Posted on 11/13/2009 5:37:11 AM PST by marshmallow
The Greek Orthodox Church is urging Christians across Europe to unite in an appeal against a ban on crucifixes in classrooms in Italy.
The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg ruled last week that the presence of crucifixes violated a child's right to freedom of religion.
Greece's Orthodox Church fears the Italian case will set a precedent.
It has called an emergency Holy Synod meeting for next week to devise an action plan.
Although the Greek Orthodox Church has been at odds with Roman Catholicism for 1,000 years, the judicial threat to Christian symbols has acted as a unifying force.
The European Court of Human Rights found that the compulsory display of crucifixes violated parents' rights to educate their children as they saw fit and restricted the right of children to believe or not to believe.
'Worthy symbols'
The head of the Greek Church, Archbishop Ieronymos, shares Catholic complaints that the court is ignoring the role of Christianity in forming Europe's identity.
It is not only minorities that have rights but majorities as well, said the archbishop.
One of his subordinates, Bishop Nicholas from central Greece, lamented that at this rate youngsters will not have any worthy symbols at all to inspire and protect them.
Football and pop idols are very poor substitutes, he said.
The Greek Church has ostensibly intervened in this case in response to an appeal by a Greek mother whose son is studying in Italy.
But without doubt it is concerned that its omnipotence in Greece is under threa
(Excerpt) Read more at news.bbc.co.uk ...
“And thank you Orthodox for supporting us against the increasing secularisation of Western Society.”
Beware lest The Church itself become secularized, C.
That's correct,dear friend,and separation of church and state is against Catholic teaching
The syllabus of errors covers much of this and condemned the following as grave error against God ...
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9syll.htm
A few excerpts....
55. The Church ought to be separated from the .State, and the State from the Church. — Allocution “Acerbissimum,” Sept. 27, 1852.
44. The civil authority may interfere in matters relating to religion, morality and spiritual government: hence, it can pass judgment on the instructions issued for the guidance of consciences, conformably with their mission, by the pastors of the Church. Further, it has the right to make enactments regarding the administration of the divine sacraments, and the dispositions necessary for receiving them. — Allocutions “In consistoriali,” Nov. 1, 1850, and “Maxima quidem,” June 9, 1862.
47. The best theory of civil society requires that popular schools open to children of every class of the people, and, generally, all public institutes intended for instruction in letters and philosophical sciences and for carrying on the education of youth, should be freed from all ecclesiastical authority, control and interference, and should be fully subjected to the civil and political power at the pleasure of the rulers, and according to the standard of the prevalent opinions of the age. — Epistle to the Archbishop of Freiburg, “Cum non sine,” July 14, 1864.
48. Catholics may approve of the system of educating youth unconnected with Catholic faith and the power of the Church, and which regards the knowledge of merely natural things, and only, or at least primarily, the ends of earthly social life.
ERRORS CONCERNING NATURAL AND CHRISTIAN ETHICS
56. Moral laws do not stand in need of the divine sanction, and it is not at all necessary that human laws should be made conformable to the laws of nature and receive their power of binding from God. — Allocution “Maxima quidem,” June 9, 1862.
57. The science of philosophical things and morals and also civil laws may and ought to keep aloof from divine and ecclesiastical authority. — Ibid.
58. No other forces are to be recognized except those which reside in matter, and all the rectitude and excellence of morality ought to be placed in the accumulation and increase of riches by every possible means, and the gratification of pleasure. — Ibid.; Encyclical “Quanto conficiamur,” Aug. 10, 1863.
59. Right consists in the material fact. All human duties are an empty word, and all human facts have the force of right. — Allocution “Maxima quidem,” June 9, 1862.
64. The violation of any solemn oath, as well as any wicked and flagitious action repugnant to the eternal law, is not only not blamable but is altogether lawful and worthy of the highest praise when done through love of country. — Allocution “Quibus quantisque,” April 20, 1849.
The following is from Pope Leo XII encyclical Libertas....
