Dignitatis Humanae and John Finnis’s understanding of religious freedom
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15448/0103-314X.2020.1.33435Keywords:
Natural Law, Religious freedom, Human Rights.Abstract
This paper aims to encourage the reader to deepen his understanding of the elements of natural law inserted in the thought of John Finnis, especially in what concerns the human right of religious freedom. This is due to the fact that this author presents a unique perspective on religion, in order to consider it as one of the fundamental basic human goods. Before being a human right protected in international treaties and in the Constitutions of various countries, religion, according to its theory, is a human good that must be protected. Such protection is essential for the fulfillment of all the potentialities of each human being, so that it is possible to reach its human flourishing and, thus, the common good. Thus, it will be discussed in this paper whether religious freedom, from the perspective of John Finnis, is universal and should thus be endorsed and universally applied throughout the world, using as an example the document of the II Vatican Council – Dignitatis Humanae (1965). Also, a bibliographical analysis of the author’s works on this topic will be carried out in order to identify what are, and if they exist, principles of religious freedom that are universally applicable throughout the world and especially in the West. Thus, the identification of these principles will be recognized the relevance of protection and encouragement to the exercise of this right in the public space, given the natural character relative to the human good of religion, in view of the theory presented by John Finnis.
Downloads
References
SUPERIOR TRIBUNAL FEDERAL. ADI 3510. Relator(a): Min. AYRES BRITTO, Tribunal Pleno, julgado em 29/05/2008, DJe-096 DIVULG 27-05-2010 PUBLIC 28-05-2010 EMENT VOL-02403-01 PP-00134 RTJ VOL00214-01 PP 00043. Disponível em: http://www.stf.jus.br/portal/geral/verPdfPaginado.asp?id=611723&-tipo=AC&descricao=Inteiro%20Teor%20ADI%20/%203510. Acesso em: 04 dez. 2018.
ARISTÓTELES. Metafísica. Tradução, textos adicionais e notas Edson Bini. Bauru. São Paulo: Edipro, 2006.
BIELEFELDT, Heiner. Freedom of Religion or Belief- A Human Right under Pressure. Oxford Journal of Law and Religion, [S. l.], v. 1, n. 1, p. 15–35, 2012. doi:10.1093/ojlr/rwr018 Disponível em: https://academic.oup.com/ojlr/search-results?f_Authors=Heiner+Bielefeldt. Acesso em: 30 ago. 2020.
BRASIL. [Constituição (1988)]. Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil de 1988. Disponível em: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/constituicao/ConstituicaoCompilado.htm. Acesso em: 29 ago. 2020.
CONCÍLIO VATICANO II. Dignitatis Humanae. Petrópolis: Vozes, 1966.
FADEL, Anna Laura Maneschy; SIMÕES, Sandro Alex Souza. O uso de símbolos religiosos nos espaços públicos e o mito da neutralidade do secularismo nos Estados modernos: uma análise da religião como um bem humano básico, à luz da teoria de John Finnis. Revista da Faculdade de Direito da Universidade de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, n. 71, p. 553-591, jul./dez. 2017. Disponível em: https://www.direito.ufmg.br/revista/index.php/revista/article/view/1893/1795. Acesso em 04 de dezembro de 2018. https://doi.org/10.12818/P.0304-2340.2017V71P553.
FINNIS, John M. Natural Law and Natural Rights. 2. ed. Oxford University Press [1980], 2011a.
FINNIS, John M. Religion and Public Reasons: Collected Essays. Oxford University Press, 2011b. Volume V.
FINNIS, John M.Towards Vatican II’s Centenary: Your next fifty years. [S. l.], p.1-18, Fall 2016. Disponível em: https://lawreview.avemarialaw.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/vXIV.Finnis.layout2.0426.pdf. Acesso em: 12 set. 2020.
FINNIS, John et al. The Universality of Religious Freedom and its Compatibility with Non-Western Cultures. In: REPORT OF THE GEORGETOWN SYMPOSIUM ON WHAT’S SO SPECIAL ABOUT RELIGIOUS FREEDOM? Washington, Nov. 17, 2011, p. 22-29. Disponível em:
https://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu/publications/what-s-so-special-about-religious-freedom. Acesso em 17 de dez. 2018.
ONU (Organização das Nações Unidas). Declaração dos Direitos Humanos [Brasil]. 2009. Disponível em: https://nacoesunidas.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/DUDH.pdf. Acesso em: 29 ago. 2020.
ONU (Organização das Nações Unidas). Declaração Universal dos Direitos Humanos [Portugal]. Disponível em: https://www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Pages/Language.aspx?LangID=por Acesso em: 29 ago. 2020
PORTELA, Paulo Henrique Gonçalves. Direito Internacional Público e Privado. 6. ed. Salvador: Juspodivm, 2014.
SOUZA, Elden Borges; PINHEIRO, Victor Sales. O Laicismo e a Teoria da lei natural, em Finnis: A Religião como bem humano básico. [S. l.], 2016a. p. 2-22. Disponível em: https://www.ojs.ufpi.br/index.php/raj/article/view/5702. Acesso em: 26 jun. 2017.
SOUZA, Elden Borges; PINHEIRO, Victor Sales. A Fundamentação Ética dos Direitos Humanos em John Finnis, 2016b p. 65-83. Disponível em: https://www.revistas.unijui.edu.br/index.php/direitoshumanosedemocracia/article/view/5513. Acesso em: 26 jun. 2017. https://doi.org/10.21527/2317-5389.2016.7.65-83.
SUPREMO TRIBUNAL FEDERAL, Tribunal Pleno, MS 22.164/SP. Relator: Celso de Mello, Brasília, DF, 30.out. 95, DJ de 17.11.95, p. 39206. Disponível em: http://redir.stf.jus.br/paginadorpub/paginador.jsp?docTP=AC&docID=85691. Acesso em: 10 set. 2020.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Teocomunicação
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright
The submission of originals to Teocomunicação implies the transfer by the authors of the right for publication. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication. If the authors wish to include the same data into another publication, they must cite Teocomunicação as the site of original publication.
Creative Commons License
Except where otherwise specified, material published in this journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license, which allows unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is correctly cited.