All of the evils afflicting the Church today relate to the erroneous belief that Christians do not really need to follow what the Church has always taught to please God and save their souls.
(LifeSiteNews) -- One of the first questions and answers in the 1861 edition of Fr. F. X. Weninger’s A Manual of the Catholic Religion for Catechists, Teachers, and Self-Instruction relates to our duties as Christians:
Q. To what does the name of Christian oblige us? A. It obliges us to render thanks to God for the inestimable favor of being called to the true faith. It obliges us to know all that the law of Christ commands us to believe and to do. It obliges us, moreover, to lead a life corresponding to this name; for if any one should pride in the name of Christian, and, nevertheless, live the life of a heathen, such a one would only bear that name for his greater responsibility and condemnation. And finally, it obliges us to suffer every thing, and to be ready to lay down even our lives for Christ, and for the truth of our holy faith, just as Christ suffered and laid down His life for us. (pp. 9-10)
Fr. Weninger wrote of our “being called to the true faith” to signify that all Christians are called to practice the Catholic Faith, which is the only religion given to us by God by which we can please Him and save our souls. Elsewhere in his Manual of the Catholic Religion, Fr. Weninger describes the limited circumstances in which those who are truly ignorant of the Catholic Faith can save their souls, but here he reminds us that God wants all souls who go by the name of Christian to belong to the Catholic Church and follow its teachings. One who would call himself Christian without living up to the obligations of the Faith “would only bear that name for his greater responsibility and condemnation.”
Those who understand and believe the words of Fr. Weninger have no doubts about whether they really need to adhere to what the Catholic Church has always taught. And, for this reason, such faithful Christians (Catholics) will stand in the way of those who seek to spread evil throughout society. Because Catholics must “be ready to lay down even our lives for Christ, and for the truth of our holy faith,” we will not easily succumb to pressures from secular powers who threaten us with temporal punishments for our refusal to subject ourselves to eternal condemnation.
As such, we know that the enemies of God and His Church would want to do all in their power to turn Catholics away from this true understanding of their obligations. In his 1832 encyclical on liberalism and indifferentism, Mirari Vos, Pope Gregory XVI warned of a primary means by which the Church’s enemies seek to deceive Catholics:
Now We consider another abundant source of the evils with which the Church is afflicted at present: indifferentism. This perverse opinion is spread on all sides by the fraud of the wicked who claim that it is possible to obtain the eternal salvation of the soul by the profession of any kind of religion, as long as morality is maintained. Surely, in so clear a matter, you will drive this deadly error far from the people committed to your care. With the admonition of the apostle that ‘there is one God, one faith, one baptism’ may those fear who contrive the notion that the safe harbor of salvation is open to persons of any religion whatever. ... Therefore ‘without a doubt, they will perish forever, unless they hold the Catholic faith whole and inviolate.’ Let them hear Jerome who, while the Church was torn into three parts by schism, tells us that whenever someone tried to persuade him to join his group he always exclaimed: ‘He who is for the See of Peter is for me.’ A schismatic flatters himself falsely if he asserts that he, too, has been washed in the waters of regeneration. Indeed Augustine would reply to such a man: ‘The branch has the same form when it has been cut off from the vine; but of what profit for it is the form, if it does not live from the root?’ This shameful font of indifferentism gives rise to that absurd and erroneous proposition which claims that liberty of conscience must be maintained for everyone.
READ: Here are some neat ways Catholics can honor the Sacred Heart of Jesus in the month of June
Gregory XVI referred to indifferentism as a “deadly error” because it misleads souls into thinking that they can save their souls without living up to the obligations described so well by Fr. Weninger. Those who think they can be saved by following a religion other than the one established by Our Lord — Catholicism — may do an exemplary job of living up to the obligations of their non-Catholic religion, but they often will scorn the obligations of the religion actually established by Christ. It is for this reason that Gregory XVI reminded Catholics of the eternal consequences of indifferentism by quoting the words of the Athanasian Creed: “Without a doubt, they will perish forever, unless they hold the Catholic faith whole and inviolate.”
