S
Sonic
Guest
From the Saudi Arabian Constitution:
Chapter 1
Chapter 2
source: servat.unibe.ch/icl/sa00000_.html
The Saudi Arabian constitution clearly states that it is subservient to Islamic Shari’ah law in all cases.
- Status
Chapter 1
The Saudi Arabian constitution clearly states that it is subservient to Islamic Shari’ah law in all cases.
S
Sonic
Guest
This is also interesting…
From the Saudi Arabian Constitution
From the Saudi Arabian Constitution
source:servat.unibe.ch/icl/sa00000_.html
C
Catherine_D
Guest
Where were you denigrated? It seems to me that there have been those who were denigrated in this thread but you were not among them.
I am not learning this now, I learned it years ago. Where did I say I just found this out? I did not mention anything of the kind.
From other posts on this subject, it would appear that these terms are not “archaic” but are part of current religious curriculum.
I have provided the information for anyone who was interested and hadn’t learned of it during their religious education. If someone is not interested, they can ignore it. However it is part of religious education and the concepts are contained in the most recent edition of the catechism.
I believe the real issue is not whether any of these terms are or are not part of anyone’s religious education. The real issue, the way this entire issue was brought up, was via one poster’s mis-use of the term “Church Militant”.
The mission of the Church Militant, that part of the Body of Christ who are here on Earth, is evangelization. It is not some aggressive or violent action, and the word “Militant” should not be construed in that way. Whether or not one wishes to use the term “Church Militant”, I think that we Catholics can all agree on the importance of evangelization and that we all are called to that important mission throughout our lives, within our families as well as our community at large.
C
Califman831
Guest
The church historically has had armed members in its service. The ones that come to mind off hand are st joan of arc, the knights templar, the teutonic knights, and currently by the vatican swiss guard. All were armed with more than the faith. While the terms church militant usually refers to evangelical efforts it is not exclusively that. The church is aware that there are spiritual and earthly threats to the faith.
youtube.com/watch?v=GOwiJ7ZCuU8 The Swiss Guard
youtube.com/watch?v=bBt9oxZFn0g Knights of malta
G
GeoCyclist
Guest
Ooopsy woopsy I got them, I wasnt being snarky and I hope you didnt think I was As you mention the WBC I went there and looked at their site and saw the video. So Thanks. I should have more properly said - thanks for the pointers’’ Either way, thanks. 
I
InSearchofGrace
Guest
Indeed, that is interesting information. We would be well served with reading up on knowledge like this.
This is probably a good segue to information on the subject of mosques as it relates to 9/11. The radical Muslims who brought down the Twin Towers worked out the details of the attack at the Taiba mosque in Hamburg, Germany. It took nearly nine years before German intelligence arrived at this conclusion and with reports that the mosque was again being used as a meeting place by extremists, it was shut down in early August. Source.
I submit that good intelligence, prevention and diligence are better than after-the-fact correction.
As for information on mosques in the U.S., people may be interested to know the following:
Since 1973, the Saudi government has spent a $87B to promote Wahhabism in the United States, Africa, Southeast Asia and Europe.
**
[Wahhabism is a conservative Sunni Islamic sect, which is Saudi Arabia’s dominant faith. It is an austere form of Islam that insists on a literal interpretation of the Qu’ran. Strict Wahhabis believe that all those who don’t practice their form of Islam are heathens and enemies. Critics say that Wahhabism’s rigidity has led it to misinterpret and distort Islam, pointing to extremists such as Osama bin Laden and the Taliban.]**According to official Saudi information, Saudi funds have been used to build and maintain over 1,500 mosques, 202 colleges, 210 Islamic Centers wholly or partly financed by Saudi Arabia, and almost 2,000 schools for educating Muslim children in non-Islamic countries in Europe, North and South America, Australia and Asia.
