In first video message, Pope Francis stresses unity: 'We are all children of God' [CNA]

[LongingSoul]

But remember that Jesus said before He comes the antichrist will come and there will be almost no faith left. Jesus will also return as He left and He will arrive with a host of angels and ALL will know Him even those who pierced Him.
The Jewish messianic age also corresponds to the new age age of aquarius and the return of Maitreya. of Buddhism.
There is absolutely nothing in Catholic eschatology that promotes a one world religion or unified society. The Catechism states that there will be a final unleashing of evil against the Church that will cause Jesus to return with His angels, The new heavens and new earth will only be at the conclusion of history and after the final judgement.

catholic.com/tracts/the-antichrist

 

[graciew]

We Catholics no longer talk of ‘false religions’ or schismatics or heretics when talking about others who believe in a divine Creator. The word false is attributed to those who put something before God in an idolatrous way like money or power or satanist practices. We can recognise the human quest for a relationship with a divine good is at the heart of all searches for God. That means recognising that quest in Jewish, Islamic and Buddhist symbols of God and building on the unity there to fight against the real anti godly idols.

I have to admit that words such as heretics ,schismatics,false religioms among others sound so.strong and foreign to me that I need to rationalize that I just learnt differently. And that is it.
At times ,it even hurts ,it is like two worlds. We do not use those words. We know we are children of God and help each other recognize that divine little light within of goodness that cannot be ours. We do not go about converting nor it is a strategy. We belong ,only that sometimes we just do not realize.
God loves us ,and we are lovable in His eyes. How can we nit say He loves us all and we are His children.
I just do not know.
It is hard to explain.

 

[Pulvis]

We Catholics no longer talk of ‘false religions’ or schismatics or heretics when talking about others who believe in a divine Creator. The word false is attributed to those who put something before God in an idolatrous way like money or power or satanist practices. We can recognise the human quest for a relationship with a divine good is at the heart of all searches for God. That means recognising that quest in Jewish, Islamic and Buddhist symbols of God and building on the unity there to fight against the real anti godly idols.

I think, if i correctly understand what you wrote, you just threw the majority of the Doctors of the Church, the majority of the Saints, And most past Popes under the proverbial bus. Not to mention the hard teachings of scripture as well.
There are heretics, there are schismatics, and there are many false religions.

 

[RACJ]

My question is, if we are all part of the same divine stew, does it matter what we believe? Is the worst of the worst, Hitler for example, in the same pot with Pope John Paul II? If so, does it matter what we believe, what we do with our lives, or on a more mundane matter, whether we attend church? Maybe we should all go our separate ways, do our own things and seek Hedonistic pleasure, since we all wind up in the same place anyway, through God’s grace.

 

[graciew]

I think, if i correctly understand what you wrote, you just threw the majority of the Doctors of the Church, the majority of the Saints, And most past Popes under the proverbial bus. Not to mention the hard teachings of scripture as well.
There are heretics, there are schismatics, and there are many false religions.

No , she didn ’ t. She left them in the hands and mouths of those who might need to adequately use them for a proper purpose.
It is not just language we use about lightly if ever against each other.

 

[LordHaveMercy]

Certainly, my friend. When I say ‘false religion’ I am referring to any and every religion other than the one true religion founded by Jesus Christ, which is the Catholic Church.

The symbol being held next to the image of Jesus is clearly a symbol of Rabbinical Judaism. Jesus practiced Biblical Judaism, which is the religion that began with God’s covenant with Abraham. With the destruction of the temple in 70 AD, Biblical Judaism ceased to exist and two new religions claimed to be its heir: Christianity and Rabbinical Judaism. The Judaism practiced today is not a mother-faith to Christianity, but a sister faith that started after, and in opposition to, Christianity.

 

[LordHaveMercy]

We Catholics no longer talk of ‘false religions’ or schismatics or heretics when talking about others who believe in a divine Creator. The word false is attributed to those who put something before God in an idolatrous way like money or power or satanist practices. We can recognise the human quest for a relationship with a divine good is at the heart of all searches for God. That means recognising that quest in Jewish, Islamic and Buddhist symbols of God and building on the unity there to fight against the real anti godly idols.

I think this is the key to why some Catholics support the video and some are horrified by it. Ultimately, if you believe that Judaism, Islam, Buddhism and Catholicism all lead to the same God with Catholicism being perhaps the most ‘direct’ path, you will see no problem with the video. If you believe that Judaism, Islam and Buddhism are false religions that take people away from the true God, then you will find the video problematic. It’s not as much about personal preferences as it is about ‘big picture’ beliefs like that.

