R
R_C
Guest
Holy Church does not bear false witness. If the Holy Father has stated that we worship the same God, then we do.
- Status
J
Jim_Baur
Guest
RC
I have not been able to follow all of the posts, life is busy.
Did the Holy Father say the Muslim and Jews follow the same God?
Thanks!
Oh, I am not asking for proof, I just do not have time to read all of the post–some of them are complex.
Again, I am not looking for documentation, just let me know if it is both religions.
Also, if you know, do both religions teach that God loves all peoples?
Thanks!
I have not been able to follow all of the posts, life is busy.
Did the Holy Father say the Muslim and Jews follow the same God?
Thanks!
Oh, I am not asking for proof, I just do not have time to read all of the post–some of them are complex.
Again, I am not looking for documentation, just let me know if it is both religions.
Also, if you know, do both religions teach that God loves all peoples?
Thanks!
R
R_C
Guest
Regarding the Church, yes, this post that has the quotes (and the links as well).
The teachings are a different, much more complex topic.
While - in a way - we can say that yes, in the wholeness of the doctrines they do teach that the Creator loves all creatures, this truth is not entirely evident: some aspects of their Sacred Scriptures may not clearly express the difference between sin and sinner, and between sinners that can repent and be saved vs unrepentant sinners. It is not entirely obvious that God loves all people unconditionally. Some small groups can and do get the idea that God hates some people, and that by doing the same and using violence on them they are doing God’s will. This is very unfortunate, but the majority, composed of true believers, is aware of God’s love and mercy for all people.
The Gospels - and overall the New Testament - along with the writings of our sacred tradition, clearly and evidently show that God loves all people unconditionally and that salvation is universal - open even to those who through no fault of their own do not know the revealed truth. It actually provides a strong insight, teaching a love that is full and that springs from the heart, not one that is mere obedience and observance of the law. That is the big difference - or, as we call it, the good news.
The teachings are a different, much more complex topic.
While - in a way - we can say that yes, in the wholeness of the doctrines they do teach that the Creator loves all creatures, this truth is not entirely evident: some aspects of their Sacred Scriptures may not clearly express the difference between sin and sinner, and between sinners that can repent and be saved vs unrepentant sinners. It is not entirely obvious that God loves all people unconditionally. Some small groups can and do get the idea that God hates some people, and that by doing the same and using violence on them they are doing God’s will. This is very unfortunate, but the majority, composed of true believers, is aware of God’s love and mercy for all people.
The Gospels - and overall the New Testament - along with the writings of our sacred tradition, clearly and evidently show that God loves all people unconditionally and that salvation is universal - open even to those who through no fault of their own do not know the revealed truth. It actually provides a strong insight, teaching a love that is full and that springs from the heart, not one that is mere obedience and observance of the law. That is the big difference - or, as we call it, the good news.
J
Jim_Baur
Guest
Thanks!
M
muslims
Guest
I think you need to read more about what prophet of Islam has talked about love take one of them :
^^ no one of you believe until he love for his brother what he loves for himself^^
ând brother here means any one other not just mulims
I’m here to talk with you about what I love for my self (my religion) ,despite you are non muslims,but I want to share with you the religion that I love and fellow !!!
2-worship the God is not just praying but even working, studing and as our prophet said :your smiling in face of your brother is a charity ^ and you know how it is nice smiling when friends,brothers meeting each others ,is that has no relation with love ?
N
Nabooru
Guest
Holy Fathers in the past have condoned slavery. Does that make it right?
Personally I think that the only reason the pope would try to get buddy-buddy with Muslims is because Islam is so volatile. To say that Islam’s claims are not true would be to put millions of lives at risk. Even if most Muslims aren’t extremists enough of them are to prove a grave danger to Christians when they feel their faith or prophet has been offended.
R
R_C
Guest
You must go over your thoughts with more prudence. Where have you read that the Church has ever condoned slavery?
Primitive Christianity did not attack slavery directly, but it acted as though slavery did not exist. St. Paul commanded “masters to give their servants what is just and equal” as if they were employees (Colossians 4:1), and a slave (or servant) who ran to stay with him was resent to his master, also a good Christian and a personal friend of Paul, with a beautiful letter in which Paul called the servant “his son”, “his heart”, “no longer as a slave but more than a slave; a beloved brother, both in the flesh and in the Lord” (Letter to Philemon).
Among the Fathers of the Church, St. John Chrysostom is notorious for having said that “slavery is the fruit of covetousness, of extravagance, of insatiable greediness”.
What about the modern era?
