D
- Status
P
pnewton
Guest
pnewton;8386727:
Kind of begs the question of what is true and what is corrupted, doesn’t it? And I do not know that I agree that it is impossible for the two to be opposed. They can never be opposed when it comes to faith and morals, but disciplines can and do change. If we choose to let our faith be rooted in the disciplines, the bells and smells, as it were, then we can neglect the core of being Catholic, namely, universality. When move away from the Catholic Church, then you are less Catholic, less universal, yet more traditional in the trappings.
So, I will agree with you in a sense, the sense represented by one of the most traditional people here, JR. After all, Franciscan spirituality predates the SSPX by centuries. Even though their spirituality does not permit the type of speech and opposition that the SSPX has engaged in, it is much older, much more a tradition of our faith. By this last statement, I mean no disrespect at all for the SSPX and still think they could have a vital place in the ministry of the Church, as can many other groups that have formed since the last ecumenical council.
Absolutely! I have never disparaged Church Tradition. It is essential. In fact, I do not think anyone has suggested otherwise.
J
JReducation
Guest
I believe that there is always a danger to narrow Catholic Tradition to disciplines, even liturgical disciplines. There is more to tradition. You mentioned Franciscanism. That’s not a bad example. It is a very old and noble tradition. It’s 800 years old. Are Franciscans opposed to the Extraordinary Form of the mass? No. Is it essential to Franciscan life? No. We never celebrated it until today. We always had our own form, which predates the Tridentine form. History shows that what came to be known as the Tridentine form is actually a more polished form of the mass celebrated by the early Franciscans, which they made very popular in Europe. The Franciscans didn’t create it either. Francis went to Pope Innocent III and asked for a simple missal, because the missal that was in use in Assisi had three or four volumes. Pope Innocent gave him an old missal that allegedly had not been used for a number of years. This missal was copied repeatedly. The friars traveled with it all over Europe.
When the Council of Trent tried to reign in the many forms of the mass, this particular form was the preferred option, because of its history and its wide use. Most dioceses in Europe had adopted it. However, the Council of Trent and Pope Pius V did not leave it as the Franciscans celebrated it. I like to say that they tweaked it. That’s not a bad thing. It’s just reality. They legislated Gregorian chant, which was used in many places. Franciscans were not allowed Gregorian chant.
To this day, Gregorian chant is very rare among Franciscans. Even though there is an indult that allows us to use it, most communities use it sparingly or not at all, out of deference to St. Francis. To some people, this may appear to be anti-Tradition. In fact, it’s a very traditional stance.
One of the reasons that we use the OF is because there is a Franciscan form of the OF, which you can see on EWTN. There is no Franciscan form of the EF. Pope Benedict did not reinstate the form that we used prior to 1962. We have been told to take the EF and adapt it, change some collects, change the calendar to fit the Franciscan calendar, celebrate in alta voce, which is the Franciscan tradition. We never had silence during the mass. The mass always required an exchange between the friar-priest and the congregation. The whole idea is that the friar-priest is a brother who leads his brothers and sisters in worship and in offering the sacrifice. That tradition dates back to the 13th century.
Other elements of Catholic Tradition are outside of liturgy, but very much a part of tradition. What many people find upsetting about ecumenism is actually very old. Long before Vatican II, Franciscans, Dominicans and Jesuits taught that the Truth is found in every faith on earth. The real problem is that the truth is often deformed, misunderstood and incomplete; however, it remains the Catholic truth. They taught that knowledge of the truth is more than rote knowledge of Catholic. It was more than that. They defined knowledge using Sacred Scripture. To the Franciscan, Dominican and Jesuit scholar, knowledge of the truth is the same kind of intimacy to which Mary refers when she says, “I do not know man.”
These great religious traditions, Jesuit, Franciscan and Dominican, influenced the writings of men like John Paul II. They understood that a non-Catholic could read and hear Catholic doctrine and still not know, because they can’t embrace it or own it. Something blocks them and this something is often out of the person’s control. It’s almost like an knee-jerk reaction. Therefore, it takes time, patience, trust and living example to help the non-believer know the faith. These are not knew concepts. They were not known by the layman, because most lay people were not exposed to these schools of theology. Most lay people have been educated by the secular clergy and by religious congregations, not by the religious orders. This understanding of faith, knowledge and the non-Catholic was not part of the religious education of the greatest number of Catholics.
