Why has there been this “five-year lull”? Because “Al-Azhar froze talks with the Vatican in 2011 to protest comments by then-Pope Benedict XVI.” What did Benedict say? Andrea Gagliarducci of the Catholic News Agency explains that after a jihad terrorist murdered 23 Christians in a church in Alexandria 2011, Benedict decried “terrorism” and the “strategy of violence” against Christians, and called for the Christians of the Middle East to be protected.
Al-Azhar’s Grand Imam, Ahmed al-Tayeb, whom Pope Francis welcomed to the Vatican in May, was furious. He railed at Benedict for his “interference” in Egypt’s affairs and warned of a “negative political reaction” to the Pope’s remarks. In a statement, Al-Azhar denounced the Pope’s “repeated negative references to Islam and his claims that Muslims persecute those living among them in the Middle East.”
Benedict stood his ground, and that was that. But in September 2013, al-Azhar announced that Pope Francis had sent a personal message to al-Tayeb. In it, according to al-Azhar, Francis declared his respect for Islam and his desire to achieve “mutual understanding between the world’s Christians and Muslims in order to build peace and justice.” At the same time, Al Tayyeb met with the Apostolic Nuncio to Egypt, Mgr. Jean-Paul Gobel, and told him in no uncertain terms that speaking about Islam in a negative manner was a “red line” that must not be crossed.
So Pope Benedict condemned a jihad attack, one that al-Azhar also condemned, and yet al-Azhar suspended dialogue because of the Pope’s condemnation. Then Pope Francis wrote to the Grand Imam of al-Azhar affirming his respect for Islam, and the Grand Imam warned him that criticizing Islam was a “red line” that he must not cross. That strongly suggests that the “dialogue” that Pope Francis has now reestablished will not be allowed to discuss the Muslim persecution of Christians that is escalating worldwide, especially since an incidence of that persecution led to the suspension of dialogue in the first place.
What’s more, the Pope’s dialogue partner, al-Tayeb, has shown himself over the years to be anything but a preacher of peace, cooperation and mercy: he has justified anti-Semitism on Qur’anic grounds; and called for the Islamic State murderers of the Jordanian pilot to be crucified or have their hands and feet amputated on opposite sides (as per the penalty in Qur’an 5:33 for those who make war against Allah and his messenger or spread “mischief” in the land. Al-Azhar was also revealed to be offering free copies of a book that called for the slaughter of Christians and other Infidels.
This “dialogue” has not saved a single church from being burned or a single Christian from being massacred. And it never will. Instead, it is being used by the Catholic hierarchy as a club to silence those who speak out about the true cause and magnitude of contemporary Muslim persecution of Christians.
This Pope, and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, are betraying the Church, Judeo-Christian civilization, and the free world. If I am a “bad Catholic” for saying that, then it is morally preferable to being a “good” one.
“Leave them; they are blind guides. And if a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit.” (Matthew 15:14)
“Vatican-Muslim Dialogue to Restart in April, Vatican Says,” Associated Press, October 21, 2016:
VATICAN CITY — The Vatican and the prestigious Sunni Muslim center of learning, Al-Azhar, are expected to formally reopen talks next year after a five-year lull….
The Vatican announcement Friday comes after Pope Francis and the grand imam of Al-Azhar, Sheik Ahmed el-Tayyib, met at the Vatican in May and embraced. It marked a turning point after Al-Azhar froze talks with the Vatican in 2011 to protest comments by then-Pope Benedict XVI.
Benedict had demanded greater protection for Christians in Egypt after a New Year’s bombing on a Coptic Christian church in Alexandria killed 21 people.

mortimer says
The Vatican views dialogue as Christian charitableness. Al Azhar sees dialogue as the terms of surrender.
The West wants equality. Islam wants supremacism
That is what every supremacist wants.
gravenimage says
Spot on, Mortimer.
Hector Archytas says
The main motivation for Muslim in the dialogue with the catholics is to study the christian propangadist strategy to make Islam looking like Christianity to spread it.
Angemon says
Indeed.
Vlad says
Pope Dhimmy the First will cave in to whatever Satan demands. Pope Dhimmy the First is Satan’s appointed Judas Goat for humanity.
Shaun says
I second your attitude re: being a good Catholic “vs.” a good human being!
Funny how Islam is reconfiguring the political landscape. Now we have liberals trying to defend religion after eons of blasting it as the opium of the people, lay Catholics who protect “the least of these” while the Pope courts our killers, and atheist feminists saying they’re kewl with gender segregation and veiling as long as Muslim women say they want it!
