quote:
When a Roman and/or Orthodox Catholic Priest invites Imams from the Islamic religion, Hindu Holy men, Wiccans (witches), nature worshipers, etc., to share the altar of their church, even, and especially if that church happens to be St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome, and the priest is the Roman Pope himself, to take part in a bastardized Mass and worship service, then if truth be known, this is nothing short of Desecration of a Holy church and a Holy altar. I believe in religious freedom and in respecting others beliefs, but not if it means the destruction of all that I hold holy, the Christian Faith!
Tell me, PG, in your own words - how does this destroy the Christian faith? What about this action in particular is destructive? Do you think that it would attract those there to lose faith? Or perhaps you think it is an insult to Christianity for the "pagans" to even be there in the first place? If that's the case, would a Muslim accepting aid from a Christian missionary be destructive to the faith?
quote:
The silence of the faithful is deafening. Where are the believers? Why won’t they speak out? Perhaps they fear martyrdom, and I do not mean the evil and disgusting martyrdom of mass murder and suicide that Islam preaches.
...or perhaps they realize that reaching out to leaders of separate religions doesn't "destroy the faith"? And that those who assert it does are either exaggerating, weak of faith in the first place (if such an action is destructive to their faith), or simply foolish? And that reaching out to such men and treating them with respect is, in fact, a Christian way to act?
quote:
How dare this man make such a statement? But the sad thing was, not one Christian leader spoke out in defense of Christianity.
Well, it is rather unusual to speak out against something that didn't happen. But if that is the case, I'd like to speak out against President Bush's speech in which he supported the pre-emptive invasion of Kansas.
If it did actually happen, then the fact that this is the only place it's documented should give you your answer - nobody spoke out against it because everybody else
somehow seemed to miss it.
quote:
This so-called one world religion which Kofi Anan and the rest of those who support the UN, would be a conglomeration of bits and pieces from every conceivable religious belief.
I'm not quite sure what this is saying, as it isn't really a sentence (the dependent clause's subject doesn't have a verb), but I assume it means "...which Kofi Anan and the rest of those who support the UN propose/support..." If this is the case, what makes you think all those who support the UN support such a religion? Does supporting the United States mean supporting the current president? - or does supporting the president mean supporting his viewpoint on all issues?
quote:
It will have parts of Buddhism. Hinduism, Shintoism, Naturism, Witchcraft, Christianity, etc., all mixed together into an obscene, Satan inspired nightmare. Do you doubt this? Wake up, we are on our way there, just look at what took place in Mexico City, when the Dalai Lame spoke for forty minutes, before a crowd of over 1,000. There were representatives from just about every major religion in attendance, including even the Greek Orthodox.
The Dalai Lama stated that: I am tremendously happy to share the altar of the old metropolitan Cathedral here in downtown Mexico City...
Um... non sequitur? The Dalai Lama spoke at a cathedral before a crowd of mixed religious backgrounds, therefore a "one world religion" is on the horizon? This "example" doesn't have anything to do with the writer's assertion that "we are on our way there".
™ Version 4.2