Bishop Sanborn responds to the "rupture theology" article
(06-05-2009, 02:17 PM)newschoolman Wrote:
(06-05-2009, 02:01 PM)lamentabili sane Wrote:
"schoolman" Wrote:Of course they support exactly what I am saying:

1) Man has a moral duty under pain of sin to obey the dictates of conscience -- even when honestly erroneous
2) The moral law confers the moral right (due freedom of conscience) to fulfill ones moral duties (the duties of conscience)
3) The right to freedom of conscience is not unlimited or unqualified -- but subject to due limits (as stated below).

I don't think it supports you. Ci Riesce does not, at least.

I think the problem here may be a misunderstanding of invincible ignorance. Invincible ignorance is not a virtue, it merely excuses a breach of the law. Those truly invincibly of their duty to join the Catholic Church must somehow be within the Church to be saved. The necessity for salvation of belonging to the Church is a necessity of means and while invincible ignorance excuses from guilt, it does not supply the necessary means.

Well, you are simply wrong insofar as you deny that an honestly erroneous conscience binds under pain of sin (see again the quotes provided above).  This does not conflict with Ci Riesce but agrees perfectly with it.  The corresponding right is not by virtue of the [honest error] -- rather, the right is confered in order to fulfill the moral duty.  In other words, we [tolerate] the error for the sake of a superior good -- that man can fulfill his moral duty in obedience to conscience as a means to his last end -- in spite of his invincible error.  As Pius XII says later in Ci Riesce:

Quote:...the Church out of regard for those who in good conscience (though erroneous, but invincibly so) are of different opinion has been led to act and has acted with that tolerance, after she became the State Church under Constantine the Great and the other Christian emperors, always for higher and more cogent motives. So she acts today, and also in the future she will be faced with the same necessity. (Pius XII, Ci Riesce)

I might be wrong about a few things here but Ci Riesce does not support your view. The last quote speaks of tolerance of error, not a right to be tolerated.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: Bishop Sanborn responds to the "rupture theology" article - by lamentabili sane - 06-05-2009, 02:29 PM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)