|
Post by Pacelli on Jan 21, 2024 10:57:00 GMT -5
It's very rare I disagree...but The muslim god might as well be jupiter..and many pagans have creator gods. It seems to me that unless its the Trinity its not God at all...there are no " diverse" forms That's not how Catholic theology treats this. The difference with Pagans, is that the Muslims only have one God, and they believe that the one God is the God who made Adam and sent the prophets. That's clearly not Pagan. I would urge you to read the sources I posted. That is why they are labeled as a heresy The denial of the Trinity is a heresy, it's not a denial of the one God who created us. Anyway, one more point, this matter is mostly academic anyway. If someone is outside the Church, for almost all practical purposes it makes little difference what label that may be attached to them. Their salvation is in serious jeopardy, as there is no salvation outside the Church. We need to pray for all outside the Church, of every type. In reference to the Pope's letter to King Anazir, if you remain unconvinced that the Muslims do believe in the one God who created the world, as the Pope wrote, and their belief that this same God created Adam, sent Moses and the Prophets, I hope you would agree that your view is not the common view among Catholic theologians and what the Pope said is reflective of the view as the Church has treated this group, that it is a heretical sect that believes in God, but denies revealed truths. The threads purpose was to deal with the false charge against the Pope. I can provide many more sources as well all that demonstrate that the Church treated the Muslims as a heretical sect, not Pagans, if you wish in a separate thread. I would also ask what sources you are relying on to support the idea that they are Pagan.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Jan 21, 2024 11:05:25 GMT -5
That's not how Catholic theology treats this. The difference with Pagans, is that the Muslims only have one God, and they believe that the one God is the God who made Adam and sent the prophets. That's clearly not Pagan. I would urge you to read the sources I posted. That is why they are labeled as a heresy The denial of the Trinity is a heresy, it's not a denial of the one God who created us. So would modern-day persons who say that they are Jews but are not who follow the Talmud and believe that Adam was a hermaphrodite [ 1, 2, 3, 4] and that because god created him/her in his/her image and likeness that god is a hermaphrodite [ 1] or both he and she without body [ 1, 2] also be a heresy, or total apostasy? I should add, that I don't think it's a coincidence that the last three Vatican II nopes have been referring to God in both feminine and masculine terms. It's a good question, and I would have to think on it, as to how these people should be labeled. It's certainly against Divine revelation, so at a minimum, it's heresy, as the book of Genesis states unequivocally that Adam was a man, and it was from his body that the first woman was created.
|
|
John Lewis
Full Member
Reviewing the Knowledge
Posts: 373
|
Post by John Lewis on Jan 21, 2024 14:41:42 GMT -5
So would modern-day persons who say that they are Jews but are not who follow the Talmud and believe that Adam was a hermaphrodite [ 1, 2, 3, 4] and that because god created him/her in his/her image and likeness that god is a hermaphrodite [ 1] or both he and she without body [ 1, 2] also be a heresy, or total apostasy? I should add, that I don't think it's a coincidence that the last three Vatican II nopes have been referring to God in both feminine and masculine terms. It's a good question, and I would have to think on it, as to how these people should be labeled. It's certainly against Divine revelation, so at a minimum, it's heresy, as the book of Genesis states unequivocally that Adam was a man, and it was from his body that the first woman was created. I should probably also point out that I don't think its a co-incidence that Bergoglio co-authored a book with a Rabbi and that the World Congress of Jews has established an office in the Vatican.
