmares. [quote] But oh how quickly you abandon your literalism when we are told in no less than 5 places that ALL have sinned, and without blinking, you expect us to believe Mary was an exception. Thus, you are a disobedient "child" who is not believing her "parent". [/quote] So I guess Jesus falls under "all" then, too?
Selah Posted October 5, 2009 Posted October 5, 2009 [quote name='Winchester' date='04 October 2009 - 11:40 PM' timestamp='1254710414' post='1977848'] The Church didn't burn anyone and was not in charge of the country at the time. Executions still take place at the behest of nations. [/quote] That is what I was thinking as well. I know many of the executions were given out by angry mobs or by the state, and not the Church itself. Wait...that is what you meant, right?
Winchester Posted October 5, 2009 Posted October 5, 2009 [quote name='Selah' date='05 October 2009 - 04:26 PM' timestamp='1254774386' post='1978374'] That is what I was thinking as well. I know many of the executions were given out by angry mobs or by the state, and not the Church itself. Wait...that is what you meant, right? [/quote] Right. However, by not condemning it outright, the Church would still share responsibility. But it's important to remember, there is no divine protection over the actions of the Church. Only in preventing official teaching from being in error, and it can be difficult even to determine that. As it was difficult to determine which of the many scriptures out there were infallible, prior to being assembled in the Bible. As it is difficult now to determine which Bible translation is the best of the many available. I could put a Bible out that had verses changed to suit me. For instance, I could add "alone" to a particular verse, or include in a prayer a sidenote from a previous translator.
Selah Posted October 5, 2009 Posted October 5, 2009 [quote name='Winchester' date='05 October 2009 - 01:02 AM' timestamp='1254715358' post='1977924'] It's not about the burning; it's about the community getting together. [/quote] When I read this, all I could think of was, "Ooh! A community get together! Are they having a potluck?"
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now