No reason to celebrate Reformation, says Cardinal Müller [CC]

[ComplineSanFran]

The teaching has not changed. Souls are saved through the Catholic Church as a result of elements of the grace of Catholic Church present in schismatic groups, who have removed themselves from the Church, in a kind of ‘ripple out’ effect. To say that someone is saved as a result of belonging to a religion or faith outside of the Catholic Church, or that they are saved despite the Catholic Church, is still indifferentism and does apply to Anglicans and other Protestants if this claim is made in regarding them.

To also claim that the ‘wider Church’ is actually made up a range of different Christian denominations who together make up the Church is dangerously close to the heresy of indifferentism as it denies that the means for salvation comes through the one true Church, the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church is not a Christian denomination, it is the Christian Church.

And there we must disagree.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

The teaching has not changed. Souls are saved through the Catholic Church as a result of elements of the grace of Catholic Church present in schismatic groups, who have removed themselves from the Church, in a kind of ‘ripple out’ effect. To say that someone is saved as a result of belonging to a religion or faith outside of the Catholic Church, or that they are saved despite the Catholic Church, is still indifferentism and does apply to Anglicans and other Protestants if this claim is made in regarding them.

To also claim that the ‘wider Church’ is actually made up a range of different Christian denominations who together make up the Church is dangerously close to the heresy of indifferentism as it denies that the means for salvation comes through the one true Church, the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church is not a Christian denomination, it is the Christian Church.

From the CCC: Bold is my emphasis.

“Outside the Church there is no salvation”

846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:

Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.336

847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:

**Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.337
**

Over the centuries there has been many causes from between Catholics, Protestants, and non-Christians, to prevent a person from seeing the Catholic Church as true or from knowing Jesus Christ as the God the Son.

It takes more than just being told, “the Catholic Church is one true Church,” as if this were enough to break though the barriers that were embedded in a person since child birth.

God’s grace can break through these barriers.

The point here is, your telling a person of the Anglican faith that they border indifferentism is not what the Catholic Church teaches today and should not be used against them.

Jim

 

[1neophyte]

Indifferentism is the belief that it is possible to obtain eternal salvation regardless of which religion one belongs to, so long as morality is maintained. It is not specifically to do with agnostic beliefs. At least not according to Gregory XVI in Mirari Vos (see paragraphs 13 and 14)

papalencyclicals.net/Greg16/g16mirar.htm

And I didn’t state that the position posed in the statement made by of ComplineSanFran (who is an Anglican) was actually Indifferentism, but that it comes dangerously close to it. The concept of the ‘Invisible Church’, which is widely held by many of our Protestant brothers and sisters in Christ, is a concept that the Catholic Church rejects.

I am always completely astounded when I hear someone take this position, which shows so much disregard and contempt for Jesus’ many parables, admonitions of the priests of His day, and treatment of sinners who weren’t “right” about anything, much less completely theologically orthodox. My objections are usually met with a lot of double talk denouncing sola scriptura or universalism, or references to writings of popes whose authority some apparently think supercedes God’s.

I’m proud to be Catholic, and would never leave the Church, but wow, am I embarrassed by some of the the “wise and learned” who completely miss the point of the whole enterprise.

 

[Padres1969]

Except that from a Catholic point of view that is dangerously close to the heresy of Indifferentism. There is no wider ‘invisible Church’ to whom we are all a part of.

And that’s where many protestants would disagree with you. That there is a “universal Church”, that all Christians are a part of.

 

[Brendan_64]

I am always completely astounded when I hear someone take this position, which shows so much disregard and contempt for Jesus’ many parables, admonitions of the priests of His day, and treatment of sinners who weren’t “right” about anything, much less completely theologically orthodox. My objections are usually met with a lot of double talk denouncing sola scriptura or universalism, or references to writings of popes whose authority some apparently think supercedes God’s.

I’m proud to be Catholic, and would never leave the Church, but wow, am I embarrassed by some of the the “wise and learned” who completely miss the point of the whole enterprise.

The Catholic Church teaches that there is only one Christian Church, the Catholic Church. Does this teaching embarrass you? That is Church teaching and was reiterated in Lumen Gentium.

 

[1neophyte]

The Catholic Church teaches that there is only one Christian Church, the Catholic Church. Does this teaching embarrass you? That is Church teaching and was reiterated in Lumen Gentium.

To wit.