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Jan 21, 2024 15:33:32 GMT -5
I dont think the Pope was being heretical...but it did savor of liberalism
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Jan 21, 2024 15:37:23 GMT -5
And the question is still there Does the Church and Islam worship the " same" God? And there is no other answer I can find but no...not at all. Despite the nuances of the sources. Islams God is not Triune...not Merciful..can lie if needed..obsessed with degenerate sexual practices....and Im sure I can find more issues with" Allah"
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Jan 22, 2024 6:46:52 GMT -5
And the question is still there Does the Church and Islam worship the " same" God? And there is no other answer I can find but no...not at all. Despite the nuances of the sources. Islams God is not Triune...not Merciful..can lie if needed..obsessed with degenerate sexual practices....and Im sure I can find more issues with" Allah" I understand your point, but the nuances are important. The issue here is that there are not two Gods existed in the Old Covenant who created the world, or two Gods that created Adam, sent the prophets, etc. These people are specifically professing that this is their God who did these things and they are worshipping him. Obviously, this does not mean that their teaching about him are correct and it may be perverse, but they are still naming the God they worship as the same God who revealed Himself in the Old Covenant, which is the same God we adore. They are a sect that received teaching through a man claiming to be a prophet. This false teaching still does not change who the object of their worship is through their public profession which is the one God who created the world, and revealed Himself in the Old Covenant. The Pope, Gregory VII, never said that they are worshiping God correctly or that their understanding of God is correct. If you ever read Luther's teaching, many things based on his perverse teachings on the Bible would make God unrecognizable to us, but the label of heresy has always remained on the Lutherans, and the Church has never accused them of following a false god. Look up Luther's many ideas on these matters, that he attributed to God, which I cannot say on our G rated forum, and you may find many similarities with the other sect under discussion. Despite this, the Church has never considered him or his sect anything more than heretics. Heresy is no small matter, and that is why it is dealt with so strongly by the Church. To say these people are professing heresy, is not exonerating them in some way. It's being accurate as to their status.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Jan 22, 2024 6:49:28 GMT -5
I dont think the Pope was being heretical...but it did savor of liberalism Or, he was trying not to offend, perhaps with the hope of building trust that may lead to the King's conversion, and going as far as he could in that regard without compromising the Faith.
|
|
|
Post by Católico on Jan 22, 2024 17:29:42 GMT -5
Pacelli, I've learned very much from many of your posts, from how you think and analyze, how you try to be charitable, and be a goid example, and from this site's terrific resources. But we disagree on this and on a couple of other important points.
The only true God is the one whose only Son came down, and sacrificed Himself, to obtain our redemption. The Creed clearly tells us this. Therefore, we don't need to be trained theologians to recognize who is and who is not the true God.
The Muslims explicitly deny this fact. They worship a concept of God (and a false one at that), not the true God.
The fact that they declare that they worship the God of Abraham, Moses, etc. is not proof that they do. It's just an allegation. It's a fantasy.
When the Jews who wanted to kill Jesus, not recognizing Him as the Messiah, they alleged they were the children of Abraham. But Our Lord immediately corrected them, responding that if they were the children of Abraham, they would not be trying to kill Him.
If the Muslims worshiped the true God, they would worship the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. But they refuse.
John said in an epistle that he who denies the Son, is of the anti-Christ. Therefore, post Christian Jews and Muslims are of the anti Christ. Does the anti-Christ, or his agents, worship the true God? Of course not. The anti Christ is of Satan.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Jan 23, 2024 6:11:55 GMT -5
Pacelli, I've learned very much from many of your posts, from how you think and analyze, how you try to be charitable, and be a goid example, and from this site's terrific resources. But we disagree on this and on a couple of other important points. The only true God is the one whose only Son came down, and sacrificed Himself, to obtain our redemption. The Creed clearly tells us this. Therefore, we don't need to be trained theologians to recognize who is and who is not the true God. The Muslims explicitly deny this fact. They worship a concept of God (and a false one at that), not the true God. The fact that they declare that they worship the God of Abraham, Moses, etc. is not proof that they do. It's just an allegation. It's a fantasy. When the Jews who wanted to kill Jesus, not recognizing Him as the Messiah, they alleged they were the children of Abraham. But Our Lord immediately corrected them, responding that if they were the children of Abraham, they would not be trying to kill Him. If the Muslims worshiped the true God, they would worship the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. But they refuse. John said in an epistle that he who denies the Son, is of the anti-Christ. Therefore, post Christian Jews and Muslims are of the anti Christ. Does the anti-Christ, or his agents, worship the true God? Of course not. The anti Christ is of Satan. Thank you for your post. Why then can't you make these same arguments about the many heretics who deny truths on the Trinity or truths as to whether our Lord was God? Do heretics believe a false God? The Church has never said that. They deny truths of Divine Revelation, which may include truths about God Himself.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Jan 23, 2024 6:43:25 GMT -5
