Skip to comments.Poep John Paul II Kissing The Koran
Posted on 04/08/2008 12:11:04 PM PDT by Beloved Levinite
The Pope Kissing the Koran
Below is a photo (see link below) of the Pope at the end of an audience with Patriarch Raphael I of Iraq, where the Pope "bowed" to the Muslim holy book, The Koran, presented to him by the delegation, and kissed it. Did the Pope, who in fact is the supposed "infallible" voice of the Roman Catholic Church not remember what The Koran has to say about Jesus and the nature of God? Did he not know how The Koran demotes Jesus the Messiah to "only a messenger of Allah" status?
"O people of the Scripture! Do not exaggerate in your religion nor utter aught concerning Allah save the truth. The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a messenger of Allah, and His word which he conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit [sic.] from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers and say not 'Three' - Cease! (it is better for you! - Allah is only one God. Far is it removed from His transcendent majesty that He should have a son...The Messiah will never scorn to be a slave unto Allah."
Of Jesus Christ, The Koran also states:
"And when the son of Mary is quoted as an example, behold! The folk laugh out, and say: Are our gods better, or is he? They raise not the objection save for argument. Nay! but they are a contentious folk. He is nothing but a slave on whom we bestowed favor, and we made him a pattern for the Children of Israel. And had we willed it we would have set among you angels to be viceroys in the earth".
Regarding Christ's death upon the Cross, The Koran says:
"That they rejected Faith; That they uttered against Mary a grave false charge; That they said (in boast): We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, The Messenger of Allah. But they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjunction to follow, for of a surety they killed him not. ... And on the Day of Judgment He (Jesus) will be a witness against them (Christians)." (Koran, 4:156-159)
The Koran even has Jesus Himself saying:
"Jesus son of Mary said: O Children of Israel! Lo! I am the messenger of Allah unto you, confirming that which was (revealed) before me in the Torah, and bringing good tidings of a messenger who cometh after me, whose name is the Praised One." The Pope was picked as "the Man of the Century" by various religious leaders. SOURCE: Fides (Rome) news Interview with Patriarch of Babylon!
Written by: Darrell G. Young Copyright©2002
Link to photo: http://focusonjerusalem.com/popekissingkoran.html
In fact, the Arab pictured is a Christian by the name of Raphael - and you might want to try looking up a picture of the Sharif translation of the Bible into Arabic.
I have one - and people instinctively assume it is a Koran because it is green and has Arabic script on the cover.
Never heard of such.
< ducking for cover>
Change the “k” to “p” and add “on” and I’m fine with it.
Can you document this?
Seriously ... if that's true ...
Then a whole lot of people need to post some truly abject apologies.
Shoah survivor in Israel recalls how Karol Wojtyla, who later became Pope John Paul II, carried her to safety after she fled a Nazi concentration camp.
The late Pope John Paul II was a crypto-rabbi and his pontificate represented, for diabolical infiltrators, a supreme coup. He became the first pope in the history of Christendom to enter an accursed synagogue, the den of the Talmudic Pharisees. Orthodox Judaism esteems the Talmud as its supreme guide. The Talmud states that Jesus Christ was a sorcerer and the son of a whore named Miriam the hairdresser. The Talmud declares that Jesus Christ is in hell being boiled in hot excrement. The Talmud gloats over Christ's crucifixion and early death and says He got what He deserved.
The Judas Iscariot of Our Time - Questioning the Record of Pope John Paul II
It is truly disheartening for us Catholics to find posts like yours, especially after this holy man has died. Above are two Jewish views of JPII. But you specifically posed the question of the Pope kissing the Koran. Here is the history behind it.
However, the former Chaldean patriarch--Raphael Bidawid--was present at the meeting where the event occurred, and in an interview with the press service FIDES, he said the following:
On May 14th I was received by the Pope, together with a delegation composed of the Shi'ite imam of Khadum mosque and the Sunni president of the council of administration of the Iraqi Islamic Bank. There was also a representative of the Iraqi ministry of religion. I renewed our invitation to the Pope, because his visit would be for us a grace from heaven. It would confirm the faith of Christians and prove the Pope's love for the whole of humanity in a country which is mainly Muslim.
At the end of the audience the Pope bowed to the Muslim holy book, the Qu'ran, presented to him by the delegation, and he kissed it as a sign of respect. The photo of that gesture has been shown repeatedly on Iraqi television and it demonstrates that the Pope is not only aware of the suffering of the Iraqi people, he has also great respect for Islam [SOURCE].
What, then, is one to make of the event?
It seems that there are a number of possibilities:
1) The FIDES news agency misquoted the patriarch.
2) Patriarch Bidawid was mistaken about what happened. It was not the Quran but something else.
3) John Paul II kissed the Quran but didn't know the nature of the book he was kissing.
4) John Paul II kissed the Quran and knew that this is what he was doing.
I would love to think that either option (1), (2), or (3) was the case, but I have no evidence that any of them was the case.
The most likely one of the three, to my mind, would be (3), because so far as I know, John Paul II was not an Arabic speaker and may not have understood the nature of the book that he was being presented with.
People shove all kinds of books into the pope's hands at audiences, and if the pope was under the impression that the thing to do with a gift in Iraqi culture is to kiss it as a sign of respect to the one who gives the gift then he might have kissed it reflexively, not even understanding the nature of the book.
While this is possible, I think it likely that an interpreter explained the nature of the gift that was being given on this occasion. This still leaves the possibility that the pope kissed it as part of Middle Eastern politeness rather than as a gesture of respect for the book itself.
