Posted on 11/22/2014 3:12:25 AM PST by livius
In the face of the offensive of radical Islam, Francis’s idea is that “we must soothe the conflict.” And forget Regensburg. With serious harm also to the reformist currents of Islam...
It is impossible not to see in this the features of a “war of Islam” pushed to the extreme, fought in the name of Allah. It is illusory to deny the Islamic origin of this unbridled theological violence. This has been published even by the officially supervised “La Civiltà Cattolica,” only to be contradicted afterward by its fearsome director, Antonio Spadaro, the Jesuit who plays the role of Francis's interpreter.
On Islam the Catholic Church stammers, the more so the higher up the ladder one goes...
(Excerpt) Read more at chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it ...
The article is worth reading, and also worth knowing is that when he was Archbishop of Buenos Aires, Bergoglio openly attacked Pope Benedict's Regensburg address.
“Don’t whip them up into any more of a murderous frenzy than they’re already in”. When Pope Benedict just quoted what a Byzantine emperor once said about Islam, the nice Muzzies killed people as a result. But catering to their penchant for evil instead of calling it out just delays it.
The Christian European West barely escaped destruction at the hands of the Moslems. At one point they were stopped near Tours and at another point, later on in time, outside the gates of Vienna. The Church throughout northern Africa was practically destroyed by Moslem power, and at the present hour, the Moslems are beginning to rise again.
Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen, Mary and the Moslems, Chapter 17 of The World’s First Love, 1953
We all have seen the true face of Islam - it’s not peaceful - has nothing to do with religious freedoms - and when those attempt to befriend or aid Islam - they become victims and are killed...
So me the progress moslems have made since their inception - not by the slaves forces to produce - not the manuscripts stolen, translated into Arabic where the originals were then burned - not the inventions created by other civilized people that were taken over and forced to convert...exactly what original concepts that have advanced mankind forward, not backwards - show me one thing...
I fully understand why banks in the US deal with Middle Eastern investors - because they want to make money - an in turn these Sharia - terrorist financing Arabs turn those profits around and spin up insurgents groups like Al Qaeda and ISIS - and to what end does making money trump the lives of the military men & women who asked to fight wars with restrictions - to build infrastructure only to seen it destroyed - and establish school where education is a sin, not a common task.
The Pope had better get his head in the fight and make right with Christ - because Islam is the counter to Christianity - this war is one of Good vs Evil...and recently we have seen the true face of evil!
Yeah well my Protestant pastor doesn’t stammer...
Islam has historically been the enemy of reason since its very inception. It is a bizarre syncretist heresy patched together by an evilly inspired lunatic out of bits of all the religions circulating in the Middle East during his day and used as a means of consolidating his military conquests. Since it was meant to subject the peoples (its very name means “subjection”), it was also opposed to reason and even opposed to art or musical expression.
It has since become the single most retrograde and violent force in the world, crushing civilizations and individuals. Pope Benedict identified the problem correctly, because its false ideology rejects not only reason, but the reality of the world outside of it. But it has always appealed to life’s losers because its fanaticism gives them power to crush other people far more advanced, successful and happier than they are. It is the power of darkness and spite; in short, the power of Satan, whose entire being is based on evil and jealous rage.
Here’s an interesting article about all the inventions made by Muslims that are an important part of the modern world.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/how-islamic-inventors-changed-the-world-469452.html
Unfortunately, when you start looking into the details of most of them, the date and location of the “invention” become less than self evident. Most of these turn out to probably not be Muslim in origin at all, though adopted and spread by Muslims.
If you really start to look into the origins of “inventions” over the millenia, a wildly disproportionate number came originally from China, startting at least 4000 years ago. This rate of invention continued up to the 1500s and then just seemed to stop, not only in comparison with the West which was just reaching takeoff technologically, but even on an absolute level.
The Chinese just stopped innovating. Never have heard a logical reason why. Interestingly, they haven’t really started up again. Very little true innovation has been done by Chinese in recent decades, even since their recent increases in freedom and prosperity. Certainly nothing to correspond with either their history, their numbers or their high average IQ. Very odd.
It lends a modicum of credence to the theory of islam being a Roman creation to oust the Jews and Copts from Jerusalem.
I don’t think it’s a Protestant/Catholic thing. Many pastors and leaders in the Catholic Church, including members of the hierarchy, don’t stammer either. On the other hand, there are large numbers of Protestants (such as the Episcopalians, famous for last week’s Islamic service at their National Cathedral) who seem to believe in something they call “Chrislam,” thinking they can somehow work out a synthesis between the two irrevocably opposed beliefs that will ingratiate them with Muslims.
I think the main problem with the Pope is that he is not a very deep thinker and also that he is somehow trapped in a 1970s bell-bottom and denim workshirt mentality where an enemy is just a friend who doesn’t really know us yet, and all we have to do is hold hands and sway in a universal peace-circle. He’s very foolish on this and it’s a dangerous time to have a foolish Pope.
We had some Islamic guy come in during 2006 to tour each Regional Embassy in Iraq - something the State Dept wanted to do...he sat there and basically talked down to us...fortunately, we also had the local Shia standing in the background to listen...this guy was a Sunni and his arrogance showed...afterwards, I was talking to a known Mahdi Militia infiltrator we kept around for a time and this guest speaker walked up to the both of us and said something in Arabic...very smug from what I could tell...afterwards, the Shia MM member looked at me and said without missing a beat, “I’d kill that guy if he wasn’t in here with you all!”
There will never be peace inside of Islam - and why would there be so outside...
Yes, China invested alot that the moslems picked up on...if it wasn’t for their expansion - driving the intellectuals into Europe - they wouldn’t have experienced the Enlightening period...so I guess that’s kinda a positive thing...I guess...
Actually, Rome, either as a political power or as religious leadership, had very little power in the Middle East at that time. The ME, which after the collapse of the Roman Empire no longer had a unifying great power to control or protect the many kingdoms and countries, was a sea of heresies and strange understandings of Christianity, many of them based on the Arian and Donatist heresies.
It was pretty easy for somebody like Mohammed, a false prophet, to patch together his own version of the religions using fragmented Christianity, the still pervasive paganism, and Jewish ritual law. He particularly revved up on the visions after his bandit tribes had overrun a few places and he needed a political/religious ideology to cement his victories.
Don’t forget that Islam also sees itself as a political system of civil governance.
Is it possible this is the last pope / anti-pope, knowing the chaotic “right is wrong, wrong is right” times that we’re in?
Is hoping that the pope and his institution will be a beacon of moral certainty / results, parallel with progressives flawed hope that a democratic president and his party offer similar?
Can’t help but to look at corrupt history, duplicity, and injust outcomes both organizations have in common,
ie: power, wealth, hypocritical dogmatic subjugation.
Both organizations supposedly champion the poor, weak, and powerless.
Yet the obscene wealth and power of the church and democratic party, actually indicate contrary results in conflict with supposed distributive altruistic mission.
Horrible injustices, ie: multiple decades rackets: Irish laundry girl slaves, protecting pedophile clergy, killing heretics, pew fees to ensure favorable heavenly status, etc.
Don’t get me wrong, I can really appreciate the Huge contribution to Christianity in the way of forming the King James bible, humane righteous missions the propogation of hospitals, universities and orphanages, beautiful cathedrals and ceremonial music, preservation of Latin, pro-life, and societal decency stance.
However, I just can not make sense of such flawed fundamental issues of there even being such a powerful and now more than ever corrupt institution than the Vatican and its diocese henchmen, just as with the DNC.
I truly wish the Catholic church could reform and become a fully Christ like, blameless organization as Paul instructs all in Christ’s church to be, ie: no more Pope, dissolve the Vatican, do away with saint / relic voodoo, and only teach / propagate God and Christ’s instruction, sans dogma (problematic priest, nun celibacy) for instance.
