More “Spirit of Vatican II” religious tolerance ecumenical madness

February 22, 2013 § 10 Comments

Those who sincerely desire to bring those outside the Christian religion to the correct faith should be earnestly engaged in displays of courtesy, not harshness, lest hostility drive far away those whose minds a clearly thought out reason could challenge.  For whoever acts otherwise, and wants to keep them away from their customary practice of rites under this pretext, is shown to be more concerned with his own interests than with those of God.  For the Jews who live in Naples complained to Us that some people have unreasonably sought to prevent them from celebrating some of their solemn feast days, so that they were not permitted to celebrate their solemn festivals, as they, up to the present, and their ancestors for a long time previously, were allowed to observe or honor.  If such is the case, these men seem to be engaged in a useless pursuit.  For what advantage is there when, contrary to long practice, these have been forbidden and it serves no benefit toward their faith and conversion?  Or why are we setting up rules for the Jews on how they should celebrate their ceremonies if in doing so we cannot persuade them?

This, then, is the agendum: by being encouraged more by reason and gentleness, they are to wish to follow, not flee from us, so that by showing them what we affirm from their Scriptures, we may be able, with God’s help, to convert them to the bosom of Mother Church.  And thus, Your Fraternity, as far as possible with God’s help, should awaken them to conversion by admonitions and not allow them to be further disturbed in their celebrations.  But they should have complete freedom to observe and celebrate all their feast and holy days as up till now … they have possessed.

Pope St. Gregory I The Great, Qui Sincera, November, 602 AD (Quoted in Denzinger)

_____

 

Although We have no doubt it stems from the zeal of devotion that Your Nobility arranges to lead Jews to the worship of Christendom, We have nonetheless thought it necessary to send you Our letter by way of admonishment, since you seem to do it with a zeal that is inordinate.  For we do not read that our Lord Jesus Christ violently forced anyone into his service, but that by humble exhortation, leaving to each person his own freedom of choice, he recalled from error whomsoever he had predestined to eternal life, doing so not by judging them, but by shedding his own blood. …

Likewise, the blessed Gregory forbids, in one of his letters, that the said people should be drawn to the faith by violence.

Pope Alexander II, Licet Ex (to Prince Landolfo of Benevento), 1065 AD, (Quoted in Denzinger)

§ 10 Responses to More “Spirit of Vatican II” religious tolerance ecumenical madness

  • AngryDrake says:

    My sarcasm detector is going off the scale!

  • Vanessa says:

    I’ve sat here for ten minutes puzzling over the title. I’m a bit slow on the uptake…

    What prompted this?

    Am I allowed to admit that I actually think that Vatican II is not the root of all evil, or will that get me banned or beheaded?

  • Zippy says:

    Vanessa:
    The title is ironic, since the citations come from more than a few years before Vatican II and from nontrivial figures in the Church.

    It is pope-picking season, so the usual hermeneutic-of-discontinuity folks are out in force. Some cling to the idea of rupture because they like what there was before VII; others because they don’t. But what they agree on is the rupture, and by that I don’t mean an event in a bad Protestant movie starring Kirk Cameron.

    But every time I look into a supposed rupture in doctrine I find a whole lot less there than meets the eye. This post is an ironic jab at the notion that Nostra Aetate represents a doctrinal rupture.

  • Chris says:

    Yerp. Straight Theology. Interestingly, when I try to look up my favourite theologian (John Calvin) on this, I get a pile of antisemetic conspiracy theories that he was Jewish.

    As if that mattered. Peter was Jewish. James was Jewish. Paul was Jewish. And I’m fairly sure a few of the early popes were Jewish. Sheesh.

  • Tomás de Torquemada says:

    I completely understand the problem.

  • Vanessa says:

    Jesus was Jewish. LOL

  • Vanessa says:

    Yeah, Zippy, I kept reading the text and then looking at the title and thinking… huh? I think I shall go polish my sense of humor, as it’s a bit rusty.

  • GKChesteron says:

    This is “proper” ecumenism though. The Jews need to be converted, that is on the table in both, just don’t be a brute in doing so.

  • Ecumenism is all well and good so long as we’re pronouncing it correctly: you-come-in-ism.

    Vatican II itself was not a rupture in doctrine, but there’s a grand canyon sized rupture on the lived practical level. To pick one example, Jesus is as truly present at a 1970’s hootenanny Mass as he is in a Solemn Pontifical High Mass, but I admit that it occasionally strains my credulity to believe both kinds of Masses belong to the same religion.

  • Zippy says:

    Beefy Levinson:
    Yes, the point is definitely about doctrine, not praxis.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

What’s this?

You are currently reading More “Spirit of Vatican II” religious tolerance ecumenical madness at Zippy Catholic.

meta

%d bloggers like this: