Merkel: "Mosques 'a feature of German landscape' "

[Smaland]

Citizens Urged to Get Used to It (http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/mosques-a-feature-of-german-landscape-20100918-15h8p.html)

[Ibericus]

http://www.boycottmuslims.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/burn_mosque.jpg

[The Lawspeaker]

It shows that Germany (and neither are we ) is not a democracy and an occupied country. The Leader has decided that there will be more mosques and the Germans will have to get used to it.

[Sahson]

I cry for Deutsch-land. No nation deserves such a fate.

[Cato]

Arminius does not approve.

[San Galgano]

Where are the old good germans of 60 years ago?:D

[Groenewolf]

"One thing is for sure: our country will continue to change and integration is a duty for a society that welcomes immigrants", she told the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.

With other words the host country has to adapt itself to those moving in. Quit a 180 degrees turn around of the usual position about integration.


"Only the Constitution can serve as a basis for us to live together in tolerance and respect. Whoever wants to live here must accept that."

Ah yes, the socalled Basic Law. I think it was already shown that it can easily be replaced and I doubt that a hypothetical Muslim majority would be unwilling to do it.

[Wölfin]

No, no, no, no!
She's doing it all wrong! Unless of course her purpose is to authorize and encourage the colonization of Germany to the UAE? What she is descibing is not immigration but colonization. Was der Fick?

[Wyn]

Oh, they're a feature of the German landscape alright. Not that they need to be towering, distinctive structures. They just are, out of convention.

Perhaps one day crosses and crucifixes will be part of the landscapes of Islamic states? In the spirit of multiculturalism, naturally.

[Lábaru]

I can not understand, cost money, fuck the progress of a society what is good in the Muslim immigrants?

[Cato]

Where are the old good germans of 60 years ago?:D

Passing away into the history books, to be largely replaced by milksops.

[Murphy]

Germany will be begging for Canossa soon enough.

[Crossbow]

I cry for Deutsch-land. No nation deserves such a fate.

It's very strange and rather unbelievable: for years Germany has been reviled, there was nothing they could do right (except for making cars, electronical devices, and so on), and they were all potential nazis. The Germans had to be controlled, otherwise they would be standing on the brink of recreating a new world of concentration-camps, random shootings, lamps made of human skin, human soap, etc.
Now people realize that Germany is subject to fundamental changes, a common fate shared with the other European countries. Something which looks like 'concern' and maybe sympathy emerges.
Not so long ago, my fellow countrymen were still making jokes (which weren't jokes actually) about the bicycles stolen (confiscated) by the Germans in WW II (Where is my grandma's bike...?) And of course, back in the days of happy multiculturalism, every Turk or Arab had to be made clear, that a part of Dutch culture was a strong dislike of Germans.

[Gamera]

Is she insane? People in Germany must be very tolerant. If they would tell us something like that here there would probably be a coup d'etat in no time.

[Debaser11]

I hate that f*cking c*nt of a PM Germany has. F*ck her. This really got my blood pressure going. There's just this bullshit baseless assumption that mult-cults trump nationality. Does she not realize she's in charge of a distinct country and that that should be her responsibility over being a world stage whore?

[Cato]

This is rather akin to Hitler inviting the Red Army into Germany with open arms. Stupid, stupid woman. The Muslims won't intergrate with the Germans, but they will, ahem, integrate the Germans... into the ummah, by any means at their disposal. Mark my words Chancellor Urkel, you're signing the death warrant for your own nation and its people.

[Lábaru]

"The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets and the faithful our soldiers...."

Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Turkish Prime Minister.

[Debaser11]

"The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets and the faithful our soldiers...."

Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Turkish Prime Minister.

That's how you win. Not by saying "take my land, women, and customs."


To put this into a twenty-first century context:

That Turkish PM wins the internets! Good for him. PM Merkel, EPIC FAAAIILLL!!

[RoyBatty]

I hate that f*cking c*nt of a PM Germany has. F*ck her. This really got my blood pressure going. There's just this bullshit baseless assumption that mult-cults trump nationality. Does she not realize she's in charge of a distinct country and that that should be her responsibility over being a world stage whore?

She's just doing her bit for the NWO. They're more or less the same in every Western country although Sarkozy has somewhat surprised me with his policy of expelling gypsy criminals. It is surprising he even bothers since those policies aren't being extended to the rest of the council estate rifraff infesting numerous French cities and towns and the "asylum seekers" holed up in Calais.

[Debaser11]

No, I understand she has a great deal of company.

[Svanhild]

Where are the old good germans of 60 years ago?:D
Killed or discredited by allied forces and pulled away from power. Many of their offsprings became victims to brainwashing. Only my generation begins to change things and thinks different after the ideological misery brought upon us by the 68ies generation. It takes time, anyway. Those who are at the switches of power are members of the 68ies generation. Be that as it may, most Germans are fed up with Merkel and the pro-multicultural stance of our political elite. The Thilo Sarrazin case proves it.

[Murphy]

The gates of Vienna have held before and they will hold again. But Europeans must acknowledge why this disaster has come about this turn. Europe must rebuke the Protestant "Reformers" and get back in line with Holy Mother Church or be swamped under the Mohammedan tide.

[Sahson]

The gates of Vienna have held before and they will hold again. But Europeans must acknowledge why this disaster has come about this turn. Europe must rebuke the Protestant "Reformers" and get back in line with Holy Mother Church or be swamped under the Mohammedan tide.

blame it on the protestants?

[Murphy]

blame it on the protestants?

We can easily lay the blame at the foot of Luther and Calvin. It must be acknowledged that the "Reformers" broke the unity of Europe. Protestant Whigs in London glorified in the siege of Vienna and prayed for a Turkish defeat against the papists who bravely manned the walls against the tide under the patronage of Our Blessed Lady.

And let us not forget the old Dutch saying of "better a Turk than a papist".

Insititutions like the European Union are attempts to reclaim the unity lost amongst Europe by the acts of the Protestant. But it is assuredly wrong-footed [the EU] because it is wishing to do so devoid of the founding philosophy behind the principle of that unity - the Catholic Faith.

[The Lawspeaker]

blame it on the protestants?
Which is so evil and easy. Of course it would be easy to whitewash the rape and molestation of innocent children, centralize all power in the hands of religious bigots with a lust for secular and financial power as well and... this:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_b09FF1MkAQU/SnpmSn6jD0I/AAAAAAAAAZA/EMpMotkjVhU/s400/vatican-pope-islam-meeting.jpg

Protestantism has nothing to do with loss of unity. However it has everything to do with people making their own decisions based on interpreting the bible and that's something that this NWO Church and the European Union are afraid of: people that are independent and not willing to get fucked over.

[Murphy]

Of course it would be easy to whitewash the rape and molestation of innocent children,

Tristan, if you wish to go there, I swear by Almighty God I will show you no mercy and bury you under so much facts that you'll spend an eternity trying to find your hand in front of your face never mind hope of escaping.


centralize all power in the hands of religious bigots with a lust for secular and financial power as well and..

Tristan, you're beginning to sound like a Marxist. Sure enough I doubt you're really complaining. If it was not for Holy Mother Church your lands would have been swarmed by the Turk.


this:

Another problem with you Tristan, and not just you, but the general Aprcity community, if you think we should all live in bubbles.


Protestantism has nothing to do with loss of unity.

It caused a break in the European secular powers between themselves by rejecting the authority of the Pope of Rome. And the very core beliefs of Protestantism, that every man can interpret Holy Scripture and the Will of God on his own authority is obviously bound to cause a break in unity.

You're not stupid Tristan.


However it has everything to do with people making their own decisions based on interpreting the bible and that's something that this NWO Church and the European Union are afraid of: people that are independent and not willing to get fucked over.

If I say one verse means something, and you say it means another, there is necessarily a break in unity of faith and faith being the driving principle behind a society means that any break in faith means a break in society.

[Wyn]

We can easily lay the blame at the foot of Luther and Calvin. It must be acknowledged that the "Reformers" broke the unity of Europe. Protestant Whigs in London glorified in the siege of Vienna and prayed for a Turkish defeat against the papists who bravely manned the walls against the tide under the patronage of Our Blessed Lady.

Elizabeth I had a fondness for the Turks, also.



And let us not forget the old Dutch saying of "better a Turk than a papist".

Liever Turks dan Paaps!

[Murphy]

And let us also not forget that it was the Protestant "Reformation" that hastened in the development of the modern capitalist economy.. another of the great social ills we face.

Tristan, why are you so hell-bent on defending the biggest catastrophe to hit our race since the beginning of time (excepting the Fall of course)?

[The Lawspeaker]

Double

[The Lawspeaker]

Tristan, if you wish to go there, I swear by Almighty God I will show you no mercy and bury you under so much facts that you'll spend an eternity trying to find your hand in front of your face never mind hope of escaping.
The church is responsible for the fact that people ran straight into the arms of the kind of people that run our show today. If the church would have behaved as in their own teachings there would have been no protestantism, no Jewish banksters, no marxism as the church would have made sure that religious knowledge was spread to the people themselves, that the Jews were dealth with and the rich were kept in check. They abused their power horribly and become the most corrupt institution in existence - which continues to this very day. I recommend you to look up Roberto Calvi and his shady dealings. Not too mention their dealings with the Nazi's and the numerous child rapes they are not trying to hide from the public.

For this the Church and the Church alone is to be held responsible. So rather then a religious institution I now consider it to be a criminal syndicate like the Mafia that should be dealt with accordingly.



Tristan, you're beginning to sound like a Marxist. Sure enough I doubt you're really complaining. If it was not for Holy Mother Church your lands would have been swarmed by the Turk.


Not really. It would be better to say that "thanks to the Church they are..."



Another problem with you Tristan, and not just you, but the general Aprcity community, if you think we should all live in bubbles.
Nonsense, friend. You are the one that is living in a bubble.


And let us also not forget that it was the Protestant "Reformation" that hastened in the development of the modern capitalist economy.. another of the great social ills we face.

Tristan, why are you so hell-bent on defending the biggest catastrophe to hit our race since the beginning of time (excepting the Fall of course)?
Because it is a direct result of the moral degradation within the Church. Luther was right and the Church hasn't changed one bit.


Elizabeth I had a fondness for the Turks, also.



Liever Turks dan Paaps!
Which continues to be taken out of context by the Roman Mafia - that genocidal paedophile institute that condoned the killing of my countrymen to the extent that they would rather have worked with the Turks then with Rome. It was a mere slogan btw with the meaning that even the Turks (and Dutch hated them already) would be better then Rome.

And that says something.

[Wyn]

And let us also not forget that it was the Protestant "Reformation" that hastened in the development of the modern capitalist economy.. another of the great social ills we face.

Tristan, why are you so hell-bent on defending the biggest catastrophe to hit our race since the beginning of time (excepting the Fall of course)?

I really do think Protestantism is the route of a lot of "modern" problems, even aside from the fact that it divided western Christendom. For one thing, it promotes individualism (read: do what you please and how it pleases you) and is of course by it's very nature revolutionary. Protestantism was always going to have major damaging repercussions.

[Murphy]

For this the Church and the Church alone is to be held responsible. So rather then a religious institution I now consider it to be a criminal syndicate like the Mafia that should be dealt with accordingly.

