With a biretta tip to Rorate, I note a story on Ahlul Bayat New Agency that… well… read it yourself.
My emphases and comments:
CAIRO (Ahlul Bayt News Agency) – Egypt’s top Muslim cleric on Sunday criticised Pope Benedict XVI’s call for world leaders to defend Christians as interference in his country’s affairs, the official MENA news agency reported.
The call, [from Pope Benedict to respect the lives of Christians…] following a deadly church car-bombing in northern Egypt, was “unacceptable interference in Egypt’s affairs,” Ahmed al-Tayeb, the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar, the oldest Islamic seat of learning, told reporters. [This isn’t exactly the Imam at “Ahmed’s corner mosque in Lower Black Duck”, is it.] “I disagree with the pope’s view, [that Christians have the right to be alive…?] and [This is great….] I ask why did the pope not call for the protection of Muslims when they were subjected to killings in Iraq?” he said at a news conference. [Ummmm… First, they weren’t being killed because they were muslims. Second, Pope’s asked for peace and respect for human life, there and everywhere.] Benedict at a New Year’s Mass at the Vatican appealed for the “concrete and constant engagement of leaders of nations” to protect Christians in the Middle East, in what he termed a “difficult mission.” In the wake of rising tension and “especially discrimination, abuse and religious intolerance which are today striking Christians in particular, I once again launch a pressing appeal not to give in to discouragement and resignation,” he said.
Tayeb, who renewed his condemnation of the New Year’s Eve church bombing which cost 21 lives, said Azhar, the highest institute in Sunni Islam, would form a joint committee with the Coptic Church to resolve disputes between the communities. The committee, which should begin its work in two weeks, will “discuss reasons for deterioration (in Muslim-Copt ties) and propose appropriate solutions,” he said. Tayeb later met with the head of Egypt’s Coptic Church, Pope Shenouda III, at his headquarters in Cairo’s St Mark Cathedral.
Let’s hope something comes from such meetings.
Sts. Nunilo and Alodia, pray for us.
UPDATE 4 Jan 0037 GMT:
On the site of Vatican Radio we read, with my emphases:
The Director of the Holy See’s Press Office, Jesuit Fr. Federico Lombardi renewed the Holy See’s commitment to authentic religious liberty as the essential element in the search for true peace.
He was responding to remarks from the chief imam of Al-Azhar in Egypt, who on Sunday condemned the deadly New Year’s attack on Coptic Christians emerging from church in Alexandria, but criticised the appeal by Benedict XVI to Egypt’s leaders to counter the persecution of Christians, as an “interference” in internal Egyptian affairs.
In his note, Fr. Lombardi notes both the Imam’s condemnation of the attack, and his personal visit to the Coptic Pope to offer his condolences, before going on to reiterate the position of the Holy Father and the Holy See.
In the note, Fr. Lombardi says that Pope Benedict XVI’s position is very clear, and always has been: a radical condemnation of violence, closeness to the community that has been so horribly stricken, and concern for the religious freedom of Christian minorities. As he said in his Peace Day Message, the Pope’s concern for the religious freedom of Christians has always been within the context of his concern for the religious freedom of all people, not only Christians.
Time and again, the Pope has condemned violence against all people – not only that, which is perpetrated against Christians. We recall his recent discourse to the new Ambassador to the Holy See from Iraq, in which the Holy Father spoke of the innocent victims of violence, both Muslim and Christian.
Right now, we need the commitment of all those responsible for the safety of peoples and the fight against terrorism; we also need all those from all faiths, from every persuasion, who work for peace, to commit themselves to opposing a foul plan that evidently aims to divide, to arouse tension, hatred and conflict. The Pope’s invitation to Assisi for this coming October demonstrates his desire to repeat the message that no war may be waged in God’s name, but only peace. Between the 6th and the 7th of January, Coptic Christians celebrate Christmas. Let us unite ourselves to them in profound solidarity with their suffering and with prayers for the peace of all their communities.
Loading ...
Is it still possible these days to celebrate a Missa Contra Paganos in the Extraordinary Form? More and more I feel such supplications are needed.
