"During the late pope's historic trip to Syria, he silently listened as Syria's President Bashar Assad denounced Jews for trying to "kill the principles of all religions." The Vatican refused to comment on the diatribe, apparently concerned any reaction would upset years of carefully crafted relations with the Muslim world."

I have been flabbergasted by the Pope's silence ever since I first read about this incident.

I would bet my bottom dollar that the Jewish Carpenter from Nazareth couldn't believe it either. How can the Pope claim to represent The Master who embodies the Spirit of Truth, when he says nothing at a time like that?

I hope we can expect better from the next Pope, but I'm not holding my breath....I see more Qu'ran kissing to come...

Posted by: rb at April 6, 2005 8:31 AM

I must admit I do not trust the Vatican regarding Islam, based on their previous record. Hope I'm wrong.

Posted by: Norwegian kafir at April 6, 2005 8:36 AM

How do you "mend relations with Islam" without becoming a dhimmi? The new pope should have "cordial relations" but no one should give to dhimmitude which is what always happens when Westerners "mend relations with Islam".

Posted by: epg at April 6, 2005 8:40 AM

"Chicago Cardinal Francis George added: "The history between Catholicism and Islam is not a happy one. We want to live at peace in a global society, so a dialogue with Islam is particularly important."..."

Maybe, just maybe the fact that beheadings, suicide bombings and killings that are made with the the call of "God is great", is a sign that it isn't so much that the history between Catholicism and Islam is not a happy one, but a warning that the future is a bleak one...

You can try and change history when one side is reverting to the past, a past that stretches 1,300 years.

Moose

Posted by: Moose at April 6, 2005 8:41 AM

Can a Vatican that has been growing increasingly Peecee since Vatican 2 be expected to stand up to Islam? My guess is that it's too scared of a mob of Somali refugees peeing on St. Peter's, or worse.

Posted by: Kepha at April 6, 2005 8:46 AM

The cardinal confuses peace with appeasement. As Benedict Spinoza put it, peace isn't simply an absense of hostilities, but a state that is truly free of threats of violence and intimidation.

Posted by: waterdragon52 at April 6, 2005 9:07 AM

We have to learn how to dialogue with Islam.

Posted by: Hulegu Khan at April 6, 2005 9:15 AM

"It's interesting that this breathtakingly ethnocentric view is usually advanced by the most energetic proponents of multiculturalism."

How acute, and how deadly.

Posted by: Hugh at April 6, 2005 9:26 AM

The Catholic church has allied itself with nazi's as well as with the mafia. Why wouldn't it ally itself with Islam?

Posted by: Voltaire at April 6, 2005 10:06 AM

Yes, we all want peace but making the assumption that the West is to blame for all of the problems in the Muslim World is totally foolhardy and false.
It seems that too many people are afraid of pointing out that the "Emperor has no clothes"(so to speak)(i.e. that aspects and sects of Islam need serious reform).
We need to stop worrying about "offending" people and need to stand up for what's right and just.
What's the point of believing in Christianity or Judaism or whatever if we're going to all kiss the Quran and pretend we agree with what's in there(#1 this is disingenuous and dishonest because we don't agree with much of what's in there and #2 the diehard sharia advocates are still going to hate us anyway because we'll still be Christians or Jews or other non Muslims).
The Pope should stand for what the Bible requires. The Bible doesn't support Sharia Law so the Pope should speak out against the discriminatory aspects of the Sharia. And no more Quran kissing(a futile pointless gesture that accomplished nothing).

Posted by: starsandstripes at April 6, 2005 10:08 AM

Is the church going to underwrite the jiz ?
This will be a real test, will they choose Christ and freedon or fear and dhimmitude. we will know soon enough their recent history has been pretty much lacking in the leadership area ,
navel gazing is not leadership

Posted by: KAOSKTRL at April 6, 2005 10:32 AM

"We have to learn to live with Islam," said Cardinal Theodore McCarrick of Washington, speaking to reporters Tuesday in Rome. "We have to learn how to dialogue with Islam."

If this is indeed the reaction of the Catholic Church, the consequences will not be good for the Catholic church..

Europe will continue to islamize, without the effective opposition that -- given the still powerful role of Catholicism in Spain, Italy, Austria, Germany, and even quasi-Gallican but mostly secular, laic and lackadaisical, France --the Catholic Church might have offered

Europeans, menaced by Islam, will have to turn to secularists alone, or to Protestants -- especially evangelicals. Both will gain power as the Catholic Church wanes in influence, having failed to protect Europe and Europeans in its crazed search to find "common ground" with Islam.

In an article in today's New York Times, Roger Cohen describes how the young Karel Wojtyla, then a seminarian, helped rescue a 13-year-old Jewish girl, Edith Ziererer (Cohen himself is related by marriage to Edith Ziererer).

Here is one paragraph from that article:

"It [Karel Wojtyla's action in helping the girl] was based on the belief that, as he once put it, "a degradation, indeed a pulverization, of the fundamental uniqueness of each human being" was at the root of the mass movements of the 20th century, Communism and Fascism."

But the very same thing could be said for that belief-system that, a few years ago, so few of us in the Infidel world knew a thing about, and so few, relative to the numbers that are needed, still do. For what does Islam itself, with its Total Regulation of Life, its Total Explanation of the Universe, its primitivizing effect on mental functions, its constant emphasis on the collective, the umma, to which all loyalty is owed, and its refusal above all to permit freedom of individual conscience so that those who are born into Islam can exercise the right of leaving Islam if they choose. But they are regarded as traitors, deserters from the Army of Islam, and treated accordingly. And if the Catholic Church thinks that it has to come to some accomodation with this kind of belief, an accomodation that will have no effect on diminishing the menace or appeal of Islam, and will be taken by Muslims as a sign of weakness and will only hasten the islamization of Europe and the disappearance, within Europe, of Catholicism -- if it thinks that, it is doomed.

Posted by: Hugh at April 6, 2005 10:57 AM

It is my hope that the next pope will choose the name Urban.

They have occupied more and more lands of those Christians and have overcome them in seven battles ... On this account I, or rather the Lord, beseech you as Christ's heralds to publish this everywhere and to persuade all people of whatever rank, foot-soldiers and knights, poor and rich, to carry aid promptly to those Christians and to destroy that vile race from the lands of our friends.

Posted by: rosh at April 6, 2005 10:59 AM

The time is right for BATTLE POPE!

Posted by: f.g. at April 6, 2005 11:10 AM

"The next Pope must REND relations with Islam"

-that would be my headline.

Until the Mohammadans renounce death fatwas for infidels and apostates.

Until they admit they stole their religion from the Jews and Christians, and distorted their far more humane teachings beyond all recognition.

Until they apologize for starting their original 'crusade' in 622 A.D. -against the entire world. And return all lands stolen from all 'infidels', and go home to Saudi Arabia.

Time for their infinite 'demands' to be laughed off the face of the Earth, and high time for them to start understanding that the era of the dhimmi is ending.

And that they themselves will end if they keep up their despotic war against all free humanity.

I hope the next Pope stands for what the church is founded on. God is Love.

And that the Muslim deity, a lord of hatred for all but his cosmic bootlickers, ends up in the dustbin of history, next to Wotan, Moloch and Quetzecoatl.

Sic semper Mohammad.

Posted by: BigSleep at April 6, 2005 11:23 AM

One cardinal from Chicago hardly represents the Vatican. Don't assume that the Catholic Church is going to fall down on the job here. I've seen many indications that the Vatican is well aware of the dangers of militant Islam to the Church and to the world.

As George Weigel said in a lecture in January 2005, "Because of its concern for imperiled Christian communities in Islamic-dominated lands, on the one hand, and a rather anodyne approach to interreligious dialogue, on the other, the Vatican has been reluctant to press its Islamic interlocutors to condemn terrorism forthrightly and publicly.

"But surely the cardinal-electors, well-aware of the threat that aggressive and militant forms of Islam pose to the world Church, will want to examine this reluctance carefully, and consider whether a more forthright approach to manifest aggression is not in order, not least because militant Islam seems to be most aggressive where it perceives weakness."

Well worth reading in it entirety:
http://www.eppc.org/publications/pubID.2298/pub_detail.asp

The improved relations between Catholics, Jews, Evangelicals and Protestants (as a result of JPII's tireless efforts) will no doubt be very useful in the fight against radical Islam.

Posted by: kelley at April 6, 2005 11:29 AM

Break the glass, and let loose the Pope-inator...If anyone needs to make efforts to mend, it's the Muslims.

Posted by: DCWatson at April 6, 2005 12:24 PM

Anyone who believes that Allah is the same god as the god of the old testament is delusional, and that included JPII, the top christian dhimmi until his death. He turned the other cheek so many times to Muslims, even forgave the Muslim who tried to assasinate him, but Muslims still harbor genocidal rage against non-Muslims.

If the next pope has any brains or courage, he will study Islam carefully and never play the dhimmi. If the church is concerned about Christians who live in Muslim countries, they should arrange for bringing them to the West. This way, when the current conflict (which no politician is brave enough to acknowledge is a religious conflict) escalates to a full blown war, which it will, the Muslims won't be able to hold local Christian populations as hostages and human shields.

(Obviously, this ain't gonna happen. Dhimmitude has taken root in the catholic church. Eurabia is hopeless.)

Posted by: angry_kafir at April 6, 2005 12:46 PM

Break the glass, and let loose the Pope-inator...If anyone needs to make efforts to mend, it's the Muslims.

Posted by: DCWatson at April 6, 2005 12:24 PM

Absolutely! There should be a chorus of demands that Islam accommodate civilization, and not vice versa!

What part of "get real" don't the appeasers understand?

Posted by: cubed at April 6, 2005 12:53 PM

Ask the Copts

All you need to know about inter-faith relations between Islam and Christianity you can learn from the Copts in Egypt.

Try asking your local Muslim Student Association for an opportunity to give a talk called "Christianity for Muslims, the real Jesus Christ." Then duck.

Posted by: Athena at April 6, 2005 12:59 PM

Such a gloomy, negative bunch of folks here sometimes! The Catholic Church's influence and strength is quite improved today over what it was 20 years ago. Not everyone who doesn't speak as forcefully as Robert and Hugh is a dhimmi. And Eurabia is not a given.

Posted by: kelley at April 6, 2005 1:09 PM

None of us really knows, of course, what is going on in the minds of the cardinals who will select the next pope, but there is one undeniable fact that, one hopes, Catholic leadership is aware of: the great challenge of the last papacy was communism, and the challenge of this papacy will be Islam. The new pope should be in every respect the nemesis of Islam that John Paul II was to communism. And does such a man exist? A man of unparaleled wisdom and courage is required.

Posted by: JTF at April 6, 2005 1:13 PM

"We have to learn to live with Islam," said Cardinal Theodore McCarrick of Washington, speaking to reporters Tuesday in Rome. "We have to learn how to dialogue with Islam."

And people like this cardinal McCarrick still don't understand it takes two to tango...

Posted by: Nordthiad at April 6, 2005 3:24 PM

Well....

I think Cardinal Arinze is much more "intune" with what Islam is in theory and in Practice. Having been born and reaered in Nigeria where Sharia is practiced and fought over I think he might be a little less inclined to the Dhimmitude of Europeans.

Excerpts from his paper on Islam written in 1997

http://www.sedos.org/english/arinze.h...

2. Lack of Self­criticism

Christians are taught by their religion to examine their conscience each day, especially in the evening, to accept responsibility for any wrongs they may have done, and to repent and beg God for forgiveness. The supreme act of Christian worship, the Eucharistic sacrifice, always begins with such a penitential rite. In the sacrament of Penance the Christian who has sinned accepts responsibility, confesses and receives forgiveness. I would like to ask my Muslim friends whether in Islam there is a similar practice. Self­criticism is not a sign of weakness. It is really a proof of maturity. It can help to consolidate and deepen relations between individuals and between communities. With regard to MuslimChristian relations, where self­criticism is lacking, there is a tendency to be content with criticising the others. This is a real obstacle to constructive and lasting relations.

5. Different Approaches to Human Rights and Especially to Religious Freedom

A difficulty in Christian­Muslim relations is constituted by different approaches to the theme of human rights and especially to freedom of religion. Christians see human beings as having been created in God's image and likeness. They are brothers and sisters of Christ, the Son of God made man. The Incarnation has ennobled the whole of humanity. This is the real foundation of human dignity. Moreover, Christ died on the cross to redeem all humanity. So we can say that love of God passes through love of neighbour. The Muslim vision is different. The human person is the servant of God, and remains so even when receiving God's call to be caliph or God's vice­regent, among created things. This vision finds _expression in the names used. Many Muslim names begin with 'Abd (servant) followed by one of the numerous names for God. Christians see man as created by God with certain inalienable rights. Prominent among these is the right to religious freedom. "This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that in matters religious no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs. Nor is anyone to be restrained from acting in accordance with his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits" (Dignitatis Humanae, n. 2). Again the Muslim perception is somewhat different. Indeed, some predominantly Muslim countries have their reservations regarding the United Nations 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights which they see as an _expression of Western culture.The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Islam, proclaimed in Paris in 1981, does contain an article on the right to religious freedom (art.13). It is however very short, merely stating: "Every person has freedom of belief and freedom of worship in conformity with his belief: 'to you your religion, to me mine' (Q. 109:6)". The following article treats of the right to summons (da 'wa) and to proclamation (balagh), but the content of the article remains vague. It is not clear whether or not people of religions other than Islam have the right to propagate their religion. There is certainly no mention of a right to change one's religion. So the question of human dignity and the rights which flow from it is one on which Christians and Muslims who have learned to know and trust one another can exchange views in the hope of greater service to the human person and therefore to the world.

6. Reciprocity

The right to religious freedom applies to individuals and also to religious communities. It includes both the right to practice a religion and the right to share that religion with others. The exercise of this right should have no territorial boundaries. It applies to all countries whether they are predominantly Christian or predominantly Muslim. A religion should not ask for religious freedom for its followers in one country while denying the same right to other believers in a country where it is the religion of the majority. This is what reciprocity is all about. On 21 June 1995, the day on which the first mosque was being inaugurated in Rome, Pope John Paul II spoke of the necessity of reciprocity in the General Audience. "A grand mosque is being inaugurated in Rome today. This event is an eloquent sign of the religious freedom recognized here for every believer. And it is significant that in Rome, the centre of Christianity and the See of Peter's Successor, Muslims should have their own place of worship with full respect for their freedom of conscience. On a significant occasion like this, it is unfortunately necessary to point out that in some Islamic countries similar signs of the recognition of religious freedom are lacking. And yet the world, on the threshold of the third millennium, is waiting for these signs! Religious freedom has now become part of many international documents and is one of the pillars of contemporary society"

Posted by: Trupolitik at April 6, 2005 4:54 PM

The excerpts above make one less anxious about Arinze. What was in #1, #3, and #4, and did anything come after #6?

Posted by: Hugh at April 6, 2005 5:45 PM

An interesting piece was posted this morning on the Free Muslims Against Terrorism website:

http://www.freemuslims.org/news/article.php?article=559

To all our Catholic Friends
April 6, 2005
Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf
On the occasion of the passing of Pope John Paul II, we wish to express our deepest condolences to all our Catholic friends.

Muslims share with Christians the belief that the real goal of life is the eternal life in the hereafter, and we pray that Pope John Paul's soul be welcomed into the best and highest rank in that eternal life.

Pope John Paul was in many respects a 21st century Pope. He saw the papacy transformed, and helped transform it, from one presiding over a smaller and more Western and European demographic to an increasingly international one. He worked diligently to further interfaith dialogue called for in Nostra Aetate, which reads: "The Church also has a high regard for the Muslims, who worship one God, living and subsistent, merciful and compassionate, the Creator of heaven and earth;" adding that "the Council has also called for the Church to have a dialogue with followers of the Prophet;" adding that "even if over the course of centuries Christians and Muslims have had more than a few dissensions and quarrels, this sacred Council now urges all to forget the past and to work toward mutual understanding as well as toward the preservation and promotion of social justice, moral welfare, peace, and freedom for the benefit of all mankind." (Nostra Aetate 3)

