Posted on 09/14/2006 5:35:05 PM PDT by NYer
KASSEL, Germany, SEPT. 14, 2006 (Zenit.org).- A Turk has been arrested in the stabbing of a 70-year-old Salesian parish priest who was attacked at the door of his rectory.
Police have arrested a 28-year-old man in connection with the attack last Monday on Father Aloys Weber.
The Salesian International News Agency (ANS) reported the incident Wednesday, detailing that the assailant repeatedly accused the priest of being "the incarnation of evil."
On Monday afternoon, the assailant went to the door of the rectory. When Father Weber opened the door, he was stabbed three times, twice in the abdomen and once near the heart.
The Salesian was rushed to the hospital, where he was operated on. He is listed in serious condition, ANS reported.
And the Holy Father plans on visiting Turkey in November ... prayers for Benedict XVI and this priest.
This Priest obviously needs to re-examine his policies towards Muslims
/s
prayers for Father Weber's recovery
This priest would be the one of the LAST people in the world to "re-examine" his policies towards Muslims because ONE Muslim man attacked him.
I DOUBT that he, or any priest worth his salt, would condemn "Muslims" for the actions of some. Not that you are condemning Muslims because of this. There are one billion Muslims in the world. Most are not murderers.
For all we know the attacker might be nuts looney mentally ill.
No doubt, he would take his lead from Pope John Paul II when it came to Muslim Turks attacking him.
Any country that allows in large numbers of Moslem immigrants is asking for trouble.
OMG! What's wrong with these people?
Prayers offered for Father Weber. I do worry about the Pope's visit to Turkey - may the Holy Spirit (for wisdom)along with the Archangel Michael (for protection) be with him the entire time.
sure if you say so
*************
I find that to be continuously frustrating as well.
Well, it IS what Pope John Paul II DID, isn't it?
****************
I agree that that this is not the role of a priest. I doubt that this incident, one of a long line of such, is going to reassure anyone here about the peaceful nature of Muslims, however.
True, priests should be the "blessed" peacemakers.
There are plenty enough folks to bash the fanatics. THEIR story is always and ever on the news in mind-numbing repetition. Nothing good is ever published about the almost 1 billion Muslims who DON'T murder. It's only the BAD news that makes OUR news.
Too bad the "Butcher of Baghdad's" evil, violence and murder, him being a Muslim fanatic too, wasn't broadcast with such mind-numbing repitition 25 years ago. We might not have ever have backed him so fiercely against Iran. Without a well-armed Hussein, there would not have been a Kuwait invasion and we might not have ever had to be there for Gulf Wars I and II.
The terror war might not have settled in there with such definitive resolve.
I think most Americans would be appalled at how the rest of the world publishes our violence (domestic and abroad) in mind-numbing repetition. Their remarks about us resemble NOTHING to do with reality, but they do sell toothpaste and make the Democrats here very happy.
Local people, Europeans and Muslim countries, that is, DON'T have the media's viewpoint. They know that their media are simply money merchants -- not unlike Sleazywood. Violence and bad news sells.
Business, travel, tourism, trade, commercialism, music, art, etc., show that most parts of the world have most of the people with brains who DON'T hate, revile and obssess because of labels and heinous actions of a few.
MOST people with brains CAN and DO separate religion and politics. Priests, by nature, should and do (mostly).
We didn't back him "ever so fiercely" against Iran. We sold him some unarmed helicopters and gave him some satellite photos of Iranian military bases.
The rest of his goodies, his warplanes, his tanks, his guns, his sarin gas shells, were French and Soviet/Russian for the most part. And Chinese and North Korean, etc, thanks to Milosovic. Those aren't typical US products we've been digging up in Iraq's deserts or US missile parts turning up in European scrapyards.
In fact, IRAN had more of our stuff than Iraq ever did.
Fact is, it wasn't Iraqi speedboats trying to attack us, or Iraqi missiles being fired our way and Kuwait's way, they was Iranian ones. Shooting up the Iranian navy wasn't for Hussein's benefit, it was for ours.
Well, Ronald Reagan said it differently, though you may know more than President Reagan did.
Reagan armed and backed the Butcher of Baghdad because he was more interested in Iran's partners (at the time), the USSR. Reagan was virulently anti-Communism and he used to remark on it. He dealt with ONE devil (Butcher of Baghdad) to get at another devil, via Iran, the USSR.
Besides, he was mega-ticked off at the Iranians for kidnapping and holding those 44 Americans hostigage for a year.
But, like I said, maybe your knowledge is greater than President Reagan's.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.