Francis: There is not only Islamic violence, there is Catholic violence

Fox News is reporting:

"When asked why he didn't describe the priest's murder (Father Jacques Hamel) and other attacks as Islamic terrorism, Francis replied he won't do that because 'it's not right to identify Islam with violence. It's not right and it's not true.'

'I believe that in every religion there is always a little fundamentalist group.'

'I don't like to talk of Islamic violence because every day, when I go through the newspapers, I see violence, this man who girls his girlfriend, another who kills his mother-in-law,' Francis said, in apparent reference to crime news in predominantly Catholic Italy. 'And these are baptized Catholics. If I speak of Islamic violence, then I have to speak of Catholic violence.'"

What Francis fails to mention, dishonest individual that he is, is that Catholics who engage in acts of violence are not doing so in the name of the Church or by appealing to a "holy book" which advocates killing "infidels" - non-believers.

In his book entitled Truth and Tolerance: Christian Belief and World Religions, Pope Benedict XVI made a few observations which refute Francis. The Holy Father wrote, "To what extent the new surge forward of the Islamic world is fuelled by truly religious forces is..open to question.  In many places, as we can see, there is the danger of a pathological development of the autonomy of feeling.." (p. 104).

On page 204 of the same book, Pope Benedict XVI writes, "...even with Islam, with all the greatness it represents, is always in danger of losing balance, letting violence have a place and letting religion slide away into mere outward observance and ritualism."

One cannot say this about Catholicism. Unless one is Francis.  Only he compares a man killing his girlfriend with Jihadists crying Allahu akbar while using the Koran as justification for flying planes into skyscrapers, beheading Catholic Priests, blowing up children or running them over with a truck.

For this sick mind, there is something called "Catholic violence."  This is a lie. And Francis is a liar.

There is absolutely no doubt that the human history of the Church, like all of human history, has its dark pages. But if anyone cares to take an objective look at this history, one must quickly acknowledge that the doctrine of the Church has always implicitly condemned abuses introduced by Her members.

In the words of Dr. Dietrich Von Hildebrand, "There were sinners in the Church yesterday and there are sinners in the Church today. But the Church Herself, in her divine teaching, emerges gloriously unspotted in a history stained by human weaknesses, errors, imperfections, and sins." In the words of the great Cardinal Journet:

"All contradictions are eliminated as soon as we understand that the members of the Church do indeed sin, but they do so by their betraying the Church. The Church is thus not without sinners, but She is without sin. The Church as person is responsible for penance. She is not responsible for sins....The members of the Church themselves - laity, clerics, priests, Bishops, and Popes - who disobey the Church are responsible for their sins, but the Church as person is not responsible...It is forgotten that the Church as person is the Bride of Christ, 'Whom He has purchased with His own blood.'" (Acts 20:28).

There is no such thing as "Catholic violence."  Those Catholics who commit murder are self-condemned and are betraying the Church and her teaching.
But with Islam, it is different.  Islam advocates violence.  See here.

Jack Van Impe Presents: Falsehood

Jack Van Impe, a man who likes to describe himself as "the walking Bible," had some disparaging comments for the Catholic Church this morning on his program "Jack Van Impe Presents." Mr. Van Impe said that the Catholic Church is doing its priests a disservice by insisting upon clerical celibacy. The "walking Bible" cited 1 Timothy 3:2 to "prove" that clerical celibacy is unscriptural. This verse reads, "..a bishop must be irreproachable, married only once..." As with most fundamentalists, Mr. Van Impe cites one verse to make his case while ignoring those scriptural verses which contradict his view. While it is true that celibacy is not required by the nature of the priesthood itself (and Mr. Van Impe might be surprised to learn that some Roman Catholic priests are indeed married), still, as Paul Whitcomb explains nicely, "Catholic priests do not marry because, while Christ does indeed approve of marriage for the Christian clergy, He much prefers that they do not marry. He made this quite clear when He praised the Apostles for giving up "all" to follow Him, saying, "And every one that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall possess life everlasting." (Matt. 19:27-29).

The Apostle Paul explained why the unmarried state is preferable to the married state for the Christian clergy: "He that is without a wife, is solicitous for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please God. But he that is with a wife, is solicitous for the things of the world, how he may please his wife: and he is divided." (1 Cor. 7:32-33). In other words, matrimony is good – Christ made it one of the holy sacraments of His Church – but it is not conducive to that complete dedication which is incumbent upon those who submit themselves to another of Christ's holy sacraments – that of Holy Orders. Even so, the unmarried state of the Catholic priesthood is not an inflexible law – under certain conditions a priest may be dispensed from this law." (See here).

Mr. Van Impe attempted to convince his viewers that the Church founded by the Lord Jesus is imposing an unscriptural "man-made" teaching on its priests. The scriptures cited above refute the so-called "walking Bible." As Vatican II explains, "Celibacy is to be embraced and esteemed as a gift. Perfect and perpetual continence for the sake of the kingdom of heaven, commended by Christ the Lord (cf. Mt 19: 22) and through the course of time as well as in our own days freely accepted and observed in a praiseworthy manner by many of the faithful, is held by the Church to be of great value in a special manner for the priestly life. It is at the same time a sign and a stimulus for pastoral charity and a special source of spiritual fecundity in the world. Indeed, it is not demanded by the very nature of the priesthood, as is apparent from the practice of the early Church (cf. 1 Tm 3: 2-5; Ti 1: 6)..." (Presbyterorum Ordinis, No. 16).

This document goes on to say that, "..celibacy has a many-faceted suitability for the priesthood. For the whole priestly mission is dedicated to the service of a new humanity which Christ, the victor over death, has aroused through his Spirit in the world and which has its origin 'not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man but of God' (Jn 1: 13). Through virginity, then, or celibacy observed for the kingdom of heaven (cf. Mt 19: 12), priests are consecrated to Christ by a new and exceptional reason. They adhere to him more easily with an undivided heart (cf. 1 Cor 7: 32-34), they dedicate themselves more freely in him and through him to the service of God and men, and they more expeditiously minister to his kingdom and the work of heavenly regeneration..." (No. 16).

Perhaps the "walking Bible" should spend a little more time with the Bible. And rather than criticizing the Church founded by Jesus Christ, perhaps he should make more of an effort to actually learn what the Catholic Church teaches. I challenge Mr. Van Impe to purchase (and study) the Catechism of the Catholic Church. He just might discover, providing he is truly open to the Spirit, the fullness of Christian truth