I haven't seen this film -- if any of you have, please add a comment or send me an email at director[at]jihadwatch.org. Maybe it isn't as witless a manifestation of politically correct moral equivalence as it appears to be from this review; if that turns out to be the case, I'll add an update. But from the looks of this review, Celine is fanatical, obsessively pious -- to the extent that she has to leave her convent due to her apparently obvious emotional instability. Then later, when she meets Nassir, she is still fervently Christian, telling him that she is "saving herself for Christ." Nonetheless, she joins him in his jihad terrorist activity, because she believes that "planting bombs will bring her closer to God."
So does Celine convert to Islam in the movie? Or does French director Bruno Dumont think that piety is piety, and that a girl who is "saving herself for Christ" one minute might just as well starting setting off bombs to bring herself "closer to God" the next? After all, all religions have their "extremists," right? And they're all essentially equivalent -- or so the mainstream media dins endlessly into our ears.
There are some hard facts here, however -- indeed, essentially irreducible ones. Christianity contains no doctrines that could lead a Christian to believe that "planting bombs will bring" him or her "closer to God." The rare occasions when someone actually does commit violence in the name of Christianity -- e.g., the handful of abortion clinic bombers, whose actual numbers are dwarfed by their cultural presence as an all-purpose bogeyman of the Left and Islamic supremacist moral equivalence artists -- are acting in defiance of the teachings of every mainstream sect of Christianity. By contrast, the mainstream sects and schools of Islam do contain doctrines that can and do lead a Muslim to believe that "planting bombs" will indeed lead him "closer to God": the Qur'an passage used to justify suicide bombing, the guarantee of Paradise to those who "kill and are killed" for Allah (9:111) is just one of many available examples.
But in the popular culture the mainstream view, reinforced with dogmatic certainty and ostracism for those who dare to dissent from it, was articulated a few years back by Rosie O'Donnell: "Radical Christianity is just as dangerous as radical Islam." And when she said this on some TV show, the studio audience applauded respectfully. This is what everyone takes for granted -- and so we get astoundingly stupid films like this one (or at least so it appears to be). In movieland, fanatical Christians are just a likely, or more likely, to kill you as are Muslims, who are generally not fanatical at all, but wise, patient, and victimized. Apparently self-hating Leftist Westerners feel more comfortable in a world where the Western Christians they've always despised are the perpetrators, rather than the victims, of terrorist violence.
The problem with films like this one -- again, if it is indeed the way it seems to be from this review -- is that it paints a picture of the world that is false, and misleading, and ultimately dangerous, insofar as it weakens the resolve of Westerners to defend themselves from Islamic supremacism and jihad. After all, why bother? Christianity is just as bad, and ergo, the Judeo-Christian civilization, even in its post-Christian form, is not worth defending. Maybe the wise, patient and victimized Muslims will civilize us -- you know, the way they did the proto-multicultural paradise of Al-Andalus.
"Pious novice can't get into the habit," by V.A. Musetto in the New York Post, December 23:
Celine, the troubled young woman at the center of French director Bruno Dumont's "Hadewijch," loves God. Trouble is, she loves Him too much.When she stops eating and caring for herself, to leave more time to pray, she's asked to depart the convent where she is preparing to become a nun.
She returns to Paris and her parents' posh apartment and cuddly little white dog. In no time, Celine has taken up with Nassir, a young Muslim man she meets in a cafe. She even invites him over to meet her indifferent parents. (Talk about culture shock for all concerned.)
The affair is platonic because Celine is a virgin who says she's saving herself for Christ. "It's not a man I need. It's God," she tells Nassir. "I think you're nuts," he responds, with good reason.
Nassir, we learn, is a terrorist, and he invites Celine to join "the fight." She accepts, because she thinks planting bombs will bring her closer to God....
"Hadewijch" -- an exploration of the power of religion -- should delight Dumont's fans. For others, it will take a bit of getting used to. The effort will prove to be worthwhile.
Maybe this is another example of how our mainstream "culture" [hereafter "culcha"] abets the destruction of our society.
