Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Neither could the UK.
What does this have to do with our conscience requiring us as Christians to engage in civil disobedience of unjust laws?
Exsurge Domine says too bad, the Catholic faithful are forbidden from holding the belief that the burning of heretics is against the will of the Holy Spirit.
I am 100% sure the UK didn't start that way but their parliament and Prime Minister have vastly more control over the government than the King. He is basically a figurehead. I do know that the King has his own small army and the loyalty of the people as royalty but he's not doing anything politically but waving at crowds while on his balcony or a parade.
It's funny that I've been asked this because it's such a far cry from a democracy. Your conscience should control YOUR vote, not the rest of a democratic Constitutional Republic. You are going to have to take over some small island to enforce Evangelical religion on a majority when you are the minority. Otherwise how do we choose which denomination has the right laws? It's rediculous. Evengelicals can express themselves with their vote and their ability to garner votes. What if your religion was in the minority and we became Sharia? No, we are founded as a nation with the God-given right to freedom of religion.
I think you will find that whatever obscure doctrine does not represent the view of many Catholics. Even if the CHurch holds that belief, secular democratic constitutional republican law trumps that little ditty. That is why it's so important. We can't have Priests burning heretics in a civilized society. Now, as far as capital punishment, from my understanding, Catholics are within the faith to support it or not support it. But guess what? The sentence has to be handed down by a secular judge and jury. No Priest or Pastor can legally just start burning heretics. The ruling by religion is why we have places the many countries in the Middle East where women can get stoned for getting raped and falling pregnant. Do you think that is better than secular law?
.png)
What is, civil disobedience? That's not even in the same category as democracy.
Freedom of religion is not a God-given right, and support of religious liberty was condemned in Pope Pius IX's Syllabus of Errors. Regardless of what the secular state says, there is no divinely-given or divinely-protected right to worship false gods.
The only one that doesn't put the Church in the position of having taught error for the vast majority of the past two millennia and that doesn't contradict the divine mandate of capital punishment for some crimes, e.g. Exodus 21:12.
Indeed, even though it was promulgated with all the markings of an ex cathedra statement. It's a sad reality that many Catholics, as far as Catholic theology is concerned, are living in venial or mortal sin, depending on their culpability, by being selective in which pre-20th-century teachings of the authentic or extraordinary magisterium they accept.
You seem to be unaware that when heretics were burned historically, it was the state that handed down and carried out the sentence, not the Church.
I think I read somewhere "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
If you are a Protestant, your beliefs are newly founded, not time-tested, and founded by the Apostles. You seem to know about Catholicism, so you should know that the Roman Catholic Church believes that God continues to reveal the truth to the Church throughout time. The Church is capable of making the changes necessary to be relevant to the time we live in, with the global hierarchy of the Church needing to agree on any changes made to policy.
Have you NOT heard of Vatican II. Like I said, THE Church always stays relevant to the times we live in.
I think you seem to be aware of the trials under "The Inquisition." Back then, the Church was on even footing with the King. It was up to the Church to approve the King's ascendancy. The Church had its own governmental powers in those days.
Do you hold the Declaration of Independence in higher regard than authoritative papal teaching?
You are more than welcome to visit my profile page or read my previous posts and see that I'm not a Protestant.
No, Catholicism does not teach that there is continual new revelation. This is another error condemned by Pius IX in his Syllabus. Nor does it teach that the Church, in coming to a deeper understanding of a revealed truth, can effect a change in meaning of a doctrine, such that capital punishment (for example) would be permissible at one time and intrinsically evil at another; that would be the heresy of modernism.
Oh yes, I know all about Vatican II. It's one of the main reasons I decided against Catholicism. But if Catholicism is true, as you presumably believe it is, then Vatican II has to be in continuity with prior authoritative teaching. Otherwise, you're stuck either denying papal infallibility or accepting modernism.
Not for my personal morality neccesarily but surely for my nations democratic constitution republican system of passing laws.You are more than welcome to visit my profile page or read my previous posts and see that I'm not a Protestant.
You might be thinking of Orthodox Catholicism but the Roman Church continues to receive revalation. See Vatican I and II for your reference to that fact.
I think you are confused about Papal infallibility like many. It can only be enacted with the approval of the Magisterium and Infallible declarations are very few and far between and are not valid without the approval of THE CHURCH at large. A Pope cannot just state something random as infallible.
Great, because we weren't talking about which laws should be passed, we were talking about which existing laws should be resisted by Christians.
You may want to ask your priest about that. Hopefully he'll be able to explain it better than I have.
