Which is (probably incorrect) Dutch for "Cheese-eating Catholic surrender monkey." I speak, of course, of Bishop Martinus Muskens of Breda, who instructed fellow Dutch Catholics to start using the word "Allah" instead of "God" in prayer, so as not to offend Muslims:
Pointing out that "Allah" is a term already used by Christians who speak Arabic, Bishop Muskens said that humans are needlessly divided over such terminology. God, the bishop said, is above such "bickering."The Dutch bishop admitted that his suggestion was not likely to gain widespread acceptance. But he predicted that within a century or two, Dutch Catholics would be addressing prayers to "Allah."
Well, with leaders like this, no wonder! Catholicism is moribund in Holland, a country that was once so fervent in its faith that it exported more missionary priests even than Ireland. Last time I was there, 2002, I took the family to Sunday mass in a village outside of Amsterdam. The small congregation was almost entirely elderly, except for one family with three teenage sons. We introduced ourselves to them, and they were kind enough to invite us for lunch.
Wonderful people, this family, struggling to keep the faith in a country that has largely turned its back on Christianity of any sort, and dealing with a hierarchy and clergy that had effectively apostatized. The father told me that he was one of something like 10 children in an observant Catholic family, but was the only one of his siblings still practicing the faith. The mother told us how she was active in catechesis in her parish, and was having to figure out how to teach the actual Catholic faith to the few young people who came around -- this in defiance of the official diocesan catechetical program. Yet this family was so peaceful, even joyful, in their faith. When we left, I thought them quiet heroes.
But, all is not lost. According to the AP report, an overwhelming number of Dutch citizens think the bishop must be smoking something. And even a spokesman for Moroccan mosques in Amsterdam distanced the mosques from the crackpot cleric's call. Here's hoping Pope Benedict transfers this ridiculous character to serve as auxiliary bishop in Partenia.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
Reader Joseph, you're responding to a post from the indefatigable Diane, who lives to be offended. Your remarks are a model of charity, but please don't feed the troll.
Cleveland: As for those who are defending Muskens, you should consider the fact that whatever deity Muslims call "Allah" is NOT the deity Christians pray to.
Rod: Cleveland, how do you square that opinion with the Catechism? Here's Paragraph 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."
Rod, my statement and the Catechism are not mutually exclusive. Was B XVI wrong during his lecture at Regensburg? He recalled at that lecture that centuries ago it already had been pointed out that reason was not compatible with the belief of [some/many/most?] Muslims that the God of Abraham commands the murder of all men, women and children who have not converted to Islam. My point is that the Catholic Catechism's "God of Abraham"--the God you and I pray to--is different IN PRACTICE, if you will, than the violent "Allah" to which Islamists pray to. The Catechism simply is referring to the fact that, IN REALITY, there is only one God of Abraham and that Islam professes to have the same faith as that held by Abraham and us. Nothing in 841 refers to what the Islamists teach about the commands of the one God, which in practice CAN NOT BE the commands of our God of Abraham. I mean only that the same God can't command at the same time two wholly opposed things. Ergo, two different concepts of "Allah". Viz: "In their religious behavior, however, men also display the limits and errors that disfigure the image of God in them:
Very often, deceived by the Evil One, men have become vain in their reasonings, and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie...." 844.
Perhaps it is the "in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims" wording that is the trouble. Certainly you are aware that we Catholics consider the Jew's concept of the God of Abraham to be not only closer to our faith than the Muslim's concept of Allah (even though they are the same God), but our God as well. See 839.
Rod, I would be the first to say that you and I would have either used different wording in 841, or more wording to explain what is meant by "in the first place". I believe it means in the first place among believers who profess the faith of Abraham but are neither Christian or Jew.
----------------------------------------------------
"And yes, the pope is "the main man" ...but... The bishops as a whole are the Magisterium and they run things."
M_David, there is no Magisterium of the bishops unless it is exercised under the authority of and with the approval the Pope. All the bishops of the world could say, all at once and in the most authoritative way they have to say it, that XYZ is true or that all Catholics must do XYZ on Fridays. If the Pope did not agree and commanded otherwise, what the bishops said or did would be a nullity.
If B XVI said Bishop Muskens is relieved of his position immediately, then there is nothing all the bishops of the world could do about. Rod is correct and you are wrong.
I think, my friend, that you are confusing normal, every day practice in the Church with the seldom used authority of the Pope, or that you are listening to some Catholic heretics and apostates such as Call to Action or Voice of the People types. They would have orgasms of joy if you were correct. But in reality all they can do is gather together in shameful displays of non serviam, such as Cardinal Roger the Dodger's "Religious Education" conferences. Cleveland: As for those who are defending Muskens, you should consider the fact that whatever deity Muslims call "Allah" is NOT the deity Christians pray to.
Rod: Cleveland, how do you square that opinion with the Catechism? Here's Paragraph 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."
Rod, my statement and the Catechism are not mutually exclusive. Was B XVI wrong during his lecture at Regensburg? He recalled at that lecture that centuries ago it already had been pointed out that reason was not compatible with the belief of [many/most?] Muslims that the God of Abraham commands the murder of all men, women and children who have not converted to Islam. My point is that the Catholic Catechism's "God of Abraham"--the God you and I pray to--is different IN PRACTICE, if you will, than the violent "Allah" to which Islamists pray to. The Catechism simply is referring to the fact that, IN REALITY, there is only one God of Abraham and that Islam professes to have the same faith as that held by Abraham. Nothing in 841 refers to what the Islamists teach about the commands of the one God, which in practice CAN NOT BE the commands of our God of Abraham. I mean only that the same God can't command at the same time two wholly opposed things. Ergo, two different concepts of "Allah". Viz: "In their religious behavior, however, men also display the limits and errors that disfigure the image of God in them:
Very often, deceived by the Evil One, men have become vain in their reasonings, and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie...." 844.
Perhaps it is the "in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims" wording that is the trouble. Certainly you are aware that we Catholics consider the Jew's concept of the God of Abraham to be not only closer to our faith than the Muslim's concept of Allah (even though they are the same God), but our God as well. See 839.
Rod, I would be the first to say that you and I would have either used different wording in 841, or more wording to explain what is meant by "in the first place". I believe it means in the first place among believers who profess the faith of Abraham but are neither Christian or Jew.
----------------------------------------------------
"And yes, the pope is "the main man" ...but... The bishops as a whole are the Magisterium and they run things."
M_David, there is no Magisterium of the bishops unless it is exercised under the authority of and with the approval the Pope. All the bishops of the world could say, all at once and in the most authoritative way they have to say it, that XYZ is true or that all Catholics must do XYZ on Fridays. If the Pope did not agree and commanded otherwise, what the bishops said or did would be a nullity.
If B XVI said Bishop Muskens is relieved of his position immediately, then there is nothing all the bishops of the world could do about. Rod is correct and you are wrong.
I think, my friend, that you are confusing normal, every day practice in the Church with the seldom used authority of the Pope, or that you are listening to some Catholic heretics and apostates such as Call to Action or Voice of the People types. They would have orgasms of joy if you were correct. But in reality all they can do is gather together in shameful displays of non serviam, such as Cardinal Roger the Dodger's "Religious Education" conferences. Cleveland: As for those who are defending Muskens, you should consider the fact that whatever deity Muslims call "Allah" is NOT the deity Christians pray to.
Rod: Cleveland, how do you square that opinion with the Catechism? Here's Paragraph 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."
Rod, my statement and the Catechism are not mutually exclusive. Was B XVI wrong during his lecture at Regensburg? He recalled at that lecture that centuries ago it already had been pointed out that reason was not compatible with the belief of [many/most?] Muslims that the God of Abraham commands the murder of all men, women and children who have not converted to Islam. My point is that the Catholic Catechism's "God of Abraham"--the God you and I pray to--is different IN PRACTICE, if you will, than the violent "Allah" to which Islamists pray to. The Catechism simply is referring to the fact that, IN REALITY, there is only one God of Abraham and that Islam professes to have the same faith as that held by Abraham. Nothing in 841 refers to what the Islamists teach about the commands of the one God, which in practice CAN NOT BE the commands of our God of Abraham. I mean only that the same God can't command at the same time two wholly opposed things. Ergo, two different concepts of "Allah". Viz: "In their religious behavior, however, men also display the limits and errors that disfigure the image of God in them:
Very often, deceived by the Evil One, men have become vain in their reasonings, and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie...." 844.
Perhaps it is the "in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims" wording that is the trouble. Certainly you are aware that we Catholics consider the Jew's concept of the God of Abraham to be not only closer to our faith than the Muslim's concept of Allah (even though they are the same God), but our God as well. See 839.
Rod, I would be the first to say that you and I would have either used different wording in 841, or more wording to explain what is meant by "in the first place". I believe it means in the first place among believers who profess the faith of Abraham but are neither Christian or Jew.
----------------------------------------------------
"And yes, the pope is "the main man" ...but... The bishops as a whole are the Magisterium and they run things."
M_David, there is no Magisterium of the bishops unless it is exercised under the authority of and with the approval the Pope. All the bishops of the world could say, all at once and in the most authoritative way they have to say it, that XYZ is true or that all Catholics must do XYZ on Fridays. If the Pope did not agree and commanded otherwise, what the bishops said or did would be a nullity.
If B XVI said Bishop Muskens is relieved of his position immediately, then there is nothing all the bishops of the world could do about. Rod is correct and you are wrong.
I think, my friend, that you are confusing normal, every day practice in the Church with the seldom used authority of the Pope, or that you are listening to some Catholic heretics and apostates such as Call to Action or Voice of the People types. They would have orgasms of joy if you were correct. But in reality all they can do is gather together in shameful displays of non serviam, such as Cardinal Roger the Dodger's "Religious Education" conferences.
I swear I don't know how that happened.
For the record, I just discovered and deleted four, count them, FOUR eccentric and worryingly anxious posts by Diane, in which she protested that she's not a troll, and she's not troubled. Ahem. Onward.
If B XVI said Bishop Muskens is relieved of his position immediately, then there is nothing all the bishops of the world could do about. Rod is correct and you are wrong.
Cleveland, you and Rod are confusing what the pope can do by law, and what he can do in the real world.
Wanna know what happens when the pope acts like you claim? Try the great Schism, when over half the bishops walked away. Try the Reformation, when 1/4 of the flock did. History judges those popes harshly, and rightfully so.
You are living in a fantasy land, where the pope is some sort of dictator. He is not - he lives in the real world, where what he can practically do is limited.
Why do you think he hasn't cleaned up American liberals? Because he knows about half the AmChurch could easily bolt. If the pope had the practical powers you claim, it would be a church of one.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.