What is wrong with kissing the Qu'ran?

[childofmary1143]

So the Jews never worshipped God? They did/do not have the understanding of the Trinity.

I can’t speak for the past, just the present.

 

[Silver_Thread]

Obviously. many people think JP2 committed an objective sin by kissing the Qu’ran. This is what I would like clarified:

1. Which commandment does this sin fall under and why?
2. What do faithful Catholics think of a Catholic who is married to a Muslim? Deep down, do they find that disgusting or scandalous?
   Is it some sort of validation of Islam to be loving and affectionate with someone who promotes that ideology?

Please just be honest, I don’t want to argue, I just want to understand where other Catholics coming from.

If you are truly Catholic, then kissing the Qu’ran is no different than kissing a Sears Catalogue.

 

[MariaG]

I can’t speak for the past, just the present.

So you don’t read/listen to the readings in the OT?!!?

You can see that your unequivocal statement just does not hold water.

Clearly, according to scripture, the Jews did not have an understanding of the Trinitarian nature of God, yet they also had true worship.

So to say you can’t worship God without Jesus, or at least knowing Jesus, is false. The Jews worship the God of Abraham. The Muslims PROFESS to do the same. AS do WE!

The kiss of the Quran, could simply have been an acknowledgement of this. And we are supposed to assume Charitable reasons for a persons actions.

 

[childofmary1143]

So you don’t read/listen to the readings in the OT?!!?

You can see that your unequivocal statement just does not hold water.

Clearly, according to scripture, the Jews did not have an understanding of the Trinitarian nature of God, yet they also had true worship.

So to say you can’t worship God without Jesus, or at least knowing Jesus, is false. The Jews worship the God of Abraham. The Muslims PROFESS to do the same. AS do WE!

The kiss of the Quran, could simply have been an acknowledgement of this. And we are supposed to assume Charitable reasons for a persons actions.

First off I am not judging in ANY way what Pope John Paul II. That is between him and God.

It would be impossible for the Jews prior to Jesus to worship him if they had no knowledge of him. They worshipped God back then because they accepted ALL that God revealed of himself to them.

God is more than just “the God of Abraham”. Abraham is not part of the Trinity. We have to deal in the present not in the past. In the present God has revealed that he is a Trinity. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Inseparable.

On a personal I find it confusing that Protestant denominations aren’t considered church’s and this is from what Ratzinger said a few years back and yet Islam worships the same God. If Protestant denominations can’t have true churches and yet some of them recognize Jesus as God, then how can Islam be said to worship the same God. Isn’t the primary purpose of church’s is to worship God?

 

[peary]

I guess I should add; You are thinking

Quran does not equal Bible so God cannot = Allah.

That is not how it is; God IS Allah; even tho the Quran is different from the bible. The bible is NOT from GOD/ALLAH. But it does not mean the God it talks about is not GOD.

Princess Diana had many books written about her and many she had nothing to do with; many books are written with lies and that does not stop people from believing them; but they are not from her but inspired by her life because she is real.

Who knows what Muhammad was thinking when he came up with this idea but it worked for him.

:whacky:

God is God

 

[stmaria]

MariaG;2956487]**Hindus do in fact contemplate the divine mystery. **What is false about this statement?
Again, you seem to think that commenting on what is true, it is an endorsement of the false. You are quite simply wrong.
In the same way, we can acknowledge that Hindu’s, just as every other man, seek God. We are not getting into what is wrong with their religion, **but what is right **or at least what is right about what they claim to do.

MariaG believe what you want.You are in denial.

Hinduism
**Lord Ganesha **- the Hindu deity in a human form but with the head of an elephant - represents the power of the Supreme Being that removes obstacles and ensures success in human endeavors.
**Lord Brahma **symbolizes the aspect of the Supreme Reality that brings forth the creation Brahma is usually conceived of by Hindus as a bearded, four-faced, four-armed deity.
Lord Shiva, also called Tryambaka Deva (literally, “three-eyed Lord”), is depicted as having three eyes: the sun is His right eye, the moon the left eye and fire the third eye.
**Goddess Durga **is shown in a female form, wearing red clothes. She has eighteen arms, carrying many objects in Her hands. The red color symbolizes action and the red clothes signify that She is always busy destroying evil and protecting mankind from pain and suffering caused by evil forces.
Hindu gods lotussculpture.com/bronze_sculpture_the_gods.htm
“The Hindu gods Shiva, Parvati, Krishna, Vishnu, Lakshmi, and Ganesh serve as a way in which devotees can see, touch and feel this unknowable God, Brahman. They give the layperson a tangible, knowable aspect of the Supreme Being. Each of the Hindu Gods represents one aspect of Brahman. Shiva takes on the destructive aspect of Brahman. Vishnu preserves the working order of the universe. Each Hindu God is one tiny aspect of the Supreme Being.”

Buddhism
Rebirth buddhanet.net/e-learning/dharmadata/fdd47.htm

“Buddhism teaches that when a person dies **they are reborn **and that this process of death and rebirth will continue until Nirvana is attained. This raises the question : “What is the person?” Most religions believe that the core of the person, the real person, is the soul, a non-material and eternal entity that survives in the afterlife. Buddhism on the other hand says that the person is made up of thoughts, feelings and perceptions interacting with the body in a dynamic and constantly changing way. At death this stream of mental energy is re-established in a new body. Thus Buddhism is able to explain the continuity of the individual without recourse to the belief in an “eternal soul”, an idea which contradicts the universal truth of impermanence.”

 

[peary]

On a personal I find it confusing that Protestant denominations aren’t considered church’s and this is from what Ratzinger said a few years back and yet Islam worships the same God. If Protestant denominations can’t have true churches and yet some of them recognize Jesus as God, then how can Islam be said to worship the same God. Isn’t the primary purpose of church’s is to worship God?

Protestant and separated ‘churches’ are “ecclesial communitites” but cannot be looked upon the same way as a parish/church united to the office of Peter.

Muslims worship God in mosques, not churches.

Also, the Muslim relationship to God is based on a master/slave mentality and approach, not father/son. There is a huge difference here.

 

[palmas85]

So you don’t read/listen to the readings in the OT?!!?

You can see that your unequivocal statement just does not hold water.

Clearly, according to scripture, the Jews did not have an understanding of the Trinitarian nature of God, yet they also had true worship.

So to say you can’t worship God without Jesus, or at least knowing Jesus, is false. The Jews worship the God of Abraham. The Muslims PROFESS to do the same. AS do WE!

The kiss of the Quran, could simply have been an acknowledgement of this. And we are supposed to assume Charitable reasons for a persons actions.

Quite correct. The Jews worshipped God as he had been revealed up until that time. Then Christ came. Suddenly, the worship of the Jews was thrown into question. Was it sufficient any longer? Christ Himself said no, that no man comes to the Father except through Christ. Since the Jews knew of Christ and completely rejected Him and HIS message, it seems somehow doubtful that their worship is sufficient in and of itself any longer.

Now Islam on the other hand appeared several hundred years after the death of Christ. The founder of Islam, Mohammed, knew of Christ, indeed many say that he may have been a baptized Christian since so much of Christian theology is mentioned and then debunked in Islam. Yet Mohammed claims that God revealed the truth to him, Mohammed, and that he, is the true and last prophet. Sounds kind of like Mormanism in that respect. Anyway, please remember the Koran is not the work of man, according to Mohammed, rather it is the divine revelation of God. It is Gods exact words. It is Gods truth . The truth of Allah the benevelent and merciful:thumbsup:

And that truth is that not only was Christ **NOT **the son of God, Christ was **NOT **God at all, there is no Trinity and Christ **DID NOT **die on the cross. Pretty neat huh?

