Catholic Catechism para. 841 on Islam vs. Robert Spencer's view on Islam

[clem456]

Why? You haven’t listed any valid problems with his work. As noted above, Spencer condemns the problems in the teachings of Islam, not the people who claim it. Both LG and the catechism affirm muslims, not Islam. There’s a difference.

The catechism does not seem to make that distinction:
841 The Church’s relationship with the Muslims.
“The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.”

Sometimes Spencer isn’t super careful about that line, but If you’re saying he’s far enough across that line that he shouldn’t be promoted or endorsed by catholics, you’d better demonstrate why.

There’s been a couple posts that have valid points in that regard.

 

[MacBP]

Why? You haven’t listed any valid problems with his work. As noted above, Spencer condemns the problems in the teachings of Islam, not the people who claim it. Both LG and the catechism affirm muslims, not Islam. There’s a difference. Sometimes Spencer isn’t super careful about that line, but If you’re saying he’s far enough across that line that he shouldn’t be promoted or endorsed by catholics, you’d better demonstrate why.

One of the problem with Spencer is that he leads people to believe that Muslims are of one accord with issues in Islam. Islam is no more united than Protestantism; imagine saying that all Protestants interpret passage x in such-and-such a manner. Some Muslims do interpret the Qu’ran like Spencer, others do not. In this respect his presentation of Islam is misleading.

I’m also going to echo other posters in saying that Spencer’s use of scripture to condemn Islam could also be used to condemn Christians. Look the law in the Old Testament! We wouldn’t want others to think that Christians want to kill homosexuals and yet with the selective use of scripture someone could make the claim that Christians wish to do just that. Perhaps Spencer’s interpretation is correct; perhaps it is not. When CA Live only presents one side of the issue it’s difficult to know the truth.

I have had the privilege of studying alongside Muslims and they have been nothing but a blessing and an inspiration. Their devotion to God in Islam has inspired to become a better Catholic. With that said, there are plenty of Muslims who would want to see me dead because I’m an infidel. Muslims are a diverse group of people and painting with one brush stroke does a great disservice to the truth.

Oh, and does anyone find the ad absolutely hilarious? It’s like they tried to find the most stereotypically middle eastern thing and slapped it in. Imagine if Catholic Answers had a book dealing with Shintoism and so they played the beginning riff from Everybody was Kung Fu Fighting.

 

[GaryTaylor]

I don’t see where he is discussing anything but jihad and radical terrorism in Islam. The fact some suggest he shouldn’t speak or speaks incorrectly is an opinion, nothing more.

In that he may interpret a verse wrong from the Quran is another opinion. Apparently so do the expert terrorists.

I see no issue, in fact I would be more concerned about the hundreds of muslim sights in protest of his freedom of speech

which include subtle threats on his life. Only is indicative that radical terrorism is in full effect.​

 

[Isaiah45_9]

Didn’t Jesus say, I didn’t come to send peace but a sword.

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.[a] 2 He was in the beginning with God; 3 all things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made. 4 In him was life,** and the life was the light of men. 5 The light shines in the darkness,[c] and the darkness has not overcome it.

Matthew 10:34 “Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.

Hebrews 4:12 For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and spirit, of joints and marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.**

 

[TimothyH]

I guess as a Catholic, I’m finding myself confused on the proper church response to Islam: Do we affirm or do we evangelize them (or a combination of both). Which is it?

They will know we are Christians by our love.

I don’t know anyone named “Islam”. I do however, know people who are Islamic. They are my friends and I am theirs.

When we are simply their friends then we do both, affirm and evangelize. Why not just be their friends?

Let “The Church” deal with “Islam.” I’ll deal with individuals.

-Tim-

 

[Perfume_of_God]

Hello to all!

Well, English is not my native language, so I will try to do my best in this reply regarding this issue.

I will quote this sentence that may put some confusion in Catholics while referencing Muslims.

“The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.”

We must understand the quite meaning of this sentence and the first words are very important for that understanding, the words ALSO INCLUDES are only saying that Muslims are among all that acknowledge the Creator, included in the God’s salvation plan, do not are saying more than that, JESUS is our Savior and we know that for Muslims He is only a prophet, so do not get confused with this sentence, because this sentence means only that.

What we must do is to pray for all Muslims to see where is the truth and the light, we must try to open their eyes through words and not by other means especially by war.

And replying to TheSufi, I recommend you to read this : biblehub.com/matthew/10-34.htm

God Bless you all

 

[GaryTaylor]

frontpagemag.com/2009/mb-snow/robert-spencer/

“Spencer has also written eleven monographs and well over three hundred articles about jihad and Islamic terrorism.”

Is terrorism an issue today? Yes or No? Do we need Islams permission to speak? Should you be intimidated by Islam not to speak? Its OK if I don’t agree with TERRORISM???

And btw the fact you have a Islamic friend doesn’t negate Boston or New Your, sorry. That means little to nothing on the larger scale of issues. Your personal experience with Islam doesn’t deem “terrorism” slavery, restrictive freedom, no tolerance of religious freedom all well and fine.

Perhaps instead of listening to your muslim friend you ought to try the daily NEWS. Where Christians are martyred and persecuted daily.

The fact that you should love muslims doesn’t mean you should walk around like a moron in silence thus cooperating with the evil.

And no, I didn’t read the message in the CCC apparently as some others. They “PROFESS”, and some profess jihad and killing Christians and Jews. And they all profess that they deny Christ is God.

And after the oh so ecumenical verse is No Salvation Outside the Church.

And I think its a bold false accusation to suggest someone is not following the Church. I don’t see where anywhere here has the role of confessor or mind reader.

Radical Islam KILLS INNOCENT PEOPLE in “Gods” name… Forgiveness does not mean forgetting or remaining silent about tyranny. .

 

[Celtic_Maiden]

Yes, but, the implication then is that because many Muslims wage war in the name of religion, then Islam is specifically a religion of war. The Church does not think that way, according to the teaching that I have seen. You do not see Christians in the modern age waging war to the same degree, but Muslims can and do make the same assertion regarding Christianity being warlike: “you killed our ancestors, stole their lands, oppress us, your scripture is full of war and slaughter…etc etc etc”. Muslims could also use the tool of survival excuse very handily.

We are not contributing to the possibility of peace with this kind of rhetoric, and maybe this is why the Church does not think or speak anything like this. The Church tries to find commonality between people in the one God.

We Catholics don’t keep bringing up the Battle of Lepanto where Moslem invaders tried to conquer the whole of Europe, only for the intervention of Our Lady, they did invade Spain and would have gone further, so they keep bringing up the Crusades and we could bring up the Battle of Le Panto and Spain being conquered, but where is this all going to get us, you have to move on which I don’t think Moslems do they live in the past, Mohammed was violent and very violent and he did not make up the Religion until the 7th Century so it does not go back to Abraham, the Jewish religion goes back to Abraham, and he sacrificed Isaac his son by Sarah, not Ismael as they portray by his unwed hand maid, The Catholic Church is older than the Moslem religion and even it does not go back to Abraham unless you graft on the Jewish Religion to bring you this far back, lets stop joking, Catholic Church 2,000 years old the Moslem religion founded in the 7th Century, my maths are not that bad.

 

[GaryTaylor]

In fact this is what is proposed here, addressed by Spencer January 3 2012.

“Islam has nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism, and that therefore any examination of the stated motives and goals of Islamic jihad terrorists constitutes “Islamophobia” and must be shunned, as well as punished”

Same agenda proposed here, only the Church is thrown in to silence and intimidate. And if that’s not enough, its a subtle suggestion CAF doesn’t “think with the mind of the Church”

This silence, that’s how good people become ruled by evil. Drink that poison yourself and call it Catholic if you wish…

Its Love your neighbor, not condone wanton murder in Gods name because you love your neighbor. That’s not responsible love and concern.

 

[GaryTaylor]

they did invade Spain

And occupied it for 700 years. 2/3 longer than the established USA. And that’s what fate holds for here through dreamers who reality is walking with their feet and head in the air.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

Why? You haven’t listed any valid problems with his work. As noted above, Spencer condemns the problems in the teachings of Islam, not the people who claim it. Both LG and the catechism affirm muslims, not Islam. There’s a difference. Sometimes Spencer isn’t super careful about that line, but If you’re saying he’s far enough across that line that he shouldn’t be promoted or endorsed by catholics, you’d better demonstrate why.

