From the looks of this article by Father Samir Khalil Samir, S.J., Pope Benedict XVI has a realistic understanding of Islam and the challenge it poses to the West today.
"When Civilizations Meet: How Joseph Ratzinger Sees Islam," from Chiesa, with thanks to Tom Syseskey:
Benedict XVI is probably one of the few figures to have profoundly understood the ambiguity in which contemporary Islam is being debated and its struggle to find a place in modern society. At the same time, he is proposing a way for Islam to work toward coexistence globally and with religions, based not on religious dialogue, but on dialogue between cultures and civilizations based on rationality and on a vision of man and human nature which comes before any ideology or religion. This choice to wager on cultural dialogue explains his decision to absorb the Pontifical Council for Inter-religious Dialogue into the larger Pontifical Council for Culture.While the pope is asking Islam for dialogue based on culture, human rights, the refusal of violence, he is asking the West, at the same time, to go back to a vision of human nature and rationality in which the religious dimension is not excluded. In this way – and perhaps only in this way – a clash of civilizations can be avoided, transforming it instead into a dialogue between civilizations.
Islamic totalitarianism differs from Christianity
To understand Benedict XVI’s thinking on Islamic religion, we must go over its evolution. A truly essential document is found in his book written in 1996, when he was still cardinal, together with Peter Seewald, entitled “The Salt of the Earth”, in which he makes certain considerations and highlights various differences between Islam and Christian religion and the West.
First of all, he shows that there is no orthodoxy in Islam, because there is no one authority, no common doctrinal magisterium. This makes dialogue difficult: when we engage in dialogue, it is not “with Islam”, but with groups.
But the key point that he tackles is that of shari’a. He points out that:
“the Koran is a total religious law, which regulates the whole of political and social life and insists that the whole order of life be Islamic. Shari’a shapes society from beginning to end. In this sense, it can exploit such freedoms as our constitutions give, but it cannot be its final goal to say: Yes, now we too are a body with rights, now we are present [in society] just like the Catholics and the Protestants. In such a situation, [Islam] would not achieve a status consistent with its inner nature; it would be in alienation from itself”.
This alienation could be resolved only through the total Islamization of society. When for example an Islamic finds himself in a Western society, he can benefit from or exploit certain elements, but he can never identify himself with the non-Muslim citizen, because he does not find himself in a Muslim society.
Read it all.
If you follow the the second link at the bottom of this article at Chiesa you will also find a revealing paragraph, above the picture, about what the Pope thinks about Oriana Fallaci. (Note the buttons at the top right that put the article into English). Alternatively, here's the link:
http://www.chiesa.espressonline.it/dettaglio.jsp?id=48741&eng=y
Dominic.
"Shari’a shapes society from beginning to end. In this sense, it can exploit such freedoms as our constitutions give, but it cannot be its final goal to say: Yes, now we too are a body with rights, now we are present [in society] just like the Catholics and the Protestants. In such a situation, [Islam] would not achieve a status consistent with its inner nature; it would be in alienation from itself”.
This alienation could be resolved only through the total Islamization of society. When for example an Islamic finds himself in a Western society, he can benefit from or exploit certain elements, but he can never identify himself with the non-Muslim citizen, because he does not find himself in a Muslim society."
-- from Cardinal Ratzinger's book "The Salt of the Earth"
"It can exploit such freedoms as our constitutions give" -- but not to become simply one more religion. The rights guaranteed by Infidel political and legal institutions (see Moussaoui, see that crazy trial with that list of "mitigating" circumstances that so perfectly encapsulate all kinds of dreamy misunderstandings of the function of a system of norms and sanctions) can be used; "free speech" can be used to defemd the hate-spewing found in assorted khutbas and those audiocassettes distributed at some mosques (see Sweden, where according to local Swedish authorities, such audiocassettes filled with anti-Jewish ravings, employing Qur'anic phrases, are to be regarded as protected speech), but is out of the question in the long run; Islam must dominate and Muslims must rule: the "total Islamization of society" is what Cardinal Ratzinger called in in 1996; Cardinal Ratzinger is now Pope Benedict XVI; Islam, however, has not changed -- for it cannot, despite all the prattle about "reform." It can be contained; its appeal can be limited; the camp of Islam can be continually kept off-guard instead of the other way round, as is happening now; it could be Muslims, and not Infidels, constantly put on edge; it could be Islam that is constantly challenged and its adherents put on the defensive, as they should be; it is the Dar al-Islam that can be divided and demoralized, instead of the Dar al-Harb; it should not be Europeans severed from Americans, but rather Shi'a from Sunni, and non-Arab Muslims from Arab Muslims, and poor Muslims from the rich ones -- the fissures, ethnic, sectarian, and economic, that are just waiting, within Islam, to be exploited but because of Western ignorance or timidity or want of imagination, are not merely not exploited, but attempts are made to prevent those fissures from growing because, we are told, we need "stability" in the Middle East and the Muslim world. Nonsense.
Whilst not a Catholic I'm slowly becoming more enamoured by Pope Benedict XVI. He seems to speak clearly and have a good understanding of Islam and other issues facing the neo Christian West.
If only there was the same clarity of thought and speech from the established protestant Christians things would really move forward.
Anglicans - where are you ??
That being said, over the last few months there does seem to be a change of spirit in the media where at last the lone voices are being joined by more and more commentators that have slowly cottened on to the truths of Islam.
Even the BBC are recording that Bin Ladin speaks for Pure Islam, rather than watered down Moderate Islam - albeit they were the words of Brixton Mosque Chairman
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4942924.stm
"He thought we were preaching a watered-down version of Islam and that he was following a pure Islam.
Dear mazztr,
I am an Anglican. I belong to the Church of England, the established Church in England, a protestant Church with a good relationship with Rome. There are no doubt others like me on this site. Don't worry, many of us are awake and our numbers amongst the clergy as well as the laity are growing daily. We practise that clarity of thought and speech which you want and I for one never let references that paint islam in a good light pass unchallenged. I know that I am not alone in that. You should hear our Vicar on the subject of islam - boy, does she know her stuff and she tells it like it is.
Dominic.
mazztr, Dominic,
As a Roman Catholic, it is pleasing that there is a pope who is truly realistic about the Muslim faith. Thankfully, more Christians are starting to wake up and smell the coffee about the harsh truth about Islam. Another article posted in this website by Cardinal Pell from down under speaks the full truth futher about Islam.
" Anglicans - where are you ?? "
There is an answer. Look to the global south, Africa in a special way. The Christians in the global south are much more Bible oriented, conservitive, and want to be missionaries to the post-Christian west.
Oh, come on! This is all too nice! We are all being entirely too friendly. Everyone loves the Pope. Everyone is being kind to the poor old Church. Where are all the Christianity haters and Catholic haters that used to pullulate on this site? Whatever happened to all the people who only consider Islam dangerous because they consider all religion - or at least all monotheism - tyrannical? Where are Tushar Saxena and Vikrant, with all their tales of evil Vatican plots against poor innocent Indians, and their denial that persecution ever ever ever happens against Christians in India? Where are Giaour and KJ? Where are the denounciations of the Anti-Christ, the Synagogue of Satan, Babylon, the Scarlet Woman on the Seven Hills? Does it take so little to silence you all? Show yourselves. This silence on the part of all the Catholic haters is really rather unnerving.
Paolo,
Could it be that those folks that you post in the above posting are on vacation, getting a little r and r before the big movie of the year, the famous " DaVinci Code " movie comes out in a few weeks?
Paolo
As a fellow, but non-practicising C, (though I'm quickly changing my mind, BRAVO.
I have to say I've been astounded at the anti-RC that's out there, I had no idea. Frightening.
