Interreligious dialogue

[Socrates]

This is a silly debate. The terms need to be clearly defined. There is nothing wrong with "inter-religious dialogue" in the sense of Catholics speaking with those of other religions in order to tell them the Truth of the Faith.
This does not mean watering down the faith or religious indifferentism.
Yes, this can be abused, like anything else, but if done properly, it can plant the first seeds of conversion.

Simply labeling something a "novelty" and then condemning it accordingly is a silly practice.

[jasJis]

It's silly to debate with children as equals. You'd never get them to bed.

[dspen2005]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Apr 10 2006, 06:40 PM']the news would if any important leaders converted.
[right][snapback]942678[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

so the only important conversions are those reported in the media, right???

[Brother Adam]

Imagine Sam's surprise when an entire rite of the Orthodox Church humbly accepted that they were wrong and came into full communion with the Catholic Church through ecumenical dialogue.

Even interreligious dialogue is fruitful, not for the lowest common denominator, but to identify what we agree with in order to fully identify what we disagree with. Religious dialogue gets very complicated, it is not basic apologetics and takes time.

Decree on Ecumenism. Read it. Know it.

Enough Said.

[Jaime]

Nicely put Adam

[Theoketos]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Apr 10 2006, 04:39 PM']Dialouge in the means of trying to convert a person is different from Ecumenical dialouge.
traditionalist are for converting people to catholicism, and bieng charitable and all that jazz.
but their is a difference between ecumencial dialouge, and dialouge meant to convert somone. ecumenical dialouge places faith at the lest common denominator. it justifies heresy, schism, of whatever. it leads to scandal, and relegious indiffernetism, wherer as Dialouge meant for conversion, is just that. it is a means to convert someone to the church.
[right][snapback]942606[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]




Let me fix this

Good dialogue is the means to convert both persons and is not different from Ecumenical Dialogoue. (Ecumenical Dialogue is only possible if both people are open to the Truth or truly free, the Tradition has nothing to fear from the truth).

Traditionalists are for converting people to catholism, radical traditionalism often tends to be too rigid and arrogant for any too listen. Humility and Charity begin awesome and true dialogue in the risk of education.

All that jazz indicates a flaw, blurs and shifts the focus from charity.

Good Eucunism, does not justify heresy, schism or whatever. Only if it is done poorly, comprimising truth, causes scandal. What really cause indiffertialism is traditional rigor (awesome) with out Charity (awful).

Good dialogue will have words and clarification on the surface. An air or respect, that is Charity, is the real substance and is deeper. In the clarification of words is where the deed of Eucunism starts, the deed done in Charity, in the light, will be seen as done in God, and this changes hearts with the grace of God.

Edited April 11, 2006 by Theoketos

[Crusader_4]

I have been involved in several interreligious dialogues representing Catholicism, particulary youth dialogues. I find that they are fairly beneficial as in you understand better people's of other faith and often have many misconceptions about their religion done away with as to better communicate and dialogue with them. I have no intention of converting or practicing their faiths, but i have been able to clear up many of my own predjudices about other religions which has created a better atmosphere of respect and comoradity.

[Nathan]

Interfaith dialogue is a positive thing when approached correctly. The thing to remember is that you are not engaging in dialogue with another religion, but with human beings. Also, In no way are we to compromise our faith, but there are certain boundaries that need to be respected when talking faith with people of other religions -- for both sides. For instance, declaring "Christianity is the truth! Your religion is false, you heretic!" would likely lead to hurt feelings and put a prompt end to the discussion.