How many bishops today agree with these words from Gregory XVI’s Mirari Vos? How many faithful outside of Traditional Latin Mass congregations have heard such things from their clergy? How many Catholics today truly live up to their obligations as Christians? How many Catholics today are willing to resist all of the temptations of the modern world to remain truly Christian, no matter what the cost?
It seems that the simplest answer to these questions is that the indifferentism condemned by Gregory XVI has essentially become the most prevalent approach to Catholicism among an overwhelming percentage of clergy in the Church. All of the evils afflicting the Church today relate, in one way or another, to the erroneous belief that Christians do not really need to follow what the Church has always taught to please God and save their souls.
How John Paul II characterized the situation over 20 years agoLest we imagine that indifferentism was relatively unknown among Catholics until the evils propagated by Francis, it is worth recalling words from John Paul II’s 2003 Apostolic Exhortation, Ecclesia in Europa:
This message is also addressed today to the Churches in Europe, often tempted by a dimming of hope. ... Among the aspects of this situation, so many of which were frequently mentioned during the Synod, I would like to mention in a particular way the loss of Europe's Christian memory and heritage, accompanied by a kind of practical agnosticism and religious indifference whereby many Europeans give the impression of living without spiritual roots and somewhat like heirs who have squandered a patrimony entrusted to them by history. It is no real surprise, then, that there are efforts to create a vision of Europe which ignore its religious heritage, and in particular, its profound Christian soul, asserting the rights of the peoples who make up Europe without grafting those rights on to the trunk which is enlivened by the sap of Christianity.
The contagion of indifferentism had spread throughout Europe already in 2003, such that John Paul II observed “a kind of practical agnosticism and religious indifference whereby many Europeans give the impression of living without spiritual roots.” From this practical agnosticism and religious indifference flowed various putrid fruits, including hopelessness, silent apostasy, and the culture of death:
At the root of this loss of hope is an attempt to promote a vision of man apart from God and apart from Christ. This sort of thinking has led to man being considered as 'the absolute centre of reality, a view which makes him occupy – falsely – the place of God and which forgets that it is not man who creates God, but rather God who creates man. Forgetfulness of God led to the abandonment of man.’ ... European culture gives the impression of ‘silent apostasy’ on the part of people who have all that they need and who live as if God does not exist. ... This culture is also marked by a widespread and growing religious agnosticism, connected to a more profound moral and legal relativism rooted in confusion regarding the truth about man as the basis of the inalienable rights of all human beings. At times the signs of a weakening of hope are evident in disturbing forms of what might be called a ‘culture of death.’
John Paul II named many symptoms of this silent apostasy and culture of death, including “the diminishing number of births, the decline in the number of vocations to the priesthood and religious life, and the difficulty, if not the outright refusal, to make lifelong commitments, including marriage.” In our own time, we see that this culture of death extends to nominally Catholic politicians promoting abortion, contraception, and euthanasia, with nominal Catholics among the largest population of voters putting them into office.
The 'Council of the media' as seen by Benedict XVITen years after John Paul II’s Ecclesia in Europa, Benedict XVI spoke of similar disasters afflicting the Church. In his February 14, 2013, farewell address to the clergy of Rome, he placed the blame on what he termed the “Council of the media”:
We know that this Council of the media was accessible to everyone. Therefore, this was the dominant one, the more effective one, and it created so many disasters, so many problems, so much suffering: seminaries closed, convents closed, banal liturgy ... and the real Council had difficulty establishing itself and taking shape; the virtual Council was stronger than the real Council.
Thus, according to Benedict XVI, the media in some way distorted the meaning of the real Council to cause so many disasters and so much suffering. If we are serious about addressing the evils in the Church, it seems that we must follow Benedict XVI’s lead in attempting to counteract this evil “Council of the media.”
Because both Gregory XVI and John Paul II referred to the disasters caused by indifferentism, we should consider whether the Council of the media might have contributed in some way to a proliferation of that plague. Recalling that Gregory XVI described indifferentism as the “claim that it is possible to obtain the eternal salvation of the soul by the profession of any kind of religion,” is there any way in which the Council of the media fostered such a wicked belief?
