Christians are committing wrong by eating halal meat

[pnewton]

So for those who disaggree with me, what you are saying therefore, is that it is OK to eat meat blessed by Islamic faith who you see as the same God, but it is not OK to read any Islamic text in a Christian church, or any Islamic text specifically relating to the very God whose food which has been blessed in His name and you have eaten and who you believe in… The only logical conclusion from this is inconsistency…

It is not our inconsistency, it is that of the Catholic Church. The doctrine of the Church has been presented against which you pit your opinion.

Your “logic” is not good. It is also acceptable to read Byron or Tolkien, but that does not make it acceptable to read in Mass. Judaism and non-Catholic Christians all worship God as well, yet their translations are not acceptable to read in Mass. Their liturgies are not acceptable to read in Mass. I can read from the King James Bible at the table, but I cannot read it in Mass.

No the Catholic Church is not inconsistent in doctrine. Logic does not work backwards.

 

[TEPO]

It is not our inconsistency, it is that of the Catholic Church. The doctrine of the Church has been presented against which you pit your opinion.

Your “logic” is not good. It is also acceptable to read Byron or Tolkien, but that does not make it acceptable to read in Mass. Judaism and non-Catholic Christians all worship God as well, yet their translations are not acceptable to read in Mass. Their liturgies are not acceptable to read in Mass. I can read from the King James Bible at the table, but I cannot read it in Mass.

No the Catholic Church is not inconsistent in doctrine. Logic does not work backwards.

We should be careful here though. The Catechism doesn’t say that Islam praises the same God we do or that it leads to God or that it’s legit at all.

…the Catechism only talks about the people and their souls. That’s all.

 

[pnewton]

We should be careful here though. The Catechism doesn’t say that Islam praises the same God we do or that it leads to God or that it’s legit at all.

…the Catechism only talks about the people and their souls. That’s all.

“…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.”
You say “praise”, the CCC “adore”.

I have yet to see even a hint at Catholic teaching that the OP is correct. A Catholic should seek to find at least some support within Catholic doctrine, including looking in the Bible, before and inconsistency is declared.

I will wait for the quote that supports not eating halal meat.

 

[underacloud]

I don’t think the OP has an issue with Muslims or Protestants at all. Sounds like it’s more about Islam to me -and the issues involved with a false religion.

…the Catechism clearly refrains from using the term “Islam”. Therefore, there is a separation between that false religion and those people who call themselves the Muslims.

It doesn’t “clearly refrain” from using the term. There are many terms used or not in the catechism, and we don’t know which of those not used have been deliberately not used. We don’t know why the term Muslim is used and Islam is not (perhaps it is merely grammatical, Muslim being the term for people of the religion Islam), so the semantic different here may be deliberately intended or not.

But it’s a semantic point with little/no relevance here. Halal meat is blessed by Mulsims, and is not sacrificial or related to Islam in any way other than being the approved means of slaughter.

What exactly do you see as the relevant “issues involved with a false religion” here?

 

[pnewton]

I would say if this is a point of conflict for someone, he could always have a priest bless his house, kitchen, dining table, etc. Better yet, if you really thing there is something to this idea, why not just take some holy water to meat aisle and make all the meat Christian.

 

[JM3]

Council of Florence

SESSION 11 4 February 1442

It firmly believes, professes and teaches that every creature of God is good and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, because according to the word of the Lord not what goes into the mouth defiles a person, and because the difference in the Mosaic law between clean and unclean foods belongs to ceremonial practices, which have passed away and lost their efficacy with the coming of the gospel. It also declares that the apostolic prohibition, to abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled, was suited to that time when a single church was rising from Jews and gentiles, who previously lived with different ceremonies and customs. This was so that the gentiles should have some observances in common with Jews, and occasion would be offered of coming together in one worship and faith of God and a cause of dissension might be removed, since by ancient custom blood and strangled things seemed abominable to Jews, and gentiles could be thought to be returning to idolatry if they ate sacrificial food. In places, however, where the Christian religion has been promulgated to such an extent that no Jew is to be met with and all have joined the church, uniformly practicing the same rites and ceremonies of the gospel and believing that to the clean all things are clean, since the cause of that apostolic prohibition has ceased, so its effect has ceased. It condemns, then, no kind of food that human society accepts and nobody at all neither man nor woman, should make a distinction between animals, no matter how they died; although for the health of the body, for the practice of virtue or for the sake of regular and ecclesiastical discipline many things that are not proscribed can and should be omitted, as the apostle says all things are lawful, but not all are helpful.

 

[TEPO]

It doesn’t “clearly refrain” from using the term. There are many terms used or not in the catechism, and we don’t know which of those not used have been deliberately not used. We don’t know why the term Muslim is used and Islam is not (perhaps it is merely grammatical, Muslim being the term for people of the religion Islam), so the semantic different here may be deliberately intended or not.

But it’s a semantic point with little/no relevance here. Halal meat is blessed by Mulsims, and is not sacrificial or related to Islam in any way other than being the approved means of slaughter.

What exactly do you see as the relevant “issues involved with a false religion” here?

Muslims and Islam are not the same thing, and it’s no coincidence that the term “Islam” is not used in the CCC. If the meat was blessed by a person who loves God, and refers to himself as a “Muslim”, then that’s fine and is a good way of looking at it. If the meat was blessed according to Islamic tradition, then that’s another less appealing perspective.

…Perspective is important, and to blur the distinction between Islam and The Muslims causes a conflict in Catholic Tradition. That’s why the Catechism was so careful in the terminology.

But I agree that the OP was incorrect in calling it idolatry.

 

[TEPO]

I would say if this is a point of conflict for someone, he could always have a priest bless his house, kitchen, dining table, etc. Better yet, if you really thing there is something to this idea, why not just take some holy water to meat aisle and make all the meat Christian.

Love it!

(Wouldn’t actually do it, but I like the idea )

 

[underacloud]

Muslims and Islam are not the same thing, and it’s no coincidence that the term “Islam” is not used in the CCC. If the meat was blessed by a person who loves God, and refers to himself as a “Muslim”, then that’s fine and is a good way of looking at it. If the meat was blessed according to Islamic tradition, then that’s another less appealing perspective.

…Perspective is important, and to blur the distinction between Islam and The Muslims causes a conflict in Catholic Tradition. That’s why the Catechism was so careful in the terminology.

Not at all. Muslims are people of the faith Islam. A person who refers to himself as a Muslim is one who practises the faith Islam. You can’t dissociate the two terms. And neither does the Church. The quote from the catechism ultimately links back to Noastra Aetate, which uses both terms here:

1. The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems. They adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all- powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth,(5) who has spoken to men; they take pains to submit wholeheartedly to even His inscrutable decrees, just as Abraham, with whom the faith of Islam takes pleasure in linking itself, submitted to God. Though they do not acknowledge Jesus as God, they revere Him as a prophet. They also honor Mary, His virgin Mother; at times they even call on her with devotion. In addition, they await the day of judgment when God will render their deserts to all those who have been raised up from the dead. Finally, they value the moral life and worship God especially through prayer, almsgiving and fasting.

Regardless, it’s an irrelevant semantic distinction. A person who is Muslim may bless the animal, in keeping with Islamic traditions, in the same way that a Christian may say grace before a meal, in keeping with Christian traditions. Hopefully a Muslim would be happy to eat a meal in the house of a Christian even if a Christian grace is offered, recognising that the prayer is offered to the same one true God. Perhaps they would not; I’m not sure on the specifics of their faith in this matter. But I know the specifics of our faith, and Catholics are not bound, or even recommended, to avoid halal meat.

 

[TEPO]

Not at all. Muslims are people of the faith Islam. A person who refers to himself as a Muslim is one who practises the faith Islam. You can’t dissociate the two terms. And neither does the Church. The quote from the catechism ultimately links back to Noastra Aetate, which uses both terms here:

Regardless, it’s an irrelevant semantic distinction. A person who is Muslim may bless the animal, in keeping with Islamic traditions, in the same way that a Christian may say grace before a meal, in keeping with Christian traditions. Hopefully a Muslim would be happy to eat a meal in the house of a Christian even if a Christian grace is offered, recognising that the prayer is offered to the same one true God. Perhaps they would not; I’m not sure on the specifics of their faith in this matter. But I know the specifics of our faith, and Catholics are not bound, or even recommended, to avoid halal meat.

I cannot follow you in this direction.

If we are to believe that: “The plan of salvation also includes the Islamic faith, which together with Christianity adores the one, merciful God”, then that is a solid break in (T)radiation. It collides directly with ‘No Salvation outside the Church’.

…do you really believe that the terms “Islam” and “Muslim” can be used interchangeably?

 

[underacloud]

I cannot follow you in this direction.

If we are to believe that: “The plan of salvation also includes the Islamic faith, which together with Christianity adores the one, merciful God”, then that is a solid break in (T)radiation. It collides directly with ‘No Salvation outside the Church’.

…do you really believe that the terms “Islam” and “Muslim” can be used interchangeably?

I said you can’t dissociate the terms. I did not say they are interchangeable (grammatically, they are not).

I certianly hold that there is no salvation outside the Church. If a Mulsim is saved, he/she is saved through Christ, even though he/she may not believe in Christ.

But this semantic argument is irrelevant, as I’ve said all along. Let’s not continue with it.

 

[TEPO]

I said you can’t dissociate the terms. I did not say they are interchangeable (grammatically, they are not).

I certianly hold that there is no salvation outside the Church. If a Mulsim is saved, he/she is saved through Christ, even though he/she may not believe in Christ.

