Catholic Aloofness

What, though, did the Roman Catholic Church do to lessen the scandal of Christian divisions? In 1919 the Catholic Church was invited to participate in an interchurch discussion on faith and order, where differences in doctrine and ministry were to be considered. But Pope Benedict XV rejected this offer. Again, in 1927, the Catholic Church received an invitation to take part in the First World Conference on Faith and Order, held in Lausanne, Switzerland. Delegates from several Protestant and Orthodox churches met to discuss obstacles to unity, but Pope Pius XI refused to allow any Catholic participation.

In its article on Pope Pius XI, the New Catholic Encyclopedia says: “The Holy See took a negative attitude toward the ecumenical movement of non-Catholic Christendom.” This negative attitude evolved into open hostility when, in 1928, the pope issued his encyclical letter Mortalium animos. In it he condemned the ecumenical movement and forbade Catholics to give any support to ecumenism.

In 1948 the WCC was formed. At its foundation, its membership included nearly 150 churches, most of them Protestant. Some Eastern Orthodox churches were included, and other Orthodox churches joined the WCC later. All these churches accepted as a basis for membership the declaration: “The World Council of Churches is a fellowship of churches which accept the Lord Jesus Christ as God and Saviour.” In spite of this definite Trinitarian formula, Pope Pius XII refused an invitation to associate the Catholic Church with this ecumenical council.

A Change Among Catholics?

John XXIII, elected as pope in 1958 at nearly 77 years of age, was considered by many Catholics to be merely a papa di passaggio, or interim pope. As it turned out, he opened the Vatican windows to winds of change that to this day are causing flurries in Catholic circles. One of Pope John’s first decisions, early in 1959, was to summon an ecumenical council, which, in Catholic parlance, meant a general meeting of the bishops of the entire Catholic Church.

The purpose of this gathering was, first, to “bring the church up to date” and, second, to “open the way toward the reunion of the separated brethren of East and West in the one fold of Christ.” In line with this second purpose, Pope John XXIII in 1960 set up at the Vatican the Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity. This was hailed as “the first official recognition by the Roman Catholic Church of the existence of the ecumenical movement.”

The winds of change certainly appeared to be blowing. But was the Roman Curia, the powerful group of prelates making up the administrative government of the church, in favor of these changes? And if so, what was their concept of Christian unity?

A Dilemma for the Catholic Church

“A NEW PENTECOST.” Such was the hope that Pope John XXIII expressed for the ecumenical council that began in 1962 and that came to be known as Vatican II. He hoped that it would be a means of spiritual renewal among Catholics and that it would bring about changes that would pave the way for reuniting Christendom.

But such ideas of aggiornamento (updating) were not shared by all the prelates in the Vatican. The New Encyclopædia Britannica reports: “The Pope’s decision, consequently, was received coolly by his conservative Curia, who were convinced that the church had prospered under Pius XII’s leadership and who saw no good reason for the changes John envisioned. Some of the Vatican cardinals in fact did everything in their power to delay the council until the old man had passed from the scene and the project could be quietly dropped.”

Vatican II’s Decree on Ecumenism

Pope John XXIII lived long enough to set the Second Vatican Council in motion, but he died shortly afterward, in June 1963, long before the council concluded in December 1965. Yet, the Decree on Ecumenism was promulgated by Pope Paul VI on November 21, 1964. It stated in its introduction: “The restoration of unity among all Christians is one of the principal concerns of the Second Vatican Council.”

Significantly, Jesuit priest Walter M. Abbott wrote in The Documents of Vatican II: “The Decree on Ecumenism marks the full entry of the Roman Catholic Church into the ecumenical movement.” And in a similar vein, under the heading “Roman Catholicism following the second Vatican Council,” The New Encyclopædia Britannica said optimistically: “The Roman Catholic Church has officially abandoned its ‘one true church’ position.”

But has the Catholic Church really abandoned that position? On what conditions was unity to be brought about? After having defined the extent to which Catholics could engage in ecumenical activity, the Decree on Ecumenism stipulated: “This sacred Council urges the faithful to abstain from any frivolous or imprudent zeal. . . . Their ecumenical activity cannot be other than fully and sincerely Catholic, that is, loyal to the truth we have received from the Apostles and the Fathers, and in harmony with the faith which the Catholic Church has always professed.”

Obstacles to Unity

The fact is, the Roman Catholic Church did not abandon its position that it is the one true church. The Vatican II Decree on Ecumenism states: “It is through Christ’s Catholic Church alone, which is the universal help towards salvation, that the fullness of the means of salvation can be obtained. It was to the apostolic college alone, of which Peter is the head, that we believe that Our Lord entrusted all the blessings of the New Covenant.”

The recent French work Théo​—Nouvelle Encyclopédie Catholique (1989) states: “For Catholics, the pope, as Peter’s successor, is theologically the permanent element of the unity of the Church and the bishops. The plain fact, however, is that the pope is the major cause of division between Christians.”

This divisive doctrine of the primacy of the pope is closely related to the dogmas of papal infallibility and the apostolic succession of Catholic bishops, both of which are unacceptable to most non-Catholic churches of Christendom. Did Vatican II do anything to modify the Catholic position on these doctrines?

