Francis

Stonewall · Mar 22, 2013

While rockets are fired into Palestine, while we continue to struggle with radical Islam, while Iran develops nuclear weaponry, while the world becomes embroiled out of the confusion comes a real voice of hope and change.

In this work (peace building), the role of religion is fundamental. It is not possible to build bridges between people while forgetting God," he said.
"But the converse is also true: it is not possible to establish true links with God while ignoring other people. Hence it is important to intensify dialogue among the various religions, and I am thinking particularly of dialogue with Islam."

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/pope-dialogue-islam-poor/2013/03/22/id/495842#ixzz2OHYibevP

This Francis speaks to us all, maybe some will listen. Do we see Islamic leadership with their hand out in such a manner? Ever?

David · Mar 22, 2013

Stonewall said:
While rockets are fired into Palestine, while we continue to struggle with radical Islam, while Iran develops nuclear weaponry, while the world becomes embroiled out of the confusion comes a real voice of hope and change.

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/pope-dialogue-islam-poor/2013/03/22/id/495842#ixzz2OHYibevP

This Francis speaks to us all, maybe some will listen. Do we see Islamic leadership with their hand out in such a manner? Ever?

I'm of the opinion that Islam's fall from advanced civilization to medieval barbarism in large part has to do with the loss of the Caliphate. Without a Caliph, there's no universally recognized voice to keep Muslims true to the faith or to declare the radical groups heretical. A moderate Caliph is desperately needed if the Muslims ever want to rise again.

Stonewall · Mar 22, 2013

I think Barbarism is a stretch. there are some very poor and struggling nations such as Pakistan or even Afghanistan. But nations such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Qatar, or even Iran have far surpassed medieval.

But I think more moderate leadership is the right track.

David · Mar 22, 2013

Stonewall said:
I think Barbarism is a stretch. there are some very poor and struggling nations such as Pakistan or even Afghanistan. But nations such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Qatar, or even Iran have far surpassed medieval.

But I think more moderate leadership is the right track.

Saudi Arabia is no more advanced then the Romans just before the 4th Crusade. The people are poor while the absolute monarchy lives large. Just because they have modern tech doesn't really change anything. Thing of it this way, before the Muslims went insane, they invented algebra, introduced a better numbering system then Roman numerals, invented ophthalmology, invented neurology (they were doing successful brain surgeries while the Europeans were running around clubbing each other), figured out the human anatomy, etc. Now the only Muslims pulling off stuff like that are doing in in Western, secular environments while in the Islamic word you just have the previously mentioned medieval barbarism.

Stonewall · Mar 22, 2013

David said:
Saudi Arabia is no more advanced then the Romans just before the 4th Crusade. The people are poor while the absolute monarchy lives large. Just because they have modern tech doesn't really change anything. Thing of it this way, before the Muslims went insane, they invented algebra, introduced a better numbering system then Roman numerals, invented ophthalmology, invented neurology (they were doing successful brain surgeries while the Europeans were running around clubbing each other), figured out the human anatomy, etc. Now the only Muslims pulling off stuff like that are doing in in Western, secular environments while in the Islamic word you just have the previously mentioned medieval barbarism.

We'll agree to disagree, I believe today's Muslim world far ahead of the Roman Empire on numerous levels including quality of life and economic realities. What the Muslim world lacks is a separation of church and state, their church's policies limiting women and religious minorities to second class citizens, difficult to allow equal rights and free expression in such societies. The Muslim world often considers women property, but then so did the Roman world, women had very few rights. Slavery existed, the selling of women a reality in both cultures.......

Their religion suppresses freedom of speech, association, and one's own happiness, it's not medieval, merely a strict religious creed.

David · Mar 22, 2013

Stonewall said:
Their religion suppresses freedom of speech, association, and one's own happiness, it's not backwards, merely a strict religious creed.

Not really, blind faith is a sin, Muslims are supposed to question their religion and actively try to refute it (the idea being their failure will prove its validity), woman are supposed to control a household's finances (the trade off being that men get 1st dibs on inheritances), etc. The real problem is the lose of intellectual prowess and a patriarchal and hierarchical society that cherry pics scripture to keep men on top and the lower classes from asking questions. without a Caliph, there's nobody of universal standing in the Islamic World to cry foul and we get the mess we have now. I see the same thing starting to happen here in the West though the secularization of society has slowed the process down (unfortunately, ideology seems to be replacing religion as the fuel of our decline).

Stonewall · Mar 22, 2013

What do you think of the Pope's words of outreach?

David · Mar 22, 2013

Stonewall said:
What do you think of the Pope's words of outreach?

It's a good thing, a message of peace undermines the 'Crusader Infidels' BS coming from the extremists.

Stonewall · Mar 23, 2013

I thought so as well. A unique start for a Pope and I must admit, a most impressive one. If there was hope of reconciliation between worlds, the Pope is as good a place to start as any. He seems to be a true leader in a world sorely lacking, we shall see.

David · Mar 23, 2013

Nice to see a pope that actually sticks to his monkish vows.

