Sunday, June 8, 2014

POPE FRANCIS BRINGS ISRAEL AND PALESTINE TOGETHER FOR PRAYER, AND BY THE WAY, CATHOLICS, ORTHODOX, JEWS AND MUSLIMS TOO! SURELY THIS IS A MOMENT IN HISTORY!

It is possible that this could be the first time public Islamic prayers are said in the Vatican since the Muslim raids of A.D. 846, in which Old Saint Peter's on Vatican Hill was sacked and occupied.

66 comments:

George said...


One can't fault the Holy Father for trying. Perhaps his effort will bear fruit.

You mentioned the Muslim raids on Rome of A.D. 846. They also sacked and burned the monetary of Monte Cassino which was founded by St Benedict.

There important battles in the History of Western Civilization.

The battle of Tours

With less than 2000 soldiers, Charles Martel halts a much larger Muslim force of as many as 60,000 cavalry under Abd el-Rahman Al Ghafiqi from moving farther into Europe. Many regard this battle as being decisive in that it saved Europe from Muslim control.

The battle of Lepanto
- One of the most decisive and important victories in European history in which a superior Muslim fleet was defeated by the Christian fleet of the Holy league .

Pope Pius V instituted the Catholic feast day of Our Lady of Victory to commemorate the battle, which is now celebrated by the Catholic Church as the feast of Our Lady of the Rosary. The victory was credited to the Virgin Mary by the Holy League whose intercession to be victorious they had implored through the use of the rosary. The Genoese admiral,Andrea Doria, kept a copy of the miraculous image of Our Lady of Guadalupe given to him by King Philip II of Spain in his state room.
as the feast of Our Lady of the Rosary.[33][34]

The siege of Vienna, 1529

This victory brought to an end the Ottoman conquest and attempted conquest of the countries in the Danube Valley.

It is good to remember these times when God saved those of faith.

It is also good to pray for the day when swords will be beaten into plowshares, and spears into pruning hooks.


Gene said...

It does not mean a thing other than compromising the Catholic faith. When they leave, the Muslims will still be blood-thirsty fanatics and they will still hate Israel. All show…smoke and mirrors. Disgusting...

Anonymous said...

"Any comment that is vitriolic and disrespectful of the laity in general, and Pope Francis, bishops and priests in particular will not be posted!"

"It does not mean a thing other than compromising the Catholic faith. When they leave, the Muslims will still be blood-thirsty fanatics and they will still hate Israel. All show…smoke and mirrors. Disgusting..."

The FARCE continues...

Gene said...

So, what was sod bad about my statement, Anonymous? It was neither vitriolic or disrespectful…oh, you must not have figured out that Muslims are blood-thirsty fanatics. Simply stating facts is bot disrespectful. You need to take your head out of your…er, the sand.

Anonymous said...

To call the Pope's actions "disgusting" is disrespectful.

To say that he is "compromising" the faith - as if you were the judge of papal actions - is disrespectful.

To impugn the millions of Muslims who are neither blood thirsty fanatics nor desirous of the destruction of Israel is both vitriolic and disrespectful.

The FARCE continues...

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

I am glad you read the comments so you can write I told you so. Your spouse must really love that!

Gene said...

Saying that someone's actions are disgusting is a personal opinion. It is not necessarily disrespectful. One can respect the office while having reservations about the occupant.

To say that having Muslim prayers in the Vatican is compromising the faith is an opinion based upon Biblical precedents (see, for instance, Ezekiel 5). It does not make me the objective judge of Papal actions.

I cannot help the fact that Muslims are a blight upon the earth. I merely state the obvious.

rcg said...

I think the Pope is bound by God to try. It is a sad task. The tune of Moametto II keeps going through my head. This terzettone will also end end in tragedy.

Gene said...

RCG, The Pope was not led by God to allow prayers to false gods in the Vatican. That's FALSE GODS, ya'll…get it? How did God deal with the Israelites when they put false gods on equal footing with JHWH? Or, did you good Catholics and Priests not read that part of the OT…I do remember from my Presbyterian/Calvinists days that Catholics were always said to be weak on Biblical knowledge... HMMM...

