The ruling by the European Court of Human Rights on the prohibition to display the crucifix in public buildings, particularly in classrooms, is in many ways exemplary.
We're not here to prove the correctness and the opportunity of a decision that only the people who make low populism can attack and that true Christians, by contrast, should greet with joy.
Because the court in Strasbourg has only banned the display of religious symbols in the exercise of public functions, of course not in buildings dedicated to religion.
Public places that, until proven otherwise, should be neutral State against the various religious denominations. What
to mean the crucifix in the classroom or in a court, somebody should explain it.
repeated Cavour Free Church in the Free State.
The crucifix is \u200b\u200ba symbol of passion and divine love, but also of supreme injustice that men did suffer the Nazarene and of which we should all be ashamed, as a symbol of infamy perpetrated, according to believers, to the detriment of the Son of God
that the buildings of Pilate expose it with bureaucratic indifference is paradoxical, historically an oath, while in places of worship, the crucifix is \u200b\u200bvery much in value and divine salvation of the Christian message.
On the other hand, is the false idea that his presence in public places is a symbol of our cultural tradition: in fact, his stay in the classroom was declared, during the Fascist regime, with only a couple of royal decrees that neither the agreed in 1929 between Mussolini and the Vatican, nor the time of its review Craxi, changed.
We're talking about 80 years ago, a pittance compared to the millennial history of Christianity, a historical recurrence irrelevant, if we think of how much water is then passed under the bridge.
The Catholic Church has, on this occasion, taken yet another rearguard who wants to act on behalf rather than the preserve temporal that the symbol of his spiritual mission. Both
not be problems in accepting the support of the Temple merchants. What
against the ruling scaglino European politicians such as Minister of Defense Ignazio La Russa and Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi should give rise to more than a doubt about the advisability of this choice. Just see how
shake La Russa, such words of hatred, which is the expression on his face, in which deformed grim mask their connotations, when the occasion unless indicated, November 4, the feast of our armed forces , use the media spotlight to blast the European judges turning the crucifix into a weapon, like a combat helicopter, a tank or a machine gun: "They can die! ..." rage in front of the frightened conductor Lamberto Honeymooners, unable to contain the crisis.
Why do not the Catholic hierarchy distance themselves from such attitudes?
We're not here to prove the correctness and the opportunity of a decision that only the people who make low populism can attack and that true Christians, by contrast, should greet with joy.
Because the court in Strasbourg has only banned the display of religious symbols in the exercise of public functions, of course not in buildings dedicated to religion.
Public places that, until proven otherwise, should be neutral State against the various religious denominations. What
to mean the crucifix in the classroom or in a court, somebody should explain it.
repeated Cavour Free Church in the Free State.
The crucifix is \u200b\u200ba symbol of passion and divine love, but also of supreme injustice that men did suffer the Nazarene and of which we should all be ashamed, as a symbol of infamy perpetrated, according to believers, to the detriment of the Son of God
that the buildings of Pilate expose it with bureaucratic indifference is paradoxical, historically an oath, while in places of worship, the crucifix is \u200b\u200bvery much in value and divine salvation of the Christian message.
On the other hand, is the false idea that his presence in public places is a symbol of our cultural tradition: in fact, his stay in the classroom was declared, during the Fascist regime, with only a couple of royal decrees that neither the agreed in 1929 between Mussolini and the Vatican, nor the time of its review Craxi, changed.
We're talking about 80 years ago, a pittance compared to the millennial history of Christianity, a historical recurrence irrelevant, if we think of how much water is then passed under the bridge.
The Catholic Church has, on this occasion, taken yet another rearguard who wants to act on behalf rather than the preserve temporal that the symbol of his spiritual mission. Both
not be problems in accepting the support of the Temple merchants. What
against the ruling scaglino European politicians such as Minister of Defense Ignazio La Russa and Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi should give rise to more than a doubt about the advisability of this choice. Just see how
shake La Russa, such words of hatred, which is the expression on his face, in which deformed grim mask their connotations, when the occasion unless indicated, November 4, the feast of our armed forces , use the media spotlight to blast the European judges turning the crucifix into a weapon, like a combat helicopter, a tank or a machine gun: "They can die! ..." rage in front of the frightened conductor Lamberto Honeymooners, unable to contain the crisis.
Why do not the Catholic hierarchy distance themselves from such attitudes?
Oh, by the way: new secretary Bersani, if you've beat it a shot!
0 comments:
Post a Comment