His pro-activity in this regard was notable. He prayed for peace in Bosnia, in Palestine and Israel. He was the first pope to visit a mosque, most notably the mosque of John the Baptist in Damascus, Syria, a site holy both to Muslims and Christians. His concern with building relationships with Muslims broke new ground, and in his best selling book, Crossing the Threshold of Hope, took pride in his unforgettable "encounter with the young people at Casablanca Stadium in 1985." "As a result of their monotheism," Pope John writes, "believers in Allah are particularly close to us." He respected the "religiosity of Muslims," admitting that "it is impossible not to admire their fidelity to prayer. The image of believers in Allah who, without caring about time or place, fall to their knees and immerse themselves in prayer remains a model for all those who invoke the true God, in particular for those Christians who, having deserted their magnificent Cathedrals, pray only a little or not at all." [p. 93]

Because he came from Poland, a country that suffered under Communist totalitarian rule, he used the moral power of his office; and in the process of freeing his people, played a major role in hastening the demise of Communism. It is noteworthy that Lech Walesa awards Pope John Paul 50% of the credit for freeing Poland and splits the balance: 30% to Solidarity and the Poles, and 20% to the then political leaders Gorbachev, Yeltsin, Reagan, Thatcher and Kohl.

Perhaps what is less on the radar screen of most people is the role the Catholic Church played during the Reagan Administration in the ending of the authoritarian regime of Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines, and in bringing forth a peaceful transition to the nascent democracy of Corazon Aquino.

Non-Muslims are not generally aware that this was an example of the use of the power of religion to bring about political freedom, and further the aspirations of a deeply believing Catholic population for better economic and social welfare, and participation in self-determination- what we in the West call "democracy." This paralleled the phenomena the world witnessed in Iran, and is now witnessing in other parts of the Muslim world.

We pray that the next pope will continue furthering Christian-Muslim relations, and will use the power of his papacy to urge for social justice, moral welfare, political freedom and self-determination that Muslims in many parts of the world long for so much. The Quran informs Muslims that the nearest in friendship to Muslims are Christians; and that the reason for this is because there are among them priests and monks, i.e. those who have given themselves humbly up for the cause of God. We can think of no greater cause today in the way of God than that the next Pope will continue the legacy of Pope John Paul II, and work towards a greater understanding of the positive role that religion-all religion- can play in a shrunken global society, in order to build the "kingdom of heaven on earth," the Biblical "City on the Hill" that has space in it for adherents of all faiths, including those who in their spiritual journey, are still at the stage of finding no need for faith at all.

While I have tremendous respect for what he did in his life, I can see the fallacy of his failures to honestly deal with the threat of Islamism. I think a figure like, Arinze, who is "close to the action" and who is keenly aware of Islamism, may provide the greatest prospects for a Pope willing to rise to the ocassion.

Thomas

Posted by: Thomas at April 6, 2005 6:18 PM

Hugh and Trupolitik
I posted a link to this very paper by Cardinal Arinze on Sunday at the "Arab News: The Pope apologized for the Crusades" thread.
Because the paper was delivered at The Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University the response to it was not good. I replied that in my innocence I had taken the Cardinals words at face value.
I was impressed by the same points that Trupolitik repeats, and I'm glad that someone else has seen this possibility.
I keep saying that Black African Christians are the ones who know what's what about Islam. He is the candidate I like the look of so far, but my gut reaction is that a Latin American will be chosen.

Posted by: Granny Weatherwax at April 6, 2005 6:29 PM

The man for pope is Cardinal Godfried Danneels. He believes this:

"A leading European cardinal claimed that Islam could not integrate into Europe unless it makes a clear break between religion and state as Roman Catholicism went through after the French revolution."

http://news.spirithit.com/index/europe/more/european_cardinal_calls_for_secularizing_islam/

Posted by: Skeet Street at April 6, 2005 6:35 PM

Note CAIR's recent news release on teh pope:

http://religion.upi.com/view.php?StoryID=20050404-085424-9241r

Posted by: Thomas at April 6, 2005 8:07 PM

Granny,

I am glad you saw it as well. I dont know what Hugh expects him to say. "Kill em all"???