 

[TCEL]

I think this is the key to why some Catholics support the video and some are horrified by it. Ultimately, if you believe that Judaism, Islam, Buddhism and Catholicism all lead to the same God with Catholicism being perhaps the most ‘direct’ path, you will see no problem with the video. If you believe that Judaism, Islam and Buddhism are false religions that take people away from the true God, then you will find the video problematic. It’s not as much about personal preferences as it is about ‘big picture’ beliefs like that.

I think I fall in another category. I don’t believe all roads lead to God, but I do believe God may speak to us on the road we are on, and predispose our hearts. Maybe that’s a distinction without a difference for some people, but I don’t think so.

 

[LordHaveMercy]

That is an opinion that some people hold, but it’s certainly not so certain. It’s a complex issue. If they do worship the same God, does that matter? Is their worship pleasing to him? Does that affect their salvation? I really am asking these questions, no sarcasm.

The Jews obviously did worship the one true God, but then rejected him right to his face, I’m honestly not sure what the implications of that are. You could say that perhaps they only rejected the Son, but Jesus says the only way to the Father is through Him.

Within Islam, it’s hard to say that Allah is Jesus Christ since the Koran speaks of Christ and not as God. Plus, the Koran positively excludes the possibility of God being a trinity, and the god of Islam has Muhammad as his prophet. These are not attributes of the one true God.

So while Judaism and Islam, and actually even the Greek pagans and others in the world, have some knowledge of god, I don’t know that we can so easily say that we all ‘worship the one true God.’ But whether or not they do worship the One True God, or even if a person worships no God at all, they are still our brother and sister and we must love them because they have an immortal soul and are created by God.

 

[abucs]

I completely reject an ‘intellectualised’ humanistic universalism that has tried to force religions all under the modern manufactured morality of equality. I believe such a view has been and is now detrimental not only to society but truth.

I can understand those who guard against such dangers.

But i find nothing objectionable in the Pope’s remarks. I am not a fan of Francis but I applaud his gesture.

 

[irenaeus1]

That is an opinion that some people hold, but it’s certainly not so certain. It’s a complex issue. If they do worship the same God, does that matter? Is their worship pleasing to him? Does that affect their salvation? I really am asking these questions, no sarcasm.

The Jews obviously did worship the one true God, but then rejected him right to his face, I’m honestly not sure what the implications of that are. You could say that perhaps they only rejected the Son, but Jesus says the only way to the Father is through Him.

Within Islam, it’s hard to say that Allah is Jesus Christ since the Koran speaks of Christ and not as God. Plus, the Koran positively excludes the possibility of God being a trinity, and the god of Islam has Muhammad as his prophet. These are not attributes of the one true God.

So while Judaism and Islam, and actually even the Greek pagans and others in the world, have some knowledge of god, I don’t know that we can so easily say that we all ‘worship the one true God.’ But whether or not they do worship the One True God, or even if a person worships no God at all, they are still our brother and sister and we must love them because they have an immortal soul and are created by God.

Excellent summary on the complexity of ‘do they worship the same God’. The only issue again is the confusion with saying we are all brothers and sisters. Well, we are all brothers and sisters because we belong to the human family irrespective of their religion, but that is not what we mean when we speak of ourselves as Christian brothers and sisters. Or similar confusion when stating we are all children of God. Yes, if we are talking about being God’s offspring; i.e., we are all his creatures. But as Christians, being children of God has a special meaning because we are incorporated into Christ; we have been adopted, and our spirit cries out, “Abba, Father.” In these senses, we are not all brothers and sisters with those of other faiths; we are not all children of God. The ambiguity causes confusion.

 

[TCEL]

Excellent summary on the complexity of ‘do they worship the same God’. The only issue again is the confusion with saying we are all brothers and sisters. Well, we are all brothers and sisters because we belong to the human family irrespective of their religion, but that is not what we mean when we speak of ourselves as Christian brothers and sisters. Or similar confusion when stating we are all children of God. Yes, if we are talking about being God’s offspring; i.e., we are all his creatures. But as Christians, being children of God has a special meaning because we are incorporated into Christ; we have been adopted, and our spirit cries out, “Abba, Father.” In these senses, we are not all brothers and sisters with those of other faiths; we are not all children of God. The ambiguity causes confusion.

