Ecumenism Ultimately Points Toward A Common Eucharist, Pope Tells Christians

Pope in meeting with Christian Leaders in crypt of St. Marys Cathedral

Pope in meeting with Christian Leaders in crypt of St. Mary's Cathedral

Source: Catholic News Agency.

Words in italics are my comments.

Sydney, Jul 18, 2008 / 01:34 am (CNA).- Fifteen leaders of the Australian Christian church met the Pope in an Ecumenical event held in the St. Mary’s Cathedral Crypt on Friday morning. In his address to the church leaders, Benedict XVI called on them to not view doctrine as divisive since that view can prevent Christians from working to improve the world.

That’s right, lay aside your differences even though you know that much of Roman Catholic doctrine is heretical and just be one big, happy family singing along to the tune played by the Roman pied piper pontiff while observing a works-based gospel to improve the world!

Archbishop of Sydney, Cardinal George Pell represented the Catholic Church, while Rev. Robert Forsythe was present for the Anglican Church. Leaders representing the Syrian Orthodox, Maronite Catholics, Indian Orthodox, Chinese Methodist, the Lutheran and Uniting churches were also present.

Youth representatives were also present at the event, where approximately fifty guests were present because of their involvement in the Ecumenical Council of New South Wales.

The pope delivered a short address to the leaders, praising their commitment to the ecumenical movement, citing the Covenant signed in 2004 by the members of the National Council of Churches in Australia.

“This document recognizes a common commitment, sets out goals, and acknowledges points of convergence without glossing over differences,” said the Pope.

While Baptism is the starting point for ecumenical dialogue, the Pope said that, “The road of ecumenism ultimately points towards a common celebration of the Eucharist… we can be sure that a common Eucharist one day would only strengthen our resolve to love and serve one another in imitation of our Lord.”

There we go, in case some have not caught on yet, ecumenism does not mean that Christians come together to work out their differences, but discard their beliefs to follow that of the Roman Church’s.

“For this reason, a candid dialogue concerning the place of the Eucharist – stimulated by a renewed and attentive study of scripture, patristic writings, and documents from across the two millennia of Christian history – will undoubtedly help to advance the ecumenical movement and unify our witness to the world,” the Pontiff said.

The ecumenical movement has, the Pope observed, “reached a critical juncture. To move forward, we must continually ask God to renew our minds with the Holy Spirit, Who speaks to us through the scriptures and guides us into all truth. We must guard against any temptation to view doctrine as divisive and hence an impediment to the seemingly more pressing and immediate task of improving the world in which we live.”

This emphasis will lead to our works of charity speaking more eloquently of God’s bountiful goodness and love towards all, Pope Benedict said.

Finally the Pope concluded his address by calling on the Christian world to work together.

“As ‘fellow citizens’ of the ‘household of God,’ Christians must work together to ensure that the edifice stands strong so that others will be attracted to enter and discover the treasures of grace within.”

Following the meeting Pope met with religious leaders of other major faiths, at nearby St. Mary’s Cathedral Chapter House.

5 thoughts on “Ecumenism Ultimately Points Toward A Common Eucharist, Pope Tells Christians

  1. Ecumenism is not the surrender of your mind. Five hundred years has shown that all sides are undoubtedly serious about the issues, and that no one has any intention of playing dumb. Five hundred years has also shown that demonizing your opponent doesn’t work very well either, so how about making the effort to understand one’s opponents clearly?

    Several times I have posted, on this web site, the claim that there is no difference in substance between Protestant and Catholic doctrine on Justification–that each side defines the terms differently. What an astounding claim! The material issue of the Reformation! Yet not the slightest glimmer of interest. Is it so much more comfortable to simply demonize the other side and thereby justify spewing vituperation at them? Is the truth so fragile?


  2. Tom J,

    The statement you made was not overlooked. Some of us are merely trying to discern where you are coming from, and whether you are actually a truth-seeker or one who trolls websites like ours seeking to create problems. At this point, this is not a personal attack against you, it is just that we have seen this kind of wording and comments before.

    You state in your last comment, “What an astounding claim! The material issue of the Reformation!” That in itself sounds like one who desires a verbal debate or argument just for the sake of it. However, I am willing to concede that this might not be the case.

    For now, let me state that some of those who claimed to be Protestant and part of the Reformation were still firmly entrenched in the harlot which is the church of Rome. In fact, some mainline denominations now have proven this by the continued dialogue with the RCC and a desire to merge together once again and be found under the fold of the very fallible, very sinful man called the pope!

    I for one, am NOT Protestant, and neither am I Catholic. This is the problem with people who neither know their Bible nor church history. There have ALWAYS been a group of people whom God has used to preserve His Word as well as to preserve the integrity of biblical doctrine.

    The Reformation was not a regaining of Biblical truth for most, but was a desire to break away from the stifling influence of the RCC. Thus most of these chose to revolt, but still insisted on holding to many of the traditions of men and even some of the heresies being taught by the perpetrators of the Inquisition!

    That should suffice for now until one of us here choose to address the matter of justification in a little clearer detail.

    By the way, the truth is NOT fragile. The truth will always remain and will remain firmly planted in the Word of God whether you, I, the Protestants, or the Catholics choose to believe it or not!

    Justified by grace through faith alone!
    The Desert Pastor


  3. I attempt to avoid the word “Protestant” as I know the word is problematic. But it does have utility as a pronoun for convience of expression.

    I found the website through a friend. And, as I do like to think about things, I wanted to interact with people who are knowledgeable on the issues. However, as you indicate, there is no shortage of verbal aggession on the web. From my point of view, that should not stop meaningful and honest interaction when it can be found.

    I will say that I have a much more affible disposition toward you than you do of me, and, I find no enjoyment in saying it, I find many here to be Gnostics.

    I wish you the best.


  4. Tom J,

    Thanks for your response to my own comments. Again, my comments were not meant to be a personal attack on you, but a generalization referring only to what has transpired on the site to date.

    You are correct that there should be allowed meaningful and honest interaction and speaking for myself (and others here), we do welcome that.

    What we do not welcome is when people come to our site not for “honest” interaction but simply for the purpose of creating problems for the sake of “free speech.”

    I hope and pray that what you read here will encourage you to search the Scriptures faithfully and be able (as is my desire) to discern the truths of God’s Word – but not in a way that is based upon tradition or man-made creeds.

    By the way, if we had felt at any time that you were here seeking trouble only – I can assure you that your comments would not be allowed to continue to appear.

    I hope this clears up any possible concern or confusion you may have had in regards to a previous comment made by myself.

    Thanks again for stopping,
    The Desert Pastor


  5. Tom,

    I would second DP’s sentiment. If you search back through the archives, we have had friendly dialogs with some Mormons (one fellow named Bryce, for example, was very cordial in his disagreement) while some LDS have come here with all the hate and bitterness of Brgiham Young in his prime. We have had Catholics on here who articulated their beliefs well, and some who declared us Anathema in their first paragraph.

    We do not shy away from disagreement, nor do we discourage it. Which makes it more interesting when someone comes in who can back up what they believe. However, when someone just wants to tcome here and spew their paricular brand of gibberish just to “have their say” (TBN worshippers, Todd Bentley followers, Word-of-Faith adherents) without any substance to it, they are gone. So far, you seem to be more level-headed than some who have come here, and I don’t see any reason why this discourse can’t continue.

    Four* Pointer


Tell us what you think:

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

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.