Why do Modern Popes Embrace Idolatry?

[EasterJoy]

The OP is adding constraints over and above the teaching of the Magesterium and the Vicar of Christ in our own time, which is not allowed, not to mention beyond that which was taught by the Apostles themselves. It is and has always been within the authority of their office to decide the appropriate boundaries for ecumenical contact!

From Ch. 15, Acts of the Apostles (Boldface mine, obviously):
22 Then the apostles and presbyters, in agreement with the whole church, decided to choose representatives and to send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. The ones chosen were Judas, who was called Barsabbas, and Silas, leaders among the brothers.
23 This is the letter delivered by them: “The apostles and the presbyters, your brothers, to the brothers in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia of Gentile origin: Greetings.
24 Since we have heard that some of our number (who went out) without any mandate from us have upset you with their teachings and disturbed your peace of mind,
25 we have with one accord decided to choose representatives and to send them to you along with our beloved Barnabas and Paul,
26 who have dedicated their lives to the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.
27 So we are sending Judas and Silas who will also convey this same message by word of mouth:
28 'It is the decision of the holy Spirit and of us not to place on you any burden beyond these necessities,
29 namely, to abstain from meat sacrificed to idols, from blood, from meats of strangled animals, and from unlawful marriage. If you keep free of these, you will be doing what is right. Farewell.’”
30 And so they were sent on their journey. Upon their arrival in Antioch they called the assembly together and delivered the letter.
31 When the people read it, they were delighted with the exhortation.
32 Judas and Silas, who were themselves prophets, exhorted and strengthened the brothers with many words.
33 After they had spent some time there, they were sent off with greetings of peace from the brothers to those who had commissioned them.

This business of adding to the constraints of the faith is the kind of thing that drove the Apostle Paul nuts. As noted already, Paul himself taught in the shadow of Greek temples and Greek idols. Neither did the Christians stop attending synagogue after Pentecost.

He and Barnabas were the ones who went up to Jerusalem with the question of what was required of Gentile converts, as others had been putting rules and constraints on them beyond that which were necessary.

St. Paul, who unlike the OP wrote epistles of exhortation that went on to become Holy Scripture, recognized who it was that Christ gave ultimate authority to decide this matter. The OP should, too.

 

[nannyma]

Anyone who would make such a claim is thoroughly ignorant of Nostra Aetate. I strongly recommend you read it.

I apologize I do not know “Nostra Aetate” but for the sake of space in the thread,I chose your answer. Though that sounds interesting?
Our Holy Fathers do not embrace idolatry. Acknowledgement is not acceptance. The two great commandments To Love God;To Love our Brothers and Sisters. That’s it! If a Rabbi offered me a blessing I would say"Thank You Rabbi" with respect. If the same Rabbi invited me to a sacred meeting with those in his congregation which would be a very Jewish adherance of their law, I would say, No thank you Rabbi and be on my way somewhat hurt at a step in the wrong direction by the Rabbi but at the same time grateful for sharing “the happenning”.of a shared brotherhood. God Bless,nannyma

 

[CWBetts]

I apologize I do not know “Nostra Aetate” but for the sake of space in the thread,I chose your answer. Though that sounds interesting?
Our Holy Fathers do not embrace idolatry. Acknowledgement is not acceptance. The two great commandments To Love God;To Love our Brothers and Sisters. That’s it! If a Rabbi offered me a blessing I would say"Thank You Rabbi" with respect. If the same Rabbi invited me to a sacred meeting with those in his congregation which would be a very Jewish adherance of their law, I would say, No thank you Rabbi and be on my way somewhat hurt at a step in the wrong direction by the Rabbi but at the same time grateful for sharing “the happenning”.of a shared brotherhood. God Bless,nannyma

It is the VII document concerning relationships with non-Christian religions

 

[A.Pelliccio]

Uh, that’s because in so doing they were actually worshipping the Emperor. He WAS considered to be divine and worshipped as a god, y’know. More than that, more than worshipping the Emperor even, they were also being asked to give up their Christian worship. You couldn’t hope to, for example, worship both in the pagan temples and in Christian services and hope to escape persecution by so doing.

Pope Benedict prayed in a mosque on his visit to Turkey - I suppose you think he betrayed Christ too? I suppose the fact that he seriously angered Muslims early in his pontificate with a speech at Regensburg slamming Islam doesn’t mean anything?