Yes. I think, given the theme of the address, it logically follows Pope Francis is speaking of our common humanity, since he’s calling us to dialogue with other faiths. Is that not a safe assumption for a committed Catholic to make? Again, this topic calls to my mind the two creation accounts-two aspects of the same story-one more “naturalistic,” the other more focused on the covenant with Adam and Eve, both true.

 

[LordHaveMercy]

Excellent summary on the complexity of ‘do they worship the same God’. The only issue again is the confusion with saying we are all brothers and sisters. Well, we are all brothers and sisters because we belong to the human family irrespective of their religion, but that is not what we mean when we speak of ourselves as Christian brothers and sisters. Or similar confusion when stating we are all children of God. Yes, if we are talking about being God’s offspring; i.e., we are all his creatures. But as Christians, being children of God has a special meaning because we are incorporated into Christ; we have been adopted, and our spirit cries out, “Abba, Father.” In these senses, we are not all brothers and sisters with those of other faiths; we are not all children of God. The ambiguity causes confusion.

Yeah, that’s a fair comment. I mostly meant it to say “we don’t need to pick through our religions and find every similarity possible in order to love our fellow humans.”

 

[SpeakInSilence]

SpeakInSilence

People who are new to faith tend to be aggressive and duallistic in the way they witness.
They see themselves separated from the discursive others who will be damned if they don’t convert.

Jim

This is extremely condescending, and you are completely and utterly missing the point of what I’m saying.

I do not see those outside of the Church as “other”. I see myself, as I was, when I was not Catholic. Something I still struggle with. I want them to be at my Fathers table. Despite all the good in other religions it’s all **** compared to the life with Christ.

Just because I’m saying the difference are important is not that I’m saying we need to pound in people’s faces they are living in false religions.

People are so caught up in dichotomies.

 

[CompSciGuy]

This is extremely condescending, and you are completely and utterly missing the point of what I’m saying.

I do not see those outside of the Church as “other”. I see myself, as I was, when I was not Catholic. Something I still struggle with. I want them to be at my Fathers table. Despite all the good in other religions it’s all **** compared to the life with Christ.

Just because I’m saying the difference are important is not that I’m saying we need to pound in people’s faces they are living in false religions.

People are so caught up in dichotomies.

I get what you are saying.

I think the people who posted in the beginning got it too.

The dichotomies are a distraction from the real issue, which is that it is our jobs as Catholics to proclaim the good news of Christ and pray for the repentance and conversion of sinners, and that it is wrong to cause scandal by being sloppy with our message. As others have stated in the beginning posts, the imagery in this video very much creates a feeling of universalism and religious indifferentism, where Christianity is just one of many valid ways to experience God. If this were made by a secular organization, that is, one not specifically affiliated with any religion, then this video would not be so objectionable. But the fact that it was made by the Catholic Church, which claims to hold the fullness of truth, and that the video does not in any way point its viewers to Christ or promote the fullness of the faith, which is the Church’s job to begin with, this is what gives cause for concern.

I know a lot of people are claiming that the pope is not promoting religious indifferentism, but is simply promoting a religious dialogue. Imagine if Pope Francis, in a well-meaning gesture, decided to do a video to reach out to Catholics experiencing same-sex attraction and tell them of Christ’s love for them invite them to mass. Now imagine if he made the video with a giant rainbow flag in the background. Even if he did not explicitly say anything to promote the sacramental union of gay couples, don’t you think he would still be sending that message with the imagery in the video? It’s the same thing with this video. Whatever the intended message is, the one that is being conveyed is inappropriate. If you don’t believe me, read the comments section on the youtube video.

For what it’s worth, if you care about whether people convert to the Catholic faith, saying that the Catholic faith is just one way out of many is not the way to do it. The liberal episcopal church has been saying this for years now, and their numbers are ever dwindling. People tend to find that there just isn’t much of a point in following a religion or converting to it if that religion deems itself unnecessary for the salvation of souls in the first place.

 

[CompSciGuy]

Really? So what do posters mean when they lament that they don’t like the Pope’s message, and complain that it does not respect all that they did to become/remain Catholic. Maybe offended is not the right term, but complaining certainly is.

So far in your posts you have done nothing but misrepresent people’s views from the beginning of this post and ignore the real issues they are bringing up. The only reason people do what you are doing is because they feel insecure and are incapable of promoting their own views logically, so they make other people’s views look silly so that they can feel vindicated in attacking them and ignoring the real points that they are raising. In logic, this is called a straw man argument. I suggest you let your emotions cool, think things through and then discuss the matters in a more rational manner.