A quick list of issues regarding Mr. Spencer that I’ve posted on numerous other threads concerning him directly or Islam-

-not a theologian (a BA in religious studies doesn’t make you a theologian)
-not an Islamic theologian or an expert on Islam (the religion), Islam (the culture), Islam (the political system), or Islamic history
-not considered by the Church to be a theologian on Christianity or Islam
-works not taken seriously by actual experts on the subject (in fact, he refuses to have his works reviewed by actual experts)
-methodology and use of sources is at best amateurish and at worse selectively used to confirm his preconceived conclusions
-happens to produce works that completely validate and support the secular political viewpoint of the organization that serves as his major source of income, “soap box,” and distributor of his works

As I’ve stated in another thread, feel free to view Mr. Spencer as an expert on Islam, just be prepared to either
-accept anti-religion/anti-Catholic authors with similar “qualifications” (Mr. Dawkins for example) and anti-Catholic websites (for example one called “Crusadewatch” which is funded and operated by a secular politically liberal organization) as valid experts and sources or
-embrace a double standard

 

[GaryTaylor]

A quick list of issues regarding Mr. Spencer that I’ve posted on numerous other threads concerning him directly or Islam-

-not a theologian (a BA in religious studies doesn’t make you a theologian)
-not an Islamic theologian or an expert on Islam (the religion), Islam (the culture), Islam (the political system), or Islamic history
-not considered by the Church to be a theologian on Christianity or Islam
-works not taken seriously by actual experts on the subject (in fact, he refuses to have his works reviewed by actual experts)
-methodology and use of sources is at best amateurish and at worse selectively used to confirm his preconceived conclusions
-happens to produce works that completely validate and support the secular political viewpoint of the organization that serves as his major source of income, “soap box,” and distributor of his works

As I’ve stated in another thread, feel free to view Mr. Spencer as an expert on Islam, just be prepared to either
-accept anti-religion/anti-Catholic authors with similar “qualifications” (Mr. Dawkins for example) and anti-Catholic websites (for example one called “Crusadewatch” which is funded and operated by a secular politically liberal organization) as valid experts and sources or
-embrace a double standard

Fact of opinion?

In addition to the seminars on Islam and jihad that Spencer has led for the United States Central Command, United States Army Command and General Staff College, a Department of Homeland Security task force, the FBI, branches of the Joint Terrorism Task Force, and the U.S. intelligence community, he has discussed jihad, Islam, and terrorism at a workshop sponsored by the U.S. State Department and the German Foreign Ministry. He has also appeared on the BBC, CNN, FoxNews, PBS, MSNBC, CNBC, C-Span, France24 and Croatia National Televison (HTV), as well as on numerous radio programs including Bill O’Reilly’s Radio Factor, The Laura Ingraham Show, Bill Bennett’s Morning in America, Michael Savage’s Savage Nation, The Sean Hannity Show, The Alan Colmes Show, The G. Gordon Liddy Show, The Neal Boortz Show, The Michael Medved Show, The Michael Reagan Show, The Rusty Humphries Show, The Larry Elder Show, The Barbara Simpson Show, Vatican Radio, and many others.

Spencer (MA, Religious Studies, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) has been studying Islamic theology, law, and history in depth since 1980. As an Adjunct Fellow with the Free Congress Foundation in 2002 and 2003, he wrote a series of monographs on Islam that are still available from the Foundation: An Introduction to the Qur’an;Women and Islam; An Islamic Primer; Islam and the West; The Islamic Disinformation Lobby; Islam vs. Christianity; and Jihad in Context. More recently he has also written monographs for the David Horowitz Freedom Center: What Americans Need to Know About Jihad; The Violent Oppression of Women In Islam (with Phyllis Chesler); Islamic Leaders’ Plan for Genocide; and Muslim Persecution of Christians.

Above link.

 

[Genesis315]

The context of the CCC paragraph is the relationship between non-Catholics to the Church and the seeds of truth they have that can act as a preparation for the Gospel.

It’s not meant to be any more of a judgment than that and more should not be read into it. In fact, since Islam is a “religion of the book” without a real, central authority, it’s difficult to make any other general statements about it–it’s almost as varied as Protestantism in its various groups with various doctrines in different parts of the world. For someone like Spencer to declare what “real Islam” is, is about as nonsensical as declaring what “real Protestantism” is. There’s a reason the CCC does not go further than it does in describing Islam.

 

[clem456]

In light of the past several posts, I would like to simply repost the following, which contains actual Catholic teaching:

In the Catechism, there are many footnotes. One would do well to look up these references to understand what the Catechism, and thus the Church, is saying in a particular paragraph.

Paragraph 841 references Lumen Gentium 16 and Nostra Aetate 3.

Lumen Gentium 16 covers the Jews, the Muslims and non-christian religions and concludes with;

Quote:

Wherefore to promote the glory of God and procure the salvation of all of these, and mindful of the command of the Lord, “Preach the Gospel to every creature”,(130) the Church fosters the missions with care and attention.

Notice the language. It is charitable, not in the modern squishy sense that so many seem to assume, but in the sense that it assumes and expects the best of all people, is truthful, finds common ground rather than pointing out grievances and grudges.

