The question was that of one of the two young terrorists who assassinated an elderly French priest by slitting his throat as he celebrated Mass in a small town in Normandy four days ago. Three nuns were present at the Mass. One fled to alert the police. The two others, both, like the priest, in their eighties, stayed in the church. One of the jihadists asked Sister Hélène whether she was afraid to die. She said no. Then he said “Why ?”
” ‘I believe in God, and I know I will be happy’, Sister Hélène said, as she quietly prayed to herself ” (we know what the journalist meant by “praying to herself”, but we also know that, as in all prayer, she was in fact talking to herself).
“Then they started talking about God. ‘Jesus cannot be God and a man. It is you who are wrong’, one of the men said.
” ‘Maybe, but too bad’, Sister Huguette replied.”
The dialogue, reported in today’s “The Guardian” (July 30, 2016) is worth recording here. Extraordinary courage on the part of the admirable nuns, calm conviction on that of the fanatic jihadist, recognition by both that while their separate, contradictory faiths allowed them both to face death without fear, on neither side were they ready to abandon their faith, or even to argue the point pointlessly about it. None of them was a Believer on the Brink.
DELENDA RELIGIO
Blind Faith: Blind Folly 
It is sadly ironic that all the principal actors in the tragic events recorded above claimed to believe in the one true “God”.
The priest and nuns would probably have been reluctantly accepting of the fact that the young jihadists had come to their one true God through a foreign and alien culture and education.
Tragically the jihadists were not content to likewise accept the same of their intended victims.
Australia is about to engage in a National Census in which one of the many questions asked is what religion (if any) the respondent identifies with.
In the most recent Census(2011) about one quarter of the population identified as Catholic. Those claiming no religious affiliation were almost as numerous (around 23%) followed by Anglicans (about 17%). Muslims were about 2%.
The number claiming no religious affiliation has been growing steadily in recent times while Catholic and Anglicans have been slowly declining.
Make of all that what you will.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I will do just that and make of it what I will, as will every other citizen. Unfortunately, the no-religion group will comprise a sizeable number of indifferents and agnostics, not atheists of conviction. Over 60% identified as Christian, of some sort in the last census.
I notice a media campaign by an atheist group, urging those of no strong conviction to tick the No-religion box; desperate for some legitimacy? I expect they are desperate to claim them.
By the way, there is no box for BOTB’s or for readers of ‘Blind faith…..’ Domage!
LikeLike
I suspect that a significant majority of the 60% who identified as Christian of one stripe or another would be “of no strong conviction” or even largely indifferent.
If a Vatican sanctioned knowledge test was required of those claiming to be Catholic the failure rate would be close to 100%. Bring back the inquisition I say and purge the Church of its faux adherents. Even Lumen might find that he is not acceptably Catholic.
LikeLike
Catholic faith is a ‘lived’ faith, not merely an academic exercise. It is not an elitist club but catholic .At judgement, we will not be quizzed on the catechism but classed into sheep and goats. This may help your understanding.
LikeLike
Religious debate aside, my heart and admiration go out to those who have bravery in their hearts and soul, regardless of the situation. Brave people who throw caution to the wind either for the greater good or standing up for the principles they believe in, rather than waiting for when the coast is clear to air their thoughts. And my Catholic religious upbringing is not why Sister Huguette’s and Hélène’s bravery – and surely faith – make them part of those silent heroes who stand by what they feel is right, and find courage to express their convictions even in the face of danger.
LikeLike
It is a crying shame that we allow different beliefs to alienate us from one another and the humanity we share. No difference in religious opinion can ever justify violence and murder. Fanaticism warps brains. I believe people are better off without religion, but that of the Sisters in Normandy is in sharp contrast with that of the terrorists. Blessed are the peace-makers.
LikeLike
If the false religion of Islam is excluded from discussion, I wonder how Frank can justify his claim that people would be better off without religion.
In my close neighborhood, there are similar numbers of Christians, Buddhists and Hindus. There is great harmony; I cant recall a single problem due to our differences.
