Posted on 12/01/2025 9:36:44 AM PST by ebb tide
On November 23, 2025, Leo XIV released his apostolic letter on the 1700th anniversary of the Council of Nicea, In unitate fidei. In it, he praised various aspects of the Council of Nicea, including what he described as its ecumenical significance:
“Finally, the Council of Nicaea is relevant today because of its great ecumenical value. Indeed, the achievement of unity among all Christians was one of the main objectives of the last Council, the Second Vatican Council. Exactly thirty years ago, Saint John Paul II further promoted this conciliar message in his Encyclical Ut Unum Sint (25 May 1995). In this way, together with the great anniversary of the First Council of Nicaea, we also celebrate the anniversary of the first ecumenical Encyclical. It can be considered a manifesto that brought up to date the same ecumenical foundations laid down by the Council of Nicaea.”
What were the “ecumenical foundations” of the Council of Nicea which were “brought up to date” by John Paul II’s Ut Unum Sint? Leo XIV did not specifically identify those foundations in his letter, but we know that the Council of Nicea condemned heresy, required Catholics to profess the true Faith, and clearly distinguished between those who are in the Church and those who are separated through heresy or schism.
These and every other achievement of the ecumenical movement have signaled to Catholics and non-Catholics alike that there is no real need to be Catholic.
As a prelude to considering the way in which Vatican II and John Paul II "brought up to date the same ecumenical foundations laid down by the Council of Nicaea,” we can consider how Leo XIV continued his new letter:
“Thanks to God, the ecumenical movement has achieved much in the last sixty years. It is true that full visible unity with the Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Churches and with the ecclesial communities born of the Reformation has not yet been reached. Nevertheless, ecumenical dialogue, founded on one baptism and the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, has led us to recognize the members of other Churches and ecclesial communities as our brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ, and to rediscover the one universal community of Christ’s disciples throughout the world. We share the same faith in the one and only God, the Father of all people; we confess together the one Lord and true Son of God, Jesus Christ, and the one Holy Spirit, who inspires us and impels us towards full unity and the common witness to the Gospel. Truly, what unites us is much greater than what divides us! In a world that is divided and torn apart by many conflicts, the one universal Christian community can be a sign of peace and an instrument of reconciliation, playing a decisive role in the global commitment to peace. Saint John Paul II reminded us, in particular, of the witness of the many Christian martyrs from all Churches and ecclesial communities: their memory unites us and spurs us on to be witnesses and peacemakers in the world.”
According to Leo XIV, “the ecumenical movement has achieved much in the last sixty years,” and he was of course perfectly correct in refraining from describing those achievements as positive or negative. Here are the key achievements he listed in his paragraph:
The common theme in all of these achievements is not too difficult to discern: these and every other achievement of the ecumenical movement have signaled to Catholics and non-Catholics alike that there is no real need to be Catholic.
It is not surprising that every so-called achievement of the ecumenical movement has called into the question the need for souls to practice the Catholic Faith. Gregory XVI’s 1832 encyclical on liberalism and religious indifferentism, Mirari Vos, essentially warned against what we now know as the ecumenical moment. Gregory XVI not only reaffirmed the Council of Nicea’s fundamental position that all Christians must practice the Catholic Faith but also described the error opposed to this truth, indifferentism:
“Now We consider another abundant source of the evils with which the Church is afflicted at present: indifferentism. This perverse opinion is spread on all sides by the fraud of the wicked who claim that it is possible to obtain the eternal salvation of the soul by the profession of any kind of religion, as long as morality is maintained. Surely, in so clear a matter, you will drive this deadly error far from the people committed to your care. With the admonition of the apostle that ‘there is one God, one faith, one baptism’ may those fear who contrive the notion that the safe harbor of salvation is open to persons of any religion whatever. They should consider the testimony of Christ Himself that ‘those who are not with Christ are against Him,’ and that they disperse unhappily who do not gather with Him. Therefore ‘without a doubt, they will perish forever, unless they hold the Catholic faith whole and inviolate.’ Let them hear Jerome who, while the Church was torn into three parts by schism, tells us that whenever someone tried to persuade him to join his group he always exclaimed: ‘He who is for the See of Peter is for me.’ A schismatic flatters himself falsely if he asserts that he, too, has been washed in the waters of regeneration. Indeed Augustine would reply to such a man: ‘The branch has the same form when it has been cut off from the vine; but of what profit for it is the form, if it does not live from the root?’”
