Catholic Thought discussion

Today’s tabloid “New York Post" has on page three more than a half page photo of Timothy Cardinal Dolan in full regalia with a stole around his neck, and with his arms around bare shoulders of Radio City Music Hall Rockettes and two more Rockettes all dressed in show girl costumes, the Cardinal kicking up his leg (the sole of his shoe showing) exhibiting more energy than the show girls even, full open smile on his face. The Post in the byline has it that he was at the music hall to bless camels and other animals that will be in the “Christmas Spectacular”:
“The holy man had a blast handing out with the leggy beauties—even testing out his dance moves after joining in on a mini-kick line.”

Need I say more why I am embarrassed and offended? This is the URL to the photo but it’s a more subdued pose than in the printed copy. His feet are on the ground:
http://nypost.com/2015/11/05/the-day-...

Holy Buckets! This is an instance where the cardinal should have put the following motto into practice:

Think before you act!

Galicius wrote: "Today’s tabloid “New York Post" has on page three more than a half page photo of Timothy Cardinal Dolan in full regalia with a stole around his neck, and with his arms around bare shoulders of Radi..."

Totally agree Galicius! This should never gave happened!

Nothing is wrong with joy... and acceptance.

The UN held a discussion this week about the ISIS inspired horror in Orlando, FL. I have not seen or heard of one such special attention devoted at the UN to the horrors perpetrated against Christians in the Middle East and Northern Africa. You remember the beheadings of 21 Egyptian Christian men on a seashore, 11 Christian missionaries crucified and beheaded in Syria, 30 Ethiopian Christians in Libya beheaded and shot, 12 Christians including a 12 year old boy beheaded in Syria. Where is the UN?

Persecution of Christians is allowed and is even politically correct now. Don't want to persecute or offend anyone else though. That would just be wrong.

Catholicism teaches us to treat others as we ourselves would want to be treated. People are entitled to their opinions but this is a safe site to reflect on our shared Catholic faith.

So what's your point? Mine remains the same. Galicius statement was that when a bunch of homosexuals in a gay night club are murdered it moves the UN to act, but when scores of Christians are routinely persecuted and martyred by the same group, Isis, they do absolutely nothing. My point is valid and has nothing to do with a safe space. I have been Catholic for over 17 years and am quite familiar with what the magisterium teaches. That does not change the fact that it is open season on Christians of all stripes, both Catholic and Protestant, and it is considered politically correct to do so. But persecuting and offending anyone else, especially Muslims, is strictly off limits.

It just seems like the conversation is getting a little heated. I stand by my opinion and respect your right to express yours.

I don't see it getting heated. I just feel you are misunderstanding.

In Luke 21:10-19 Christ foretells of wars and persecution. In John 15:20 Christ warns, " Remember the word that I said to you: g‘A servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you."

Galicius pointed out many examples of this persecution, and I was affirming what he said by making my point that as far as the world is concerned it is open season on Christians. From the attacks on Christians and our beliefs and efforts to stand up for Christ, to those Christians especially in the middle east who are being martyred, Christians are being persecuted in a way not seen since the beginning of the first millennium AD.

This is NOT my opinion. It is FACT. All you have to do is open a newspaper or turn on the TV news to see more and more examples of this persecution. Even the UN is not moved to act when Christians are persecuted and martyred, but murder a few homosexuals in a nightclub and they hold a special session to discuss what to do about it.

Even our own president does not acknowledge the persecutions and martyrdoms of Christians. He refuses to use the phrase 'radical Islam" because it might offend Muslims, but he cancels the prayer breakfast, a decade's long-standing tradition, on the National Day of Prayer because Muslim's might offended while not caring that one iota that that the hundreds of millions of Christians in this country might be offended.

There is no safe place for Christians in this world. In the middle east, they are martyred for their faith. In the west, they are marginalized, shouted down and silenced by the atheistic, secular humanists who have changed God's laws and called good evil and evil good. This, again, is NOT my opinion. It is the sad facts of the world we live in.

If ever there was a time to look for the return of Christ, it is now. The world is in the worst shape it has ever been in. The prophecies of Christ in Matthew and Luke regarding the end times are coming to pass with a vengeance, and Christians are the main targets worldwide.

I think I can understand where Doreen is coming from. Let's be careful not to bring politics into our discussions. We are already bombarded with horrid news eveytime we turn on the television, surf the Internet, or open a newspaper.

Politics is a large part of our religious life. Politics is what is doing everything it can to stifle religious life. Political correctness is used daily to shout down and silence religion, especially Christianity. It's impossible to avoid if you live in any western society.

