"Easter Worshipers"

[Emeraldlady]

Emeraldlady:

Oh my giddy Aunt! What a load of rubbish.

I’m not sure what it would take for me to refer to a priest’s homily as a load of rubbish.

What in it is sufficiently egregious to get you to that point?

Because it is all about US political agendas. Not to do with demons being unable to say the word Christian. Here are the tweets.

Obama: “The attacks on tourists and Easter worshippers in Sri Lanka are an attack on humanity. On a day devoted to love, redemption, and renewal, we pray for the victims and stand with the people of Sri Lanka.”

Clinton: “On this holy weekend for many faiths, we must stand united against hatred and violence. I’m praying for everyone affected by today’s horrific attacks on Easter worshippers and travelers in Sri Lanka.”

In contrast here is Trumps: “Heartfelt condolences from the people of the United States to the people of Sri Lanka on the horrible terrorist attacks on churches and hotels that have killed at least 138 million people and badly injured 600 more, We stand ready to help!” (which was subsequently deleted because the wrong death toll)

And yet the far righteous right have an issue with specifically left wing politicians who’s tweets were by any standards respectful of the religiousness of the day on which it happened.

Priests have an obligation not to scandalise their flock by demon related conspiracy theories.

 

[Finn]

And yet the far righteous right have an issue with specifically left wing politicians who’s tweets were by any standards respectful of the religiousness of the day on which it happened.

Priests have an obligation not to scandalise their flock by demon related conspiracy theories.

With regard to the term, there were many more than just Obama & Clinton who used it, as per the picture below. There were also many who queried its sudden emergence and the absence of the word Christian. They are entitled to do so without being reductively mischaracterized as ‘far righteous right’.

I think you might benefit from listening to the homily again. It’s a succinct exposition on the power of the name of Jesus and the need for us not to be reluctant to use it. It’s hardly a political diatribe and there’s nothing remotely scandalous about it.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[Emeraldlady]

I remain convinced we are making fools of ourselves with this conspiracy theory. The ‘conspirators’ were definitely not too bright if they were trying to promote a nonChristian vibe. Why did Clinton call it a ‘holy day’ and offer prayers for the victims. Why did Obama say it was a “day devoted to love, redemption, and renewal” and also offer prayers?

They would have had a far better go at “de religiosing” the whole event if they’d just called them ‘people of Sri Lanka’ and withheld any offer of prayers like Trump did.

 

[Finn]

I remain convinced we are making fools of ourselves with this conspiracy theory.

I do understand your perspective. I don’t tend to see it as a grand conspiracy. As another poster mentioned upthread, it’s probably more accurate to view it as a communication strategy.

Christian persecution is generally underreported & there are definite attempts to shape the narrative when it comes to tragedies such as this.

In this instance, I believe that the use of a packaged, contrived term set off a lot of people’s spin detectors - and rightfully so.

I really liked the homily but that’s simply personal preference.

All the best to you.

 

[LilyM]

For all we know, the term may have been used because, unlike most other Sundays of the year, a large percentage of folks going to Easter Sunday worship tend not to actually be practicing Christians, but rather simply attending with family members or friends who are. Some of the survivors might even be offended to be automatically pigeonholed as Christian if they do not identify as such.