Joe Potillor said...

Well, we've come a long way since Ragensburg of happy memory...I happen to think Pope Francis should re-read it.

Catholic Mission said...

Sunday, June 8, 2014

Peres, Abbas need to convert for salvation according to Pope John XXIII's Vatican Council II

Israel’s Shimon Peres and Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas according to the Catholic Church's Vatican Council II are on the path to Hell since they do not have 'faith and baptism' needed for salvation.According to the Catholic Church (Notification, CDF, Dupuis 2001) their religions are not paths to salvation. There are good and holy things in their religion ( Nostra Aetate ) but the religions are not paths to salvation and they need to convert ( Dominus Iesus 20).

They will both pray today at the Vatican, which affirms outside the Church there is no salvation, in the text of Vatican Council II (AG 7) and the Catechism of the Catholic Church (846).However publically it is not affirmed.

Therefore, all must be converted to Him, made known by the Church's preaching, and all must be incorporated into Him by baptism and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself "by stressing in express language the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mark 16:16; John 3:5), at the same time confirmed the necessity of the Church, into which men enter by baptism, as by a door.-Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II

Even Patriarch Bartholomew, the spiritual head of the Orthodox Church, who will be present does not have Catholic faith ( AG 7) and according to the defined dogma Cantate Domino Council of Florence he is oriented to the fires of Hell unless he converts into the Catholic Church before death.

This was the teaching of Pope John Paul II in Ut Unum Sint.He taught that membership in the Church under the pope was necessary for other Christians.This is also the teaching in the Catechism which says God wants all people to be united in the Catholic Church (CCC 845) .In Ecclesia di Eucarestia Pope John Paul II upheld the ecclesiology of outside the Church no salvation.


According to Pope John XXIII's Vatican Council II Jews,Muslims and other non Catholics need 'faith and baptism' for salvation. In Heaven there are only Catholics, who are there without mortal sin, and with faith and baptism. Pope Paul VI who concluded Vatican Council II said in Evangelii Nuntiandi that even though the members of other religions may have their hands raised to God, the Catholic Church is the only path to salvation.

In 2014 we do not know any person saved with ' a ray of the Truth'( NA 2) or 'seeds of the Word'(AG 11) or 'imperfect communion with the Church'(UR 3). They are possibilities but the ordinary means of salvation in 'faith and baptism' in the Catholic Church.

-Lionel Andrades

http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1402316.htm

http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/the-vatican/detail/articolo/francesco-francis-francisco-pizzaballa-34582/

Cardinal Jean-Louis Pierre Tauran must accept Vatican Council II and set an example for the Catholic religious communities and SSPXhttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/05/cardinal-jean-louis-pierre-tauran-must.html#links

CARDINAL KOCH MUST BE ASKED TO ACCEPT VATICAN COUNCIL II http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/05/cardinal-koch-must-be-asked-to-accept.html

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/06/peresabbas-need-to-convert-for.html

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Gene, Gene, Gene, you sound like a Fundamentalist Protestant in your pontificating about the God of Islam. They worship the One God although incompletely:

The most authoritative teach is from Vatican II:
3. The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems. They adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all- powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth,(5) who has spoken to men; they take pains to submit wholeheartedly to even His inscrutable decrees, just as Abraham, with whom the faith of Islam takes pleasure in linking itself, submitted to God. Though they do not acknowledge Jesus as God, they revere Him as a prophet. They also honor Mary, His virgin Mother; at times they even call on her with devotion. In addition, they await the day of judgment when God will render their deserts to all those who have been raised up from the dead. Finally, they value the moral life and worship God especially through prayer, almsgiving and fasting.

Since in the course of centuries not a few quarrels and hostilities have arisen between Christians and Moslems, this sacred synod urges all to forget the past and to work sincerely for mutual understanding and to preserve as well as to promote together for the benefit of all mankind social justice and moral welfare, as well as peace and freedom.