Lucienne says
Dear Robert, The Church is found inside your body with The Holy Spirit in Faith alone, not works in Jesus Christ. with love, Lucienne
Wellington says
Sounds at least a tad Buddhist, Lucienne. And how do you know that what you asserted is the way of things? What is your proof?
Ah, religious people aplenty make this, that or the other assertion as though it is an axiom. Trouble is that again and again we only have assumptions asserted as fact, when, in fact (how fitting,) they are only assumptions.
Extra trouble occurs with Islamic assumptions posing as fact because Muzzies aplenty want to kill you for not accepting them. At least other religions, in their theological blueprint, don’t go this “far.” But Islam surely does and it’s why Jihad Watch exists in the first place. It’s not what Muslims believe that is itself the problem. Rather, and unlike all other religions, it is the control-freak aspect of Islam which is the problem.
But getting back to your comment, how do you know that what you averred is actually true? Oh, you can believe what you averred is actually true, and it may be (though personally I doubt it), but HOW DO YOU KNOW?
Mark Swan says
Jesus said: “If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him” (John 14:23). Through the Holy Spirit, Christ and the Father actually live within the truly converted Christian, guiding them, inspiring them and empowering them to keep the commandments and live God’s way of life! The Apostle Paul was also inspired to make this very plain when he wrote: “I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ lives in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me” (Galatians 2:20, KJV). That is the “key.” Through the Spirit, Christ will literally live His life in our human flesh! He will give us the strength to obey God’s commandments! Religious opponents challenge the real Christian by saying: “You can’t keep the Ten Commandments! They are spiritual and you are only physical.” But one who is led by God’s Holy Spirit may truly reply: “You are right. In my own human strength, I can’t. But to the degree I yield to God’s Holy Spirit, I can and I will keep God’s commandments! Christ within me helps me not to kill, steal, lie, commit adultery, covet, dishonor my parents, break God’s Sabbath, practice idolatry, take God’s name in vain or have another ‘god’ before the true God. I may slip in some point occasionally, but I will then repent and confess my sin to God and have His forgiveness (1 John 1:8–9). Then I get back on God’s path and, through His Spirit, grow in grace and knowledge. I am not perfect. But, through Christ living His life within me, I am growing toward perfection and walking in God’s law as my basic way of life.”
The doctrine of Antichrist, then, is that Christ does not literally live His life within His people today! It is the false teaching that Christians today can live a different kind of life from what Jesus lived and still be His true followers. It often includes the idea that Christ was righteous in our stead, and therefore we do not have to be. We just accept Him and His righteousness is imputed to us. Effectively, God “kids Himself” and pretends that we are really righteous when we actually are not! This doctrine is a damnable lie! “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever” (Hebrews 13:8). He will live the same kind of life in you and me today that He lived nearly 2,000 years ago when He walked this earth in the human flesh. At that time, He continually taught obedience to all of God’s commandments (Matthew 5:19). We have seen His answer to the young man asking Him how to inherit eternal life: “Keep the commandments” (19:17).
Near the end of the Apostolic Age, God inspired the Apostle John to describe the true saints of God: “Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city” (Revelation 22:14). There are many, many false ministers today who are teaching the doctrine of Antichrist, a doctrine that sanctions disobedience to God’s commandments—a doctrine of “no works.” The Apostle Paul said of these ministers: “For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ. And no wonder! For Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also transform themselves into ministers of righteousness, whose end will be according to their works” (2 Corinthians 11:13–15). You will notice here that Satan has ministers who appear to be righteous. Ironically, their end—their final reward—will be according to their “works,” the very thing they seek to deny! God intends for us to obey His commandments, do good works and live by His every word. Once you get this principle straight, you can clearly understand the “spirit of Antichrist” and how to test whether any religious leader’s idea or doctrine is of God! Then, by diligent study of God’s Word and by constant prayer, you will come to a deeper understanding of the real purpose of your life and experience closer contact with the Living God than you may ever have dreamed possible. You will come to see who truly is of God—His true Church, which has faithfully proclaimed the same Gospel He sent through Jesus Christ. In this end time, that Message—of obedience to God’s Kingdom and rule—is to be preached by His Church as a witness to all nations (Matthew 24:14). You are reading that Message this very instant! In Revelation 12:17, the true Church of God is described as a woman persecuted by the devil. This Church is a remnant. Its members are those “who keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.” Again, the true saints of God are described in like manner in Revelation 14:12: “Here is the patience of the saints; here are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.”
