Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

High profile Muslim convert quits Catholic Church
The Tablet ^ | 3/25/2013

Posted on 03/25/2013 9:08:05 AM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM

High profile Muslim convert quits Catholic Church

25 March 2013

Magdi Cristiano Allam, an Egyptian-born Muslim whom Pope Benedict publicly baptised at Easter five years ago in St Peter's Basilica has announced that he is leaving the Church because it has taken too soft a stand against Islam.

"My conversion to Catholicism, which came at the hands of Benedict XVI during the Easter Vigil on 22 March 2008, I now consider finished in combination with the end of his pontificate," Mr Allam wrote on Monday in the right-wing Milan daily, Il Giornale.

The 61-year-old journalist and right-wing politician has long been an Italian citizen. He said he had pondered his decision to leave the Church for some time. However, he affirmed that the "last straw" was the election of Pope Francis, which he said was proof that the Church is "troppo buonista" - excessively tolerant.

"The 'papolatry' that has inflamed the euphoria for Francis I and has quickly archived Benedict XVI was the last straw in an overall framework of uncertainty and doubts about the Church," he wrote.

"The thing that drove me away from the Church more than any other factor was religious relativism, in particular the legitimisation of Islam as a true religion," he said. Mr Allam said Islam was "an intrinsically violent ideology" that had to be courageously opposed as "incompatible with our civilisation and fundamental human rights". "I am more convinced than ever that Europe will end up being subjugated to Islam just like what happened beginning in the seventh century on the other side of the Mediterranean," he warned.

The journalist's baptism in St Peter's Basilica was a highly guarded secret until the day it occurred. Mr Allam said Archbishop Rino Fisichella, head of the Pontifical Council for the New Evangelisation, "personally accompanied" him to accept and be instructed in the Catholic faith. His godfather and confirmation sponsor was Maurizio Lupi, a high-ranking member of the Forza Italia party founded by former Italian prime minister, Silvio Berlusconi.


TOPICS: Catholic; Current Events; Islam; Religion & Culture
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last
To: Zionist Conspirator

Typo, sorry. Sounds like you are confused at to how Catholic theology and teaching works, and you’ve got a chip on your shoulder. As I said, have fun with all that, and good luck with everything.


41 posted on 03/25/2013 2:30:01 PM PDT by Free and Armed (Playing leap frog with a unicorn and compromising with liberals--both have a similar end result)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp

So the fella didn’t leave Jesus...He only left the Catholic religion...Sounds like he encountered a relationship with Jesus before he became a Catholic and found the two were not compatible...


42 posted on 03/25/2013 4:56:25 PM PDT by Iscool (uee)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr; little jeremiah
"As long as the Church recognizes any religion other than itself, isn’t that relativism?"

You would have to explain what you mean by "recognizes."

The Catholic Church recognizes some elements of truth and value in other faith communities, without saying all faiths and religions are equal or identical or equivalent.

For instance, if a Baptist, a Catholic, a Muslim, a Baha'i, a Sikh, a Calvinist, a Brahmin and a Jew all agreed, "There is only one God, Who is the Supreme Being and Creator of all things visible and invisible," --- well, that statement is true, no matter who it was who said it.

That's not relativism; it's not acceding that all these significantly different religious systems are valid; it's just recognizing that the truth is true, no matter who said it.

That's the opposite of relativism, wouldn't you say?

Here's an affirmation which neither Pope Francis, not any other pope will deny: DOMINUS IESUS: ON THE UNICITY AND SALVIFIC UNIVERSALITY OF JESUS CHRIST AND THE CHURCH (Link).

43 posted on 03/25/2013 6:12:39 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Takes one to know one, and vice versa.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Da Coyote

News flash: Islam has been at war with us for ~1400 years.

Whether you/we choose to recognize it is another thing altogether, but the facts on the ground back me up.


44 posted on 03/25/2013 6:23:36 PM PDT by FreedomPoster (Islam delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: HerrBlucher
Well said, C.S. Lewis, and well said, Herr Blucher!

You might like mine at #43

45 posted on 03/25/2013 6:51:21 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Takes one to know one, and vice versa.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Excellent!


46 posted on 03/25/2013 7:05:42 PM PDT by HerrBlucher (Praise to the Lord the Almighty the King of Creation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Thank you for the ping. There’s an old Sanskrit saying, I hope I can remember correctly, goes something like this:

One should accept a qualified teacher even from a low born family, one should accept a good wife even if poor and uneducated, and one should accept gold even if found in a dirty place.

Truth is truth where ever it is found; and once truth is alive in your heart, you can recognize it even in different garb.


