FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Can Catholics even preach anymore?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
The true Church, which is and will remain the Roman Church, has been in worse scrapes than this and will get out of this one. God will not abandon it, even if his intercession is not as quick as we'd like. Take a deep breath and pray.
Novus Ordo Catholicism is still better than protestantism or sects like the Jehovah's Witnesses.
I have to admit, this thread has bothered me. One of my parents is a Jehaovah's Witness and how can I convince her to become Catholic when she can point to the example of the Pope and show how the Holy Father is not interested in converting people from other religions. It's make me think I should consider the SSPX or something.
(08-03-2014, 06:11 AM)Pacman Wrote: [ -> ]I have to admit, this thread has bothered me. One of my parents is a Jehaovah's Witness and how can I convince her to become Catholic when she can point to the example of the Pope and show how the Holy Father is not interested in converting people from other religions. It's make me think I should consider the SSPX or something.

I apologize for causing scandal. Although my fears were similar to yours, the fact of the existence of Evangelii nuntiandi and Redemptoris missio - along with the 2007 Clarification - have settled my worries a little.

Francis may say ridiculous things in his "fervorini", but they are not encyclicals or infallible statements; so, his wacky, off-the-cuff opinions alone cannot undo 4 decades of slow-but-sure recovery.
(08-03-2014, 06:11 AM)Pacman Wrote: [ -> ]I have to admit, this thread has bothered me. One of my parents is a Jehaovah's Witness and how can I convince her to become Catholic when she can point to the example of the Pope and show how the Holy Father is not interested in converting people from other religions. It's make me think I should consider the SSPX or something.

Tell her that the Holy Father is not the Church! Don't convince her to join based on who's more determined to get converts.....we all know that the Mohommedans have that bolted down with the "convert or die" motto.
(08-03-2014, 08:28 AM)Heorot Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-03-2014, 06:11 AM)Pacman Wrote: [ -> ]I have to admit, this thread has bothered me. One of my parents is a Jehaovah's Witness and how can I convince her to become Catholic when she can point to the example of the Pope and show how the Holy Father is not interested in converting people from other religions. It's make me think I should consider the SSPX or something.

I apologize for causing scandal. Although my fears were similar to yours, the fact of the existence of Evangelii nuntiandi and Redemptoris missio - along with the 2007 Clarification - have settled my worries a little.

Francis may say ridiculous things in his "fervorini", but they are not encyclicals or infallible statements; so, his wacky, off-the-cuff opinions alone cannot undo 4 decades of slow-but-sure recovery.

Try reconciling that with this 1993 document: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontif...on_en.html

Quote:Progressively, in the decades which followed these unions, missionary activity tended to include among its priorities the effort to convert other Christians, individually or in groups, so as "to bring them back" to one's own Church. In order to legitimize this tendency, a source of proselytism, the Catholic Church developed the theological vision according to which she presented herself as the only one to whom salvation was entrusted. As a reaction, the Orthodox Church, in turn, came to accept the same vision according to which only in her could salvation be found. . . .

(Here we see a clear denial of "Extra ecclesiam nulla salus.")

12. Because of the way in which Catholics and Orthodox once again consider each other in their relationship to the mystery of the Church and discover each other once again as Sister Churches, this form of "missionary apostolate" described above, and which has been called "uniatism", can no longer be accepted either as a method to be followed nor as a model of the unity our Churches are seeking.

13. In fact, especially since the panorthodox Conferences and the Second Vatican Council, the re- discovery and the giving again of proper value to the Church as communion, both on the part of Orthodox and of Catholics, has radically altered perspectives and thus attitudes. On each side it is recognized that what Christ has entrusted to his Church - profession of apostolic faith, participation in the same sacraments, above all the one priesthood celebrating the one sacrifice of Christ, the apostolic succession of bishops - cannot be considered the exclusive property of one of our Churches. . . .

(So, papal infallibility, which the E.O. reject, cannot be considered part of the apostolic faith...)

15. While the inviolable freedom of persons and their obligation to follow the requirements of their conscience remain secure, in the search for re-establishing unity there is no question of conversion of people from one Church to the other in order to ensure their salvation.

Now, go and read Pope Leo XIII's Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae: http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13praec.htm
It doesn't need to be reconciled any more than some of the working draft documents of, say, the Council of -Basle-Ferrara-Florence that were ultimately not promulgated as the doctrine of the Church. 

Regarding texts like that (and, say, the Joint statement on justification with the Lutherans), they are considered part of work in progress, not the final position of the Church. 