But this semantic argument is irrelevant, as I’ve said all along. Let’s not continue with it.

Okay.

 

[TEPO]

It couldn’t be as good as bulgogi. That’s Koran style marinated beef -it’s so good! Especially with Asian style cole slaw, cold corn and white rice… Oh my goodness, it’s so good!

Hahaha… I totally meant Korean not Koran. :doh2:

…how strange.

 

[Rau]

Muslims and Islam are not the same thing, and it’s no coincidence that the term “Islam” is not used in the CCC. If the meat was blessed by a person who loves God, and refers to himself as a “Muslim”, then that’s fine and is a good way of looking at it. If the meat was blessed according to Islamic tradition, then that’s another less appealing perspective.

…Perspective is important, and to blur the distinction between Islam and The Muslims causes a conflict in Catholic Tradition. That’s why the Catechism was so careful in the terminology.

But I agree that the OP was incorrect in calling it idolatry.

Frankly, I wouldn’t care if the beast who gave up his body was blessed by satanists! It is entirely irrelevant to my purchase.

 

[EasterJoy]

Council of Florence

SESSION 11 4 February 1442

It firmly believes, professes and teaches that every creature of God is good and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, because according to the word of the Lord not what goes into the mouth defiles a person, and because the difference in the Mosaic law between clean and unclean foods belongs to ceremonial practices, which have passed away and lost their efficacy with the coming of the gospel. It also declares that the apostolic prohibition, to abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled, was suited to that time when a single church was rising from Jews and gentiles, who previously lived with different ceremonies and customs. This was so that the gentiles should have some observances in common with Jews, and occasion would be offered of coming together in one worship and faith of God and a cause of dissension might be removed, since by ancient custom blood and strangled things seemed abominable to Jews, and gentiles could be thought to be returning to idolatry if they ate sacrificial food. In places, however, where the Christian religion has been promulgated to such an extent that no Jew is to be met with and all have joined the church, uniformly practicing the same rites and ceremonies of the gospel and believing that to the clean all things are clean, since the cause of that apostolic prohibition has ceased, so its effect has ceased. It condemns, then, no kind of food that human society accepts and nobody at all neither man nor woman, should make a distinction between animals, no matter how they died; although for the health of the body, for the practice of virtue or for the sake of regular and ecclesiastical discipline many things that are not proscribed can and should be omitted, as the apostle says all things are lawful, but not all are helpful.

Even better…thank you.

 

[Cojuanco]

Council of Florence

SESSION 11 4 February 1442

It firmly believes, professes and teaches that every creature of God is good and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, because according to the word of the Lord not what goes into the mouth defiles a person, and because the difference in the Mosaic law between clean and unclean foods belongs to ceremonial practices, which have passed away and lost their efficacy with the coming of the gospel. It also declares that the apostolic prohibition, to abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled, was suited to that time when a single church was rising from Jews and gentiles, who previously lived with different ceremonies and customs. This was so that the gentiles should have some observances in common with Jews, and occasion would be offered of coming together in one worship and faith of God and a cause of dissension might be removed, since by ancient custom blood and strangled things seemed abominable to Jews, and gentiles could be thought to be returning to idolatry if they ate sacrificial food. In places, however, where the Christian religion has been promulgated to such an extent that no Jew is to be met with and all have joined the church, uniformly practicing the same rites and ceremonies of the gospel and believing that to the clean all things are clean, since the cause of that apostolic prohibition has ceased, so its effect has ceased. It condemns, then, no kind of food that human society accepts and nobody at all neither man nor woman, should make a distinction between animals, no matter how they died; although for the health of the body, for the practice of virtue or for the sake of regular and ecclesiastical discipline many things that are not proscribed can and should be omitted, as the apostle says all things are lawful, but not all are helpful.

And there we have it. Who you gonna believe, Holy Mother Church, or the rinky-dink ramblings of some pundit who might well be professing a little heresy on the side?

 

[VivienneJ]

If this were the case then my priest, here in the Middle East where all the available meat in supermarkets and butchers is halal, would have told us about it.

He never fails to remind us about dressing modestly for church, observing days of obligation, fasting and abstaining where necessary - so something as serious as this would not have been neglected.

 

[EasterJoy]

If this were the case then my priest, here in the Middle East where all the available meat in supermarkets and butchers is halal, would have told us about it.

He never fails to remind us about dressing modestly for church, observing days of obligation, fasting and abstaining where necessary - so something as serious as this would not have been neglected.

Bingo! We have had brothers and sister in this position for centuries!

 

[fastenatingguy]

Haha! I was going to say that…

great minds or evil twins?

 

[Luvz2travel]

As Christian muslim practices or customs don’t mean much to me. I would eat it on that context if that were all that was available. I look at it as having a statue of the Budda or some other religious are as decoration. I don’t view it in a religious context and worship Budda but as a piece of art work or decor I would have a problem having such a piece in my house.