In 1462, Pius II declared slavery to be “a great crime”. In 1537, Paul III forbade the enslavement of the Indians. In 1639 the same was forbidden by Urban VIII, then by Benedict XIV in 1741. In 1815 pope Pius VII demanded the suppression of the slave trade in the Congress of Vienna, to no avail; in 1839, pope Gregory condemned once more the slave trade. In 1850 Pius IX canonized Peter Claver, S. J., strong opposer of slavery, and called “supreme villany” the act of the slave traders. In 1890 Leo XIII condemned the slave traders and “the accursed pest of servitude”, and ordered an annual collection to be made in all Catholic churches for the benefit of the anti-slavery work.
Like I said, Holy Church does not bear false witness.
The Church has been establishing a strong dialogue with the Abrahamic religions, based on the prudent search of common ground and on the wise understanding of faith in the same God, who is the God of infinite and unconditional love.
Primitive Christianity did not attack slavery directly, but it acted as though slavery did not exist. St. Paul commanded “masters to give their servants what is just and equal” as if they were employees (Colossians 4:1), and a slave (or servant) who ran to stay with him was resent to his master, also a good Christian and a personal friend of Paul, with a beautiful letter in which Paul called the servant “his son”, “his heart”, “no longer as a slave but more than a slave; a beloved brother, both in the flesh and in the Lord” (Letter to Philemon).
Among the Fathers of the Church, St. John Chrysostom is notorious for having said that “slavery is the fruit of covetousness, of extravagance, of insatiable greediness”.
What about the modern era?
In 1462, Pius II declared slavery to be “a great crime”. In 1537, Paul III forbade the enslavement of the Indians. In 1639 the same was forbidden by Urban VIII, then by Benedict XIV in 1741. In 1815 pope Pius VII demanded the suppression of the slave trade in the Congress of Vienna, to no avail; in 1839, pope Gregory condemned once more the slave trade. In 1850 Pius IX canonized Peter Claver, S. J., strong opposer of slavery, and called “supreme villany” the act of the slave traders. In 1890 Leo XIII condemned the slave traders and “the accursed pest of servitude”, and ordered an annual collection to be made in all Catholic churches for the benefit of the anti-slavery work.
Like I said, Holy Church does not bear false witness.
The Church has been establishing a strong dialogue with the Abrahamic religions, based on the prudent search of common ground and on the wise understanding of faith in the same God, who is the God of infinite and unconditional love.
R
R_C
Guest
St. Augustine of Hippo said: errare humanum est.
A pope giving an authorization is *not *the same thing as a pope expressing a teaching in matters of faith and morals. This permission of Nicholas V was in 1455. In 1462 pope Pius II condemned slavery of newly-baptised Christians as a “great crime”. Clearly, the Church taught - without the possibility of error - that slavery was sinful. The issue is: why was not all slavery considered the same? Perhaps some people were not seen as human…
It was a matter of time for the Church to reach a deeper understanding about the humanity of all the people and expand its ancient doctrine against slavery to all of humanity - an achievement that the Church reached and preached a very long time before the secular world…
I will also remind you that the Catholic Church counts among the sins that are so evil that cry out to heaven for vengeance, oppression of the poor and defrauding workers of their just wages. This teaching was already found in the Douay Catechism of 1649, but the origin, of course, is much more ancient. While these are not the worst sins, they are taken under special consideration because they undermine the fundamental order of society. We are not just talking of condemning slavery, but of condemning even unjust wages, something we still have a hard time understanding in the XXI century…
J
Jim_Baur
Guest
*ta`ab
This word is found in Psalm 5: 7, depending on the translation.
It is often translated as hate or with a similar word.
I wonder if the translation should be oppose, but not hate in the normal sense of English.
It also seems to mean turn away. I might see that as God’s goodness and beauty turn the sinner away, or turn the sinner OFF.
This could be most helpful in realizing that God does love all people!
*
This word is found in Psalm 5: 7, depending on the translation.
It is often translated as hate or with a similar word.
I wonder if the translation should be oppose, but not hate in the normal sense of English.
It also seems to mean turn away. I might see that as God’s goodness and beauty turn the sinner away, or turn the sinner OFF.
This could be most helpful in realizing that God does love all people!
*
N
Nabooru
Guest
And it could be possible that the Pope and others are misguided or trying to cover their behinds with regards to overtures towards other religions. One of the reasons I’m not a full-fledged Roman Catholic is because of this. The church is a big place. There are people, priests, and poles who are, have been, and will be misguided and mistaken. They have been influenced by politics, basing teachings on an agenda (just look at the church during the Middle Ages and renaissance - whoa!), and I feel the same is being done now with regards to religious pluralism.
I’m not saying the church is wrong, or that it does not possess the spirit of God. It just also possesses human error. It’s simple denial to say, “Popes have been wrong sometimes, but not really.”
N
Nabooru
Guest
I’ve often felt this way. I think once people are exposed to the Holy Spirit, as I was, they do have the power to turn it away - but only because the idea of such love is reprehensible to them. That’s why atheists accuse Christians of believing merely out of comfort or a sense of having an eternal Father. The love that they have rejected is a source of gnawing hatred to them. They hate that love.
T
TheAtheist
Guest
Eh?
N
Nabooru
Guest
It’s one thing I’ve heard. An atheist ex-friend who couldn’t leave me alone about being religious made that accusation. “You just believe in God because you want to feel good like someone loves you and looks out for you. You need to get with the picture, there’s nobody up there who cares.”
T
TheAtheist
Guest
To which i’d say to your ex-friend also… “Eh?”
Why a person happens to believe in the existence of God, or Gods, or Buddhas, or whatnot and why they don’t is a rather complicated issue drawing from not only personal psychology but one’s values, cultural roots, and traditions.
We all have different metrics for validity and therefore different blind spots.
R
R_C
Guest
Not on matters of faith and morals. On this, the Church cannot err. At least not in official pronouncements and teachings.
They may definitely err in such things as giving permission to do something or allowing something to happen…that’s why, although referring to a Pope, I dared to quote St. Augustine’s famous line…
The issue here is a deep one: the way you speak of the Church falls short of respect…both for the other religions, and for the Church. The reason, oddly enough, seems the same: we do not consider the fact that many faithful of those religions that seek God with all their heart and love all people, and who are being unfairly judged and condemned based on the behavior of a few…this is the case for the other religions as well as for the Catholic Church…
The hierarchy of the Church, forgive me, does not get buddy-buddy or try to cover their behinds…in my opinion, they even fall short of the Lord’s commandment of “being as prudent as snakes”… the Vicar of Christ and the Bishops in communion with him must speak for the 1.2 billion Christians in the Catholic church, and know that their words will be heard (and potentially misunderstood) by those who may not even care if a Christian is Catholic or not…thus their statements must try to discern where the truth truly is…try to find common ground without bearing false witness…and as far as I could read, that is what John Paul II and Benedict XVI have done.
If the Church understands that we worship the same God, the One True God - though in different ways and based on different scriptures - it has very good reasons to say this. For centuries, theologians have gone over these topics. That’s without even mentioning the ever-persisting guidance of the Holy Spirit, which cannot “force” humans not to err, but does definitely give them light in order not to constantly err…perhaps, then, you want to find out more about the theological foundations of the Pope’s statements…
They may definitely err in such things as giving permission to do something or allowing something to happen…that’s why, although referring to a Pope, I dared to quote St. Augustine’s famous line…
The issue here is a deep one: the way you speak of the Church falls short of respect…both for the other religions, and for the Church. The reason, oddly enough, seems the same: we do not consider the fact that many faithful of those religions that seek God with all their heart and love all people, and who are being unfairly judged and condemned based on the behavior of a few…this is the case for the other religions as well as for the Catholic Church…
The hierarchy of the Church, forgive me, does not get buddy-buddy or try to cover their behinds…in my opinion, they even fall short of the Lord’s commandment of “being as prudent as snakes”… the Vicar of Christ and the Bishops in communion with him must speak for the 1.2 billion Christians in the Catholic church, and know that their words will be heard (and potentially misunderstood) by those who may not even care if a Christian is Catholic or not…thus their statements must try to discern where the truth truly is…try to find common ground without bearing false witness…and as far as I could read, that is what John Paul II and Benedict XVI have done.
If the Church understands that we worship the same God, the One True God - though in different ways and based on different scriptures - it has very good reasons to say this. For centuries, theologians have gone over these topics. That’s without even mentioning the ever-persisting guidance of the Holy Spirit, which cannot “force” humans not to err, but does definitely give them light in order not to constantly err…perhaps, then, you want to find out more about the theological foundations of the Pope’s statements…
J
John_Lazarus
Guest
So you are saying not only do Muslims not worship the same God we do… but neither do the Jews.
No?
Posted from Catholic.com App for Android
N
Nabooru
Guest
I cannot say that the Church is by default correct on its teachings regarding other religions. Other things, I think it’s entirely possible. But the only thing that Christ has told us is to make disciples of all nations, and that is how people are saved, not through conscience. Conscience is a tricky thing. For example, because of my conscience, which on this issue I cannot force myself to waver, I do not feel that the church’s teachings regarding Muslims are in the right place. But according to the church, I am wrong for being and feeling that way. But I’m following my conscience to the best I can do. So who is right?