 

[Brendan_64]

And that’s where many protestants would disagree with you. That there is a “universal Church”, that all Christians are a part of.

Yes indeed, that is where many Protestants would disagree. As you are probably aware, the Catholic Church rejects the concept of a “universal Church” that encompasses all Christian denominations. And since truth is absolute and two contradictory views cannot both be right either the Catholic Church is wrong on this issue or Protestants are wrong on this issue.

As the Catholic Church teaches that she cannot err on issues of faith and morals, I know who I think is wrong on that issue.

 

[Padres1969]

Yes indeed, that is where many Protestants would disagree. As you are probably aware, the Catholic Church rejects the concept of a “universal Church” that encompasses all Christian denominations. And since truth is absolute and two contradictory views cannot both be right either the Catholic Church is wrong on this issue or Protestants are wrong on this issue.

As the Catholic Church teaches that she cannot err on issues of faith and morals, I know who I think is wrong on that issue.

And of course we reject that notion that the RCC cannot err on issues of faith and morals.

So no need to belabor the point.

 

[Brendan_64]

From the CCC: Bold is my emphasis.

Over the centuries there has been many causes from between Catholics, Protestants, and non-Christians, to prevent a person from seeing the Catholic Church as true or from knowing Jesus Christ as the God the Son.

It takes more than just being told, “the Catholic Church is one true Church,” as if this were enough to break though the barriers that were embedded in a person since child birth.

God’s grace can break through these barriers.

The point here is, your telling a person of the Anglican faith that they border indifferentism is not what the Catholic Church teaches today and should not be used against them.

Jim

I’m not using anything against ComplineSanFran, just pointing out Church teaching.

And yes, the Church’s teaching on indifferentism hasn’t changed, nor has the Church’s rejection of an ‘invisible Church’ made up of all Christian denominations. There is only one Church of Christ, the Catholic Church. Lumen Gentium reiterated this.

Yes there are indeed many causes that may prevent a person from seeing the Catholic Church for what it is, the one and only Church of Christ, and as a result the culpability may be reduced to minimal amounts in many cases, but that still doesn’t detract from the fact that what they believe on such issues is in fact false.

 

[Brendan_64]

And of course we reject that notion that the RCC cannot err on issues of faith and morals.

Indeed you do.

 

[zz912]

You’re trying to change from your previous statement that we have to be centered on the “Catholic Religion,” of which I responded to, and are now trying to educate us about the body of Christ which is the Church. Christ is within the people of faith who make up the Church, but it is only part of the institutional religion of the Roman Catholic Church.

I’m changing nothing. The Catholic religion is the Catholic faith, which is the teaching of the Catholic Church. Any amount of separation from the teachings of the Catholic Church is a separation from the Catholic religion, and a separation from Jesus.

There are those who are outside the Church who have a portion of Jesus and the Christian faith, but not the fullness. This is the truth.

 

[zz912]

Next you’re going to tell me the RCC has always promoted the worship of Mary, right?

While it is true that the fullness of truth is found in Catholicism, that doesn’t mean that non-Catholic Christians have “departed” from Jesus, as someone just mistakenly said. That isn’t just a matter of “tone”, it’s a matter of accuracy. Yes, the Roman Catholic Church is the Church started by Jesus, but it doesn’t follow that all of its members are correct in their depictions of its Truth.

The Catholic Church has never promoted or taught worship of Mary.

And the fullness of truth is found in the Catholic Church, so any divergence from the Church or her teachings is a divergence from Jesus and the truth. Some bristle at this because they want to pretend that other faith communities are just as good as the Catholic Church, but that’s not true. The Catholic Church is the ONE Church of Jesus, and is different in kind and nature from those faith communities.

Is it your claim that the Church was “getting it right” when indulgences were sold? If yes, then good luck to you. If no, then why do you trust the Church to “get it right” now?

Has it ever occurred to anyone that it isn’t a celebration of the Reformation that Pope Francis is participating in, but a celebration of Jesus? Do you think God is going to look down at the celebration in question and shake His head the way all of the confused people criticizing it are? Or is the Jesus who prayed fervently to the Father that we all be one going to be smiling down on it?

Indulgences were never commanded to be sold and the Church never okayed the selling of indulgences. Some in the Church may have done so, but they weren’t following Church teaching if they did.

As for your second paragraph, I know that Jesus prayed for all to be one, and He built ONE Church. So I don’t see how He would be exactly thrilled with a celebration of the greatest fracturing of Christians in history.

The only thing i will acknowledge in 2017 is the 100th anniversary of Fatima.

The statement negates all of the work of the counter reformatio, the work of Saints who attempted to bring back the faithful across Europe who were fooled into joining the protestant movements, and ignores the incredible damage done to the body of Christ.
Someone earlier potulated that due to the excesses of some within the Hierarchy the Church warranted Luthers actions. I would have to point out that unlike our current 24 hour news cycle, **most faithful had zero knowledge of the Borgia or Medici Pontiffs excesses. **There actions were horrendous, but not to the average Catholic. They merely pracriced their faith and carried on.
What Luther started opened the floodgates for the likes of Calvin, Smyth, Wesley et al. There is nothing to celebrate here. The Council of Trent corrected the abuses, yet the lid on the reformation box cannot be closed.
I will end with this: Who wins from division of the Body of Christ?

Bingo. The claims that the Medici’s and Borgia’s caused the Protestant Revolution are vastly over-inflated.

You could argue Christ does. I mean there are plenty of people who have been brought to Christ’s Universal Church through Protestant and other Christian Churches, even if incompletely and imperfectly by Catholic reckoning, who would not have been brought to Christ otherwise.

Christ prayed for all Christians to be ONE, and united in the ONE Church He built, the Catholic Church. He knows best how Christians should be organized. I wouldn’t dare tell Him that He didn’t know what He was doing.

 

[Brendan_64]

And there we must disagree.

Indeed.

 

[1neophyte]

The Catholic Church teaches that there is only one Christian Church, the Catholic Church. Does this teaching embarrass you? That is Church teaching and was reiterated in Lumen Gentium.

When I woke up this morning, I was convinced that the RCC was the one true Church, but your tone-deafness is making me reconsider, so I’m going to exit this conversation before you do any more damage.

I’ll leave with this: I absolutely positively guarantee you that like Thomas Aquinas, Paul VI at some point had a moment of realization that his words were like sand when held in the light of the mercy and love of God. It is profoundly sad that you are so stuck on them.

 

[Louie1983]

When I woke up this morning, I was convinced that the RCC was the one true Church, but your tone-deafness is making me reconsider, so I’m going to exit this conversation before you do any more damage.

I’ll leave with this: I absolutely positively guarantee you that like Thomas Aquinas, Paul VI at some point had a moment of realization that his words were like sand when held in the light of the mercy and love of God. It is profoundly sad that you are so stuck on them.

How can you guarantee something you can’t prove? You don’t think Aquinas and Paul VI prayed and thought about what they said before they said it?

Can you point out exactly what is wrong with Brendan’s comment?

One poster on the internet forum has led you to reconsider joining the Catholic church?

Wow…

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Pope Saint John Paul II, Ut Unum Sint

*42. It happens for example that, in the spirit of the Sermon on the Mount, Christians of one confession no longer consider other Christians as enemies or strangers but see them as brothers and sisters. Again, the very expression separated brethren tends to be replaced today by expressions which more readily evoke the deep communion — linked to the baptismal character — which the Spirit fosters in spite of historical and canonical divisions. Today we speak of “other Christians”, “others who have received Baptism”, and “Christians of other Communities”. The Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms on Ecumenism refers to the Communities to which these Christians belong as “Churches and Ecclesial Communities that are not in full communion with the Catholic Church”.This broadening of vocabulary is indicative of a significant change in attitudes. There is an increased awareness that we all belong to Christ. I have personally been able many times to observe this during the ecumenical celebrations which are an important part of my Apostolic Visits to various parts of the world, and also in the meetings and ecumenical celebrations which have taken place in Rome. The “universal brotherhood” of Christians has become a firm ecumenical conviction. /…/

In a word, Christians have been converted to a fraternal charity which embraces all Christ’s disciples…*

 

[Pulvis]

One of the ideological movements that found traction during Vatican Council II was a desire to soften the tenor of the Church’s stance on protestantism. Some saw Trent and the counter reformation as harsh, vindictive and a barrier to ecumenism. This is well documented. It was a motivating factor for the changes in the Mass by Archbishop Bugninni. But, from the close of Trent until the close of Vatican Council II, the Church taught that the fullness of revelation and Truth resided in the One True Catholic and Apostolic Church, and those allied with her. Outside of this, there was no salvation. Obviously, those teachings were changed. But i fail to see where the divisions in teaching, the denial of the Holy Mass, The denial of the Sacraments have succeeded in advancing the cause of Christ Jesus and His Church. Splinter group after splinter group has drifted so far from the means of Salvation that they are merely a characiture of the True Church. It is terribly sad for those of us who believe in the fullness of the Church to see our protestant brethern missing out on the totality of the Faith.
This is the results of Martin
Luther’s decisions. This is the resultant division that found it’s birth with the reformation.
I will not be celebrating the aniversery. I will attend Mass, and offer a Rosary for reparation for the damages done.

[1] I therefore, a prisoner in the Lord, beseech you that you walk worthy of the vocation in which you are called, [2] With all humility and mildness, with patience, supporting one another in charity. [3] Careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. [4] One body and one Spirit; as you are called in one hope of your calling. [5] One Lord, one faith, one baptism.

[6] One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in us all"
Ephesians 4:5 drbo.org

 

[Don_Ruggero]

I think Pope Saint John Paul II is very eloquent when he wrote in Ut Unum Sint:
87. Along the way that leads to full unity, ecumenical dialogue works to awaken a reciprocal fraternal assistance, whereby Communities strive to give in mutual exchange what each one needs in order to grow towards definitive fullness in accordance with God’s plan (cf. Eph 4:11-13). I have said how we are aware, as the Catholic Church, that we have received much from the witness borne by other Churches and Ecclesial Communities to certain common Christian values, from their study of those values, and even from the way in which they have emphasized and experienced them. Among the achievements of the last thirty years, this reciprocal fraternal influence has had an important place. At the stage which we have now reached, this process of mutual enrichment must be taken seriously into account. Based on the communion which already exists as a result of the ecclesial elements present in the Christian communities, this process will certainly be a force impelling towards full and visible communion, the desired goal of the journey we are making. Here we have the ecumenical expression of the Gospel law of sharing. This leads me to state once more: “We must take every care to meet the legitimate desires and expectations of our Christian brethren, coming to know their way of thinking and their sensibilities … The talents of each must be developed for the utility and the advantage of all”.
If 1Neophyte should read this note, I would encourage him or her to actually read Ut Unum Sint very thoughtfully and prayerfully – and to read the writings of theologians and ecclesiologists who are presently engaged in the dialogue. There you will find the thought of the Holy See.

At the end of the day, the voices of individuals on websites are inconsequential…but not the orientation the Church undertook at Vatican II, thanks to the Council Fathers guided by the Holy Spirit, which carries forward across the decades to even more profound developments – and we rejoice for what we see and live in these times.

I personally have little interest that there are individuals who will choose not to commemorate the anniversary – that is their choice.

What is not their choice is that the Catholic Church will jointly commemorate it with Lutherans around the world…in the person of the Holy Father, in the person of the President of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, Kurt Cardinal Koch, and by the members of the College of Bishops throughout the world who are already making provisions for a variety of commemorations with their Lutheran counterparts…and by all those who are responding to and collaborating in this splendid initiative that the Holy See has put in place.

We owe so much to the vision of Saint John XXIII, Blessed Paul VI, and Saint John Paul II for where they have guided us – and now to Pope Francis, who will carry this journey even further.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Extracts from Pope Benedict’s speech during his visit to Germany in 2011:

*Ladies and Gentlemen,

As I begin to speak, I would like first of all to thank you for this opportunity to come together with you. I am particularly grateful to Pastor Schneider for greeting me and welcoming me into your midst with his kind words. At the same time I want to express my thanks for the particularly gracious gesture that our meeting can be held in this historic location.

As the Bishop of Rome, it is deeply moving for me to be meeting representatives of Council of the EKD here in the ancient Augustinian convent in Erfurt. This is where Luther studied theology. This is where he was ordained a priest in 1507. Against his father’s wishes, he did not continue the study of Law, but instead he studied theology and set off on the path towards priesthood in the Order of Saint Augustine. On this path, he was not simply concerned with this or that. What constantly exercised him was the question of God, the deep passion and driving force of his whole life’s journey. “How do I receive the grace of God?”: this question struck him in the heart and lay at the foundation of all his theological searching and inner struggle. For him theology was no mere academic pursuit, but the struggle for oneself, which in turn was a struggle for and with God.

