Talk:Syllabus of Errors

message: How does the Syllabus of Errors seem to condemn freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and separation of church and state?  Isn't that like saying that the Declaration of Independence seems to declare the United States to be a separate country from Great Britain?  That is its point — that these ideas are wrong and anti-Christian.  While the validity of this is disputed by many (including myself), aren't we being overly politically correct here by saying that this docuemnt only "seems" to do this?  It does so, whether we of a more modern era like it or not.
Rlquall 11:24, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Seem" 

message: :To Rlquall
:
::I'm not surprised that Propositon 55 seems wrong to you. Many people, both Catholic and non-Catholic, today and yesterday, alike also feel the same way.
::This is mainly because the Syllabus of Errors is a collection of "conclusive statements" instead of a detailed process of reasoning before arriving at a conclusion.
::I would equate the "shock" you've received to the shock a person would have, waking up one morning and finding out that the street where he parked his car the previous night, now has a spanking brand new "NO PARKING" sign and a ticket with a hefty fine under the wiper blade. To the person in question, it would seems that a bunch of know-nothings from who-knows-where just destroyed his freedom to park his car.
::In a perfect world, the municipal council would have taken the time out to drop by the person's home with a nice little PowerPoint presentation explaining how the street he was on was just too narrow to accept parking and still permit traffic to flow through smoothly, then repeat the process with every home in the neighbourhood. As you can see, such a scenario is extremely unlikely.
::A more likely scenario would be that the municipal council just assumed that everyone on the street knew that traffic was a bitch and that if something was done, everyone would be happy.
::A classic case of "Good Intentions, Poor Implementation."
::Now let's take a look at Propositon 55. When read in non-Yoda-speech, Propositon 55 reads as:
::: The proposition that the Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church is condemned and anathematized.
::Sounds pretty straight-forward, right?
::Yes and no.
::Yes to people in-the-know and no to people who have no prior explanation.
::It may come as a shock to some people, but the Pope doesn't sit around with a Piña Colada in hand, thinking up new ways for Catholics to be different from everyone else. If you can accept this premise, then you can accept that all ex cathedra pronouncements have some logic behind them.
(Still writing... just saving then editing...)
El Caudillo 10:52, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: "Seeming right" and "seeming wrong" are red herrings, of course. Such casuistry aside, Wikipedia needn't insert "seem" where the Syllabus of Errors actually says. Direct quotes are uncontrovertible. The article quite rightly doesn't stray as far from the text as the above. --Wetman 11:00, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Seem" is Right 

message: It desperately needs some cleaning, as it is full of original research and speculation that doesn't belongs on Wikipedia. I thought I would make a comment here before wading into the text. Dominick (TALK) 12:49, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Subsequent History is a mess!