Yes, Jesus Christ is to live and dwell within His people today through the Holy Spirit. To the degree they yield to Him, their lives will be ones of full and complete obedience, just as Jesus’ life was in the flesh. Their customs, their traditions, their way of life will be the same as His in every respect, because He does not change. And He will be living within them! Then Christ and the Father can be absolutely sure that their people are fully surrendered to God, who can continually impart to true Christians His very divine nature and character—and so prepare them to be kings and priests in the literal Kingdom of God soon to be set up on this earth. “And from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler over the kings of the earth. To Him who loved us and washed us from our sins in His own blood, and has made us kings and priests to His God and Father, to Him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen” (Revelation 1:5–6). We need to Examine ourselves honestly. Have we really understood Christianity before? Is Christ really living His life in us? Do we have the spiritual “backbone” to act on the truth we have just reviewed?
John Stefan says
Salvation, justification, by grace alone, for Jesus’ sake, through faith. Ephesians 2:8 etc.
billybob says
“Leave them; they are blind guides. And if a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit.” (Matthew 15:14)
That was a very audacious statement in the context within which it was found here. Read and heed!
Wellington says
Francis I is not the baddest ass in papal history. Others like Stephen VI, Benedict IX, Urban VI and Alexander VI could claim this “distinction,” but he certainly is a “contender” for the most foolish Pope in history.
And it should never be overlooked that foolishness can do more harm, often times far more harm, than “mere” malevolence. Here Francis is a real “contender.”
BLC says
In Christianity, money is said to be the root of all evil. In Buddhism, ignorance is the root of all evil.
le mouron rouge says
BLC,
More precisely:
“For the LOVE of money is a root of all kinds of evils. It is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pangs”
1 Timothy 6:10 (Emphasis added)
Michael Poulin says
Wake up Catholics! The Pope is a blasphemer and a heretic.
Jorge Bergoglio aka Francis publicly accused God of willing mankind to sin:
“It [the conscience of the adulterer / fornicator] can recognize with sincerity and honesty what for now is the most generous response which can be given to God, and come to see with a certain moral security that it [persistence in adultery / fornication] is what God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one’s limits, while yet not fully the objective ideal.” (Amoris Laetitia 303)
The preceding is in direct opposition to Scripture : Epistle of Saint James 13:1
“Let no man, when he is tempted, say that he is tempted by God. For God is not a tempter of evils: and he tempteth no man.”
As far as the JW story, the Mohammadens will piss all over the grave of Saint Peter under the alter of the Vatican and Pope Francis the Modernist will lick it up.
Michael Poulin says
This false Pope is so in love with his god “Dialogue” that he fails to heed the warnings of his predecessor Paul VI, the man who promulgated the Vatican II Council!!
“…The desire to come together as brothers must not lead to a watering-down or subtracting from the truth. Our dialogue must not weaken our attachment to our faith. In our apostolate we cannot make vague compromises about the principles of faith and action on which our profession of Christianity is based.
.
An immoderate desire to make peace and sink differences at all costs is, fundamentally, a kind of skepticism about the power and content of the Word of God which we desire to preach
,,,
…Obviously we cannot share in these various forms of religion nor can we remain indifferent to the fact that each of them, in its own way, should regard itself as being the equal of any other and should authorize its followers not to seek to discover whether God has revealed the perfect and definitive form, free from all error, in which he wishes to be known, loved and served. Indeed, honesty compels us to declare openly our conviction that there is but one true religion, the religion of Christianity. It is our hope that all who seek God and adore Him may come to acknowledge its truth.
…
But we must add that it is not in our power to compromise with the integrity of the faith or the requirements of charity. ”
Quotations from: Ecclesiam Suam, Encyclical Letter on the Ways in which the Church Must Carry Out its Mission in the Contemporary World Promulgated on August 6, 1964 by His Holiness Pope Paul VI
So Mr Spencer you are not a “bad Catholic” for criticizing this man Bergoglio. He is a fool in need of correcting. In fact, it is both your right and duty to defend the Catholic faith, even to the point of resisting the Pope. All you have to do is study the faith of the past and compare it to the words of Bergoglio and you will quickly find the two do not match.
Michael Poulin says
2 Corinthians 6:14
Bear not the yoke with unbelievers. For what participation hath justice with injustice? Or what fellowship hath light with darkness?
Wellington says
Well, Michael Poulin, Paul VI may have officially ended Vatican II (I think this is what you meant by “promulgated”) but it was John XXIII who foolishly called Vatican II into creation in the first place—–thus serving, quite unfortunately for the Catholic Church and by extension for all the West, as a “magnificent” example of the idiocy of trying to fix something which isn’t broken.
