Is rampant Ecumenism undermining the Pope's Crusade against Relativism?

[JSmitty2005]

Unfortunately it doesn’t seem like Benedict is doing anything differently compared to JP2 when it comes to ecumenism and interfaith “dialogue” (whatever the goal of that is, no one is exactly sure). Because of this, I think that the Holy Father will have a very hard time advancing his agenda to eradicate relativism when the Church is implicitly supporting religious indifference! What say you?

 

[buffalo]

JSmitty2005:

Unfortunately it doesn’t seem like Benedict is doing anything differently compared to JP2 when it comes to ecumenism and interfaith “dialogue” (whatever the goal of that is, no one is exactly sure). Because of this, I think that the Holy Father will have a very hard time advancing his agenda to eradicate relativism when the Church is implicitly supporting religious indifference! What say you?

Agreed. Ecuneminism should be to bring us all together under the Catholic Church, not to validate their errors.

 

[Reformed_Rob]

JSmitty2005:

Unfortunately it doesn’t seem like Benedict is doing anything differently compared to JP2 when it comes to ecumenism and interfaith “dialogue” (whatever the goal of that is, no one is exactly sure). Because of this, I think that the Holy Father will have a very hard time advancing his agenda to eradicate relativism when the Church is implicitly supporting religious indifference! What say you?

Maybe I’m 40 years behind the times, but…

reading Pope Paul VI’s Encyclical “Ecclesiam Suam” was very helpful in regard to the “dialogue” issue which you bring up. Obviously, this was promulgated during the time of the V2 Council, so it’s got that “in the midst of the Council” feel to it. But, it’s definitely helpful, at least it was to me.

You’ve probably read it. The link’s right there above. Here’s a very relevant excerpt on the term “dialogue.”

The Term Explained

  64. If, as We said, the Church realizes what is God's will in its regard, it will gain for itself a great store of energy, and in addition will conceive the need for pouring out this energy in the service of all men. It will have a clear awareness of a mission received from God, of a message to be spread far and wide. Here lies the source of our evangelical duty, our mandate to teach all nations, and our apostolic endeavor to strive for the eternal salvation of all men. Merely to remain true to the faith is not enough. Certainly we must preserve and defend the treasure of truth and grace that we have inherited through Christian tradition. As St. Paul said, "keep that which is committed to thy trust." (42) **But neither the preservation nor the defense of the faith exhausts the duty of the Church in regard to the gifts it has been given. The very nature of the gifts which Christ has given the Church demands that they be extended to others and shared with others.** This must be obvious from the words: "Going, therefore, teach ye all nations," (43) Christ's final command to His apostles. The word apostle implies a mission from which there is no escaping.

To this internal drive of charity which seeks expression in the external gift of charity, We will apply the word "dialogue."

1. The Church must enter into dialogue with the world in which it lives. It has something to say, a message to give, a communication to make.

Lofty ideals, yes. Would P. Paul VI be pleased with the situation you complain of today?? I don’t know, but you’re here in post-Conciliar era, so you ought to make the most of it, I think!!

Certainly, it’s a bold ideal, to go forth among the nations and teach them, believing and obeying what you ought to without watering it down…hmmmm… I’ve heard that before somewhere it sounds familiar…:yup:

You seem to be suspicious and dialogue. Well, for me, it was interfaith dialogue that made me first be interested in learning about the Catholic faith, and has in part maintained that interest over time. As for your supposing relativism to be running rampant in the Church, someone else will have to address that.

And btw, show us all proof that the Church is “supporting religious indifference.”

 

[AquinasXVI]

The Curia has two parts when it comes to Ecumenism: the CDF and the CU. The CU advances the communication and the human dialog and the CDF reigns in how far the CC can go in the dialog…this tension is part of the design so there’s a check and balance built in the system…this is JP II’s idea.

I do not think that ecumenism is undermining…it’s like a long term investment. We first need to get everyone on the table and then we can start doing work.

As for us laypeople…we need to pray for these two offices that they do the will of God in unifying Christendom.

in XT.

 

[rwoehmke]

buffalo:

Agreed. Ecuneminism should be to bring us all together under the Catholic Church, not to validate their errors.

