Anguish and misery for the state of the Church

[ThereCanBeOnly1]

The act of kissing the book is a sign of respect; too many people equate a sign of respect with an acceptance of all within it. The two are not the same, and anyone who has studied John Paul 2’ life and writings would understand both the sign of respect, and what he thought of Islam.

So is it correct to assume that you believe the given the opportunity, that St Peter ‘the Great’ would have kissed the Qur’an as a sign of respect? So then what does this mean?:

**The Summa Theologica of St. Thomas Aquinas
Second Part of the Second Part (Secunda Secundæ Partis)
Faith Question 12. Apostasy (II - II:12:2)
**
Objection 2. Further, unbelief is an act of the understanding: whereas apostasy seems rather to consist in some outward deed or utterance, or even in some inward act of the will, for it is written (Proverbs 6:12-14): “A man that is an apostate, an unprofitable man walketh with a perverse mouth. He winketh with the eyes, presseth with the foot, speaketh with the finger. With a wicked heart he deviseth evil, and at all times he soweth discord.” Moreover if anyone were to have himself circumcised, or to worship at the tomb of Mahomet, he would be deemed an apostate

As to praying for them and asking for their protection, it seems to me it was Christ who said “Pray for your enemies”, and I am sure that you would agree that we should follow Christ. And John Paul did no less.

I agree that we should pray for our enemies, of course!
But It is one thing to pray for enemies and another to pray FOR Protection of A Religion that denies CHRIST WHO IS GOD and denies vehemently the Most HOLY TRINITY.

And as to the martyrs, one can do something without showing disrespect for them; perhaps you feel otherwise. I would suspect that JP 2 meant no disrespect to them; if you take it as a sign of disrespect of them, perhaps you need to look further to determine if the act was intended as such. If it wasn’t, then you should not find that it does so.

It is better you think of it this way:
Did Christ say to pray for the protection of religions who deny GOD? Christ did not mean to pray for the protection of the apostate religions. I am sure you know he meant pray for enemies to worship the Almighty GOD and follow his laws.
Or better yet, would you kiss the Qur’an, a book that denies the divinity of Christ who is GOD and the Most Holy Trinity?

BTW, these are simple Yes or No questions.

 

[latinmasslover]

1. Kissing a book when it is offered as a sign of respect to your hosts and not as a statement of Faith.
2. I pray for the protection of Islam along with all other religions in the hope that they may be protected ultimately through conversion to Catholicism. Don’t you? What better protection is there than conversion?

1. While that statement is true (regarding the intentions) the words he said are what cause the problem.
2. Why pray for the protection of false religions? Why not just focus our prayers on the conversion of the adherents?

 

[Sure]

1. While that statement is true (regarding the intentions) the words he said are what cause the problem.
2. Why pray for the protection of false religions? Why not just focus our prayers on the conversion of the adherents?

1. I don’t know what he said or meant.
2. Did you read what I wrote? What better protection that to be converted to Christ’s Church!

 

[Christophorus]

Ugh… this is going to get ugly.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Now you’re going to condemn me for not personally knowing bear? Nice. I make a couple of points and you accuse me of being a paranoid martyr? “My type” is not in schism simply for disagreeing with some words or actions of the pope. Disobedience and schism are not the same thing dear, and if people refuse to listen to Pope Benedict because they don’t like “traditionalists” then they’re no different than Luther and those who followed in his footsteps. As for obedience: it is at the service of the Faith, not the other way around. Our first pope said it is better to obey God rather than men, and when it comes down to it, duh! Not every word uttered by the pope is Gospel, and to condemn somebody who doesn’t approve or validate bad decisions made by the pope, simply because he’s the pope, is absurd. You and others have a nasty habit of twisting what I say to fit your accusations. Grow up. Accuse me of something I’ve said and not a mentality you’d like to think I have.

Not so, not so, Latin Mass Lover. One has only to go and read your posts to see otherwise. What about your comment to Estesbob regarding the Tarot? Not to mention about your point reference to Bear: “It’s people with similar opinions to yours that happen to be in power and are respected by the worldly majority, which is why things don’t seem to be getting done. You all keep condemning us for holding to the holy traditions, using a false interpretation of V-II to back your erroneous accusations. When the Pope gets the Church back on track, will you remain loyal?” As if she wouldn’t. If you don’t want to be reminded of what you say, then I suggest you watch what you say. AGAIN, no one here has condemned anyone for clinging to Tradition, either the immutable or the mutable. No one here is NOT listening to Pope Benedict (though I daresay many would take issue that what the Pope is saying and what people like you SAY the Pope is saying are two distinct things). And on obedience to the Holy Father, I strongly suggest you read a “traditional” source on that: Saint Catherine of Sienna. She appears to disagree with you.

