FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Will the ecumenical and irenic spirit remain?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
Or rather, will the strong modes of discourse taken by some Popes in the past not fly today?

I was thinking about ecumenism. And I thought, ecumenism is here to stay. Why did I think this? Well, while ecumenism has been around for a while, I think the post World War II era really threw people in the "irenic" direction. WWI had about 40 million dead. WWII had about 70 million. Communism was spreading throughout the world. There were the movements of the UN and other organizations. Truman vaporized a 100 to 200,000 in seconds. And there was this general belief that somehow we've got to get over divisions or we're going to annihilate ourselves. There seem to be less room to fight wars without costs being too high. (Dorothy Day held to pacifism because she said that nuclear bombs and mutual-assured destruction ruled offensive war out. Apparently Ottaviani agreed: http://www.catholicapologetics.info/mora...ustwar.htm) We see this sense of needing to settle differences coming in other places. Civil rights movements. Ending of colonialism. Old feuds being tempered. Etc. Now I think about some who want anything like ecumenism to go away. Let's get back to fire and brimstone discourse from the Pope. And I really wonder if that in full force can fly. Not because people would reject it per se, but just the fact that fighting these days can become a really big problem. I think we can get back to Pius XII's declaration on ecumenism (see below), keeping in mind that the point of unity is the Church, but I think the ecumenical project in terms of visiting each other's places and having joint declarations and the bit, is here to stay in some way (I guess until our Lord comes). As Ron Paul says in reference to guns, you can't reverse time. You can't put the genie back in the bottle. Guns are here to stay. Nuclear bombs are here to stay. What do you think, besides the obvious implementation of our Lady's message at Fatima? Which even if done, would still require people to reach out to others to convert. Do you think ecumenism must stay in some form? And if so, how would you like to see it changed?

http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFECUM.HTM
Good questions. Answers are more difficult, as this is quite a large subject.

Let's first look at the Enlightenment and what followed, the years of new philosophies. Specifically from about the time the Declaration of Independence was signed and the French Revolution occurred. The era of the Rights of Man. As man moved away from religion, and let's face it, that meant Catholicism, the general thought seemed to be that wars would cease. Instead, we have seen eras of total war and what seems like war that never ends.

Yes, I think the era of ecumenism is here to stay. But, it ought to be from a standpoint of conversion. Our popes must get back to a day when they proclaim Catholicism as the One True Faith. And I believe this will happen in due time. We may not see it. But, who are we to demand it happen on our watch while we are in our earthly pilgrimage?

What you write about the World Wars is a big key  to the situation we find ourselves in. And I have come to believe as of late, that the Church had no choice but to reach out to the world a little as Her enemies were certainly at Her doorstep waiting to lay at least part of the blame at Her doorstep.

What followed, "in the spirit" so called, is an entirely different matter and one that I think was unexpected. But, this all has more to do with the American Church in my humble opinion and the Heresy of Americanism. The Church has clung to hard to the American Way. She made this mistake with France long ago.

Either way, it is a complicated situation and the media does not help. And that is one reason I choose to give our modern popes a break.
I think yes, it will continue, but stuff like Assissi can't.  If it proceeds in the Catholic way as we think it should, it'll be a boon, and way out there possibly bring conversions. In the near term it can bring a little less persecution. I think after the last war people looked around and thought we can not do this again. Here in America it was mostly emigres, known then as "d.p.'s". It was great assimilating them and the ones that escaped the "iron curtain" that came later as the Hungarians.  So in America it was a happy time.

In Europe it was a mess. We all know the history of rebuilding and the Marshall Plan, but many of the d.p.'s spent years in American internment camps before they could go anywhere.You also have to remember that there were many alive that had seen both wars, and any glimmer of hope they pounced on it. Pope Pius XII used his own money to start a political party in hopes of quashing the commies there. in short all the pieces on the chess board were moving, and every one wanted to be involved.