Vatican II was not only not necessary, it opened up the flood gates to modern leftist thought in an ecclesiastical institution, i.e., the Catholic Church, which needed no flood gates opened. Francis I, to date, serves as the finest example (there are of course many others) of the end result of this MASSIVE error by John XXIII, arguably a most destructive Pope, though he meant well, but then powerful people who mean well. but who do unnecessary things. are some of the greatest contributors to folly and tragedy to be found anywhere in the pages of history.
Michael Poulin says
Agreed .
Be careful Wellington – you are starting to sound like Archbishop LeFebvre and us grumpy traditional Catholics 😉
The Vatican II modernist cult is like the AIDS virus, it leaves the Church infected with an indifferent philosophy, totally man-centered, with which it cannot defend itself. If everybody and their goldfish go to heaven, including Muslims, then there is not much necessity for the Catholic Church, her Sacrifice, or her sacraments. When the Catholic Church believed and taught that is was the one true Church of Jesus Christ outside of which there was no salvation, it put forth efforts to convert the Muslims, or at least defend themselves against their onslaughts. Now as you can see we are in full meltdown mode
Wellington says
My understanding, MP, is that traditional Catholic teaching, long before Vatican II, asserted that if one leads a Christ-like life, one can go to Heaven. Thus some poor Hindu in the eighth century, who barely or never heard of Christianity, but was very good with family and friends and led an upright life can go to Heaven. Much of the Protestant world, as I have understood it, has insisted over the centuries that only if one is baptized and believes in Jesus as the Son of God, does such a person have a shot at Christian Heaven. And the Orthodox world, for instance Russian and Greek Orthodoxy, has taken a third position on this matter and that is that it is up to God to decide and humans cannot know what God will decide. If I’m wrong here about these three different viewpoints I would appreciate knowing that..
BLC says
Muslims? In Heaven? Makes you hope there’s lots of security and gated communities in Heaven then.
somehistory says
Wellington,
I do not belong to any of the groups you named. However, the Bible says that “God is an Examiner of hearts.” Jesus said, in Matthew 25, that He will separate people based on how they treat His “brothers” and that helping them when they are ill, in prison, thirsty, in need of clothing, etc., will mean the one helping His brothers will gain their eternal life. Those that do not do anything good for His brothers, will be sent into eternal destruction.
The Apostle Paul said there are people that do not have “law” but act according to the Law anyway, doing the right thing because it is right, not because it has been written down that they would be punished if not obeying it.
King Solomon, when dedicating the first Temple to Jehovah, asked that God see those far away in other lands, but that had their hearts turned to Him, and answer their prayers.
Jesus said that “to His Master each one stands or falls.” This was in response to some criticizing others who claimed to be serving His Father.
So, it is my understanding that God will examine each one, as to whether his heart is upright or not. Evil people with evil hearts will not gain eternal life. If someone is given eternal life, it will be that God has seen that the person’s heart is upright.
Rufolino says
Yes Wellington, Vatican II was not necessary, and :-
“Unless it is necessary to change, it is necessary NOT to change.”
DFD says
To:
Michael Poulin, Rufolino & (posibly) Wellington:
—————————————————————
A friend of Father Marcel Lefebvre suffered the same fate after the “Council”, which he, together with Lefebvre opposed bitterly. His name was Father Hans Milch (1924-1987). Excommunication etc. Finally mureder.
He held a lengthy sermon, after the ‘council’ in which he branded the church and its, effective, treason upon Christianity and Christian culture. Excommunication followed promptly, he was declared to be ‘deranged’, ‘disturbed’ etc. Ten years later he was murdered by an ’emotionally unhinged’ member of his (excommunicated??) community. The church forgave, and the murderer walked Scot-Free, for practical purposes. Obviously something that’s a bit difficult to do with, say, Benedikt.
Now, Father Milch’s sermon, in it’s original, lousy sound quality (recording is from 1979) but ENGLISH SUBS, and well worth listening to, paying attention to. Or rather: reading along. It’s in three parts, about 15 min each, for easy digestion.
Again, the lament/sermon is from October 1979 !!! That’s correct! Title:
“The Church and The Imminent Fall of Europe”, 1979!
=========================================
The following link leads you to all three parts. Other items on/in that link may be of interest, depends upon your leanings, believes or perceptions. But these three parts I urge you to watch, and again, 1979. Think about it. There’s nothing new with “all this”. The elites (Volksverrater!) know fully well what they are doing, they don’t need to know the core texts of Islam.