Gene said...

They do not worship the Christian God. Have you ever read anything about Mohammed and how he "created" Islam? It reads like a Timothy Leary 60's acid trip. It is not unlike the way Joseph Smith put Mormonism together. Utter nonsense. And quoting Vat II to me is a waste of your time. Of course, Vat II like Islam…and protestantism, and Zen, and Hinduism, and pantheism, and Taoism, and Shintoism, and Janism, and Mormonism, and Kwanza, and Unitarianism, and the Way of the Yellow Dog. Big deal!@

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Is this Protestant infallibility declared from your recliner Chair excathedra? Keep in mind if you reject Vatican II, you Protestants are heretics and anathema and true Catholics can't pray with you, you are just one step away from being like a Moslem!

Marc said...

The god posited by Islam is very clearly not the True God of Christianity.

Gene said...

I do not reject Vat II…I just view it as an unfortunate (and unnecessary) chapter in Church history. I accept it as an amusing foray into a false ecumenicism brought about by, perhaps, well-intentioned products of a humanistic age and secularized culture.
Plus, they said a lot of nice things about God and the Church and all that.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Prior to Vat II the Church would have said about the same thing concerning the god of Protestants. So is gene one step above Moslems in the god he worships and should he be banned from praying in our churches and yards ?

Marc said...

Do you have any evidence that before Vatican II the Catholics believed the Protestants worshipped a different God?

It is foolish to claim that Islam worships the True God of Christianity. One could only make such a claim if one had conducted no study of Islam. In fact, it is probably rather offensive from the Muslim perspective to make such a claim.

JBS said...

Be careful. When Pope Emeritus Benedict once commented upon the Islamic theology of God, a theology in clear contrast to that of the Church, people died.

JBS said...

It's worth noting that the Holy Father cannot be invited to the "holy" sites of Mecca.

JBS said...

Saint Francis of Assisi somehow won the esteem of the sultan of Egypt, which seemed to pave the way for establishing Christian and Jewish rights to the Holy Land. Perhaps Pope Francis will win over the hearts and souls of Moslems, completing the work of the saint by bringing in converts from the religion of the "prophet".

One thing we can certainly learn from Moslem practice is reverence in prayer. I would gladly invite a Moslem to come teach people not to chat inside the church after Mass. And, perhaps the daily Moslem prayer discipline could prompt us to revive the thrice daily Angelus.

Gene said...

Fr, I am not even sure what you are talking about. The issue here is that a false God will be prayed to in the Vatican. Mohammed took most of his ideas about Jesus from Nestorius, he denied the resurrection, believed that Jesus did not die on the cross but god put a phantom there in his place, believed Jesus was a magician, Jesus was not the son of God, and on and on…LOOK IT UP!

Protestants do not worship a false God, the Church has long recognized protestant Baptisms, and protestant and Catholic Christology are in agreement on most everything but the extrinsic justification which still holds sway in protestant theology. To suggest that the God I worship is just a step above Islam is insulting to me, God, Jesus, and protestants.
BTW, your ambivalence regarding liturgy, the EF, the OF, and this Pope scream from between the lines of much of what you write. I am paying you a compliment...

Pater Ignotus said...

March 2013: "His [Pope Francis']remarks to the latter [Muslims] recognized that Muslims “worship the one living and merciful God, and call upon him in prayer.” In this he echoed the 1964 dogmatic constitution Lumen Gentium, which gave a nod to “the Mohammedans, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind.”

Yes, Muslims, Jews, and Christians worship the one God.

Yes, rejecting the teaching of Vatican II is a rejection of that which the Church believes and teaches to be revealed by God.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation. Logically in Pre-Vat II times Protestants were outside the Church even had to be rebaptized if they converted. How can the Protestant god have been the true Catholic God if their belief in their god condemned them to the everlasting fires of hell? One one then have to say the true Gid was at work in a false religion! That was a no, no back then. One cannot separate the true God from the true Religion back then prior to you know, that dreaded VatII

Marc said...