What is more, if he wants to know what else is said, the link was provided. More reading, less jibber jabber, Hugh. ;-)

Anyway, what I really liked is that he never said the religions were the same. He never said the viewpoints on human rights were the same. In fact, he seemed to be politely saying, "you guys are playing on an equal playing field. If you want peace, change" If you go through the paper he keeps talking about what should be done by both sides, and then says the truth, Chritians are already doing and Muslims are not.

The way I read it was that while he was willing to have good conversation, there a point to which he would not yield, a line he would not cross. To me that is the essence of Christian behavior. I mean, for the leader of Interfaith section of the church to basically tell muslims they need all the changing and we need to welcome you, speaks volumes.

I think (maybe it is just my hope of hopes) that he will be Pope. Alot of attention is being placed on Africa these days. Armies are being built, and Billions are being poured into different "initiatives". His being ordained Pope fits hand in glove with this.

Granted, a pope from latin America would be similar to Pope John Paul;s nomination as ithelped bring down Oppressive goverments, but I think in all honesty, as bad as the situation in latin America is...Africa is infinitely worse. Pick a problem.

If he is not Pope it will be a wasted opportunity.

But I think he will.

Posted by: Trupolitik at April 6, 2005 8:57 PM

Prediction: The next Pope will be an ultra conservative dhimmitized African. And BTW African is not code for "black" either, but the continent.

The Catholic Church is political and only cares about survival, that's why dhimmitude is preferable to confrontation (if you can't beat 'em , join 'em). Latin American will not be the source of the next pope because Latin America is secure in it's Catholic following, and Latin Americans are relatively un or under educated hence "religious". Europe is given up on, because of the education of the masses.

The only fertile field left for proslytizing and expanding the numbers of the faithful is in Africa, and Africa is the target of evangelicals, and Muslims, thus a prime market target and a competitive eschatological battleground.

Evangelicals will fight Muslims head on as in Nigeria,with the consequent bloodshed that Nigeria suffered where war broke out when Christian Muslims resisted Sharia. The Pope will accomodate Muslims through dhimmitude. A policy of appeasement, based on forelorn hope, the Church has learned nothing at all from History.

Yes the Church does need a Pope Urban, and a Pope who sees it's very survival is not dependent on maintaining and militating for "ultra conservative" patriarchial social policy, but on confronting that which threatens to overwhelm it, and eventually eliminate it.

Muslims don't seek to convert kaffirs, for to do so would be counterproductive. Islam needs dhimmi's to sustain, and maintain the ummah, to do the grunt work, pay the taxes. In time though, the dhimmi's will tire of being slaves and convert as they did in Egypt, Albania, Macedonia, Kosovo, Greece, Sicily, Bosnia, Chechnya, and yes Andalusa

What the heck.We are all dhimmi's every time we fill the tank or use plastic we are paying jizyah.

The Pope should stand for what the Bible requires. The Bible doesn't support Sharia Law so the Pope should speak out against the discriminatory aspects of the Sharia. And no more Quran kissing(a futile pointless gesture that accomplished nothing). Posted by: starsandstripes

Starsandstripes a typical protestant, who understands nothing about Catholicism, but can only project. Catholics see the Bible not as a source, nor as a point of departure, eschatology or discussion. Catholics including the Pope are not Bible thumpers.

To Catholics Peter was the successor of IHSus, and the "revelation" is ongoing, the Pope doesn't even refer to or read the Bible because Catholics believe that God speaks through the Pope, and that's why Papal Encyclicals or Papal Bulls are considered to be unquestionable and sacrosanct.

However the notion of Papal infallibility is in itself a rather recent notion, as a consequence of a Papal "Bull". The doctrine was never official until 1870, the document of Pastor Aeturnus, and then only qualified infallibility when he speaks ex cathedra.

All of which to say that telling Catholics or the Pope to read the Bible is a waste of time and a plea from ignorance.

Posted by: Giaour at April 6, 2005 10:06 PM

So the next Pope should be a Muslim?

Here's a link to show how screaming "Racism"
can get Muslims 10,000 dollars for their Mosque in England,a Muslim was offended by a comment during a debate and said the Police fail to stop the Racist insults to Muslims.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/lancashire/4414701.stm

Posted by: ala-sux at April 6, 2005 10:23 PM

I hope Catholics are not stupid to trust the Muslims. Here is an example from Muslim's comment in Ali Sina's website (www.faithfreedom.org)

Nothing can cure a Muslim. Like the Nazis they are full of hate.
------------------------------------------
From:
"Ali Mohammed"

Subject:
your site and the Pope

Date:
Mon, 04 Apr 2005 07:17:33 +0000

The pope is dead. One Christian scumbag down. Allahu Akbar! You will too soon join the Pope.

Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar!

Posted by: buddha at April 6, 2005 10:36 PM

If Cardinal McCarrick were prime minister of Great Britain in 1938, he would be Neville Chamberlain. If Cardinal McCarrick were the British foreign minister in 1938, he would be Lord Halifax.

Posted by: Joseph D'Hippolito at April 7, 2005 1:26 AM

A hard-core Protestant's analysis:

JPII attempted to reconcile both the truth claims of traditional Roman Catholicism with an openness and modernization that followed Vatican 2. An important break, though, was that whereas Tridentine and eariler Roman Catholicism tended to see a world clearly divided into the realms of belief and damned unbelief, with the Roman church on one side and ALL others (even Eastern Orthodox and high Anglicans) on the other, post-V2 Roman Catholicism tends to look at the world as a series of concentric circles of which Christ is center. The Roman church is closest to the center; then, perhaps the Eastern Orthodox; next, the Protestants (but divided over whether the Evangelicals who have the numbers and orthodoxy or the liberals with the money, power, and historic organizations are further out); next the Jews, who at least have 4/5 of the Bible; then the Muslims...etc.

Speaking as one who accepts both the Messiah as the great divider of humanity (i.e., there's such a thing as truth) AND the Holy Spirit's work of bringing people from the wrong side to the right one, I agree fully that we cannot expect the Pope, or anyone who would sincerely seek to follow Christ to say "Kill them All".

Certanily, the erroneous Qur'an should not be kissed; nor should Islam be seen as inherently closer than Unitarianism, Rabbinc Judaism, Karaism, or Samaritanism, but at the same time, I believe firmly that the Christian response to the Furor Islamicus must be a renewed and deepened committment to speaking the truth of the Gospel in love, not a new armed crusade.

As for the new pope, I pray for an admission that Zwingli, Luther, and Calvin were right in saying that we are justified by the imputed (rather than infused) righteousness of Christ, but not holding my breath.

As for a Latin American Pope, I have my misgivings. Latin America is not really solid for Rome, but has been yielding converts to Evangelicals and Pentecostals for generations; and some in various Latin American hierarchies, whether Traditionalists or Liberation Theologians, see us Protestants as heretical poachers yet. Also, Latin America is one of the few parts of the world where Marxism-Leninism is still attractive; and the plight of Indigenous Evangelicals caught between RC enmity and Marxist insistence that all Evangelicals are Yanqui spies in places like Colombia or Guatemala can be pretty horrifying. Remember, a combination of inherited anti-Evangelical bigotry and Marxist dialectical materialism among the Sandinistas gave the Moravian Miskito Indians of the Caribbean Coast a very rough time, driving many of a semi-pacifistic sect to armed defense.

A Subsaharan African might conceivably understand that, vis-a-vis Islamofascism, Protestants and Catholics are in the same boat.

Finally, a note on the Free Muslims Against Terrorism. They run the gamut from people who would be major revisionists of Islamic belief to people who are orthodox but willing to appeal to every possible legal hedge in islamic law to justify refraining from attacks on a wide range of non-Muslims. I'll continue to give such people the benefit of the doubt.

Posted by: Kepha at April 7, 2005 5:52 AM

"I believe firmly that the Christian response to the Furor Islamicus must be a renewed and deepened commitment to speaking the truth of the Gospel in love, not a new armed crusade.

A Subsaharan African might conceivably understand that, vis-a-vis Islamofascism, Protestants and Catholics are in the same boat.

