Debating Ecumenism

[latinmasslover]

Pope Leo XIII, Custodi di Quella fede (# 15), Dec. 8, 1892:
“Everyone should avoid familiarity or friendship with anyone suspected of belonging to masonry or to affiliated groups. Know them by their fruits and avoid them. Every familiarity should be avoided, not only with those impious libertines who openly
promote the character of the sect, but also with those who hide under the mask of universal tolerance, respect for all religions…”

You seem to have left out the more important ones. Selective are we?

Excellent point. “By their fruits you shall know them.”

 

[DustinsDad]

In traditional Catholic teaching, they do worship the same God.

Only in a certain “nuanced” sense with regard to Muslims, since their religion in a somewhat twisted way derives from the original OT revelation of God - but since it is based and founded on the rejection of Our Lord Jesus Christ’s Divinity - it cannot be “of God”.

Since the one God can be discovered through natural means, those religions which acknowledge one supreme and omnipotent God, are said to have found Him, even if there knowledge of Him has many errors.

Now you speak of thouse outside the Church who have never heard the Gospel of Salvation preached - those are “pagans” at least - though it might not be politically correct to call 'em that these days.

They have never been classified as pagans or heathens.

Then who are?

Also, with regard to Muslims, Jews, etc…anyone outside the Church, No matter what you “call” them, they are normatively (nuances aside) identified by one tragic characteristic - they are damned.

Catechism of St. Pius X
10 Q. Who are they who do not belong to the Communion of Saints?
A. Those who are damned do not belong to the Communion of Saints in the other life; and in this life those who belong neither to the body nor to the soul of the Church, that is, those who are in mortal sin, and who are outside the true Church.
11 Q. Who are they who are outside the true Church?
A. Outside the true Church are: Infidels, Jews, heretics, apostates, schismatics, and the excommunicated.**

St. Paul (Acts 17:23)“For passing by, and seeing your idols, I found an altar also, on which was written: To the unknown God. What therefore you worship, without knowing it, that I preach to you.”

And remember, while commending them for their natural recoginition of God, it was immediately followed by an urgent call to repentance and conversion to the supernatural faith in Jesus Christ.
Acts 17:-30-32 The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all men everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed, and of this he has given assurance to all men by raising him from the dead." Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked; but others said, "We will hear you again about this."

Pope St. Gregory VII (11th century) to a Muslim prince:

Interesting quote - I’d love to see it all, the whole letter.

Catechism of Pope St. Pius X

See above.
%between%

…Church teaching on heresy has not changed. The obstinately denial of some article of faith is still heresy. The policy now, however, is not to pass rash judgment and assume someone who has never been Catholic is obstinate in their heresy.

Well, do you mean to say passing rash judement was policy for the Church up until the 2nd Vatican Council?

I don’t think it’s rash judgement to acknowledge that normatively, those outside the visible bonds of Holy Mother Church cannot be saved. This has always been understood with certain strict nuances. The new “policy”, if we can call it that, seems to make the nuance the norm. I think that’s about a million times more “rash” a judgement than before. And it has a few tragic negative consequences…it muzzles the call to conversion to the One True Church for the Salvation of Souls, and it leads to religious indifference.

As a “policy”, this would fall more under the heading of practical and prudential matter, of which the faithful are free to disagree and pursue a more, eh, “traditional” perspective. No?

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad

 

[thecoach]

So, in your opinion, is the goal of ecumenism to convert the Protestants, Orthodox, and others into the Roman Catholic Church?

nope, and I think you know better than to think it does.

 

[Pax_et_Caritas]

nope, and I think you know better than to think it does.

What is the goal of ecumenism?

 

[thecoach]

So, in your opinion, is the goal of ecumenism to convert the Protestants, Orthodox, and others into the Roman Catholic Church?

What is the goal of ecumenism?

Before that, perhaps you would like to share your views as well.

 

[Pax_et_Caritas]

Pax et Caritas:

What is the goal of ecumenism?

The Coach:

Before that, perhaps you would like to share your views as well.

My views are expressed perfectly by the following encyclical. It was written in 1928, and deals with the ecumenical movement. It is short, easy to understand, and explains the only path to true unity. It also clearly exposes certain individuals who are in “error and deceived” and who “distorting the idea of true religion they reject it, and little by little. turn aside to naturalism and atheism… from which it clearly follows that one who supports those who hold these theories and attempt to realize them, is altogether abandoning the divinely revealed religion”

He further said these these deceived people use flowery words to promote their error, but that " in reality beneath these enticing words and blandishments lies hid a most grave error, by which the foundations of the Catholic faith are completely destroyed".