The Kingdom has fully or partially financed Islamic Centers in Los Angeles; San Francisco; Fresno; Chicago; New York; Washington; Tucson; Raleigh, N.C. and Toledo, Ohio as well as in Austria, Great Britain, France, Spain, Italy, Germany, Russia, Turkey, and even in some Muslim countries such as Morocco, Indonesia, Malaysia and Djibuti.
Saudi aid to Muslims abroad, however, comes with strings attached, and most of the recipient institutions end up promoting the Wahhabi version of Islam.
The Kingdom has fully or partially financed Islamic Centers in Los Angeles; San Francisco; Fresno; Chicago; New York; Washington; Tucson; Raleigh, N.C. and Toledo, Ohio as well as in Austria, Great Britain, France, Spain, Italy, Germany, Russia, Turkey, and even in some Muslim countries such as Morocco, Indonesia, Malaysia and Djibuti.
Saudi aid to Muslims abroad, however, comes with strings attached, and most of the recipient institutions end up promoting the Wahhabi version of Islam.
More from this source. And this source.
Now, this Imam Feisal promoting the Cordoba House is reportedly a Sufi, but he came from a family of Sunnis from Egypt. In fact, his father was a contemporary of Hassan-Al Banna, one of the founders of Muslim Brotherhood. Feisal only converted after he moved to New York, and became the imam of the organization he formed.
Post 9/11, President Bush appointed him as the U.S. “reconciler” or promoter of improved Islamic-Western relations, but it does not seem that his administration did a good job in vetting him. And the imam is still being sent to Islamic countries and paid by the State Department on these so called diplomatic missions. So many things have now surfaced that should make the people of New York and the rest of the country pause, with his earnestness to build this Islamic Center / mosque at the identified site. See here.
I am not an alarmist, and I will not waste my time arguing endlessly for people to change their minds about the mosque. I did not find it worthwhile to post what I thought about the threatened burning of the Qu’ran books in Florida because radical Muslims would just find the next offensive thing that we do. They are super-motivated to strike fear in us, and kill, whenever and wherever.
I just hope and pray that people make it a point to be informed as much as they can.
Peace to all.
A
agnes_therese
Guest
Actually, I’ve seen a lot of “it’s their right but it’s a bad idea” for BOTH. No hypocrisy there.
F
Flame4
Guest
The Korans shouldn’t be burned and the Mosque shouldn’t be built. People have a right to do either of these things, but obviously it is offensive to large amounts of people.
While I don’t agree with the teachings of Islam, I think it is wrong to burn the Quran.It is morally wrong, as this is just something bad which people are saying they are doing “in the name of God.” It is practically wrong as well. After all do we want to give terrorists more fuel and “reasons” to be violent? How about the safety of our troops in the Middle East? How about normal, innocent Muslims who are just offended?
I also don’t think that building the Mosque is a good idea. I personally don’t have a problem with it, but it is offensive to so many people including many of the loved ones of those who lost there lives on 9/11. It may be that those who wished to build the Mosque (or wasn’t it some religious centre…something like that) did it as an act of peace, to show that they condemn what happened on 9/11. However obviously it is offending the people they wanted to make peace with. What would be the point then? Perhaps they could move the Mosque furthur away. Or they could pray for those who lost there lives that day, or something else instead.
I also think the media is really hyping it up. I mean no one cares when someone makes fun of Christ, but since I don’t like that I refuse to offend Muslims in such a way either. All these problems are reallly giving a bad name to both Christianity and Islam and the good people that practise them.
While I don’t agree with the teachings of Islam, I think it is wrong to burn the Quran.It is morally wrong, as this is just something bad which people are saying they are doing “in the name of God.” It is practically wrong as well. After all do we want to give terrorists more fuel and “reasons” to be violent? How about the safety of our troops in the Middle East? How about normal, innocent Muslims who are just offended?
