How can I reconcile Nostrae Aetate with my faith and common sense?

[JReducation]

It must be noted, also, that this does not mean that the Muslims are correct or “right” in their understanding of God.

You may get 60% of the questions correct on an exam, but you still fail and get a low D.

The Church has never said this. What the Church has said and we must accept is that the Muslims have a special place in the plan of salvation, because they do worship the one God who is the God of Abraham.

The Church has not said that they understand the nature of God. If they did, they would be Christian.

To not understand the nature of God is not the same as worshiping a false God.

I’ve always explained it this way. Muslims and Jews have serious problems with the Incarnation, because they believe that it is a sin to imagine that God would stoop so low as to take on the form a man who is made of dust and returns to dust. They just can’t wrap their heads around the idea that human nature is elevated to a higher dignity by the Incarnation of the Second Person of the Trinity.

Their rejection of the Trinity is not based on a desire to reject God, but on a mistaken idea of protecting God from defilement.

Even though the idea is mistaken, the desire to protect God is an act of love. They’re just protecting him from a danger that does not exist.

That’s the truth. I’m a Jew. This is the first problem that Jews have with the Trinity, the Incarnation. If you can’t wrap your head around this point, the rest is not even worth trying to understand.

 

[Melchior_1]

The Trinity is like neapolitan ice cream. Three distinct flavors, one ice cream box.

Christians, Jews, and Muslims all have the box of neapolitan ice cream, and hold onto it. Muslims and Jews only acknowledge the chocolate portion of the tri-flavored ice cream they hold in their hands. Same ice cream as us, but they only acknowledge one third of it.

Added bonus for this analogy; as Catholics, we actually eat the ice cream.

 

[moon1234]

Could someone then please explain how you reconcile the following ex cathedra statements from Pope’s with NA? If the old is somehow wrong then so much for infallibility. NA can not reform what came before so how are we to interpret these ex cathedra statements:

Pope Boniface VIII, Bull Unam sanctam (1302): "We are compelled in virtue of our faith to believe and maintain that there is only one holy Catholic Church, and that one is apostolic. This we firmly believe and profess without qualification. Outside this Church there is no salvation and no remission of sins, the Spouse in the Canticle proclaiming: ‘One is my dove, my perfect one. One is she of her mother, the chosen of her that bore her’ (Canticle of Canticles 6:8); which represents the one mystical body whose head is Christ, of Christ indeed, as God. And in this, ‘one Lord, one faith, one baptism’ (Ephesians 4:5). Certainly Noah had one ark at the time of the flood, prefiguring one Church which perfect to one cubit having one ruler and guide, namely Noah, outside of which we read all living things were destroyed… We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.

"*

*Pope Eugene IV, Cantate Domino (1441): “The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that **none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the “eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” ***(Matthew 25:41), unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.”

Pope Sylvester II, Profession of Faith, June AD 991: "I believe that in Baptism all sins are forgiven, that one which was committed originally as much as those which are voluntarily committed, and I profess that outside the Catholic Church no one is saved."

There are many more Popes who have spoken on this topic. I guess the best explanation comes directly from Jesus:

Jesus saith to him: I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father, but by me.

John 14:16.

Since Muslims outright reject Christ as God the Son, I don’t see how they can get to the father when Jesus spoke that is not possible.

 

[Genesis315]

The Christian God is Trinitarian. The muslims do not worship the Trinitarian God…they will tell you that to your face.

So would a Jew before Christ revealed the Trinity. So would those Gentiles St. Paul came across, since they had not received this revelation with faith. But they would not therefore be denying the true God (even if innocently), even though the true God was Trinitarian even then.

Just to add, good or bad faith ignorance does not have much bearing here, since God is Trinitarian either way. If, for the sake of argument, it is necessary to acknowledge the Trinity of Persons to acknowledge God, whether one denies the Trinity through innocent ignorance or malice would cause the person to fail to acknowledge the true God (the person would be referring to some other thing which may or may not exist).

I think he seems to support my argument. He certainly does not say that they worship the same God as the Christians. As a matter of fact he calls them: “the forerunner of the Antichrist, which prevails until now.”

