Pope: Other Christians Not True Churches

[Ricardo Reis]

Tuesday July 10, 2007 5:46 PM
AP Photo LDC120
By NICOLE WINFIELD
Associated Press Writer
LORENZAGO DI CADORE, Italy (AP) - Pope Benedict XVI has reasserted the universal primacy of the Roman Catholic Church, approving a document released Tuesday that says Orthodox churches were defective and that other Christian denominations were not true churches.
Benedict approved a document from his old offices at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that restates church teaching on relations with other Christians. It was the second time in a week the pope has corrected what he says are erroneous interpretations of the Second Vatican Council, the 1962-65 meetings that modernized the church.
On Saturday, Benedict revisited another key aspect of Vatican II by reviving the old Latin Mass. Traditional Catholics cheered the move, but more liberal ones called it a step back from Vatican II.
Benedict, who attended Vatican II as a young theologian, has long complained about what he considers the erroneous interpretation of the council by liberals, saying it was not a break from the past but rather a renewal of church tradition.
In the latest document - formulated as five questions and answers - the Vatican seeks to set the record straight on Vatican II's ecumenical intent, saying some contemporary theological interpretation had been ``erroneous or ambiguous'' and had prompted confusion and doubt.
It restates key sections of a 2000 document the pope wrote when he was prefect of the congregation, ``Dominus Iesus,'' which set off a firestorm of criticism among Protestant and other Christian denominations because it said they were not true churches but merely ecclesial communities and therefore did not have the ``means of salvation.''
In the new document and an accompanying commentary, which were released as the pope vacations here in Italy's Dolomite mountains, the Vatican repeated that position.
``Christ 'established here on earth' only one church,'' the document said. The other communities ``cannot be called 'churches' in the proper sense'' because they do not have apostolic succession - the ability to trace their bishops back to Christ's original apostles.
The Rev. Sara MacVane of the Anglican Centre in Rome, said there was nothing new in the document.
``I don't know what motivated it at this time,'' she said. ``But it's important always to point out that there's the official position and there's the huge amount of friendship and fellowship and worshipping together that goes on at all levels, certainly between Anglican and Catholics and all the other groups and Catholics.''
The document said Orthodox churches were indeed ``churches'' because they have apostolic succession and that they enjoyed ``many elements of sanctification and of truth.'' But it said they lack something because they do not recognize the primacy of the pope - a defect, or a ``wound'' that harmed them, it said.
``This is obviously not compatible with the doctrine of primacy which, according to the Catholic faith, is an 'internal constitutive principle' of the very existence of a particular church,'' the commentary said.
Despite the harsh tone of the document, it stresses that Benedict remains committed to ecumenical dialogue.
``However, if such dialogue is to be truly constructive, it must involve not just the mutual openness of the participants but also fidelity to the identity of the Catholic faith,'' the commentary said.
The document, signed by the congregation prefect, U.S. Cardinal William Levada, was approved by Benedict on June 29, the feast of Sts. Peter and Paul - a major ecumenical feast day.
There was no indication about why the pope felt it necessary to release the document, particularly since his 2000 document summed up the same principles. Some analysts suggested it could be a question of internal church politics, or that it could simply be an indication of Benedict using his office as pope to again stress key doctrinal issues from his time at the congregation.



Pope: Other Christians Not True Churches | World Latest | Guardian Unlimited

[Václav]

Last Pope was better

But still I think the article is overreaction:

``Christ 'established here on earth' only one church,'' the document said. The other communities ``cannot be called 'churches' in the proper sense'' because they do not have apostolic succession - the ability to trace their bishops back to Christ's original apostles

The question is: how do we define "succession"? It can also be seen in a spiritual sense, and Pope does not exclude this.

[Ricardo Reis]

"Yawn"

The Orthodox Churches have been independent for 1300-1500 years and are independent of each other. They do not and have never acknowledged any other authority over them, now the Pope has reiterated that he has authority over them, to which the Orthodox church will respond by showing him their left butt cheek and yawning again.

[Milesian]

I don't think the Pope is trying to re-assert authority over them, I think he saying that he considers them schismatic congregations. That might be just as offensive to members of the various Eastern Orthodox churches, but it's not the same thing.

[Sergius]

These words shouldn't surprise anyone. While I obviously disagree, I still think the current Pope is doing well.

[Milesian]

Originally Posted by Ljubomir

These words shouldn't surprise anyone. While I obviously disagree, I still think the current Pope is doing well.

