Christianity

Current issues, news and ethics
Post Reply
star_munir
Posts: 1670
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2003 12:55 am
Contact:

Post by star_munir »

"Elie Elie Lama Sabakhtani - Elie, why have you forsaken me?"

This verse was spoken by Hazrat Essa [Jesus] and Elie here means Ali who was with every prophet according to Farman and Hadith.

There is one Ginan about Jesus and full story is told in it. I forgot Ginan I have heard some verses of it some times before. If any one knows than share it. Hope than every thing will be clarified.
kmaherali
Posts: 25107
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 3:01 pm

Historicity of Crucification.

Post by kmaherali »

History is always subject to interpretation. It involves an element of the faith or the beliefs of the person interpreting it. The question is not whether the incident ever took place, the evidence of which is fraught with inconsistencies and controversies, but rather if it is believable at all and what is its significance.

Our history is replete with examples of sacrifice for the cause of truth or for the sake of Allah. Imam Husein's martyrdom is a prime example. The issue is what is the significance of these events in terms of our world view, futility of excessive materialism, possibilities and potential of the elevated soul to overcome and endure any material affliction in happiness. Indeed the prophets of Allah being the paragons of purity and elevation have endured the most hardships even involving the ultimate sacrifice of their lives to teach humanity about the futility of this life and the greatness of the hereafter.

What we must learn from these incidences is that an enlightened or an elevated soul can endure any affliction without being affected and that we must strive to enrich our inner lives through Ibaadat to build that shield.

In the Ginan Kalpat Jalpat, Peer Hasan Kabirdeen says:

“Nisi jal hove to kuchh kaar na aave” meaning: If you are pure as water, you will not be affected by vagaries and vicissitudes of time.
aminL
Posts: 84
Joined: Sat May 22, 2004 3:59 pm
Location: Toronto

Post by aminL »

This is strictially my opinion but, yes history has proven that Judus who betrayed Jesus did look a lot like him. Jesus himself knew that Judus would betray as he told the other 11 desiples of him at the last dinner. He said one amongst you will betray me and then he turned and looked to Judus. Judus then ran out of the room and the other 11 deciples could not believe it. Like I mentioned earlier, Allah would not let his Phrophet suffer such disgraceful puncishment. So, histoians belive that it was Judus who was cursified on the cross not Jesus.

Just my opinion, if you would like to repond please PM me or Email
karimqazi
Posts: 78
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2003 2:53 pm
Location: Houston, Texas

chistianity

Post by karimqazi »

Ya Ali Madad to All,

When we talk about Jesus, we are discussing a controversal issue, because Christains believe he was the son of God and Muslims believe in the oneness of God. Let us discuss with farmans of Imam e Zaman, Sultan Mohd. Shah. In His farmans Mowla says that Isa Haqiqati hatao te khuda ma fana theo which means that Jesus was pure and he became one with pure. According to the farmans these four people--Jesus, Mohammed, Mansur, and Pir Shams (peace be upon them) are all from haqiqat, which implies that they are not human beings like us. They came directly from God to teach and guide the human race. Just on a side note Mowlana Rumi , Salman Farsi, Pir Sadarddin, Pir Nasir Khusraw and Wazir Saleh were five people who were human beings like us and were able to reach oneness with God. So it is important for us to realize that Jesus was Nur like the others mentioned, but was not the son of God. I think this will help clarify the concept of Jesus. Farmans come directly from Mowla, so there are no mistakes or different version like other sacred texts like the Bible and the Quran. That is we Ismailis believe in.

May Mowla bless you all and give you a deeper understanding of Ismaili teachings.
shamsu
Posts: 644
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2003 8:32 am

Son of God

Post by shamsu »

YAM Everyone,

When Jesus referred to his father I believe he mean his spiritual father The Imam of that time.

Just like MHI blesses us with paternal and maternal blessings which makes him our spiritual father and mother (Shah and Pir).

Imam SMS has called our deen haqiqati.

Isa was haqiqati which means to me that he existed in a spiritual realm at all times. So when he said father he meant spiritual father.

YAM

SHAMS
aminL
Posts: 84
Joined: Sat May 22, 2004 3:59 pm
Location: Toronto

Post by aminL »

The Holy Quran totally REJECTS the idea that Jesus was crusifed on the cross. We Muslims and EVEN Ismaili's belive that Allah would not let his Phrophet suffer such a horrible punishment and would save him. All Phrophets of God were chosen souls. All Pirs were chosen souls who were sent upon this Earth to help us in our spiritual journey. Adam,Noah, Amraham, Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad were all from Allah. So we Muslims do not except the fact that Jesus was crusifed on the cross. Like I mentioned in my earlyer reply it was Judus who was crusified on the cross instead of Jesus. If you say that Jesus was crusified on the cross then I belive that you also should except the idea of the Holy Trinity, which being a Muslim you can not do because then you are beliving in someone other then Allah. Just my views and ideas. I will post the Quranic Iyat later on about the Quran rejeting the fact that Jesus was crusified on the cross.
kmaherali
Posts: 25107
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 3:01 pm

Post by kmaherali »

aminL wrote:The Holy Quran totally REJECTS the idea that Jesus was crusifed on the cross. We Muslims and EVEN Ismaili's belive that Allah would not let his Phrophet suffer such a horrible punishment and would save him. All Phrophets of God were chosen souls. All Pirs were chosen souls who were sent upon this Earth to help us in our spiritual journey. Adam,Noah, Amraham, Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad were all from Allah.
Are you saying that Prophets and Imams should not suffer physically and that that kind of suffering is only for human beings? I think that is a totally wrong understanding of esotericism and elevation of the soul. The prophets and Imams endure the most hardships and even sacrifice their lives for survival of the fundamental principles and values that sustain creation. To the elevated souls this body and the world is nothing in comparison to the sea of divinity that they enjoy continuously. As I mentioned in my earlier post, our history is replete with examples of martyrdom and sacrifice. Many of our Imams were murdered and often ruthlessly. Do you think that the Imams and the Prophets do not have the capacity to avoid or overcome these tragedies. Offcourse they do. They can turn the world upside down if they choose to.

I am not saying that Jesus was actually crucified. However this event is believable to Ismailis. I do not see this as any different than the martyrdom of Imam Husein at Karbala. Or the martyrdom of Mansur who had his limbs severed.

These Haqiqati elevated souls teach humanity that you scarifice your life but do not compromise your values and principles and they set examples about that.

The other message that comes out is that elevated souls are beyond pain and suffering. They are not affected by physical atrocities at all. I think MHI mentions this in his Firmans of BUK that you will be able to overcome any material difficulty through this light. Being an elevated soul does not absolve one from engaging and suffering in this world. They also go through physical hardships. The difference is that they are not affected by these hardships. Thats why MHI tells us to strengthen our Batini lives because through stronger Batini lives we will be able to surmount any worldy difficulty.
aminL
Posts: 84
Joined: Sat May 22, 2004 3:59 pm
Location: Toronto

Post by aminL »

here is the ayat from the Quran where ALLAH tells us that Jesus was not crusified.

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 conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not (Sura An-Nisa; 4:157)

Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise (Sura An-Nia; 4:158)
aminL
Posts: 84
Joined: Sat May 22, 2004 3:59 pm
Location: Toronto

Post by aminL »

I am not saying that.... Allah is in the Quran
aminL
Posts: 84
Joined: Sat May 22, 2004 3:59 pm
Location: Toronto

Post by aminL »

I am not saying that.... Allah is in the Quran
kmaherali
Posts: 25107
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 3:01 pm

Post by kmaherali »

Based on the Quran, if such a major biblical event is questionable at the very least, what are we to think of the dates of all biblical events? How wildly inaccurate could they be?
aminL
Posts: 84
Joined: Sat May 22, 2004 3:59 pm
Location: Toronto

Post by aminL »

I dont get your question.... can u explain it more plz
kmaherali
Posts: 25107
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 3:01 pm

Christianity

Post by kmaherali »

Christianity can be condensed into four words: Admit, Submit, Commit and Transmit.