Understand please:
If those ‘elites’ (Volksverrater!) would not know what it is all about, they would not try to implement any of this. Does that make sense?
The link:
https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?fr=yhs-mozilla-002&hsimp=yhs-002&hspart=mozilla&p=The+Church+and+The+Imminent+Fall+of+Europe%2APart%2A+youtube#id=3&vid=ad1aa9396297cbe4dc6224a16af20c19&action=view
John Stefan says
Wellington and others: I am very glad that, surely, it is God Himself in the final analysis Who decides who it is that will spend eternity with Him, but, I, a Lutheran retired pastor, believe and have been teaching that we humans here in this world who must die because of sin are to believe and preach that God forgives the sins of the people of the world for the sake of His beloved Son Who lived and suffered and died to redeem the world of its sins. That is salvation by faith in the Lord Jesus which the Holy Spirit gives to us through His Word which is also in Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. He who has no faith in Jesus, therefore, is lost. That’s hard to preach and hard to believe because right next door to me is a fine unchristian family, but they have no faith in Jesus. I would like him to be in heaven, but the serious problem of sinful man is that he is sinful and sin is so serious that it had to take God’s innocent Son to suffer and take as His very own all of the sins of the world and die in our place to be the world’s Saviour from sin. I’m not the one that sacrificed any of my three sons. The innocent blood of God’s Son is very precious to Him. . . .Sorry, if this is too long.
Mark Swan says
Here is a very simplistic over view~
We are here because God is reproducing, that is the all importance of Human existence, everything of necessity was done for our existence. What is God’s story,
He limits us to what He is doing with us. He does say he has done everything by knowledge, He is the master scientist. I continually use the term Him, when in fact
They is more appropriate, for now, there are two. The Father, and the Son, the One that emptied Himself and was born as a Human. They have plans for a large family, thus the tremendous universe, which is still expanding as I write this.
When God the Father draws a human to Him, it is Christ who judges that Human, they both join their minds with that Human, through the power called the Holy Spirit, the very power used to do all the things found in the entire universe, it is beyond speculation, and our view is limited to the results it brings about. Christ is the One who judges, and logically so, He lived as a Human, and was tempted, just as we are, but did not sin. Sin is the breaking of God’s law. The penalty for this is death. It would take a perfect being to pay that penalty. They knew before they made humans this would be the way.
Humans like Adam, would choose to teach themselves. All Humans would have chose this, and they knew. So to make it possible for Humans to be forgiven sin, there is why Christ had to be beat unmercifully to heal us of physical sin, and He had to die to heal us of spiritual sin.
For now they are allowing humans time for experimenting with everything, Religion, Government, Education, and everything else. That time is nearly up. The time of Man and Satan’s rule will end. Man will be on the verge of destroying all live on earth, if God did not intervene all life would be destroyed. At that point Christ will return to this earth.
Just like now nearly all Humans who ever lived were not taught by God, they will remain asleep (dead). The ones who were taught and remained faithful until they died, will be resurrected, along with those who were still alive who have been taught and remained faithful, all these will be changed into Spirit Beings, just like God, these real Children will be added to the number with Christ the first born. He will remain their Lord and King.
All the Humans still alive will now be taught by God, during a thousand year period, with Satan taken away. At the end of the thousand year period, all those that lived and died before the thousand year period, will be resurrected, and taught. After this is all
completed, then comes the judgment, of all who learned the truth of God and rejected it. Then no more Humans.
All those who loved the truth, and remained faithful to it, are then in God’s Family, a large and very God Family.
Those who are being taught now, should take everything God wants, to heart, now.
carol says
Michael Poulin…thanks for providing additional info re Popes Benedict and Francis. The mystery of the sudden “pope replacement” has actually been on my mind over the last 24 hours because I was struck by Cardinal Dolan’s closing comments at the Alfred Smith charity dinner in Manhattan (where Trump and Clinton “roasted” each other). I was taken aback by the obvious effort to meld oil and water and slip in “equal billing” for Islam as one of “the big three”. I made a few lengthy posts and one ended with a spontaneous compliment to Robert Spencer and so I’ll paste the relevant last few paragraphs here:
“MONEY oils the wheels for these loony-tunes and that means our being rational and hopeful will NOT turn the tide. Don’t expect fairness or reciprocity – be smarter than the Catholic church. Masking what these predators are insults and jeopardizes what Judeo-Christian values have achieved in the Western world and it insults those of your fellow citizens who’ve been actively sought out and blown to bits.
