Muslim Cannot Stand Mary Statue

[Ikutiera]

MUSLIM CANNOT STAND MARY STATUE IN FRONT OF HOME, WALLS IT IN

(AGI) - Milan, Aug 21 - He couldn't stand the statue of the Virgin Mary in front of his home, as it offended his religious conscience. For this reason, he walled her in, to end that affront once and for all. This took place in Cascina Rimoldo a Valaperta di Casatenovo, a small village in the province of Lecco almost on the border with the province of Milan. The action, reported by online paper 'Merateonline', was undertaken by a Muslim non-EU citizen who had recently arrived and settled down with some of his compatriots. He had immediately manifested his intolerance for that statue with its arms open as if welcoming its children. Only the action of two women prevented the statue from being walled in, while nothing could be done for the two angels who were beside the statue. The niche containing the Virgin, one of the oldest, dated back to the mid-1800s. A small statue given devotion and respect, even by non-believers. The man had initially begun to manifest his contrariety only with nasty words aimed at the statue, and finally acted upon his thoughts. When he was surprised by the two women who asked him to explain his action, the man replied that he did not believe in that statue at all, that it had no value and did not want to meet her gaze every time he was returning home. Only the insistence of one of the two elderly women permitted him to return the Virgin, removing her from the 'tomb' in which she was being walled in.

AGI News on

ilGiornale.it - Musulmano mura la Madonna, il paese si ribella - n. 197 del 22-08-2007

Dispatch from the Eurabian Front: Italy, Flanders, the Netherlands, France, Britain | The Brussels Journal

[svin]

Bastard.

[Marcus Marulus]

It is a clear sign of degeneracy of Europe. For such behaviour he should have been kicked in the butt by the locals and catapulted back to Morocco, or wherever he comes from. People are these days so estranged from each other, form their culture and legacy, from any sense of honour, that they allow outisders to defile something that is so sacred to them.

Is it some sort of destructive individual egoism, or certain over-civilizedness, that prevents people from acting in self-defence, even when the instruments of the civilization (ie. institutions) that are supposed to protect local communities from such impertinent intruders, are ineffective, dead or indolent?

Originally Posted by svin

Bastard.

Yes, he is a bastard and the inhabitants of that town are shameless cowards.

[BeornWulfWer]

It does make you think how the minds of this man,and others of his ilk,think they will achieve by acting as they do?

I would'nt dream of going to his country and removing his sacred statues.
The fact this man thought he could get away with doing this, is an example of how these "foreigners" will-and do- act upon arrival into our countries.

Absolutely disgusting behaviour.

[kimm]

Sickening and disgraceful behaviour.

Once again I'm disappointed and shocked by the willingness of people to allow their faith and culture to be trampled on. Or their indifference for that matter.

If roles were reversed, I doubt the equvilent action by a forgeiner would be taken so lightly in an Islamic country.

[BeornWulfWer]

Originally Posted by kimm

If roles were reversed, I doubt the equvilent action by a forgeiner would be taken so lightly in an Islamic country.

Exactly!
The perpetrator would no doubt be harshly punished by the governing law.
(that is of course, you make it alive through the masses of angry people wanting to tear you apart for such lack of respect to their sacred values and customs)

Such is the irony.

[Carnyx]

So typical... No embarrassment for Muslims to make themselves at home (which is not even theirs), it's a second nature.

Eh for a non-Muslim to do significant damage to any Islamic building, they'd need a bulldozer or bombs to execute the deed. Muslims are so insecure they need to control everything and that includes building humongous mosques that dwarf all other buildings around them. Even the smaller places of worship*, called suraus, are relatively big and can accomodate dozens.
* Not including "prayer" rooms in non-religous buildings.

[Menydh]

The Marian Cult is very significative, as it is deeply entrenched in European Tradition of ancient. Early Christians in the Middle East did not have a cult for Mary. The cult of Mary was adapted from ancient European pagan cults of the mother-goddess, mother-earth.

It was one of the accusations that many Reformists launched against Rome, that of being paganistic.

The view from Evangelical Lutherans leaves little doubt about it: "Mary-worship is reheated paganism!"

Which again proves the semitic roots of the Evangelicals and other Protestants.

Long before the Reformation, other heresies also rejected and attacked the Marian Cult and the Trinity. And at least in one case it proved a source to connivance with Islam against Christendom.

[Carnyx]

Yeah the best things in Christianism are actually pre-Christian, the remaining, the ME element, sucks.

[Marcus Marulus]

Originally Posted by Carnyx

Yeah the best things in Christianism are actually pre-Christian, the remaining, the ME element, sucks.

And what is this Middle Eastern influence, if I may ask?

[Carnyx]

Originally Posted by Plethon

And what is this Middle Eastern influence, if I may ask?

Not influence, but ME element I said. It is actually the pre-christian religions (what you would call "paganism") of the native europeans which have influenced Christianism, not the other way around. There's a nuance in it.
Sure, you may ask. Very briefly... take its very origin for instance, even though it developped in Europe, it was born in Palestine. The Christ himself was a semite (ethno-culturaly). He spoke Aramean, didn't? And he wasn't a blonde aryan Gallic. The holy writings are full of references (people, etc.) that are no way connected to Europe. The Jews were the elected people of God. Again, hardly Europeans me thinks. You simply can't deny the foreign source of Christianism.

[Marcus Marulus]

Originally Posted by Carnyx

Not influence, but ME element I said. It is actually the pre-christian religions (what you would call "paganism") of the native europeans which have influenced Christianism, not the other way around. There's a nuance in it.

Yes, that is correct, and I prefer this traditional Christianity, with its saints and festivities, often connected with natural cycles, seasons, nature in general (though many of these elements might have been taken from pre-Christian beliefs), to some Judaized variety thereof, with all indigenous elements extracted (aka Calvinism in the last instance). Maybe that Christianity had more life in itself, maybe it is exactly the purging of indigenous elements that brought it to its present state of decline.

When I say "traditional", I mean both traditional in dogmas and traditional i its connection with the local culture.

Originally Posted by Carnyx

Sure, you may ask. Very briefly... take its very origin for instance, even though it developped in Europe, it was born in Palestine.

Correct.

Originally Posted by Carnyx

The Christ himself was a semite (ethno-culturaly). He spoke Aramean, didn't?

Yes, and? So what? His message was universal. The Semites in Palestine did not accept it, apart from the few...

Originally Posted by Carnyx

The holy writings are full of references (people, etc.) that are no way connected to Europe.

We have also Arabic numbers, paper (from China), different plant that we use as comestibles, which are not from Europe etc.

Originally Posted by Carnyx

The Jews were the elected people of God.

They were the chosen people. The past tense is important here. Some self-styled "Christians" today think that the Jews are, in some mysterious ways, still a chosen people. It is not Christianity, but a deviation therefrom.

They were given a universal message which they were supposed to spread throughout the world. They refused that message, failed in that mission. The essence of Christians' using the Old Testament is not worshipping Jews/Israelites (it is questionable whether the Jes of today can be identified with the OT Israelites) as a "chosen people", but an allegory/example of how people, even when given a message of God, tend to deflect from it and distort it...and finally reject it.

Originally Posted by Carnyx

You simply can't deny the foreign source of Christianism.

However, it was, from, the very beginning, influenced by the Greek philosophy as well. So, the partly foreign source of the Christianity cannot be denied, indeed it can't.

It is impossible to reject those foreign elements if you want to be a Christian. By rejecting Christ, because he was a "Semite", what is left anyway? Of course, I am speaking from a Christian point of view. Not that I would ever, even if I could, try to impose Christianity on anybody. Because I am not a fundamentalist...

And what does foreign mean? Something can be foreign carnally but nevertheless domestic spiritually in as much as its message is universal.

[Carnyx]

Originally Posted by Plethon

Yes, and? So what? His message was universal. The Semites in Palestine did not accept it, apart from the few...

And? Well Christ, the messenger, was a semite. It's not few. That the Palestinians didn't accept it doesn't change the fact that it came from another continent.

We have also Arabic numbers, paper (from China), different plant that we use as comestibles, which are not from Europe etc.

Ok but it is about a people's history, not mere food or numbers. Mose, Noah, Kirikou... it is hard to identify to them.

They were the chosen people. The past tense is important here. Some self-styled "Christians" today think that the Jews are, in some mysterious ways, still a chosen people. It is not Christianity, but a deviation therefrom.

Whatever. They used to. It is another foreign aspect of this religion.

However, it was, from, the very beginning, influenced by the Greek philosophy as well. So, the partly foreign source of the Christianity cannot be denied, indeed it can't.

Come on. You know very well what I mean by foreign (to Europe, that is).

It is impossible to reject those foreign elements if you want to be a Christian. By rejecting Christ, because he was a "Semite", what is left anyway? Of course, I am speaking from a Christian point of view. Not that I would ever, even if I could, try to impose Christianity on anybody. Because I am not a fundamentalist...

Christianity is more a cultural fact than anything else nowadays. I can very well pick up what suits me or not within Christianism.

And what does foreign mean? Something can be foreign carnally but nevertheless domestic spiritually in as much as its message is universal.

Universalism is so wrong. It doesn't "speak" to me at all.

[Marcus Marulus]

Originally Posted by Carnyx

And? Well Christ, the messenger, was a semite. It's not few. That the Palestinians didn't accept it doesn't change the fact that it came from another continent.

It has absolutely no meaning whatsoever to me. Maybe because I tend to see things more spiritually than purely carnally. I abhor worship of skin pigmentation and the like....

Chosen to be born among the Jews/Israelites, amnog the people who showed to be ungrateful to God and rejected his message hundred times before Christ. The fact that he was born in such a people was maybe a lesson of humility to all those powers of that time (Roman Empire, Persian Empire etc.)

Originally Posted by Carnyx

Ok but it is about a people's history, not mere food or numbers. Mose, Noah, Kirikou... it is hard to identify to them.