Pope condemns 'blind violence,' offers prayers after Brussels attacks

Source: Catholic News Service
By Cindy Wooden
July 22, 2016

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Pope Francis, condemning the "blind violence" of the terrorist attacks in Brussels, offered his prayers to the victims, the injured, their families and all those offering assistance in the aftermath of the bombings.

Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Vatican secretary of state, sent the pope's condolences March 22 to Archbishop Jozef De Kesel of Mechelen-Brussels.

"The Holy Father again condemns the blind violence which causes so much suffering, and he implores from God the gift of peace," the message said.

The pope "entrusts to God's mercy those who died and, in prayer, he shares the pain of their loved ones," the message said. "He expresses his deepest sympathy to the injured and their families, as well as for all those providing assistance, "asking the Lord to give them comfort and consolation amid this ordeal."

Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, Vatican spokesman, told reporters the attacks in Brussels would not lead to any changes in Pope Francis' Holy Week and Easter schedule. Already for the Year of Mercy, especially after the November terrorist attacks in Paris, the Italian police presence at the Vatican has been increased.

Three nearly simultaneous attacks -- two at the Brussels airport and one on the Brussels area of Maalbeek, near where much of the European Union is based -- left at least 31 dead and dozens more injured. At least one of the airport attacks was attributed to a suicide bomber.

The Associated Press reported that a spokesman for the Brussels Metro said 20 people were killed and more than 100 injured in an explosion on a train, and Belgian media reported at least 11 dead in two explosions at the airport, with many others injured. The Islamic State group claimed responsibility for the attacks.

After the attacks, Belgium raised its terror alert to the highest level.

Belgium's Catholic bishops said they shared "the anguish of thousands of passengers and their families, aviation professionals and aid teams called to the breach once more."

The bishops said airport chaplains were "at the daily service of all," and would "offer the necessary spiritual service," adding that it counted on the whole country to "live through these days with great civic responsibility."

Brussels Auxiliary Bishop Jean Kockerols told the church's Cathobel news agency he was shocked by the savagery of the "completely absurd attacks."

"We must support the efforts of the public authorities we've elected and mandated to serve the common good and maintain law and order -- it's not for us to start polemicizing and making accusations today as to whether they fulfilled their duties and did all they could," Bishop Kockerols said.

"It's a great mystery that this has all happened on the threshold of Holy Week, the most sacred time for Christians, when we are about to mark Good Friday and Easter. In the face of such madness, we should adopt the courageous attitude of Mary, who remained at the foot of the cross in silence."

Cathobel issued an emergency number for those seeking information about missing family members and said it had been in contact with Father Michel Gaillard, the Brussels airport chief chaplain.

Meanwhile, German Cardinal Reinhard Marx, who heads the Brussels-based Commission of the Bishops' Conferences of the European Community, or COMECE, said Catholics would be "praying especially in Holy Week" for victims of the violence.

In a statement, he said he had been concerned about COMECE staffers, who later issued a message confirming that all personnel were safe.

A bishops' conference staffer, Father Geert Lesage, told Catholic News Service he expected Catholic clergy to visit sites of the attacks to offer pastoral care, as well as to organize special Masses as soon as security conditions permitted.

However, he added that all mobile phone connections were now down in Brussels, making it impossible to obtain news of Catholic victims or damage to church property.

Father Charles De Clercq, a Brussels priest, told Cathobel he had been in the first car of the bombed Metro train, which had been "plunged into darkness and filled with smoke" after the explosion.

"Smashed windows fell on my knees -- there was light, smoke and shouts. The driver arrived after two minutes with a lamp and made the passengers leave via an emergency window," the priest said.

"On the floor, passengers were curled up, obviously in pain, who could have been crushed by those in flight. I knew there'd been two explosions in the morning at Zaventem (airport), so I knew there was a real possibility this was also an attack."

A day earlier, gunmen in Bamako, Mali, targeted a hotel that was serving as the headquarters of an EU troops who were there to train the country's military. Mali and other West African countries have been under attack by Islamic extremists.

Catholic Relief Services, which has programs in Mali, announced March 22 that its staffers were safe after the attack. 

Photo Source: Vatican Radio

Pakistani illustrator writes to Ben Affleck on radical Islam: 'Your heart's in the right place but…'

Read the highlights, it's very powerful! -CD2000
Source: scroll.in

Dear Ben,

I am writing to you today as a woman who was born and raised in Islam. I saw your discussion with Bill Maher and Sam Harris, and I must say you did me a great disservice that day. Your heart was in the right place, of course, and it was lovely of you to step up and defend "my people".

What you really did though, perhaps inadvertently, was silence a conversation that never gets started. Two people attempted to begin a dialogue and you wouldn’t even listen. Why should any set of ideas be above criticism, Ben?

Why are Muslims being "preserved" in some time capsule of centuries gone by? Why is it okay that we continue to live in a world where our women are compared to candy waiting to be consumed? Why is it okay for women of the rest of the world to fight for freedom and equality while we are told to cover our shameful bodies? Can’t you see that we are being held back from joining this elite club known as the 21st century?

Noble liberals like yourself always stand up for the misrepresented Muslims and stand against the Islamophobes, which is great but who stands in my corner and for the others who feel oppressed by the religion? Every time we raise our voices, one of us is killed or threatened. I am a blogger and illustrator, no threat to anyone, Ben, except for those afraid of words and drawings. I want the freedom to express myself without the very real fear that I might be killed for it. Is that too much to ask?

When I wrote a children’s book that carried a message of diversity and inclusivity for everyone, my life changed. My book, My Chacha (uncle) is Gay’ has the innocent anti-homophobia message, "Love belongs to everyone." This was not palatable to many of my Muslim brothers and sisters.

Since that project I have been declared an "enemy of God" and deemed worthy of death. All because I want to help create a world where South Asian children too can have their stories told, so they too can know that love comes in all forms, and that that’s okay. My Muslim brothers and sisters were hit hard by this work because it addresses the issue of homophobia within our own community. It is not something they can pass off as "Western" immorality. Just like they deny that any issues exist within the doctrine of Islam, many deny that homosexuality exists amongst good, "moral" Muslims. Just like that, millions of people’s existence is denied. Please do not defend people who think this way, and let me tell you Ben, many "good" Muslims do think this way.

What you did by screaming "racist!" was shut down a conversation that many of us have been waiting to have. You helped those who wish to deny there are issues, deny them. You became an instant hero, a defender of Islam. It’s kind, it really is. I understand because I too am plagued and affected by the issues brought about by actual Islamophobia. I have a Muslim name and brown skin, my peaceful relatives have been pushed in the subway and called "terrorist" for no reason.

I get that.

We must distinguish critiquing an ideology from being hateful towards a group of people. And for this reason I think that tackling the issues within Islam should be two-pronged. They must be brought up, but simultaneously we should stress that blame for these issues cannot be placed on individuals.

In the interest of being politically correct and "liberal", we silence the voices of millions. I am turning to you because you were instrumental in starting this conversation. Those of us who want reform are muted by extremists, as well as the liberals who betray us in the name of multiculturalism.

ISIS paints a horrific picture, so I understand the knee-jerk reaction to deny any link. Most Muslims choose to interpret scripture in a peaceful way, but that doesn’t mean the raw material isn’t there for those who choose the path of violence. That material must be addressed.

Can we talk about the blatant double standards and violation of human rights, for a second? Mosques are built throughout western countries, usually without much issue. But in the hub of Islam, the heart of Islam, Saudi Arabia, no one but Muslims are allowed to officially practice their faith. There are no churches, temples or synagogues because Saudi Arabia will not permit any non-Muslim place of worship to exist. Who will hold them accountable for such injustice if we hush everyone who speaks out against Islam?

What is so wrong with wanting to step into the current century? There should be no shame. There is no denying that violence, misogyny and homophobia exist in all religious texts, but Islam is the only religion that is adhered to so literally, to this day.

In your culture you have the luxury of calling such literalists “crazies”, like the Westboro Baptist Church, for example. In my culture, such values are upheld by more people than we realise. Many will try to deny it, but please hear me when I say that these are not fringe values. It is apparent in the lacking numbers of Muslims willing to speak out against the archaic Shariah law. The punishment for blasphemy and apostasy, etc, are tools of oppression. Why are they not addressed even by the peaceful folk who “aren’t fanatical, who just want to have some sandwiches and pray five times a day? Where are the Muslim protestors against blasphemy laws/apostasy? Where are the Muslims who take a stand against harsh interpretation of Shariah? These sandwich-eating peaceful folk do not defend those suffering in the name of Islam, Ben, and therein lies our problem.

Maybe the points Maher and Harris were trying to make are more easily digested when coming from within the community, I can appreciate that. That is why I am writing to you, as someone who has personally been hurt by the lack of acknowledgement of these issues.

If Muslims do not critique their own atrocities, then people on the outside will and their message will not be listened to simply because of who they are. It’s a vicious cycle, one that can only break if indeed, like Harris said, true reformers are empowered.

I ask you and anyone reading this to make an effort to seek out reformers from within our community, and support them in any way you can.

If I were allowed to meet a man that is not my father, brother or husband unchaperoned, I would have loved to discuss this over drinks (which I am also not allowed to have) with you. So, you see, things must change.

Sincerely,

Eiynah

Hoax: Prime Minister Julia Gillard - Australia on Muslim Immigration

But I wish they were TRUE!

She Did It Again !!!
Australia says NO -- This will be the second Time Julia Gillard has done this!

She sure isn't backing down on her hard line stance and one has to appreciate her belief in the rights of her native countrymen. Muslims who want to live under Islamic Sharia law were told on Wednesday to get out of Australia, as the government targeted radicals in a bid to head off potential terror attacks.

Separately, Gillard angered some Australian Muslims on Wednesday by saying she supported spy agencies monitoring the nation's mosques. Quote:

'IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT... Take It Or Leave It. I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali, we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Australians.

'This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom.

'We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society, learn the language!

'Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture.'

'We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us.

'This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom, 'THE RIGHT TO LEAVE'.

'If you aren't happy here then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country that accepted you.

NOTE: IF we circulate this amongst ourselves in Canada & USA, WE will find the courage to start speaking and voicing the same truths.

Are ISIS Muslims or Not?

Source: StopIslam

The persecution of Christians in the ‘Muslim world’

ChristiansOfIraq and WorldMag

Dec. 15, 2010

The New York Times this week ran a front-page article on Christian persecution in Iraq, noting, “A new wave of Iraqi Christians has fled to northern Iraq or abroad amid a campaign of violence against them and growing fear that the country’s security forces are unable or, more ominously, unwilling to protect them.” The Times goes on to inform us that “more than half of Iraq’s Christian community, estimated to number 800,000 to 1.4 million before the American-led invasion in 2003, have already left the country.”

What is the Obama administration doing to put pressure on the al-Maliki government in Baghdad to stop these murders of Christians? We have heard endlessly of this administration’s “outreach to the Muslim world.” That term—“Muslim world”—may itself be part of the problem. By telling Shia and Sunni Muslims that the Middle East is their world, are we not saying that Middle Eastern Christians and Jews don’t belong there?

The Christian community in Iraq has been there since the beginnings of the Church. Bible readers will recognize Nineveh Province, one of the regions in modern-day Iraq. Didn’t some biblical character named Jonah have a rendezvous with destiny there? The Chaldean Assyrian Christians—note their Bible name—speak Aramaic, which is the language scholars tell us Jesus spoke. Yet these people, too, are being driven away.

Opinion: What’s the difference? Media, The Koran Burning, and the Pope’s U.K. Visit

Commentary by Matthew Anderson

September 21, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – One can’t help but notice that religion is all the rage in the news these days. First there was the planned burning of the Koran on September 11 by a Florida pastor, and second, the visceral reactions by some British against the Pope’s visit.

Interestingly (but perhaps unsurprisingly) the reaction from the mainstream media has been rather different regarding these two stories: One is decried as an outrage, while the other is protected under freedom of speech.

This gives rise to an important question: What is the difference between Islam and Christianity? Why are journalists, and the majority of people for that matter, ready to rush to the aid of Islam, but they allow Christianity to be openly attacked?

It goes without saying that burning the Koran was a terrible idea, and there should have been an outcry against it. I may not believe the Koran is inspired, but many people do; and destroying something that many people love (though that love may be misguided) for no constructive purpose, is against charity. For the same reason, non-Catholics should be disturbed by the treatment the pope has received at the hands of certain members of British society. It is extremely offensive to Catholics when the Holy Father is abused so viciously by such as British scholar Claire Rayner, who recently referred to the pope as “this creature,” and said that she has “never felt such animus against any individual” (See previous LSN Coverage here)

Yet, despite the similarities between the two situations, they haven’t been treated alike at all.

For instance, after the burning of the Koran didn’t happen, CNN posted a story on its blog called, “Lessons from the Whole Quran Episode.” For the large part, the comments from the CNN writers who contributed to the post were dead-on.

Akbar Ahmed, a contributing writer and professor at the American University in Washington said, “We … learned how Jews, Christians and people of other or no faiths all categorically rejected the idea of burning the Quran as disrespectful and even harmful. In that sense, Jones' story had a happy ending, showing that there is such a thing as reason and compassion in the hearts of the high and mighty and the ordinary folk, which trumped hatred and bigotry.”

But last week CNN posted a story under a picture of the pope entitled, “Opinion: Why I Oppose the Pope’s Visit,” that does anything but advocate for “reason and compassion in the hearts of the high and mighty.”

The author, Peter Tatchell, the UK’s most prominent gay activist, says, “As a democrat, I defend the right of Pope Benedict XVI to visit Britain and to express his opinions. But people who disagree with him also have a right to protest against his often harsh, intolerant views.” But Tatchell’s defense of the remarks of Rayner, or Richard Dawkins (who has been hurling an endless stream of abusive epithets at the pope for months now) is a far cry from the media’s reaction to the burning of the Koran. When the abuse is aimed at a Christian figure, the media is happy to allow it in the name of free speech.

So again I ask, what’s the difference between Islam and Christianity that leads to this disparate treatment? The primary difference may be found at the very root of each religion: man’s relationship with God. One believes God can never be subject to anything outside himself, the other believes God’s willingness to be a servant to man and humiliated by him is what defines His identity as Love itself.

In Islam, God is all powerful. He is far beyond man’s grasp, and thus to attack him strikes against his nature. He is incapable of being subject to anything. Even depicting God is forbidden. This “untouchable” aspect of God is transmitted to Islam as a whole, making any offense against Islam, such as drawing the prophet or burning the Koran, incompatible with God’s nature.

The president of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai, expressed the Islamic view of God recently when he said, in reference to the planned Koran burning, “Humiliation of the holy book represents the humiliation of our people.” It is humiliation that cannot be tolerated. An all-powerful God cannot be humiliated; any attempt at humiliating him must be rejected.

Christianity, however, is built upon the greatest humiliation God could ever endure. No one sums this up better than St. Paul who describes Christ as he “who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross.” (Philippians 2: 6-11)

In Christianity, unlike Islam, God allows himself to be attacked. It is a religion where God allows all to touch him, in love or in hate. Those who approach Him out of love are invited deeper; those who approach Him out of hate only advance His will and face judgment in the end. But all are allowed to approach Him.

The media takes advantage of God’s humility and allows any and all to attack Christianity. Because he won’t come down from the Cross, the media is not afraid of the Christian God, not realizing they will one day face judgment for their silence in the face of such attacks, or, indeed, their complicity in them.

More importantly, they do not realize the attacks they are allowing only further the mission of the Church they often criticize. They forget that the Crucifixion comes before the Resurrection. The Pharisees wanted to get rid of Christ so they had him murdered, but this only advanced his mission. By aiding those who attack Christianity, the media does not realize it has taken the place of the Pharisees in furthering Christ’s mission in our day. It still has not learned the lesson of the Cross: that God brings redemption out of suffering, and victory out of defeat.

The view of God as one who “humbles himself and becomes obedient unto death” and the view of God as “unapproachable” are polar opposites. Surely, the religions that espouse each view will be treated differently by outsiders. One will be accepted as the target of criticism while the other will remain untouchable. However, as Christians we must have faith. Good Friday always comes before Easter Sunday.