I am well aware of the traditions of Rome, and the point of incense was a lead into my second paragraph about my experiences here in Iraq. So by kissing a Quran, or allowing non-Catholics to use our Churches for worship, or praying within the structures of heretics, schismatics, heathens, and pagans we betray the blood of the past martyrs and those who continue to live under the yolk of Islam.

Secondly, I cannot speak to the Holy Father’s heart. I know he was not praying to Mohammed in that mosque, but we must realize the imagery broadcasted across the sea of ignorance, barbarism, and illiteracy that is the Islamic world. It was a public relations stunt and it hurt morale where Christians live under Islamic occupation. The Holy Father would make no overt motions while in the Hagia Sophia and yet bow his head in a Mosque?

I am, as I am the Church is, more concerned with healing the 1000 year old rift with the east, as opposed to coddling the moslems. An outward sign of prayer in one of the largest structures in Christendom would have sent the proper motions to a suffering people in Turkey and across the world. There are separated brethren to the East possess no seminary and the Hagia Sophia remains a place devoid of proper worship. When ethnic cleansing forced the remaining Greeks from Anatolia and Constantinople since the 20th century, why should the Holy Father go to Turkey and glad hand? Since the governance of Bethlehem passed to the PA in the Oslo peace accords, the Christian population went from 75% to 23%. The Holy Father was spot on in his speech on Islam, and he should not have backed away from it. Ask the Catholics here in Iraq who daily attacks, kidnapping, bombings, and intimidation, ask them if they thought the Holy Father’s initial analysis of Islam was out of line. It is very easy for us in the West to, in our comfort and hubris, philosophically and progressively engage in dialogue with Islam. For those in the east who have for 1400 years resisted conversion and remain proud in their traditions, we should just ‘go along to get along’. The Church as a whole should be asking itself quo vadimus.

 

[nannyma]

Anyone who would make such a claim is thoroughly ignorant of Nostra Aetate. I strongly recommend you read it.

Yes, I would like to say I have been informed of Nostra Aetate and I commend you for sharing that document. I was deeply moved by the line of the poem of Bishop Klaus Hemmerle that said: My God’s house was set on fire and my own people did it
It was taken away from those who gave me the name of my God!
This document does not deal with all other faiths however what it says that is most important is that the Church (our Church) recognizes the truth that IS IN other religions and for that reason a dialogue is maintained.
I was also impressed about the Muslims recognition of Our Lady which I already knew but I enjoyed reading that part of this thread as well.
All in All;God is good. The two great commandments keep getting greater.God Bless,nannyma

 

[EasterJoy]

I am well aware of the traditions of Rome, and the point of incense was a lead into my second paragraph about my experiences here in Iraq. So by kissing a Quran, or allowing non-Catholics to use our Churches for worship, or praying within the structures of heretics, schismatics, heathens, and pagans we betray the blood of the past martyrs and those who continue to live under the yolk of Islam.

Secondly, I cannot speak to the Holy Father’s heart. I know he was not praying to Mohammed in that mosque, but we must realize the imagery broadcasted across the sea of ignorance, barbarism, and illiteracy that is the Islamic world. It was a public relations stunt and it hurt morale where Christians live under Islamic occupation. The Holy Father would make no overt motions while in the Hagia Sophia and yet bow his head in a Mosque?

I am, as I am the Church is, more concerned with healing the 1000 year old rift with the east, as opposed to coddling the moslems. An outward sign of prayer in one of the largest structures in Christendom would have sent the proper motions to a suffering people in Turkey and across the world. There are separated brethren to the East possess no seminary and the Hagia Sophia remains a place devoid of proper worship. When ethnic cleansing forced the remaining Greeks from Anatolia and Constantinople since the 20th century, why should the Holy Father go to Turkey and glad hand? Since the governance of Bethlehem passed to the PA in the Oslo peace accords, the Christian population went from 75% to 23%. The Holy Father was spot on in his speech on Islam, and he should not have backed away from it. Ask the Catholics here in Iraq who daily attacks, kidnapping, bombings, and intimidation, ask them if they thought the Holy Father’s initial analysis of Islam was out of line. It is very easy for us in the West to, in our comfort and hubris, philosophically and progressively engage in dialogue with Islam. For those in the east who have for 1400 years resisted conversion and remain proud in their traditions, we should just ‘go along to get along’. The Church as a whole should be asking itself quo vadimus.

