• Why Jihad Watch?
  • About Robert Spencer and Staff Writers
  • FAQ
  • Books
  • Muhammad
  • Islam 101
  • Privacy

Jihad Watch

Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

Why Pope Francis shouldn’t have washed and kissed the feet of Muslim migrants

Mar 31, 2016 6:21 pm By Robert Spencer

“When the Pope kneels before a Muslim, these are the thoughts that will come into the minds of many followers of Islam. For them, the Pope’s gesture will serve as confirmation of the age-old Islamic conception of Christianity as a second-rate religion. Although some Muslims may be moved by the Pope’s gesture and some may even be converted, it’s likely that a majority of Muslims will interpret it as a sign of weakness.” Indeed. And submission. But as the entire Catholic hierarchy and even the rank-and-file clergy appear to be in full submission mode, and determined to stigmatize those who call evil what it is, the Pope’s act was in line with the way the wind is blowing.

Italy Pope Holy Thursday (Thanks to Urban Infidel for the photo.)

“The Problem with Multicultural Foot Washing,” by William Kilpatrick, Crisis, March 31, 2016:

During Holy Thursday Mass, Pope Francis washed the feet of migrants, three of whom were Muslims. Most Catholics understood this as a gesture of humility and brotherhood. That is how the Catholic press reported it—and that, undoubtedly, was the Pope’s intention.

Many Muslims, however, may see it differently—not as a gesture of brotherhood, but as one of submission and surrender. The word “Islam” means “submission,” and submission is what Islam expects of other faiths. Muslims consider Islam to be the supreme religion. To the extent that it tolerates the “People of the Book” (Christians and Jews), Islam tolerates them on the condition that they acknowledge its supremacy.

Historically, the People of the Book were expected to assume the status of dhimmis—second-class citizens with limited rights. The origin of this attitude can be found in several verses in the Koran, particularly 9:29, which says that the “People of the Book” are to be fought “until they pay the jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”

The conditions that govern the lives of dhimmis were further elaborated in the Pact of Omar (named after the second caliph, Omar bin al-Khattab). The two dozen or so stipulations include a prohibition on building new churches or repairing old ones, a prohibition on displaying crosses, and a demand that dhimmis give up their seats “to honor the Muslims.”

With the passage of time, the dhimmi requirements were expanded, but the general idea was to keep Christians in their place, and even humiliate them. Sometimes, when dhimmis paid the jizya, they were required to approach the tax official on all fours.

Unfortunately, the dhimmi laws are not a thing of the past. Churches are prohibited in Saudi Arabia, and Christian visitors to the Kingdom are not allowed to bring Bibles with them. In Pakistan and other Muslim countries, Christians are looked upon by many as inferior beings, fit only for menial jobs. In Iraq and Syria, the Islamic State has re-imposed the jizya tax, and Islamic State scholars cite the Koran and the Pact of Omar as justification for doing so.

When the Pope kneels before a Muslim, these are the thoughts that will come into the minds of many followers of Islam. For them, the Pope’s gesture will serve as confirmation of the age-old Islamic conception of Christianity as a second-rate religion. Although some Muslims may be moved by the Pope’s gesture and some may even be converted, it’s likely that a majority of Muslims will interpret it as a sign of weakness.

In assessing the impact of the novel foot-washing ceremony, the timing also needs to be taken into account. The Holy Thursday Mass came two days after the Brussels bombings, and at a time when Muslim persecution of Christians is escalating. If Christianity was anything other than a humiliated faith, Muslims would expect to see some kind of strong response or some gesture of resolve.

Islam claims to be the natural religion of mankind, and the natural response to aggression is resistance. As Osama bin Laden reminded us, “if a man sees a strong horse and a weak horse, he will by nature favor the strong horse.” Yet, in the face of worldwide attacks on Christians, Church leaders meekly call for more dialogue and indulge in “reaching-out” gestures.

These unfortunate interpretations of the foot-washing ceremony could have been avoided if Pope Francis had not sought to give it a multi-religious flavor. Apparently, he was hoping to make a statement about the Church’s inclusivity. But the statement may have backfired. That’s one of the dangers in politicizing the liturgy. Muslims who see the Pope’s gesture as one of submission before Islam are not going to be convinced of the wisdom of Christian charity, they are going to be convinced of the prudence of sticking with the strong-horse religion. They will be more, not less likely to throw in their lot with the militants. If the Catholic Church appears to be submitting to Islam, they will reason that the only safe course of action is to do the same….

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Follow me on Facebook

Filed Under: Catholic Church, dhimmitude, Featured, Islamic supremacism Tagged With: Pope Francis


Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Comments

  1. jihad3tracker says

    Mar 31, 2016 at 6:34 pm

    An obvious point here to Jihad Watch’s long-time readers — those of us who know the minds of devout Muslims — something Robert has written about many times.

    ANY GESTURE — SMALL OR NOT INTENTIONAL of “reverence” for Islam will be exploited AS WEAKNESS TOWARD ALLAH’S SUPREMACY.

    Pope Francis is a good hearted but ignorant fool — who, at his advanced senior age, is clearly someone whom no Cardinals have the courage to oppose.

    • Bridget Ames says

      Mar 31, 2016 at 7:23 pm

      I like your optimism and I myself know I need to pray for him more, but sometimes I wonder if he truly is good hearted or a humanist spreading his false ideologies.

      • Mirren10 says

        Apr 1, 2016 at 7:25 am

        ”Pope Francis is a good hearted but ignorant fool — who, at his advanced senior age, is clearly someone whom no Cardinals have the courage to oppose.”

        http://angelqueen.org/2016/01/20/did-pope-francis-threaten-the-authors-of-the-13-cardinals-letter/

        • Mirren10 says

          Apr 1, 2016 at 7:34 am

          From the article in the link:

          ” I have heard from several second-hand sources who know people who were present that the Holy Father had a terrible outburst in the dining room at Santa Marta in front of bishops, priests, seminarians and many others. He was apparently screaming “Full power has been given to me! I run the show around here. Who do these cardinals think they are? I will remove their [red] hats.” He was so angry that he almost fainted; some say he almost had a heart attack. People were shocked, and the news spread like wildfire in certain circles in Rome.”

        • jihad3tracker says

          Apr 1, 2016 at 8:59 am

          Thank you, Mirren, for that revelatory & entirely plausible item.

          Robert often is the moderator here, but if he has someone else is doing it currently, and because you are the original poster, howzabout YOU passing that hotlink on to him ?

          Use “director [at] jihadwatch [dot] org” for the path.

        • Custos Custodum says

          Apr 1, 2016 at 3:12 pm

          Thank you, Mirren, for that item.

          Secular princes have been involved in papal politics from time immemorial.

          Given that John Paul II and Benedict XVI played significant roles in rolling back socialism, would it be surprising if “progressives” under Obama had used the CIA and other resources to force the resignation of Benedict and his replacement with a reliable “liberation theology” front man?

          And if so, would such secret backers not CONTINUE to use secret service methods (blackmail, comprehensive physical and electronic surveillance, special operations to destroy the reputation or person of Francis’ opponents, etc.)

          Remember that to the “Left,” the aim has always been WORLD DOMINATION. Mere nation states are petty “bourgeois” “constructs” to be discarded at will when the demands of global domination require it.

        • Custos Custodum says

          Apr 1, 2016 at 3:25 pm

          Pope Francis washed the feet of migrants, three of whom were Muslims.

          Doesn’t this whole spectacle seem like a sophomoric revenge fantasy concocted by a gaggle of political operatives out of Georgetown U., no doubt with some major personal hang-ups against the Catholic Church in connection with sexual or (non-)procreational preferences?

          Washing of feet as such is an established and honorable Christian tradition, but earlier incarnations of this rite were appropriately stage managed to send the right message. As Robert Spencer and other commenters have pointed out, the choice of three Muslims as recipients of papal devotions is as bizarre as it is immensely harmful to Western civilization.

    • Nick says

      Apr 1, 2016 at 1:44 am

      Why is it that half of Muslims don’t care about there religion and these false ideologies, while the other half do like to impose it. People wake up half of Muslims in the world have been inbreeding for 1400 years and even until now which causes them a sense of inferiority in comparison to other people across the world so in order to compensate there sense of low self worth they like to use false ideologies such as dhimmi attitude to non-Muslims which is of course is wrong and we all know it who feels backwards and inferior in this modern world. Plain simple reverse my jealousy and inferiority status on others. Example the Greeks considered the Turks an inferior race while the Turks envied the Greeks for various reasons and tried make them feel inferior.

      • Andy says

        Apr 1, 2016 at 3:30 am

        You are dead right that the papa is an intelligent fool. The Bible states that in the world there are INTELLIGENT fools. Let’s say that a few Muslims turn to christianity because the papa washed the feet of Muslims. What kind of christianity will they embrace? I say it will be ROMAN CATHOLICISM. According to the Holy Scriptures anybody who kneels in front of a statue bowing the head in reverence to the statue is an idolater and thus they become ABOMINABLE to Almighty God. Here it is: 1st Peter 4:3: For the time past of our life may suffice us to have wrought the will of the Gentiles, when we walked in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of wine, revellings, banquetings, and ABOMINABLE IDOLATRIES.: Btw it is PETER who wrote the words under the Holy Spirit’s influence.

        • vince says

          Apr 1, 2016 at 4:51 am

          IDOLATRY:
          noun [ mass noun ]
          the worship of idols.
          • extreme admiration, love, or reverence for something or someone

          According to the definition of idolatry, no Roman Catholic is one since they only worship the one true God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit). You need to look at all references in the bible regarding statues, imagery and relics. If God commands such things to be, then it isn’t idolatry:

          Exodus 2:18 And you shall make two cherubim of gold; of hammered work you shall make them at the two ends of the mercy seat.

          Numbers 21:8-9 Then the Lord said to Moses, “Make a fiery serpent, and set it on a pole; and it shall be that everyone who is bitten, when he looks at it, shall live.” So Moses made a bronze serpent, and put it on a pole; and so it was, if a serpent had bitten anyone, when he looked at the bronze serpent, he lived.

          1 Kings 6:23-25 Inside the inner sanctuary he made two cherubim of olive wood, each ten cubits high. One wing of the cherub was five cubits, and the other wing of the cherub five cubits: ten cubits from the tip of one wing to the tip of the other. And the other cherub was ten cubits; both cherubim were of the same size and shape.

          1 Kings 6:35 Then he carved cherubim, palm trees, and open flowers on them, and overlaid them with gold applied evenly on the carved work.

          Other references that could be considered idolatry but is not:

          Matthew 9:20-21 20 And suddenly, a woman who had a flow of blood for twelve years came from behind and touched the hem of His garment. For she said to herself, “If only I may touch His garment, I shall be made well.”

          Acts 19:11-12 Now God worked unusual miracles by the hands of Paul, so that even handkerchiefs or aprons were brought from his body to the sick, and the diseases left them and the evil spirits went out of them.

