Muslim leaders should ‘take responsibility’ for extremism – Archbishop of Canterbury

[tolpuddle]

If i am not mistaken there is something in the pledge of allegiance in US which says a country ruled under God or something like that. So the actions are if we go by that narrative also one could say is done under the name of Christianity if do not want to create double standards.

If you now say US or UK or any other western country are NOT Christian countries but Godless countries, i take by my words. However when you do say that, that is also that my mindset changes and i do not look at them as anything that is ruled according to Christians values or even something that has anything to do with God. So that is the moment that there are no double standards.

Which will be?

I don't understand your second paragraph, but regarding the first, the oath of allegiance is deliberately wide, referring to God rather than specifically to Christianity; i.e. it is Deist, not Christian. I'm quite certain that the US oath of allegiance isn't specifically Christian, otherwise how could Muslims or Jews take it ?

Although most of the Americans who fought for Independence against King George III's Britain were Christians, their leaders (Washington, Franklin, Adams, Jefferson etc) were not - they were merely Deists, though much influenced by Christianity. They were also Freemasons, Freemasonry being a specific (and weird) form of Deism.

 

[Serinity]

Do you ever blame a knife for what blood a man has shed?

And Allah :swt: knows best.

 

[Simple_Person]

I don't understand your second paragraph, but regarding the first, the oath of allegiance is deliberately wide, referring to God rather than specifically to Christianity; i.e. it is Deist, not Christian. I'm quite certain that the US oath of allegiance isn't specifically Christian, otherwise how could Muslims or Jews take it ?

Although most of the Americans who fought for Independence against King George III's Britain were Christians, their leaders (Washington, Franklin, Adams, Jefferson etc) were not - they were merely Deists, though much influenced by Christianity. They were also Freemasons, Freemasonry being a specific (and weird) form of Deism.

So what you are saying is in other words US is NOT a Christian country ...that being said, saying God, doesn't mean God as their actions belong rather to Satan worshipers?

If that is the case, which means we judge based on actions, then also with ISIS those actions do not represent Islam as Islam isn't that shallow how to kill certain people with that also the people being killed (innocent people).

So in both cases if we go by that logic of yours, we could say not Christianity as well as not Islam are responsible for such people, as they just wear certain names and symbols and preach certain words, but the actions do not represent the religion they supposedly follow.

 

[Abz2000]

MOSCOW (Sputnik) — On June 11, the Iranian military announced that they had evidence of direct US support of Daesh militants.

"These documents are planned to be released. It is necessary to mention that these documents are not written texts or some kind of contracts that could be published in a written form. This evidence is related to the aspects of battle actions. This means that the evidence show, in which locations [the United States] provided assistance to the IS. Weapons, supplies, logistical and medical assistance — all these point at this support," Hamid Reza Moghadam Far said.

The official added that Washington itself had also contributed to the creation of Daesh.

"The fact that the United States is behind the creation of the IS is more important. They cannot conceal this fact. But even today, when they state that 'we have made a mistake, creating this organization, and want to destroy it now,' they are still telling lies and it could be proved by many documents," the Iranian official said.

Daesh has overrun a number of settlements during recent years as part of their declaration of a caliphate, especially in Syrian cities, such as Raqqa, and in Iraqi cities such as Mosul. The group is infamous for numerous violent actions, including terrorist attacks and widespread destruction of cultural heritage on the occupied territories.

The United States is leading a coalition of almost 70 nations fighting against the terrorist group in Syria and Iraq. The activities, including the airstrikes, in Iraq, are conducted in support of the country's government, but those in Syria are not authorized by the UN Security Council or the Syrian government.

https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201706221054872380-tehran-evience-us-support-terrorists/


One thing to keep in mind is that there was the IRA and then also the real IRA.
it is now beyond doubt that secularist gangs directly employed by the government of Britain have been causing bloodshed in Muslim majority countries whilst waving shahadah flags and claiming to be Islamic State members, this type of behaviour is characteristic of deceitful secularist leaders - the mother of which is the corrupt and corruptive british government. There was a british soldier called Frank Kitson who wrote a book called "low intensity operations" after the mau mau massacres, he described a method of setting up false flag deceiver gangs in order to discredit genuine revolutionary forces, by getting the false flag deceiver gangs to go out and commit atrocities which would be blamed on the real revolutionary group as a form of psychological warfare upon the soldiers within the genuine group and upon the world's audience including those who may incline to it and stand up in vocal or physical support for it.

There is evidence beyond doubt that the type of behaviour mentioned above has been practised by the british government - and much circumstancial evidence so far that the American government has done so too (remember the American plumber's vehicle with the shahadah flag which turned up in syria with a mounted machine gun?
Remember blackwater's eric prince training arabs in the uae after the American (u.s.a) government began to lose face due to his overtly illegal acts....much to think about.

-------


When Houston-area plumbing company owner Mark Oberholtzer sold his truck to a local dealer in October of 2013, he had no idea it would wind up on Syria's front lines being used by ISIS fighters -- with his plumbing company name and phone number still on the side.

"You know, it hurts my feelings, that anyone could possibly thing that we were connected to terrorism in any way," Oberholtzer told CBS News.

He says he was assured by the dealership that it would remove his information before selling the truck. But there it was in the photo -- which then went viral.....


....."You used to have 'Mark-1 Plumbing Inc.' would come up on the Internet," Oberholtzer says. "Now it comes up 'Mark-1 Plumbing Inc. ISIS."

He's now suing the AutoNation dealership that sold the truck for $1 million.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/texas-plumber-i-didnt-sell-my-truck-to-isis/




The plumber said a salesman told him to stop removing the decal when he sold the 2005 Ford F-250 in October 2013, as the company would do it. The truck was resold and according to the lawsuit was shipped to Mersin, Turkey, in December 2013 before arriving in Syria.

https://www.usnews.com/news/article...e-decaled-truck-went-to-syria-settles-lawsuit

 

[Abz2000]

Here's how the treachery of the enemies of Allah played out during the previous momentous event:

The Conquest Of Mecca (Makkah)
Posted by Discover The Truth

In the year 6 Hijri, a treaty was concluded (treaty of Hudaybiyah) with the leaders of Quraysh and Prophet Muhammed. According to the pact, Quraysh and the Muslims were free to make agreements with the tribes they liked.

As a result, the Banu khuza’a tribe decided to make a pact with the Muslims. And the Banu Kinana (Banu Bakr), who were old enemies of the Khuza’a sided and made agreement with the Quraysh. Part of the agreement in these treaties was that there will be peace throughout Arabia i.e., that the parties who agreed to the pact will not fight fight against each other, nor incite or instigate any war.

While there was general peace for few years, the Muslims busied themselves with worship and preaching the message of Islam. The old feud started again between the Khuza’a and Banu Bakr b. Abdu Manat b. Kinana. The Quraysh instigated the banu Bakr in fighting against Khuza’a, as a result many men of the Khuza’ah were killed.

As a consequence of the Quraysh’s involvement and the killing of the Banu Khuza’ah’s people, the conquest of Makkah took place.

Reports

Ibn Ishaq:

