I think people are jumping to conclusions pretty quickly and should look at some of the wordings. The fact is, Muslims did not necessarily worship in the parish, but celebrated Muhammad’s birthday. Even if they did worship in the parish, the question is how much of the words are put in loosely just to create scandal. Is the parish a Church or is it a publicly operated site under the Archbishops jurisdiction? Did he know of the purpose before the event or was the purpose only made clear at a point when he could not prevent the celebration?
Are any of you confused as to what religion he is? I am certain that his actions were blurred and are a distortion of what actually occured. The fact is, he acknowledges that their gods are false. The Hindu’s were not confused because he put flowers at an altar. Was his offering of flowers necessary? Probably not and so it was probably a bad decision on his part, but that does not mean that he is following Hindu offering practices. I will bet that some flowers are not an adequate offering in accordance with the Hindu religion.
That being said, I hope that he make a public apology for causing confusion and scandal in the Catholic Church. I do not think he needs to be removed because the most liberal newspaper on this Earth brings up a topic they can’t even support. It is interesting that the offering of flowers is not on the source website but we are to trust the worst source of news imaginable on their word that the Archbishop did what they say he did. I am not saying the Archbishop did not do this, but it would no surprise me if this is just a made up story to get people mad and attempt to seperate God’s Church.
I am not the best person to offer this advice, but we should not judge because we are reading second hand news stories from one of the worse sources for news. I suppose the Guardian would be worse, but not by much. Judge not lest ye be judged yourself.
God Bless.
