Monarchy Forum
Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 2 of 2      Prev   1   2
SupremeDirector

Registered:
Posts: 192
Reply with quote  #16 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jovan66102

I suppose it depends on your view of what constitutes dogma. The Ordinary Magisterium is binding as well as infallible, dogmatic statements. The defence of the workers to unionise does not need to be dogmatised since it is rooted in natural law, i.e., binding upon all men, not just on Catholics as a matter of dogma. In this, it is very similar to Humanae vitae which is binding upon all men, not just Catholics, since it is a matter of natural law and not of Catholic dogma.

 

When I speak of dogma, I'm talking about things like the Immaculate Conception. That's something you have to accept or your not a Catholic. However, the right to organize was not always seen as a part of natural law. It seems somewhat hypocritical to me that the very same Catholics who reject Vatican II would embrace post-Vatican II thoughts on morality. However, that aside, there is much disscussion, even in the Church, upon what is and is not against natural law. Sweat shops are against natural law because they remove human dignity. But the concept that keeping workers from organizing is somehow stripping them of their human dignity I feel is more than a stretch.

 

And Inquisitor makes a valid point in my opinion.


__________________
Long Live The King, Long Live Louis XX!

"So pride yourself on what you are, And hold them all to words they can't take back. I've seen a place (it comes) to me in dreams, Where fires die but light still shines for us to see! Would God bless a murder of the innocents? Would God bless a war based on pride? Would God bless a money-hungry government? Noooo! Would God bless our ineffective court system? God bless the sweatshops we run. God bless America? God bless America?" ~Rise Against (Blood Red, White & Blue)


Registered:
Posts: N/A
Reply with quote  #17 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupremeDirector
Quote:
Originally Posted by jovan66102

I suppose it depends on your view of what constitutes dogma. The Ordinary Magisterium is binding as well as infallible, dogmatic statements. The defence of the workers to unionise does not need to be dogmatised since it is rooted in natural law, i.e., binding upon all men, not just on Catholics as a matter of dogma. In this, it is very similar to Humanae vitae which is binding upon all men, not just Catholics, since it is a matter of natural law and not of Catholic dogma.

 

When I speak of dogma, I'm talking about things like the Immaculate Conception. That's something you have to accept or your not a Catholic. However, the right to organize was not always seen as a part of natural law. It seems somewhat hypocritical to me that the very same Catholics who reject Vatican II would embrace post-Vatican II thoughts on morality. However, that aside, there is much disscussion, even in the Church, upon what is and is not against natural law. Sweat shops are against natural law because they remove human dignity. But the concept that keeping workers from organizing is somehow stripping them of their human dignity I feel is more than a stretch.

 

And Inquisitor makes a valid point in my opinion.

 
I totally agree that Inquisitor makes a valid point. However I'm a bit confused by your statement, "It seems somewhat hypocritical to me that the very same Catholics who reject Vatican II would embrace post-Vatican II thoughts on morality," since the documents I referred to go back to HH Pope Leo XIII (obit, 1903). I assume that the post V II Popes have agreed with him and with HH Pope Pius XI (obit, 1939) but I haven't read them in detail, so I can't say for sure.
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.