This Pope is more traditionalist than the previous Vatican II Popes.
It is regretable if some of his comments are causing offense to some, but for me as a Catholic he is only re-affirming the faith of the Church. That is something that has not been done in half a century. If he can steer the Church away from false ecumenicism and syncretism, then while I am sorry for any feelings that may be hurt in the process but overall I am glad that the Church is regaining the strength of her convictions.

Perhaps we must simply agree to disagree. That may be preferable to everyone compromising things which really ought not to be compromised.
Rather, we should learn to respect our differences.
Personally, I would prefer that Orthodox Christians held differing opinions from me yet preserved their own tenets of faith. I do not wish to see myself or anyone else coerced into syncretism or religious indifferentism.
I actually think what Pope Bendict is doing is far healthier for all. I don't think he intends for a moment to cause bad feeling between different denominations. Rather, he simply sees the urgent need to reaffirm what the Church actually believes in. After the reign of the previous Popes, the laiety (and even clergy) were left scandalously confused about what exactly they were supposed to believe.
No Church can tolerate such confusion in it's ranks if it wishes to survive. Thus, I see this as being directed more internally towards Catholics themselves than towards those outside of the Catholic Church.
More than anything, perhaps the Pope is finally putting his own house in order.

[Ricardo Reis]

Originally Posted by Ljubomir

These words shouldn't surprise anyone. While I obviously disagree, I still think the current Pope is doing well.

Eh?

[Sergius]

He administers his role as church leader well, and as Milesian said, he is re-affirming the faith for Catholics, so I can see past things like this.

[Señor Malo]

Allthough I'm on the atheist side of the ring, I don't see anything wrong with Protestant movements. I'd have some arguments in their favour but I don't think it is worth begining a discussion on the subject

[Milesian]

Reading it again,

The document said Orthodox churches were indeed ``churches'' because they have apostolic succession and that they enjoyed ``many elements of sanctification and of truth.''

What he is saying here is basically that he believes that the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Churches differ primarily on the issue of Papal Primacy (and there is the Filioque of course, which I have always seen as a difference of emphasis more than anything else). In all else, they are essentially the same - even so far as to confirm that they are proper Churches and have the Apostolic Succession (something not recognised to any other denominations).

I think the Pope has actually conceded as much as he possibly can to the Orthodox Churches without being branded a heretic to the Catholic Faith.

[Errigal]

Originally Posted by Ljubomir

These words shouldn't surprise anyone. While I obviously disagree, I still think the current Pope is doing well.

I get the same impression. His speech in Regensburg (which people pretended was anti-Muslim) was a very clearly stated argument that Christianity is European and has been from its origins.

Originally Posted by searcher of truth

Allthough I'm on the atheist side of the ring, I don't see anything wrong with Protestant movements. I'd have some arguments in their favour but I don't think it is worth begining a discussion on the subject

"Protestant" is a very broad category; some are good, some are bad and some are just crazy.

[Señor Malo]

Originally Posted by Errigal

"Protestant" is a very broad category; some are good, some are bad and some are just crazy.

You have no idea how much I agree with youspecially those small "independent" small churches which abusivelly give themselves names such as "evangelical"; "baptist"; "pentecostisit" labells; While following my mother and sisters in their attemps to "convert" me I followed them through several of them: My Gosh! I've never seen such a bunch of alienated ! And so many "Miracle simulators"!

[Kernunnos]

Originally Posted by Ljubomir

He administers his role as church leader well, and as Milesian said, he is re-affirming the faith for Catholics, so I can see past things like this.

The pope has clearly affirmed the dignity of Orthodox churces, they are the sole non-catholic that he fully recognizes as christian churches.

In fact he has called non churches the protestant one, while admitting that orthodoxes are not self proclaimed christians.

in sum, apart from the doctrinal subjugation to he pope, for the catholics the orthodoxes are clean.

It is a fact that catholics and orthodoxes can intermarry freely or take mass into each other churches, while it is not so for the protestants.

The latin mass is a blow to the cathocommunist monster that has been living in the entrails of the catholic Church for forty years: thats good news for all of us, regardless of each one's background.

Originally Posted by Breha

in sum, apart from the doctrinal subjugation to he pope, for the catholics the orthodoxes are clean.

Arguable, schismatics also have some doctrinal differences with the true Orthodoxy (Rome). Read what they believe about Purgatory, hell, Filioque, etc.

[Sergius]

Don't be ridiculous. For a Roman Catholic, I am sure that the Orthodox view on Hell and Purgatory seems alien, but claiming that the Roman Church is any more orthodox on such grounds is pointless. It is a very complicated theological question that has no one objective answer.