So in four areas to begin with, God advised Mohammed that everything Christians believed about Him was wrong. If you accept the validity of Islam how can you say you believe in the Catholic faith or even Christianity for that matter? It isn’t like Mohammed didn’t know these things, he did and his religion, Islam, thoroughly and completely rejects them and their truth. It is one thing to never have knowledge of Christ. It is completely another to know of Him and to deny HIM

No matter how politically correct and non judgemental you choose to be you cannot get away from those very salient facts. There is no wiggle room. Just because the Muslims claim something as their own…

DOESN’T MAKE IT TRUE

And yes, we are to think charitably when we can. That doesn’t mean we are to close our eyes to the truth and pretend it doesn’t exist.

 

[TNT]

Go to a church in Egypt and ask if Allah is God.

The Allah IS the same as our Christian God. The message from the Muslims is all wrong. BUT the God is not. Just because the quran did not send down Jesus does not mean Allah is not God.
Allah (God) is given credit for the Quran even tho he had nothing to do with it. He was trusted in the middle of this “off” message.

God IS God. No matter how you worship him HE never changes.
HE is consistent and the same sustainer and THE ALL KNOWING.

Look, Islam is a primative form of tribal nazism. It uses “ALLAH” as a cloak to prevent people, including Western PC’s, from calling it what it really is.
It is political, and mind controlling nazism…a POLITIACAL ideology, with a religious wrapper
Most of its moral foundations are anathema to anyone who believes in the True God.
Its growth, just like any form of totalitarianism is by conquest and subterfuge.
This so-called ALLAH instructs in mass murder, theft, robbery, and more.
ALLAH is the same GOD a the Caholic one?
100 years ago, such a proposition would be preposterous, and should have been.

To give any credence to this abomination against humanity and the Catholic Church, is a sin against the very nature of the real GOD.

The very foundations and history of this movement requires annilation of the True Church, Jews, Hindus, and all the rest.

Getting them to give up their conversions by conqust & live in harmony with Catholics (christians) has the same chance as getting Traditional Catholics to give up the Sacrament of the Eucharist in the traditional Mass of Pius V…they’d rather DIE.

As the visible head of the world’s catholics, you do not insult the sensibilities of your subjects & create GAFAWS for those who want ammunition that the catholic church is an antichrist all at the same ceremony…in permanent photos no less.
This is horrendous.
As far as I know, he never even mentioned that it might have been a bad idea or that the Muslims would kiss his Douay Rhiems since it is a book about the same God as theirs…because even they don’t believe that.

 

[peary]

Look, Islam is a primative form of tribal nazism. It uses “ALLAH” as a cloak to prevent people, including Western PC’s, from calling it what it really is.
It is political, and mind controlling nazism…a POLITIACAL ideology, with a religious wrapper
Most of its moral foundations are anathema to anyone who believes in the True God.
Its growth, just like any form of totalitarianism is by conquest and subterfuge.
This so-called ALLAH instructs in mass murder, theft, robbery, and more.
ALLAH is the same GOD a the Caholic one?
100 years ago, such a proposition would be preposterous, and should have been.

To give any credence to this abomination against humanity and the Catholic Church, is a sin against the very nature of the real GOD.

The very foundations and history of this movement requires annilation of the True Church, Jews, Hindus, and all the rest.

Getting them to give up their conversions by conqust & live in harmony with Catholics (christians) has the same chance as getting Traditional Catholics to give up the Sacrament of the Eucharist in the traditional Mass of Pius V…they’d rather DIE.

As the visible head of the world’s catholics, you do not insult the sensibilities of your subjects & create GAFAWS for those who want ammunition that the catholic church is an antichrist all at the same ceremony…in permanent photos no less.
This is horrendous.
As far as I know, he never even mentioned that it might have been a bad idea or that the Muslims would kiss his Douay Rhiems since it is a book about the same God as theirs…because even they don’t believe that.

Wow! How did you get away with what you wrote in here? The moderator let you through? Calling Robert Bay…calling Robert Bay…

 

[Silver_Thread]

Along these lines, and this line of reasoning that kissing something means you are worshipping something, Protestants must be right! Catholics are idol worshippers, worshipping everything from our spouses to the crucifix.

