Islam At The Vatican?

[HisChildForever]

I've seen some pretty bizarre reactions to this story,

 

For the first time in history, Islamic prayers and readings from the Quran will be heard at the Vatican on Sunday, in a move by Pope Francis to usher in peace between Israelis and Palestinians.

Francis issued the invitation to Israeli President Shimon Peres and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas during his visit last week to Jordan, Israel, and the Palestinian Authority.

 

Okay so this is what I've been seeing in the comments section of news articles and the posts displayed in Facebook "trending." People are citing that Catholicism and Islam is becoming the evil one world religion and Jesus is coming soon (the ignorance is unbelievable), and on the flip side I see Catholics calling Pope Francis's decision "pathetic" and insulting "neo-conservatives" for supporting him.

 

The issue is addressed on this blog,

 

[T]his is a time for some Muslims, Jews and Christians to meet together for a time of prayer each in their own traditions.

 

...

 

CNS has this outline of the service tomorrow: the three leaders will meet at the Pope’s residence at the Casa Santa Martha. They will then go to the location for the service in the Vatican Gardens. A Jewish rabbi and Muslim Imam will lead the prayers of each of those traditions. Notice this is not taking place in a Catholic Church. Then there will be a Jewish service of prayers, readings and music. This is followed by a Christian service of prayers, readings and music. Then there will be a Muslim service of prayers and readings. They will plant an olive tree for peace and probably pose for photos. It is also important to recognize the personal and semi-private nature of the event. This is not a huge public event.

 

Personally I found this explanation charitable and refreshing. However I follow this one Catholic page on Facebook and I suppose one would call him "rad trad" but his post on this particular blog explanation was rude and insulting, citing that "neo-conservatives" (what IS that anyway??) have "not lost their minds, they obviously didn't have one to begin with!" Honestly if there was a "laid back Catholic" label that would be me. I prefer to observe what's going on (when stories like this appear) and maintain a healthy level of curiosity without going off the deep end. 

[HisChildForever]

Here is the full text of the "Invocation for Peace." I see nothing questionable.

[Basilisa Marie]

If anything it looks like a good example of how inter-faith stuff is supposed to happen. Focusing on our similarities (everyone praying for peace) without ignoring any of the differences. Each group is being represented in an authentic way in a neutral space.  It's something a lot of people who want to do inter-faith stuff can learn from. 

[Perigrina]

Here is a Catholic News Service article with the Vatican explanation for what is happening: http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1402316.htm

 

This passage seems especially helpful: 

 

When leaders of different religions come together and pray for a common cause, they are not only appealing to God, they also are showing the world they believe that followers of different religions are still brothers and sisters before the one who created them.

That is not the same as ignoring religious differences or pretending those differences do not matter.

"It should be evident to all who participate that these occasions are moments of being 'together for prayer, but not prayer together,'" said guidelines for interreligious dialogue published in late May by the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue.

"Being able to pray in common requires a shared understanding of who God is," the document said. "Since religions differ in their understanding of God, 'interreligious prayer' -- meaning the joining together in common prayer by followers of various religions -- is to be avoided."

The distinction between praying together and praying at the same time is one Vatican officials have found increasingly necessary to emphasize as popes have led more and more interfaith gatherings for peace.

 

 Here is a good blog article by fr. Longnecker that expands on this: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/2014/06/muslim-prayers-in-the-vaticanshock-horror.html

Basically this is his position:

 

The explanations are only necessary because of the ignorance of the press who are sensationalizing what is a low key spiritual event.

Bottom line: The Pope is meeting with two world leaders to pray together for peace. This is part of his role as the premier spiritual leader in the world.

[Perigrina]

I realized after I posted that I cited the same blog cited by the OP.  Great minds and all that.  

 

I have seen some of the response to this in trad circles and I find it disturbing.  Some people seem intent on twisting everything the pope says and does into evidence for heresy or apostacy.

 

As often happens in the current papacy, I have some questions about the prudence of the pope's gesture and concerns about it being misinterpreted.  But questioning whether he is Catholic or well-intentioned goes way beyond the line.

[HisChildForever]

I realized after I posted that I cited the same blog cited by the OP.  Great minds and all that.  

 

I noticed but didn't want to say anything LOL.

 

Have you seen the responses from evangelicals/nondenom Christians like the one I mentioned in the OP? Hysterical.

[Perigrina]

The term neo-conservative, while properly a political term, is used by some trads to describe a Catholic position between liberal and traditionalist.  In this nomenclature, Liberal Catholics reject some Church teachings, neo-conservatives accept all Church teaching since Vatican II, and traditionalists accept all real Church teaching, i.e. pre-Vatican II. (Obviously, this way of thinking assumes the hermeneutic of rupture condemned by Pope Benedict.)

 

[Perigrina]

I noticed but didn't want to say anything LOL.

 

Have you seen the responses from evangelicals/nondenom Christians like the one I mentioned in the OP? Hysterical.

 

I haven't seen that, but my husband was telling me about comments he had seen that were from a political perspective, criticizing it because it will obviously be ineffective.

[Basilisa Marie]

The term neo-conservative, while properly a political term, is used by some trads to describe a Catholic position between liberal and traditionalist.  In this nomenclature, Liberal Catholics reject some Church teachings, neo-conservatives accept all Church teaching since Vatican II, and traditionalists accept all real Church teaching, i.e. pre-Vatican II. (Obviously, this way of thinking assumes the hermeneutic of rupture condemned by Pope Benedict.)

 

I was under the impression that neo-conservatives have questionable beliefs regarding the church's economic teachings (like people who think unregulated capitalism is the bee's knees)? Unless it's used differently by trads. Not to get totally submerged in labeling and name-calling, or anything. :) 

[PhuturePriest]

I was under the impression that neo-conservatives have questionable beliefs regarding the church's economic teachings (like people who think unregulated capitalism is the bee's knees)? Unless it's used differently by trads. Not to get totally submerged in labeling and name-calling, or anything. :)

 

It really is sad that a lot of people take the position of capitalism before Catholicism. Then again, many liberals take the stance of socialism before Catholicism. I don't think it's an issue special to one side, but rather to both, concerning both social and economic issues. I remember speaking to my dad recently about the political beliefs that Republicans take which are contrary to Church teaching. He didn't believe me when I said republicans believe in things contrary to the Church, but when I started naming things off like the death penalty, pre-emptive strikes, numerous issues concerning war, nationalism, and things of that ilk, he said "Well, those things are preferable to abortion." In other words, "They're contrary to the Church, but that's not as bad as *x* that those unfaithful Catholics believe." That's the kind of thinking we have, and it's destructive to the Church and society. I don't care if you think unjust wars aren't as bad as abortion, unjust wars are still just as contrary to Church teaching. America would be a better place if Catholics obeyed the Church's teachings more closely than their political party's platform.

Edited June 8, 2014 by FuturePriest387

[NotreDame]

I'm used to seeing the term "neoconservative" used this way in segments of the Spanish blogosphere, but this is the first time I've seen it in English.  When used in Spanish it's often describing new congregations like Opus Dei, the legion of christ, or any one of a myriad of new institutes that have popped up.  It obviously lacks a formal definition, but peregrina's sounds close to the idea I had in my head:  "conservative/orthodox" groups that are only affiliated w/ the novus ordo, took lots of pictures with JPII, and usually have something very wrong with them.

[Perigrina]

I was under the impression that neo-conservatives have questionable beliefs regarding the church's economic teachings (like people who think unregulated capitalism is the bee's knees)? Unless it's used differently by trads. Not to get totally submerged in labeling and name-calling, or anything. :)

 

The conventional meaning for "neo-conservative" refers to a political/economic position.  Here's the Wikipedia description: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism  I have only seen a religious sense of the word used by trads. It does not seem to have anything to do with the political meaning.  I think it was coined independently.  It almost certainly was being used with the trad meaning in the things you were reading.

[Perigrina]

I'm used to seeing the term "neoconservative" used this way in segments of the Spanish blogosphere, but this is the first time I've seen it in English.  When used in Spanish it's often describing new congregations like Opus Dei, the legion of christ, or any one of a myriad of new institutes that have popped up.  It obviously lacks a formal definition, but peregrina's sounds close to the idea I had in my head:  "conservative/orthodox" groups that are only affiliated w/ the novus ordo, took lots of pictures with JPII, and usually have something very wrong with them.

 

 

In my experience, the sort of person who uses "neoconservative" this way would also refer to Phatmass as neoconservative.  From this perspective, anyone who accepts Vatican II has something very wrong with him.

[Perigrina]

The conventional meaning for "neo-conservative" refers to a political/economic position.  Here's the Wikipedia description: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism  I have only seen a religious sense of the word used by trads. It does not seem to have anything to do with the political meaning.  I think it was coined independently.  It almost certainly was being used with the trad meaning in the things you were reading.

 

I meant it was being used with the trad meaning in the things that Hischild was describing in the OP, but I posted this in response to Basilisa.  I am not doing too well on this thread.  :)

[mortify ii]

Hopefully there will be peace in the middle east. As for neo-Catholicism (ie neo-conservative) here is one take:http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Catholicism