“How do I receive the grace of God?” The fact that this question was the driving force of his whole life never ceases to make an impression on me. For who is actually concerned about this today – even among Christians? What does the question of God mean in our lives? In our preaching? Most people today, even Christians, set out from the presupposition that God is not fundamentally interested in our sins and virtues. He knows that we are all mere flesh. Insofar as people today believe in an afterlife and a divine judgement at all, nearly everyone presumes for all practical purposes that God is bound to be magnanimous and that ultimately he mercifully overlooks our small failings. But are they really so small, our failings? Is not the world laid waste through the corruption of the great, but also of the small, who think only of their own advantage? Is it not laid waste through the power of drugs, which thrives on the one hand on greed and avarice, and on the other hand on the craving for pleasure of those who become addicted? Is the world not threatened by the growing readiness to use violence, frequently masking itself with claims to religious motivation? Could hunger and poverty so devastate parts of the world if love for God and godly love of neighbour – of his creatures, of men and women – were more alive in us? I could go on. No, evil is no small matter. Were we truly to place God at the centre of our lives, it could not be so powerful. The question: what is God’s position towards me, where do I stand before God? – this burning question of Martin Luther must once more, doubtless in a new form, become our question too. In my view, this is the first summons we should attend to in our encounter with Martin Luther.

Another important point: God, the one God, creator of heaven and earth, is no mere philosophical hypothesis regarding the origins of the universe. This God has a face, and he has spoken to us. He became one of us in the man Jesus Christ – who is both true God and true man. Luther’s thinking, his whole spirituality, was thoroughly Christocentric: “What promotes Christ’s cause” was for Luther the decisive hermeneutical criterion for the exegesis of sacred Scripture. This presupposes, however, that Christ is at the heart of our spirituality and that love for him, living in communion with him, is what guides our life.

Now perhaps you will say: all well and good, but what has this to do with our ecumenical situation? Could this just be an attempt to talk our way past the urgent problems that are still waiting for practical progress, for concrete results? I would respond by saying that the first and most important thing for ecumenism is that we keep in view just how much we have in common, not losing sight of it amid the pressure towards secularization – everything that makes us Christian in the first place and continues to be our gift and our task. **It was the error of the Reformation period that for the most part we could only see what divided us and we failed to grasp existentially what we have in common in terms of the great deposit of sacred Scripture and the early Christian creeds. The great ecumenical step forward of recent decades is that we have become aware of all this common ground and that we acknowledge it as we pray and sing together, as we make our joint commitment to the Christian ethos in our dealings with the world, as we bear common witness to the God of Jesus Christ **in this world as our undying foundation.

The risk of losing this, sadly, is not unreal. /…/

Moreover, we should help one another to develop a deeper and more lively faith. It is not strategy that saves us and saves Christianity, but faith – thought out and lived afresh; through such faith, Christ enters this world of ours, and with him, the living God. As the martyrs of the Nazi era brought us together and prompted the first great ecumenical opening, so today, faith that is lived from deep within amid a secularized world is the most powerful ecumenical force that brings us together, guiding us towards unity in the one Lord.*

catholicherald.co.uk/news/2011/09/23/full-text-popes-speech-to-lutheran-leaders/

 

[Brendan_64]

When I woke up this morning, I was convinced that the RCC was the one true Church, but your tone-deafness is making me reconsider, so I’m going to exit this conversation before you do any more damage.

I’ll leave with this: I absolutely positively guarantee you that like Thomas Aquinas, Paul VI at some point had a moment of realization that his words were like sand when held in the light of the mercy and love of God. It is profoundly sad that you are so stuck on them.

Your comment has bothered me. Perhaps my tone has not come across well and this has contributed to this. So if you would allow me to try to summarise my position as I think you may misunderstand me.

I absolutely consider Protestants as my fellow brothers and sisters in Christ, absolutely. There is one baptism in Christ and anyone who is validly baptised, by another Christian using the Trinitarian formula (as the vast bulk of Protestants are is baptised in Christ) is baptised in Christ. I would even go so far as to say that many Protestants baptised by an invalid form of baptism may in actual fact be baptised through ‘baptism of desire’. So let there be no doubt whatsoever about whether I regard Protestants as my fellow brothers and sisters in Christ, because I most certainly do.

Do I consider there to be an ‘invisible’ Church to which all Christian denominations belong to? No, I don’t. There is only one true Church, the Catholic Church.

My view of Protestants is that they are our fellow Christian brothers and sisters, who are separated from the Church, and who I dearly wish to return.