Robert Spencer?

[Denise1957]

Anti-Catholics have accused Catholics of doing the same for centuries. I can’t help but think of the accusation faced by Blessed John Henry Newman: “I am henceforth in doubt and fear, as much as any honest man can be, concerning every word Dr. Newman may write. How can I tell that I shall not be the dupe of some cunning equivocation, of one of the three kinds laid down as permissible by the blessed Alfonso da Liguori and his pupils, even when confirmed by an oath, because ‘then we do not deceive our neighbour, but allow him to deceive himself?’ … It is admissible, therefore, {for Catholics} to use words and sentences which have a double signification, and leave the hapless hearer to take which of them he may choose.”

And, yet, when people here recommend that we should read Muslim sources firsthand in order to better understand the religion, they are accused of promoting Islam. Why would Spencer get a pass and the rest of us be forbidden?

Catholics are bound by the 8th commandment, and I have found that they are, for the most part, honest. What does Islam teach about being bound to always tell the truth according to the 8th commandment?

 

[pietro1]

Denise1957:

One of the interesting things he said was that Muslims will have different information that they will give to non-Muslims from that which they share with other Muslims. He only uses sources/info which is meant to be used between Muslims. He said that info given by Muslims to non-Muslims is meant to misinform, and that it’s intentional. He stressed the concern that there are former Christian countries that are now Muslim countries. How did the Muslims take over the formerly Christian countries? I don’t recall that he explained it, but I wasn’t able to listen to the entire interview.

Denise, how can’t you see that all these Spencer’words are incitement?
All these are accusation of intentional lying, conspiracy against others… this is crazy, it is fascist rhetoric ,he should be locked in a jail.

 

[Denise1957]

Denise1957:

Denise, how can’t you see that all these Spencer’words are incitement?
All these are accusation of intentional lying, conspiracy against others… this is crazy, it is fascist rhetoric ,he should be locked in a jail.

Perhaps you can answer the question:

Does Islam teach that all Muslims are bound to tell the truth according to the 8th commandment?

 

[GaryTaylor]

how can’t you see that all these Spencer’words are incitement?
All these are accusation of intentional lying, conspiracy against others… this is crazy, it is fascist rhetoric ,he should be locked in a jail.

How can’t you see the Islamic supremacist strategy to suppress free speech about Islam and jihad in the U.S. today? Is that what Mohammad taught?

So you would like to come here and do the same thing here that muslims are attemping to do to Spencer?

 

[aspirant]

Catholics are bound by the 8th commandment, and I have found that they are, for the most part, honest.

And yet anti-Catholics have, for centuries, accused Catholics such as Blessed John Henry Newman of “cunning equivocation” and other practices that, anti-Catholics argue, lead almost inevitably to the deception of listeners and which are freely allowed within Catholicism despite the commandment not to bear false witness.

Think about that. Really allow that to sink in. Anti-Catholics accuse us of teaching and believing that it is morally legitimate, under what they claim to be “our” interpretation of the aforementioned commandment, to engage in practices which have the end result of deceiving listeners.

If people assume this about us Catholics, as we know that some do, what can we possibly say that will actually convince them that we are not lying to them? Once our bad faith is assumed by our interlocutors, anything we might say in our own defense, such as “but we are bound by the 8th commandment!,” will be interpreted as still more “cunning equivocation” designed to have the effect of deception. When others assume that we will deceive them, we are placed in a terrible position, because we are thereby prevented from sharing even the truth about ourselves.

We know how it feels to be placed in this position. How ought we to engage others?

Tobit 4:15: “And what you hate, do not do to any one.”
Sirach 31:15: “Recognize that your neighbor feels as you do, and keep in mind everything you dislike.”
Matthew 7:12: “So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them.”
Luke 6:31: “And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them.”

Should we, prior to our encounter with another person, assume bad faith on his part, assume that he will lie to or deliberately deceive us? No. The Church’s teaching prohibits us from making such assumptions about others. To assume the moral fault of a neighbor without sufficient foundation, even tacitly, is a sin: rash judgment, which is a form of prejudice (pre-judgment). “To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor’s thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way: ‘Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another’s statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it. And if the latter understands it badly, let the former correct him with love. If that does not suffice, let the Christian try all suitable ways to bring the other to a correct interpretation so that he may be saved.’”

So when I encounter Fatima at a neighborhood picnic, for example, it would be wrong for me to assume “She is a Muslim and therefore she will deliberately deceive me” or even “Ahmed has deceived me, and they are both Muslims, therefore Fatima will do the same.” That would be rash judgment, a form of prejudice, and a sin against Fatima. I must allow Fatima to speak for herself, not assuming a moral fault on Fatima’s part, but giving her own words the most favorable interpretation possible and asking her for clarification as needed to ensure understanding. According to the teaching of the Lord and of his Church, I should give her the same fair and unprejudiced hearing in a conversation that I would want for myself.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Who’s assuming bad faith, Islam? Seems to me to be so. EWTN and Raymond Arroyo ran a aspect of the World Over tonight on the same issue’s Robert Spencer speaks about. Is that bad faith on EWTNs part also? How about all the listed links from Israel on children and women rapes. the Christians fleeing Syria? All bad faith?

frontpagemag.com/2013/raymond-ibrahim/fatwa-permits-rape-of-non-sunni-women-in-syria/

 

[aspirant]

Who’s assuming bad faith

As I explained above, we would be guilty of assuming bad faith, of rash judgment, if we approached Muslims with the assumption that they will deliberately deceive us. That would be a sin against them. (We need not do this, of course.) Please read what I wrote.

 

[AbideWithMe]

And yet anti-Catholics have, for centuries, accused Catholics such as Blessed John Henry Newman of “cunning equivocation” and other practices that, anti-Catholics argue, lead almost inevitably to the deception of listeners and which are freely allowed within Catholicism despite the commandment not to bear false witness.

Think about that. Really allow that to sink in. Anti-Catholics accuse us of teaching and believing that it is morally legitimate, under what they claim to be “our” interpretation of the aforementioned commandment, to engage in practices which have the end result of deceiving listeners.

If people assume this about us Catholics, as we know that some do, what can we possibly say that will actually convince them that we are not lying to them? Once our bad faith is assumed by our interlocutors, anything we might say in our own defense, such as “but we are bound by the 8th commandment!,” will be interpreted as still more “cunning equivocation” designed to have the effect of deception. When others assume that we will deceive them, we are placed in a terrible position, because we are thereby prevented from sharing even the truth about ourselves.

We know how it feels to be placed in this position. How ought we to engage others?

Tobit 4:15: “And what you hate, do not do to any one.”
Sirach 31:15: “Recognize that your neighbor feels as you do, and keep in mind everything you dislike.”
Matthew 7:12: “So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them.”
Luke 6:31: “And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them.”

Should we, prior to our encounter with another person, assume bad faith on his part, assume that he will lie to or deliberately deceive us? No. The Church’s teaching prohibits us from making such assumptions about others. To assume the moral fault of a neighbor without sufficient foundation, even tacitly, is a sin: rash judgment, which is a form of prejudice (pre-judgment). “To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor’s thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way: ‘Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another’s statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it. And if the latter understands it badly, let the former correct him with love. If that does not suffice, let the Christian try all suitable ways to bring the other to a correct interpretation so that he may be saved.’”

So when I encounter Fatima at a neighborhood picnic, for example, it would be wrong for me to assume “She is a Muslim and therefore she will deliberately deceive me” or even “Ahmed has deceived me, and they are both Muslims, therefore Fatima will do the same.” That would be rash judgment, a form of prejudice, and a sin against Fatima. I must allow Fatima to speak for herself, not assuming a moral fault on Fatima’s part, but giving her own words the most favorable interpretation possible and asking her for clarification as needed to ensure understanding. According to the teaching of the Lord and of his Church, I should give her the same fair and unprejudiced hearing in a conversation that I would want for myself.

Well said.

 

[MartinJordan]

Well said.

Motion seconded

MJ

 

[GaryTaylor]

As I explained above, we would be guilty of assuming bad faith, of rash judgment, if we approached Muslims with the assumption that they will deliberately deceive us. That would be a sin against them. (We need not do this, of course.) Please read what I wrote.

And who is doing this? Topic is Robert Spencer. Islam writes their own script, that is how the world understands them and responds. Its not on a person to person basis. Truly that would be a personal issue.

 

[aspirant]

If you’ve read the thread, then you will see that I was responding to a generalization that Muslims deliberately misinform non-Muslims. When someone makes a generalized claim such as this, we must take special caution not to engage in rash judgment or prejudice in our own encounters.

 

[GaryTaylor]

If you’ve read the thread, then you will see that I was responding to a generalization that Muslims deliberately misinform non-Muslims. When someone makes a generalized claim such as this, we must take special caution not to engage in rash judgment or prejudice in our own encounters.

Are the rapes generalizations? Was EWTNs News feed last night a generalization? You continue to “assume” what was read and not. Its not a “personal” meeting we are talking here and a class on how to conduct oneself as a Christian in such a situation.

 

[murraymuzz]

If you’ve read the thread, then you will see that I was responding to a generalization that Muslims deliberately misinform non-Muslims. When someone makes a generalized claim such as this, we must take special caution not to engage in rash judgment or prejudice in our own encounters.

I think when Spencer said that, he was pointing out a verses in the Qur’an that Muslim commentators have explained to mean that it is permissible to lie if they need to. Now again this is not saying that all Muslims are liars, but that Islam itself condones lying if the Muslim sees it as a necessity.

Here is a link that explains the circumstances in which a Muslim may lie: thereligionofpeace.com/quran/011-taqiyya.htm

 

[Reuben_J]

I think when Spencer said that, he was pointing out a verses in the Qur’an that Muslim commentators have explained to mean that it is permissible to lie if they need to. Now again this is not saying that all Muslims are liars, but that Islam itself condones lying if the Muslim sees it as a necessity.