In the end Tristan that is all you need to say. But when you try and "deal" with Holy Mother Church, when She as the sleeping lion rises and roars Her dominance over the field of battle which Europe is sure to become, and you tremble at the sight of Her glory, just remember "I told you so".

[The Lawspeaker]

In the end Tristan that is all you need to say. But when you try and "deal" with Holy Mother Church, when She as the sleeping lion rises and roars Her dominance over the field of battle which Europe is sure to become, and you tremble at the sight of Her glory, just remember "I told you so".
Empty words in defence of a treasonous institute of paedophile and shady bankers that work together so elegantly with the NWO.

[Megrez]

Unite Europe under a Fourth Reich and be done with this if you want Union so much.

[Osweo]

Yawny yawny yawn. The Roman Church split Christianity itself LONG before Luther showed up in his attempt to clean up some of the mess. There is no going back to Rome for us in the West, she discredited herself far too much already, and still does. If it hadn't been for the arrogance of the Roman hierarchy, there would have been no Great Schism in 1054, no conquest of Constantinopolis, perhaps the Eastern Empire could even have held onto Palestine itself, and withstood the Arabs. Now, while 'Rome is burning' this Nero fiddles around the fringes, causing trouble in traditionally Orthodox regions with its mad expansion programmes, damning anyone here in the West who dares to speak out against immigration and our ethnic replacement.

Far from our rallying champion in the battle against cultural and racial oblivion, the Roman Church plays more the role of some lowly jackal, scavenging for scraps. This Church and its supporters delight in crowing over the fall of its old rivals while a far greater enemy struts around our lands unopposed by these bitter myopic opportunists. What do we hear from them all the live long day? "I told you so!" Where is the more courageous and necessary cry to our rulers about the foul crimes they are committing against our nations? Nowhere. All we get is a few pathetic murmurs here and there, like that Cardinal a bit ago, later passed off as gaffs or unacceptable heresy by the hierarchy. The Church of Rome will do nothing for us.

Protestantism is the root of all this shit nowadays, is it? Well ask yourselves, Catholics; What is the root of Protestantism? A simple desire to protest against the foulest of abuses, political, spiritual, intellectual and even downright criminal.

Rome's only argument for the legitimacy of its universal domination, is that little comment Jesus made to Simon when he first called him 'Peter'. Well, that's not very convincing at all, and will never convince all of us. What an absurd arrogance.

Roman Catholicism was a phase we passed through, as was Protestantism. We are moving on, and can never go back.

[Murphy]

Edit: Don't want to offend Alana.

[The Lawspeaker]

I wont even get started on the Reformation with you.. I have not doubt Alana, being a female, would have more success in convincing you of your error. Or at least long enough for you to jump into bed with her!

:thumb down2 "Whistles in disguist about the audacity" !

[Murphy]

:thumb down2 "Whistles in disguist about the audacity" !

I did edit it.

[poiuytrewq0987]

The divide between Roman and Greek Catholicism goes way back. It happened for a good reason. Because of slight differences in what Greek Catholics believed, they were deemed heretics and 'tis was ridiculous. Quite frankly, I don't see why we should follow the words of a mere mortal, the pope, who wasn't elected by God himself but rather by a pretentious elite in Rome.

[Crossbow]

And what to think of France, a Catholic nation, which entered into an alliance with the Ottoman Empire. This alliance lasted for two and a half centuries and was referred to by other Europeans as "the impious alliance". Apparently, the French kingdom, without scruples, did not see any objection to assist the Turks in their military campaigns against The Habsburg Empire and Hungary, both Catholic nations.

Read more: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franco-Ottoman_alliance)

[poiuytrewq0987]

And what to think of France, a Catholic nation, which entered into an alliance with the Ottoman Empire. This alliance lasted for two and a half centuries and was referred to by other Europeans as "the impious alliance". Apparently, the French kingdom, without scruples, did not see any objection to assist the Turks in their military campaigns against The Habsburg Empire and Hungary, both Catholic nations.

Read more: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franco-Ottoman_alliance)

Both France and Britain had a hand in ensuring the Balkans would firmly remain under control of the Ottomans. The British (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Turkish_War_%281877%E2%80%931878%29#Intervention_b y_the_Great_Powers) stopping the Russian liberation of the Balkans in 1878 is probably one of the most popular examples. Ironically, the Russians chose to come and liberate us because they felt solidarity for their Orthodox, Slavic brothers.

[The Lawspeaker]

Both France and Britain had a hand in ensuring the Balkans would firmly remain under control of the Ottomans. The British (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Turkish_War_%281877%E2%80%931878%29#Intervention_b y_the_Great_Powers) stopping the Russian liberation of the Balkans in 1878 is probably one of the most popular examples. Ironically, the Russians chose to come and liberate us because they felt solidarity for their Orthodox, Slavic brothers.
And because they wanted ports on the Adriatic so they could work on taking over Europe.

[Amapola]

:thumb001:

[Amapola]

I really do think Protestantism is the route of a lot of "modern" problems, even aside from the fact that it divided western Christendom. For one thing, it promotes individualism (read: do what you please and how it pleases you) and is of course by it's very nature revolutionary. Protestantism was always going to have major damaging repercussions.

It is true, Lutherans and Calvinists claimed liberty of conscience . . . but to grant it to others never occurred to them so long as they were the stronger side. Save for a few splendid sayings of Luther, confined to the early years when he was powerless, there is hardly anything to be found among the leading reformers in favor of freedom of conscience. As soon as they had the power to persecute they did.

. . . Protestantism, because attacking the great institution, was almost inevitably virulent against the Catholics and at the same time optimistic that on the basis of Scripture a new reformed Church could be erected, unified within itself. When however this confidence was shaken by inner rifts, the initial reformers were even more disconcerted than by the blows from Rome. Luther stood at the very center of this development. His own course was a sign, a symptom and in part also a cause of the wider sequence.

No Protestant can deny an organic relationship to Luther, any more than a Catholic can disavow all ties to the historic papacy, the Crusades and Inquisition, etc. If the Catholic must be constantly subjected to taunts about the "baggage" and "skeletons in the closet" of Catholicism, then the Protestant must likewise face up to the unsavory and less-than-saintly elements in Protestant history. Both sides must have the courage to fairly acknowledge their own shortcomings and the other side's positive, godly attributes.

[The Lawspeaker]

Ooh yes. It makes me wonder why so many people fled to the protestant Republic of the United Netherlands then :)
Including a lot of your countrymen, my French ancestors. While the French hung everyone that didn't follow the ways of Rome and it's eternal corruption here even Papists could follow their religion.. albeit under restrictions.

Protestants in Catholic countries:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/46/Verscheiden_wijzen_van_pijnigen_bij_de_inquisitie_ gebruikelijk.jpg

http://mijnlimburg.web-log.nl/photos/uncategorized/inquisitie.jpg



Catholics in our blessed Protestant Republic:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cc/Amstelkring3.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/84/Onze_lieve_heer_op_zolder.jpg

[Amapola]

Ooh yes. It makes me wonder why so many people fled to the protestant Republic of the United Netherlands then :)
Including a lot of your countrymen, my French ancestors.

Few historians of the Low Countries would deny that that at several critical junctures during the Revolt of the Netherlands the actions of militant Calvinists drove the revolt forward or destabilized the situation just when it appeared that a solution to the religio-political crisis besetting the region might be found. Dutch historiography depicts the Reformed as establishing their privileged position in the Northern Netherlands through a ‘revolutionary Reformation’ in which the Calvinists sought the eradication of Catholic worship, compulsory participation in the rituals of the Reformed Church, and a new moral and legal order, although they ultimately were only able partially to obtain these goals, since they comprised too small a fraction of the total population to impose their will entirely.

It is unquestionable . . . that the champions of Protestantism - Luther, Calvin, Beza, Knox, Cranmer and Ridley -- advocated the right of the civil authorities to punish the 'crime' of heresy . . . Rousseau says truly:

The Reformation was intolerant from its cradle, and its authors were universal persecutors . . .

The Protestants . . . were wrong-headed. They did not really think what they were doing; and this was chiefly because the real driving force behind them was the impatient insolence and avarice of new nobles and rebellious princes . . . The Reformers themselves . . . e.g., Luther, Beza, and especially Calvin, were as intolerant to dissentients as the Roman Catholic Church.

What makes, however, Protestant persecutions specially revolting is the fact that they were absolutely inconsistent with the primary doctrine of Protestantism -- the right of private judgment in matters of religious belief! Nothing can be more illogical than at one moment to assert that one may interpret the Bible to suit himself, and at the next to torture and kill him for having done so!

[The Lawspeaker]

Few historians of the Low Countries would deny that that at several critical junctures during the Revolt of the Netherlands the actions of militant Calvinists drove the revolt forward or destabilized the situation just when it appeared that a solution to the religio-political crisis besetting the region might be found. Dutch historiography depicts the Reformed as establishing their privileged position in the Northern Netherlands through a ‘revolutionary Reformation’ in which the Calvinists sought the eradication of Catholic worship, compulsory participation in the rituals of the Reformed Church, and a new moral and legal order, although they ultimately were only able partially to obtain these goals, since they comprised too small a fraction of the total population to impose their will entirely.

It is unquestionable . . . that the champions of Protestantism - Luther, Calvin, Beza, Knox, Cranmer and Ridley -- advocated the right of the civil authorities to punish the 'crime' of heresy . . . Rousseau says truly:

The Reformation was intolerant from its cradle, and its authors were universal persecutors . . .

The Protestants . . . were wrong-headed. They did not really think what they were doing; and this was chiefly because the real driving force behind them was the impatient insolence and avarice of new nobles and rebellious princes . . . The Reformers themselves . . . e.g., Luther, Beza, and especially Calvin, were as intolerant to dissentients as the Roman Catholic Church.

What makes, however, Protestant persecutions specially revolting is the fact that they were absolutely inconsistent with the primary doctrine of Protestantism -- the right of private judgment in matters of religious belief! Nothing can be more illogical than at one moment to assert that one may interpret the Bible to suit himself, and at the next to torture and kill him for having done so!
How many Catholics were ever hung, shot, murdered, tortured for their religion after the Alteration of Amsterdam?


The answer: 0

Very well. They could not have their services in public, nor could they run for office and it was outlawed by the States General but no one was ever prosecuted. No one even-though the sheriffs knew where the churches were. And Dutch Catholics resisted themselves fiercely against the French invaders just as well as their protestant counterparts.

At least in protestant countries we had Home Rule (now Tel Aviv Rule) whereas the Catholics always had Rome Rule and now Tel Aviv Rule

[Amapola]

How many Catholics were ever hung, shot, murdered, tortured for their religion after the Alteration of Amsterdam?


The answer: 0

The tradition of intolerance among Protestants did not soon die out. According to Protestant historian Owen Chadwick:

The ablest defence of persecution during the 17th century came from the Scottish Presbyterian Samuel Rutherford (1649).

In Massachusetts, for successive convictions, a Quaker would suffer the loss of one ear and then the other, the boring of the tongue with a hot iron, and sometimes eventually death. In Boston three Quaker men and one woman were hanged. Baptist Roger Williams was banished from Massachusetts in 1635 and founded tolerant Rhode Island (Stoddard, 208). To his credit, he remained tolerant, an exception to the rule, as was William Penn, who was persecuted by Protestants in England and founded the tolerant colony of Pennsylvania.

In the 17th century the most notable instances of practical toleration were the colonies of Maryland, founded by Lord Baltimore in 1632 for persecuted Catholics, which offered asylum also to Protestants, and of Rhode Island, founded by Roger Williams.

For example, stories of Protestant intolerance in America prior to 1789 could be multiplied indefinitely.

[The Lawspeaker]

The tradition of intolerance among Protestants did not soon die out. According to Protestant historian Owen Chadwick:

The ablest defence of persecution during the 17th century came from the Scottish Presbyterian Samuel Rutherford (1649).

In Massachusetts, for successive convictions, a Quaker would suffer the loss of one ear and then the other, the boring of the tongue with a hot iron, and sometimes eventually death. In Boston three Quaker men and one woman were hanged. Baptist Roger Williams was banished from Massachusetts in 1635 and founded tolerant Rhode Island (Stoddard, 208). To his credit, he remained tolerant, an exception to the rule, as was William Penn, who was persecuted by Protestants in England and founded the tolerant colony of Pennsylvania.

In the 17th century the most notable instances of practical toleration were the colonies of Maryland, founded by Lord Baltimore in 1632 for persecuted Catholics, which offered asylum also to Protestants, and of Rhode Island, founded by Roger Williams.

For example, stories of Protestant intolerance in America prior to 1789 could be multiplied indefinitely.
Your propaganda doesn't work on me. Protestant England wasn't exactly Protestant or isn't exactly Protestant. The Anglican Church is a copy of Rome and cannot be compared to the Lutheran Church or to the Reformed Churches (from which there are many) and even what they combined did is not a fraction of the HELL Rome caused in Europe . And ooh: before you accuse me of being a Prot myself. Guess what religion I was raised ?

[Amapola]

Your propaganda doesn't work on me. Protestant England wasn't exactly Protestant or isn't exactly Protestant. The Anglican Church is a copy of Rome and cannot be compared to the Lutheran Church or to the Reformed Churches (from which there are many) and even what they combined did is not a fraction of the HELL Rome caused in Europe .

Here you are! Dissensions plagued Protestantism from the start, even though one would think that a religion stressing individualism and conscience would be free from such shortcomings and would promote mutual respect. The myth of Protestant magnanimity and peaceful coexistence (especially in its infancy) dies an unequivocal death once all the facts are brought out.


And ooh: before you accuse me of being a Prot myself. Guess what religion I was raised ?
It's irrelevant. I am not accusing you though, I am just talking about theology/history.

[The Lawspeaker]

Here you are! Dissensions plagued Protestantism from the start, even though one would think that a religion stressing individualism and conscience would be free from such shortcomings and would promote mutual respect. The myth of Protestant magnanimity and peaceful coexistence (especially in its infancy) dies an unequivocal death once all the facts are brought out.

You do realize you're talking rubbish right ? Protestantism was never meant to be a unified Church and quarrels about the Bible kept theologians active and busy- looking for new things. It encouraged theology and science in that respect. And you're from France: the Protestant churches never lived off the backs of the masses as guess what: they came forth from the masses and there was no top heavy institution bearing down. What did the Catholic church do until 1789 in France ?

Exploitation.

Remember Galilei ? What would have happened to him here ?

[Groenewolf]

Can someone split up this tread so that the off-topic Protestantism vs Catholicism can be continued somewhere else. :coffee:

[Murphy]

What did the Catholic church do until 1789 in France ?

Do you really need to ask? I've said it once and I will say it again, open up a decent history book Tristan.

[poiuytrewq0987]

And because they wanted ports on the Adriatic so they could work on taking over Europe.

Wow, you sound like a Russophobe. While an independent Serbia would've undoubtedly become a strong ally of Russia in the Balkans. However they weren't interested in liberating Orthodox Slavs until the Ottomans committed atrocities in the Bulgarian April Uprising; that finally gave the Russians a reason to liberate the Orthodox Slavs from Ottoman rule.

The Tsar originally intended to have the Slavic states in the Balkans become strong allies of Russia against Austria. And do I support Austria? No, I certainly don't because they have always been one of the foremost oppressors of South Slavs.

Do you know where the irony is in all this? If Austria hadn't oppressed us so greatly and continued their occupation of South Slavic lands then we probably would've never seen the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand I. The assassination that led to a chain of events which inevitably triggered WW1.

[poiuytrewq0987]

The gates of Vienna have held before and they will hold again. But Europeans must acknowledge why this disaster has come about this turn. Europe must rebuke the Protestant "Reformers" and get back in line with Holy Mother Church or be swamped under the Mohammedan tide.

What happened to the Gates of Constantinople, my Roman-loving friend? The Romans abandoned and left us to the Muslim dogs after having held them off for over 1,000 years. All because we were terrible Greek Catholics who were considered heretical in your eyes.

[Murphy]

What happened to the Gates of Constantinople, my Roman friend? The Romans abandoned and left us to the dogs after having held them off for over 1,000 years.

Don't you dare act as if the Byzantines were completely innocent! The Sack of Constantinople would never have happened for instance if the Byzantine Emperor wasn't trying to rob the Latins blind!

And you forget, whilst the Byzantines were busy sitting at court with the Turk, enjoying their fine silks and wines, fine Latin Catholics were in the deserts fighting the Mohammedan with sword and mace!

The Greeks were selling us up the river. But we remained true until we could hold on no longer. We were torn from the Holy Land, and Byzantine treachery played no small part!


All because we were terrible Greek Catholics who were considered heretical in your eyes.

Yes.. hey, remember that time when all those fine Greek men got together, and drove Latin Christians out of Constantinople? Good laugh wasn't it? And remember when they tore the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour from the tabernacles and trampled upon Him!?

[Foxy]

Killed or discredited by allied forces and pulled away from power. Many of their offsprings became victims to brainwashing. Only my generation begins to change things and thinks different after the ideological misery brought upon us by the 68ies generation. It takes time, anyway. Those who are at the switches of power are members of the 68ies generation. Be that as it may, most Germans are fed up with Merkel and the pro-multicultural stance of our political elite. The Thilo Sarrazin case proves it.

Believe me Svanhild, I have seen too much muslims in Munich this summer. A lot of them also wearing burqa. I dunno in Germany, but in Italy it is forbidden to go around without showing the face, but if an Italian does he receives a fine, if it is a muslim woman who does it, we must be tolerant. :mad:
Law above all, I say, and law is the same for all... ar least in theory...

[poiuytrewq0987]

Don't you dare act as if the Byzantines were completely innocent! The Sack of Constantinople would never have happened for instance if the Byzantine Emperor wasn't trying to rob the Latins blind!

Rob us? The Latins sacked Constantinople out of pure greed when they were supposedly on their holy crusade. All because we were Greek Catholic heathens which is quite odd because Christianity was spread by the Greeks so there can be no truer teaching by any but them.


And you forget, whilst the Byzantines were busy sitting at court with the Turk, enjoying their fine silks and wines, fine Latin Catholics were in the deserts fighting the Mohammedan with sword and mace!
Please do enlighten me what the crusades have achieved. I can say one thing, it has achieved absolutely nothing except made Muslims hate us even more.


The Greeks were selling us up the river. But we remained true until we could hold on no longer. We were torn from the Holy Land, and Byzantine treachery played no small part!
The Byzantine Empire once stretched from Slovenia to Egypt... Where were the Romans when Alexandria (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Alexandria_%28641%29) was lost to marauding Muslims? Again, where were the Romans when Jerusalem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Jerusalem_%28637%29) was lost to the same marauding Muslims? We defended quite hardily but the emerging Arabs and Turks (and the Sassanid Empire) were simply too much 'tis like taking all of Roman Catholic nations and pitting them against the Byzantine Empire.



Yes.. hey, remember that time when all those fine Greek men got together, and drove Latin Christians out of Constantinople? Good laugh wasn't it? And remember when they tore the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour from the tabernacles and trampled upon Him!?If it weren't for the Greeks who brought the word of the One God then you would not be a Christian but a heathen pagan sacrificing cows.

[Murphy]

Rob us? The Latins sacked Constantinople out of pure greed when they were supposedly on their holy crusade. All because we were Greek Catholic heathens which is quite odd because Christianity was spread by the Greeks so there can be no truer teaching by any but them.

The Greeks owed the Venetians money! If the Greeks were actually honest businessmen and were willing to pay their due then the Venetians would never have sent the Latins against Constantinople. It should never have happened but the blame is not soley with us!


Please do enlighten me what the crusades have achieved. I can say one thing, it has achieved absolutely nothing except made Muslims hate us even more.

The crusades bought you time. Whilst Latin men were fighting in the front lines though, the Greeks were too busy doing God know's what else! We bought you time and you squandered it.


The Byzantine Empire once stretched from Slovenia to Egypt... Where were the Romans when Alexandria (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Alexandria_%28641%29) was lost to marauding Muslims? Again, where were the Romans when Jerusalem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Jerusalem_%28637%29) was lost to the same marauding Muslims? We defended quite hardily but the emerging Arabs and Turks (and the Sassanid Empire) were simply too much 'tis like taking all of Roman Catholic nations and pitting them against the Byzantine Empire.

I do not think so! It was the Greek's duty at the time to defend the Byzantine Empire, not the Latins'! How dare you try and lay blame for your defeats at the foot of Rome!

You almighty god-men were hammered by a bunch of barbarians at Yarmuk! The regular army of Byzantium was humbled by lowly barbarians even when the Christians vastly outnumbered the Mohammedan! Where were the Greeks at Damascus the very gate of the East? Where were the Greeks at a hundread other battles?

And at later dates, where were the Greeks when the Latins answered their plea for help? Where was the Greek man when the Latin knight stode on the walls of Jerusalem and swept the Mohammedan tide back?


If it weren't for the Greeks who brought the word of the One God then you would not be a Christian but a heathen pagan sacrificing cows.

What?!

Hilarious! Coming from a Byzantine? If it was not for the Pope of Rome the Faith you have today would be so corrupted by the countless heresies sprung up in the Graeco-footsteps of your ancestors that we would see the true heathen in you!

[Amapola]

Yawny yawny yawn. The Roman Church split Christianity itself LONG before Luther showed up in his attempt to clean up some of the mess.

There were indeed abuses but only after Protestantism, we had a NEVER-ENDING DIVISION AND MULTIPLICATION. There was to be not one Reformation but many, and all tended to split up into sects . . . Calvinism . . . proved itself incapable of disciplining the whole . . . possibly because the true genius of the Reformation lay in its conception of religion as a purely personal affair . . . The initial and lasting consequences of the Protestant Revolt are more than enough, I believe, to cause one to seriously question the premises of this upheaval within Christendom.

It is foolish to think that the Catholic Church was supposed to simply bow to Luther's novel ideas, rather than assert its own received Tradition and demand a retraction on his part. There were indeed abuses, and the Church dealt strongly with them -- to that extent we might be grateful to Luther, I suppose. But he wasn't content to deal just with abuses -- as true Catholic reformers all through the centuries had done. He had to "throw the baby out with the bath water," and so rejected indulgences altogether, along with many other received doctrines too numerous to mention.