Now, we the explosion of the internet, the low cost of books and greater access to all means of communication, Catholics are hearing something that Dominicans, Jesuits and Franciscans have known and taught to their men and women for hundreds of years. It sounds new. Of course, when it’s not well explained or you don’t have access to the whole tradition, say the whole Jesuit missionary tradition, to take one, then you do not get the big picture. You get a piece of the puzzle. To get the big picture, one would have to go back and read the writings of men like Francis Xavier and about these men.
One of the little known facts about Francis Xavier was that he left India in disgust. In several of his letters to Ignatius, he complains that the Catholic Church in India is too European. When he arrives in Japan, he again tries to evangelize by living as a European religious and he realizes that he must separate the European from the Catholic and bring the Japanese into the Catholic. He did not live long after, but he introduced something into missiology that has been part of our tradition over 500 years.
Like this, there is much to Catholic tradition, beyond what institutes like the SSPX defend. This is not to say that the SSPX had no place in the Church. What I’m saying here is that it would be very narrow to see the SSPX as the only traditional movement. The customs, theology, liturgical practices, spirituality, even ministries of many other institutes are very much a part of tradition and older, but are not represented by the SSPX. It would be impossible for the SSPX to do so. The priests of the Society are not intimately familiar with all of them and they can’t extend themselves so far as to try to be all things to all men.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
When the Council of Trent tried to reign in the many forms of the mass, this particular form was the preferred option, because of its history and its wide use. Most dioceses in Europe had adopted it. However, the Council of Trent and Pope Pius V did not leave it as the Franciscans celebrated it. I like to say that they tweaked it. That’s not a bad thing. It’s just reality. They legislated Gregorian chant, which was used in many places. Franciscans were not allowed Gregorian chant.
To this day, Gregorian chant is very rare among Franciscans. Even though there is an indult that allows us to use it, most communities use it sparingly or not at all, out of deference to St. Francis. To some people, this may appear to be anti-Tradition. In fact, it’s a very traditional stance.
One of the reasons that we use the OF is because there is a Franciscan form of the OF, which you can see on EWTN. There is no Franciscan form of the EF. Pope Benedict did not reinstate the form that we used prior to 1962. We have been told to take the EF and adapt it, change some collects, change the calendar to fit the Franciscan calendar, celebrate in alta voce, which is the Franciscan tradition. We never had silence during the mass. The mass always required an exchange between the friar-priest and the congregation. The whole idea is that the friar-priest is a brother who leads his brothers and sisters in worship and in offering the sacrifice. That tradition dates back to the 13th century.
Other elements of Catholic Tradition are outside of liturgy, but very much a part of tradition. What many people find upsetting about ecumenism is actually very old. Long before Vatican II, Franciscans, Dominicans and Jesuits taught that the Truth is found in every faith on earth. The real problem is that the truth is often deformed, misunderstood and incomplete; however, it remains the Catholic truth. They taught that knowledge of the truth is more than rote knowledge of Catholic. It was more than that. They defined knowledge using Sacred Scripture. To the Franciscan, Dominican and Jesuit scholar, knowledge of the truth is the same kind of intimacy to which Mary refers when she says, “I do not know man.”
These great religious traditions, Jesuit, Franciscan and Dominican, influenced the writings of men like John Paul II. They understood that a non-Catholic could read and hear Catholic doctrine and still not know, because they can’t embrace it or own it. Something blocks them and this something is often out of the person’s control. It’s almost like an knee-jerk reaction. Therefore, it takes time, patience, trust and living example to help the non-believer know the faith. These are not knew concepts. They were not known by the layman, because most lay people were not exposed to these schools of theology. Most lay people have been educated by the secular clergy and by religious congregations, not by the religious orders. This understanding of faith, knowledge and the non-Catholic was not part of the religious education of the greatest number of Catholics.
