Killing in the name of God, Reflections on Islam

KILLING IN THE NAME OF GOD, REFLECTIONS ON ISLAM

On the question of how to punish the impiety is interesting comparison between the Bible and the Koran. In both the use of force or killing the enemy's legitimate, of the attacker and the wicked. Both the Bible and the Koran admit one God who reveals himself to the prophets. But here ends the contact between the Bible and the Koran, because according to Islam the revelation that God has made his salvific will humans not culminates in Jesus, but it goes beyond, Jesus corrects to culminate in the Mahomet, who claims to correct Jesus because not only would he be made God, but falls in the pagan polytheism, stating that in God there are three people, then claiming three gods, impiety worthy serious Muhammad of capital punishment.

.

which we now present, 2 August 2016, this article last year

Author John Cavalcoli OP

Author
John Cavalcoli OP

.

.

Rai 1

. .

Muslims are convinced to conquer the West, even those among them who are not jihadists or extremists, They are convinced. I've heard him say many times: "We will conquer Europe with faith and with the fruitfulness"

His Bechara Boutros Raï Beatitudine, Patriarch of Antioch of the Maronites [cf. WHO]

.

.

.

.

.

islam 1

militants of the Islamic Jihad

It is often said that one cannot kill in the name of God, why, if he says, God is the God of life and does not want anyone's death. It does not make sense, It is a crime to attack next in the name of religion [1]. So motivated, This speech can have its validity, and it is important to stimulate the love of neighbour and honor of God, especially in our time, in which, with the terrible weapons that we, if a serious conflict arises, We know how it begins, but we will not know how it will end up. This talk also stimulates the faithful of different religions to mutual respect and to refrain from violent actions under the pretext of defending their religion. However remains a puzzlement on three points: first, There is no way to kill: it is one thing to kill an innocent, for example an abortion, an account is to kill in self-defense or to save the homeland. It is true that God does not want anyone to die.

.

islam 4

running a Chaldean Catholic in Iraq

Let us ask ourselves then how exactly that principle should be understood. About it remember that legitimizes the killing is nothing but a way to put into practice a principle of Justice, that is the moral or legal law. But who is the tutor first and high of every law and every right, name Dio? Killing in the name of the law, of justice, of the common good, of freedom, What is then ultimately, except to kill legitimately in the name of God? We must not be too hasty in saying that you can not kill in God's name, without making the necessary clarifications; otherwise you end up endorsing that injustice and violence that would prevent, as it is just the right murder or the proper use of force, that punish and prevent in some extreme cases the injustice, violence or actual mass sterminî.

.

islam 5

a group of Blue Helmets United Nations

Peace is not built and defended only peacefully, but also coercively. To spare those who are submissive and to conquer the proud, as the great poet Virgil. Already the ancient Romans had the motto: If you want peace, prepare for war. The enemies of peace must be overcome or kept at bay. War is not remedied only by inviting the belligerents to peace, but also indicating what concretely the aggressor must give up why don't both move a just war. This is the work of Evangelical advocates of peace. The work of justice and peace.

.

robbery

armed robbery

It would be nice to be able to persuade a gangster (c)he looks threatening to us with the gun aimed to desist, maybe in the name of God, from his bad deed. But experience shows that, unfortunately, hardly the criminal has the fear of God, so this noble call, unless we are gifted by God to a rare gift of persuasiveness and the gangster is touched by grace, it has no effect. But you can't ordinarily rely on these supernatural interventions and God commands us to resort to human prudence. Hence the need to move to pickax. The give up self-defense or combat, When would be necessary and possible "we think for example to warring military" is a serious indiscipline or cowardice toward themselves and toward the common good, that may be subject to criminal penalty, as in the case of renegade soldier. It is said that saving the skin is always a legitimate defense.

.

St. massimiliano

painting of Saint Maximilian Maria Kolbe in the concentration camp

Different is the sacrifice of one's life, in the civil field, see for example Salvo d'acquisto; or religious, see for example St. Maximilian Maria Kolbe. This can be a most noble gesture of heroic love. And here we have Christ himself and the martyrs as our supreme model, who allow themselves to be killed - for example a Saint Ignatius of Antioch - to testify their faith or to save a multitude. Maybe that even in these cases is not acting "or rather" do not suffer in the name of God? Therefore God wants the death of the martyr? The father wanted as such and the death of her son? It would be ungodly to say so. The father wanted his son's sacrifice, which resulted in death.

.

sacrifice of Christ

the sacrifice of the Lamb of God

If I pay a fee to buy a well, don't pay for the sake of spending money, but to buy that good. Don't accuse me of having squandered the money, ma, If I made a good deal, I'll be worthy of praise. Which one “deal” more advantageous to us the Father, for his glory and that of his son, he could devise what to give his Son for our salvation? For this St. Paul says that we were ' bought dearly» [The Cor 6,20]. Those who foolishly, as Edward Schillebeeckx, focus on the material fact of Christ's death, to deny the value of the redemptive sacrifice of Christ by his father and wanted to make sure only the murder committed by killers of Christ, they don't know what they say.

.

SAMSUNG DIGITAL CAMERA

depiction of civil justice

Second point. Acting in the name of someone, If it is sincere, is an act for which the agent performs an action, the qualification which involves moral and responsible person on behalf of whom the agent acts. From him, in the name of such acts, people, after all, receives the endorsement or the mandate to do what it does in its name. The action of the agent, so, It is not that the execution of the will or of the person in whose name the agent acts. What the agent does, It does for the principal authorities, guaranteed by that authority and to honor the same principal, receiving glory from the action of the agent, assuming of course that it is a good deed.

.

The priest acts in the name of Christ, when this occurs validly and legitimately, it means what it does, it does so either because of or by the power of Christ or by the authority of Christ or by mandate or on behalf of Christ. Ultimately, what the priest does as a minister of Christ, it comes from Christ. Christ is the ultimate justification of what the priest does.

.

Beyond a purely reading material of the fifth commandment, fashionable today, but only when it's convenient, it must be borne in mind that killing in itself is not yet a sin or a crime. It is necessary to see why or in the name of what or of what value or of what idea one kills. The judge who in the name of the law imposes the death penalty on the criminal, It is not a killer, but he acts according to justice, vindex is the law and defender of the common good of threatened criminal. The jeweler who, threatened with death by a thug, to defend the prevents and kills him, It is not a murderer, but he defended the inviolable value of his life as an innocent. The unjust aggressor loses the right to live with his own act of aggression, While the attacked unjustly has the right and duty to defend, up to kill, If necessary, the aggressor.

.

self-defense

self-defense

The Righteous Kill It is therefore the right, as justified by a value or by a law that give sufficient legal or moral reason at the time of killing. In the name of defending innocent life may be safe to suppress a life. A lower level of life can and must be sacrificed to the higher, When this is endangered by the first. An idolatrous cult of life would make it impossible to supply the same. But let's ask ourselves: what is it or who, ultimately, justifies or establishes the bloody defense of life, unless the creator and Lawgiver of life, i.e. God? Here, then, as is evident, in the aforementioned cases, the killing of a criminal in the name of God.

.

It is obvious that God is the God of life and does not want the death of the living, not even that of an Ant, because every living thing from him is created, loved, guarded and preserved. But precisely because God is such, protects life from defends unjust assailant, much to enable legally or even control the killing.

.

slaughter of the innocents duccio Boninsegna

massacre of the innocents, work by Duccio di Buoninsegna

Let's ask ourselves another question: It may be right to kill the wicked, that is, the one who dishonors the name of God? God punishes the wicked with death? Surely God is immortal and does not need neither to defend nor be defended. However, even those who kill in self defense, even the judge who sentenced to death, even those who fought in a just war or for Justice or for freedom, ultimately fighting for God or in the name of God, that tutor and of vindex is all these values. As Scripture says: «Save the weak and the poor, liberatelo by the hand of the wicked» [Shall 82,4].

.

On the question of how to punish wickedness, the comparison between the Bible and the Koran is interesting. In both there is coercion or the use of force or the killing or legitimate enemy or assailant or killer, and even the wicked. In both of these sacred texts, such acts, in appropriate conditions and circumstances, are undeniably taken from God or made in his name.

.