Sorry, meant to say 'anti RC animus that's out there'
Dominic
If you are not already familiar with the organisation Anglicans for Israel, then I think you may find much of interest to you, and not solely about Israel, here on their website.
Yes, there will more than likely be a semi-illiterate anti-RCatholic bash-fest unleased by the DaVinci code, annoyingly all Brown has done has rehash conspiracy theories that have been in the public domain for aeons and that I read years ago. (Why didn't I write the bestseller and reap all the rewards.. Gnash!).
This movie will give the muslims give so much 'ammunition', aided and abetted by our own.
St. Paul: If Christ be not risen, then our faith is in vain.
Why the compulsion to sexualise Jesus?
Why do other Christian denominations continue to hate the RCs so much? We always seem to be the benchmark.
Dear Granny Weatherwax,
I followed the link you set and found everything very, very informative. Thank-you muchly.
Yours,
Dominic.
"Why do other Christian denominations continue to hate the RCs so much? We always seem to be the benchmark. "
Well, we all know the Pope is the anti christ - or is it the EU, or Nato or well there are plenty to choose from... ;)
On a serious note, as a protestant Christian I've got a few issues with RC doctrine but the new Pope is certainly standing up for biblical truth on certain issues. He's clearly a man of wisdom and the whole idea of dialoguing with Islam as a cultural issue rather than religious is something totally new to me.
For a man such as that to be ardently RC has got me questioning my 'issues' with RC. No, I'll never be one, but I've definately changed my view of them.
As for why do "other denominations pick on RC's", well I dont know. Maybe it's because the Pope is clear speaking and uncompromising. Just compare him to Rowan Williams, who basically won't say anything clear about anything. As far as I can tell his faith is purely an intellectual challenge, rather than a relationshp with God.. but I'm not going to judge him, only God knows..
Dear bigcatgirl13106,
Yep, the global south certainly do lead the way in clear biblical standards.
I'm actually quite ashamed at the anglican church in the UK - yes, there are a large number of conservative people within it, but they seem to stuggle to gain visibility against the large liberal (and frankly world (and media) friendly) majority.
Every time there is some moral issue the Pope seems to comment clearly, & then we have Rowan Williams mummbling on about something or other an no one really notices or cares.
/rant.
Thats it from me on this issue !
Well, we all know the Pope is the anti christ - or is it the EU, or Nato or well there are plenty to choose from... ;)
Mazztr
Don't forget we're the Whore of Babylon as well, don't get me started on Ian Paisley! LOL, and he's actually a charming man - he's good craic!
Mazztr
Granny Weatherwax calls Rowan Williams the 'Archdruid'.
(Granny, correct me if I'm wrong.)
Mazztr
Granny Weatherwax calls Rowan Williams the 'Archdruid'.
(Granny, correct me if I'm wrong.)
Why not call him the "Archbish"? I know Hugh frowns on that, but is it that necessary to use decorum when referring to such a Dhimmi.
sofia,
At least with Benedict XVI you know where he stands. He is the right man, for the right subject, at the right time.
Islam can't change? Yeah right. It can change, but not over night. There are Muslim women in Pakistan who disregard Sharia concerning women's dress code (they may were a hair scarf, but it seems primarily for fashion).
I knew a Muslim down in the south of New Mexico, who didn't follow the Prophet's sayings after the move to Medina.
It can change, Jews no longer follow OT Law, so there is hope for Islam.
sofia
I know Christian denominationa have their differences, but we're not going to slaughter each other them. Let's stick together against a common adversary.
PS
There is no idolatory in Roman Catholicism. Do you really think we worship statues?
"From the point of view of intercultural relations, a certain reduction of the level of secularism in Western societies is probably necessary"
-from the site Dominic posted
That is utter rubbish. The RCs are delusional. If anything, we need FAR more secularism. It is the ONLY weapon that Islam fears, not conversion to your belief in a man-god. You won't get them to convert to your religion in large numbers. The only hope is to reform the religion of Islam from the inside and have it implode. We can start by humiliating their violent wing; hitting it until it suffers intolerable losses.
