Posted on 03/03/2011 8:26:20 AM PST by marshmallow
In an interview with The Portal-- a new publication devoted to the ordinariate of Anglican communities received into the Catholic Church-- an official of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith emphasized that the goal of ecumenical dialogue is the restoration of full communion between non-Catholic Christians and the Pope.
“The ordinariate is very important to the Holy Father,” said Father Hermann Geissler, the Austrian priest who leads the Congregation’s doctrinal office. “The ordinariate promotes unity and is a powerful instrument for unity, it will help Christians to be evangelists.” Noting that “we must cooperate and grow together,” the priest said that the Church will be enriched by the Anglican patrimony of music.
“The goal of the ecumenical movement is complete visible union with one Christ and with Peter in one Church,” Father Geissler emphasized.
The Portal also reported that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has begun to receive requests from Lutherans to establish a similar canonical structure that would allow them to enter the Catholic Church while retaining aspects of the Lutheran heritage. “The Holy Father will do all he can to bring other Christians into unity,” Father Geissler commented.
ping!
It WILL happen.
Finally, after so much false ecumenism, we get a glimpse of true ecumenism. Hopefully, this will be the only theme at Assisi III.
I think its aims are more modest; mutual respect so that those who profess differing beliefs can coexist.
Don Bosco’s dream of the 2 pillars coming true
good idea
As Jesus prayed in John Chapter 17.
Solemn Pronouncements from Dogmatic Counsels, and Papal Encyclicals:
Council of Carthage, 418
One must neither pray nor sing psalms with heretics, and whosoever shall communicate with those who are cut off from the communion of the church, whether clergy or layman; let him be excommunicated.
III Council of Constantinople, 680
If any ecclesiastic or layman shall go into the synagogue of the Jews or the meeting-houses of the heretics to join in prayer with them, let them be deposed and deprived of communion. If any bishop or priest or deacon shall join in prayer with heretics, let him be suspended from communion.
Code of Canon Law, 1917
#1258 - 1. It is not permitted at all for the faithful to assist in any active manner at or to have any part in the worship of non-Catholics.
Excerps from "Mortalium Animos", Encyclical of Pope Pius XI, On Religious Unity, January 6, 1928.
2. A similar object is aimed at by some, in those matters which concern the New Law promulgated by Christ our Lord. For since they hold it for certain that men destitute of all religious sense are very rarely to be found, they seem to have founded on that belief a hope that the nations, although they differ among themselves in certain religious matters, will without much difficulty come to agree as brethren in professing certain doctrines, which form as it were a common basis of the spiritual life. For which reason conventions, meetings and addresses are frequently arranged by these persons, at which a large number of listeners are present, and at which all without distinction are invited to join in the discussion, both infidels of every kind, and Christians, even those who have unhappily fallen away from Christ or who with obstinacy and pertinacity deny His divine nature and mission. Certainly such attempts can nowise be approved by Catholics, founded as they are on that false opinion which considers all religions to be more or less good and praiseworthy, since they all in different ways manifest and signify that sense which is inborn in us all, and by which we are led to God and to the obedient acknowledgment of His rule. Not only are those who hold this opinion in error and deceived, but also in distorting the idea of true religion they reject it, and little by little. turn aside to naturalism andatheism, as it is called; from which it clearly follows that one who supports those who hold these theories and attempt to realize them, is altogether abandoning the divinely revealed religion.
3. But some are more easily deceived by the outward appearance of good when there is question of fostering unity among all Christians.
4. Is it not right, it is often repeated, indeed, even consonant with duty, that all who invoke the name of Christ should abstain from mutual reproaches and at long last be united in mutual charity? Who would dare to say that he loved Christ, unless he worked with all his might to carry out the desires of Him, Who asked His Father that His disciples might be "one"[1]. And did not the same Christ will that His disciples should be marked out and distinguished from others by this characteristic, namely that they loved one another: "By this shall all men know that you are my disciples, if you have love one for another"[2]? All Christians, they add, should be as "one": for then they would be much more powerful in driving out the pest of irreligion, which like a serpent daily creeps further and becomes more widely spread, and prepares to rob the Gospel of its strength. These things and others that class of men who are known as pan-Christians continually repeat and amplify; and these men, so far from being quite few and scattered, have increased to the dimensions of an entire class, and have grouped themselves into widely spread societies, most of which are directed by non-Catholics, although they are imbued with varying doctrines concerning the things of faith. This undertaking is so actively promoted as in many places to win for itself the adhesion of a number of citizens, and it even takes possession of the minds of very many Catholics and allures them with the hope of bringing about such a union as would be agreeable to the desires of Holy Mother Church, who has indeed nothing more at heart than to recall her erring sons and to lead them back to her bosom. But in reality beneath these enticing words and blandishments lies hid a mostgrave error, by which the foundations of the Catholic faith are completely destroyed.
5. Admonished, therefore, by the consciousness of Our Apostolic office that We should not permit the flock of the Lord to be cheated by dangerous fallacies, We invoke, Venerable Brethren, your zeal in avoiding this evil; for We are confident that by the writings and words of each one of you the people will more easily get to know and understand those principles and arguments which We are about to set forth, and from which Catholics will learn how they are to think and act when there is question of those schemes which have for their end the union in one body, whatsoever be the manner, of all who call themselves Christians.