Stonewall · Mar 24, 2013

Christian leadership held to a higher standard is a rather common theme.

Salty · Mar 24, 2013

David said:
I'm of the opinion that Islam's fall from advanced civilization to medieval barbarism in large part has to do with the loss of the Caliphate. Without a Caliph, there's no universally recognized voice to keep Muslims true to the faith or to declare the radical groups heretical. A moderate Caliph is desperately needed if the Muslims ever want to rise again.

Great point.

Stonewall · Mar 25, 2013

Yes..... a Caliph needed to "keep Muslims true to the faith" and 'declare' this or that radical group "heretical" and then of course...deal with them all?

What the Muslim world needs is quite the opposite. Individual rights is what the current explosion is about if I'm not mistaken, the Arab Spring is nothing more than the Arab World demanding more self determination, the right to choose their own leadership, representation. It is individual rights, freedom of speech and association, and self determination that is needed, quite the 180 of any Caliphate.

Rather than a 'Caliph' to determine what is "true to the faith", the individual would determine that for themselves. And elect government leaders who through representation decide who is the radical...rather than some cleric.

Why is it particular agendas always need some government or oligarchy who must "keep" people to faith or creed? Some "universally recognized voice", how about the voice of Muslims themselves? Who have been suppressed and denied a voice for centuries, especially under these Caliphates.

Not to mention the endeavors of conquest these Caliphates went on shortly after Mohammed's death. You Progressives surprise me here.

David · Mar 25, 2013

Stonewall said:
Yes..... a Caliph needed to "keep Muslims true to the faith" and 'declare' this or that radical group "heretical" and then of course...deal with them all?

What the Muslim world needs is quite the opposite. Individual rights is what the current explosion is about if I'm not mistaken, the Arab Spring is nothing more than the Arab World demanding more self determination, the right to choose their own leadership, representation. It is individual rights, freedom of speech and association, and self determination that is needed, quite the 180 of any Caliphate.

Rather than a 'Caliph' to determine what is "true to the faith", the individual would determine that for themselves. And elect government leaders who through representation decide who is the radical...rather than some cleric.

Why is it particular agendas always need some government or oligarchy who must "keep" people to faith or creed? Some "universally recognized voice", how about the voice of Muslims themselves? Who have been suppressed and denied a voice for centuries, especially under these Caliphates.

Not to mention the endeavors of conquest these Caliphates went on shortly after Mohammed's death. You Progressives surprise me here.

Yet you're praising a pope? You realize the 2 positions are equivalent, yes?

Stonewall · Mar 25, 2013

David said:
Yet you're praising a pope? You realize the 2 positions are equivalent, yes?

The Pope is tolerant of other religions, where are the two positions equivalent. Careful Tangent, I praised the Pope for his words of outreach towards the Muslim Community. I do not call for some Catholic Caliphate to "keep" Catholics 'true to their faith' nor denounce the 'heretical.'

Tighten up.

David · Mar 25, 2013

Stonewall said:
The Pope is tolerant of other religions, where are the two positions equivalent. Careful Tangent, I praised the Pope for his words of outreach towards the Muslim Community. I do not call for some Catholic Caliphate to "keep" Catholics 'true to their faith' nor denounce the 'heretical.'

Tighten up.

The Caliphate, before it just became an honorary title o the Ottoman sultan, was the religious head of Islam in the same what the Pope (and before that, the Patriarchy) is the leader of Christianity. They are equivalent positions.

Tell me, how many Catholic terrorists do you see running around today?

Stonewall · Mar 25, 2013

Many Catholics enjoy self determination, separation of church and state where their governments are concerned.

The Islamic faith...including under Caliphates...promised eternal riches for the killing of infidels. But to answer your question, Catholicism has been guilty of many acts of terror and while serving under a Pope.

You're asking questions as if you know nothing of the topic matter, perhaps we discuss something you've tuned up on?

David · Mar 25, 2013

Stonewall said:
Many Catholics enjoy self determination, separation of church and state where their governments are concerned.

The Islamic faith...including under Caliphates...promised eternal riches for the killing of infidels. But to answer your question, Catholicism has been guilty of many acts of terror and while serving under a Pope.

You're asking questions as if you know nothing of the topic matter, perhaps we discuss something you've tuned up on?

Under which moderate pope, Ireland being the glaring exception (condemned by the papacy), were Catholics running around commenting terrorist acts? I said a moderate Caliph, not the Mullahs of Iran.

Stonewall · Mar 26, 2013

A "moderate Caliph" that would tell you who is "heretical" and "keep" Muslims true to their faith, huh?

Big government mentality at best, David, anything else?

David · Mar 27, 2013

Stonewall said:
A "moderate Caliph" that would tell you who is "heretical" and "keep" Muslims true to their faith, huh?

Big government mentality at best, David, anything else?

So if Pope Francis reminded Catholics to not rape and pillage whenever life got hard and called out the crazies in Africa, you'd be opposed to it?

Francis

Similar threads