In fact, 2 young Hindus whom we see almost daily attend Latin Mass each Sunday with many of their young Hindu friends. They also attend Mass on Saturdays.
At our own Catholic church, many Buddhists and Hindus visit daily the shrine to Our Lady, and lavish it with beautiful flowers. They remove shoes as they approach to kneel in prayer. About 30 adult Chinese Buddhists are baptized in our church every Easter.
By contrast, can we be really expected to believe that life under atheistic regimes where religion is suppressed is better than Christian communities. Are these people “better off”. Why was there such euphoria by East Germans when the wall came down? Was the wall built to prevent westerners escaping to the east?
How can Frank’s often repeated mantra be taken seriously.
LikeLike
I don’t know why you think I think “Islam is excluded from discussion”. Laroche complains that I don’t speak enough about Judaism, the elimination of which he believes would make other religions disappear. Some would say that I talk too much about Islam and Islamism. The fact is, as Laroche rightly says, that Islam is, at present (Catholicism was just as murderous in previous centuries) the only dangerous religion among the three monotheisms. But the world would, indeed, be better off without all of them, for all the reasons discussed in my book and this Blog. Their disappearance, a consummation devoutly to be wished but no doubt an impossible dream, would not necessarily result in the atheistic regimes of the type you have in mind. Political regimes can be atheist without persecuting and murdering believers, and insist on the human rights of every citizen, including the right to believe or not believe without physical harassment. And Jim, please do not insult my intelligence by suggesting either that I do not know that the Berlin Wall was to keep East Germans in prison, not to keep us out, or implicitly that they risked their lives merely to escape religious repression. They wanted freedom, food and a future for themselves and their children.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Maybe my wording was poor, but I did not mean that Frank excluded Islam. I reword it thus: ‘ If one excludes Islam……’ Ca va mieux?
Frank, can you give us an example of one such atheist utopia that has survived the test of time?
The East Germans wished to regain the Western culture that had been built, over centuries, on Christian principles, even if faith had waned. They hated the repression which invariably accompanies imposed atheist cultures.
LikeLike
The majority of young people that was sent to butchery in 1914 was afraid to die
Jihadists want to die for their religion to become a saint
Why our elites always do the contrary of what people want ? Why don’t they help jihadists in their quest ( in France one of the last that was jailed has a private sport Hall)
LikeLike
I’d like to think your remarks were tongue-in-cheek, Jean-Paul, but it sounds as though you have forgotten “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”, and are suggesting that without going to Trump extremes, you consider America’s jails – including the famous one in Irak – and its continued practice of capital punishment models for France. I hope not.
LikeLike
“Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”. Where does this come from ?
It’s a current error to act towards others according to our own ideas. We help better others if we are able to imagine that we are in their place
Another error is to consider quite differently mass sacrifices from single executions. Killing lot of humans, comprising innocents one, under bombs is allowed, not killing a man that ask for it ? An old memory of the “lost sheep” (brebis égarée) story ?
LikeLike
You may be more familiar, cher ami, with the Jewish Bible than with the Christian New Testament . The quotation (Luke 6:31 and Matthew 7:12) has become part of our language to the point that people forget that it was Jesus who is said to have said it. It clearly means that we should treat other people as we would expect them to treat us.
With “mass sacrifices” you open the Pandora’s box of a “just war” and “collateral damage”. You distinguish these from “single executions” and “killing a man that ask(s) for it”. Capital punishment is an abomination that was outlawed in France in 1981, but is still practised in several countries, notably the United States. As I said, you seem to agree with the Americans rather than the French. But surely you do not suggest that there is no moral objection to killing a man, in this case a fanatical jihadist, because he “asks for it” ! The only exception is, of course, justified euthanasia.
Jesus’ parable of the Lost Sheep, where the Good Shepherd leaves the 99 to seek out the one that was lost, is totally irrelevant. If I were not a militant atheist, I would recommend that you re-read the Gospels . . .
