Why Does Catholicism Teach We Worship The Same God As Islam?

[franciscanheart]

*Sighs internally*

:huh: What's with all of this business? And I hate to be obtuse, but what about this is internal? Isn't your posting about it intrinsically external? So then I guess the sighing may be internal but it's posted about (externally) so that we might all know you are sighing?

I guess I just wonder what this adds, if anything. Is this just teenage speak for "moron"? I'm honestly unsure.

 

I am new here so will tread warily, but you know, there are fanatics in every religion, not just Islam. The God of Abraham wasn't a very nice sounding guy until Jesus came along and started telling people that He was a God of love. Since Islam didn't follow Jesus' teachings, they missed out on the compassion and mercy aspect somewhere along the line. but then, the Crusades were a pretty bloody form of Christianity for awhile too, as was the Inquisition. Maybe we just have to separate the extremists from those who try to follow Mohammed in a more peaceful way.
 
I do think they have the same God, but they interpret Him in different ways.

This was a wonderful post. Thank you for the time you took to type it!

 

Right. It wasn't his tactic. Because he loved Muslims, was respectful of their religious traditions, and hoped for their conversion to Christ.
Which is why St Francis would be ashamed of a lot of the stuff on this thread.

I'm out of props. :( (When has that EVER happened to me? Never. It's never happened.) Great post!
 
 

Incidentally, the water can get hot around the forums now and then, but most of the time its just fine!

:lol:

[Not A Real Name]

 

[spoiler]http://youtu.be/dakxwoVV7yM[/spoiler]

Edited January 13, 2015 by Not A Real Name

[Guest]

So should Catholics honor Muhammad? Serious question.

[Nihil Obstat]

So should Catholics honor Muhammad? Serious question.

Absolutely not.

[PhuturePriest]

I think both the Crusades and the Inquisition remain a blot on our history for a Church that proclaims a God of Love and Compassion and claims to be followers of Jesus, murdered/politically assassinated for His Message of Peace and Love, goodwill towards ALL men.

 

 It is quite true I think that both the Crusades and the Inquisition took place in a certain culture prevailing in their times.  I don't think this is an excuse at all, it might be a reason but no excuse and I don't think as Catholics we should try to excuse the two terrible events, rather to own up to them and pray that such terrible crimes against humanity will never be repeated again and in the name of Jesus.  That we have learned the lesson of history, one of which is that Catholicism is ideally very often counter cultural and swims very often against the tide of modern thought and culture and very often must do so.

 

Then you know nothing of the Crusades and the Inquisition.

 

The Crusades began because for four hundred years, the Muslims had conquered Christian land in the Middle East, Africa, and even Spain, by means of besieging cities and killing people who wouldn't convert. Christians were being persecuted, and the Byzantine Empire was falling, so the Byzantine Emperor called the Pope for aid. The purpose of the Crusade was to save Christian lives and reclaim land which was forcefully taken from us. There is nothing about that which is unchristian or wrong. Were there excesses during the Crusades? Yes. But the image of bloodthirty, greedy Crusaders who murdered every man, woman, and child in their sight given by such gems as Kingdom of Heaven is wrong. Every historian who has ever watched movies like that has discredited the movie for barely even trying to give a somewhat accurate historical representation.

 

As for the Inquisition, there was sort of more than one, so I have to know which one you're talking about. I assume it's the Spanish Inquisition, in which case here's a very nice article from Catholic Answers about it: http://www.catholic.com/tracts/the-inquisition

 

It's not worth listening to historians from the post-Reformation period, as they are documented trying to discredit everything the Church did, including the Inquisition and Crusades, and their claims never match that of the people who actually lived during those times.

[veritasluxmea]

:huh: What's with all of this business? And I hate to be obtuse, but what about this is internal? Isn't your posting about it intrinsically external? So then I guess the sighing may be internal but it's posted about (externally) so that we might all know you are sighing?

I guess I just wonder what this adds, if anything. Is this just teenage speak for "moron"?

It's something I saw someone use somewhere else and I posted it here. There's another place I visit where that phrase is used somewhat frequently, sort of like "meh" is used around here. After I posted it here, Not a Real Name picked it up and put it on another thread. So that's where it comes from. 

 

I'll try to explain it as best I can. Yes, my posting is external, and I said the response is internal. I'm not really sighing in anyway, just conveying a feeling using that phrase. Have you ever seen that joke around the internet about people posting "LOL ROFL  LOLOLOL" while their faces are completely neutral? Aside from sometimes smiling or huffing while reading the internet, I don't really make sounds, internally or externally. So no, I'm not really sighing in any way. However, the phrase conveys a feeling I have in reaction to whatever was posted; so I use it to convey my reaction. No, it's not teenage speak for "moron," the closest I can come to is "ugh," but it's not exactly ugh. It's just... sighing internally. I could just post "no" or "I disagree with you." 

 

What does it contribute? I don't know. Expresses my feelings, maybe? 

[franciscanheart]

So should Catholics honor Muhammad? Serious question.

Good word, no.

[franciscanheart]

It's something I saw someone use somewhere else and I posted it here. There's another place I visit where that phrase is used somewhat frequently, sort of like "meh" is used around here. After I posted it here, Not a Real Name picked it up and put it on another thread. So that's where it comes from. 
 
I'll try to explain it as best I can. Yes, my posting is external, and I said the response is internal. I'm not really sighing in anyway, just conveying a feeling using that phrase. Have you ever seen that joke around the internet about people posting "LOL ROFL  LOLOLOL" while their faces are completely neutral? Aside from sometimes smiling or huffing while reading the internet, I don't really make sounds, internally or externally. So no, I'm not really sighing in any way. However, the phrase conveys a feeling I have in reaction to whatever was posted; so I use it to convey my reaction. No, it's not teenage speak for "moron," the closest I can come to is "ugh," but it's not exactly ugh. It's just... sighing internally. I could just post "no" or "I disagree with you." 
 
What does it contribute? I don't know. Expresses my feelings, maybe?

I haven't seen those memes. I think this must be a new expression I have not yet experienced. I appreciate you helping me out. I'm going to go look for those memes now; they sound amusing.

[BarbTherese]

Then you know nothing of the Crusades and the Inquisition.

 

The Crusades began because for four hundred years, the Muslims had conquered Christian land in the Middle East, Africa, and even Spain, by means of besieging cities and killing people who wouldn't convert. Christians were being persecuted, and the Byzantine Empire was falling, so the Byzantine Emperor called the Pope for aid. The purpose of the Crusade was to save Christian lives and reclaim land which was forcefully taken from us. There is nothing about that which is unchristian or wrong. Were there excesses during the Crusades? Yes. But the image of bloodthirty, greedy Crusaders who murdered every man, woman, and child in their sight given by such gems as Kingdom of Heaven is wrong. Every historian who has ever watched movies like that has discredited the movie for barely even trying to give a somewhat accurate historical representation.

 

As for the Inquisition, there was sort of more than one, so I have to know which one you're talking about. I assume it's the Spanish Inquisition, in which case here's a very nice article from Catholic Answers about it: http://www.catholic.com/tracts/the-inquisition

 

It's not worth listening to historians from the post-Reformation period, as they are documented trying to discredit everything the Church did, including the Inquisition and Crusades, and their claims never match that of the people who actually lived during those times.

 

There are understandable reasons for the Crusades and The Inquisition when they are situated in their times, but I don't think we should whitewash them entirely and attempt to excuse some of the terrible things done and in the name of Jesus and His Church in such a whitewash. The Crusades and The Inquisition (Spain) and even the terrible things done are not an indication that The Church is not that founded by Jesus and enduring until now - it is an indication, however, that we can fail and will, in varying degrees, until the end of time.  This underscores that we are a Church of sinners and not of saints.  The recent scandals in The Church brought about by some priests and leadership (cover-ups) is an indication.

 

Blots on our history!

 

 I have read articles on the Catholic Answers website on both events, the Crusades and also the Inquisition.

[Ash Wednesday]

Whenever any threads related to Islam come up I'm like

 

 

Not the best Mediator of Meh job, I know. Sorry.

[Ash Wednesday]

 
[spoiler]http://youtu.be/dakxwoVV7yM[/spoiler]

 
You understand me? Catching my drift?...Or am I being obtuse?

Give him another month to think about it. 

[PhuturePriest]

There are understandable reasons for the Crusades and The Inquisition when they are situated in their times, but I don't think we should whitewash them entirely and attempt to excuse some of the terrible things done and in the name of Jesus and His Church in such a whitewash. The Crusades and The Inquisition (Spain) and even the terrible things done are not an indication that The Church is not that founded by Jesus and enduring until now - it is an indication, however, that we can fail and will, in varying degrees, until the end of time.  This underscores that we are a Church of sinners and not of saints.  The recent scandals in The Church brought about by some priests and leadership (cover-ups) is an indication.

 

Blots on our history!

 

 I have read articles on the Catholic Answers website on both events, the Crusades and also the Inquisition.

 

There were certainly excesses and things which shouldn't have happened, which, as you say, are blots on our history. However, the Crusades and the Inquisitions in and of themselves are not blots, and that's what I was contesting.

[Not A Real Name]

 
You understand me? Catching my drift?...Or am I being obtuse?

Give him another month to think about it. 

[BarbTherese]

There were certainly excesses and things which shouldn't have happened, which, as you say, are blots on our history. However, the Crusades and the Inquisitions in and of themselves are not blots, and that's what I was contesting.

 

As I posted, there are understandable reasons when the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition are situated in their own times - but these understandable reasons cannot EXCUSE some of the things that were done and in the name of Jesus and God who is Love.  Too often, Catholics in grasping the understandable reasons for these two historical events attempt to whitewash the whole history entirely and due to the fact that the shocking events within those two events did have understandable reasons due to the times and thought in which they occurred.   What this does illustrate however, and a lesson of history, is that we are not always absolutely correct and this has occurred repeatedly at times in our history.  The Church is organic, a living organism situated in time, and what we are and think today will undergo change as time progresses.  There can be no growth without change while change is not of necessity positive.

 

I do tend to wonder 100 years from now what we will be looking back at in our today as not absolutely correct.  This is not a reason to reject Catholicism, but it is a reason to look at our history and who and what we are realistically and to adjust our perspective and attitude towards The Church and we who are The Church - and to be prepared to proclaim and own our identity fully.  Jesus Himself has told us that He did not come for the righteous, who have no need of Him, but that He did come for sinners (Mark Chapter 2).  To my mind, therefore, it is no shock to me when sinners commit sin.  If Jesus expected us to become saints on becoming Catholics, He would not have left us with His Unlimited Mercy and Forgiveness and for all time, and without boundaries, in the Sacrament of Reconciliation. This is not only a Gift, it is an absolute necessity since His Church until He Returned would be comprised of the sinful.  My 'logic' tells me this :)

 

The Crusades and Spanish Inquisition cannot be claimed as virtues in our history.  They remain a blot, not because of the event themselves, but because of some of the terrible things that did happen within those historical events. 

[Kia ora]

It is a good question. How do we convert Muslims to Catholicism? How do we convert anyone to Catholicism, really? With Protestants at least we have some solid starting points.

With a bit of brief reflection, I do not think it is us here in the west that can really do anything substantial in converting Muslims. Not in a direct way and on a large scale. I think that their Christian neighbours, being the ones who better understand them and can provide a material witness to Truth and Charity, will be the ones who can make better inroads. That is why it is so important for us to support the Catholic Church in Muslim regions, especially for instance the Chaldean Church, the Copts, The Assyrian Church of the East, and of course the Roman Catholics who have ended up in those areas.

 

 

Didn't you guys forcibly convert the Muslims and Jews of Spain? Seemed to work well.

 

/s