Ecumenism Of Return

[mortify]

[b]From a Cardinal of the Catholic Church:[/b]
[i]
[color="#0000FF"][b][size="4"]"In its ecumenical approach, Vatican II took a standpoint centred on Christ. This was a new and decisive step. Until then the standpoint was centred on the Church. The accepted view was that ecumenism meant a ‘return’ to the Catholic Church. The formula was: ‘The Catholic Church is the true Church of Jesus Christ, therefore unity is only possible if the others return to the Roman Catholic Church.’ But Vatican II gave up this view."[/size][/i][/b][/color]


Have you given up this view?

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='mortify' date='21 February 2010 - 01:22 PM' timestamp='1266780163' post='2060560']Have you given up this view?
[/quote]

no

[Thy Geekdom Come]

A return to Christ means a return to His Church.

[Era Might]

[quote name='mortify' date='21 February 2010 - 02:22 PM' timestamp='1266780163' post='2060560']
[b]From a Cardinal of the Catholic Church:[/b]
[i]
[color="#0000FF"][b][size="4"]"In its ecumenical approach, Vatican II took a standpoint centred on Christ. This was a new and decisive step. Until then the standpoint was centred on the Church. The accepted view was that ecumenism meant a ‘return’ to the Catholic Church. The formula was: ‘The Catholic Church is the true Church of Jesus Christ, therefore unity is only possible if the others return to the Roman Catholic Church.’ But Vatican II gave up this view."[/size][/i][/b][/color]


Have you given up this view?
[/quote]
I do not know the context of this quote, so I cannot address it specifically.

But speaking in general, it seems to me that the language of "return" does not work well with an ecclesiology of communion. Over the centuries in the West, I think that "the Church" was increasingly seen as a monolithic entity, because the West was estranged from the East, so Westerners associated "the Church" with the Western Church that they were accustomed to. It seems to me that the Second Vatican Council was trying to get back to an understanding of the Church as a communion of particular Churches. In such an ecclesiology of communion, the language of "return" might be seen as suggesting some kind of institutional conglomeration. But unity does not require institutional conglomeration. How exactly would unity look without institutional conglomeration? I don't think we can know that yet...that is part of what we are working toward. But the ecclesiological model of the early Church should, I think, be the normative reference point as Christians work toward unity.

[Nihil Obstat]

I believe that this author creates a false dichotomy.

[MIKolbe]

I have always noticed a difference between what Vatican II did, and what most liberal leaning people SAY it did; and how those who stood up in defense got shouted down for being 'too traditional and closed-minded'.

Most of my issues with the council come from THAT, not what was 'done' if properly shown/interpretted through the light of the traditon of the church.

sorry for the rant.

[Ed Normile]

I beleive both John Paul II and Benedict XVI both stated there is no salvation outside the catholic church.

ed

[little_miss_late]

I don't know the context of the quote but wouldn't it be fair to say that true unity will take work on the part of all the faithful in all the churches?

Sometimes, when Catholics discuss this topic, I get the impression that they are implying that all the work needs to happen in those other churches and that the good Roman Catholic faithful just need to sit back and wait for everyone else to start doing exactly what they are doing.

Meanwhile, in my hometown, just to achieve a measure of unity among English speaking Catholics and Spanish speaking Catholics takes more work on both sides than anyone can manage. I went to the Rite of Election for my Archdiocese today and it was celebrated in three languages. Everyone had to work a little harder and probably change their expectations a bit in order to participate. And that's for folks who are already part of the Roman Catholic Church. I don't think we should water down the faith in order to make people comfortable. But maybe the point is that we shouldn't confuse the things we can't give up and the things that we might need to give up, for unity's sake.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Ed Normile' date='21 February 2010 - 08:33 PM' timestamp='1266805985' post='2060829']
I beleive both John Paul II and Benedict XVI both stated there is no salvation outside the catholic church.

ed
[/quote]
I'm pretty sure this is formally defined as dogma. Certainly it's infallible doctrine.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='21 February 2010 - 10:03 PM' timestamp='1266807835' post='2060848']
I'm pretty sure this is formally defined as dogma.
[/quote]

Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus is definitely a dogma. See the Athanasian Creed, Pope Boniface VIII's [i]Unam Sanctam[/i], and the Council of Florence's [i]Cantate Domino[/i].

Edited February 22, 2010 by Resurrexi

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='21 February 2010 - 09:05 PM' timestamp='1266807959' post='2060853']
Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus is definitely a dogma. See the Athanasian Creed, Pope Boniface VIII's [i]Unam Sanctam[/i], and the Council of Florence's [i]Cantate Domino[/i].
[/quote]
Good good. I hesitated to say dogma because I always get confused about whether or not it's been specifically called that, except for the easy ones like the immaculate conception.

Edited February 22, 2010 by Nihil Obstat

[Apotheoun]

I agree with what Cardinal Kasper said in the quotation in the original post at the beginning of this thread, and I also agree with what Pope Benedict said about this issue at a meeting in Cologne on 19 August 2005:

". . . unity does not mean what could be called ecumenism of the return: that is, to deny and to reject one's own faith history. Absolutely not! It does not mean uniformity in all expressions of theology and spirituality, in liturgical forms and in discipline. Unity in multiplicity, and multiplicity in unity: in my Homily for the Solemnity of Sts. Peter and Paul on 29 June last, I insisted that full unity and true catholicity in the original sense of the word go together. As a necessary condition for the achievement of this coexistence, the commitment to unity must be constantly purified and renewed; it must constantly grow and mature."

Source: [url="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2005/august/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20050819_ecumenical-meeting_en.html"]Vatican[/url]

[Ed Normile]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='21 February 2010 - 10:03 PM' timestamp='1266807835' post='2060848']
I'm pretty sure this is formally defined as dogma. Certainly it's infallible doctrine.
[/quote]


Yup, thats my point.

ed

[MissyP89]

Christ and the Church are inseparable. To have Christ is to have the Church at least in part, whether they accept that or not. To accept Christ is to accept His Church.

[Ed Normile]

[quote name='MissyP89' date='22 February 2010 - 01:08 AM' timestamp='1266818927' post='2061025']
Christ and the Church are inseparable. To have Christ is to have the Church at least in part, whether they accept that or not. To accept Christ is to accept His Church.
[/quote]


There are multitudes that claim to accept Christ but deny his church, sad but true.

ed