Comments on: The “Subsists In” Debate http://anunslife.org/2007/07/19/the-subsists-in-debate/ Catholic Sisters and Nuns in Today's World Sat, 21 Nov 2009 00:32:01 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: deerose http://anunslife.org/2007/07/19/the-subsists-in-debate/#comment-1789 deerose Wed, 25 Jul 2007 20:48:46 +0000 http://anunslife.org/2007/07/19/the-subsists-in-debate/#comment-1789 Barbara: I agree with you. The Vatican should find a more diplomatic spokesperson - or at least have someone edit the Pope's messages to make them less offensive. Sr. Julie: I remember about 8-9 years ago, before people in this country even thought much about Islam, I was asked to participate in an interfaith service on peace. I was given the task of doing a short talk on Islam. Not knowing all that much about it at the time, I phoned my friend whose husband is a Lebanese Muslim. I asked him where in the Koran I could find some good quotes on peace and love that I could use in my presentation. He, a practicing Muslim going to mosque regularly and praying 5 times a day, said he really didn't know of any because Islam didn't really deal with those concepts much. I was surprised to hear that. Years later, after some study and reading through the Koran myself (and familiarizing myself with the varieties of Shariah law), I realize what my friend's husband expressed was true. To best see this, I think it would be good for people interested in comparative religion and politics to read the Koran for themselves. Second hand knowledge can be limiting. It's also important to remember that Muslims are taught to believe the words of the Koran are directly dictated from God. So if the Koran says beat your wife (if disobedient) or kill the infidel (if he/she won't convert to Islam), as it does, it's a divine mandate. Our Scripture is inspired by God. We are taught to interpret it on many levels. If the OT is called the Book of Iron and the NT the book of love, I'd say the Koran is the book of fear. I do not base that on reading a few quotes out of context as some may. I base my assertion on reading the whole volume. I'm sure others disagree with me. So be it. Ok, I'm off my soapbox. deerose Barbara:

I agree with you. The Vatican should find a more diplomatic spokesperson – or at least have someone edit the Pope’s messages to make them less offensive.

Sr. Julie:

I remember about 8-9 years ago, before people in this country even thought much about Islam, I was asked to participate in an interfaith service on peace. I was given the task of doing a short talk on Islam. Not knowing all that much about it at the time, I phoned my friend whose husband is a Lebanese Muslim. I asked him where in the Koran I could find some good quotes on peace and love that I could use in my presentation. He, a practicing Muslim going to mosque regularly and praying 5 times a day, said he really didn’t know of any because Islam didn’t really deal with those concepts much. I was surprised to hear that.

Years later, after some study and reading through the Koran myself (and familiarizing myself with the varieties of Shariah law), I realize what my friend’s husband expressed was true. To best see this, I think it would be good for people interested in comparative religion and politics to read the Koran for themselves. Second hand knowledge can be limiting. It’s also important to remember that Muslims are taught to believe the words of the Koran are directly dictated from God. So if the Koran says beat your wife (if disobedient) or kill the infidel (if he/she won’t convert to Islam), as it does, it’s a divine mandate. Our Scripture is inspired by God. We are taught to interpret it on many levels. If the OT is called the Book of Iron and the NT the book of love, I’d say the Koran is the book of fear. I do not base that on reading a few quotes out of context as some may. I base my assertion on reading the whole volume. I’m sure others disagree with me. So be it.

Ok, I’m off my soapbox.

deerose

]]> By: Sister Julie http://anunslife.org/2007/07/19/the-subsists-in-debate/#comment-1790 Sister Julie Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:42:06 +0000 http://anunslife.org/2007/07/19/the-subsists-in-debate/#comment-1790 Another blog reader mentioned that one of her parish priests gave a recent homily on the "subsists in" debate. <a href="http://www.datsoc.com/audio_files/071607.mp3" rel="nofollow">Check it out by clicking here for the audio file.</a> (Warning: download file is large ... 18MB) Another blog reader mentioned that one of her parish priests gave a recent homily on the “subsists in” debate. Check it out by clicking here for the audio file. (Warning: download file is large … 18MB)

]]> By: Sister Julie http://anunslife.org/2007/07/19/the-subsists-in-debate/#comment-1799 Sister Julie Mon, 23 Jul 2007 11:59:39 +0000 http://anunslife.org/2007/07/19/the-subsists-in-debate/#comment-1799 And by the way, excellent point about the media, deerose! And by the way, excellent point about the media, deerose!