What Gregory XVI described as the perverse opinion of “indifferentism” is basically a synopsis of the achievements of the ecumenical movement praised by Leo XIV and his predecessors.
The translation: because the Holy Spirit is the bond of unity for all Christians, we must leave behind the theological controversies that separate Catholics and non-Catholics.
As Leo XIV observed in his new letter, the Council of Nicea’s anti-indifferentism approach to ecumenical matters was “brought up to date” by John Paul II’s Ut Unum Sint, which began as follows:
“Ut unum sint! The call for Christian unity made by the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council with such impassioned commitment is finding an ever greater echo in the hearts of believers, especially as the Year 2000 approaches, a year which Christians will celebrate as a sacred Jubilee, the commemoration of the Incarnation of the Son of God, who became man in order to save humanity. The courageous witness of so many martyrs of our century, including members of Churches and Ecclesial Communities not in full communion with the Catholic Church, gives new vigour to the Council's call and reminds us of our duty to listen to and put into practice its exhortation. These brothers and sisters of ours, united in the selfless offering of their lives for the Kingdom of God, are the most powerful proof that every factor of division can be transcended and overcome in the total gift of self for the sake of the Gospel.”
In these introductory words, John Paul II asserted the following:
Already in these introductory words we can see signs of the indifferentism that Gregory XVI condemned in Mirari Vos. John Paul II’s Ut Unum Sint further developed the foundations of ecumenism as follows:
These ideas are presumably among those that Leo XIV had in mind when he wrote that Ut Unum Sint “can be considered a manifesto that brought up to date the same ecumenical foundations laid down by the Council of Nicaea.” That is a curious way to express the reality that John Paul II’s Ut Unum Sint rejected the ecumenical foundations of the Council of Nicea.
Beyond praising John Paul II’s work in updating the Council of Nicea’s ecumenical foundations, Leo XIV added his own touch:
“The Holy Spirit is the bond of unity whom we worship together with the Father and the Son. We must therefore leave behind theological controversies that have lost their raison d’être in order to develop a common understanding and even more, a common prayer to the Holy Spirit, so that he may gather us all together in one faith and one love.”
The translation: because the Holy Spirit is the bond of unity for all Christians, we must leave behind the theological controversies that separate Catholics and non-Catholics. Apparently indifference is no longer optional. This is arguably the highest achievement to date of the ecumenical movement launched by Vatican II and nearly perfected by John Paul II.
If we are truly interested in addressing the crisis in the Church, affirming these truths is essential. If we are unwilling to affirm these truths then we will undoubtedly witness even more atrocious “achievements” from the ecumenical movement until God intervenes.
There are few things more unpopular to do in the company of many serious Catholics than to call into question John Paul II’s legacy, so discussions about ecumenism can be challenging. On the one hand, it is perfectly clear that the ecumenical movement praised by Leo XIV has been an unmitigated disaster that has offended God, led souls to hell, and emptied Catholic pews. On the other hand, John Paul II was its most important advocate, so many who should combat this cancer plaguing the Church are instead determined to denounce anyone who suggests that perhaps John Paul II got this one wrong.
Is there a solution? Given that so many serious Catholics cannot bring themselves to call into question Vatican II, let alone John Paul II, it is worth considering a next-best path. Surely those serious Catholics who oppose Leo XIV (but revere Vatican II and John Paul II) would be comfortable quoting Leo XIII’s 1896 encyclical on the unity of the Church, Satis Cognitum. Assuming this to be the case, one of the best responses to Leo XIV would be to remind him of the words of St. Augustine (whom he professes to revere), quoted by his namesake:
“But he who dissents even in one point from divinely revealed truth absolutely rejects all faith, since he thereby refuses to honour God as the supreme truth and the formal motive of faith. ‘In many things they are with me, in a few things not with me; but in those few things in which they are not with me the many things in which they are will not profit them’ (S. Augustinus in Psal. liv., n. 19). And this indeed most deservedly; for they, who take from Christian doctrine what they please, lean on their own judgments, not on faith; and not ‘bringing into captivity every understanding unto the obedience of Christ’ (2 Cor. x., 5), they more truly obey themselves than God. ‘You, who believe what you like, believe yourselves rather than the gospel’ (S. Augustinus, lib. xvii., Contra Faustum Manichaeum, cap. 3).”
