We already know that the Bishop of Rome is an expert in Jewish dietary and other rules; so much so in fact, that he insists his Jewish Rabbi, the pro-homo Skorka chap, follows them strictly, lest he should one day be tempted to convert to Catholicism (convert a Jew? No, no, no!).
It now appears Francis was given a rare opportunity to publicly learn the salient parts of the Koran in what impinges the “peace” element of the funnily named “religion of peace”.
It is good that the Pope is contradicted in public, and charitably helped to form sound opinions. If he does not want to learn in the privacy of his own desk, he will be forced to be taught in public.
Still, I somewhat doubt Francis will be a good pupil. To accept reality concerning Islam would stay massively in the way of the sugary “Lady Diana cum Nelson Mandela” image he is trying to promote.
Francis applies to Islam the same thinking that he applies to the rapid decay of Christianity in the West: if it isn’t convenient, it must be ignored or attributed to not having done enough. It’s never anyone’s faults, but Capitalism’s.
The last controversy about Obama choosing to keep God out of his rendition of the Gettysburg Address is another very telling indicator of how the mind (or what takes that name) of this man works.
Who would, believing in the Holy Trinity, do everything possible and impossible to expunge God from every public statement? Nobody, is the easy answer. Lame excuses of wanting to “respect” those who do not believe in God are as stupid as wanting to follow the rules of Ramadan so that the colleague near you is not offended at seeing you having lunch, but then again one like that would obviously leave God in the Gettysburg address so that the Christians are not offended, too.
It is evident to everyone with a brain that for a Christian to want to expunge God from the public sphere is tantamount to be ashamed of his faith; which no Christian could ever, in conscience, be, so that of this man we could only say that he has lost his faith.
We will, therefore, have to conclude that such a man is an enemy of Christianity, bent on sabotaging it from the comfortable spot of his convenient Christian facade.
Obama, the son of an early example of liberal college slut, certainly did not get any religious education from his mother, or from his anyway absent father. He grew up in a Muslim environment, and attended schools – I am informed – reserved to Muslims, which means he either was considered such, or was such, or certainly did not have anything speaking for his being a Christian. When millions in the West were listening to the bells of the local church, he heard – and stated he is still very fond of – the call of the Muezzin. When he went back to the US – after being abandoned by his mother, too; such are liberal parents – he was raised by his grandparents, and particularly his grandmother, whose liberal ideas are well known and, by the way, clearly shown in the daughter they raised.
But did young Barry improve when he went back to the “country under God”, the United States? Not really.
His Christian facade was the one of a rabidly racist preacher, Jeremiah Wright, a man from whom even Obama at some point had to distance himself, and only after repeated controversy. Is this a good Christian credential? Not likely.
Does he attend church now that he has – finally – canned Wright? Very rarely; apparently a couple of times a year, on those TV occasions. Does he defend Christian values? Never. He would have his daughters abort if they were “punished with a baby” (my words, not his: punished. with. a. baby), and what he calls Christian values are without exceptions the flags of the atheists and liberal culture, from de facto socialism to de iure sodomy.
Not a Christian, then, for sure. Certainly not a Muslim. A clearly thoroughly secular man, very probably as atheist as Stalin, with a cultural predilection for the religion in which he grew up (Islam, of course), and just that ridiculously thin varnish of Christianity that is necessary to become President in the USA.
A whitened sepulchre like few others on this planet, Obama incarnates the hypocrisy of the liberal classes, feigning some lip tribute to Christianity in abstract whilst trying to eradicate it from the planet in concrete.
Stalin was, at least, more honest.
The Gay President used to make a good show of his Christian credentials, something absolutely necessary to avoid the nation believing he is a Muslim.
In order to do so, he also staged a TV walk on Easter: look, look at your oh so Christian President going to Church and listen to the über-liberal preaching of the “progressive” proddie pastor!
It appears now, though, that the Gay President feels he does not need the alibi anymore.
He hasn’t been seen in Church for more than five months now . One wonders what excuse will the White House find for him, then five months is a darn long time even for a Proddie.
Security, perhaps? Ehy, by golfing this does not seem to be a problem? Is he afraid to hurt the sensitivity of atheists? This is more probable. Is he atheist himself, and having to choose would he rather pop in in a mosque, for purely cultural and sentimental reasons? Ah, I think we have it here.
In the meantime, “hope ‘n change” appears more and more isolated on Syria. A completely different picture from G.W. Bush, who in 2002 was called “isolated” when a dozen or more countries were ready not only to support the US military effort, but to put their soldiers where their mouth is and directly participate to the military effort after the invasion. I wonder how all those Democrats who called Bush “isolated” then should call Obama now.
The things you have time for clearly show where your priorities lie. The Gay President’s priorities seem to be so ordered that Golf is more important than religion; or golf is his religion; or, most probably, Obama is his religion.
I like the “Jihad Watch”, and I have linked to it several times.
It seems, though, the excellent man is now in the sight of the Nazi thought-police, who want to prevent him from being invited to participate to public debates.
The tactic of the Nazi Nannies is always the same: demonise and destroy. A good chap with a very laudable penchant for exposing the menace coming from Islam – Islam is, in itself, a menace; it is built to be so; that many individuals are both Muslim and peaceful does not change a iota in that – is then slandered as an incendiary bigoted madman, and even compared with Holocaust deniers.
The PC Wehrmacht agitates everywhere and, worryingly, at times they get – as you can read in the linked article – some a d more than some results. Their bullying knows no boundary and no shame; which is rather rich coming from people who are always salivating about how tolerant they are, and who target “bullying” only when it concerns – at least allegedly – some pervert.
This character assassination does get some result, unfortunately. Read the blog post, and you will be worried.
I invite you to please click the link and leave a word of support and encouragement on Robert Spencer's site. I propose to buy the book too, when it is available in kindle format.
Beware of the Nazi dog today.
Tomorrow, he will bite you.
The frequency with which this man does something very stupid for a Catholic, but rather well-sounding for the secular world cannot but astonish. Methinks, newspapers will soon have to hire extra personnel to follow the antics of this pathetic excuse of a priest. I seriously think at this point he would be considered a clown even among the Anglicans, who have a very strong tradition in the matter and can therefore recognise them swiftly.
Apparently, every year the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue sticks its “ecumenical” nose very deep in Islam’s intimate parts by sending the usual bla bla message stressing how wonderful it is that there are faithful Muslims. This year, it appears the Bishop thought the world would be a better place if he were to send the message personally.
If you think I am kidding you, the original of the message is here. And no, it’s not “off-the-cuff”. Out of his senses, rather.
There is an excellent take on this on the blog Harvesting the Fruit of Vatican II. The blog author simply rephrases the message to adapt it to an hypothetical papal message to certain infidels – the Wiccans – rather than to other infidels – the Mohammedans -.
I allow myself to reproduce the text here:
Message from His Holiness Pope Francis to Wiccans throughout the World
It gives me great pleasure to greet you as you celebrate the sabbat of Lughnasadh, so commencing the month of August, dedicated mainly to honoring Lugh, the sun god.
This year, the first of my Pontificate, I have decided to sign this traditional message myself and to send it to you, dear friends, as an expression of esteem and friendship for all Wiccans, especially those who are religious leaders.
This year, the theme on which I would like to reflect with you and with all who will read this message is one that concerns both Wiccans and Christians: Promoting Mutual Respect through Education.
Turning to mutual respect in interreligious relations, especially between Christians and Wiccans, we are called to respect the religion of the other, its teachings, its symbols, its values.
It is clear that, when we show respect for the religion of our neighbors or when we offer them our good wishes on the occasion of a religious celebration, we simply seek to share their joy, without making reference to the content of their religious convictions.
At the Mass marking the beginning of my ministry, I greatly appreciated the presence of so many civil and religious leaders from the Wiccan world. With these words, I wished to emphasize once more the great importance of dialogue and cooperation among believers, in particular Christians and Wiccans, and the need for it to be enhanced.
With these sentiments, I reiterate my hope that all Christians and Wiccans may be true promoters of mutual respect and friendship, in particular through education.
It is clear we are here – I mean, with the original message – in front of some serious, serious crap.
There is no word about evangelisation; there is not one single mention of Christ or the Holy Ghost; there is conversion concern whatever. On the contrary, the accent is on things that are nothing to do with making new Christians: the usual “dialogue” or purely secular concerns.
Christ and the Holy Spirit will, I am afraid, have to stay out.
In case you should think “we and Muslims believe in the same God”, allow me to say rather emphatically that
No, this is not the case.
The de facto Commander-in-Chief of the American Catholics today openly apostatised, officially declaring his abandonment of Christian dogma. Now allegedly moved by Mohammed, he went to visit a local Mosque.
Great was the joy of the still cardinal at being finally able to enter a place considered sacred by the followers of a child rapist. “I thank God that this day has arrived”, said the future Muslim cleric, overwhelmed by emotions after so many years of clearly outdated Tabernacles, Blessed Virgin statues, and worship of Christ and the Holy Ghost as God.
Mr Dolan, now slated for a position of high responsibility among New York Muslims, officially announced his abandonment of Christianity, explicitly saying that Muslims and Christians believe in the same God.
After the future Imam’s official betrayal of Christ, commenters are divided among those who think he is a retard and those who think he is simply a prostitute, with the second faction apparently prevailing for the time being. Sudden insanity has been excluded, and the still cardinal was reported to eat with the usual appetite today.
The new Imam has given a short outline of what he thinks leads to salvation: love of marriage and family, or children and babies is what saves. The Truth, the Way and the Life are clearly, to him, past sell-by date.
Coherently, he has called for Muslims not to lose their faith. Otherwise they might – God forbid! – become Christians…
The new Imam, who has declared Christians and Muslims love “the same God”, is on record for thanking the Muslim for letting him feel “part of the family”, and his blatant denial of the divinity of Christ and the Holy Ghost persuaded everyone.
Today, Timothy Dolan denied Christ, and truly became part of the Muslim family.
Interesting, if tragic, developments in Bangladesh, where four bloggers have been arrested for having written comments “insulting to Islam” (possibly something like “fake religion soaked in violence and blood, created by a bloodthirsty pedophile”; but I have no exact news). Muslim hardliners want the death penalty for blasphemers of Islam (see above for a possible definition), the others want to tell them where to stuck their ideas.
The four now risk up to ten years in jail, and the matter caused the blood pressure to rise all over the country. Apparently 90% of the Country is Muslim, and again 97% of those Sunnis.
Being Bangladesh a very poor Third-World country I do not doubt they are recipient of more than generous transfer from a number of UNO organisations, which means they get an awful lot of money from Western countries.
One is curious to see how the West, always oh so attentive to the instances of even perverts by us, will react to this rather, ahem, unedifying “human rights situation” in a Muslim country.
The BBC coverage will also be interesting to follow. Remember, these are the people who gave order to call the terrorists “fighters” after the 7 July 2005 bombs who killed 52 innocent people going about their business.
I truly do not know why, with all the names at their disposal, they had to pick “religion of peace”.
It might be good to review again Andrew Klavan’s lesson about how to behave during an Islamic massacre..
From the otherwise rather sleepy and windy Wales, news of some importance reaches us: it says here (I know it’s the BBC, a lair of pedophiles and other perverts; but this they should have managed right) that a mother has beaten her son to death with a stick, as a punishment because the boy could not learn the Koran fast enough.
The detail gives a lot of interesting details: the woman (forget “lady”) is a university graduate; when she discovered that her son had died out of the injuries inflicted to him she set fire to the body of her dead child; she said she did so in order to avoid being killed by her husband upon discovery of the death; she also managed to accuse her husband of the killing. What a delicate person.
You might wonder: why does Mundabor bore us with this individual case of a loony family? Because it seems to me that there is a system of values at play here, which was if not directly causative at least an important contribution in what has happened.
Firstly, you hear every now and then of White mothers who are very cruel to their children (rare, though); but you see, they generally aren’t observant Christians; they come from the worst of the urban plebs, and tend to have a history of alcohol or drugs. Here, we have a family of observant Muslims who want their son to become a Koran memorisation expert. The family is certainly not destitute, taxi-driver isn’t bad in Cardiff and if they had lived in misery this would have been used by the defence for all it’s worth (look, it’s so difficult; the stress of the abject misery, and having to care for so many children at home; of course the one or other gets beaten to death once in a while…).