I have heard claims that in some Middle Eastern cultures that this is a typical gesture of respect for one giving a gift, but I have asked Chaldean friends of mine whether this is the case in Iraqi culture and the answer was a definite "No." "The pope put his foot on the neck of all Chaldeans with this action" was the response I was given. (Just to make things clear, putting your foot on the neck of someone is a bad thing in Iraqi culture.)
Still, the pope may have been under the mistaken impression that this was the appropriate thing to do when receiving a gift in their culture. He can't be an expert on every culture in the world, and he could get this wrong.
Or maybe he didn't.
Maybe he knew it was the Quran and kissed it anyway, not as a customary gift giving response, but for some other reason.
What might that reason be?
It certainly wouldn't be that he believes in Islam or believes that Islam is on a par with Christianity. If he believed either of these two things then he (a) wouldn't be the earthly head of the Christian faith and (b) wouldn't have approved the publication of Dominus Iesus, which asserts the salvific universality of Jesus Christ and the Church.
Any attempt to represent him as thinking one of those things doesn't even get out of the gate.
So what might he have been thinking?
We're only speculating here, but two things spring to mind as what JP2 might have been thinking:
1) The Quran does contain some elements of truth (as well as grave elements of falsehood) and he might have wanted to honor the elements of truth it contains.
2) Showing respect in this way could foster world peace and interreligious harmony.
Of these two, I would conjecture that the latter would have been uppermost in John Paul II's mind, though the former may not have been absent.
John Paul II was a man who was enormously concerned with world peace and interreligious harmony. As a young man he lived through the horrors of World War II, which had a permanent effect on him and his generation and their views about war and peace.
As a mature man he lived through the Cold War that repeatedly brought the world to the brink of nuclear disaster, and this also had a permanent effect on him and his generation and their views about war and peace. The constant threat of nuclear warfare hung particularly heavily over Europe--which would have been the chief battleground in a conflict between the Soviet Union and the West--and (particularly on the heels of WWII) it deeply impressed the "find peace at any cost" message on his generation.
As a result of the Cold War, the nations of western Europe were forced into an alliance (NATO) whereby their centuries-long enmities (as between France and Germany) had to be suppressed for the sake of common survival. Negotiation became the key to survival in western Europe, and the same message was driven home to those in Eastern bloc countries, such as John Paul II's native Poland.
By letting the US shoulder the main burden for the military defense of Europe (during and after the Cold War), many Europeans of John Paul II's generation absorbed the idea that negotiation was paramount and could solve virtually any problem. It wasn't until the events of the Global War On Terror that this idea began to be seriously called into question many in European circles.
As a result, as a man of his generation, John Paul II--for the best of motives--may have overestimated both the need for and the utility of gestures such as the one exhibited in the Quran-kissing event.
If the former pontiff did understand that the gift was a Quran and if he wasn't under the impression that kissing a gift was a standard response in Iraqi culture then I would suppose that he did so out of a desire to foster peace and interreligious harmony, but it would still have been a mistake to my mind.
The Quran, whatever elements of truth it contains, also contains venomous attacks on the divinity of Christ and on Christian doctrine and these make it inappropriate for the Vicar of Christ to kiss it under any circumstances.
John Paul II also may not have been attending to the gravity of the false elements in the Quran. Even if he knew them, he may not have been thinking about them and may have acted on the spur of the moment, without fully thinking through his action.
Fortunately, the infallibility of the pope and the indefectibility of the Church do not extend to such actions. A pope is not attempting to make anything remotely like a dogmatic definition in an act of this nature. And so, however misguided the action may have been and however good the motives for it may have been, it would constitute an error that does not touch upon papal infallibility or ecclesial indefectibility.
It would be one of the mistakes that all fallen humans are heir to, even the vicars of Christ.
To be honest, this is quite “old news.” Firstly, it should be noted that many Catholics were dismayed by Pope John Paul’s actions. It was evidently a gesture meant to recognize Islam’s monotheism, but I would have to agree with those that say that kissing the Quran was in poor judgement and provided easy fodder for anti-Catholic Christians and anti-Christian Muslims alike. The pope is a human being and made a very human error in judgement, IMHO.
But I have to correct a glaring error in the analysis of this action. The author asks “Did the Pope, who in fact is the supposed ‘infallible’ voice of the Roman Catholic Church not remember what The Koran has to say about Jesus and the nature of God?” The doctrine of papal infallibility has absolutely nothing to do with the Holy Father’s actions in this incident. The author insinuates that the pope could not really be infallible AND have kissed the Quran. In fact, the infallibility of the successor of Peter (i.e. the pope) is excercised in very narrow circumstances, and only when speaking “ex cathedra” (”from the chair [of Peter]”) in making official pronouncements of faith and morals.
In other words, this incident has absolutely no bearing on the truth or untruth of papal infallibility.
Do you have a source that explains/elaborates on this? This issue comes up in discussion other places from time to time and would like to be able to point out the truth when it does.
Wonder if it's a Viking Kitty?
If I had better photoshop skills, I'd make up an image of a cat in a Swiss Guard helmet, carrying a halberd.
Are you familiar with the history concerning this picture. It has been around for a long time, and been discussed thoroughly.
No new news here.
Might be good for you to do a search next time.
This is all news to me ... I’d seriously like to see some documentation.
As I said, there’s been a lot of “hay” made over it being a koran.
If it’s a Bible ... the “haymakers” have a whole heck of a lot of apologising to do.
I would like substantiation of your (wideawake’s) claim as well, however, like sandyeggo, I’m not too concerned about it, as this is pretty old news, hashed, and rehashed over and over again on this forum.
But if your claim could be substantiated, it would be very helpful.
Next time, do a little research?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.