If you read the Pope’s original comments on Islam that caused the firestorm, I think you’ll have to agree that his words were misconstrued. He did not back away from what he said. He explained how what he said in the first place had been twisted out of context. The twist is unfortunately what people seem to remember, not what he actually said. If he was not already painfully aware that his carefully-worded intellectual nuance is lost on most people, both inside and outside of the Church, he was after that incident. What a nightmare.

Speaking of ignorance, nobody in the Islamic world thought the Holy Father was worshipping Mohamed, because none of them worship Mohammed. They are monotheists who worship the One God of Abraham. They may not recognize the Trinity, but they are not pagans and they don’t worship idols, nor those they hold to be prophets. We need to remain very clear about that, and not throw words like “pagan” and “idolatry” around loosely.

Having said all that, it is most important that we thank you, both for your service to your country and for your unswerving adherence to the faith. The Holy Father knows well what he is doing and where the boundaries of ecumenism should be drawn. It is within his authority to decide where that line is. I think it safe to say that the Holy Father is far more aware of the theological and historical differences between Islam and both the Eastern and Western Churches than anyone on this forum. He is an expert, an incredible and brilliant scholar, as well as an entirely faithful successor of Peter. If he has a weak point, it is that perhaps he forgets how ignorant the rest of us are. As for the rest of us, when in doubt, it is far better to refrain from worshipping ignorantly than to even unwittingly betray the faith. You were very right to leave the religious observances of other religions to those others to practice. It is too easy to either betray our own faith, offensively trivialize theirs, or both. (What a sorry trifecta, and how dangerous!)

It must be easy for him to forget how rare truly careful and informed listeners and subtle thinkers like him are anywhere in the world outside of the Vatican, the Magesterium, and the scholarly circles of other religions. It must seem sometimes that everyone around him was born being able to intelligently discuss 14th century theological controversies. Surrounded by those who appreciate his brilliant mind and careful reasoning, it must be hard for him to imagine how little trust we sometimes put in his informed judgment. If the Pope needs to remember how little we know and how weak our obedience is, though, how much more should we humbly remember how much he does know, and how deep his obedience is! In other words, give the Holy Father the credit he is due!

As for your comrades and enemies, though, pray for them, in the confidence that God reads hearts and knows why we each do what we do and yet thirsts for each soul. When giving a model of Christian behavior, always include compassion. This is what the saints and martyrs did, even as they died terrible deaths in witness to Our Lord, starting with St. Stephen. Let us imitate them in that way, too, then, above all others…for Christ did not command us to die, but to love, even when it means death to do it.

 

[RosaryCrusader]

Psalm 95:5

For all the gods of the Gentiles are devils: but the Lord made the heavens.

Yes, it is unfortunate - I don’t think the Pope is paying tribute to these false gods when he calls an interfaith meeting but it’s certainly scandalous.

LilyM, you actually brought up a good point about putting the shoe on the other foot although I think you meant it in a different light. But if the Dalai Lama prayed in the Sistine Chapel, I probably wouldn’t think he had converted outright but that he at least found nothing objectionable in Catholicism or that there were no significant obstacles to his outright embracing of it - or, in the very least, I would think his oppinion is one of indifferentism or syncretism. However, when you flip this back around and realize this was the Pope, the visible head of the true religion, then it becomes seriously problematic.

 

[Onegin]

Would you have me say no to her and turn my back? Yell and argue with her? Slap the poor lady in the face or something? Any such gesture would be a fantastic example of being all things to all men in order to save some.

Certainly not. But I have a hard time believing that in all these situations, the Pope is literally accosted on the street to do these things. He makes appointments, is invited to pray at these locations, etc.

What would you suggest for these situations?

I’m all for finding common ground and using that as a starting point, but at some point in time differences will arise - this is normal. The problem with the idea of ecumenism seems to be conveniently ignoring these differences in order to have these great press conferences with world religious leaders, conveying the image that everything is fine an dandy when, in actuality, very little real substantive “dialog” ever occurred.

Culturally, it seems we’ve come to expect that religions with violently different beliefs can happily sit in one room and come out equally happy. This is disingenuous. If the ultimate point of ecumenism is actually conversion (as it should be), then difficult matters will need to be raised.

 

[shoewindow3000]

For the Pope to sit with world religious leaders is to imply that he is giving their religions a higher status than idolatry and paganism. He is essentially telling the world that the True faith is simply “one among many.”

It is not!

