The Babylonian Captivity of the Church in a democracy THE SWISS CROSS WITH THE CHURCH
ways out of the Babylonian Captivity of the Church in Switzerland or how democracy defuses (September 2006)
The Catholic Church behaved in the Swiss democracy is usually far more cautious than in Germany, where she was after the second world war; than they would have been the stronghold of resistance, more offensive than in the Swiss democracy in society and politics intervened to enforce church law in terms of women's rights in the state tried.
In Switzerland, the state had until recently a say in the appointment of the dioceses. The parishes have democratic structures and determine on the establishment of their own money. The referendum of 1 June 2001, repealed the so-called diocese article in the Federal Constitution, which say the state was abolished with the establishment of dioceses, on the grounds that they wanted to stop relics from the culture war time.
Who wants to get an idea of what you understand Catholic Kulturkampf in hand, to read a comment from Surcuolm (GR) 2005. The new culture war has begun. The Swiss Catholics, the report of a "church law expert" from Surcuolm are, as there, a German bishop is quoted, "The Plague of Europe. That makes sense. For the plague is democracy, which grants also lay participation in church affairs and participation of their church taxes. According to the man from Surcuolm Church is the church, as long as lay people can still have a say in the "Babylonian captivity" while in Germany was praised God the municipalities already made harmless (sic) were. Read to the Swiss church law something from the diocese of Chur. You read that right! If you will be blacked out: not to believe early on that the clash of totalitarianism and democracy comes out of nowhere. > Http://nemesismemory.npage.eu/von_der_babylonischen_gefangenschaft_der_kirche_in_der_demokratie_12235317.html
The lifting of the diocese article was a stage win, the real fight will come. And since there are powerful new allies. The soft kicking the Swiss church officials is over, now it is blowing a different wind. The Catholic Church
mixes are so strong in the Swiss domestic politics as they would not have dared before the vote said. As the Muslims in England on foreign policy, so log on to the Bishops of Swiss domestic policy to speak and connect offensive against the new asylum law to restrict the abuses in the asylum system. Many Swiss who voted for the abolition of the article in the Diocese of religious beliefs, the culture war was also at the church past, may be surprised thereat. Nothing like the servility of German politicians from the church men, something like the dance attendance of the Social Democrats against the Catholic Church on abortion laws, something like the prostration of the Minister Süssmuth before Bishop tears ("the bishop is right," announced the verger submissive) was known in Switzerland has not to this extent. In the debate about the term solution occurred Federal Councillors from different parties fearlessly against the men clergy, both retired FDP Elisabeth Kopp, as well as the recent Federal Councillor Ruth Metzler of the CVP, the no ifs and buts in favor of the term solution without any nod to the bishops (though the latter the Repeal of the diocese advocated article) because, as yet, said former Federal Councillor Ruth Dreifuss, SP, the other day in the Jewish magazine "Tachles". The Swiss are good-natured. She said "naive"? She said this not in relation to the Diocese of articles, but in regards to the upcoming vote on the new asylum law, with its submission to the Federal calls for the elimination of abuses in the uncontrolled immigration. Ruth Dreifuss is as SP-wife against the new asylum law, and in association with the churches, the fight is massive and have turned the election campaign in full. Apparently Dreifuss hopes this time to the benign nature of the Swiss to allow the illegal immigration continues as before. The alliance of the Left and the churches are not surprised.
Unlike the new CVP Federal Councillor Doris Leuthard, who was in confrontation with the bishops not as pious as the church left, the church support is welcome. Not all politicians get in Switzerland, as humble as Mrs Süssmuth opposite the old church power on which the "culture war overcome" has to get him now to lead with increased force. The voice from
Surcuolm, which wants to lay harmless argued with the Bismarck law carefully and forget that Switzerland was also the time of Bismarck's no Prussian monarchy ...
The clash of cultures between the Church and democratic government has now escalated again, the bishops will compete against the asylum bill of the Federal Council and try to impose their concept of how far virtually unlimited immigration along with the left. The interests of both faith schools are very clear for the less good-natured people. The church hopes that the Muslim Population more mosques and minarets, that is more respectful of religion and elimination of religious criticism, as Pope Benedict has already explained to the cartoon controversy: more respect for religion (or less before the freedom of expression), and the Left expects more social conflicts and new potential voters, the social workers of both groups Group expects to expand and secure their livings, the interests are fairly clear.
In a debate with the SVP politician Maurer bishop (view v. 9.1.2006); he had clearly where God sits. The church has other long-term goals in mind than the national interests of the Swiss people, which is provided by the left under suspicion, to "xenophobic" if it does not absorb as many foreigners do like coming to Switzerland.
that coincides with the proxy fight for asylum bill the church take sides in the dispute and its minaret bishops open position relate each minaret is of course no accident. Bishop Koch will speak out in an interview with the NZZ am Sonntag of 3 September 06: "Religion is not private." As the prophet says. That even the recent statement of the Federal Commission against Racism (FCR) flanking joins with the request to the Swiss people, Muslim "values" to recognize, is only the culmination of a concerted action on by way of replacing the popular will by the will of God.
times we hear the Bishop of Basel, Kurt Koch, which can be assessed in Surcuolm white, in a dialogue with the NZZ am Sonntag. (For those who believe naively that Bishop Kurt Koch here represents his personal opinion, we recall that the organization he belongs to a so-called "teacher" has the so-authentic, for the Umma sancta as the Koran the faithful, even if some of my faithful, it was not binding upon it, but for the others). If what Bishop Koch says here, is not yet officially announced by the Holy See, then this does not mean the Bishop Koch does not say to what the Holy See, but that it will act as a test balloon, with which you tried, how far can the bishops' conference in Switzerland already. (Reside Still, the Bishop of Basel, Solothurn in exile, as the Basel bishop expelled in 1500 from the city. The cathedral, although since then Protestant, but change can the Catholic Renewal of Switzerland is also a long-term project.)
First, the Catholica, building on the left, which is interested in how the church to the rapid increase of Muslim immigrants - the church because she hopes that the Islamic terrorist, sorry, the Islamic "strong faith" is the general belief readiness with his own religious assertiveness, strengthen the left, because she expects a strengthening of their constituents-clients.
Also islamophile Tachles would not want to carry on regardless if it is to lay the Islam religion of peace, the peaceful people of Switzerland to the good-natured heart. In the same issue of making Tachles, in the three-foot this beautiful statement, one may also contain an item with the good-natured lead "is Islam a peaceful religion" to heart. Tachles the good-natured. (See Sept. 2006)
In a conversation between the SVP politician Maurer and bishop for the new asylum law which the known abuse to prevent, the latter insists on the "Christian charity", which prohibits a quick deportation of asylum seekers in non-occurrence decision. The Federal Council's proposed scheme is for applicants with no papers, no prosecution can demonstrate and do not cooperate well in the attempt of establishing identity. How many commands illegal immigrants who want to stay indefinitely in Switzerland to receive the Christian love for the country, does not tell the bishop. It is not the problem of the Church which does not emanate from the national interests of the Swiss population, but by the wishes of the Muslim immigrants, such as Bishop Koch minaret things clearly makes. What
Bishop Koch tells the NZZ on Sunday, 09.03.2006 testimony, already a powerful strengthening of his faith by the new partners in the Council of Religions in Bern, where together what belongs together.
NZZ, "Bishop Kurt Koch is committed to ensuring that Muslim minarets as" characters are allowed to build their identity. " He warns against equating Islam and terrorism and is upset over the handling of the Bundesrat Blocher with opponents of the asylum law. "
have now angered opponents of the asylum law every reason to be on the Swiss bishops and their dealings with the Federal Council. But as yet the Muslims announced in the Federal House Bern: "Religion comes before democracy."
time has come. The culture war is dead, long live the clash of cultures.
The Charity of bishop refers less to the women in Switzerland than the Muslim men who do this to build their minarets, whose needs are not the churchmen even so far as the needs of local women to respect women's rights.
"Can you understand the need of the Muslims?" Asked the NZZ. What
says Bishop Koch, he believed "the struggle over the minarets are ultimately just a fever, the expression of a much deeper flu."
Is something ill at the Swiss democracy? Who is sick? Certainly not Islam, is ill population, it may not like the bishop. Even the totalitarian left is impregnated the people for a long time to populism:
bishop: "I believe that the public simply a lot of fears are there. . About these fears must speak, that are very different "
So this is the disease - the fear of Islam among the population.
For he is healthy. Only the population suffers from something, "you say" what would have, but unfortunately, the bishop will not just talk about it, he would like a flu virus that is not more detail under the microscope, but only talk about the "fears", as the therapist of the perpetrators protection lobby, trying to dissuade the victims the fear of crime, according to those German leftists Antifeministin Frigga Haug, who like nachsagt the mothers, they made the children unnecessary fear of strangers. You have to teach the children that is a general trust towards all strangers. Everything else is "sick". In some countries not suffers from the popular will, has given the psychiatric hospitals. Recently celebrated the Swiss Young Socialists, which has twice in its history to this version of socialism, went its 100th anniversary. One hundred years of history forgotten. The comrades Dreifuss and Calmy-Rey were present benevolent. Dreifuss smiled good-naturedly, we wonder just how she feels good so with the anti-Israeli policy of Comrade Calmy-Rey. National Ziegler, a friend of Ramadan Muslim brother, was the candidate of the National Young Socialists. As found together what belongs together. Ruth Dreifuss What may think of the new Swiss neutrality policy towards Hezbollah? (It was not to be read in Tachles because Tachles one talks in Switzerland rather with Israel.)
NZZ hooked even after time: "Do you understand the desire of the Muslims?"
criticism of religion was for the Church has always been suspect. laymen are not pests at a table with the Bishops, says the voice from Surcuolm. So how will "talk" to the bishop with the lay people who do not belong to the Bishop table? We will see that he became very difficult.
Koch: "A minaret for them is of course a sign of identity. If one were to say to a Christian church, you are allowed to build a church, but no tower - there would also ask: Where exactly is the problem "
J awoisteigentlichdas PROBLEM! The problem is
Bishop Koch and his believers. Unlike with Muslims, which may leave the penalty not think without risking their lives, the Swiss sheep by Bishop Koch left the herd means, if the bishop throws at them, a minaret being unable to distinguish from a church tower and the message of Minaret not the gospel. But believers do not believe everything that says the bishop. The bishop receives much mail. Not only Surcuolm. See
> Letters to the Church and democracy Letters
some who voted against the Diocese of articles you may now open your eyes. For the Bishop of Basel shares here with not only his private opinion, but also of the episcopal conference, on this first cooking Voresser is used as (soon as Chairman), otherwise the bishop of Rome put it, who knew nothing at all. But now it is the different sheep on track. That is the problem of the bishop, the still began the predecessor of Benedict as the successor of Bishop bird. The man from the good-natured Emmenbrücke was among the sheep sometimes as a "progressive". When he was still in Lucerne and Solothurn came not in the true development. Some rub their eyes now, perhaps. These are the ones who were already short-sighted and voted against the Diocese of article because they wanted to be modern and not to live in the old culture war periods of 1500 thought. You should be aware that this message comes from the "religious freedom" for the religion of freedom not only from the kitchen by the cook, but that have cooked this soup cooks many of the Bishops 'Conference, in particular Roland Trauffer, secretary general of the Bishops' Conference. After one bird came from bad to worse (Trauffer is a very special bird, which we trust a lot.)
What Koch served hot here, must be eaten only once and digested by the sheep. It is prepared according to the old tried and tested recipe ....
Yes where is the problem with Islam! Bishop Koch apparently has none, but the sheep have fears and need to be reassured. The pastor also knows how to do that.
NZZ "must accept the Muslims that one wants to forbid them?"
Koch. "Inasmuch as I would expect that there should be in Muslim countries, religious freedom for Christians" After all, the Bishop here is that it knows what his church is well known, has long been well-oriented (such as name again, the Jesuit magazine? "Orientation") If "the Bishop of Arabia, for example .. celebrate in some countries no Eucharist "may, this is after all a reason for Bishop Koch, certain expectations of the Muslims" to exclude so far "not quite ... In this respect he is in agreement with the Islamic treatment of women, he would not again, that Islam as such is the language except as a certain "fear" of the population, must resolve that one. In terms of a healthy religion. No word on what is hidden so all in Islam and also open its appearance. The Shepherd is wary. In this respect, there again not.
now wants to know the NZZ, however, as it keeps the bishop with the minarets here and now, even though no "equality" exists with the Christians in Arab countries. The bishop can no longer that of "inasmuch as" dodge: Koch: "I would concede to the Muslims, a minaret have as a sign of identity can. Generally, however, I advise you to not only talk about the minaret, but about what is behind the conflict. "
What might that be? The bishop will in no circumstances talk about what's behind the minaret, his fears of public opposition. This could even restore a vote and the Diocese of article again and revise the federal constitution. This is the plague of the bishop from Germany. Who might have been? Meisner? Dyba?
NZZ: "You have this picture of a disease used." Cooking: "Yes."
MaW who does not accept Islam, which must be sick be. Most particularly so ill have to be the ex-Muslims. Converts are healthier.
Koch: "In view of this conflict is already aware of something strange to me. Our entire society is full of symbols, each club has its symbol, the state symbols, including the advertising. That's no problem. "
This is indeed very strange. The fact that pigeons have any breed club's letterhead, and any Kaninchenzuchtverein his character is not the only Dschihadreligion? Very strange that they do not like any rabbit breeding association shall not operate their advertising from the minaret. Where but each dove settling on may the church towers.
Bishop Koch also knows what is apparent in!
"It it's all focused on the religious character. "
Here the shepherd plays discreetly in a sign that Muslim women must wear on their heads if they want to be a whore released for Muslim men and rape. That the sign bearers with religious legitimacy as children and married women may be raped, of which Mr. Koch would not even talk, of course, for contrast, he has not the slightest objection. He'd rather talk about religion as such. Because "there is a very ambivalent attitude to the phenomenon of religion is actually visible, which is now in the concrete minarets." Now the white bishop from Emmenbrücke very well, that it is permissible in a democracy like the Swiss population, a thoroughly "ambivalent attitude to the phenomenon of religion" to take, and not just one, which is required by the religion itself - and not as a submissive attitude as that of the German politicians against the bishops. It was in Switzerland uW no politician who went to Churchill as Rita Süssmuth to Fulda, in order to make apologies for the brazen women who wanted the right in the first trimester and not a government druchgesetztes church law for all non-members of the church.
It is the people of Switzerland have released what it believes and how it votes. The bishops have so far not as loudly asked to speak as in Germany. But now a different wind is blowing. Nor Switzerland is not a Caliphate. Still not ambivalent attitude of the Muslims before the House of Parliament, the "Religion comes before democracy" in the sentence is reflected, not anchored in the Swiss constitution. This should also Bishop Koch and the Swiss Bishops' Conference to be known. Therefore, these Koch speaks only once around the bush, which here is served Sun meek and lukewarm, the one touch but not as the hosts, you should swallow it.
comes in the rejection of the minaret that is an "ambivalent attitude towards the phenomenon of religion in general to express ... Therefore, this rejection worrying so much for the bishop than the message. Which must indeed be comforting.
MaW Islam is for Koch & Co. religion in general. And he who refuses, rejects religion as ever. All right. Koch has no such "fears" as the population, he does not fear that too many cooks spoil the Religionsbrei could, on the contrary, Islam is for him, the wort to the phenomenon of religion in general. It shows what is missing the Christians.
This is even the NZZ feel uneasy, "the minaret dispute lead to an ambivalent attitude toward religion back at all?" The
the shepherd will now not re-told was after he said it just recently. But he would not be established with sufficient precision to what he meant. The sheep are to swallow the church court first and then digest. Not inspect beforehand exactly. Koch: "No, of course, this conflict has its own background." Really? Koch can not say well, the Christian free churches rejected the religion from ever ...
NZZ: "What" We now have the pointy ears like in the confessional to mitzukriegen that background to the conflict with Islam in the land of the bishop because so familiar. Koch: "I think it is a big fear of strangers. Islam is still little integrated into our society. "
Aha. Since it needs men who know how to integrate the. Whether the bishop who is not afraid of Islam, it is not as strange as the dhimmi population that simply does not want to get used to it, it would integrate better into his church? How about with Muezzinruf from the church tower? Thus, the Muslims also feel comfortable with us and not "discriminate." Koch admits now what he refers to Islam as healthy:
"He has a strong commitment"
can say that again. But he is strong and vigorous, as the force of 41 cops who were said to the great role model, multiplied by many millions. Since, the population will become ill, take an example. It could perhaps be that the admired the strong adherents of the powerful Muslim religious violence potency trembling with reverence as saints by Schollahtour!
Koch: "It is for us Christians, who are something of a confession-resistant, to a great challenge ....
The bishop has recognized what we lack the Christians who are not so hard from the faith as Muslims. You need to take one example, more Islam needs the Church, so that they can bring the Christian men into shape and set before the women following the example of the Prophet a strong commitment to Christian morality proliferation. The canon Dr. Grice (Surcolm) is already long been a thorn in the side, the lay people may not vote at all and not the church policy have genuine answer by lay participation in the hands of the bishops' conference.
Even in the asylum debate and talk shows in the minaret of the Episcopal Conference in how to confession strongly against the ambivalence and the Islamic resistance of the population.
"The problem is not really the strength of Islam, but the weakness of Christianity," says the bishop. What he means by the force: "If we could to our roots, stand by our convictions, we would open approach other religions." Which open to what God he says? More openness to Allah and the way to him, the Shari'a? Or what "roots" is to make Christianity so open to Islam? So what will the Christians go there? More open to polygamy? For the child marriage, forced marriage for? More openness to the murder of apostates? Of concern for the persecuted Islam is the question. Are indeed fallen from the faith.
There should be Christians who expect something more open to the criticism of Islam. But that is not expected by Bishop Koch. When the bishop says freedom of religion, he certainly does not mean more freedom for religious criticism. The churchman hopes for greater unity against the "ambivalent" Attitude to religion. Since Islam has a strong role model of commitment, which also strengthens the position of the Church against the Swiss government. The bishop is a good example of the obvious: "It's like a journey. It is allowed to cross the border if you have the right identity papers with him. "
doubt. It may be God does not forbid the wrong. For example, if an Iranian Christian who has converted from Islam to the wrong religion that Allah does not tolerate, with the right identity papers across the border to Tehran goes back where it gets to the wrong place, his papers are not exactly the right ones. It is advisable not to this to cross the border, but with fake that it still identify as Muslim. But when Mullah cooking as a friend of Muslims and minarets supporters is over the border, he has the right papers, you will assess and treat the man absolutely right as the right useful dhimmi. Now who's probably the longer breath on the way to the common God? The NZZ noted that the proper Christian identity does not necessarily mean the greater openness towards Islam:
NZZ: "All the more surprising that - at least in Langenthal - the resistance especially of very devout Christians from free churches is coming."
Au weia. So as if someone had out of print in the font. The free churches are the Bishop of Basel, much less uneasy than Islam, so they are democratically structured. Before Protestants is warned. Koch must of course be expressed quite clever. He must not talk away just as the canon in the Grisons, the seat of Churchill is even closer, was removed from the Bishop Haas now, but in Surcuolm to Hold the fort, to have come better times for the church again as this democratic plague . (Sometimes they chat away to himself). Our man in Surcuolm trembles with anger that the bishop has been made to the Queen, who has to say not much.) Koch moved cautiously on the ice and speaks with spiritual trained tongue in the Babylonian captivity, which counted the days of white democracy:
"I would not focus on this conflict-free church. Also we have received responses. Sometimes very violent. "
What he reveals what he really believes. He must only make the bucking sheep so believable that they do not notice what he says. No, the Free Churches and the Christian opposition from the Free Churches against Islamofascism wants the bishop does not come to speak of this phenomenon is to clean up when the time is right.
The conflict is not so much one between Islam and the Christian Free Churches who have something against Islam, but also one between the Catholic pastors who have less than the free churches against Islam, and their bucking sheep who have something against Islam. "We" have to get strong reactions. Although "we" have nothing against Islam, only to the fear of him ... We could have said that not really nice.
? "And what answer you a member of your church," the NZZ questioned nor does Bishop and cook slightly in Schwierigkeiten.Koch: "It is difficult to answer in a letter to it." Pastoral letters are so difficult?
It would be difficult for a Christian Mullah, a Christian respond to critics of Islam. Bishop Koch would in big trouble if he should put in writing, so that no one can say, Benedict had not read it. He proposes, therefore, suggests that the Swiss left the Israelis: An interview with Hizbullah. Bishop Koch said then, "one would have to engage in conversation" (with its sheep-Islam, that he is not got talking ...). "And can ask. What are you afraid of actually"
A fool who would like to "talk" with Bishop coming chef has himself to blame. Shepherd of the Lambs popular not knowing so, what are the opponents of the Islamisation of Europe "have really scared." Respectively. He acts as if he knew it not, the test balloon rises higher and higher. Not a challenge to democracy, it is the question. The NZZ
asks meekly, if "these fears," there are, "entitled" are. to confront instead the church official with the Essentials of the Qur'an and to ask considers how justified and how it really matter in this book, she asks eiertanzend to the "fears" and gives the church Mullah thus the opportunity to further long-winded ramblings about fears in general, on The talk was "difficult." In a democracy, it is much more difficult, the "fears" be removed before Islam as a theocracy, where you can simply behead the unbelievers rather than vote to allow.
Koch: "To speak of the rights of fear is difficult. You can not ban fears. One can only help them to overcome. And you can not with good information. "As the bishop but right!
How to overcome the knowledge of the Koran dhimmis? This can be "not having good information."! What then? With "emotions".
Indeed, it is not easy to let the sheep on her supposed ignorance of Islam. Sound cookery:
"It takes emotions, and encounters. Since the church can make a good service. "
She can. She understands something of high quality information. It also overcomes the false emotions and makes the right ones. Outrage about forced marriages, female genital mutilation, child marriage, these are all issues that are occupied by the wrong emotions, which also constantly try to drive out the left voters with the Abschreckwort "Islamophobia". Otherwise we always hear in the debate on Islam: "Do not emotions," the FCR was the "objectivity" and so contributed, emotions are now suddenly be out of place! What is that? It can only act for the fun of Islam, which breaks out if the confession is weak group cured of the flu. Then the real charity comes to Islam, the admiration for the strong religious confession, the real fascination with religion in general. It must be mobilized for jihad more emotions, ranging from mere respect for the religious terrorist, no, the Muslims have welcomed with open arms and closed in the same. Bishop Koch wants to approach the Muslim women even more frank, the look at the Kuffar always so loving, to this end, he would also know their concealment respected! For Bishop Koch is also a man of the headscarf, says with the Council of Religions for women, find it again to go. Read Only the paper from Surcuolm.
Koch: "creating forums where you can meet people of other religions." Encounter enough explanation as to whom to address)
critics of Islam under police protection.? An emotionally rich encounter of a special kind of understand Muslims, too much emotion. Which it is to gain respect and to prevent risks from them. The church pastors know the dangers. For example, terrorism. Terrorist is a risk not in terror, but that Islam in touch with him brings, yes, "that Islam sweeping equated with terrorism," as Bishop puts it, to avert the danger of religious terror, that even him something equate. Details of the religions are dangerous. Especially when you equate Islam with Islam.
"And here to help you have to differentiate," says the shepherd, and is equal to one example of his distinctive ability:
Koch: "Islam is something quite different from the terrorist delusions, there is."
They have nothing to do with the messages of the to do peace-loving prophet that are in fact so Christian, that Christians must be more open towards the Koran messages. Too bad that it was not for the NZZ can help.
that Islam is something quite different than the Islamic law, the bishop said of course not, because the daily Religion of Islam terror against women is the man of God holy, inviolable. Fears of Sharia are more than morbid. They are sinful. The firewood for hell, the vessel of sin belongs to the fire.
The NZZ, which has not enough cost wash, around to God's mercy and lets the cleric spout to Islam around and anointing themselves from him, without citing even a single sura, which could explain the readers what is at stake. Who repektieren to what. It builds the man from Emmenbrücke golden bridge turn around and talk about the bush, the cook served the church so piping hot - they would only pure stand in this mixture of mock Ignorance and islammfrommer strategy and a few tough questions, rather than let the drivel from the fears run wild, which treats all minaret opponents as ignorant and degraded as critics sick and ignorant cowards, while the man of God guards in Solothurn be true knowledge. These shepherds the pious lambs that received all information about the religion from the mouth of the male clergy who are in good care. The women's morality is prepared properly in Solothurn. According to ancient Roman recipes. (In the history of women's suffrage in Switzerland you could see what cartoons appeared in newspapers the old church on women, rather than read the newspaper to have children. That's a while ago, it was the time of the last world war, again currently at a time of understanding of the church with the brothers in Allah, who know also something of war and cartoons)
NZZ. "In free churches believed the Islamist terrorism is a reaction to a Christian values vacuum in the Western world. "
Yes what you think well of the free churches in the circles of the church by Bishop cooking! Too bad the NZZ does not ask whether the Bishop also believes that it is free churches as clueless in terms of doctrine and history of Islam, as the bishop was raised.
But after the terror of the Prophet asks you not in politically correct circles. The Free Churches seem to religion in the way of Allah not to want to "open" meet. You seem to know better than the bishop admits the hopes that the dialogue with Islam as the better deal of the discussion in a democracy. The Swiss free churches seem to not be so readily as the German pastor of Christ the King church in Bochum, who bowed before Mohammed even as good dhimmi. The model for the terror against the unbelievers is also the people of the NZZ not understand or will disappear discreetly. Just as the terror of Islamic law against women is not an issue with which you want to harass the bishop democratic. One would surely not the confessional strong image of Islam , It may also tarnish the NZZ? is
The fact that the Islamic Jihad in response to the Western world and has nothing to do with Islam from its origin, belongs indeed to the dogmas of stock of the Western Islamic faithful, to also Bishop Koch pretends to believe, against better knowledge of his bosses in Rome, and despite Best links of the Swiss Bishops Conference on Central, but why must also believe the NZZ it and can not ask a single question that crossed the entire church-Islam dizziness? Instead of asking the bishop if he believed that in the Christian free churches not know the history of Islam, which the bishop will know at least unofficially, the NZZ asked: "The (Which believe the Free Churches, see above) means that the Islamic fundamentalism is a Christian sometimes compared. Does that make sense? "
The question is whether it makes sense to place himself as stupid as the NZZ against a bishop, which is assumed here that he had not the faintest idea about Islam, or believe that none of his sheep, the has a clue about it. Tertium non datur.
The bishop may, instead of being made to make continued smart stupid:
Koch: "fundamentalism can not be fought by fundamentalism. That would mean the devil with Beelzebub cast out. "
(What a true saying that the organization of Bishop Koch narrowly should apply - you can not drive out a force propagating religion with a Gebärzwangsreligion).
we hold: the Free Churches are therefore of the fundamentalism of the only true! For Basel Kurt will not drive out the devil ratzekahl he so admired the Islamic confession of strength. Or he might want to say that "strong confessional" Muslims are moderate in their commitment to Islam? To Sharia?
Yet another good set, the Kurt Koch from the knowledge intensity of the bishops' conference draws: "Fundamentalism is a typical fear response to the harshness of the modern age." (Peter Scholl-Latour, Father Troll greet) In a good cook
is never harsh, there must be a good Muslim, have no fears of the Modern. Koch knows how to overcome them by the dhimmis Sun approach the Muslims with open arms, that they lose all fear of modernity and understand that they have in the West really no reason to fear the least. You need not even lead a jihad, they can take over without a fight. Before the Christians they have to have no fears.
Bishop Koch also knows how to "fundamentalism", although the Christians but have no reason to fear the Muslims (! It should not be previously or vice versa?) "Overcome" is by looking for the "causes" asks that "provoke" the fundamentalism!
The cause which provoked the Jihad from the very beginning of Islam, Islam is now the time for which the cause is the existence of infidels. Today it is the West. The bishop agreed with the Muslims know that something like the existence of Western democracies, of course, is a provocation. The Bishop of Rome knows that they do not provoke the Muslims, but to respect. Looking for a "Cause" means: not only ask about the origin of Islam. Unless the bishop is not a root cause analysis. He then says that the Christians "is present open identity" a! "The fact that he may take next to his path to God other ways. "For example, the Sharia, which is a very special way to God?
What should the bishop there?! He has just praised the commitment or strength of the Muslims as so exemplary, and now the Christians are to take other routes as a strong confessional? Should they convert? Or does he want to urge the Muslims to take on approaches other than Allah? To which he leads his flock astray? Strong commitment identity for Muslims and open identity for Christians? Church doors open for Islam, or what? Now, the NZZ is finally a little to the point:
"The Council of Religions the wearing of religious symbols such as crosses and headscarves recently defended explicitly as part of religious freedom. "
The Council of Religions, in which Kurt Koch represents the Catholic Church (without the knowledge Ratzinger? the hope of the lambs ...) does what was expected. The equation of the cross and head scarf - the symbol for the suffering of the dead religion's founder, who preached non-violence, and the symbol of the religion of Jihad, whose founder violence practiced and preached, and the killing of infidels called - is introduced to religion fusion, with the license to gender apartheid begins and ends with the full enforcement of Shariah.
The representative of the Catholic Male clergy in the Council of Religions of Bern, who defended the character of women's subjection to the man as "religious freedom" explicitly makes it unequivocally clear that this is freedom of religion for women subjugation, freedom of religious legitimacy of liberty. It is about the empowerment of Muslim men, even in the West the sex-apartheid practice, which underpins the right of men Islamofascism. About the degradation of women to subhuman in the name of religious freedom. Bishop Koch and the Muslims, with whom he sits on the Council of Religions to know that and do it. Also, the evangelical patriarch heads have no fundamental against it. Women are neither present nor desired in Männermoralrat of Bern. At best, Bishop Koch would allow perhaps a Muslim. They are also far more agreeable to the Church as Catholic priests.
On the rhetorical question of the NZZ, where the "limit was exceeded" the religious symbol, says the bishop, who has driven suddenly
"For example, Islamic symbols are used for to fundamentalist tendencies, or to legitimize even terrorist."
tendencies? Is the gender apartheid under the Koran, in which every man the power to rape the wife, Surat 2223, - is the identification of women by Islamic battle uniform that symbolized their submission to the legitimate as divine men will and imprison even small girl in a black hood and adult women, a life sentence under house arrest missed under the control of male domestic police force, a "tendency" or the woman submitting to the deified men will of the core of the Islamic Religious terror against women? But the Sharia is not a religion for Bishop Koch terror, at least not if it is directed against women. But strength of faith. Then the white
NZZ yet that the minaret is rejected as a symbol of the subjection of the surrounding territory. Bishop Koch comes to mind:
"That may be so with fundamentalist groups. For the Muslims, which I know is not certainly the case. "
Eijapopeia, I know a Muslim who. Islam is not so as they say. Pope Benedict was eager to meet Bishop Koch. Perhaps there are indeed one of the Swiss Bishops Conference, who knows the address? No phone available?
The bishop, whom we meet here, knows Islam well enough, is not it plays to ignorance, but real knowledge of the competition with which you have some fundamental concerns in terms of propagation methods together and from which one can learn a lot. And their efficiency can be expected synergies.
Koch: "It's about public stand by his religion to be able to. "put women in public in bags? The NZZ now says not: "No, Mr. Bishop, is about to publicly criticize this religion may, without being threatened and murdered for it." That's not like cooking them publicly.
NZZ: "Is your commitment to the showing of other religions actually primarily self-defense, because you are afraid that Christians will one day no longer allowed to show their faith."
Almost the mark! At most, the bishop feared that Christians no longer attend his church in sufficient numbers, even if they may show up there without hindrance. He believes Although not seriously, that Christians should not occur in Switzerland open to the preamble of the Constitution it is well known. The Jesuits are allowed to re-open show in Switzerland, the Swiss people are very good natured, it has also abolished the existing obsolete items diocese, so what the bishop fears of Switzerland that he needs strengthening commitment to Islam? The question is: What is he afraid of democracy and what he hopes instead of Islam, that is the question, but it's the wrong question of the NZZ. The Bishop knows full well that Islam does not allow the "Show" of the Christian Religion, where he is so strong as in the confessional Caliphate. He fears something different from democracy in which one must show the ballot papers have not.
He hopes to strengthen cooperation with the confession by the strong faith of Islam and the Christians who are not really motivated to show a faith they do not have. Using the Islamic religion would gain the Bekenntnisfreudigkeit the church Christians resistant motivate something? Nothing like the Sharia law has always faith-reinforcing, even to unbelievers. It brings the Muslims "on board", as does Bishop cooking it to the renegade sheep again to get a better grip. When it comes to women, the bishop has no problem with Islam. The Council of the Religions is a merger deal.
remarkable about the bishop's strong commitment to denominational religion is the openness with which he is held on the theocratic religion in democratic politics. Democracy is less trustworthy than the theocracy.
In the assessment of the religion-resistant women, there is agreement in this Kirchenschiffchen. It's the man of God not only to the "point" of the character of this religion, he is concerned with their unrestricted recognition in Europe. The Islamization must not be delayed by adverse criticism, called "FEARS".
If he says it is also about the habit of Catholic sisters, he knows himself very well that was not challenged, began to debate the headscarf - the complaint comes only from the Muslims! Should we give them that? - Make clear that a voluntary dress is a very different character than the women forced their subordination to the man who had even the NZZ he can. In this case, Islam is the symbol of female sex racism and disenfranchisement, which applies not to the nun's habit, which no woman is forced to carry more. It is also the bishop announced that no woman is whipped in the church if they want to not wear nun's habit. There is no forced recruitment for the monasteries such as forced marriage in Islam. A small difference. In addition, the white church official even very good, what does the headscarf, his concern for the nuns is hypocritical islamservil, in fact, he defends the subordination of women in Islam, which he hopes to opportunities for new controls on the women of the church. He is not about the freedom of the nuns, it's about the freedom of women in Islam, and cooking makes himself a defender of freedom in the name of a confession, the strength impresses him.
go Sooner or later, even the Christian religion, he claimed - as if their persecuted Muslims held by the West priviliegiert with special rights and, as would a state persecution of Christians instead of running at full speed Islamic persecution of Christians into the house. The rotation is as perfect as perfidious. Koch says the religious restoration and defended for that purpose the Islamic terror. Interestingly, by what means he intends to save the Christian religion. It is not with democracy, with which the Church has always done much more difficult than with dictatorships of all kinds. Islam is more appropriate to save the religion of Bishop Koch - and restore. Instead of defending democracy against Islam, the three opaque-looking church official defended Islam against democracy. Because his church has never been as uneasy as the totalitarian religious regime. "Therefore," the bishop logically "should we look a bit the same Boat feel "
If we were to women who have not yet realized that they are in opposition to Islam with the hope of the church on the wrong track, wanted something to remind it that: Who's with these churchmen. board "wants to" ship in a storm "as we hear from church faithful side needs to know that these are the men who let the women go first on board.
is now the Swiss FDP as the NZZ recalls, "recently put a ban on all religious symbols in the classroom for discussion." We do not think this makes sense. If the FDP on the occasion of this demand increasing Islamic pressure on public schools does, it's a pathetic capitulation to Islam. Even if you "sign" such as swastikas, prohibits mitverbieten you have to justify not just its own flag.
the headscarf, the women stigmatized as less than human, the forced marriage fight man to life imprisonment for rape may Koran and Sharia, shows no fundamentalist "tendency", but it is the symbol of Islamofascism itself, not its "tendency." As always, his carriers justify the concealment of her head after the brain washing of the religion that can only leave their lives to danger: the headscarf is for the total subjugation of woman to man, as the Prophet commanded them, and how the Koran commands continue. (Not "recommended")
Koch seems unwilling to distinguish the meaning of the cross of the headscarf, he relies on the Islamic terror, he does not name, of course, as such ("Commitment Strength"). Democracy was not enough to preserve its religious beliefs. Although it also protects his freedom of religion. If something threatens the freedom of religion, then it is not democracy, but Islam. If the bishop does not oriented - or is it rather well oriented and know how and with whom you collaborated. That it still
another alternative to ban all religious symbols are as approval of the signs and propaganda towers of Islamofascism, to this idea of the Christian man in the church office seems too confessional weak, would otherwise occur to him that the cross is quite different from the Islamic struggle icon. Apparently he believes himself not turn. Otherwise he would know his faith to differ from Islam, rather than religion as such in common front against the unbelieving people to swear - and against the free churches, it is much stranger than Islam. That the Catholic official who is about to lead the Swiss Bishops Conference, the Christians of the Free Church in Islam reveals, is a Beelzbubenstück.
NZZ emerges as the representative of Muslim needs and asks the bishop, who has just released the equivalent of religious character assumed:
. "How do you justify that a Muslim child in the classroom a cross in front of the nose"
How like the interviewer is since found that girls get served up in the public school as an example a woman in the Islamic combat uniform's nose. They remain to Islam quite discreet. The question what is the Muslims who do not cross "in your face" want to have to look here at all, why do not they stay in their Muslim countries and come in large numbers in the hated West, in this climate not.
Bishop Koch thinks but the other way. Instead of defending warn against Islamofascism and its landmarks and the Christian, however, he wants to equate Islam with the Christian persecutions of the Christian religion. Forward flight or hope for the restoration of its once strong denominational religion that would tolerate no dissenters?
The issue of the NZZ, as the cross "in your face" is to justify Muslim children is now so islammfromm and stupid, that Bishop cooking here for once not Islamkotau reply when he says he always find it a bit dangerous if we speak of a multicultural society. I hope he remembers the Council of the religions in it. But - the consequences this has for him? More mosques and minarets? He then speaks of the growing even traditional culture (that is to say the dominant culture) that one can not deny. Otherwise, you must change the Federal Constitution.
Finally a word of truth. Unfortunately, it follows from this knowledge no criticism of religion, which now conforms in any way with the Federal Constitution, and their representatives to understand already gave at the demonstration in front of the Houses of Parliament, that they stand above the Constitution and is prior to democracy! Whether the bishop this "commitment strength," says the out takes no other religion in Switzerland? That's obviously what impressed him Sun But what he carefully is silent in this interview, why do these Muslims profess. For the bishop feels "in the same boat" with the professors on the abolition of democracy and acting as if they were discriminated against in Switzerland, how to feel persecuted the church as seen in Surcuolm (an old complex of Catholica, tracker and Totalitarian always pursued in the secular state). Since the church is afraid of democracy, obviously, more than Islam, which they umbuhlt, she probably hopes on the help of Allah who does not tolerate apostasy, to keep the herd together.
What has forgotten the NZZ or avoided - the church official to ask, who is sitting in the boat with the Muslims and wants to save the minarets, the strength of faith, which can miss his flock: whether the Christian man has heard of the skull in Andalus minarets, built with Christians in the minds of the peaceful tolerant flowering praised by all friends of totalitarianism Islam? (Is also for the NZZ it is not easy to distance themselves from something that we sympathize.) See (> Letters to Bishop Koch)
If the bishop of Rome with the Bishop of Basel disagrees on what we do not assume , could place him. For example, appoint a cardinal in the direction of Austria and his time as bishop of Chur Haas disposed to Liechtenstein etc. Church careers. A popular papal practice. But Koch has to be auxiliary bishop or cardinal is not the same, the chairman of the Swiss Bishops Conference meets. For those who do not believe it: they can always ask in Rome. There are people who know what chef & co brewing after a Roman recipe against the plague. The population that is not the flu, such as Bishop Koch puts it, but also in Switzerland rampant plague of Islam. The cure for the plague, if we understood correctly Bishop Koch, the Chollahlah. We believe we have understood him.
This is an article from the acute Catholic Kulturkampf. A canon of the diocese of Chur-oriented about the plague in Europe! Here we learn how to do it democratically-structured churches destroyed and many others to know more. The Verfassser explains how the church officials must occur in Switzerland, in order not to arouse the suspicion that they are who they are. A great lesson for Kathakiya. Who will additionally know a little about the activities of Bishop grave and the grave-digger of democracy in Switzerland read in the church newsletter how to continue. The report comes from the time before the vote on the diocese article, so Kathaykiya even in times of Babylon. Meanwhile, the liberation is near. Allahuhu akbar.
or the needs of Muslims understand