Oh no! What are they thinking?! Uniting Faiths?!

[Lovez4God]

Episcopal Bishop Seeks To Unite World Faiths
His organization will act as a spiritual U.N.

Imagine trying to design a global agency that could speak for all the religions of the world, a spiritual parliament patterned after the United Nations. That was the dream of Episcopal Bishop William Swing of San Francisco, who has been envisioning just such an organization for the past five years. One week from today, ``United Religions’’ will be officially born at a charter-signing ceremony in Pennsylvania…
read more…
sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2000/06/19/MN96862.DTL

__
We must take action!!! And stop this!
Pope Benedict XVI has warned about relativism, we know what we stand for! We have the truth!
What do you think?!

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

Whats worse is while the Vatican rightly has nothing to do with it certain Catholic Bishops in the US are supporting it We need to pray for them big time:nope: May God have Mercy on us

 

[gilliam]

Already been done by the Unitarian Universalists

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

gilliam:

Already been done by the Unitarian Universalists

Are they doing it through the UN?

 

[Barbara_Ann]

Already done here. It is called Interfaith Counsel most members are Catholic Parishes. What it does is seek to find things we all agree on and to understand our differences. When we all agree on something (like prolife) we are a powerful political force. The United Nations is not making us all one Nation or even culture, it is only there to make sure we don’t tear ourselves apart.

 

[David_Paul]

The UN doesn’t save anyone. The Secretary General of the committee which created the body and the man who drafted the UN charter was a Soviet agent–Alger Hiss.

In 1958, the Danish diplomat Povl Bang-Jensen was driven out of the UN by UN Secretary General Dag Hammarskjold after he refused to turn over the names of 81 Hungarian freedom fighters who resisted the Soviet invasion of their country in 1956. Hammarskjold wanted the names to turn over the the KGB for execution. Because he resisted, Bang-Jensen was murdered.

The UN supports birth control and abortion. It props up and gives cover to dictators. UN officials stole billions of dollars from the Food for Oil program which was supported to help children of Iraq. The body is corrupt to the core.
The hundreds of NGOs which nest within the UN are, for the most part, pure evil. They despise the Catholic teachings of life and subsidiarity. The UN is undemocratic and seeks to weaken the bonds of family, culture and nationality which tie societies together.

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

Barbara Ann:

Already done here. It is called Interfaith Counsel most members are Catholic Parishes. What it does is seek to find things we all agree on and to understand our differences. When we all agree on something (like prolife) we are a powerful political force. The United Nations is not making us all one Nation or even culture, it is only there to make sure we don’t tear ourselves apart.

They are wanting a one world Religion the Vatican is not for that for a good reason.This is not ecuminical this is anattempt to create a relative faith it goes beyond dialog:nope: The UN could have been a force of good but sadly it has allied itself with diabolical agendas:nope:

 

[gilliam]

Lisa4Catholics:

They are wanting a one world Religion the Vatican is not for that for a good reason.This is not ecuminical this is anattempt to create a relative faith it goes beyond dialog:nope: The UN could have been a force of good but sadly it has allied itself with diabolical agendas:nope:

The Vatican also wants a one world religion. It is called Christianity.

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

gilliam:

The Vatican also wants a one world religion. It is called Christianity.

They do not want a watered down politically correct aborted babies,free sex with condoms for everyone religion gilliam:nope: Jesus already set His religion and His Church and it isn’t the UN

 

[gilliam]

Lisa4Catholics:

They do not want a watered down politically correct aborted babies,free sex with condoms for everyone religion gilliam:nope: Jesus already set His religion and His Church and it isn’t the UN

I know. We should be advocating Christianity as the one religion of this world.

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

gilliam:

I know. We should be advocating Christianity as the one religion of this world.

So you understand the concern over this then?

 

[Lovez4God]

Lisa4Catholics:

Whats worse is while the Vatican rightly has nothing to do with it certain Catholic Bishops in the US are supporting it We need to pray for them big time:nope: May God have Mercy on us

I’m sure the Vatican knows Catholicism cannot be compromised with other foreign faiths, or contrary beliefs to it.
It’s just doesn’t make sense that they are trying to unite all religions with such an effort as if they are worshipping the same gods.Totally opposite of that! Cannot they see they are weakening their own spiritual enlightenment by watering down their singular religious truth?? What has gotten to spiritual leaders? Why do they think they are making

nonviolent conflict resolution, protecting the environment, encouraging religious tolerance, and working for justice and peace.

When these don’t have anything to do with their faith alone all together.
Wonder if there’s some sort of motive behind these drastic moves?
Yes, it’s so sad to see bishops, faith leaders take so light on these problems. Aren’t they suppose to promote Catholicism, instead of watering it down to a branch structure part of the whole religions of the world?