 

[manualman]

One of the problem with Spencer is that he leads people to believe that Muslims are of one accord with issues in Islam. Islam is no more united than Protestantism; imagine saying that all Protestants interpret passage x in such-and-such a manner. Some Muslims do interpret the Qu’ran like Spencer, others do not. In this respect his presentation of Islam is misleading.

I’m also going to echo other posters in saying that Spencer’s use of scripture to condemn Islam could also be used to condemn Christians. Look the law in the Old Testament! We wouldn’t want others to think that Christians want to kill homosexuals and yet with the selective use of scripture someone could make the claim that Christians wish to do just that. …

I agree that Spencer sometimes does not do an adequate job of ensuring that his attacks against Islam don’t sound like blanket denunciations of all muslims. It’s very hard to make that separation clear and he’s more interested in making his points against the fundamental problems of Islamic teaching than in correcting people prone to making false leaps of bad logic. That’s a legitimate criticism.

But your second paragraph is invalid. Islamic texts and formal Islamic teachings endorse the actions Muhammed committed AND note that he was an example for all men in all times. This is fundamentally different than the Christian examples in the OT where God commanded killing at specific times and contexts (wiping out whole cities for example) or Levitical commands for lethal punishment for certain sins (adultery or sodomy, for example). OT genocides were clearly not precedents for future emulation, but specific instances of God judging an entire society. That’s explicit in a way NOT taught by the Koran. Similarly, OT punishments for sin were explicitly abrogated by Jesus in the NT in a way not found in the Koran (cast the first stone…). By contrast, in the Koran it is often Muhammed doing the killing. It’s simply illogical to claim the two faiths are equally prone to result in violence.

Put simply, some christians can and have been horrific sinners precisely because man is good, but tragically fallen. But the crimes of Christians in history have been in SPITE of clear teaching in Christianity against them. Similarly most muslims are and always have been decent and honorable men precisely because man is good, if fallen. But their goodness (and that goodness that does exist in Islamic teaching) arises from them being created in God’s image, not because Islam redeems men. The crimes of muslims in history and current events are often explicitly encouraged by the Koran, Islamic tradition and Muhammed’s own example in a way that is fundamentally different from abuses of the Christian scriptures used to justify similar atrocities. Muslims naturally don’t agree, but they are ignoring the evidence. Spencer makes a good contribution in demonstrating that evidence (even if he could be a bit more cautious sometimes to avoid sweeping generalities).

 

[GaryTaylor]

Apparently what is read into this by individuals becomes the mind of the Church. I would suggest we all may not be reading the same into these below paragraphs.

CCC…

The Church and non-Christians

839 "Those who have not yet received the Gospel are related to the People of God in various ways."325

The relationship of the Church with the Jewish People. When she delves into her own mystery, the Church, the People of God in the New Covenant, discovers her link with the Jewish People,326 "the first to hear the Word of God."327 The Jewish faith, unlike other non-Christian religions, is already a response to God’s revelation in the Old Covenant. To the Jews “belong the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ”,328 "for the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable."329

840 And when one considers the future, God’s People of the Old Covenant and the new People of God tend towards similar goals: expectation of the coming (or the return) of the Messiah. But one awaits the return of the Messiah who died and rose from the dead and is recognized as Lord and Son of God; the other awaits the coming of a Messiah, whose features remain hidden till the end of time; and the latter waiting is accompanied by the drama of not knowing or of misunderstanding Christ Jesus.

841 The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day."330

842 The Church’s bond with non-Christian religions is in the first place the common origin and end of the human race:

All nations form but one community. This is so because all stem from the one stock which God created to people the entire earth, and also because all share a common destiny, namely God. His providence, evident goodness, and saving designs extend to all against the day when the elect are gathered together in the holy city. . .331

843 The Catholic Church recognizes in other religions that search, among shadows and images, for the God who is unknown yet near since he gives life and breath and all things and wants all men to be saved. Thus, the Church considers all goodness and truth found in these religions as "a preparation for the Gospel and given by him who enlightens all men that they may at length have life."332

844 In their religious behavior, however, men also display the limits and errors that disfigure the image of God in them:

Very often, deceived by the Evil One, men have become vain in their reasonings, and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and served the creature rather than the Creator. Or else, living and dying in this world without God, they are exposed to ultimate despair.333

845 To reunite all his children, scattered and led astray by sin, the Father willed to call the whole of humanity together into his Son’s Church. The Church is the place where humanity must rediscover its unity and salvation. The Church is “the world reconciled.” She is that bark which “in the full sail of the Lord’s cross, by the breath of the Holy Spirit, navigates safely in this world.” According to another image dear to the Church Fathers, she is prefigured by Noah’s ark, which alone saves from the flood.334

