Must Catholics Reject Halal Meat?editor
Click on the picture to read a newspaper report about the sale of Halal meat in UK shops. This issue has been the subject of recent news reports and radio and TV discussions. Blogger, Christina, submitted the following article for discussion, from a Catholic perspective…
The UK operates under European Union rules which normally require stunning before animal slaughter. But the rules have an opt-out clause for “religious rites” that exempts animals from being stunned.
The Muslim community is divided over whether stunning of animals is allowed before bleeding. Strict interpretation of the law requires that they be not stunned, as they might die before the throat is cut, and ‘the animal needs to do the convulsions so that the flowing blood is drained out’. It is claimed that most halal meat is stunned – 81 per cent of sheeps and goats and 88 per cent of poultry, according to the Food Standards Agency, although, given the information to be found on various Muslim sites, and the two Muslim certification bodies active in the UK, one may perhaps be forgiven for considering these figures to be underestimated.
However, I am not considering here the question of whether or not halal and kosher methods of slaughter are cruel and inhumane (although clearly the BVA and other animal welfare groups argue convincingly that without prior stunning of the animal they certainly are, and think that the EU opt-out clause for ‘religious rites’ should be opposed).
What I am considering is the ritual aspect, specifically the ‘tasmiyah’ or blessing said over the animal being slaughtered, and whether or not this should concern me as a Catholic.
According to a Muslim source:
Sharia is a general principle, a way and a way of life. This is what Islam applies in all matters whether it is an act of worship or a daily act. Animal slaughter can be both of them. It is an act of worship if the Muslim slaughters a goat, a sheep, a cow or even a camel on the occasion of the Sacrifice Day on the 10th, 11th or 12th day of the last month of the Islamic calendar. This sacrifice is compulsory on every sane Muslim, male or female alike – having 613,65 grams of silver and who is not on a journey. The sacrifice, done because of an oath taken previously called ‘adak’ is also an act of worship. The animal slaughtered for daily consumption is slaughtered the same way as a sacrifice……….Another verse of the holy Qur’an gives us further details: “They ask thee what is lawful to them as food. Say: Lawful unto you are all things good and pure: and what ye have taught your trained hunting animals to catch in the manner directed to you by Allah. Eat what they catch for you, but pronounce the name of Allah over it and fear Allah. For Allah is swift in taking account” (Qur’an 5:4). This is the first Quranic reference in the order of the chapters to slaughter in the name of Allah. Four verses……..reveal that this principle does not only apply to hunting but to normal slaughter as well (which must be done by a Muslim, or a group of Muslims). Remembering Allah means pronouncing the following formula three times: “Bismillah. Allahu akbar” (In the name of Allah. Allah is the greatest).
Thus halal slaughter is an act of worship (or a sacrifice) to Allah, the god of Islam, a false religion dating from 622AD, after Mohammed claimed to have been visited by the Angel Gabriel who dictated the Qur’an to him. In this visitation ‘Gabriel’ told Mohammed that God has no Son and that God is unable to become incarnate, thus contradicting the true Angel Gabriel’s words to Mary, some six centuries earlier, telling her that she was to become the Mother of God. Thus, Mohammed’s ‘angel’ was most certainly a demon, for Satan himself can pass for an angel of light, and his servants have no difficulty in passing for servants of holiness (2. Cor.11: 14-15), and Islam, the new religion he taught, is a false religion: But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema (1. Gal.1: 8-9). Allah is therefore a false god or idol.
Because I am forbidden, by the first Commandment, to worship false gods or idols, it follows that I am forbidden to have anything to do with the worship of the false god Allah, which, I believe, includes the eating of meat that has been slaughtered ritually by a Muslim(s) pronouncing the ‘tasmiyah’ as an act of worship or a sacrifice to him.
In the First Epistle to the Corinthians St. Paul deals in detail with the eating of meat that has been used in idolatrous worship. He says: But the things which the heathens sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God. And I would not that you should be made partakers with devils. He goes on to say that although human considerations might dictate that they avoid giving offence to others by refusing to eat such meat, nevertheless such liberty does not obtain if there is any danger that eating it might give scandal: …..but if any man say: this has been sacrificed to idols, do not eat of it for his sake that told it, and for conscience’ sake.
Muslims are strictly forbidden to eat meat slaughtered ‘in the name of anyone but Allah’, and ‘all that has been dedicated or offered in sacrifice to an idolatrous altar or saint or a person considered to be divine’. In other words, they observe the first commandment strictly in accordance with their own religious laws. They are giving witness to their false religion with such fervour that our entire society is bowing to it. To counter Muslim witness, where is Christian witness? It is confined to a few, mainly Evangelicals, who have been dismissed contemptuously as ‘islamophobic’ and told that this is no longer a Christian society so ‘Christian interests’ no longer need to be considered. To accommodate Muslims our islamophilic establishment and its economic interests ensure that in the schools, hospitals and care homes in parts of the UK only halal meat is served. Two branches of Tesco near to my home sell only halal meat, and the government’s refusal to label ensures that I, as a Christian, have no choice unless I limit myself to eating pork meat and products therefrom.
So, to conclude, I believe that as a Catholic I must bear witness to my faith in God, and His Son, our Lord Jesus Christ. I cannot in conscience eat the halal meat that is foisted on me increasingly in UK shops, supermarkets and restaurants. I recently asked the manager of the meat section in my local Tesco if the steak I wanted to buy was halal. He lied, saying: “Tesco doesn’t sell halal meat”, and turned his back on me. I then said (to his back): “Are you going to serve me?” and he turned round and lied again saying “Halal meat has to be labelled”. It obviously isn’t going to be easy to have a Christian voice heeded. Maybe pork is going to be the only option.
Do you agree with Christina? Is it troublesome to the Catholic conscience to have no choice but to purchase halal meat?
In a nutshell…YES!!!! Of course Catholics must reject halal meat and thus they should refuse to eat it. Catholics can never eat halal meat because to do so would be to consume a product that had been sacrificed and blessed in the name of patently false and satanic ‘deity’, and also to subconsciously pledge obeisance to and subjugate one’s soul to this demon. The Muslim god is a devil, and absolute devil. Don’t take my word for it though folks, just read what the Apostle Paul wrote in his letters in the information above regarding eating things sacrificed to idols. Likewise, Catholics should not consume Kosher meat. I would sooner eat grass and drink out of puddles.
Although, what would modern neo-Catholics say about this I wonder? After all in the new Catechism, it does state after all that we all worship the same Masonically inspired super-Deity.
Actually, one particular neo-Catholic, the American Robert Spencer, is the leading expert on politicial Islam, Islamisation, and Islam and the West. I command you to learn form him! Search Robert Spencer on YouTube.
Anybody who wants to learn to truth about Islam should read some literature on the subject by Robert Spencer, a Catholic Islamic scholar, democracy campaigner and critic of the West’s capitulation to cultural Jihad. You should watch some videos on YouTube of his talks. Search Robert Spencer when you have the time, you will be shocked.