    • maghan says

      Apr 1, 2016 at 2:58 am

      Apply Occam’s razor. Make it short and snappy. That Pope is a dim-witted exhibitionist.

  2. Kepha says

    Mar 31, 2016 at 6:50 pm

    Many Muslims, however, may see it differently—not as a gesture of brotherhood, but as one of submission and surrender.

    Such Muslims will have a far worse consequence: before the Judge of all mankind, whom all of us must one day face more surely than the sun setting yesterday, they will prove themselves steeped in pride, disregard for truth, contempt for the Word of God who became flesh and washed his disciples feet (I mean Jesus the Messiah, not Pope Francis), numerous other sins, and thus fit for the Lake of Fire reserved for the devil and his angels.

    I choose to hope that perhaps some of these migrants, who had enough goodwill to accept some time with the Pope, may be led to the Gospel of John, in which Jesus’ washing of his disciples’ feet is recorded, and from there to faith in the Word made flesh who dwelt among us. And I will pray for this.

    By all means, the guys who hide among the refugees as a way of having a chance to blow up Kufr and rape Kufr women should be found out and hanged (no, Westerners already labor under too great a tax burden to be required to support such lowlifes for the remainder of their natural lives). The imams who encourage such behavior should be kicked out of whatever country allowed them to sojourn. If the current refugee flow is indeed a hijra jihad, by all means it must stay in Syria and not be allowed to cross into Europe or any other country which desires a quiet and orderly life.

    But, in principle, I see nothing wrong with what the Pope did. If Muslims choose to interpret the Pope’s gesture as humiliation before Islam, the problem is with the Muslims, not the Pope (and I am a Protestant and will remain one).

    • Nichole says

      Mar 31, 2016 at 10:51 pm

      I agree. Well said.

    • SpiritOf1683 says

      Apr 1, 2016 at 1:54 am

      What is more important is the way THEY see it. They see it as weakness and kowtowing on our part. A further act of submission, and further evidence that they’re the strong horse and we’re the weak one, and that we’re there for the taking.

      • Magali Marc says

        Apr 1, 2016 at 10:40 am

        SpiritOf1683: No what is more important is that Christians continue the tradition and the rituals we practised way before islam even existed!
        If you start worrying about what the Jihadists believe you’re doing then what will you want to cancel next? The Holy Communion because they view it as cannibalism? Christmas Holidays because some Muslims object to it?
        How the Muslims or Jihadists choose to understand my religion is the least of my worries.
        The Holy father ignorant of Islam? Why should he be a an expert in other religions? His job is to tell us what Christianity is about. How we deal with Jihadists is up to us!

        • SteveFinSC says

          Apr 1, 2016 at 2:58 pm

          However, the problem here is not the washing of feet, but whose feet are being washed. If the pope were washing the feet of his cardinals to demonstrate his servant leadership and love for his flock (What Jesus was doing when he washed his disciples’ feet) that would be one thing. But, to wash the feet of fully-professed unbelievers is something else entirely. He was obviously misguided no matter how well-meaning. Jesus did not wash the feet of the unrepentant sinner. These Muslims are not part of the pope’s flock. Islam denies, as part of its theology, the divinity of Jesus, his death, his resurrection, and his place as the Savior of mankind. That is the basic theology of Christianity! “What hath light to do with darkness?” What the pope did was wrong. But, it is just one of many things he has done that are against Christian teaching.

        • SpiritOf1683 says

          Apr 1, 2016 at 3:48 pm

          The way they see it is how they interpret it. They interpret it as us being weak, grovelling, and shallow. It sends out a loud hailer message to the Islamic world that we’re weak and ripe for toppling. Could you see an imam washing the feet of an infidel? Somehow, I doubt it.

        • gravenimage says

          Apr 1, 2016 at 11:49 pm

          Magali Marc wrote:

          SpiritOf1683: No what is more important is that Christians continue the tradition and the rituals we practised way before islam even existed!
          If you start worrying about what the Jihadists believe you’re doing then what will you want to cancel next?
          …………………………

          Magali Marc, you are mistaken in your belief that there is a long tradition of Pope’s washing the feet of Muslims.

          This Pope was the first to do this, beginning in 2013 if I recall correctly.

        • Magali Marc says

          Apr 2, 2016 at 10:33 am

          @ Gravenimage: «…Although the practice (feet washing) had fallen into disuse for a long time in parish celebrations, it was restored in 1955 by Pope Pius XII as a part of the general reform of Holy Week. At that time the traditional significance of the rite of foot washing was stated by the Sacred Congregation of Rites…»
          Obviously, this practice was not invented by Pope Francis!

        • gravenimage says

          Apr 4, 2016 at 6:29 pm

          Megali Marc, your implication that Pope Pius was washing Muslims’ feet back in 1955 is mistaken at best and meretricious at worst.

      • Keys says

        Apr 1, 2016 at 11:10 am

        That’s how I see it too, Spirit of 1683. It will only encourage Muslims to further Allah’s designs to have all mankind submit to Allah.

        And these kinds of encouraging and placating actions by Western leaders are proof that Allah is, and will continue, assisting them in jihad resulting in strengthening their resolve.

        Many individual Muslims may see it differently, but Islamic leaders and organizations like CAIR, the Muslim Brotherhood, etc. will tell their followers these signs verify that Allah’s immutable plan is working through his warriors – join the fight, be part of the glorious battle; see the clear evidence that the largest religion on Earth is beginning to submit to Allah.

  3. Godwin says

    Mar 31, 2016 at 6:54 pm

    This fool has nothing better to do. He should have opened up the gates of the Vatican and allow thousands of Muslim refugees to stay for free food n lodging forever. That would be a better act of charity in the name of Christ.

  4. Robert Zarranz says

    Mar 31, 2016 at 7:08 pm

    This so called Pope has left the teachings of Jesus a long time ago. Catholic laity need to hold the Church together and weather this horrible storm. One thig Jesus promised was that we will prevail.

  5. sally says

    Mar 31, 2016 at 7:11 pm

    I admit i am not orthodox but ill tell you God’s truth. the humility in jesus’s life represents the humility we need to have in ourselves because the ego is satan and humbling ourselves before god, eg, finally making the choices that lead you to get over the fact that you wife screwed your best friend and maybe eventually to realise youre better off all require humility (maybe you didnt treat her well or maybe you needed to come to terms that it wasnt okay that mom beat you or whatever the case may be). So the symbolism of foot washing is about repentance, Chrst only goes to work when, and here’s the catch, surrender (submit) to the Holy Spirit. So not only does fransis not take into account the fact of whether there is any repentance going go, which blasphemes the metaphor and ritual for what is always very personal and holy healing work between your soul and the Trinity, but do understand that by its very definition, Islam blasphemes the Holy Spirit, in whom we do surrender ourselves if we want to be happy and healthy

  6. Jerry says

    Mar 31, 2016 at 7:21 pm

    I wholeheartedly agree with Mr. Spencer that some muslims will see feet-kissing as a sign of weakness. But I personally would not want it any other way. This is what makes Christianity the light of spiritual wisdom for me, I speak as an atheist. This is the act that transcends the hatred humans love to live. In my skeptical mind, this is god kissing the feet of humanity. This is what makes Christianity great, the example the world needs. I don’t think much of religion. But I’m smart enough to know goodness when I see it. No, the pope ain’t weak with the blowing wind, he’s strong for what’s good and right. One man kissing feet in humility doesn’t inspire jihad, muslims already have their motives. Instead it teaches kindness with example. I can say without the slightest reservation that I respect him for the act. He sets a good example in his own way for humanity, just as does Robert Spencer and the David Horowitz Freedom Center does in fighting islamic bigotry.

    I stand by the pope and his well-intentioned gesture of humility and peace toward all. Let the whole islamic world see the basis for our beliefs in this man’s kind gesture. It’s the perfect counterpoint to the world’s madness. Let the Pope live his love, we’ll do the dirty that sets us free. There’s more than one kind of hero in life. Let’s not think we’re the only ones serving humanity. It really is a team effort.

    • DFD says

      Apr 1, 2016 at 7:29 am

      Jerry says; 2…. Let the Pope live his love, we’ll do the dirty that sets us free. There’s more than one kind of hero in life. Let’s not think we’re the only ones serving humanity. It really is a team effort.”

      Agreed.

      In particular: we’ll do the dirty that sets us free
      And: It really is a team effort.

    • gravenimage says

      Apr 1, 2016 at 11:53 pm

      Jerry wrote:

      Let the Pope live his love, we’ll do the dirty that sets us free.
      ……………………….

      Jerry, why would you consider exposing the threat of Islam to be “dirty”?

      • Jerry says

        Apr 2, 2016 at 8:50 am

        War is always dirty work, you know that.

  7. Fred Boenig says

    Mar 31, 2016 at 7:34 pm

    Robert Spenser- Really? You are going to tell The Pope what a Christian should do? Really- as much false hate you spew- you are going to tell the POPE- Wow- you really do think highly of yourself and your knowledge of Christianity. Telling the POPE how to be a Christian- I just shake my head.

    Well now I really have heard everything!

    • Angemon says

      Mar 31, 2016 at 8:04 pm

      a) – It’s Spencer, not Spenser
      b) – The article was written by William Kilpatrick
      c) – No one here is telling the Pope what to do since the Pope doesn’t take his marching orders from anyone here
      d) – There’s plenty of Christians out there to whom the Pope is not the leader of the Faith but someone ranging from a misguided fool to the Antichrist – i.e., the Pope has no jurisdiction over non-Catholics. Are, for example, Protestants wrong if they disagree with the Pope?
      e) – Catholics are allowed to criticise the Pope if, for no other reason, because he’s human and humans err.
      f) – Appeal to authority is a logical fallacy.
      g) – Why are you visiting this website when you claim the director “spews much false hate” (does this mean there’s true hate?)?
      h) – You’ve heard everything? Really? Have you hear a muslim cleric saying that muhammad was not a really nice person and that islam should be reformed?

      • Stephen says

        Mar 31, 2016 at 10:58 pm

        Was St. Paul wrong when he corrected the first Pope, St. Peter for his dissimulation? Make no mistake what the Pope did was the same form of dissimulation Peter was guilty of. No. St. Peter accepted it in humility.

        • Kepha says

          Apr 1, 2016 at 10:55 pm

          Even though I share a name with the “first Pope”–

          @Stephen: There’s a wonderful sermon by Bp. J.C. Ryle entitled “Beware of Men” that you might like to look up and read (even if it was preached well over a century ago).

          Paul’s rebuke of Peter (found in the book of Galatians) came from the latter’s first eating with Gentiles at Antioch, then pretending he hadn’t when he thought some of the other Jewish Christians would disapprove. Paul thereupon reminded Peter (Cephas) that we are justified by faith; and that Gentiles as well as Jews are heirs of God’s grace.

          Paul’s rebuke to my namesake means that the church must serve those without as well as those within–just as Paul was bringing the Gentile (Greek, Roman, and whoever) outsiders under the Messiah, alongside those Jews who had already believed.

          Backtrack to other things.

          I understand there’s a Jewish legend of the Lamed-Vavniks, 36 righteous persons who may or may not know who they are, for whose sake the world is preserved and divine judgment is withheld. . The Christian faith has a similar teaching.

          Jesus taught that Christians are to be salt and light in this world. Light, in that we reflect and carry the true light of God’s Word; salt in that we act as a preservative, preventing the rot that would otherwise happen. Jesus goes on to teach that if the salt loses its savor, it is good only to be cast out and trampled underfoot. This “saltiness” or “savor” of the church is its doing as Christ commands (not at all using a drunken sailor’s cursing), which as some other Christian posters have noted includes humility. A good part of that “saltiness” is practicing the spiritual warfare of prayer, loving witness, and constructive service taught in the Old and New Testaments which seeks the good not only of fellow Christ-followers, but of those outside as well.

          I nod to Jerry above on this one. Jesus, in teaching us to be salt and light, teaches us to remain Christians; even if others despise us for it. I am at heart an old-line Calvinist, not a Roman Catholic, “Feet-washin'” Primitive Baptist, nor a Mennonite, and I take Jesus’ washing the disciples’ feet as an object lesson rather than a sacrament (although it might be something to do if guests wore sandals and walked in a hot and dusty land). But if the Pope is truly trying to show some outsiders the humility that Jesus’ enjoins, I’ll save my criticism of Francis and the office he occupies for another time and place.

          There are indeed cracks appearing in the world of Islam. Returning Guest Workers who had been treated right in Europe have returned to places like Kabylia and southeastern Anatolia/Turkish Kurdistan to replant Evangelical churches in what had been stony ground for a long time. I feel both humbled and grateful to God when I consider something like this. I am sure, though, that those ex-Guest Workers did not hear “Get the f**k outta here, Raghead!” from the Christians they encountered. I also understand that some of those ex-Muslims out there also saw that Christianity enjoins are far different ethic–one of speaking the truth in love and service rather than violent conquest–which led them to consider the claims of Christ they found in the New Testament.

          Sure, there’s such a thing as the just war. Maybe the time for such approaches faster than Uncle Kepha would like. I’m neither a Quaker nor a Mennonite. But if I can see the victory of the Messiah in changed hearts and believing communities springing up where once the church was extinguished, that is far, far better than blasted cities, piles of corpses, and hordes of orphans slowly starving to death. That is the victory for which I and many others pray.

      • DFD says

        Apr 1, 2016 at 7:26 am

        Angemon says : “…a) ….. h) – You’ve heard everything? Really? Have you hear a muslim cleric saying that muhammad was not a really nice person and that islam should be reformed?”

        I take the liberty to co-sign your post.

      • Mary C says

        Apr 1, 2016 at 1:59 pm

        Angemon, you ‘hit that one out of the ball park.’ Loved it.

    • tedh754 says

      Mar 31, 2016 at 9:14 pm

      The Pope was elected. I don’t consider anyone elected to be “infallible.”

    • Russell Kirk Was Right says

      Mar 31, 2016 at 11:05 pm

      You act as if being a Pope makes one automatically the most faithful Catholic. History is absolutely littered with sinful prelates, bishops, and popes. Anyone who thinks thinks the highest office of the Church will of necessity always be occupied by a faithful Christian doesn’t understand Scripture, Theology, or History. Those in the sacred offices are *supposed* to have impeachable character, be learned, and apt to teach. The fact is people can and do turn on their faith, their commitments, their ideals — and when it happens as it so often does, especially in the light of public scandal, there is the responsibility of every layman to denounce the scandal, whether doctrinal or practical.

      I’m more flabbergasted that anyone has the audacity to think the Pope is beyond criticism.

    • gravenimage says

      Apr 2, 2016 at 12:04 am

      Fred Boenig wrote:

      Robert Spenser (sic)- Really? You are going to tell The Pope what a Christian should do? Really- as much false hate you spew-
      ……………………….

      Opposing Jihad terror is “false hate”?

      But this should not surprise from the egregious Fred Boenig, who has been an apologist for Jihad savagery for quite some time here.

      And he does not care about hypocrisy–his usual position here is to condemn and slander Christianity–he only takes the stance he does here because he believes he can harm Anti-Jihadists by it.

      Here he is, slamming Christianity in general, and Catholicism in particular:

      http://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/03/massachusetts-vandals-behead-sever-hands-of-virgin-mary-statue#comment-1408010

    • Champ says

      Apr 2, 2016 at 12:17 am

      “Fred” is here spouting nonsense and making false accusations against Robert Spencer, and Truth is the new hate speech in “Fred’s” twisted view, eh? Fools like him are a dime a dozen.

      What’s wrong “Fred” is the Truth too hot for you to handle? Yep!

    • Jerry says

      Apr 2, 2016 at 10:52 am

      Kepha says:

      But if the Pope is truly trying to show some outsiders the humility that Jesus’ enjoins, I’ll save my criticism of Francis and the office he occupies for another time and place.

      Couldn’t agree more. This is no time to slam the Pope for staying true to his convictions. Maybe the church should be more bold in its condemnation of islamic jihad and persecution of Christians. But to imply that he is acting weak for this traditional display of humility and service is to deny this man the right to his religion. Islam is the criminal here, they’re the ones killing the weak. We don’t blame a weak child for getting their head cut off for allah, and we shouldn’t blame the Pope for his good intentions.

      • Kepha says

        Apr 2, 2016 at 10:57 am

        And I don’t even think that the Pope’s good intentions were the kind with which the proverbial road to Hell is paved!

        • Jerry says

          Apr 2, 2016 at 11:09 am

          You are such a rebel thinker. 😉

  8. Hera says

    Mar 31, 2016 at 7:44 pm

    The Pope’s public gesture of washing the feet of migrants had more to do with politics and making a display of religion then with Christ’s humility. The Pope’s public gesture was more in line with the hypocritical Pharisees of Jesus day who liked to show how holy they were to the public. But were denounced as hypocrites by Jesus. When Jesus washed the feet of the Apostles in private it was about teaching them humility as they had been arguing earlier about who was the greatest Apostle. In contrast the Pope’s public display was about exulting himself and had nothing to do with humility. Otherwise he would have done this in private to teach the migrants humility not as a shaming tactic to force migrants on people who do not want them.

    • Jerry says

      Mar 31, 2016 at 7:59 pm

      The Pope’s public gesture of washing the feet of migrants had more to do with politics and making a display of religion than with Christ’s humility.

      Oh, if only all politics were so benign.

    • somehistory says

      Mar 31, 2016 at 8:39 pm

      I agree with your comment, your reasoning on the differences between Jesus washing the feet of His Apostles, and the pope washing the feet of these individuals, including those from the ideology of hate and murder, and on why he did it.

      Each one will be judged by Christ (God has given judging to the Son) for what they do and for what they don’t do and He knows all of the reasons behind the actions of men.

  9. Angemon says

    Mar 31, 2016 at 7:55 pm

    Muslims who see the Pope’s gesture as one of submission before Islam are not going to be convinced of the wisdom of Christian charity, they are going to be convinced of the prudence of sticking with the strong-horse religion. They will be more, not less likely to throw in their lot with the militants. If the Catholic Church appears to be submitting to Islam, they will reason that the only safe course of action is to do the same…

    Nicely stated, Mr. Kilpatrick.

  10. celticwarriorcanada says

    Mar 31, 2016 at 8:26 pm

    ” After that,He poured water into a basin and began to wash THE DISCIPLES FEET,and to wipe them with the towel with which He was girded.” Gospel of John 13:5( N.K.J.V.) Jesus washed the Disciples Feet , not the feet of the Scribes and Pharisees! And even if Judas was his enemy ,Judas still professed to be a disciple ! For the Pope to wash the feet of those who Openly Deny The Christian Faith ,is Not Following The Example of Jesus .By doing this the Pope is placing himself ABOVE JESUS and The Apostle Peter , whose Episcopal Seat , the Pope claims to inherit !

  11. Antonio Gutierrez says

    Mar 31, 2016 at 8:56 pm

    The reason —or reasons –why he shouldn’t have done that washing and kissing, goes beyond the realm of geopolitics, Christians-muslims confrontations, East against West or even the fact–proven and sad–of Christian genocide.

    It goes back to the Scriptures themselves:
    Christ after the feet washing didn’t command His disciples: OK, go around and do the same to whoever you please.
    No. He said:
    John 13:14-15King James Version (KJV)

    14 If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet; ye also ought to wash one another’s feet.

    15 For I have given you an example, that ye should do as I have done to you.

    He said ONE ANOTHER’S FEET. Among brethren. Only among brothers.

    EVEN MORE: The Lord washed only those who were already clean. (which is not the case for Franci’s picks).

    John 13:10King James Version (KJV)

    10 Jesus saith to him, He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit: and ye are clean, but not all.(here He is speaking about Judah Iscariot).

    • dumbledoresarmy says

      Apr 1, 2016 at 12:33 am

      Yes.

      Every one of those migrants whose feet he washed should have been …Christian and other non-Muslim refugees who have fled from Muslim lands.

      Imagine the message of service and solidarity he would have sent, had he lovingly washed and kissed the feet of those who have suffered persecution for the Name of Jesus. imagine if most of the people had been Iraqi and Syrian Christians…Catholic, and Orthodox, and Nestorian.

      And it would have sent a powerful message, too, had he offered loving service to Yazidis and Mandaeans, people who have been abused and tortured and raped and enslaved by Muslims, right alongside the Christians.

  12. CJ Milan says

    Mar 31, 2016 at 9:17 pm

    That man is more DANGEROUS than Daesh

  13. Baucent says

    Mar 31, 2016 at 9:20 pm

    The Pope is clearly a nice man and his gesture was one of humility and inclusiveness. But as the article points out the problem is how will muslims interpret the act? With no parallel teaching such as “whoever wishes to be great in the Kingdom must act like a servant” muslims will see this as submission to Islam. Once again a heartfelt gesture not well thought through. A bit like criticizing the building of a wall, when you live in a walled city.

    • maghan says

      Apr 1, 2016 at 3:02 am

      Nice people can be very stupid. Q.E.D.

  14. George says

    Mar 31, 2016 at 9:48 pm

    This is basically a Liturgical act that can easily be taken totally out of context. The Pope’s intentions are good but he has not given any thought to his audience. He has politicized the Liturgy.

    Jesus already said that my Kingdom is not of this world so why does the Pope drag the Divine Liturgy into the Political arena?

    Jesus also said do not cast pearls before swine. Why does the Pope cast the Divine Liturgy before people who have no appreciation of a crucified Jesus?

    We need to be both wise as serpents and harmless as doves.

  15. Jerry says

    Mar 31, 2016 at 10:29 pm

    Criticizing the Pope for this one act of humility is like blaming free-speech advocates who get murdered for speaking the truth about islam. It’s sort of like, let’s blame the victim. If the Pope wants to kiss 10 thousand feet then that’s still no invitation to murder. The blame should not be on the humble servant, the teacher of humility. It should always stay where it belongs, on those willing to kill for their own bigoted reasons. I think it’s a grave error to lay this man’s good example out for criticism. If the purpose of fighting islam is the defense of freedom, then where is there room for criticizing this man’s display of compassion and humility? No, asking the Pope to be anything other than what he is meant to be is expecting him to change for islam. And that’s exactly what we’re fighting against. I defend the Pope’s right to kiss as many feet as he wants. It’s the people that want to kill him for it that I’m worried about.

    Sorry Mr. Spencer. You’re like a god to me. But I think you signed off on the wrong post this time.

    • gravenimage says

      Apr 2, 2016 at 12:33 am

      If the Pope wants to kiss 10 thousand feet then that’s still no invitation to murder.
      ………………………..

      No one ever said it was. But if Muslims take it as a sign of weakness–and they do–it is important to know this.

      More:

      If the purpose of fighting islam is the defense of freedom, then where is there room for criticizing this man’s display of compassion and humility? No, asking the Pope to be anything other than what he is meant to be is expecting him to change for islam. And that’s exactly what we’re fighting against. I defend the Pope’s right to kiss as many feet as he wants. It’s the people that want to kill him for it that I’m worried about.
      ………………………..

      No one is saying the Pope should not be allowed to do this. But the idea that since he has the right to do this that it should ergo be beyond criticism is not freedom. Being able to criticize is a significant *part* of freedom.

      And who has threatened to kill the Pope for having done this? No one that I have seen.

      • Jerry says

        Apr 2, 2016 at 8:41 am

        No one ever said it was. But if Muslims take it as a sign of weakness–and they do–it is important to know this.

        I wholeheartedly agree. Yes, it’s important to spread the word on muslims’ mindset of supremacy for allah. However, where I disagree with JW is in their criticism of the Pope’s performing this feet-kissing tradition. The Pope is supposed to be the vicar of Christ, let him do his job. To suggest that he is somehow complacent toward islam by living true to his faith, well, that’s wrong. The Pope shouldn’t have to change this traditional teaching of humility for islam, and if he did that would be an even greater show of weakness.

        No one is saying the Pope should not be allowed to do this. But the idea that since he has the right to do this that it should ergo be beyond criticism is not freedom. Being able to criticize is a significant *part* of freedom.

        Okay, now you’ve moved JW’s criticism of the Pope into the larger arena of free-speech rights. Of course one can criticize anything in life. The question for me is, is that criticism justified? I respect R. Spencer immensely. But I’m not at all shy in pointing out where I think he might be wrong. He’s wrong.

        R. Spencer tried to place this criticism in a larger context but it still seems unjust to me. Christianity’s humanitarian policy has always included Christ’s teaching of forgiveness and love your enemy. Regardless of what one thinks of that alleged divine wisdom, I’m not prepared to blame it for islam’s jihad hatred of the infidel. Mr. Spencer is called a bigot for his good work against islamic fascism, but we know that’s unjust criticism. How strange it is now for Mr. Spencer to do the very same thing by calling the vicar of Christ “weak” with the blowing wind, just for staying true to his faith.

        • Jerry says

          Apr 2, 2016 at 8:43 am

          NOTE: The second paragraph should not be italicized.

        • gravenimage says

          Apr 4, 2016 at 6:38 pm

          Jerry, I’m afraid the current pope has disturbingly enabled violent Islam before:

          “Pope Francis wants “dialogue” with Muslim leader who broke off ties after Benedict XVI condemned jihad mass murder attack”

          http://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/02/pope-francis-wants-dialogue-with-muslim-leader-who-broke-off-ties-after-benedict-xvi-condemned-jihad-mas-murder-attack

          “Pope decries Europe’s ‘indifference’ to Muslim migrants, compares them to Jesus”

          http://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/03/pope-decries-europes-indifference-to-muslim-migrants-compares-them-to-jesus

          There are many, many more examples.

          Whether he is doing so unwittingly or otherwise, this is of great concern to Islam’s victims. I find things to admire about Pope Francis, but I don’t think these issues should be beyond criticism.

          You may, of course, disagree.

        • Mirren10 says

          Apr 4, 2016 at 7:50 pm

          I don’t think Jerry is primarily concerned with defending Francis. At most, I think it is a side issue. I think he is an atheist who wants to gain acceptance here, and thinks he can do so by passionately defending this egregiously foolish act. He apparently thinks JW is full of Christian Catholics, and that by defending Francis, he is ingratiating himself..

          Of course he is wrong. JW is a wide swathe of philosophical, and religious opinion, and indeed, *lack* of religious opinion, or outright atheism, or indeed, agnosticism.

          His reactions to criticism of his stance, are, as I have said, typical of the way in which leftists,, and other people who have been indoctrinated, are so intellectually compromised, as to be unable to engage in intelligent argument/debate. Which can be clearly seen in Jerry’s response to my last post on this subject.

          If Jerry is so totally convinced of the rightness of Francis’s actions, then he should have actually engaged with the arguments put forward by those who opposed it. He failed to do so, instead, he engaged in ridiculous accusations of ‘ad hominem’, and ”unreasoned attacks”, , neither of which is borne out by the comments of those involved.

          People like Jerry worry me very much. Their total inability to actually argue any case on its merits, and the resort to the accusations of ‘ad hominem’, and ”unreasoned attacks” when the weakness of their argument is laid bear, augurs ill.

  16. Stephen says

    Mar 31, 2016 at 10:39 pm

    The primary reason the Pope should not have done it is the the washing of the apostles feet is related to their being anointed priest. The form of humility the Pope honors is secondary and has no place in the Holy Thursday Mass that is particularly related to Holy Orders.

    The Priest is to exercise humility by teaching the flock those truths entrusted to them by Christ not being a PC or false religions doormat. There is to be none of ones opinion in the teaching so he humbles himself by giving himself entirely to the teaching of Christ without compromise.

    The priest especially the Pope is supposed to be willing to die rather than scandalize the littlest of the brethren. Willing to die for every tittle and dot of the law of Christ. Willing to die than give the slightest approval to a false religion. This is a embarrassment to the Church and a insult to every saintly Pope who called for the Crusades, every saintly priest who preached of the moral obligation of every able body man to answer to call and push back the Mohammedan scourge and all the saintly men who left their family in order to defend the family. Many of the above are canonized saints in the Catholic Church and one is left with the impression the Pope turned his back on their memory.

    Read the Koran and wake up. The jihadis and the bin Ladens of this world are the good Muslims who follow the Koran to its logical conclusion and the ones who don’t are bad Muslims but good men. Will it be to late before good Christians wake up or rather will we continue to be bad Christians and let this continue or good Christian and fight as we should?

    • Jerry says

      Mar 31, 2016 at 11:23 pm

      The Priest is to exercise humility by teaching the flock those truths entrusted to them…

      By showing this good example of Christ-like humility he’s doing just that. JW has made the same mistake you have, you want to blame the victim. I don’t care if he wants to be pathetically weak for love and humility, that’s well within the bounds of “freedom” I want to protect. I’m not going to blame him for muslims’ murderous intent. That’s so completely wrong.

      No, you made a valiant attempt to defend JW’s bad judgment. But there is no justification for condemning a peaceful man for wanting to teach with an act of kindness. He is not to blame for those who may want to kill him out of hate. And he is not a doormat for staying true to the message of Christ. To change and be something else to please islam would be a doormat. And even if he and his faith were a doormat, then so what? let him be a doormat. At least he’s a doormat for peace and love. I defend freedom because I prefer a world where people can feel free to be kind, humble, and compassionate, without fear of murder or unjust criticism. The day I expect good people to act less good for islam is the day I’m a sellout to freedom.

      • Steohen says

        Apr 1, 2016 at 3:09 am

        Your view of freedom, kindness and peacefulness is rooted in the sentimentality that has gotten us into this problem. It is no kindness to perform acts that confirms the sinner in his sin. True freedom lies in doing the will of God, not what you feel. Peacefulness can only be rooted in the one truth revealed by Christ who stated “Think ye, that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, no; but separation.”

      • Stephen says

        Apr 1, 2016 at 4:02 am

        First of all a “pathetically weak” act can in no way by descrided as a kind act.

        Your understanding of freedom, kindness and peace is rooted in the sentimentality that has gotten the world in such a state of chaos.

        Freedom is rooted in doing the will of God as revealed by Christ not what you feel. Kindness is not rooted in performing weak acts that serve to confirm the sinner in sin but correcting in season and out of season the ones we love. We are called to love all men even if the witness to truth and morality as taught by Christ leads to our death. We can be assured that it will cause all of us, myself included, the sting of “hurting our/my feelings” but it must be done or you have no claim to saying you love your fellow man. Peace must be rooted on the truths taught by Christ or it is no peace but an earthly mockery of peace and Christ Himself said, “Think ye, that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, no; but separation” and further, “For I came to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.” So much for the sentimental gospel of feelings.

        • Jerry says

          Apr 1, 2016 at 8:41 am

          Kindness is not rooted in performing weak acts that serve to confirm the sinner in sin but correcting in season and out of season the ones we love.

          So true. But the Pope staying true to his convictions of humility and unconditional love is not a “weak act,” it’s a show of courage. If he had cancelled the event out of fear of looking weak, that would have been a weak act. Did you stop an consider that such an act would be considered an even greater show of weakness? Wow! muslims would exclaim, he’s so afraid that he’s abandoning his beloved principles for us!

          Peace must be rooted on the truths taught by Christ or it is no peace but an earthly mockery of peace… [bold mine]

          Would this be one of those truths you are referring too?…”But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.”

          And in regard to Christ’s “separation” of us, I’m going to ad lib here. The only sensible interpretation of that could be this, that he knew the superior light of wisdom that he brought into the world was bound to separate the good from the bad, the light from the darkness. The separation that he spoke of in my opinion was not a result that he contrived or hoped for. He was only offering his honest assessment of man’s love of evil, and how his great example of selfless love would deepen the divide between those that love good and those who love evil. “Blessed are the Peacemakers,” he said. He did not say, blessed are those who hate and kill others for the new religion I have founded.

          No I believe JW made a serious blunder with this post. It’s not a judicious appraisal of this man’s responsibility as Christ’s representative on earth. To describe this example of universal love and humility as some kind of weakness is appeasing islam at the expense of good morals and behavior. Of all things to criticize in this war against islam, I see no room to criticize this traditional teaching by a man who is supposed to be the epitome of love and forgiveness. Muslims must be rejoicing over JW’s betrayal of that for them, a tiny smile must have graced their face.

        • Stephen says

          Apr 1, 2016 at 10:58 am

          Jerry, their is no reasoning with a PC mind. Stop hearing what you want to hear. Your “logic” is pure sentimentality and hence no logic at all.

        • Stephen says

          Apr 1, 2016 at 11:01 am

          Unconditional love is always a weak act because it excludes right behavior.

        • Jerry says

          Apr 1, 2016 at 11:04 am

          Stephen says

          April 1, 2016 at 10:58 am

          Jerry, their is no reasoning with a PC mind. Stop hearing what you want to hear. Your “logic” is pure sentimentality and hence no logic at all.
          —————–
          Thanks Stephen, I can’t think of any better concession than an ad hominem reply. I’m sure we can still be friends. We’re both on the same team.

        • Stephen says

          Apr 1, 2016 at 3:13 pm

          Its not Ad hominem. We have become extremely lazy in the way we use our minds.

          We cherry pick what others say to suit our feelings/emotions and tune out the totality of what others say. I can assure you charity is not as easy to exercise as most think. It is the most difficult virtue to exercise because it knows freedom is not the ability or the “right” to do and say what we want. Its not about making everybody feel good. It is simply wrong to say freedom should allow someone to shout fire in a theater, even if no one is hurt.

          We have become habituated to judging the intention not the act. For instance, in the Holy Thursday liturgy of the Catholuc Church the washing of the feet has to do with the conferring of the Sacrament of Holy Orders on the Apostles as stated before. That is what the act symbolizes and that is what the act should be. Any other reason in the context of that liturgy is a bad act regardless of intention To me you seem to ignore that. You have stated time and time again let him do it even if its stupid graciously asserting the it is in accord with Christ’s actions. Graciously you assert graciously I deny. Show me where Christ performed such action. He wouldn’t even talk to the homicidal maniac Herod.

        • Mirren10 says

          Apr 2, 2016 at 7:57 am

          ”Thanks Stephen, I can’t think of any better concession than an ad hominem reply.”

          Jerry, I like a lot of your posts, but to accuse Stephen of an ‘ad hominem’ reply is, quite simply, a typical PC leftist jerk reaction to **criticism of an argument or stance**.

          Ad hominem is an argument directed at the *person*, rather than their argument.

          If Stephen had insulted you personally, that would be ad hominem. He did not. He was criticising your argument.

          ”We cherry pick what others say to suit our feelings/emotions and tune out the totality of what others say.”

          Exactly. Argument is not about ‘making others feel good’. It’s about getting to the truth of a matter.

          Foot washing is not a Sacrament of the Church, RC or C of E. What Francis is doing is a publicity stunt to further his agenda of more and more *mohammedan* immigration. It is designed to play on *Christian* religious feelings, to make them feel if they do not welcome overwhelming mohammedan immigration, the destruction of their societies and culture, they are being *un-Christian*. It is a deliberate twisting of the reasons why Christ did it, into ”if you don’t welcome these people, you are rejecting Christ”.

          As noted by others, islam is a religion that ”respects the strong horse”. Consequently, Francis’s act will be seen by many, if not all mohammedans, as an act of *submission* to islam.

          *That* is why he should not have done it. But his agenda is to betray his Church, his religion, and the *founder* of his religion.

        • Jerry says

          Apr 2, 2016 at 11:07 am

          Mirren10 said,
          As noted by others, islam is a religion that ”respects the strong horse”. Consequently, Francis’s act will be seen by many, if not all mohammedans, as an act of *submission* to islam.

          There’s nothing “weak” about staying true to ones convictions. You make it sound like this one act by the Pope is a shocking revelation to muslims. Like none of them have ever heard Christ’s message of “love your enemy” and forgiveness. Good grief, you sound so simple minded with this stark view of this one humble act by the vicar of Christ. Why don’t you just bring it to the logical conclusion and blame the Pope for jihad hate of infidels, that’s the way your “wind” is blowing.

          *That* is why he should not have done it. But his agenda is to betray his Church, his religion, and the *founder* of his religion.

          If he had NOT done it, that would have be a betrayal of the Church. Disappointing that you can’t see this.

        • Mirren10 says

          Apr 2, 2016 at 12:26 pm

          ”If he had NOT done it, that would have be a betrayal of the Church. Disappointing that you can’t see this.”

          What *I* find disappointing is your ignoring the points I made, and Stephen, and others, as to the fact that foot washing is not a Sacrament, and that what Francis is doing is a publicity stunt to further his stance on mohammedan immigration.

          ” … a betrayal of the Church.”

          What *I* see as a betrayal of the Church, and *Christians*, is Francis’s perfunctory condemnation of mohammedan atrocities towards Christians in Syria, and the rest of the ME, in favour of islamopandering, and pandering of mohammedans.

          ”Good grief, you sound so simple minded with this stark view of this one humble act by the vicar of Christ. Why don’t you just bring it to the logical conclusion and blame the Pope for jihad hate of infidels, that’s the way your “wind” is blowing.”

          I don’t see that this follows logically, at all. Perhaps you could elaborate.

          Incidentally, I must say I find this impassioned defence of Francis’s action somewhat odd, considering your first few posts that I noticed, in particular to Champ, were extremely *critical* of Christianity.

        • Jerry says

          Apr 2, 2016 at 1:15 pm

          Mirren10
          …I find this impassioned defence of Francis’s action somewhat odd, considering your first few posts that I noticed, in particular to Champ, were extremely *critical* of Christianity.

          I’m an atheist and anti-religion. But that’s not going to stop me from arguing good sense. I believe I’ve already stated my reasons well-enough as to why I think JW was wrong in criticizing this feet-washing tradition. I don’t know why Mr. Spencer feels it good and right to expect the Pope to deny his own religious convictions for islam. That’s an appeasement that I can’t agree with.

          A Pope not willing to live true to his faith is not worth protecting. If he had turned this tradition into some kind of protest against muslims then Christianity would have been disgraced to the lowest depths. It is my confident understanding that JW is fighting against any attack against our ideals and values by muslims. Certainly the principle of human compassion and humility is somewhere on that list. Soldiers don’t fight wars with compassion and humility, but neither do Pope’s fight hate with guns and bombs. Don’t think you’re the only one that has the light of moral reason in your heart and mind. Let the Pope do his job, we’ll do ours.

          I’m tiring of this thread. Unless you have something good to offer, I’m done.

        • Mirren10 says

          Apr 2, 2016 at 2:04 pm

          ”I’m tiring of this thread. Unless you have something good to offer, I’m done.”

          You have engaged with none of the points I, Stephen, or others have made. Your dismissive and arrogant riposte is all too typical of leftist rhetoric, as is your logic fallacy appeal to emotion.

          ”I’m an atheist and anti-religion. But that’s not going to stop me from arguing good sense.”

          Unfortunately you argue neither good sense, nor logic.

        • Stephen says

          Apr 4, 2016 at 1:47 pm

          Jerry its nice to see a “man” who constantly and erroneously accuses others of ad hominem attacks assault a woman with one (sarcastic tone intended) simply because she doesn’t agree with you. Do the manly thing and apologize to the lady!

          The Pope as the Vicar of Christ is infallible when he intends as the Successor of St. Peter to bind the faithful on a matter of Faith or Morals. He is not impeccable in all his other actions as the man who is Pope. His prudence, judgements, statements and actions are subject to criticism and St. Thomas Aquinas taught that the faithful have a right and indeed an obligation to speak out when the Pope’s acts as a man cause scandal. He is infallible in matters of faith and morals when he intends to bind the faithful on such matters. He is peccable like us in all other matters and subject to criticism. This indeed was what one of his predecessor St. John Paul II stated on many an occasion. St Alphonus de Liguori goes so far as to teacher that if the Vicar of Christ ever had it in mind to bind the faithful as the Vicar of Christ in error regarding Faith or morals the Lord would remove him from this life before he could do so.

          When you state, “I’m an atheist and anti-religion. But that’s not going to stop me from arguing good sense.” The Word of God declares that that very statement excludes one from “arguing good sense”. “The fool hath said in his heart: There is no God, They are corrupt, and are become abominable in their ways: there is none that doth good, no not one.” Ps 14:1.

          Jerry you make wild accusations implying one is saying something he is not like, “but neither do Pope’s fight hate with guns and bombs.”(historical note: even though the Pope carried not one weapon into battle as those courageous Christian men of the Crusades sought to save civilization from the Mohamedan scourge, not one of those men took up arms except by the authority and command of the Pope) , and “Why don’t you just bring it to the logical conclusion and blame the Pope for jihad hate of infidels, that’s the way your “wind” is blowing.” to name a few that is known as straw man argumenration and is a logical fallacy.

          “Don’t think you’re the only one that has the light of moral reason in your heart and mind.”

          No one here arguing against you has made that claim but none of us can grow in virtue if we refuse to follow the light to our reason which God alone can provide. St. Paul describes very clearly where we go if we delibrately refuse the divine aid God gives our reason no matter how good our intentions may be,

          “Because that, when they knew God, they have not glorified him as God, or given thanks; but became vain in their thoughts, and their foolish heart was darkened. [22] For professing themselves to be wise, they became fools. [23] And they changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of the image of a corruptible man, and of birds, and of fourfooted beasts, and of creeping things. [24] Wherefore God gave them up to the desires of their heart, unto uncleanness, to dishonour their own bodies among themselves. [25] Who changed the truth of God into a lie; and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

          [26] For this cause God delivered them up to shameful affections. “

      • Jerry says

        Apr 2, 2016 at 3:49 pm

        Mirren10 said:
        You have engaged with none of the points I, Stephen, or others have made.

        You haven’t made any points. You guys have squandered every opportunity to prove me wrong with empty denials and ad hominem. Now I’m “arrogant” with an “appeal to emotion.” On the contrary, you are arrogant in thinking you are good enough to criticize the vicar of Christ for his humble example. And foot washing is a “publicity stunt”? That “stunt” has illustrious beginnings:

        14 “If I then, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another’s feet. 15 For I have given you an example, that you should do as I have done to you. 16 Most assuredly, I say to you, a servant is not greater than his master; nor is he who is sent greater than he who sent him. 17 If you know these things, blessed are you if you do them.”

        Straight from the mouth of Jesus, 2000 years old. There’s nothing “emotional” about my defense of the Pope’s dedication to his God’s good example. I’m simply fair minded enough to acknowledge the Pope’s right to live out his faith in peace and without compromise for islam. It is you who has resorted to unreasoned attacks in your replies, a sure sign of emotional control over intellect.

        • Mirren10 says

          Apr 3, 2016 at 7:01 am

          ”You haven’t made any points. You guys have squandered every opportunity to prove me wrong with empty denials and ad hominem.”

          Stephen pointed out to you, this;

          ”We have become habituated to judging the intention not the act. For instance, in the Holy Thursday liturgy of the Catholuc Church the washing of the feet has to do with the conferring of the Sacrament of Holy Orders on the Apostles as stated before. That is what the act symbolizes and that is what the act should be To me you seem to ignore that.. Any other reason in the context of that liturgy is a bad act regardless of intention.”

          This is an ’empty denial’ ? I think not.

          ”You have stated time and time again let him do it even if its stupid graciously asserting the it is in accord with Christ’s actions. Graciously you assert graciously I deny. Show me where Christ performed such action. He wouldn’t even talk to the homicidal maniac Herod.”

          Where is the ’empty denial’ here ?

          Or here ?

          ”The primary reason the Pope should not have done it is the the washing of the apostles feet is related to their being anointed priest.”

          Where is the ‘ad hominen’ ?

          ” Now I’m “arrogant” with an “appeal to emotion.”

          I said your dismissive response was arrogant, and that your appeal to emotion is a *logic fallacy*. You should engage with what people actually say, not what you think they said, or wish they had said.

          ”On the contrary, you are arrogant in thinking you are good enough to criticize the vicar of Christ for his humble example.”

          Francis is merely a human being, as we all are. There is nothing arrogant in criticising his actions.

          Neither do I consider his action to be humble. It was carried out in the full glare of publicity, with the requisite photo opportunities.

          In your quote, Christ is referring to his disciples, not the general population. He didn’t then go out to Samaria to wash the feet of Samaritans. He is also referring to the concept of humility; warning the disciples that *one* must not consider himself superior to the *other*.

          ” It is you who has resorted to unreasoned attacks in your replies, a sure sign of emotional control over intellect.”

          Really ? Kindly cite where I have ”resorted to unreasoned attacks”.

          Criticism of an argument, as I have already pointed out, is neither ‘ad hominem’, nor an ”unreasoned attack”. That you think it is shows you lack debating skills, and as I have also pointed out, it is the usual leftist response to those who challenge a weak argument.

        • Jerry says

          Apr 3, 2016 at 8:42 am

          Dear Mirren10,

          I’m sorry, but your last protracted post is too weak and petty for me to respond. You’re starting to sound like an angry hen defending her broken egg. It’s time we just agree to disagree. Thanks for your interest.

        • Mirren10 says

          Apr 3, 2016 at 11:32 am

          ”I’m sorry, but your last protracted post is too weak and petty for me to respond. You’re starting to sound like an angry hen defending her broken egg.”

          Your latest post is a perfect example of ‘ad hominem’ in action.

        • Stephen says

          Apr 4, 2016 at 2:22 pm

          Jerry its nice to see a “man” who constantly and erroneously accuses others of ad hominem attacks assault a woman with one (sarcastic tone intended) simply because she doesn’t agree with you. Do the manly thing and apologize to the lady!

          The Pope as the Vicar of Christ is infallible when he intends as the Successor of St. Peter to bind the faithful on a matter of Faith or Morals. He is not impeccable in all his other actions as the man who is Pope. His prudence, judgements, statements and actions are subject to criticism and St. Thomas Aquinas taught that the faithful have a right and indeed an obligation to speak out when the Pope’s acts as a man cause scandal. He is infallible in matters of faith and morals when he intends to bind the faithful on such matters. He is peccable like us in all other matters and subject to criticism. This indeed was what one of his predecessor St. John Paul II stated on many an occasion. St Alphonus de Liguori goes so far as to teacher that if the Vicar of Christ ever had it in mind to bind the faithful as the Vicar of Christ in error regarding Faith or morals the Lord would remove him from this life before he could do so.

          When you state, “I’m an atheist and anti-religion. But that’s not going to stop me from arguing good sense.” The Word of God declares that that very statement excludes one from “arguing good sense”. “The fool hath said in his heart: There is no God, They are corrupt, and are become abominable in their ways: there is none that doth good, no not one.” Ps 14:1.

          Jerry you make wild accusations implying one is saying something he is not like, “but neither do Pope’s fight hate with guns and bombs.”(historical note: even though the Pope carried not one weapon into battle as those courageous Christian men of the Crusades sought to save civilization from the Mohamedan scourge, not one of those men took up arms except by the authority and command of the Pope) , and “Why don’t you just bring it to the logical conclusion and blame the Pope for jihad hate of infidels, that’s the way your “wind” is blowing.” to name a few that is known as straw man argumenration and is a logical fallacy.

          “Don’t think you’re the only one that has the light of moral reason in your heart and mind.”

          No one here arguing against you has made that claim but none of us can grow in virtue if we refuse to follow the light to our reason which God alone can provide. St. Paul describes very clearly where we go if we delibrately refuse the divine aid God gives our reason no matter how good our intentions may be,

          “Because that, when they knew God, they have not glorified him as God, or given thanks; but became vain in their thoughts, and their foolish heart was darkened. [22] For professing themselves to be wise, they became fools. [23] And they changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of the image of a corruptible man, and of birds, and of fourfooted beasts, and of creeping things. [24] Wherefore God gave them up to the desires of their heart, unto uncleanness, to dishonour their own bodies among themselves. [25] Who changed the truth of God into a lie; and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

          [26] For this cause God delivered them up to shameful affections. “

        • Stephen says

          Apr 4, 2016 at 3:30 pm

          Since Scripture quoted out of context becomes a pretext let us use Scripture to take careful note of what is occurring.

          Before proceeding to a theological look can we all agree that on a practical level the practice of the Pope is some what odd considering that, “The public washing and usually also kissing of the feet of women on the part of a man, in our case, of a priest or a bishop, is considered by every person of common sense in all cultures as being improper and even indecent. Thanks be to God, no priest or bishop is obliged to wash publicly the feet of women on Holy Thursday, for there is no binding norm for it, and the foot washing itself is only facultative.”

          “Then came the day of Unleavened Bread, on which the passover lamb had to be sacrificed. So Jesus sent Peter and John, saying, “Go and prepare the passover for us, that we may eat it.” They said to him, “Where will you have us prepare it?” He said to them, “Behold, when you have entered the city, a man carrying a jar of water will meet you; follow him into the house which he enters, and tell the householder, `The Teacher says to you, Where is the guest room, where I am to eat the passover with my disciples?’ And he will show you a large upper room furnished; there make ready.” And they went, and found it as he had told them; and they prepared the passover. – Luke 22:7-13 Note that Christ takes pains to see that this Passover takes place outside the public eye, clandestinely if you will with the emphasis on Him as “The Teacher”.

          St John continues the narrative, “Now before the festival of the Passover, Jesus knew that his hour had come to depart from this world and go to the Father. Having loved his own who were in the world, he loved them to the end. 2 The devil had already put it into the heart of Judas son of Simon Iscariot to betray him. And during supper 3 Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he had come from God and was going to God, 4 got up from the table,[a] took off his outer robe, and tied a towel around himself. 5 Then he poured water into a basin and began to wash the disciples’ feet and to wipe them with the towel that was tied around him. 6 He came to Simon Peter, who said to him, “Lord, are you going to wash my feet?” 7 Jesus answered, “You do not know now what I am doing, but later you will understand.” 8 Peter said to him, “You will never wash my feet.” Jesus answered, “Unless I wash you, you have no share with me.” 9 Simon Peter said to him, “Lord, not my feet only but also my hands and my head!” 10 Jesus said to him, “One who has bathed does not need to wash, except for the feet,[b] but is entirely clean. And you[c] are clean, though not all of you.” 11 For he knew who was to betray him; for this reason he said, “Not all of you are clean.”

          12 After he had washed their feet, had put on his robe, and had returned to the table, he said to them, “Do you know what I have done to you? 13 You call me Teacher and Lord—and you are right, for that is what I am. 14 So if I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another’s feet. 15 For I have set you an example, that you also should do as I have done to you. 16 Very truly, I tell you, servants[d] are not greater than their master, nor are messengers greater than the one who sent them. 17 If you know these things, you are blessed if you do them.”

          St. Peter’s interpretation of it as an act of condescending humility which can be a legitmate act is clearly rejected by Christ because it is a reference to baptism and the priesthood which are necessary not for the cleansing of the body but the soul. If your interested in truth here’s why, http://www.catholicworldreport.com/Item/3074/holy_thursday_footwashing_and_the_institution_of_the_priesthood.aspx

        • Stephen says

          Apr 4, 2016 at 5:52 pm

          For a more comprehensive an in-depth study of the above thesis see, https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.scotthahn.com/download/attachment/4014&ved=0ahUKEwiF5fKg-vXLAhWHs4MKHReEBnYQFggnMAQ&usg=AFQjCNHoSqZmKFfZ_iR4Vo0y0BQCsvfNbg&sig2=jTCmwULTP3UbkH_GXUku7Q

        • Stephen says

          Apr 4, 2016 at 6:05 pm

          Jerry you state to Mirren, “I’m sorry, but your last protracted post is too weak and petty for me to respond. You’re starting to sound like an angry hen defending her broken egg. It’s time we just agree to disagree. Thanks for your interest.” By your own words you prove yourself guilty of what you charge,

          “I can’t think of any better concession than an ad hominem reply.”

    • Lion of Judah's Cub says

      Apr 2, 2016 at 2:21 am

      Stephen,
      I agree. And Jerry is incorrect.

      • Jerry says

        Apr 2, 2016 at 10:42 am

        On the contrary, I’m right and I know I’m right. If the Pope is weak for staying true to his religious convictions then Robert Spencer is a bigot for staying true to his. Of course neither is true, but if the first one be true then I say so is the second.

        • Stepgen says

          Apr 4, 2016 at 1:57 pm

          And if the first one isn’t true because it is not? It is not “his” religious convictions that a Pope is called to be true to but rather Christ’s revealed truth. Truth is attained when our minds conform to the greatest of all realities which is outside our minds, namely, GOD who alone transcends the created world both visible, the cosmos, and invisble the angels (good and bad).

        • gravenimage says

          Apr 4, 2016 at 6:48 pm

          Jerry, if washing the feet of supremacist Muslims is the only way for a pontiff to stay true to his faith, then every pope for almost 2,000 years has failed until Pope Francis came along.

          This is not a papal tradition, and endlessly claiming that it is does not help your argument, whatever it may be.

        • Jerry says

          Apr 5, 2016 at 8:14 am

          gravenimage says
          April 4, 2016 at 6:48 pm
          Jerry, if washing the feet of supremacist Muslims is the only way for a pontiff to stay true to his faith, then every pope for almost 2,000 years has failed until Pope Francis came along.
          This is not a papal tradition, and endlessly claiming that it is does not help your argument, whatever it may be.
          —————
          Even a Wikipedia knowledge of the subject is enough to know that’s not true. It goes way back, feet washing does in the Church. But even if this Pope had pulled it out of his a$$, that’s still not a green light for JW to criticize Christianity’s best example for humility and forgiveness. The pope is simply doing his job, he is staying true to his faith’s principles. When JW criticizes that they are appeasing islam. Sad that you guys can’t see that.

          I’m pretty much done with this thread. I’ve already made my case well enough. I can’t help it if you guys lack the wisdom to understand.

        • Mirren10 says

          Apr 5, 2016 at 8:37 am

          ”Even a Wikipedia knowledge of the subject is enough to know that’s not true. It goes way back, feet washing does in the Church.”

          Your assertions are not facts. Provide evidence for what you say.

          ”But even if this Pope had pulled it out of his a$$, that’s still not a green light for JW to criticize Christianity’s best example for humility and forgiveness.”