While I also think it would be wonderful if Ecumenism brought us all together in the Catholic Church, I also see a realistic value in such dialogue as it exposes those of other faiths to exactly what the Catholic Church is about. Some will be attracted and convert, but there will be many who will not. We are seeking to validate our commonalitys and not our differences. To accept that someone is different from us is not the same as validating those differences. One other erroneous belief that I hear repeated time and again is that this is to lead to a lowest common denominator type of faith.
The dialogue helps us to understand where each of us is coming from and to build friendship or Christian love on the basis of those things we have in common. The long term goal is of course as Jesus says,“that all may be one.” We are seperated brethren, but that we are brethren at all is important. No one is being asked to compromise their faith to come closer to that unity. Meditating on the story of the Good Samaritan can teach us a lot about ecumenism. Jesus never said to love only those who are like ourselves. I think that is where John Paul II and now Benedict are coming from.

 

[Hegesippus]

JSmitty2005:

Unfortunately it doesn’t seem like Benedict is doing anything differently compared to JP2 when it comes to ecumenism and interfaith “dialogue” (whatever the goal of that is, no one is exactly sure). Because of this, I think that the Holy Father will have a very hard time advancing his agenda to eradicate relativism when the Church is implicitly supporting religious indifference! What say you?

I did not think His Holiness Pope Benedict was going as far in ecuminism as JPII. Could you give examples of Benedict engaging in some actions that were similar to his predecessor.

 

[CollegeCatholic]

Since all of humanity carries the same value evidenced in being created in the image and likeness of God and especially so in the universal atonement of mankind in the death and resurrection of Christ on the Cross, we can not play the “we’re better than you game” when it comes to dialogue. By participating in peaceful and respectful dialogue, we are both recognizing the inherrent value of each human individual and also offering our seperated brethren the Good news in its unadulterated form. Also, by reinforcing the truths that exist in practically all faith traditions, we are able to find leverage on these particular aspects and thus proclaim the Wholeness of Truth found only in Christ’s established Church, bringing greater light to the truths and also distortions of other faiths. As a city on a hill that cannot be hidden, our place in this world is not that of seclusion, secrecy, and condemnation but of oppenness, charity, and sincere intent on unifying all of mankind. We must first shake hands before we can lock arms and this interfaith and ecumenical dialogue is just that. While you all stigamtize this exchange by calling the other hand unclean, Christ takes the hand of the leper and makes it clean with a kiss.

 

[InnocentIII]

JSmitty2005:

Unfortunately it doesn’t seem like Benedict is doing anything differently compared to JP2 when it comes to ecumenism and interfaith “dialogue” (whatever the goal of that is, no one is exactly sure). Because of this, I think that the Holy Father will have a very hard time advancing his agenda to eradicate relativism when the Church is implicitly supporting religious indifference! What say you?

My feeling is that ecumenism is a misnomer for what we have been experiencing since the 60’s. What goes by this name is in fact just syncretism, the rduction of all differences to the lowest possible denominator. True ecumenism in the Catholic sense is possible only with the Orthodox in so far as our theology is the same though we differ on matters of government. Thus we accept the validity of Orthodox sacraments (and vice versa) and we can have our differences while maintaining our commonality. There are very real issues however once we move beyond this. The non-Catholic christians rejected the whole sacramental basis of the Church, while non-christians have never accepted it. Hence they do not accept the true faith as it is defined by the scriptures and traditions of the Church. How then can we have ecumenism - only by focusing on the very limited areas of common belief. Thus it can be argued that Jews, Moslems and Protestants all believe in the same God, Protestants believe in Jesus as the son of God, Hindus believe in divine beings. Buddhists believe in certain core moral values similar to ours. You see the point. All religions then become valid and no religion has a monopoly on truth. Hence we fail Our Lord’s command to “go ye and preach the gospel” and religion becomes purely a social marker such as race, class etc. The 60’s obsession with “inclusiveness and diversity” was always a cover for a syncrenistic endeavour to reduce all differences to a bland commonality. Ecumenism has been a disastrous failure because it drives away the faithful but lacks the authority to draw others and in fact deliberately avoids “proselytising”. This is a recipe for religious suicide.