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."

[roamer_1]

Trinity is not found in the Bible

Yes, it is.

[CTrent1564]

Actually, not true, the Saduccees only accepted the Torah (first 5 books of OT) and thus had a different theological view of Judaism, than the Pharisees, who favored a larger set of books, and some oral tradition.

The Hellenistic Jews, of which St. Paul was, had a longer list of scriptures as were found in the LXX version (Septuigiant). The Essenes, who we new little about until the findings at Qumran, also had a list of scriptures similar to the Greek-speaking Jews in Diaspora. In other words, the 7 Deueterocanoncals recognized by Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Christians, but not recognized by Protestants, did have Hebrew translations as the Essene sect of Judaism, a monastic type Jewish community, had copies of most of the 39 OT books (fragments in some cases) that would end up in the Protestant OT and the 7 Deuterocanonicals (fragments in some cases) that made up the Catholic canon put together at the end of the 4th century, as attested to by St. Augustine, and which would go into ST.Jerome’s Latin Vulgate translation, requested by Pope Damasus.

In summary, Judaism was not “monolithic” and one must understand the various views of the different Jewish Groups to understand the context of the Scriptures when Christ is talking to one group (e.g. Pharisees) or the other group (Saduccees).

Regards

[CTrent1564]

The word “Trinity” is not found in the bible. The theological concept is there (c.f. Mt. 28), but the doctrinal definitions of the relationship among the 3 persons of the Most Holy Trinity were not dogmatically defined in such a way to express and defend this orthodox doctrine from non-Trinitarian heresies until the Council of Nicea (325 AD) and the three other great early Councils (Constantinopile 381 AD; Ephesus 431 AD; and Chalcedon 451 AD, where Pope St. Leo the Great provided the most concise Christilogical definition with respect to the Divine and Human natures our Lord Jesus Christ.)

So strictly speaking, the word “Trinity” and the “Doctrinal Definition of the Trinity” are not “explicitly” stated in the Sacred Scripture. The Trinitarian Doctrine is implicit in the Biblical text, but it would take the reflections of the early Church Fathers and the great Councils to more fully develop and define this beautiful Doctrine of orthodox Christian belief.

Regards

[Biggirl]

The feasts commanded in the Bible are only commanded of the Jewish people to observe, not Christians. Christians have Easter Sunday.

[Boagenes]

Sola Scriptura isn't in the Bible any more than the Trinity is in the Bible, it is derived from Scripture, unlike the Catholic doctrines such as the "assumption of Mary" which are made up whole cloth - pulled out of thin air. But I have noticed this is a typical Catholic diversion to avoid the central point of the invented doctrines of the Church.

Sola Scriptura doesn't mean "Solo Scriptura" or that the Bible is the sole thing we believe in (we adhere to the Apostles, Nicene and Athanasian creeds, the belief in the "real presence" - at least in the Lutheran Church, etc). But this is a typical Catholic misunderstanding (more charitable than calling it willful distortion). Sola Scriptura simply means that all that is necessary for salvation, including Christian doctrine, can be found within sacred Scripture. It does not preclude other things, but it means, to paraphrase Wesley, "that the Church is to be judged by Scripture and not Scripture by the Church".

Doctrines like the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption are simply manufactured by the Church without one whit of evidence, from either Scripture or the writings of the early Church fathers. These doctrines were developed in the Middle Ages out of an inordinate Marian devotion. I've said it before and I'll say it again, the Marian thing in the Catholic Church seems to have developed starting around the time of Constantine, as more and more pagans were drawn into the Church. The cult of Artemis was huge and I think that as the Christians tried to draw in the pagans who were used to worshipping goddesses, they naturally drew a parallel between their prior goddesses and the mother of the Lord. From this point, the doctrine just kept growing and expanding - part fantasty, part invention, part wishful thinking - until you end up in the Middle Ages with a virtual cult of Mary in the Church.

There's no basis for any of it, and it's the central stumbling block - a stonewall - between Catholics and Protestants and why I think there will never be any true ecumenism. Protestants will never accept it, and Catholics will never give it up.

[Uri’el-2012]

The feasts commanded in the Bible are only commanded of the Jewish people to observe, not Christians. Christians have Easter Sunday.

Do you want to be grafted into the olive tree of YHvH?

Then you need to obey the Word of Elohim: Yah'shua.