We are reading Hillarie Belloc’s “The Great Heresies” in another Catholic reading group here in goodreads. Belloc devotes a large chapter to Islam or Mohammedanism as he calls it. It’s not possible to do any kind of a précis of the chapter but I will briefly quote Belloc:

“Mohammedanism was a heresy: that is the essential point to grasp before going any further. It began as a heresy, not as a new religion. It was not a pagan contrast with the Church; it was not an alien enemy. It was a perversion of Christian doctrine.”

Belloc concludes his chapter with a warning, written in 1938, that Islam will re-emerge. He reminds us of a forgotten event:

“Less than 100 years before the American War of Independence a Mohammedan army was threatening the overrun and destroy Christian civilization, and would have done so if the Catholic King of Poland had not destroyed that army outside Vienna.”

We can safely discuss Islam on the level of religion alone. Mr. Belloc, I think has earned his due as a Catholic and I, at least take seriously what he wrote about Mohammedanism.

I have never heard of it referred to as Mohommedanism. I am also not aware of anyone else referring to Islam as a perversion of Christianity. What sources does Belloc cite as proof of this?

Jeffrey wrote: "I have never heard of it referred to as Mohommedanism. I am also not aware of anyone else referring to Islam as a perversion of Christianity. What sources does Belloc cite as proof of this?"

Mohammedism is the term that was used up into the 40's or 50's. There's actually some really interesting work done on the origins of Islam and whether and how much Mohammed's exposure to Christianity had to do with it. The theory that I heard from a Christian guide in Jordan is that Mohammed learned Nestorianism from his wife and took it from there.

I feel perfectly safe as a Christian and do not feel persecuted in any way.

I feel uneasy when I see mosques appearing where there were none in lower New York State counties. I feel especially uneasy when what was a Catholic high school twenty-five years ago, three miles from our home, closed down for poor attendance and the diocese sold the buildings to an Islamic group. The only proviso was not to put up a minaret. I ask: “Why does a Catholic diocese sell its property to an Islamic group?” There are two large signs at the entrance to the property however that leave little doubt to what is inside: “Islamic Center . . . etc” with a crescent and star prominently above the signs.

The World Youth Day will start on July 26 in the fields outside the city of Krakow, Poland. Pope Francis will be present. You can see photographs of the preparations in a local newspaper of the facilities here:
http://www.gazetakrakowska.pl/swiatow...

The official website is here: http://worldyouthday.com/krakow-2016

There is concern about the safety of the expected 350,000 young people. Some predictions are for well over a million. Please offer a prayer for peace and safety of all at this event.

Thank you for the links Galicius and I will certainly be praying.

The recent horrific murder of a pastor during mass in France brought two thoughts to mind. The first that an 86 year old priest Rev. Jacques Hamel, in St.-Etienne-du-Rouvray, France was still serving as a pastor in a parish. There is a great shortage of priests in France. Our parish pastor retired from his position at age 70.

The second thought about France was how little coverage there was in the media. The only thing I did not see in the media was an often-repeated story that it was an act of madmen and not an act of a religious war. The French president stated though that the terrorists were “soldiers” of ISIS. Pope Francis yesterday said it was not an act of religious war. The Pope said, as quoted on CNN, "The world is at war because it has lost peace," he said.

"There is a war of interest, there is a war for money, a war for natural resources, a war to dominate people," he continued.

"Some might think it is war of religion. It is not. All religions want peace. Others want war."

That do you think?

Islam is NOT a religion that wants peace. It has been a religion of Jihad against Christians and Jews since it inception in the seventh century. Islam wants nothing else than for the entire world to be Islamic and living under sharia law. If that means killing everyone who refuses to convert to Islam then so be it.

I love the way Pope Francis puts things. He is an inspiration for me.

Not all religions want peace. Galicius, you are projecting Christianity into other religions. Obviously some parts of Islam want peace and some parts do not want peace. But either way Islam is not a religion of peace. Here are three articles that discuss the nature of Islam. First from The Catholic World Report:
http://www.catholicworldreport.com/It...

and this from The Catholic Thing:
https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2016...

And this from Hillsdale College speech by Andrew McCarthy:
https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/islam-...


Here's what you have to remember. As Christians we believe that God loves us. We conceptualize God as a family member, "our Father." Islam holds no such notion and actually is insulted that we perceive God in this manner. Allah is not "Father" but a remote deitific force that has to be appeased. Islam means to submit and humanity is supposed to submit to his whims. Anyway, the more you try to understand the rudiments of Islam and its theology, the more you realize how radically different it is from Christianity. The only thing we have in common is a monotheistic notion of God, and they claim we are not truly monotheistic because of our Trinity. Personally I've come to the conclusion that Islam, besides being a heresy (it denies the divinity of Jesus) is filled with the demonic and is at heart evil.

