Are there any historical precedents for ecumenism?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JSmitty2005
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
USMC:
I think I may have found a good definition of ecumenism given by the magesterium. See if this sounds right.

Ecumenism: “[T]the great movement of apostasy being organized in every country for the establishment of a One-World Church which shall have neither dogmas, nor hierarchy, neither discipline for the mind, nor curb for the passions… under the pretext of freedom and human dignity…” (Pope St. Pius X, Our Apostolic Mandate).

Sounds pretty accurate to me.
Click to expand...
**THAT’S A THREAD KILLER!http://bestsmileys.com/religous/1.gif:yup: **
 
40.png
JSmitty2005:
Sounds pretty accurate to me too! All I’ve ever seen ecumenism do is promote indifferentism and doctrinal relativism.
Click to expand...
Humani Generis ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS XII CONCERNING SOME FALSE OPINIONS THREATENING TO UNDERMINE THE FOUNDATIONS OF CATHOLIC DOCTRINE AUGUST 12, 1950 ”Some reduce to a meaningless formula the necessity of belonging to the true Church in order to gain eternal salvation.”
 
40.png
barsapp:
ecumenism, is it not that all must convert to Catholicism?
Click to expand...
Bite your tongue. That was “expressly abandon at Vatican II”

“Today we no longer understand ecumenism in the sense of the ecumenism of return, by which the others would ‘be converted’ and return to being ‘Catholics’… each church has its own riches and gifts of the Spirit, and it is this exchange that unity is trying to be achieved, and not in the fact that we should become ‘Protestants’, or that the others should become ‘Catholics’ in the sense of accepting the confessional form of Catholicism. This was expressly abandoned by Vatican II” (Cardinal Kasper, February 2001)
 
THANKS BARSAPP & USMC:

ECUMENISM WOULD BE GETTING THE FOLLOWING TWO GUYS INTO THE SAME CHURCH WITHOUT CHANGING THE MINDS OF EITHER:
PIUS II
**Humani Generis **
CONCERNING SOME FALSE OPINIONS THREATENING TO UNDERMINE THE FOUNDATIONS OF CATHOLIC DOCTRINE AUGUST 12, 1950
”Some reduce to a meaningless formula the necessity of belonging to the true Church in order to gain eternal salvation.”
Cardinal Kasper, February 2001
“Today we no longer understand ecumenism in the sense of the ecumenism of return, by which the others would ‘be converted’ and return to being ‘Catholics’… each church has its own riches and gifts of the Spirit, and it is this exchange that unity is trying to be achieved, and not in the fact that we should become ‘Protestants’, or that the others should become ‘Catholics’ in the sense of accepting the confessional form of Catholicism. This was expressly abandoned by Vatican II”
 
USMC said:
“Today we no longer understand ecumenism in the sense of the ecumenism of return, by which the others would ‘be converted’ and return to being ‘Catholics’… each church has its own riches and gifts of the Spirit, and it is this exchange that unity is trying to be achieved, and not in the fact that we should become ‘Protestants’, or that the others should become ‘Catholics’ in the sense of accepting the confessional form of Catholicism. This was expressly abandoned by Vatican II” (Cardinal Kasper, February 2001)
Click to expand...

To preach religious freedom, indifferentism, doctrinal relativism is the same as to preach Atheism.

I’m afraid we have the answer for Our Lord’s question: Luke 18:8: “when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?”

In my humble opinion Cardinal Kasper (not being taken out of context) is completely wrong.
 
40.png
barsapp:
To preach religious freedom, indifferentism, doctrinal relativism is the same as to preach Atheism.

I’m afraid we have the answer for Our Lord’s question: Luke 18:8: “when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?”

In my humble opinion Cardinal Kasper (not being taken out of context) is completely wrong.
Click to expand...
Yes, you are obviously right. Ecumenism has evolved from the goal of converting others to the One True Church, to attempting to “unite” with them without their converting. They are attempting to build a One World Church; that is, a “church” consisting of all relgions under one tent.

They are seeking unity outside of the faith. But the Catholic faith is the foundation for supernatural unity. There can never be true unity without each professing the true faith. Any other kind of “unity” is merely of a fraternal human unity, and not what Our Lord established.
 
Okay, so is there *anything * positive that has *ever * come from ecumenism? I was delighted to read in the newspaper a few months ago about the Anglicans accepting some Marian dogmas or something like that. How do you think Pope Benedict XVI will handle ecumenism? To be quite honest, I loved JP2, but his ecumenism was disasterous.
 
40.png
JSmitty2005:
Okay, so is there *anything *positive that has *ever *come from ecumenism? I was delighted to read in the newspaper a few months ago about the Anglicans accepting some Marian dogmas or something like that. How do you think Pope Benedict XVI will handle ecumenism? To be quite honest, I loved JP2, but his ecumenism was disasterous.
Click to expand...
Episcopal sect proposes reunion with Rome

SCARBOROUGH (Sep 29, 2005): A meeting in Portland last week brought an Episcopalian sect closer to reunifying with the Roman Catholic Church, in what would be the first post-Reformation church to rejoin with Rome.
…
The group’s members voted in favor of starting a formal discussion with Rome and eventually creating what is called a “single Eucharist community,” allowing members of the Traditional Anglican Communion and the Roman Catholic Church to take communion at each other’s churches.