Now, we the explosion of the internet, the low cost of books and greater access to all means of communication, Catholics are hearing something that Dominicans, Jesuits and Franciscans have known and taught to their men and women for hundreds of years. It sounds new. Of course, when it’s not well explained or you don’t have access to the whole tradition, say the whole Jesuit missionary tradition, to take one, then you do not get the big picture. You get a piece of the puzzle. To get the big picture, one would have to go back and read the writings of men like Francis Xavier and about these men.
One of the little known facts about Francis Xavier was that he left India in disgust. In several of his letters to Ignatius, he complains that the Catholic Church in India is too European. When he arrives in Japan, he again tries to evangelize by living as a European religious and he realizes that he must separate the European from the Catholic and bring the Japanese into the Catholic. He did not live long after, but he introduced something into missiology that has been part of our tradition over 500 years.
Like this, there is much to Catholic tradition, beyond what institutes like the SSPX defend. This is not to say that the SSPX had no place in the Church. What I’m saying here is that it would be very narrow to see the SSPX as the only traditional movement. The customs, theology, liturgical practices, spirituality, even ministries of many other institutes are very much a part of tradition and older, but are not represented by the SSPX. It would be impossible for the SSPX to do so. The priests of the Society are not intimately familiar with all of them and they can’t extend themselves so far as to try to be all things to all men.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
T
True_Mass
Guest
Did they teach that non-Catholic religions were “means of salvation”? Or that in order to be saved one must be united to the Catholic Church?
J
JReducation
Guest
They taught both. They taught that the fulness of truth was in the Catholic Church and every human being has a moral duty to desire to know the fullness of truth.
They also taught that Christ’s mercy extended to those outside of the boundaries of the Catholic Church through the few truths that they knew.
They also understood that knowledge of truth is much more than just hearing and repeating. Knowledge is intimacy with the truth. To put it in our language, it is the ability to wrap one’s head around something and accept it, even when one does not fully understand it. In other words, they understood that there was such a situation in which people rejected what the missionaries were teaching, not because they were obstinate, but because it sounded like a sin to them and they did not want to sin.
It was a rather simple way of understanding these non-Catholics, but it made sense. You could not fault someone who said, “I can’t accept that, because it’s a sin and I don’t want to sin.”
The person is not understanding what you’re presenting; otherwise, he would see that it’s not a sin. This person is being honest and is trying to do the best he can with what little he has. These missionaries understood this and understood that Christ used that sincerity and that desire to do what is right, even when they were mistaken.
Sooooo . . . what they did was to keep chipping away at helping people understand. St. Francis always used the term, “preach always, but only when necessary use words”. In other words, he did not harass non-Catholics nor allow his brothers to do so. But he insisted on preaching by their example and living the Christian life in such a way that it is enticing. When it becomes enticing and the other person grows to trust you, he will ask. That’s your golden moment to do catechesis. If there is no trust, you’re wasting your breadth. Who’s going to believe a person that they don’t trust?
That’s why it was so important to these missionaries to preach by example. This is what made them so successful. They were very holy men.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
T
True_Mass
Guest
Please cite evidence that these orders, during the time you are discussing, preached that non-Catholic religions are a “means of salvation”.
J
JReducation
Guest
You’re taking it out of context. That’s not what anyone has said. What has been said is that Christ in his mercy uses what people have.
Either you take it as I give it to you or you leave it. As a member of my community, I have no obligatioin to engage in an agenda driven discussion with you. If you want to understand that tradition that was left to us by our founder, go read his life and the writings of the early friars.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
T
True_Mass
Guest
What agenda do I have? I asked you a simple question: whether these religious orders taught that non-Catholic religions are a means of salvation. You said they did.You’re taking it out of context. That’s not what anyone has said. What has been said is that Christ in his mercy uses what people have.
Either you take it as I give it to you or you leave it. As a member of my community, I have no obligatioin to engage in an agenda driven discussion with you. If you want to understand that tradition that was left to us by our founder, go read his life and the writings of the early friars.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
I’m now asking you to please cite evidence that these orders preached non-Catholic religions are a means of salvation. That’s a fair question.