LikeLike
But surely the golden rule (“Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”) predates Christianity. Its almost evolutionary.
LikeLike
Well done, Frank. There is a residue deep down that is hard to repress.
Atheists on the brink take note!
LikeLike
Wishful thinking is part of the explanation of the origin of belief in God and in an afterlife. To consider me an “atheist on the brink” is an example of wishful thinking which many would find just as unfounded. Sorry to disappoint you, Jim.
LikeLike
Hum Franck, as a militant atheist you refer to Luke and Matthew ? I knew the origin of the expression but it was surprising to read it from you. lol
Not doing to others what we don’t want they do us can help to act correctly if we have no other information. But when these “others” are so different, it is not obviously the rule.
I am not ashamed to share some opinions with American, Guatemalan, etc … Capital punishment can wake up other crazy people, open their eyes. It is an “abomination” that is not on the point to out pass Hiroshima for example
There is a lot of hypocrisy around the “capital punishment”. How many men and women do we leave completely hopeless ? 20 000 suicides in France each year and far more with an “under-life”.
The story of the Good Shepperd was my main concern with the new testament at a time. I succeed at last to find a case of application as I had to worry more on one of my children rather than on the 4 others. But generally, I find it stupid. I prefer that we help the muslims ready to rewrite the koran rather that we lose time and money with jihadists. And if quiet muslims have a strong majority, jihadists will follow them.
We are far from this dream and at this time, if we consider the number of canceled events in France, Jihadists win.
LikeLike
We now know, thanks again to modern science, that life begins at the moment of conception. At the first cell division, the new life has independent DNA, distinct from its parents.
The new life is a human being at one of the several stages of life passed through from conception until death. In the womb, this life is completely innocent.
So why do we get so “moral” about the taking of non innocent life by capital punishment, for the protection of potential innocent victims yet blithely ignore the atrocity of millions of abortions each year in “civilized” countries.
Please do not jump to the conclusion that I am necessarily supporting capital punishment but I point out the inconsistency of being moralistic in this area, deemed politically acceptable, yet not taking a stance on the killing of innocent lives.
I am very happy to belong to a faith, I believe the only one, which totally opposes abortion. It adds to my conviction that I have the ‘true’ Faith. When believers go over the brink, they lose all consistency of reasoning.; the will dominates the intellect.
LikeLike
At the risk of sounding (again) like an “atheist on the brink” (!), allow me, Jim, to bring a little water to your mill. I heard recently that abortions in France now number annually 220,000. That’s a lot of little people who never saw the light of day. You will remember from previous discussions my discomfort with all this, but also my recognition that the excruciating moral decision involved cannot be eliminated by blanket condemnation. Most societies and citizens recognize the existence of exceptional circumstances, where early termination of pregnancy (“life begins at the moment of conception” is far from an established truth) can be justified. In reality, too many abortions are performed for unacceptable reasons.
LikeLike
“In reality, too many abortions are performed for unacceptable reasons.”
Whatever the reasons, its a woman’s right to choose. We mustn’t retreat on this.
LikeLike
Who says it’s a woman’s right? It’s certainly not a moral right. Under pressure from women’s groups it has recently become a civil right in some countries.
The life taken is a totally different life to the mother who accommodates it for 9 months.
Further, with much more detail now detectable about the nature, potentials and limitations of the child, do you accept the right of a mother to abort if her child does not measure up?
We are becoming more and more of a callous society.
LikeLike
I do believe that “life begins at the moment of conception is an established truth.
Naturally there are those who find this an uncomfortable truth, and try to bring up untruthful distractions.
I am happy to follow a faith which can be objective about truths, however inconvenient.
I ask; can one consistently argue against the death penalty for dangerous criminals and, at the same time, not oppose abortion of the innocents?
LikeLike
“Capital punishment is an abomination that was outlawed in France in 1981”
Yes, and to continue to be politically correct there is no more prisoners. Jihadists are kiled during the “action”.
If you prefer, I don‘t care
LikeLiked by 1 person