Posted on 06/15/2005 6:27:05 PM PDT by murphE
COLOGNE, Germany, JUNE 15, 2005
Ecumenism is included in the initiatives scheduled for World Youth Day this August in Germany.
On Aug. 17, for example, an interconfessional "Way of the Cross" is planned in Cologne, Bonn and Dusseldorf.
Aug. 16-19, the World Youth Day Spiritual Center will hold ecumenical meetings with the participation of the Taizé, Chemin Neuf (New Way) and Sant'Egidio communities.
Numerous Lutheran and Orthodox will participate in the Youth Festival planned for the occasion, reported the Holy See's missionary agency Fides.
In addition, the Christian Churches Working Group will invite participants to attend round-table discussions and meetings to reflect on Christian identity and the ecumenical future. Theology students of various confessions will give presentations on their faith and traditions.
Many of the World Youth Day participants will lodge with Lutheran and Orthodox families. The catecheses and several events of the Youth Festival will take place in Lutheran churches, and many Lutheran communities will offering pilgrims overnight facilities.
ping.
Counting down and waiting for the flames to start flying :]
I'm sure they're all "Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic" Churches. Or is there supposed to be only one of those?
For although a Christian man instructed only in ecclesiastical literature may perhaps be ignorant of the very name of Platonists, and may not even know that there have existed two schools of philosophers speaking the Greek tongue, to wit, the Ionic and Italic, he is nevertheless not so deaf with respect to human affairs, as not to know that philosophers profess the study, and even the possession, of wisdom. He is on his guard, however, with respect to those who philosophize according to the elements of this world, not according to God, by whom the world itself was made; for he is warned by the precept of the apostle, and faithfully hears what has been said, "Beware that no one deceive you through philosophy and vain deceit, according to the elements of the world."7 Then, that he may not suppose that all philosophers are such as do this, he hears the same apostle say concerning certain of them, "Because that which is known of God is manifest among them, for God has manifested it to them. For His invisible things from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things which are made, also His eternal power and Godhead."8 And, when speaking to the Athenians, after having spoken a mighty thing concerning God, which few are able to understand, "In Him we live, and move, and have our being,"9 he goes on to say, "As certain also of your own have said." He knows well, too, to be on his guard against even these philosophers in their errors. For where it has been said by him, "that God has manifested to them by those things which are made His invisible things, that they might be seen by the understanding," there it has also been said that they did not rightly worship God Himself, because they paid divine honors, which are due to Him alone, to other things also to which they ought not to have paid them,-"because, knowing God, they glorified Him not as God: neither were thankful, but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of the image of corruptible man, and of birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things;"10 -where the apostle would have us understand him as meaning the Romans, and Greeks, and Egyptians, who gloried in the name of wisdom; but concerning this we will dispute with them afterwards. With respect, however, to that wherein they agree with us we prefer them to all others namely, concerning the one God, the author of this universe, who is not only above every body, being incorporeal, but also above all souls, being incorruptible-our principle, our light, our good. And though the Christian man, being ignorant of their writings, does not use in disputation words which he has not learned,-not calling that part of philosophy natural (which is the Latin term), or physical which is the Greek one), which treats of the investigation of nature; or that part rational, or logical, which deals with the question how truth may be discovered; or that part moral, or ethical, which concerns morals, and shows how good is to be sought, and evil to be shunned,-he is not, therefore, ignorant that it is from the one true and supremely good God that we have that nature in which we are made in the image of God, and that doctrine by which we know Him and ourselves, and that grace through which, by cleaving to Him, we are blessed. This, therefore, is the cause why we prefer these to all the others, because, whilst other philosophers have worn out their minds and powers in seeking the causes of things, and endeavoring to discover the right mode of learning and of living, these, by knowing God, have found where resides the cause by which the universe has been constituted, and the light by which truth is to be discovered, and the fountain at which felicity is to be drunk. All philosophers, then, who have had these thoughts concerning God, whether Platonists or others, agree with us. But we have thought it better to plead our cause with the Platonists, because their writings are better known. For the Greeks, whose tongue holds the highest place among the languages of the Gentiles, are loud in their praises of these writings; and the Latins, taken with their excellence, or their renown, have studied them more heartily than other writings, and, by translating them into our tongue, have given them greater celebrity and notoriety.
*Augustine references Acts 17:28
For in him we live and move and are: as some also of your own poets said: For we are also his offspring.
Catholic Commentary on Scripture*The poets/poems referenced are Cleanthes' Hymn to Zeus and the Phaenomena of Aratus.
* If St. Paul can reference and recognize the truth existing in those outside the early Church, and St. Augustine can recognize the truth in pre-Christian truths, who then can complain about the "evils of Ecumenism" which cites the objective truths observed by Christians in those outside the visible church of today.
Ecumenism is Tradition.
"Ecumenism is Tradition"
Um, I don't really know what you think that means, but true Ecumenism is traditional.
"The unity of Christians cannot otherwise be obtained than by securing the return of the separated to the one true Church of Christ from which they once unhappily withdrew. To the one true Church of Christ, we say, that stands forth before all and that by the will of its Founder will remain forever the same as when He Himself established it for the salvation of all mankind." (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos)
who then can complain about the "evils of Ecumenism"
No one complains about true ecumenism, and it certainly is not evil. People do rightly complain about false ecumenism, which in seeking to be PC and tolerant, is in all actuality not charitable, and therefor yes, it is evil.
"Ecumenism is Tradition"
Aside from the 1949 document from the Holy Office, and the documents of the Second Vatican Council to the present, I would be sincerely interested if you could point me to ONE official and authoritative document of the Church that even uses the word "ecumenism" prior to 1949. Ecumenical Councils, of course, were usually called General Councils, so besides that, please name ONE document and citation where the Church uses the word "ecumenism" in the same manner it is used today.
Tick... Tick... Tick...
Aside from the question of whether (and what kind of) ecumenism is good, it can be said that your test is not a good one. For the first couple of centuries of the Christian Church no one had ever used the word "homoousios". And yet that became the very watchword of orthodoxy eventually, so that those who would not use it were considered heretics. Many other examples could be given. (e.g. "transubstantiation", "Trinity")
The idea that we should treat other baptized Christians as brothers (estranged brothers, to be sure) rather than simply as enemies, is hardly alien to Tradition. Tradition has long made a distinction between "material heresy" and "formal heresy". There are "men of good will" (as in "pax hominibus bonae voluntatis") who are not Catholic, and we must reach out to them in truth and love.
Do we know for a fact that they were not invited? Maybe they just said, "No, thanks". I do not know about the Anglicans, but I do not believe that any strict Calvinist would want to be caught dead at World Youth Day, but I wouldn't want to speak for them, let's ask someone who might know, shall we?
What say you Gamecock?
2. I would not be surprised if the PC(USA) does not send youth to this event. The PC(USA) is CINO, but that really doesn't answer your question.
3. As long as the decrees of the Council of Trent stand, I don't see why we should participate. I don't see why our RC friends would want us there, considering we are anathema.
><> GC
3. As long as the decrees of the Council of Trent stand, I don't see why we should participate. I don't see why our RC friends would want us there, considering we are anathema.
And that is precisely why I respect Calvinists, in some ways you know more about authentic Church teaching than many Catholics, even though, (to my sadness) you reject it. Also, it is my impression that most of you seem to know that any unity not based in truth is false unity; you are not willing to overlook serious doctrinal differences for the sake of the appearance of unity.
I agree with all three points, GC.
I would agree with your "0.02 cents" although I'll miss the hot dogs and the balloons.
BTW-I wouldn't be so flattered. Leaders of the Swarm have historically had a short life expectancy.
Agreed.
Ecumenicalism is false unity.
Unity can only be based upon having something in common, and there are too many differences for there to be true unity between Protestants and Catholics.
Christ alone knows his sheep and only he knows our hearts regardless of any outward public confession we may make. Those who truly believe in his promise are his sheep (the one fold, the one "church" or the communion of saints et al) and are led by one shepherd (Christ, the good shepherd)...
Have you been reading Pope Pius IX? Your interpretation is a very close paraphrase of what he said on the subject 150 years ago.
I however would conclude you take, faithfully according to the translation of the church, that this means the one fold is and always has been only the RCC...
A respectful question...Knowing these differences do we agree that if we both believe in the promise of Christ's death and for the washing of our sins, are we both his sheep? Or because I am not a RCC member I am incapable of being one of Christ's sheep?
If I may, I'd prefer to let Venerable Pope Pius IX answer that:
"It must, of course, be held as a matter of faith that outside the apostolic Roman Church no one can be saved, that the Church is the only ark of salvation, and that whoever does not enter it will perish in the flood. On the other hand, it must likewise be held as certain that those who are affected by ignorance of the true religion, if it is invincible ignorance, are not subject to any guilt in this matter before the eyes of the Lord."
"Now, then, who could presume in himself an ability to set the boundaries of such ignorance, taking into consideration the natural differences of peoples, lands, native talents, and so many other factors? Only when we have been released from the bonds of this body and see God just as He is (1 John 3:2) shall we really understand how close and beautiful a bond joins divine mercy with divine justice. But as long as we dwell on earth, encumbered with this soul-dulling, mortal body, let us tenaciously cling to the Catholic doctrine that there is one God, one faith, one baptism (Eph. 4:5)."
Singulari quadam
Allocution against the Errors of Rationalism and Indifferentism
December 9, 1854
As to the historical background, I recommend an excellent history of the early Church, "Saint Peter and the First Years of Christianity", by the Abbe Constant Fouard. I have an original edition from 1892, but reprints are available from several sources online. Without getting into a lengthy discourse, I don't believe that there's any historical basis for five "congregations" in the Apostolic period as we see sects today. Everything coalesced around Peter, and his line of succession is clear. Fouard started out with a different idea, and came to this conslusion as a result of his extensively-documented research. Plus, it's a pretty good read!
In any event, I hope this was helpful and I appreciate your thoughtful questions and courtesy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.