“Outside the Church there is no salvation”

 

[manualman]

As I’ve stated in another thread, feel free to view Mr. Spencer as an expert on Islam, just be prepared to either
-accept anti-religion/anti-Catholic authors with similar “qualifications” (Mr. Dawkins for example) and anti-Catholic websites (for example one called “Crusadewatch” which is funded and operated by a secular politically liberal organization) as valid experts and sources or
-embrace a double standard

Actually, I DO find it quite worthwhile to read the critics of Catholicism and catholic culture. As I can generally see the gaping holes in their charges and claims I find it reinforces my faith quite well. A particularly good example was the vile book Hitchens wrote about Mother Theresa (a book which demonstrated the author’s total lack of comprehension about MT’s vocation and mission).

The interesting thing about Spencer vs. Hitchens/Dawkins/“crusadewatch”, etc. is that catholics generally respond to the inaccuracy of the statements and claims made in the work of the latter type. Muslims generally complain that Spencer is a knave unqualified to understand Islam and so he shouldn’t be listened to. You don’t see a rather glaring difference there? Either Spencer is making invalid claims about Islam or he isn’t. Establishing that requires refuting his claims, not complaining about his lack of credentials.

 

[clem456]

Apparently what is read into this by individuals becomes the mind of the Church. I would suggest we all may not be reading the same into these below paragraphs.

CCC…

The Church and non-Christians

839 "Those who have not yet received the Gospel are **related to **the People of God in various ways."325

The relationship of the Church with the Jewish People. When she delves into her own mystery, the Church, the People of God in the New Covenant, discovers her link with the Jewish People,326 "the first to hear the Word of God."327 The Jewish faith, unlike other non-Christian religions, is already a response to God’s revelation in the Old Covenant. To the Jews “belong the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ”,328 "for the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable."329

840 And when one considers the future, God’s People of the Old Covenant and the new People of God tend towards similar goals: expectation of the coming (or the return) of the Messiah. But one awaits the return of the Messiah who died and rose from the dead and is recognized as Lord and Son of God; the other awaits the coming of a Messiah, whose features remain hidden till the end of time; and the latter waiting is accompanied by the drama of not knowing or of misunderstanding Christ Jesus.

841 The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day."330

842 **The Church’s bond with non-Christian religions is in the first place the common origin and end of the human race: **

All nations form but one community. This is so because all stem from the one stock which God created to people the entire earth, and also because all share a common destiny, namely God. His providence, evident goodness, and saving designs extend to all against the day when the elect are gathered together in the holy city. . .331

843 The Catholic Church recognizes in other religions that search, among shadows and images, for the God who is unknown yet near since he gives life and breath and all things and wants all men to be saved. Thus, the Church considers all goodness and truth found in these religions as "a preparation for the Gospel and given by him who enlightens all men that they may at length have life."332

844 In their religious behavior, however, men also display the limits and errors that disfigure the image of God in them:

Very often, deceived by the Evil One, men have become vain in their reasonings, and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and served the creature rather than the Creator:bigyikes:. Or else, living and dying in this world without God, they are exposed to ultimate despair.333

845 To reunite all his children, scattered and led astray by sin, the Father willed to call the whole of humanity together into his Son’s Church. The Church is the place where humanity must rediscover its unity and salvation. The Church is “the world reconciled.” She is that bark which “in the full sail of the Lord’s cross, by the breath of the Holy Spirit, navigates safely in this world.” According to another image dear to the Church Fathers, she is prefigured by Noah’s ark, which alone saves from the flood.334

“Outside the Church there is no salvation”

Thanks so much for posting more of this. It is a beautiful. Simple, direct. Anyone with ears to hear can understand it.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Your welcome. The interrelated structure of reality is acknowledged. And so is the jihad, extreme radical aspect of Islam that’s prevalent today.

Charity is not to be confused as ignoring misguided thinking and true evil. Love you neighbor and resist no evil is not to be confused as ignoring it either.

I see no valid connection of the two. Spencer doesn’t suggest how one should live a Christian message, not his intention, he leaves that to the Church. His intention is to inform of the above to raise awareness. The Church doesn’t state you should accept evil and be silent about it.

1] Its yet to be proven he is wrong

2] He obviously has the credentials which is suggested he doesn’t.

3] There is no indication he is speaking contrary to the CCC as suggested.

Just Saying.

 

[Eric_Hilbert]

Keep it charitable please.