Yes Jesus sat and ate with the “sinners” and tax collectors, but he also corrected them, even at the expense of self-ease or being criticized.

The Pope sits with these guys, but does he tell them about God? Maybe he does when the cameras are off, I don’t know, but he should at least make an attempt if he doesn’t already!

 

[LilyM]

For the Pope to sit with world religious leaders is to imply that he is giving their religions a higher status than idolatry and paganism. He is essentially telling the world that the True faith is simply “one among many.”

It is not!

Yes Jesus sat and ate with the “sinners” and tax collectors, but he also corrected them, even at the expense of self-ease or being criticized.

The Pope sits with these guys, but does he tell them about God? Maybe he does when the cameras are off, I don’t know, but he should at least make an attempt if he doesn’t already!

There’s a very well-known story about St Francis of Assisi. If memory serves, it goes like this:

Francis called one of his brothers to go to a particular town with him, and said that they were going to preach there. Upon reaching the town, they walked slowly and deliberately through it, with Francis not saying a word. Upon reaching the other side, they continued on out of the town.

‘I thought you said we were going to preach there’ said the brother. Francis’ reply? “We just did. Our walking IS our preaching.”

John Paul II and Benedict have both done plenty of Francis’ sort of preaching. For that matter so does every man who wears a cassock in public. And many a time their mere public presence, as walking breathing advertisements for Catholicism, is more effective preaching than any amount of verbal attempts at persuasion.

 

[I_Believe]

I’m upset too, but I think prayer for, and support of, the New Liturgical Movement in the Church would be better time spent than judging dead Popes at this point. GRTS’s.

Then again, with all the fuss laying here on the internet before our eyes, it’s no surprise some will vent when they come across these things.

The pendulum is swinging back toward reverence and more orthodox thinking. Roman Catholic clergy, religious, and laity must accept and know well what the Church taught up to VII first. Then that what followed VII, and has a connection to Tradition, can be accepted as well.

We have a good Pope.

 

[I_Believe]

There’s a very well-known story about St Francis of Assisi. If memory serves, it goes like this:

Francis called one of his brothers to go to a particular town with him, and said that they were going to preach there. Upon reaching the town, they walked slowly and deliberately through it, with Francis not saying a word. Upon reaching the other side, they continued on out of the town.

‘I thought you said we were going to preach there’ said the brother. Francis’ reply? “We just did. Our walking IS our preaching.”

John Paul II and Benedict have both done plenty of Francis’ sort of preaching. For that matter so does every man who wears a cassock in public. And many a time their mere public presence, as walking breathing advertisements for Catholicism, is more effective preaching than any amount of verbal attempts at persuasion.

Sort of like H.H BXVI administering Communion on the tongue, leading by example ?

 

[LilyM]

Sort of like H.H BXVI administering Communion on the tongue, leading by example ?

If you want to put it that way, I guess his rather pointedly NOT saying the EF publicly is an instance of same

 

[I_Believe]

If you want to put it that way, I guess his rather pointedly NOT saying the EF publicly is an instance of same

We’ll see. I think he’s working on the OF right now. After all, the Gregorian Rite is flawless and in no need of concern

And by the way, he has some in his posse praying the Gregorian Rite in public anyway. Cardinals Hoyos and Cannizares are two of them

 

[LilyM]

We’ll see. I think he’s working on the OF right now. After all, the Gregorian Rite is flawless and in no need of concern

And that’s why the OF was promulgated in the first place, of course, because just absolutely everything about the EF was so peachy keen and hunky-dory … and I suppose Elvis is still alive and the pyramids really were built by aliens.

And by the way, he has some in his posse praying the Gregorian Rite in public anyway. Cardinals Hoyos and Cannizares are two of them

A whole two Cardinals out of the College, I am so very very impressed.

 

[shoewindow3000]

There’s a very well-known story about St Francis of Assisi. If memory serves, it goes like this:

Francis called one of his brothers to go to a particular town with him, and said that they were going to preach there. Upon reaching the town, they walked slowly and deliberately through it, with Francis not saying a word. Upon reaching the other side, they continued on out of the town.

‘I thought you said we were going to preach there’ said the brother. Francis’ reply? “We just did. Our walking IS our preaching.”

John Paul II and Benedict have both done plenty of Francis’ sort of preaching. For that matter so does every man who wears a cassock in public. And many a time their mere public presence, as walking breathing advertisements for Catholicism, is more effective preaching than any amount of verbal attempts at persuasion.