 

[CompSciGuy]

Pope Francis closes the video by expressing his hope that viewers “will spread my prayer request this month: that sincere dialogue among men and women of different faiths may produce fruits of peace and justice. I have confidence in your prayers.”

Lets get the word out folks

I have to ask, what is the end goal of this dialogue?

 

[graciew]

I have to ask, what is the end goal of this dialogue?

It is explained in the OP.

And asfar as points people may be raising , here is more.
The first document is to be read in its totality to understand it better as inter religious dialogue is concerned.

Nostra Aetate ,Paul VI

1. We cannot truly call on God, the Father of all, if we refuse to treat in a brotherly way any man, created as he is in the image of God. Man’s relation to God the Father and his relation to men his brothers are so linked together that Scripture says: “He who does not love does not know God” (1 John 4:8).

vatican.va/archive/hist_c…aetate_en.html

Redemptoris Missio ,John Paul II

w2.vatican.va/content/john-pa…is-missio.html

. "The Church forms consciences by revealing to peoples the God whom they seek and do not yet know, the grandeur of man created in God’s image and loved by him, the equality of all men and women as God’s sons and daughters, the mastery of man over nature created by God and placed at man’s service, and the obligation to work for the development of the whole person and of all mankind.

1. Through the gospel message, the Church offers a force for liberation which promotes development precisely because it leads to conversion of heart and of ways of thinking, fosters the recognition of each person’s dignity, encourages solidarity, commitment and service of one’s neighbor, and gives everyone a place in God’s plan, which is the building of his kingdom of peace and justice, beginning already in this life. This is the biblical perspective of the “new heavens and a new earth” (cf. Is 65:17; 2 Pt 3:13; Rv 21:1), …"

usccb.org/news/2014/14-144.cfm

"The bishops affirmed Pope Francis’ words of November 28, 2013, to the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, that “dialogue does not mean renouncing one’s identity” nor accepting compromises on faith and morals "

 

[Beautiful]

Maybe we should start focusing on what we agree on, rather than what sets us apart.

In a nutshell…I like to believe that is the message.

But I say to you, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you,

that you may be children of your heavenly Father, for he makes his sun rise on the bad and the good, and causes rain to fall on the just and the unjust.

Matthew 5:44-45

I am sure Pope Francis’ prayer and prayer request is sincere.

The concern that I have is that this ‘movement’ for inclusiveness of a diverse set of beliefs under One could be used as the channel to the prophesied antichrist. Clearly that is not the intent of Pope Francis…just saying proceed with caution.

“Behold, I am sending you like sheep in the midst of wolves; so be shrewd as serpents and simple as doves.

Matthew 10:16

 

[Pulvis]

I have to ask, what is the end goal of this dialogue?

Compsciguy, if the end goal is not the conversion of all to Christ Jesus and unity with His Church, the dialogue is rather pointless in my opinion.
The Holy Gospel according to St. Matthew; Ch. 28>
" [19] Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. [20] Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world. "

For we know our Lord said this:
"[5] Thomas saith to him: Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way?

[6] Jesus saith to him: I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father, but by me. [7] If you had known me, you would without doubt have known my Father also: and from henceforth you shall know him, and you have seen him. [8] Philip saith to him: Lord, shew us the Father, and it is enough for us. [9] Jesus saith to him: Have I been so long a time with you; and have you not known me? Philip, he that seeth me seeth the Father also. How sayest thou, shew us the Father? [10] Do you not believe, that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? The words that I speak to you, I speak not of myself. But the Father who abideth in me, he doth the works.
[11] Believe you not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? [12] Otherwise believe for the very works’ sake. Amen, amen I say to you, he that believeth in me, the works that I do, he also shall do; and greater than these shall he do. [13] Because I go to the Father: and whatsoever you shall ask the Father in my name, that will I do: that the Father may be glorified in the Son. [14] If you shall ask me any thing in my name, that I will do. [15] If you love me, keep my commandments." St. John, Ch. 14

Scripture from DRBO.ORG

This age of relativism is in direct conflict with Scripture and the perineal teachings of the Church.
I suppose it might boil down to whether one accepts that the Church is the sum of it’s teachings from the Beginning of Christ’s ministry in 28-30 A.D. to the present, or you believe that the Church in it’s current state has clarified the Faith starting in A.D. 1965 going forward, and previous teachings are now moot.

just my opinion. I am more confused than certain as to the current state of affairs.