Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 04/25/2013 3:09:58 PM PDT by NYer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: netmilsmom; thefrankbaum; Tax-chick; GregB; saradippity; Berlin_Freeper; Litany; SumProVita; ...
The subtraction of beliefs leaves, as a remainder, “no one’s religious beliefs,” or more accurately, non-belief. Non-belief thereby becomes the established state worldview. Secularism takes the place of an established religion.

Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI began to warn us about this back in 2005 when, as the Prefect for the Congregation of the Faith, he led the Pro-Eligendo Mass prior to the Conclave. In his homily, he noted:

How many winds of doctrine have we known in recent decades, how many ideological currents, how many ways of thinking. The small boat of the thought of many Christians has often been tossed about by these waves - flung from one extreme to another: from Marxism to liberalism, even to libertinism; from collectivism to radical individualism; from atheism to a vague religious mysticism; from agnosticism to syncretism and so forth. Every day new sects spring up, and what St Paul says about human deception and the trickery that strives to entice people into error (cf. Eph 4: 14) comes true.

Today, having a clear faith based on the Creed of the Church is often labeled as fundamentalism. Whereas relativism, that is, letting oneself be "tossed here and there, carried about by every wind of doctrine", seems the only attitude that can cope with modern times. We are building a dictatorship of relativism that does not recognize anything as definitive and whose ultimate goal consists solely of one's own ego and desires.

Full Text

2 posted on 04/25/2013 3:13:01 PM PDT by NYer (Beware the man of a single book - St. Thomas Aquinas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NYer

I don’t think we need to ‘rethink’ religious liberty in general so much as the ridiculous liberal interpretation of the establishment clause ... which has been re-written as the “endorsement” clause.

A manger scene is not an establishment of religion. Teaching that God exists in a public school is not an establishment of religion. A Christmas play — whether Santa Claus or the Baby Jesus — is not an ESTABLISHMENT of religion.

They might be endorsements of the majority religion ... but endorsements are not unconstitutional under a reasonable interpretation of the 1st amendment, and should not be outlawed.

SnakeDoc


3 posted on 04/25/2013 3:17:49 PM PDT by SnakeDoctor ("I've shot people I like more for less." -- Raylan Givens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NYer

Modern secularism is a failure, and its results can bee seen in the nations of Europe who have abandoned their heritage. Every society has a core belief system and requires it. That’s why we have ‘In God We Trust’ on our dollar bills, and the presence of the Ten Commandments is visible at our highest court. This doesn’t mean we operate in a theocracy as Iran. You have the freedom to practice whatever you want, such is your right. However, the nation was built on Christianity, which separates our society from that in India or Japan. It is distinct. If you seek to wipe out the country’s foundation in Christianity in favor of a secular vacuum, it WILL be filled by something else eventually. Likely one of the two most agressive belief systems in the world. Atheism and Islam, and such societies have only bought death to their victims.


4 posted on 04/25/2013 3:25:08 PM PDT by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NYer

Great Article...


5 posted on 04/25/2013 4:07:42 PM PDT by jafojeffsurf (Return to the Constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NYer
Thank you for posting!

In America, since the early 1900's, we have allowed that movement which now self-describes as "progressive" to redefine the Founders' ideas of liberty, especially as it relates to freedom of conscience and religious liberty.

May we, each and all, use the technology available to us to study the ideas which motivated the men and women of America's founding period to create such a clear statement of understanding of the Source of life, rights, liberty and law. Perhaps we may be able to influence and guide new generations into what Jefferson, in his First Inaugural, called "the only road that leads to peace, liberty and safety."

"Kings or parliaments could not give the rights essential to happiness, as you confess those invaded by the Stamp Act to be. We claim them from a higher source - from the King of kings, and Lord of all the earth. They are not annexed to us by parchments and seals. They are created in us by the decrees of Providence, which establish the laws of our nature. They are born with us, exist with us, and cannot be taken from us by any human power, without taking our lives. In short, they are founded on the immutable maxims of reason and justice." - John Dickinson (Signer of the Constitution of the U. S., as quoted in "Our Ageless Constitution," p. 286)

Unless today's citizens rediscover the ideas of liberty existing in what Jefferson called "the American mind" of 1776, we risk going back to the "Old World" ideas which preceded the "Miracle of America."

There are those who call themselves "progressives," when, in fact, their ideas are regressive and enslaving, and as old as the history of civilization.

Would suggest to any who wish an authentic history of the ideas underlying American's founding a visit to this web site, at which Richard Frothingham's outstanding 1872 "History of the Rise of the Republic of the United States" can be read on line.

This 600+-page history traces the ideas which gave birth to the American founding. Throughout, Richard Frothingham, the historian, develops the idea that it is "the Christian idea of man" which allowed the philosophy underlying the Declaration of Independence and Constitution to become a reality--an idea which recognizes the individual and the Source of his/her "Creator"-endowed life, liberty and law.

Is there any wonder that the enemies of freedom, the so-called "progressives," do not promote such authentic histories of America? Their philosophy puts something called "the state," or "global interests" as being superior to individuals and requires a political elitist group to decide what role individuals are to play.

In other words, they must turn the Founders' ideas upside-down in order to achieve a common mediocrity for individuals and power for themselves.

"Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it; no constitution, no law, no court even can do much to help it." - Judge Learned Hand


8 posted on 04/25/2013 6:11:00 PM PDT by loveliberty2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NYer

No Catholic is bound by Dignitatis Humanae, because it is not a document that binds. It is full of philosophical errors, and it will need to be corrected by a future Pope or Council.


12 posted on 04/25/2013 8:15:19 PM PDT by blackpacific
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NYer
No need to rethink. Jesus described the essence of liberty in John 8 :

31 Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.33 They answered him, We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?34 Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.35 And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever.36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.

Sin is the ultimate tyranny from which all other tyranny and oppression arises. Believe on Jesus and continue in his word. Be free indeed.

19 posted on 04/28/2013 5:59:57 AM PDT by Theophilus (Not merely prolife, but prolific)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NYer
Another excellent article.

"Freedom of religion" was created for a specifically Protestant context in which the basics were universally assumed (and therefore public) while various other matters were a matter of denominational disagreement (and therefore private). Minus this Protestant context, "freedom of religion" doesn't work.

The greatest contradiction of "freedom of religion," especially when espoused by people who object to abortion, homosexuality, euthanasia, etc., is that it enshrines as a "right" the greatest sin of all: the right to commit idolatry.

All this (in my opinion) stems from chrstianity's transformation of religion from statute to an "offer of salvation." If G-d is making an "offer," naturally one is free to refuse. If there is no "offer of salvation," if G-d has only laws and statutes which He commands us to obey, then this problem ceases to exist.

20 posted on 04/28/2013 8:17:45 AM PDT by Zionist Conspirator (Ki-hagoy vehamamlakhah 'asher lo'-ya`avdukh yove'du; vehagoyim charov yecheravu!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson