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."

[Uri’el-2012]

Benedict XVI is looking for a "commitment of honesty" from Christians engaged in ecumenical dialogue, according to a Vatican aide.

Did Brother Benedict plan his "Rock Star" whirl-wind tour
to remove all coverage of the most holy of Christian and Jewish
YHvH commanded feast : Passover?

The question is: was it done deliberately or
out of ignorance of the Holy Word of Elohim?

shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua

[Petronski]

But Scripture comes first.

Luther and Cauvin put the prideful confection sola scriptura before Scripture itself.

[Petronski]

...elevating the mother of the Lord to the status of virtually the Fourth Person of the Trinity.

Good. That would be blasphemy.

[lastchance]

I think the whole point is that the Pope does not want us to deny there are differences in our theologies as a means of increasing ecunemical understanding. Also in context of the speech I do not think he meant Tradition as Catholics understand it but traditional teachings on such things as sexual morality that were once universally shared by Catholics and Protestants. As well as Christian teachings stated in the Creeds and the confessions, etc of various Protestant denomination.

I say this because the Pope knows perfectly well Protestants reject Sacred Tradition as a source of revelation and have done so since the Reformation. It would be very unlikely he would think such an action as prophetic. In Protestanism (and amongst dissident Catholics) we see new challenges to the faith being made daily not by outsiders but by those within the denominations.

Calls for the blessing of homosexual unions, calls for the ordination of non celibate gay clergy. Denial of the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ, of the Virgin Birth, of the uniqueness of Christ. The list could go on and on.

These all go against the traditions of the very Protestant denominations faced by these “prophetic” actions. That is what the Pope was addressing how in their own context Protestant churches must continue to affirm Truth and not be afraid to emphasis their own doctrines.

The Pope of all people surely knows the leaders and members of Protestant churches are not going to forsake the Reformation and its core doctrines. His call indeed is for those to be upheld. Because in spite of our very real differences the Truth of Christ and His Gospel are still proclaimed in the teaching of the Protestant churches. That needs to continue.

[Boagenes]

Yes, it would be blasphemy. So what is it with Catholics and this inordinate attachment to someone who is dead, and alive with the Lord? There is nothing to indicate any human being, Mary or anyone else, in Heaven, can hear or see anything happening on Earth or that they can in any way intervene or intercede or anything else. Then you go one step beyond that, and start dragging in terms like "Co-Redemptrix". That is blasphemy. That is (whether you or anyone in the Church will admit it) elevating Mary to virtually the Fourth Person of the Trinity.

It's also blasphemous in that Christ is the Messiah, not his mother, and his work of atonement was his own, and his alone. He died once, for all. There wasn't anyone else involved in the atonement, not directly or indirectly - Christ himself, that's it. He died so that we may live. To suggest that someone else participates in redemption is denying the atoning death of Christ the Lord. Period.

[Boagenes]

All Sola Scriptura means is that everything that is necessary for us to know, of salvation, is contained within the Word of sacred Scripture. It does not discount all traditions, or liturgy or anything else. In the Lutheran Church, our service is virtually the same as the Mass, and we also believe in the real presence, etc. But Lutherans don't cling to invented things (prayers to Mary and saints) or traditions that are self-evidently false (the assumption, calling someone "Co-Redemptrix", etc). In addition to Scripture, all else we agree on is contained in the Book of Concord and the words of the Augsburg Confession.

But Sola Scriptura simply means that what is necessary for salvation can be found within the Word. That's it. The best thing the Reformation did was jettison all of the things the Church built up to stand in front of, or take attention away from, the Son.

[Petronski]

That is (whether you or anyone in the Church will admit it) elevating Mary to virtually the Fourth Person of the Trinity.

It is NOT, whether you or anyone else will admit it.

To suggest that someone else participates in redemption is denying the atoning death of Christ the Lord. Period.

You should read about what it actually means rather than beating up on a strawman like that. Period.

[Petronski]

But Sola Scriptura simply means that what is necessary for salvation can be found within the Word. That's it.

This is brutally ironic, since sola scriptura does not appear in Scriptura.

[Biggirl]

Well Catholics and Protestants celibrated Easter about a month ago and the Orthodox now are doing Holy Week. The Christian Passover is Easter or the Paschel Feast.

[Biggirl]

I think this thread is becoming a Catholic bashing match.

[Boagenes]

I think you are severely confused about Protestantism, as almost no Protestant churches "want to change the doctrine of the Trinity". Certainly not any mainstream denomination.

Yes, the schism within the Christian world is of great concern to me, and the downside of Protestantism is the lack of unity and the myriad denominations. But for me, as it was with Luther, is a matter of reason, conscience and faith (meaning guided by the Holy Spirit) that I am a Protestant.

My reason and my intellect tell me that all of Marian doctrine has no basis in history or early tradition. My conscience and my faith tell me that it is blasphemy, according to scripture, to attribute to anyone other than Christ the atoning work of redemption. And my reason, conscience and faith tell me that praying to anyone other than the Trinity is idolatry.

[ArrogantBustard]

The biggest threat to “ecumenical honesty” I see is folks who (either ignorantly or maliciously) misrepresent other folks’ beliefs.

[Boagenes]

“Trinity” isn’t found in scripture either, is it?

[Uri’el-2012]

Well Catholics and Protestants celibrated Easter about a month ago and the Orthodox now are doing Holy Week. The Christian Passover is Easter or the Paschel Feast.

sorry; There is only one Passover and is is when YHvH commanded it.

The date for Easter was commanded by Constantine the Pontiff
of the Roman church in 325 AD at his council of Nicea.

I'm not sure how the date for Pasqua was arrived at
but it is not from the Holy Word of Elohim.

b'SHEM Yah'shua

[bobjam]

I would love to hear the Pope describe, in a straightforward manner, exactly what his and his church’s ecumencial goals are.

Is his goal to convince Anglicans and Protestants that they are completely wrong and that they should immediately convert to Catholicism?

Is his goal to convince the Orthodox that he is, in fact, the head of the universal church and that they must submit to his authority as he defines it?

Is his goal to promote better understanding among the denominations so that cat fights such as the one on this thread do not occur?

Is there anything he is willing to concede?

[Petronski]

No. That's a further demonstration that sola scriptura is bunk.

[CTrent1564]

What do you do with the following passage from St. Paul when he writes “Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and im my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in the afflictions of Christ on behalf of his body, which is the Church, of which I am a minister in accordance wiht God’s stewardship given to me to bring completion for you word of God” (c.f. Col 1: 24-25).

So a literalist sola scripturist would have to conclue that St. Paul is preaching heresy as he states “I am filling up what is lacking in the afflictions of Christ...”. Doctrinaly, there is nothing lacking in the suffering of Christ. The question is what do the members of his body, do with the suffering that comes in their lives. St. Paul exhorts the community at Colossae to unite their sufferings to Christ Cross, which is where the traditional Catholic act of spiritual sacrifice comes in, when you suffer offer it up to God and unite it with Christ for the conversion of souls.

Thus, this understanding, from the Catholic, and I would say Eastern Orthodox tradition, is consistent with the “communion of saints”, which is stated in the Apostles Creed, a baptismal Creed of the Church of Rome in the late 2nd/early 3rd century. Thus, all the baptized, including the saints in heaven, can and do pray for the rest of the body, which is the Church. Mary, having a singular and unique role in salvation history, reflects the power of God’s Grace as it “made and transformed” Mary into the state holiness that God’s wants for all of us.

So, in Christ, all of the baptized are in communion with the Holy Trinity and all are made one with God. Death, therefore, does not separate Christ’s body, which is the Church, the communion of heaven and earth. For example, St. Paul writes that death does not separate us from the love of God (c.f. Romans 8:35-38) as God is the God of “the living and not the dead” (c.f. Matt. 22:32; Mark 12:27; Luke 20:38) - God is the God of the living not the dead. Furthermore, the angels all rejoice when a sinner reconciles to God (c.f. Luke 15:7-10), consistent with the idea of the Communion of saints, as well as the angels, as Holy/Holy/Sanctus (part of Eucharistic prayer where the Liturgical assembly joins there voices with the choirs of angels and saints) and the Penitential Rite of the Catholic Church (Confidor) where the Liturgical assembly asks “the Blessed Mary ever virgin, all the angels and saints, and you my brothers and sisters, to pray for me to the Lord our God”.

In the Heavenly Liturgy described in Revelation, we see the prayers of the saints (on heaven and earth) are presented to God by the angels and saints in heaven (c.f Rev 5:8). Again, this passage is consistent with the “communion of saints doctrine” that all the parts of the Church (Christ’s body) pray for one another. It also, demonstrates that our prayers on earth are united with their prayers in heaven. I say this as Catholic Biblical scholarship understands the “24 elders” to refer to the people of God – perhaps the 12 tribes and 12 apostles - and the “four living creatures” are said to refer to the angels.

Rev. 6:9-11 – the martyred saints in heaven cry out in a loud voice to God to avenge their blood “on those who dwell upon the earth.” These are “imprecatory prayers,” which are pleas for God’s judgment (see similar prayers in Psalm 35:1; 59:1-17; 139:19; Jer. 11:20; 15:15; 18:19; Zech.1:12-13). This means that the saints in heaven are praying for those on earth, and God answers their prayers (Rev. 8:1-5). We, therefore, ask for their intercession and protection.

In the Rev 8:3-4 we see a vision of heavenly prayer where an angel mingles incense with the prayers of all the saints on the golden altar before the throne of God, and the smoke of the incense rose with the prayers of the saints from the hand of the angel before God.

In summary, the doctrine of the “communion of saints” is found in Apostolic Tradition in both sources 1)Sacred Scripture, as described above, and 2)Sacred Tradition, as expressed in the Liturgy (the way the Church prays), Creed, and the Church Fathers, which I could have cited, but did not in this post.

Pax Domine Christi

[CTrent1564]

You are correct, the Eastern Orthodox set pasch/Easter using the old Roman Julian calander, as opposed to calander modified by Pope Gregory, ie, the Gregorian Calander used by Catholics and Protestants as well.

Regards

[lastchance]

If you want to be Jewish I am sure any Rabbi would gladly give you instructions in the faith. They welcome converts and you would be treated with all affection and respect.

Constantine was never a pontiff in the Church. Orthodox and Catholics were united at the time so you might also query Orthodox on this matter.

You will notice in reading Scripture that Sts Peter and Paul both were very clear about Christians still not being bound by the Torah. It did take Peter longer to get it but I guess visions from God will finally get the point across.

One cannot be a Jew and a Christian at the same time. If this was the case than Christianity would never have expanded beyond Israel and it would have remained a small Jewish sect. With Jesus being regarded as no more than a very wise Rabbi.

But you can not believe in the Risen Christ and remain a Jew. To try and do so is both an insult to Judaism and Christianity.

[Uri’el-2012]

XS>Constantine as the first Pontiff of the Roman church condemned Passover
where Yah'shua celebrated with bread and wine and replaced it with the pagan Easter.

The Roman Office of the Pontifex Maximus began in 712 BC

Later all Roman Emperors held the title Pontifex Maximus.

Emperor Constantine held the title from 306 to 337 AD

Constantine convened the Nicene Council in 325 AD and issued this edict:

ON THE KEEPING OF EASTER.

From the Letter of the Emperor to all those not present at the Council.
(Found in Eusebius, Vita Const., Lib. iii., 18-20.)

