No it’s racist. discriminating against someone because of their religion that a vast majority are born into is racist. But it nice to see a jew who doesn’t feel that gibson wasn’t being racist when he went into his drunken triade.
Erm?
Jewish, Catholic, Protestant, etc. are not races. All who belong to those religions (or any other religion, for that matter) are people, though. Discrimination on the basis of race, creed, religion, sex or national origin is wrong, based on natural law, moral code, religious beliefs of Catholics, and the civil law of the United States. Prejudice of any type, against any people mentioned above is sinful. All of us were created by God, in His image and likeness, and all have the same worth in the eyes of our Creator.
I hope my question/observation couldn’t be described as defending any discrimination - though I rather accept that a Jewish King of England is unlikely - I thought I was defending language!
There should not be any reason why a Jewish man cannot be King of England, although I am American, so I am speaking on the basis of American, not English civil law. We could have a Jewish President in the U.S.A.
Changing the statutes of the UK to allow for a Catholic monarch (all those traditions about being head of the Anglican Church etc) would be one thing, a Jewish monarch would require all sorts of extras, I’d expect. The monarch does all that state occasion religious stuff, pretty meaningless religiously but a lot of traditional symbolism, which would be much less problematic for a Catholic than for a Jew - a Jewish King or Queen could hardly be crowned in a Christian cathedral.
gu
…an extremely difficult thing, too. See
This putative Jew would have to be crowned head of the Church of England (and Scotland) too, which may cause rather a lot of difficulties. But, yes, the only religion explicitly forbidden is Catholicism (‘papists’, as the old laws so lovingly call us).
No it’s not. It’s a bad law, and a discriminatory law, but not a racist law. Catholics don’t form a race.
Probably because the idea of the monarch being Jewish, Muslim, Hindu or whatever was literally unthinkable, unimaginable. Jews had only recently been allowed back in the country after all.
Oh, indeed. Catholics were the ‘threat’, none of the others were considered such at that point in any sense.
Since the prohibition makes no reference to race, the law is not racist. This does not mean that it is a good law, it simply means that it is not a racist law. As somebody else said, it would probably require the disestablishment of the Church of England before it would change. In any event, it is an unjust law and one that Britain should change…not that I am British so I don’t really have a say if you know what I mean.
)The most persecuted religion in the world in the Jewish faith. Period. This isn’t even another faith that is remotely close. Look at how Jews were treated in Europe by everyone over the centuries, by Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox. Pograms, Inquisitions, Diaspora, legal discrimination. Then came the Holocaust of the 20th Century…over 6 million Jews killed within a few short years. And to top it off, when Israel declared independence in 1948 they were immediately invaded by over six Islamic nations with established armies. Jews have certainly been the most persecuted faith, it isn’t even close…
No way. If the Episcopal Church leaves, or is tossed out of the Anglican Communion, the result will be a Communion that is much more biblically orthodox but not necessarily more Catholic. The Global South Anglicans are more in the mode of conservative evangelicals than conservative Anglo-Catholics.
Well with 3 millions catholics killed during the holocaust in poland alone. Not to mention the millions of catholics who died out side of those camps. is mind boggling. Since the beging of the church we catholics have been persescuted. From Jesus down. from the muderous nazi’s to the racist royal family of britain All enjoy laying the boot into us catholics. So i’m sorry to inform you. we catholics are by far the most persescutied people on the face of this earth. even today the rage still goess on towards us.
I beg to differ, and I am Catholic not Jewish. More Jewish people were killed in the Holocaust than any other religion (Catholics don’t even come close). Throughout history, Christians (Catholic and Protestant) have persecuted Jews.
That’s certainly my impression. These African Bishops don’t look at all like they are on the same page as my Anglo-Catholic friends. Some Anglo-Catholics I know I could see becoming Catholics (indeed, in some cases I’m not altogether sure why they’re not!). Not these African churches though.
it’s a racist teaching.Since the prohibition makes no reference to race, the law is not racist. This does not mean that it is a good law, it simply means that it is not a racist law. As somebody else said, it would probably require the disestablishment of the Church of England before it would change. In any event, it is an unjust law and one that Britain should change…not that I am British so I don’t really have a say if you know what I mean.
BTW, ever read the Syllabus of Errors? It is taught there that non-Catholics should not have the right to practice their religion publicly in Catholic nations. Is that a racist teaching or simply an erroneous one?
(C’mon guys, I know what everybody else will say…let ***latin rite ***answer the question…