“The Catholic Church is in crisis,” writes Crisis Magazine Editor-in-Chief Eric Sammons in his highly informative new book, Deadly Indifference: How the Church Lost Her Mission and How We Can Reclaim It. Since the Catholic Church’s 1962-1965 Second Vatican Council (Vatican II), a spirit of relativism has undermined the Catholic Church’s commitment to divine truth, with particularly negative effects upon the relationship of Christians to Islam.
As Sammons writes, “religious indifference has permeated the Church in almost every aspect of her life and ministry. The idea that in the long run one’s religion doesn’t much matter has taken root in the Church.” This “attacks both the desire to gain new members and the desire of existing members to remain,” such that former Catholics are now America’s “second largest ‘religion.’” As a former evangelical Methodist, this “indifference that reigns in the Church shocked me when I first converted to Catholicism in the early 1990s. Part of what had attracted me to Catholicism was the historical passion of its members.”
This indifference is new, for “historically the Church noted the deficiencies in other religions,” Sammons notes. “The Church’s traditional doctrine on salvation and the role of other religions can be summed up in the famous Latin phrase, extra Ecclesiam nulla salus,” or “outside the Church there is no salvation,” he explains. This teaching has clear Hebrew scripture roots, for “[n]owhere in the Old Testament is Religious Pluralism endorsed, and in fact, it is repeatedly and harshly condemned.”
Yet “over time the Church begins to recognize some extraordinary means of salvation” beyond ordinary water baptism, Sammons observes. “Starting in the sixteenth century, Catholic theologians debated the status of those peoples in the New World who had died without hearing of Christianity.” Were they “saved, much like Jews and Gentiles before the time of Christ were eligible for salvation? Perhaps they implicitly desired Baptism.”
Nonetheless, Sammons summarizes the traditional Catholic teaching that
although it is possible for a non-Catholic to be saved, Catholics are discouraged from believing it is probable that non-Catholics will be saved. Living a virtuous and dutiful life and keeping the precepts of the natural law is incredibly difficult for a Catholic who has access to the sacraments; how much more so for the pagan who does not!
Yet Sammons delineates a theological “Emphasis Shift” in the Catholic Church under the “heavy influence on Vatican II” of German Catholic theologian and Jesuit priest Karl Rahner. Among the “most influential Catholic theologians of the twentieth century,” he had developed the theory of “Anonymous Christianity.” This, he wrote, “means that a person lives in the grace of God and attains salvation outside of explicitly constituted Christianity.”
Thus, a spirit of “Inclusivism came to predominate Catholicism, which pushed the extraordinary means to the forefront, making them in many ways ordinary,” Sammons notes. Accordingly, “Vatican II texts are exceedingly positive” about other religions and advocate that the “elements of truth found in other religions—which find their source in the Holy Spirit—help prepare non-Christians for the Gospel.” Subsequently a “Catholic under the age of sixty has likely never heard a Church leader criticize a non-Catholic belief system,” which are discussed “always positively, never critically.”
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who became Pope Benedict XVI in 2005, critically accepted this Inclusivism, but nevertheless renounced a “‘dictatorship of relativism’ plaguing the world and the Church,” Sammons writes. As Benedict XVI wrote in 2012, Vatican II’s oft-noted document Nostra Aetate “speaks of religion solely in a positive way, and it disregards the sick and distorted forms of religion.” He tried to address such spiritual sickness in his September 12, 2006, Regensburg, Germany, speech concerning the relationship between faith and reason.
Benedict XVI’s quotation of Byzantine Emperor Manuel II Paleologus, who had described in a 1391 writing how Islam spread through force, unleashed furor, which forced the pope to conciliate Muslims worldwide. “Even the suggestion of criticism of another religion is now verboten among Catholics,” Sammons marvels. “Any deviation from this party line, however slight, is harshly silenced, even if that deviation comes from the pope himself.”
Benedict XVI has had little apparent influence upon his successor, Pope Francis. This became evident in his February 4, 2019, meeting in the United Arab Emirates capital of Abu Dhabi with Sheikh Ahmad al-Tayyeb, Grand Imam of Al-Azhar University in Cairo, Egypt, Sunni Islam’s most prestigious religious authority. There the two clerics signed A Document on Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together, also known as the Abu Dhabi Declaration.
Religious indifference permeates the declaration, Sammons observes, such as when the “pope and sheikh state together that they write ‘in the name of God.’” However, Muslims adamantly reject the Christian understanding of a triune God of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Contrastingly, the Abu Dhabi Declaration “suggests that there is no fundamental difference between the two religions as to the ‘name’ of God.”
The Abu Dhabi Declaration also makes repeated “equalization of religions” in statements such as “religious values,” Sammons notes. Yet, he wonders,
how does, for example, the Catholic view of women co-exist as an equal value with the Muslim view of women? What does it mean that ‘religious extremism’ is bad? Does this mean a Catholic ‘extremist’ such as Mother Teresa equates with an Islamic extremist such as Osama bin Laden?
Controversy also erupted over Abu Dhabi Declaration language that implied “that the pluralism of religions is willed by God,” Sammons noted. This diversity appeared in a list of human characteristics such as the division of humanity into male and female, God-designed natural sex differences according to Biblical teaching. Pope Francis never responded to requests for clarification, and so the declaration is an unprecedented Catholic “watershed in that it puts in print an endorsement (whether intentional or accidental) of Religious Pluralism,” Sammons notes.
Sammons found Pope Francis’ 2020 encyclical Fratelli Tutti equally disappointing. Here the pope
placidly says of other religions, “Others drink from other sources.” From this, it sounds like all religions can equally supply fresh, life-giving water. But what about a religion like Islam that oppresses women in horrific ways and forces people to convert by the tip of the sword…The “water” of other religions often contains poison.
For Pope Francis, “interreligious dialogue takes center stage in his pontificate,” Sammons notes, for the pope wants to unite humanity in addressing matters such as climate change or conflict. “Even the most casual observer of Francis recognizes that his pontificate is scrupulously concerned with political issues,” he notes, but Pope Francis inverts the traditional Catholic relationship between matter and spirit. “Earthly problems were seen as something that would be more easily addressed if nations first come to Christ. The priority was the conversion of the nations; the result would be greater peace in the world,” Sammons explains.
This aimless “dialogue” achieves nothing, Sammons despairs. “High-cost symposiums and official meetings proliferate,” yet “most dialogues face an insurmountable problem: no true end goal.” He concludes:
In our modern world, it’s easy to discover what other religions believe and how their adherents practice their religions. These official dialogues are now simply opportunities for religious leaders to socialize and affirm one another as members of equally valid religions.
By contrast, Sammons urges Catholics “to regain some of the maligned ‘triumphalism’ of our forefathers in the Faith.” Catholics should be “willing to state flatly that non-Catholic religions are false religions and point out ways in which they are contrary to the natural law or divine revelation,” he explains. This “Old Evangelization says it like it is, and it doesn’t avoid the hard topics like Hell, divorce, or the errors of Islam.” “Catholics should be tolerant, but tolerance does not equate to acceptance of false beliefs, nor does it preclude calls to conversion,” he clarifies.
Absent this renewed church militant, Sammons fears for the loss of souls and societies. “We need only look at Northern Africa after the Muslim invasions or England after Henry VIII to know that Catholicism can essentially disappear from large geographic areas,” Sammons correctly observes. His book therefore makes a compelling case for not just Catholics to reconsider relativistic multicultural pieties and once again rigorously seek truth about this world and the next.
Shirley Ann says
We have the Displeasure of a Globalized Pope, Francis, & his Mission to Merge Roman Catholicism with the Death Cult of ISLAM.
I REFUSE.
From his Hospital Bed, He announced the PUNISHMENT OF THE BANNISHMENT OF THE LATIN MASS, except, when approved by his Liberal henchmen.
We had one Latin Mass in my Parish & very Successful, now all is disarray.
Pope Francis is trying to destroy Tradition & Replace it with Perversion. I REFUSE.
Ecosse1314 says
I agree.
GreekEmpress says
Me too. I have already heard of concern Pope Francis might try to
disband Eastern Rite churches and merge them into the Roman Rite, after this announcement came out about the Latin Mass. And if most Eastern Rite churches are like mine, they are more conservative and will not be happy. I know I wouldn’t be.
gravenimage says
I hope this doesn’t happen.
Jim says
I remember once at a Peace Corps office in my town, an exchange with a worker there. I had visited Afghanistan once before the wars and the Taliban, and the bus drove dangerously in the mountains at night in rain, and we guests were all scared. I thought I was just describing my adventures with other cultures. But the employee looked at me like I were a racist and said, “You know you are supposed to respect other cultures.” I think the churches have adopted this same cultural relative view, where you cannot criticize other cultures, even if they put your life in danger. And with the Pope, he is even letting Islam endanger his own religion. There was a time when people would defend their beliefs, now it is the opposite, we are supposed to defend the cultures that seek to replace our own culture. We cannot feel proud of our culture, we have to condemn it and idealize its enemies. Pushing this attitude is seen as the key to political power and wealth. That is also why illegal immigration without any controls is furthered and taken to extremes by the Biden administration. There can be no superior culture, so they are all alike and no immigration standards need to apply. Of course, it is expected that the new voters vote Democrat. I suppose the pope hopes the new Europeans will at least spare Christian churches and centers as they build ever bigger mosques and Islamic centers. Appeasement seems so much nicer than defending Christianity and Judaism against the forces of destruction. In the Middle Ages, the Muslims were sometimes identified as the anti-Christ, but now that is out the window. Now, Islam is equal to Christianity as a religion. They all worship the same god, as it were.
