Replies

I used the word "monument" intentionally; I understand these countries are essentially post-Christian. But there are plenty of people who think of Notre Dame and the like as constants, something they might go see sometime when they get the chance; unaware unless they actually visit Strausbourg, for example, that France is becoming a Muslim country. My statement was rhetorical, but there's some reality there: if you really are interested in seeing great Western or Christian history in Europe, you need to go soon. Notre Dame is not a constant, especially in an increasingly-Islamic nation.

As for mourning the loss of this brick and mortar (which my post was not), why not mourn it? Why not mourn the end of Christian faith in whole nations where it once flourished? It's sad to see these stunning structures reduced to monuments to belief past. It's now inevitable, but it's sad, nonetheless.

The post-Christian nations are primarily in Western Europe, where both Protestantism and Roman Catholicism both essentially surrendered to the tidal wave of materialism in the 20th century. Eastern Europe is different.

The Serbs still practice their Orthodox faith. Maybe that's the real reason why Clinton and the U.N. decided that they needed to be bombed into submission.

I agree, it is sad. However, my point is we should mourn MORE the demise of vital Christianity in Europe more than the signs of that demise...that is church buildings as mere dead monuments.