So not only is Vatican II the last word in Roman Catholicism, it is also the last word in Islam. What a remarkable council!

Saying that outside the Church there is no salvation is not a comment on whether the God of the Protestants is the True God.

rcg said...

If Vat II is not doctrinal, why is it binding to believe it?

Gene said...

The protestant God was the same as the Catholic God, the protestants were just worshipping Him incompletely. Apparently, the Pope believes the true God can work through a false religion because he is having prayers to this false God said in the Vatican.

Now, how can Muslims worship the true God if they do not believe He was Incarnate of the Virgin Mary and that there is no Trinity. The Trinity exists from before Creation, for all time. So, the OT God is the Trinitarian God. Muslims deny the Trinity, ergo, they worship a false God. Vat II was just a nicey nice bone to modernism.

Gene said...

How about Mormonism and Joseph Smith's schizophrenic delusions? Do they worship the true God, too? Both religions were created in much the same way.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

exactly and I prayed Catholic prayers at a Mormon funeral recently and they allowed a crucifix in the funeral home before the casket. Of course, like Muslims, we would baptize Mormons if they converted to the true faith. At one time, I would not have been allowed to offer Catholic prayers at a Mormon funeral, in pre-Vatican II times. Times are better today and promotes understanding and not fear.

Gene said...

I disagree that times are better because we are willing to entertain false religions. Aquinas strongly condemned Islam and so did virtually every Pope up until Vat II, including Pius X, who condemned all Modernism and such indifferentist tendencies. Vat II was a NON-DOGMATIC statement of "esteem" for Islam. Give me a break! Vat II has done way more damage than Martin Luther or John Calvin ever did to the Christian Faith.

Marc said...

Of course! Times must be better! People are returning to Christianity in droves and remaining stalwart in practicing the Faith. There is also much less sin in these times, and more people are going to heaven.

Just look at the result of our greater understanding. People are no longer afraid. What a victory!

Pater Ignotus said...

Can the True God be known differently by people of different religions?

Yes.

My father died in 1962 when I was four. My three sisters were all teenagers and in high school in 1962. (Our brother was 10 in 1962.)

My sisters' knowledge of the true father we share is substantially different from my knowledge of him. He is the father of us all, he is the same person, but is known by us in very different ways.

We Christians know the True God as Triune - Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Jews and Muslims do not know the True God as Triune, but as unary.

That God is known differently by different religions does not mean, ipso facto, that those who do not acknowledge God as Triune are members of "false" religions or that they are not worshipping the same God as we.

rcg said...

I am not convinced that Muslim acknowledgment of Mary to some degree, or of Jesus to a lesser degree is in their favor. Satan acknowledges Christ but does not worship Him. Gene is on to something in that every group that claims to worship Christ is not Christian. What I would like to see is a large number of women convert from Islam to Christianity.

Anonymous 2 said...

Gene:

I have two questions for you:

(1) Were you always this hostile towards Islam? More specifically, were you as hostile before 9/11? If you were, how much did that hostility have to do with Muslim terrorism, in particular against Israel?

(2) Is Judaism also a false religion? After all, Jews reject the Trinity too. In fact, in many ways, Muslims esteem Jesus more highly than do Jews.

Marc said...

I don't think I've ever seen a more Modernist evaluation of God than what Pater has written. God is an objective reality, the only such reality. He has revealed to humanity that his existence is Trinitarian. In the face of that revelation, those claiming that he is not Trinitarian have a fundamental misunderstanding of God's essence.

So, to use the analogy of a father: the situation with Muslims is more akin to one who doesn't know his father, so he ascribes the devotion due his father to someone else.

Or if I were to find some random person and start calling him "Pater Ignotus," even in the presence of the actual Pater, I am not addressing the actual Pater because I have fundamentally mistaken the real Pater and ascribed his identity to someone else.

Modern Judaism is a false religion for similar reasons

Anonymous 2 said...

