Religious Freedom: Did Vatican II Contradict Traditional Catholic Doctrine? A Debate

Religious Freedom: Did Vatican II Contradict Traditional Catholic Doctrine? A Debate

Paperback(1)

$35.00
Usually ships within 6 days

Product Details

ISBN-13: 9781587316982
Publisher: St. Augustine's Press
Publication date: 04/30/2013
Edition description: 1
Pages: 384
Product dimensions: 5.90(w) x 9.10(h) x 1.20(d)

About the Author

Arnold T. Guminski has authored the book The Constitutional Rights, Privileges, and Immunities of the American People and has also written essays published in the journals Whittier Law Review, Philo, and Philosophia Christi, as well as on the Secular Web.

Brian W. Harrison, o.s., a priest of the Society of the Oblates of Wisdom, is an emeritus Professor of Theology of the Pontifical Catholic University of Puerto Rico. He is the author of two books and over 120 articles in Catholic books, journals and periodicals in the U.S.A., Australia, Britain, France, Spain and Puerto Rico.

Table of Contents

Preface Gerard V Bradley 1

Part I

Contra Harrison in re Libertate Religiosa: On the Meaning of Dignitatis Humana Arnold T. Guminski 5

Introduction (##1-2; notes 1-2) 5

A An Analysis of Religious Liberty and Contraception on Preconciliar Doctrine and Practice (##3-8; notes 3-17) 6

B Fr. Harrison on the Meaning of Dignitatis Humanae (##9-12; notes 18-30) 10

C Fr. Harrison's Book on the "Public Order" and "Objective Moral Order" (##13-40; notes 31-65) 14

D The Development of Fr. Harrison's Doctrine in His Subsequent Writings (##41-71; notes 66-104) 28

Conclusion (##72-73; note 105) 43

Part II

What Does Dignitatis Humanae Mean? A Reply to Arnold Guminski Brian W. Harrison 45

Introduction (note 1) 45

A Guminski vs. Harrison: the Status Quaestionis (##1-6; notes 2-17) 45

B Preliminary Criticisms of Religious Liberty and Contraception (##7-10; notes 18-26) 50

C RLC on "Public Order", "Public Law" and the "Objective Moral Order" (#11) 52

I Past and present in relation to DH, chapter 1 (##12-17; Notes 27-36) 52

II "Common Good" vs. "Public Order" (##18-19; Notes 37-39 57

III Bishop De Smedt's Final Relatio (##20-24; notes 40-48) 59

IV Tertio Millennio Adveniente (##25-30; notes 49-54) 61

V Postconciliar changes in Spanish law (##31-32; notes 55-58) 63

VI DH#l and doctrinal "development" (##33-38; notes 59-64) 65

VII What is the "Objective Moral Order"? (##39-14: notes 65-70) 68

D Articles Published After RLC 70

I The Meaning and Status of DH #7 (##45-50; notes 71-78) 70

II The Meaning of DH#1 (##51-56; notes 79-90) 73

III The Catechism of the Catholic Church on DH#1 (##57-62, notes 91-100) 78

IV My Review of Michael Davies' The Second Vatican Council and Religious Liberty (##63-71; notes 101-116) 82

Conclusion (##72-73) 87

Part III

Further Reflections on Freedom in Religious Matters: A Response to Father Harrison Arnold T. Guminski 89

Introduction (# 1; notes 1-3) 89

A The Basic Procedural Approach Necessary for Our Inquiry (##2-7; notes 4-12) 90

B Why No Relevant Preconciliar Doctrine is Definitive (##8-18; notes 13-27) 94

C Why the Issue of the Consistency of Relevant Preconciliar Doctrine with that of DH is Legitimately Open for an SOC (##19; notes 28-29) 106

D Why the Authentic Doctrine of DH Does Not Contradict Sacred Tradition and the Doctrine of the Church (##20-24; notes 30-39) 107

E Why the Authentic Doctrine of DH Does Not Contradict the Traditional Catholic Doctrine on the Moral Duty of Individuals and Societies towards the Catholic Religion (##25-33; notes 40-48) 111

F The Statement in DH that It Developed the Doctrine of the More Recent Popes on Human Rights Does Not Preclude the Fact that Some Preconciliar Doctrine Is Inconsistent with the Doctrine of DH (#34) 118

