And only three weeks after the anniversary of the St Bartholemew Day's Massacre, no less.
Posted on 09/16/2012 2:27:03 PM PDT by marshmallow
The Holy Father met with Lebanese political and religious leaders in the Baabda Presidential Palace, where he was welcomed by the country’s President Michel Suleiman and his wife
The Pope’s second day of his three-day Apostolic Visit to Lebanon is being marked by a series of political and institutional meetings and an encounter with a group of young Middle Eastern people in the afternoon. After lunching with Lebanese patriarchs and bishops in the Armenian Catholic Patriarchate of Cilicia, Benedict XVI will move on to Bkerke, to meet with Lebanese and Middle Eastern young people.
Thousands of people waving Lebanese and Vatican flags gathered this morning in Beirut to greet Benedict XVI, who left the Apostolic Nunciature in Harissa (north of the capital) at 9:30 am to visit the Presidential Palace in Baabda.
The Pope was welcomed by Lebanon’s Marronite Catholic president, Michel Suleiman, in person, who invited locals yesterday to gather in the streets to greet the Pope. Today was declared a national holiday in Lebanon on the occasion of Benedict XVI’s Apostolic Visit to the country. A part from the President, the Pope also met with other State officials and leaders of the Muslim communities.
The Pope planted a Lebanese cedar tree (the country’s national emblem), together with President Suleiman in the Baabda Presidential Palace. The brief ceremony was held before the Pope addressed his speech on peace to Lebanese political, intellectual and religious figures in the May 25th Hall (the date of the Israeli retreat from Lebanon after the war in 2000) of the Baabda Presidential Palace. When Benedict XVI entered the Hall he was greeted with applause and music by Mozart in the background.
In an inflamed Middle East, Benedict XVI has called for collaborative action and “authentic dialogue bearing....
(Excerpt) Read more at vaticaninsider.lastampa.it ...
Believers have often practiced human sacrifice. The Aztecs thought the sun coming up deserved a fresh human heart.
Proving once again Islam is a Satanic cult. You are not a good muslim unless you are killing.
The Koran:
Sura (2:191-193) - "And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution of Muslims is worse than slaughter of non-believers...and fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah."
Sura (4:74) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward."
Sura (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"
Sura (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"
Sura (9:30) - "And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!"
Sura (47:4) - "So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make them prisoners,"
From the Hadith:
Tabari 7:97 The morning after the murder of Ashraf, the Prophet declared, "Kill any Jew who falls under your power."
Ibn Ishaq: 327 - “Allah said, ‘A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.’”
Ibn Ishaq: 992 - "Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah."
Real Believers don’t murder,they might have to kill.
The Pope sounds alot like Bush’s “Religion of Peace” talk...
What is wrong with these people?
Islam is for World Conquest and enslavement of all Infidels...
There can be no agreements with Lying Murderers.
For there to be a one world system, all must be herded to the same place, by whatever methods works on the masses.
He’s doing well; one necessary component in bringing about the end of jihad is to separate it from its wellspring in the minds of those who don’t engage in it.
Thanks marshmallow.
BS. Believers in mohammed kill like rabid animals.
“Authentic faith does not lead to death... verbal and physical violence must be rejected......”
He said this with a straight face, did he?
The one time I’ll disagree with His Holiness.
We need a Pope Benedict like the one who launched the Crusades.
great point!
-
Pope Benedict is WRONG.
...what he should have said,
instead of real believers don’t kill,
is real religions don’t condone murder.
(of course, Islam even has an “out” for that.
since in Islam, killing one innocent,
is like killing the entire world...
except innocent is defined as muslim only...)
-
but, Benedict is still wrong.
the problem isn’t with the believers.
the problem, is with ISLAM.
If I could ask the Holy Father one question, it would be this:
“should we passively allow ourselves to be made subject to sharia, or oppose it?”
How does that work?
one necessary component in bringing about the end of jihad is to separate it from its wellspring in the minds of those who don’t engage in it.
///
respectfully, in the minds of who?
the mythical moderate muslims?
-
a moderate muslim, is already NOT following Islam.
you CANNOT remove jihad from Islam.
it is commanded, IN the Holy Quran!
and the Holy Quran, are the literal unalterable words,
of Allah.
Islam CANNOT go through a reformation. impossible.
the closer they return to the original texts,
the more they will kill and terrorize.
(as FatherofFive so excellently showed,
with direct quotes.)
-
this isn’t a problem of a tiny minority of muslims
misunderstanding.
they, are the ones, who DO understand what it says.
-
we are simply fortunate, that MORE muslims don’t read and obey their own book.
(and i KNOW what they believe. i spent many months INSIDE a “moderate” mainstream Sunni masjid.
it was... educational.)
This new so-called "pope" has learned NOTHING. The last so-called "pope" kissed the Koran and proclaimed it a "holy book". Since then Muslims have been BUTCHERING Christians all over the globe in the name of Islam... and he is talking "authentic dialogue".
Pope Benedict thoroughly understands the Koran. He is a great scholar.
I couldn’t disagree more strenuously; Pope Benedict understands these issues more profoundly than you or I. Perhaps it is a syllogism: true believers don’t kill; you are a killer; therefore...
And only three weeks after the anniversary of the St Bartholemew Day's Massacre, no less.
1* There is an appointed time for everything,
and a time for every affair under the heavens.
2A time to give birth, and a time to die;
a time to plant, and a time to uproot the plant.
3A time to kill, and a time to heal;
a time to tear down, and a time to build.
4A time to weep, and a time to laugh;
a time to mourn, and a time to dance.
5A time to scatter stones, and a time to gather them;
a time to embrace, and a time to be far from embraces.
6A time to seek, and a time to lose;
a time to keep, and a time to cast away.
7A time to rend, and a time to sew;
a time to be silent, and a time to speak.
8A time to love, and a time to hate;
a time of war, and a time of peace.
I doubt the irony was lost on Muslim listeners either.
I believe you are correct. He is referring to true believers in God.
Jesus--- who is the absolute fulfillment and summit of the revelation of God to Man --- makes that stunningly clear. Lest there should be any confusion.
The theoretical, pharmaceuticlly-pure robo-Muslim would be quite a killer. But not all Muslims “live down to” Koranic ideals.
He said “authentic” faith. It’s a tautology really. A “No True Scotsman” argument.
Followed by this:
Inshallah.
I think the Papacy is the only office in the world whose incumbent is automatically guilty of all the crimes of his predecessors, as well as every crime that was merely committed in the name of one of his predecessors. You might as well take Benedict to task for his hypocrisy in talking about "true belief" at all -- after all, Peter denied Christ THREE times, didn't he???
Is he ignorant of the long and bloody history of the organization he heads? Or he is he now redefining “true believers”?
Good point. But it's probably more accurate to say that "Reformation" is what Islam is going through before our eyes, in the form of radical Wahhabist, Salafist, jihadist belief and practice.
Wahhabism is Islamic Puritanism. That's fascinatingly explained in this article from H.W. Crocker which was a Free Republic thread a couple of years back (LINK).
Wahhabism (radical Reformation) calls for scriptural literalism independent of human reason or logic; destruction of statues, images, shrines; rejection of veneration of saints, strict moralism and the extirpation of all "impure" elements; conflation of Church and State on the basis of Cuius regio, eius religio (just like Reformation-era Church of England, Church of Sweden, Church of whatever-German-prince); et-freakin-cetera.
Radical and terrorist groups such as al-Qaeda and the Taliban, cannot be cured by Reformation for the very simple fact that they are the Reformation. Islam --- religious falsehood--- doesn't need a Reformation. It needs to be replaced by religious truth.
Neither.
He's attempting to protect Christians in the Middle East, many of whom have been thrown under the bus by US policy, firstly in Iraq (Bush) and secondly, by our unrestrained enthusiasm for the "Arab Spring" (Obama).
I would have thought those who truly consider Middle East Christians to be brothers in Christ would applaud his efforts. Naturally, if you think he's doing a lousy job or he has no business being there, perhaps you could nominate a substitute. I'm sure the Pope would be happy to lend his support. It's not like he has nothing else to do apart from risking his life on trips to the Middle East.
Someone more suitable, perhaps. Someone who wouldn't offend the naysayers who consider the Catholic Church to be disqualified from intervening in human conflict. Is the Jehovah's Witness big cheese available? How about Rick Warren or Paul Crouch?
This is the "whack a Pope" game, isn't it? If the Pope said nothing, folk would scream...."why isn't he doing something, instead of hiding in the Vatican?" When he does say something, the response is ...."shut up....the Catholic Church has no moral authority to criticize those who engage in violence.."
That's the beauty of being a naysayer. It's win-win.
I can't think of any Catholic saint who was canonized because of military or sanguinary exploits. You won't find sainted torturers, slavers or warrior-kings. I cant think even of any canonized Crusaders except maybe Louis IX of France, and he was mostly a peacemaker and a just lawgiver who died before actually getting to the Crusade (died of some plague-related infection in Tunis.)
The very --very --- few sainted soldiers are vastly outnumbered by sainted EX-soldiers like Ignatius of Loyola, Martin of Tours, Francis of Assisi, who --- rather like the ex-sword-wielding Apostle Peter --- put down the sword and took up the Cross.
There's plenty of sin in Catholic history. But the perps were in those instances violating, not exemplifying, Catholic doctrine. The one saint I can think of who was famed for a feat of arms (St. Joan of Arc) is a solitary rare bird; there's not another like her.