And yes, we should reject it, for three reasons: it helps Muslims impose Sharia, it is cruel to animals, and it is idolatrous.
We can hardly avoid it if we cannot identify it though. How they have been allowed to get away with forcing it on all of us is scandalous.
I am sick of Muslims and their superiority complex. We are forced to eat Halal. Meanwhile, Subway have banned all pork! So no more ham on your subway sandwiches. Schools and hospitals are even serving the stuff. We let them take so many liberties in this country, we are so good to them, yet they never stop complaining. I am fed up of it.
Agreed, Miles. I was disgusted at Subway’s recent decision. I used to go there on a Tuesday morning for a sausage and cheese sub, and know, my freedom is being subsumed in the name of appeasing this bizarre, heathenous and satanic cult. We are not just ‘so good’ to them, we are ‘brilliant’ to them. They are permitted to build Mosques left, right and middle and yet Christians cannot build Mosques in the Middle East or other Muslim states. This is not religious freedom, it is creeping sharia. I refuse to accept the laws of the Muslims and the Jews.
They used to serve halal food at my high school. Although, in all fairness they did in fact provide alternatives.
Kosher and Halal should be banned completely.
I don’t think they should be banned. They can have it if they want it. Just don’t force it on the rest of us! All institutions and businesses should offer non-halal and halal must be labelled.
I am horrified that parliament voted overwhelmingly against labelling last month.
One way to shut anybody up in our society is to call them a bigot, a racist or an islamophobe. Look at how the mainstream portrayed Tommy Robinson. He was character assassinated. Geert Wilders, Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer have been or are banned from entering the UK!
There is also a putative move to have public holidays for Muslim, Hindu, Jewish (etc. where would it end) feasts.
Well, there’s also a move afoot to give Atheists their own official holiday (1st April) 😯 so we can’t complain about the others, really, when you think about it… 😀
Miles when in Rome etc .Why did all the first generation muslims not starve as the killing of animals surely wasn’t to their liking before they imposed their belief system upon us .The same mob who sell all our children cheap booze but wont let their own touch it .They are the biggest shower of hypocrites who ever walked Godless crowd the lot of them. Look what they are doing to Christians around the World and they are helped by the most powerful man on the planet -After Putin of course.
Faith of our Fathers,
We can hardly say that ALL Muslims are hypocrites – that’s a bit like saying that all contemporary Protestants are to blame for the Reformation. Not so long ago I met a non-Catholic man who hadn’t even heard of the Reformation, would you believe. We have to allow for good faith in people who are literally ignorant of the facts.
After all, only yesterday I had to spend time trying to convince a Catholic that we have had bad popes in history before this current pontiff. It was hard work. She’s not a “hypocrite” for defending Pope Francis against my criticisms of him. She’s been taught that popes cannot err in matters of faith and morals – full stop. And there are plenty more who are likewise ignorant of the limits of papal infallibility. So, let’s not make sweeping statements about all Muslims being hypocrites, and recall, instead, that the “most powerful man on the planet” (Pope Francis) is definitely more culpable before God than any of them because he is refusing to place before them the truths about the Catholic Church and salvation. He has chosen, instead, to encourage them to continue in their false religion. Our righteous anger should be directed at him, our true compassion towards those Muslims in good faith, who may be awakened to the truth if we had a good pope.
The Muslim I mentioned in a previous post, who had been on a TV programme with me and keeps in touch from time to time, had quoted Nostra Aetate on the show, while I quoted “outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation.” In later emails, he said that he had simply trusted the Catholics he knew who had never told him that. We have to keep focused on the real culprit and the real victims in this crisis. That’s crucial to not going after the wrong target…
We can hardly blame the Muslims for asking for halal meat to be made available. I doubt very much if they are demanding that we all eat halal meat, so the target of our anger in this case has to be the government and stupidly politically correct retail outlets for making the decision not to label halal and kosher products. Years ago, when Friday abstinence from meat was the norm in the Catholic Church, most, if not all, restaurants and cafes had a fish dish on the menu on Fridays. I doubt any pope or bishop demanded that and it was good of retailers to make a fish dish available but in the absence of a fish dish we could have had scrambled egg – none of us were demanding that the entire population ate fish on Fridays. You get my drift? 😀
“We have to keep focused on the real culprit and the real victims in this crisis.”
I suppose I am used to hearing Traditional Catholics insisting the ‘Judeo-Illuminati’ are the real culprits, and I just got a bit fed up of it. Is Islam really not a genuine ‘real culprit’, it seems to be the direct cause of a lot of evil in the world.
“I doubt very much if they are demanding that we all eat halal meat”
I am not so sure Editor, I have the impression that Muslims expect us all the comply with Shariah and that Islam commands all non-Muslims to submit to Shariah.
Sausage and cheese? You kidding, Catholic Convert? Sausage and CHEESE? I mean, we all love sausages and most of us love cheese, but … together?
I can vouch for the high quality of the sausage and cheese subs CC talks about, Editor!
Its delicious, if counter-intuitive!
My Grandfather used to eat sandwiches with cheese and jam together!
Ive never had the guts to try!
Your grandfather makes sausage and cheese sound normal!
I know opposite tastes can be delicious – I love sweet and sour. Reminds me of Catholic Convert – only kidding!
I’m still not as delicious as you Ed!!! When is my paycheck coming through?
You mean your pay rise hasn’t come through? Maybe that’s a sign from Heaven – I’ll have to consult Miss McMoneypenny to see what she thinks!
I don’t like the fact that Halal seems to be taking over, purely because of the great timidity surrounding Islam.
These false religions can have their silly rules if they wish, but it should not be forced on everyone. The labelling should be clear.
While the typical ignorant Briton is unwittingly buying halal food every time at the shops, Muslims staff in the same supermarket can refuse to handle alcohol or pork.
All of these little concessions will add up so that Islam will dominate the UK and everyone else will be tip-toeing frightening to complain or even question this.
And where are the homosexual-driven sexual societies on this issue? There’s no end to their spittle-flecked rants about Catholic schools etc, yet they are completely silent here…………
Exactly Gabriel. The homosexual moron campaigners aren’t interested. They have an anti-Christian axe to grind and that this the long and short of the matter. However, one would have thought that ‘gay’ rights campaigners would be anti-Islam, what with the vicious punishments meted out to homosexuals in Islamic countries and all.
I wonder how the Muslims get on in France? The French are much less politically correct than in country, and I suppose they would be less liable to knuckle under. Also, as evidenced by the recent EU result, they are much more inclined to political extremes.
I read recently that, in French council seats which were won by the Marie Le Pen party, they very quickly stopped serving halal and kosher options in school canteens under their control.
The justification was that France was a secular republic and so catering for religious food was unacceptable.
I disagreed with this move, as – from what I understand – it was simply a vindictive act against jews and muslims. In my understanding, hahal/kosher was not being forced on everyone, but rather supplied only to those who needed it.
See here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2597082/Eat-pork-hungry-Frances-far-right-National-Front-leader-tells-schools-stop-offering-religious-alternatives-canteen.html
I have no problem with people eating halal etc meat, but it should never become the norm for everyone and shops and restaurants should not be feeding it to non-muslims “on the quiet”.
I oppose Halal and Kosher meat on principle, regardless of the religious ramifications. I oppose it also for reasons of animal rights. Meat prepared in this matter is a cruel and inhumane method of killing an animal, and as for the proponents of this method, who say it is painless, I suggest that it is tried out on them. I personally restrict the amount of meat I eat, and my diet mainly consists of white meat (i.e poultry), fish and vegetables etc. The killing of large animals such as cattle has always worried me. Halal and Kosher meat should be banned across the board in shops, supermarkets, schools and businesses etc. If the Jews and Muslims want to import ritually slaughtered meat, then they can. Could I go to Islamabad or Tel Aviv and open and pork butchers? No!!!
Until I read this article, I have been opposed to halal meat because of the barbaric manner in which the animals are killed. But now, knowing that the animals are slaughtered as a sacrifice to Allah, I’d have even more reason to avoid Halal meat. I don’t buy kosher products either.
It is sickening though, that churches cannot be built in the Middle East but you can have a mosque on every street. They bring their barbaric customs (halal and honor-killings) to Christian countries/secular countries and expect, rather demand that concessions be made for them. It’s time to stop tip-toeing around them and treat them like any other religious group.
I am very opposed to the sale of unlabelled Halal (and Kosher) meat. I also agree with a lot of what has been said here. However, I don’t agree with some of the tone here. I really don’t think it is right to harangue Islam and Muslims. Yes, there can only be one true religion and that is Catholicism, but it’s not likely to endear people or bring them to see that fact, if Catholics are harsh when speaking about their religion. How can calling the Muslim god “a devil” help to bring any Muslim closer to the Catholic Church? I also think it is needless to call homosexuals “morons”.
I think this topic is too important to be lost in a lot of name-calling. To be honest, I’ve waited to see if editor would remove some of the worst of the insults, but I guess she’s busy right now. I don’t mean to offend any of the posters here but reading a lot of the comments here wasn’t a pleasant experience and I felt obliged to say so.
I agree with what you say about needless name-calling. I was wondering what to write when your post came online.
My comment is just that I am very opposed to the sale of halal meat without labelling, but I don’t mind it being available for Muslims if they wish it. I definitely think it is a conscience issue for Catholics, though. Now that I know about it being sold without being labelled, I will ask in shops, because it is a blasphemy to take meat which has been offered to a false god. Muslims understand that themselves, so should not be offended.
Surely it can`t be blasphemy if someone goes into a shop and buys halal meat ignorant of the fact as to how it was slaughtered.
Of course, someone who buys meat ignorant of the facts, is not committing any sin.
Muslims are offended by everything.
Editor: please stop making personal remarks to the blogger to whom you are responding. Nobody on here is “naïve” or “brainwashed” – two remarks which may be interpreted as insulting, which I’ve had to delete from your posts. Thank you.
Sorry Nicky for calling you naive and brainwashed. I think I was in a defensive mode. I am just really angry at our society’s denial of the problem of Islamism and creeping Shariah in the West, and the corrosion of our liberties.
No need to apologise – I actually understand where you are coming from. I also agree that there is a blind eye being turned to the problems with Islam and the effect it can have on our freedoms.
It’s not name calling. You don’t know about Islam. Educate yourself. Listen and read Robert Spencer. It is very likely you have accepted the Western liberal secular narrative on Islam.
As for leftist homosexuals who attack the Catholic Church. They are morons. So are white feminists.
They are absolutely silent about the murder, subjugation and torture of women in Islam. When we defend these women, they call us racists.
The penalty for homosexuality in Islam is death. Why don’t gay rights groups ever attack Islam?
I have not been free to read the blog in detail today but have now skimmed this thread and I have to say that I agree with Nicky.
There are ways of expressing ourselves clearly and correcting errors, without leaving ourselves open to the charge of being “offensive”. And no, I’m not a mad liberal – I just fail to see the point in making enemies before we’ve made our point.
You have, yourself, made some key points without being at all offensive. You said, for example, “The penalty for homosexuality in Islam is death. Why don’t “gay rights” groups ever attack Islam”? Unnecessary adjectives or jibes in there would have buried the point.
Now, I just don’t have the time to go through every post and remove everything that is likely to distract from the issue right now. I just don’t. Dealing with adults, I don’t really expect to have to do that. It’s irritating. By now, given our carefully thought through yet very simple house-rules published in the About Us section, I would have thought the penny would have dropped with just about everyone. Seems not. I am beginning to understand why most blogs are fully moderated. I really am.
I don’t know who Robert Spencer is, but if he lacks the skill to speak about Islam and any other false religion, in a factual manner, without descending into name-calling, then I wouldn’t give him the time of day.
Please, would everyone make an attempt to write in a calm and charitable manner. That doesn’t mean dancing around issues; I’ve said on national TV what I think of Islam and intermittently ever since been in contact with a very nice Muslim called Muhammed, who’d been on the same show. So, please be aware that this is a public forum, that there is nothing to be gained by even the appearance of being offensive in a personal sense to Muslims, while, at the same time, there is everything to be gained by a measured, honest, frank and factual conversation about the issues.
On the topic of halal meat…
I think it is disgraceful in the extreme that these meats are being sole in UK shops without any indication that they have been subject to ritual slaughter. It is offensive to Christ (not to me, personally, I don’t matter) that his followers may purchase and eat food that has been offered to a false god, through a rite peculiar to a false religion. I think the fact that the Westminster Parliament has approved the sale of unlabelled halal meat suggests that there is a very real fear of displeasing Muslims, in any way. This ridiculous political correctness is getting tedious in the extreme, but, to be fair, I know there are members of the various non-Christian religions who dislike it as well. Some of them feel patronised by the PC nonsense.
Catholic Social Teaching requires that Christ be recognised as the head of every nation under Heaven, yet every effort appears to be made to play down Christianity across the UK. By making the population complicit in idolatry, through the unwitting purchase and consumption of halal meat, the UK Government – aided and abetted by the silence of the Catholic hierarchy and clergy – is heaping coals of fire (literally) upon its own head…
Okay, understood. Sorry. I’ll change my tone.
Thank you Miles – you are a star!
Do you know anything about Islam? What it teaches? What Muslims really believe?
Watch a few YouTube videos of Robert Spencer. You’ll be horrified by the truth.
I know perfectly well what Islam teaches. I also know that insulting individual people, including Muslims, is not a good idea. And it’s definitively not a good idea on this blog. Please and thank you.