Here is a link that explains the circumstances in which a Muslim may lie: thereligionofpeace.com/quran/011-taqiyya.htm

Taqiyya is an Islamic feature that officially allows lying in specific circumstances, perhaps in situations where it could save one’s life or in an innocuous moment where a flattering remark to a spouse may be more upbuilding rather than hurting. In Christianity we do not condone lying of any form. Muslims would quick however to point out that some prominent Biblical figures lied for the sake of greater good. So this is some of our differences with them.

Sunni Muslims deny the practice of taqiyya which they attribute only to the Shiite sect.

Islam, unlike Christianity, also does not believe in offering the other cheek, deeming such teaching as impractical. However, again, Muslims are quick to point out that Christendom did go to war to illustrate their point that though the teaching is there, it is not practiced literally.

When we look at Islam in totality, it is more as a practical religion, which many Muslims that I came across admitted as being so. This may be perhaps the problem with Islam, something practical may not be right with God. In Christianity, very often we are called as a sign of contradiction to the world.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Well. its not for me to second guess what Islam has to say about their Quran. Nor is it for me to suggest Robert Spencer doesn’t have and can’t invoke his right to free speech as an American. Nor do I believe he should be threatened into submission because of what he has to say about Islam.

A] When terrorism, rape, murder and violence is perpetrated and communicated via world news in regards to aspects of Islam, or anyone else. We would be “ignorant” not to comprehend the reality of the situation!

B] How we respond as Christians indicates we are Christian. This doesn’t change point A.

Thanks for the reminder to conduct ourselves as Christians. Frankly I find it offensive in that on a personal level it suggests “otherwise”. And on a “general” level it suggests we should shut-up. I disagree with “both”.

 

[Reuben_J]

Well. its not for me to second guess what Islam has to say about their Quran. Nor is it for me to suggest Robert Spencer doesn’t have and can’t invoke his right to free speech as an American. Nor do I believe he should be threatened into submission because of what he has to say about Islam.

A] When terrorism, rape, murder and violence is perpetrated and communicated via world news in regards to aspects of Islam, or anyone else. We would be “ignorant” not to comprehend the reality of the situation.

B] How we respond as Christians indicates we are Christian. This doesn’t change point A.

Thanks for the reminder to conduct ourselves as Christians. Frankly I find it offensive in that on a personal level it suggests “otherwise”. And on a “general” level it suggests we should shut-up. I disagree with “both”.

Gary, I can understand what you are trying to say. I really hope I do.

What I observe in such thread, posters tend to go to the extreme on their views. If one does not agree with Spencer, one is pro-Islam and vice-versa. I think this is far from the truth.

Granted we are in a time where radical Islam is on the rise and the Western world are somewhat threatened by this new phenomenon. Experience like the 911 and the war in Iraq seem to exacerbate the thinking on how we see this issue. The historical competition and wars between Christianity and Islam as religions and as people would make it difficult to see Islam as anything but primadona and a danger to Christianity.

Perhaps we should strike a balance somewhere notwithstanding the teaching of our Church vis-à-vis the Muslims. Nobody is really right or wrong here. I know it is wrong to advocate Islam and its theology but other than that there is room for exchanging of thought. Spencer cannot be totally right nor is he totally wrong. But whichever line we take on him, please do not jump to any idea that we are for Islam.

Spencer as an individual in a free country is free to promote his thought but the Church also has to be consistent and perhaps makes a stand. I think this is what a local Bishop is doing.

You point A, though valid is also a generalization. While it is true that ‘terrorism, rape, murder and violence’ is perpetrated by Muslims sadly this is not their sole dominion today. Muslims would be offended by this and so are we if we change the word ‘Muslims’ to ‘Christians’.

The greatest defense against any threat would be to be informed, good and zealous Christians both in faith and practice. Anything else or if we approach this problem like what the world does, then it makes no difference as to who we are.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Sorry you misread point A. I said “in aspects of Islam” Is that too general? There is no issue with Church teaching nor how Christians respond as Christians, we don’t want to generalize and offend Christians right?

 

[aspirant]

Are the rapes generalizations?

Apparently you are determined to ignore what I’m saying.

I think when Spencer said that, he was pointing out a verses in the Qur’an that Muslim commentators have explained to mean that it is permissible to lie if they need to.

And I am cautioning people against misapplication.

While it is true that ‘terrorism, rape, murder and violence’ is perpetrated by Muslims sadly this is not their sole dominion today. Muslims would be offended by this and so are we if we change the word ‘Muslims’ to ‘Christians’.

The greatest defense against any threat would be to be informed, good and zealous Christians both in faith and practice.

Agreed.

 

[Reuben_J]

Sorry you misread point A. I said “in aspects of Islam” Is that too general? There is no issue with Church teaching nor how Christians respond as Christians, we don’t want to generalize and offend Christians right?

I am sorry to misread you, Gary. What do you mean terrorism, rape, murder and violence is perpetrated and communicated via world news in regards to aspects of Islam? If that is not generalizing, then we are in agreement.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Apparently you are determined to ignore what I’m saying…

I disagree with your “generalization” which you choose to ignore, and then placed into an individual context which I also disagree with since point B stemmed from a generalization of point A.

And I am cautioning people against misapplication…

And generalizing in doing so.