What a nasty Leftist propaganda crap from the Left - after all the Nazi Hitler was from the Left; he was a Socialist! I wonder who's behind the funding of making the film - I suspect much from some Sheikdom. Muslim fanatics have always use the strategy to divide Jews and Christians since Mohammed's days, hence, this film is trying through such evil and arrognat lies by twisting our God, our Lord Jesus Christ's teaching. to get naive Christians on the side of these Muslim fanatics and terrorists. Just as in Islam where it claims how Jesus is also revered as in Christianity, although as Arabic prophet, supposedly murdered by the Jews - the intention is to ever divide Jews and Christians. Nowhere in the Bible, our God condone suicide especially for Him, being a virgin for Him - He's a God for goodness sake, not a Pedophile rapist maniac human being like Mohammed; or killing innocent human beings.
Off topic, but for all of you who continue to express solidarity and support for our former comrade Hesperado, get a load of the recent posts on his blog. His antipathy for Robert is no longer consigned to disagreements over the strategy and tactics of our anti-Jihad. Now he is suggesting Robert is editing our posts, conspiratorially removing references to Andrew Bostom because of an apparent falling-out the two have had.
Hesperado has become obsessional and delusional about Robert Spencer. It's creepy.
PS - Read the entry 'Censorship or Self-Censorship at Jihadwatch
http://hesperado.blogspot.com/
Because Dumbledores overlooked citing Andrew Bostom in one of her offerings, Hesperado has extrapolated from this that there is an Orwellian conspiracy afoot at Jihadwatch to make Bostom a non-person and expunge his from the record. It's so ludicrous that it's comical...and further evidence that either Hesp has far too much idle time on his hands...or that his banishment from JW has him on the cusp of a psychological breakdown.
A failed nun aiding jihadists?
Hmm, are we sure this isn't a bio of Karen Armstrong?
Apparently, Bruno Dumont's next movie is about a jihadist, Shaheed, who stumbles on a moderate Islamic website. He discovers that he's been completely mistaken about Al Qur'an's call to jihad. The moderate website gives a thorough theological refutation of his misunderstanding based on Al Qur'an.
He then abandons all thoughts of jihad and spends his life spreading Islam's peaceful message.
At the end of the movie, the credits are written in a Cecil B.de Mille sized font saying; all characters and portrayals of Islam in this movie are totally imaginary and do not in any way reflect reality.
Too true! :))
Failed nun, no. But as a traditional Catholic I can certainly see these 'nuns' setting bombs:
http://www.adorers.org/standingforjustice.aspx
The cuddly little white dog was her mistake. To keep muzzies at bay you need a big black dog, preferrably one with two white spots between the eyes.
Then again, given the utter biblical and theological illiteracy of so many who claim to be serious Christians, this character "Celine" may be just a little bit credible.
I like Marisol's comments re Karen Armstrong.
But, considering how radically Leftist a lot of Marymount people went back in the 1960's-'80's, it may just be plausible that there will be some who will join the Islamic jihad.
"Hadewijch" - is that Brabant Dutch for "Jihadwitch", or perhaps "Hajjah Witch"?
Dijjal watch.
"What a nasty Leftist propaganda crap from the Left - after all the Nazi Hitler was from the Left; he was a Socialist!"
Sure was! This is worth reading.
HITLER WAS A SOCIALIST
http://jonjayray.tripod.com/hitler.html
Katharina, it being off topic, you shouldn't force your protestant vie of christianity around:
"Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do. But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion" - 1 Cor 7:8-9
Poor nuns. Always the source of ridicule.
Hey Assy-chaldian, when am I forcing my views on others like the Muslim fanatics do - don't you understand what civilized Western/Judeo-Christian democracy means? You don't like my Christian views; you don't have to read it - the West don't belong to Islam! And I ahve to get your permission what to write? Get a civilized education! By the way, that Bible verse shows exactly how flexible our Christian God is; and not about sacrificing oneself as a virgin sexually to God - like how the Arabic Pedophile rapist, mass murderer of the Jews, Mohammed who created Islam, partly to justify the beastly evilness of raping young children - as virgins sacrificed for him amidst his savage Arabic culture. Further, here's for you: Poor Mohammed and the mullahs. Always the source of ridicule.
Zulu; thanks anyway - I found that too! What a great educational reference to challenge the Islam-loving Left; a historical fact they'd like us to forget or ignore! But thus is why, the Left is pushing in so stealthily Islamic migration in droves into the West - to get the votes!
