Vatican thinks theological dialogue with Islam is impossible, experts charge [Allen]

[Catholic_Opinion]

By JOHN L. ALLEN JR.
Washington, D.C.
More than a year after Pope Benedict XVI’s explosive comments on Islam at the University of Regensburg, the Vatican has not shown any new leadership in Muslim/Christian dialogue, and apparently has decided that theological exchange with Muslims is simply impossible, according to a leading Muslim scholar and a top Catholic expert in dialogue with Islam.
read more

More…

 

[Franze]

Very true!

 

[Teen_Catholic]

Honestly, that makes me sad. I think that Islam and Christianity have alot to learn from eachother. Although they may not contain the fullness of truth, one can’t help but admire the discipline devout Muslims inject into daily life.

As my very holy priest said, “Who can help but be moved by the site of hundreds of Muslims bowing in prayer.”

 

[CathCentrist]

Islam has much to learn from christianity - islam offers NOTHING to christianity imo, except repressiver zealotry that makes hard core fundamentalists and radical evangelicals seem normal

 

[melensdad]

I dunno. After reading the article I saw 2 Islamic scholars who seemed to want one thing, a theological debate with the Pope. But I don’t understand to what end. Do they think they will change his mind? Are they open to have their minds changed? If the answer is “no” to those two questions, then what is wrong with the Vatican simply following a diplomatic course of action?

We can learn from others, and they can learn from us. To that point I will not argue. But I don’t see how top religious leaders having a theological debate will resolve anything, however I do see how it can easily lead followers of each religion to form opinions that would widen the religious rift.

 

[estesbob]

I dunno. After reading the article I saw 2 Islamic scholars who seemed to want one thing, a theological debate with the Pope. But I don’t understand to what end. Do they think they will change his mind? Are they open to have their minds changed? If the answer is “no” to those two questions, then what is wrong with the Vatican simply following a diplomatic course of action?

We can learn from others, and they can learn from us. To that point I will not argue. But I don’t see how top religious leaders having a theological debate will resolve anything, however I do see how it can easily lead followers of each religion to form opinions that would widen the religious rift.

They already learned from us=Mohamed stole huge chunks of the bible

 

[Tim_Kirchoff]

They already learned from us=Mohamed stole huge chunks of the bible

And refused to learn from any of it! Now with that little outburst out of the way, I can move on to something meaningful…

He claimed something along the lines that he and his followers were descendants of Ishmael, which begs the question, why Allah didn’t choose to reveal himself to “his people” sooner.

 

[estesbob]

And refused to learn from any of it! Now with that little outburst out of the way, I can move on to something meaningful…

He claimed something along the lines that he and his followers were descendants of Ishmael, which begs the question, why Allah didn’t choose to reveal himself to “his people” sooner.

Well he did reveal himself to mohamed at least 1,000 years before he got around to the Protestants…

 

[Tim_Kirchoff]

Well he did reveal himself to mohamed at least 1,000 years before he got around to the Protestants…

So true, so true. (I thought is was more like 800, whatever)

My mother owns a bunch of old cassette tapes on theology and Bible study. One talked about how early in the Bible, the “firstborn” are passed over in favor of their younger siblings. (Isaac and Ishmael, Esau and Jacob, Reuben, Simeon, Levi, and Judah, the list goes on…)

But my point is, Mohammed’s claim to God’s Covenant as Ishmael’s desendant is nonsense at best.

 

[OneAugustKnight]

I dunno. After reading the article I saw 2 Islamic scholars who seemed to want one thing, a theological debate with the Pope. But I don’t understand to what end. Do they think they will change his mind? Are they open to have their minds changed? If the answer is “no” to those two questions, then what is wrong with the Vatican simply following a diplomatic course of action?

We can learn from others, and they can learn from us. To that point I will not argue. But I don’t see how top religious leaders having a theological debate will resolve anything, however I do see how it can easily lead followers of each religion to form opinions that would widen the religious rift.

They just want to make the Pope look stupid. That’s all that Muslims mean when they talk about debate. They refuse to understand you, go on and on about their talking points, refuse to directly address difficult questions or criticisms, and then declare themselves the winner of the debate.

These are just Islamic scholars that don’t lead or represent anybody. But nobody wants to refer to Osama Bin Laden as a “top Islamic religious leader.”

On further reflection, maybe they don’t even want a debate. Maybe they want an opportunity to shoot the Pope, since this is such an about-face from spending the past year calling for his death. Maybe they finally realized that when Muslims say they are going to kill somebody, they really hurt their chances of doing that because people believe them and stay away from them.

 

[John_Hiner]

Laudatur Iesus Christus.

Father James Schall, professor of political philosophy at Georgetown University, is the author of “The Regensburg Lecture,” published by St. Augustine’s Press. Fr. Schall suggests that the Pope’s *academic lecture *in Regensburg was itself an opening of theological and philisophical discussion, engaging Islam, modern philosophy, and the modern secular state at the fundamental level. (See, the interview with Fr. Schall on Zenit.)

The speakers highlighted in Mr. Allen’s article seem not to have appreciated this. The death of Sister Leonella Sgorbati, a Consolata missionary, who was shot to death in Mogadishu, Somalia, on or about 18 September 2006, may have been part of the Islamic response which distracted people from the issues actually raised by the Pope.

It might be that the Vatican’s response has been diplomatic since that time, because the Islamic response to the Pope’s theological opening was violent and political.

It is also true that the Pope’s suggestion is that Islam will have to revise its fundamental view of Allah in order to recognize that the “Logos” (Christ Jesus) is God and therefore “will” is not primary to “reason.” This would lead to the conclusion that the Pope and the Byzantine Emperor whom he quoted in Regensburg suggested, namely that unreasonable action is antithetical to the will of God, precisely because it is unreasonable.

Pax Christi nobiscum.

John Hiner

 

[cascherman]

I dunno. After reading the article I saw 2 Islamic scholars who seemed to want one thing, a theological debate with the Pope. But I don’t understand to what end. Do they think they will change his mind? Are they open to have their minds changed? If the answer is “no” to those two questions, then what is wrong with the Vatican simply following a diplomatic course of action?

they would want it publicized and they think they can beat him theologically. If they could do that it would demoralize all of Christianity, not just Catholicism.

 

[MiddleBear]

This article is from the National Catholic Report a dissenters magazine. The author has misrepresented the Pope again.

Basically anything written in the NCR is to be discounted as rhetoric in the spirit of Vatican II.

 

[Caesar]

What exactly do they expect? That Islam and Catholicism could be compatible?

 

[Melvin]

There is nothing to discuss. Islam blasphemes God by denying His Tri-une nature, His incarnation, death and resurrection. And Muslims around the globe persecute God by persecuting His children.

World governments, non-governmental organizations, and individuals are being told ad nauseum that they must respect Islam, show deference to Muslims in their religious practices, and allow the institution of Sharia law. In the United States we’re so stupid as to allow Muslim proselytizers into our prisons (so progressive of us) and provide funding for Islamic practices, such as foot-baths.

Any discussion of the negative aspects of Islam is almost non-existent, under threat of violence by Muslims and persecution (a word specifically chosen over and against prosecution) of those who do hold such discussions for “hate crimes” by backward, incompetent governments too cowardly to face the threat.

The only reason Islam seeks any kind of dialogue with the Church is to attempt to bring the same vile pressure on the Church as the ultimate representative of the Christian world.

I am thankful the Vatican will not pretend to have a “theological dialogue” with Islam. It’s small comfort compared to the stand our forefathers took 1,000 years ago, but at least someone has the courage to utter a still, small “no” to the continuing encroachment on the cultures and lives of non-Muslims. It’s sure not our politicians.

Blessed be Pope Benedict XVI forever!

 

[estesbob]

This article is from the National Catholic Report a dissenters magazine. The author has misrepresented the Pope again.

Basically anything written in the NCR is to be discounted as rhetoric in the spirit of Vatican II.

Arent they the ones who had a nervous breakdown when the new Bishop of Kansas City Mo cleaned house?

 

[Catholic29]

Islam and Christianity, are innexorably two different world views and religions.

One religion (Christianity) views God as being one in three divine persons (the Trinity), and that He came down to Earth in the form of man (Jesus Christ).

While the other religion (Islam) views God as being one in nature, and the person Jesus Christ is believed as being merely a prophet and only a man.

Of course there are many other profound differences, but these are the main ones, and both positions cannot be more mutually exclusive in my view. And around the end of time, the followers of at least one of these belief systems will find themselves out to be wrong.

 

[Nohome]

Honestly, that makes me sad. I think that Islam and Christianity have alot to learn from eachother. Although they may not contain the fullness of truth, one can’t help but admire the discipline devout Muslims inject into daily life.

As my very holy priest said, “Who can help but be moved by the site of hundreds of Muslims bowing in prayer.”

Prayer to the God of Abraham (our God). There is indeed some common ground, just very little.

Nohome

 

[Nohome]

Islam has much to learn from christianity - islam offers NOTHING to christianity imo, except repressiver zealotry that makes hard core fundamentalists and radical evangelicals seem normal

Actually, I’ve found much of the Koran to be inspired. There is much in the Muslim holy book that few christian would refute and vice versa.

The zealotry, hard core fundamentalism and radical evangelisim is not the religeon, it is the people and the people who choose to follow these mad men. We have plenty of examples of the Christian equivalent.

Nohome

 

[estesbob]

Actually, I’ve found much of the Koran to be inspired. There is much in the Muslim holy book that few christian would refute and vice versa.

The zealotry, hard core fundamentalism and radical evangelisim is not the religeon, it is the people and the people who choose to follow these mad men. We have plenty of examples of the Christian equivalent.

Nohome

Can you give us some examples of what you considered inspired in the Koran? And if it is inspired how can it have diametrically opposed views of Jesus and salvation?

Of course if you consiider these books to be nothing more than just feel good self help books like those promoted on the Ophra Winfrey show I guess one could pull out a random verse here and there to try and prove their case. Other than that the Books and the religions are so completely inocompatible it is laughable anyone would clam they were.