8. This being so, it is clear that the Apostolic See cannot on any terms take part in their assemblies, nor is it anyway lawful for Catholics either to support or to work for such enterprises; for if they do so they will be giving countenance to a false Christianity, quite alien to the one Church of Christ.
9. These pan-Christians who turn their minds to uniting the churches seem, indeed, to pursue the noblest of ideas in promoting charity among all Christians: nevertheless how does it happen that this charity tends to injure faith? Everyone knows that John himself, the Apostle of love, who seems to reveal in his Gospel the secrets of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and who never ceased to impress on the memories of his followers the new commandment "Love one another," altogether forbade any intercourse with those who professed a mutilated and corrupt version of Christ's teaching: "If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him: God speed you"[18]. For which reason, since charity is based on a complete and sincere faith, the disciples of Christ must be united principally by the bond of one faith. 10. So, Venerable Brethren, it is clear why this Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in the assemblies of non-Catholics: for the union of Christians can only be promoted by promoting the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from it, for in the past they have unhappily left it. To the one true Church of Christ, we say, which is visible to all, and which is to remain, according to the will of its Author, exactly the same as He instituted it.
To quote from the encyclical which you posted:
" for the union of Christians can only be promoted by promoting the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from it, for in the past they have unhappily left it.".
Amen!
The Anglican Ordinariate does precisely that and the new Catholic groups assent to Catholic teaching in toto and have humbly pledged their unqualified loyalty to the Pope, in contrast to some self-proclaimed Catholics who've made a lifestyle out of criticizing him and proudly telling him how to carry out his ministry .
Union with the Pope is no bad thing. You ought to try it for yourself. You'd be surprised how liberating it is.
I remember you once telling me that the term "Christian" was essentially meaningless and not a term which the Catholic Church used in any significant way. Yet here I see Pius XI throwing it around with gay abandon.......
........." for the union of Christians can only be promoted by promoting the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from it, for in the past they have unhappily left it.
You need to call your office. Apparently a pre-Vatican II pope disagrees with you.
It was not me who said it, it was the Catholic Dictionary by Donald Attwater. IT IS MEANINGLESS IN THE WAY THE WORLD USES IT!, not the Church! Here is the definition again:
CHRISTIAN. A name first given to the followers of our Lord at Antioch (Acts xi, 26). Since the rise of Protestantism the name has been used in so many different senses as to have become almost meaningless: it may indicate a Catholic or a Unitarian, or even be applied to an infidel who displays some virtue which is associated with Christ. It may reasonably be applied to the members of all the ancient churches whether in communion with the Holy See or not, and to those Protestants who profess, explicitly -or implicitly, the Nicean creed in its traditional Interpretation. The Church puts no definite official meaning on the word, as she does on Catholic. (Catholic Dictionary, Donald Attwater, 1958, TAN Books)
---------------------------------------------------
The term Christian to Church Fathers, Bellarmine, , AND PIUS IX :
Those who go off to heretics, and all who leave the Church for heresy, abandon the name of Christ. Those who call these men "Christians" are in grievous error, since they neither understand Scripture at all nor the faith which it contains. St Athanasius ("Discourse Against the Arians", Bk. I, ch.1,no.1, pg 26:11)
In name only is Christ found among certain heretics who want to be called Christians. In reality, He is no longer among them. (St. Augustine)
He who falls away from the doctrine and faith of the Catholic Church would not be, nor would even be called, a Christian. (St. Athanasius)
]All true Christians are members of the Church. (St. John Eudes)
Whosoever and whatsoever he might be, he who is not in Christ's Church is no Christian! (St. Cyprian)
A manifest heretic is not a Christian, as is clearly taught by St. Cyprian, St. Athanasius, St. Augustine, St. Jerome, and others. (St Robert Bellarmine)
Pope Pius IX, Etsi multa (#25), November 21, 1873: “Therefore the holy martyr Cyprian, writing about schism, denied to the pseudo-bishop Novatian even the title of Christian, on the grounds that he was cut off and separated from the Church of Christ. ‘Whoever he is,’ he says, ‘and whatever sort he is, he is not a Christian who is not in the Church of Christ.’”
From: Mystici Corporis Christi, by Pope Pius XII (and First Vatican council):
The true Church of Jesus Christ ...is the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church
.........."or the union of Christians can only be promoted by promoting the return to the one true Church of Christ."
Well?
As Catholics we have to read keeping in mind “what the mind of the church has ALWAYS taught”. Therefore, my answer to you is yes, I agree with your reading of that line. Now, what are you trying to say that in any way conflicts with everything that I just gave you, I don’t see it?
You jumped on me on a previous occasion for using the term "Christian" to refer to non-Catholics. Here, I see Pius XI doing the same thing.
Therefore I expect that in future, there will be no quibbling from you when I do likewise. What's good enough for Pius XI is good enough for me.
When we communicate to the World, we have to use their language, what they want to be called, what they call themselves. But let's not get carried away with it. I call them non-Catholics, or Protestants or Eastern Orthodox. Avoiding using Christian unless it's unavoidable. Remember all the Church quotes from the Fathers to Pius IX that I posted.
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.