I agree with you both Jeffrey and Manny one hundred percent. Not I but Pope Francis said: "All religions want peace."

Galicius wrote: "I agree with you both Jeffrey and Manny one hundred percent. Not I but Pope Francis said: "All religions want peace.""

I guess Pope Francis is trying to bring out the better nature of religions, and in this case Islam. But either he's a starry-eyed sentimentalist or he's fudging to bring about peace in the world. But on its face that can't be true. The Aztecs had a horrible religion of conquest and murder; the ancient Roman gods didn't appeal to peace. And neither does Islam. Instead of Pope Francis on Islam, read St. Thomas Aquinas. You can get a summary here, with links to the original sources:
https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2012...

All the reading on Islam I have done and talking to Muslims causes me to agree with Pope Francis and to regard those non-Islamic writers who vilify Islam as having an incorrect understanding of the faith. An outsider could read texts from any society or faith tradition and come away with either a negative or positive view of it. It depends on what one reads and how one interprates them.

Well, Irene, I thought I picked four writers who were not trying to vilify. Yes, there are those who are decidedly anti Muslim, but there are those who are starry-eyed, as I used the term above. But then there is also a reality. The articles I selected acknowledged the various interpretations of Islam.

If Islam were a religion of peace, then why in just about every century since its founding have there been waves of Islamic aggression toward non-Muslims? Why is it that their founder, Mohammed, was a war leader who conquered people and had prisoners beheaded? It's not just the Koran that has commandments of violence, it's also the Hadith, which is their commentary on the Koran, and Sharia, which is their law, and the life of Mohammed, which they are supposed to emulate. Yes, Mohammed had acts of mercy, which they are supposed to emulate, but he had acts of aggression as well. The reason the terrorists behead, which is not necessarily the easiest method of killing, is because they are emulating their prophet.

The only argument I ever hear that denies the vast statements of violence in the religious texts is that it's supposed to be metaphor. True over the centuries there have been Islamic theologians who have tried to instill this metaphoric reading to the texts, but still over the centuries over and over Muslims return to violence and aggression. Here's the problem with the metaphoric interpretation. Rhetorically the sentences are in declarative statements, such as this: "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them" (K 8:12). How is strike off their heads supposed to be metaphor? Or from Koran 5:33, "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement" That's not metaphor. These are general statements of conduct. It's like saying the ten commandments are supposed to be metaphor. Well that can't be. In rhetoric, declarative statements take priority over metaphoric.

It's not just those who wish to vilify Islam that point to things like this. The Muslims--that which we call radicals--all cite specific passages to substantiate their claims. I never see any substantiation by the moderates or by the westerners who try to defend Islam, such as Pres Bush or Pres Obama or Pope Francis. It's quite possible that the radicals are the ones who understand Islam correctly, and that the moderates are like the many Christians who don't know their own faith, under an incorrect assumption.

Until Pope Francis spells out in some sort of detail why he considers Islam a religion of peace, I'm going to stick with my statement that he's either fudging for practical purposes or he's a starry-eyed sentimentalist. I don't see any substantiation. Until then I will go with St. Thomas Aquinas, probably the smartest person to have ever lived, who did a thorough study of Islam, and found it very negative.

Very good post, Manny! I agree with you. Those who believe that Islam is a religion of peace are either deceived or simply don't understand the religion they are trying to defend. I would love to read St. Augustine's writings on Islam.

I have seen people cite similarly violent passages from our own Old testament, the complete slaughter of populations such as at Jericho, the instruction to stone to death those who violate certain laws, permitting parents to sell their own children into slavery or to have them put to death, the image of bashing the heads of the enemy infants against the stones, the disgraceful treatment of women such as Haggar's exile into an unhabitable desert or sending one's concubine to be gang raped and left to die as in Judges and I could go on. Yet for all of these examples that have been offered up, I would never consider Judaism a violent religion. It looks as if we will have to agree to disagree because neither of us is going to be persuaded by the limited arguments possible in these small postings.

Irene wrote: "I have seen people cite similarly violent passages from our own Old testament, the complete slaughter of populations such as at Jericho, the instruction to stone to death those who violate certain ..."

Good points Irene!

There is one thing that I try to do everyday, and that is to pray for the conversion of souls and especially for those souls that would commit violence.

That is a wonderful practice. I pray similar prayers when something in the news calls it to mind, but not daily. I should. thank you for that challenge.

Well, Irene, here's a major difference between Christianity and Islam. Christ is a complete pacifist, so if there are any suggestive violent passages in the New Testament, such as in Revelations, then clearly the context is metaphoric. That's rather obvious but I point that our because in Islam, their prophet was violent, and commanded violence. So when you come across passages as I have quoted, and the prophet himself has done those things, and they are supposed to emulate their prophet, then the context is not metaphoric but literal. The context clarifies the ambiguity.

As to Judaism, well yes, if Jews were quoting those passages and doing those deeds, then they would be a religion of violence. However, Jews don't do that, and those passages have long been modified by the prophets and the oral traditions as compiled in the Talmud and the Mishna. Unlike Christianity and Islam, Judaism has an evolving nature of ethics, even in some views a God who evolves over time. Jews are actually encouraged to argue with God and point out His injustices. Just look at the Book of Job. I'm not going to speak for Judaism. It is more complex than Christianity, at least to me. The passage in the Book of Joshua you cite is a one time order from God. It is not a general conduct of ethics. If you want to take it literally then perhaps God required it to shape history, such as providing a homeland for the Jews. I don't see what stoning as a punishment per a system of justice has anything to do with aggression and violence. Those other matters you list were not commandments but events. There was no commandment from God to gang rape women. I don't know what you're talking about.

As to Islam, I guess if we ignore the recurring cycles of violence, now over 1400 years, the life of their prophet, their declarative commandments of violence, their sharia, their Hadith, then we could say Islam is religion of peace. But then we would be starry-eyed.

Yes, we'll have to disagree.

Susan M, I too pray for the conversions. I especially pray for the conversion from heresies.

Jeffrey wrote: "Very good post, Manny! I agree with you. Those who believe that Islam is a religion of peace are either deceived or simply don't understand the religion they are trying to defend. I would love to r..."

Jeffrey, it was St. Thomas Aquinas, not St. Augustine. Islam hadn't sprung yet when St. A was alive. Though, as I now think of it, St. A was crucial in the fighting off of Arianism and Docetism, which were the prevalent heresies of his day. Today the prevalent heresy is Islam, the denial of Christ's divinity. I would think St A would be as passionate against Islam as he was against those heresies.

Manny wrote: "Susan M, I too pray for the conversions. I especially pray for the conversion from heresies."

Manny, both you and Irene have given some interesting arguments and I have learned a bit from the both of you! You guys have prompted me to learn a little more about Mohammed and the history of Islam.

Irene wrote: "I have seen people cite similarly violent passages from our own Old testament, the complete slaughter of populations such as at Jericho, the instruction to stone to death those who violate certain ..."

The difference between the violence in the Bible and the violence in the Quran is that neither Christians nor Jews commit such violence any more and haven't for 2000 years. OTOH, Muslims daily commit acts of extreme violence against Christians, Jews, homosexuals, and anyone else with whom they disagree.

Manny wrote: "Jeffrey wrote: "Very good post, Manny! I agree with you. Those who believe that Islam is a religion of peace are either deceived or simply don't understand the religion they are trying to defend. I..."

Sorry about that, Manny! I didn't realize I had mistyped the wrong person until you pointed it out. Thanks!

I also don’t want to create the impression that Muslims are evil people. The overwhelming majority are good and decent people. The true God is love, as we Christians conceptualize Him, and that love is written on the human heart, and that goes for all people, Christian and non-Christian One has to forcibly over ride that love on the heart to justify cruel violence. There is much in Islam that nurtures and develops that love that makes most Muslims good and kind people. I work and live around a number of them. However, there is that element as I’ve mentioned within Islam that justifies violence, and causes it to be a recurring problem. Pope Benedict XVI brought up this element in his now famous Regansburg speech, from which the Muslim world threw a hissy fit. So not all Popes look at Islam with the same starry eyes as Pope Francis. We should never assume the Muslims we meet and work around are evil and support the evil actions of the terrorists. When I point out that element in Islam, I have my amateur theologian’s cap on. When I interact with Muslims I do so with my Christian heart.

I don't see any comments regarding the canonization of Mother Teresa. That was current events. Perhaps it was discussed somewhere else in our Group. I posted as a commemoration of her being elevated to sainthood last week on my blog an analysis of a little prose poem Mother Teresa wrote. If anyone wishes to read it, here:
http://ashesfromburntroses.blogspot.c...

Manny wrote: "I don't see any comments regarding the canonization of Mother Teresa. That was current events. Perhaps it was discussed somewhere else in our Group. I posted as a commemoration of her being elevate..."

Thanks for posting this Manny. As always, I enjoy reading your blogs!

Susan Margaret wrote: "Manny wrote: "I don't see any comments regarding the canonization of Mother Teresa. That was current events. Perhaps it was discussed somewhere else in our Group. I posted as a commemoration of her..."