Gene:

As to condemnation of Islam in Catholic history, I also have two questions:

(1) How much of that hostility had to do with other historical factors, specifically the military conflicts between Christendom and Islamdom?

(2) What did Catholicism have to say about Jews? Although as I understand it, the official Catholic position was mixed and perhaps more tolerant towards Jews than is commonly believed, there seem to have been periods when attitudes were more hostile. Moreover, how were Jews actually treated in Catholic countries over the centuries?

Moreover, as indicated in my comment yesterday, I will see your St. Thomas Aquinas and raise you a St. Francis of Assissi:

http://www.saintandthesultan.com/about.html

rcg said...

I will rely on those who study such things, but I don't at this time thing Judaism is a false religion, but in error and incomplete. salvation comes form the Jews. Islam is made up by a mad man.

Marc said...

rcg, salvation came through the Jews of the Old Testament. Modern day Judaism was created by men, largely sheet the Temple fell, to challenge directly the doctrines of Christianity.

Pater Ignotus said...

Marc - First, you throw "Modernist" around without much understanding of the term.

Second, the evaluation I wrote is decidedly NOT an evaluation of God, but an evaluation of how God is understood or apprehended by Christians, Jews, and Muslims.

Yes, God's nature is God's nature is Trinitarian. Yes, Christians know Him in that way through revelation. Jews and Muslims know the same God, but in a different (and we would say, incomplete) way.

JBS - Pope Benedict did NOT so much comment on Islamic theology in the Regensburg; rather he quoted Byzantine Emperor Manuel II Palaiologos concerning Islam. And in the talk, Benedict criticized the Emperor for his "brusqueness" in his (the emperor's) description of the Prophet Mohammed.

In the estimation of many, Benedict chose poorly the example he used, unnecessarily giving great offense. There was gross overreaction to the quotation in many places, which added to the mess.

And if the point of Benedict's words was to show that Islam has been used as the "religious" basis for violence, we can refer to any number of examples when Catholicism was also so mis-used.



Gene said...

Judaeo-Christian history is linear. Knowledge of Christ was brought through the Jews. God chose them for His purpose. He did not choose Islam or Mohammed. Muslims do not worship the same God.

Anon 2, Duh!! Of course the Church's attitude toward Islam is based upon they history of conflict. If a religion has vowed to destroy you and over run half of Western civilization, damn right you want to annihilate them and you condemn their false beliefs and practices. You and Ignotus and people like you are, in many ways, more dangerous than the enemy with weapons because you weaken resolve with your conciliatory, liberal, go-along-to-get-along sing song. You sow doubt and you practice a sophistic that can be deadly to weaker souls who will be devoured when they waver or hesitate. I completely understand why the Church burned heretics and false teachers. Be thankful that neither of you lived in the thirteenth century.

Marc said...

What makes you think I don't have much understanding of the term "Modernism"?

Is it possible for one to misperceive something to such a degree that they are perceiving something completely different than the actual object?

If I see what I perceive to be a stop sign, but objectively it is actually a yield sign, this doesn't make the stop sign into a yield sign, it makes me incorrect about what the object actually is. If I were to take various actions based on my incorrect understanding of the objective reality, how far could I take that before one would say that I was describing something and taking action on something that was not the yield sign?

JBS said...

Pater Ignotus,

Thank you for your observations, to which I would add that Pope Benedict did indeed comment upon the militant tendencies of medieval Islam, tendencies developed despite earlier rejections of the "faith by sword" principal.

Gene said...

Ignotus, It is you that does not understand Modernism because you are trying to define it from within it. It is like someone trying to describe the outside of a house they have never seen from inside it.

Marc said...

I cannot believe Gene and I are actually having to argue against this utterly ridiculous idea that Muslims, whose primary profession of faith is deliberately anti-Christ, worship the same God who so graciously became incarnate for us.

This is blasphemy. Plain and simple. You "priests" might as well go urinate on the relics of all that martyred at the hands of the "religion of peace."

Gene said...

