Dignitatis Humanae

[treeofjesse]

I've had another read through Dignitatis Humanae and can not, in good conscience, see any flaw. The text seems to me a sublime example of humanity in a world degenerated into gnawing despair and despondency.

Born and raised in Malta, a constitutionally catholic country (one of the last in Europe not to have abortion and the only country in the Western world without divorce), my understanding of multi-culturalism was, sadly, lacking. Now, finishing my second year of uni in London, I've seen the strain that intolerence can have on a larger social scale when respect is lacking between civilised human beings. My feelings towards the sanctity of the eternal Latin Rite and liturgy remain unchanged. What I've realised is perhaps I've been attracted to the aesthetic, rather than ideology, of Traditionalism; a realisation that is not a little disturbing. Of course, limited in my understanding of Catholic literature, I'd be grateful for the opportunity to hear thoughts other than my own and, through the grace of God, come to an honest understanding.

[McMaster]

I've had another read through of Dignitatis Humanae and can not, in good conscience, see any flaw. [...] My feelings towards the sanctity of the eternal Latin Rite and liturgy remain unchanged. What I've realised is perhaps I've been attracted to the aesthetic, rather than ideology, of Traditionalism; a realisation that is not a little disturbing. Of course, limited in my understanding of Catho[l]ic literature, I'd be grateful for the opportunity to hear thoughts other than my own and, through the grace of God, come to an honest understanding.

For some recent thoughts other than your own, see the thread entitled Religious freedom and Dignitatis humanae: A right to pick whatever "religion" you wish?. I don't believe that rejection of Dignitatis humanae forms any necessary, or desirable, part of the "ideology" (so to speak) of traditional Catholicism. As you'll see, some other people don't agree.

Blessings,

Don McMaster

[GrumpyTroll]

Religious liberty is an ongoing subject of debate, as you can see from the following threads:

• “Religious liberty: Vatican II vs. prior Church teaching?”
• “Thomas Jefferson on Religious Freedom (1779)”
• “Religious liberty: Archbishop Lefebvre's marijuana parable”
• “Religious freedom and Dignitatis humanae: A right to pick whatever "religion" you wish?”
  

[Dilexisti]

I've had another read through Dignitatis Humanae and can not, in good conscience, see any flaw. The text seems to me a sublime example of humanity in a world degenerated into gnawing despair and despondency.

That is your opinion.   It is not for one's conscience to accept or reject a teaching of the Church; rather, it should be accepted with a catholic faith.  How many read-throughs are required to grasp and understand a document that was never taught as de fide by the Universal and the Extraordinary Magisterium.   If there is a doctrine that has ever been taught that agrees with D.H. we shouldn't be debating it:  all Catholics would be of one mind and heart.   But that is not the case because there is some flaw that one can see in this declaration which another can't.  A teaching that has been pronounced and declared by a General (ecumenical) Council of the Church should be completely catholic, which nobody can find reasons to shoot holes in them.  The Church has never taught that man is free to choose what religion he wants to arrive at the Truth he seeks which will lead him to God, and therefore salvation.  The person who chooses the wrong religion will not find salvation.  That is what has been taught always, everywhere and by all.  If this were the case then D.H. should have been written accordingly.

What say you about this world that has degenerated into a condition you describe as desperate and despondent?  What has brought about this condition?   The degeneracy of humanity has been the norm since time immemorial, beginning with the first humans created by God, except during the period of time when the Catholic Church was at her heyday, the glorious years when she had complete rule of the world.  One true religion leading all souls to God.  But heretics since Simon Magus down to this age's Modernists have broken the law and shattered the peace and order created by God and which heretics will continue to do what they have in their hearts until the end of the time because the sworn enemy of God, Satan,  never sleeps.  But ultimately, w have the promise by Our Lady that in the end Her Immaculate Heart will triumph and there will be once more only one Faith, one Lord, and one Baptism, and men's hearts will see that there is only one Truth to choose from and that this Truth is what will set him free.  That is what true religious freedom is.

[HMiS]

There is no such thing as the "ideology" of "Traditionalism". "Traditionalism" is used by opponents to denote faithful Roman Catholics adhering to the Tridentine Mass, despite their often diverging theological opinions on other matters.

The Roman Catholic Faith is what matters and this was defined in many dogmatic definitions, the last being done in 1950 by Pius XII.

As to Dignitatis Humanae, it must square and fit into Tradition if it wants to be accepted. It is an expression merely of the authentic Magisterium which does not enjoy infallibility. But is it formally heretical? I believe not. Please remember that one cannot mix religious freedom with the concept of religious tolerance. In fact Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and other traditionalist leaders at the Council called for more religious tolerance. However the concept of religious liberty seemed to them liberal, and untrue, as of course not all religious expressions are equal and e.g. Maya child sacrificing or ritual raping sects cannot be allowed by the state in good morality.

Do not believe those who say traditionalists are against religious tolerance or that they favour religious wars with other religious majorities and minorities for the sake of state domination. That is simply not true. The considerations as in regard to DH are more difficult and principally theological, about Truth and its rights.

[treeofjesse]

Thanks for all your answers so far and all the links to previous threads.