One more point on this: why wouldn't we as simple laymen trust the opinion of St. Aphonsus, among so many others on this matter, who didn't just speak off the cuff on heresy, but actually studied the heresies that existed in the Church since the beginning, naming them one by one, and wrote detailed explanations of them so Catholics could understand? St. Alphonsus isn't infallible but he was an expert on this matter, as he wrote on this in a very deliberate and detailed manner, an entire two volume set, just on heresies. He specifically named the Islam sect as a heresy, not as believers in a false god. I have provided a Catholic source for my assertion, a Doctor of the Church, a master theologian that none of us could even come close to, and in this case, one who specifically had a masterful knowledge in the matter of heretical sects and even wrote a two volume set on it. I gave the source for St. Aplhonsus above, and I'll provide it again below. There are others, but I haven't seen anyone yet write taking on St. Alphonsus' explanation of it yet. Where do you think I learned how to treat the Muslim sect? He specifically labeled it as a heresy and that's how he treated it in his book. It was from him, and I have no problem being challenged, so I now refer you to my teacher on this, St. Alphonus. Is he right or is he wrong on this and why? St. Alphonsus, History or Heresies, 2 volume set, linked HERE
|
|
|
Post by patricius on Jan 23, 2024 11:51:59 GMT -5
The reason I did not believe the translated quote to be correct, was in hindsight due to my lack of knowledge of church teaching on the subject.
My intent is to always believe what the Church teaches, even when I do not understand, but this time I assumed the error was due to an intentional mis-translation by the novus ordo, who were using the Pope's letter as a crutch for their lumen gentium ecumenism heresy.
To now read it was labelled as a heresy by St. Alphonsus and St. John Damascene as per that chapter by Belloc that you kindly referenced, makes it clear there was nothing controversial in the Pope’s letter.
Thank you most graciously Pacelli for clearing up this error.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Jan 23, 2024 14:41:47 GMT -5
This matter has been on my mind, so I've been digging into it deeper and deeper going through my research, especially the writings of Venerable Peter of Cluny, who wrote an entire book on the Muslims. As Abbot Cluny was a highly regarded theologian, his opinion is important on this matter as well. On the question or whether they are to be labeled as a heresy or as Pagan, he leaves the matter as an open question, so based on the authority of Ven. Peter, I think either position is acceptable. There are good arguments on both sides, and he does not settle it, and seems to respect both sides of the question. He just stresses that whether they are regarded as heretics or Pagan, they must be opposed. In my opinion, though, for what it's worth, I think it better to follow the opinion of St. Alphonus on this, but I will not dispute over an open question. The purpose of this thread is the pope's letter, and clearly the Pope was holding an acceptable Catholic opinion, by treating them as heretics and not Pagans, which is all that matters for this purpose. The Pope did not profess heresy in his letter. The following is from Ven. Peter's book: keyboard checker
|
|
|
Post by Católico on Jan 23, 2024 14:43:04 GMT -5
Paclli, Thank you for responding. I will go ahead and completely read St. Alphonsus and Mr.Bellic on Islam, as you recommended. But I will need some time for that. In the meantime, in the interest of defending the faith, I wish to point to the following:
1) Where does the Church teach that - all -- heretics believe in the one and only true God?
2) The second ecumenical council (circa 325) gave us the Nicene creed. It was approved by the pope and by bishops in union with him. Therein, the true God is infallibly defined. Any subsequent assertions by whoever, must accept this as an undisputable definition.
3) There is not one God for the Old Testament, and another for the Old and New Testaments. It is the same God in the Old and New Testaments. Islam and post-Incarnation Jews deny the truth of the New Testament. Therefore, they deny the One God of the Old and New Testaments.
4) If Islam worshipped the same God, they would necessarily have to worship the Blessed Trinity. To claim otherwise is tantamount to claiming that the God of the New and Old Testament is not the only true God.
5) Words point to ideas. Ideas may or may not point to what is real. The Islamic and post-Incarnation "Jews" assert an idea that does not point to anything real.
6) Objectively, only the Blessed Trinity is God. Subjectively, an - individual- Muslim or a post-incarnation Jewish individual may have a sincere intention, and somehow innocently believe he or she is worshiping the true God, due possibly to invincible ignorance. Only God can judge if that is the case. But they do not worship the objectively true God.
7) The question of what Pope Gregory VIi meant is a separate matter. Whatever he meant can not contradict the Nicene Creed or Holy Scripture and Tradition. Perhaps he meant that they intend to worship one God, a god, who they believe is almighty. But he couldn't have meant that they worship the same God that Catholics worship.
-------
-- Voxx, thank you for allowing me to post as a guest. Please allow me to continue this very important discussion. I haven't registered because of certain differences, even though I am a Catholic who has signed on to the sedevacantist position (non sectarian) since 2015.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Jan 23, 2024 15:33:36 GMT -5
Católico, Please read my answers in blue font below. Paclli, Thank you for responding. I will go ahead and completely read St. Alphonsus and Mr.Bellic on Islam, as you recommended. But I will need some time for that. In the meantime, in the interest of defending the faith, I wish to point to the following: 1) Where does the Church teach that - all -- heretics believe in the one and only true God? You will find it in the writings of theologians who distinguish between heresy and apostasy. In order to keep some truths, one must at least believe in God who revealed these truths. Apostates reject everything. I'll try to get you a source on this tomorrow. 2) The second ecumenical council (circa 325) gave us the Nicene creed. It was approved by the pope and by bishops in union with him. Therein, the true God is infallibly defined. Any subsequent assertions by whoever, must accept this as an undisputable definition. Agreed, but that's not at issue here. If one is a heretic, they may just as much deny a point of the Nicene Creed as much as a Pagan certainly would. 3) There is not one God for the Old Testament, and another for the Old and New Testaments. It is the same God in the Old and New Testaments. Islam and post-Incarnation Jews deny the truth of the New Testament. Therefore, they deny the One God of the Old and New Testaments. Agreed, but the God of the Old Testament is the same God as the New Testament. There are not two, but one. If one professes belief in the God of the Old Testament, by default he then professes belief in the same God of the New Testament, as God is one. 4) If Islam worshipped the same God, they would necessarily have to worship the Blessed Trinity. To claim otherwise is tantamount to claiming that the God of the New and Old Testament is not the only true God. That's the crux here. Is this a heresy, or is it apostasy. Read my last post dealing with Ven. Cluny's opinion. He was an expert on this matter, and he couldn't say either way, whether they are heretics or not, so I think it's probably better that we leave it alone, when someone of his caliber can't settle on an opinion.5) Words point to ideas. Ideas may or may not point to what is real. The Islamic and post-Incarnation "Jews" assert an idea that does not point to anything real. Ok, but I don't see how it applies here.6) Objectively, only the Blessed Trinity is God. Subjectively, an - individual- Muslim or a post-incarnation Jewish individual may have a sincere intention, and somehow innocently believe he or she is worshiping the true God, due possibly to invincible ignorance. Only God can judge if that is the case. But they do not worship the objectively true God. That's the question. If they are heretics and are professing belief in the one God that created the world snd sent the prophets, but denying points of revelation, then they are worshiping Him, as the are praying to the one that they profess is Him, they are just not worshiping Him in the manner that He taught us that He wishes to be worshipped. It's unauthorized worship. Again, read my last post. I think based on that the your point of view is permissible, but it's hardly settled, as to whether they are heretics or Pagans.7) The question of what Pope Gregory VIi meant is a separate matter. Whatever he meant can not contradict the Nicene Creed or Holy Scripture and Tradition. Perhaps he meant that they intend to worship one God, a god, who they believe is almighty. But he couldn't have meant that they worship the same God that Catholics worship. I think his letter makes perfect sense if he considered them heretics and not Pagans. ------- -- Voxx, thank you for allowing me to post as a guest. Please allow me to continue this very important discussion. I haven't registered because of certain differences, even though I am a Catholic who has signed on to the sedevacantist position (non sectarian) since 2015.
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Jan 23, 2024 17:22:15 GMT -5
No need to fear...there are no obligations to be a member....and the forum is always open to guests...but if youve recieved benefit come join the group
|
|