Bible

the Holy bible

Both the Bible and the Koran admit a one God, single, spiritual, personal, creator of heaven and earth, then the angels and mankind, Eternal, Infinity, very high, wise, Provident, Almighty, mysterious, salvatore, just and merciful, that rewards with good paradise, the believers and the obedient, and punishes the wicked with hell, the infidels and the disobedient.
This God is revealed to the prophets, as it is revealed to Adam, to Abraham, Moses and Jesus. But here ends the contact between the Bible and the Koran, why, as we know, According to Islam, the revelation that God has made his salvific will humans not culminates in Jesus (Issa), but it goes beyond, corrects Jesus and culminates in Muhammad, who, without denying qualities and virtues in Jesus by Muhammad himself considered holy, up to chide the Jews killed him, However claims to correct Jesus because not only would have made God "and Muhammad here coincides with Judaism", but falls in the pagan polytheism, stating that in God there are three people, so, in the eyes of Muhammad, claiming three gods, impiety serious, worthy of capital punishment.

.

Koran 2

the Koran, Italian Edition

Salvation, so, According to the Qur'an, does not take place by means of Christ's sacrifice, but with submit to God wholeheartedly and with absolute faith (Islam), in prayer, in ritual practices and in listening to the spiritual guide (Imam), in keeping to the Koranic law (Sharia), the study of the Qur'an, in the practice of virtue and in repairing the wrongs done. To this cultic sacrifice of the lamb is not a priestly Act, but simple to treat God, that can be accomplished by any faithful, as a member of the religious community (Umma).
Different is the method of the diffusion or promulgation of the divine orders concerning salvation in the Bible and in the Koran. In both cases you intimate with every man to accept and obey orders, under penalty of eternal damnation. «Who believes will save; Whoever does not believe will be condemned " [cf. MC 16, 15-16]. These words of Christ, mutatis mutandis, feedback can be found in the words of Muhammad. But there is also this profound difference: that while Christ refers to the afterlife damnation, the Qur'an also speaks of an earthly immediate coercion.

.

Also different is the salvific message content in one and in the other case. The maximum difference is noted between the Koran and the Gospel: While the Quran merely transmit prescriptive orders with promise of reward and threat of punishment, This is not present in the Gospel; This however has as main announcement, entirely absent in the Quran, the coming of Christ the incarnate Son of God, that redeemed us with the sacrifice of the cross, giving us the remission of sins, the advertisement so that God wants us to grace, to make us his children and to give us his own divine life through Christ.

.

authoritarian orders

order and authoritarianism

The faithful relationship with God in the Quran It then summarizes the “devotee” (muslim, from which “Mussulman”). The perspective of the faithful as is completely absent “son of God”, which instead, as you know, it is fundamental in the Gospel. On the contrary, for the Qur'an, that does not accept Jesus as the son of God, the idea of a divine sonship bears an inexcusable familiarity with God, which the Koran, without excluding leniency, However, accentuates the transcendence and temibilità.

.

Also note that in the Koran the subjective consciousness has a very small part. What man thinks or wants so it does not affect anything; for which the Koran leaves little room for personal reflection or being examined for signs of credibility that may lead to a convinced and reasoned faith. The faithful is more moved by fear of retribution that the love of a God who is love, as in Gospel. He must obey and just, more so than God, whatever human decisions, does what it wants without taking account of human choices. Hence the distinctive Islamic fatalism, which human free will crisis straining to derive from God as much good as bad.

.

forced conversion

men, means and tools of forced conversion to Islam

The coercive element appears in the religion of Islam also under this angle: the faithful believe and obey not so much for love or free personal reflection in consciousness, but for fear of eternal punishment and threatened thunderstorms. It is therefore necessary to make a distinction between divine injunctions announced in the Old Testament and those announced by Christ. Moreover, in Church history, It should be about, distinguish three periods: first, the early Church was persecuted by the Roman Empire; second, the Constantinian era, inaugurated by Constantine in 315, the Christian religion has become religio bid and even the official religion of the Empire. And finally we have the third period, currently in progress, whose preparations begin, After the Protestant crisis and the collapse of the Holy Roman Empire, principle whose region, his religion, the religious freedom enshrined in the peace of Westphalia the 1648. This approach of the Church-State relationship reaches maturity in civil field with the French Revolution, which puts an end to the medieval theocracy (old regime), he founded the democratic secular state and confirmed the right to religious freedom, without admitting that misfortune atheist state, that was the tragedy of the 20th century, of which we have not yet completely freed: see for example the Chinese Communist regime.