Although, properly speaking, it is not “the media,” the Lutheran-Roman Catholic Commission on Unity (co-chaired by the heretical Cardinal Walter Kasper and a Lutheran bishop) published a 2006 study on the “apostolicity of the church” which assuredly showcases the interpretations of the Council that give rise to the indifferentism condemned by Gregory XVI. Here, for instance, the study cites Vatican II’s Decree on Ecumenism, Unitatis Redintegratio, to support the assertion that Catholicism and Lutheranism have common share of Christ’s salvation:
Vatican II's Decree on Ecumenism (Unitatis redintegratio) laid a central foundation of our dialogue by acknowledging that the other churches and ecclesial communities ‘have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation...’ (UR 3). The same passage mentions again ‘the elements of sanctification and truth,’ with amplification on liturgical worship among the endowments which come from Christ and constitute the separated communities as means by which the Spirit of Christ works out the salvation of their members. From this conciliar affirmation of the Christian endowments of the separated churches, Catholic ecumenical theology is justified in concluding to an implicit recognition of these churches and ecclesial communities as apostolic, since the very elements listed are not meteorites fallen from heaven into the churches of our time, but have come from Christ through the ministry of his apostles and are components of the apostolic tradition. Beyond our common sharing in Christ's salvation by grace and personal faith, we are also in real, but still imperfect, ecclesial communion (UR 3) because we share the mediating elements of sanctification and truth given by God through Christ and the apostles. [Emphasis added.]
This statement unambiguously promotes the religious indifferentism condemned by Gregory XVI in his Mirari Vos. Is its reliance on Vatican II’s Unitatis Redintegratio illegitimate? How, in other words, should we accurately read the following passage from Vatican II's Decree on Ecumenism to avoid the conclusion reached by the Lutheran-Roman Catholic Commission on Unity?
The brethren divided from us also use many liturgical actions of the Christian religion. These most certainly can truly engender a life of grace in ways that vary according to the condition of each Church or Community. These liturgical actions must be regarded as capable of giving access to the community of salvation. It follows that the separated Churches and Communities as such, though we believe them to be deficient in some respects, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Church.
Does the statement that the Spirit of Christ uses non-Catholic religions as a means of salvation seem limited to the case of Baptism, which is efficacious even when properly administered by non-Catholics? No, the reference to liturgical actions that “engender a life of grace” obviously extends well beyond Baptism. Thus, there does not appear to be a reasonable interpretation of this key passage from Vatican II other than the one made by the Lutheran-Roman Catholic Commission on Unity.
But if Lutherans and Catholics are each on the path of salvation by following their respective religions, what can we say about the “culture of death” so detested by true Catholics? What do Lutherans believe on the relevant issues? Here are positions on three key issues from the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America:
Abortion: “Abortion ought to be an option only of last resort. Therefore, as a church we seek to reduce the need to turn to abortion as the answer to unintended pregnancies.”
Contraception: “This church teaches that abortion and reproductive health care, including contraception, must be legal and accessible.”
Same-Sex "Marriage": “The Lutheran Office for Governmental Affairs (LOGA), Washington D.C., the federal public policy office of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA), joined 25 other religious organizations June 3 to urge members of the U.S. Congress to reject the proposed ‘Federal Marriage Amendment.’ The religious organizations said the proposal threatens individual civil rights and religious freedom. The amendment, proposed in February by President George W. Bush, states that ‘Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman.”
If Lutherans and all other Protestants are saved by following their non-Catholic religions (as we read above), how can Catholics be damned for adopting the authorized Protestant positions on these issues? And how can Catholics credibly demand that non-Catholic politicians oppose the Lutheran (or other Protestant) positions when high percentages of Catholics have also adopted them? The culture of religious indifference among Catholics has become one of the greatest contributors to the culture of death throughout the world. As such, a vital step in helping restore a culture of life is to restore the Catholic belief on the need for all Christians to live up to the true obligations of the Catholic Faith. Until that happens, the message that we must protect life will be continually undermined by the message that there is no real need to practice the Catholic Faith to please God and save our souls. Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us!