 

[Genesis315]

I think you’re putting your own soul in danger by declaring John Paul II was worshipping Mohammed or declaring Isalm to be true or any of those things:

As the Father says to St. Catherine of Siena in “The Dialogue”:

“Another thing is necessary for you to arrive at this union and purity, namely, that you should never judge the will of man in anything that you may see done or said by any creature whatsoever, either to yourself or to others. My will alone should you consider, both in them and in yourself. And, if you should see evident sins or defects, draw out of those thorns the rose, that is to say, offer them to Me, with holy compassion. In the case of injuries done to yourself, judge that My will permits this in order to prove virtue in yourself, and in My other servants, esteeming that he who acts thus does so as the instrument of My will; perceiving, moreover, that such apparent sinners may frequently have a good intention, for no one can judge the secrets of the heart of man. That which you do not see you should not judge in your mind, even though it may externally be open mortal sin, seeing nothing in others, but My will, not in order to judge, but, as has been said, with holy compassion. In this way you will arrive at perfect purity, because acting thus, your mind will not be scandalized, either in Me or in your neighbor. Otherwise you fall into contempt of your neighbor, if you judge his evil will towards you, instead of My will acting in him. Such contempt and scandal separates the soul from Me, and prevents perfection, and, in some cases, deprives a man of grace, more or less according to the gravity of his contempt, and the hatred which his judgment has conceived against his neighbor.”

 

[JKirkLVNV]

1. Kissing a book when it is offered as a sign of respect to your hosts and not as a statement of Faith.

I read that he was told that gesture was the traditional way that culture received gifts and nothing more. Of course, it is a Catholic teaching that we are to assume the best about about a person’s motives and actions unless there is strong evidence to suggest otherwise. In light of that, maybe we should ask, does anyone have strong evidence that Pope John Paul II made his submission to Islam and thus became an apostate?

 

[Dempsey1919]

This thread is headed the wrong way.

I don’t agree with what The Servant Of God John Paul II did on this occasion but I will never insinuate that he was an apostate or say anything bad about him.

Even though he did this, JPII never stopped preaching the Gospel; he may not have given sermons calling for the conversion of muslims, but his actions spoke louder than words. He was a man who did what Jesus commanded. He truly was a humble servant of God.

If we ever want the Muslims to embrace the truth of the Catholic Church, we must first show them that the Church stands for love, respect, and compassion. John Paul did this. He made thousands of people respect the Church through his actions. And that’s not counting the many thousands he brought into the Church.

John Paul II showed respect to all men, irregardless of religion, race, or creed. He led many people to the truth simply by his actions.

In today’s world, you have to be more accomodating to others. You may not agree with what they stand for but you should not condemn them for it. You should gently show them the error of their ways and point them towards the truth; this is what John Paul II did.

St Thomas Aquinas lived in a different world. Times have changed and the Church has adopted a different approach without changing its beliefs or creeds. There is no doubt that John Paul II was orthodox in his beliefs - he was just more tolerant of other religions than previous Popes.

 

[ThereCanBeOnly1]

1. Kissing a book when it is offered as a sign of respect to your hosts and not as a statement of Faith.
2. I pray for the protection of Islam along with all other religions in the hope that they may be protected ultimately through conversion to Catholicism. Don’t you? What better protection is there than conversion?

I pray that all are converted to the one and only faith, that is the Catholic Faith.

 

[ThereCanBeOnly1]

All nice conversation but most have failed to tell me what it is St Thomas Aquinas meant in his SUMMA THEOLOGICA. (see post #61)
I am sure most know that this doctor of the Church is a Saint for good reason, and that his work, the SUMMA THEOLOGICA is no less than pure brilliance and truth.

So comment on his words, and try not to suggest that I am judging anyone, since I am not and can not.

But please, did any Pope in any way, shape, or form, worship in a Mosque? Or taken part in native Indian or other pagan rituals? Post your answers. I could post pictures but then the thread may close

 

[Sure]

Kissing a book that is put in front of you isn’t the same as “worship at the tomb of Mahomet.”

 

[Dempsey1919]

Kissing a book that is put in front of you isn’t the same as “worship at the tomb of Mahomet”

Exactly. I could kiss hundreds of Qurans but I would never believe that the truth is contained within. He kissed a book. So what. That doesn’t make him an apostate. It makes him a man of respect, who is aware that his actions will help to bring Muslims closer to the Church. He planted a seed that may one day result in the conversion of many Muslims.

 

[bear06]

Exactly. I could kiss hundreds of Qurans but I would never believe that the truth is contained within. He kissed a book. So what. That doesn’t make him an apostate. It makes him a man of respect, who is aware that his actions will help to bring Muslims closer to the Church. He planted a seed that may one day result in the conversion of many Muslims.

Well, why wouldn’t you believe the truth contained within? Truth is truth. I know it’s hard for people to fathom but the Koran does contain limited truth, very limited. Muslims do believe in Mary’s Immaculate Conception and the Virgin Birth.

Here’s a good piece by Fulton Sheen regarding how to use this truth to convert the Muslims.

catholicculture.org/library/view.cfm?recnum=4000

 

[DustinsDad]

So is it correct to assume that you believe the given the opportunity, that St Peter ‘the Great’ would have kissed the Qur’an as a sign of respect?

Or would Ezekiel have kissed a “Book of Ba’al”?

What does it all mean? It means that emotions can run roughshod over the intellect when a charismatic leader passes away.

It also means that anytime someone commends someone (even a declared saint) or something pre-Vatican II, there will be those like JKirk who immediately have to shift attention to something “newer”. Newer is always better to some folks.

For Pope John Paul II, I hope and pray that he’s in or on his way into Heaven. As for the title “The Great”, well…seeing as how it’s only been given a couple of times (only 3 popes I believe) in the history of the Church, and seeing the current state of the Church in the world and it’s continued decline during his pontificate: number of ordinations, number of conversions, decsent of the West deeper into secularism and materialism, the horrific mismanagement and lack of discipline that lead to the homosexual scandals in the priesthood, etc., I struggle to see what he accomplished that would be deserving of the title. Now of course I would agree that the pope was probably against all of these things - but being against them isn’t “Great”, it’s required. What’s “Great” is if someone actually accomplishes or makes great strides toward their defeat.

I am also troubled by Pope John Paul II’s handling and promoting of this “new” ecumenism. I think the unintended consequenses of all his good-will “gestures” was religious indifferenitsm being absorbed by countless numbers of Catholics.

And can someone correct me if I’m wrong on my suspicion - but did Pope John Paul II ever…and I mean* ever*…specifically invite non-Catholics to convert to the Catholic faith?

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad

 

[bear06]

And can someone correct me if I’m wrong on my suspicion - but did Pope John Paul II ever…and I mean* ever*…specifically invite non-Catholics to convert to the Catholic faith?

Google my friend. He’s the first article I hit:
findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1141/is_6_36/ai_58170165

It’s also intersting to see how many personal conversion stories I hit.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

It also means that anytime someone commends someone (even a declared saint) or something pre-Vatican II, there will be those like JKirk who immediately have to shift attention to something “newer”. Newer is always better to some folks. **I’ve never intimated this nor do I believe it. You’re misrepresenting me. I haven’t shifted attention to something newer. Gosh, I even quoted Juliana of Norwich, who lived in 800’s, in THIS VERY THREAD. **

For Pope John Paul II, I hope and pray that he’s in or on his way into Heaven. As for the title “The Great”, well…seeing as how it’s only been given a couple of times (only 3 popes I believe) in the history of the Church, and seeing the current state of the Church in the world and it’s continued decline during his pontificate: number of ordinations, number of conversions, decsent of the West deeper into secularism and materialism, the horrific mismanagement and lack of discipline that lead to the homosexual scandals in the priesthood, etc., I struggle to see what he accomplished that would be deserving of the title. Now of course I would agree that the pope was probably against all of these things - but being against them isn’t “Great”, it’s required. What’s “Great” is if someone actually accomplishes or makes great strides toward their defeat. First of all, the title isn’t “given,” like a declaration of sainthood or being made a doctor of the Church. It’s just used and the more it’s used, the more it will be used. Pope Benedict uses it, Fr. Richared Neuhaus uses it, George Weigel uses it, Peggy Noonan uses it, etc. They have, to one degree or another, a bit more of a bully pulpit than you or I, so I’d say that the chances of it sticking are better than it not sticking, not to mention the affection in which he was held by the run of the mill types.

I am also troubled by Pope John Paul II’s handling and promoting of this “new” ecumenism. I think the unintended consequenses of all his good-will “gestures” was religious indifferenitsm being absorbed by countless numbers of Catholics.** I think so to. I’m troubled by it, but in the balance scale, I think the good he did outweighed where he might have failed. I think the Church will remember the balance.**

And can someone correct me if I’m wrong on my suspicion - but did Pope John Paul II ever…and I mean* ever*…specifically invite non-Catholics to convert to the Catholic faith?

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad

Do any of the Popes? Seems I heard of Blessed Pius IX doing so, but I don’t recall hearing anything of latter ones. Did the Servant of God Pope Pius XII exhort all of the Jews he helped during WWII, in hiding in the Holy See and in Church property around Italy and the rest of Europe, to become Christian? When they receive heads of state in audience, don’t you think that would be a good time to try and convert the lost? It might be that person’s last shot, mightn’t it? Yet we don’t hear about the Popes doing that. Pope Benedict doesn’t, this great conservative whose election was hailed by those who wanted the cafeteria closed (I’m one of them, he can visit a synagogue if he’ll give Richard McBrien and Joanie Chichester their walking papers).

 

[stmaria]

Kissing a book that is put in front of you isn’t the same as “worship at the tomb of Mahomet.”

If Pope Benedict kissed the Book of Mormon, what would you say?

 

[DustinsDad]

I’ve never intimated this nor do I believe it. You’re misrepresenting me. I haven’t shifted attention to something newer. Gosh, I even quoted Juliana of Norwich, who lived in 800’s, in THIS VERY THREAD.

Sorry JKirk - that’s my impression. (And I didn’t catch that quote)

First of all, the title isn’t “given,” like a declaration of sainthood or being made a doctor of the Church. It’s just used and the more it’s used, the more it will be used.

I understand that. I’m merely looking at the only three examples we have (I did this several months ago - I’d have to go look it all up again) and trying to see a comparable “track record” with JP2. God bless him, but I dont’ see it.

I think so to. I’m troubled by it, but in the balance scale, I think the good he did outweighed where he might have failed. I think the Church will remember the balance.

Fair enough. I think it will be for generations that come after us to determine. We’re too close in history to make the objective “call”.

Do any of the Popes? Seems I heard of Blessed Pius IX doing so, but I don’t recall hearing anything of latter ones.

Yeah - I think they did. Quite often. Read through the encycilcals and such.

Pope Benedict doesn’t, this great conservative whose election was hailed by those who wanted the cafeteria closed (I’m one of them, he can visit a synagogue if he’ll give Richard McBrien and Joanie Chichester their walking papers).

Don’t know the two folks you mention. And yes - it seems Pope Benedict isn’t proclaiming an explicit call to conversion to the Catholic Church either. I blame it on the entrenched “new ecumenism” that views such things as totally unnecessary and not PC. He’s moving things back…give him time - and all your prayers.

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad

 

[DustinsDad]

DustinsDad: And can someone correct me if I’m wrong on my suspicion - but did Pope John Paul II ever…and I mean* ever*…specifically invite non-Catholics to convert to the Catholic faith?

Bear06: Google my friend. He’s the first article I hit:
findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1141/is_6_36/ai_58170165

I don’t mean to split hairs, but that wasn’t what I was looking for. I asked for a *specific *invitations to non-Catholics to convert to the Catholic faith, Here’s the quote attributed to PJP2:
“There can be no true evangelization without the explicit proclamation of Jesus as Lord”
What PJP2 did here was fine - it was a great start…but it really does nothing to ease the problem of religious indifferentism - especially within Christianity.

It was a generic call to Christianity - and was immediately met with members of the hierarchy doing “spin control” on even this - as if the Church didn’t believe conversion - even to Christianity in general - was was necessary!!! Here’s one of those passages from the article…
Archbishop Alan de Lastic of New Delhi told journalists the pope had spoken only of “inner conversion,” not changing religions. Conversion, he said, does not necessarily mean a change of religion.

He said the church in India denounces “forced conversions” and that the pope in no way intimated the “Christianizing of India.”
Members of the hierarchy - like this Archbishop - were never corrected by the pope.

I mean, did you actually read through the article? Any non-Catholic reading it would have absolutely no idea whatsoever that the Catholic Church actually believes it is necessary for them to come home to the Catholic Church for the salvation of their very souls.

It’s also intersting to see how many personal conversion stories I hit.

I’m more interested in the “big picture” regarding conversions. I’m sure there are individual stories out there - very inspirational…but when examining the state of the Church, we can’t look one at a time, but at the bigger picture. One soul gained is awesome for the Kingdom…thousands lost is, well, not.

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad

 

[bear06]

I’ve got to chuckle here because it was not long ago that someone on this forum was going on and on how the Catholic Church was the Christian Faith and that protestants weren’t. So, which is it?

The Pope’s comments sure seemed obvious to those who heard it. They were none too happy!