An abortionist may feel that what he or she is doing is a great act of compassion, according to their conscience. A suicide bomber may feel that he or she is doing the greatest thing that could be done in God’s eyes. A nurse or doctor who quietly causes a suffering patient to die may think they are being truly merciful. Since they are acting according to their conscience, are they doing what is right, and will they be excused for what they have done?
Likewise, if a person denies Christ, is that not a sin like any other? In fact it’s the greatest of all sins. So why of all sins should it be excused under special mitigating circumstances? God is just. He is merciful to those who accept His mercy in the sacrifice of His Son. He is just to those who reject the sole means of salvation, since they cannot save themselves, no matter how much they think they can. Does that mean they go to hell? Not necessarily. Perhaps a place like limbo really does exist. (I prefer Dante’s description personally.) But they cannot be saved in the truest sense.
One can acknowledge “a” creator, but that does not mean they acknowledge “the” creator. Hindus believe Brahma created the world (kind of - it’s complicated). Brahma and God are very different. I can think a painting is by Monet, when it’s actually a Manet (I know nothing about art), and no matter how much I admire and respect “Monet” for his work, that doesn’t make he and Manet the same person.
The Muslims do acknowledge that the God of Abraham exists, but their idea of Him is skewed. So skewed that they deny one of His essential features, which throws the whole question of whether or not we worship the same Being up in the air.
An abortionist may feel that what he or she is doing is a great act of compassion, according to their conscience. A suicide bomber may feel that he or she is doing the greatest thing that could be done in God’s eyes. A nurse or doctor who quietly causes a suffering patient to die may think they are being truly merciful. Since they are acting according to their conscience, are they doing what is right, and will they be excused for what they have done?
Likewise, if a person denies Christ, is that not a sin like any other? In fact it’s the greatest of all sins. So why of all sins should it be excused under special mitigating circumstances? God is just. He is merciful to those who accept His mercy in the sacrifice of His Son. He is just to those who reject the sole means of salvation, since they cannot save themselves, no matter how much they think they can. Does that mean they go to hell? Not necessarily. Perhaps a place like limbo really does exist. (I prefer Dante’s description personally.) But they cannot be saved in the truest sense.
One can acknowledge “a” creator, but that does not mean they acknowledge “the” creator. Hindus believe Brahma created the world (kind of - it’s complicated). Brahma and God are very different. I can think a painting is by Monet, when it’s actually a Manet (I know nothing about art), and no matter how much I admire and respect “Monet” for his work, that doesn’t make he and Manet the same person.
The Muslims do acknowledge that the God of Abraham exists, but their idea of Him is skewed. So skewed that they deny one of His essential features, which throws the whole question of whether or not we worship the same Being up in the air.
R
R_C
Guest
You know the answer.
God’s commandments are engraved in all human hearts, regardless of their religion, even if they do not believe in God at all, even if they do not believe that there is such a thing as right and wrong. So you have, in a way, answered your own question: conscience needs to be properly formed in order to hear God’s voice - which is a gentle whisper - and not the thundering and arrogant voice of the Self, which only utters one phrase: “I’m always right”.
We know - because our Teacher instructed us - that a sin requires full knowledge and deliberate consent. If you do not know who Christ is, how can you truly deny him? If furthermore you heard things about Christ, but never really had the personal encounter that lead all of us - whether born Christian or not - to our conversion, and you have strong forces around you moving you away from Christ, are you deliberately consenting to deny him? And even if you did, don’t you know that Christ would forgive you anyways if you repent?
There is no such thing as a “limbo”. Heaven, Purgatory, and Hell are not “places”, either. More like “states”. Purgatory and Hell are identical in suffering in that they are a state of separation from God while being fully aware of His presence (unlike here on earth, where we can see Him only through the veil of faith), only that Purgatory is temporary because the souls long to be at His presence. In the state of Hell, it is the soul that rejects God and does not want to be at His presence. This is very basic Christian doctrine.
So are they separated from God? It would not be fair to say so. Many people who do not know Christ still do God’s will. Only God knows if, having that person known about Christ, they would have - like Nathanael said - left everything behind and followed Him.
So what does it matter if some worship God with a different name, or do not fully know Him as we do? Does a blind person become less of a son for his father?
N
Nabooru
Guest
So as long as I don’t know what I’m really doing, that excuses me? That seems to be resorting to the ignorance defense. Try standing in front of a judge and saying, “But Your Honor, I didn’t know killing was wrong in that case.” Will he or she absolve you of your guilt? Perhaps if you were insane, but chances are you’re not. In fact they’ll tell you quite the opposite - “Ignorance of the law is no excuse!”
- Status