.

cavour

Camillo Benso count of Cavour and the principle “Free Church in a free State”

This new type of relationship between state and church "free church in a free State" as Cavour, released by Liberals from which grain was infected, was officially recognized ecclesial field, After being put into practice since the past centuries, from the Second Vatican Council. Instead, the Qur'anic style the announcement of divine commands resembles that of mosaic Church of the medieval regime “secular arm“, When the Pope ruled a Western European Christianity entirely cattolica, so that you can serve in some degree of civil power and the public force to enforce the rules of Christian ethics and the contents of Catholic doctrine, approved the State law.

.

secular arm

the secular arm

It is to be noted that the Constantinian recognition of Catholicism as the State religion, if on the one hand it helped and protected the Church to assert itself on the civil level and to expand geographically in accordance with its mission and spiritual purposes, on the other hand not allowed to implement properly the Lord's command to spread and sustain the Gospel with the simple testimony of charity, of solidarity and human promotion, without the use of coercive apparatus provided State, what later would be called “secular arm“. In this the Church assumed the new style of Apostolate established by Christ, but it still remained influenced by the Mosaic tradition, who wanted the announcement of divine orders was meant by the Prophet and the priest, but supported by coercive power and King's justice. Moses himself, as you know, It was not only the Prophet and liturgist, but also political and military leader of the people of Israel; and Muhammad, for his prophetic style, not taken to model Christ, but Moses.

.

papal state

The states of the Italian peninsula and the Papal State

Thus the papacy over the centuries acquisì, as is known, a real temporal power with territory, that was the so-called “States of the Church“, equipped with military forces like any other European state. In the field of ecclesiastical discipline the death penalty for heretics was tacitly abolished only with the abolition of the Criminal Code of the Papal States following the fall of the temporal power in 1871.

.

The birth of the Italian, inspired by the principles of secularism and then open the right of religious freedom and the end of the temporal power marked the beginning of a new era in the relationship between Church and State in relation to evangelization and to the question of ecclesiastical use coercive power. The church, while maintaining its own judiciary and coercive power against the faithful, it stood towards civil society no longer Catholic but religiously divided or pluralistic, no longer as the State religion that is ultimately as one of the powers of the State, although under the presidency of the Pope, but as a public community competitor to the common good of society and the State within the State and obedient to civil laws, Despite its autonomy as a church, while at the same time it was protected by civil law.

.

conquests of Muhammad

the first conquests of Islam

As the project of Koranic spread of Islam, It is inspired on the one hand by the Jewish people created by Moses "always, is intende, in the name of God "and the other towards Evangelical program of world conquest for Christ. Indeed, While on the one hand, the practice of the Islamic faith is associated with the possession of a territory, and therein the Qur'anic project resembles that of mosaic conquest of Palestine as the promised land, with the forced expulsion of peoples formerly therein in, on the other, Unlike Israel, the Muslims, taking a cue from the Christian perspective of world conquest, they believe that God sends them to conquer the world not only in the sense of global spread of Islam, but also in the belief that God has given to them the physical possession of the entire Earth, something that cannot happen without the use of arms. Hence the concept of “Holy war” (jihad), as military support of the preaching of the Koran from Islamic preachers.

.

stoning of a woman 1

Syria, stoning of a woman …

The Islamic religious authority does not claim to have only that coercive power that is allowed in principle to censor the faithful deviants, as is also given in Christian canon law, But u.s. threats and coercion even against the infidels or those to whom it is directed the Koranic message. The words of Christ ' who does not believe, will be condemned ", After having changed the reference to the Gospel, are therefore adapted to the Koran and preaching are intended in the sense that whoever does not accept the Islamic faith, he is punished up to the death penalty or forced to accept it by force.

.

stoning of a woman

… at the end of which the criminals of Isis have spread the video

The use of force in the name of God in Islam until you come to the murder in jihad, goes beyond any reasonable limit of respect not only the conscience of others, but his own physical safety. It is a missionary zeal whose doctrinal content may be partially acceptable, such as divine attributes or certain duties of morality or divine worship; But what is absolutely unacceptable and, to the limit, inhumane and barbaric, it is this method of violent and aggressive pressure, that oversees each method of calm and thoughtful persuasion, with the adduction of evidence and signs of credibility, that characterizes so obvious the Christian apostolate.

.

tommaso averroe

the triumph of Saint Thomas Aquinas in philosophical dispute with the Muslim philosopher Averroes

It's not that the religious culture, philosophical, Theology and Islamic mysticism, mind you, It is not full of great values and great thinkers, Masters, moralists, poets and mystics, only this immense literature formed over the centuries, not at all a free charm, of its suasiveness and credibility, then instead of fact sets by force from religious authority-Islamic policy in its inexorable motion of expansion and conquest of peoples not yet subdued to the Qur'an. And that is because the motor of Islamic expansion is not only the religious interest, but inextricably to this joint, is a thirst for power and political and even economic domain.

.

In conclusion, we can say that appealing to God to justify the use of force or the Suppression of a human life can be lawful or a laudable action if it is right in itself, Since God is the Foundation of Justice and the Supreme Lawgiver, so everything is right can be found in Him its latest justification. This appeal, however, it must be sincere and well founded and must not be a pretext for coonestare an act of violence or an injustice. We must therefore see many acts of Saints who in the past have resorted to the use of force or endorsed in the name of God and for the love of God. We cannot think that they were all or cruel fanatics or hypocrites. They were in good faith, Although the time was not yet ripe, and even if undoubtedly they have done acts that we would not do today. But this does not mean that they remain our models, Once we have adapted their testimony to the needs of the Church today. Many doubts instead leave us some Islamic habits and stubborn inveterate, "not to mention the terrorists, they have nothing of religious, but they are pure criminals ", which make us suspect that the God in whose name they claim to act in reality is only the pretext of their pride, their arrogance and intolerance.

.

Varazze, the 2 July 2015

.

____________________________________

NOTE

[1] Hence the disapproval without appeal of the wars of religion, even those carried out by Catholics against Protestants or Muslims.

.

.

madonna militia

In the town of Scicli, in south-eastern Sicily, the statue is kept in the Madonna of the Militia that Hunt via the Saracens who had invaded the territory. Every year the statue of Lady Warrior is carried in procession through the streets, at least until it is outlawed for “religious discrimination” …

2 replies
  1. hector says:

    About recent interviews, here's what he says Ignatius Joseph III Younan, 71 year old, Patriarch of Antioch of the Syrian Catholics
    "We have to stop by telling that these terrorists have economic problems, they are political or ideological radicals. Look at the command of Dacca ... It was composed of young, educated and affluent. All these guys are criminals manipulated by the mullahs who instilled their literal exegesis of the Koran. The Bible also knows some very violent steps, but we have realized that they must be read in the era in which they were written, which they refer to events of millennia ago. Unfortunately in Europe continue to make excuses for Muslims, with nothing short of paternalistic attitudes. For you have the poor things, the ignorant who need an evolution towards democracy. You say that we have to accept their culture ... It is not true, what we should do is to tell them the truth in love "

  2. Zamax says:

    About Moses as a "model" (strictly in quotes) Muhammad, there is to say that in any case, in my opinion, the roots of the future distinction (no "separation") between natural law and positive law (and then of church and state) They are already in the Old Testament dialectic between the Ten Commandments (written by the “finger of God”) and the Mosaic Law (dictated by God) proper. In this distinction the most advanced pre-Christian pagan world could not have come, not for lack of intelligence, but rather for lack of authority. In fact, only God, which is assumed, He could ratify making themselves manifest to man. So that in the Old Testament we see Aaron, and not Moses, become Israel's high priest; and only the "seed of Aaron" be reserved for the priestly office; and the tribe of the Levites, which belonged to Aaron, and who took care of the religious cult Management, the only one of the twelve of Israel which are not assigned territories.
    Moreover, It is highly symbolic (and pedagogical) the fact that Moses was not permitted to set foot in the Promised Land, but only to look at her from a distance. If Moses had entered a winner in Canaan the people of Israel would have been seduced by the idea of ​​an earthly fulfillment of the Promise. The death of Moses in the land of Moab that the subtended Promise was not completed with the conquest of Canaan, but that it was contained in a second and bigger Promise, ultraterrena: was not it conceivable that his prophet par excellence it would be excluded. This intimate dialectic between Old Testament Terrestrial Jerusalem and Heavenly Jerusalem, which will be clarified and completed by Jesus, not only it will not be developed, but it will be totally ignored by Muhammad.

Comments are closed.