If You Can't Trust a Priest, Who Can You Trust?

[Fred the Red Shirt]

And finally regarding: http://wdtprs.com/blog/2010/09/ground-zero-mosque-a-rabat-not-a-cultural-center/,
if Father Zuhlsdorf feels that we should suppose a 21st century Rabbat
to serve the same purpose as one did in the 7th century, should we not
fear the Catholic Dominicans as they are the perpetrators of the far
more recent Inquisition? Should we not fear the Catholics because
wherever they went they replaced the local religion and culture with
their own at the point of a sword, enslaved the local people, and tore
down the local places of worship building their own churches to
replace them on the very same foundations?

Mind you, the Protestants were arguably worse, but I daresay that
Father Zuhlsdorf perhaps does not feel that Protestants are followers
of the one true faith.

Honestly, I cannot remember seeing an essay with more self-
contradictions.

There is also outright dishonesty, for example, "Faced with the anger
of New Yorkers, the promoters of the project have started calling it
the Cordoba House, " In fact, the promoters have STOPPED
calling it "the Cordoba House", in deference to the objections voiced
by New Yorkers and others. This essay is dated Sept 10, 2010, at 9:35
am so it is unreasonable to suppose that the good Father is ignorant
of the change.

While Father Zuhlsdorf is correct to point out that: "It is true that
the Muslim rulers of Cordoba didn’t force their Christian and Jewish
subjects to accept Islam. However, non-Muslims could keep their faith
and enjoy state protection only as dhimmis (bonded ones) by paying a
poll tax in a system of religious apartheid."

He neglects to tell us that after the Catholics drove the Muslims out
of Cordoba they required all Muslims to convert to Catholicism upon
threat of death. OTOH Jews, who had lived in Spain before either the
Catholics or Muslims, were exiled.

So here we have an essay in which the good Father condemns the Muslims
rulers in Spain who were tolerant of minority religions while
remaining silent on the fact that when his own religion took over,
minority religions were persecuted.

As I have stated elsewhere, I condemn dishonesty, revisionism,
deception, and bigotry. Therefor I condemn this essay, and, though I
do not hold him liable for the sins of his forbears, ask Father
Zuhlsdorf to repent of his own recent sins.

There is no question that in today's Islamic Republics the unholy
intermingling of secular and religious authority facilitates and
promotes bigotry, injustice and outright atrocities against religious
minorities. But that does not justify dishonesty and deception about
the history of relations between religions.