While Islamic terrorists in various parts of the world are burning churches and executing Christians, crosses are being removed from some European churches — by church officials themselves.
And it’s being done in deference to Muslim sensibilities.
In what would be an example of a church exhibiting supposed Christian charity in a very secular way, InfoWars tells us:
A Protestant church in Oberhausen, Germany is set to remove Christian crosses, altars and pulpits in order to accommodate 50 Muslim migrants who were invited to stay in the building.
“The parish had offered that to the city,” Oberhausen city spokesperson Rainer Suhr told media outlets.
“Before the refugees can move in, the seats have to be taken away. Also the altar, the pulpit and font are movable,” said the superintendent of the Oberhausen church district Oberhausen, Pastor Joachim Deterding.
Sanitary facilities with washing machines will be installed next to the church, while free lunches will also be delivered to the migrants.
While some might understand the moving of benches and making room for bodies, making room for biases is a different matter. And while the original source doesn’t seem to make perfectly clear whether all crosses will be purged along with the altar in Oberhausen, a prelate in Sweden left no doubt about her intentions. As the Express reports:
Earlier this month the Bishop of Stockholm told a church in her diocese to remove all signs of the cross to make the building “more inviting” for Muslim worshippers.
She also said the direction of Mecca should be marked and called Muslim refugees "angels."
Eva Brunne added: "It is important that there are places for praying sisters and brothers and we show hospitality and tolerance, regardless of faith.
"Good people of different beliefs must be able to meet and help each other."
Of course, along with the definition of “good,” what constitutes “help” is the crux of the matter, as a disgruntled priest in Brunne’s diocese pointed out. The Express continued:
Father Patrik Pettersson said: "The only argument bishop Eva really put forward in support of her view is 'hospitality.'...
"How do you respond to that? Not much of a basis for discussion, as one colleague put it.
"The theological, ecclesiological, pastoral and working issues are left untouched."
In a way, these churches are doing for the secularists what the secularists have always tried to do to them: In the name of administering material aid to non-Christians, they’re ceasing to be churches.
Of course, it would be a bit childish and appear self-serving to say, when administering charity, “We’re doing this as Christians.” And no true Christian would ever make conversion a prerequisite for receiving aid. Yet the fact that one does “good works” as a Christian serves as a witness for Christ; thus, while Christian status may not be explicitly announced, neither should it be hidden. This is especially important because it follows that if your faith is the Truth — which any authentic adherent believes — sharing it is itself an act of charity.
And a pious believer will consider it the most important kind. Famed essayist and “anti-theist” Christopher Hitchens once called Mother Teresa “not a friend of the poor” but “a friend of poverty” and a “fundamentalist” and “fanatic.” It may well have appeared that way to him, viewing matters from the confines of his materialist box. But while a true Christian will tend to material needs, he understands they pale in comparison to spiritual ones. For this life relative to eternity is as a drop of water in the ocean. If you feed the body but not the soul and flourish in this finite world but languish in the next, “What is the point?” asks the believer.
Yet food sans faith is precisely what critics would expect from a spiritually desiccated West where, to paraphrase G.K. Chesterton, “Nowadays we have Christian values floating around detached from one another. Consequently, we see scientists who care only about truth but have no pity, and humanitarians who care only about pity but have no truth." Bishop Brunne certainly exhibits the pity — and a pitiable lack of faith.
This failure is especially striking since Europe’s Muslim migrants aren’t starving; in fact, the vast majority are healthy men of military age, and they generally aren’t “desperate,” either. Although billed as Syrian, only about 25 percent hail from that nation; moreover, reports Mudar Zahran, a Muslim refugee living in Britain, “Seventy-five percent of those arriving from Syria come from safe area[s]; actually, the ones in disaster areas cannot… leave.” Zahran points out that the migrants are heading to Europe simply for welfare-state benefits, which is why they leave safe nations such as Turkey and head to rich ones such as Germany and Sweden.
Thus, it’s not surprising that the migrants don’t behave as needy people would. There are reports of Muslims throwing away food because it’s not “halal” or, having been distributed by the Red Cross, has a cross on it. Meanwhile, others have the energy to rail against their hosts (as shown in this video), calling them “racists” and issuing threats. All the while the Europeans roll out a red carpet. As InfoWars also reports, “Migrants are ... being provided with accommodation at luxury ski resorts and hotels while Europeans living in social housing are being given eviction notices to make way for the ‘refugees.’” Even more shockingly, while Christians who speak of modesty are reflexively mocked as “prudes” or “repressed,” some German school officials sent a letter to parents telling them that because of Muslims housed nearby, “modest clothing should be adhered to. Revealing tops or blouses, shorts or miniskirts could lead to misunderstandings.”
But perhaps the misunderstanding is the West’s. As Muslim pop star Shams Bandar herself pointed out on Egyptian TV recently, “All the Arab countries have closed their borders to them [the migrants]”; this includes rich nations such as Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Bahrain. And while this could be chalked up to a lack of charitable spirit, there could be another factor. Dr. Zahran has called the Muslim influx into Europe the “Islamic conquest of the West” and revealed that when “you read Arab magazines and Arab newspapers, they are talking about, ‘Good job! Now we’re going to conquest [sic] Europe.’ So it’s not even a secret.”
Nor anything new, say many. As Michele Hickford writes about the migration at ex-congressman Allen West’s website, “It’s actually an ancient strategy, straight from the Islamic playbook called The Hijra (Arabic: هِجْرَة hijrah), also called Hegira or Hejira, the migration or journey. Hijra is one of the most effective methods of jihad which requires no military or wars. But it is an invasion nonetheless, and the politically-correct, humanitarian West is inviting it with open arms.”
And, critics might say, open minds — so open the brains have fallen out.