Did the JDDJ contradict Trent?

  • Thread starter Thread starter MicholasMolotov
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

MicholasMolotov

Guest
Assuming the citations given are accurate, it would be difficult to say it was not a contradiction. Clever language keeps most of it in the territory of “officially the same, but in practice different” but some of it seems to pass over even that barrier and into official statements of heresy.

So the question is: is this an accurate portrayal of what was written in both documents?

Did they really reduce Trent to “salutary warnings”?
 
Hi MicholasMolotov,

We examined the JDJ specifically in one of our theology classes. If you read it carefully, it does not contradict Trent. Everything stated in the JDJ is actually drawn from Trent in its near entirety. It is just simplified to the lowest common denominator because the Lutheran tradition no longer has the same theological meanings applied to the same terms and has left out the language of condemnation (as this is an ecumenical document focusing upon our similarities rather than our differences). The confusion arises because Catholics and Lutherans use the same, if not identical, terms but mean very different things. There is a lot of connotation and nuance which is left unsaid which goes against the others theology. The JDJ wasn’t really meant to be a big theological statement on the Church’s part. It was more focused on reducing inter-religious tensions and providing a basis for inter-faith groups to put aside differences between the two faiths and come together on social issues such as poverty, hunger, and social justice. This was part of John Paul II’s preparations to they year 2000 in an effort to make the third millennium an era of peace.

God Bless,
Br. Ben
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top