47 posted on 03/25/2013 7:59:59 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point. CSLewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp

“The only thing that didn’t happen to Bergoglio was being removed from his post”, wrote investigative journalist Horacio Verbitsky in his column in left-wing daily newspaper Página/24”...

I’d need another source before I’d believe this leftist “journalist” as the story doesn’t ring true.


48 posted on 03/25/2013 8:11:03 PM PDT by bronxville (Margaret Sanger - “We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population,Â)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bronxville

Correction - I should have said - credible source.


49 posted on 03/25/2013 8:11:45 PM PDT by bronxville (Margaret Sanger - “We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population,Â)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: HerrBlucher

“The Church recognizes elements of ABSOLUTE Truth in other religions, such as Monotheism, the afterlife, etc.”

Well said. Moral relativism always contradicts itself because as soon as one says “it’s wrong to impose ones morals on others” they’re claiming a moral absolute.

Peter Kreeft - A Refutation of Moral Relativism...

“No culture in history has ever embraced moral relativism and survived. Our own culture, therefore, will either
(1) be the first, and disprove history’s clearest lesson, or (2) persist in its relativism and die, or (3) repent of its relativism and live. There is no other option.”
http://www.peterkreeft.com/audio/05_relativism/relativism_transcription.htm


50 posted on 03/25/2013 8:44:16 PM PDT by bronxville (Margaret Sanger - “We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population,Â)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

“The Catholic Church recognizes some elements of truth and value in other faith communities, without saying all faiths and religions are equal or identical or equivalent.”

Also well said...great link...thank you.

The left believes in subjective relativism which allows them to say “my truth is different from your truth”. Debate is fruitless.

The left also believes in cultural relativism which allows them to say “society says so”, Debate is fruitless.

But if one believes there’s Truth - opinions can be wrong - then an open dialogue is possible. Hearing and discussing reasoned opinions gives us all an opportunity to see which is True.

Why even debate if there is no Truth?!


51 posted on 03/25/2013 8:58:14 PM PDT by bronxville (Margaret Sanger - “We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population,Â)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

You are assuming any one religion is valid for all. I don’t believe that.

I don’t believe in an absolute moral truth because one cannot be proven...they are absolute beliefs, not truths


52 posted on 03/26/2013 6:03:25 AM PDT by stuartcr ("I have habits that are older than the people telling me they're bad for me.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Iscool
You can never really “leave the Church”.
Posted on by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

I occasionally get an message from someone who explains in self-righteous high dudgeon that she is leaving the Church because of [INSERT FLIMSY EXCUSE HERE].

Over at his excellent blog, Ed Peters looks at a case of someone who said he left the Church.

This is instructive.

Is Magdi Allam still a Catholic?
by Dr. Edward Peters

Magdi Allam, “a prominent Muslim-born journalist baptized by Pope Benedict XVI” has now blogged about “leaving the [C]hurch because it is too ‘weak with Islam.’” Maybe it’s just me, but this modern proclivity to parade one’s spiritual angst in the blogosphere is wearing pretty thin. [It's not just you, Ed.] Besides, as Chesterton remarked, there are a thousand reasons to leave the Church and only one reason to stay: It’s true. So, Magdi cited two or three reasons to leave the Church, and not reasons especially high up on the “Top 1000 Reasons To Leave the Catholic Church” list at that. Whatever.
Still I don’t know why some folks are so quick to assume that (a) Allam was not ‘really’ a Catholic, or (b) he was not adequate catechized, or (c) Allam’s abandonment of the Faith must be an embarrassment to Abp. Fisichella who shepherded Allam into the Church. If my sins cannot be laid at the feet of my parents or pastors why should Allam’s be charged to Fisichella? God has no grandchildren.
In particular, because of the indelible character conferred by Baptism (c. 845, and I’m presuming Confirmation, as Allam was baptized as an adult, c. 866), Allam will, for all eternity, be marked as a baptized and confirmed Christian. Now, one’s canonical identity is not easily turned on or off and nothing in the reports I’ve seen so far suffice for, say, schism or even formal defection. All I glean so far is one man expressing contempt for his obligation to conduct himself in accord with the requirements of communion (c. 209). But that does not make one a non-Catholic, that just makes one a bad Catholic.
Ultimately, Allam’s sacramental seal will either be a source of greater joy to him in Heaven (as, hopefully, he will repent of his deed) or of greater suffering for him in Hell (if his act is sufficiently imputable to him, as only God would know), but either way, Allam is, on these facts, still Catholic and should be regarded as a Catholic whose need for prayers is just a little more obvious than is ours.

