Sunday, January 29, 2012

Archbishop Dolan VS Full Natural Law

Archbishop Timothy Dolan has (Again?) addressed the matter of Natural Law as basic
to respect-for-life (A). Yet, he (And so many others within and without the Church) inflict the same platitudes on use and avoid the "hard questions" as to Natural Law.

Those (eg Archbishop Timothy Dolan) who present "glittering generalities" about the above noted subjects should be prepared AND should be required to address the following questions and points.
1. Does, in fact, Natural Law strictly allow the innocent to protect themselves against the attacks of the unjust?
2. Does the absence of such civil-or-military forces who are both able and willing to provide immediate-and-effective protection magnify that right to self-defense?
3. Does the absence of such immediate-and-effective government protection specially allow the innocent to have the means (ie Modern firearms and other weapons) to enforce the Natural Law right to self-defense?
4. Does that right stop at the first hesitation of the criminal-attacker OR extent to the prevention of such attacks in the immediate future? At some longer interval when the attacker has clearly indicted an intent to continue such attacks?
5. Does Natural Law extend a right OR duty to protect the innocent against like criminal attacks?
6. Does Natural Law (As understood by the Church) allow for the use of deadly force to protect the lives of innocent others?
7. Does the Church admit that Islam's teachings, goals and methods all combine to encourage, if not command (As the expressed will of the Allah of the followers of the false prophet Mohammed), murder, rape, banditry, genocide, suppression of all true religions and of all other ideologies as well as that of all women and all Non-Muslims?
8. Does the Church still accept or now deny the validity of the teachings of that "Doctor Of The Church, St. Bernard Of Clairvaux (In his De Laude Militae Novae; E.), that it is sometimes necessary, if not required, that the faithful "Strike (Deadly) Blows For Christ"---If, and only if, the Christian warrior is without selfish or illicit motives? In doing so we would be "Good Shepherds".

If, and only if, Archbishop (And others) wish to teach about Natural Law, protecting life and like subjects, he (And they) must address the "hard questions" lest he (They) fail of the duty to fully teach "The Splendor Of Truth"

No comments: