Bishop Sanborn responds to the "rupture theology" article
(06-09-2009, 10:25 PM)newschoolman Wrote:
(06-09-2009, 10:18 PM)lamentabili sane Wrote:
(06-09-2009, 09:17 PM)newschoolman Wrote:
Quote:You have argued that the "moral good" Pius XII speaks of in Ci Riesce is being obedient to conscience, which includes error of any kind, as long as it is invincible. DH gives a positive authorisation to error. You claim that an erring conscience can contain what is contrary to "religious truth and moral good".

No, you should go back and quote me.  I have said that the moral law commands under pain of sin that a certain conscience be obeyed -- even when honestly erroneous.

You have ignored what conscience actually is...conscience is not "a long-sighted selfishness, nor a desire to be consistent with oneself"; but it is "a messenger from Him who both in nature and in grace, speaks to us behind a veil, and teaches and rules us by His representatives".

Conscience cannot lead one to error in "religious truth and moral good" simply because it is "a messenger from Him who both in nature and in grace, speaks to us behind a veil, and teaches and rules us by His representatives".

Quote:"The natural law," says St. Thomas, "is an impression of the Divine Light in us, a participation of the eternal law in the rational creature." This law, as apprehended in the minds of individual men, is called "conscience"; and though it may suffer refraction in passing into the intellectual medium of each, it is not thereby so affected as to lose its character of being the Divine Law, but still has as such, the prerogative of commanding obedience. "The Divine Law," says Cardinal Gousset, "is the supreme rule of actions; our thoughts, desires, words, acts, all that man is, is subject to the domain of the law of God; and this law is the rule of our conduct by means of our conscience." Hence it is never lawful to go against our conscience; as the Fourth Lateran Council says, "Quidquid fit contra conscientiam, aedificat ad gehennam." . . . The rule and measure of duty is not utility, nor expedience, nor the happiness of the greatest number, nor State convenience, nor fitness, order, and the pulchrum. Conscience is not a long-sighted selfishness, nor a desire to be consistent with oneself; but it is a messenger from Him who both in nature and in grace, speaks to us behind a veil, and teaches and rules us by His representatives. Conscience is the aborigrinal Vicar of Christ, a prophet in its informations, a monarch in its peremptoriness, a priest in its blessings and anathemas, and even though the eternal priesthood throughout the Church could cease to be, in it the sacerdotal principle would remain and would have a sway.


Your understanding of conscience is an erroneous one, at odds with the traditional understanding of conscience. The drafters of DH did not believe that "error has no rights" and this is expressed in the document.

Quote:I  have said that man has a moral right to fulfill his moral duties.  I have also said that this  right is not by virtue of the "error" or founded on "error" -- but exists in spite of it -- for the sake of the superior good of obedience to  the moral law required by man in order to obtain his final end.  Finally, I have  provided  authoritative sources to  back all of this up.

No, you have not. You provided sources that say error must be tolerated and the pagans obeying the natural law should be tolerated. You are saying that a man has a moral duty (and corresponding right) to worship God as he sees fit and he should never be disturbed unless he violates the public order somehow.

DH teaches that error has rights. The drafters of DH admit this...why can't you?

So, according to your understanding, an  honest conscience can never be erroneous?  In other words, it is always enlighted by God in all of the particulars of the Divine law and of the Faith?  Is that your view?

No.

Quote:"The natural law," says St. Thomas, "is an impression of the Divine Light in us, a participation of the eternal law in the rational creature." This law, as apprehended in the minds of individual men, is called "conscience"; and though it may suffer refraction in passing into the intellectual medium of each, it is not thereby so affected as to lose its character of being the Divine Law, but still has as such, the prerogative of commanding obedience.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: Bishop Sanborn responds to the "rupture theology" article - by lamentabili sane - 06-09-2009, 10:49 PM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)