“THE CAUSES THAT LED TO THE OCCUPATION OF MECCA, A.H. 8
After he had sent his force to Mu’ta the apostle stayed in Medina during the latter Jumada and Rajab. Then the B. Bakr b. Abdu Manat b. Kinana attacked Khuza’a while they were at a well of theirs in the lower region of Mecaa called al-Watir. The cause of the quarrel was that a man of B. al-Hadrami called Malik b. Abbad – the Hadramu being at that time allies of al-Aswad b. Razn – had gone out on a trading journey; and when he reached the middle of the Khuza’a country they attacked and killed him and took his possessions.
So B. Bakr attacked a man of Khuza’a and killed him; and just before Islam Khuza’a attacked the sons of al-Aswad b. Razn al-Dili who were the most prominent chiefs of b. Kinana – Salma, Kulthum, and Dhu’ayb – and killed them in Arafa at the boundary stones of the sacred area.
One of the B. al-Dil told me that B. al-Aswad during the pagan era were paid double bloodwit because of their position among them, while they only got a single bloodwit. While B. Bakr and Khuza’a were thus at enmity Islam intervened and occupied men’s minds. When the peace of Hudaybiya was concluded between the Apostle and Quraysh one of the conditions – according to what al-Zuhri told me from Urwa b. al-Zubayr from al-Miswar b. Makhrama and Marwan b. al-Hakam and others traditions – was that anyone who wanted to enter into a treaty relationship with either party could do so; the B. Bakr joined Quraysh and Khuza’a joined the Apostle. When the armistice was established B. al-Dil of B. Bakr took advantage of it against Khuza;a in their desire to revenge themselves on them for the sons of Aswad whom they had killed. So Naufal B. Mu’awiya al-Dili, who was their leader at the time, went out with the B. al-Dil, though all the B. Bakr did not follow him, and attacked Khuza’a by night while they were at al-Watir their well, killing one of their men. Both parties fell back and continued the fight. QURAYSH HELPED B. BAKR WITH WEAPONS AND SOME OF THEM FOUGHT WITH THEM sexretly under cover of the night until they drove Khuza’a into sacred area. When they reached it the B. Bakr said, ‘O Naufal, we are in the sacred area. Remember your God, remember your God!’ He replied in blasphemous words that he had no god that day. ‘Take your revenge, ye sons of Bakr. By my life, if you used to steal in the sacred area, wont you take vengeance in it?’
Now on the night they attacked them in al-Watir they killed a man called Munabbih who had gone out with one his tribesmen called Tamim b. Asad. Munabbih had a weak heart and he told Tamim to escape for he was as good as dead whether they killed him or let him go, for his heart had given out. So Tamim made off and escaped and Munabbih was overtaken and killed. When Khuza’a entered Mecca they took refue in the house of Budayl b. Warqa and the house of a freed slave of their called Rafi. … When Quraysh and B. Bakr had combined against Khuza’a and killed some of the, thereby breaking their covenanted word with the Apostle in violating Khuza’a who were in treaty with him, Amr b. Salim al-Khuza’a of the clan of B. Ka’b went to the Apostle in Medina. (This led to the conquest of Mecca).”(Ibn Ishaq, page 540 – 542) [1]

Another report, Zad al-Ma’ad:

“The Quraysh helped Banu Bakr with weapons while their chiefs, taking advantage of the night, fought Khuz’a along with Banu Bakr. Their combined charge drove Khuza’a into the sacred territory where some of the Qurayshites said to one another: ‘We are now in the sacred area. Mind your gods! Mind your gods!’ But others replied imprudently: ‘We have no god today. Take your revenge, O sons of Bakr, for you may not get a chance again.” (Zad al-Ma’ad, volume 1, page 419, and Ibn Hisham, volume 2, page 390) [2]


Scholar

Shaykh Muhammad al-Ghazali:

“THE CONQUEST OF MAKKAH
After the Treaty of Hudaybiyah the Muslims busied themselves with the spread of the Da’wah and the presentation of the teachings of Islam to all who had understanding. Their faithfulness to the Quraish was visible to all in matters that they liked or disliked and the people could see clear evidence of that. However, the Quraish persisted in their old, stagnated policy without taking into account the momentous events which had changed conditions in the Arabian peninsula and which were about to change conditions in the world as a whole. This lack of insight led the Quraish to commit a grave act of stupidity, after which the treaty of Hudabiyah was to become null and void. It happened that the Quraish, along with their allies of the Banu Bakr, attacked the Khuza’ah, who were allies of the Muslims, and killed a few of their men.
The Khuza’ah sought refuge in the sanctuary of the Ka’bah for they were not prepared for combat. Despite that, the Banu Bakr pursued them while the Quraish lent arms and assisted the Banu Bakr in their oppression.
Some men of the Banu Bakr felt that they ought not to fight in the Haram, and spoke to their chief, Naufal ibn Mu’awiyah, about this, saying: ‘We have entered the Haram, (so mind) your god, your God!’

Nevertheless, Naufal said: ‘There is no God today, Banu Bakr, Carry out your task!’
The Khuza’ah were terrified by what happened to them, and they sent Amir ibn Salim to the Prophet to tell him the news. Upon hearing the account, the Prophet promised to come to their aid. … The Prophet ordered the people to prepare themselves and said that he was going to Makkah. He urged them to be serious and brisk. He supplicated: ‘O Allah, take away the eyes and the news from the Quraish until we surprise them in their land.’ The Muslims listened to the Prophet’s order and began mobilizing their forces for the expected encounter. They knew that the decisive hour between them and the Quraish was close. [3]


https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/03/23/the-conquest-of-mecca-makkah/comment-page-1/

Don’t forget to follow Discover The Truth on Facebook and Twitter. PLEASE help spread the word by sharing our articles on your favourite social networks. Thank You!

References:

[1] Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah – The Life of Muhammad Translated by A. Guillaume, page 540 – 542
[2] Muhammad Rasulullah: The Apostle Of Mercy, [Translated by Mohiudin Ahmad, Academy of Islamic Research And Publications, Lucknow (India) – Series No. 126 – Edition English 2nd Lucknow, 1982]S. Abul Hasan Ali, page 314
[3] Fiqh-us-seerah, Shaykh Muhammed al-Ghazali, page 406



---------


Hadith narrated in Sahih Bukhari from Awf Bin Malik who said that "I went to the Prophet during the Ghazwa of Tabuk while he was sitting in a leather tent. He said, "Count six signs that indicate the approach of the Hour: my death, the conquest of Jerusalem, a plague that will afflict you (and kill you in great numbers) as the plague that afflicts sheep, the increase of wealth to such an extent that even if one is given one hundred Dinars, he will not be satisfied; then an affliction which no Arab house will escape, and then a truce between you and Bani Al-Asfar (i.e. the Byzantines) who will betray you and attack you under eighty objectives. Under each objective will be twelve thousand soldiers".

The same Hadith is narrated in Abu Dawood with some different words. The Prophet said: "You will make peace with the People of Rome and then you and they together will combat an enemy. You will be victorious in that battle. After that all of you will stay at a pasture, at that time a person from among the People of the cross will raise a cross then a Muslim will get angry and rise to him and push him away. Thereafter all the People of Rome get together and attack you under eighty flags…" [Abu Dawood]
Imam Muslim narrates from Abu Hurairah reporting Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The Last Hour would not come until the Romans would land at al-A'maq or in Dabiq. An army consisting of the best (soldiers) of the people of the earth at that time will come from Madinah (to counteract them). When they will arrange themselves in ranks, the Romans would say: Do not stand between us and those (Muslims) who took prisoners from amongst us. Let us fight with them; and the Muslims would say: Nay, by Allah, we would never get aside from you and from our brethren that you may fight them. They will then fight and a third (part) of the army would run away, whom Allah will never forgive. A third (part of the army), which would be constituted of excellent martyrs in Allah's eye, would be killed and the third who would never be put to trial would win and they would be conquerors of Constantinople. And as they would be busy in distributing the spoils of war (amongst themselves) after hanging their swords by the olive trees, the Satan would cry: The Dajjal has taken your place among your family. They would then come out, but it would be of no avail. And when they would come to Syria, he would come out while they would be still preparing themselves for battle drawing up the ranks. Certainly, the time of prayer shall come and then Jesus (peace be upon him) son of Mary would descend and would lead them in prayer. When the enemy of Allah would see him, he would (disappear) just as the salt dissolves itself in water and if he (Jesus) were not to confront him at all, even then it would dissolve completely, but Allah would kill him by his hand (Jesus) and he would show them his blood on his lance (the lance of Jesus Christ)". [Reported by Imam Muslim]
Imam Ibn al-Muneer said: 'Till this time the incident of gathering and attacking Rome in this huge number of soldiers has not happened yet. This matter has not taken place yet. In this Hadith there are glad tidings and warning at the same time to the Muslims. This Hadith also proves that the result will be in favor of the Muslims and the Muslim army will be much greater than it is now". The Ahadith mentioned above are all correct.
Allah knows best.

