Tuesday, April 17, 2012

New Mosque Planned for St. John's, NL

According to this article, Muslims in St. John's want a new mosque, which also includes prayer rooms, classrooms, and a gym. They ran into a snag because the land they bought is zoned rural and apparently they can't build there. They're hoping to have it built by 2013.

 Some people see this as a problem because they are not Christian and some of their beliefs conflict with ours. Obviously on a personal level, as I mentioned before, I would like for everyone to be Catholic, but I acknowledge that not everyone is. Anyway, from a religious perspective, I think people should have the right to worship as they choose. Freedom of religion is a very important value.

In the history of Catholicism, our Church has been persecuted a lot. In England for a long time it was illegal to be Catholic. Many Catholics were murdered by the state. In many Middle Eastern countries today it is difficult or impossible to be openly Christian. These are injustices.

The Catechism addresses the issue of freedom of religion in the following sections:

2107 "If because of the circumstances of a particular people special civil recognition is given to one religious community in the constitutional organization of a state, the right of all citizens and religious communities to religious freedom must be recognized and respected as well."36 
2108 The right to religious liberty is neither a moral license to adhere to error, nor a supposed right to error,37 but rather a natural right of the human person to civil liberty, i.e., immunity, within just limits, from external constraint in religious matters by political authorities. This natural right ought to be acknowledged in the juridical order of society in such a way that it constitutes a civil right.38 
2109 The right to religious liberty can of itself be neither unlimited nor limited only by a "public order" conceived in a positivist or naturalist manner.39 The "due limits" which are inherent in it must be determined for each social situation by political prudence, according to the requirements of the common good, and ratified by the civil authority in accordance with "legal principles which are in conformity with the objective moral order."40
Allowing people to worship in whatever way they choose, even if they are in error, does not constitute any form of participation in that error.

Also, having respect for other religious communities can open the door to evangelism. Taking a disrespectful attitude can close that door.

Having said all that, any religious belief should be allowed as long as it does not violate the law. Violence in the name of religion cannot be tolerated and people from all religions must act according to the law of the land, without attempting to create a separate law unto themselves. Child abuse, abuse of women, and any other form of intimidation or violence cannot be tolerated even if they are legitimate aspects of a particular religious system. It goes without saying that violence to the population at large can also not be tolerated.

But any of these issues can be dealt with using existing laws and will be applicable to all religious communities.

Religious tolerance is an important political idea as is all freedom of expression. It guarantees the rights of not only small or new religious communities, but of all of them.















1 comment:

  1. Thursday, May 10, 2012
    NO DENIAL FROM DIOCESE OF WORCESTER, USA: All religious communities are permitted to hold the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II (AG 7)

    The men’s religious communities in the diocese can teach that in reality everyone needs to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation and there are no known exceptions.

    Also the women’s religious communities and lay persons in the diocese can affirm the literal interpretation of the dogma and Ad Gentes 7 along with implicit baptism of desire.

    They agree that they do not know anyone saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance.

    Explicitly known baptism of desire was the heresy, knowingly or unknowingly, of the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Richard Cushing. If the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 assumed that the baptism of desire was explicitly known then it would be an objective, factual error.

    Fr. Leonard Feeney’s position is consistent with the Church Fathers, Church Councils, popes, saints, Catechisms, Vatican Council I, Vatican Council II (AG 7) and the Letter of the Holy Office 1949(reference to ‘the dogma’, the ‘infallible statement’).

    An apology is over due from the Archdiocese of Boston and the Jesuit Superior General.
    -Lionel Andrades

    No one from the Diocese of Worcester,USA will answer if they know any one saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance
    http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/05/no-one-from-diocese-of-worcesterusa.html

    BISHOP ROBERT J.MCMANUS CAN ALL RELIGIOUS COMMUNITIES IN WORCESTER BELIEVE THAT WE DO NOT PERSONALLY KNOW ANY CASE SAVED WITH THE BAPTISM OF DESIRE?
    http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/05/bishop-robert-jmcmanus-can-all.html

    http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/05/no-denial-from-diocese-of-worcester-usa.html

    ReplyDelete