PENDING CANONICAL ISSUES 2
PENDING CANONICAL ISSUES -2( CONTINUED)
3. EWTN NEWS
EWTN News on X has criticized the SSPX , for not accepting Religious Liberty as interpreted by the schismatic John Courtney Murray. EWTN indicates that the SSPX is moving towards ‘an ecclesia break ‘.
But with Vatican Council II rational, the Vatican Cuncil II (AG 7) is aligned with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Athanasius Creed and so the Proclamation of the Social Reign of Christ the King in all political legislation in a Catholic State, with the non separation of Church and State. So the traditionalist teaching of the Church on religious liberty stands with Dignitatis Humanae. EWTN News interprets Vatican Council II irrationally and not rationally. This is schismatic.
@EWTNVatican
Mar 18
An analysis of Dignitatis Humanae explores the Council’s teaching on religious freedom, offering lessons for the Church as the SSPX moves toward a potential further rupture.
How Vatican II Shaped ‘Dignitatis Humanae’
On Nov. 19, 1963, Belgian Bishop Emiel Jozef De Smedt presented an initial draft of a Vatican II text on religious liberty to the Council Fathers. His eloquent explanation of the importance of the topic and the doctrinal development behind it aroused fervent applause. The Council would not have time to discuss the draft, then situated as the final chapter of a text on ecumenism, during that year’s Council sessions.
How Vatican II Shaped ‘Dignitatis Humanae’
The revised text on religious liberty was presented once more by Bishop De Smedt to the Council Fathers on Sept. 23, 1964. This new version of the text provided a clearer definition of religious freedom as a “right to religious freedom in society, by virtue of which men can privately and publicly practice their religion and cannot be prevented from practicing it by any coercion.”
How Vatican II Shaped ‘Dignitatis Humanae’
With this definition, the Secretariat for Christian Unity wanted to reiterate that it was not trying to deal with the freedom of man in his relation to God, nor with the nature of freedom itself. Rather, the document was interested in the specifically legal issue of the right to religious freedom, a right founded in the God-given dignity of the human person.
How Vatican II Shaped ‘Dignitatis Humanae’
These criticisms and others brought up issues the Council would still need to grapple with. In particular, how could the Church better articulate an authentic notion of religious freedom, in keeping with the Christian faith, while not condoning the errors associated with exaggerated conceptions of liberty?
The Council debate in the early fall of 1964 revealed that there was still much distance to travel before agreement could be reached. Much work needed to be done to elaborate a teaching that could respond to the eager expectations of so many and, at the same time, adequately satisfy the emphatic critiques.
How Vatican II Shaped ‘Dignitatis Humanae’
21.03.2026
PENDING CANONICAL ISSUES : SSPX , UNA VOCE, ABP. VIGANO, CARDINALS ROCHE, CUPICH ETC
PENDING CANONICAL ISSUES : SSPX , UNA VOCE, ABP. …
-Lionel Andrades
For Pope Leo, LG 16 is invisible. So he has aligned himself with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as held by Brother Andre Marie micm, Prior, at the St. Benedict Center, Richmond, New Hampshire, USA.
For Pope Leo, LG 16 is invisible. So he has …
DIGNITATIS HUMANAE
1. A sense of the dignity of the human person has been impressing itself more and more deeply on the consciousness of contemporary man,(1) and the demand is increasingly made that men should act on their own judgment, enjoying and making use of a responsible freedom, not driven by coercion but motivated by a sense of duty. The demand is likewise made that constitutional limits should be set to the powers of government, in order that there may be no encroachment on the rightful freedom of the person and of associations. This demand for freedom in human society chiefly regards the quest for the values proper to the human spirit. It regards, in the first place, the free exercise of religion in society. This Vatican Council takes careful note of these desires in the minds of men. It proposes to declare them to be greatly in accord with truth and justice. To this end, it searches into the sacred tradition and doctrine of the Church-the treasury out of which the Church continually brings forth new things that are in harmony with the things that are old.