 

[BLB_Oregon]

Since the Vatican has used their dialogue with Islam to oppose laws supporting abortion and other evils, the idea could have its merits. If the idea is “Let us see what values we share and what common threats we face, and deal with those as a body”, I could get on board with that.

Keep in mind that this body cannot hand over sovereignty like the members of the UN could. It is difficult for people to oppose civil government by leaving their country or ousting their leaders. Not so with religion.

Nevertheless, in the present more or less complicated use of piecemeal diplomacy, there is room to have conflict in the safety of discrete meetings. I think it would be a mistake to put religious leaders in a position where some members might seek to further their own agendas by grandstanding. That would do religion a great deal of harm. Also, relatively few religions have the centralized heirarchy that we have, so choosing representatives could itself cause more rancor than it’s worth.

So… interfaith councils, I could see being of benefit. A true UN of world religions, though, is likely to do as much harm as good.

 

[Matt25]

In AZERBAIJAN the late John Paul II said these words vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/speeches/2002/may/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_20020522_world-culture-azerbaijan_en.html

One of your great poets wrote: “The word, new and at the same time old . . . The word, which is like the spirit, is the treasurer of the riches of the invisible realm: it knows stories never heard, it reads books never written” (Nizami, The Seven Effigies). This image alludes to something that is dear to the three great religions present in this country: Jewish, Christian and Muslim. According to the teachings of each of them, the One God, shrouded in unapproachable mystery, has chosen to speak to man, inviting him to submit to his will.

1. Despite the differences between us, together we feel called to* foster ties of mutual esteem and benevolence*. I am aware of all that is being done by religious leaders in Azerbaijan to favour tolerance and mutual understanding. I am looking forward to the meeting tomorrow with the representatives of the three monotheistic religions, so that together we can affirm our conviction that religion must not serve to increase rivalry and hatred, but to promote love and peace.

From this country, which has held and still holds tolerance as a primary value of all wholesome life in society, we wish to proclaim to the world: enough of wars in the name of God! No more profanation of his holy name! I have come to Azerbaijan as an ambassador of peace. As long as I have breath within me I shall cry out: “Peace, in the name of God!” And when word joins word, a chorus is born, a symphony, which will spread to every soul, quench hatred, disarm hearts.

1. Praise to you, followers of Islam in Azerbaijan, for being open to hospitality, a cherished value of your religion and your people, and for having accepted the believers of other religions as brothers and sisters.

Praise to you, Jewish people, who, with courage and constancy, have kept your ancient traditions of good neighbourliness, enriching this land with a contribution of great value and depth.

Praise to you, Christians, who have given so much, especially through the ancient Church of the Albans, in shaping the identity of this land. Praise especially to you, Orthodox Church, witness to God’s friendship with man and a hymn extolling his beauty. When the fury of atheism was unleashed in this region, you welcomed the children of the Catholic Church who had lost their places of worship and their pastors, and put them into contact with Christ through the grace of the holy Sacraments.

Praised be God for this testimony of love, borne by the three great religions! May it grow and become ever stronger, extinguishing with the dew of affection and friendship any remaining source of contrast!

 

[Matt25]

John Paul II called together two huge interfaith events for peace at Assisi
thepastoralreview.org/cgi-bin/archive_db.cgi?priestsppl-00103

The presence and universal action of the Spirit of God among the ‘others’ and in their religious traditions represent John Paul II’s most important contribution to the theological foundation of interreligious dialogue. There is no need to cite all the prominent texts. It suffices to mention the main ideas. The Pope says that the ‘firm belief’ of the followers of other religions is ‘an effect of the Spirit of truth operating outside the visible confines of the Mystical Body’ (* Redemptor Hominis * 6). In the important speech given by the Pope to members of the Roman Curia on December 22, 1986, after the Assisi World Day of Prayer for Peace (27 October 1986), the Pope wished to justify theologically the ‘event’, held in Assisi two months previously. Hence, taking the theological foundation of dialogue which was presented by the Council – the unity of origin and of destiny of the human race through creation and redemption – he sees it as a ‘mystery of unity’ which unites all human beings, whatever the differences in the circumstances of their lives might be: ‘The differences are a less important element than the unity which, by contrast, is radical, basic, and decisive’ (3)6 He further insists: In the light of this twofold ‘mystery of unity,’ ‘differences of all kinds, and first of all religious differences, to the extent to which they diminish God’s design, are shown to pertain to another order… They must be surmounted in progress toward the realization of the great design of unity guiding creation’. Despite their differences, which are sometimes perceived as insuperable divisions, all human beings ‘are included in the grand and single design of God in Jesus Christ’ (5). ‘The universal unity based on the event of creation and redemption cannot but leave a trace in the reality lived by human beings, even those belonging to different religions’ (7). These ‘seeds of the Word’ sown among the others constitute the concrete foundation of interreligious dialogue encouraged by the Council.