More and more when these middle eastern liberals say that they don’t respect us and criticise us for ‘medling’ I think ok, by your logic muslims living in Europe, America etc and demanding ‘special treatment’ = interfering in our affairs. Why don’t we just arange for an exchange; we’ll take all the Christians living in dara al islam and you can get all the muslims living in our civilized countries
Examples of an un-civilized country being Iran but also including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan etc where the towel headed SOB’s who don’t execute virgins have a prison guard forcibly marry and rape her the night before she’s executed, hang and stone people for adultry, forcibly convert people whose belief system is different to your own and shoot, bomb, kidnap, torture , rape those who won’t kowtow to theres.
Then after an appropriate armastice we can have a nice reply of the Crusades in which our Superior Western forces alongside those of Israel will nuclear bomb (not ICBM’s but those nice dial a yeild warheads you can put on Cruise Missles) your raggedy ass armed forces back to the time of the false prophet mohammed before entering Mecaa and converting the Kaba idol which you worship into a Cathedral dedicated to Our Lady of Victories (we will also re-convert the Hagia Sophia) where the Holy Father will offer a Pontifical High Mass (EF) in thanksgiving to God for allowing us to rid the world of your False religion
here endeth the rant/fantasy [/comment posting ability without some moderation… for a while]
“Then after an appropriate armastice we can have a nice reply of the Crusades in which our Superior Western forces alongside those of Israel will nuclear bomb (not ICBM’s but those nice dial a yeild warheads you can put on Cruise Missles) your raggedy ass armed forces back to the time of the false prophet mohammed”
Wow. Seriously? So Christians should indiscriminately murder Muslims and that is a cause for celebration, but Muslims should not indiscriminately murder Christians? What part of the Holy Father’s call for peace did you miss?
OK, three things, probably all in the “wild fantasy” department –
1. Interfering in affairs? When will the EU and the US turn this phrase around back on these guys?
2. When will the Vatican issue a clarification of the DISASTROUS pronunciation from Vatican II (was it Nostra Aetatae?) that seemed to put Islam on an even footing with Judaism and Christianity in terms that were weak then and have now been totally corrupted? Was that the intent? The religion is VERY different from even the most militant Christianity of people like St. Bernard authorizing the military orders. They specifically deny the Trinity, they believe that Christ’s Crucifixion was an illusion, and they believe that things like honesty and charity are required only with fellow believers. When will the Church say something blunt, and specific, about the VAST GULF between that religion and ours?
3. When will someone like the Vatican or the US State Department say something to these guys about how we do intend to interfere in their affairs if they intend to use words like “dhimmi” when they get around to “proposing appropriate solutions”? For those who haven’t studied, that is the term for the second-class-citizen “protected” status that Christians are to be afforded in Moslem countries. They will say that Egypt is majority Moslem and that therefore the appropriate thing is to stop being so loud, or to stop having their church look like a church, or to get rid of their big cathedral altogether since it is merely a goad to the faithful and the infidels should be more discreet, and that these are “appropriate” measures. When they do, we should expel their ambassador.
And why is everything italic today?
(1) Both Pope Benedict and Pope John Paul II are on record as disapproving of initiating the war in Iraq.
(2) It wasn’t either Americans or local Christians bombing mosques in Iraq — it was local Muslims. It would be awkward at best for the Pope to specifically condemn Sunni on Shiite or Shiite on Sunni violence.
We are in italics because the worthy EoinOBolguidhir neglected to include </i> in his post.
IIRC the close of italics spanning multiple posts is a faculty reserved to the Blog Owner.
If this is not italic, I was wrong, and lucky.
JMody – Maybe somebody forgot to close the tag?
I agree with you on the need for more clarity from the Vatican on the fact that Islam is not the same as Christianity and Judaism, not only because of its bizarre idea of ethics (resulting in its vicious treatment of women, its practice of conversion through violence, etc.), but because it is simply a false religion from start to finish.
The only thing that probably enabled the more starry-eyed among the “ecumenical” crowd to consider Islam a religion similar to Christianity and Judaism is that Islam was brewed by Mohammed’s fevered brain as a syncretist religion, having a little bit of all of the things circulating in the Middle East at that time: it has the pagan tribal ethical code, a few Jewish dietary and ritual practices, a lot of pagan beliefs, and occasionally mentions Jesus simply because this was one of the religions in Mohammed’s environment. While part of this is the result of Mohammed’s clearly unstable mind, it is also to some extent calculated, since such a syncretist religion was much easier to impose on people (especially in the fragmented and heresy-riven Middle East) because they recognized parts of it. Islam is actually a political cult based on a theory of Arab supremacy, but expressing it as a religious cult gave its masters – Mohammed and his Arab followers – complete domination over every aspect of the lives of the conquered peoples.