-Samuel Wilberforce

Is this really different than Islam?
kmaherali
Posts: 25107
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 3:01 pm

Post by kmaherali »

aminL wrote:here is the ayat from the Quran where ALLAH tells us that Jesus was not crusified.

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 conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not (Sura An-Nisa; 4:157)

Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise (Sura An-Nia; 4:158)
The following is my interpretation of the above two ayats. The fact that it is mentioned: "but so it was made to appear to them" implies there was an appearance of this fact. Many Christian mystics have had visions of the crucification of Isa Nabi. So I believe that this event did take place.

However, the second verse states that Isa Nabi was really united with God. According to our Ginans, there is no death for such a soul anymore, i.e. it is immortal beyond death. In Ginan "Kal Pat Jal Pat" Peer Hassan Kabirdeen says: " Nisi jal hove ta kuchh kaal na aave" - meaning: If one has attained purity (through enlightenment), he/she is not affected by time or death.

Hence in reality he was not crucified or killed, rather, that event was a means towards his ultimate unity with God.
kmaherali
Posts: 25107
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 3:01 pm

Humor And The Scriptures

Post by kmaherali »

This is not a joke! The following is the article that appeared in today's Calgary Herald about scholars discussing humour in the Bible.

Scholars mine Bible for hidden punchlines

The Associated Press

February 15, 2005

Humour in the Bible? Scholars say the Old and New Testaments are riddled with humorous references and aim to set the record straight at a three-day congress beginning Monday, called Laughter and Comedy in Ancient Christianity.

There's the tale from Luke's Gospel of Zaccheus, a diminutive and despised tax collector who, eager to see Jesus at a busy gathering, is forced into the attention-grabbing indignity of scrambling up a tree.
Or the patriarch Isaac, whose name comes from the Hebrew word for laughter because of the joy and disbelief his birth brought to his aging parents, Abraham and Sarah.

These witticisms may not have modern readers rolling on the floor. But scholars of Christian literature and theology at the congress in Turin insist the Bible is full of jokes and clever wordplay. They hope to show that humour, far from being considered sinful, had an important place in early Christianity and in the Bible itself, said Clementina Mazzucco, a professor of Ancient Christian Literature at Turin University.

"There is a prejudice that states that humour and Christianity are incompatible," Mazzucco said in a telephone interview. "On the contrary, there are many episodes and dialogues in the Scriptures where irony and sarcasm are being used."
© The Calgary Herald 2005
kmaherali
Posts: 25107
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 3:01 pm

Post by kmaherali »

The following interview with a person who deals with the church related issues on a daily basis, provides us wih an insight into the state of the church at present. It is interesting to note that the issues and the problems that they are dealing with are not unlike the ones that we deal with. These range from ethics to faith and doubt. What is even more striking is that there are areas such as shared ethics where there is unity with the Jews although they disagree upon doctrines particularly with reference to Christ as a Messiah. In the context of understanding and promoting pluralism it is a very useful article.

'These Are My Struggles'
Popular radio preacher Chuck Swindoll explains that being a Christian doesn't mean eradicating all of life's problems.

Interview by Rebecca Phillips



Chuck Swindoll is one of the foremost Christian radio evangelists in the country, reaching an audience of millions through his internationally syndicated radio show, "Insight for Living." He is also senior pastor of Stonebriar Community Church in Frisco, Texas and chancellor of Dallas Theological Seminary. Swindoll's latest contribution to his canon of more than 30 books is "Getting Through the Tough Stuff," an inspirational tome about how Jesus and the Bible can help Christians overcome struggles with anxiety, doubt, temptation, divorce, and other life challenges. Swindoll recently spoke with Beliefnet about his experience with these struggles and the relationship between faith and doubt.

What motivated you to write this book?
I wrote on getting through the tough stuff because there's so much of the tough stuff that makes up life. It is easy for Christians to have the false impression that once we have established a relationship with Christ, which we believe sets us right with God, the problems of life will somehow scoot away or they will slowly be removed from our lives. I find people surprised to hear that Jesus never promised that. In fact, sometimes when a person does decide to get serious about his faith, to trust in Christ and him alone for eternal life, that causes problems. It brings about misunderstanding, and sometimes it leads to confrontation, and a number of the things I deal with. Doubt is a part of it, and you don't get removed from the reality of death or pain. I decided to write and explain these are not exceptions; this is the rule. Life doesn't work out nice and neatly for those who are sincere about their faith. As a matter of fact, it often turns very serious as a person becomes serious about his faith.

As you say, people often think that finding faith in Jesus will make life easier. In your experience, has finding out that that doesn't happen ever caused people to lose faith? Certainly. There's a lot of disillusionment. Someone may watch a televangelist, and the televangelist's message may suggest, 'If you do this, and you do that, you're on easy street.' The idea is this is a no-lose deal, a no-brainer, 'I'm going to be healed.' But the reality is that they aren't healed. That leads to disillusionment. The book says, come back to basics: Life is tough.

You mentioned misunderstanding. In your book you say that Jesus was the most misunderstood individual who ever lived. What do you mean by that?
First of all, in my view of the scriptures, he was sinless. Being sinless, you would think he would get enormous respect, that there would be a massive following, that there would be those who would want to be a part of that life and yield to him. On the contrary, from the very beginning, his life was marked by those who saw him not as a virgin-born child, but as just another carpenter's son who claimed to be messiah. Many people in his own day saw him as an illegitimate child. So he's misunderstood as far as his birth is concerned, and also his purpose and his mission. That's what drove him to the cross--misunderstanding. That's why he said, 'Father, forgive them, they don't know what they're doing.'

Do you think Jesus is still misunderstood today?
Surely, mainly by those who have never investigated his life, or they've investigated with a preconceived caricature and haven't allowed the scriptures to speak for themselves. That's not fair. If I'm going to make a judgment call, I need to investigate the evidence to form an opinion.

You begin the book with the problem of temptation. Why did you choose that topic?
There is no order of importance in the book. I could have started with inadequacy, which is probably a problem for more people than the onslaught of temptation. I do find in life that temptations are numerous, whether it's toward eating too much, saying too much, going too far. The temptation to be greedy, envious of others, the temptation to have what somebody else has--these are all very common, and I thought it would be a good place to begin. Plus [temptation is present in] the life of Christ, as his ministry begins. He was taken into the wilderness for 40 days and tempted by the devil.

You were obviously very moved by Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ."
I was. As I state in the book, I've never witnessed anything that comes anywhere near depicting what I believe the New Testament teaches regarding the suffering Christ went through. I've preached on it for over 40 years, and every year before Easter, I address the subject of the crucifixion. But I have never seen it portrayed in such a vivid and realistic manner. I don't think he took liberties with the text. I don't know him, so I'm not carrying a torch for Mel Gibson. I just find when I study the scriptures and I read the rather antiseptic term, 'they scourged him,' you can pass over that word that we rarely use today and think little of it. When you see it for 35 minutes, like in the scenes in the film, it does something to you. I think it's a remarkable work. I finished that film in tears.

In your chapter about doubt, you write about reconciling faith and doubt. How can the two co-exist?
Not every Christian finds it easy to believe. Obviously [this is a problem for] everybody, but I'm just going to stay with the Christian ranks. When you read the story of Lazarus being raised from the dead, a non-reflective kind of person will think, "Gee, I would have loved to have been there." The reflective person will say, "Hold on. How'd that happen? Was he really dead?" Those are all thoughts of doubt. [In John 20] Thomas said, "If I see the scars in his hands and put my hand at his side and see where the spear was driven into him, I will not believe." Thomas was a reflective person. So when Jesus came to him, he didn't shame him. He said to him, 'Here, reach out your hand and touch the scar. I want you to see this, Thomas." He blessed him, he didn't make him ashamed. But he said, even more blessed are those who have not seen and believed. There will only be a few Thomases that have the privilege of touching the hands and the feet and the side. But the rest of us must believe by faith. In my book, this chapter says doubt is ok; it's not something that's going to send you to perdition. It's part of being a reflective person.