The Vatican II Dogmatic Constitution on the Church answers, in paragraph 18: “This sacred synod, following in the steps of the First Vatican Council [which decreed the dogma of papal infallibility], teaches and declares with it that Jesus Christ, the eternal pastor, set up the holy Church by entrusting the apostles with their mission as he himself had been sent by the Father (cf. Jn. Joh 20:21). He willed that their successors, the bishops namely, should be the shepherds in his Church until the end of the world. In order that the episcopate itself, however, might be one and undivided he put Peter at the head of the other apostles, and in him he set up a lasting and visible source and foundation of the unity both of faith and of communion. This teaching concerning the institution, the permanence, the nature and import of the sacred primacy of the Roman Pontiff and his infallible teaching office, the sacred synod proposes anew to be firmly believed by all the faithful, and, proceeding undeviatingly with this same undertaking, it proposes to proclaim publicly and enunciate clearly the doctrine concerning bishops, successors of the apostles, who together with Peter’s successor, the Vicar of Christ and the visible head of the whole Church, direct the house of the living God.”

Significantly, this Dogmatic Constitution on the Church was promulgated by Pope Paul VI on the very day that he signed the Decree on Ecumenism. And on that same November 21, 1964, he made a statement proclaiming “Mary ‘Mother of the Church,’ that is, of all the faithful and all the pastors.” How can it be claimed that the Decree on Ecumenism ‘marked the full entry of the Roman Catholic Church into the ecumenical movement’ when the pope chose on the very day it was published to reaffirm dogmas that are totally unacceptable to the majority of the members of the WCC (World Council of Churches)?

The Dilemma of the Church

Dr. Samuel McCrea Cavert, former general secretary of the National Council of Churches, who played a leading part in the formation of the World Council of Churches, stated: “The Decree [on Ecumenism] does not really reconcile its ecumenical outlook with its assumption that the Roman Catholic is the only true Church. . . . Associated with this is the further assumption of the primacy of Peter and of his jurisdiction over the whole Church. These assumptions seem to indicate that the Roman Catholic understanding of ecumenism is unchangeably Rome-centered.”

Dr. Konrad Raiser, deputy secretary-general of the WCC, declared: “The pope [John Paul II] is making many ecumenical declarations, but he is inspired by a mission that is taking him in a different direction.”

This evident contradiction between the Vatican’s facade of ecumenism and its dogged attachment to its own traditional concepts only reveals that the Church of Rome finds itself on the horns of a dilemma. If it is sincere about its participation in the ecumenical movement for Christian unity, it must forgo its claim to be the only true church. If it refuses to forgo this claim, it must admit that its so-called ecumenism is just a tactical move to entice the Orthodox and Protestant churches back to the Catholic fold.

Put bluntly, the Catholic Church must either admit that its centuries-old claims are false or that its present participation in the ecumenical movement is sheer hypocrisy. Either way, many sincere members of Christendom’s churches are perplexed. They wonder if Christian unity will ever be attained.

[Blurb on page 8]

‘The Decree on Ecumenism marks the full entry of the Roman Catholic Church into the ecumenical movement’

[Picture on page 7]

Vatican II placed the Catholic Church on the horns of a dilemma

[Credit Line]

UPI/​Bettmann Newsphotos

The Catholic Church and Unity

The Catholic Church, which claims about half of the total membership of Christendom, has its own concept of Christian unity. Various “unions of prayer” were formed at the turn of the century. Among these were the Archconfraternity of Our Lady of Compassion for the Return of England to the Catholic Faith, the Pious Union of Prayer to Our Lady of Compassion for the Conversion of Heretics, and the Archconfraternity of Prayers and Good Works for the Reunion of the Eastern Schismatics with the Church.

In 1908, on the initiative of an Anglican priest turned Catholic, an annual Catholic prayer week (January 18-25) was organized “for the conversion and return of the separated brethren.” This later became the annual Week of Prayer for Christian Unity, with which the WCC (World Council of Churches) has associated itself since the early 1950’s.

The Catholic book The Documents of Vatican II states: “Each year in January, for many decades, Roman Catholics have offered eight days of prayer for Church unity. Until 1959, the general idea behind those days of prayer, January 18-25, was the hope that Protestants would ‘return’ to the one true Church, and that the Orthodox schism would end.”

Did Vatican II fundamentally change the Catholic Church’s view of Christian unity? Pope John’s successor, Paul VI, promulgated the Vatican II Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, which says: “This is the sole Church of Christ which in the Creed we profess to be one, holy, catholic and apostolic. . . . This Church, constituted and organized as a society in the present world, subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the bishops in communion with him.”

So the Catholic Church’s view of Christian unity has not changed fundamentally. The view expressed at Vatican II is, in effect, that whatever good things exist outside the Catholic Church really belong to her and are, therefore, as the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church says, “forces impelling towards Catholic unity.”

Qualified to Promote Unity?

What can be said of the Catholic Church’s oft-repeated profession to be “one, holy, catholic, and apostolic”? First, the recent schism of traditionalist Catholics under the leadership of Archbishop Lefebvre, not to mention the open rebellion of hundreds of Catholic theologians, gives the lie to the church’s claim to be “one.”a

Second, the record of the Catholic Church, with its anti-Semitism, its torturing of “heretics,” its promotion of “holy wars,” and its involvement in politics and dirty financial scandals, reveals that it is far from holy.

Third, the Church of Rome can hardly justify its claim that it is “catholic,” or “universal,” since it consists of only about half of those claiming to be Christian, or approximately 15 percent of the world population.

Finally, neither the facts of history, the record of the papacy, nor the opulence, the immorality, the political involvement of many Catholic prelates, can justify the church’s claim to be “apostolic.” Obviously, the Catholic Church is in no position to claim to be the rallying point for true Christian unity.