I'm right there with Marc. You guys are not getting it, I don't care if you are Priests. Your slavish worship of the non-dogmatic, non-infallible Vatican II comes far closer to idolatry than any liturgist or protestant Biblical fundamentalist. Islam is evil, of the Devil, false, and an enemy of the Judaeo-Christian tradition and culture.

I'll tell you Fr's what...this is a one time offer…in an effort to get you both on the right track vis a vis Islam, I will teach you (absolutely free) to shoot, clean and maintain an AR-15 rifle. You can even bless it and the ammo. In fact, I wish you would sprinkle mine with a little Holy Water...

Pater Ignotus said...

Marc - You misuse of the term "Modernism" shows you don't know its meaning.

Your perception of the yield sign doesn't change the nature of the stop sign.

A person who does not see God as Triune does not alter the Triune nature of God.

But I did not speak to the nature of God; rather, I spoke to the how the person seeing God understands God.

JBS - If acts of violence by Muslims that are based on theology can be used to condemn Muslims, then acts of violence used by Catholics that are based on theology can be used to condemn Catholics. We, too, employed the "faith by the sword" principle.

Gene said...

Ignotus, But, Catholicism was the True Faith applying the sword in righteous might. Your relativism is showing.

BTW, you can purchase an AR-15 for about a grand. Go to Academy Sports. They have the best prices. Pick up several extra 20 round magazines and maybe 500rnds of .223 ammo to start. Get the carbine. It handles well and is quicker to bring to target. The sights are tricky to beginners, but I'll have you popping targets at 200 yards before you know it.

Gene said...

BTW, God's nature is not dependent upon the person's understanding Him. You make it sound that way…but, Hell, you make everything sound screwed up.

Marc said...

Pater, how have I misused the term "modernism"?

Also, maybe you can try to address the actual questions:

How can one who misunderstands the essence of God be said to worship God when that person posits a god with a completely different essence? At what point do the different understandings of God's essence become so great that one stops worshipping the True God?

Marc said...

Gene, that idea about God that Pater is espousing is part of a certain theological trend, or heresy, called...

Modernism.

Pater Ignotus said...

Marc - And the person who misperceives a stop sign, thinking it is a yield sign, is STILL seeing the same stop sign I'm seeing, though he understands it incorrectly.

The person who misperceives the Triune God, thinking Him a unary God, is STILL seeing the same God, though he understands it incorrectly.

Pin/Gene - No I am arguing that God's nature is NOT changed by how God is perceived. If Jews and Muslims misperceive God and think Him unary, God's Triune nature is unchanged.

Marc said...

Okay, Pater. Thank you for addressing those questions. I appreciate your answer.

I'm curious how much one can misperceive and still be said to be seeing the same God.

Gene said...

Marc, Do you remember the old Monty Python skit about "Eric the Half-Bee?" It was a spoof on philosophers (possibly like G.E. Moore) regarding essence, substance, etc. Pretty funny and most apropos for your conversation with Ignotus. At what point in perception is God not God.

George said...

Something good to read on this topic.


http://www.crisismagazine.com/2012/do-catholics-and-muslims-worship-the-same-god

Anonymous said...

If I may add to this discussion.

A couple of points for clarification. Prior to Vat II protestants worship a false God and since they are outside the Church, they can not inherit the Kingdom. Vat II changed this teaching.

So was the Church in error and teaching error prior to Vat II and if so why did the Holy Spirit allow this for 1,963 years?

This thread seems to be supporting Articles 19 and 20 of the 39 Articles of Religion.

Why has no one gone to Holy Scripture? Jesus in John 8 starting around verse 39 and going to 59 talks about those who confess God, but are as Jesus called them children of the devil. Yes these were Jews, pharisees to be precise and not Islamic. But it fits Islam.

Johns 1st general epistle, chapter 2:22-23. Read it, but basically, deny Jesus is Christ, you are anti-christ and reject God.

The early church was very clear is the scriptures it gave us. You can not have God if you reject Jesus as Christ for you are rejecting God as Jesus is God in flesh.

