Why Does the Vatican Need to Humor Other Religions

  • Thread starter Thread starter weepixie71
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
W

weepixie71

Guest
Why does the pope feel the need to make Jews, Moslems, Islams, Buddists, Protestants etc. happy?

How far do we sacrifice our traditions and our ways of thinking to humor those who do not make the same sacrifices in return to humor us all in the name of being peacemaker?

I am so tired of hearing if it doesnt sway dogma or what the pope says is infallible its ok to change. In my opinion it is not ok. We are so much more than that as a religion. We have so many beautiful ways of worship slowly being stripped from us to appease people who are not catholic. Is that not what Vat II, a large portion anyway, is about?

Do we rid ourselves of traditions, disciplines, or honoring of saints before our statues for change, or for these “other” religions to make them feel welcome?

What is your opinion?
 
The Church is doing what it can to reach out to others for the sake of Jesus Christ, whom prayed that all may be one.
 
I think there’s a difference between “humoring” other religions, and acknowledging that they exist and may have some elements of Truth in them, which is what the Church actually does.
 
i agree we should reach out and preach the word of God to them. especially if they are wanting to listen.

but i feel as catholics we have reached too far. we have caused schisms in our own church over this and made drastic changes to our mass and traditions.

catholicism is worldwide now. there is not a place on this earth that does not know, with the exception of some extreme remote spots, what we are all about. any place in the world you can find a catholic church or ministry.

we have a horrible infection in our church right now, its time to clean out the wound and not worry what other religions are thinking of us. what we as catholics do for the good of our church is no more protestants and jews business than it is ours what they do with their religion.
 
weepixie71 said:
we have a horrible infection in our church right now, its time to clean out the wound and not worry what other religions are thinking of us. what we as catholics do for the good of our church is no more protestants and jews business than it is ours what they do with their religion.
Click to expand...
It might be - if it affects them directly. And even if it doesn’t, they have every right to speak out and express their opinions. How we respond to them - and in what Spirit - is our business.

It’s also worth remembering that, in times past, Protestants and Jews (among others) have actually helped our Church. How? Well, for example, after the Protestants under Martin Luther left, we took a good, hard look at the abuses that were going on, cleaned them up, and had the Council of Trent to nail everything down. If Luther hadn’t revolted, maybe that wouldn’t have happened.
 
I’m going to have to agree with theistgal that when people speak against the Church and her liturgy, the correct response is to convene a council and denounce their errors.
 
theistgal said:
It might be - if it affects them directly. And even if it doesn’t, they have every right to speak out and express their opinions. How we respond to them - and in what Spirit - is our business.

It’s also worth remembering that, in times past, Protestants and Jews (among others) have actually helped our Church. How? Well, for example, after the Protestants under Martin Luther left, we took a good, hard look at the abuses that were going on, cleaned them up, and had the Council of Trent to nail everything down. If Luther hadn’t revolted, maybe that wouldn’t have happened.
Click to expand...
I’m going to have to agree with theistgal that when people speak against the Church and her liturgy, the correct response is to convene a council and denounce their errors.
 
We should only work with other religions if the end goal of such measures is to spread the work of Jesus Christ and the one true Church.
 
As religions get more and more away from the gospel, we are going to be forced to take a stand

The Episcopal church is in a mess…If you don’t stand for something you will fall for anything
 
Miles_Mariae said:
I’m going to have to agree with theistgal that when people speak against the Church and her liturgy, the correct response is to convene a council and denounce their errors.
Click to expand...
AND our own as well - as Trent did when it banned the sale of indulgences.

AND perhaps have a look at our liturgy where necessary, since liturgy has an impact on belief and praxis - as Trent did, and not just Paul VI.
 
Beats me. I wish we could just be Catholic and unapologetic about it. Not that I think we need to be unkind to members of other faiths (it would be very un-Catholic!) but all the formal bowing and the scraping is unnecessary, IMO.
 
dove51 said:
Beats me. I wish we could just be Catholic and unapologetic about it. Not that I think we need to be unkind to members of other faiths (it would be very un-Catholic!) but all the formal bowing and the scraping is unnecessary, IMO.
Click to expand...
You got that right 👍 .
 
It is because we to a great part do not want to appear to be judgemental and prejudiced, so we accept all, no matter wnat it is.

I don’t know how the Church chose to follow this path, but in accepting everything we in effect deny what the Church really is. And that is a dangerous road to be on. A very dangerous road indeed…
 
well, I think sometimes it is a mean to protect some Catholic populations in some countries not to mention some non-Catholic populations. The Church rides a fine line in many moslem countries (and India too), that could be easily aggrevated if the Church went out and said “We are going to convert moslems.” And of course many hardline countries you cannot convert as apostasy equals death. Protestants are about searching a middle ground that they can relate and be brought in, though I think we sacrifice too much, for we are making our Churches as barren as Protestant theology. Don’t quite know about the Jews, I guess it is a guilt trip for all that has happened in the past.
 
