USCCB Joins Ecumenical Organization

[All4lifetoo]

Action of Churches Together in Scotland

Churches Together in Britain and Ireland

Churches Together in Wales

---

Of the Catholic Churches in England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland, all are full members in at least of the above groups of different Christian Churches.

So the action of the CC in the USA is only the most recent of many such moves.

I’m all for it. It’s high time that “the salt of the earth” got out of its salt-shaker, in the USA as elsewhere. Otherwise, it is no better than if it were salt that had lost its taste - and salt like that, gets thrown away.

“Splendid isolation” in the RC goldfish bowl is no way for a Church to behave. Of course there are risks - life is one long series of risks. Jesus did not save us by staying safely in Heaven. And the CC will not do the work of Jesus Christ by staying in a nice safe holy huddle, away from the “heretics” and all those “sinful” people who are not in the “right” Church. Jesus did not keep safe; He mixed with the “heretics” and “sinners” and “schismatics” of his own time, “leaving us an example” to follow. If Jesus had been an RC in the USA CC, we would still be waiting for salvation. Happily for us, He was nothing of the kind. ##

Well, you have made the point that the USCCB action is not the first, but I would not characterize these three as “many such moves.” I take exception to your characterization of the Church as “splendid isolation in the RC goldfish bowl.” Nothing is further from the truth. JPII has been leading the Church in the ecumenical work for a long time. True ecumenism brings the separated back into communion with, not the “right” church, but the true Church and the fullness of the Faith.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

All4lifetoo:

Well, you have made the point that the USCCB action is not the first, but I would not characterize these three as “many such moves.”

These are only a few such bodies - I chose them, because they are geographically close. There is a lot of this about - and it’s a nice change from the stand-offish RC attitude that used to prevail.​

How can we get to know other Christians if we don’t mix with them, if we don’t read their books, make an effort to understand how they see the Christian Gospel by listening to them, if we treat them as inferior or as lepers ? Society is in far too much of a mess for any one Church to be able to carry the whole load - if we don’t work together willingly, what sort of witness are we giving ? If we as a Church really think that others too are Christians - let’s act like it ! Otherwise, Vatican II’s documents on ecumenism will become a dead letter, through Catholic inaction, and Catholic small-mindedness - which is the behaviour one expects, not from a universal Church, but from some tiny little sect.

Ignoring other Christians is simply not an option. There is nothing Christ-like in ignoring or belittling those who are as much His as we are. The petty squabbling between Christians, over mere trifles much of the time, is really depressing. ##

So much for “See how these Christians love one another”

I take exception to your characterization of the Church as “splendid isolation in the RC goldfish bowl.” Nothing is further from the truth. JPII has been leading the Church in the ecumenical work for a long time. True ecumenism brings the separated back into communion with, not the “right” church, but the true Church and the fullness of the Faith.

I should like to be able to withdraw the remark you find so exceptionable, but cannot in honesty do so. I agree that JP2 is giving an excellent example in this matter. But unfortunately a lot of us seem to be extremely wary of other Christians - as are many of them, of us. But in the past, the Church has been so keen on being the unspotted, unsullied, bride of Christ, that she has not been keen on treating other Christians as, well, Christians. “Ideological purity” very definitely took priority over meeting people as human beings who were no less the object of the Love of God than Catholics - which is not how Christ behaved.​

He put people above structures and taboos and laws. He healed “schismatics”, such as Samaritans; ignored pettifogging regulations about the Sabbath in order to heal on it; mixed with “sinners”, such as tax-collectors, who were collaborators with the occupying power of Rome, fleecing their own countrymen and getting rich on the profits. He mixed with Gentiles: centurions and swine-herds, of all people. He didn’t worry about getting dirty by living as a man among men, the Holy One among us sinners; He humbled himself to the disgusting and sweaty and bloody death of the Cross. I can’t see the Church doing that. It’s not her style - unfortunately If the Church were really Christ-like, she would be glad to “decrease, that He may increase”, as St. John the Baptist did. Without Christ, the Church has no meaning.