First, the council professes its belief that God Himself has made known to mankind the way in which men are to serve Him, and thus be saved in Christ and come to blessedness. We believe that this one true religion subsists in the Catholic and Apostolic Church, to which the Lord Jesus committed the duty of spreading it abroad among all men. Thus He spoke to the Apostles: "Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have enjoined upon you" (Matt. 28: 19-20). On their part, all men are bound to seek the truth, especially in what concerns God and His Church, and to embrace the truth they come to know, and to hold fast to it.
This Vatican Council likewise professes its belief that it is upon the human conscience that these obligations fall and exert their binding force. The truth cannot impose itself except by virtue of its own truth, as it makes its entrance into the mind at once quietly and with power.
Religious freedom, in turn, which men demand as necessary to fulfill their duty to worship God, has to do with immunity from coercion in civil society. Therefore it leaves untouched traditional Catholic doctrine on the moral duty of men and societies toward the true religion and toward the one Church of Christ.
Over and above all this, the council intends to develop the doctrine of recent popes on the inviolable rights of the human person and the constitutional order of society.
2. This Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom. This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits.
The council further declares that the right to religious freedom has its foundation in the very dignity of the human person as this dignity is known through the revealed word of God and by reason itself.(2) This right of the human person to religious freedom is to be recognized in the constitutional law whereby society is governed and thus it is to become a civil right.
It is in accordance with their dignity as persons-that is, beings endowed with reason and free will and therefore privileged to bear personal responsibility-that all men should be at once impelled by nature and also bound by a moral obligation to seek the truth, especially religious truth. They are also bound to adhere to the truth, once it is known, and to order their whole lives in accord with the demands of truth. However, men cannot discharge these obligations in a manner in keeping with their own nature unless they enjoy immunity from external coercion as well as psychological freedom. Therefore the right to religious freedom has its foundation not in the subjective disposition of the person, but in his very nature. In consequence, the right to this immunity continues to exist even in those who do not live up to their obligation of seeking the truth and adhering to it and the exercise of this right is not to be impeded, provided that just public order be observed.
3. Further light is shed on the subject if one considers that the highest norm of human life is the divine law-eternal, objective and universal-whereby God orders, directs and governs the entire universe and all the ways of the human community by a plan conceived in wisdom and love. Man has been made by God to participate in this law, with the result that, under the gentle disposition of divine Providence, he can come to perceive ever more fully the truth that is unchanging. Wherefore every man has the duty, and therefore the right, to seek the truth in matters religious in order that he may with prudence form for himself right and true judgments of conscience, under use of all suitable means.
Truth, however, is to be sought after in a manner proper to the dignity of the human person and his social nature. The inquiry is to be free, carried on with the aid of teaching or instruction, communication and dialogue, in the course of which men explain to one another the truth they have discovered, or think they have discovered, in order thus to assist one another in the quest for truth.
Moreover, as the truth is discovered, it is by a personal assent that men are to adhere to it.
On his part, man perceives and acknowledges the imperatives of the divine law through the mediation of conscience. In all his activity a man is bound to follow his conscience in order that he may come to God, the end and purpose of life. It follows that he is not to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his conscience. Nor, on the other hand, is he to be restrained from acting in accordance with his conscience, especially in matters religious. The reason is that the exercise of religion, of its very nature, consists before all else in those internal, voluntary and free acts whereby man sets the course of his life directly toward God. No merely human power can either command or prohibit acts of this kind.(3) The social nature of man, however, itself requires that he should give external expression to his internal acts of religion: that he should share with others in matters religious; that he should profess his religion in community. Injury therefore is done to the human person and to the very order established by God for human life, if the free exercise of religion is denied in society, provided just public order is observed.
There is a further consideration. The religious acts whereby men, in private and in public and out of a sense of personal conviction, direct their lives to God transcend by their very nature the order of terrestrial and temporal affairs. Government therefore ought indeed to take account of the religious life of the citizenry and show it favor, since the function of government is to make provision for the common welfare. However, it would clearly transgress the limits set to its power, were it to presume to command or inhibit acts that are religious…(Emphasis added)
Dignitatis humanae
21.03.2026
PENDING CANONICAL ISSUES : SSPX , UNA VOCE, ABP. VIGANO, CARDINALS ROCHE, CUPICH ETC
PENDING CANONICAL ISSUES : SSPX , UNA VOCE, ABP. …