The Second Vatican Council’s document Lumen gentium at par. 14 has sobering words for those who think they want to leave the Church or who refuse to join it, knowing and believing the Church’s divine origin and claims.

This Sacred Council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.

“… could not be saved”.


53 posted on 03/26/2013 6:09:43 AM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM ("Miserando atque eligendo")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: bronxville
You are absolutely right when you say that to the relativists, no debate is possible.

Some people are always proclaiming their ardent nature, which they take to be an unqualified virtue: "I'm passionate about ----- -----" "I just feel so strongly about this." "It's a cause I can totally identify with."

Well, if that's the case, you can't even ask a question without (1) revealing your own lack of blood in your veins and showing yourself a cold fish and a heartless emotional squib, and/or (2) being "mean" to this vital, passionate person who "identifies" with his truth, his cause, his enthusiasm.

No question of right or wrong, true or false, good or bad; it's: if you feel with me, you're human; and if not, not.

54 posted on 03/26/2013 6:42:48 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr
So you believe in relativism as an absolute?

: : : :sigh : : : :

55 posted on 03/26/2013 6:44:32 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

No, I believe it’s just how God made me. I imagine He made you differently.

: : : :sigh : : : :: : : :sigh : : : :


56 posted on 03/26/2013 7:03:19 AM PDT by stuartcr ("I have habits that are older than the people telling me they're bad for me.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr; don-o
I don't believe in your radical relativism, and moreover, I can prove it.

You have a rational mind, and the mind is attracted to truth, just as the eye is attracted to light, and finds in it its real satisfaction.

God Himself did not make you into a relativist, because God Himself says He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life; and He has made you in His image and likeness, though that image may be trodden down, wounded and obscured.

If you insist of the logical consequences of "there is no absolute truth" or "truth is un-knowable," it reduces to absurdam very quickly indeed.

It is a discussion-stopper (you will already have experienced this); it is a thought-stopper; it can also be a life-stopper, since a reasonable person finds an absurd existence intolerable.

Cry out for your own sake; cry out for your well-being on the chance someone is there to hear.

57 posted on 03/26/2013 7:17:19 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (O Lord, hear my voice; O Holy One, let my cry come to You.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Why do you say the mind is attracted to truth? Isn’t it attracted to untruths also?

Everything you say, is relative to your faith, isn’t it...or what you would call the truth.

Why does it reduce to absurdum?

Of course it’s a discussion-stopper. Why do you think these discussions have been going on forever?


58 posted on 03/26/2013 7:37:23 AM PDT by stuartcr ("I have habits that are older than the people telling me they're bad for me.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr
"Why do you say the mind is attracted to truth? Isn’t it attracted to untruths also?"

No. It is disgusting to discover one has been lied to, morale-busting to realize you've been laboring under a delusion, annoying to get or be given a wrong answer. The mind is not attracted to untruth, except so as to undo the untruth: e.g.some people are attracted to controversy because they like to expose an error. Even in this it is the truth that attracts them.

Everything you say, is relative to your faith, isn’t it...or what you would call the truth.

Actually, what I said is accurate and rightly compels assent. It will stand up to scrutiny. It is suported by evidence. I'll grant you that this requires an a priori respect for evidence.

"Why does it reduce to absurdum?"

Because if you apply the premises of "there's no truth" or "truth is un-knowable" consistently, it de-motivates discussion, de-motivates exploration and discovery, de-motivates thinking, and finally de-motivates living.

"Of course it’s a discussion-stopper. Why do you think these discussions have been going on forever?"

People discuss because they're motivated to correct error and get at the right view of things.

(I'll grant that there are low motivations, too: the desire to grandstand for your friends, the desire to vent negative feelings and inflict emotional pain--- Merciful Lord, I don't know why some people do keep arguing on and on!!!.)

But if you keep spraying on the Universal Solvent called "Truth is Un-knowable", the conversation will dissolve rather quickly. People will not see what is the point of saying anything.

59 posted on 03/26/2013 3:04:03 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (O Lord, hear my voice; O Holy One, let my cry come to You.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr
You have stated....”I don’t believe in an absolute moral truth because one cannot be proven...they are absolute beliefs, not truths”......

That very statement is an absolute truth statement, the very thing you are saying cannot be proven by the “reasoning” you are using.

Truth by it's very definition ‘excludes’ it's opposite...it cannot be all-inclusive. When a person denies the exclusive nature of truth they are making a truth claim.

The question will always be whether the truth claim being made is sustained by the tests for truth.

60 posted on 03/26/2013 7:41:55 PM PDT by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson