"Easter Worshipers"

  • Thread starter Thread starter YHWH_Christ
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Somehow we’ve managed to shift the focus from the real victims of this tragedy: the dead, to our own hurt little feelings over the use of the term “Easter worshippers”. I doubt they or their families care what the Western media calls them. Why don’t we just pray for them and for the ones responsible?
 
You can highlight anti-Christian bias and still pray for the victims, it’s not mutually exclusive. Christians are the most persecuted religious group in the world. It needs to be called what it is. That’s not just “hurt little feelings”.
 
But Easter worshippers is not in and of itself an offensive term. Be offended at the bombings, there’s the real attack! This outrage is in the same genre as the outrage of over the color of Starbucks Christmas cups. It’s a talking point for people who just need something to be personally offended by.
 
While I expect it was not the meaning intended by the tweeters, I cannot really take exception to the term Easter Worshipers. I do not know what the culture is like in Sri Lanka, but I, myself, I expect, saw many Easter Worshipers yesterday at Mass.

Though I usually refer to them somewhat more economically as CAPE Catholics. You know:

Christmas
Ash Wednesday
Palm Sunday
Easter

2️⃣©️©️
 
Wouldn’t it be nice if that’s what was intended?
Plenty of those where I was too.
 
Indeed! My church had triple the people it usually does. On Palm Sunday, Father made a point of asking us all to leave the good parking spaces free and be nice to all the new faces so hopefully they’d come back. 😂
 
YHWH_Christ said:
when an attack is made on an “Easter worshiper community” by Islamic extremists on a very holy day in which many many many more people are killed, then we just stand against hate in general and move on, at least according to Obama and Hillary Clinton
Click to expand...
Would you please link me to these statements by President Obama or Senator Clinton?
 
An expression of sympathy, words about prayer, how are these offensive?

When the phrase is used on context it makes perfect sense!
 
gracepoole said:
? People worshiping on Easter. Christians worshiping on Easter. Easter worshipers. One of these is far more economical re: use of language when creating news headlines.
Click to expand...
Christians - it doesn’t get much more economical - or accurate - than a single word.
 
The anti-Christian attitudes many in the media and the politicians on the left espouse doesn’t help them. That’s why something minor like this is easily used as a stick by many on the right.
 
Last edited:
In twitter the number of characters used is limited. “Pray for the Easter worshipers who were killed” is much shorter than “Pray for the people who were killed as they worshiped on Easter”. There is literally nothing offensive about the phrase used in context. Nothing.

I was an Easter worshiper.
 
Finn said:
40.png
gracepoole:
? People worshiping on Easter. Christians worshiping on Easter. Easter worshipers. One of these is far more economical re: use of language when creating news headlines.
Click to expand...
Christians - it doesn’t get much more economical - or accurate - than a single word.
Click to expand...
As explained earlier…
40.png
"Easter Worshipers" Popular Media
The point, of course, is that they wanted to highlight that these people were murdered on Easter. That’s a significant part of the story. At least it is if we want to be consistent here…
Click to expand...
 
Pretty sure you and I have had this conversation before, but, again I will say this is not the case for the many Muslims I know and love.
 
No, we’re not. Where did you get the idea that we were? If we were, they wouldn’t have tried to force the Little Sisters of the Poor to dispense contraceptives. If we were, they wouldn’t have required us to fund abortions.
 
ATraveller said:
The anti-Christian attitudes many in the media and the politicians on the left espouse doesn’t help them. That’s why something minor like this is easily used as a stick by many on the right.
Click to expand...
I would also add the editorial decisions made by some journalists don’t help. For example, a national newscast in Canada decided the first story should be about floods in a part of my country, then Ukraine, then Iran sanctions. No one died in any of those. 93 in a single church died in Sri Lanka. The total death toll was over 290 with multiple coordinated attacks. But that was the fourth story.
I remember when the NZ terror attack occurred, nearly the entire newscast was about that story for days. That was horrific and shouldn’t be downplayed. But it’s not unreasonable for people to suspect bias when inconsistent treatment like this happens a lot.
 
Last edited:
Several reasons: 1. It feeds accusations that we Catholics are pagans. Such accusations come from Protestant, pagan, and atheist alike. 2. It impugns the integrity of the victims, speaking as though they only go to Church on Christmas and Easter, and perhaps a few other holidays. 3. The ones saying it have themselves persecuted Christians, and thus we regard it as a blasphemy on their account, refusing to pronounce the Name of Christ. 4. The persecuted Christians are being invalidated by not acknowledging their Faith.
 
gracepoole said:
The point, of course, is that they wanted to highlight that these people were murdered on Easter. That’s a significant part of the story.
Click to expand...
Fairly sure the date and church locations made that aspect clear to everyone.
 
Oh but maybe they wanted to remind the unchurched and the unbelievers of how important Easter is. Yeah…that must be it. They were actually evangelizing, phrasing it the way they did!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top