"Ecumenism"?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jane_doe
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
But you have no interest in Baptist/Orthadox/Anglican Tradition. And no where in this are Catholics getting out of their pews to talk to Baptist/Orthadox/Anglican in their pews. Rather this is all going down is some porcelain tower.

I’m sorry… I’m being testy… I just… this honestly has my guts tied in knots.
I know all of my other posts went unanswered, but I will try again.

What do you mean by ā€œinterest in ____ religionā€?

Respect for, sure. What would a Catholic, a member of the church started by Jesus Christ himself and protected by the Holy Spirit, need to learn from another’s man-made religion?

Some may say Protestant churches are more friendly, for example, but that is not something to* learn* about another’s religion, it is not doctrine.
 
Ecumenism for a lot of people means religious pluralism. More along the lines of I’m ok, you’re ok, or, it’s all good!

Could be a shock to discover that is not what it means for the Catholic Church. Religious pluralism is a heresy, to Catholicism.
 
the horror I’m feeling right now).
In the meantime, might I suggest this ol’ standard?

http://cdn.randomfunnypicture.com/pictures/605dutycallsvu3.png
P.S. I notice that there have been some posts here from Don Ruggero . IMHO his writings are superb.

That aside, from the little bit that I’ve read of this thread (basically a few of your posts, Jane, like the above) it does not at all sound like this thread has actually been about ecumenism, despite that being the thread title.
 
Ecumenism for a lot of people means religious pluralism. More along the lines of I’m ok, you’re ok, or, it’s all good!

Could be a shock to discover that is not what it means for the Catholic Church. Religious pluralism is a heresy, to Catholicism.
It seems to come as a shock for some people that Jesus got it right the first time. šŸ˜‰

And that we, as Catholics, believe(d) him!
 
I know all of my other posts went unanswered, but I will try again.

What do you mean by ā€œinterest in ____ religionā€?

Respect for, sure. What would a Catholic, a member of the church started by Jesus Christ himself and protected by the Holy Spirit, need to learn from another’s man-made religion?

Some may say Protestant churches are more friendly, for example, but that is not something to* learn* about another’s religion, it is not doctrine.
This attitude… I’m sorry, but I find it appalling. These are people’s dearly held beliefs, part of of their souls, that you are so off-handly dismissing. You say that you want them to come back to Rome, but you have zero interest in them. I… is this true?
 
This attitude… I’m sorry, but I find it appalling. These are people’s dearly held beliefs, part of of their souls, that you are so off-handly dismissing. You say that you want them to come back to Rome, but you have zero interest in them. I… is this true?
This coming from a Mormon? Thanks for the laugh, Jane!
 
It seems to come as a shock for some people that Jesus got it right the first time. šŸ˜‰

And that we, as Catholics, believe(d) him!
Yeah that too.

I don’t know why it would be horrifying to discover that the Catholic Church teaches the fullness of truth exists in itself and Christian unity means unifying separated Christians back to the fullness of truth. There is but one faith, one God, one baptism and one Lord over all. Religious pluralism does not unite under one faith and one Lord. It is an approach that defines faith as whatever-I-believe-is-Truth and Christ’s Kingship as fickle.
 
This makes me think you know nothing about Mormonism, and truly value other people little.
Let’s see…I’ve hung around Mormon friends for 27 years, I live in Utah, I had the missionaries over for multiple visits and even for dinner, I have the Book of Mormon on the desk next to my computer, I’ve engaged on hundreds of Mormon threads for several years…

I know a couple of things I would think.

But, tell me, what about Mormonism am I getting wrong? Do the LDS missionaries tell others that the LDS church is the one, true church? When a person is baptized LDS, do they stop attending their former church? Do Mormons actually believe you can become Mormon and still be, say Baptist?
 
This attitude… I’m sorry, but I find it appalling. These are people’s dearly held beliefs, part of of their souls, that you are so off-handly dismissing. You say that you want them to come back to Rome, but you have zero interest in them. I… is this true?
Do you believe in objective truth?

I ask because the Catholic Church teaches that there is objective truth.

The Catholic and Orthodox Churches teach that Jesus is truly present in the Eucharist and that the bread and wine really and truly become His Body and Blood. The Catholic and Orthodox Churches teach that baptism is salvific and it really does wash away our sins.

