Monotheism/beatific Vision

[Era Might]

[quote name='"Kyrie eleison' post='1311931' date='Jul 4 2007, 12:19 AM']...claim that we should [b]only[/b] discuss subjects of civil discourse and any theological discussions should be [b]absolutely[/b] avoided because of confusion.[/quote]
The Church's dialogue with non-Christians is not limited to civil discourse, but extends to religious truth as well. It is distinguished from evangelization, but not from the mission "ad gentes." Evangelization is the direct proclamation of the Gospel, while dialogue is the encounter of two sides who come together in a personal sense. To spread the Gospel effectively we must relate to non-Christians as friends and understand them, and through that relationship of dialogue we bear witness to our own faith:

[quote]In the light of the economy of salvation, the Church sees no conflict between proclaiming Christ and engaging in interreligious dialogue. Instead, she feels the need to link the two in the context of her mission ad gentes. These two elements must maintain both their intimate connection and their distinctiveness; therefore they should not be confused, manipulated or regarded as identical, as though they were interchangeable.

...

Dialogue does not originate from tactical concerns or self-interest, but is an activity with its own guiding principles, requirements and dignity. It is demanded by deep respect for everything that has been brought about in human beings by the Spirit who blows where he wills. Through dialogue, the Church seeks to uncover the "seeds of the Word," a "ray of that truth which enlightens all men''; these are found in individuals and in the religious traditions of mankind. Dialogue is based on hope and love, and will bear fruit in the Spirit. Other religions constitute a positive challenge for the Church: they stimulate her both to discover and acknowledge the signs of Christ's presence and of the working of the Spirit, as well as to examine more deeply her own identity and to bear witness to the fullness of Revelation which she has received for the good of all.

This gives rise to the spirit which must enliven dialogue in the context of mission. Those engaged in this dialogue must be consistent with their own religious traditions and convictions, and be open to understanding those of the other party without pretense or close-mindedness, but with truth, humility and frankness, knowing that dialogue can enrich each side. There must be no abandonment of principles nor false irenicism, but instead a witness given and received for mutual advancement on the road of religious inquiry and experience, and at the same time for the elimination of prejudice, intolerance and misunderstandings. Dialogue leads to inner purification and conversion which, if pursued with docility to the Holy Spirit, will be spiritually fruitful.

--Pope John Paul II, Encyclical Letter "Redemptoris Missio"[/quote]

[quote]Interreligious and intercultural dialogue between Christians and Muslims cannot be reduced to an optional extra. It is in fact a vital necessity, on which in large measure our future depends.

--Pope Benedict XVI, World Youth Day "Meeting with Representatives of some Muslim Communities"[/quote]

[Laudate_Dominum]

Very provocative, thanks Era.

["Kyrie eleison"]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1311122' date='Jul 3 2007, 01:45 PM']Invincible ignorance does not fall into place anywhere in this discussion, because no human being can tell who is or is not invincibly ignorant. Moreover, it worries me when a Catholic pushes forward the idea of invincible ignorance as if it is the panacea for all problems. It is the duty of Christians to evangelize, not to assume that everyone is invincibly ignorant and thus [i]somehow[/i] saved. Ignorance, invincible or otherwise, is not salvific.

Now, as far as the "many mansions" comment is concerned, it has nothing to do with this topic either, but I will say this much about it, it is wrong to hold that the many mansions refered to by our Lord means that there is a Muslim heaven, and a Hindu heaven, etc., because salvation is made possible only in, with, and through Christ. In other words, no one is saved by being a member of a false religion.[/quote]

I missed this post and ran across it when re-reading. Apotheoun, again, in your world there is only [b]black [/b]and [b]white [/b]and there is no room for anyone by no fault of their own, not coming to the FULLNESS of TRUTH. For the record I am not insinuating and or pushing invincible ignorance as a solution and or an excuse as so that one may be saved.

The constant teaching of the Church is summarized in the Catechism of the Catholic Church; and section 847 of the Catechism clearly states the Church's teaching that ... [b]"those who through no fault of their own, do not know the gospel of Christ or His Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do His will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - THOSE TOO MAY ACHIEVE ETERNAL SALVATION". [/b]


Is it wrong to believe that there will be Muslims in heaven? It is my greatest desire that they too [b]may[/b] acheive salvation by our merciful God. Would it be so disheartening to you to believe that there could be other faiths enjoying a mansion in the house of God? This scripture verse has very deep meaning to this topic. In the end you will not be the judge of any human being, regardless if they are Catholic, Hindu, Muslim or atheist. edit Nor will I have a say in ones' salvation, but it is my greatest desire that there will be other faiths who by the best of their abilities lived a godly life. I put my trust in an all powerful, all loving and just God.

Edited July 4, 2007 by "Kyrie eleison"

[Laudate_Dominum]

I quoted this a couple weeks ago and it is just one example of said definitive teaching (as quoted from the CCC above).

This is from the encyclical [i]Quanto Conficiamur Moerore [/i]of Pope Pius IX promulgates in 1863 (an interesting year in history).

[quote]7. Here, too, our beloved sons and venerable brothers, it is again necessary to mention and censure a very grave error entrapping some Catholics who believe that it is possible to arrive at eternal salvation although living in error and alienated from the true faith and Catholic unity. Such belief is certainly opposed to Catholic teaching. There are, of course, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion. Sincerely observing the natural law and its precepts inscribed by God on all hearts and ready to obey God, they live honest lives and are able to attain eternal life by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace. Because God knows, searches and clearly understands the minds, hearts, thoughts, and nature of all, his supreme kindness and clemency do not permit anyone at all who is not guilty of deliberate sin to suffer eternal punishments.[/quote]

["Kyrie eleison"]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' post='1311963' date='Jul 4 2007, 12:57 AM']I can give you Saint Augustine's take, which happens to be reflected throughout the history of Catholic thought.

"The many mansions point to the different grades of merit in that one eternal life. For there is one glory of the sun, another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differs from another star in glory; and so also the resurrection of the dead. The saints, like the stars in the sky, obtain in the kingdom different mansions of diverse degrees of brightness; but on account of that one penny no one is cut off from the kingdom; and God will be all in all in such a way, that, as God is love, love will bring it about that what is possessed by each will be common to all. For in this way every one really possesses it, when he loves to see in another what he has not himself. There will not, therefore, be any envying amid this diversity of brightness, since in all of them will be reigning the unity of love." - St. Augustine, [i]Tractates on the Gospel of John[/i], No. 67

Again, the Catechism of the Council of Trent:

"For in my Father's house, says our Lord, there are many mansions, in which shall be distributed rewards of greater and of less value according to each one's deserts. He who soweth sparingly, shall also reap sparingly: and he who soweth in blessings, shall also reap blessings." - Catechism of Trent, Article XII[/quote]

That is so profound and thank you for posting this.

[Era Might]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' post='1312017' date='Jul 4 2007, 01:34 AM']I quoted this a couple weeks ago and it is just one example of said definitive teaching (as quoted from the CCC above).

This is from the encyclical [i]Quanto Conficiamur Moerore [/i]of Pope Pius IX promulgates in 1863 (an interesting year in history).[/quote]
Pope John Paul II also addresses this in "Redemptoris Missio":

[quote]The universality of salvation means that it is granted not only to those who explicitly believe in Christ and have entered the Church. Since salvation is offered to all, it must be made concretely available to all. But it is clear that today, as in the past, many people do not have an opportunity to come to know or accept the gospel revelation or to enter the Church. The social and cultural conditions in which they live do not permit this, and frequently they have been brought up in other religious traditions. For such people salvation in Christ is accessible by virtue of a grace which, while having a mysterious relationship to the Church, does not make them formally part of the Church but enlightens them in a way which is accommodated to their spiritual and material situation. This grace comes from Christ; it is the result of his Sacrifice and is communicated by the Holy Spirit. It enables each person to attain salvation through his or her free cooperation.

