Mercy or Mugs? Is it Un-Christian To Revoke Shamima Begum’s Citizenship?

Since the above interview was aired, Shamima Begum’s baby has died. 

The mother of Shamima Begum has urged the government to reconsider the decision to revoke her daughter’s British citizenship.

A letter to the Home Office from the family’s lawyer – written on behalf of Asma Begum – asked the Home Office to do so as “an act of mercy”.

It said this was in light of the news the teenager’s newborn son had died last week. Ms Begum left London to join the Islamic State group when she was 15.

When she was found in a Syrian refugee camp last month, she gave an interview in which she said did not regret joining IS.  Click here to read entire BBC report

Comment: 

Do Christian charity and mercy apply here?  Should this young woman, who has lost three children since she left the UK to join IS, be allowed back into the UK, given the circumstances of her life now in war-torn Syria?  Or would that make “mugs” of  the Government and peoples of the UK?

Is there a right and a wrong way to deal with this situation?  Note that Shamima says in the above interview that she really only became interested in religion before she left for Syria (when she was fifteen).  She’s not expressed regret or repentance, and, in fact, horrified us all by saying (in another widely televised interview) that she was unfazed at the sight of heads in bins, but maybe her ability in English lessons was as impoverished as her religious education – maybe she just doesn’t know how to find the words to express regret.  Or am I clutching at straws? 

The one question that nobody has raised however, not any of the news interviewers or  commentators is this:  why on earth does she want to return to the UK when Islamic State  seeks to destroy  the west.   I don’t get it.  Do you?  

Europe: will Brexit kick-start the Christian restoration – or is it too late?

 From the website of the Lepanto Foundation – dated 7 December, 2018

The roots of the crisis in the European Union (1991 – 2011)

The economic, social and political crisis which the EU is undergoing is there for all to see. In a few days it will be the 20th anniversary of the Maastricht treaty, signed on 11 December 1991, which brought the European Union into being. Professor Roberto de Mattei, who was then president of the Lepanto Cultural Centre and who is now president of the Lepanto Foundation, was one of the first in Europe to express his criticisms of the Maastricht Treaty in a letter sent to all MEPs in Strasbourg on 11 May 1992, the day before the speech given by Queen Elizabeth II to the European Parliament. His analysis, which preceded by nearly 10 years the entry into force of the euro, invites us to reflect on our future.

Prof. Roberto de Mattei’s letter to the Members of the European Parliament.

Rome – May 11th, 1992

Dear Sir /Madam,

On behalf of the Lepanto Cultural Centre, of which I am President, I take the liberty of submitting for your attention certain reflections (1) on the Maastricht Treaty, stipulated by the Heads of State and Government of the Twelve on the 11th of December 1991, to launch the new international organization called “European Union”.

This Treaty, formally signed on the 7th of February 1992 and due to be endorsed by the respective national Parliaments by the 31st of December 1992, is arousing increasing doubts and perplexities in many quarters: will it really unite and strengthen Europe, or will it plunge her into chaos? This letter aims to stimulate discussion on this capital point.

A nihilist dream of the destruction of Europe

The year 1992 marks the 500th anniversary of the Discovery and civilization of America by Europeans, yet European and Christian Civilization is on trial.

Europe is being accused of having imposed its civilised patterns on the world, instead of “opening itself to the Other”, “to what Europe is not, never was and will never be” (2); it should therefore deny itself to recover the “otherness” it rejected, viz. barbarians, Indians, Muslims, all bearers of a “cultural message” which we must now adopt. Europe should therefore renounce its “secular ambition of historical centralization whose symbol is Columbus” (3) in order to “de-civilize” itself and sink into tribalism.

According to the historical vision by these “theoreticians of chaos”, Europe should be founded on the “loss of foundations” (4) and “not identify with itself” (5). This is nihilism.

No historical and cultural identities would deserve to survive because in the world nothing is stable and permanent and everything is devoid of order and significance: this Nothingness is the only reality which is to assert itself in history and society: “We must acknowledge the historically positive role of Nothing / … / We should base our European citizenship on Nothing” (6).

The real nature of the Maastricht Treaty

These nihilist theses on Europe, set out in journals, books, symposia, amplified by the mass-media and abundantly echoed by politicians, are neither to be ignored nor forgotten when debating such an ambitious political accord as the Maastricht Treaty.

It is not a matter of being generally for or against Europe, but of addressing the real background issue: What kind of Europe are we aspiring to? What kind of Europe is envisaged by the Maastricht Treaty? Political and diplomatic agreements do not simply boil down to technical formulas, but reflect political patterns, visions of the world and ideal aspirations. Which ones in this particular case?  Click here to read the rest of Professor Roberto de Mattei’s prophetic letter – it is lengthy, and thoroughly documented, and very well worth reading in its entirety. 

Comment: 

One highly significant section in the Professor’s letter relates to the rise of Islam in Europe:  “In terms of the Treaty, European political parties will “express the political will of Union nationals” (Title II, art. 138A). A “European Muslim Party”, owing to its deep-rooted presence in all territories of the Union, its power of political and religious cohesion, its financial resources and its international connections, might become the leading party in the European Parliament. This would imply Muslim political domination in Europe, peacefully won, or rather, peacefully handed over by Europeans themselves.” 