I think I was in the same mindset I am in when I am defending myself against extreme Islamists elsewhere on the internet. I realise it was inappropriate. I am just angry at what I perceive as the absolute ineptitude and impotence of our secular culture against the terrifying threat of Islamism.
I understand. Thank you for your humility. I’m now jealous. I thought I was the only humble blogger around here… 😀
With all due respect, Miles Immaculatae, I would like to offer some points for consideration here on this subject.
1-Islam, of course, is a false religion, non-salvific, and a doctrinal evil. There should be no quarrel there from a traditional Catholic perspective. But that should not mean we are free to be inaccurate and/or unbalanced in our explication of any of the false religions’ teachings out there. One can even single out and cite Islam apart from the other false religions as having particularly noxious and problematic features without being irresponsible.
2-Folks like RS do not always particularly handle the subtleties and complexities of Islamic doctrine and theology in the most accurate and appropriate manner. A very, very careful review of critical facts here can show that.
3-The real answer to your concerns about any Islamification of the West is naturally the Church’s Social Reign of Christ doctrine. Problem solved. Do you think RS is an ally in pursuing the real solution? Think again. He is committed to the separation of Church and State and appears to have no regard for traditional Catholic teaching in this area. Ever notice how often he talks about freedom, liberty, and the so-called rights of conscience? Compare that to how many times he talks about the rights of Christ the King in commanding recognition and assent from governments.
Thank you for your very interesting comment. Not having heard of RS, what little you have told us about him here, is very revealing indeed.
I noticed that about Robert Spencer. He promotes the ideals of the American constitution very fiercely, along with Pamela Geller. He’s also quite Republican. I know this isn’t properly the Catholic view of things, as is outlined in the Syllabus of Errors for example, in this sense I understand RS has modern ideas.
I am confused. RS makes so much sense and he seems very convincing. In what aspects is he unbalanaced or inaccurate, if you know? What facts has he distorted, he appears to back everything up?
I hear a lot of people bash Israel all the time. Even Traditional Catholics. Is this just? I am confused. Who are the bad guys? What are Catholics meant to think about the Israel/Palestinian problem? It appears to me, based on what RS has said that Israel are the victims here, they are the good guys. I know they have committed some injustices, but really, is it anywhere near as bad as the crimes committed in the name of Islam? Wouldn’t Islam still incite hate and jihad against Jews even if Israel didn’t exist? That is my impression.
I know I was a bit heavy handed against Muslims. I have been told off. It was just the halal thing, and the Trojan Horse thing, then the Boko Haram thing, then the Miriam Ibrahim thing, and then that woman being stoned to death by her family in Pakistan, all of which have occurred over the past few weeks. I was just angry.
I think there are a number of subjects where RS can be called into question. If Editor will indulge me a bit with this post, I will take one example that seems to have made widespread rounds in the blogosphere and try to show what a critical examine of it can yield.
With regard to honor killings, which generally means those who kill a female relative who has engaged in, or is perceived to have engaged in, sexual misconduct, we are told by such commentators that Islam supposedly, in effect, supports this, though I personally have never really seen any direct backing up of this claim from standard Islamic sources.
One key argument adduced for this is a passage in Umdat al Salik, a classical Islamic theological manual, that has been certified by Al Azhar U. as a reliable guide for Sunni Islamic law, that says that retribution is to be taken against anybody who engages in unjust killing or murder, except for parents or grandparents who kill their children or grandchildren. We are then solemnly informed by the Islamo critic that a parent who chooses to kill their child or grandchild for reasons of honor faces no punishment, and apparently by implication, that honor killings are fine.
So where does this analysis seem to be weak?
1-While the text is carving out some kind of exception for parents and grandparents, it leaves intact the implication that even these killings are unjust and without right.
2-The passage in Umdat al Salik says the parent or grandparent killer cannot be slapped with any retributive form of punishment. It does not mean that they cannot be slapped with other, non-retributive, forms of punishment for such a homicidal act. To say that such a killer gets off completely scot free is not accurate and comes from a less than exacting read of the text.
3-The subject matter here in Umdat al Salik, whatever one thinks of the Islamic view of this subject, has discontinuity with the subject of honor killings and would appear to make it a poor basis upon which to make meaningful conclusions regarding honor killings. The victims in UaS situations being addressed are solely children and grandchildren. Honor killings are heavily slanted against females, and include non-children victims such as wives, sisters, fiancees, mothers, aunts etc, victims whose murder would not be covered by this UaS injunction.
Personally, I feel that the disordered view of masculinity that Islam promotes, and the misogyny this fosters, fuels a culture where women may be killed with impunity, as is common all around the Islamic world.
Although Islam might not directly condone it by the letter, it does seem to create a toxic culture where women suffer murder.
The Quran does after-all permit a husband to beat his wife if she does not attempt to make herself beautiful for him; refuses to meet his sexual demands; leaves the house without his permission or a “legitimate reason”; neglects her religious duties.
Woman inherit half as much in Shariah.
Woman are not permitted in the company of a non-related man if they are not accompanied by a related man.
A woman’s testimony in court is not worth as much as a man’s.
A man may take four wives.
According to the example of Muhammad, as spoken by Allah, a man my marry a female child.
Muslim men are permitted to rape their slave women (sariyyah).
Considering this is how Islam encourages men to view women, is it any wonder they are so often slain like cattle?
You raise valid points here, though I am not sure all of them are exactly accurate, depending upon whom one consults in the Islamic world on such subjects.
There can certainly be a sound basis for calling into question what appears to be laxity on the part of Islamic leaders in the face of such crimes. But citing generalized notions about toxic culture is rather dicey. How about the charges we face of a culture of celibacy with relation to child abuse? Or women not being able to have holy orders nor have so-called reproductive freedom in the face of whatever travails Catholic women suffer from?
We could also study the treatment of women in any number of non-Muslim lands from Latin America to Africa. Do you realize what we would find? And what conclusions about Christianity, or Western secularism, or African animism should we draw from those?
And the fact remains that distortion, inaccuracy, and imbalance are in play here by a number of critics of Islam, with honor killings and a number of other subjects. And it appears that many of these critics are driven by liberal secularized agendas, folks who presumably would not hesitate to turn their fire onto traditional Catholics if we have enough resurgent power and influence some day to get in their way of their secularized fantasies.
It seems a key factor at work in all of this is that Islam is, relatively speaking, the strongest force in the world today against secular liberalism. While that does not mean we should not view Islam for the falsity it is and even threats it can represent, we should not be eager to throw in our lot with secularized activists, their goals, and their lack of appropriate meticulous care in their analyzing of another religion.
I am somewhat shocked at your response.
I have gotten in trouble here for calling people names and being generally quarrelsome, but I feel I have to ask this question, without meaning any offence, do you know much about Islam? My estimation is that it is a totalitarian idealogical political system just like Stalinism and Nazism, and just as evil.
Your mentioning of clerical celibacy, contraception and woman’s ordination in relation to Catholicism is so absolutely different that to make a comparison is an outrage to me.