Can Muslims and Jews be saved? Of course just as Christians can be saved. We must seek to convert the non-believer out of love and compassion for their soul. To tell them they are ok in their worship does not help. Can they find Christ in their scriptures...of course.

Since we like analogies. I know the current resident of the White House. I know of him, know about him etc. I can not walk into the White House and expect to get past the Marines and police buy saying I know the president. He has to know me and have sent me an invitation. Without the invitation I do not get in.

God sent us an invitation...Christ. We can know alot about God and Christ, but as Christ himself said in Matthew 7, just knowing is not enough.

I pray good will come from the Popes decision to allow "event". I do not think so, as the Muslims will see this as a victory over the false god of christianity.

Just a view from an Anglican priest.

Mark

Gene said...

Well, I agree with the Anglican Priest…imagine that!

Gene said...

George, I found that article to be long, tedious and noncommittal. He talks all around the issue.

Anonymous 2 said...

Gene:

“I completely understand why the Church burned heretics and false teachers. Be thankful that neither of you lived in the thirteenth century.”

Accepting your above premise for the sake of argument, I am indeed thankful that I do not live in the thirteenth century. Although I would not presume to speak for him, I suspect Pater Ignotus is also thankful that he does not live in the thirteenth century. Indeed, I suspect Father McDonald is thankful, the Church Fathers who gave us Vatican II are thankful, Pope Francis is thankful. A whole host of Catholics must be very thankful that they did not live in the thirteenth century. Why? -- Because, on your premise, and apparently with your approval, all of us would have been burned at the stake as heretics and false teachers for accepting the Vatican II teachings of the Catholic Church regarding Islam. Your indictment of me and Pater Ignotus indicts all of us. I assume you would have burned St. Francis of Assisi too. I hope you realize what you are saying.

Anyway, while you were typing your rants, I was reading again a very illuminating book published in 2002 by a Mercer Professor Emeritus, Rollin Armour, on how the Christian West has responded to Islam over the centuries, entitled “Islam, Christianity, and the West: A Troubled History.” Perhaps you know the author or even had him as a professor. You might want to read it before your next rant. Of course, I expect you would have wanted to burn Rollin at the stake too:

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/islam-christianity-and-the-west-rollin-s-armour/1111031447?ean=9781570754074

I am not denying the existence of dangerous elements within Islam. And – if you want to feed these elements, then by all means carry on with the rants. They are doubtless very effective in confirming radical Muslim stereotypes of the West and Christianity as the enemy of Muslims and Islam, just as radical Muslim rants are effective in confirming your own stereotypes of Muslims and Islam as the enemy of the West and Christianity.

By the way, for a latter day Thrasymachus such as your good self to accuse Pater Ignotus and me of practicing a deadly sophistic is highly ironic, no?

Anonymous 2 said...

George:

Thank you for the link. I read the article. It is written by the director of Jihad Watch, Robert Spencer. This may account for the tortured exegesis of the Vatican II documents and the selective history. The author’s best point comes at the end when he talks about understanding Vatican II in the context of the times and notes the different and more challenging nature of the contemporary context. But I would turn that argument in favor of working with reformist impulses within the Islamic world during the current “battle for the soul of Islam” so as to help ensure that Muslim societies continue to develop in a healthy direction that resists radicalization while remaining true to authentic Islamic values rather than perverted ones.

Prudent and authentic inter-faith dialogue is surely part of this process. We should then trust that God will reveal to hearts and minds what needs to be revealed.


Joe Potillor said...

I'll keep my comments short and sweet…God have mercy on us. Assisi I-III (as bad as they were) were pale in comparison to this…God have mercy...

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

One of the reasons for the Vatican and it's complicated diplomatic corps and the pope as head of state of the smallest nation on earth is to promote peace on the world stage as a function of the Gospel mandate! The Vatican Interfaith Prayer Service makes me proud to be a Catholic and the international peacemaking role of the papacy. Pope Francis is recovering this divine legacy!

JBS said...

Pater Ignotus,

"If acts of violence by Muslims...": agreed.

JBS said...

Anonymous,

The Church did not, prior to VCII, teach that Protestants worship a false God. Further, teaching on Protestants up to that time was in reaction to the Reformation itself, during which Catholics adopted the various heresys of Luther and the like. VCII merely acknowledged that there are now multiple generations of Protestants who have not freely and personally chosen to abandon the fullness of truth or full incorporation into the Church. Since they do not know any better, they cannot be held guilty of heresy and division.

George said...

Gene:
I found that article to be long, tedious also. I thought he had made some interesting points though.

Father McDonald:
You bring up an important point. The Holy Father is not only is the leader of the world's Roman Catholics but also a sovereign head of state.

Anonymous2

In Africa alone, millionns of Muslims have converted to Christianity so that shows what can be done. Mr Spencer did note that the pertinent Vatican II documents did say "Mohammedans" and not "Islam". This is an important distinction.


JBS
You bring up an important point in stating "Since they do not know any better, they cannot be held guilty of heresy and division." These can be difficult waters to wade into since it is God who will judge each person individually. The Divine grace of God through power of the the Holy Spirit reaches out beyond the physical boundaries of the Church to those who through no definitive act of the will and with full knowledge have rejected her truth. The grace is available through the generosity and love of the Merciful God. He is God to all - even to those who don't recognize all His truths. It is up to those, according to how they are disposed to co-operation with the Holy Spirit, to accept His grace. We must always and constantly pray for conversions.

Anonymous said...

JBS etal,

My confusion comes from seeing on this thread statements alluding that the Roman Catholic Church position prior to Vat II was protestants worship or did worship a false god.

If I could. Since St Cyprian in the 3rd century, and repeated through Church History, taught there is no salvation outside the Church. And St Ignatius of Antioch tells us let me paraphrase, no bishop no church. Did Vat II change that by redefining the meaning of Church?
I agree Trent was a reaction to the teachings of the protestant reformation or rebellion if you like. But it also appears Vat II changed, modified or adjusted teachings held prior to Trent. Hence my reference to ST Cyprian and Ignatius. And many more of the Church Fathers, Saints and Doctors of the Church which I won't mention.

I must be the bearer of bad news, most protestants have an idea of what the Church teaches and stands for and they reject it. Whether it be Marian Dogmas, office of the Pope, justification, baptism for remission of sin or baptismal regeneration. Protestants, for the most part, know the Church does not teach faith alone and reject the Churches teaching on justification, faith and works. So they full well know and embrace the heresy and division regardless of the softening of the Church's position towards them.

So I guess I was longed winded to ask, did the Church have teachings prior to Vat II that placed protestants due to protestant belief outside the Church and thus outside salvation. Is Sts Cyprian and Ignatius in error, and all the Popes, leaders etc. that cited them and relied on that teaching in error?

Second part, yes I am long winded.

How does the Holy Scriptures line up with what is being taught about the Muslims? Jesus and St John both seem to be saying, reject Christ reject God. If the Muslims reject Jesus as Christ, and they do, how can they worship the same God as we do. For Jesus and John say you can't reject Christ and still claim to worship the same God as the Christians.

And do Muslims say we worship the same God? Or do they have a different concept of god and we are projecting our belief, hopes etc onto them?

Mark

Flavius Hesychius said...

"I must be the bearer of bad news, most protestants have an idea of what the Church teaches and stands for and they reject it."

In which part of the world do you live?! "Most protestants" in my home town believed we: worship Mary, believe in a "third place" as an eternal destination, believe the Pope to be either a god or demigod (and higher than Christ), believe Sacred Tradition trumps Scripture, commit human sacrifice, and that we can do whatever we want as long as we go to Confession.

That, to me, does not meet the definition of what you mean by "have some idea". In fact, even you (as I believe you said elsewhere on this blog that you are an Anglican priest) would not, by their evangelical standards, be considered protestant. You would be considered a quasi-Catholic with your prayerbooks, vestments, and "canned" liturgies.