Pardon possible offense to any and all Catholics. We non-Catholics do have serious questions we struggle with about the RC church, and I for one would gladly embrace the very best of what the Catholic church can offer as it aligns with Christ’s ways in these times.
The Muslims get very defensive about Islam because they know it’s intellectually indefensible. The only thing they can do when questioned is lash out with violence.
The Islamic claims to invention are, for the most part, like the Soviet claims in the early part of the 20th century, where Russian textbooks falsely attributed every modern invention to Communists, no matter how much evidence existed to the contrary. The rewriting of history is a common tactic in tyrannical, conquest-oriented societies.
Islam is violent and ruthless enough to overrun far more advanced societies, and after it does this, usually lives for a generation or two on the intellectual capital of the conquered people. But once it has crushed that, the society not only ceases to invent but even forgets how to use the earlier inventions.
The analogy to the rise of Nazism and the policy of appeasement by those who did NOT want to fight another War is overused.
However, I suggest there are aspects of this analogy that are truly instructive.
The first is that not wanting to fight another major war was and is an entirely logical POV. So was the attempt to prevent one by addressing the quite genuine and legitimate grievances of the German people. It simply was not self-evident in 1933 or 1936 that Nazis could not be appeased, that their drive towards world dominance was inherent.
This inherent drive corresponds quite nicely to the similar drive of Islam, at least in its “political” incarnation. Except there’s a lot less excuse for those who refuse to see it today. Islam’s drive is openly proclaimed, and has been for almost 1500 years. It went underground for several centuries, but now it’s back.
The other issue is not of intent, but of capability. The Germans in 1933 were quite capable of building a military machine capable of conquering the world, as they indeed demonstrated by building one in about five years that came remarkably close to doing exactly that.
This was because in 1933 the Germans were as advanced technologically as any nation on earth. Indeed, they were arguably the most advanced in a great many areas of culture and science.
One simply cannot say the same about the Muslim world. If the rest of the world were to stand still, Islam might catch up in perhaps 50 years. Maybe. But of course the world won’t stand still, and so they are arguably falling farther behind, not catching up.
The notion of Muslim countries innovating militarily or technologically so as to outstrip us is just laughable. And their inability to do so is as inherent to their culture as is their desire invade, conquer and occupy the rest of the world.
Their only true military advantage is our unwillingess to destroy them. That’s not how you conquer the world.
To sum up. Islam (and many Muslims) has the same intent and drive to conquer the world as the Nazis did.
But their capability to do so is, by comparison, nonexistent. They are therefore no military threat in any strategic sense of the word.
It’s also relevant to note that recent advances in alternate ways of tapping energy reserves is steadily reducing the strategic importance of Muslim lands.
Exactly what sort of activism would you say the Pope has to engage in? What is his real purpose? What is the real purpose of the Catholic (or other Christian) religion?
The false teaching of Vatican II is the reason why the post-conciliar church responds to Islam the way they do. This is not just about Francis. I wish all the pro-Benedict folks would wake up and see that he isn't all that different when it comes down to it. Subsequent to the Regensburg address, he apologized for offending the Muslims and then prayed in a mosque with them:
"I am deeply sorry for the reactions in some countries to a few passages of my address at the University of Regensburg, which were considered offensive to the sensibility of Muslims.
"These in fact were a quotation from a medieval text, which do not in any way express my personal thought. I hope this serves to appease hearts and to clarify the true meaning of my address, which in its totality was and is an invitation to frank and sincere dialogue, with mutual respect."
This is distressing. This new Pope is incoherent at best.
Those people at the National Cathedral aren’t historic Protestants. They are Protestant only in the sense that they claim to be Christians who aren’t Catholic. The truth is they are post-Christian apostates. I don’t know why they bother.
Maybe the problem with your pope is that he is a JESUIT. Then again, I am no fan of any pope, whether Jesuit or not.
From what I have been reading and hearing, I have to wonder if maybe this Pope shouldn’t have been called “Peter the Roman”.
muslims never invented a damned thing but misery.
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.