James Lincoln says
Jim says,
“…we are supposed to defend the cultures that seek to replace our own culture.”
Yes, Jim, that about sums it up.
Suicidal insanity…
gravenimage says
Too true.
And that even identifying dangerous driving conditions is now considered “racist” is just nuts.
Kepha says
Re Bad driving habits–When touring northernThailand, my wife and I hired a driver. We were going up Doi Suthep, on a series of tight hairpin turns, when at one there was a large bronze Buddha image. Approaching, the driver took his hands off the wheel for a while to perform his puja, and I had visions of the car with me, my wife, my son, and the driver flying through the air to crash into the gorgeous scenery of rural northern Thailand below the Buddha image. Well, the drivergot his hands on the wheel in time to do the turn; but this memory serves me as a somewhat scary one. It isnt just the Islamic world that can scare a visitor with its driving!
tim gallagher says
A terrific summary of the situation, Jim. There seems to have been a big loss of confidence among people in western countries. To me, the idea that all cultures, islam being a load of evil and incredibly primitive garbage, are equal and should be respected equally, is laughable. I still see islam as an evil religious ideology, or the anti-Christ in the old style of language. Maybe our societies do become too soft over time or just too slack, so too many people want to take the easiest path of appeasement. Also, a lot of people in western countries have bought the idea that the western world has been evil and done a lot of damage, so they don’t have a strong belief in our way of life. Many school teachers and university teachers have run the western world down and many people have bought their crap. I heard Mark Steyn interviewed here in Australia maybe 5 or 6 years ago and I remember him saying that the western world can lose, to islam and its invading hordes, just through becoming too slack, or words to that effect, and I thought it seemed pretty right.
Wellington says
I can understand, if one is Catholic, embracing the concept that one can be saved without actually being Roman Catholic, indeed, I think this an enlightened and admirably tolerant viewpoint, but this is far different from asserting that all religions are worthy of equal respect and admiration and that criticism of other religions should effectively cease. This is a gutless, wishy-washy and stupid choice. It’s virtue-signaling with no real conviction, and where Islam is concerned downright dangerous.
Yes, if you believe that your religion is the true faith, this in and of itself is OK if you don’t act in an arrogant or control-freak manner. It’s also understandable that you might find certain features of other religions that are commendable (e.g., the monastic tradition in Buddhism mirroring the monastic tradition in Roman Catholicism), but one should not be so open minded that one’s brains fall out. This is what has happened to Roman Catholicism since Vatican II (1962-1965) in spite of rear guard actions fought by some Catholics like the two immediate previous Popes. The current Pope, of course, is an ongoing disaster and represents in “sterling” fashion the fruition of the harm Vatican II, an ecumenical council that never needed to be called, caused.
Ecosse1314 says
I actually do respect your agnostic views. And i do not mean to be disresctful but i think you are still RC at heart. Very much like myself who does not know where to turn sometimes. Best wishes.
Wellington says
Ecosse1314: Thank you for your gracious reply. I in no way read it as disrespectful. In fact, you sound like my sister who is now a devout Roman Catholic having formerly been invincibly ignorant as I still remain.
I do admire the Judeo-Christian ethic and, as you probably know by now, I have stated many times here at JW how much better off all mankind would be if every Muslim woke up tomorrow a devout Christian. Referencing Benjamin Franklin again as well (for me as shrewd a human being as ever lived–a few as shrewd, none shrewder), and himself a skeptic, if man is bad with religion, imagine what he would be without it. The history of the last hundred years or so bitterly proves Franklin’s point, though of course Islam would be the exception to this rule as I know you know.
An individual without religion can still lead an ethical life, but I have grave doubts that a society as a whole can be an ethical society without religion (again Islam being the exception—better no religion than Islam). Or, as Voltaire, yet another skeptic, opined, if God doesn’t exist we’ll have to invent Him.
Best to you and yours over there across the pond in Scotland. Always good to read your informed and wise posts. Take care.
P.S. How coincidental I received a missive from you today since just last night I was reading about Duncan I, Macbeth, Gruoch, Lulach, Malcom III, et al. The historical Macbeth was a far finer individual than the Shakespearean and Holinshed Macbeth, and Duncan was pretty much a doofus and not the stalwart, admirable figure portrayed by Shakespeare—but you already know this too.
tim gallagher says
Very good points you make in your post, Wellington. I like that saying about people being so open minded that their brains fall out. I haven’t heard that before. It certainly is a good description of the mentality of some of the far too tolerant people around these days. Also the quote about how, if man is bad with religion, imagine how bad he would be without it. Christianity and, no doubt, other religions, excluding islam, which encourages all sorts of evil, do have very high ideals for people to try to live up to. People in the religions with high ideals will fail to live up to those ideals, but at least they will be trying to be good people. Islam, by comparison, is way down in the gutter with no noble ideals to aim for.
gravenimage says
Tim, this saying has been around for a bit:
https://quoteinvestigator.com/2014/04/13/open-mind/
It is very apt, especially in these days.
tim gallagher says
Thanks for that, gravenimage. It definitely is very apt. It is a good description of quite a few people these days. Not a saying I had heard before, but one that I’m sure I will use sometime when it seems to accurately describe some of the clowns around these days.