My point about papal infallibility was that you are interpreting Vatican II as a rupture from previous consistent Catholic teaching. So either those popes who made ex cathedra statements like those in Exsurge Domine or Unam Sanctam prior to Vatican II were wrong, and thus papal infallibility is wrong, or doctrines can change from having one meaning to having another, which is modernism.
This is crazy stuff. The real Big Brother happening right before our eyes and most people go along. The basis is dractonian. The idea that certain beliefs and states of conscience are not allowed.A British army veteran who served in Afghanistan was found guilty today of praying silently near an abortion clinic in England.
Adam Smith-Connor breached a Public Spaces Protection Order by this action, according to the ruling at Poole Magistrates Court in the town of Poole near Bournemouth, Dorset, England. The court gave Smith-Connor a conditional discharge, meaning he will be sentenced only if convicted of future offenses within the next two years.
“Today, the court has decided that certain thoughts — silent thoughts — can be illegal in the United Kingdom,” Smith-Connor said after the court ruling. “That cannot be right. All I did was pray to God, in the privacy of my own mind, and yet I stand convicted as a criminal?”
Continued below.
'All I did was pray to God': Court finds Christian man guilty of 'disapproval of abortion' for silently praying for son
A British army veteran who served in Afghanistan was found guilty today of praying silently near an abortion clinic in Englandwww.christianpost.com
A British army veteran who served in Afghanistan was found guilty today of praying silently near an abortion clinic in England.
Adam Smith-Connor breached a Public Spaces Protection Order by this action, according to the ruling at Poole Magistrates Court in the town of Poole near Bournemouth, Dorset, England. The court gave Smith-Connor a conditional discharge, meaning he will be sentenced only if convicted of future offenses within the next two years.
“Today, the court has decided that certain thoughts — silent thoughts — can be illegal in the United Kingdom,” Smith-Connor said after the court ruling. “That cannot be right. All I did was pray to God, in the privacy of my own mind, and yet I stand convicted as a criminal?”
Continued below.
'All I did was pray to God': Court finds Christian man guilty of 'disapproval of abortion' for silently praying for son
A British army veteran who served in Afghanistan was found guilty today of praying silently near an abortion clinic in England
If they are resisted by protest, that's fine but they shouldn't be resisted by insurrection.
I already have and that is how it was explained to me. Orthodoxy is more ancient and unchanged but Roman Catholic philosophy/theology says that God is active in his Church's past, present, and future. God inspires changed based on the times. For example, slavery in the past was totally supported by the Church but that point of view is not acceptable in the modern age. The CHurch torturing and executing people is no longer a viable concept.
I think you still may be confused about the concept of reformation or in the case of the RCC, counter-reformation. The doctrine concerning the Sacraments and things like Mass are not really changeable but The Church can adjust to every passing era. As I said above, God remains active in the formation of his Church. He did not just set it up and walk away from it. That was the reason (and politics were the reason). that the Church split in the first place. As learned theologians went through scripture and other writings by Apostles and their followers. Doctrine is not really changed but philosophy has. Things like being hanged for committing adultery are just no longer sustainable. No doctrine actually changed, adultery is still a sin but since the times after the counter-reformation, the philosophy started changing to not killing in the name of God and letting God pass judgment rather than a tribunal of Priests. It seems, according to your criticism, that you think some of the ancient ways needed to be changed. That is why there is a global conference of Bishops and Cardinals. The Pope is not a dictator. Things change very slowly and there must be a consensus among the global community. Just like when the Nicene Creed was established, the Apostle's Creed and a bunch of others. I mean Protestants changed all kinds of things by the writings of one man like Calvin and Luther, who disagreed with some policies of The Church but never renounced his faith. As it says in the Bible when Christ authorized Peter to take command of his Church.....
People go to a gravesite or the place of a fatal accident to pray. Does that make the prayer more effective? Only God knows.But people have always done it and continue to do it to this day. He was praying for his son.So here is a question: Does God better hear and answer prayers about abortion if they are made closest to the clinic? If I am going to pray for you, will my prayers be more effective made outside of your house?
Does God better hear and answer prayers if they are made in a church? How about a holy site on a pilgrimage? Do prayers for the dead have greater effect in a cemetery?
Then you may have misunderstood him. From Dei Verbum: "The Christian dispensation, therefore, as the new and definitive covenant, will never pass away and we now await no further new public revelation before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ (see 1 Tim. 6:14 and Tit. 2:13)."
I'm well aware of the "discipline, not doctrine" apologetic. It's just that what's included in doctrine keeps shrinking and what's included in discipline keeps expanding.