Sometimes you have to FIGHT for freedom or you’ll be remembered as having been “asleep at the wheel”.
Aside from Christopher Hitchens (the anti-theist who despised Islam and the Clintons and their buddy Kissinger) here are two other men who in my view accurately embody what Christianity should mean:
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/09/video-robert-spencer-on-jihad-dhimmitude-islamization-and-the-failure-of-western-leaders”
What do they say? There are no accidents! Just as Mr. Spencer expresses a certain self-doubt this little lady was giving her unsolicited thumbs up to him plus Father Trenham and the inimicable Christopher Hitchens. It’s a sign I say!
carol says
Correction “inimitable” – sorry Christopher.
somehistory says
2 John; “If one comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not invite him into your homes or say a greeting to him, for the one that says a greeting to him…is a sharer in his wicked works.”
This pope guy is “sharing in his [the moslims] wicked works” and those include everything done to Christians in the cause, the name, and the goals of islam. Both of them are working hard for satan the devil and his evil wild beast.
Anthony says
i am a Catholic and I just wonder what kind of result will this dialogue bring out ? i read koran and a bit of hadits and sira literature and baffled by the fact that mo’s teaching is contrary to the Bible’s concept of salvation, Jesus’s resurection and Jesus being the Son of God.
So according to islam, Christianity is just simply heresy, well I like to how how the Pope and the Mufti can reconcile that facts ?
..let the truth prevail ! …I am the way, the truth and the life…Jesus ( John 14:6 )
gravenimage says
Anthony, I doubt *very much* that this dhimmi pope will actually be debating Al Azhar in this manner. Instead, Francis will likely be accepting the whitewash of Islam presented to him.
BLC says
Muslims believe that Jesus was not the Son of God, but a mere prophet. Muslims do not believe in the Trinity. Therefore, Muslims have the Spirit of the Antichrist.
Jesus said, “I am the Alpha and the Omega.” He didn’t say, “Wait until Mohammed gets here.” He said, “My sheep hear my voice.” He did say that there would be false prophets.
False prophets would disguise themselves as “servants of righteousness” and deceive “even the very elect”. The Pope is being deceived by a representative of the false prophet.
gravenimage says
Oh, Islam is much worse than this. It is not just that Muslims do not believe that Jesus is the Savior–he is also not a healer or a peacemaker.
In fact, the main role of “Jesus”–really, “Isa”–in Islam is to return in the Last Days and *kill Christians*.
Rob says
Al Azhar academics have (a) affirmed that there is nothing heretical in ISIS actions and doctrine and (b) that rape of captive women is the best way of humiliating them.
I think Frankie that the dialog has a lot of ground to cover.
gravenimage says
And here is Al Azhar, affirming that Christians and other Infidels should be murdered:
“Al Azhar “freely” promotes slaughter of Christians and infidels”
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/02/al-azhar-freely-promotes-slaughter-of-christians-and-infidels
Not much room for “dialogue” here…
Ali Bey says
A dialogue of the deaf.
BLC says
The notion of a dialogue between the Pope and any Muslim leader is impossible. Mohammed wanted people to believe that Islam is in some kind of logical progression following through from Judaism to Christianity to Islam, but it isn’t. Islam is simply nothing like either Judaism or Christianity, except what Mohammed copied from either one of them.
Billy Graham once said the best way to spot a fake is to study the authentic original. Mohammed was no Jesus. He was no Abraham or Moses either.
Islam is a fake religion. Mohammed is a false prophet and antichrist.
Ernie says
Dear Mr. Robert Spencer , I admire your integrity ; as a human being and as a catholic . May the Lord our G-d protect an keep you , and may you have peace in your indeed great , loving heart . Amen .
BLC says
graven image said, “the main role of “Jesus”–really, “Isa”–in Islam is to return in the Last Days and *kill Christians*.
Just when I think it can’t get any worse with Islam, it always does.
Paul Ashley says
This is equivalent to Obama’s sucking up to the Muslim Brotherhood at Cairo. Nothing but misery and destruction will come of it
Sam says
So POPE is going to resolve conflict with evil, which has been going on for centuries by dialogue. Pope is an idiot like Obama and the rest.
August West says
So despite Papal Magisterium two Popes have clearly and seriouisly disagreed over the relationship between Islam and Christianity. This disagreement happened during the 21st century and after Vatican II supposedly cleared up the matter. I wonder what Msgr Sweatland would say about that?
