Posted on 07/26/2013 7:56:13 PM PDT by marshmallow
Fatima, Harissa, Damascus, Samalut, Assiut, Zeitun and many other places where the Virgin appeared are the destination of incessant pilgrimages from Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, Iran. Pilgrims in search of physical but also spiritual healing; spontaneous and mystical prayer and not the schematic and formal verses of official Islam. The iconoclast Salafists destroy places of pilgrimage every year. But the devotion to Mary is growing, also fueled by the stories of the Koran. The spiritual dialogue between Christians and Muslims is much more promising than cultural, theological or political dialogue.
Beirut (AsiaNews) - Each year millions of Muslims come on pilgrimage to the Catholic Marian shrines. Not only to the major shrines such as Fatima in Portugal or Harissa in Lebanon, but also to Egypt, Syria, Iran. Muslims - especially Muslim women - go to give thanks to the Madonna or great Christian saints, like St. Charbel or St. George.
In the eyes of many Westerners these gestures seem ridiculous or false: they speak of apparitions, of prayers, but then there are massacres, killings, violence in the name of religion!
Like it or not, the religious phenomenon is alive in Latin America, in Africa, in Asia. When you see millions of Hindus go to bathe in the dirty water of the sacred river it may seem like a ridiculous thing. Yet for those who do it is an act of purification, of prayer. The West is tolerant and benevolent towards other religions, but its attitude towards Christians is increasingly hypercritical. The West is not post-Hindu, post-Islam. It is only post-Christian!
The point is that in the West, the supernatural is considered outdated, it is branded as mythology, illusion, instead the West is forever denouncing the difficulties that neither miracles nor pilgrimages can erase.
But in the rest of the world the spiritual.....
(Excerpt) Read more at asianews.it ...
It's much deeper than that. In Fundamentalist Protestantism "heaven" is a holding area for disembodied souls awaiting the resurrection of the body and the return to a material paradise earth--the way we were actually supposed to live in the first place. So far from being the "final purpose" of our existence and something even an unfallen Adam would experience, the whole thing is a contingency. And because paradise earth is man's natural state, no purgation is required to enter either it or the heavenly "holding area;" this would make as much sense as saying Adam would have had to be purified before he could have been created! Once one accepts J*sus' vicarious damnation in one's place, there's simply no where else to go.
Oddly enough, I spoke on this to the intermediate school relious education class last spring. With the priest and deacon both there. With their approval. Of course, our bishop and I have tangled in public on the Catholic faith and the diocesan establishment. On television (heh heh heh).
You're a brave man. I still have the four letters sent to me by the late Archbishop Whelan of Hartford, Connecticut during my written correspondence with him. He was most singularly unsympathetic.
I don't have a lot of time for FR due to a change in career and escalating responsibilities with five kids at home. If you wish to note what you consider to be posts that contain ideas contrary to the word of God, please let me know. I have no problem confronting Catholics and have done so many times on FR. However, I do it in private, not in the public forum, for the sake of onlookers' satisfaction.
Mark, I'm so sorry I bit your head off. I'm just so blasted rubbed raw by the more conservative Catholics here never saying anything and claiming to never notice anything, when I can find plenty of stuff easily. And of course you don't confront people publicly, though it might do some good to simply publicly post a contrary opinion without chewing anyone out. I've been dealing with something as well during the past four months; hopefully this will be through tomorrow.
Did you even read the article? It posed it as a possibility, while acknowledging that it was in no way a definite conclusion. You and I have known each other here for a long time. I don't post speculative stuff like this. I realize that people might and do not begrudge them this; however, claiming that this article is the Gospel Truth, assuming that I actually see it, would normally get me involved.
It always struck me as peculiarly strange that the "ancient unchangeable church" produces so much "speculation" such as this while Fundamentalist Protestantism does not. Where does this itch for novelty come from? No such article would ever appear in Sword of the Lord, for example. Why are "heretical" Fundamentalist Protestants satisfied with what G-d says while the church of billions of illiterate peasants simply cannot leave things alone without doubting and questioning everything? Is there any way you can explain this to me so that I can understand it? Is the need to prove "we're not like those awful people" so great?
