Imagine judging Roman Catholicism by what one ancient priest in Gozo might say
I find the ignorance on display beneath this article far more shocking than that Saudi (Saudi, for crying out loud) cleric’s pronouncement on snowmen.
The Maltese people commenting all clearly think themselves terribly superior, yet in their lack of education they think it’s about snowmen, and don’t even know or understand that it’s about the proscription on craven (graven) images.
When I read through the comments, just before posting this, there wasn’t a single one discussing whether a snowman constitutes a craven image or whether the proscription on statues or images of living things is still relevant.
In other words, the same sort of discussion we used to see some years ago about the proscription on contraception and sex outside marriage in the Roman Catholic Church, before Maltese Catholics decided en masse that both are brilliant ideas and not a word has been spoken about the matter since – because a decision was taken, and not by the Vatican.
30 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20150112/odd-news/saudi-cleric-condemns-snowmen-as-anti-islamic.551624
He has a point you know https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txXHlyReC0I
It’s just what happened in Britain.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfyXUszMyOk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHdUgc6gxDI
As happened to Mozart in Germany eight years ago and what’s happening to Dante in Italy.
http://articles.latimes.com/2006/sep/27/world/fg-opera27
http://www.liberoquotidiano.it/news/rubriche/956338/Dante–razzista—follia.html
It is also one of the ten commandments. One would be surprised of how many common things are haram/sinful/wrongful in both Christianity and Islam.
You must be joking.
It’s not surprising at all that Christianity and Islam have a lot in common because they have common origins in the Abrahamic god of the Jews. Even Jesus is a significant figure in the Quran and Muslims are required to believe in him as a Prophet of Islam.
And Judaism of course .
Hi Daphne , have you been following the JK Rowling vs Rupert Murdoch twitter clash?
What is most shocking to me about this kind of thing is not the result of this particular ruling. It is the fact that people are brought up to feel the need to ask their religious leaders that sort of question and be constantly dependent on them for moral guidance, instead of figuring things out for themselves.
There is no form of idolatry or worship with a snowman. I find the idolatry within processions distasteful.
Are there not graven images of the Saudi King plastered all over the Kingdom?
Islam prohibits statues and three-dimensional figures of living creatures but can a snowman really fall under that category?
The Saudi cleric’s prohibition has to be seen in the context of Islam’s prohibition of images of anything which may constitute or lead to idolatry. That prohibition, in its turn, was included by Mohammed in the context of the pagan elements of the society in which he himself lived.
Whether creating or keeping images of other creatures, included humans, as decoration or just for fun can still lead Moslems – or any other believers – to idolatrous practices depends, of course, on their mentality and life-style.
The comparison with local ‘enlightened’ practices regarding self-control and contraceptives can hardly be said to hold water. The reason being that such practices are the result of
a measure of irresponsibility, peer-pressure and hedonism – the latter being described by Pope Montini back in 1973/74 as a ‘folosofia dell’ illusione e della morte’.
Pope Montini can hardly be described as being ‘one ancient priest in Gozo’ now, can he!
Irresponsibility and peer-pressure, moreover, can hardly be said to change white into black or black into white, can they!
It isn’t about the snowman. It’s the cleric who is the imbecile, who has defined the creation of a snowman to be the figurative representation of a human, thus going against the teachings of the Koran. The population should have just ignored him and built as many snowmen as they could.
Roman Catholicism’s point of reference is the approved Cathecism of the Roman Catholic Church, whatever an ancient priest in Gozo have to say, and for sure he will not enter into such trivialities as a snowman.
[Daphne – They have entered into far greater trivialities, like whether to have somebody arrested and prosecuted for dressing as a nun or a priest during carnival. And our law is no better given that it provides for such arrests.]
Why would one comment on the words of an Islam cleric when one is not a believer of Islam? The cleric made a fact of the writings of the Koran to Muslims.
Why would anybody, unrelated to Islam, find the need to comment on this?
[Daphne – Because we live in a free part of the world, zz, and because we are all interconnected. And because people who are intelligent, curious and socially engaged take an interest in what is going on. Football bores me to tears, but I still had an opinion about Ched Evans playing for a Maltese team and about Ched Evans in general.]
As a matter of fact I realise I came across wrongly.
Why would anyone not related to Islam be reprimanding a cleric of the Islam faith? While I find his comments interesting I do not believe they would affect me to such an extent expressed by people of the Times of Malta comment board.
[Daphne – People in Malta were still, in the 20th century, being raised in a culture of polarity between Christianity and Islam. The way the ‘Great Siege’ was taught (I don’t know about the current situation) to Maltese children and the way it is presented in the context of Maltese identity and history is a metaphor for that. Therefore any mention of Islam pushes buttons in the subconscious and triggers a Pavlovian response. It is literally impossible to have a dispassionate discussion with a conventionally-raised Maltese person about the subject.]
Daphne, the current situation is pretty much the same. I left secondary school five years ago and we were still being taught about the Great Siege in an Us vs Them approach.
Why is an atheist free to criticise Islam or any other religion but a cleric cannot comment on on his own credo?
The question does not even make sense because it is based on a false premise. No one is stopping the cleric from commenting on his own credo. Likewise, no one should stop anyone else (be he atheist or not) from commenting on the cleric’s comment.
Exactly. Everybody is free to comment on whatever he/she wants but this cleric is being chastised for his comments.
Free speech includes the right to chastise (verbally, of course) people for their outrageous opinions. Do these things even have to be explained?
And what qualifies one to chastise others? High opinion of themselves?
Also what qualifies what is outrageous? Outrageousness is relative and cannot describe anything on its own.
The cleric is commenting on an Islamic notion and not on what Obama can do in his backyard at the white house. The cleric’s comment are in context of the religion he lives, studies and preaches. Who are we, non Muslims, to chastise him for his interpretation of his faith?
I’ll reply to each of your questions, zz.
And what qualifies one to chastise others?
Birth.
Also what qualifies what is outrageous?
Each person decides for himself.
Who are we, non Muslims, to chastise him for his interpretation of his faith?
We are free persons with a mind of our own and the freedom to express our opinions.
These are the basics of democracy, and yet, they still have to be explained. I give up.
Your replies are pompous and arrogant and your definition of democracy is distorted and wrong. And if I have to explain why then you are too full of yourself to fit in any sense and logic.
My replies are pompous and arrogant? I couldn’t have been more accurate and concise in my replies.
My definition of democracy is distorted and wrong? I didn’t define democracy. I only mentioned some of the basics. To fully define democracy would require much more than a few short sentences.
I also love your logic, zz. If you have to explain, you say, that means I am too full of myself to fit in any sense and logic (whatever that means). It would appear that actually, the opposite would be the case. But go ahead, keep on dreaming.
An idiot even wrote “integration at its best”, when the cleric lives in Saudi Arabia.
That such clerics are given a platform on Saudi TV is very telling.
There is one arguing why women should not drive, or when it is acceptable for a man to beat a woman. You can find it on Youtube. And guess what? It’s how the law and customs are in Saudia.
As for that Gozitan priest, I still have to witness something similar.
One of the ways workplaces can be improved and undesirable behaviour stamped out is through incident reporting and auditing. This is not rocket science. Having said that I am still trying to make sense of this newspaper article:
”Records only kept for injuries on AFM members, but not on migrants at detention centres”
http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2015-01-13/local-news/Records-only-kept-for-injuries-on-AFM-members-but-not-on-migrants-at-detention-centres-6736128673
What about the Maltese Church’s stated view on Halloween.
[Daphne – There is no such thing as the Maltese Church. Malta doesn’t have its own religion.]