For this reason the Council, after affirming the centrality of the Paschal Mystery, went on to declare that "this applies not only to Christians but to all people of good will in whose hearts grace is secretly at work. Since Christ died for everyone, and since the ultimate calling of each of us comes from God and is therefore a universal one, we are obliged to hold that the Holy Spirit offers everyone the possibility of sharing in this Paschal Mystery in a manner known to God."[/quote]

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1312024' date='Jul 4 2007, 12:47 AM']Pope John Paul II also addresses this in "Redemptoris Missio":[/quote]
Thanks Era! Beautiful.

My post was intended to show, contrary to a common radtrad attack, that this teaching is not a new "Vatican II" innovation. It would be interesting to compile every relevant magisterial statement in the history of the Church and do some serious exegesis.

Hmm..

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='"Kyrie eleison' post='1312020' date='Jul 4 2007, 12:41 AM']That is so profound and thank you for posting this.[/quote]
NP.

I've been reading a lot of Augustine lately and am quite often in awe of the beauty and profundity of his thoughts.

Oh, and I should point out that the interpretation of that verse which Augustine gives was not a novelty on his part. This was a common patristic understanding, although Augustine puts it quite beautifully.

["Kyrie eleison"]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' post='1312027' date='Jul 4 2007, 01:50 AM']Thanks Era! Beautiful.

My post was intended to show, contrary to a common radtrad attack, that this teaching is not a new "Vatican II" innovation. It would be interesting to compile every relevant magisterial statement in the history of the Church and do some serious exegesis.

Hmm..[/quote]

Thank you all who have contributed to this thread.

[Apotheoun]

The statements made by the Bishops at Vatican II are innovative and contrary to Sacred Scripture and the Church's liturgical tradition, both of which teach that the only acceptable act of worship made to God the Father was completed by the Son in the power of the Holy Spirit, and is perpetuated by the Church in the Eucharistic oblation. That said, I hold as a matter of divine and Catholic faith, based on Scripture and Tradition, that Muslims do not worship in Spirit and in truth, because they openly reject the Son of God, and that no Catholic is required to believe that Islamic "worship" is acceptable to the Blessed Trinity.

Moreover, as far as authority goes, I am not an authority, but then neither is anyone else posting in this thread, nor even -- on this issue -- is the Pope an authority, because the Papal Magisterium cannot make a definitive proclamation on an issue that is beyond its competence, and who Muslims "worship" is precisely beyond the scope of Magisterial authority, either of the Pope or of the Episcopal College.

Finally, as a Christian I will never confess the false and heretical notion that Muslims worship the true God, because to say that they do would require that I abandon the Catholic faith and embrace theological indifferentism.

God bless,
Todd

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1312051' date='Jul 4 2007, 01:50 AM']The statements made by the Bishops at Vatican II are innovative and contrary to Sacred Scripture and the Church's liturgical tradition, both of which teach that the only acceptable act of worship made to God the Father was completed by the Son in the power of the Holy Spirit, and is perpetuated by the Church in the Eucharistic oblation. That said, I hold as a matter of divine and Catholic faith, based on Scripture and Tradition, that Muslims do not worship in Spirit and in truth, because they openly reject the Son of God, and that no Catholic is required to believe that Islamic "worship" is acceptable to the Blessed Trinity.

Moreover, as far as authority goes, I am not an authority, but then neither is anyone else posting in this thread, nor even -- on this issue -- is the Pope an authority, because the Papal Magisterium cannot make a definitive proclamation on an issue that is beyond its competence, and who Muslims "worship" is precisely beyond the scope of any Magisterial authority, either of the Pope or of the Episcopal College.

Finally, as a Christian I will never confess the false and heretical notion that Muslims worship the true God, because to say that they do would require that I abandon the Catholic faith and embrace theological indifferentism.

God bless,
Todd[/quote]
Interesting and provocative. Thanks Apotheoun.. Hmm....