I am in perfect agreement with the following encyclical. I believe that the people he discusses are indeed deceived; are falling gradually into Athiest, via Pantheism, and, if such people ever worked their way into high places within the Church, would, unless God stepped in to stop them, destroy the Church.

Here is the link: papalencyclicals.net/Pius11/P11MORTA.HTM

If you have any follow up questions, let me know.

 

[ThereCanBeOnly1]

In traditional Catholic teaching, they do worship the same God. Since the one God can be discovered through natural means, those religions which acknowledge one supreme and omnipotent God, are said to have found Him, even if there knowledge of Him has many errors. They have never been classified as pagans or heathens.

Which Traditional Catholic teaching is that?
Many modern Catholics are convinced that they and Muslims worship the same God.

Q:Is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ the same as Allah? You are saying that Jesus who is God is Allah?

The biblical doctrine on the Trinity is correctly expressed in the Nicene and Athanasian creeds:

We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen. We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father…We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life…

Now the catholic faith is that we worship One God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity, neither confounding the Persons nor dividing the substance. For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, another of the Holy Spirit. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, is One, the Glory equal, the Majesty coeternal.

The importance of the doctrine of the Deity of Christ cannot be overstated. For in Christ we know God in truth:

And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us an understanding, that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life (1 John 5:20, 21).

The Son is the true God; any other god is an idol.

The Quran

Islam vehemently rejects the doctrine of God as revealed in Holy Scriptures.

Islam denies the Trinity:

Certainly they disbelieve those who say: Surely Allah is the third (person) of the three; and there is no god but the one God, and if they desist not from what they say, a painful chastisement shall befall those among them who disbelieve **(Sura 5:73).**

O People of the Scripture! Do not exaggerate in your religion nor utter aught concerning Allah save the truth. The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a messenger of Allah, and His word which He conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers, and say not 'Three' - Cease! (it is) better for you! - Allah is only One Allah. Far is it removed from His Transcendent Majesty that He should have a son **(Sura 4:171).**

Islam denies the Father and the Son:

The Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them **(Sura 9:29-30)**.

It does not befit GOD that He begets a son, be He glorified **(Sura 19:35)**.

Islam denies the Deity of Christ:

The Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary, was no more than God’s apostle **(Sura 4)**.

They do blaspheme who say: Allah is Christ the son of Mary **(Sura 5:72).**

And when Allah saith: O Jesus, son of Mary! Didst thou say unto mankind: Take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah? he saith: Be glorified! It was not mine to utter that to which I had no right (**Sura 5:116)**.

In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Christ the son of Mary **(Sura 5:17)**.

Clearly then, the Quran denies:

1. The Trinity;
2. The Sonship of Christ;
3. The Deity of Christ.

The conclusion is inevitable: the god of Islam is not the same God of the Holy Scriptures. Christians do not adore the same God as Muslims. Muslims are not merely ignorant of the Triune nature of God and the Deity of the Son: the Quran explicitly negates the doctrine of Christ as taught in the Bible. Rather than adoring God with us, Muslims pray to their god that he might destroy us because of our faith in Christ, the Son of God. ‘The Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them’ (Sura 9:29-30).

(Dr. Joesph Mizzi - justforcatholics.org/islam.htm))

 

[DustinsDad]

ECUMENISM

The modern movement toward Christian unity whose Protestant origins stem from the Edinburgh World Missionary Conference in 1910, and whose Catholic principles were formulated by the Second Vatican Council in 1964. These principles are mainly three: 1. Christ established the Church on the Apostles and their episcopal successors, whose visible head and principle of unity became Peter and his successor the Bishop of Rome; 2. since the first century there have been divisions in Christianity, but many persons now separated from visible unity with the successors of the Apostles under Peter are nevertheless Christians who possess more or less of the fullness of grace available in the Roman Catholic Church; 3. Catholics are to do everything possible to foster the ecumenical movement, which comprehends all “the initiatives and activities, planned and undertaken to promote Christian unity, according to the Church’s various needs and as opportunities offer” (Decree on Ecumenism, I, 4).

If we are going to define terms, let’s do so correctly.

Is this a “definition” ecumenism? If so, I missed it in there. The first sentence isn’t even a sentence - doesn’t have a verb to go with the subject “movement”. It never defines the term “ecumenism”, what it means.

For example, perhaps you can finish this sentence: "Ecumenism means…"

Further, if as you claim, the goal of ecumenism is not to convert people to Christ’s Church, then what, pray tell, is this unity it (apparently) seeks? Some “unity” outside Holy Mother Church?

By the way, Pax answered your question as to the goal of ecumenism. The ball is now in your court. I await your answer as to what you think the “goal” of ecumenism is.

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad

 

[stmaria]

*Lumen Gentium *16.0 “But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the creator. First among whom are the Moslems: these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day”

Lumen Gentium say’s that Moslems adore mankind’s judge on the last day. Isn’t that impossible when mankind’s judge on the last day will be Jesus Christ who the Moslems believe is only a prophet.

Luke 21:27 “and they will see the Son of Man coming upon a cloud with great power and majesty”

Matthew 24:27 “For as the lightning comes forth from the east and shines even to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man”

Matthew 24:44 “Therefore you also must be ready, because at an hour that you do not expect, the Son of Man will come”

 

[thecoach]

Is this a “definition” ecumenism? If so, I missed it in there. The first sentence isn’t even a sentence - doesn’t have a verb to go with the subject “movement”. It never defines the term “ecumenism”, what it means.

For example, perhaps you can finish this sentence: "Ecumenism means…"

Further, if as you claim, the goal of ecumenism is not to convert people to Christ’s Church, then what, pray tell, is this unity it (apparently) seeks? Some “unity” outside Holy Mother Church?

By the way, Pax answered your question as to the goal of ecumenism. The ball is now in your court. I await your answer as to what you think the “goal” of ecumenism is.

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad

I frankly do not appreciate the tone of your post. I dont need you to tell me who has answered my questions or not, that is my determination. The “grammar” if you bothered to follow, was a copy paste from the source indicated. Perhaps put that attitude in check a little, you do no service otherwise.

 

[thecoach]

My views are expressed perfectly by the following encyclical. It was written in 1928, and deals with the ecumenical movement. It is short, easy to understand, and explains the only path to true unity. It also clearly exposes certain individuals who are in “error and deceived” and who “distorting the idea of true religion they reject it, and little by little. turn aside to naturalism and atheism… from which it clearly follows that one who supports those who hold these theories and attempt to realize them, is altogether abandoning the divinely revealed religion”

He further said these these deceived people use flowery words to promote their error, but that " in reality beneath these enticing words and blandishments lies hid a most grave error, by which the foundations of the Catholic faith are completely destroyed".

I am in perfect agreement with the following encyclical. I believe that the people he discusses are indeed deceived; are falling gradually into Athiest, via Pantheism, and, if such people ever worked their way into high places within the Church, would, unless God stepped in to stop them, destroy the Church.

Here is the link: papalencyclicals.net/Pius11/P11MORTA.HTM

If you have any follow up questions, let me know.

Well done! And I love that site, thanks for posting it!

 

[DustinsDad]

…I dont need you to tell me who has answered my questions or not, that is my determination.

Well, when you “determine” the time is right for you to actually answer the questions posed to you, then you will have many anxious ears awaiting your responses.

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad

 

[GerardP]

Here are some important passages from Pope John Paul II’s encyclical on ecumenism–it does not advocate the “big tent” idea, but rather that all must embrace the fullness of the Catholic faith. What is meant by rejecting the “ecumenism of return” defined as " to deny and to reject one’s own faith history" does not reject this truth (as the very quote from Pope Benedict XVI shows) but rather that coming into full communion with the Church does not entail rejecting everything one has had as a part of their faith, but rather perfecting it and allowing it to grow into the fullness of the Christian faith–that is, Catholicism.

Do any of the post conciliar documents acknowledge that other faiths while possibly having some truths in them must reject the positive errors that they actually do have?

What does “denying and rejecting one’s own faith history” mean?

Is that the same as denying and rejecting one’s former faith because it was wrong in order to become Catholic? (this is the traditional understanding of the 'Ecumenism of Return)

Or is it claiming ecumenism means “I was never wrong in my previous religion and I’m not wrong now in becoming Catholic”?

Or third, does it mean you don’t have to say, “I was never a Calvinist or Baptist or New Ager?” (which no one has ever asked of a convert as far as I know. )

That last example is what a rational person would call denying their “faith history.”

Doesn’t a Calvinist have to reject Calvinist errors in order to become a Catholic?

What does “growing into the fullness” of the Christian Faith actually mean? I don’t know of errors and lies “growing into truths.”

