Aide: Pope Looking for Ecumenical Honesty

ZNA ^ | 4/20/2008

[markomalley]

Aide: Pope Looking for Ecumenical Honesty

Says Benedict XVI Not Satisfied With "Well Wishing"

NEW YORK, APRIL 20, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Benedict XVI is looking for a "commitment of honesty" from Christians engaged in ecumenical dialogue, according to a Vatican aide.

Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, director of the Vatican press office, said this Saturday in comments to the press on the address the Pope gave to ecumenical leaders Friday evening.

The meeting of over 300 religious leaders involved in ecumenical dialogue gathered at St. Joseph's Parish in Manhattan. According to organizers, some 250 represented various Protestant churches, 50 were Orthodox leaders and 50 were Catholics.

Father Lombardi said the Pope wants "to go to the foundations," "to move all Christians of every community to reflect on the importance of seeking the truth together," without being satisfied with "a certain 'well wishing,' let us say, a certain generic goodwill, but to seek out that which is our duty to revealed truth."

What the Pontiff is promoting, he added, is therefore "a commitment of honesty, of honesty and reflection in which the true Christian faith is brought to light [...] by seeking the essential elements of the profession of faith that Scripture and Tradition uphold and on the basis of which, then, we must come together."

Challenges

In his address, Benedict XVI outlined various challenges facing the globalized community, which he said today is "poised between two poles."

He commented that on one hand "there is a growing sense of interconnectedness and interdependency between peoples even when -- geographically and culturally speaking -- they are far apart," but on the other hand "we cannot deny that the rapid changes occurring in our world also present some disturbing signs of fragmentation and a retreat into individualism."

The Pope added that using new communication technology can often cause greater isolation, and that people are yearning for "more authentic forms of community."

Additionally, the Pontiff highlighted the spread of a secularist ideology that "undermines or even rejects transcendent truth."

"The very possibility of divine revelation, and therefore of Christian faith," he added, "is often placed into question by cultural trends widely present in academia, the mass media and public debate."

"For these reasons," the Holy Father urged, "a faithful witness to the Gospel is as urgent as ever. Christians are challenged to give a clear account of the hope that they hold."

Division

Benedict XVI said the division among Christians causes confusion among non-Christians regarding the authentic message of the Gospel, "just at the time when the world is losing its bearings and needs a persuasive common witness to the saving power of the Gospel."

The Pope recalled the "unwavering conviction of the early Christian community that its unity was both caused by, and is reflective of, the unity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This, in turn, suggests that the internal cohesion of believers was based on the sound integrity of their doctrinal confession."

"My dear friends," continued the Holy Father, "the power of the kerygma has lost none of its internal dynamism. Yet we must ask ourselves whether its full force has not been attenuated by a relativistic approach to Christian doctrine similar to that found in secular ideologies, which, in alleging that science alone is 'objective,' relegate religion entirely to the subjective sphere of individual feeling.

"Scientific discoveries, and their application through human ingenuity, undoubtedly offer new possibilities for the betterment of humankind. This does not mean, however, that the 'knowable' is limited to the empirically verifiable, nor religion restricted to the shifting realm of 'personal experience.'"

The Pontiff called this line of reasoning "faulty," and that accepting it would lead to more division and a loss of the "importance of doctrinal content for Christian living."

Benedict XVI said that even within the ecumenical movement, some are "reluctant to assert the role of doctrine for fear that it would only exacerbate rather than heal the wounds of division."

"Yet a clear, convincing testimony to the salvation wrought for us in Christ Jesus has to be based upon the notion of normative apostolic teaching," he asserted, "a teaching which indeed underlies the inspired word of God and sustains the sacramental life of Christians today."

"Only by 'holding fast' to sound teaching," added the Pope, "will we be able to respond to the challenges that confront us in an evolving world. Only in this way will we give unambiguous testimony to the truth of the Gospel and its moral teaching."

[Gamecock]

by seeking the essential elements of the profession of faith that Scripture and Tradition uphold and on the basis of which, then, we must come together."

Talk about stacking the deck on the call for Ecumenical Honesty.

While I haven't seen the final list of the 250 Proddies in attendance, I'm sure they were not those who would see any issue with that statement.

Nothing to see here folks, move along.

[Petronski]

There is no "stacking the deck" in acknowledging that sola scriptura is--ironically--non-scriptural.