Twisted logic at best. Kissing something can have be a sign or respect. The Pope was placed in a precarious position if he did not expect that to happen. Personally, i think if you are truly Catholic, kissing the Qu’ran is no different than kissing the Sears Catalogue.

 

[Daisiegirl]

that’s pretty funny! kissing the Sears catalogue would make one just a little nutsy, but kissing the Koran is an act of apostasy, regardless of one’s motive or ignorance… i like TNT’s flipside on the picture… no faithful Muslim would kiss the Douay Rheims, they would prefer a martyr’s death… based on the evidence, Benedict XVI would prefer to live another day…

 

[latinmass]

that’s pretty funny! kissing the Sears catalogue would make one just a little nutsy, but kissing the Koran is an act of apostasy, regardless of one’s motive or ignorance… i like TNT’s flipside on the picture… no faithful Muslim would kiss the Douay Rheims, they would prefer a martyr’s death… based on the evidence, Benedict XVI would prefer to live another day…

It’s nice to see some sense out there. Thank you.

 

[bear06]

that’s pretty funny! kissing the Sears catalogue would make one just a little nutsy, but kissing the Koran is an act of apostasy, regardless of one’s motive or ignorance… i like TNT’s flipside on the picture… no faithful Muslim would kiss the Douay Rheims, they would prefer a martyr’s death… based on the evidence, Benedict XVI would prefer to live another day…

Honestly, does anyone actually know what the term apostasy means? I’ve never seen a word more misused on these forums. Apostasy is the total rejection of the Christian Faith It is voluntary, not accidental. Kissing the Koran is not necessarily an act of apostasy. Can it be an act that an apostate might make? Sure but the act in an of it self is not apostasy.

2089 Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it. “Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.”

 

[cam100]

Honestly, does anyone actually know what the term apostasy means? I’ve never seen a word more misused on these forums. Apostasy is the total rejection of the Christian Faith It is voluntary, not accidental. Kissing the Koran is not necessarily an act of apostasy. Can it be an act that an apostate might make? Sure but the act in an of it self is not apostasy.

Ahhhh… the voice of reason! …and the key to understanding the situation.

 

[ThereCanBeOnly1]

Honestly, does anyone actually know what the term apostasy means? I’ve never seen a word more misused on these forums. Apostasy is the total rejection of the Christian Faith It is voluntary, not accidental. Kissing the Koran is not necessarily an act of apostasy. Can it be an act that an apostate might make? Sure but the act in an of it self is not apostasy.(This is actually not necessarily true according to the Saint and Doctor the Great St. Thomas Aquinas)

Actually St Thomas Aquinas in
Summa Theologica:
Secunda Secundæ Partis Q12:A1

Reply to Objection 2. It belongs to faith not only that the heart should believe, but also that external words and deeds should bear witness to the inward faith, for confession is an act of faith. On this way too, certain external words or deeds pertain to unbelief, in so far as they are signs of unbelief, even as a sign of health is said itself to be healthy. Now although the authority quoted may be understood as referring to every kind of apostate, yet it applies most truly to an apostate from the faith. For since faith is the first foundation of things to be hoped for, and since, without faith it is “impossible to please God”; when once faith is removed, man retains nothing that may be useful for the obtaining of eternal salvation, for which reason it is written (Proverbs 6:12): “A man that is an apostate, an unprofitable man”: because faith is the life of the soul, according to Romans 1:17: “The just man liveth by faith.” Therefore, just as when the life of the body is taken away, man’s every member and part loses its due disposition, so when the life of justice, which is by faith, is done away, disorder appears in all his members. First, in his mouth, whereby chiefly his mind stands revealed; secondly, in his eyes; thirdly, in the instrument of movement; fourthly, in his will, which tends to evil. The result is that “he sows discord,” endeavoring to sever others from the faith even as he severed himself.newadvent.org/summa/3012.htm

 

[TNT]

Honestly, does anyone actually know what the term apostasy means? I’ve never seen a word more misused on these forums. Apostasy is the total rejection of the Christian Faith It is voluntary, not accidental. Kissing the Koran is not necessarily an act of apostasy. Can it be an act that an apostate might make? Sure but the act in an of it self is not apostasy.