http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&Id=83460



Sunan Abu Dawud,Book 35, Number 4234:*
Narrated Hudhayfah:
The tradition mentioned above (No. 4232) has also been transmitted through a different chain of narrators by Nasr ibn Asim al-Laythi who said:*We came to al-Yashkuri with a group of the people of Banu Layth.He asked: Who are these people?*We replied: Banu Layth. We have come to you to ask you about the tradition of Hudhayfah.*
He then mentioned the tradition and said:
*I asked: Apostle of Allah, will there be evil after this good?
He replied:
There will be trial (fitnah) and evil.
*I asked: Apostle of Allah, will there be good after this evil?*
He replied: Learn the Book of Allah, Hudhayfah, and adhere to its contents. He said it three times.
I asked: Apostle of Allah, will there be good after this evil?
*He replied: An illusory truce and a community with specks in its eye.*I asked: Messenger of Allah, what do you mean by an illusory community?*He replied: The hearts of the people will not return to their former condition. I asked: Messenger of Allah, will there be evil after this good?*
He replied: There will be wrong belief which will blind and deafen men to the truth in which there will be summoners at the gates of Hell. If you, Hudhayfah, die adhering to a stump, it will be better for you than following any of them.

*قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم لعوف بن مالك:أعدد ستاً بين يدي الساعة موتي ثم فتح بيت المقدس ثم موتان يأخذ فيكم كعقاص الغنم ،ثم استفاضة المال حتى يعطى الرجل مائة دينار فيظل ساخطاً ،ثم هدنة تكون بينكم وبين*بني الأصفر*فيغدرون فيأتونكم تحت ثمانين غاية {راية} تحت كل غاية اثنا عشر ألفاً)) رواه البخاري

Awf bin Malik Al-Ashja'ee said that the Messenger of Allah
*صلى الله عليه وسلمduring the Battle of Tabuk said to him:*"....




There will be Hudna (truce) between you and*Bani Al-Asfar*(refers to the Romans).*
Then,*they will deceive you (break the truce)*and will march against you under eighty banners*
and each banner will have ten thousand (soldiers)."
(Bukhari,* Ibn Majah)




11. Leave Me alone, (to deal) with the (creature) whom I created (bare and) alone!-

12. To whom I granted resources in abundance,

13. And sons to be by his side!-

14. To whom I made (life) smooth and comfortable!

15. Yet is he greedy-that I should add (yet more);-

16. By no means! For to Our Signs he has been refractory!

17. Soon will I visit him with a mount of calamities!

18. For he thought and he plotted;-

19. And woe to him! How he plotted!-

20. Yea, Woe to him; How he plotted!-

21. Then he looked round;

22. Then he frowned and he scowled;

23. Then he turned back and was haughty;

24. Then said he: "This is nothing but magic, derived from of old;

25. "This is nothing but the word of a mortal!"

26. Soon will I cast him into Hell-Fire!

27. And what will explain to thee what Hell-Fire is?

28. Naught doth it permit to endure, and naught doth it leave alone!-

29. Darkening and changing the colour of man!

30. Over it are Nineteen.

 

[LaSorcia]

I don't understand your second paragraph, but regarding the first, the oath of allegiance is deliberately wide, referring to God rather than specifically to Christianity; i.e. it is Deist, not Christian. I'm quite certain that the US oath of allegiance isn't specifically Christian, otherwise how could Muslims or Jews take it ?

Although most of the Americans who fought for Independence against King George III's Britain were Christians, their leaders (Washington, Franklin, Adams, Jefferson etc) were not - they were merely Deists, though much influenced by Christianity. They were also Freemasons, Freemasonry being a specific (and weird) form of Deism.

That is correct (as you already know lol). But where did you learn real history? Because I know it wasn't in the American School System.

Yes, satire.

 

[LaSorcia]

While there was general peace for few years, the Muslims busied themselves with worship and preaching the message of Islam.

Isn't this beautiful? This is how we should publicly conduct ourselves in peacetime.

 

[Abz2000]

Isn't this beautiful? This is how we should publicly conduct ourselves in peacetime.

It certainly is, in peacetime.

 

[LaSorcia]

It certainly is, in peacetime.

I gotcha.

But if we all did this more in peacetime...there would be more peacetime. Allah, please strengthen our imaan and guide us all.

 

[Abz2000]

I gotcha.

But if we all did this more in peacetime...there would be more peacetime. Allah, please strengthen our imaan and guide us all.

I had more time to think about the implications of your comment.
It is incumbent upon us to busy ourselves with worship (service of Allah) and preaching of Islam at ALL times,
But which peace time are you talking about.
Or is it the case that some people get upset when the false propaganda of the enemies of Allah against Islam and Muslims begins to fall apart and their false justifications for unjust bloodshed begin to collapse, and so they schneidily attempt to portray those who set the record straight as mischief-mongers?


Or maybe some mischief-mongers prefer to pretend that all is well when they have warplanes and thousands of soldiers busy killing Muslims without just cause?
Maybe you and your family feel safe and secure in such impressions and are unable to comprehend what the millions of victims and their families are feeling.

 

[LaSorcia]

I had more time to think about the implications of your comment.
It is incumbent upon us to busy ourselves with worship (service of Allah) and preaching of Islam at ALL times,
But which peace time are you talking about.
Or is it the case that some people get upset when the false propaganda of the enemies of Allah against Islam and Muslims begins to fall apart and their false justifications for unjust bloodshed begin to collapse, and so they schneidily attempt to portray those who set the record straight as mischief-mongers?


Or maybe some mischief-mongers prefer to pretend that all is well when they have warplanes and thousands of soldiers busy killing Muslims without just cause?
Maybe you and your family feel safe and secure in such impressions and are unable to comprehend what the millions of victims and their families are feeling.

Thanks for taking the time to think about my comment.

I just meant it as straightforward a it sounds.

 

[Huzaifah ibn Adam]

To those who complain about "extremism", I have a question:

Define extremism.

 

[Abz2000]

Thanks for taking the time to think about my comment.

I just meant it as straightforward a it sounds.

There is no need to thank me in order to come across as polite and courteous.
I did ask a question of you for which I would like a reply - that would be more near to courtesy since it has become normal for people to look into depth at what I am saying or implying whilst diverting the topic of discussion on superficial debate without any depth.

Which peace time are you alluding to in your quotes?

 

[Abz2000]

To those who complain about "extremism", I have a question:

Define extremism.

Extremism as defined by Allah's messenger is going to unreasonable and excessive lengths in ritualistic practice whilst neglecting priorities enjoined by God.

Moderation is being a person in complete submission to Allah and living life as a true Muslim believer to the best of one's ability. Moderation includes living as a muslim, practicing the obligatory rituals enjoined by Allah, practicing some non- obligatory rituals when circumstances permit whilst keeping priorities in mind, earning halal when one is able to work, and also includes jihaad (striving ones utmost in Allah's way in order to make the word of Allah highest by establishing Islam in oneself, family, and community according to one's ability and circumstances.

Transgressing beyond bounds is transgressing the limits of Allah.

 

[LaSorcia]

There is no need to thank me in order to come across as polite and courteous.
I did ask a question of you for which I would like a reply - that would be more near to courtesy since it has become normal for people to look into depth at what I am saying or implying whilst diverting the topic of discussion on superficial debate without any depth.

Which peace time are you alluding to in your quotes?

I'm talking about times of personal peace. That might be in the midst of pleasant or unpleasant circumstances. That might be in a time of war or a time of truce.

 

[Abz2000]

I'm talking about times of personal peace. That might be in the midst of pleasant or unpleasant circumstances. That might be in a time of war or a time of truce.

I see, I only asked because I infered that you were trying to imply that
1. there currently exists real peace and that secularist America and it's allies were adhering to a truce and are not seeking new causes to foment injustice and unnecessary bloodshed.
2. That people who were clarifying issues and taking part in informing the masses of the real state of affairs were somehow doing something wrong since all is peaceful.

But i realize now that as you appear to claim, you were just making a statement about a situation that doesn't really mean peace. I hope we can return from the unreal imaginary to the real and just truth since we appear to have digressed vastly from pointing out facts and looking into the issues and causes for the current bloodshed so that we can see truth as truth and falsehood as falsehood in order to react properly to false accusations rather than continue to cheer on fabricated justifications for unnecessary bloodshed and injustice.
I really do believe that the minds of the masses are a great part of the process and can play a huge role in setting things right once the falsehood, confusion and truth become clear; that the political situation has an effect on our spiritual state; and is a determining factor in how many make it to paradise and how many end up in hell.

 

[Abz2000]

I hope that some of the above has gone towards dispelling the myth and accusation insinuated by the archbishop of canterbury that "Muslim leaders" (as if his corrupt handlers agree with such a concept as actual Islamic leadership) should somehow take responsibility for "extremism" (as if he knows what it is).

The facts speak for themselves, the archbishop's handlers in buckingham palace and downing street are guilty of corruption and are drowning in it.

 

[Samiul123]

Honestly we need more unity right now more than ever

 

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you Samiul123;

Honestly we need more unity right now more than ever

I absolutely agree with you, but Unity is a challenging word, I am a Catholic and you are a Muslim. I feel there is always hope, our bishop recently offered prayers and friendship for the local Muslim community. You might be interested to read about our bishop's recent visit to Abu Bakr Mosque, Southampton.


MESSAGE TO MEMBERS OF THE ABU BAKR MOSQUE
Dear Friends, I thank you for the huge joy and privilege of visiting your
beautiful Abu Bakr mosque today. I am Bishop Philip Egan, the Catholic
Bishop of Portsmouth. Originally I come from Manchester and so I do ask
your prayers for the people of that city, after the terrible bombing last
week. But I live in Portsmouth and our Diocese is a big one. It has
235,000 Catholics. It covers the south coast along to Bournemouth and
stretches north to Reading and Oxford. So on behalf of all Catholic
Christians in this region, I offer you today our sincerest greetings and
prayers for a Happy Ramadan. Ramadan Mubarak!
This morning in Rome, our Pope, Pope Francis, has just sent a special
message to all our Muslim friends across the world, to assure you of our
prayers during this time of fasting, prayer and charity. The theme of his
message is Care of our Common Home. For as Catholics, we are deeply
concerned about the damage our modern lifestyles are causing to the
environment in which we live, and also the disorder these lifestyles bring
to our families and human relations. Both Muslims and Catholics believe
the Earth is holy; it belongs to God. It’s His work and so we must treat it
with respect. So let us pray that the ecological crisis humanity is facing
will call everyone in the world to a profound interior conversion, and to a
renewed care for the Earth, our common home.
Let me add one more thought. Great Britain is a highly secular society.
Yet you and I, Muslims and Christians, we are people of religion, faith and
spirituality. We believe in God, and we believe that every human being is
called to know Him, serve Him and love Him, to worship Him and to
respect Him, and to find in Him ultimate happiness. It’s our task to
witness to this in society, so that other people, those who say they have
no religion, those who say they’re not sure, those who are lost or on the
margins, can find their way home to Him. This is why I’d like to ask you
to pray also for us Christians, as we pray for you. Together, we have an
important task in society and so we need to be strong, solid, authentic in
our religion: in a word, holy. Indeed, it’s crucial for the well-being and the
future of our land, and something to think about as we prepare for the
General Election next week.
So thank you for listening. Thank you for your kind and warm welcome.
Thank you for giving me the enormous joy and privilege of saying these
few words to you in your Abu Bakr mosque. Ramadan Mubarak! Please
pray for me, and for the Catholic community here in Southampton and
across our whole diocese. We are praying for you.

Blessings and peace be with you all,

Eric

 

[TDWT]

To those who complain about "extremism", I have a question:

Define extremism.

Extremism, people mean the likes of Bin Laden and Isis who condone attacking innocent civilians through bombs and explosions.

Now, I know what you're going to say: "Why don't your criticize western powers for stuff like airstrikes?"

And here is my response: "Of course I am vocal and a critique of airstrikes done by those powers. I condemn terrorism whether it comes from air/drone strikes or the likes of Bin Laden and Isis.