The Vatican´s New Realism about Islam

Abu Adak, Freitag, 31. Oktober 2003, 20:36 (vor 7868 Tagen)

The Vatican´s New Realism about Islam
By Robert Spencer
October 31, 2003

The semi-official Jesuit magazine La Civiltà
Cattolica has done nothing less than shock the
world by publishing an absolutely scathing
criticism of the mistreatment that Christians
suffer in Islamic societies. Why so shocking? It´s
a sharp break with Pope John Paul II´s
long-standing policy toward Islam, which some have
characterized as «dialogue to the point of
extremism.« Nothing is published in La Civiltà
Cattolica without the approval of the Vatican
Secretary of State — so this blistering article
presumably corresponds to the views of some very
high placed Vatican officials, if not the ailing
Pope himself.

The Civiltà Cattolica piece represents the first
indication that any Catholic Church officials
recognize the dimensions of the religious conflict
that jihadists are waging against Christians and
others around the world. Up to now the signals
have all been in the other direction: the Pope has
been such a relentless proponent of dialogue with
Islam that Rome´s criticism of the persecution of
Christians in Muslim countries has been muted..

Civiltà Cattolica also counters the dozens of
misleadingly incomplete analyses of jihad that
Muslim advocacy groups have used to befuddle the
public over the last few years. Jihad, it points
out, «has two meanings, both of which are equally
essential and must not be dissociated, as if one
could exist without the other. In its primary
meaning, jihad indicates the ‘effort´ that the
Muslim must undertake to be faithful to the
precepts of the Koran and so improve his
‘submission´ (islam) to Allah; in the second, it
indicates the ‘effort´ that the Muslim must
undertake to ‘fight in the way of Allah,´ which
means fighting against the infidels and spreading
Islam throughout the world. Jihad is a precept of
the highest importance, so much so that it is
sometimes counted among the fundamental precepts
of Islam, as its sixth ‘pillar.´« The only meaning
of jihad you will get from American Muslim
spokesmen is the first. Is there some reason why
they don´t want you to know that radicals are
acting on the second all over the world today?

Contrary to another prevailing myth, that
Christian-Muslim enmity began with the Christian
Crusades, the article states: «All of Islamic
history is dominated by the idea of the conquest
of the Christian lands of Western Europe and of
the Eastern Roman Empire, whose capital was
Constantinople.« Warfare was initiated by the
Muslim armies that swept into Syria and other
Christian areas of the Middle East within just a
few years of the death of Muhammad in 632. The
first Crusade wasn´t called until 1095.

«In reality,« says Civiltà Cattolica, «for almost
a thousand years Europe was under constant threat
from Islam, which twice put its survival in
serious danger.« Now, in its radical, terrorist
form, it is doing so again — but up until now no
one at the Vatican, and precious few elsewhere,
have taken much notice..."

"...What about Islamic tolerance? Another myth.
«According to Muslim law,« Civiltà Cattolica notes
correctly (and courageously), «Christians, Jews,
and the followers of other religions assimilated
to Christianity and Judaism (the ‘Sabeans´) who
live in a Muslim state belong to an inferior
social order,... "

More at:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.a
sp?ID=10582

The Vatican´s New Realism about Islam

Nora, Freitag, 31. Oktober 2003, 20:57 (vor 7868 Tagen) @ Abu Adak

«Christians, Jews,
and the followers of other religions assimilated
to Christianity and Judaism (the ‘Sabeans´) who
live in a Muslim state belong to an inferior
social order,... "



That is not intolerance, that must be understood
and cherished as part of their culture.

The Vatican´s New Realism about Islam

Abu@theVatican?, Dienstag, 11. November 2003, 01:00 (vor 7858 Tagen) @ Nora


by Diana West

November 10, 2003

"...Here´s the point: For the first time in almost
30 years, a source close to the heart of the
Catholic Church (articles in La Civilta Cattolica
are approved by the secretary of state of the
Vatican) has published what Vatican-watcher Sandro
Magister calls "a strikingly severe" account of
the Christian condition under Islamic rule. The
article may represent a shift, if not a break, in
the long-standing Vatican policy of silence on the
persecution of Christians in Muslim countries.

The article highlights the "seemingly rather
curious fact" that wherever Islam has imposed
itself by conquest -- in what is now Egypt, Libya,
Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan,
Turkey, and in the regions of historic Mesopotamia
and Palestine -- "Christianity, which had been
extraordinarily vigorous and rooted for centuries,
practically disappeared." And, the article further
notes, "for almost a thousand years, Europe was
under constant threat from Islam, which twice put
its survival in serious danger."

The explanation? As if taking a page from the
historian Bat Ye´or, the article cites the Islamic
precepts of jihad (holy war) and dhimmitude
(inferior status of non-Muslims). It also
stipulates that there are two meanings of jihad --
the spiritual war, or struggle, to be faithful to
the teachings of the Koran, and the literal war
that is waged to spread Islam. Both meanings, it
says, are "equally essential and must not be
dissociated, as if one could exist without the
other." The article continues: "Obedience to the
precept of ´holy war´ explains why the history of
Islam is one of unending warfare for the conquest
of infidel lands." This same "obedience" has led
to recent anti-Christian violence in Algeria,
Pakistan, Nigeria, Java, East Timor, the Moluccas
and, most dramatically, Sudan. Little wonder, as
the article also reports, that between roughly
one-quarter and one-third of the estimated
Christian population of the Middle East has
emigrated over the past decade to the free world.

".. .I personally welcome the greater
straightforwardness evident in these statements,"
said Richard John Neuhaus, a Catholic priest and
editor of First Things magazine. "Of course, we
are committed to (interfaith) dialogue, but we ask
our Muslim interlocutors to take seriously some of
the difficulties posed by Islam." As examples, he
listed Islam´s failure to allow religious freedom,
its persecution of Christian minorities and its
hateful attitude toward Jews. Dialogue, Neuhaus
said, "cannot be purchased at the price of telling
the truth...""

Nina Shea, director of the Center for Religious
Freedom at Freedom House, suggests that the new
frankness in Rome may be linked to the
increasingly dire plight of Christians at the
hands of Muslims in Sudan, Nigeria and other parts
of Africa. The situation in Europe, where
immigration policies have created large,
unassimilated Muslim communities within
traditionally Christian, secular societies, could
also be influencing Vatican thinking. "Before the
1990s," Ms. Shea said, "the biggest persecutors of
Christians were communist countries." With the
fall of the Soviet Union, radical Islam took
communism´s place. "We´re still very naive," she
said. "We need to educate people."

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/dianawest/print
dw20031110.shtml

The Vatican´s New Realism about Islam

Kalkleiste, Dienstag, 11. November 2003, 02:11 (vor 7857 Tagen) @ Abu@theVatican?

Why not reading the original? Ok, it´s the english
translation ...

http://213.92.16.98/ESW_articolo/0,2393,41931,00.h
tml

Interestingly enough, for being the "vatican
shocker" it´s rather sober, just describing the
means of discimination in the muslim world towards
christanity. Anyway, for even that being a
shocker, let´s face the rest ...

Maybe that might be also of some interest for you:

http://www.faithfreedom.org/

The Vatican´s New Realism about Islam

mehrdad, Dienstag, 11. November 2003, 12:25 (vor 7857 Tagen) @ Abu Adak

im islam haben einige begriffe eine ganz andere
bedeutung, als wir es hier in der zivilisierten
und demokratischen welt kennen:

-hudna= waffenstillstand? FALSCH. hudna ist eine
zeitlich begrenzte feuerpause, welches moslems mit
ungläubigen beschliessen können, NUR wenn die
ungläubigen stärker sind, als die mosleme. wenn
die moslems sich dann stark genug für die
fortsetzung des angriffs fühlen, dann dürfen sie
die hudna jederzeit brechen und ohne warnung
angreifen. mohamad hat exakt auf die art und weise
mekka erobert.

-dialog= austausch in beide richtungen? FALSCH.
intrareligiöser dialog bedeutet für moslems, dass
sie unter ungläubigen dawa (mission) betreiben
können, wobei jedoch ein austreten aus dem islam
in islamische länder strikt verboten ist und
drakonische strafen (bis zur ermordung) zufolge
hat. der islam versucht mit sektenmethoden die
mitgliedszahlen zu erhöhen. so dürfen moslemische
frauen niemals einen ungläubigen heiraten. dieser
muss erst zum islam übertreten. dies ist kein deut
besser als die "fishing-methoden" einiger sekten,
die ihre frauen als huren missbrauchen, um männer
in ihre sekte reinzubringen. ferner ist ein
austritt aus dem islam nur in freie und
unislamische länder wie deutschland möglich,
jedoch nicht in der islamischen welt.

islam= frieden? FALSCH: man braucht sich nur die
lebensgeschichte des "propheten" mohamad
anzuschauen, um zu sehen, dass die bezeichnung
kriegsfürst und aggressiver eroberer beser passen
würde. der islam hat sich ausschliesslich durch
das schwert verbreitet, weil der islam es nicht
geschafft hat, die herzen der menschen zu erobern.
mohamad war kein prophet einer friedlichen
religion, sondern jemand, der kinder als frauen
hatte, dutzende sex-sklavinen hatte, und 23 jahre
lang nur krieg führte, eroberte, ermordete und
zerstörte. alles fakten.

unsere blinden kirchenführer sollten sich diese
fakten mal klar werden, bevor sie von dialog mit
moslems reden und unsere politiker sollten diese
fakten auch lesen, bevor sie es zulassen, dass die
moslems sich hier immer mehr extrawürstchen
rausnehmen dürfen.

wir müssen die moslems hier genauso!!! behandeln,
wie sie christen, juden, bahai, atheisten...in
ihre länder "behandeln". alles andere wäre
einseitige tolleranz und deswegen falsch.

tolleranz kann nämlich nur beidseitig funktioniern
und genauso, wie man neonazis und deren
weltanschaung nicht tolleriern kann, kann und darf
man auch nicht die weltanschaung islam einseitig
tolleriern.

dash allen freunden israels

The Vatican´s New Realism about Islam

Monido, Mittwoch, 12. November 2003, 12:48 (vor 7856 Tagen) @ mehrdad

Der Islamismus ist wahrscheinlich die abstoßendste
und gefährlichste Ideologie seit dem
Nationalsozialismus. Er predigt ebenfalls
Judenhass, Anti-individualismus (Du bist nichts,
deine Religion ist alles) und bekämpft die
moderne, freie Welt. Hier darf es keine falsche
Toleranz geben. Selbstverständlich sollte man sich
um ein differenziertes Weltbild bemühen, doch wenn
es zum Kampf kommt, muss jeder wissen auf welcher
Seite er steht.

The Vatican´s New Realism about Islam

mehrdad, Mittwoch, 12. November 2003, 15:09 (vor 7856 Tagen) @ Monido

sie sagen es.

der islam ist keine religion, sondern eine
weltanschaung. das sage nicht ich, sondern das
sagen tiefgläubige moslems.

insofern ist der islam, was ziele angeht, kein
deut besser als die NSDAP und ihre ziele, die auch
ausbreitung mit allen mitteln und ein gnadenloses
vorgehen gegen diejenigen, die sich von diese
weltanschaung lösen wollen, beinhalten.

über eines sollten wir uns im klraen sein. die
lage der demokratie und die sicherheitslage wird
sich weder im westen, noch in israel zum positiven
verändern, wenn es noch mehr moslems in diese
freien und zivilisten welt gibt.

dash allen freunden israels

RSS-Feed dieser Diskussion
powered by my little forum