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_20061888_libertas_en.html
“There are others, somewhat more moderate though not more consistent, who affirm that the morality of individuals is to be guided by the divine law, but not the morality of the State, for that in public affairs the commands of God may be passed over, and may be entirely disregarded in the framing of laws. Hence follows the fatal theory of the need of separation between Church and State. But the absurdity of such a position is manifest. Nature herself proclaims the necessity of the State providing means and opportunities whereby the community may be enabled to live properly, that is to say, according to the laws of God. For, since God is the source of all goodness and justice, it is absolutely ridiculous that the State should pay no attention to these laws or render them abortive by contrary enact menu.”[58]
INSCRUTABILI DEI
ON THE EVILS OF SOCIETY
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13evl.htm
And if any one of sound mind compare the age in which We live, so hostile to religion and to the Church of Christ, with those happy times when the Church was revered as a mother by the nations, beyond all question he will see that our epoch is rushing wildly along the straight road to destruction; while in those times which most abounded in excellent institutions, peaceful life, wealth, and prosperity the people showed themselves most obedient to the Church’s rule and laws. Therefore, if the many blessings We have mentioned, due to the agency and saving help of the Church, are the true and worthy outcome of civilization, the Church of Christ, far from being alien to or neglectful of progress, has a just claim to all men’s praise as its nurse, its mistress, and its mother.
6. Furthermore, that kind of civilization which conflicts with the doctrines and laws of holy Church is nothing but a worthless imitation and meaningless name. Of this those peoples on whom the Gospel light has never shown afford ample proof, since in their mode of life a shadowy semblance only of civilization is discoverable, while its true and solid blessings have never been possessed. Undoubtedly, that cannot by any means be accounted the perfection of civilized life which sets all legitimate authority boldly at defiance; nor can that be regarded as liberty which, shamefully and by the vilest means, spreading false principles, and freely indulging the sensual gratification of lustful desires, claims impunity for all crime and misdemeanor, and thwarts the goodly influence of the worthiest citizens of whatsoever class. Delusive, perverse, and misleading as are these principles, they cannot possibly have any inherent power to perfect the human race and fill it with blessing, for “sin maketh nations miserable.”[3] Such principles, as a matter of course, must hurry nations, corrupted in mind and heart, into every kind of infamy, weaken all right order, and thus, sooner or later, bring the standing and peace of the State to the very brink of ruin.
MATER ET MAGISTRA
ENCYCLICAL OF POPE JOHN XXIII
ON CHRISTIANITY AND SOCIAL PROGRESS
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_xxiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_j-xxiii_enc_15051961_mater_en.html
Venerable Brethren and Dearest Sons, Health and Apostolic Benediction.
Mother and Teacher of all nations—such is the Catholic Church in the mind of her Founder, Jesus Christ; to hold the world in an embrace of love, that men, in every age, should find in her their own completeness in a higher order of living, and their ultimate salvation. She is “the pillar and ground of the truth.” (1) To her was entrusted by her holy Founder the twofold task of giving life to her children and of teaching them and guiding them—both as individuals and as nations—with maternal care. Great is their dignity, a dignity which she has always guarded most zealously and held in the highest esteem.
No Solution Apart from Religion and Church
16. In this Leo XIII showed his complete mastery of the situation. There were those who presumed to accuse the Church of taking no interest in social matters other than to preach resignation to the poor and generosity to the rich, but Leo XIII had no hesitation in proclaiming and defending the legitimate rights of the workers. As he said at the beginning of his exposition of the principles and precepts of the Church in social matters: “We approach the subject with confidence, and in the exercise of the rights which manifestly appertain to Vs, for no practical solution of this question will be found apart from the counsel of religion and of the Church.” (6)
17. You know well enough, Venerable Brethren, the basic economic and social principles for the reconstruction of human society enunciated so clearly and authoritatively by this great Pope.
The State's Role
20. As for the State, its whole raison d’etre is the realization of the common good in the temporal order. It cannot, therefore, hold aloof from economic matters. On the contrary, it must do all in its power to promote the production of a sufficient supply of material goods, “the use of which is necessary for the practice of virtue.” (7) It has also the duty to protect the rights of all its people, and particularly of its weaker members, the workers, women and children. It can never be right for the State to shirk its obligation of working actively for the betterment of the condition of the workingman.
21. It is furthermore the duty of the State to ensure that terms of employment are regulated in accordance with justice and equity, and to safeguard the human dignity of workers by making sure that they are not required to work in an environment which may prove harmful to their material and spiritual interests. It was for this reason that the Leonine encyclical enunciated those general principles of rightness and equity which have been assimilated into the social legislation of many a modern State, and which, as Pope Pius XI declared in the encyclical Quadragesimo Anno, (8) have made no small contribution to the rise and development of that new branch of jurisprudence called labor law.