[Gamecock]

Oh but it is. Only tradition says that it isn’t.

[marshmallow]

Take an honest look at the fruits of severing Scripture from Tradition. Just step back for a moment and observe the fractured, multiplied professions who have discarded the idea of Tradition and proclaim to the world that one man with a Bible, divorced from the accumulated wisdom of the Church fathers and the magisterium, is all that is necessary to understand God's word.

If we're going to speak of "honesty", then it seems to me that one has to conclude that this type of false theology has fostered widespread Christian disunity. It has negated the prayer of Jesus that "they all may be one, as you and I Father are one".

Not only in matters of faith but also in life in general, those who proudly discard the learning and wisdom of their ancestors and forefathers, are destined to fall into error. Tradition is not a millstone which hangs around our necks or something invented by man to keep us from knowing God. It is a light which illumines the path of truth and wisdom.

It is the sin of pride which leads man to think that Tradition amounts to naught and that his own personal reading of Scripture will suffice.

[Gamecock]

God’s word vs. manmade tradition.

Tell me which results from pride.

[Petrosius]

If you are going to be consistent and honest about your rejection of tradition then let us burn every commentary on Scripture. Furthermore, stop telling everyone what you think Scripture means and let everyone figure it out themselves. The truth is that Protestants are just as bound by their traditions as Catholics.

[Gamecock]

Calvinists are all for tradition.

But Scripture comes first.

[marshmallow]

God’s word vs. manmade tradition. Tell me which results from pride.

The key word, of course, is "man made".

Why is the Scriptural teaching of the Church fathers and the Magisterium "man made" tradition, yet when Joe Bloggs picks up the Bible and reads it, it's not "man made". It's somehow an authentic understanding of God's word?

But I digress.

What about the fruits of this approach? Do you see no disunity?

[Boagenes]

Sola Scriptura is not what (and never was) what most Catholics and Protestants think it means.

The Reformation was quite necessary, in its day. I'm a great fan of the tradition and liturgy of the Church, and I like this Pope, but there will never be any real ecumenism until the Catholic Church agrees that its doctrines are open to question and debate. Every ecumenical effort on the part of the Church always seems end up with, "how can we get you all to come back to us and agree with everything we teach."

The Church never approaches ecumenism on equal footing, prepared to hear out Protestant issues - on theological and doctrinal issues.

But I hold out no real hope, because the Church has backed itself into a corner. It cannot throw out any of its ex-cathedra doctrine, and it cannot change or throw out any of its tradition without losing its mythical infallibility. And therefore complete inventions, like the "assumption" of Mary, can not be revisited, examined, changed, or thrown out. To do so, by the Church, would be a de-facto admission of fallibility.

And though I love so much about the Catholic Church, this Protestant will never agree to any Marian doctrines such as "immaculate conception", "assumption", etc, or that I should pray to the souls of dead human beings who are now alive with the Lord. For most Protestants, anything to do with Marianism is right out, anathema. So unless the Church is willing to agree that Marianism is a private matter and nothing within it is required for a believer who joins the Church, then ecumenism is a wasted effort.

Sola Scriptura meant something, too, and it's too bad so many Catholics and Protestants have forgotten what Luther originally said.

[Boagenes]

Because Joe Bloggs doesn’t pray to dead human beings, including elevating the mother of the Lord to the status of virtually the Fourth Person of the Trinity.

[Gamecock]

***Why is the Scriptural teaching of the Church fathers and the Magisterium “man made” tradition, yet when Joe Bloggs picks up the Bible and reads it, it’s not “man made”.***

So what if Joe reads a Bible? Don’t Catholics read the Bible?

[Boagenes]

It is the sin of pride that a Church should invent entire doctrines out of thin air, like the "assumption" of Mary and then require members of the Church to believe it on pain of damnation from Christ, Peter and Paul (read the ex-cathedra statement).

The fallibility of "tradition" is self-evident when it comes into conflict with scripture, when it violates scripture, or when it declares something true for which there is no basis or which is self-evidently untrue.

[marshmallow]

So what if Joe reads a Bible? Don’t Catholics read the Bible?

Not in an isolated bubble with the perspective that their personal insights are a) synonymous with truth and b) carry equal or even more weight than the teaching of the Church fathers and Magisterium.

Any thoughts yet on the fruits of abandoning Tradition?