Nope. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadewijch
"her lyrical poetry followed the forms and conventions used by the trouvères and minnesingers of her time, but with the theme of worldly courtship replaced by sublimated love to God."
Seems there's a connection there.
Marisol...
you took the words right off of my keyboard!
Katharina
gently, sister.
I understand your passion, since you've recently escaped from Islam.
But please don't insult our Eastern Orthodox and Catholic brothers and sisters, many of whom in the course of the past 1300 years have endured terrible persecution - and torture, and death - at the hands of Muslims, rather than renounce the name of Jesus Christ.
Just think of our Assyrian Catholic brothers and sisters, even little babies, who were murdered by jihadists who rushed into the middle of a service in a church in Baghdad, on the 31st of October last year.
Mr Spencer, who hosts this forum, is himself a practising Greek Melkite Catholic.
So long as the single life is freely chosen, out of love for God and desire to serve the church, and not out of disgust for the flesh, it is good. The historic church sees both marriage *and* singleness as good. Although the evangelical Christian church does not formally advocate singleness, or prefer it over marriage, there have been many devout evangelicals, often missionaries, who have felt themselves called by God to a single life in His service: just google 'Gladys Aylward', 'Mary Slessor', 'Jackie Pullinger' and 'Corrie ten Boom', to see some of them. Similarly, Brother Roger of Taize never married; but no-one could say that his influence was bad, or his long life of preaching, teaching and spiritual encouragement wasted. He drew many young Europeans back into the Christian church.
During the middle ages, many an intelligent and gifted woman lived a long, healthy and productive life as a nun, respected by her community, and with considerable authority and freedom of action; often given a good education (see 'Hildegard of Bingen') and sure of being cared for into old age and infirmity, just as much so as any successful matriarch of a large family. Indeed, given the hazards of childbearing in the pre-modern world, choosing to be a nun quite possibly gave a woman a better life-expectancy than marriage!
Two good modern novels that show the positive aspects of a nun's life are Rumer Godden's "In This House of Brede" and "Five for Sorrow, Ten for Joy". And Francois Poulenc wrote a very moving opera called 'Dialogues of the Carmelites', which concludes with the martyrdom of a group of French Carmelite nuns during the French Revolution (when many monks and nuns, attacked by fanatically atheist revolutionaries, chose to die rather than renounce their faith or their profession).
"Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do. But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion" - 1 Cor 7:8-9"
Good words to go by. Too bad Christian drum this into the heads of their children constantly as if though by being virgins they too can be like Christ, even though Christ was son of god and a perfect man. A perfection no man/woman can imitate.
Back to the above saying, Hindus and Buddhists have been following this for eons. Staying a virgin has to do with not giving in to temptations of the world and seeking to get closer to god. ..But you see god made us as sexual beings. It's in our DNA. Our own Krishna, who was god, but reborn into a child just to experience what it was like to be a man, enjoyed sex to the fullest.
Cornelius wrote:
Off topic, but for all of you who continue to express solidarity and support for our former comrade Hesperado, get a load of the recent posts on his blog. His antipathy for Robert is no longer consigned to disagreements over the strategy and tactics of our anti-Jihad. Now he is suggesting Robert is editing our posts, conspiratorially removing references to Andrew Bostom because of an apparent falling-out the two have had.
Hesperado has become obsessional and delusional about Robert Spencer. It's creepy.
.........................
I have to agree, Cornelius—even though I am one who has continued to "express solidarity and support for our former comrade Hesperado".
The idea that the forthright Dumbledore's Army would censor herself is absurd—she can be quite tactful (see her post, above) but she says just what she thinks.
I have seen a few occasions when a particularly egregious post has been removed, but posts are *never edited*. To accuse Marisol of such a thing is calumny. Besides, posters here would likely notice, and comment *on that*. Dumbledore's Army certainly would.
Hesperado says he is no longer producing the ridiculous "Jihad Watch Watch", but he must have devoted three-quarters of his recent blog entries to criticisms of Jihad Watch. This *is* incredibly obsessive, to say the least.
I have no problems with his taking *anyone* to task on occasion on a particular point, but his constant criticism of Jihad Watch and Robert Spencer does indeed seem rather unhealthy. If you don't like a certain ally's approach, then simply take your own.