Do you think Christians today doubt enough?
That's hard for me to answer. I find that I'm around people who are a little too quick to believe. They say 'because I hear it from some televangelist, I'm now going to believe it, or because some Christian author wrote this, I'm supposed to believe it.' So in that sense, I think too many people are gullible. The key word here is discernment. We need discernment in what we see and what we hear and what we believe.

Turning to your chapter on prejudice, you write that your own understanding of Jesus overcoming prejudice had a lot to do with your own overcoming prejudice when you grew up in the South. How so?
I'm a child of the mid-30s and I had parents whose roots are in the deep South. So I heard statements and words used that, as I grew up, I found myself increasingly uncomfortable with. It especially helped me to do a stint in the Marine Corps, where fighting right alongside me were people of color. If you do enough of that, you become colorblind. You realize there are magnificent people out there of all colors, and there are some bad people out there, of all colors. Prejudice is a learned trait. You're not born prejudiced; you're taught it. If you're standing there as a five-year-old child in a Ku Klux Klan outfit, you're learning to hate African-Americans. If you never see that, if you're around parents who teach you to love one another, it doesn't dawn on you not to come to the aid of someone in need or not to talk to someone because of color. I think there are few people like Christ who can get you beyond that problem.

In that same chapter, you imply that Jews are still prejudiced against Jesus.
Some are. You've got to admit that when there are Orthodox Jews who are around Messianic Jews, that is people who were born Jewish but who have come to faith in Christ, there is a hatred for them.

You think that's because they have a hatred of Jesus?
I think it very well may be. They do not believe that the one who came is in fact Messiah. They're still looking for the Messiah. If you place your faith and trust in one you've called Messiah, they believe that's a false messiah. So, you ask if that's a hatred toward Jesus or toward them [Messianic Jews]. I think it's a disrespect toward them, and if we're going to use the word hate, I think the hate would be directed toward the one in whom they believed. They resent the thought that the other person would trust in one who claimed to be Messiah who they say is not Messiah.

Well, hatred of Jesus certainly isn't part of the many alliances forming between Orthodox Jews and conservative Christians these days. They're coming together on gay marriage, on abortion, on Israel. How do you view these alliances?
What they're agreeing on is ethical issues, moral issues. I'd be the first to say that some with whom I would not agree spiritually, as it relates to their rejection of Christ, I would agree with their position as it relates to abortion, or one of the issues you have mentioned. I think we can align with one another on those issues, and that's great. I don't think that just because a person rejects Christ that he doesn't have any opinion I can respect or he has nothing to offer that I can't learn from. That's stupidity and that's ignorance.

You've said that one of the most important principles for life is that marriage is forever, to the same person. But your book devotes entire chapters to getting through divorce and remarriage. What do you really think about marriage?
If it's an ideal world, then the ideal plan is one man for one woman for all of life. However, the ideal is that I never have germs. Sin is a reality. People disobey. Affairs happen. Broken vows occur. I think because of that, there is the permission on rare occasions for divorce and remarriage. I think it's the exception, rather than the rule. It's permitted rather than applauded. But I've even married couples who have been married before, if I've been convinced that they've thought it through, that they had reasons for divorce. In certain cases, you're not under bondage to stay with a person.

Which of the topics that you cover in the book have special meaning in your own life?
Have you personally struggled with any of these issues?
You bet. I've been misunderstood. I struggle at times with anxiety and I worry over things. I've felt ashamed over things I've done; until I've made it right, the shame has sort of dragged me down like an anchor. Thankfully, I haven't gone through divorce or the struggle of remarriage. I've known pain, I've worked my way through prejudice. I'm a child of the South and my parents were prejudiced, and I've learned to get beyond the battle of prejudice, but I've known many who haven't because I minister and live in the southern states. Hypocrisy is always a battle for people, along with feelings of inadequacy. These are mine--I just let you listen in on my own struggles.

You offer specific Bible verses to help readers through each of these issues. Were these the same Bible verses that you turned to yourself?
Absolutely. When people ask me how I knew what to speak about on a particular day, or how I knew what to write on, I'll often say, I'll let you listen in on what I needed to hear. I'll let you read what I needed to read. I'll be honest with you--there are times when an author finds himself or herself more strengthened by what he's written than anybody who reads it.
kmaherali
Posts: 25107
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 3:01 pm

Post by kmaherali »

Before Jesus died, He willed us His Peace...He wants us to have peace in the midst of our current circumstances--peace in the morning, at night and all times in between. Peace is our inheritance! And it is a wonderful possession.

-Joyce Meyer

Is the above description of Christianity any different than Islam?
ShamsB
Posts: 1117
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 5:20 pm

Post by ShamsB »

kmaherali wrote:
aminL wrote:here is the ayat from the Quran where ALLAH tells us that Jesus was not crusified.

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 conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not (Sura An-Nisa; 4:157)

Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise (Sura An-Nia; 4:158)
The following is my interpretation of the above two ayats. The fact that it is mentioned: "but so it was made to appear to them" implies there was an appearance of this fact. Many Christian mystics have had visions of the crucification of Isa Nabi. So I believe that this event did take place.

However, the second verse states that Isa Nabi was really united with God. According to our Ginans, there is no death for such a soul anymore, i.e. it is immortal beyond death. In Ginan "Kal Pat Jal Pat" Peer Hassan Kabirdeen says: " Nisi jal hove ta kuchh kaal na aave" - meaning: If one has attained purity (through enlightenment), he/she is not affected by time or death.

Hence in reality he was not crucified or killed, rather, that event was a means towards his ultimate unity with God.
"but they killed him not, nor crucified him, "

Hmm..Kmaherali..that is pretty clear that Allah says he wasn't killed nor crucified....there is actual some historical fact that Jesus was taken away to India/China..there is a tomb in Kashmir that is rumored to be of Christ..another myth has him escaping to Europe...
I personally don't believe Christ was crucified....Christ was a title given to anyone that was crucified in those days..crucifixion being a common punishment..the Romans must have crucified anywhere upto 20-30 men a day...remember christianity wasn't started by Jesus..it was preached and started by Saul of Tarsus who later became Paul..who had never met Jesus in real life..he had a vision of Jesus on his way to Damascus after the stoning of Stephen the Martyr.
The authors of the new testament are also in doubt..notice like Islamic Law..Jewish Law dictates that there be 4 male witnesses...thus the 4 gospels...the bible was also canonized by men seeking to consolidate power in the time of Constantine...so Gospels and books were left out...
in terms of the authorship of the bible..2 of the 4 gospel writers were illiterate....
There is also a historical theory that Paul and Jesus were one and the same person...don't know if that holds water but research is going on...


Shams (the OTHER Shams)
kmaherali
Posts: 25107
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 3:01 pm

Post by kmaherali »

ShamsB wrote:"but they killed him not, nor crucified him, "

Hmm..Kmaherali..that is pretty clear that Allah says he wasn't killed nor crucified....there is actual some historical fact that Jesus was taken away to India/China..there is a tomb in Kashmir that is rumored to be of Christ..another myth has him escaping to Europe...
I personally don't believe Christ was crucified....Christ was a title given to anyone that was crucified in those days..crucifixion being a common punishment..the Romans must have crucified anywhere upto 20-30 men a day...remember christianity wasn't started by Jesus..it was preached and started by Saul of Tarsus who later became Paul..who had never met Jesus in real life..he had a vision of Jesus on his way to Damascus after the stoning of Stephen the Martyr.
The authors of the new testament are also in doubt..notice like Islamic Law..Jewish Law dictates that there be 4 male witnesses...thus the 4 gospels...the bible was also canonized by men seeking to consolidate power in the time of Constantine...so Gospels and books were left out...
in terms of the authorship of the bible..2 of the 4 gospel writers were illiterate....
There is also a historical theory that Paul and Jesus were one and the same person...don't know if that holds water but research is going on...