If someone gets offended at the request for the other party to demonstrate evidence to support a claim, I’m not sure how any of us can have a meaningful discussion.
J
JReducation
Guest
Normally, I don’t give people such firm responses. However, I’ll be very honest and tell you why I am responding to you with such firmness.
I don’t trust your motives. I saw what you posted in other threads about religious and clergy. Frankly, you can’t expect us to engage with anyone in an honest dialog when we have to watch our backs, because what we say can be used to discredit us as heretics, homosexuals, criminals and other aberrants.
The phrase that you’re using comes from the writings of Bl. John Paul II. But you’re taking it out of context and asking me to show you where the Franciscan, Dominican and Jesuit patriarchs said such a thing, when you know the source of that phrase and you and everyone here knows that there is more to that phrase. It’s part of an entire document, which has to be read from end to end to make sense of it.
In the same manner, to make sense of the missionary traditions of these orders, you have to read their founders’ lives, observe how they worked and observe how their sons were formed. There is no single one line sentence that’s going to give you this precise wording, because this is not the way they spoke. It doesn’t take a genius to know this.
However, when one looks at how they worked with and how they approached non-Catholics and then looks at what Blessed John Paul wrote, in its entirety, one sees the parallels and even sees from where he drew to put together his treatise.
To go page by page, tome by tome of history with anyone who believes that we’re a bunch of aberrants is not my idea of a healthy discussion or a good time.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
D
Dan_Daly
Guest
If by “means of salvation” one thinks other religions have their own route to heaven, they are wrong.
If however, one says as the good Brother did, that another faith can be a means of salvation AND you must be united to the Catholic Church, the other faith is a means of salavtion…in so far as it leads someone to the Catholic Church.
Take someone like Scott Hahn. He didn’t come to the Catholic Church with a mind that was a blank slate. God used things within his Protestant background to guide him home to the One True Faith.
There is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church. Everyone in Heaven is Catholic, but not every Catholic goes to heaven.
However, from our earthly perspective, we may not indeed know that someone has entered the Catholic Church before their death.
Pax and God Bless.
If however, one says as the good Brother did, that another faith can be a means of salvation AND you must be united to the Catholic Church, the other faith is a means of salavtion…in so far as it leads someone to the Catholic Church.
Take someone like Scott Hahn. He didn’t come to the Catholic Church with a mind that was a blank slate. God used things within his Protestant background to guide him home to the One True Faith.
There is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church. Everyone in Heaven is Catholic, but not every Catholic goes to heaven.
However, from our earthly perspective, we may not indeed know that someone has entered the Catholic Church before their death.
Pax and God Bless.
D
Dan_Daly
Guest
True Mass, I understand your concern on the topic and share it. I also understand Brother being very careful with his language, and also try to do likewise.
It is an issue where there is a lot of bad teaching going around in the Church. The “I’m ok, you’re ok, we’re all ok” philosophy that one religion is as good as any other, and all you have to do to get to heaven is be a generally nice person, is very prevalent in our world today, both within and outside of the Church.
However, I don’t see Brother saying or arguing anything along those lines.
Pax.
It is an issue where there is a lot of bad teaching going around in the Church. The “I’m ok, you’re ok, we’re all ok” philosophy that one religion is as good as any other, and all you have to do to get to heaven is be a generally nice person, is very prevalent in our world today, both within and outside of the Church.
However, I don’t see Brother saying or arguing anything along those lines.
Pax.
J
JReducation
Guest
I like this example that you gave, because this is what these great missionaries found out. They went to places like India, China and the Americas, before we were Christian and they found that many Catholic truths had been revealed to these people. Some of these truths had been “deformed” to use a word that St. Maximilian Kolbe used when he spoke about Buddhism in Japan. But he also found that deformed does not change the essence.
How do I explain this?
OK . . . let me try this. I’m in a car accident and I’m deformed. I’m still me. The essence is there.
This is the same thing that St. Paul found when he looked at the image to the unknown god. There was an awareness of a supernatural being that transcended even beyond the pagan gods. This was part of the Truth that Paul knew so well. It was deformed, because this transcendent God was misrepresented, but the fact that such a God exists is a truth. Paul is able to point and say, “This is the God of Jesus Christ.”
The missionaries were able to say, “Your rules about fidelity in marriage, are exactly what God commands.” That’s just an example. But this is the kind of thing that did actually happen. These people didn’t come to Christianity with a blank slate.
I’m a convert from Judaism. But you can’t tell me that I had no knowledge of the truth before I became Catholic. That’s hogwash. More than half of what Catholics believe is also what Jew belief and many Catholic traditions are Jewish traditions, for example, the LOTH. The Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles speak about them.
Another wonderful thing that the missionaries discovered was that many non-Catholics, even Protestants, rejected some Catholic teachings, because they thought that what we were doing or believing was a sin.
This is very important. They didn’t reject our Catholic teachings because they were bad people. Just the opposite. They thought that what we were proposing was offensive to God and they didn’t want to offend God. Men like St. Francis of Assisi, St. Francis Xavier and St. Dominic respected their desire not to offend God. What were they supposed to say, “It’s OK to offend God, so kneel down a pray the rosary?”
They had to take another approach. If these folks believed that praying the rosary was a form of idolatry, the best thing to do was to acknowledge the truth in their statement. “Idolatry is a grave sin,” and acknowledge that this truth is placed in their hearts by the grace of God that flows into the world through the presence of his Church.
Now . . . the challenge is how to help them realize that veneration of the Blessed Mother does not fit under idolatry. Eventually, many will get it and many will shy away from it out of fear. This fear is very real. But God , who is all mercy, understands this. He knows men’s hearts and knows who is being obstinate and who is genuinely afraid or confused. He uses what they have in order to save them. In this case, there is grace to be had for shunning idolatry, not for shunning the Blessed Mother, but for the other part.
Just as there is grace to be had for saying, “I don’t want to do what you Catholics do, because I think it’s a sin and I don’t want to sin.” God loves those who don’t want to sin and he blessed them with grace for that desire not to sin. They don’t get the grace that would come from praying the rosary or adoring the Blessed Sacrament, but they do get the grace that comes from the desire to do the right thing. God is not a ruthless God.
I truly believe that we human beings are ruthless while God is eternally merciful. As Christ told St. Faustina, his mercy holds back his justice. That’s not the exact quote, but it’s late and I’m not about to go paging through her writings to find the exact wording. I also believe that God gives his graces in due season. I see this in my own life and in the life of my people.
How many generations between Abraham and Jesus? God did not convert Israel with a snap of the finger. Sometimes we want to rush something that God does not want to rush. For a reason that is known only to him, he wants to take his time with certain people, just as he took his time with Israel and with the Gentiles.
At the end of the day, God wants to bring all men and women into the Church, but not at the same time, at the same speed, via the same means, or even in the same lifetime.
I remember studying theology of death and reading how at that one instant, truth is fully disclosed to us and we are given that one last chance to say “Yes.”. I truly believe that this is the case for some people. Everything comes together and become clear at the 11th hour. That does not mean that we should wait for the 11th hour. I’m not saying that at all. I think it happens that way for some people.
God is God and we’re not him.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
V
Vianney33
Guest
It is a fair question and I’ll answer it. The orders in question never taught that non-Catholic religions are a “means of salvation”. In fact, this idea would have horrified them and also eviscerated the entire need for the missions (which has seemed to happen in the period following VCII).
The founders of these orders and their disciples were tireless in their efforts to CONVERT (not converge with) non-Catholics. Surely they used different prudential methods to accomplish this goal, but that does not equate with teaching these religions’ adherent’s that their religion is a “means of salvation”. This teaching knows of no historical precedent.
J
JReducation
Guest
First of all, you folks are taking this statement out of context. This statement is from the writings of Bl. John Paul II. But to understand its meaning, one has to read the entire document, Ut Unum Sint.
Second, I never said that they used this wording. This wording is foreign to them.
Third, if you examine their approach to evangelization, you can see the parallels between them and what Bl. John Paul is saying.