          Why do you think Francis should be exempt from criticism ?

          ”The pope is simply doing his job, he is staying true to his faith’s principles. When JW criticizes that they are appeasing islam. ”

          In what way does your assertion logically follow ?

          ”I’ve already made my case well enough.”

          That’s the point. You haven’t made a case at all, which is why people on this thread have provided evidence that shreds your assertions to pieces. As has already been pointed out to you, ad nauseam, assertions are not facts.

          ” I can’t help it if you guys lack the wisdom to understand”

          You accuse others of ‘ad hominem’, and ”unreasoned attacks”, oblivious to what you are doing yourself. As I said previously, this is the attitude of a leftist who resents the weakness of his argument being pointed out.

        • Jerry says

          Apr 5, 2016 at 9:56 am

          Dear Mirren10,

          Why don’t you just come clean. You’ve fallen in love with me and you can’t get enough.

          Am I close? 😉

          I’m absolutely done in here, this is my last post. I’m confident I presented a good argument. If you choose to not agree that’s your right.

        • Mirren10 says

          Apr 5, 2016 at 10:12 am

          ”Why don’t you just come clean. You’ve fallen in love with me and you can’t get enough.

          Am I close? ?”

          No. Just very childish.

  17. Stephen says

    Mar 31, 2016 at 11:07 pm

    I wish to state in no uncertain terms as a scholarly dominican priest, expert it both arabic and the Islamic culture having lived in the heart of it for 7 years once taught me. “The Koran is the evilest book ever written.”

    • gravenimage says

      Apr 4, 2016 at 6:49 pm

      Thank you, Stephen.

  18. citycat says

    Mar 31, 2016 at 11:40 pm

    That’s an acid trip wyrd scene. There’s more to it than reason.
    Jesus’d be turning in his grave he he hadn’t ascended.

  19. a fool says

    Apr 1, 2016 at 12:38 am

    The Pope should not have done that! Jesus washed His Apostles’ feet, no outsider’s! So that they will walk in the Light with Purpose in each step they took. All of their steps were to serve the Lord God by caring for His Mission; to spread the Word, to teach, to heal and to suffer for their Vocation.

  20. The Vilest of Creatures says

    Apr 1, 2016 at 1:46 am

    What the hell does that even mean? He should be thinking about he looks to the constituents of the religion is the head of. It was an embarrassment to the Catholic Church.

  21. Lord Wrath says

    Apr 1, 2016 at 2:31 am

    This entire demonstration was video recorded so that it can be used as an instructional aid for all catholic priests when they assume their proper role in the new Europe…

  22. Dacritic says

    Apr 1, 2016 at 4:01 am

    I would like to see some “act of brotherhood” the other way. How about Muslims washing the feet of Christians, or of other people? Will Muslims do that? I don’t think so.

    • Stephen says

      Apr 1, 2016 at 4:08 am

      They can’t at least not in a muslim nation for it would assure their death and even if done outside a muslim nation but in a muslim neighborhood like molbeek, Belgium or Dearborn, Michigan the results would most likely be the same.

  23. uri hoffmann says

    Apr 1, 2016 at 4:15 am

    Even G-d has no cure for stupidity

  24. TH says

    Apr 1, 2016 at 4:33 am

    This Pope is not only totally clueless and naive about the nature of Islam, but he also seem to be clueless about the nature of the Sacred Liturgy. If the liturgy is sacred, then it cannot be instrumentalized for political purposes. Also, in my opiion, such a gesture does no good for the Church’s ecumenical relationship with its Orthodox brethren, as they have a supremely sacred notion of liturgy which is far from such instrumenalization.

    • mortimer says

      Apr 1, 2016 at 6:29 am

      TH said: liturgy should not be politicized.

      Well, it can be politicized…and if it can be, I suggest to you it has been politicized… over and over… in Orthodox regions too!

      Francis obviously is trying to show himself as a leader in showing compassion.

      However, no Afghan, Somalian, Libyan cousins of jihadists will be living next to his apartment in the Vatican, will they? His daughters will not be raped, his sons will not be beaten and bullied.

  25. Paleologos says

    Apr 1, 2016 at 4:48 am

    Francis is the papal equivalent of Jimmy Carter.

    Francis is a small, anti – semite man in a job that is way too big for him.

    R/

    Paleologos.

    • mortimer says

      Apr 1, 2016 at 6:19 am

      Pope Francis is well-meaning, but without the required depth of learning. His lacuna of ignorance about Islamic source texts gives him the false security of understanding Islam. He does not. Francis is presumptuous and over-confident about his knowledge of Islam.

      He has not read and studied the hadiths, Sira, Sharia law, and canonical commentaries, and yet, he preposterously presents himself as an expert on how to deal with Islam. He is not an expert as shown by his consistent unawareness of the OPTICS of his stunts in the eyes of Muslims.

      Robert Spencer understands the Muslim mind. Francis is not even a beginner!

    • Jay Boo says

      Apr 1, 2016 at 10:20 am

      I am not sure that anti – Semite is precise, but he is not pro- Israel.

      I agree, “Francis is the papal equivalent of Jimmy Carter.”

  26. mortimer says

    Apr 1, 2016 at 6:12 am

    Humiliation and Jizyah. The purpose of the jizyah is the infliction of humiliation. For Shaybani, “humiliation is the payment of the poll tax (jizya).” As ibn Kathir explained, the phrase “and feel themselves subdued” from Koran 9:29 means that those who submit are “miserable, disgraced and humiliated” and should therefore be treated with “continual humiliation, degradation and disgrace.” In fact, even al-Ghazali, the famed Sufi philosopher (and pre-eminent Shafi’i authority) emphasized the calculated role humiliation plays when imposing the jizyah tax:

    ‘The dhimmi is obliged not to mention Allah or His Apostle…Jews, Christians and Majians must pay the jizya …on offering up the jizya, the dhimmi must hang his head while the official takes hold of his beard and hits the dhimmi on the protuberant bone beneath his ear (i.e. the mandible) …The dhimmi may not ride an elegant horse or mule; he may ride a donkey only if the sddle-work is of wood. He may not walk on the good part of the road. They – the dhimmis – have to wear an identifying patch on their clothing even women, and even in the public baths…dhimmis must hold their tongue.

  27. Benedict says

    Apr 1, 2016 at 6:27 am

    This Pope is playing to the gallery. He is an idiot. He is unaware of the harm he is doing to Christians and the faith. He lives in a walled city, most of us don’t. There is no Jew in the line of twelve whose feet he washed, though the apostles were Jews. I do not see any woman apostle that Jesus chose, why is there a woman whose feet he has to wash. Playing to the gallery and trying to please the world. By pleasing the world he has alienated himself from Christ

    • Jay Boo says

      Apr 1, 2016 at 10:17 am

      Benedict said,
      “Playing to the gallery and trying to please the world. By pleasing the world he has alienated himself from Christ”

      Yes
      He should know better.

  28. SD says

    Apr 1, 2016 at 6:34 am

    A Pope kissing the feet of muslims confirms the muslims logic that Rome will fall and be islamized afterall their own Pope dishonours himself in his way even if that was not his intention. I have great love for Catholics and my mother is Catholic but I am glad that I am Protestant like my Father and not Catholic. Protestants dont do ridiculous rituals like kissing feet lol.What was this man thinking (shaking my head).

  29. Judi says

    Apr 1, 2016 at 7:40 am

    Like Hussain Obama, I believe the man is a “plant” and part of the New World Order. Sorry if I have offended any Catholics reading this.

  30. Queen Jenevere says

    Apr 1, 2016 at 9:27 am

    The pope is an ignorant Marxist fool.. & Christianity wise bowing down to the Satan’s spawn & pagan moon-god that they worship.. Washing feet he is making himself out to be the laughing-stock of Christianity, allowing muslims to do more of the same , and thus giving the green light that its ok to murder behead etc, The People of The Book, the same Book he and the Church represent. He needs to wake up b/c he is giving not only muslim the wrong message by bowing down to evil but to rest of the western world too… especially the brainwashed Left. I have personally lost all respect for him and he is indeed fallible, he is merely man, and no the Holy Father in the TRUE sense of the word, AAs God said you shall have no other gods be4 me, and as Christ said Himsrlf .. I am the way the truth the life.. (not Satan) It is clear this death cult worships and is a perpetuator of evil.. and the pope is bowing down and acknowledging that that is ok…This is in fact a blasphemous act, I believe.

  31. Raj Kumar Joseph says

    Apr 1, 2016 at 9:28 am

    Maybe he is the false prophet mentioned by Nostrodamus !!
    He restored priesthood to a paedophile priest who raped a Minnesota girl

    http://www.twincities.com/2016/02/15/church-lifts-ban-on-indian-priest-who-assaulted-minnesota-girl/

  32. Fr Agathon says

    Apr 1, 2016 at 9:37 am

    The “Pope” is consistent with the tradition of the Pharisees and hypocrites of the past. We are all in need of humility and repentance. If he wishes to wash the feet of others as symbolizing Christ washing the feet of His disciples it should be done without cameras, media, and reporters. Christ taught us this: “““Beware of practicing your righteousness before other people in order to be seen by them, for then you will have no reward from your Father who is in heaven. And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites. For they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. …”

  33. Queen Jenevere says

    Apr 1, 2016 at 9:37 am

    The pope is a Marxist fool. Bowing down and appeasing to these murderous blood-thirsty jihadists makes the laughing-stock of the world and of the catholic church. Technically he is a false pope just like the muslims worship a false paganest god. both sides are bowing down to evil. And catholics should not applauding this misguided gesture of humility. In no way did my Lord bow down to Satan… Clearly this pope does..And he will not be winning too many souls, if any, for this grossly misguided act of Christian charity/humility. HE IS A STUPID STUPID FOOL.

  34. Jay Boo says

    Apr 1, 2016 at 10:14 am

    Why doesn’t the pope just get a job doing pedicures to deal with his foot fetish.
    All those years of celibacy have taken a toll.

    The gentleman with a beard is wearing sneakers and clearly does not want any part of this foot fetish freak show. He would probably prefer that the pope flaunt his ‘humility’ at the end of his neck slicing knife.

  35. staffsgt7 says

    Apr 1, 2016 at 11:34 am

    Since Vatican II, there has been major problems with the church. And not one Pope since has even bothered to change this. It tells me that not one of them has cracked open Islamic texts and read them to find out what that allah is, what the message of islam is, or that it is blasphemy not only of Jesus, but also of God the Father and God the Holy Spirit.

    And of course, Popes want some Popes since Vatican II made into saints when they have allowed such blasphemy in our church. I call it more crap within the church. There might be some individual clergy who know better but most are either too afraid to even dare to crack open Islam’s texts and find out what I tell them OR they are ok with the blasphemy being downplayed.