Certain Protestants believe that the Eucharist is only symbolic and that Jesus’ presence in the bread and wine is metaphoric. Certain Protestants also believe that baptism in and of itself is not salvific and only a sign of a person’s faith in and commitment to Christ.

So who is right? They both cannot be correct.
 
Oh so true…
Thank you. šŸ™‚ Isn’t it curious how often many of us are upset by the opinions of people whose names we don’t even know? :hmmm:

Btw, Father may have beaten me to the punch on this, but I would strongly recommend that you visit vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/index.htm. (Granted, it will put you in the same dilemma that many of us encounter, namely cutting into the amount of time you spend on discussion forums. 😦 :o)
 
Do you believe in objective truth?

I ask because the Catholic Church teaches that there is objective truth.

The Catholic and Orthodox Churches teach that Jesus is truly present in the Eucharist and that the bread and wine really and truly become His Body and Blood. The Catholic and Orthodox Churches teach that baptism is salvific and it really does wash away our sins.

Certain Protestants believe that the Eucharist is only symbolic and that Jesus’ presence in the bread and wine is metaphoric. Certain Protestants also believe that baptism in and of itself is not salvific and only a sign of a person’s faith in and commitment to Christ.

So who is right? They both cannot be correct.
Every Mormon teenager I know begins their testimony with ā€œI know the church is trueā€.

Obviously, Mormons are taught, and teach, that they are correct. The One True Church.

As the Missionary Pal likes to say, ā€œeither the Catholics are right, or the Mormons are right. But we can’t both be rightā€.
 
This attitude… I’m sorry, but I find it appalling. These are people’s dearly held beliefs, part of of their souls, that you are so off-handly dismissing. You say that you want them to come back to Rome, but you have zero interest in them. I… is this true?
Your protestations ring hollow in light of your own church’s history of splinter groups, some of whom have merged with or been reconciled with or otherwise absorbed into various other groups within the offshoots of and main branch of the Mormon church.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sects_in_the_Latter_Day_Saint_movement

The goal of ecumenism within the Christian community is to heal the divisions and regain unity. We are talking about healing *within *Christianity, not conversion from without. That is something entirely different.

Whether the Mormon groups have this goal within their own religion, or what they call it, I don’t know. But clearly there has been work in this regard because some groups have merged and have been reconciled with others over time. Entire GROUPS, not just individuals. Isn’t this what you find abhorrent? Yet it takes place inside your own religion.
 
Every Mormon teenager I know begins their testimony with ā€œI know the church is trueā€.

Obviously, Mormons are taught, and teach, that they are correct. The One True Church.

As the Missionary Pal likes to say, ā€œeither the Catholics are right, or the Mormons are right. But we can’t both be rightā€.
Not to mention the Orthodox teach their church is the one true church. As do the Oriental Orthodox. As do the Assyrian Church. Not to mention other smaller faith groups that make the claim.

There’s a lot of churches that make claims to being the one true church.
 
Not to mention the Orthodox teach their church is the one true church. As do the Oriental Orthodox. As do the Assyrian Church. Not to mention other smaller faith groups that make the claim.

There’s a lot of churches that make claims to being the one true church.
For some reason though, Jane has trouble with the Catholic Church doing it. 🤷
 
I feel I’m missing part of the story here and/or misunderstanding things. Anyone care to help me out?
I would say it would be similar to Apostle Paul Palmieri working with all the other latter-day-saint groups to unite them under the true successor to Joseph Smith.
 
To state this again, my objections are NOT:
  1. A church claiming to be the One True Church
  2. Somebody believing they have the Truth
  3. Somebody wanting to share that Truth with someone
  4. The dream of having one unified Christian church
  5. People believing something is True and another person believing a different thing is True (obviously a least one is really wrong, but that is their belief)
I DO object:
  1. You guys pretending that ā€œecumenismā€ has some other goal than them jettisoning their belief and adopting yours.
  2. The fact that I am the only person here to use the word ā€œbeliefā€, or care about what an individual believes.
  3. The whole methodology behind this mass proselytization, particularly the part where Catholics don’t get out of the pews to talk to Anglicans/Baptists/whatever.
 
  1. The whole methodology behind this mass proselytization, particularly the part where Catholics don’t get out of the pews to talk to Anglicans/Baptists/whatever.
Do you represent the Brighamite latter-day-saint church? Can you speak for the whole Church?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top