I get the impression you were saying Islam is our ally against the secular liberalism. This is no more true than saying that Nazism would be our ally against Communism. In fact, if I had to pick sides, I would choose the secular liberals. I would rather live in a secular liberal democracy than under Shariah!!!
This is one thing that bothers me about Traditonal Catholics in the West. They complain about our country and the secular culture. This is justified, but what I can’t tolerate is the attitude that liberal democracy is totally evil and that Saudi Arabia, Iran and Afghanistan at least, do not have secularism, and suppose they are better than us for it!!!
We are free! We live in a democracy! Do we not know how lucky we are, to have been born here, in this county? We aren’t generally liked. But the state is not putting us in prison for being Traditional Catholics, our Churches aren’t being bombed! We have it good! We should be more grateful.
Not everything liberal secular democracy stands for is evil. Much of it is good. And much of what liberal secularists say is truthful, like Christopher Hitchens for example. He talked a lot of poison, but he also said a lot of truth, in regard to history and politics and ideology.
I find your latest comment on Islam puzzling in the extreme.
There is no comparison whatsoever with Catholic theology on male only priesthood, the outrageous and false connection between celibacy and child abuse, and so called honour killings. Blame God for the teaching on male only priesthood and ask any celibate person when was the last time they were tempted to abuse a child. Tell you what. Ask me. Answer: NEVER.
I once read a book written by the friend of a Muslim woman who was killed by her father for her romantic relationship with an Irishman. The author, presumably keen to avoid charges of Islamophobia, said in the early pages that honour killings were customary among Christian families as well as Muslim families. She quoted the Koran to show the source of this madness in Islam but, of course, didn’t quote anything from the Bible to support her false claim about Christianity also permitting such barbarity. I wrote to the author care of the publishing house to point out her injustice in misleading readers, but no reply. Surprise, surprise.
Islam is a false religion, and it is a fallacy to justify false religions because they may challenge aspects of secular culture.
Thus, to pay a visit to the topic for a moment, I’m not going to be purchasing or eating halal meat – for any reason. If Muslims oppose secular culture, if Jews oppose secular culture, if Hindus… etc. Fine. Doesn’t change the fact that these are false religions and traditionally, the Church has instructed Catholics to avoid them. If, as you say, Islam is the strongest force against secular culture then yet again the finger of blame points to the Catholic hierarchies of the world, led by Pope Francis the First, and we hope, Last.
I’ve had a number of interruptions while typing this so apologise for any typos which I will correct later. Right now, I need to deal with the latest interruption. I wish folk would stop interrupting me 😯
You have misunderstood me. I wasn’t calling homosexuals ‘morons’, I was calling their advocates morons. Sorry for any ambiguity. It is obvious that the Muslim god is a devil. The introduction stated that the ‘Gabriel’ who visited Mohammed was ‘clearly a demon’. Are you going to ask Ed to take that down too?
Oh, I’m sorry I misunderstood about the “morons” comment. I saw the bit in the article about Gabriel “clearly a demon” but because it is followed by a bible quote showing why a Christian would think that, it doesn’t seem so rude. To say the god of Islam is a devil is a bit different, IMHO, but I apologise if I’ve jumped the gun on that as well.
The person of Allah in the Quran does say some strongly objectionable things. For example:
Lo! those who disbelieve, among the People of the Scripture (Christians and Jews) and the idolaters, will abide in fire of hell. They are the worst of created beings.
(Quran 98:6, Pickthall)
And then there are all the passages inciting violence against us, wife beating etc..
Considering this, how can Catholics and Muslims worship the same God, as the concilliar texts seem to imply?
Aren’t all false God’s devils? As in what Saint Paul writes. Have I misunderstood this? Could Editor help me with this question?
Firstly, Catholics and Muslims emphatically do NOT worship the same God – that is one of the many errors that have been spread abroad in the past fifty or so years. The Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Ghost is condemned in the Koran (and it is actually misrepresented – presumably by accident – to include Our Lady!) Whatever, Muslims do not worship God the Son, Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, Jesus. Manifestly, therefore, we (Catholics and Muslims) do not worship the same God.
Turning now to your closing remarks: “Aren’t all false Gods devils? As in what Saint Paul writes. Have I misunderstood this? Could Editor help me with this question?”
Editor will do her level best 😀
It is true that Sacred Scripture (in the psalms) condemns “all the gods of the nations [as] devils” – i.e. non-Christian religions. And St Paul’s first letter to Timothy also tells us that all false beliefs are the “doctrines of devils”. Mgr Basil Loftus take heed…
Reason should enable us to realise the obvious truth of these statements from Scripture, because if God is One, if God, is Truth, and is immutable, unchangeable, if He cannot contradict Himself or deceive us, then any teaching which contradicts HIS revelation, can only come from the Devil, the Father of Lies. That’s a case of 2 plus 2 equals 4.
But that doesn’t mean that each and every follower of a false religion, or every heretic, is possessed by the Devil. There are, manifestly, sincere followers of non-Christian religions who are good people, in good faith. The task of the Church – of each of us – is to communicate the key truth that there were plenty of “good people” around before Christ, and that – unfortunately – being a good person is not sufficient to ensure our salvation which, in God’s plan, comes only through His Church. That’s why pretending that we all worship the same God is not only a lie, but a very dangerous lie. Someone may die in his false religion but if he’s saved, then he is saved by Christ’s death, by Christ’s Church – not by his false religion. So, we may well meet some of our Muslim friends in Heaven but it won’t be because they were Muslims.
So, what about this “diabolical” false religions stuff? Perhaps this analogy (sort of) will help clarify things, Having read various theses about the hoax “shrine” at Medjugorje, I have to say that one of the best explanations, in my view, is the one where it is considered possible that the “seers” did encounter an apparently supernatural phenomenon but that it came from the Devil, not from God. That is possible. The Devil has a certain ability to cause apparent visions. It may be that this is what happened to Muhammed. His “vision” of the Archangel Gabriel, came some 700 years after the same Angel appeared to Our Lady, hence it is entirely possible that diabolical efforts to kill off the Faith included an approach to the man now revered by Muslims, as “The Prophet Muhammed”. We certainly have to presume good faith on his part – he may have encountered some sort of apparition, and believed it to be genuine.
One of the most wonderful graces of our Catholic Faith is that, while we may discuss and research (preferably in reverse order!), speculate and debate, and while we may obviously judge objective facts, we may never judge the disposition or intention of any soul.
Thus, while we know that we belong to the one, true religion, that God is Father, Son and Holy Ghost, and so, on through the Creed, and that, therefore, our religion having been revealed by God, all others must have diabolical roots, nevertheless we know, too, that we must never denounce the individual non-Christian as evil or “doing the work of the Devil.”
After all, every time we fall into sin, even venial sin, we are actually being diabolical in our thoughts and behaviour. In short, until we can say that we’ve cracked the Gospel imperative to love our enemies, we are – to a greater or lesser extent – allowing the diabolical to influence us. We must always, therefore, allow for the fact that, while the Devil may have (literally) worked his magic to instigate heresy and false beliefs, those adhering to non-Christian beliefs are unlikely to be consciously doing the work of the Devil.
Not sure if I’ve rambled off the point but – yet again – it’s been one of those days. I hope I’ve answered your question, in some measure, Miles. If not, life’s like that 😀
With all due respect, I did want to ask you a follow up about this, as what you stated here is certainly what I have believed.
However, I was recently shown an excerpt from the Catechism of Pope Pius X that has the following:
12 Q. Who are infidels?
A. Infidels are those who have not been baptised and do not believe in Jesus Christ, because they either believe in and worship false gods as idolaters do, or though admitting one true God, they do not believe in the Messiah, neither as already come in the Person of Jesus Christ, nor as to come; for instance, Mohammedans and the like.
Does this not say, in effect, that Islam and Christianity have the same true God?
I do not interpret “[Muslims] admit [to belief in] one true God” to mean that the Pope is saying that Muslims and Catholics worship the same God.
A Muslim who says he believes in “one true God” is not professing belief in the same “one true God” in Whom we profess belief.
There are other non-Christian religions who worship multiple deities (Hinduism springs to mind) and I interpret # 12 of the Catechism of Pius X as making a distinction from those religions and others like Judaism and Islam who profess belief in one God albeit not the “Christian God”.
So, no, I do not think for a second that # 12 of the Catechism of Pope Pius X is teaching that Islam and Christianity worship the same God. Indeed, the quote you cite is identifying “Mohammedans” as “infidels” – those who do not believe in Jesus Christ. Back to Square One. The Christian God – the one true God – is Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Muslims do not worship that one, true God, but another “one true God” peculiar to their own religion.
Not sure if this answers your question but one does one’s best… 😀
Robert Spencer doubts the historicity of Muhammad, so it’s possible he didn’t exist, and therefore no demon could have visited him.
Robert Spencer wrote what I thought was a very good essay on “Why a Classical Education”, and that is all I know of him. But I agree in part, with what Immortaladei says about accepting the mainstream “conservative” view of Islam unquestioningly.
I do not know what RS says about Israel except for what you quoted, but I suspect his reasoning is very much in keeping with the ‘conservative political’ view of Islam as villain and Israel the innocent victim. It’s hard to find an unbiased view of the Islam-Israeli conflict.
I think too, that the teachings of the Quoran can be interpreted to suit the times (a little like V 2?) and that adds to the confusion. Education plays a big role here. For example, no educated Muslim woman would consent to have her daughters mutilated like Muslim women in the villages of Africa ( friends who have gone on mercy medical missions to Africa are astounded by the attitude of the women who consent to these mutilations simply because “what was good enough for my ancestors, is good enough for me”). The religion condones cruelty and this makes it easier for fallen human nature to take advantage of it.
Editor, a friend of mine offered this thought, “Abraham could not have been a very good man, just see the trouble his children are causing world-wide” 😀 😀
“No educated Muslim women…”
This is thoroughly incorrect. FGM affects all social classes and families of all levels of education. It is not found exclusively among primitive, poor tribal groups.
I don’t think Israel is sinless. Neither am I Zionist etc. but I think RS makes some good points.
I am fed up of liberal secularists denouncing all criticism of Islam as racism and islamophobia. They are useful idiots.
Yes we should refuse to eat halal meat. Thank you for this article. I will now always ask whether the meat I am buying is halal and refuse to buy it if it is.
I’m also going to always check out now if the meat is halal. It might be a chance to educate some butchers about why it would be wrong for any Christian to take it. I wouldn’t be surprised if most people don’t understand the issue of idolatry.
Muslims only eat meat which is labelled halal.
The reason so much halal is unlabelled is simply to save money. It’s just easier and cheaper for meat factories to make all their products halal, whether it will be sold as halal or not.
We should all boycott meat market and eat fish instead…
That is what I am doing and it is better for health.
I could never give up my steaks, not even for Scottish salmon!!!!
Then you check before you buy your delicious steak…
A Doctor told me that “it is better to eat meat once a week only and after fifty years old no eggs at all”. Would you not like a “Dos de Bar” (back of sea-dace) with butter and lemon sauce with long rice and chive? Huuum!
And if you want to get old, “you just drink a glass of Bordeaux every day and sometimes a very little glass of whisky to take care of your arteries”.
You have read my mind. I agree that it is better for health.
À votre santé!
Thank you very much for all this information.
I have to say this sacrifice business never crossed my mind at all. What have we come to? It’ll have to be local butchers and supermarkets from now on, with a very close scrutiny of packaging, although I expect it is only a matter of time before the non-labelling policy hits Ireland too.
That was good point, Lionel, about eating fish instead. I presume fish is safe from all this pagan sacrifice. It’s strange that the animal rights people haven’t been making a lot of noise about the widespread use of Halal meat. Maybe in this case they are being ignored.
On the whole issue of Catholics and the proper attitude towards false religions, there has of course been a glaring lack of leadership for a long time now. Remember what Pope Francis said at Lampedusa on July 8th last:
“I also think with affection of those Muslim immigrants who this evening begin the fast of Ramadan, which I trust will bear abundant spiritual fruit.”
God help us if any of the shepherds think that Halal slaughter is going to provide spiritual fruit.
And what about the Holy Father’s message to Mohammedans at the end of Ramadan last year? It included the following:
“Turning to mutual respect in interreligious relations, especially between Christians and Muslims, we are called to respect the religion of the other, its teachings, its symbols, its values. Particular respect is due to religious leaders and to places of worship. How painful are attacks on one or other of these! It is clear that, when we show respect for the religion of our neighbors or when we offer them our good wishes on the occasion of a religious celebration, we simply seek to share their joy, without making reference to the content of their religious convictions.”
Well the respect is very much one way right now, and it ain’t towards the one, true, Faith.
Can I suggest that the Pope’s next such message contains some of the following words:
“He that honoureth not the Son, honoureth not the Father who sent Him.” – John 5:23
“Let no man deceive you with vain words. For because of these things cometh the anger of God upon the children of unbelief. Be ye not therefore partakers with them.” – Ephesians 5:6
“The holy universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in Her and asserts that all who are outside Her will not be saved.” – Pope Saint Gregory the Great
I think it is very well worthwhile posting a link to the magnificent, truly Catholic words of Father de Cacqueray, the Society’s District Superior of France. They really should be read. The linked article also has the Pope’s full message.