To that ‘mystery of unity,’ the foundation of dialogue, the Pope added a second element, namely the active presence of the Spirit of God in the religious life of the ‘others’, especially in their prayer: ‘We may think’, he wrote, ‘that any authentic prayer is aroused by the Holy Spirit, who is mysteriously present in the heart of every human being’ (11).

The text of the encyclical * Dominium et Vivificantum * (1986) on the Holy Spirit could be cited at length. In it the Pope extends his discourse with a far-reaching theological treatment of the universal presence of the Spirit throughout the entire history of salvation from the beginning and after the Jesus Christ event, well beyond the confines of the Church. Suffice it to evoke the encyclical * Redemptoris Missio * (1990), where it is explicitly said that the presence of the Spirit extends not only to the religious life of individuals but also to the religious traditions to which they belong. ‘The Spirit’s presence and activity affect not only individuals but also society and history, peoples, cultures and religions’ (28).

Through these texts there gradually emerges the same teaching: the Holy Spirit is present and active in the world, in the members of other religions, and in their religious traditions themselves. Every authentic prayer (even if addressed to a God still unknown), the human values and virtues, the treasures of wisdom hidden in the religious traditions, and thus also the dialogue and authentic encounter between their members, are so many fruits of the active presence of the Spirit.

 

[Matt25]

And the then Cardinal Ratzinger said this tcrnews2.com/DialogJudaism.html

Interreligious Dialogue and Jewish-Christian Relations**
**

       *1.* The religions can encounter one another only by delving more deeply into the truth, not by giving it up. Skepticism does not unite. Nor does sheer pragmatism. Both are simply an opening for ideologies, which then step in with all the more self-assurance. The renunciation of truth and conviction does not elevate man, but exposes him to the calculus of utility and robs him of his greatness. What is required, however, is reverence for the other's belief, along with the willingness to seek truth in what I find alien--a truth that concerns me and that can correct me and lead me further. What is required is the willingness to look behind what may appear strange in order to find the deeper reality it conceals. I must also be willing to let my narrow understanding of truth be broken open, to learn my own beliefs better by understanding the other, and in this way to let myself be furthered on the path to God, who is greater--in the certainty that I never wholly possess the truth about God and am always a learner before it, a pilgrim whose way to it is never at an end.

       *2.* Although we must always seek the positive in the other, union means that the other must help me to find the truth, we cannot and must not dispense with criticism. Religion contains, as it were, the precious pearl of truth, but it is also continually hiding it, and is always running the risk of missing its own essence. Religion can grow sick and become a destructive phenomenon. It can and should lead to truth, but it can also cut man off from it. The Old Testament's critique of religion has by no means become superfluous today. It may be relatively easy for us to criticize the religion of others, but we must also be ready to accept criticism of ourselves, of our own religion. Karl Barth distinguished between religion and faith in Christianity. He erred in wanting to separate them entirely, in regarding faith alone as positive and religion as negative. Faith without religion is unreal. Religion is a part of faith, and by its very nature Christianity must live as a religion. But Barth was right in that even the religion of Christians can grow sick and become superstition. He saw correctly, in other words, that the concrete religion in which Christians live their faith must be unceasingly purified by the truth. This is a truth that shows itself in faith and that at the same time newly reveals its mystery and its infinity in dialogue.

       *3.* Does this mean that missionary activity must cease and be replaced by dialogue, in which we do not speak of truth, but help one another be better Christians, Jews, Moslems, Hindus, and Buddhists? My answer is no. For this would be yet another form of the complete lack of belief. Under the pretext of fostering the best in another, we would fail to take both ourselves and the other seriouslyand would end up renouncing truth. The answer, I think, is that mission and dialogue must no longer be antitheses, but must penetrate each other.[(15)](http://tcrnews2.com/DialogJudaism.html#N_15_) Dialogue is not random conversation, but aims at persuasion, at discovering the truth. Otherwise it is worthless. Conversely, future missionaries can no longer presuppose that they are telling someone hitherto devoid of any knowledge of God what he has to believe in. This situation may in fact occur and perhaps will occur with increasing frequency in a world that in many places is becoming atheistic. But among the religions we encounter people who through their religion have heard of God and try to live in relation to him. Preaching must therefore become a dialogical event. We are not saying something completely unknown to the other, but disclosing the hidden depth of what he already touches in his own belief. And, conversely, the preacher is not simply a giver, but also a receiver. In this sense, what Nicholas of Cusa expressed as a wish and a hope in his vision of the heavenly council should take place in interreligious dialogue. It should increasingly become a listening to the Logos, who shows us unity in the midst of our divisions and contradictions.[(16)](http://tcrnews2.com/DialogJudaism.html#N_16_)*--*