Free Muslims Against Terrorism…... I'll continue to give such people the benefit of the doubt."
Posted by Kepha earlier today

As a middling Anglican I can agree with that.
Keep using that telling phrase ISLAMOFASCISM
Until the world knows that this is not a religion of peace hijacked by terrorists.
But a doctrine of war and oppression, that has tried to hijack The Almighty.

Posted by: Granny Weatherwax at April 7, 2005 7:12 AM

A discussion on the The next pope

Odds from the bookmakers favor Francis Arinze of Nigeria, which incidentally is more or less the speculation of the Arabs.

Weatherwax you are one of only two Brits that I know, that realize the threat of Islam.

The other Brits (Aussies,Europeans) I encounter on the net give the Muslims a pass, they believe that there is a difference between Arab Muslims and European Muslims.

Interestingly watching Deutsche Welle's Journal today on Link TV. the comment was that European Muslims are more prone to violence, fanaticism and jihad than Arab Muslims, because they don't live in the mid east are out of touch and feel "humiliated" by the invasion of Iraq and the Palestinian situation.

Humiliation is a big thing with the Arab concept of manhood, and that people who live in Europe can feel "humiliated" is proof in itself that Islam is nothing more than a virus that turns people into Arabs. Indeed Islam is Arab Imperialism.

In the minds of Muslims, including converts, Arab and Muslim are synonyms, In fact even non Arab Christian populations of Lebanon,Syria, Iraq and Palestine identify themselves as Arab.

Genetically the Arab population of the world is quite small, mostly in The Kingdom and Iraq.

Egyptians (whom comprise the majority of "Palestinians") are not Arabs at all, but Egyptians. The identification as Arab is based soley on the mother tongue, which of course was imposed by the Arab conquerors who then forced Islam down the throats of their victims, by imposing their language, Qur'an and Shari'a.

There are a lot of Arabs still in Spain, descendants of the Morisco's who stayed behind after the Reconquista, descendants of the Moors, they constitute the dark Spaniards. Many of whom have now openly reverted (publicly) to Islam.

Posted by: Giaour at April 7, 2005 12:42 PM

I believe that the Muslims fear those believers coming from the Evangelical wing of Christianity. Although there are brave priests, bishops, nuns and Catholic lay people who have spoken out about Islam, I think that it is the Evangelcials who have the fortitude to fight fire with fire, so to speak. I am not an Evanglical myself, but I feel that they can be counted on to confront the Muslim world. I would hope that at the very least, the Vatican can speak out more forcefully for those Christians and non-Muslims caught in the Islamic lands with little or no hope for a safe future for themselves and their children.

Posted by: maryrose at April 7, 2005 1:39 PM

From Maryrose: I believe that the Muslims fear those believers coming from the Evangelical wing of Christianity

From Linda:

You are correct! Wait, Watch, See, and be patient.

I will say this.... after doing some serious research over the past 3 years, I've come to the conclusion that muslims (per se') are not the enemy.. The enemy is islam, and islam WILL be defeated. The elimination of this cult will bring freedom and deliverance to many who are born and bred under its severe constraints. The bonds of islam that enslave so, so very many innocent souls will be broken. Although the cult (hiding under the cloak of a religion) claims 1.2 billion followers, if those followers were truly given free choice to stay in the cult, or leave the cult, I would imagine an exodus of 1 billion. The remaining cultists/followers would consist of males between the ages of 16-70 and the ayatollah's in Iran.

It is both a duty and an honor to resist this cult and to work for the freedom of those slaves of islam that simply have no way out. We must MAKE a way out, a way to safety, a way for apostates to feel a sense of respect, honor, pride, dignity and righteousness. And above all, apostates must KNOW that we will keep themselves and their families safe. This should be one of the roles of Homeland Security.

It will be our generation's burden to eliminate this cult, and free the slaves of islam.

We've freed slaves before, and we can do it again.

Posted by: Just_Linda at April 7, 2005 9:34 PM

Quite agree with you Linda - the cult and not the people. I think this should be manifest, but it does bear repeating.

Geoff

Posted by: Geoff at April 8, 2005 12:51 AM