Ecosse1314 says
The strange thing was in that period Scottish kings didnt last that long.
Macbeth actually reigned for 17 years. Scotland was so stable at that time (comparatively) that Macbeth could leave the country for months to go on a pilgrimage to Rome. It was said that he threw money to Romes poor like seed.
gravenimage says
Good exchange.
Wellington says
Thanks, gravenimage. Thanks, tg.
James Lincoln says
Very well stated, Wellington.
Bravo Zulu as they say in the Navy…
Wellington says
Thank you, James.
RichardL says
I don’t see any problem in a Catholic believing that all good people are loved by God and at the same time thinking that there is only one Church. Whenever I attend a ceremony in a non-Catholic church, I feel nothing, but I understand that these people, if good, are loved by God. The Church closing its doors during a fake pandemic and saying genetic treatments arrived at by using murdered children is another matter entirely. There will be a catharsis and I have no trouble with that idea.
gravenimage says
The Catholic Church’s Deadly Indifference Towards Truth, Islam, and Other Faiths
………..
All grimly true stuff from Andrew Harrod. This come from the top right now with this awful pontiff.
Kepha says
It looks as if people are looking for an authoritative, all-powerful church; but could care less about the Jesus Christ who paid the price of our sins on the cross and rose from the dead. Religion, per se, can be abominable–as Islam, Marxism-Leninism, and some animist cults practiced by the ancestors of some people I’ve met amply demonstrate. I’ll join the church that points me to Christ, not itself.
Ecosse1314 says
Thars just the point though. The RC church, with its present incumbent, seems to be pointung to every religiion except its own.
Mike Ramirez says
INTERFAITH DECEPTION and THE DILEMMA WITH VATICAN II
“…We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; our Allah and your Allah is one; and it is to Him we bow (in Islam)”
– Qur’an: 029.046
************************************************************
The Difference Between The God of the Holy Bible (Yahweh) and The Islamic deity, (Allah)
1. Yahweh NEVER commanded His angels to bow down prostrate to Adam.
Al’lah Did: Qur’an: (002.034) (007.011)
2. Yahweh NEVER authorized mankind to honor and kiss a stone. (Ka’ba)
Muhammad Did and Muslims still do to this day.
3. Yahweh NEVER authorized men to beat their wives.
Al’lah Did: Qur’an: (004.032)
4. Yahweh NEVER authorized His prophets to have multiple wives- as many as the prophet desired, nor did Yahweh authorize men to have up to four wives.
Al’lah Did: Qur’an: (033.050) (004.003)
5. Yahweh NEVER promised a “paradise” filled with dark-eyed voluptuous women (virgins) as a “reward” to the “righteous.”
Al’lah Did: Qur’an: (037.040-.049) (056.035-.036) (078.031-.033)
6. Yahweh NEVER said that women were second-class citizens and comprised the greatest amount of residents in hell.
Muhammad Did: (Sahih Bukhari: Vol. 7, Book 62, No. 126)
*****************************************************************
Catechism 841 (Muslims & Catholics believe in the same God)
841 The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.”330
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P29.HTM
Pope Francis clearly believes that Christians and Muslims worship the exact same God. And so that helps to explain why he authorized “Islamic prayers and readings from the Quran” at the Vatican for the first time ever back in 2014.
http://themostimportantnews.com/archives/islamic-prayers-to-be-held-at-the-vatican
In New York, Pope Francis Embraced Chrislam And Laid A Foundation For A One World Religion – September 27, 2015 by Michael Snyder
http://thegoodnewstoday.org/in-new-york-pope-francis-embraced-chrislam-and-laid-a-foundation-for-a-one-world-religion/
Mike Ramirez says
Pope Francis clearly believes that Christians and Muslims worship the exact same God. And so that helps to explain why he authorized “Islamic prayers and readings from the Quran” at the Vatican for the first time ever back in 2014.
http://themostimportantnews.com/archives/islamic-prayers-to-be-held-at-the-vatican
In New York, Pope Francis Embraced Chrislam And Laid A Foundation For A One World Religion – September 27, 2015 by Michael Snyder
http://thegoodnewstoday.org/in-new-york-pope-francis-embraced-chrislam-and-laid-a-foundation-for-a-one-world-religion/
IanB says
With a fool as Pope what do they expect?