Doesn’t conversion mean “rejecting” the positive errors and omissions of false Christian beliefs? (ie. heresies)

What if someone dies and they haven’t “grown into the fullness of the Catholic Faith and perfected it?” What if they flat out reject the real presence of Our Lord?"

Isn’t it kind of important to have completed the “growing into the fullness of the Church” before you die? Because you’ll go to Hell if your not “inside” the Church when you die.

Is believing in a Jesus Christ who did not found a real Church in space and time the same as believing in a false Jesus Christ or is it the same as believing in the True Jesus Christ?

 

[DustinsDad]

Do any of the post conciliar documents acknowledge that other faiths while possibly having some truths in them must reject the positive errors that they actually do have?

What does “denying and rejecting one’s own faith history” mean?

Is that the same as denying and rejecting one’s former faith because it was wrong in order to become Catholic? (this is the traditional understanding of the 'Ecumenism of Return)

Or is it claiming ecumenism means “I was never wrong in my previous religion and I’m not wrong now in becoming Catholic”?

Or third, does it mean you don’t have to say, “I was never a Calvinist or Baptist or New Ager?” (which no one has ever asked of a convert as far as I know. )

That last example is what a rational person would call denying their “faith history.”

Doesn’t a Calvinist have to reject Calvinist errors in order to become a Catholic?

What does “growing into the fullness” of the Christian Faith actually mean? I don’t know of errors and lies “growing into truths.”

Doesn’t conversion mean “rejecting” the positive errors and omissions of false Christian beliefs? (ie. heresies)

What if someone dies and they haven’t “grown into the fullness of the Catholic Faith and perfected it?” What if they flat out reject the real presence of Our Lord?"

Isn’t it kind of important to have completed the “growing into the fullness of the Church” before you die? Because you’ll go to Hell if your not “inside” the Church when you die.

Is believing in a Jesus Christ who did not found a real Church in space and time the same as believing in a false Jesus Christ or is it the same as believing in the True Jesus Christ?

Now I’m going to sit back and watch this…should be good!
http://bestsmileys.com/eating1/16.gif

 

[thecoach]

Well, when you “determine” the time is right for you to actually answer the questions posed to you, then you will have many anxious ears awaiting your responses.

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad

What part of I don’t appreciate your attitude didn’t you get?

 

[DustinsDad]

What part of I don’t appreciate your attitude didn’t you get?

Every word of it.

Perhaps I’ve just grown weary of the dodges and the ducks.

Why do you keep responding to me and not to Pax?

 

[thecoach]

Every word of it.

Perhaps I’ve just grown weary of the dodges and the ducks.

Why do you keep responding to me and not to Pax?

Apparently not every word of it. And if you cant figure it out, Pax doesnt keep posting to me, you do.

 

[DustinsDad]

…Pax doesnt keep posting to me, you do.

I’m sure he’s still waiting for you to answer the question “What is the goal of ecumenism?” posed to you Thursday afternoon.

He’s obviously more patient then me.
http://bestsmileys.com/anxious/1.gif

Here’s my opinion, since I’m sure you want to know.

The end goal of authentic ecumenism is conversion to Christ’s Church - the One True Church. Preaching the truth in charity in other words.

The end goal of ecumenism as practiced today, and as given from your quoted link earlier, must be ecumenism itself. That is, whatever constitutes “ecumenical” activity, these actions have as their end goal more of these same actions. Like a self replicating virus.

I suggest you read "Ecumenism" as a Virus - interesting short little article.

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad

 

[thecoach]

I’m sure he’s still waiting for you to answer the question “What is the goal of ecumenism?” posed to you Thursday afternoon.

He’s obviously more patient then me.
http://bestsmileys.com/anxious/1.gif

Here’s my opinion, since I’m sure you want to know.

The end goal of authentic ecumenism is conversion to Christ’s Church - the One True Church. Preaching the truth in charity in other words.

The end goal of ecumenism as practiced today, and as given from your quoted link earlier, must be ecumenism itself. That is, whatever constitutes “ecumenical” activity, these actions have as their end goal more of these same actions. Like a self replicating virus.

I suggest you read "Ecumenism" as a Virus - interesting short little article.

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad

Good, you’re entitled to your opinion. I would prefer not to chat with you any further.

 

[latinmasslover]

Good, you’re entitled to your opinion. I would prefer not to chat with you any further.

So what’s the goal of ecumenism?