Perhaps he would say:
The king is dead, long live the king. Just don’t upset my revenue stream.
Of course it is possible that Msgr Sweatland’s view of the relationship between Islam and Christianity was the same in 2011 as it is now, but I somehow doubt it. If the next Pope’s views revert back to those to Benedict I wonder if Msgr Sweatland will evolve to agree with him as well?
Michael Poulin says
Dear Wellington ( and interested Catholics)
Vatican II taught indirect contradiction to previous Church teaching concerning the pagans:
Here is the fate of non-Catholics, as stated prior to Vatican II, by the Catholic Church
.
Pope Innocent III ( 1160 – 1216) At theFourth Lateran Council wrote:
“There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside of which no one at all can be saved.”
.
Pope Boniface VIII (1235-1303) promulgated a Papal Bull in 1302 titled Unam Sanctam:
“Urged by faith, we are obliged to believe and to maintain that the Church is one, holy, catholic, and also apostolic. We believe in her firmly and we confess with simplicity that outside of her there is neither salvation nor the remission of sins…In her then is one Lord, one faith, one baptism [Ephesians 4:5]. There had been at the time of the deluge only one ark of Noah, prefiguring the one Church, which ark, having been finished to a single cubit, had only one pilot and guide, i.e., Noah, and we read that, outside of this ark, all that subsisted on the earth was destroyed….Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.”
Pope Eugene IV, (1388-1447) wrote a Papal bull in 1441 Cantate Domino:
“It [the Church] firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart ‘into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels’ [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”
VATICAN II Documents and Catechisms DIRECTLY CONTRADICT the previous teachings
.
The 1997 Catechism (quoting Lumen Gentium of Vatican II )
“This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church: Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience—those too may achieve eternal salvation. “(CCC 847)
Vatican II document Gaudium Et Spes teaches similarly on the possibility of salvation of the invincibly ignorant :
“All this holds true not only for Christians, but for all men of good will in whose hearts grace works in an unseen way. For, since Christ died for all men, and since the ultimate vocation of man is in fact one, and divine, we ought to believe that the Holy Spirit in a manner known only to God offers to every man the possibility of being associated with this paschal mystery. ”
So the whole point in presenting these statements is to show how the Vatican II “Catholic Church” religion teaches the exact opposite of the what Catholic faith taught centuries prior to Vatican II in offering salvation to those outside the Church.
.
.The end result of such a major shift in doctrine is that “Pope” Francis and his followers condemn all efforts of evangelization and conversion of the Muslims and the Jews and pagans. False ecumenism and dialogue are now their religion.
The new Vatican II religion makes it impossible for the Catholic Church to fight Islam.
Wellington says
Thank you for that, MP.
Well, no one messed with Innocent III and got away with it (e.g., King John of England). Boniface VIII’s Unam Sanctam was primarily meant as a rebuke to Philip IV of France, a la Gregory VII to Emperor Henry IV back in the eleventh century, and Philip knew it and that is why he actually had Boniface physically retained (even slapped around if the rumors of this are true). Eugen IV, a pretty good Pope in his own right coming shortly after the Great Schism, did have trouble with the Council of Basel and had to also put up with the last anti-Pope in papal history, Felix V.
In any case, it appears that the medieval Catholic positon was very much akin, respecting the issue at hand, to what the major Protestant reformers averred in the 16th century. Though no fan of Vatican II, to put it mildly, I do welcome its idea that a person doesn’t have to personally be baptized and believe that Jesus is the Son of God in order to be saved. In some instances, this would simply be downright unfair, for example all the many fine people who lived centuries before Jesus ever walked the earth. Such people had no way of knowing Christ or being baptized and I can’t understand how a merciful God would hold bad timing against a good person. Perhaps the Orthodox position is the best one of all, to wit, that this is a matter for God to decide.
But thanks for your input and for so many of your other comments. Though an invincibly ignorant agnostic, I respect many of those who function within the Judeo-Christian theological framework, even though my overall hunch is that God is a legend. But, of course, overall hunches can sometimes, if not often, be wrong. Take care, my friend.
Michael Poulin says
Thank you Wellington.I find your comments here knowledgeable and insightful and edifying.
As to why Vatican II should be of interest to non-Catholic Jihad Watch readers – Yes the pre-Vatican II teachings were much harsher for sure, but you can appreciate how they inspired the activities of the missionaries to baptize as many souls as possible, and would strengthen one’s resolve to fight Islam. (As far as pre-Christian Jews were concerned, they fell under the Old Mosaic covenants and so could be saved and there was room there too for righteous Gentiles.