The Remedy
37. Pius XI saw the re-establishment of the economic world within the framework of the moral order and the subordination of individual and group interests to the interest of the common good as the principal remedies for these evils. This, he taught, necessitated an orderly reconstruction of society, with the establishment of economic and vocational bodies which would be autonomous and independent of the State. Public authority should resume its duty of promoting the common good of all. Finally, there should be co-operation on a world scale for the economic welfare of all nations.
38. Thus Pius XI’s teaching in this encyclical can be summed up under two heads. First he taught what the supreme criterion in economic matters ought not to be. It must not be the special interests of individuals or groups, nor unregulated competition, economic despotism, national prestige or imperialism, nor any other aim of this sort.
39. On the contrary, all forms of economic enterprise must be governed by the principles of social justice and charity.
40. The second point which We consider basic in the encyclical is his teaching that man's aim must be to achieve in social justice a national and international juridical order, with its network of public and private institutions, in which all economic activity can be conducted not merely for private gain but also in the interests of the common good.
Amen
They want to make a new kind of religion. They will fail.
Makes perfect sense.
Why should the Church care if the fifth commandment is broken as a matter of law? Why should the Church care if the civil law is based on the moral law? The fifth commandment is none of the Church's business.
Neither does the parable of the Good Samaritan apply to it, nor the words in the New Testament which describe how the early Church took care of those in material need, the widow and the orphan nor the words of James.
It must be comforting to know that in times of secular persecution, your church will give you a decent baptism or burial but won't lift a finger to stop the killing.
The question of what religious symbols may be displayed in classrooms is essentially an issue of religious freedom. There is no black and white demarcation between "social" and "religious" issues and your attempt to construct one in your original post to me for the purpose of explaining the intervention of the Greek Church was laughable.
It's not an either/or situation.
The issue of religious expression or freedom of religion in society is both a social and a religious issue. The Greek Church has found that out, too. All organized religious activity is contingent on societal and governmental approval or at least the disposition to not interfere. It often happens that the state does interfere, however, as is happening now in Europe. When it does, the Church can either submit meekly, or....horror of horrors........confront the secular powers.
I look forward to further vigorous action from the Greek Church in opposition to the rulings of the European Courts. It will help to solidify Christian opposition to the secular agenda and it will be hugely entertaining watching you guys trying to explain it after all the tripe you've spouted about the Catholic Church's battles in the culture wars due to your knee-jerk naysaying.
Hurrah for the activism of the Greek Church!! LOL.......
God issued 613 Laws; why do you care only about the 10? Besides, if those in authority are simply instruments of God, then they are not breaking the law of God any more than when God himself kills every firstborn.
The fifth commandment is none of the Church's business.
The fith commandment is not directed at authorities, but at individuals. +Paul says all authority that exists is from God. How can it be breaking God's commandment?
I don't know. You tell me.
Neither does the parable of the Good Samaritan apply to it, nor the words in the New Testament which describe how the early Church took care of those in material need, the widow and the orphan nor the words of James
All directed at individuals, not at authority.
It must be comforting to know that in times of secular persecution, your church will give you a decent baptism or burial but won't lift a finger to stop the killing.
What did you Church do to stop the massacre in a Croatian concentration camps run by a Catholic priest, or German aggression?
The question of what religious symbols may be displayed in classrooms is essentially an issue of religious freedom.
No it's not. The crucifixes were an obligatory ornament on the walls of public schools and courtrooms. That is not an exercise of religious freedom. That is an imposition of religious symbols where they don't belong. A public school is a secular institution; religious symbols have no place in it any more than secular symbols do in a church.
The Greek Church has found that out, too
The Greek Church is actually a state institution. In Italy, the Catholic Church is not. Crucifixes or icons in Greek schools and courtrooms is not a violation of Greek constitution. In Italy it is.
You are correct. This is one of St. Paul’s sweeping generalisation (”all have sinned and fell short of the glory of God” is another). A thinking reader would, however, realize that IF a prince IS a “terror to good work” then such prince is not acting on divine authority.
