Replies

I'd locate it in the teaching on the State. I don't have the time to look it up now though. Free Speech wasn't about Porn and whatnot (an underused word, IMO)but about the liberty of men to criticise and speak the truth about political matters and political men.

How about just the doctrinal support for the latter, when you have a moment.

I don't doubt it may exist.

But the "Free Speech" the Founders envisioned was not even a Catholic ideal at the time. Heretics did not have any fundamental "right" to spread heresies in Catholic ethics.

I'm not sure they even do to this day...

Just something I've thought about...anyone know a cohesive article on this?

But the "Free Speech" the Founders envisioned was not even a Catholic ideal at the time. Heretics did not have any fundamental "right" to spread heresies in Catholic ethics

There are many surprising precedents concerning democracy in Catholic practice. Many folks are surprised when they first read the Rule of St. Benedict. I think after reading it that some would claim he had been infected with liberalism... he even includes a conscience clause.

When I get home, I'll kick around some books to see where a free speech right could be located. I certainly agree that what we have now can in no way be supported but I think that free speeech as envisoned by the Protestant Fathers of this country as regards political speech is not contrary to Catholic ethics

the liberty of men to criticise and speak the truth about political matters and political men.

How about just the doctrinal support for the latter

There's discussion of the principles underlying society in the Catechism, but nothing there as far as I know, which discusses 'freedom of speech' explicitly. See sections 1901 et seq., which I believe permits freedom of speech if that 'fundamental right' is included in the organizing poltical arrangements/documents. There are probably other sections of the Catechism as well.

The Church might look at 'freedom of speech' as permitted but not required as a matter of doctrine, or preferred but not required as a matter of doctrine.

Heretics did not have any fundamental "right" to spread heresies in Catholic ethics.

I'm not sure they even do to this day...

I don't see how anyone can have a fundamental "right" to spread heresy.

First, in one sense, no one has any rights before God, only obligations. On the other hand, a definition of "rights" that would be consistent with Catholic teaching (and natural law) would be "that which is due a person because of his personhood."

How would this principle apply in the political realm? Certainly the right to "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" does not contradict Catholic teaching as long as "pursuit of Happiness" is not considered in a utilitarian sense. But absolute "freedom of speech" cannot be a First Principle of morality because, for example, in the case of blasphemy, God would be upholding the "right" to sinful action.

On the other hand, the Church demands that human beings be free to act according to conscience, within reasonable limits. Therefore, the degree of "freedom of speech" granted to citizens by the State must be an area for prudential judgement.