I think ecumenism is an off shoot of this peace quest. I don't think Pope John XXIII or Pope Paul VI had any idea what was coming at all, they were hoping for some kind of intertwined national peace through ecumenism. I think the problems we see with it are the sleepers that have been hidden in the Church waiting to act, and all the useful idiots that have been carried away with nouvelle catholicism.

tim 
I think if the Popes do the consecration of Russia we will see finally the conversion of Russia and the ecumenical return of the Eastern Orthodox. There are political signs all over the place, Turkey seems to becoming more Islamic fundamentalist and with their longtime enemy Greece in dire straits , i  wouldn't be surprised if the Islamists want to conquer Athens and Athens is connected to the Orthodox Churches in Russia, Romania, Bulgaria and other Eastern places. The spirit of Ecumenism has virtually destroyed at least in the minds of the Catholics the dogma No Salvation Outside the Church, so what Pope Benedict and his successors must do is to correctly implement that pastoral teaching (ecumenism) until the consecration and the church return to more normalcy when militant catholicism returns.
(06-16-2012, 07:14 PM)Tim Wrote: [ -> ]I think yes, it will continue, but stuff like Assissi can't.  If it proceeds in the Catholic way as we think it should, it'll be a boon, and way out there possibly bring conversions. In the near term it can bring a little less persecution. I think after the last war people looked around and thought we can not do this again. Here in America it was mostly emigres, known then as "d.p.'s". It was great assimilating them and the ones that escaped the "iron curtain" that came later as the Hungarians.  So in America it was a happy time.

In Europe it was a mess. We all know the history of rebuilding and the Marshall Plan, but many of the d.p.'s spent years in American internment camps before they could go anywhere.You also have to remember that there were many alive that had seen both wars, and any glimmer of hope they pounced on it. Pope Pius XII used his own money to start a political party in hopes of quashing the commies there. in short all the pieces on the chess board were moving, and every one wanted to be involved.

I think ecumenism is an off shoot of this peace quest. I don't think Pope John XXIII or Pope Paul VI had any idea what was coming at all, they were hoping for some kind of intertwined national peace through ecumenism. I think the problems we see with it are the sleepers that have been hidden in the Church waiting to act, and all the useful idiots that have been carried away with nouvelle catholicism.

tim   

Yes Tim, and those sleepers were the same bunch of "enlightened" thinkers that The Holy Fathers had been warning about since before the reformation. This is what i beleive neither Pope John XXIII or Paul VI had any clue about. I honestly feel the idea of a Catholic enlightenment was their ideal, but the actual darkening we received was beyond their ability to conceive. The designers of the documents at V-II knew what was comming, but the rest of the council was clueless as well. We are suffering from an enlightened tendancy to ignore history because we assume we are so much more educated today. Serious mistake! And only a true return to Tradition and True Teaching will stop the current crisis from dividing the Church once again.
DMorgan, that's exactly what I try to bring. I wasn't in WWII. I was born hard on it's heels. What I try to do is give a feel for what it was like. The history books have been written, and most here are pretty well educated but it is light years from then to now. Linear thinking would lead us to believe it was like today but somewhat less so. That's crap, and both groups, the left and the right have re-written the facts to their liking.

tim
(06-16-2012, 09:24 PM)Dmorgan Wrote: [ -> ]Yes Tim, and those sleepers were the same bunch of "enlightened" thinkers that The Holy Fathers had been warning about since before the reformation. This is what i beleive neither Pope John XXIII or Paul VI had any clue about. I honestly feel the idea of a Catholic enlightenment was their ideal, but the actual darkening we received was beyond their ability to conceive.

The idea of a "Catholic enlightenment," though not of course phrased that way, held sway long before John XXIII and Paul VI, though. A propensity to ignore history was also not uncommon, even before VII. We have to go to the root of the problem.
I recall an interview with Bp. Fellay, in which he said that Benedict XVI stated that the conciliar church would not abandon this course.

There is also a statement from one of the conciliar popes that says that there is no turning back from these ecumenical efforts. I am trying to find the text.
For example, in a letter to Queen Elizabeth II, John Paul II told her that "there can be no turning back from the ecumenical goal we have set ourselves in obedience to the Lord's command" (Zenit: Pope and Queen say there is no turning back in ecumenism, 19-Oct-00).

The conciliar popes made many comments such as these. I think the one I'm recalling is from a papal address, but I'm still looking.
Diplomatic relations with other religious groups are here to stay, and if I were pope, I'd probably feel compelled to continue them to some degree. After all, if we Catholics don't join together with other religious groups in a fight to stem the tide of secularism in the West, the liberty of the Church could be lost.

What's wrong, of course, is communicatio in sacris. We must avoid things like the events at Assisi, and--just as importantly--we must stress the necessity of membership in the Christ's Church for the salvation of each person. Diplomatic relations of Catholics with other religious groups must never make it seem as if we accepted the others' beliefs as being on equal ground with ours.
Pages: 1 2