I’ve read that link and took this bit out about the attitude of the modern popes to non-Christian religions:
This attitude is the very opposite of that of St. Francis of Assisi when he met Sultan Al Malik Al Kamil: he gave proof of a demanding charity towards him, showing that he truly understood the man, but desiring only one thing: that his soul might go to Jesus Christ and abandon Islam. He neither insulted nor assaulted him. But neither did he give way. He told him straightforwardly:
“If you wish to convert to Christ, and your people with you, I will most gladly remain among you out of love for Him. If you are hesitant about abandoning the law of Mohammed for the faith of Christ, order an immense fire to be lit; I will enter into it with your priests and you will see which is the surer and holier of the two creeds, and which one you must follow.”
It’s just amazing that these modern popes right up to Francis, think that non-Christians needn’t convert. It’s mind-blowing.
About the halal meat, I will now always ask at the butcher or supermarket because I had no idea it was sold everywhere. I see shops with huge signs saying “Halal Meat sold here” so I didn’t realise it was being sold in other shops.
Thanks Christina, great article.
Local butchers, yes, supermarkets not. All the meat in cooler cabinets and freezers in supermarkets is Halal (obviously not pork). At least this is the situation in England.
It’s much easier if you don’t eat meat!
Leo and Fidelis
Thank you for thanking Christina for her excellent article. She told us on the General Discussion thread yesterday (I think) that she was going away for a few days holiday (to the sunny south of Scotland, I happen to know…) so I doubt if she has internet access during her break. I hadn’t realised she was going so soon, or I’d have held off posting this thread until her return but having already delayed it longer than planned, I suppose it’s just as well we’ve gone ahead and Christina has the joy of reading it all on her return.
That last sentence is far too long but it’s been a long day so why make it even longer by reworking a lengthy sentence? 😀
Thank you, Christina, if not for this article, the sacrifice part of the slaughtering would never have occurred to me.
I’m sorry for going off topic. I have Muslim friends and neighbors (who are unhappy about the application of sharia law in countries outside their own), and I would never want to be offensive while disagreeing with their religious practices.
You are not off topic at all. And as long as I have a standing invitation to holiday at your lovely USA home, you won’t be off topic!
Seriously, I am hearing from a lot of people that, but for Christina’s article, they wouldn’t have thought about the significance of the ritual prayer etc involved in the halal process, so we are all indebted to Christina for her thoughtful article.
If a poor and starving Catholic accepted a piece of this meat, would he risk his eternal salvation by eating it?
It seems to me that you are completely missing the point. To paraphrase St Paul, we should refrain from eating food which has been sacrificed to false gods because of the bad example this sets to others. There is nothing evil about the meat itself, but what is in the heart of man. I cannot see how a starving person would risk eternal salvation by eating meat, however it has been killed, as long as they did not accept or condone the purpose for which it was slaughtered. I await correction, of course.
I agree with you. Nobody could be condemned by God for eating halal or kosher meat in the case of being poor and hungry.
Could someone please recommend a book that explains the most truthful view of a Traditional Catholic understanding of Israel/Palestine – Islam(ism)/Zionism.
I don’t think there could be a traditional Catholic understanding of the Israel/Palestine conflict, Islamism/Zionism because these are really political matters and the Church leaves us to make up our own minds on politics, as long as we avoid the extremist positions of capitalism and communism. That’s my understanding. So I personally don’t know of any books to recommend.
You might find the Jews Against Zionism website useful on the Israeli question http://www.truetorahjews.org/
I think the traditional Catholic teaching about false religions is all we need to know about Islam, IMHO.
I just can’t stand the attitude of some Traditional Catholics:
Israel: Evil Judeo-Illuminati Zionist land-thieving warmongers!
Muslims: An oppressed people. Oppressed by the West, oppressed by Jews. They just happen to follow a false religion.
This is not true. They would hate the Jews and the West even if Israel had never existed! Even if we had never invaded Afghanistan/Iraq. ‘Evil’ Israel just happens to be a liberal democracy, an oasis in a ideological hell-hole.
I know you do not think this, nor were you saying this.
I disagree with you though. Islam is more than just a false religion. It is a political, ideological system. A dangerous one.
The Catholic Church may condemn Zionism on a theological level, but in reality, Israel as it exists today, as a state, isn’t all that bad, relatively speaking.
Christopher Hitchens has some very interesting thoughts on the situation. I agree with him, especially on Zionism being the false Messiah of the Jews. And his view on the problems facing the two-state solution, i.e. Messianic settlers, their violence and land-stealing, and also Islam, the loathsome Hamas etc. who believe only Muslims may have this land. Disclaimer: I do not agree with everything CH says in this video.
I think I read somewhere that the Revisionists, the anti-semitic kind, get funding from the muslims. So their propaganda is pro-muslim and this trickles down inside what ever group they try to influence.
This is the wrong video as well
I do not like these comments about “traditional Catholics” whom you clearly think should be of one mind and heart on matters concerning Islam and Judaism.
Sorry, but my life is hectic enough trying to makes sense of Catholicism, never mind non-Christian religions and major world trouble-spots and their politics-cum-religion.
Where we are not bound by Catholic teaching to adhere to any particular belief, Miles, I would exhort you to respect our right to hold opinions that may be contrary to yours and what you consider to be self-evidently the “right” opinion.
Nobody here has adopted any of the stances you cite, that Israel: Evil Judeo-Illuminati Zionist land-thieving warmongers!
Muslims: An oppressed people. Oppressed by the West, oppressed by Jews.
If you are suggesting that we are all stupid and brainwashed – well don’t. We’re not.
But I will say this; when I was in the Holy Land some years ago, our mini-bus, driven by a Muslim, was stopped by soldiers carrying rifles who marched up and down scaring the living daylights out of us. They questioned the driver and eventually left. He was good enough to have agreed to take us to the Western Wall (Wailing Wall) at a time when nobody except the Jews were supposed to be there. Since he knew we were Religious Studies students he said he would do his best to get us into the area. Later, the driver told us that they could identify the Arabs because they had special number plates. So, while I’m not saying all Israel is bad and all Muslims are good, I’m not going to forget what I witnessed first hand either.
Does that make me one of those “traditional Catholics whose attitude you can’t stand”?
No no you have misunderstood. I wasn’t referring to anybody here. I meant people like Bishop Williamson and the Resistance crowd, and perhaps even some things Fr Kramer has said.
I am sorry if I have upset people. I don’t think I will comment on this thread.
I don’t think anybody here is brainwashed. I apologised already for that comment. I’ve never said anyone here was stupid, I don’t know what gave you that impression, do think I would be so arrogant to say anybody here was stupid?
My apologies. Your comment beginning with that remark about “traditional Catholics” coming right after Margaret Mary gave you a link, made me think you meant the bloggers here and “traditional” Catholics in general.
I dislike the Bishop Williamson/Fr Kramer focus on Jews. I really do. I think you are wise to give this thread a miss now – not least because, as a student, your comments on the “youth groups” thread would be invaluable. And not least, too, because it’s taken off about as quickly as my beauty treatment. Started many years ago and still not showing signs of working!
No need to apologise. I have been strident. Mea culpa.
This is not a prescription but I do not eat any animal products. I know the pain and suffering that they go through in a mechanical factory farming system and if I can avoid that in any way I can. They might not be able to reason but they can feel pain. God bless.
I completely agree.
As our series of exchanges is narrowing the column and I don’t even seem to get a REPLY button any more, I’m replying to you here.
I’ll try to be relatively brief.
-I’m not offended by what you’re saying here. This is nothing compared to the inflammatory nonsense that goes on at places like Atlas Shrugged.
-While I am no expert on Islam, I think I have a fairly good non-Muslim layman’s understanding of it. I have done extensive reading about it – including one of RS’s books – have taken a couple of classes at an Islamic college, and have periodic contact and discussion with Islamic figures in the Third World.
-I don’t accept your equating of Islam with Bolshevism and Nazism. In fact, for all the differences that modern ‘Westernism’ has with them, it is the one that, in certain key respects, is closer to Nazism and Bolshevism than Islam is. For all that we enjoy in the contemporary West, a close adherence to true traditional Catholicism should dictate we hold in scandal much of what goes on today, regardless of how relatively cushy it may be for us. BTW, we actually did ally ourselves with Bolshevism against Nazism in WWII. And we could almost as easily, I would claim, have done the reverse. There were military Finnish Jews who in effect allied themselves with Nazi Germany.
-My reference to celibacy and holy orders was simply to illustrate the perils of making claims about religious culture directing followers’ to engage in wrong doings when one comes up empty finding approval for wrongdoing in the letter of theology. I think it’s wrong for any claims to be made that a celibacy culture is tied to child abuse or a non-women-in-holy-orders culture is tied to mistreatment or lack of regard for women. It should give us long pause before doing the same with another religion.
-I was not saying that Islam is or should necessarily be an ally against secularism.
-Compare the laws on abortion in the West today to what they are in Islamic countries. It’s not all good or bad on either side.
-How does one compare secular liberalism and Islam? I think, well, that depends. If I am talking as a Catholic, then I agree with you I have a better life and more latitude as things now stand with secular liberalism compared to living under Islam. However if I was not a Catholic, if Catholicism somehow did not exist at all, if the only two affiliation choices in the whole world were secular liberalism or Islam, I would choose Islam.
-I think you are wrong about Zionism. Regardless of relative behavior comparisons between the two sides, I think the salient issue is who is responsible for the outbreak of the conflict. I think you’re going to have a hard time making a consistent claim for European Zionist Jews based on hundreds of years of history while not having the U.S., Canada, and Australia torn apart theoretically by any similar claims by Aborigines and Native Americans.
Okay I understand. I hope I haven’t come across as too obnoxious.
No problem, let us all strive to remember that St. Augustine dictum about essentials, unity and charity.
Editor, please excuse me if the post you commented on was unclear to the point of being disturbing. I hope this last post I have put up here has helped clarify what I was saying.
Yes, thank you Immortaledei. In fact I had an idea of the point you were trying to make but maybe I’ve been reading too many documents of Vatican II of late because I’m seeing ambiguity everywhere – even in the supermarkets when I see Buy One, Get One Free I ask the assistants if this means I get two, or what? 😀
Editor, the several comments made by Bloggers Miles Immaculata and Catholic Convert1 are a total disgrace. Absolutely you should have removed them. (Editor: there you go again, telling me how to run this blog. When was the last time you lectured or instructed the Editor or administrator of any other blog? My “gerragrips” are in danger of turning into “get losts”) They are not only offensive to the Jewish and Muslim faiths but are extremely offensive to all Catholics ,of whatever persuasion they may be. (Editor, one is either a Catholic or one is not a Catholic.) In allowing these comments to stand you ally yourself to this extreme and fundamental xenaphobia (Editor: don’t be daft) and bring into total disrepute the work of CT (Editor: again? You’re always saying that.) I believe you need to remove the offensive posts immediately and speak to both bloggers as the Editor of this blog. (Editor: your wish is, unfortunately for you, NOT my command.) Not to do so means that you are failing in your duty as an Editor and also reflects badly on your personal integrity. (Editor: again?) Failure to deal with the views expressed should then seriously require resignation from this blog.(Editor: and to whom do I tender my resignation – you?) Further such comments may be considered to be illegal and as such you are in danger of being investigated.(Editor: wouldn’t be surprised. They’ve given up even the pretence of free speech in the UK. Well spotted YOU!) Even CT comes under the laws of publishing comments which are offensive and insulting to other religions. PLEASE act very quickly in this SERIOUS and offensive matter. (Editor: obviously you are not a teacher, or you would have noted that both bloggers were investigating and openly expressing their views – always wiser than brushing things under the carpet, and readily adjusted opinions when new information was given to them. Anyway, don’t you bother your head about the “insult” to false religions – you think hard about the insults you heap on me at every opportunity and put an end to your prejudice against the traditional Catholic religion. Leave the members of false religions to worry about their “Faiths”. Please and thank you.
Editor: please note, comments which make no attempt to contribute to the topic, and which, instead, persistently attack individual bloggers and/or administrator, will be deleted.
Editor: please note, comments which make no attempt to contribute to the topic, and which, instead, persistently attack individual bloggers and/or administrator, will be deleted.
Editor: please note, comments which make no attempt to contribute to the topic, and which, instead, persistently attack individual bloggers and/or administrator, will be deleted. All charges of “censorship” are irrelevant. Please check out in-house rules at the About Us section of this blog, and accept that, as is the norm in all blogs, failure to comply will result in your comment being deleted.
Well there’s a surprise!!!!
Yes Editor, I’m sorry that this thread came up while i was away, sadly not on holiday in Bonnie Scotland, but away in darkest Wirral in order to be close to the Liverpool University Veterinary Campus where my ritually-unclean animal ‘Lucy’ was having investigation. Not good news, so will any dog-lovers on here please say a little prayer for her? And even if you don’t like dogs, consider that they, by their innocent trust, give glory to God their Creator, and so say a little prayer anyway.
I read the comments with great interest, and had a really good laugh at the end when Domchas came in. Hilarious, Editor – you’ve cheered me up no end.
Inevitably there was much straying off topic (as I was only expressing my concern about the ‘creeping Islamism’ that the inposition of halal meat willy-nilly on all of us represents), but I’d have loved to be in on it!
Sorry, CC to further limit your diet, but much of our chicken is halal, as it’s imported cheaply from Turkey. That means the old chip-shop chicken and chips is out. Stick to pork and fish in supermarkets and find a good old-fashioned butcher who sources his meat locally when you want a nice steak!
Miles, I’m now risking going to the bottom of the pay-scale, as I wouldn’t have thought you should leave the thread. Bringing up the writings of RS was off-topic, but his many books, such as his ‘Politically Incorrect Guides’ do serve to open one’s eyes, though his extremely polemical style inevitably puts one off.
Thanks to all those who will ask about halal meat in supermarkets – it might make a few people think.
Comments are closed.