    All of this, including the church putting forward a false Sr. Lucy – I have left the church but am not a Protestant and believe as they do so I am in limbo – all thanks to our clergy because I have tried to wake the ones that I know up, and I have also written to different shows on EWTN, and even the Pope. I know the Pope probably didn’t get the note and I noticed they took out the information to contact the Pope and the email didn’t work anymore (or they blocked my email address), and none of them respond. Or their response is as smarmy my politicians.

    • EYESOPEN says

      Apr 1, 2016 at 9:13 pm

      Staffsgt7, I agree with you 100%. This false pope is a product and an enabler of the “New World Odor” crowd, and I want nothing more to do with him – or the USCCB (the U.S. Conference of Communist Bishops) who are raking in millions of dollars of U.S. taxpayers’ money to bring muzlim (sic – on purpose) so-called “refugees” into the U.S.

      Catholics prior to the farce known as Vatican II knew well that the “god” of izlam was NOT the Almighty God – Yahweh – that Christians worship. But that was one of the “ecumenical” changes wrought in Vatican II.

      If you would like to know more about what happened back then, here is an excellent article that clearly spells out what happened – and why. It is called “The Oath Against Modernism Betrayed”. You can find it at this link:

      http://www.cfnews.org/page88/files/59aa93f4d2f6c0f4599cfb2e19519a69-438.html

      About halfway down the article, you will find what happened with Vatican II – about how the schema for the Council, originally written with Cardinal Ottaviani’s oversight and faithful to the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church, were thrown out because the Leftist bishops whined that they had had no say in it. Well, read the whole thing if you REALLY want to know what happened.

  36. Peter says

    Apr 1, 2016 at 1:14 pm

    With this act, the pope shows, not that he is more humble, or understands the scripture better, but rather the contrary:

    The symbol of Jesus washing the feet of the disciples is important: It’s Jesus’s way of saying that the Master is not more important than his pupils. The Master is only Master, for the benefit of the disciples. And more: The success of the Master is completely dependent on the success of his disciples. So, by caring for the feet of the disciples, the Master shows, he’s not more than them, he shows them his love and care, and also, he prepares them for what they must do: Follow in his steps, and walk far, and meet many obstacles along the path. It’s a blessing, for initiates of the Narrow Path.

    But by washing the feet of muslim migrants, what does the pope say: These are not disciples of Christ, nor will they persuaded by this act. Instead of showing himself smaller than his discipels (i.e. Christians), he boasts and tries to show himself better, by showing that he is “more humble”. But by doing so, he fails, and so, his pride is for all the world to see, it shines through the holes in this hollow act. He forgets his disciples, whose feet he should really kiss, the victims of the persecution in the Middle East, and washes the feet of those that trample on them.

    Jesus was quite short and drastic when people of other faiths tried to get close to him and ask for help. It was not unless they showed their faith, that Jesus helped them. And Jesus was sure to point out, that it was their faith that had helped them.

    So, if the pope wants to help muslims, the best he can do, is to help those Christians that are in need of his help, and though his example motivate muslims to become Christians. When they have shown their faith, then he can wash their feet, and thank God for each miraculous conversion.

  37. Shmooviyet says

    Apr 1, 2016 at 4:05 pm

    “…past his prime”? In what way? As Pope? In years lived?

    He is therefore allowed to show this scraping sort of deference to islam, which is exactly how it appears, and have it broadcast to the Catholics of the world? He’s ‘entitled to his pleasures’, whatever they may be? Why?
    How many, past and present, totalitarian leaders would agree with your statement. It gives me pleasure, so off with his head.

    This man —good intentions or not– has RESPONSIBILITIES to HIS followers. He’s given the title of Papa for a reason.

  38. Larry A. Singleton says

    Apr 1, 2016 at 8:25 pm

    (Bible Study) Notes on Islam in Revelation and Obama 5-20-14 II

    Article: “Unsealed: A Closer Look At Revelation 6 and ‘The four Horsemen of the Apocalypse’” by ICA 05/02/2013

    The crowns on the beast’s head are symbolic of its claim of “devine honor”. A “god”.

    On his heads were blasphemous names”

    “name” can have a different meaning”

    The names could be those of the saints that the beast is trying to slander or badmouth.

    Blasphemy is literally “evil-speaking” or “slander”

    The very name of the beasts speaks evil of someone” besmirching their good name

    The beasts very appearance is meant to instill fear and intimidate

    civil gov’t has become an instrument of the devil/Satan

    “The dragon gave him his power”

    “One head appeared to be slain but was healed”

    a break in the persecution that was resumed…

    …maybe when the emperor Constantine was converted to Christianity

    Revived again when Obummer took over and declared war on Christianity

    13:3 One of his heads seemed to have been butchered to death, but its mortal would was healed.

    13:3 and the whole world, following (with “Hope and Change”) the beast, was filled with admiration. (Nobel Peace Prize)

    I think about the persecution of Christians by Muslims. And this is only my opinion. There wasn’t this kind of persecution of Christians even by the Romans. The Romans weren’t out to destroy Christianity. Maybe individual emperors were. I keep thinking about Ammianus Marcellinus (Loeb Classics) who marched under Julian. I don’t recall any particular animosity he had when it came to Christians. It seemed, as I’ve read Roman history, when it came to Christianity they had kind of a “take it or leave it” attitude. The average Roman didn’t CARE about Christians. How much persecution could there have been when Rome turned Christian so soon after Julian the Apostate?

    But thinking about 13:3 “but the fatal wound was healed” and the Antichrist being an “ideology”. The ideology of Islam that was all but destroyed and now lives again, spreading all over the planet. It has infiltrated and subverted every level of our government and universities. Including those of just about every other democratic country on earth.

    And thinking about the rumor that the president of the United States wears a ring on his finger that says “No God But Allah”

    At a time when Christians are seeing the worst persecution in their history

    Think about what a “crown” means. What a “name” means.

    What it means that this ring. This “tiara” that he is purported to have worn for the past 30 years DEFINES WHO HE IS!!!!

    It’s almost as if Obummer, who has collaborated with the MB and has actually been directly responsible for the renewed persecution of Christians around the world.

    “the popular admiration of this beast is connected with honor paid to the devil”

    The non-Christian world may superficially or on the surface recoil from worshiping the devil….But all worship that is not directed at Christ is in reality offered to Satan. Thus the world worships the dragon when it bestows idolatrous honor on earthly (secular) governments 1 Cor 10:20-> Those who share in their religious meals (Interfaith) are uniting themselves with demons.

    11:2 turned over to “the nations” or “nation of Islam”?

    6:2 white horse > deception

    The first horseman conquers by deceiving. The NT and Revelation is littered with warnings about false teachers, etc.

    And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name saying I am Christ; and shall deceive many (Matt 24:4-5)

    6:8 pale “green” horse > Green official color of Islam.

    9:14 6th angel > Muhammad?

    18:17 In a single moment all is gone > Iran nuclear blast?

    20:4 “those beheaded”

    11:10 People will gloat over them/Give presents to each other. (Where have we seen this?)

    Beast that comes out of the earth. “two horns”

    Horns usually a symbol of power

    “two” might indicate that this beast exercised both secular and spiritual power.

    Islam is both secular/political and religious.

    See P-192 Hinds note on 13:11

    “had two horns like unto a lamb…” Is it the “Lamb” as in Christ.

    Becker > “lamb” refers to Christ. “The thought is not that the beast looks like a Christian, but that he actually looks like Christ”

    Applied to “interfaith” movements and the claim by Muslims tempting to mislead by saying “we share the same God”.

  39. gravenimage says

    Apr 1, 2016 at 11:37 pm

    This is how pious Mohammedans interpret the Pope washing the feet of Muslims:

    “Kneel before Zod!”

  40. Jay Boo says

    Apr 2, 2016 at 12:44 pm

    This pope never misses an opportunity to — flaunt ‘humility’.
    The pope has raised the stakes on Obama

    Now Obama who only bowed to a Saudi King will have to break out the chap stick and literally do some serious full-on naked butt kissing before the camara in order to win the Islam panderer’s jackpot of dubious bragging rights.

  41. gravenimage says

    Apr 4, 2016 at 6:53 pm

    Here is a witless political cartoon implying that the only way to fight Jihad terror is through appeasement like this:

    “Pick the Most Effective Counterterrorism Messenger:

    http://www.cartoonistgroup.com/store/add.php?iid=141302

  42. Champ says

    Apr 4, 2016 at 8:03 pm

    Robert Spencer is 100% correct about the pope …

    And this foot-washing idiocy is part and parcel of the evil Chrislam movement:

    https://youtu.be/k7R-IWXzgeo

FacebookYoutubeTwitterLog in

Subscribe to the Jihad Watch Daily Digest

You will receive a daily mailing containing links to the stories posted at Jihad Watch in the last 24 hours.
Enter your email address to subscribe.

Please wait...

Thank you for signing up!
If you are forwarding to a friend, please remove the unsubscribe buttons first, as they my accidentally click it.

Subscribe to all Jihad Watch posts

You will receive immediate notification.
Enter your email address to subscribe.
Note: This may be up to 15 emails a day.

Donate to JihadWatch
FrontPage Mag

Search Site

Translate

The Team

Robert Spencer in FrontPageMag
Robert Spencer in PJ Media

Articles at Jihad Watch by
Robert Spencer
Hugh Fitzgerald
Christine Douglass-Williams
Andrew Harrod
Jamie Glazov
Daniel Greenfield

Contact Us

Terror Attacks Since 9/11

Archives

  • 2020
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2019
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2018
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2017
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2016
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2015
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2014
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2013
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2012
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2011
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2010
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2009
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2008
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2007
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2006
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2005
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2004
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2003
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • March

All Categories

You Might Like

Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Recent Comments

  • Mount Zion on Iranian Kurdistan: Muslim brothers behead their sister in honor killing over her romantic relationship
  • James Lincoln on Islamic Republic of Iran: Turkey’s Erdogan champions Islam only as a tool to further his own interests
  • James Lincoln on Canadian Mental Health Association studies Muslim women’s mental health due to ‘discrimination’ and ‘hate crimes’
  • terry sullivan on Greece, Cyprus, Egypt, France and UAE conduct joint military exercises amid rising Turkish threat
  • Keith O on India: Police make first arrest for ‘love jihad’ under new law

Popular Categories

dhimmitude Sharia Jihad in the U.S ISIS / Islamic State / ISIL Iran Free Speech

Robert Spencer FaceBook Page

Robert Spencer Twitter

Robert Spencer twitter

Robert Spencer YouTube Channel

Books by Robert Spencer

Jihad Watch® is a registered trademark of Robert Spencer in the United States and/or other countries - Site Developed and Managed by Free Speech Defense

Content copyright Jihad Watch, Jihad Watch claims no credit for any images posted on this site unless otherwise noted. Images on this blog are copyright to their respective owners. If there is an image appearing on this blog that belongs to you and you do not wish for it appear on this site, please E-mail with a link to said image and it will be promptly removed.

Our mailing address is: David Horowitz Freedom Center, P.O. Box 55089, Sherman Oaks, CA 91499-1964

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.