There are two things I would like to see: (a) a clear analysis and denunciation of Islam by Rome; and (b) a call by our US and in fact all bishops for prayers for the suffering Christians in Muslim lands or simply for Christians suffering at the hands of Muslims. The first, of course, is never going to happen, but would it really cost the US bishops too much to stop those sniveling “prayers of the faithful” that generally seem to be praying for the onset of world socialism and turn their attention to somebody who really needs prayers and solidarity?
The meetings between this Iman and Pope Shenouda are only window dressing. Deterioration of “Muslim/Coptic ties”? The only tie is the noose around the Copts necks for 1400 years. Perhap I have a bigger dog in this fight than most since my husband is Copt. I can only pray that the exposure is finally occurring because of the Internet and they can’t controll the spin like they used to. Father Zacaria succeeds because of the Internet – that’s why these Imans have a $10 million bounty on his head and he lives in hiding.
The REAL message here from Ahmed al-Tayeb, the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar???
“Hey, Pope Benedict, shut up and behave like a good DHIMMI…who do you think you are, Pius the Fifth?”
My bad on the runaway italics. Perhaps an HTML guru can help.
These are the people of the “peace” religion called Islam. You know, where only a few idiots are calling for Jihad against Christians and Jews and most are “peace-loving.” B.S!! Maybe we should start thinking about factual history and how they have forced conversions by the sword on Christians and Jews. Lets remember a few centuries back when the Muslims turks tried to take Europe. King Jan Sobieski of Poland, with Emperor Leopold of The Holy Roman Empire, The Venetians, and with backing from the Pontiff, set out to stop them. Sobieski’s coalition gloriously defeated them at the gates of Vienna. Even if we don’t battle with the sword in the 21st century, it should be a battle cry to the Church Militant. Onwards Christian Soldiers! should be our answer, not false ecumenism with a fake religion that came AFTER Judaism and Christianity.
Don’t forget the Holy Rosary…that powerful weapon that defeated the Turks at Lepanto too. Pray, pray, pray.
Unless the Holy Father is paying jizya, he should not be called a Dhimmi! (Called “Zimmi” in the paper cited below.)
“…Jizya literally means penalty. It is a protection tax levied on non-Muslims living under Islamic
regimes, confirming their legal status. Mawdudi states that “the acceptance of the Jizya
establishes the sanctity of their lives and property, and thereafter neither the Islamic
state, nor the Muslim public have any right to violate their property, honor or liberty.”
Paying the Jizya is a symbol of humiliation and submission because Zimmis are not regarded
as citizens of the Islamic state although they are, in most cases, natives to the country…..”
More about Dhimmi (zimmi) see “Rights of Non-Muslims in an Islamic State,” by Samuel Shahid:
http://www.dhimmitude.org/d_today.html
The paper is undated, but its latest reference citation is 1993.
Good gosh.
It seems to me that Fr. Lombardi’s response to the Grand Imam’s statement by noting that the Pope calls for non-violence against Christians within the context of non-violence against all people, really does the Church no good at all. By noting something so patently obvious even a supremely stupid person would take for granted as established fact, it almost casts doubt on the assertion, by making it appear as if it needs to be stated.
Some things are clearer without having to reinforce them. What he should’ve done is called the Grand Imam’s statement what is was: ludicrous, laughable on its face, uncharitable, and moronic. And just let that be that.
“Dieu le volt!”
When the Romans fought against the Carthaginians, they knew that the kingdom was one of the most evil on earth-even more evil than the Roman culture. The Macabees were under obedience to fight the Seleucids. Europe was bound by culture and religion to fight defensive battles against the Moslems. In the modern age, Europeans fought against the pagan tyranny of the Nazis and the pagan tyranny of the Japanese Empire. The problem today is that the West lacks the will and the moral strength to either defend itself against the false, violent religion of Islam. Many years ago, I ask a class of young men if they would defend America against the Islamic nations. They all said “no”. We have at least two generations of men who do not believe either in evil which exists in men and in certain ideologies, nor do they have a moral sense of duty to defend freedom.
In recent years, I believe that the Popes have seen the degradation of the youth of the West and the Popes have believed that appealing to the larger world for peace would solve the problem of Islamic global national interests. In a moral vacuum, it is hard to be a leader, when there are so very few who would be led. We must understand the context of the Papal efforts for peace, when there is no longer a Western world view, a Western army, or Western leaders, who would stand against Islam. I believe the Pope is doing what he thinks is best in a deteriorating situation, without much or any backing from other Western leaders.
my either or phrase is missing–either defend itself against the false, violent religion of Islam, or even label a false religion ” evil” at its roots, preferring not to judge, lacking a framework for such judgment.
Supertradmum, the young men currently in Iraq or Afghanistan would defend America against anyone they are told to. The problem if any is in the telling.
I’d glad we didn’t go to war with, say, Ireland, in the 1980s. But I’d have fought whomever.
Two of the sentiments attributed to the HF seem seriously problematic.
1. “the Pope’s concern for the religious freedom of Christians has always been within the context of his concern for the religious freedom of all people, not only Christians” … the problem here is that the free exercise of false religions leads to harming of innocent victims, e.g.
(a) oppressed women, by religions that promote polygamy
(b) deserted wives and children, by religions that tolerate divorce
(c) oppressed minorities, by religions that promote racism.
IMHO one of the best things that a civil government could do for the weak and defenceless would be to crack down on false religion. Let’s hope that the indications of Vatican II to the contrary get canned asap.
2. “The Pope’s invitation to Assisi for this coming October demonstrates his desire to repeat the message that no war may be waged in God’s name, but only peace” … while there is lots of practice to lead the HF to this attitude (e.g. the craziness of Christian Europe going to war against itself in 1914), as a matter of principle his view seems odd. A Christian society should in principle be able to call upon God’s assistance in defending itself against aggression, no? What did St. Augustine have to say about that? Where’s the hermeneutic of continuity in this case?
To conclude, as long as the Catholic Church continues in its 50-year binge of self-loathing, we can expect outsiders to despise us all the more.
Happy new year
Paul
Q. What do western liberals and fundamentalist muslims have in common?
A. Selective memories (historical revisionism) and hatred toward the Church. They both employ the former to justify the latter. Both employ deceit/taqiyyah to veil their real intentions.
The muslim cleric’s comments are no surprise. What does come as a surprise (though, it probably shouldn’t be) is the appalling ignorance revealed in an exchange I heard on my car radio today on NPR’s “All Things Considered”.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=132622969
Q. Robert Siegel – “Are christians a new front for islamist militants in the region?”
A. Borzou Daragahi (LA Times/Beirut) – “Y’know, increasingly it does seem that way.”
Do you think that, given the fact the story ran today and has now been buried on the website, NPR is a bit nervous about drawing the wrong kind of attention?
There’s contemporary journalism in a nutshell: uninformed, weak-kneed and therefore toothless.
Pray for the conversion of infidels. Our Father, Hail Mary, Glory Be.
These are truly dangerous times, but we have a weapon greater than any terrorist – prayer!
One is witheringly, almost irreconcilably angry at the outrage of these murders and the accompanying,execrable screaming wail ” Ollie-is-Ockbar”. Who, we wonder, could possibly believe the Deity takes pleasure in this murder? And I would ask these Islamists, if ‘your All-ah’ takes pleasure in such slaughter, then by contrast, in what acts does the Evil One delight? I have imagined the complete conversion of the Moo-ham-Ed-ians by the appearance of Mary or Our Lord Himself over the black rock. Otherwise, might many of these killers find to their horror a different fire, unquenchable, and greeting them after the belt spatters their Ock-bar to smithereems? I pray for the Coptic Christians. “IHS”
The cold hard fact is that anyone who truely believes in Islam is the enemy. All non Islamists are infidels and their “bible” essentially demands that infidels be killed. One can try to white wash that as our PC politicians do but denial of the facts is both dangerous and deadly.
Here’s a geopolitical, rather than a religious, view of what the church bombings in Egypt and Nigeria might mean: http://mail.aol.com/33069-111/aol-1/en-us/suite.aspx
Alright, Ed the Roman, you’ve touched a sore spot that demands a reply.
I’d glad we didn’t go to war with, say, Ireland, in the 1980s. But I’d have fought whomever.
I do not believe that America’s servicemen are a bunch of combat zombies who have voluntarily signed away their free will and moral accountability for a bowl of pottage, which is precisely what you are implying. If you were correct, America’s armed forces would be only the lowest scum of mercenaries, at best worthy of only their pay and no praise whatsoever, and at worst vastly more powerful and proximate threat to our freedoms than bin Laden has ever dreamed of being.
