Whom do you think is correct?
Can they both be?
Francis:
States must be secular. Confessional states end badly. That goes against the grain of History. I believe that a version of laicity accompanied by a solid law guaranteeing religious freedom offers a framework for going forward. We are all equal as sons (and daughters) of God and with our personal dignity. However, everyone must have the freedom to externalize his or her own faith*. If a Muslim woman wishes to wear a veil, she must be able to do so. Similarly, if a Catholic wishes to wear a cross. People must be free to profess their faith* at the heart of their own culture not merely at its margins. Francis of Rome, La Croix interview
Pius XI:
It would be a grave error, on the other hand, to say that Christ has no authority whatever in civil affairs, since, by virtue of the absolute empire over all creatures committed to him by the Father, all things are in his power... If We ordain that the whole Catholic world shall revere Christ as King, We shall minister to the need of the present day, and at the same time provide an excellent remedy for the plague which now infects society. We refer to the plague of anti-clericalism, its errors and impious activities. This evil spirit, as you are well aware, Venerable Brethren, has not come into being in one day; it has long lurked beneath the surface. The empire of Christ over all nations was rejected. The right which the Church has from Christ himself, to teach mankind, to make laws, to govern peoples in all that pertains to their eternal salvation, that right was denied. Then gradually the religion of Christ came to be likened to false religions and to be placed ignominiously on the same level with them. Pope Pius XI, Quas Primas
5 comments:
I first read about this via The Remnant's story on the Pope's statement. As one commenter there noted, in fairness to His Holiness Pope Francis, he simply offered the same notion that has been advanced by the past few Popes. In fairness, therefore, the headline could read: Pius XI or Benedict VI — Whom Do You Believe?
Not that I'm saying that the following has benefitted the Church, but what Pope Francis has offered is a repeat, for example, of that which Pope Benedict XVI, on January 19, 2012 A.D.m during his Ad Limina Visit to the Bishops of the United States, declared.
That is, in Pope Benedict XVI's words, there exists a "legitimate separation of Church". That is what Pope Francis has repeated.
In his 2005 A.D. Encyclical, Deus Caritas Est, Pope Benedict also advanced the notion of separation of Church and state.
#28. "In order to define more accurately the relationship between the necessary commitment to justice and the ministry of charity, two fundamental situations need to be considered:
"Fundamental to Christianity is the distinction between what belongs to Caesar and what belongs to God (cf. Mt 22:21), in other words, the distinction between Church and State...the State may not impose religion, yet it must guarantee religious freedom and harmony between the followers of different religions."
*******That is what Pope Francis said. Pope Benedict XVI first, then Pope Francis, have insisted that "the State may not impose religion". Rather, the State must permit the existence of "different religion".
How does that square with Pope Pius XI's denunciation of the unfortunately reality that via the State, the Catholic Religion has been "placed ignominiously on the same level with them" (false religions)?
======================================================================
Pope Benedict XVI continued...
"This is where Catholic social doctrine has its place: it has no intention of giving the Church power over the State. Even less is it an attempt to impose on those who do not share the faith ways of thinking and modes of conduct proper to faith. It recognizes that it is not the Church's responsibility to make this teaching prevail in political life."
============================================================
******* "The Church cannot and must not take upon herself the political battle to bring about the most just society possible." *******
******* "A just society must be the achievement of politics, not of the Church." *******
===============================================================================
There you have it. Long before Pope Francis became Pope, Pope Benedict XVI declared the same teaching in regard to the separation of Church and State.
Do Pope Benedict XVI's teachings on Church-State square with Pope Pius XI's teachings in question? If they do, then the same must be said of Pope Francis' comments in question as they repeat simply that which Pope Benedict XVI said.
If Pope Benedict XVI's teachings in question oppose Pope Pius XI's teachings on Church-State, then, of course, that would also apply to Pope Francis' teachings in question. Again, Pope Francis repeated simply Pope Benedict XVI's theme on the Church-State issue.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Vox,
Thank you for the lovely image of Christ the King.
+ Come, let us adore our King and God!
+ Come, let us adore Christ the King and our God!
+ Come, let us adore and bow down before the very Lord Christ the King and our God!
From the Horologion (in all the Hours)
Yours in Christ the King,
Margaret
You're correct Mark.
It did not begin with Francis.
"If We ordain that the whole Catholic world shall revere Christ as King, We shall minister to the need of the present day, and at the same time provide an excellent remedy for the plague which now infects society." Pius XI
The above is what Pope Francis should be doing and what has been clearly lacking for years. We revere Christ as King by keeping His word, doing His will and giving example to other Catholics and non-Catholics alike. The way to win over non Catholics is for us to demonstrate that the Catholic religion changes our lives for the better. Substituting misplaced Mercy for strict adherence to Christ's word will only make non-Catholics think of us as hypocrites. And they are so right!
For an in depth analysis on this topic, check out this site:
http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2013/10/on-religious-liberty-an-objection-considered/
Post a Comment