Papa Ratzi on the "ecumenism of return"

Karl Keating, in his e-letter of 9/13/05 comments on a discussion by Fr. Brian Harrison (whose byline appears in Keating's apologetics journal, This Rock) about Pope Benedict's remarks in Cologne on August 19th to representatives of non-Catholic churches. To Fr. Brian Harrison's mind, as Keating notes, what the Pope said in one particular paragraph was especially interesting--for what he left out.

The Pope's talk, in Harrison's words, "included a paragraph which I personally find encouraging because, while paying lip service to the fashionable postconciliar repudiation of the traditional 'ecumenism of return,' the Pontiff gave his own subtle spin to this repudiation, which has caused so much anguish in recent years to traditional, orthodox Catholics."

Here's what Pope Benedict said:

This unity does not mean what could be called ecumenism of the return: that is, to deny and to reject one's own faith history. Absolutely not! It does not mean uniformity in all expressions of theology and spirituality, in liturgical forms and in disciplines.

Harrison comments:

The first impression here is that Pope Benedict is right in line with Cardinal Kasper and other ecumaniac luminaries. ... But what, precisely, is Benedict ruling out when he rules out so categorically this dreaded, abhorrent, unthinkable "return" of the separated brethren? He answers this question by proceeding to rule out any future requirement of "uniformity" in four distinct and specific areas of the Church's life: theology, spirituality, liturgical forms, and discipline. Note well that the Pope conspicuously fails to include doctrine among these areas in which uniformity will not be required.

Now I would suggest that this omission, to the extent that it comes to be taken seriously and implemented at high levels, really amounts to a pulling the rug out from under the feet of heretical ecumenists. It's the old Catholic orthodoxy creeping in again by the postconciliar back door. For what preconciliar pope ever insisted on uniformity in any of the four areas specified now by Benedict XVI?

Harrison looks at each of the four areas.

First, in theology the Church always has allowed for "legitimate theological differences among approved Fathers and Doctors." Saints such as Thomas Aquinas, Bonaventure, Augustine, and John Chrysostom "have had their differing approaches in explaining the mysteries of faith and their relationship to human reason and philosophy."

Second, in matters of spirituality, the "non-requirement of uniformity has traditionally been even more evident." Harrison says, "Differing schools of asceticism, ancient and modern, Eastern and Western, have always constituted part of the richness and true catholicity of the Church."

Third, in matters of liturgical form, one can point to "the wide variety of liturgical rites, Eastern and Western, approved from ancient times by all the successors of Peter."

Fourth, in matters of discipline, "the approved lack of uniformity over the centuries has perhaps been more evident" than anywhere else. "Canon law has always allowed for innumerable variations between particular and universal law, and at present the differences in disciplines between the Latin-rite Church and the Oriental Churches are so significant as to require two separate codes of canon law."

"So there you have it," says Harrison. "In regard to ecumenism, the Holy Father comes across in this address as nothing more or less than a sheep (or, rather, shepherd) in wolf's clothing."

Keating comments:

For my part, let me note that "ecumenism of return" always was an unfortunate phrase. You can't return to something unless you first have left it. Almost all non-Catholic Christians were brought up as non-Catholics. They never have been Catholics. If they were to become Catholics now, they would not be "returning" to the Church. They would be entering for the first time.
When such people come "home to Rome," they bring with them ways of theologizing, prayer, worship, and discipline that are not necessarily incompatible with the Catholic faith. The Church does not object to their keeping these distinctives.

I would add that this was made amply clear during Richard John Neuhaus' reception into the Catholic Church, when he was told, in effect, that he was being welcomed along with (as Louis Bouyer would say, all that is good and positive in) his Lutheranism.

Keating concludes:

What is insisted upon, though, is uniformity of belief. That's why creeds talk about matters of faith but never matters of spirituality or discipline. Under a regime of real ecumenism, everyone would believe the same (and thus be Catholic), but there would be many ways to pray or to worship or to work through theological questions. You'd be free to subscribe to Franciscan spirituality or Benedictine, to the Mass is Latin or to the Divine Liturgy in Greek, to Thomistic or Augustinian approaches to theological propositions.

Pope Benedict knows all this and, if Brian Harrison's reading is right, is trying to convey it not just to non-Catholics but to Catholics too.