Nor has the rcc abolished the "office" responsible for this atrocity. They just changed the name.
In Italy, after the restoration of the Pope as the ruler of the Papal States in 1814, the activity of the Papal States Inquisition continued on until the mid-19th century, notably in the well-publicised Mortara Affair (1858–1870). In 1908 the name of the Congregation became "The Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office", which in 1965 further changed to "Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith", as retained to the present day.
Offend a Muslim and he is obliged to kill you.
But neither should we tolerate the kind of intolerance that provoked this violent reaction
In other words, surrender and submit to Islam! or they will be offended and have every right to kill you for being offended.
It is amazing the number of people who don't know that "but" removes/negates everything that precedes it.
Every single one of these "attack the victim" articles is from the same boilerplate.
If you don't like something or it offends you, don't read it.
Tell them to be angry at their own. Better yet...stop supporting these nuts...leave Islam...it’s not a religion...it’s a political system. They’re just stuck on stupid....1400 years of stupid.
I see Bill Donohue's at it again. Is he advocating punching someone in the face?
Related thread:
Pope on Charlie Hebdo: There are limits to freedom of expression when faith is insulted
He matches his Pope for his chutzpah.. which aint saying much.
But neither should we tolerate the kind of intolerance —
Then do not tolerate it. But do not speak for me.
It is between me and God about me tolerating it.
I’m angry at a lot of what Charlie Hebdo publishes too. But you don’t express that anger by slaughtering the staff; you do it by not buying the product. The people at the magazine have a right to be offensive without being killed for it.
So, can Muslims be considered as a group or as individuals? Which is it?
Are they homogenous or not?
ALL Moslems have a right to be angry? Or just the masses who has expressed their outrage at their own members who defame their own religion via horrendous and vile acts? (Oh wait, that’s like 5 people)
I heard Bill Donohue spew on Raymond Arroyo/ EWTN. RA was aghast and speechless; his next guest said the opposite thing. I think BD is way out of line on this and will not bother to read it.
According to this wiki...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition
The Inquisition is[1] a group of institutions within the judicial system of the Roman Catholic Church whose aim is to combat heresy. It started in 12th-century France to combat religious sectarianism, in particular the Cathars and the Waldensians. Other groups which were investigated later include the Spiritual Franciscans, the Hussites (followers of Jan Hus) and Beguines. Beginning in the 1250s, inquisitors were generally chosen from members of the Dominican Order, to replace the earlier practice of using local clergy as judges.[2] The term Medieval Inquisition covers these courts up through the 14th century.
In the Late Middle Ages and early Renaissance, the concept and scope of the Inquisition was significantly expanded in response to the Protestant Reformation and the Catholic Counter-Reformation. Its geographic scope was expanded to other European countries,[3] resulting in the Spanish Inquisition and Portuguese Inquisition. Those two kingdoms in particular operated inquisitorial courts throughout their respective empires (Spanish and Portuguese) in the Americas (resulting in the Peruvian Inquisition and Mexican Inquisition), Asia, and Africa.[4] One particular focus of the Spanish and Portuguese inquisitions was the issue of Jewish anusim and Muslim converts to Catholicism, partly because these minority groups were more numerous in Spain and Portugal than in many other parts of Europe, and partly because they were often considered suspect due to the assumption that they had secretly reverted to their previous religions.
Except within the Papal States, the institution of the Inquisition was abolished in the early 19th century, after the Napoleonic wars in Europe and after the Spanish American wars of independence in the Americas. The institution survived as part of the Roman Curia, but in 1904 was given the new name of “Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office”. In 1965 it became the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
People are going to make you angry. If we try to get rid of everything that makes people angry we will have to do universal lobotomies.
Since there will always be people who offend us then what is the solution?
It is found in the "sin not". You can be angry. You can write letters, you can protest, you can avoid those people and their product.
But "sin not" don't burn down their stuff, don't kill them, don't threaten them, don't try to put them in jail.
Sin not.
And let it go by the end of the day.
That is the next verse.
Something that Mr Donohue should meditate on for a few decades.
Sure, they can be angry all they want, what they don’t have is the right to act upon that anger by taking another person’s life or property.
But as we all know, Islamic Culture and Basic Impulse control are mutually exclusive...
Why? Christians have to tolerate it and unless everyone is OK telling atheists it will be illegal to insult Christ then I don’t see what can be done...
Free speech...
Mooselimbs deserve nothing.
Nuke em
Satan wants us believers reacting and angry. Perpetual outrage. This IS NOT OUR HERITAGE! We know the end of the wicked, so we can be BOLD and yet kind to wicked men in the hope of saving some (re: apostle Paul’s attitude).
I know, this from a fallen creature who can go nuclear in a heartbeat. Yet my heart agrees with the above. We have the Spirit of Christ in us! Just how much flak from the world can He take and still shine forth?!?!
Semantic Fallacy!
Publishing cartoons of Mohammed is not a "kind of intolerance."
Killing people even though they have not physically attacked you, on the other hand, is intolerance.
Regards,
Believe as an adult in a child-like, 6th century religion and you are going to hear about it - especially if you use its tenets to justify hurting people who do not believe as you do.
Catholics and many other Christian religious leaders don't want to criticize Islam because they are far too afraid their own beliefs can't meet such grown-up standards. That's too bad. If men like Donohue can't even boldly make the case to the natterers that modern Catholic religious practices do not sanction the flying of jetliners into buildings, then they had better just shut up entirely.