Thank you and you;re welcome.

Galicius wrote: "Manny wrote: "I don't see any comments regarding the canonization of Mother Teresa. That was current events. Perhaps it was discussed somewhere else in our Group. I posted as a commemoration of her..."
Thank you for your kind words. I did not realize that Galicius! Fasciating. Ironic.

Galicius,

I know more than a few people who be highly offended by your referral to the death and funeral of Lady Diana as a "non-event". It may not have been important to you personally, but to millions of Brits and Anglophiles all over the world it was most certainly a major event.

I haven’t heard any head of state speak out against the Christian persecution in the Middle East that is taking place right now until today when the President of Poland addressed UN’s General Assembly on the second day of gathering of world leaders in New York. He made this issue a main point of his message and called it genocide. He said:

“In the Middle East, the incidence of acts of violence targeting members of Christian churches is growing at an alarming pace. Let us not forget either about a plight of the Yazidis’ community, the people murdered and evicted from their native soil. Poland appeals to international community to take decided steps to protect the rights of religious minorities.

Military conflicts in the Middle East take the toll of thousands of innocent lives, infringing on social and economic stability of the region. The militants of the so called ISIS pillage museums, defile Christian and Shia shrines, blowing up the remains of ancient metropolises. . .”

His full address can be accessed here: http://www.voltairenet.org/article188...

This is not Catholic issue, but did anyone notice that Bob Dylan won the Nobel Prize in Literature? It's gotten many praises and many criticisms. Put me squarely on the side of Do Not Agree. Literature and music are separate artistic mediums. If there were a prize for music, I would have said Dylan was worthy. But for literature it's wrong, despite that some consider his lyrics poetry. Yeah, some are good and may rise to poetic, but most do not. There's a distinction between song and poetry, and I posted on my blog why that is so, and why Dylan should not have gotten the prize for Literature. You can read it, if you find it's interesting, here:
http://ashesfromburntroses.blogspot.c...

By the way, I heard a good joke today in reference to a musician winning the Nobel Prize in Literature which I have to share. The Swedish Academy announced early that next year's winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature will be Lin Meng Ning. Who is Lin Meng Ning? He's the guy who writes the fortunes in the Chinese fortune cookies. His classic, "Someday Everything Will Make Perfect Sense" was just too hard to pass by. :)

Manny wrote: "This is not Catholic issue, but did anyone notice that Bob Dylan won the Nobel Prize in Literature? It's gotten many praises and many criticisms. Put me squarely on the side of Do Not Agree. Litera..."

From what I have read, Bob Dylan is not even returning phone calls from the Nobel Prize Committee. Maybe he also feels he does not deserve it. I guess the prize comes with a $900,000.00 check. I think I would return the phone call and take the money and run.

Manny wrote: "This is not Catholic issue, but did anyone notice that Bob Dylan won the Nobel Prize in Literature? It's gotten many praises and many criticisms. Put me squarely on the side of Do Not Agree. Litera..."

Since songs are poetry set to music I would give the Nobel committee a pass, of course making the assumption that they're honoring his lyrical skill more than his musical. For very similar reasons he was Poet Laureate of the United States for a bit.

Joseph wrote: "Manny wrote: "This is not Catholic issue, but did anyone notice that Bob Dylan won the Nobel Prize in Literature? It's gotten many praises and many criticisms. Put me squarely on the side of Do Not..."
I didn't know he was Poet Laureate at one time. I would have to disagree with that too.

Manny wrote: "This is not Catholic issue, but did anyone notice that Bob Dylan won the Nobel Prize in Literature? It's gotten many praises and many criticisms. Put me squarely on the side of Do Not Agree. Litera..."

I responded to a friend’s rejoicing at the award that she could not think of a more deserved Nobel that I like Bob Dylan, have been to his concerts, bought this albums going back to the sixties, and even read his odd-ball autobiography "Chronicles" Vol 1 (half of it name dropping), but it "blew my mind" to hear about the Nobel for Literature. The ambiguity, vagueness of his lyrics do not make for great literature for me. I don’t know of any poetry per se that he published other than the lyrics to his songs.

She argued that Bob Dylan’s lyrics are elegiac poetry but that in reality, the Nobel price for literature has come down to 10 people's liberal interpretation of what is art. Dante would have never gotten a Nobel, for instance: too catholic for them!

We agreed that politics got the upper hand in this decision.

This was a charity event this evening in New York City. The Republican candidate suggested to the Democratic candidate that she go to confession. It didn't work:

https://a.msn.com/r/2/AAjbbuT?m=en-us