As the Balamnd document itself notes:

Balamand Wrote:As with all the results of the joint dialogue commissions, this common document belongs to the responsibility of the Commission itself, until the competent organs of the Catholic Church and of the Orthodox Churches express their judgement in regard to it.

Pope Benedict XVI made this more explicit:

Benedict XVI Wrote:Today, moreover, one of the fundamental questions is the problem of the methods adopted in the various ecumenical dialogues. These too must reflect the priority of faith. Knowing the truth is a right of the conversation partner in every true dialogue. It is a requirement of love for one’s brother or sister. In this sense, it is necessary to face controversial issues courageously, always in a spirit of brotherhood and in reciprocal respect. It is also important to offer a correct interpretation of that order or “hierarchy” which exists in Catholic doctrine, observed in the Decree on Ecumenism, Unitatis Redintegratio (n. 11), which in no way means reducing the deposit of the faith but rather bringing out its internal structure, the organic nature of this unique structure. The study documents produced by the various ecumenical dialogues are very important. These texts cannot be ignored because they are an important, if temporary, fruit of our common reflection developed over the years. Nevertheless their proper significance should be recognized as a contribution offered to the competent Authority of the Church, which alone is called to judge them definitively. To ascribe to these texts a binding or as it were definitive solution to the thorny questions of the dialogues without the proper evaluation of the ecclesial Authority, would ultimately hinder the journey toward full unity in faith.
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedi...de_en.html

So, for example, the official response of the Church on the Joint Declaration on Justification is here (this may not be considered a definitive judgment, but it is an example of my point):
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontif...ic_en.html
Note, it points out where the joint statement is wrong or problematic and where the Lutheran doctrine is still touched by the anathemas of Trent.

I am unaware if the Balamand Statement was ever given such a response from the Church, but it was certainly contradicted by later interventions from the CDF, such as the note on certain doctrinal elements of evangelization, the CDF note on the use of the term "Sister Churches," as well as Dominus Iesus, and the note on the doctrine on the Church, all issued subsequently by the CDF. Likewise, John Paul II's May 31, 1995 audience explicitly affirming the formulation of St. Cyprian and explicitly referring to the definitions of Lateran IV, Florence, and Boniface VIII concerning the EENS dogma also came after it.

Furthermore, The Romanian Greek-Catholic bishops all wrote a letter to the Pope rejecting Balamand, and there was no negative response to that.  Neither has anything in the Balamand statement been enforced at all.  You can find plenty of Orthodox complaints by priests, etc. on the internet saying Rome and Catholics are ignoring the Balamand statement, and evangelizing, opening new churches, etc. in Orthodox territories without their permission, etc.  These actions, rather than being condemned and forbidden, seems to be instead supported by the subsequent actions of the Church.

Sure, allowing an open reading of these documents or promoting them as evidence of good progress on the road to reunion might be scandalous for those who may ignorantly take their contents as the position of the Church (despite the explicit disclaimers to the contrary right at the beginning), but there have been worse things in past centuries vaguely praised and similarly left to float around out there in the history of the Church--and those without even any disclaimers...
(08-02-2014, 04:34 PM)Clare Brigid Wrote: [ -> ]Well, then, why not focus on Him instead of this stupid drama?  Seriously.  Enough already.

We focus on Him within a particular context, i.e. the Church.  Both the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church claim to be "the Church".  If one agonizes over which really IS "The Church", that is hardly "stupid drama".  It might be clear to you and others who have already come to the conclusion that you know which is "the Church", but some people have not achieved that clarity of vision yet.  For some it is the Roman Catholic Church.  For others, the Orthodox Church.  And, for yet others, neither of those.

It does happen that things occur (or do not occur) within one or the other of them that can point a given individual one way or the other or turn them around completely.  Sometimes this process is dramatic, especially when discussed on internet fora.  It is, however, never stupid.  If you have ever had a similar struggle and have reached a place of resolution about it, that is great.  Others may not yet have achieved that same kind of resolution, and for them to air their doubts, questions, and quandaries is hardly "stupid drama".  If they do so in a manner that upsets or offends you somehow, perhaps you should just skip over their posts.
[Image: keep-calm-and-dont-be-such-a-drama-queen.png]
(08-04-2014, 02:48 PM)Clare Brigid Wrote: [ -> ][Image: keep-calm-and-dont-be-such-a-drama-queen.png]


[Image: pot-and-kettle1.jpg]

:P
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7