Professor de Mattei goes on to point out the possibility of this same dominance in the member states.  Logically, then, we must ask, might Brexit actually contribute to the restoration of Christianity – Christian belief and culture – both here in the UK and on the continent of Europe?  If you have any practical ideas on how this might be effected, share them with us. Or maybe you think the restoration of Christianity in Europe is a pipe dream?

Is the UK no longer free? 

The treatment of Tommy Robinson, coupled with the contrived outrage over Boris Johnson’s ‘burka’ remarks this week, do beg the question: is Tucker Carlson right to question whether, in fact, the UK really is a free land?   And why are the Catholic bishops not asking the same question? 

Comments invited…   

Hate Speech: Former Irish President Calls Catholic Teaching “Evil”…

Former Irish President Mary McAleese has described the Catholic Church’s teachings on homosexuality as “evil”.

But McAleese also said that she was hopeful that the Pope Francis will eventually change the Church’s homophobic attitudes.

She said that Pope Francis “exploded that myth” that the Church can’t be changed and she believed he could now rid the Church of its “homophobic messages”.

The former Irish President also accused the Pope of having “bad manners” and being “disrespectful” for failing to reply to a letter she recently wrote to him. She had penned him a letter after an attempt was made to exclude her from an international women’s conference in Rome.

“I had faith in this pope and it would be wrong to say anything other than I am disappointed,” she said.

McAleese made her comments when receiving the inaugural Vanguard award for her support for the LGBT community.

Speaking at the award ceremony, Sarah Williams, chairperson of the Board of the GAZE LGBT Film Festival said: “Dr McAleese’s unwavering support for the advancement of the LGBT+ community has been widely acknowledged and praised, and we felt very strongly that we wanted to present her with this award this evening to mark her achievements.”
And Filmmaker John Butler said: “It’s an honour to present this award to a life-long hero of mine, what an inspiration and what a contribution to Irish life!”  Source

Comment: 

Just imagine for a second if Mary McAleese had described the teaching of Islam on homosexuality as “evil”  or the teaching of Judaism on homosexuality as “evil” – can you just imagine the ruckus?  But the teaching of the Catholic Church on homosexuality (or anything else) well, that’s fair game.  No hate speech here, move along. 

You must not say a word out of place about Islam or Judaism, on pain of being labelled Islamophobic or Anti-Semitic, and finding yourself the subject of a police complaint.  But anti-Catholic? Bring it on…

Is there any point in lodging an official complaint about Mary McAleese’s bigotry, her attack on the Church which, if applied to any other religion would fall foul of ‘hate crime’ laws – or will Catholics simply do what we’ve always done, turn the other cheek, make every attempt to “love our enemy” – and, believe me, McAleese is an enemy of the Catholic Faith.  Mind you, so is Pope Francis, whom she applauds for his attempts to change Catholic teaching.  Now that he’s undermined traditional teaching on capital punishment, is the ultra-feminist/pro-“gay”  former Irish President likely to see a similar change to the Catechism paragraphs on homosexuality?  Don’t get me wrong; no pope has the authority to change the moral law, and when good order is restored to the Church, the damage done by this disgraceful pontiff will be put right. No question about it. Still, given that he has form on “revising” the Catechism, might he re-write the prohibition of homosexual activity, just for the hell of it (so to speak…) 

Share your thoughts – which is worse: the bigoted, hate-filled Mary McAleese, or her sometime idol, Papa Francis? Or, is it a case of “you pays your money and you takes your pick…”?  

Do Muslims Worship The True God?

From the Catholic Herald

Some time ago I wrote a blog in which I remarked that only Christians worship the true God, that is, the Trinitarian God who is composed of Father, Son and Holy Spirit; God as three divine Persons: creator, saviour and sanctifier. This led to an exchange of emails with a reader of the blog in which we discussed the Muslim idea of God. He thought Muslims worshipped the same God as Christians; I thought they didn’t. He referred me to the philosopher Peter Geach’s book God and the Soul (1969) and specifically to his chapter “On Worshipping the Right God”.

In this chapter, Geach does not specifically refer to the Muslim idea of God but he does make a number of interesting statements. For instance, he writes, “A sufficiently erroneous thought of a God will simply fail to relate to the true and living God at all. Where the line is to be drawn God only knows…” He also comments, “ For Christians, “God” is not a proper name like “Woden”, but a descriptive term, true of the Blessed Trinity and not true of Woden.” In another place he writes, “Only by turning to the true God can a man win grace and forgiveness.”

So do Muslims worship “the true and living God?”  For the [writer’s]  answer, click here

Comment:

It has been commonplace for years now, to hear popes, priests and teachers claim that Christians and Muslims worship the same God.  Here’s Pope Francis:  “Our relationship with the followers of Islam has taken on great importance, since they are now significantly present in many traditionally Christian countries, where they can freely worship and become fully a part of society. We must never forget that they “profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, who will judge humanity on the last day”.  [emphasis added].

Nobody ever quotes the words of Christ Himself in the matter of so-called “Abrahamic faith”:  “Before Abraham was made, I am.”  

Still, if the Pope thinks Muslims and Christians worship the same God, that must be true … mustn’t it?