[Apotheoun]

I have already answered the question on the "many mansions" mentioned by Christ at least to a certain degree, because as I said earlier it is contrary to Tradition to hold that different religions lead to salvation. Christ is the sole savior of humanity.

That said, according to Patristic tradition the "many mansions" are varying degrees of glory given to the saints in the eschaton; and so, this comment of our Lord has nothing to do with the topic of discussion in this thread, since the Church Fathers openly condemned all forms of theological relativism.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' post='1312055' date='Jul 4 2007, 12:54 AM']Interesting and provocative. Thanks Apotheoun.. Hmm....[/quote]
My comments are not provocative at all. The only acceptable act of worship was made by the Son to the Father in the Holy Spirit, and this one act of worship is rendered present only in the Church's liturgy.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1312051' date='Jul 4 2007, 01:50 AM']The statements made by the Bishops at Vatican II are innovative and contrary to Sacred Scripture and the Church's liturgical tradition, both of which teach that the only acceptable act of worship made to God the Father was completed by the Son in the power of the Holy Spirit, and is perpetuated by the Church in the Eucharistic oblation. That said, I hold as a matter of divine and Catholic faith, based on Scripture and Tradition, that Muslims do not worship in Spirit and in truth, because they openly reject the Son of God, and that no Catholic is required to believe that Islamic "worship" is acceptable to the Blessed Trinity.

Moreover, as far as authority goes, I am not an authority, but then neither is anyone else posting in this thread, nor even -- on this issue -- is the Pope an authority, because the Papal Magisterium cannot make a definitive proclamation on an issue that is beyond its competence, and who Muslims "worship" is precisely beyond the scope of any Magisterial authority, either of the Pope or of the Episcopal College.

Finally, as a Christian I will never confess the false and heretical notion that Muslims worship the true God, because to say that they do would require that I abandon the Catholic faith and embrace theological indifferentism.

God bless,
Todd[/quote]
Christianity, Judaism and Islam are often grouped together as the "kindred" monotheistic faiths (in contrast with polytheistic religions).
If it is worthy of anathema in your book to suggest that Muslims worship the true God (whatever that means) then what say ye to the idea that Jews, both in the past and to this day, worship the one true God?
I suppose the notion I have seen in many is that an affirmation of monotheism can in some way qualify spiritual works as worship of the one, true God. Saint Paul's preaching in Athens may be understood to this effect.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1312058' date='Jul 4 2007, 02:00 AM']My comments are not provocative at all. The only acceptable act of worship was made by the Son to the Father in the Holy Spirit, and this one act of worship is rendered present only in the Church's liturgy.[/quote]
Yes, but can't it be held that heretics and heathen may be directing their worship and prayers to the one true God even if their understanding of that God lacks the fullness of the truth? I am not suggesting that there is salvific efficacy outside of the life of the Church, but the idea of persons acknowledging the one true God outside of Christ's fold does not seem particularly outlandish to me. And what would you say of the prayers and spirituality of Protestants?

[Apotheoun]

Judaism, since the incarnation of our Lord, is basically the first Christian heresy. Rabbinic Judaism is not Biblical Judaism, but is founded instead upon the rejection of Christ. Nevertheless, the Jews of the post-Christian era do have a special place in relation to the Church, and that is why the curial office for relations with the Jews is connected to the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity.

On the other hand, Islam is a false religion, which was founded by a false prophet, and it has no connection whatsoever to the truth faith. Its monotheistic focus is a natural good, but -- as I have said before -- God is not an abstract concept, and simply knowing intellectually that there is one God is not the same thing as experiencing Him through grace, or worshipping Him in the power of the Holy Spirit.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' post='1312061' date='Jul 4 2007, 01:04 AM']Yes, but can't it be held that heretics and heathen may be directing their worship and prayers to the one true God even if their understanding of that God lacks the fullness of the truth? I am not suggesting that there is salvific efficacy outside of the life of the Church, but the idea of persons acknowledging the one true God outside of Christ's fold does not seem particularly outlandish to me. And what would you say of the prayers and spirituality of Protestants?[/quote]
No, it cannot be held that heretics and heathen are directing their "worship" to the true God.