Thanks for not being dismissive of people who have faith. It is difficult for anyone to explain how they know something through faith. In my case I do not feel my faith is a blind faith,but one that has been supported by reason.
I have to admit that no ”proof” is ever absolute, but don’t we always use several lines of inquiry to come up with the best probabilities and the best explanations? When all lines of inquiry point to one conclusion that is the best fit, then I can accept all of those probabilities as “proof” I am naturally quite skeptical,and desire to know why things are the way they are.
There are lines of evidence being pursued by honest scientists that have pointed me in the direction of saying that some type of transcendent super-intellect is responsible for all that IS, and such a being is the best explanation for reality as it is observed.
I have wondered “why does the universe bother existing at all? It seems like a lot of energy is being used for no reason at all if materialism is true.
First – it seems probable that time and space had a beginning, a beginning to what we call “reality” which seems to imply some type of a causative power of an enormous magnitude that is now outside any possibility to observe or measure it – that seems to sound similar to the “transcendent cause” or a ”first cause” arguments of philosophers like Thomas Aquinas.
There is an exceedingly high improbability of our low entropy universe hitting the target at the moment of the Big Bang , and it is estimated to be on the order of 1 out of 10 to the 123rd power – which is totally unexplained. In other words, the chances of a low entropy universe popping into existence as it did are infinitesimally small. ( Big Bang cosmology was first theorized by a Catholic priest, Fr Georges LeMaitre by the way )
The universe also seems to have properties and limits akin to a computer simulation, such as “pixelation” and speed of light limits. The simulation hypothesis might help explain the observer effect – whether a photon behaves as a wave or a particle depends on the act of a conscious observer, and independent of when the photon was emitted ( even before the observer’s existence in time the photon seems to ”know” that it will be observed!) . This hypothesis, while admittedly “out there” is actually beginning to be tested by real scientists. And if true it begs the question – who or what is running the simulation?
There is the exceedingly high improbability of all the anthropic values of our universe’s constants- seemingly balanced on a knife’s edge. To me these coincidental values of fundamental physical constants seem to imply some type of super natural intelligence. The “fine-tuning” of those constants had to be just right or we wouldn’t be here. These numbers dictated the initial conditions of the universe and its expansion at the Big Bang and the formation of structures in it – For example:
If the gravitational constant, electromagnetism, or the “proton mass relative to the electron mass” varied from their values by only a tiny fraction (higher or lower), then all stars would be either blue giants or red dwarfs. That means stable long-lived stars like ours – necessary for life.
Secondary to the creation of stable stars needed for life is the necessity of having unstable ones that explode and create carbon atoms. The resonances necessary for oxygen, helium and beryllium in supernovae have precise values that allow for the fusion of the nuclei into carbon – resonances that explain both carbon abundance and carbon bonding (necessary for life). Another coincidence that put the universe on the path to the emergence of conscious life. There are several of these constants in physics – and they all just happen to work just right to make our universe habitable for conscious beings to arise to discover them. i find this very interesting and unlikely to happen for no reason,
The fact that the universe is describable with symbolic mathematics, math that follows rules and is self-correcting, implies some type of logic and order and information that is built in, is very interesting. Math points to patterns and laws which operate our world and further – those laws are discoverable by conscious beings – and conscious beings only. This math is highly symbolic, and seems to work at an ideal level that is not directly observed in nature. For instance, math can give us an equation that describes a perfect circle, yet no perfect circle has ever been observed in nature. This fact argues toward the existence of some type of perfection which cannot be directly observed but only imagined in the mind a conscious being. So we are here imagining perfection symbolically, yet we can’t “prove” that this perfection actually exists! Yet I have yet to meet anyone who does not believe in circles.
So these are just a few lines of inquiry that lead me to believe that a super-intellect transcendental necessary being is the best explanation for what I see around me,
Ok I am rambling far of the main story – bye for now
jerome henen says
Still no churches or synagogues in Saudi Arabia and christians are still being slaughtered along with the ‘wrong’ kind of muslims in various countries. There is no reciprocity of accommodation for each other at all from one side. The POPE and other world religious leaders are not prepared to acknowledge the fact that islam seeks only dominance. Not inclusion. Ever.
utis says
So this means I can’t say “Is the Pope Catholic?” anymore? Because it’s a real question and not a joke?
Michael Poulin says
True, the Pope is not Catholic in the older sense, but bears still shit in the woods!
ECAW says
What is the Pope saying?
http://wp.me/a4qPq8-pH