 

[Matt25]

On the subject of the United Nations John Paul II said this ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/JP2US95D.htm

The United Nations and the Future of Freedom

1. As we face these enormous challenges, how can we fail to acknowledge the role of the United Nations Organization? Fifty years after its founding, the need for such an Organization is even more obvious, but we also have a better understanding, on the basis of experience, that the effectiveness of this great instrument for harmonizing and coordinating international life depends on the international culture and ethic which it supports and expresses. The United Nations Organization needs to rise more and more above the cold status of an administrative institution and to become a moral center where all the nations of the world feel at home and develop a shared awareness of being, as it were, a “family of nations”. The idea of “family” immediately evokes something more than simple functional relations or a mere convergence of interests. The family is by nature a community based on mutual trust, mutual support and sincere respect. In an authentic family the strong do not dominate; instead, the weaker members, because of their very weakness, are all the more welcomed and served. Raised to the level of the “family of nations”, these sentiments ought to be, even before law itself, the very fabric of relations between peoples. The United Nations has the historic, even momentous, task of promoting this qualitative leap in international life, not only by serving as a center of effective mediation for the resolution of conflicts but also by fostering values, attitudes and concrete initiatives of solidarity which prove capable of raising the level of relations between nations from the “organizational” to a more “organic” level, from simple “existence with” others to “existence for” others, in a fruitful exchange of gifts, primarily for the good of the weaker nations but even so, a clear harbinger of greater good for everyone.

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/messages/peace/documents/hf_jp-ii_mes_20031216_xxxvii-world-day-for-peace_en.html

The system developed with the* United Nations Charter* was meant “to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind”.(4) In the decades which followed, however, the division of the international community into opposing blocs, the cold war in one part of the world, the outbreak of violent conflicts in other areas and the phenomenon of terrorism produced a growing break with the ideas and expectations of the immediate post-war period.

A new international order

1. It must be acknowledged, however, that the United Nations Organization, even with limitations and delays due in great part to the failures of its members, has made a notable contribution to the promotion of respect for human dignity, the freedom of peoples and the requirements of development, thus preparing the cultural and institutional soil for the building of peace.

The activity of national Governments will be greatly encouraged by the realization that the ideals of the United Nations have become widely diffused, particularly through the practical gestures of solidarity and peace made by the many individuals also involved in* Non-Governmental Organizations and in Movements* for human rights.

This represents a significant incentive for a reform which would enable the United Nations Organization to function effectively for the pursuit of its own stated ends, which remain valid: “humanity today is in a new and more difficult phase of its genuine development. It needs a* greater degree of international ordering*”.(5) States must consider this objective as a clear moral and political obligation which calls for prudence and determination. Here I would repeat the words of encouragement which I spoke in 1995: “The United Nations Organization needs to rise more and more above the cold status of an administrative institution and to become a moral centre where all the nations of the world feel at home and develop a shared awareness of being, as it were, a * family of nations*”.(6)

 

[Matt25]

Lovez4God:

I’m sure the Vatican knows Catholicism cannot be compromised with other foreign faiths, or contrary beliefs to it.
It’s just doesn’t make sense that they are trying to unite all religions with such an effort as if they are worshipping the same gods.Totally opposite of that! Cannot they see they are weakening their own spiritual enlightenment by watering down their singular religious truth?? What has gotten to spiritual leaders? Why do they think they are making When these don’t have anything to do with their faith alone all together.
Wonder if there’s some sort of motive behind these drastic moves?
Yes, it’s so sad to see bishops, faith leaders take so light on these problems. Aren’t they suppose to promote Catholicism, instead of watering it down to a branch structure part of the whole religions of the world?

If you are that hostile to multi-faith initiatives why use the words of a Jewish Rabbi Maimonides as your signature?

 

[Franze]

Matt25, we are more worried about freedom religion, because the dialogue haven´t produced many fruits, in Sri Lanka, buddhist monks burn churches, in India, hindus are killing priests and re-converting christians and islam, you know what is happening.
I am christian, although you think that I am not, and I don´t want to kill anybody, I want freedom to preach the gospel of Jesus, and the dialogue, is a very beautiful thing but if you are speaking with a person, for example muslims who whave other opinions very different from you, you are speaking to a wall. And this is what is happening, in Turkey, there are catholic seminarians? not, in Morocco, you can preach to the moroccans the catholicism, not, even,the nuns don´t want to convert. And this is very sad.

 

[Lovez4God]

Matt25:

If you are that hostile to multi-faith initiatives why use the words of a Jewish Rabbi Maimonides as your signature?

what do you find contradictory in my signature, Matt?
If I am correct, Catholics and Judaism both worship the same God.
Is not Catholicism, the fulfillment of Judaism?