It is absolutely essential to keep in mind that there have been butchers, lechers, slave-abductors and so forth in Christian history, but they were acting outside-of and against the precepts and example of Christ, acting (at their worst) in disobedience to their own authorities, were seen by their more devout contemporaries as scandalous, and are seen in retrospect as abhorrent.
By contrast, the butchers, lechers, and slave-abductors in Islamic history were acting in accordance with the precepts and example of Mohammad, acting in conformity to their authorities, were seen by their contemporaries as devout, and are seen in retrospect (by fellow Muslims) as exemplary.
The more religiously observant a Muslim becomes, the more he or she wishes to conform to the Hadiths, to the Koran, and to Mohammad himself; and the more damnable their behavior becomes.
That's the utter perversion of it all.
“.... the ex-sword-wielding Apostle Peter”?
Peter was told he was wrong to wield the sword and he didn't go out to burn and torture “heretics”.
Maybe the Catholic church owes an apology to Bruno the Cathars and many others then.
Is THIS what you had in mind?
That there have been "unbelievers" in positions of authority within the Church is beyond dispute. There still are today.
Is the current plight of Christians in Syria, Iraq and other places no more than a window of opportunity to attack Catholicism? Or is your point here that this is an example of "what goes around, comes around" and that we've had this coming to us?
Is there some weird Jehovah's Witness Scripture interpretation which says that Catholics and Orthodox getting a good kicking from the Muslims, is all part of God's plan to punish the "Harlot of Rome"?
Unfortunately, that simply ignores the fact that wherever Christianity has not opposed islam by the sword, Christianity as a social/cultural force has died.
Would to God they all converted, but conducting oneself according to hopes that have an unblemished record of failure is simply insanity.
While ancient Rome may have been a ravening beast, it did have some measure of honor and nobility. By analogy, islam is little more than a disease; the more circumspect it’s adherents, the less human (in the philosophical sense) those adherents becomes.
That man was a paragon! But were the members of the Catholic Church not “ real believers” back then?
As a Pope? Which ones of these who claim to the successor to Peter, Vicar of Christ, etc.?
I didn't write Benedict's speechs or the history of the Catholic and Muslim warfare in the Middle East.
It was all predestined and therefore something we should be thankful for.
And then,what did Jesus say to Peter? I believe He said,"those who live by the sword will die by the sword",didn't He?
It seems to me that since this was Christs last night on earth that the conversation was more than some casual back and forth between Jesus and Peter,just maybe He was telling Peter about the futility of fighting and killing. Maybe Benedict XVI follows Him,just as He asked Peter (in perpetuity) to do.
And maybe Benedict XVI is obedient and understands what Christ is telling him to do today. And maybe we all ought to pray and think a little more about what our Triune God wants.
I am interested in anyone's thought. I feel that we are just like those people that lived at the time of the Crucifixion.half asleep but eager to help and more often than not do the wrong thing because we forget what God has taught us.
Who was acting “...in disobedience to their own authorities”,..in the murder and virtual annihilation of “heretics” in France? In fact were not officials and citizens threatened with punishment themselves for any lack of cooperation? Was it not by papal decree?
“In retrospect” who sees such acts as abhorrent? Or are justifications offered up?
“Why do you think that Jesus picked up the ear of the centurion and placed it back where it came from? I am talking about the ear that Peter, roused from his sleep,and seeking to help save Jesus,lopped off.
And then,what did Jesus say to Peter? I believe He said,”those who live by the sword will die by the sword”,didn’t He?”
Actually it was the ear of a slave belonging to the High Priest and Jesus added to that comment that Jesus could call upon legions of angels for assistance if he choose.
So he didn’t need Peter’s sword or ours to protect or extend the church.
He also asks Peter in both gospels to put the sword away and in the one I had referred to He says those who live by sword shall perish by it.
I only mentioned it to draw attention to the fact that despite some of the comments questioning what the Pope was doing and saying there are many good reasons to believe the Pope was "following" Truth (Jesus) and Jesus believes it necessary to warn His slumbering people that they should at least be very careful lest their actions cause even more grief.
I just wanted to thank you for so many of the great articles you have posted such as this one as well as the many concise and clear comments,right now I'm referring to the comment you made to a responder.
That is an excellent point! It is Almighty God who calls all men to repentance and faith in Christ. It is the Holy Spirit who is in the world to convict the world of sin, righteousness and judgment. All we are called to do is speak the truth, preach the Gospel, be instant in season and out, and trust the Lord to open hearts to receive the truth. No soul was ever won to saving faith in Christ at the end of a sword. Jesus said all would know we are his disciples by our love one for another. This should be a HUGE clue to those who might be considering conversion to Islam.
As Peter amply demonstrated,we can make people very hard of hearing depending on how we wield the 'sword'.(Ephesians 6:17,1 Peter 3:15)
Of course, the immortal Oscar Wilde.
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.