Shams (the OTHER Shams)
This theory would make it look like Jesus was a coward in the face of death! Why would he escape crucification and let his followers be crucified instead? The other issue is whether this fact is believable at all. Against the background of our own history this is not beyond belief. Our Imams have sacrificed their lives for the cause of justice and peace and also to demonstrate the glory of the hereafter and the futility of this life. I think this is the central message of the event - death does not exist hence "but they killed him not, nor crucified him, ".

It is true that Jesus travelled extensively from age 13- 30 to avoid marriage and gain more knowledge and insight. There is evidence in the writings of some temples of India, that Isa Nabi had actually been there.
kandani
Posts: 238
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2003 10:55 am

Post by kandani »

ACcording to an Eyewitness account of the crucifixtion by an Essene brother...

Jesus was crucified and was passed out on the Cross. However the Essene order applied their healing techniques and revived Jesus.

However, rumours went around that he actually died and was resurrected.

The Essenes then took Jesus into concealment and he died six months later of his wounds.
unnalhaq
Posts: 352
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2004 8:20 pm

Post by unnalhaq »

Not to deter from the topic it I feel it is important to recognize toady's event of Pop's passing. My thoughts and prays are with those who have lost their Leader.
kmaherali
Posts: 25107
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 3:01 pm

Pope John Paul II

Post by kmaherali »

The following tribute to Pope John Paul II brings into focus the historical relationship between Christianity and Islam. The relationship has been defined by the wars of crusaders and colonialism and all the related hatred and ill feelings. The Pope was trying to change that and I hope the future will move in this direction and a better relationship is established.


Bridge Builder to the Muslim World

Pope John Paul II broke a thousand years of mutual distrust and began to heal the wounds of the church's demonization of Islam.

By Akbar S. Ahmed



In the wall-to-wall coverage of Pope John Paul II’s life and death, media commentators talked of his charisma, his rock star status, his global tours and influence, and the fact that he was the first non-Italian pope in many centuries. Some talked of the pope visiting the Western Wall in Jerusalem to apologize to the Jews on behalf of his community–long overdue and fully deserved.

Yet in the torrent of words from commentators, there was a resounding silence about the elephant in the room: relations between Christianity and Islam. Despite John Paul II's historic gestures of penitence for the church's long-standing demonization of Islam, one heard virtually nothing about this outstanding hallmark of his pontificate. While there are many possible explanations for this disturbing absence of interest and understanding about Islam on the part of Western media, one clear cause is a general psychological revulsion against Islam after 9/11. The resulting aversion has discouraged an examination of the complex relationship between Christians and Muslims, rooted in a thousand years of history.

The institution of the papacy has had a direct impact on the relationship between Christianity and Islam for the past thousand years. No pope has ever been neutral toward Islam. Popes encouraged, launched, and led the Crusades. They have vilified Islam as a false religion. Pope Innocent III (1161-1216) identified the Prophet Muhammad as the Anti-Christ. Such pronouncements by successive popes created a climate of hatred among Christians toward Muslims.

In 1099, when the Crusaders took Jerusalem, they massacred 40,000 Muslims–men women, and children. The Church of the Holy Sepulcher, the holiest church in Christendom, the site of Calvary, was a pool of blood. The Crusaders found Jews huddled in the main synagogue in Jerusalem and burned them to death, dancing around the pyre and singing Te Deum. After the killing, the looting started. The mosque of Umar was sacked; the tomb of Abraham was destroyed. “In the Temple and the porch of Solomon, men rode in blood up to their knees and bridal reins,” wrote Raymond of Aguilers, an eyewitness chronicler of the First Crusade. Women were not spared, he observed: “The Franks did no other harm to the women whom they found in the enemy camp, save that they ran their lances through their bellies.” The Jews were perhaps the worst hit: “To the Jews of Palestine the white knights of Europe came as the ravens of the apocalypse.”

Little wonder that for Muslims, Christianity came to be equated with savagery and barbarism. The Muslim world looked for a champion, and they found one in Saladin (Salahuddin), who was able to recapture Jerusalem in 1187.

In contrast to the Crusaders' rapacious behavior toward non-Christians and their holy places, Saladin protected the Holy Sepulcher and other holy Christian sites and forced exemplary behavior on his soldiers. Saladin also allowed the Jews back to Jerusalem. James Reston, Jr., in his book "Warriors of God: Richard the Lionheart and Saladin in the Third Crusade," said of Saladin, “By his amnesties and various charities toward his enemies he secured forever his reputation for gentility and wisdom.”

Saladin’s recapture of Jerusalem and his generosity to the captured Crusaders created the mythology of the pious, brave, and generous Muslim ruler. Up to our time, many Muslim rulers have fallen back to the mythology around Saladin: from Nasser in Egypt to Saddam Hussein and Yasser Arafat more recently.

Until John Paul II, no pope had reviewed the terrible savagery inflicted on the people of the Middle East–Jews, Christians, and Muslims–and either apologized for or regretted it. This left a dark and bitter legacy between the great faiths. Muslims invariably complained that Westerners were essentially “Crusaders.” That is why Osama bin Laden and others who fight against the West still refer to Westerners as “Crusaders,” arguing that the West can only know Muslims in the relationship of conqueror or aggressor.
One of the consequences of the Crusades was the shift in the position and status of Jesus within Islam. The Qur'an refers to Jesus with reverence, and there is an entire chapter on his mother Mary. The Prophet of Islam said that there was no one who had more respect or reverence for Jesus than himself. Sufis in particular have written mystic verses praising Jesus in glowing terms.

But the Crusades identified Christianity, and its savior, with cruelty and violence in Muslims' minds. In time and over the centuries, the love and respect for Jesus in Islam became muted. By the time the West re-emerged in the Muslim world as a colonial force in the 19th century, and once again the soldier and trader were followed by the missionary, Muslim suspicions of Jesus were confirmed. Few Muslims even remembered the deep respect for Jesus that Islam teaches.

In 1981 John Paul II was shot by a young Turkish man, Mehmet Ali Agca. The assassination attempt still remains somewhat of a mystery. There is little doubt that there was a bigger plot, possibly organized by the Soviets, who feared the pope and his crusade against their evil society. But when he survived the attack, the Pope focused on the human story, rather than on politics. He visited Agca, his would-be assassin, in prison and forgave him. This was truly the act of a man touched by Jesus himself.

The Vatican's 1999 declaration, “Memory and Reconciliation,” subtitled "The Church and the Faults of the Past," which followed the 1992 apology for the persecution of the 17th-century astronomer and physicist Galileo, was a profoundly important act of grappling with the dark episodes of church history as part of a process the Holy See called “historical purification.” In the litany of atrocities against Jews, Muslims, women, and ethnic groups, the Crusades were specifically mentioned. For the first time in church history, the Vatican, under John Paul II, apologized for what the Crusaders had done. Its impact was enormous, signifying a tectonic shift in Christian attitudes toward Islam. In guiding the church toward this repentance, Pope John Paul II allowed Muslims to re-connect with one of their own main theological figures–Jesus.

In the emotion and anger after 9/11, Pope John Paul II once again showed wisdom and compassion toward the Muslim world. While American and British leaders talked of revenge and were swift to act punishing those who may have had nothing to do with the terrible act of Sept. 11, the pope talked of the need for understanding and a nonviolent response. This would also be his position when he consistently proved to be the biggest critic of the war on Iraq. It took great moral courage for the pope to stand against the tidal wave of emotion that was swirling about in the West against the Muslim world.

The new pope needs to build on the bridge to Islam established by Pope John Paul II. He must start by studying about Islam, talking to Muslims, and visiting Muslim lands. Much work has to be done, but the stakes are high.
ShamsB
Posts: 1117
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 5:20 pm

Re: Pope John Paul II

Post by ShamsB »

kmaherali wrote:The following tribute to Pope John Paul II brings into focus the historical relationship between Christianity and Islam. The relationship has been defined by the wars of crusaders and colonialism and all the related hatred and ill feelings. The Pope was trying to change that and I hope the future will move in this direction and a better relationship is established.


Bridge Builder to the Muslim World

Pope John Paul II broke a thousand years of mutual distrust and began to heal the wounds of the church's demonization of Islam.

By Akbar S. Ahmed



In the wall-to-wall coverage of Pope John Paul II’s life and death, media commentators talked of his charisma, his rock star status, his global tours and influence, and the fact that he was the first non-Italian pope in many centuries. Some talked of the pope visiting the Western Wall in Jerusalem to apologize to the Jews on behalf of his community–long overdue and fully deserved.

Yet in the torrent of words from commentators, there was a resounding silence about the elephant in the room: relations between Christianity and Islam. Despite John Paul II's historic gestures of penitence for the church's long-standing demonization of Islam, one heard virtually nothing about this outstanding hallmark of his pontificate. While there are many possible explanations for this disturbing absence of interest and understanding about Islam on the part of Western media, one clear cause is a general psychological revulsion against Islam after 9/11. The resulting aversion has discouraged an examination of the complex relationship between Christians and Muslims, rooted in a thousand years of history.

The institution of the papacy has had a direct impact on the relationship between Christianity and Islam for the past thousand years. No pope has ever been neutral toward Islam. Popes encouraged, launched, and led the Crusades. They have vilified Islam as a false religion. Pope Innocent III (1161-1216) identified the Prophet Muhammad as the Anti-Christ. Such pronouncements by successive popes created a climate of hatred among Christians toward Muslims.

In 1099, when the Crusaders took Jerusalem, they massacred 40,000 Muslims–men women, and children. The Church of the Holy Sepulcher, the holiest church in Christendom, the site of Calvary, was a pool of blood. The Crusaders found Jews huddled in the main synagogue in Jerusalem and burned them to death, dancing around the pyre and singing Te Deum. After the killing, the looting started. The mosque of Umar was sacked; the tomb of Abraham was destroyed. “In the Temple and the porch of Solomon, men rode in blood up to their knees and bridal reins,” wrote Raymond of Aguilers, an eyewitness chronicler of the First Crusade. Women were not spared, he observed: “The Franks did no other harm to the women whom they found in the enemy camp, save that they ran their lances through their bellies.” The Jews were perhaps the worst hit: “To the Jews of Palestine the white knights of Europe came as the ravens of the apocalypse.”

Little wonder that for Muslims, Christianity came to be equated with savagery and barbarism. The Muslim world looked for a champion, and they found one in Saladin (Salahuddin), who was able to recapture Jerusalem in 1187.

In contrast to the Crusaders' rapacious behavior toward non-Christians and their holy places, Saladin protected the Holy Sepulcher and other holy Christian sites and forced exemplary behavior on his soldiers. Saladin also allowed the Jews back to Jerusalem. James Reston, Jr., in his book "Warriors of God: Richard the Lionheart and Saladin in the Third Crusade," said of Saladin, “By his amnesties and various charities toward his enemies he secured forever his reputation for gentility and wisdom.”

Saladin’s recapture of Jerusalem and his generosity to the captured Crusaders created the mythology of the pious, brave, and generous Muslim ruler. Up to our time, many Muslim rulers have fallen back to the mythology around Saladin: from Nasser in Egypt to Saddam Hussein and Yasser Arafat more recently.

Until John Paul II, no pope had reviewed the terrible savagery inflicted on the people of the Middle East–Jews, Christians, and Muslims–and either apologized for or regretted it. This left a dark and bitter legacy between the great faiths. Muslims invariably complained that Westerners were essentially “Crusaders.” That is why Osama bin Laden and others who fight against the West still refer to Westerners as “Crusaders,” arguing that the West can only know Muslims in the relationship of conqueror or aggressor.
One of the consequences of the Crusades was the shift in the position and status of Jesus within Islam. The Qur'an refers to Jesus with reverence, and there is an entire chapter on his mother Mary. The Prophet of Islam said that there was no one who had more respect or reverence for Jesus than himself. Sufis in particular have written mystic verses praising Jesus in glowing terms.

But the Crusades identified Christianity, and its savior, with cruelty and violence in Muslims' minds. In time and over the centuries, the love and respect for Jesus in Islam became muted. By the time the West re-emerged in the Muslim world as a colonial force in the 19th century, and once again the soldier and trader were followed by the missionary, Muslim suspicions of Jesus were confirmed. Few Muslims even remembered the deep respect for Jesus that Islam teaches.

In 1981 John Paul II was shot by a young Turkish man, Mehmet Ali Agca. The assassination attempt still remains somewhat of a mystery. There is little doubt that there was a bigger plot, possibly organized by the Soviets, who feared the pope and his crusade against their evil society. But when he survived the attack, the Pope focused on the human story, rather than on politics. He visited Agca, his would-be assassin, in prison and forgave him. This was truly the act of a man touched by Jesus himself.

The Vatican's 1999 declaration, “Memory and Reconciliation,” subtitled "The Church and the Faults of the Past," which followed the 1992 apology for the persecution of the 17th-century astronomer and physicist Galileo, was a profoundly important act of grappling with the dark episodes of church history as part of a process the Holy See called “historical purification.” In the litany of atrocities against Jews, Muslims, women, and ethnic groups, the Crusades were specifically mentioned. For the first time in church history, the Vatican, under John Paul II, apologized for what the Crusaders had done. Its impact was enormous, signifying a tectonic shift in Christian attitudes toward Islam. In guiding the church toward this repentance, Pope John Paul II allowed Muslims to re-connect with one of their own main theological figures–Jesus.

In the emotion and anger after 9/11, Pope John Paul II once again showed wisdom and compassion toward the Muslim world. While American and British leaders talked of revenge and were swift to act punishing those who may have had nothing to do with the terrible act of Sept. 11, the pope talked of the need for understanding and a nonviolent response. This would also be his position when he consistently proved to be the biggest critic of the war on Iraq. It took great moral courage for the pope to stand against the tidal wave of emotion that was swirling about in the West against the Muslim world.

The new pope needs to build on the bridge to Islam established by Pope John Paul II. He must start by studying about Islam, talking to Muslims, and visiting Muslim lands. Much work has to be done, but the stakes are high.
Great article..but isn't it a little disappointing that the late Pontiff apologized to the Jews for all the atrocities commited over the centuries by the Catholic Church on the Jews..yet didn't apologize to the muslims....

S.
kmaherali
Posts: 25107
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 3:01 pm

Re: Pope John Paul II

Post by kmaherali »

ShamsB wrote:Great article..but isn't it a little disappointing that the late Pontiff apologized to the Jews for all the atrocities commited over the centuries by the Catholic Church on the Jews..yet didn't apologize to the muslims....

S.
I thought he did according to the following statement in the article:

"The Vatican's 1999 declaration, “Memory and Reconciliation,” subtitled "The Church and the Faults of the Past," which followed the 1992 apology for the persecution of the 17th-century astronomer and physicist Galileo, was a profoundly important act of grappling with the dark episodes of church history as part of a process the Holy See called “historical purification.” In the litany of atrocities against Jews, Muslims, women, and ethnic groups, the Crusades were specifically mentioned. For the first time in church history, the Vatican, under John Paul II, apologized for what the Crusaders had done. Its impact was enormous, signifying a tectonic shift in Christian attitudes toward Islam. In guiding the church toward this repentance, Pope John Paul II allowed Muslims to re-connect with one of their own main theological figures–Jesus."
tasbiha
Posts: 101
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 8:47 pm

Re: Pope John Paul II

Post by tasbiha »

Let us not forget that Saladin screwed the Fatimid dynasty in Egypt.

Thank God that Usama bin Laden and his various crews don't have the brains to promulgate another Saladin.

As for JPII and his pro-Jewish stance, I can tell you various Popes have been pro and anti Jewish - did you know that Jews in Italy were slaves about 300 years ago? One Pope would free them, another would enslave them again. Not kidding. That's a dirty little fact that Jews and Italians don't want to think about, unless they are descended from Italian Jews.

The Roman Catholic Church blows with the wind, let's see what they pick next to lead them. The only Moslem at the funeral will be the King of Jordan.

Now, I want to make myself perfectly clear. In the Western world, Jews are always given preference over Moslems, so if you understand history and how badly the Jews have been treated by the Roman Catholic Church, what do you think they are thinking about Moslems?
kmaherali
Posts: 25107
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 3:01 pm

Re: Pope John Paul II

Post by kmaherali »

tasbiha wrote:Let us not forget that Saladin screwed the Fatimid dynasty in Egypt.
When Saladin invaded Egypt, the Fatimid dynasty was already in turmoil and decline. Perhaps Saladin just 'nailed the coffin'.

I am more optimistic about the relationship between Islam, Christianity and Jews. We have more in common than the apparent differences. As MHI said at Brown University, "We have much to build with. A common Abrahamic, monotheistic tradition. Common ethical principles, founded on shared human values. Common problems of yesterday, resolved together. Common challenges of tomorrow, that we can best face together."
kmaherali
Posts: 25107
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 3:01 pm

Post by kmaherali »

The following article that appeared in today's issue of the Calgary Herald discusses issues around the election of the new pope. The inter faith relationships, especially the relationship with the Muslim world is going to be a critical factor - an optimistic outlook for world peace.

Next pope expected to reach out to Islam

Brian Murphy
The Associated Press


April 17, 2005


They represent John Paul II's last major stamp on the future of the church: 26 cardinals from six continents, added to the list of papal electors 18 months ago.

These latest cardinals, who account for nearly a quarter of the expected 115-member conclave beginning Monday, include some of the Vatican's leading voices protesting the U.S.-led war in Iraq and defending the church's moral teachings.

One issue stands out vividly: the need to strengthen bonds with Muslims or risk a more polarized and dangerous world.

Some of the most dynamic prelates in the group have been active on the front lines of Christian-Muslim conflict in Africa or involved in interfaith outreach.

Their backgrounds reinforce the perception that questions about Islam could exert a strong influence on the conclave in the way Cold War politics entered into the election of John Paul in 1978.

"John Paul II made the Vatican a geopolitical force," said Jo Renee Formicola, a professor of religious and political studies at Seton Hall University in New Jersey. "There is no bigger question now in the West than building better contacts with the Islamic world. The Vatican recognizes this."

The late pope took historic steps to open channels between Islam and the Vatican, including a 2001 trip to Syria when he became the first pontiff to enter a mosque.

But the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and the growing strength of radical Islam have raised calls in the Vatican for more comprehensive contacts with mainstream Islamic leaders.

A possible papal candidate who could benefit from that new focus is Vatican-based Francis Cardinal Arinze, 72, of Nigeria, who has led inter-religious dialogue since the 1980s, and whose nation is a fault line between Christianity and Islam.

Also, Belgian Godfried Cardinal Danneels, 71, is seen to possess diplomatic finesse for a papacy that may require extensive contacts with Islamic leaders.

Fourteen of the new cardinals come from Europe, including six from Italy.

The others are spread across the globe: three each from Latin America, Africa and Asia; two from North America and one from Australia.

Interest in advancing contacts with Islam links many of the new cardinals, elevated during ceremonies to mark the 25th year of John Paul's papacy.

Among them is French Jean-Louis Cardinal Tauran, who served as a top Vatican diplomat from 1990 to 2003 and was the pope's main envoy for the Middle East. He has called interfaith relations an "enormous task" for the next papacy and urged majority Muslim nations to resist "second-class" status for Christians.

Other cardinals from France -- Marseilles Archbishop Bernard Panafieu and Lyons Archbishop Philippe Barbarin -- have taken strong stands in support of better contacts with mainstream Muslims.

For Panafieu, the issue is at his doorstep. Nearly 17 per cent of the French port is now Muslim.

Last year he fought a French law outlawing Muslim head scarves and other religious symbols in public schools and has since urged the government to "act through persuasion rather than by compulsion" to help Muslim immigrants adjust to the West.

Spanish Cardinal Carlos Amigo Vallejo, archbishop of Seville, was formerly head of the archdiocese in Tangiers, Morocco, with only a few thousand Catholics. He has warned that "ignorance and neglect" between the faiths needs attention.

Croatian Cardinal Josip Bozanic is vice-president of the Council of the Episcopal Conferences of Europe, which holds a series of conferences on interfaith issues. Bozanic has joined other religious leaders trying to rebuild trust in the Balkans following the bloody collapse of Yugoslavia.

But the strongest messages come from two new African cardinals.

In Sudan, the nation's first cardinal, Gabriel Zubeir Wako, has been caught up in more than two decades of war that has claimed more than two million lives.

A peace pact in January was reached between the Islamist government and the rebel Sudan People's Liberation Army, which has battled since 1983 for greater rights and a share of wealth for southern Sudanese of Christian and animist faiths.

But Wako fears the deal could unravel without better contact between Sudan's Christians and the majority Muslims, whom he has accused of trying to "colonize" the entire country.

Another new cardinal, Anthony Olubunmi Okogie of Nigeria, begged in 1991 for calm after a round of Muslim-Christian clashes. "We cannot take any more of this," he said at the time.

Other Contenders

Here are some of the front-runners, as picked by Irish bookmakers.

- Dionigi Tettamanzi, 69, the theologically conservative archbishop of Milan who helped John Paul with some of his encyclicals, disqualified by being the odds-on front-runner.

- Claudio Hummes, 70, Franciscan archbishop of Sao Paulo, a theological conservative known for defending the Movimento dos Sem Terra (landless movement).

- Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga, 62, of Honduras, former head of the Latin American Bishops and an opponent of globalization, possibly too young.

- Joseph Ratzinger, 78, the critical theologian heading the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith; called the "panzer cardinal" and a lightning-rod for liberal outrage.

- Jean-Marie Lustiger, 79, the Jewish convert archbishop of Paris whose mother died at Auschwitz; a human rights champion.

- Angelo Sodano, 77, Vatican's secretary of state, former No. 2, likely disqualified by his prominence and accumulated enemies.

- Godfried Danneels, 71, a liberal Belgian archbishop, probably disqualified for advocating women in the curia and the use of condoms in fighting AIDS.

- Giacomo Biffi, 76, retired archbishop of Bologna, a champion of Opus Dei and other new orthodox movements.

- Ivan Dias, 69, archbishop of Mumbai, a seasoned church diplomat and theological conservative, but with limited pastoral experience.

This story features a factbox "Other Contenders".

© The Calgary Herald 2005
unnalhaq
Posts: 352
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2004 8:20 pm

Benedict XVI

Post by unnalhaq »

Lets hope and pray that Almighty may bless and guide the Cardinal Ratzinger's in his endeavors as the leader (Pope Benedict XVI) of the Faith (Roman Catholic) (remember they are our cousins too, Ahl Al-Kitab).
kmaherali
Posts: 25107
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 3:01 pm

Post by kmaherali »

The following article discusses the challenges facing the new pope as he embarks upon his new mission. One of the major issues will have to be the rapid expansion of Islam globally but especially at the heart of Christianity. How will the pope react to this situation?

Soul Searching
Islam's Global Gains
Pressure Catholics
To Rethink Strategy


Next Pope Could Lead Vatican
To Adopt Tougher Stance;
Mosque Returns to Granada
Church's Lost 'Missionary Zeal'
By GABRIEL KAHN in Vatican City, KEITH JOHNSON in Granada, Spain, and ANDRÉS CALA in Paris
Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
April 19, 2005; Page A1

In 1492, Christian armies drove the last Muslim rulers out of the ancient hilltop city of Granada in a victory still celebrated as the birth of modern Spain. Now, Islam is back, this time making more peaceful inroads by adding adherents among the local immigrant population and also some Spaniards. Two years ago, a mosque, the first to stand in Granada in five centuries, was built on the site of a former Catholic church.

"It's clear that Islam is eating into Catholic turf," says Malik Abderraman, the president of the foundation that runs the mosque and himself a Spanish convert to Islam.

For more than 40 years, the Roman Catholic Church has embraced a seductive theory: By extending an olive branch, Christianity could lay to rest its 1,400-year history of conflict with Islam. The church created a new curial office dedicated to fostering a robust dialogue with Islam, as well as other world religions, with the goal of achieving mutual understanding and peace. It welcomed the building of mosques in Europe and spoke out against religious discrimination of Muslims.


The recently constructed Grand Mosque, built on the site of a former church in Granada, Spain


Now, as Catholic cardinals meet in the Vatican to choose the next pope, there is a growing feeling that these efforts to reach out to Islam have backfired. While some Muslims have embraced the call for dialogue, many Catholics now fret that the conciliatory approach has tied the church's hands, preventing it from keeping up with Islam's rapid growth, particularly in parts of the world once dominated by Catholicism. Some critics also believe the softer stance should be more contingent on a reciprocal tolerance of Catholics in the Muslim world.

"Dialogue is not sufficient on its own. What effect does it have?" asks Cardinal Achille Silvestrini, who was once in charge of overseeing the well-being of Catholic communities from Turkey to Iraq, in an interview in February. "Finding common ground with Islam, in a way that includes mutual respect, is not easy."

The concerns underscore how Islam is looming as one of the defining issues for Catholicism in the 21st century, in much the same way that communism was in the last century. Islam offers a new type of challenge, one to which the church is still struggling to find a way to respond. The former Soviet empire was easier to paint as an enemy, with its armies spread across Eastern Europe, repressive political system and atheist ideology. Islam's rise is more difficult to counter because it is a religious faith with many things in common with Christianity, including shared roots that both religions, along with Judaism, trace back to the prophet Abraham in the ancient Middle East.

That makes the rivalry subtler, and more complex. Often, religious differences get tangled up with other divisions, like ethnicity. In Nigeria, which has one of the fastest-growing Catholic populations in the world, Christian communities in parts of the country are forced to live under the strict Islamic code of sharia law. Violent clashes between Christians and Muslims, often sparked by deep-seated ethnic tensions, are frequent.

Meanwhile, Islam has grown rapidly, replacing Catholicism as the world's biggest faith. Islam has seen particular success in areas like Africa and Asia that were once considered the future cradle of Catholicism. In 1970, there were 20% more Catholics in the world than Muslims, according to the World Christian Encyclopedia. But since then, Islam has expanded at nearly double the rate of Catholicism. By 2000, the number of Muslims world-wide had surpassed Catholics, swelling to nearly 1.2 billion, compared with 1.06 billion Catholics, the World Christian Encyclopedia says.

At the same time, many Catholics see the church's conciliatory gestures as being increasingly one-sided. The lot of Christian communities in the Muslim world appears to have grown tougher, not easier. The largest mosque in Europe opened 10 years ago just a mile from the Vatican. But in Saudi Arabia, a million Catholic guest workers, many from the Philippines, still can't attend church services because the kingdom doesn't allow any religion but Islam. In some parts of the Middle East, the cradle of Christianity, some Catholic communities are in danger of vanishing altogether. In Syria, for instance, priests say Mass in nearly empty churches as Catholic communities that thrived for centuries have fled regional violence and a resurgent Islam.

Drifting Away

Perhaps nowhere is the challenge greater than in the church's traditional heartland of Western Europe, now home to as many as 15 million Muslims. The Vatican has seen a slow decline in Europe as part of a century-long drift away from Christianity by white Europeans. But Islam has been increasing its followers, mainly among immigrant populations from the Middle East and Africa. In France, Muslims currently number around 5.5 million, a figure that could double over the next 20 years. Meanwhile, some estimates say the percentage of French Catholics attending Mass on a regular basis has fallen into the single digits.


In the diocese of Seine Saint-Denis, just north of Paris, Father Jacques Gueddi feels he has been losing ground to Islam in an area that was once considered a bastion of Catholicism. The area's population has swelled over the past 30 years as immigrants moved in. Father Gueddi, himself the son of Muslim Moroccan immigrants, converted to Catholicism when he was 24 and became a priest at 39. Now 72, he spends much of his time traversing the rows of drab, cinderblock apartment buildings to counsel youths from Catholic families who might be flirting with converting to Islam.

Rome's approach of reaching out to Islam "might be good in theory," he says, but falls short in practice. "The church doesn't want to throw oil on the fire, but it needs to be more combative, more militant and organized." Catholic priests, he says, have been poorly prepared to confront Islam's growing influence. "Muslims are missionaries, while we lost our missionary spirit," he says.

On the other side of Paris, in the suburb of Evry, Khalil Merroun presides over a mosque that is now one of the best attended in France. "The advice I give my Catholic colleagues is to insist on asking themselves why their faithful don't live their spirituality," he says. The steady expansion of Islam in places like Evry, he adds, means that "the Catholic Church should not feel Europe belongs to it." He says that he converted 80 people at his mosque last year, most of them former Christians.

Islam's expansion in Catholicism's own backyard is prompting renewed reflection and worry about how Rome should respond. In a possible sign of discontent within the church with the olive-branch approach, the Vatican last year issued a document warning Christian women about the "bitter experience" that could arise when marrying Muslim men.

Finding ways to appear friendly to Islam while countering its gains and re-energizing the church will be one of the first issues the next pope must confront, and one of the thorniest. Within the church hierarchy, no clear consensus exists. "We're at a crossroads," says Andrea Riccardi, the founder of an influential, left-leaning Catholic group, the community of Sant'Egidio, in Rome.

Before this death earlier this month, Pope John Paul II made numerous efforts to reach out to other faiths, especially Islam. He visited many majority Muslim countries, such as Azerbaijan and Egypt, and was the first pope to ever set foot in a mosque, during a 2001 visit to the Syrian capital of Damascus. He approached many Muslim leaders as well, and even held a feisty exchange of letters with the leader of Iran's Islamic revolution, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

This earned him respect across the Muslim world, where some have welcomed the church's call for dialogue. Ahmet al-Rawi, head of the Federation of Islamic Organizations in Europe, an umbrella group based in Marksfield, England, that represents conservative Muslim groups, says he has visited the Vatican many times to meet with church officials. He said there are dozens of areas of agreement between the two faiths, such as the family, peace, justice and many moral issues.

"I wouldn't say that we could be allies, but we do have some common points of view," Mr. Rawi says.

But such dialogue hasn't succeed in turning the tide against the Muslim world. That has left many in the church wondering whether to adopt some sort of tougher approach to Islam. "The real question is, what kind of dialogue? Dialogue at all costs? Has it brought results?" asks Father Andrea Pacini, a professor specializing in the Islamic world at the Edoardo Agnelli Center for the Study of Comparative Religions in Turin, Italy. Some influential Catholics hope the next pope will make the church's conciliatory gestures toward Islam conditional on Christians receiving greater freedoms in the Muslim world.

The Vatican's current policy started with high hopes. In 1965, the church drafted a document called "Nostra Aetate," or "Our Age," which set a new policy of openness to the rest of the world. The Vatican created the Pontifical Council for Inter-Religious Dialogue, an office to reach out to Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus and other religions.

Red Faces

The openness initiative got off to a bumpy start. In 1976, several senior Vatican officials traveled to Libya for one of the first official dialogues with Muslims. The conference ended with the Vatican officials signing a lengthy document that they didn't have sufficient time to review, which, among other things, contained a harsh repudiation of Zionism. When the officials returned to Rome, a red-faced Vatican was forced to distance itself from the entire affair.

Since then, the council has fared better, though its initiatives have never gone very far. It has established relationships with organizations such as Al-Azhar University in Cairo. Its most recent session with Al-Azhar, in February, concluded with a request from the Muslim side that the Vatican issue an official apology for the Crusades, Christian invasions of the Middle East more than 800 years ago that still stir strong emotions among Muslims. The Vatican agreed to appoint a joint panel of experts to study the Crusades.

WORSHIP IN THE WORLD



Take a look at a map of the world's most prominent religions.



The Vatican's outreach office is currently run by a 67-year-old English archbishop named Michael Fitzgerald, who studied at a Christian seminary in Tunisia that was later closed by the Tunisian government. Monsignor Fitzgerald, who works out of a drafty office a few meters from St. Peter's square, has so far resisted calls for a tougher approach.

"A strict understanding of reciprocity as tit-for-tat cannot be the attitude of the church," he says. "You can't impose the Christian message on anyone. And if they are not interested in the message, does that mean you stop dialoguing with them? No."

The church's attitude wasn't always so conciliatory. In 1095, Pope Urban II launched the first Crusade with a call to Christians to deliver Jerusalem from Muslim domination. Successive Crusades followed for the next two centuries, as armies waged war in the name of Christ for control of the Holy Land.

Granada, too, was the scene of violent rivalry. In 711, Moorish troops, who were Muslims from North Africa, swept north across a Spain that was divided into tiny kingdoms. Spanish kings spent the next eight centuries pushing the Muslims out, unifying Spain as they advanced. Finally, in 1492, Spanish troops surrounded Granada, ending the Moorish occupation.

Since then, Granada has carried a stigma in the Muslim world as a rare setback for a faith that has expanded for most of its history. This made construction of Granada's new Grand Mosque so poignant for some in the city's growing Muslim population, now estimated to number 15,000 in a city of 250,000. "The powers that be didn't want the mosque built because Granada was a symbol of the reconquest" of Spain by Christians, says Abdelkarim Carrasco, head of the Spanish Federation of Islamic Religious Entities.

The city of Granada still celebrates the holiday of La Toma, or The Taking, which commemorates the Christian victory five centuries ago. Father Jose Luis Nogales Sanchez, a professor at the Catholic University of Granada, says Catholics are split in their reaction to the mosque.

One group, he says, "sees Islam as a challenge and even as a threat." Another sees Muslim immigration in Spain as inevitable and motivated by a search for economic opportunity, not religious conquest. "Between the two sides, there is a big gap," Father Sanchez says. "One side is arguably too hysterical, too alarmist, and the other could be said to be too naive."

---- Ian Johnson in Berlin contributed to this article.

Write to Gabriel Kahn at gabriel.kahn@wsj.com, Keith Johnson at keith.johnson@wsj.com and Andrés Cala at andres.cala@wsj.com
kmaherali
Posts: 25107
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 3:01 pm

Post by kmaherali »

Hero Who Fought Crusaders Is Role Model for Muslims
For many Syrian Muslims, the Crusades still rankle. But the 12th-century leader Saladin may inspire today's peacemakers.

By Rhonda Roumani

On a dark street in a wealthy district of Damascus, a light shines from an arched, brass doorway. The door is slightly ajar. Inside, except for a small computer in the corner, the room seems like a medieval study. Ottoman-engraved silver plates, carved wood couches, and stained glass windows line the sides of this narrow office. Here, University of Damascus professor Suhair Zakkar is translating old manuscripts for a 90-volume series on the Crusades--an accumulation of his life's work.

To Zakkar, these texts are not exactly ancient history. "We feel the campaigns never ceased," says Zakkar, who speaks with the precision of a historian. "Europe invaded our country, and we fought the Europeans here and at last succeeded in liberating our country."

In Syria, the memory of the Crusades runs deep. It is here that Muslims fought an onslaught of crusaders all along the coastline from Damascus to Aleppo. For Arabs and Muslims, the Crusades marked a time of assault and destruction—a time when the Muslim world was in dire jeopardy, defending against bloodthirsty crusaders bent on destroying their land and their people simply because they were not Christian—or because they were Muslim.

“For two centuries, the crusaders killed several million Muslims,” explains Zakkar. “They left in this country a very bad memory of killing, destruction, spoiling and devastation. More than that, they came to this country to ‘rescue’ or help the local Christians. Before the coming of the Christians, in every part of Syria, there was a considerable number of Christians. But because of the Crusades, [Christianity] became a smaller religion in Syria and the Christians became a real minority.”

Like Zakkar, many Muslims in the region believe that the current political situation in the Arab world--which began when the French and the British attempted to divide the region and helped establish the state of Israel after the second world war--is nothing more than another wave of the Crusades.

"The Crusades have continued until today," Zakkar says. "In 1291 we had the Crusades against Egypt by Cyprus and then several Crusades against North Africa. The Ottoman Empire faced several Crusades. Then we have the French and the British mandate. Then up to today. When President Bush wanted to take his forces to Iraq, he used the word Crusades several times--and up to this moment, he believes himself to be the new messiah."

Because past hurts of the Crusades are felt afresh, the Muslim heroes of earlier campaigns are powerful symbols in the Arab world. Nureddin, the son of a Turkish tribal leader, united all of Syria in the 12th century and defeated the crusaders in Egypt. His successor, Saladin al-Ayyubi, symbolizes resistance and pride in defending against Christian crusaders. The leader of Egypt, Saladin wrested Muslim land from the crusaders and gained his place in history in the Battle of Hattin in 1187, when he liberated Jerusalem with little bloodshed. This battle is the climax of the new Ridley Scott movie "Kingdom of Heaven."

Saladin died in Damascus in 1193, but his spirit lives on in this and other cities. Just outside the old city walls, which were once expanded and strengthened by Saladin, his statue stands as a present-day protector. Inside the walls in a red-domed building just behind the famous Umayyid Mosque, his mausoleum lies between columns that were once part of the Roman Temple of Jupiter.

Other than "Kingdom of Heaven," few recent Hollywood films have tackled the Crusades. But in the Middle East, screen portrayals of Saladin are plentiful. Over the last decade, documentaries and television series on the Crusades and the life of Saladin have multiplied, presenting to the Arab world an honorable history in which Muslims were united, strong, and able to defend themselves against Western aggression. Muslims here view Saladin as both astute and chivalrous—a general who earned the respect not only of his own people, but also of his enemy with whom he sought peaceful coexistence. Saladin continues to represent the savior who brought hope and dignity to a Muslim world in a time of pain and darkness.

In “Kingdom of Heaven,” Saladin is played by Ghassan Massoud, a respected Syrian actor. A slight man with strong Arab features--a furrowed brow and brown, expressive eyes--Massoud portrays Saladin as a stately, chivalrous man who knew how to deal with his enemy. In a Beliefnet interview, he said he believes Saladin would have been able to bring understanding and dialogue between the Muslim world and the West, were he alive today.

“It is in my nature to understand Saladin more than [Westerners can],” Massoud says over coffee. “My religion is the same religion as his. We have the same geography, the same history. He was a huge hero. He enabled Arabs, Muslims, and the Christians to return to Jerusalem. ...He conveyed a good image to the West of a noble enemy.”

Muslims today have no counterpart to Saladin, Zakkar says. He hopes Saladin’s model of coexistence will provide a prototype for a new generation of Muslims who could bring about a peaceful solution to the dispute over Jerusalem.

“If we are looking for a new champion, we want him to liberate our land and not to kill anybody,” he says. “We do not like to do it the way the Americans do. We want to liberate Jerusalem and Palestinian land, but we do not want to kill the Jews. We are looking for a new generation and a new generation will create new leadership—a Muslim one, not an American one or a Russian one.”

For now, Zakkar says that the key to defusing the current clash of civilizations may be found in the past.

“Saladin liberated Jerusalem and dealt [fairly] with the crusaders, with his enemy, as a good Muslim because Islam is a tolerant religion,” says Zakkar. “He won respect here and in the West. Nowadays, because of the struggle between Islam and the West—the struggle between civilizations—and the movement to unite Europe and [the attempt to unite] the West under the leadership of the U.S. by will or by force—and because of the occupation of Israel, many people here and there are writing about Saladin. Probably not to know what happened in the past, but to predict what will happen in the future."
Post Reply