What is wrong with kissing the Qu'ran?

[jedi]

It’s more than fine to be loving and affectionate to muslims.

But to show affection for their holy book? That definitely seems like validation and acceptance of Islam. It’s like the pope said “I love the teachings of Islam”.

hi! i saw that picture long time ago… the 1st impression of cos no doubt i was so shock, so surprised. and i ask my self how about the iman or any muslime leader kiss the catholic bible in public??? if the iman did kiss the bible well tomorrow the iman is shoot in the head by sniper…
after some time well i reflect maybe JP2 have his own idea. maybe he’s the man of peace. maybe he think the koran is violent, by his kiss the violent will be less and everybody is peaceful.

i don’t know only JP2 know his action.

Benedicite Deus

 

[MariaG]

Unless I am mistaken, the God of Abraham is also the God that we as Catholics worship in the Holy Trinity correct? I mean He did not change miraculously with the birth of Christ as man. No, Christ and the Holy Spirit are part and parcel of the Godhead. So, since they deny the existence of the Holy Trinity, they effectively deny the existence of the one true God. Ergo, their God, whoever he is, cannot be the same God that we worship no matter how politically correct the Church tried to make it sound.

By this logic, the Israelites did not worship the One True God either, although they too profess to worship the God of Abraham.

I might be persuaded that their religion is some partially developed faith that one day might blossom into Christianity if they did not know of Christ. However Islam not only knows of Christ and the Holy Spirit, having been founded long after Christ died. But they explicitly reject any idea that Christ is God. Mohammed for his own personal reasons cut Christ and the Holy Spirit out of the equation. The entire faith is founded on a lie so why should any heed be paid to the book they use to worship with?

Again, as I said, as the Bible says, as the Catechism says, we are supposed to put the kindest “spin” on a person’s actions. You are assuming that JPII was paying homage to the book they worship with.

I assume He was paying homage to the God to whom they profess to worship, the God of Abraham. The God whom we worship. That we understand Him to be a Trinitarian God, one God in three persons, does not mean He ceased being the God of Abraham upon this revelation.

So obviously, kissing one shows respect and reverence to something that deserves neither

The God of Abraham is not deserving of your respect and reverence?

 

[MariaG]

Everyone here already knows that the Koran denies that Jesus is God, and denies the doctrine of the Trinity.

Abraham didn’t know about Jesus. Are you saying that Abraham worshipped a different God than you and I do? No, he just didn’t know all of the qualities and attributes of God. Same with the Muslims.

I agree.

However,

EVEN IF, it ends up that because of the untruth of the Muslim religion, they do not worship the God of Abraham, we can ascribe JPII motives as honoring the God of Abraham, Our God because of the profession of Islam which claims to worship the God of Abraham.

 

[MariaG]

Oh course I am Catholic, a TRADITIONAL Catholic. I believe in what has always been taught. Please note that the quote from the Catechism has a footnote # 330 that refers to two Vatcian II documents *Lumen Gentium and Nostra Aetate. *

Why doesn’t if have a footnote from a pre-Vatican II council or encyclical? Could it be that this is a NEW interpretation. Read the following from Pope Leo. He states that the creator of heaven and earth is the God of the Trinity NOT the Muslim God.

Pope St. Leo IX,* Congratulamur vehementer*, April 13, 1053:
“For I firmly believe that the Holy Trinity, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, is one omnipotent God, and in the Trinity the whole Godhead is co-essential and consubstantial, co-eternal and co-omnipotent, and of one will, power, majesty; **the creator of all creation, from whom all things, through whom all things, in whom all things which are in heaven or on earth, visible or invisible. **Likewise I believe that each person in the Holy Trinity is the one true God, complete and perfect.”

Where does Pope Leo say, in what you quoted that the creator of heaven and earth is not the God of Abraham, the God whom Muslims profess to worship?

Again from the Catechism.
841 The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day**."330**

Once again I believe the infallible words of Christ that He will be mankind’s judge on the last day. Muslims deny his divinity. They deny the Trinity, the creator of heaven and earth.
So is the Catechism wrong? It appears to be.I cannot reconcile the Catechism with the teaching of Pope Leo IX or the words of Crhist.
Luke 21:27 “and they will see the Son of Man coming upon a cloud with great power and majesty”

Matthew 24:27 “For as the lightning comes forth from the east and shines even to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man”

Matthew 24:44 “Therefore you also must be ready, because at an hour that you do not expect, the Son of Man will come

First epistle of John 4:2-3 “every spirit that acknowledges Jesus Christ come in the flesh belongs to God, while every spirit that fails to acknowledge him does not belong to God. Such is the spirit of the antichrist

Again, could you please show me where in the words you posted Pope Leo says that we don’t worship the God of Abraham? Or where Muslims say they don’t worship the God of Abraham? Or anything that is talking about the Muslims at all? And how the Current Catechism contradicts Pope Leo’s words about the Trinity?

Respectfully,
Maria

 

[MariaG]

THis is NOT true…Islam is 6 centuries younger than Christianity. THey outright reject the deity of Christ in the Koran…They are FULLY informed of the CHristian GOd.

But where does it deny the God of Abraham?

That is the point here.

The Israelites did not/do not recognize or understand that the One true God, The God of Abraham, is One God in Three persons, but that in no way says they do not worship the One true God. They just do not understand the full Nature of that One God.

No one is claiming that the Quran is correct, but MY point is that we need to give the best possible motive.

Muslims PROFESS to worship the God of Abraham. We worship the God of Abraham. The Kiss to the Quran, could simply be an acknowledgement that we both PROFESS to worship the God of Abraham.

 

[MariaG]

Is the Most Holy Trinity = Allah?

JP2 :Mai Santo!

You ask the wrong question.

The most Holy Trinity = The God of Abraham?

The God of Abraham = The professed God of Islam?

 

[peary]

By this logic, the Israelites did not worship the One True God either, although they too profess to worship the God of Abraham.

Again, as I said, as the Bible says, as the Catechism says, we are supposed to put the kindest “spin” on a person’s actions. You are assuming that JPII was paying homage to the book they worship with.

I assume He was paying homage to the God to whom they profess to worship, the God of Abraham. The God whom we worship. That we understand Him to be a Trinitarian God, one God in three persons, does not mean He ceased being the God of Abraham upon this revelation.

The God of Abraham is not deserving of your respect and reverence?

That isn’t the point. The point was the pope sent the wrong message to the islamic world. By ‘kissing’ the Koran, he was admitting that the Koran is God’s holy book and that Mohammed is his prophet. That is how the radical islamists took it to mean. This goes far beyond the God of Abraham not deserving respect and reverence. The Koran rejects Christ as God, rejects the Trinity, rejects that Christ died on the Cross, and rejects that Christ died, period. By kissing the Koran (if he did), he was, again, substantiating the truth of the contents within the book to the islamic world.

It was not a smart move.

 

[MariaG]

You have got to be kidding? are you and JKirk for real?

Ridiculous. You are using a text promulgated and corrected by John Paul II to prove his actions.

Pure and utter deception.

Summa Theologica
SS Q12 A1

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.

The difference is that I am doing my Christian duty and ascribing the best possible motives to the actions of JPII and you are ascribing the worst.

I also do not think the Church has gone apostate since Vatican II, which apparently, you do?

Respectfully,
Maria

 

[TNT]

Another penetrating n profound question:
Have any of the posters herein actually KISSED the Qu’ran or the Koran for that matter?

Tell you what, Hank, if you’ve ever done it you know you never wanna kiss nothin else…man, woman, beast, baby or buns…

From what I saw, JPII from that day on had a new glow about him.

Try it won’t ya?

 

[MariaG]

That isn’t the point. The point was the pope sent the wrong message to the islamic world. By ‘kissing’ the Koran, he was admitting that the Koran is God’s holy book and that Mohammed is his prophet. That is how the radical islamists took it to mean. This goes far beyond the God of Abraham not deserving respect and reverence. The Koran rejects Christ as God, rejects the Trinity, rejects that Christ died on the Cross, and rejects that Christ died, period. By kissing the Koran (if he did), he was, again, substantiating the truth of the contents within the book to the islamic world.

It was not a smart move.

Respectfully, that is the point.

I am not commenting on the message that got sent. I am commenting on the message that I believe JPII intended to send. I happen to agree with you that it was not a smart move. But neither was it akin to idolatry.

It was well intentioned actions, that sent a message JPII did not intend.

And that is exactly my point.

God Bless,
Maria

 

[MariaG]

I for one objected to the Pope kissing the Koran (that is still debatable. I heard it was a bible from the Assyrian Orthodox Church that was kissed). It sent the wrong message to Muslims, especially to the elements of radical Islam. The symbolic act of honor actually said to them that the pope recognizes the Koran as the only holy and authentic book of God and that Mohammed is His Prophet. That is how it was explained to me. Many Muslims throughout the world were angry that the pope did not convert to Islam as that was the affect of his kissing the book. The Koran itself denies that Christ died, or that He died on the Cross. Why would the pope kiss a book which denies this truth of our Faith? It made no sense to me. If the story is true, the pope should have known better and should have been able to foresee the effect this was going to have.