Secondly, the mere idea of a mother burning her son’s dead body and then accusing her husband of the killing is utterly inconceivable in a Christian setting, as is the affirmation the husband would kill the wife upon discovery of the death. Strangely enough, both acts do not seem so strange if put in a Muslim setting: if a Palestinian mother can set her many children against the IDF and cash a lot of money if one of them is killed, one isn’t very surprised that another Muslim mother would beat his son “like a dog” (not my words; hers) for not memorising the Koran fast enough. As to the fear of being killed, I have known of Muslim women killed by their relatives for much less, though here it was probably an excuse; still, in this setting it is a less improbable one.
All in all, a climate emerges in which, though Islam must certainly not make of people such beasts (and I am sure many perfectly decent Muslim families live in England, though they follow the wrong religion; I have known some I can only define as exemplary), it is instrumental in what has happened here, where a well-educated woman beats her own child to death for not memorising the sacred book of her religion fast enough.
In a related news, the mega mosque in London will not be built; at least not as it is now proposed, a 9,000-place concrete nightmare.
Why am I relieved?
Religion of peace, my foot.
Chose a child rapist as a “prophet”, and this is what you get.
Read here on Deacon’s Bench about the latest “inclusive” madness. It has been organised by some interfaith group or other, and everyone has been invited to participate. In short, in every one of the participating houses people from the other two religions will get in and read from their own scriptures.
Truly, it is as if the First Commandment didn’t exist anymore. These people get together and everyone appreciates how good the other’s religion is. That this should happen also in Christian churches is another manifestation of the new religion, Niceness.
Scandalously enough, among the Christian parishes adhering to this unheard-of summer sale of Christian values is one Catholic parish. Behind the initiative seems to be (as usual, I would say) a Jesuit, called Father Pat Earl.
In another example of how distant Jesuits have become from Christians, Father Pat Earl is on record with the following words:
“Just having something public is not going to be a big, big deal here, but to have someone come in and read from the Quran and to recognize publicly the existence of Islam and to reverence and respect is a good thing for the church to do,”
Truly, the Jesuits have become the enemies of Christianity and the worst defender of the moral relativism criticised by the Holy Father. This is even worse than moral relativism though, this is active promotion of other religions under the pathetic disguise of fashionable words like “reverence” and “respect”.
I can understand a certain feeling of vicinity (and a rather detached one, anyway) with our – to use the Holy Father’s words – “older brothers and sisters”, the Jews, though I’d never allow this to create any confusion whatsoever about who is right and who is wrong. But it is still not clear to me why I, a Christian, should have any “reverence” for Islam, or show any “respect” for a murderous, false religion founded by a pedophile.
I do hope that the responsible bishop stops this initiative and doesn’t allow the Catholic parish to participate. I am not holding my breath, though.
Read here on CNA about the heavy damage suffered by a Nigerian Cathedral by the hand of the usual group of supporters of the, erm, “religion of peace”.
The group’s name translates in the local dialect as “Western education is a sin” and I hope their sons and sons’ sons never learn anything else than their stupid, blasphemous Coran, thus adequately preparing themselves for a life as toilet cleaners; unless of course they get themselves killed beforehand, which is clearly in the cards.
The group has been carrying on these attacks on what appears to be an almost daily basis, probably to fight the boredom of modern office life or perhaps, who knows, because they are simply people who understand the message of Islam and put it in practice.
You’ll be pleased to know that they don’t seem to exclusively target Christians, though, as in the same day two police stations have been targeted, too. Busy people.
In such circumstances, one is reminded of the nice Andrew Klavan’s video about “sensitivity training”.
Truly, for certain countries decolonisation seems to have been rather a self-inflicted punishment.
This is not really new anymore, but in my eyes it touches themes and a way of seeing religion that is at the same time still actual and very well argued. The comparison with the “gigantic german mouse” is powerful, the one with the carmelite nuns even more so.
Enjoy this brilliant video of Andrew Klavan.
This is not a joke; just, I am afraid, the last idea of some idiot Episcopalian who has completely forgotten what he should stand for.
Read here about this lates Episcopalian exploit. Cupio dissolvi at its best.
And if you happen to be one of those misled souls, do yourself a favour and convert to some Christian organisation (I would suggest the Only Church; the only one founded by Christ) before it’s too late.