FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Kissing the Koran
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Disagreeing with someone over what a certion action meant is one thing; calling him a heretic is another. Next time you do that, you should have my words and the Church document condemning me. Thanks. Good night (its late  :))

Don't forget to read 2 Kings 5:1-[18-19] -27

(11-13-2011, 11:13 PM)aquinasg Wrote: [ -> ]St Gregory VII Dictatus Papae (Mar. 1075): "That the Roman Pontiff, if he has been canonically ordained undoubtedly is made a saint by the merits of St Peter."

This is completely insane and contrary to the gospel.

Quote:The Pope is to be treated as a Holy Father, our Papa in faith. Let us not be like the sons of Noah, and concentrate on his faults, to gossip at his nakedness

See where that servile attitude got us: the worst crisis in Church history.
(11-14-2011, 03:10 AM)INPEFESS Wrote: [ -> ]
(11-14-2011, 03:09 AM)aquinasg Wrote: [ -> ]The Pope believes, as I do, that a Muslim can still be in good faith. The Church doesn't condemn us for that

You aren't listening.

Introducing a new point of discussion doesn't refute a previous point not addressed.

"I don't mind arguing with a Novus Ordo person, a Muslim, a pagan, or whoever, if there is actually some back-and-forth in the debate. This character, however, would never concede a point even if he had already been shown he was wrong several times." -- CathInfo user on aquinasg


(11-14-2011, 01:10 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: [ -> ]See where that servile attitude got us: the worst crisis in Church history.

This.
Just read the first and second post. I think I can well imagine the complaining crowd.

Good post, OP.

Oh, I did read maybe the 3rd post asking if the soldiers fighting in Iraq would kiss the Koran.

I think the answer is no, as they are too busy kissing the Talmud, metaphorically of course, by helping to kiss Israel's ass. Even if they are unawares.

But as Pete Townshend of The Who was said in form of a song, "I know that the hypnotized never lie...

Do you?"
Kissing the Koran means more than casual niceness to Islam. It means kow-towing to Islam, the culture, the religion, and its leaders. I've seen some blog chat by devout Muslims who said they interpreted JP II's actions in that way, as a sign that he is bowing to the primacy of Mohammed and his religion as truth. Even though JP II didn't intend his act to be construed that way, it's exactly how it was interpreted around the world. Let's put the shoe on the other foot:  has anyone seen any Islamic leader kissing the Catholic Bible in all of history? On the contrary, we have news footage of burning bibles and Christians in ditches. You'll never see Islam kiss the Bible out of respect...because they don't respect us. What JP II did was inadvertently tell everyone that Christ isn't divine, and that the pope isn't the vicar of Christ on earth, endowed with a special gift and primacy directly from God to Peter that supersedes all religions. Quite the opposite. I love JP II--don't misunderstand me, but this was a mistake.
(11-14-2011, 04:18 PM)lauermar Wrote: [ -> ]Kissing the Koran means more than casual niceness to Islam. It means kow-towing to Islam, the culture, the religion, and its leaders. I've seen some blog chat by devout Muslims who said they interpreted JP II's actions in that way, as a sign that he is bowing to the primacy of Mohammed and his religion as truth. Even though JP II didn't intend his act to be construed that way, it's exactly how it was interpreted around the world. Let's put the shoe on the other foot:  has anyone seen any Islamic leader kissing the Catholic Bible in all of history? On the contrary, we have news footage of burning bibles and Christians in ditches. You'll never see Islam kiss the Bible out of respect...because they don't respect us. What JP II did was inadvertently tell everyone that Christ isn't divine, and that the pope isn't the vicar of Christ on earth, endowed with a special gift and primacy directly from God to Peter that supersedes all religions. Quite the opposite. I love JP II--don't misunderstand me, but this was a mistake.


Exactally!
(11-14-2011, 04:18 PM)lauermar Wrote: [ -> ]Even though JP II didn't intend his act to be construed that way, it's exactly how it was interpreted around the world.

Wanna bet?
I agree that JPII should never have kissed the Koran.  Furthermore, it is debatable exactly what he meant to convey with his actions.  For example, AFAIK, he never commented upon the controversy he generated however.  Surely he received word of the fact that his actions upset many people.  But, let us assume he did recognize he should not have kissed the Koran.  How should he have rectified this faux pas?
Servire Deo, the gentleman from Catholicinfo was referring to our discussion about whether God could accept prayers of good-willed pagans. Read over the discussion. He did not prove that the Church taught his position, so I am allowed to have my opinion. Read the thread on here "Imperfect Prayers". The old Catholic Encyclopedia even holds my position.

Now, it's okay for people to be upset by the Pope's action. And I admire all your contempt for evil and heresies; we should all be willing to die for our faith. But it is wrong to assume more than is needed in a negative way towards the Pope. That is all I was pointing out. Contrary to what  VetusOro says, the Pope is called by Catholics "The HOLY Father"; Vatican I speaks of him as if he were Peter himself. This thread did not have my hoped for affect. Nobody said "oh, well good, perhaps there is some explanation for it". Out of love for the former Pope, you would think people would be happy to know these thing. Too many people calling themselves tradition Catholics have gloated over it.  People have called it apostasy without knowing the Popes heart or mind on the matter. An action has the meaning which the person intends to give to it.

2 Kings 5:18-19

18 Yet in this thing may the LORD pardon your servant: when my master goes into the temple of Rimmon to worship there, and he leans on my hand, and I bow down in the temple of Rimmon—when I bow down in the temple of Rimmon, may the LORD please pardon your servant in this thing.”
19 Then he said to him, “Go in peace.” So he departed from him a short distance.


This servant would be helping his king into his temple and bowing in there with his king leaning on his arm. If the king's religious action was completely evil, the prophet of God would not have said "Go in peace". If the servant was doing wrong by performig an action that shows respect, than the prophet of God was a prophet of Satan. Muslims, with the Koran as the foundation of their faith, can and do pray to God; some in America with pray at their required times in public with everyone looking at them. John Paul II wanted better relations with them, not animosity. Kissing the Koran was intended to do this, so that is what the action meant. Early Christians were not allowed to offer incense to gods, even if they only did it externally, because it was seen by the coercing pagans to be a denial of the Faith. We cannot do actions which others will interprete as a denial of the Faith. We can safely assume that the Muslims present knew the custom of kissing books, and we do not know whether the Pope even knew about the photo (some don't flash, and he was old).

People jumped the gun again when the Pope asked John the Baptism to protect Islam. The word "Islam" has two meanings: the faith of those people, or those people themselves. Again, we can and should assume that the Pope asked St. John to protect those people from harm, for truly the Pope is their Father still. I understand the concern of people over "giving 'concessions'" to non-Christians. But let's remember that St. Paul did this in Acts right after the Council. The Apostles decreed that circumcision wasn't necessary for the faith. And right after, what does Paul do? Does he say "let's show everyone that they must accept the Council"? Well, he circumcises Timothy, in order not to offend the Jews! It can take steps in order to convert people. We lay people do not know all the factors involved in papal decisions. Does any of you even know anything about a single person who was present when the Pope kissed the Koran? I doubt any of the complaining Catholics did. If we were talking about your biological father, you would not jump to rash judgments. Let's remember our place in the Church, for we are "sheeple"
(11-14-2011, 08:07 PM)aquinasg Wrote: [ -> ]Let's remember our place in the Church, for we are "sheeple"

No, we are not "sheeple", we're Christians who have been given a special dignity by baptism. The clergy are not automatic saints just because the position they hold in the church. This mentality is absolutely ruinous and abjectly equates the church to a mere human organisation, a "special club" where some members rule and others just pray, pay and obey.

All of us, clergy and laity alike, "are a chosen generation, a kingly priesthood, a holy nation, a purchased people," like St. Peter so boldly proclaimed. We all have a responsibility when it comes to proclaiming and perserving the evangelical truths of our faith. Relying solely on the clergy to think and do all the work for us has gotten us into all sorts of trouble.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13