Well ! Just don’t let me ever catch you doin it sister.
You ain’t goin to …are ya?http://www.websmileys.com/sm/crazy/265.gif

 

[Creary]

I came across this article today written by a Mr. Charles Colson. It seems to fit with some of the discussion on this thread; especially the following two paragraphs. Link to full article here.

"As for gifts—many Muslims will be eager to give a copy of the Koran to Christian neighbors, but they will refuse to accept a copy of the Bible in return. “Muslims are always on the alert for opportunities for mission,” Sookdeo says, “but they guard themselves against anything that might serve to deflect them from the way of Islam, such as the scriptures of another faith.”

“In their efforts to reach out to Muslims, Christians must beware of taking part in one-sided events that benefit Islam at the expense of Christianity. For instance, a Christian pastor may invite a local imam to speak from the pulpit as part of a cultural exchange. But all too often, Sookhdeo says, “the pattern is that the imam preaches in the church and the minister merely prays in the mosque.” Muslims view this as a victory. As with the attempted exchange of scriptures, Sookhdeo writes, “Muslims will use every opportunity to promote their faith and to prevent the similar promotion of Christianity.” Christians end up doing all the learning while Muslims do all the teaching.”

From that perspective, any respect shown to a Muslim book by a Christian, especially the Pope, is going to be misconstrued as a victory for the Muslim faith.

That would be one thing wrong with kissing the Qu’ran.

Respectfully,
Brian

 

[Daisiegirl]

To Brian ~ how right you are!

 

[bear06]

Well ! Just don’t let me ever catch you doin it sister.
You ain’t goin to …are ya?http://www.websmileys.com/sm/crazy/265.gif

Well, I’ve yet to be called an apostate so maybe I’ll give it a go even though it would wrongly be applied again. <------- That was a joke. T, don’t you ever wonder why people don’t get along the way we do?:hug1:

TBCO1, you are partially quoting. Let’s look at the whole shebang. You skipped a few parts:

I

answer that, Apostasy denotes a backsliding from God. This may happen in various ways according to the different kinds of union between man and God. For, in the first place, man is united to God by faith; secondly, by having his will duly submissive in obeying His commandments; thirdly, by certain special things pertaining to supererogation such as the religious life, the clerical state, or Holy Orders. Now if that which follows be removed, that which precedes, remains, but the converse does not hold. Accordingly a man may apostatize from God, by withdrawing from the religious life to which he was bound by profession, or from the Holy Order which he had received: and this is called “apostasy from religious life” or “Orders.” *A man may also apostatize from God, by rebelling in his mind against the Divine commandments: and though man may apostatize in both the above ways, he may still remain united to God by faith. *

But if he give up the faith, then he seems to turn away from God altogether: and consequently, apostasy simply and absolutely is that whereby a man withdraws from the faith, and is called “apostasy of perfidy.” On this way apostasy, simply so called, pertains to unbelief.

Reply to Objection 1. This objection refers to the second kind of apostasy, which denotes an act of the will in rebellion against God’s commandments, an act that is to be found in every mortal sin.

Also, you failed to quote the objection that Aquinas was responding to:

Objection 2. Further, unbelief is an act of the understanding: whereas apostasy seems rather to consist in some outward deed or utterance, or even in some inward act of the will, for it is written (Proverbs 6:12-14): “A man that is an apostate, an unprofitable man walketh with a perverse mouth. He winketh with the eyes, presseth with the foot, speaketh with the finger. With a wicked heart he deviseth evil, and at all times he soweth discord.” Moreover if anyone were to have himself circumcised, or to worship at the tomb of Mahomet, he would be deemed an apostate. Therefore apostasy does not pertain to unbelief.

Again, kissing the Koran in an of itself doesn’t equal an act of apostasy. If anyone here thinks that Aquinas’ entry can be used against the Holy Father, I would say it quite ridiculous. And once again, I’m one who wished he hadn’t done it.