Absolutely true. "Religious Liberty" means that all religions must be tolerated. Which means that there is not one, true religion that it set above all others, such as Catholicism. I can understand how otherwise good Catholics can get caught up in believing that religious liberty will help the Church to maintain her rights, but her rights, in a religious liberty setting, cannot be properly maintained.

For example, Satanists believe that they have just as much right to practice and promote their evil "religion" as any other religion. And of course they cannot really be suppressed, except through public outcry, because they appeal to the false "Religious Liberty" for their right to exist.

There was a time in this country when Religious Liberty didn't seem like such as bad idea, especially since at least most Americans were some brand of Christian.  But those days are over. Now the great flaw of Religious Liberty is painfully obvious.

Religious liberty really is an error. If you let all the religions have rights, then where is the boundary?

That was me above.

It directly contradicts the traditional teaching of the Church. V2 says that religious liberty is part of Divine Revelation. Conversely, many Popes have condemned it and taught it is erroneous.


Vatican II docuмent, Dignitatis Humanae (# 12): “The Church therefore, faithful to the truth of the Gospel, follows the way of Christ and the Apostles when it acknowledges the principle of religious liberty as in accord with human dignity and the revelation of God, and when it promotes it…”

Pope Leo XIII, Libertas (# 21-23), June 20, 1888: “Justice therefore forbids, and reason itself forbids, the State to be godless; or to adopt a line of action which would end in godlessness – namely, to treat the various religions (as they call them) alike, and to bestow upon them promiscuously equal rights and privileges.

When the proposition that a pope can contradict propositions condemned by a pope, such as B16 CONTRA, PIUS IX's syllabus of errors, is accepted, you have then given free reign to the violation of the principle of non-contradiction and are, therefore, too dumb to live.

If the tippy top religious leader of the world, does not teach religious freedom, everyone will be at each other's throats, and their wouldn't be peace.  It is possible to say, in some way, that men have a right to choose their religion.  If you keep in mind scholastic philosophy and what you can do with mental reservations, and all the philosophy that could be possible, the Church can say this safely.  The Church can teach whatever she wants.  The Church can give a pastoral directive here, for the peace of the world, easily within the powers of the keys of St. Peter.

Don't know about the "too dumb to live" part. Certainly "too dumb" to govern a church, or have any control over anything requiring rational thought.
And yet they govern, and, say, "he who hears us hears Him" - liars, sons of the father of lies.

Sons of perdition.