]]> By: Sister Julie http://anunslife.org/2007/07/19/the-subsists-in-debate/#comment-1800 Sister Julie Mon, 23 Jul 2007 11:59:08 +0000 http://anunslife.org/2007/07/19/the-subsists-in-debate/#comment-1800 I'm not that familiar with Islam though I have studied it a bit. My understanding is that it is not a religion that promotes violence. Both the Quran and the Bible have passages in them that can be rather scandalous in terms of violence. But in both sacred scriptures, there is a call for peace, and love. With sacred texts, there is always the danger of isolating one or two verses and interpreting them out of context. Sadly, those who promote violence (within any religion) truly believe that they are interpreting it correctly, that somehow the violence is santioned by God. Here's an interesting <a href="http://www.islam101.com/terror/quranWPJ.htm" rel="nofollow">article on Islam</a> and understanding some of the Quran's verses on war. I’m not that familiar with Islam though I have studied it a bit. My understanding is that it is not a religion that promotes violence. Both the Quran and the Bible have passages in them that can be rather scandalous in terms of violence. But in both sacred scriptures, there is a call for peace, and love. With sacred texts, there is always the danger of isolating one or two verses and interpreting them out of context. Sadly, those who promote violence (within any religion) truly believe that they are interpreting it correctly, that somehow the violence is santioned by God. Here’s an interesting article on Islam and understanding some of the Quran’s verses on war.

]]> By: Sister Julie http://anunslife.org/2007/07/19/the-subsists-in-debate/#comment-1801 Sister Julie Mon, 23 Jul 2007 11:48:11 +0000 http://anunslife.org/2007/07/19/the-subsists-in-debate/#comment-1801 Deerose ... According to the Laveda’s article (see above for link), the document was in process for awhile and was not intended to be in response to any particular issue. It is meant as a general clarification of the teaching of the Church. Louisa ... The statement specifically means the Roman Catholic Church. As the statement says, the Catholic Church recognizes that the Orthodox Churches have apostolic succession, a validly ordained clergy who celebrate the Eucharist that Catholics recognize as carrying our the intentions of Jesus when he said, “Do this in memory of me.” The only thing that keeps us from being fully united with the Orthodox churches is that they do not accept the authority of the Pope in Rome. In regard to the Anglican Church, the Roman Catholic Church would regard Anglican clergy as protestant clergy who in the eyes of the Catholic church are not validly ordained. According to my theologian friend, since the Anglican Church first began in schism in the 1530’s there was at the turn of the 20th century a serious examination whether the Catholic Church would accept Anglican orders as being valid. The committee in Rome set up to study the issue concluded that while in the first generations, the priests and bishops had apostolic succession, later on this lapsed. Under the influence of Calvinistic tendencies in later English church history, the formula for ordination changed and did not include the words and form that Rome recognized as being valid. So according to Rome, the Anglican communion connection with the apostolic church lapsed in terms of having a validly ordained clergy. Deerose … According to the Laveda’s article (see above for link), the document was in process for awhile and was not intended to be in response to any particular issue. It is meant as a general clarification of the teaching of the Church.

Louisa … The statement specifically means the Roman Catholic Church. As the statement says, the Catholic Church recognizes that the Orthodox Churches have apostolic succession, a validly ordained clergy who celebrate the Eucharist that Catholics recognize as carrying our the intentions of Jesus when he said, “Do this in memory of me.” The only thing that keeps us from being fully united with the Orthodox churches is that they do not accept the authority of the Pope in Rome.

In regard to the Anglican Church, the Roman Catholic Church would regard Anglican clergy as protestant clergy who in the eyes of the Catholic church are not validly ordained. According to my theologian friend, since the Anglican Church first began in schism in the 1530’s there was at the turn of the 20th century a serious examination whether the Catholic Church would accept Anglican orders as being valid. The committee in Rome set up to study the issue concluded that while in the first generations, the priests and bishops had apostolic succession, later on this lapsed. Under the influence of Calvinistic tendencies in later English church history, the formula for ordination changed and did not include the words and form that Rome recognized as being valid. So according to Rome, the Anglican communion connection with the apostolic church lapsed in terms of having a validly ordained clergy.

]]>