I will defend the integrity of Deuteronomy as what God wanted Moses to know. I will consider Joshua down a notch. God did not dictate Joshua.
I am most astounded to read that statement from a Catholic, I admit.
I know that you are disappointed in the Church. We have had conversation before on this. Believe it or not, it does distress me.
Thank you, Mark. As hard as this may be to believe, I really appreciate that.
The Founders and Framers were well informed, by Protestant tradition, classical learning, and alertness to what surrounded them..
I'm a Dominican. I fancy myself pretty good at philosophy and theology, though I am an amateur. Kolokotronis is no slouch at his tradition and his view of ultimate Truth. By the demanding standards of our avocations (once, when I thought myself an Episcopal priest, my profession) there are meaningful things we can say about the theological defects of the vision of the founders.
I do not think it a blanket, a total condemnation and rejection when Kolokotronis implies that we Dominicans are doing it ALL WRONG! I am pretty confident that he does not think I am rejecting him when I (entirely correctly, by the way) describe him as an Attic imbecile who couldn't put together a coherent theological system if a case of ouzo depended on it.
In other words, among us extremely old school Xtians, a profound respect for the thinking and acts of people with whom we disagree in no way excludes a protracted and vicious argument against some small part of it. If I were in Kolokotronis's league, I would throw down against him. That would in no way interfere with my reliance on him for spiritual advice and even wisdom.
In our tradition, it is important that God once moved an ass to speak truth. (YES, Kolokotronis, I'm talking about you.)
So we feel free to highlight the errors of the founders and framers AS we also revere them.
Some Protestants don't get this. Their loss.
:-)
Well said, IMHO.
This is taken from the Gospel of Basilides which was a fraudulent gospel written in the 300s
Come on -- one can mock the differing beliefs of the afterlife. the Torah doesn't comment on it. Only post the Exile do we see the beginning emerge in Ezekiel
That's not true. Each interprets what G-d says in a different way. Let's leave aside the old argument about myriad interpretations for a while and just to this point you make -- doubting and questioning everything is why we no longer have animal sacrifices in a synagogue -- or why we know (unlike what our secular foes toss at us) that the OT's injunct against killing the Canaanites is not comparable to Islam's jihad.
well we illiterate rednecks are that way only :-P
Indeed. The whole thing is plagiarized from beginning to end.
That's what I thought, but on re-looking at these, we don't really have his own words but Hadiths that date at least a century after his death
perhaps, but the "Christians" that were there in the Nejd were those who were chased out of the Roman Empire which was orthodox or miaphysite (Coptic, Syriac, Armenian) and the Persian which was Assyrian
these included groups as vague as Gnostics or Nazoreans (who believed that Jesus was the child of the Father with Sophia (the Holy Spirit) as the Mother) or the Gospel of Basilides or even Arians.
Add that to pre-pagan Islamic beliefs and Zoroastrianism and add in the Jewish laws and transfer the chosen people's right to the Arabs and you have a potent mix.
So it was the guidelines for what happened AFTER????
That's what I thought, but on re-looking at these, we don't really have his own words but Hadiths that date at least a century after his death
We have reason to believe that he actually dictated/wrote? the Koran.
True, but again, Persians are not Arabs, to cut a fine point. And it took Muhammed and a fine band of brigands to take advantage of it.
True, persians are different, but their influence was felt deep into Arabia. Oman for instance had an irani colony. And Zoroastrian is ancient, so its influences would be felt among semitics
Yet there are no korans written prior to caliph uthman
Quite correct. But you want a scimitar to the throat, just call an Iranian an Arab.
According to various traditions, Muhammed had individual writings dictated to his secretaries, or wrote some of them himself. Uthman gathered the information (and added whatever he did).
yet there is no proof of this — very surprising when you consider that the Arabs were the conquerors and conquerors generally would write “Oh, i won this land thanks to the Prophet....”
Like many of our own traditions, the participants never thought of writing it down. In the Muslim case, they simply cut the heads off people who scoffed or didn’t believe in their (sometimes) fairy stories.
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.