Thanks to a series of courageous Popes, those days are, one hopes, gone. Ecclesiastical chauvinism - xenophobia ? - is not the same as fidelity to Christ. There is still far too much mutual loathing, thanks to the poisoned atmosphere of the last 500 years, in places such as Northern Ireland; if ecumenism can help to get rid of the smog of sectarian rivalry, I’m all for it. ##

 

[katherine2]

All4lifetoo:

Well, you have made the point that the USCCB action is not the first, …

apology accepted. You might add the Middle East Council of Churhes.

 

[All4lifetoo]

Gottle of Geer:

. . .]and it’s a nice change from the stand-offish RC attitude that used to prevail.

How can we get to know other Christians if we don’t mix with them, if we don’t read their books, make an effort to understand how they see the Christian Gospel by listening to them, if we treat them as inferior or as lepers ? Society is in far too much of a mess for any one Church to be able to carry the whole load - if we don’t work together willingly, what sort of witness are we giving ? If we as a Church really think that others too are Christians - let’s act like it ! Otherwise, Vatican II’s documents on ecumenism will become a dead letter, through Catholic inaction, and Catholic small-mindedness - which is the behaviour one expects, not from a universal Church, but from some tiny little sect.

. . .]

I should like to be able to withdraw the remark you find so exceptionable, but cannot in honesty do so. I agree that JP2 is giving an excellent example in this matter. But unfortunately a lot of us seem to be extremely wary of other Christians - as are many of them, of us. But in the past, the Church has been so keen on being the unspotted, unsullied, bride of Christ, that she has not been keen on treating other Christians as, well, Christians. “Ideological purity” very definitely took priority over meeting people as human beings who were no less the object of the Love of God than Catholics - . . .]​

He put people above structures and taboos and laws. He healed “schismatics”, such as Samaritans; ignored pettifogging regulations about the Sabbath in order to heal on it; mixed with “sinners”, such as tax-collectors, who were collaborators with the occupying power of Rome, fleecing their own countrymen and getting rich on the profits. He mixed with Gentiles: centurions and swine-herds, of all people. He didn’t worry about getting dirty by living as a man among men, the Holy One among us sinners; He humbled himself to the disgusting and sweaty and bloody death of the Cross. I can’t see the Church doing that. It’s not her style - unfortunately If the Church were really Christ-like, she would be glad to “decrease, that He may increase”, as St. John the Baptist did. Without Christ, the Church has no meaning.

Thanks to a series of courageous Popes, those days are, one hopes, gone. Ecclesiastical chauvinism - xenophobia ? - is not the same as fidelity to Christ. There is still far too much mutual loathing, thanks to the poisoned atmosphere of the last 500 years, in places such as Northern Ireland; if ecumenism can help to get rid of the smog of sectarian rivalry, I’m all for it. ##

I don’t buy your characterzation of the way the Church has treated the Protestants. Quite simply, they were heretics and the heresies had to be fought. The heresies of the Protestants still have to be fought. What is different is that the Protestants of today are not “break-away” Catholics. They grew up being taught about God and Jesus Christ in the “tradition” of their forefathers in the faith. Thus, they don’t share in the blame or guilt of their forefathers in the faith and are in fact victims of the heresies of their forefathers in the faith. The reason it behoves us to understand their points of view is so we can learn how to best show them the error and lead them back to the Catholic Truth.

The error you make when using Jesus as an example of how to reach out to others is in characterizing Jesus as accepting them as they were. Jesus never did that. Jesus always led them from where they were to the Truth. In others words, Jesus met them where they were and then led them to where they were not. True ecumenism meets the Protestant/non-Catholic where they are and then leads them to the full Divine Truth revealed by Jesus for the Salvation of all men. It does not form a community where everyone can just get along and ignore the differences in faith by seeking the lowest common denominator.

 

[Richard_Froggat]

I see St. Paul sitting far off on a hill, talking with a bunch of people who believe: Who knows what?

In JMJ, Richard