Whether you recognize and accept it or not the Catholic Church and its 1.4 billion members is a global institution. It is also the largest US faith. The Church has a duty to God and to mankind to be an instrument of Gods Word. The constitution prohibits governmental involvement in religion, but not religious involvement in government.
The "separation of Church and state" does not mean -- and it can never mean -- separating our Catholic faith from our public witness, our political choices and our political actions. That kind of separation would require Christians to deny who we are; to repudiate Jesus when he commands us to be "leaven in the world" and to "make disciples of all nations." That kind of radical separation steals the moral content of a society
All political leaders of draw their authority from God. We owe no leader any submission or cooperation in the pursuit of grave evil. In fact, we have the duty to change bad laws and resist grave evil in our public life, both by our words and our non-violent actions. The truest respect we can show to civil authority is the witness of our Catholic faith and our moral convictions, without excuses or apologies.
>>> Whether you recognize and accept it or not the Catholic Church and its 1.4 billion members is a global institution. It is also the largest US faith. The Church has a duty to God and to mankind to be an instrument of Gods Word. The constitution prohibits governmental involvement in religion, but not religious involvement in government. <<<
What you present here is a list of irrelevancies. The argument I’ve been making is that _CiV_ — and thus by extension BXVI, the Vatican, and the Church of Rome — is engaging in advocacy of global policies in a globalist fashion for globalist ends. Whether my argument is true or not is a question of fact, for it refers to a public document that can be referred to by others to affirm or rebut my claims.
To state, as you do, that “The Church has a duty to God and to mankind to be an instrument of Gods Word,” does not amount to a rebuttal of my position. One can easily argue that being “an instrument of God’s word” entails that the Church of Rome should intervene in “technical questions” and propose and advocate “systems or models of social organization.” In fact, this is what I believe _CiV_ does on almost every page (and if you don’t believe that _CiV_ is advocating intervention in “technical questions,” please look again at the second paragraph of Section 61; section 51 is interesting, too, esp. the first sentence of the second paragraph).
>>> The “separation of Church and state” does not mean — and it can never mean — separating our Catholic faith from our public witness, our political choices and our political actions. That kind of separation would require Christians to deny who we are; to repudiate Jesus when he commands us to be “leaven in the world” and to “make disciples of all nations.” That kind of radical separation steals the moral content of a society <<<
There’s a big difference between fulfilling the Great Commission and being an instrument’s in God’s great plan of Salvation and “preaching,” as _CiV_ does, that “The international community has an urgent DUTY to find institutional means of REGULATING the exploitation of non-renewable resources, involving poor countries in the process, in order to plan together for the future” (Section 49, my emphasis).
There’s a huge difference between recognizing, as a Christian, that abortion is intrinsically evil and should not be supported by word or deed or policy, and recognizing, as _CiV_ claims we must do on a GLOBAL scale, that “development aid for poor countries must be considered a valid means for creating wealth for all” (WHATEVER that means; cf. Section 60).
>>> All political leaders of draw their authority from God. We owe no leader any submission or cooperation in the pursuit of grave evil. In fact, we have the duty to change bad laws and resist grave evil in our public life, both by our words and our non-violent actions. The truest respect we can show to civil authority is the witness of our Catholic faith and our moral convictions, without excuses or apologies. <<<
Mostly true, but quite beside the point in regards to the issue at hand. I find the institution of things like a reformed UN, or a global political, juridical and economic order to be a prime example of the “grave evil” you speak of. Such a global order is thus something that should be resisted by all Christians and “men of good will” in their public life. My concern, and the concern of others as expressed on this thread and elsewhere, is that _CiV_ — and thus by extension BXVI, the Vatican, and the Church of Rome — is advocating the creation of a “domesticated” version of this “grave evil.” And thus we are displeased, to put it gently.
It’s as if the _CiV_ is based on the belief that the Dragon can be tamed or that a lasting Tower of Babel can be built (this time, for sure!), and that with the use of magic concepts like “subsidiarity” and “integral human development” the evil and tyranny inherent in such a global system can be subdued. This strikes me as being either the height of foolishness — or despair.
“”The “separation of Church and state” does not mean — and it can never mean — separating our Catholic faith from our public witness, our political choices and our political actions. That kind of separation would require Christians to deny who we are; to repudiate Jesus when he commands us to be “leaven in the world” and to “make disciples of all nations.” That kind of radical separation steals the moral content of a society””
Very well said ,dear friend. The following is from Blessed Pope Leo XIII
Some excerpts from Libertas - Pope Leo XIII
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_20061888_libertas_en.html
” Again, it is not of itself wrong to prefer a democratic form of government, if only the Catholic doctrine be maintained as to the origin and exercise of power. Of the various forms of government, the Church does not reject any that are fitted to procure the welfare of the subject; she wishes only - and this nature itself requires - that they should be constituted without involving wrong to any one, and especially without violating the rights of the Church.”
“there remain those who, while they do not approve the separation of Church and State, think nevertheless that the Church ought to adapt herself to the times and conform to what is required by the modern system of government. Such an opinion is sound, if it is to be understood of some equitable adjustment consistent with truth and justice; in so far, namely, that the Church, in the hope of some great good, may show herself indulgent, and may conform to the times in so far as her sacred office permits. But it is not so in regard to practices and doctrines which a perversion of morals and a warped judgment have unlawfully introduced. Religion, truth, and justice must ever be maintained; and, as God has intrusted these great and sacred matters to her office as to dissemble in regard to what is false or unjust, or to connive at what is hurtful to religion.”
from Immortal Dei.....
“In the same way the Church cannot approve of that liberty which begets a contempt of the most sacred laws of God, and casts off the obedience due to lawful authority, for this is not liberty so much as license, and is most correctly styled by St. Augustine the “liberty of self ruin,” and by the Apostle St. Peter the “cloak of malice.”(23) Indeed, since it is opposed to reason, it is a true slavery, “for whosoever committeth sin is the slave of sin.”(24) On the other hand, that liberty is truly genuine, and to be sought after, which in regard to the individual does not allow men to be the slaves of error and of passion, the worst of all masters; which, too, in public administration guides the citizens in wisdom and provides for them increased means of well-being; and which, further, protects the State from foreign interference.”