Religious Toleration

The topic of "Religious Liberty" is sprinkled about through various forms of media and discussions in recent months. Unfortunately language used in reference to the topic is often "nuanced", and discussion is unclear.

God created man for a purpose, namely to "know Him, to love Him, and to serve Him in this world, and to be happy with Him for ever in heaven." To this end, sin plays no part. God did not create man to sin. Certainly God gave man free will. With our will we can choose good or what we perceive to be a "good"; so it is possible for us (albeit insane) to choose sin over God. Thus the materialists twist freedom into a matter of choosing whatever one desires. In reality, choosing God and fulfilling our purpose is to choose freedom. Choosing sin on the other hand is an abuse of freedom.

Man's God given rights, the "natural rights", are those that assist man with his created purpose. Sin plays no role in assisting man towards his goal. While man is capable of sin, it is never his right to sin.

Sin is nothing else than a morally bad act (St. Thomas, "De malo", 7:3), an act not in accord with reason informed by the Divine law. God has endowed us with reason and free-will, and a sense of responsibility; He has made us subject to His law, which is known to us by the dictates of conscience, and our acts must conform with these dictates, otherwise we sin (Romans 14:23).

If by "religious liberty" it is meant that man cannot be coerced into religious belief against his conscience by the state, or if it is meant the right of man to hold the Catholic faith, then we can concur with this. The latter is not contradictory as we know that the Catholic Church serves to bring us to God, and thus participating in the Faith is in union with our natural rights. The former is known as religious toleration with an emphasis on the true meaning of the word "tolerance".

If by "religious liberty" it is meant as a right of man to choose any religion, dogma, belief, etc., that is contrary to God, then it should be obvious that man has no such right. Often the phrase "Religious Liberty" is used when what is intended is "freedom (meaning right) to worship how we choose (including that which is contrary to God)." This might be a "right" granted by the state, but it is no true natural right any more than something like abortion is a right.

...no one is allowed to be remiss in the service due to God, and since the chief duty of all men is to cling to religion in both its reaching and practice-not such religion as they may have a preference for, but the religion which God enjoins, and which certain and most clear marks show to be the only one true religion...

- Leo XIII, Encyclical Immortale Dei (references: 1, 2, 3)

I believe it necessary for one to have a strong grasp on "religious toleration" before one can properly understand the Church on what some call "religious liberty". The Catholic Encyclopedia has a very extensive article on the topic of "Religious Toleration" that deserves study.

USCCB says "virgin" means "young woman"

The New American Bible was revised, and has been released this month by the USCCB. I tend to read and study the Douay Rheims with the Haydock Commentary as a norm, but found myself interested in the "Sample Changes" listed on the USCCB's website. The changes made to Isaiah 7:14 has me really grasping for an understanding at what those in charge of the revisions are attempting to accomplish.

Now, I am not a biblical scholar in any way shape or form, so bear with me as I weave my way back in time through biblical versions. (I am certainly likely to skip important concepts and steps here... so if you want to make this short, skip to the bold words at the bottom of this post.)

2011 NAB: "Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign; the young woman, pregnant and about to bear a son, shall name him Emmanuel." [Why "young woman"... the USCCB states at the bottom of "Sample Change" - "The young woman: Hebrew ‘almah designates a young woman of marriageable age without specific reference to virginity. The Septuagint translated the Hebrew term as parthenos, which normally does mean virgin..." So if it normally means "virgin"... why not translate it as "virgin?"]

1970 NAB: "Therefore the Lord himself will give you this sign: the virgin shall be with child, and bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel." [Seems the 70's had something right.]

1609 Douay Rheims: "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign. Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and his name shall be called Emmanuel." [Do we have a pattern?]

Latin Vulgate (Jerome): "propter hoc dabit Dominus ipse vobis signum ecce virgo concipiet et pariet filium et vocabitis nomen eius Emmanuhel" [I am not a Latin scholar]

Hebrew: "כן יתן אדני הוא לכם אות הנה העלמה הרה וילדת בן וקראת שמו עמנו אל׃" [Yeah... I have no clue... I just copied it from some website and started doing google searches for the different groups of characters. I am not a biblical scholar, and I am certainly NOT a Hebrew scholar!]

While this exercise in performing Scripture comparisons was fun, and even forced me to learn a smidgen of Hebrew... the effort really - doesn't - matter. The Perpetual Virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mary is a Dogma of our Catholic Faith. Since the Infallible interpretation of Catholic Church on Sacred Scripture does not and cannot conflict with this Dogma of our Faith... it is very odd that this revision was deemed necessary.

Can non-Catholics be saved?

Quite recently, on the Catholic blogosphere, the question was raised of whether non-Catholics can be saved. Let me answer that question with a question: if you were in a house that was engulfed in flames, would you be able to survive by staying inside? Of course you could; the odds would be significantly against it, but if you wanted to bet your life on it there technically is a chance.

Likewise, non-Catholics have the possibility of being saved; only God can see into the soul of a (wo)man and see if there exists a reflection of Himself (supernatural Charity), a quality without which we cannot be saved. To receive and maintain this quality of the soul God gave us the Sacraments of the Catholic Church. Could you obtain and maintain this quality of the soul without formal membership in the Christ's Church? Technically yes... but do you really want to bet your soul on it?