Rorate Coeli: A "renewed anthropological foundation to religious freedom"
I have to agree with those commenting who see no change in the Holy Father's understanding of Dignitatis Humanae. The anthropology is the basis for the freedom and for the right.
Zenit: Mexican Christian Leaders on Religious Freedom [2011-05-06]
"Not a Benevolent Concession of the State But a Fundamental Human Right"
3 comments:
Regarding: "anthropology is the basis for the freedom and for the right"
Does this mean one has the right to spread error? Doesn't participating in a false religion ipso facto spread error?
Thank you for the Mexico City news story; I usually follow stories regarding the Church there, but I missed this one. I am still confused as to why they would respond to the incident by signing a communique on religious freedom. It's one thing to be ecumenical but another to assert the right of religious freedom. Asserting religious freedom seems to be an extreme, overly-inclusive, dangerous form of "ecumenism."
Is one free to propagate error?
Two relevant distinctions?
(1) Free in what sense: permitted to do so by Natural Law? Or free in that one should be unhindered by the state. I think that those who would defend DH would do so on the latter grounds, that in the absence of a serious reason (a threat to the common good or "public order"), people should be left alone to worship in accordance with their conscience, and pass this on to others.
(2) Those who sincerely believe the errors to be truths are not knowingly propagating error.
"Or free in that one should be unhindered by the state." If it isn't the State protecting other citizens from those spreading error, who else has the authority to do so?
"Those who sincerely believe the errors to be truths are not knowingly propagating error." They may not be morally culpable, but it is still error nevertheless.
Post a Comment