[marshmallow]

The Church never approaches ecumenism on equal footing, prepared to hear out Protestant issues - on theological and doctrinal issues.

Which Protestant issues?

Methodist? Presbyterian? Anglican? Baptist?

Who actually speaks for Protestants?

Maybe you should sort out your own issues, come to some consensus and then get back to us. Aside from an opposition to Catholicism, there isn't much agreement in an ever diverging non-Catholic" world.

But I hold out no real hope, because the Church has backed itself into a corner. It cannot throw out any of its ex-cathedra doctrine, and it cannot change or throw out any of its tradition without losing its mythical infallibility. And therefore complete inventions, like the "assumption" of Mary, can not be revisited, examined, changed, or thrown out. To do so, by the Church, would be a de-facto admission of fallibility.

I can't imagine what it must be like to belong to a "church" which doesn't believe that it possesses the whole truth and nothing but the truth. What is it like to belong to a Church that is not fully convicted that some of it's teachings are not falsehood? That leads naturally to all sorts of debate, confusion and in the end, disunity.

What should be so shocking about a body of believers who believe that in matters of faith and Christian teaching that it is infallibly guided by the Holy Spirit? That God is one, truth is one and the Church is one.

Anything less is just an apology for Christianity, isn't it?

Did Jesus commission the Apostles and those who follow them to go out to the whole world and teach baloney?

A Church that believes that Jesus Christ is infallible and that the Church, His Mystical Body is likewise.

What a shocker!

[Gamecock]

I don’t read it in “isolation.”

Any thoughts on the abuses in the name of tradition?

[CTrent1564]

Question, how is someone who is in heaven with Christ, Dead? In theological terms, they are “more alive in Christ” than those here on earth. 2) The Catholic Church does not elevate Mary to the “4th person of the Trinity”. The Catholic Church, along with the Eastern Orthodox, more than any other Christian confession defends the Unity of God and the distinctness of the 3 persons of the Most Holy Trinity. It is many Protestant Confessions that are changing the wording used in Baptisms, Liturgy/Worship, prayer, etc with respect to the Trinity. I know where I live, the largest Presybterian Church in my home town left the Presbyterian Association that it was affiliated with due to exactly what I stated above. And you know what, the arguments used by those who want to change the doctrine of the Trinity use the “Bible” to do so as a) Trinity is not found in the Bible, 2) While Christ Commanded the Apostles to baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, the “Sola Scripturist” state that no where else did the Scriptures state that Liturgy/worship, and prayer must have a Trinitarian perspective.

Thus, with respect to what I wrote above, it is precisely the principle of “Sola Scriptura” that is used in justifying these spits among Protestant confessions.

I am glad the Pope is being clear. Here is what the Catholic Church believes ,which if the faith of the Church before the 16th century, and thus is the faith now. The more the historic Protestant confessions move away from Apostolic Tradition, the further they are moving from Catholic unity. The lived experience of what has happened in the Protestant communities, what is going on, and what will continue to to on, points to the reality, no matter how hard it is for some of you to admit it, that most Protestant confessions will not only move further away from orthodox Apostolic Tradition (e.g. Catholic and Eastern Orthodoxy), but continue to splinter among itself into more and more groups with doctrinal positions always up for the most recent interpreation that the local Pastor or group of Pastors believes is the correct way of interpreting the Bible.

Regards

[Campion]

Joe Bloggs picks up the Bible and reads it, it’s not “man made”.

Well, if Joe's real name is Rick and enough ministers like his stuff, it will end up leatherbound and in a pretty presentation box at the local "Christian" (more precisely: Baptist) bookstore, right next to the shelf with the Bibles.

But we aren't elevating manmade tradition to be equal with the Word of God, oh heavens no. Only the "Romanists" do that.

But if you don't like what the minister teaches, you'd better move to another church. Don't worry, he'll call ahead to tell them what a "troublemaker" you are.

Fact: you can fit all the Christians who don't add tradition to the Bible inside these brackets: []

[Petronski]

Oh but it is.

Only the Traditions of Men such as Luther and Cauvin say sola scriptura is biblical. Scripture does not.

[Petronski]

God’s word vs. manmade tradition.

Scripture v. Calvinism
Scripture v. Lutheranism

Tell me which results from pride.

Luther was the original prideful egomaniac; Calvin followed along as the pride-crazed megalomaniac (thrown out of Geneva for trying to make himself demipope there).