I’m not arguing that they acknowledge Jesus as the Christ. They don’t and their doctrine rejects faith in Him, so antichrist is an appropriate pejorative. We’re talking about whether they acknowledge the one Creator of the Universe, not whether they acknowledge the Incarnation of the divine Logos.

Could you specifically address the arguments I have made and show where the logic is lacking? For example, the syllogism I made with with Scriptures concerning natural and supernatural knowledge of God, where does that fail? Can God not be acknowledged naturally? Can the Trinity of Persons be known naturally?

Furthermore, if not God, what do they worship? a demon? an imaginary thing like they did before with Aphrodite? Worshipping anything other than God is idolatry, but St. John of Damascus says they ceased being idolators at the time of Heraclius. If they are not idolators, and they worship something, they must worship God. Where does this syllogism fail?

And now let me ask you:

If a Catholic refuses to believe that the muslims worship the same God as the Christians…is it a sin?

I think at most a teaching like this is at the level which requires obsequium religiosum, so a person could withhold assent if they come to the opposite conclusion in good faith after due diligence.

 

[Melchior_1]

moon1234, do you believe in Baptism of Desire? The concept of NA is essentially BoD writ large.

Everyone in Heaven is Catholic. They must say yes to Christ before they die. God is beyond time, in the 0.00000000001 second before one dies, God can give them the choice.

The question is when God asks them, and that how one lives there life here will shape how they answer. Being Catholic increases your chances of saying yes to Christ, but is still in a guarantee.

 

[PRmerger]

I think it is sad that as you argue vehmently for the concept that muslims worship the same God as the Christians…your main tactic is to attempt to attack our reformed Christian brethren by using the sacraments against them.

Such a strange paradigm you live in.

I am simply pointing out an inconsistency, Mickey.

You cannot exclude the Muslims for denying the Trinity without excluding your Protestant brethren for denying the Eucharist.

You have not yet been able to explain how this is a consistency in your thinking. One presupposes the other.

And now that you’ve brought up sin, it prompts the very good question of whether you think that Protestants are worshipping a different Christ for denying his command to confess our sins in the sacrament of confession.

Do you think they are worshipping a different Christ for denying this, Mickey?

 

[triumphguy]

You are still side-stepping the question.

If you refuse to believe that the muslims and Christians worship the same God. If you say that you do not accept what is written about this in Nostrae Aetate…is it a sin? Do you have to go to confession?

Is it a sin to deny Church teaching?

I’ve denied quite a bit in my time and it’s only in my 50s that I’ve realized I’m not as all-knowing as I thought I was.

I rejected Church teaching on chastity, birth control, the real presence, women priests, the magisterium, etc etc. I was a liberal Catholic.

I confessed to being a “liberal” Catholic. I was in a state of sin because of the way my mind was working.

In order for me to reject Church teaching I would now have to at least commit a sin of pride. So yes, I would have to confess it.

How about you? Is it a sin to deny Church teaching?

I know that you are playing in the catholic sandbox, and I presume you will retreat to your default defense - that doesn’t apply to me I’m not Catholic.

But, if you were Catholic, would you have to confess a sin of disobedience against the Church.

What about in your Church. If you choose to disbelieve a teaching of the church would you have to confess it as a sin?

 

[triumphguy]

I don’t think it’s a sin to think that the Muslims do not worship the same God as Christians, even if written in NA that they do worship God (The Father). Why would you think that it’s a sin? The Vll documents were pastoral, not dogmatic. Does the document define, or does it specifically state that Catholics are obliged to give their assent to this on pain of grave sin? I don’t believe it does. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

What about the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation, Dei Verbum
Or, the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, Lumen Gentium

it’s right there in the titles.

What is an Ecumenical council? Vatican II was the 21st such council.

Ecumenical Councils are assemblies of Patriarchs, Cardinals, residing Bishops, Abbots, male heads of religious orders and other juridical persons, nominated by the Roman Pontiff. They meet to discuss matters of faith and Church discipline. Council decisions, to be valid, are approved by the popes. Participation is limited to these persons, who cannot delegate their voting rights.

