Submit your comments on this article |
Europe |
Jesuit Magazine Sharply Criticizes Islam |
2003-10-30 |
Link from LGF First, notice that the article is badly titled: âLa Civiltà Cattolicaâ is not breaking a cease-fire, but merely beginning to fight back. Long article, just posting the introduction here: ROMA â There is a conspicuous absence among the new cardinals created on October 21 by John Paul II: Archbishop Michael Louis Fitzgerald, president of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue. The current explanation is that Fitzgerald was not made cardinal because of his excessively placid approach to Islam. And it is true that, together with this exclusion, an article was printed in âLa Civiltà Cattolicaâ that contrasts markedly with the matter of Fitzgeraldâs rebuke. âLa Civiltà Cattolica,â edited by a group of Jesuits in Rome, is a very special magazine. Every one of its articles is reviewed by the Vatican secretary of state before publication. So the magazine reflects his thought faithfully. Itâs official Vatican policy, in other words. In its October 18 edition, âLa Civiltà Cattolicaâ published a strikingly severe article on the condition of Christians in Muslim countries. The central thesis of the article is that âin all of its history, Islam has shown a warlike and conquering faceâ; that âfor almost a thousand years, Europe lived under its constant threatâ; and that what remains of the Christian population in Islamic countries is still subjected to âperpetual discrimination,â with episodes of bloody persecution. What follows is an ample extract from the article printed in âLa Civiltà Cattolicaâ no. 3680, October 18, 2003, and used here with the kind permission of the magazine: Follow the link to read the whole thing. This is the Vaticanâs equivalent of a warning shot, just short of declaring Holy War. Better get those Swiss guards ready. How do Christians in Muslim-majority countries live? [...] We must first highlight a seemingly rather curious fact: in all the countries of North Africa (Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco), before the Muslim invasion and despite incursions by vandals, there were blossoming Christian communities that contributed to the universal Church great personalities, such as Tertullian; Saint Ciprian, bishop of Carthage, martyred in 258; Saint Augustine, bishop of Hippo; and Saint Fulgentius, bishop of Ruspe. But after the Arab conquest, Christianity was absorbed by Islam to such an extent that today it has a significant presence only in Egypt, with the Coptic Orthodox and other tiny Christian minorities, which make up 7-10 percent of the Egyptian population. Nice to know somebody at the Vatican notices the obvious. From Pope John Paulâs statements, one might believe Islam is the best of all religions (John Paul might criticize Christianity sometimes, but never Islam.) In conclusion, we may state in historical terms that in all the places where Islam imposed itself by military force, which has few historical parallels for its rapidity and breadth, Christianity, which had been extraordinarily vigorous and rooted for centuries, practically disappeared or was reduced to tiny islands in an endless Islamic sea. It is not easy to explain how that could have happened. [...] Oh, yes it is. Through coercion, through discriminatory laws, through sporadic violence. Thus, in all of its history, Islam has shown a warlike face and a conquering spirit for the glory of Allah. [...] against the âidolatersâ who must be given a choice: convert to Islam, or be killed. [...] As for the âpeople of the Bookâ (Christians, Jews, and âSabeansâ), Muslims must âfight them until their members pay tribute, one by one, humiliatedâ (Koran, Sura 9:29). [...] Right on. It is evident that the condition of the dhimmi, prolonged through centuries, has led slowly but inexorably to the near extinction of Christianity in Muslim lands: the condition of civil inferiority, which prevented Christians from attaining public offices, and the condition of religious inferiority, which closed them in an asphyxiated religious life and practice with no possibility of development, put the Christians to the necessity of emigrating, or, more frequently, to the temptation of converting to Islam. There was also the fact that a Christian could not marry a Muslim woman without converting to Islam, in part because her children had to be educated in that faith. When Muslim apologists tell you of the âwonderful freedom of religionâ in Islamic countries, remember the paragraph above. And also remember religions other than Judaism and Christianity are even worse off. We must, finally, recall a fact that is often forgotten because Saudi Arabia is the largest provider of oil to the Western world, and the latter therefore has an interest in not disturbing relations with that country. In reality, in Saudi Arabia, where wahhabism is in force, not only is it impossible to build a church or even a tiny place of worship, but any act of Christian worship or any sign of Christian faith is severely prohibited with the harshest penalties. Thus about a million Christians working in Saudi Arabia are deprived by violence of any Christian practice or sign. They may participate in mass or in other Christian practices â and even then with the serious danger of losing their jobs â only on the property of the foreign oil companies. And yet, Saudi Arabia spends billions of petrodollars, not for the benefit of its poor citizens or of poor Muslims in other Muslim countries, but to construct mosques and madrasas in Europe and to finance the imams of the mosques in all the Western countries. We recall that the Roman mosque of Monte Antenne, constructed on land donated by the Italian government, was principally financed by Saudi Arabia and was built to be the largest mosque in Europe, in the very heart of Christianity. Thatâs the master plan of Islamists: ask for freedom of religion in non-Muslim countries, so Islam can spread, repress competing religions in Islam-dominated countries, so Islam becomes absolute. |
Posted by:Sorge and Steve |
#28 And a LIBERAL Democrat like me |
Posted by: NotMikeMoore 2003-10-31 12:20:19 AM |
#27 Dad was Parris Island USMC too |
Posted by: NotMikeMoore 2003-10-31 12:19:39 AM |
#26 Wish you the best Jarhead--and wish you stay in the US with your family--mean that |
Posted by: NotMikeMoore 2003-10-31 12:16:08 AM |
#25 Oh yeah in SC! A lot of jarheads are Catholics, we have a lot of northerners from our part of the country as well as hispanics. Our chapter is pretty small - mainly former mil but a good group of guys. The Baptists pay us no attention. |
Posted by: Jarhead 2003-10-31 12:00:07 AM |
#24 OMFG KofC in SC>? surrounded by all those Baptist NUTZ? more power to ya -- I prefer the more laid back style of Vatican II |
Posted by: NotMikeMoore 2003-10-30 11:37:43 PM |
#23 NMM - I think your analogy is right. It's similar to what I've been told. Most of the Catholic Churches I've been involved w/were associated w/the Franciscans so I can't speak w/any real authority. I'm also in the KofC - I think our founder was originally a Jesuit but I could be wrong. |
Posted by: Jarhead 2003-10-30 11:27:18 PM |
#22 In my admittedly limited knowledge of my religion I always felt/was taught that the Jesuits were the true enforcers--as well as the most learned vs the Dominicans and the Franciscans The Society of Jesus was was originally designated by its founder as "The Company of Jesus". The title was Latinized into "Societas Jesu" in 1540. The name had been previously borne by a military order approved by Pius II in 1450, the purpose of which was to fight against the Turks. The Jesuits are indeed perhaps the most educated of all the orders. As to whether they can be considered enforcers for the Church - that's a mixed bag, especially in the Western Hemisphere (they had a major role in developing "liberation theology"). |
Posted by: Pappy 2003-10-30 11:20:06 PM |
#21 Jarhead--what say you? |
Posted by: NotMikeMoore 2003-10-30 9:56:50 PM |
#20 In my admittedly limited knowledge of my religion I always felt/was taught that the Jesuits were the true enforcers--as well as the most learned vs the Dominicans and the Franciscans |
Posted by: NotMikeMoore 2003-10-30 9:56:10 PM |
#19 I also remember the Jesuits were the big vow of poverty fellows that became super-bloody rich as everyone who was rich, and guilty, gave them money for forgiveness during their early decades making the order itself extremely wealthy. If my employees took a vow of poverty, I'd be pretty rich too :) -Vic |
Posted by: Vic 2003-10-30 6:13:37 PM |
#18 I could be wrong but I remember hearing that there has never been a Jesuit Pope before. Not sure why not but that's what I remember. I also remember the Jesuits were the big vow of poverty fellows that became super-bloody rich as everyone who was rich, and guilty, gave them money for forgiveness during their early decades making the order itself extremely wealthy. |
Posted by: Yanks 2003-10-30 2:58:55 PM |
#17 its worth noting that President Clinton received his undergrad degree at Georgetown, a Jesuit University. Perhaps that was where he learned to dispute the meaning of "is". |
Posted by: liberalhawk 2003-10-30 2:44:59 PM |
#16 There is a conspicuous absence among the new cardinals created on October 21 by John Paul II When the article started out like this, did anyone else expect to read a complaint about the lack of Islamic cardinals? |
Posted by: snellenr 2003-10-30 2:15:03 PM |
#15 One of the primary characteristic of being a Jesuit is that you take an oath of personal loyalty to the Papacy. In the past, that made them the Special Ops for the Pope. You needed someone to go into Soviet Russia or Communist China, you called the Jesuits. If it was gonna be a fatal mission, you called the Jesuits. It is an intellectual order, with nearly all being priests, not brothers (more education there) then many go on for advanced degrees. Jesuits have served as the advisor to more than one European monarch, and had a reputation for brutal practicality, which got the order banned and persecuted in more than one nation. |
Posted by: Chuck Simmins 2003-10-30 1:26:03 PM |
#14 i aint feudin' wit anyone. Pardon my spelling of St. Iggy, above, BTW. |
Posted by: liberalhawk 2003-10-30 1:06:59 PM |
#13 The Dominicans were in charge of the Inquisition. |
Posted by: buwaya 2003-10-30 12:35:51 PM |
#12 ...The Jesuits aren't known as 'the Marine Corps of the Roman Catholic Church' for nothing. The level of learning and training they have to meet is incredible. Mike |
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski 2003-10-30 12:34:15 PM |
#11 mojo, nobody expects the Dominicans... |
Posted by: Chuck Simmins 2003-10-30 12:28:48 PM |
#10 The Society of Jesus is the *logical* arm of the Catholic church. Better them than the Dominicans, believe me. |
Posted by: mojo 2003-10-30 12:23:10 PM |
#9 The splodydopes want to blow up the Vatican. I find the timing of this article interesting considering JPII is on deathwatch. Has the decision already been made as to who wears the miter? Or is the ruling class going to force the new pope into a more confrontational stance? Should be interesting in the occupied territories, considering the phrench cardinal is such a bud w/Arafish. |
Posted by: Anonymous-not above 2003-10-30 12:21:41 PM |
#8 When asked by one of the crusader warriors about the possible killing of Catholics along with the heretic Cathars, Arnaud-Amaury is supposed to have delivered his nefarious statement "Kill them all! God will recognize His own!" From http://xenophongroup.com/montjoie/albigens.htm, a history of the Albigensian crusade. Also, the Jesuits were formed by a Papal Bull on September 27, 1540. Please see http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14081a.htm |
Posted by: Anonymous 2003-10-30 12:17:59 PM |
#7 What would the Europeans do if the Vatacan declared Holy War on Islam? Would they even notice? Or just sneer distastefully. |
Posted by: Yank 2003-10-30 12:08:56 PM |
#6 In the 1300's (?), the French fought a Crusade against heritics in Southern France. In 2001, the Muslims fought a jihad against unbelievers in the US. 3000 died in a period of hours. (Note also that the Crusade was fought in an era when Muslim empire was expanding everywhere and doing similar things to infidels. The Mongol hordes also lurked on the horizon, having devastated several European armies before staging what, to the people of the time, may have seemed like a tactical retreat). |
Posted by: Zhang Fei 2003-10-30 11:52:30 AM |
#5 Liberalhawk; I'm an ex-Catholic, but I can confirm that. (A personal note: are we, or are we not feuding today?) |
Posted by: Sorge 2003-10-30 11:44:13 AM |
#4 Sorry Steve, I beat you by less than ten minutes. I guess not having breakfast improves productivity after all. |
Posted by: Sorge 2003-10-30 11:40:16 AM |
#3 Jesuits were founded by St. Ignatious Loyala, in the 1500's, a couple of hundred years after the above incident (from the Albigensian crusade) Any catholics here who can confirm that? |
Posted by: liberalhawk 2003-10-30 11:34:32 AM |
#2 Dammit, second. And you're not even named Frank! |
Posted by: Steve 2003-10-30 11:16:00 AM |
#1 Remember, the Jesuits originated the phrase "Kill them all; God will sort them out." In the 1300's (?), the French fought a Crusade against heritics in Southern France. After capturing a town, the Crusaders went to the Jesuit advising them to report that the town was alive with the sound of turning coats. What were they to do? "Kill them all" the priest advised. "God will know the difference." |
Posted by: Chuck Simmins 2003-10-30 11:14:11 AM |