True or False Ecumenism?

[Genesis315]

Does Pope Pius XI’s encyclical ‘Mortalium Animos’ condemn ecumenism and inter-religious dialogue?

Mortalium Animos is addressing a specific kind of assembly or society. See par. 7 of the encyclical. It addressing societies that state the unity of Christ’s Church has failed, that the Church now consists of various separated branches which are to be reconciled and united by compromise of their differences. They sought to establish a visible communion based on the lowest common denominator or compromises in doctrine.

A Catholic could not be a member of such an organization since its stated goals are in and of themselves contrary to the faith on two main points–that the Church is no longer one (which is not the same as saying that all the baptized lack unity amongst themselves) and that the unity of the Church can be re-achieved through compromise in the deposit of faith. A Catholic cannot work toward those false ends.

Vatican II’s decree on ecumenism and John Paul II’s Ut Unum Sint explicitly reject both of these false ends as well (and it is one reason the Catholic Church is pretty much the only Christian “denomination” that has chosen not to be a member of the World Council of Churches). Participation in a conference with non-Catholics can be permitted by the Church when such participation does not imply assent to the above propositions and where the goal of the Catholic participants is true unity in the entire deposit of faith and in hierarchy of government in the Catholic Church.

Participation in such conferences has been permitted (with oversight and by authorized persons) since there has been the separation of the baptized from the Church. It has just been done on a greater scale since Vatican II made it a priority.

So there’s no contradiction in principle between Mortalium Animos and Vatican II/Ut Unum Sint.

 

[Eufrosnia]

Does Pope Pius XI’s encyclical ‘Mortalium Animos’ condemn ecumenism and inter-religious dialogue?

It does not condemn ecumenism. But it does condemn the type of ecumenism that is prevalent today i.e. lets just get together and sing hymns once a year and get back to being good Catholics/Protestants/Orthodox/Buddhists/Hindus/Atheists or whichever it maybe. Perhaps occasionally even have communion distributed to others as well (the issues around the Taize communities come to mind here)

The problem however is that the condemnation of Pius XI is not a doctrinal condemnation. It is more of a condemnation based on prudent thinking in order to safeguard the faithful from going in to error i.e. Disciplinary.

For better or for worse, since Vatican II, even Popes have determined that such a restriction is not needed. Perhaps they see it as having potential to maybe make true ecumenical work easier later on and a worthwhile risk.

Personally, I do not think it wise and that is why I do not engage or support any ecumenical activity of that sort. I have seen too many mislead individuals who now think that all are saved and have fallen in to the very doctrinal errors (modernist precepts, indifferentism) that Mortalium Animos warned as possible. But I am always up for, and do engage in ecumenical work where I talk to other faiths and have actual discussions on faith and why we believe any religion to be true etc.

That being said, from the perspective of the Popes, I do sympathize with them allowing somethings. In a way, they are human and living at a time much different from Pius XI. If one were to condemn actions of the sort done by Pius XI, most Catholics in the West will just outright leave the Church. It is also not correct anymore to say that “all religions cannot be true and its either one or neither”. The UN might pass a binding resolution against the Church for inciting hate if the Pope were to say it.

So in this sense, times are a bit different. So perhaps the Popes are hoping to sneak in Catholicism to others in the same way they used to want try and sneak in their faith to Catholics i.e. become friends, invite them to worship etc.

But I do feel that at the same time, the Church needs to regain its unwavering and uncompromising attitude toward speaking the truth more often. Not doing so can lead others to a false hope that perhaps the Church does mean that all paths lead to God/heaven.

That particular issue however is out of my control. I cannot force the Pope to come out hard like that. Neither can I do so even if I were to gather a huge enough following, sign a letter and send it to the Pope. Neither am I sure that coming out hard will convince anyone he is right anyway. It seems like doing so will only stand to lose (many will leave saying the Pope is a bigot) for sure while at least in not doing so explicitly, one can hope to gain some followers. There is a risk of losing but the risk is perhaps not as great as the possible loss in coming out direct. After all, the teaching is still there and nothing in the teaching has been denied. All we have are ambiguous or contrary actions/events being promoted at best. But neither the Pope nor anyone is considered infallible in their actions, promotions etc.

Now what I can do is change attitudes, one person at a time and bring them back in to the Church as faithful Catholics. Since the Pope will one day come from our society, if we change society, there will be a Pope one day from that society who will reflect what it holds. Thus, change will come about organically and society itself will be ready to receive it when that day comes.

 

[Eufrosnia]

Mortalium Animos is addressing a specific kind of assembly or society. See par. 7 of the encyclical. It addressing societies that state the unity of Christ’s Church has failed, that the Church now consists of various separated branches which are to be reconciled and united by compromise of their differences. They sought to establish a visible communion based on the lowest common denominator or compromises in doctrine.

A Catholic could not be a member of such an organization since its stated goals are in and of themselves contrary to the faith on two main points–that the Church is no longer one (which is not the same as saying that all the baptized lack unity amongst themselves) and that the unity of the Church can be re-achieved through compromise in the deposit of faith. A Catholic cannot work toward those false ends.

One could say that communities such as Taize attempt just that, no? There is no call for conversion or to become Catholic. Everything is rather geared toward, in the words of Pope John Paul II

By desiring to be yourselves a “parable of community”, you will help all whom you meet to be faithful to their denominational ties, the fruit of their education and their choice in conscience, but also to enter more and more deeply into the mystery of communion that the Church is in God’s plan.

(source: taize.fr/en_article6718.html)

The goal of the Church can never be to strengthen ties of those already outside the Church to the very institutions that promote them staying outside. But it seems to have been considered at least ok in this case.

So I agree with you that it is not right according to MA to promote such things but the Church today does do just that. I think it is because the Church does feel that it cannot be so stringent as it was in MA. I do feel personally that it is not a right path to take but the Pope is above the law. If he wants to do it, as much as I disagree with him, I cannot impede him in his task.