When the question relative to the sacred festival of Easter arose, it was
universally thought that it would be convenient that all should keep the
feast on one day; for what could be more beautiful and more desirable,
than to see this festival, through which we receive the hope of
immortality, celebrated by all with one accord, and in the same
manner? It was declared to be particularly unworthy for this, the
holiest of all festivals, to follow the custom [the calculation] of the
Jews, who had soiled their hands with the most fearful of crimes, and
whose minds were blinded. In rejecting their custom,(1) we may
transmit to our descendants the legitimate mode of celebrating Easter,
which we have observed from the time of the Saviour's Passion to the
present day[according to the day of the week]. We ought not,
therefore, to have anything in common with the Jews, for the Saviour
has shown us another way; our worship follows a more legitimate and
more convenient course(the order of the days of the week); and
consequently, in unanimously adopting this mode, we desire, dearest
brethren, to separate ourselves from the detestable company of the
Jews, for it is truly shameful for us to hear them boast that without
their direction we could not keep this feast. How can they be in the
right, they who, after the death of the Saviour, have no longer been led
by reason but by wild violence, as their delusion may urge them? They
do not possess the truth in this Easter question; for, in their blindness
and repugnance to all improvements, they frequently celebrate two
passovers in the same year. We could not imitate those who are openly
in error. How, then, could we follow these Jews, who are most
certainly blinded by error? for to celebrate the passover twice in one
year is totally inadmissible. But even if this were not so, it would still
be your duty not to tarnish your soul by communications with such
wicked people[the Jews]. Besides, consider well, that in such an
important matter, and on a subject of such great solemnity, there ought
not to be any division. Our Saviour has left us only one festal day of
our redemption, that is to say, of his holy passion, and he desired[to
establish] only one Catholic Church. Think, then, how unseemly it is,
that on the same day some should be fasting whilst others are seated
at a banquet; and that after Easter, some should be rejoicing at feasts,
whilst others are still observing a strict fast. For this reason, a Divine
Providence wills that this custom should be rectified and regulated in a
uniform way; and everyone, I hope, will agree upon this point. As, on
the one hand, it is our duty not to have anything in common with the
murderers of our Lord; and as, on the other, the custom now followed
by the Churches of the West, of the South, and of
the North, and by some of those of the East, is the most acceptable, it
has appeared good to all; and I have been guarantee for your consent,
that you would accept it with joy, as it is followed at Rome, in Africa,
in all Italy, Egypt, Spain, Gaul, Britain, Libya, in all Achaia, and in the
dioceses of Asia, of Pontus, and Cilicia. You should consider not only
that the number of churches in these provinces make a majority, but
also that it is right to demand what our reason approves, and that we
should have nothing in common with the Jews. To sum up in few
words: By the unanimous judgment of all, it has been decided that the
most holy festival of Easter should be everywhere celebrated on one
and the same day, and it is not seemly that in so holy a thing there
should be any division. As this is the state of the case, accept joyfully
the divine favour, and this truly divine command; for all which takes
place in assemblies of the bishops ought to be regarded as proceeding
from the will of God. Make known to your brethren what has been
decreed, keep this most holy day according to the prescribed mode; we
can thus celebrate this holy Easter day at the same time, if it is granted
me, as I desire, to unite myself with you; we can rejoice together,
seeing that the divine power has made use of our instrumentality for
destroying the evil designs of the devil, and thus causing faith, peace,
and unity to flourish amongst us. May God graciously protect you, my
beloved brethren.

from DOCUMENTS FROM THE FIRST COUNCIL OF NICEA [THE FIRST ECUMENICAL COUNCIL] A.D. 325

This is the Decree from the first Pontiff of the Roman church to all the world.

Emperor Constantine, Emperor of the Roman Empire

He had issued an Edict making Sunday the day of rest

In 321 CE, while a Pagan sun-worshiper, the Emperor Constantine
declared that Sunday was to be a day of rest throughout the Roman Empire:

"On the venerable day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest,
and let all workshops be closed. In the country however persons engaged in agriculture
may freely and lawfully continue their pursuits because it often happens that another day
is not suitable for gain-sowing or vine planting; lest by neglecting the proper moment
for such operations the bounty of heaven should be lost."

Council of Laodicea circa 364 CE ordered that religious observances were
to be conducted on Sunday, not Saturday. Sunday became the new Sabbath.

They ruled: "Christians shall not Judaize and be idle on Saturday, but shall work on that day."

b'SHEM Yah'shua