French church attacked during Mass, priest murdered [CC]

[JimG]

Not sure what you are saying is incorrectly attributed. Are you saying that you agree with the Holy Father, or do you disagree?

I was agreeing with Father Rutler’s article and with the statement of Cardinal Burke quoted within it.

I don’t know what motivations Pope Francis attributes to ISIS terrorism. But the question would be not whether I agree with him, but whether ISIS agrees with him. Quoting again from Father Rutler’s article:

“A Vatican spokesman said that the killing of Father Hamel was “absurd.” That is not so if one understands the logic of the Quran and the “arationality” of Allah who is pure will not subject to reason. Not even the vast numbers of kind and sympathetic Muslims in many lands can alter the indelible texts that are said to come directly from an inspired mouth and cannot be changed.”

So in the end it doesn’t much matter what motive anyone else attributes to terrorism if it is not the motive of the terrorists.

 

[St_Francis]

My respectful disagreement … equally holy and equally evil.

The acts in which each set of victims was engaged were not equally holy. The Consecration is our participation in the re-creation of Our Lord’s Passion and death; hence, the priest (according to reports I have read) was killed just as he had completed this most holy act.

I think that we are not able to compare evils as you do–maybe a saint could, but I do not see that those of us on the path can see clearly enough to render an accurate judgement. Among other things, we would be judging the state of the souls of the victims, which we ourselves cannot do (altho the Church may be able to determine the state of Fr Hamel’s soul).

So I tried to show that it’s like comparing apples to oranges…

 

[St_Francis]

Hi Jim,

I agree completely that when people are immediately threatened, there is no consolation in long-term solutions and anything other than efforts toward protection are inappropriate. However, when the initial fear, anger, and other forefront issues have passed, we can take the steps to forgive, even while protective measures are ongoing.

Timing is very important, no doubt. Now is a time for prayer - and action.

What action?

 

[St_Francis]

Good Morning, Francis

I am saying that God wills reconciliation, he does not want us to continue war. The “us” is all of us, all of humanity. You remember that I have said that we must protect ourselves from harm, right? There are instances of “just” self protection, but peace is a greater justice:

wagingnonviolence.org/2016/04/vatican-conference-calls-for-nonviolence-just-peace-pope-francis/

What action do these nonviolent people recommend a father to take when his wife and children are being attacked?

There is a time for everything, right? Now is a time for reconciliation (while we continue to protect ourselves). Forgiveness and reconciliation are always the end we want.

Anger is not a sin, right? We can “blow up” and express anger for very just reasons. Jesus did this. We are agreeing, I think. (as usual)

Forgiveness and reconciliation are the greatest acts of mercy and justice, right? Can you think of a greater act of justice than the unification of people in His Love?

I have already addressed this, correct? We are on the same page here.

Well, you might leave, and I am sure that some do. Plenty of Catholics leave their faith because they see problems, but their leaving does not solve the problem. Every religion has some problems, but since people affiliate by religion, leaving represents a rejection of their community. We don’t like it, we feel sad when people leave the Church, right? We can say “we are addressing pedophile priest problem, we are addressing this other problem”, but ultimately some people leave because they cannot see that the Church is getting better, always.

Since my youth I have been motivated by “If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem”. Reformers of Islam are part of the solution; it is their words that help lead to reconciliation among peoples. If you are thinking “everything would be better if we were all followers of Christ”, I agree, but that would be a long-term transformation, very long term.

We can pray for reconciliation, too. When we pray for reconciliation, we stay focused on the greatest goal. Sure, there are victories to win over enemies and oppressors, but what do we really want? When there is a victorious side in battle, there is a winner. When there is reconciliation, everyone wins!

As far as “understanding the truth of why it is happening”, much can be gleaned here:

catholicnews.com/services/englishnews/2016/its-not-right-to-equate-islam-with-violence-pope-says.cfm

But as I have said before, I am convinced that the people of “IS” are really doing what they think is just. Yes, they have a warped view, but it is warped for understandable reasons. They do not see the Truth, nor are they looking at long-term solutions. Their leadership and many soldiers are blinded by resentment.

 

[OneSheep]

I was agreeing with Father Rutler’s article and with the statement of Cardinal Burke quoted within it.

I don’t know what motivations Pope Francis attributes to ISIS terrorism. But the question would be not whether I agree with him, but whether ISIS agrees with him. Quoting again from Father Rutler’s article:

“A Vatican spokesman said that the killing of Father Hamel was “absurd.” That is not so if one understands the logic of the Quran and the “arationality” of Allah who is pure will not subject to reason. Not even the vast numbers of kind and sympathetic Muslims in many lands can alter the indelible texts that are said to come directly from an inspired mouth and cannot be changed.”