It is true that they must, and do, give extreme deference to the judgments that come down from the chain of command. They are docile to an extent that bishops must dream about, but docile does not mean either unthinking or unaccountable. The idea that they would blithely kill whoever they were pointed at — foe or friend, combatant or noncombatant, it doesn’t really matter who — with no more thought than that given by a Tomahawk missile — that idea does not square with the character of ANY of the servicemen that I know.
ContraMundum, I think you are not hearing what Ed the Roman was saying. He was assuming that you would understand something like the following: “If the US is being attacked or endangered by any country, then clearly, it is the duty of any American to defend the US against said country. If the US decided to attack someone while I was in the Service, I had a fair amount of trust in our democratic processes and thus would have assumed that my orders came for good reason. Naturally I reserve the right not to follow illegal orders or fight unjust wars, but that goes without saying for anybody in the US military, so I didn’t say it.”
The Pope’s invitation to Assisi for this coming October demonstrates his desire to repeat the message that no war may be waged in God’s name, but only peace.
Since it is the teaching of the Church that just wars do exist (however rarely), in what name may they then be waged? The name of Mammon?
I think Chesterton was much closer to the truth when he said, “The cheapest and most childish of all the taunts of the Pacifists is, I think, the sneer at belligerents for appealing to the God of Battles. It is ludicrously illogical, for we obviously have no right to kill for victory save when we have a right to pray for it. If a war is not a holy war, it is an unholy one — a massacre” (CW, XXX, p. 307).
The Muslim agenda in the middle east is not congruant with the Christian mission. No matter how much we want to kid ourselves and talk about religious freedom, tolerance, etc, it is NOT the same. I challenge the notion their God is the same too, simply because of how he manifested and personality, compared to how the Lord God, through the ages, manifested to us, but alas I digress. What I get from the imam is the usual bully tactics I see from all the other imams. The very fact Christians are there probably infuriates him.
Make no mistake, they have an agenda. The imam might not be the one to pull the trigger or knife..but he isnt exactly against it, or has shown he is against it either
Suburbanbanshee, I don’t think that kind of thing can be left unsaid, particularly after an unqualified “I’d have fought whomever.”
Jeez people turn off the talk radio and read a book about Islam not written by a Western polemicist.
And look to other news sources outside your bubble. You are being played and amped up to further an agenda. These Muslims condemn the attack: (I’d link them, but we are censored from posting links. Google them up yourself. Use your brain. Don’t let other people think for you regardless of their perceived and packaged “devoutness”)
Nuri al-Maliki Condemns Egypt Church Attack
Sheikh Abdul Aziz Bin Abdullah Aal Al-Sheikh Condemns Church Attack
Egypt’s religious leaders condemn ‘predictable’ attack
Regarding accusations against Pope Benedict XVI of interference expressed by the Imam of AL Azhar, Vatican Press Office director, Fr. Federico Lombardi, states he believes there has been a “misunderstanding in communications”.
Anyway, the point is that, if the government of Uruguay tried to kill us, my 7th grade report on the beauties of the Purple Land is not going to make me tell our government not to storm the lovely beaches or run an assault on Montevideo. If Ireland tries to kill us, then I’m on the side of my citizenship, not my ancestry. If Uruguay and Ireland don’t like that, they shouldn’t attack us.
Re: the Imam, his beef is that Islamic people are allowed (by their religion and law system) to order around non-Islamic people, to protect them if it’s strategic and to cut them down if it’s not. Non-Islamic people are allowed to grovel and plead for protection, and show themselves to be submissive and productive workers toward Islamic people. They are not allowed to say anything bad about Islamic people (even if it’s true), because shaming an Islamic person is a crime punishable by death. Likewise, non-Islamic people aren’t allowed to call on Islamic people to follow their own laws, except in the most groveling fashion, because that’s uppity.
But it’s not a good idea for Christians to grovel like this, especially if they don’t live in Muslim lands. It’s agreeing to the initial premise — that Islam is in charge by God’s true command, and that Christianity is inferior and untrue and rightly survives only by sufferance.
Also, the logic of natural law and conscience bypasses all these cultural brainwashings, and potentially penetrates to the heart of every human being. We are Christians. We should speak the Truth and shame the devil.