There is no going back to Rome for us in the West, she discredited herself far too much already, and still does. If it hadn't been for the arrogance of the Roman hierarchy, there would have been no Great Schism in 1054, no conquest of Constantinopolis, perhaps the Eastern Empire could even have held onto Palestine itself, and withstood the Arabs
Rome is still in the West. You would be surprised how alive and well it is in some sectors of Europe, not to mention outside Europe where it continues to be a strong, strong presence.

http://www.andrewcusack.com/net/wp-content/uploads/bscov11.jpg

http://www.andrewcusack.com/net/wp-content/uploads/bscov15.jpg



arrogance of the Roman hierarchy, there would have been no Great Schism in 1054
Arrogance of Roman hierarchy? or a schism fomented by the ambition of the patriarchs of Constantinople and favoured by the Greek emperors? What's the difference?


Far from our rallying champion in the battle against cultural and racial oblivion, the Roman Church plays more the role of some lowly jackal, scavenging for scraps. This Church and its supporters delight in crowing over the fall of its old rivals while a far greater enemy struts around our lands unopposed by these bitter myopic opportunists. What do we hear from them all the live long day? "I told you so!" Where is the more courageous and necessary cry to our rulers about the foul crimes they are committing against our nations? Nowhere. All we get is a few pathetic murmurs here and there, like that Cardinal a bit ago, later passed off as gaffs or unacceptable heresy by the hierarchy. The Church of Rome will do nothing for us.
Cut the crap and blame secularism. All governments have in the last fifty years accepted large numbers of Muslim immigrants, who naturally have had children and grandchildren. The governments all supposed that they would be able to integrate such immigrants easily, through one form or another of secularism. The fact is - secularism does not work. The foolish arrogance of thinking that religion does not shape culture, that religion in general is unimportant, now has to be paid for.


Protestantism is the root of all this shit nowadays, is it? Well ask yourselves, Catholics; What is the root of Protestantism? A simple desire to protest against the foulest of abuses, political, spiritual, intellectual and even downright criminal.
It is indeed. What is the root of Protestantism? PLUNDER, the temptation to loot Church property, the property of convents and monasteries. The princes . . . could be spiritual as well as temporal lords, and all the wealth of the Church could be theirs . . .The greatest scholar and man of letters in Europe at this time, Erasmus, who looked with some favor upon the "Reformation" initially, but came to despise it as he saw its fruits, wrote on May 10, 1521, just a few weeks after the Diet of Worms, about those who "covet the wealth of the churchmen." :This certainly is a fine turn of affairs, if property is wickedly taken away from priests so that soldiers may make use of it in worse fashion; and the latter squander their own wealth, and sometimes that of others, so that no one benefits.


Rome's only argument for the legitimacy of its universal domination, is that little comment Jesus made to Simon when he first called him 'Peter'.
St. Paul teaches us (Ephesians 2:20) that the Church is built on the foundation of the apostles, whom Christ Himself chose (John 6:70, Acts 1:2,13; cf. Matthew 16:18). In Mark 6:30 the twelve original disciples of Jesus are called apostles, and Matthew 10:1-5 and Revelation 21:14 speak of the twelve apostles.


Well, that's not very convincing at all, and will never convince all of us. What an absurd arrogance.

There are a lot of things that convince people of the truth of Catholicism and not just a "little comment" (Which basically assumes Sola Scriptura). As far as it not being convincing, that's not an argument, just a declaration no more meaningful than "I like chocolate ice cream."

It's not arrogance, it's fact: Peter and Paul were evangelizing in Rome and laying the foundation of the Church . . . the greatest and most ancient Church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by them.

Who is really arrogant anyway? I'll tell: secularist rhetoric founded
on belief in the supremacy of reason and absolute faith in science and progress, dogmas which arouse ridicule in serious academic and
intellectual circles nowadays.

[The Lawspeaker]

Do you really need to ask? I've said it once and I will say it again, open up a decent history book Tristan.
They lived off the peasant, and they didn't pay taxes but they exploited the people on their lands. And that's why punished so brutally. And I actually think that they weren't punished hard enough.

[Murphy]

[FONT="Georgia"]They lived off the peasant, and they didn't pay taxes but they exploited the people on their lands.

I love how you wish to attempt and convey a sense that Catholic clergy lived like lords.. the fact is the vast majority of Catholic clergy lived exactly like their parishoners. Was Padre up in that little French village in 1325 any better off than his neighbours? No.

But let us keep something in mind.. what is wrong with the people paying for the upkeep of their clergymen?

These are men who have sacrificed everything in the service of his fellow man. He follows in the footsteps of Christ and gives himself up for men. I think paying for his meal is the least we can do.


And that's why punished so brutally. And I actually think that they weren't punished hard enough.

And here we have it! Tristan! Could it be you are glorfying in the pillaging of monasteries and sacred places? The destruction of priceless art? The trampling on of Christ Himself?!

The Church has not suffered enough? So you glorify in the raping of nuns? You glorify in the murder of innocent men who have done no wrong but provide the Sacraments to people?

Tristan I am glad for the honesty! I see you now.

[Murphy]

There were indeed abuses, and the Church dealt strongly with them -- to that extent we might be grateful to Luther, I suppose.

Something worth highlighting! We can name a long listof true Catholic reformers such as Saint John of the Cross and Saint Teresa of Ávila who worked with reforming the monasteries. Tetzel, Johann von Eck, Miltitz, Nausea, Jerome Emser, Julius Pflug and Johann Gropper who worked in the Germanies. And of cours the crowning glory of the Counter-Reformation, Saint Ignatius and the Jesuits.

These were men who truly understood what a true reform was. A reform of men was what was needed, not of religion. And brave men & women answered the call.

And I love how the same people who defend the Reformation generally speak highly of the Renaissance, ignoring that it was the Renaissance period that introduced much of the debauchery and evil into the heart of Churchmen that Protestants claim as the instigator of their rebellion.

[The Lawspeaker]

I love how you wish to attempt and convey a sense that Catholic clergy lived like lords.. the fact is the vast majority of Catholic clergy lived exactly like their parishoners. Was Padre up in that little French village in 1325 any better off than his neighbours? No.

But let us keep something in mind.. what is wrong with the people paying for the upkeep of their clergymen?

These are men who have sacrificed everything in the service of his fellow man. He follows in the footsteps of Christ and gives himself up for men. I think paying for his meal is the least we can do.
Exempt of taxation - indeed they were like Lords ruling over their subjects. And don't deny it. Many of the orders were completely out of control.




And here we have it! Tristan! Could it be you are glorfying in the pillaging of monasteries and sacred places? The destruction of priceless art? The trampling on of Christ Himself?!

The Church has not suffered enough? So you glorify in the raping of nuns? You glorify in the murder of innocent men who have done no wrong but provide the Sacraments to people?

Tristan I am glad for the honesty! I see you now.
If you live like nobles and forget Christ then pay the price like nobles. It's just a shame that they destroyed some art in the process as well would they could have sufficed with guillotining every single bishop etc.

[Murphy]

Exempt of taxation - indeed they were like Lords ruling over their subjects.

Religious institutions should be tax-exempted. And whilst on the subject, do not ignore that for centuries Protestants forced Catholics to pay for the upkeep of the Protestant ecclesial communities! They charged Catholics to not attend Protestant service!

Don't dare cometo me high-and-mighty in regards to taxes.

I what if they did live like Lords (noting that they did not)? Who else has a better claim to lordship than those of the priesthood of Christ?


Many of the orders were completely out of control.

Of course many were. And they were sorted. But not by Luther's hand. What did Luther accomplish except for the breaking of Europe and the destruction of the Faith? Who was Luther to rebel against the Faith? Excepting one or two points, the Latin and Greek Christians are completely uniformed in the Faith.

Who was Luther or who are you to rebel against this and say that we have gotten it wrong all these millenia?


[. . .]

You're digusting Tristan. Nuns have been raped, monks have been hung.. and all you really care about is artwork?

God save Europe from the likes of you. I am only glad you are not the average man or I would be praying for the hastening of her destruction.

[Wyn]

they could have sufficed with guillotining every single bishop etc.

You don't honestly believe this shit do you? Beheading every single bishop? Every single bishop was guilty, was he? At least be rational in your attacks against the Church.

[Murphy]

You don't honestly believe this shit do you?

Of course he does.

In the end, the battle lines have been drawn. Why waste time talking? When the physical attacks begin we can answer them back a hundredfold.

[Osweo]

Yes.. hey, remember that time when all those fine Greek men got together, and drove Latin Christians out of Constantinople?
I can't believe you are justifying the Latin sack of Constantinople?! :eek: Jesus Christ... :eek: That Greeks should gain your condemnation for booting an opportunistic plunderer out of their OWN city!?!?!? :confused:

You could have condemned the Latins for choosing to strike at a temporariliy vulnerable target instead of the REAL enemy, and said that what they did was NOT Christian (adding some bullshit that 'nobody's perfect' and you hope God forgives them this sin or whatever), but NO, you uphold them no matter what they do as 'Latin Christians'. Absolute petty tribalism, regardless of ethics. Yes, typical Romish standards, there! You knock me fucking sick.

Ah, but here's an interesting motive;

The Sack of Constantinople would never have happened for instance if the Byzantine Emperor wasn't trying to rob the Latins blind!

The Greeks owed the Venetians money! If the Greeks were actually honest businessmen and were willing to pay their due then the Venetians would never have sent the Latins against Constantinople.
LOL Hit Rome where it hurts; in the wallet. :....



Hilarious! Coming from a Byzantine? If it was not for the Pope of Rome the Faith you have today would be so corrupted by the countless heresies sprung up in the Graeco-footsteps of your ancestors that we would see the true heathen in you!
Yeah yeah, tell your Bishop in Rome to stop using the pagan 'Pontifex Maximus' title. :rolleyes:

[Lábaru]

Meanwhile in Sweden have invented the "mosquechurch"

http://www.minutodigital.com/imagenes4/mos/1.jpg

http://www.minutodigital.com/imagenes4/mos/2.jpg

http://www.minutodigital.com/imagenes4/mos/4.jpg

Sorry, the link is in Spanish.

http://www.minutodigital.com/noticias/2010/09/30/la-ultima-creacion-de-la-alianza-de-civilizaciones-la-mosquiglesia/

[Crossbow]

That beats everything !
The church at a lower level because islam forbids that the houses of the dhimmis reach higher than houses of islam. Can you believe that? It starts to be frightening.

[Debaser11]

"Little as we know about the events of the future, one thing is certain: the moving forces of the future will be none other than those of the past--the will of the stronger, healthy instincts, race, will to property, and power." --Oswald Spengler

[Korbis]

Catholic church always have encouraged racial mixing or atleast didn´t show strong oposition to it (that´s why KKK guys where not very fond of it at first). Isn´t that reason enough to bash them?

[Cato]

Catholic church always have encouraged racial mixing or atleast didn´t show strong oposition to it (that´s why KKK guys where not very fond of it at first). Isn´t that reason enough to bash them?

It also encourages, or at least turns a blind eye to, the mating of good Catholics with infidels and whatnot. So much for the church Constantine's sword and sedition founded. :rolleyes: Time to go back to the original religio Romana then, I daresay.