Orthodoxy means "true worship," while heterodoxy means "false worship," and the Church has nothing to do with the immorality of "false worship."

The only act of worship that is acceptable to God was made by His only begotten Son. Neither you nor I on our own can offer true worship, only Christ -- and those incorporated into His body -- can do that. Sadly, many Catholics no longer understand the true nature of worship, because as the Holy Spirit said through St. John, "No one who denies the Son has the Father."

P.S. - The prayers of Trinitarian Protestants are directed to the true God, but those Protestants groups that do not possess the reality of the Eucharistic Mystery do not make a true act of worship. It must be remembered that not all prayer is worship. Nevertheless, if a man prays to the Father, through the Son, and in the Holy Spirit, his prayer has value, even though it is not the supreme and only act of worship, which is the [i]anamnesis[/i] of Christ's Paschal Mystery.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1312069' date='Jul 4 2007, 02:21 AM']No, it cannot be held that heretics and heathen are directing their "worship" to the true God.

Orthodoxy means "true worship," while heterodoxy means "false worship," and the Church has nothing to do with the immorality of "false worship."

The only act of worship that is acceptable to God was made by His only begotten Son. Neither you nor I on our own can offer true worship, only Christ -- and those incorporated into His body -- can do that. Sadly, many Catholics no longer understand the true nature of worship, because as the Holy Spirit said through St. John, "No one who denies the Son has the Father."

P.S. - The prayers of Trinitarian Protestants are directed to the true God, but those Protestants groups that do not possess the reality of the Eucharistic Mystery do not make a true act of worship. It must be remembered that not all prayer is worship. Nevertheless, if a man prays to the Father, through the Son, and in the Holy Spirit, his prayer has value, even though it is not the supreme and only act of worship, which is the [i]anamnesis[/i] of Christ's Paschal Mystery.[/quote]
I don't think people mean worship in the ultimate sense. If one were to bow down and adore an idol of Krishna it would be appropriate to say they are worshipping that idol (or god depending on how you look at it). When I said, "can't it be held that heretics and heathen may be directing their worship and prayers to the one true God even if their understanding of that God lacks the fullness of the truth", I was not suggesting anything about the acceptability or efficacy of said worship, but merely that if one intends to offer praises and worship to the one Creator and Lord of the universe there is surely a possibility that this can be called worship of the one true God. I'm not talking about "true worship" but simply the acknowledgment of the one true God, in spite of how partial or even erroneous the understanding may be. God sees the heart and the intentions and I don't see why it is heretical to suggest that Muslim worship may be understood and directed toward the one God or that Jewish worship may be directed to the one God. Some even go so far as to say that when the pagans sang praises to the sole father of the cosmos and addressed him with the name Zeus they were in some sense worshipping the one God. There are Christian patristic writers who make statements of this sort.

[Apotheoun]

The incarnate Logos made the only true act of worship.

The Eastern Christian tradition rejects as heretical any notion of "natural" worship of God, or that God can be given worship in an abstract sense. God is not a mental abstraction. Natural knowledge [i]that[/i] God exists (which the demons also possess), must not be confused with the experience of God received in the divine liturgy.

The modern innovative position of the Roman Church is ultimately an obstacle to ecumenical dialogue with the Orthodox, who see it as a betrayal of Christ.

P.S. - L_D, the modern Roman position, which is reflected in many of your posts, ultimately involves a Pelagian outlook.

[Apotheoun]

Let me be as clear as I can be on this issue: there is no such thing as "Muslim worship," or "Jewish worship," or "Hindu worship," etc., because the only true act of worship was made by the incarnate Son of God to the Father in the Spirit, and this one and only act of worship is perpetually rendered present in the Church's liturgy.

[i]Ortho Doxa[/i] is given to God only by the Church.