So in the end it doesn’t much matter what motive anyone else attributes to terrorism if it is not the motive of the terrorists.

Hi Jim,

I don’t know if you have read this, but it may be helpful:

catholicnews.com/services/englishnews/2016/its-not-right-to-equate-islam-with-violence-pope-says.cfm

Excerpts:

“I do not think it is right to identify Islam with violence. This is not right and it is not true,” he said.

An economy that focuses on the god of money, not human beings, is the foundation of terrorism, Pope Francis said.

When the U.S. invaded Iraq, the Shia Majority “paid back” the Sunnis for years of being economically and politically marginalized, which caused the formation of radical elements in the Sunni population. Since the “Imperialists” (Britain, France, U.S., etc.) were instrumental in the overthrow of the Sunni leader (Saddam Hussein), they had anger towards both the Shia and those who allowed them to take power. I am not telling you anything new, right? If the Sunnis had been given their just share of access to wealth and political power, the “IS” would not exist, at least not in Iraq. Syria is a different story with the same basic plot.

Does that help explain a slightly different view than that written in the magazine?

 

[OneSheep]

What action?

Measures of protection, of course, which is what the French govt is doing, as well as joining hands with Muslims in grieving the murder and condemning the attack, which is what is happening in the local Church.

What action do these nonviolent people recommend a father to take when his wife and children are being attacked?

I cannot speak for those specific individuals, but I can say that speaking for non-violence does not mean saying that a person does not use whatever means necessary to protect others in situations when people are being attacked.

We can all agree that a state of peace is more just than a situation of war, right, if we are talking in terms of the Kingdom? In terms of justice-for-all?

foreignpolicy.com/2016/05/18/pope-francis-just-peace-catholic-vatican-africa-isis/

We are going to be having more of this discussion in the Church!

 

[OneSheep]

It is my hope that people are seeing that there is much that we can all agree on, including that our goal should be one of forgiveness, and eventual reconciliation between all people, regardless of faith (or lack thereof), ethnicity, or any other criteria.

In the climate of such habitual forgiveness and actual reconciliation, people will not attack one another, period. Why would the Kingdom be any less than this? We would not want anything less, at least in terms of vision!

This is truly a subject for prayer.

Blessings!

 

[St_Francis]

It is my hope that people are seeing that there is much that we can all agree on, including that our goal should be one of forgiveness, and eventual reconciliation between all people, regardless of faith (or lack thereof), ethnicity, or any other criteria.

In the climate of such habitual forgiveness and actual reconciliation, people will not attack one another, period. Why would the Kingdom be any less than this? We would not want anything less, at least in terms of vision!

This is truly a subject for prayer.

Blessings!

I feel like you are admonishing the choir. What is the difference between forgiveness, reconciliation, and non-violence and regular Church teaching on this/these topics?

In the climate of such habitual forgiveness and actual reconciliation, people will not attack one another, period.

Christ Himself came to earth, and people still behaved badly. What makes you think that our being forgiving, etc., is going to stop those with other ideas of justice and the belief it is necessary to implement them through violence?

 

[OneSheep]

Good Morning Francis,

I feel like you are admonishing the choir. What is the difference between forgiveness, reconciliation, and non-violence and regular Church teaching on this/these topics?

It is only a difference in implementation, and on the forum it is a difference in focus. I may have mentioned this before in answer, but Jesus was surrounded by people resentful and fearful of their occupier, and He did not discourage people from protecting themselves. What He did do was change the entire agenda to one of forgiving enemies; that was His aim.

Christ Himself came to earth, and people still behaved badly. What makes you think that our being forgiving, etc., is going to stop those with other ideas of justice and the belief it is necessary to implement them through violence?

Yes, Christ came, but people still have not learned how to forgive their enemies.

Let me give an example. It is very natural for us Catholics from the West to desire to punish “IS” for what they did to Fr. Hamel, punish those responsible. If we were to carry out such punishment, then the “IS” would then find more reason to turn around and punish again, in return. This is the eye-for-an-eye scenario.

If, instead, we focus on forgiveness while we do what we must to protect ourselves, the desire to punish will dissipate, and the focus will be on remediation; we can turn ourselves toward mercy - even for our enemies.

Now, I am not suggesting that other nations refrain from assisting in the stopping of “IS” terror and expansion. I pray for alternatives to continued aggression. If we are set on punishment, alternatives are not even considered.