G The Promulgation of DH Concerning Religious Freedom Leaves in Place Important Authoritative Doctrines on Church-State Relations (##35-40; notes 49-54) 119

H On the True Meaning of that Preconciliar Doctrine Most Likely to be Inconsistent with the Doctrine of DH Concerning Freedom in Religious Matters (##41-43; notes 50-62) 122

I On the True Meaning of the Doctrine of DH on Freedom in Religious Matters within the Limits of a Just Public Order (##44_64; notes 63-89) 129

Conclusion (##65-69; note 90 144

Part IV

Dignitatis Humanae: A Final Reply to Arnold Guminski Brian W. Harrison 149

A Some Preliminary Questions 149

I Is anyone claiming "a de facto inerrancy" of the non-definitive magisterium? (##1-2; notes 1-7) 149

II Do mainstream Catholics admit doctrinal discontinuity in DH? (##3-5; notes 8-19) 150

III Are the condemnations in Quanta Cum irreformable? (##6-11; notes 20-29) 154

B The Central Issue: Has Guminski Shown that Proposition Z Is True? 158

I Did the Council intend to reverse any existing doctrine in DH? (##12-18; notes 30-35)

II The preamble (DH 1) revisited (#19) 163

1 "Sacred doctrine"? (##20-25; notes 36-44) 163

2 The "moral duty of men and societies" (##26-30; notes 45-55) 166

3 DH's intention to "develop" the doctrine of recent popes (##31-33; notes 56-58) 170

III The Catechism of the Catholic Church (##34-37; notes 57-65) 171

IV The "true meaning" of relevant preconciliar doctrine 174

1 Is Quanta Cura irreconcilable with Dignitatis Humanae? (##38-41; notes 66-70) 174

2 Do we agree about the content of traditional doctrine? (##42-48; notes 71-89) 176

V The "true meaning" of DH: the "always-and-everywhere" factor (##49-55; notes 90-100) 181

C A Secondary Question: What Sort of "Public Order" Does DH See as "Just" for Today's World? (#56) 186

I What does it mean to restrict non-Catholic propaganda as such? (##57-64; notes 101-113) 186

II A regression to superseded Old Testament norms? (##65-71; notes 114-125) 192

III The "objective moral order" (#72-73; notes 126-129) 196

1 Preliminary "difficulties" (#74) 198

a Religious "discrimination": a necessary distinction on (#75; notes 130-131) 198

b "Moral legitimacy" (#76; notes 132-133) 198

c Natural rights and common-good rights (##77-80; notes 134-138) 199

2 What does "the objective moral order" mean in DH, #7? (#81; note 139) 202

a Why didn't the Fathers spell out "natural law"? (##82-83; notes 140-143) 203

b Do Gaudium et Spes and Veritatis Splendor support Guminski's position? (##84-86; notes 144-149) 206

c DH, #3 and the "divine and eternal law" (#87: notes 150-151) 208

d Do May and Finnis support Guminski? (#88-89; notes 152-157) 209

e The relatio of November 1964 (##90-95; notes 158-166) 210

D "Important remaining points" (#101; notes 174-175) 215

I "Moral rights" vs. "Juridical rights"? (##102-103; notes 176-181) 216

II Rights, past and present (##104-105) 218

III "Common good" vs. "public order" (##106-108; notes 182-188) 219

Conclusion (##109-115; notes 189-197) 221

Part V

Appendix A The Scope and the Limits of the Church's Inherent Coercive Power Arnold T. Guminski Brian W. Harrison 225

Introduction (1-2; notes 1-4) 225

A The Nature of the Church's Inherent Coercive Power (##3-5; notes 5-12) 226

B The Meaning of Coercion in Dignitatis Humanae (##6-10; notes 13-24) 231

C The Legitimacy of some Temporal Penalties According to DH (##11-19; notes 25-32) 236

D The Consistency of Preconciliar Doctrine Concerning the Church's Inherent Coercive Power with the Doctrine of DH (##20-26; notes 33-56) 242

E Pre-Mystici Corporis Theological Opinion that the Church's Inherent Coercive Power does not Encompass Temporal Penalties Typical of Civil Authority Only (##27-29; notes 57-72) 256

Conclusion (#30) 261

Appendix B Are the Condemnations in Quanta Cum Definitive? Brian W. Harrison 263

(##1-8; notes 1-26) 263

Select Bibliography with Citations to Notes 272

About the Authors 288

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

See All Customer Reviews