But…
they were walking through a town that at least had knowledge of and access to Christianity. If they walked through a town in a Muslim country, or in some remote village in the middle of Taiwan, how many people would even have known what Christianity is?

 

[LilyM]

But…
they were walking through a town that at least had knowledge of and access to Christianity. If they walked through a town in a Muslim country, or in some remote village in the middle of Taiwan, how many people would even have known what Christianity is?

In this day and age when 1/3 of all people on the planet are Christian? We aren’t nearly as isolated or ignorant as we were in centuries past, and you’d be very hard put to it to find any place in the world today where there was genuinely no knowledge of Christianity.

Besides which, there’s no question that any of the people the Pope or these Papal Nuncios or what have you are meeting would be unaware of Christianity. You have to make an effort to meet the Pope or a Papal Nuncio in such settings, and you wouldn’t make the effort if you were in utter ignorance of who they were and what they stood for.

 

[I_Believe]

And that’s why the OF was promulgated in the first place, of course, because just absolutely everything about the EF was so peachy keen and hunky-dory … and I suppose Elvis is still alive and the pyramids really were built by aliens.

A whole two Cardinals out of the College, I am so very very impressed.

Lily, I was messing with you, but seriously, you know the reversion to the EF would take time. If the Pope abrogated the OF today, the majority of priests could not pray the EF. They wouldn’t know where to start. It’s silly to ask why it’s not happening so abruptly.

A minority of Cardinals at VII wanted the EF in the vernacular. They didn’t ask for a new Mass.

Name something about the Gregorian Rite you don’t like. You can’t without flirting with anathema or rejecting the demand and decree of the man who called VII in the first place. As long as John XXII was alive there was to be no changes to the Mass of the Ages. Why would he write Veterum Sapientia and publish the 1962 Missal if he was going to tolerate a new Mass in the vernacular ? Sadly he died before the close of the Council. GRHS

I guess it’s open to debate, but I believe he did in fact demand the Council be closed, while he lay on his deathbed.

 

[Marfran]

Let’s put the shoe on the other foot - what would you think if the Dalai Lama went to a meeting with the Pope, received a gift of a Bible from him and kissed it? Then received a blessing from Pope Benedict?

Would you HONESTLY say ‘yippee, he’s embracing Christianity/Catholicism!’ ‘He’s converting!’ ‘He’s not a Buddhist/less of a Buddhist’! If you would, I’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn I’d like to sell you …

Listen, one gesture, as long as it is not an actual act of worship in another faith, does not make or break a person’s Catholicism - or Buddhism in the case of the DL - which is the product of a lfetime. You firstly need to look at the person’s sum total of words and actions. And then at the context of the gesture as well.

I’m guessing you know next door to nothing about these people who you are criticising. For all you know the blessing at least was sprung on the poor man without any forewarning.

As an example, just the other week I met a nun and showed her a necklace with a cross on it which had been given to me. She then proceeded to bless it as a priest or deacon would. I know that wasn’t kosher, but it was done without any consent on my part. Yet I’m sure if I’d been Pope Benedict and a photo had been taken - well, all manner of rubbish would’ve been written about it.

Would you have me say no to her and turn my back? Yell and argue with her? Slap the poor lady in the face or something? Any such gesture would be a fantastic example of being all things to all men in order to save some.

Didn’t Paul literally say ‘when I was among Jews I acted as a Jew’? To the extent of having poor Timothy circumcised so as not to offend the Jews among whom he was working?

Please please do NOT take my comments as meaning that I think anything and everythign goes in the name of ecumenism - not in the least. I’m just saying don’t be quick to presume either that you know the whole story behind a gesture, or that any and every effort to find common ground with people of other faiths is wrong.

:clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping:

 

[Marfran]

There’s a very well-known story about St Francis of Assisi. If memory serves, it goes like this:

Francis called one of his brothers to go to a particular town with him, and said that they were going to preach there. Upon reaching the town, they walked slowly and deliberately through it, with Francis not saying a word. Upon reaching the other side, they continued on out of the town.

‘I thought you said we were going to preach there’ said the brother. Francis’ reply? “We just did. Our walking IS our preaching.”

John Paul II and Benedict have both done plenty of Francis’ sort of preaching. For that matter so does every man who wears a cassock in public. And many a time their mere public presence, as walking breathing advertisements for Catholicism, is more effective preaching than any amount of verbal attempts at persuasion.

:clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping: