The heresy of Americanism!
(08-15-2012, 01:07 AM)SouthpawLink Wrote: Crusading Philologist,
Have you read Christus Imperat's posts (nn. 72, 76)?

"If the Constitution of the USA was and is in no way acceptable, why didn't Pope Leo XIII say so?

"Do you have the quote from Leo XIII or any other Pope which says the American Constitution is an unacceptable document?"

I provided a quote where Pope Leo pointed out that the United States should have an official relationship with the Catholic Church and that the current situation was not ideal.  Here the Supreme Pontiff implicitly speaks of the federal government's error in being indifferent towards the true religion.

Precisely so.  Pope Leo's tone is that the current (late 19th century) situation in America is not ideal.  Who would disagree?  But there is a major difference in kind between saying that America's Church-State relations are not the ideal and some changes need to be made and saying that the entire Government and Constitution need to be swept away and replaced with something radically different.  This is my point. 
Reply
(08-15-2012, 02:51 AM)Crusader_Philly Wrote: I strongly disagree. Do Catholics in Europe or Asia have to a "love" for their constitutions?

I don't see why this would be a problem. The point is that everyone should respect the political constitution of his own country. If you ask me, it reeks of the Enlightenment to say that we ought to come up with one political constitution that would then be applied to all countries regardless of particular circumstances or histories.
Reply
(08-15-2012, 03:32 PM)Crusading Philologist Wrote:
(08-15-2012, 02:51 AM)Crusader_Philly Wrote: I strongly disagree. Do Catholics in Europe or Asia have to a "love" for their constitutions?

I don't see why this would be a problem. The point is that everyone should respect the political constitution of his own country. If you ask me, it reeks of the Enlightenment to say that we ought to come up with one political constitution that would then be applied to all countries regardless of particular circumstances or histories.

Hahaha, good one. For the record, I don't advocate that. I want to see the US Cons. amended, as I said. Respecting the Cons. is different from having a "deep love" of it.
Reply
(08-15-2012, 03:36 PM)Crusader_Philly Wrote:
(08-15-2012, 03:32 PM)Crusading Philologist Wrote:
(08-15-2012, 02:51 AM)Crusader_Philly Wrote: I strongly disagree. Do Catholics in Europe or Asia have to a "love" for their constitutions?

I don't see why this would be a problem. The point is that everyone should respect the political constitution of his own country. If you ask me, it reeks of the Enlightenment to say that we ought to come up with one political constitution that would then be applied to all countries regardless of particular circumstances or histories.

Hahaha, good one. For the record, I don't advocate that. I want to see the US Cons. amended, as I said. Respecting the Cons. is different from having a "deep love" of it.

Well, sure, I don't think anyone would say that you need to go on about the Constitution all day like a Republican or anything. But it does seem to me that one must have a certain amount of respect or reverence for the constitution of one's country. That said, I think a more interesting question would be whether or not the modern state is really essentially the same as the sorts of political community that existed in the premodern West. If not, one might argue that the duties owed to the state are lessened. I believe I've linked to this article before, but for anyone interested, the theologian William Cavanaugh makes a fairly decent argument here: http://www.jesusradicals.com/wp-content/...ompany.pdf
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)