Why should he have been able to foresee this effect?

Your sister in Christ,
Maria

 

[MariaG]

I for one objected to the Pope kissing the Koran (that is still debatable. I heard it was a bible from the Assyrian Orthodox Church that was kissed). It sent the wrong message to Muslims, especially to the elements of radical Islam. The symbolic act of honor actually said to them that the pope recognizes the Koran as the only holy and authentic book of God and that Mohammed is His Prophet. That is how it was explained to me. Many Muslims throughout the world were angry that the pope did not convert to Islam as that was the affect of his kissing the book. The Koran itself denies that Christ died, or that He died on the Cross. Why would the pope kiss a book which denies this truth of our Faith? It made no sense to me. If the story is true, the pope should have known better and should have been able to foresee the effect this was going to have.

 

[TNT]

Why should he have been able to foresee this effect?

Your sister in Christ,
Maria

Cause Pius XI TOLD him and every catholic so.

In addition, even you would see it if you were considering such an act.
Makes ya shiver just thinkin about it, don’t it?

 

[MariaG]

…

BUT he was certainly ill advised, showed horrendous judgement and did irreparable damage to the faith in the eyes of both the Muslims and the Jews as well as most Christians, Catholic and otherwise.

I agree that it was ill advised and showed lack of forethought. I do not feel it did any irreparable damage to the faith at all.

But I prefer to believe JPII’s actions were intended to be seen as something quite different. I just thank God that I get judged by my motives in my heart and not by the result.

 

[MariaG]

…

If you think John Paul II ought not have kissed that Koran, fine. That’s your opinion; you’re entitled to it. But to say that John Paul II sinned in doing so is another matter entirely. It isn’t your or my place to examine the conscience of another person. That undeniable point aside, John Paul II went to Confession regularly. If kissing the Koran were a sin, which I doubt, it’s certainly been forgiven by God.
…

– Mark L. Chance.

Exactly!

 

[Daisiegirl]

If you’ve read the Koran, you would know how blasphemous it is to God and the Church… i was little ole homemaker, who had little children at the time, who took the initiative to find the blasphemy in it. What excuse would a man of the cloth have, not to do the same?

al-Baqarah 2:136.36, Al-Imran 3:59.5, an-Nisa’ 4:157.10, an-Nisa’ 4:171.22, an-Nisa’ 4:46.6, al-Baqarah 2:135.5, al-Baqarah 2:113.3,at-Taubah 9:30.3, Maryam 19:35, al-Ma’idah 5:51, al-Ma’idah 5:17,al-Ma’idah 5:78, al-Ma’idah 5:72, al-Ma’idah 5:73

Do not kiss that book OR the unedited, unabridged Talmud… they are blaspehmous and to kiss it is sinning against the Holy Ghost ~ a sin which is not forgiven…

 

[peary]

Respectfully, that is the point.

I am not commenting on the message that got sent. I am commenting on the message that I believe JPII intended to send. I happen to agree with you that it was not a smart move. But neither was it akin to idolatry.

It was well intentioned actions, that sent a message JPII did not intend.

And that is exactly my point.

God Bless,
Maria

With John Paul II being a such learned man - and Benedict XVI the same - I wonder sometimes about their lack of common sense. You would think an advisor to the pope would have pointed out the ramifications of this; they do it for everything else.

 

[MariaG]

With John Paul II being a such learned man - and Benedict XVI the same - I wonder sometimes about their lack of common sense. You would think an advisor to the pope would have pointed out the ramifications of this; they do it for everything else.

Sometimes the smartest people are completely lacking in common sense! I’ll bet you though, it was just a spontaneous action on the part of JPII. If he had thought about it, I would like to think he would have reconsidered and thought of all the possible ramifications, or at least his advisors would have. I hope

 

[MariaG]

Cause Pius XI TOLD him and every catholic so.

In addition, even you would see it if you were considering such an act.
Makes ya shiver just thinkin about it, don’t it?

Could you be more specific as to what words “TOLD” him and every Catholic so?

 

[peary]

Could you be more specific as to what words “TOLD” him and every Catholic so?

What does Pius XI have to do with anything?? LOL