So if the Pope had sent a message begging the imams to protect Egypt’s Christians, the imams probably would have accepted this smugly as proper dhimmi behavior. But the Pope purposefully didn’t act in a conciliatory way (as he might have with other cultures), because that would be acting like a dhimmi. He purposefully insisted that he (or anybody) had the authority to chide Egypt’s Muslims for wrong behavior (as he was right to do). They don’t like it, so of course their head guy will whine about it. But the Imam complains because he knows the Pope is telling the truth.
Yes, I am sure they condemn the attack. There is also a line in the Quran that specifically speaks on decieving an enemy into thinking you are his friend.
Also – Why shouldnt we think they wont rest till the world is Islam….are we not supposed to rest until all nations are Baptized? What makes their motivation any different…what one has to take into account is the methods… ares are quite a bit different
Nuri al-Maliki Condemns Egypt Church Attack
What is that supposed to prove? The guy certainly owes his office, and very likely his life, to the Western occupation forces. He’s a politician, and he’s doing the politically sensible thing.
Regardless, I think it is worth remembering that there is as much variation among Muslims as there is among Catholics or Protestants. Some observe their religion closely, some barely at all. Some are harsh, some are gentle. Some respect the humanity of others, some do not.
Islam is an evil and false religion, but there are no doubt millions who are like the Samaritan woman, to whom Jesus said, “You people worship what you do not understand” — the worship may be genuine, but the understanding is faulty.
Frank_Bearer, using your extensives resources as a foundation for your argument, please justify the historical treatment of the Copts since the inception of Islam and the current national and religous (one in the same?) laws to which the Copts are subjected. Are you stating that the Copts are true equals in Egypt to the Muslims? I sincerely wish for you to respond because it would be very enlightening to me to hear your explanation of the situation.
And while we spend time trying to differentiate between those who take Islam seriously and those who are IINO (that would be Islam in name only) the hard core majority continue to plot ways to destroy us.
It’s not a hardcore majority. It’s various fanatical minorities with the sanction from their religion to make pretty much anyone a target of anger and fear and lust, a lot of people who disapprove but are afraid to act (with good reason) so pretend to approve, some decent people who try to live by the more decent folkloric aspects of Islam and try to avoid thinking about the rest, intellectuals who either rebel against it all (including morals) or support it all (and collect public approval and goodies), severely dysfunctional traditional family structures in the Arab countries, a surplus of young men who won’t be able to marry a woman of their choice until they’re old and rich and whose sweethearts and sisters are bartered to old men, and a lot of people who work out their own anger and fear and lust by supporting the fanatical minorities.
Brave, brave Pope Benedict, once again speaks the truth with courage.
History is repeating itself: Christians in the Middle East being victimized again by the Muslims warlords. All of us in the West must seriously pay attention to what is happening in the world, and pray in unison .
In a lot of ways, Islam is like the system that Tokugawa guy imposed on Japan, to keep the people from being able to unite against the government. All the sudden religious death penalties for Islamic and non-Islamic people are sort of like letting the samurai kill any non-noble without penalty but not letting them own land or businesses. The power to kill and enslave, but no power to live a peaceful life and better oneself. The power to kill destroying trust from other classes and ranks, thus preventing them from the obvious team up with other people who have money but no way to defend themselves. Similarly, women’s treatment in the family prevents them from teaming up with their own husbands and children and siblings, but encourages them to be mean to the women who have lower status than they. The whole societal structure is like that; nice people really have to struggle against the tide.
ContraMundum,
1) What Suburbanbanshee said.
2) The caveats and whys and wherefores that you think required by proper moral theology are implicit, but there simply is not time, interest or ability among infantrymen, plane captains and gunner’s mates to do that much formal parsing. You remind me of some left-atheist friends of mine who thought that a parody of the Time cover of “The American Fighting Man” as “The American Myrmidon” complete with Totenkopf emblems photoshopped in was a fair appraisal.
3) The substance of your complaint, of course, is that without your desired caveats I have confessed *myself* to being a “combat zombie… who ha[s] voluntarily signed away [his] free will and moral accountability for a bowl of pottage, … the lowest scum of mercenaries, at best worthy of only [his] pay and no praise whatsoever, and at worst [a] vastly more powerful and proximate threat to our freedoms than bin Laden has ever dreamed of being….[who] would blithely kill whoever [he] w[as] pointed at — foe or friend, combatant or noncombatant, it doesn’t really matter who — with no more thought than that given by a Tomahawk missile”. Did you really mean to say that?
Dear mrose
In case you haven’t noticed these people don’t understand the meaning of the word peace, one of the things that I admire about +Lefervre is that he understood that Muslims respect strength.
I’m not saying we should ‘murder’ muslims I’m saying we should put our cards down saying that we will not behave like good Dhimmi’s anymore and that we WILL retaliate against these people if they do not grant Christians their full human rights and by the way we happen to have enough nuclear weapons to turn their barbaric countires into parking lots a couple of hundred times over trust me they’ll get the message.
paulbailes,
“IMHO one of the best things that a civil government could do for the weak and defenceless would be to crack down on false religion. ”
Which civil government do you trust to pick the true religion? What will you do if they pick the Unitarians?
Dear Ed the Roman
Re “Which civil government do you trust to pick the true religion? What will you do if they pick the Unitarians?” …. I would move to somewhere that picked Catholicism. The trouble is that nowadays there aren’t any of these (thanks Vatican II!), while there are plenty of civil governments that favour other religions (most notably Islam, but also the kind of aggressive anti-religion so often noted here in WDTPRS).
Cheers
Paul
Ed the Roman said,
The substance of your complaint, of course, is that without your desired caveats I have confessed *myself* to being a [mere mercenary]. Did you really mean to say that?
Yes, that is certainly a possibility, at least a priori. People reveal unflattering details about themselves quite often, sometimes intentionally, more often not. Certainly some people in the armed forces are mere mercenaries; I suspect the worst may be found among the career officers, which should surprise no one. In spite of this, I maintain that most servicemen are genuine patriots
I have heard the “zombie excuse” from some people who simply wished to avoid the sticky ethical problem which is the war in Iraq. There are a long list of reasons why starting the war does not square with just war theory, and many people will do whatever it takes to avoid confronting those issues.
To be clear, I don’t think that is necessary to justify the individual serviceman. Those who were in the military when the war started had not joined to start a war with Iraq, but to defend the country against any real threats, of which there are quite a few. What about those who re-enlisted or volunteered after the war was started? I think this is also not a problem; with some reluctance, I have to agree that sometimes the most just thing to do — particularly to the civilian population and those who have helped us — is to bring a war to a successful conclusion, even if it was unjust to start the war in the first place. (The uncertainty about what even constitutes a “successful conclusion” and whether we can achieve it are strikes against the “reasonable prospect of success” criterion of a just war.) A volunteer who could be pretty certain he would be sent to Iraq could volunteer with confidence that he was helping give Iraq its best chance for meaningful peace.
Ding ding ding!!!
These days, most pronouncements from the Church seem better suited for crayon or child-safe water color than grown up ink.
Furthermore, invoking Nostra Aetate illustrates either cynical comedy, total incompetence, or (most likely) the sin of pride: the inability to accept that the warm and fuzzy embrace of the world (which we were taught since Jesus Christ preached to be wary of) has not only nearly destroyed the Church, but it has made the world even more screwed up.
A big challenge in confronting explicit persecution is that the West is not Catholic nor is it Christian. It is a burnt out husk of Yankee Trading Consumerists shaped by three centuries of Freemasonic ideals, symbology, and dualism.
Our wars in Iraq and Central Asia have nothing to do with protecting Christianity or even remotely Christian ideals. These wars are fought for a hodgepodge of political and commercial interests: Current political theorists support projecting power while intensely powerful corporations seek to ensure new markets are opened to delivery of units of whatever.
But finally, the natural consequences to years of living for ourselves are finally coming home to roost.
After demanding ultra cheap goods, Americans and Europeans under 30 cannot find work that pays anything…while Chinese slaves are forced to drudge in dehumanizing conditions as American executives drown in lucre.
After coveting as much sex as possible with ‘no consequences,’ Europe, Commonwealth Realms, and America are, demographically speaking, terminally ill…meanwhile divorce and STDs are at historical heights.
After casting aside Church teaching on economic matters in favor of pursuing fast money, entire nations are bankrupt or are teetering on the edge of insolvency…juxtaposed against incredible wealth concentration that is far more lopsided than in monarchies of the past.
Unfortunately, the Copts should not anticipate any relief force of Eurofighters, Abrams tanks, or Marine expeditionary forces. As time passes, it will become less deniable that the West does not identify as Christian and thus has no desire to risk itself for besieged Christians the world over.