Remember how the Dutch Catholic church has taken to explaining a basic Christian tradition to its young in terms of Islam? That kind of thing has surfaced in France. Twenty years from now, Charles Martel will be a villain.
Advertisement
Remember how the Dutch Catholic church has taken to explaining a basic Christian tradition to its young in terms of Islam? That kind of thing has surfaced in France. Twenty years from now, Charles Martel will be a villain.
From Marathon to the Metaurus to Tours the Europe had fought to preserve its Greek, then Roman, then Christian civilization. Each successive layer nourished those that followed. Though Tours checked the onslaught of Mohammedan imperialism in Europe, it did not sound its death knell. Another beachhead was yet to be taken in the Balkans and Constantinople.
Throughout Europe now the campaniles' peal grows stiller, the muezzins' shriek yet shriller. Minarets are rising, steeples crumbling. As Hagia Sophia, so Notre Dame de Paris. The Hammer has been let fall.
Hannibal intra portas.
I can't wait to see how they're going to spin Charlemagne.
::Two words here: Christmas. Tree.
The Christian church has a looooong history of adapting and appropriating the symbols and dates (you think Christ was born on December 25?) of other cultures and religions for its own purposes. This is just more of the same.::
Not quite. Having to explain the tenets of the native religion that has been there for nearly two millenia in terms of an alien religion shows a failure of history and culture. This is vastly different than assimilating another cultures practices and rebrandishing them as yours while you evangelize and demographically take over...
I'm more concerned about increasing regularity with which I'm seeing secular publications add a parenthetical "peace be upon him" after mentions of the prophet Muhammad.
"I'm more concerned about increasing regularity with which I'm seeing secular publications add a parenthetical "peace be upon him" after mentions of the prophet Muhammad."
Yes, I think that kind of thing is more objectionable. I even find reference to "the Prophet Mohammed" offensive - who says he was a prophet?
I thought this example was really poor. I certainly think it is a good idea to place an obscure French king with reference to Mohammed - people 1,000 years from now may place people by reference to Hitler.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.