 

[St_Francis]

Good Morning Francis,

It is only a difference in implementation, and on the forum it is a difference in focus. I may have mentioned this before in answer, but Jesus was surrounded by people resentful and fearful of their occupier, and He did not discourage people from protecting themselves. What He did do was change the entire agenda to one of forgiving enemies; that was His aim.

Yes, Christ came, but people still have not learned how to forgive their enemies.

Let me give an example. It is very natural for us Catholics from the West to desire to punish “IS” for what they did to Fr. Hamel, punish those responsible. If we were to carry out such punishment, then the “IS” would then find more reason to turn around and punish again, in return. This is the eye-for-an-eye scenario.

Why do you assume that the motivation for action is a desire for revenge?

If, instead, we focus on forgiveness while we do what we must to protect ourselves, the desire to punish will dissipate, and the focus will be on remediation; we can turn ourselves toward mercy - even for our enemies.

Now, I am not suggesting that other nations refrain from assisting in the stopping of “IS” terror and expansion. I pray for alternatives to continued aggression.

I think almost everyone prays that Daesh discontinued its aggression.

If we are set on punishment, alternatives are not even considered.

Who is set on punishment?

 

[St_Francis]

A Second Post regarding my question:

Good Morning Francis,

It is only a difference in implementation, and on the forum it is a difference in focus. I may have mentioned this before in answer, but Jesus was surrounded by people resentful and fearful of their occupier, and He did not discourage people from protecting themselves. What He did do was change the entire agenda to one of forgiving enemies; that was His aim.

Yes, Christ came, but people still have not learned how to forgive their enemies.

Let me give an example. It is very natural for us Catholics from the West to desire to punish “IS” for what they did to Fr. Hamel, punish those responsible. If we were to carry out such punishment, then the “IS” would then find more reason to turn around and punish again, in return. This is the eye-for-an-eye scenario.

If, instead, we focus on forgiveness while we do what we must to protect ourselves, the desire to punish will dissipate, and the focus will be on remediation; we can turn ourselves toward mercy - even for our enemies.

In my previous post I responded to your comments as ideas; here I want to respond to your comments as answers to my question: **What makes you think that our being forgiving, etc., is going to stop those with other ideas of justice and the belief it is necessary to implement them through violence? **

The response you gave is a theory that if we are really, really nice to them, they will cease their aggression. How is this different from the statement I had asked about?

On what do you base your prediction that radical Islamic terrorists will stop their aggression if we forgive them enough?

Now, I am not suggesting that other nations refrain from assisting in the stopping of “IS” terror and expansion. I pray for alternatives to continued aggression. If we are set on punishment, alternatives are not even considered.

 

[Tomdstone]

On what do you base your prediction that radical Islamic terrorists will stop their aggression if we forgive them enough?

Were we hearing about this Islamic extremism before the US invaded Iraq?

 

[St_Francis]

Were we hearing about this Islamic extremism before the US invaded Iraq?

Yes, we were. read about the history of Islam: from the moment the founder attained sufficient power to do so, adherents of the violent strain of Islam have been violently aggressive at any time they believe they have a chance of success (their sole criteria for just war). When they do not see a chance of success, they lay low, waiting for their enemies to weaken and the chance of success to open up.

Notice that not all Moslems have been this way. Islam has been divided since the death of Mohammed, so “peaceful Moslems” have always been around, sometimes also being beheaded for lack of the Islam-spreading spirit.

 

[Tomdstone]

Yes, we were. read about the history of Islam: from the moment the founder attained sufficient power to do so, adherents of the violent strain of Islam have been violently aggressive at any time they believe they have a chance of success (their sole criteria for just war). When they do not see a chance of success, they lay low, waiting for their enemies to weaken and the chance of success to open up.

Notice that not all Moslems have been this way. Islam has been divided since the death of Mohammed, so “peaceful Moslems” have always been around, sometimes also being beheaded for lack of the Islam-spreading spirit.

But in recent times, did we hear a lot about ISIS before the US invaded Iraq?

 

[St_Francis]

But in recent times, did we hear a lot about ISIS before the US invaded Iraq?

Before ISIS was formed after the departure of the US from Iraq, we did not hear much about them, that is true.

 

[JosieN]

But in recent times, did we hear a lot about ISIS before the US invaded Iraq?

I may be wrong about this, but I heard that ISIS was able to take the arms and tanks (Amercian Hummers etc.) that were left in Iraq from the US invasion. You can find pictures of ISIS driving their vehicles. Where else would poor soldiers without a government to fund them get the necessary equipment to fight a war? This may be why they became stronger and better at fighting and conquering after the invasion. After all you can’t fight a war without weapons, can you?

 

[JosieN]

Before ISIS was formed after the departure of the US from Iraq, we did not hear much about them, that is true.

Maybe this is why.

‘Property of the U.S. government’: ISIS jihadists upload photographs of American Military kit they are using against us
Canadian militant fighting for ISIS in Syria uploaded images to Twitter page

Abu Turaab al-Kanadi shared pictures of U.S. military kit seized in Iraq

Equipment is believed to have been seized from Iraqi troops as they fled
Haul contains everything from Humvee vehicles to rifles and sunglasses
Images posted alongside provocative caption: 'American tax dollars at work’

Read more: dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2725040/Property-U-S-government-ISIS-jihadists-upload-photographs-online-American-Military-kit-claim-seized-fleeing-soldiers-Iraq.html#ixzz4Gp0OlX2m

 

[zz912]

But in recent times, did we hear a lot about ISIS before the US invaded Iraq?

We didn’t hear about them even after the invasion. It wasn’t until we pulled out of Iraq that they started to arise.

 

[OneSheep]

Good Morning Francis,

Why do you assume that the motivation for action is a desire for revenge?

Who is set on punishment?

It is very natural for humans to desire to punish wrongdoing. We are naturally compelled to do so; none of us are immune. We also have a compulsion to protect people. Both motives have their place, but when we deal with the former through prayer and forgiveness, we engage with the latter without being enslaved by resentment.

Modern U.S. soldiers are encouraged to keep a clear head in battle, not to be set on “settling the score”, but seeing the enemy as people just as we are. Their emphasis is not for the purpose of forgiveness, though, it is so that people do not make rash decisions. But you see, the letting go of the desire to punish is addressed because we humans naturally want to punish the enemy.

I think almost everyone prays that Daesh discontinued its aggression.

Yes, I join you in prayer. We can also pray that “IS”/Daesh choose to forgive and reconcile. Can you see it? If we want peace, we must pray for reconciliation. A simple laying down of arms because of weariness, a victory on one side or the other and an end to war is not the end of the problem. Look at Israel/Palestine; sure we can rejoice when aggression is stalled, but real, lasting solutions involve forgiveness and reconciliation.

In my previous post I responded to your comments as ideas; here I want to respond to your comments as answers to my question: **What makes you think that our being forgiving, etc., is going to stop those with other ideas of justice and the belief it is necessary to implement them through violence? **

So, their desire to punish, which is natural, is part of their desire for justice. It is the same for all of us, it is an activity of the conscience. Forgiveness in these situations is a non-complementary behavior, it comes from God and distracts and heals the natural tit-for-tat escalation of war. It changes the agenda.

Let’s say you see two people having a big argument, and one finally shifts his focus and apologizes for something, or he stops trying to defend his view and instead says, “I understand what you are saying, you have a good point, even though I disagree”. The shift changes the tone, it changes the agenda.

The response you gave is a theory that if we are really, really nice to them, they will cease their aggression. How is this different from the statement I had asked about?

On what do you base your prediction that radical Islamic terrorists will stop their aggression if we forgive them enough?

In response to your second question,it is based on my observation of human nature, but it has a lot of support from the Gospel. (nothing I observe is original) If we take the Lord’s prayer and look at the whole picture, it is forgiveness itself that helps create the Kingdom.

Forgiveness is the only action called for in the Lord’s prayer. Being part of an effort to create the Kingdom is implied, of course, but other than petitions and praise, the Lord’s prayer calls us to forgive. If we reap forgiveness, we will sow the same. Sorry to be a broken record with that statement, but hopefully the argument scenario I presented above will be an illustration of what I am talking about.

God’s Peace be with you, and all humanity.

 

[OneSheep]

We didn’t hear about them even after the invasion. It wasn’t until we pulled out of Iraq that they started to arise.

Hi zz,

It is true that they had more freedom to congregate and consolidate weaponry and power when we left, but the Sunni people already had built up a great deal of resentment toward their Iraqi government very soon after that government came to power, and of course they had no love for the U.S. for deposing the Baathists.

What I am saying is the populations’ discontent was very understandable, and their own feelings of powerlessness was a precursor to acceptance of a developing zealous extremist group wanting to save their people from oppression.

To me, it does no good to be engaging in blame in all of this. We can understand and forgive our U.S. government for invading Iraq; I am sure that there was good intent. We can understand and forgive the Shia-led government for trying to even the score after years of subjugation by the Sunni minority. We can understand and forgive Assad for leading a cruel effort to maintain control, and for favoring certain groups within his nation. We can understand and forgive the Sunni groups for wanting justice and their own nation.