"I knew a Muslim down in the south of New Mexico, who didn't follow the Prophet's sayings after the move to Medina."
"It [Islam] can change, Jews no longer follow OT Law, so there is hope for Islam."
-- from a posting above
Anecdotal evidence - "I knew a Muslim..."
And "[Islam] can change." How do we know this? Because apparently Judaism changed. But Judaism, like Christianity, has been undergoing slow change over two millennia. And neither the Old nor the New Testaments are regarded as the absolutely immutable texts, the literal word of God, that the Qur'an is. Nor is there in either religion a warlike figure (78 campaigns) at all comparable to Muhamamd, who remains for Muslims the image of the Perfect Man, uswa hasana.
Some Muslims have been trying to "reform" Islam during its 1350 year history. Not one has succeeded -- not in the slightest. Why should we believe that all of a sudden, just because it would make things more comfortable for Muslims in the West, and also allow Infidels to deny the need to come to grips with a most unpleasant and permanent threat to their wellbeing, somehow, in quite unspecified ways, "Islam will change."
And if this or that person calling himself a Muslim chooses simply to be unobservant, or not to recognize parts of the Qur'an, that is not a reform of Islam. That does not change Islam. That is merely someone deciding not to be a fully observgant, orthodox Muslim. That's fine, and one hopes that many people born into Islam through no fault of their own will, upon looking into it fully, decide to jettison it -- here in the West, where it is possible to do so without risking one's life. But that does not mean that Islam has changed. It can't. It won't. No one here or anywhere has shown exactly what, realistically, could be done to "change" Islam so that its adherents are no longer a threat to Infidels.
By all means, tell us which texts would be ignored or thrown out, and who would do the throwing out or ignoring, and why it would be accepted by hundreds of millions of Believers.
Ah, yes, yes, at last. Stung beyond endurance, Kafir Nonbeliever has finally brought hatred, prejudice and the spirit of persecution to the thread. The spell is broken, and we are back in the country we know.
God's in His heaven - all's right with the world.
We have got to put western and eastern religious differences behind us, be we Catholics, Anglicans, Jews, Buddhists - whatever.
I also feel there is no need to fully secularise. If people need organised religion - fine with me. I don't, but would never hold that against them or try to prevent then doing so.
I am not 100% sure that the Da Vinci code will necessarily have a bad effect: in fact I think it is possible that people will appreciate a more "humanised" Jesus. Let's not forget that Christianity was properly formulated at the council of Nicea to make it more palatable to different sects that were popular around then. (Around 300AD).
Isn't it also that Christians follow Jesus' philosophy as well as the Man himself? Which is more important? Anyone??
What I am hoping for is that people who share common values,,,in essence what the Ten Commandments show, sanctity of human life, morality and integrity which most other religions hold dear, also personal freedom,,,will unite to deal with this awful situation we now find ourselves in
We are going to have to do that - or we are all doomed.
Islam offers none of the above, sadly. I find it hard to fathom how any sane person can convert to islam. They willingly give up their right to think,,so I guess they don't want to be sane.
In reply to Karif Nonbeliver,
I wrote a long 'essay' as a response but it errored upon submittal. However Cardinal George Pell from the post above sums it up:
"This is another place where religious people have an edge. Western secularists regularly have trouble understanding religious faith in their own societies, and are often at sea when it comes to addressing the meaninglessness that secularism spawns. An anorexic vision of democracy and the human person is no match for Islam. "
####
Regarding the Davinci Code, there's no real benefit in once again publicising lies and untruths about Jesus and the history of the church. Yes, it gives Christians the chance to talk about Jesus, but we'll spend all our time answering irrelvant questions about Him being married or gay or whatever etc. The bible is quite clear on who Jesus was and what he came for - everything else is superfluous conjecture.