These words from Satis Cognitum are sufficient to undermine many of the most pernicious aspects of the ecumenical movement praised by Leo XIV. If we are truly interested in addressing the crisis in the Church, affirming these truths is essential. If we are unwilling to affirm these truths then we will undoubtedly witness even more atrocious “achievements” from the ecumenical movement until God intervenes. Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us!
Ping
Leo the Lyin’
Reminds me - need to go wash some feet later.
I wouldn’t lose too much sleep about the possibility of the Church bending over backwards to placate the Orthodox in the name of ecumenism. Despite all the talk, unity ain’t happening any time soon.
The reasons for that are several:
1. The Orthodox see crap like Fiducia Supplicans and want no part of it. The Coptic Orthdox, for example, were so repulsed that they shut down the commission that was in dialogue with the Vatican.
2. The Orthodox see the liturgical bullying that Catholic traditionalists receive and rightly fear the same treatment.
And, finally, and most importantly...
3. The Russian Orthodox Church is the 800lb gorilla in the room of Orthodoxy—the biggest and most dominant branch— and since at least the Romanovs, the ROC has essentially been a chaplaincy of the Russian government. There would have to a massive change in the dominant mentality within the Russian government to ever allow the ROC to be unified with Rome.
Strange when talking about unity he would cite the Nicene Council, which produced the Nicene Creed which contains one of the seeds of the Great Schism between east and west. What the Council did do was quash Arianism, a popular and influential heresy at the time, which was its main purpose for being called. Unity on the one hand, division on the other.
Adding on to #3... the Russian government essentially took over where the Byzantine emperor left off in terms of being an obstacle to Catholic-Orthodox unity... It’s the same story, a temporal power wary of ceding any power to a “foreign” Church.
“contains one of the seeds of the Great Schism “
Honestly, the “filioque” controversy was always more of a facade than the actual reason for the split. It was a convenient thing to latch on to, but even back then many in Orthodoxy took no issue from the idea that the Holy Spirit proceeds from both the father and the son. The schism was always more about power and politics than theology.
But why all the "talk" in the first place? Why drop the honorific Marian titles, why drop the Filioque? That's not only "talk", it's actions.
” why drop the Filioque? “
Not to split hairs, but the filioque has not been dropped. Prevowt recited the pre-589 version of the creed at a gathering. He didn’t permanently excise the filioque from the Latin rite. As far as I know, the pre-589 version of the Nicene creed isn’t invalid. Nothing in that version is untrue. Of all people, we on the trad side should appreciate this line of thinking. Just as Bugnini’s 1970 missal didn’t invalidate all prior Roman missals, the 3rd Council of Toledo’s creed didn’t invalidate all preceding versions.
Unity is important.
“That they all may be one, as thou, Father, in me, and I in thee; that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.” -John 17:21(DR)
“And the multitude of believers had but one heart and one soul” -Acts 4:32(DR)
But the only way to be truly unified is in the full truth. Watering down or God forbid, denying the truth, will not result in a true unity but a hollow one. Why are so many modern Catholics obsessed with the world or other Christians or non-Christians liking them? I think of Sally Field after she won her Oscar for Norma Rae: “You like me! You really like me!” Jesus said to present the truth. If others don’t like it, shake the dust from their town off your feet and that it will be more tolerable for Sodom on the day of Judgment.
My problem with synodality is that several generations of Catholics are so poorly catechized. And so they rant that the Church should overturn natural law truths on sexuality that the Church cannot overturn and it seems like a waste of time. Jesus didn’t found a Democratic, opinion poll, mob rule Church, he founded a hierarchical Church on Peter.
The Servant Of God John A. Hardon (1914-2000), S.J., a master theologian who had influence inside John Paul’s Vatican, said he thinks both the Orthodox split and the Protestant split were most about sexual morality. Particularly, divorce. People want do-overs. But there are no do-overs once a valid marriage has been consummated. It is only broken by death.
Yes, Hardon had a point there.
The “Filioque” addition was to the 381 creed adopted at the Second Ecumenical Council. The 325 creed adopted at Nicaea has nothing about the procession of the Holy Spirit—its statement about the Holy Spirit is all of 6 words long.
From the denomination that claims it never changes.
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.