St. Maximilian Kolbe cites something that Bl. John Paul states in a much more polished way. St. Maximilian wrote long before Bl. John Paul. He pulls from his Franciscan experience. If you go to the workd, Forget Not Love, you will find this statement made by him, which was handed down through generations of Franciscans dating back to Francis. While he was in mission on Japan he wrote to the friars in formation,
**“There is in all belief outside of Catholicism some truth that one must at all cost discover so as to use it as the basis for dialogue.” **He applied this principle even to Marxism, which is so diametrically apposed to his own faith.
In Francis encounter with the Sultan, he refers to the Q’uran as a book containg great truths, without agreeing with every proposition of Islam. In fact, he refers to it as “the Holy Q’Uran”. For him, anything that contained a shadow of truth is holy.
In the first mission to the Holy Land, after Francis returns, the friars are sent to the Holy Land, Pope Gregory IX erects the Custody of the Holy Land, taking under the papal protecting this particular jurisdiction of the Friars Minor. What has marked them for 800 years is the aliance that Francis made with the Sultan at Dalmietta, that if he allowed the friars to pass through is territory, which is today a certain part of Egypt and Jordan, the friars would not proselytize to Jews and Muslims, but limit themselves to serving Christiand and the protection of the sacred places in the Holy Land. For 800 years, these men have never tried to convert Muslims and Jews.
Yet, they have made may converts, because they developed a reglationship of trust instead of antagonism and trust leads to dialog.
In the new world, Men like the Franciscan Juniper Serra and the Dominican Bartolome de las Casas abhorred forced conversions, because the people were being bullied. The wrote letters to the Crown as the crown to intervene. Instead, they took the same approach that had been taken by Francis and Dominic before them and Maximilian after them. They found what God in his mercy used to reveal himself to this people in their context. They identified it as truth. They started from that point.
They also understood and accepted that God saves through Truth, even if one’s knowledge of truth is limited.
This statement by Bl. John Paul II echoes what was already a practice by the the great missionaries of the past. Truth can be found outside of the boundaries of the Church. God save through truth, even if this truth is outside of the Church.
J
JReducation
Guest
All truth points back to the Church. It is the moral imperative to want to seek the wole truth. It is also very human to be afraid for real or imagined reasons. These fears are not of the making of the individuals. God understands these fears and does not penalize people for having them. Throughout the history of thse missionaries, we don’t see them penalizing people or threatening them with eternal damnation because they are afraid to take the next step. They were very compassionate and they tried another approach, but they also trusted that God undestood the human heart and the human condition and that he would not abandon these people or allow them to be lost as they tried to do the best they could with the little they had.
In the writings of St. Maximilian, actually several letters. he used the term pagan. However, it is very important to read the letters. His messages to the friars who were going to join him in Japan and in India was one of great love. He tells them that there is truth and then reminds them that God is truth; therefore, God is present even among the pagans. They must never approach the pagans as one who comes to save, but as one who comes to teach, because one must show respect for the truth that is found there.
He borrowed something from the early missionaries: “No one in the world can change Truth. What we can do and should do is to seek truth and to serve it when we have found it."
But on leaving for the missions he also said, “The thing to do now is to pray well in order to win as many souls as possible.”
The tradition that has been handed down to us is not an either or, it’s both. God is truth. Truth is found in non -Catholic religions. Truth does save. To say that truth does not save is to cast a doubt on the power of God and on the will of God to save. It is to this that Bl. John Paul referred when he made that statement in Ut Unum Sint.
They also beleived that it was necessary to know the fulness of truth. They were dtermined to teach it to those who could learn it. For this, they needed the help of Province. It did not depend on them. They needed to preach by example, more than words.
St. Thomas Aquinas reflected his own Dominican tradition in his belief that “To convert somebody go and take them by the hand and guide them.”
As we can see, these traditions, do not take an antagonistic approach toward the non-Catholic. Just the opposite. What they took was a very fraternal approach and they remained open to the work of God in these other faiths.
It was not a matter of leaving people out there with only part of the truth. It was a matter of acknolweding that part of the truth is out there and that God does use it to save, while at the same time, being faithful to the search for the fulness of truth and the proclamation of the fulness of truth.
Their formation in evangelization was much less ruthless than what popular culture has presented to us. Popular culture has presented these men as ruthless and intolerant. It has present them as being in total denial of the possibility of God’s presence and work outside of the Church Church. But their behavior and their formation says otherwise. There were always some zealots. These were not the norm. The norm among these great missionaries was to be very gentle, very honest about God’s presence and very creative in working with what the truth they found, so as to have a starting point.
Bl. John Paul called for Catholics to do the same.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
In the writings of St. Maximilian, actually several letters. he used the term pagan. However, it is very important to read the letters. His messages to the friars who were going to join him in Japan and in India was one of great love. He tells them that there is truth and then reminds them that God is truth; therefore, God is present even among the pagans. They must never approach the pagans as one who comes to save, but as one who comes to teach, because one must show respect for the truth that is found there.
He borrowed something from the early missionaries: “No one in the world can change Truth. What we can do and should do is to seek truth and to serve it when we have found it."
But on leaving for the missions he also said, “The thing to do now is to pray well in order to win as many souls as possible.”
The tradition that has been handed down to us is not an either or, it’s both. God is truth. Truth is found in non -Catholic religions. Truth does save. To say that truth does not save is to cast a doubt on the power of God and on the will of God to save. It is to this that Bl. John Paul referred when he made that statement in Ut Unum Sint.
They also beleived that it was necessary to know the fulness of truth. They were dtermined to teach it to those who could learn it. For this, they needed the help of Province. It did not depend on them. They needed to preach by example, more than words.
St. Thomas Aquinas reflected his own Dominican tradition in his belief that “To convert somebody go and take them by the hand and guide them.”
As we can see, these traditions, do not take an antagonistic approach toward the non-Catholic. Just the opposite. What they took was a very fraternal approach and they remained open to the work of God in these other faiths.
It was not a matter of leaving people out there with only part of the truth. It was a matter of acknolweding that part of the truth is out there and that God does use it to save, while at the same time, being faithful to the search for the fulness of truth and the proclamation of the fulness of truth.
Their formation in evangelization was much less ruthless than what popular culture has presented to us. Popular culture has presented these men as ruthless and intolerant. It has present them as being in total denial of the possibility of God’s presence and work outside of the Church Church. But their behavior and their formation says otherwise. There were always some zealots. These were not the norm. The norm among these great missionaries was to be very gentle, very honest about God’s presence and very creative in working with what the truth they found, so as to have a starting point.
Bl. John Paul called for Catholics to do the same.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
P
ProVobis
Guest
So the question remains, does this apply equally to ex-Catholics as it does to the Lutherans, for example?
J
JReducation
Guest
I’m a little confused, so if I answer the question incorrectly, it means that I missed what you were asking.
Truth remains unchanging whether he comes from an ex-Catholic or a Lutheran. Let me use this example. When this person speaks about the Trinity, even though he is not Catholic, the truth is the same. We can’t deny this. This faith in the Trinity does serve as a means for grace to operate.
If the Trinity the only truth? Nope. Is it a truth? Yes. Does faith in the Trinity and prayer to the Trinity serve as a vehicle of Grace? Yes. What about other truths? There is a need to get to know them. It is not good enough to know only some truths. Even if God uses those few truths that you know in order to save you, in justice you owe it to God and you to come to the knowledge of the full truth.
Do you see what I’m saying?
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
A
At_Trent
Guest
So who do you folks think will win the World Series ?
J
JReducation
Guest
T
Tylervo
Guest
If I were to be asked to speak for them (which I would decline in other circumstances) I would probably compare this to our own denunciation of liturgical abuses. Condemning liturgical abuses is not the same as condemning the entire Mass, though it can be a very serious occasion of sin in some circumstances.
A disclaimer, which sometimes proves necessary in these debates: I do not attend SSPX Masses (though I could if I wanted to quite easily), I attend Mass by the FSSP, and I am not affiliated with the SSPX in any way, nor do I consider them entirely justified in their actions.
A disclaimer, which sometimes proves necessary in these debates: I do not attend SSPX Masses (though I could if I wanted to quite easily), I attend Mass by the FSSP, and I am not affiliated with the SSPX in any way, nor do I consider them entirely justified in their actions.
- Status