Young Jews, Catholics And Muslims United At Wyd Rio

[HisChildForever]

Has this ever happened at WYD before? Article here.

 

Among the official activities of WYD Rio2013, there will be an unprecedented moment in WYD history: young Jews, Catholics, and Muslims will meet on the July 21, at the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro. Close to 200 representatives from the three main monotheistic religions of the planet will be united and will present, along with a general sketch of their faiths, concrete recommendations to continue and develop inter-religious dialogue.

[Basilisa Marie]

That is really, really cool. :) 

[Guest]

Why aren't the Mormons invited ? Its way better then Islam.

[Basilisa Marie]

There are way more Muslims in the world, and Mormons hardly count as heavy hitters on the inter-religious dialogue stage.   Whereas Jews, Muslims, and Christians (Catholics mostly) are the big three Abrahamic religions of the world.  

[HisChildForever]

Why aren't the Mormons invited ? Its way better then Islam.

 

:doh:

[Guest]

Gotcha :)

[Apotheoun]

Inter-religious dialogue seems to have replaced the Great Commission.

[CatholicCid]

Yes, this has happened before, at least in some sort. Here are the text of addresses Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI gave at WYD 2008 in Sydney and 2005 in Germany to Ecumenical gatherings of various religious leaders and youth: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2008/july/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20080718_ecumenism_en.html (2008) and http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2005/august/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20050819_ecumenical-meeting_en.html (2005).

 

Edited June 13, 2013 by CatholicCid

[Apotheoun]

Yes, this has happened before, at least in some sort. Here are the text of addresses Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI gave at WYD 2008 in Sydney and 2005 in Germany to Ecumenical gatherings of various religious leaders and youth: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2008/july/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20080718_ecumenism_en.html (2008) and http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2005/august/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20050819_ecumenical-meeting_en.html (2005).

I always love when Church officials mention the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification, or as I like to call it the Joint Declaration on Agreeing to Disagree about Justification.

[Basilisa Marie]

Inter-religious dialogue seems to have replaced the Great Commission.

 

Nah, I think it's about trying to understand each other and ourselves, and promoting peace in the world.  And that's a good thing.

[Apotheoun]

Nah, I think it's about trying to understand each other and ourselves, and promoting peace in the world.  And that's a good thing.

I am all for promoting peace, but true peace comes not from trying to understand error (i.e., Islam and Judaism), but from Christ, the Prince of Peace. No offense, but inter-religious dialogue appears to be a dead end.

[Basilisa Marie]

I am all for promoting peace, but true peace comes not from trying to understand error (i.e., Islam and Judaism), but from Christ, the Prince of Peace. No offense, but inter-religious dialogue appears to be a dead end.

 

Maybe.  Or maybe we could do more of it.   True peace does come from Christ.  And I definitely don't think you're doing religious dialogue right if you end up ignoring your differences entirely.  

[Apotheoun]

Maybe.  Or maybe we could do more of it.   True peace does come from Christ.  And I definitely don't think you're doing religious dialogue right if you end up ignoring your differences entirely.  

Christ said to make disciples of all nations. He did not say that the Church should enter a dialogue with false religions in order to try and create a worldly (i.e., false) peace. The early Church Fathers did not 'dialogue' with pagans in order to come to some kind of mutual understanding; instead, they evangelized pagans and defended Christian doctrine from error. Thank God the modern Catholic approach was not adopted by the Church Fathers. 

[Kia ora]

Christ said to make disciples of all nations. He did not say that the Church should enter a dialogue with false religions in order to try and create a worldly (i.e., false) peace. The early Church Fathers did not 'dialogue' with pagans in order to come to some kind of mutual understanding; instead, they evangelized pagans and defended Christian doctrine from error. Thank God the modern Catholic approach was not adopted by the Church Fathers. 

 

The early Church Fathers did much worse than merely dialogue with pagans. Christians throughout the ages have formed their Christianity using pagan philosophies. Augustine owes much to Platonism. Aquinas owes much to Aristotle. Christian doctrine is intimate with pagan thought, because Christians have found it hard to reject truth in non-Christian places.

Edited June 14, 2013 by Kia ora

[Apotheoun]

The early Church Fathers did much worse than merely dialogue with pagans. Christians throughout the ages have formed their Christianity using pagan philosophies. Augustine owes much to Platonism. Aquinas owes much to Aristotle. Christian doctrine is intimate with pagan thought, because Christians have found it hard to reject truth in non-Christian places.

That is the common Western viewpoint, but anyone with even a cursory knowledge of the Eastern (Greek) Fathers knows that they used Greek philosophical terms while giving them a new meaning. For example, the Greek terms ousia and hypostasis are synonymous in Greek pagan philosophy, but they mean very different things in Eastern Christian theology. The former term in pagan philosophy stands for essence, the knowable substrate that informs a thing, while in Greek Christian theology ousia stands for the unknowable divine essence (i.e., the being beyond being that transcends created existence); and - of course - as I already indicated - the term hypostasis in Greek pagan thought stands for the knowable substrate (or substance) that informs a thing making it knowable by rational reflection, while in Eastern Christian theology hypostasis stands not for essence, but for personal existence (i.e., a particular subsistence), which has distinguishing characteristics that make it unique, and unrepeatable. A hypostasis is an individuated existence (i.e., a subsistent being) that cannot be shared by or with any other hypostasis. Thus, to summarize, in Greek patristic theology ousia and hypostasis are no longer used to stand for one and the same thing; instead, they represent two very different things, and this is just one example of how the Eastern Fathers altered the meanings of Greek pagan philosophical terms in order to represent Christian theological ideas.

Edited June 14, 2013 by Apotheoun