That's correct,dear friend,and separation of church and state is against Catholic teaching
The syllabus of errors covers much of this and condemned the following as grave error against God ...
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9syll.htm
Pope Pius was writing from the point of view that these cover Christian societies and also that all nations ought to be Christian ones. The fact here is that Italy is not. You are mixing two things into one here; what should be done with the current situation w.r.t. religious practices in public institutions, and what should be done w.r.t making those public institutions into Christian ones.
Boston College is a Catholic university; I not only approve of, but expect crucifixes on the walls of the classrooms. The problem is that in a strictly secular institution, who approves religious symbols and who pays for their purchase, installation and upkeep? Shall the crucifix occupy the space beside a swastika, a hammer and sickle, a moon and scimitar, an icon of Tom Cruise jumping on Oprah's couch, and a rainbow GLBT&OO? If not, then what separates them and makes one acceptable and the other not? Your own personal whim? That is no better than the sultans of self-interpretation of Scripture.
The reason why Saudi Arabia does not and cannot be forced by any world government to display the Star of David anywhere is that their state is a Muslim one and therefore a champion of Islam and not a champion of Judaism. They do not have to permit Jewish religious practice in their nation if they so choose. That is why the state institutions (also Muslim) do not have to purchase Stars of David and display them or allow others to do so. You want crucifixes on classroom walls? Create your own school and put them there, or else change the laws of the country and each state of the Union to make the US into a Christian nation.
No. This is a parochially American view of the law, infected by the Pavlovian reflex ACLU infected us with.
Italy may not be a Catholic country constitutionally, but it is a predominantly Catholic country. This is all we need to know. Where do these cretins in the Hague (or is it Brussels) got their power to dictate what is or is not to happen in Italy?
Those who don’t want to look at a crucifux are free to have a privete school without one, are they not?
Article 7 [Relation between State and Church]
(1) State and catholic church are, each within their own reign, independent and sovereign.
(2) Their relationship is regulated by the lateran pacts. Amendments to these pacts which are accepted by both parties do not require the procedure of constitutional amendments.
Article 8 [Religion]
(1) Religious denominations are equally free before the law.
(2) Denominations other than catholicism have the right to organize themselves according to their own by-laws, provided they do not conflict with the italian legal system.
(3) Their relationship with the state is regulated by law, based on agreements with their representatives.
Lateran Treaty
Negotiations for the settlement of the Roman Question began in 1926 between the government of Italy and the Holy See, and in 1929 they culminated in the agreements of the three Lateran Accords, signed for King Victor Emmanuel III of Italy by Prime Minister Benito Mussolini and for Pope Pius XI by Cardinal Secretary of State Pietro Gasparri. The agreements were signed in the Lateran Palace, hence the name by which they are known.
The agreements included a political treaty which created the state of the Vatican City and guaranteed full and independent sovereignty to the Holy See. The Pope was pledged to perpetual neutrality in international relations and to abstention from mediation in a controversy unless specifically requested by all parties. The concordat established Catholicism as the religion of Italy. The financial agreement was accepted as settlement of all the claims of the Holy See against Italy arising from the loss of temporal power in 1870.
To commemorate the successful conclusion of the negotiations, Mussolini commissioned the Via della Conciliazione (Road of the Conciliation), which would symbolically link the Vatican City to the heart of Rome.
The Lateran Agreements were incorporated into the Constitution of the Italian Republic in 1947.
In 1984 an agreement was signed, revising the concordat. Among other things, it ended the Church's position as the state-supported religion of Italy, replacing the state financing with a personal income tax called the otto per mille.
Italy may not be a Catholic country constitutionally, but it is a predominantly Catholic country. This is all we need to know.
No, it is not all we need to know. We need to know the terms of the Lateran Treaty and the change to the status of the Church in 1984.
Those who don’t want to look at a crucifux are free to have a privete school without one, are they not?
That's not the point. This is the Law in Italy, which is similar to that of the US pertaining to religion. As I said previously, it's simple. Change the law and the Constitutions of the country and each state or province within it to make Catholicism the state religion, and the country may install Crucifixes on every building and in every classroom. First, though, you must give to Caesar the law, then you may have Caesar give to God. You want crucifixes in every classroom in the US? Do the same here. I find no objection to the crucifix; we have them liberally distributed around our house and motor vehicles, as well as a holy water font beside the front door.
But the laws of the land are different from how I conduct affairs in my home.
The Italian law is irrelevant to the case because Italy remains Majority-Catholic country.
Could you please rephrase this for me? It seems that you are saying that Italian law does not matter in Italy on Catholic issues, even though Italian law (laid out in the amendment to the Lateran Treaty in 1984) explicitly says it does? Who are you that is so wise in the matters of Italian law?
“”First, though, you must give to Caesar the law, then you may have Caesar give to God.””
If Cesar decides to make a state godless the Church usurps any law Caesar decides and ignores the state
From Pope Leo XIII
From Libertas
“Wherefore, civil society must acknowledge God as its Founder and Parent, and must obey and reverence His power and authority. Justice therefore forbids, and reason itself forbids, the State to be godless; or to adopt a line of action which would end in godlessness-namely, to treat the various religions (as they call them) alike, and to bestow upon them promiscuously equal rights and privileges. Since, then, the profession of one religion is necessary in the State, that religion must be professed which alone is true, and which can be recognized without difficulty, especially in Catholic States, because the marks of truth are, as it were, engraven upon it. This religion, therefore, the rulers of the State must preserve and protect, if they would provide-as they should do-with prudence and usefulness for the good of the community” (Leo XIII, Libertas, 21).
This certainly is not followed and I doubt the Pope pledged to it
If Cesar decides to make a state godless the Church usurps any law Caesar decides and ignores the state
Where does it say that? The paragraph you posted listed the duties that the Church says that the State must do. It does not say what the Church or believers will do after a state has been made Godless.
This certainly is not followed and I doubt the Pope pledged to it
He most certainly did. The Popes were virtually prisoner for those 59 years while negotiations were going on. That's what made things very tricky during WWII and why the prisoners had be very sneakily gotten out of Germany, so that the Church would not be seen violating the treaty. I have not gone into the later negotiations in depth, but I believe that with the evolving relationship between the Church and Italy, and with the jettisoning of Catholicism as state religion, the Vatican is for all means and purposes a fully independent nation with no strings attached in terms of international relations.
+Paul is simply saying that rulers received divine authority to punish bad, and reward good work; in other words work that is beneficial or detrimental to the society, not work that makes you holy or unholy.
The fact that our government makes killing of unborn children "legal" makes our government what? Satanic? Why would the Holy See have diplomatic relations with a satanic government?
“”Where does it say that?””
We are not to obey the state when it is at variance with the will of God
But when anything is commanded which is plainly at variance with the will of God, there is a wide departure from this divinely constituted order, and at the same time a direct conflict with divine authority; therefore, it is right not to obey.
31. By the patrons of liberalism, however, who make the State absolute and omnipotent, and proclaim that man should live altogether independently of God, the liberty of which We speak, which goes hand in hand with virtue and religion, is not admitted; and whatever is done for its preservation is accounted an injury and an offense against the State. Indeed, if what they say were really true, there would be no tyranny, no matter how monstrous, which we should not be bound to endure and submit to.
“I believe that with the evolving relationship between the Church and Italy, and with the jettisoning of Catholicism as state religion, the Vatican is for all means and purposes a fully independent nation with no strings attached in terms of international relations.”
The treaty seems to say otherwise though
I would agree and this explains that a Pope could speak out against Nazi Germany although it is was an alley of Italy
MIT BRENNENDER SORGE
On the Church and the German Reich
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius11/P11BRENN.HTM
We are not to obey the state when it is at variance with the will of God
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_20061888_libertas_en.html
But when anything is commanded which is plainly at variance with the will of God, there is a wide departure from this divinely constituted order, and at the same time a direct conflict with divine authority; therefore, it is right not to obey.
As individuals, that is true. This does not extend to the Church condemning any state for refusing to install crucifixes in public classrooms. You are mixing up the ideals of the Church as it pertains to the State and also as it pertains to individual men. There is no way that refusing to purchase, install and maintain crucifixes in public classrooms amounts to the same thing as individual men being ordered under law to perform deeds which contradict the commandments of God.
Again, I say; it's easy. Declare the country a Catholic state; change the Constitution to say that and we have no problem. The problem is that Italy is a Republic, similar to our own. Change our Constitution first. Then we may use that example for foreign countries. But only then.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.