Sir_Anthony said:
well, I think sometimes it is a mean to protect some Catholic populations in some countries not to mention some non-Catholic populations. The Church rides a fine line in many moslem countries (and India too), that could be easily aggrevated if the Church went out and said “We are going to convert moslems.” And of course many hardline countries you cannot convert as apostasy equals death.
Click to expand...
This, of course, raises the issue of martyrdom which is seldom addressed in a modern context.

My question or rather, concern about the original topic is this: How long can truth and error dialogue before the former takes on elements of the latter? Is it worth the risk?

To quote the user Ottavani in another thread, should the Church be concerned with reconciling to world to itself or reconciling itself to the world?

I think the former goal has always been the goal of the Church. The latter is … something else. Something new and something other than Catholic.
 
Sir_Anthony said:
well, I think sometimes it is a mean to protect some Catholic populations in some countries not to mention some non-Catholic populations. The Church rides a fine line in many moslem countries (and India too), that could be easily aggrevated if the Church went out and said “We are going to convert moslems.” And of course many hardline countries you cannot convert as apostasy equals death. Protestants are about searching a middle ground that they can relate and be brought in, though I think we sacrifice too much, for we are making our Churches as barren as Protestant theology. Don’t quite know about the Jews, I guess it is a guilt trip for all that has happened in the past.
Click to expand...
so how far should we go to keep the peace? would you suggest our pope to kiss the kahran :confused:?
should we take a mass that we know pleases God and change it to make protestants more comfortable:(?
should we let jews determine who is excommunicated or not?
we as catholics have an obligation to preach the truth for we are the only religion who has the full truth. we do not need to change.🤷
 
Second Vatican Council is not about appeasing other religions but about respecting them. Read the Book of Acts in which God accepts the prayers of a good non-Christian man…In the Book of Revelation all people are judged according to their works. Whether our good works are inspired by Jesus Christ or through belief in another God/religion, does not make a difference. Christians have a Savior who forgives sins and intercedes with God on their behalf. That is the difference. Jesus clearly wanted all Christians to obey His commands as a sign of our love for Him. He said, “Not all who call me Lord, Lord, will enter the Kingdom of Heaven but only the ones who do the will of my Father…”

Non-Christians should have the freedom to accept Christianity on its merit alone. Second Vatican Council recognizes that God revealed Himself in different ways to different people (if God created the whole world, how could He possibly have ignored all human beings when they sought Him in their own ways?), but revealed Himself fully in the form of a human person only once in human history in the person of Jesus Christ. No other religion but Christianity claims to worship a human being who is both man and God.

There is beauty and truth in other religions too. There is no need for a Christian to be afraid to admit it and even learn from it wherever possible, as long as it can be done without losing one’s own faith in Christianity. But what we should know with conviction is why we are Christians and not followers of any other religion.
 
S_J_Thaikattil said:
Second Vatican Council is not about appeasing other religions but about respecting them. Read the Book of Acts in which God accepts the prayers of a good non-Christian man…In the Book of Revelation all people are judged according to their works. Whether our good works are inspired by Jesus Christ or through belief in another God/religion, does not make a difference. Christians have a Savior who forgives sins and intercedes with God on their behalf. That is the difference. Jesus clearly wanted all Christians to obey His commands as a sign of our love for Him. He said, “Not all who call me Lord, Lord, will enter the Kingdom of Heaven but only the ones who do the will of my Father…”

Non-Christians should have the freedom to accept Christianity on its merit alone. Second Vatican Council recognizes that God revealed Himself in different ways to different people (if God created the whole world, how could He possibly have ignored all human beings when they sought Him in their own ways?), but revealed Himself fully in the form of a human person only once in human history in the person of Jesus Christ. No other religion but Christianity claims to worship a human being who is both man and God.

There is beauty and truth in other religions too. There is no need for a Christian to be afraid to admit it and even learn from it wherever possible, as long as it can be done without losing one’s own faith in Christianity. But what we should know with conviction is why we are Christians and not followers of any other religion.
Click to expand...
Without faith, it is impossible to please God. By faith, we are not talking about religious belief in general. We are talking about supernatural faith. I’m not sure what you meant by the comment about our works being all that matter, but it sounds very close to Pelagianism. Belief in other religions is not salvific. Folks in such religions might be saved, but if they are, it will be in spite of their false religion.

Anything true in another religion is by right already Catholic anyway.
 
Kook said:
Without faith, it is impossible to please God. By faith, we are not talking about religious belief in general. We are talking about supernatural faith. I’m not sure what you meant by the comment about our works being all that matter, but it sounds very close to Pelagianism. Belief in other religions is not salvific. Folks in such religions might be saved, but if they are, it will be in spite of their false religion.

Anything true in another religion is by right already Catholic anyway.
Click to expand...
I was trying to explain Second Vatican Council, not Pelgianism.

Without faith it is impossible to believe in God. But we must also believe that atheists who find it impossible to believe in God will not be sent to hell for that reason alone even if they lead virtuous lives, and a Christian will gain automatic entry to heaven in spite of being totally evil, simply because they say they believe in Jesus. The letter of James states clearly that even the devil believes in God, so belief alone is not sufficient, it must be proved by obeying the commands of Jesus. Faith without works is mere fantasy and is therefore dead.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top