>>Regarding the Davinci Code, there's no real benefit in once again publicising lies and untruths about Jesus and the history of the church. Yes, it gives Christians the chance to talk about Jesus, but we'll spend all our time answering irrelvant questions about Him being married or gay or whatever etc. The bible is quite clear on who Jesus was and what he came for - everything else is superfluous conjecture.
Gramfan,
"That is why I previously said are we following the Man or the lessons he taught?"
The two are unseperatable - its not like current politics where "his personal life is his own business".
The life, actions, sayings, speeches, sermons, relationships of Jesus ALL show us who God is, how He thinks, behaves, acts, loves, worships - the WHOLE package.
Christianity is about an individual relationship with God - Jesus shows us clearly WHO God is, and HOW he interacts with us.
From that we can know him.
Jesus sets the example of how we should be and therefore - ideally - we should all strive to be more like him.
####
There are difficulties in the bible if you look for them (Calvanism for example) however the central tenents are simple to understand and hold onto. Jesus said simply believe in me. So in its simplist form that is the core and everything else is additional to it.
####
"As I said before it was all done at the Council of Nicea"
Lies, dam lies and revisionist historians.
####
I can understand your interest in biblical debates & theories as a non believer - I've read the DaVinci code - it is interesting! - however, personally - I find it a distraction to getting the truth about Jesus out to people.
####
"In the democratic world - you can believe what you like, so can I ,,and I am comfortable with that."
Roger that.
Although I'd like you to know Jesus I won't tax you if you don't want to ;)
/duel
Kafir Nonbeliever,
While there has been hatred, religious bigotry, violence and war in the name of most religions (except perhaps the Jains), such things are contrary to both the spirit and teachings of Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Daoism, Buddhism, Sikhism, Wicca, Animism, etc.
Islam is the glaring exception to this rule because it is both a religion and a totalitarian ideology. In this regard it shares much with communism and nazism.
As for secularism, it is in the same category as religion. Most secularist are peaceful people but the extremist secularism of communism was murderous.
On a personal note, it is my deeply held Orthodox-Catholic faith, that requires me to affirm the truth of God but equally to respect others who may not share that truth.
Mazztr:
Thanks for answering my questions.
I guess therefore muslims also cannot separate muhammed the man and his philosophies????
I, too, would like to know the Man, believe it or not!
I just have issues with the way His life has been "documented".
I also have issues with some of what has been committed in His name - eg the Spanish Inquistion!
The council of Nicea is NOT revisionist and untrue. I studied medieval history many ,many years ago.Proof being it made Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire.
You may wish to check out the ancient religions of Mithras, and the Cult of Isis. You will find amazing similarities to the Christmas Story and the Mother and Child images.
But let us not get sidetracked.
Again,, I say we must unite against a common enemy.
So,,,,you do your thing; I'll do my thing and good luck to both of us!
PS Mazztr
>>>I can understand your interest in biblical debates & theories as a non believer - I've read the DaVinci code - it is interesting! - however, personally - I find it a distraction to getting the truth about Jesus out to people.
Hi Gramfan,
"I guess therefore muslims also cannot separate muhammed the man and his philosophies????"
I think so, we have what he was told of God in the Koran & we have how he acted in the Hadiths.
Again the action and 'sayings' are interlinked. If he had said - kill all infidels and then in action actually didn't they'd be issues with Islam we could challege as a religion. However, he said 'kill the infidels' (to paraphrase) and he then did. Sayings and action combined.
####
"Lies, dam lies and revisionist historians."
Was a bit tounge in cheek ;)
History is interesting but at the end of the day I think the truths we need to know, to know Jesus, are in the bible. When looking for God / Jesus the bible is where you should look first. There will always be LOTS of other things around the bible to confuse and obfuscate the truth.
If you are searching for Jesus, look to the bible and then look/ask directly to Him - he'll answer your questions (meaphorically, not literally - i.e. can He be believed, is He trustworthy, is the bible trustworthy.)
####
"No where did I say I was a non believer. You assumed that."
I'm sorry for assuming, from your comments I thought you were.
I also think you are male and in his 50's - how interesting that we picture the people we are writting to.
####
"I just don't have a lot of time for "organised" religions of any kind."
Neither do I if what you mean is formalised worship. However there are many churches where worship of God is dynamic, honest and full of joy and real love for God. If you've never been to such a church (assuming you come from a hristan background & in the UK) try Churchs in the Evangelical Alliance (http://www.eauk.org/)
####
"I do not think one needs to go to church to prove one is a believer.It is personal thing:between you and God."
Very true, there are individual believers in Communist or Islamic countries that have never been to church. However if you are free to go to Church then one really should if one can; - to learn, to be part of the body of Christ, to collectively worship, to support the church community and wider society etc.
####
"Again,, I say we must unite against a common enemy."
I agree - lets face the enemy of humanity united. I look forward to reading (and maybe commenting on) your posts in the future.
####
Yours,
Mazztr.
Hello, mate!!
I appreciate all your posts, truly!And your patience. I am glad and appreciative of your answers. I feel we all have something to contribute:)) I am glad we have some common grounds too.
However I have to say you have made one MAJOR mistake:
I AM A FEMALE!!! lol!!
(you got the age bracket right - well done!)
Minor mistake: I do not live in the UK! I live in that "convict colony" Australia, and am glad, and proud of it! I was, howerver, born in Florence, Italy.
I have been enjoying these little chats!
I am not necessarily a Christian either - I am tending more to agnostic I guess. I just appreciate various philosophies that better mankind. Obviously islam is not one of them. (I always use lower case letters on purpose).
I also appreciate Native American and Buddhist as well as Judeo-Christain teachings so I guess you may consider me a little strange.(So do my kids!)
I was a school teacher and have never stopped learning. I love learning new things and I guess that is why I cannot cope with islam as it seems to stifle all learning and thinking. I love this forum, and am so happy that I am not the only "freak" who sees islam for what it is.
I also want to say I was in the US on 9/11. (in Arizona) and I guess I have never quite recovered from that.
Best wishes to you, Mazztr and all who post here.
We are all the same really. We simply want to preserve our culture and way of life!
Sofia wrote to Sylvester: "you said that Catholics don't worship Idols. But I fail to understand all the kneeling, bowing, kissing, garlanding, taking in procession, praying in front of Idols of Jesus,Mary, Joseph, and Saints, including Mother Theresa. My Protestant friends tell me that this practice of Idolatiory, is standing as a block for all the Christians to unite"
Sofia, first of all, no Catholic or Orthodox Christian worships statues or ikons. We Worship (give latria) to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, who though three Persons are the One God alone.
We venerate, not worship, the Blessed Virgin and the saints. The respect shown to the images is only due to what they represent. Moses, himself, was commanded by God to make the Ark of the Covenant and carve images of two cherubim on it. This image was venerated as the mercy seat of God, but was never considered an idol.
Since, we Christians believe that God the Son became incarnate and VISIBLE in Jesus Christ, we recognize that He can be pictured. Jesus said "He who has seen me has seen the Father" John 14:9.
From the very beginning, Christianity venerated images of Christ, the angels, and the martyrs. It was only under the influence of Islam that iconoclasm arose.
When the Byzantine emperor Leo ordered the destruction of the ikons because the Muslims had accused Christians of idolatry, Saint Gregory pulled out a coin with Leo's picture. He spat on it in front of Leo, who became enraged.
"Why are you angry?" Gregory asked, "It's just your image."
"By dishonouring my image, you dishonour me," Leo replied.
"Exactly!" responded Gregory, "and by honouring the images of Christ and his saints, we honour them."
So Sofia, we Catholics and Orthodox can never become like the Muslims and dishonour our faith by rejecting the beauty of its art.