You need to reject 1683 years of paganism.

shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua

[Boagenes]

I don't know which "mainline" Protestant denominations those are, I've never heard of such a thing, but yes, there are certainly huge heresies and apostasies creeping into the Protestant denominations.

Maybe this will give you a little comfort. Before a person like me ever sees such things accepted in my church, or sees my own church descend into full blown liberal heresies, I will join the Catholic Church. I've already decided that. I agree with 85% of Catholicism, but the 15% I disagree with are the doozies. I will move toward orthodoxy, liturgy, and confessional faith before I will ever find myself in communion with any of the liberal extremes that are destroying certain Protestant denominations (Episcopalian, United Methodist and ELCA come to mind). It's just that Mary thing I'll have to figure out how to deal with if it ever comes to that...because right now, I can't deal with it.

[Campion]

You need to reject 1683 years of paganism.

You need to reject 4000 years of Judaism, which wasn't given to you in the first place, and re-enter the New Covenant sealed in Christ's Blood. By works of Law is nobody saved.

[Uri’el-2012]

You need to reject 4000 years of Judaism, which wasn't given to you in the first place, and re-enter the New Covenant sealed in Christ's Blood. By works of Law is nobody saved.

Bless you my son.

May you one day come to know the creator of the universe :

Yah'shua HaMashiach Adonai

[roamer_1]

So strictly speaking, the word “Trinity” and the “Doctrinal Definition of the Trinity” are not “explicitly” stated in the Sacred Scripture.

I agree, though the concept is implied at least, and can be proven with very little extrapolation.

It is an important subject for us both, as it does demonstrate a reasonable conceptual foundation in the Word, something the Protestants are agreeable toward, and use a good bit of Catholic tradition to expand upon.

This sort of 'Foundation in the Word' is the proof that Protestants look for, and stands against those who would accuse us of denying tradition in it's totality. It also stands against those who would say that Protestant 'sola scriptura' is unreasoning.

[big'ol_freeper]

I see we have more of the same ol' same ol'

[Petronski]

...and can be proven with very little extrapolation.

And yet, "very little extrapolation" is still "extrapolation," and beyond sola scriptura.

[Biggirl]

It would not suprise me if more of the Mainline Protestant churches end up imploding because of these hersies you describe. God Bless you on speaking the truth about these churches.

[Hacksaw]

[big'ol_freeper]

You said: And yet, “very little extrapolation” is still “extrapolation,” and beyond sola scriptura.

But, but, but...

[big'ol_freeper]

Tocan Sam....doesn’t he advertise FROOT LOOPS?

[Campion]

May you one day come to know the creator of the universe

He's my Big Brother. Same fellow who taught me that nobody is saved by works of law taught me that. Fellow named Saul, from Tarsus.

[roamer_1]

And yet, "very little extrapolation" is still "extrapolation," and beyond sola scriptura.

No, because it is in there. One just has to finesse it out of the pages...

The Spirit overshadowed Mary, yet Jehovah declares Jesus His son. The only logical conclusion to that dilemma is to understand that God the Father, and God the Spirit must be one and the same.

Jesus declares Himself God, as do His Apostles. Yet Jehovah says there is only one God, and He is that God... So either Jesus s a lier and a blasphemer, or He and God must be one and the same.

The OT claims the Spirit was the tool in God's hand at the creation, but the NT declares that everything that was made, was made by Christ, so the Ghost and the Christ are one and the same.

This sort of comparative goes on and on. It is extrapolated, but all of the extrapolation is internal to the Scriptures, and is repeated enough throughout to form a theme.

It is a very different thing from the Marian concepts, which have little (I would say no) scriptural foundation and rely extensively upon tradition.

I point to the 'Trinity concept' as the sort of non-explicit, non-declared interpretation that is excepted by Protestants, because it is at least thematically presented throughout, and really stands on it's own foundation within the Word, without the need for the Traditional support.

[Petronski]

One just has to finesse it out of the pages...

LOL

Somehow I'm reminded of the idea of "just a little pregnant."

It is a very different thing from the Marian concepts, which have little (I would say no) scriptural foundation...

You would be wrong.

[xzins]

The pope killed any ecumenical honesty when he declared that he doesn’t consider the participants in his discussions to be real churches.

“My way or the highway” is how I read Benedict.

I will remain unfettered except by Jesus’ call that true believers be united in true unity.