Pope Gregory: Christians, Muslims, one God

[Ahimsa]

“Pope Gregory VII’s letter to Anzir, Moslem King of Mauritania (1076), acknowledges that Christians and Moslems worship the same God: 'for we believe and confess one God, although in different ways, and praise and worship [God] daily as the creator of all ages and the ruler of this world.” [386-387, *Catholicism, McBrien; see also footnote number 5, Nostra Aetate]

 

[tjmiller]

Nice quote, good ref. to NA - but I don’t think Richard McBrien’s brand of “Catholicism” is likely to go over well on this largely orthodox forum. It’s a text censured even by the US Bishops Conference’s doctrinal secretariat as theologically unreliable (as are most things the man says)…

 

[Cyber_Knight]

“Pope Gregory VII’s letter to Anzir, Moslem King of Mauritania (1076), acknowledges that Christians and Moslems worship the same God: 'for we believe and confess one God, although in different ways, and praise and worship [God]
daily as the creator of all ages and the ruler of this world.” [386-387, *Catholicism

, McBrien; see also footnote number 5, Nostra Aetate]

whats pope’s main point by making such statement? we consider them worship the same god in a different way? it should have been applied to buddhism or hinduism or other faith except Islam.

 

[StMarkEofE]

“Pope Gregory VII’s letter to Anzir, Moslem King of Mauritania (1076), acknowledges that Christians and Moslems worship the same God: 'for we believe and confess one God, although in different ways, and praise and worship [God]
daily as the creator of all ages and the ruler of this world.” [386-387, *Catholicism

, McBrien; see also footnote number 5, Nostra Aetate]

Somewhere in scripture it says that Christ said that no one comes to the Father except through Him. Does this sound like the same God only different? The Muslim faith was man started and no better or worse than Jehovah’s Witnesses , etc. Why would God start another faith long after He sent His only Son to earth to save sinners? This really dosnt make any sense - same God not in my opinion.

 

[Ahimsa]

tjmiller:

Nice quote, good ref. to NA - but I don’t think Richard McBrien’s brand of “Catholicism” is likely to go over well on this largely orthodox forum. It’s a text censured even by the US Bishops Conference’s doctrinal secretariat as theologically unreliable (as are most things the man says)…

Yeah, I knew a quote using only McBrien as a source would be questioned, to say the least, on such a forum as this.

 

[SolaChristo]

So your saying pope Gregory is wrong?

 

[Ahimsa]

SolaChristo:

So your saying pope Gregory is wrong?

Is that question for me?

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

SolaChristo:

So your saying pope Gregory is wrong?

For me, no, I am not saying that Pope Gregor is worng, just that I disagree with him. As this is not a dogmatic pronouncement, we as Catholics are free to disagree.

Just as Catholics are free to disagree with Pope John Paul II view on capital punishment.

 

[discipleofJesus]

ByzCath:

For me, no, I am not saying that Pope Gregor is worng, just that I disagree with him. As this is not a dogmatic pronouncement, we as Catholics are free to disagree.

Just as Catholics are free to disagree with Pope John Paul II view on capital punishment.

What about the DECLARATION ON
THE RELATION OF THE CHURCH TO NON-CHRISTIAN RELIGIONS
NOSTRA AETATE
PROCLAIMED BY HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI
ON OCTOBER 28, 1965
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651028_nostra-aetate_en.html

Are Catholics free to disagree with that?

Are Catholics free to disagree with the Catechism of the Catholic Church?

Honest questions, I would like to know.

 

[exoflare]

discipleofJesus:

What about the DECLARATION ON
THE RELATION OF THE CHURCH TO NON-CHRISTIAN RELIGIONS
NOSTRA AETATE
PROCLAIMED BY HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI
ON OCTOBER 28, 1965
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651028_nostra-aetate_en.html

Are Catholics free to disagree with that?

I guess you take issue to this part:

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.

Since in the course of centuries not a few quarrels and hostilities have arisen between Christians and Moslems, this sacred synod urges all to forget the past and to work sincerely for mutual understanding and to preserve as well as to promote together for the benefit of all mankind social justice and moral welfare, as well as peace and freedom.

I really can never see why so many people take issue with this. They keep making assumptions about what it means, but it means no more than the very words that are written. It does not contradict that all who enter into heaven do so through Jesus (which in itself is another vague statement), or that “Islam is another correct religion”. What exactly do people see here that they have a problem with? Anyway, most of this is just advice on how to interact with Muslims and information on what Muslims believe and practice themselves; it doesn’t even make any claims about the truth or falsehood of any given Muslim belief.

 

[BryPGuy89]

Cyber Knight:

whats pope’s main point by making such statement? we consider them worship the same god in a different way? it should have been applied to buddhism or hinduism or other faith except Islam.

Why? Christian, Jew, and Islam all follow the same guidelines, why say the Jews follow a different God because they do it differently and don’t except Jesus? Buddhism is agnostic and without any god, Hinduism has hundreds of gods. Islam excepts many beleifs Christians and Jews do.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

discipleofJesus:

What about the DECLARATION ON
THE RELATION OF THE CHURCH TO NON-CHRISTIAN RELIGIONS
NOSTRA AETATE
PROCLAIMED BY HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI
ON OCTOBER 28, 1965
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651028_nostra-aetate_en.html

Are Catholics free to disagree with that?

Are Catholics free to disagree with the Catechism of the Catholic Church?

Honest questions, I would like to know.

As I said, Catholics are free to disagree on non-dogmatic issues.

 

[oat_soda]

this sacred synod urges all to forget the past and to work sincerely for mutual understanding and to preserve as well as to promote together for the benefit of all mankind social justice and moral welfare

this is very vauge. surely, we are to forgive, but to forget the historical record is ridiculous. forgive, not forget. how can we understand islam without understanding its history? this should be read with a grain of thought.

 

[BryPGuy89]

ByzCath:

As I said, Catholics are free to disagree on non-dogmatic issues.

A papal decree would be considered church dogma, would it not?

 

[BryPGuy89]

discipleofJesus:

What about the DECLARATION ON
THE RELATION OF THE CHURCH TO NON-CHRISTIAN RELIGIONS
NOSTRA AETATE
PROCLAIMED BY HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI
ON OCTOBER 28, 1965
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651028_nostra-aetate_en.html

Are Catholics free to disagree with that?

Are Catholics free to disagree with the Catechism of the Catholic Church?

Honest questions, I would like to know.

I think not, Papal decrees under most circumstances should be viewed as truth and be followed. If the pope says we follow the same God then it is so, God said what Peter does on earth will also be in heaven, that is why people fear excomunication.

The catechism of the Catholic Church is accepted as the truth and it can not be denied. All things are to be taken as truth and not questioned.

 

[exoflare]

oat soda:

this is very vauge. surely, we are to forgive, but to forget the historical record is ridiculous. forgive, not forget. how can we understand islam without understanding its history? this should be read with a grain of thought.

That’s what I’m saying. Since the letter is so vague in most of its content, people may start reading things into it that just aren’t there. I think people just look at the letter and start to assume that tolerance must necessarily mean endorsement… which is, of course, just not true.

 

[oat_soda]

That’s what I’m saying. Since the letter is so vague in most of its content, people may start reading things into it that just aren’t there. I think people just look at the letter and start to assume that tolerance must necessarily mean endorsement… which is, of course, just not true.

even cardinal dulles has been critical of some of the VII documents. they are worded probably too positively and must be interpreted in the light of tradition. look at the crisis we are having today after VII. much can be attributed to bad interpretation of the documents which are the result of being in my opinion imprudently writen.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

BryPGuy89:

A papal decree would be considered church dogma, would it not?

Papal decrees are not dogma.

Papal decrees do not carry the need to assent to them.

I maybe wrong but until proven otherwise that is what I believe.

On the matter in question in this thread I will remain silent as my view is my view and I do not feel like discussing it.

 

[BryPGuy89]

ByzCath:

Papal decrees are not dogma.

Papal decrees do not carry the need to assent to them.

I maybe wrong but until proven otherwise that is what I believe.

On the matter in question in this thread I will remain silent as my view is my view and I do not feel like discussing it.

I beleive they are, the definition of dogma is:
A doctrine or system of teaching of religious truth as maintained by the Christian church or any portion of it; hence, a statement of religious faith or duty formulated by a body possessing or claiming authority to decree or decide.

That is something you can easily find is true. That I would say constitutes proof. I would like to know your opinion, but if you would rather not share no problem.

 

[exoflare]

BryPGuy89:

I beleive they are, the definition of dogma is:
A doctrine or system of teaching of religious truth as maintained by the Christian church or any portion of it; hence, a statement of religious faith or duty formulated by a body possessing or claiming authority to decree or decide.

That is something you can easily find is true. That I would say constitutes proof. I would like to know your opinion, but if you would rather not share no problem.

“dogma” in the Catholic sense, means a doctrine that is irreversible… or “set in stone” so to speak. This was my understanding. So, all dogmas are doctrines, but not all doctrines are considered dogma.