And pastoral means that instead of directly attacking specific heresies it was concerned with the Church in the world. Not that it was all about be nicey nice to all and sundry.

It wasn’t some potluck where everyone sings kumbaya!

It was a meeting of nearly 3,000 church leaders. The largest ever gathering in any council.

 

[Denise1957]

What about the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation, Dei Verbum
Or, the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, Lumen Gentium

it’s right there in the titles.

What is an Ecumenical council? Vatican II was the 21st such council.

And pastoral means that instead of directly attacking specific heresies it was concerned with the Church in the world. Not that it was all about be nicey nice to all and sundry.

It wasn’t some potluck where everyone sings kumbaya!

It was a meeting of nearly 3,000 church leaders. The largest ever gathering in any council.

Where does the Church define that it’s a sin to not believe that Muslims worship the same God? I can’t imagine anyone going to confession for this. It would just be silly.

 

[Mrs_Sally]

Please also read the fabulous explanations from Br JR and others in the thread about “pagans”. Also please note that the OP from that thread is currently suspended.

It is certainly OK to realize that you don’t understand something said by the Church. But as Timothysis said

Whenever you come across something that you find incompatible with your faith and common sense, give the benefit of doubt to the Church and start from the position that you are probably mistaken.

 

[moon1234]

moon1234, do you believe in Baptism of Desire? The concept of NA is essentially BoD writ large.

Sure I do. But BOD requires that one be ignorant of the Requirement to be a member of the Church. Muslims are NOT, on the whole, ignorant of this requirement. They outright Reject it. They reject Christ as God. It is in the Quaran.

Everyone in Heaven is Catholic. They must say yes to Christ before they die. God is beyond time, in the 0.00000000001 second before one dies, God can give them the choice.

The question is when God asks them, and that how one lives there life here will shape how they answer. Being Catholic increases your chances of saying yes to Christ, but is still in a guarantee.

We can NOT know who God admits to heaven unless it is revealed to us. What we can NOT do though is presume that those not in the Church worship the same God as Catholics. Who are we to know WHAT imams are teaching? For that fact do you think that a religion that states in their Quarn that Jesus is NOT God is worshiping the SAME God. Jesus did say no one gets to the Father EXECPT through him.

I can’t find ANYTHING before VII or LG that explicitly states that Muslims worship the same God as Catholics. It fact almost all of the documents from Popes and councils state exactly the opposite.

Now as for individual Muslims taken as a person without respect to their professed religion, we can not make a judgement of what will happen to them when they die. It would be no different that us assuming how God will Judge every person. To state that Muslims worship the same God? I just don’t accept that. It is not de fide anyway and I will just stick with the prior teachings of about 20 Popes and state that only Catholics have a sure path to heaven through the Church that Jesus FOUNDED.

 

[triumphguy]

Where does the Church define that it’s a sin to not believe that Muslims worship the same God? I can’t imagine anyone going to confession for this. It would just be silly.

That’s being very reductionist.

So why should the church teach at all? Maybe she should just leave everything to everyone’s interpretation?

When the Pope teaches with two thousand two hundred and twenty one Bishops that a certain thing is a certain way then we should perk up our ears and listen very carefully. And if we cannot understand WHY they are saying X, we should at least assent to X. Assent means
I can’t figure out how they arrived at this destination, but I will just follow the road map they set out.

Not to assent is a sin.

BTW Nostra Aetate’s teaching on Islam was repeated in the Dogmatic Constitution,* Lumen Gentium*

#16 But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Muslims, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind. Nor is God far distant from those who in shadows and images seek the unknown God, for it is He who gives to all men life and breath and all things,(127) and as Saviour wills that all men be saved. DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON THE CHURCH LUMEN GENTIUM SOLEMNLY PROMULGATED BY HIS HOLINESS POPE PAUL VI ON NOVEMBER 21, 1964

 

[Lormar]

Please also read the fabulous explanations from Br JR and others in the thread about “pagans”. Also please note that the OP from that thread is currently suspended.

It is certainly OK to realize that you don’t understand something said by the Church. But as Timothysis said

Whenever you come across something that you find incompatible with your faith and common sense, give the benefit of doubt to the Church and start from the position that you are probably mistaken.

That is wise advice that Timothysis gave, and I am going to remember it.

 

[PRmerger]

I think it is sad that as you argue vehmently for the concept that muslims worship the same God as the Christians…your main tactic is to attempt to attack our reformed Christian brethren by using the sacraments against them.

Actually, I am upholding our Protestant brethren as worshipping the same Christ we do.

That’s because I am consistent and say that the Muslims also worship the same God that we do. Like our Church says.

Where they get it right, I give them a

Where they get it wrong, I say, “Taste and see the goodness of the Lord!”

But you cannot have it both ways. If you deny Muslims worship the same God, then you must also deny that Protestants worship the same Christ.

And I don’t think you would dare to do that, even to someone who vehemently opposes the doctrine of the Real Presence. :nope:

 

[Denise1957]

That’s being very reductionist.

So why should the church teach at all? Maybe she should just leave everything to everyone’s interpretation?

When the Pope teaches with two thousand two hundred and twenty one Bishops that a certain thing is a certain way then we should perk up our ears and listen very carefully. And if we cannot understand WHY they are saying X, we should at least assent to X. Assent means
I can’t figure out how they arrived at this destination, but I will just follow the road map they set out.

Not to assent is a sin.

BTW Nostra Aetate’s teaching on Islam was repeated in the Dogmatic Constitution,* Lumen Gentium*

Okay, so you are saying that everything in the council documents must be assented to by the faithful, or they are in a state of sin?

 

[Mrs_Sally]

We can NOT know who God admits to heaven unless it is revealed to us. What we can NOT do though is presume that those not in the Church worship the same God as Catholics. Who are we to know WHAT imams are teaching? For that fact do you think that a religion that states in their Quarn that Jesus is NOT God is worshiping the SAME God. Jesus did say no one gets to the Father EXECPT through him.

I can’t find ANYTHING before VII or LG that explicitly states that Muslims worship the same God as Catholics. It fact almost all of the documents from Popes and councils state exactly the opposite.

Now as for individual Muslims taken as a person without respect to their professed religion, we can not make a judgement of what will happen to them when they die. It would be no different that us assuming how God will Judge every person. To state that Muslims worship the same God? **I just don’t accept that. It is not de fide anyway and I will just stick with the prior teachings of about 20 Popes **and state that only Catholics have a sure path to heaven through the Church that Jesus FOUNDED.

Moon, I know how confusing and difficult this teaching is. But the part I bolded is the position of a “cafeteria Catholic”. Saying that you do not accept the teaching of the magisterium and will simply go your own way, picking and choosing single sentences or paragraphs out of individual documents, is not the way to “think with the Church.” Please reconsider this position and in humility accept what the Holy Father teaches - he has been a scholar in this area since probably before you were born.

You say that the position of an individual Muslim is different. That is exactly what the Holy Father is saying - but writ large. He is not saying and has never said that every Muslim (or every Jew) will be saved, but that God is merciful to those who do their best to follow him as well as they know how.

Certainly that shouldn’t stop you from engaging in religious discussion with those you know personally from other faiths. However, please show them a Christian at his/her best and be charitable and respectful in your discussions.

 

[Mickey]

That’s because I am consistent and say that the Muslims also worship the same God that we do.

And yet…they don’t.

But you cannot have it both ways

There is no both ways. One way does not worship the Trinitarian God…the other way does. Quite simple.

Your uncharity towards protestants does not change the matter.

How sad.that you must resort to such a paradigm.

 

[Mickey]

Not to assent is a sin.

Legalism.

 

[Mickey]

Where does the Church define that it’s a sin to not believe that Muslims worship the same God? I can’t imagine anyone going to confession for this. It would just be silly.

Agreed.

 

[clem456]

Quote:
Originally Posted by triumphguy
Not to assent is a sin

.

Legalism.

No. This is the oldest one in the book, literally. And probably the most dangerous one.
Re Genesis.