I also don’t think that building the Mosque is a good idea. I personally don’t have a problem with it, but it is offensive to so many people including many of the loved ones of those who lost there lives on 9/11. It may be that those who wished to build the Mosque (or wasn’t it some religious centre…something like that) did it as an act of peace, to show that they condemn what happened on 9/11. However obviously it is offending the people they wanted to make peace with. What would be the point then? Perhaps they could move the Mosque furthur away. Or they could pray for those who lost there lives that day, or something else instead.
I also think the media is really hyping it up. I mean no one cares when someone makes fun of Christ, but since I don’t like that I refuse to offend Muslims in such a way either. All these problems are reallly giving a bad name to both Christianity and Islam and the good people that practise them.
L
larkin31
Guest
Burning Korans is stupid and bigoted.
A
a_priori
Guest
I don’t think it could be said any more succinctly and truthfully.
“Thank you for the sources”
and
“it does seem an antiquated term.”
Were not part of the source material.
And there was nothing to indicate you were quoting from anything in the middle of it all.
You intermingled the source material with your own words without providing bibliographic information. You should have provided quotes.
I approached it believing it your words until I read the source matter itself.
I was left feeling you to be dishonest.
Actually, I was never in RCIA.
I just find it very odd that something so integral to what I learned in school was never touched upon in what you say was 18+ years of Catholic education.
As for the money spent sending kids to Catholic school, I wouldn’t be sorry.
I am sure the Catholic school is much better then any public school in the area.
Antiquated, old, archaic…
These all take on a completely different meaning when used in reference to a church that still uses Latin as its official language.
Please understand, no one here wishes to denigrate you. But many here do find it absolutely shocking when we hear of another common teaching that is no longer being covered.
It worries us.
S
Sabda
Guest
I agree, I have never had any official Catholic schooling beyond CCD and even I have heard of the term. It’s a term that was and is still used. It gives a good description of the different levels of the Church.
Via Dolorsa there is no need to be defensive about this. If anything you should be glad that you learned something new about your Faith. Unfortunately education in this country for the past several decades has been deplorable. It doesn’t matter if you where in a private or public school. The best thing we can do and is to continue to learn about our Faith and the world around us and be thankful when we do learn something new.
S
Sonic
Guest
Good job! You certainly did your homework! Thank you for passing the information along.
D
donsnow
Guest
Now, now, like our DI often told us in boot camp, “Don’t anticipate! Wait for the order.”
GeoCyclist, let me remind you, we haven’t let go of them…yet. Right now, oh, yes, we have taken them. After we leave, you can spout your little spiel…which sounds exactly like the leftist propaganda dumped on America about Vietnam during that war… It’s all an old recording, to me, what you just wrote. Try to do your own thinking, and see for yourself if a statement matches the physical facts, before you repeat it.
That’ll save you lots of embarrassment. Really.
D
donsnow
Guest
I once knew a Marine Roman Catholic who was Church Militant by quietly and humbly walking the talk, but said little. His example had much to do with my conversion, later.
I’m in the Church Militant, and kin to the Church Suffering and hope to join the Church Triumphant.
I hope Via Dolorosa hasn’t got too educated for her own good, where she no more has to learn anything. That happens to people with experience and others with college. I try to learn both from the experience of others and the education of others. My little bit of education and dab of experience serve me well, by the grace of God.
D
donsnow
Guest
I wouldn’t call an attempt to point out the insensitivity and arrogance of placing anything Muslim that close to Ground Zero as persecution. I would call Sharia and other Muslim law persecution of non Muslims and of Muslim women.
Careful, not to throw stones in the glass religious house.
M
mary_bobo
Guest
Well, it must be archaic because I learned it back in grammar school (we still called it that when I was there) when we still memorized the Baltimore Catechism. It wouldn’t hurt us to revert back to that archaic book. It might result in better catechized Catholics.
I
InSearchofGrace
Guest
And I, sir, am grateful to come across your edifying and uplifting posts.
May God bless you!
- Status