But from a basic theological and operational standpoint, nothing will be different within the church, according to Very Rev. Lester York, dean of St. Paul’s, which split in 1989.
…
By next year Traditional Anglican leaders hope to propose a formal plan to the Vatican outlining how intercommunion may be accomplished. It is unclear how long this process will take, as it has never been attempted by churches that descended from the Reformation.

more**
**
 
40.png
JSmitty2005:
Okay, so is there *anything * positive that has *ever * come from ecumenism? I was delighted to read in the newspaper a few months ago about the Anglicans accepting some Marian dogmas or something like that. How do you think Pope Benedict XVI will handle ecumenism? To be quite honest, I loved JP2, but his ecumenism was disasterous.
Click to expand...
They also have 500 priestesses and bishopesses.
Give a little, take a little. That’s what ecumenism is all about.
Can’t wait until Bishop Mrs Jane Gray, who is 8 mos. pregnant, is elected Archbishop of Canterbury, and the pope is invited to meet with her to exchange ring kisses!:eek:
 
Do not be yoked with those who are different, with unbelievers. For what partnership do righteousness and lawlessness have? Or what fellowship does light have with darkness? What accord has Christ with Beliar? Or what has a believer in common with an unbeliever? What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; as God said: “I will live with them and move among them, and I will be their God and they shall be my people. Therefore, come forth from them and be separate,” says the Lord, “and touch nothing unclean; then I will receive you and I will be a father to you, and you shall be sons and daughters to me, says the Lord Almighty.”

II Corinthians 6:14-18

Ecumenism and, even more so, interfaith ‘dialogue’ (whatever ‘dialogue’ means?!), doesn’t appear to be very scriptural 😦
 
So, if ecumenism is nonsense and the Church is engaging in it, then is the Church in heresy? It seems as though the gates of Hell are knocking on the front door of St. Peter’s, let us pray that they will not prevail.
 
40.png
JSmitty2005:
the gates of Hell are knocking on the front door of St. Peter’s, let us pray that they will not prevail.
Click to expand...
How convenient? There will be a talk on Catholic Answers Radio about whether or not the gates of Hell have prevailed against the Church on Friday, October 12. I do not believe that they have, but things like ecumenism make one wonder. I hope there is a good explanation on the show for things like ecumenism.
 
40.png
JSmitty2005:
Here is the link to an mp3 lecture by Peter Kreeft entitled “Ecumenism without Compromise”:

peterkreeft.com/audio/03_ecumenism/ecumenism.mp3

I found it helpful in understanding true ecumenism. 👍

Let me know what you think of what he says.
Click to expand...
How about B16’s idea?
Benedict XVI, Address to Protestants at World Youth Day, August 19, 2005:
“And we now ask: What does it mean to restore the unity of all Christians?.. This unity, we are convinced, indeed subsists in the Catholic Church, without the possibility of ever being lost (Unitatis Redintegratio, nn. 2, 4, etc.); the Church in fact has not totally disappeared from the world. Other the other hand, this unity does not mean what could be called ecumenism of the return: that is, to deny and to reject one’s own faith history. Absolutely not!” (L’Osservatore Romano, August 24, 2005, p. 8.)

Notice that 2 points are equated that are in the negative but have NO connection!
  1. Ecumenism of Return
  2. Deny AND reject your faith History.
    However, one does not in ANY way reject his own history by returning. History is a FACT. One’s history of Faith can indeed be cherished, as many prot converts so clearly admit. It was part of their Faith journey!
    Rejecting it would be nonsensical. It has NOTHING to do with “returning”. It was put in there to justify the unjustifiable…NOT returning. Clever eh? Not really. It’s part of modernist linguistics.
    When one returns, one simply and honestly rejects ONLY the ERRORS of one’s former beliefs. But B16 somehow cannot say that. For that would in fact be giving validity to the necessity of “Ecumenism of Return”.
    god forbid, one should propose ANYONE but a traditional Catholic, be in Error.
    In conclusion, he gives a completely false definition of Ecumenism THROUGH its false NECESSARYconsequences. Therefore, he can tell you that, by this necessary (untrue consequence), that Ecumenism of return is damaging in that way.
 
The wording that Christ’s Church ‘subsists’ within the Holy Catholic Church seems to verge on heresy. 😦 THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS THE CHURCH THAT CHRIST ESTABLISHED! There is only one!
 
40.png
JSmitty2005:
The wording that Christ’s Church ‘subsists’ within the Holy Catholic Church seems to verge on heresy. 😦 THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS THE CHURCH THAT CHRIST ESTABLISHED! There is only one!
Click to expand...
It is very similar to the homoousian and homoiousian debate of the 4th century.

Homoousian means that Our Lord is of the same substance as God the Father. The heretics used the term homoiousian, which means he is of like substance. Very subtle, but the term homoiousian was condemned. That is where the term “not one iota” comes from. “Iota” is the letter i in Greek, which is what the Arian heretics added to the word homoousian to change the meaning.
 
This is taken from the interview with Bishop Fellay after his meeting with Pope Benedictus XVI (29 August 2005):
“We must get the Roman authorities to admit that we cannot follow without serious reservations the interpretation given of the Council and of Ecumenism, as it is practiced. Deep down, what we hope for is to make them understand one day the whole reason for Tradition.”
sspx.co.uk/articles.php?articleid=283
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top