The anti-Jihad tent should, in my opinion, be a large one.
A few days after his banning last September, he ran a blog entry where he cites a comment from poster Champ (which he mistakenly attributes to Denise):
"Hi gravenimage, Wellington, dumbledoresarmy, Eastview, traeh, duh_swami, Courreges, demsci, Susanp -- Hesperado is wondering from beyond the grave if you remember him, and if you do, would you say a few words at his memorial service in memory of his passing?"
.........................
He nastily takes the above mentioned posters to task for not bothering to reply, even though this was, as he says, a busy thread.
Well, I do try to read each article on JW, read the comments threads, and comment when I can. Like every reader here, though, I find I am too busy at times to keep up with the huge flow of Jihad Watch material.
Not only did I not see Champ's comment, *I missed the entire article and thread*. Hesperado, who has commented many times on the growing mountain of unceasing Jihad news, must know that this happens.
If I had seen Champ's comment, I *would* have responded. The idea, in any case, that I—or any other poster—was either prevented from responding due to Mr. Spencer's policies, or out of some sort of fear of incurring his disapproval—is ridiculous.
I have both argued with Hesperado at times, and at times defended him. One instance where I defended him, in fact, he weighed in considering my defense insufficiently robust. He is nothing if not contentious.
Still and all, I do find I miss his comments at times.
But at some point Hesperado decided to spend far more of his considerable energies castigating his allies than our common enemy—Islam, Jihad, and Shari'ah. I have no idea why, but I am saddened by it.
Hesperado was a narcissistic loon. I'm glad that you realized that his self-proclaimed "now-defunct" Jihad Watch Watch blog is mostly dedicated to, you guessed it, criticising JW and its administrators.
He actually has previously whined that I got him banned from JW the last time, which is absurd, but I never replied to him because it is encouraging to me to see him remain crestfallen about his latest dismissal.
That said, I believe the thread where my profanity-laced tirade against him occured, I had posts that were not only wiped, but also, initially edited, so for that part of his reference on the thread Cornelius linked, I believe he is correct.
Even though this thread is archived and no longer active, I must respond to both "gravenimage" and "awake" at least for the sake of public record ...
I completely missed this thread back in December, but ran across it today in search of some other news information.
Poster "gravenimage" is INCORRECT when she states that "Hesperado" mistakenly referred to me as "Denise" on his blog, since "champ" and "Denise" were one in the same. For about a month I WAS posting as "Denise" to avoid detection by two trolls that were causing disruptions every time I posted, but I changed it back to "champ" when things cooled down with those two (who will remain unnamed).
As a matter of fact, I changed my monikder to "Denise" about one week BEFORE "Hesperado" was banned; and I had written "Hesperado" a private email notifying him that "Denise" was ME. Hesp was actually exercising tact by not disclosing that "Denise" was "champ", and I never asked him to do that. Say what you will about Hesp, but one thing is for certain, he is a real gentleman and in fact a very kind person - unlike you, awake, who is anything BUT a gentleman.
And I am glad to see that you have acknowledged the fact that one of your comments WAS edited, since I witnessed this myself. Within minutes of your posting your egregious comment about 5 aggressive words were removed from your comment leaving the remainder of your comment in tact. However I do remember wondering why the entire comment was not deleted, since the remaining comment expressed your utter hatred for Hesp. After witnessing the editing I lost my trust in Marisol's ability to keep things fair on Jihad Watch. Clearly she was showing favoritism towards you and that really disturbed me - it still does. I have had less aggressive and egregious comments completely deleted, coupled by warnings posted by Marisol directed right at me for all the world to see. Little scoldings, if you will. Very embarrassing. But nevertheless I agreed with her and stopped the annoying posts that she requested.
One time I called a poster a "bullying-bitch", and Marisol immediately deleted the comment, as she should have, but then added a post scolding me publicly. And her latest scolding on another thread was equally embarrassing, where she sided with you, a thug and bully, and instead shined the spot light on me. But that's what she does. She embarrasses you if she doesn't like you, but pampers those she does. Fine. But that sort of treatment only demonstrates an inability to be truly fair for one put in the position to BE fair. Clearly she has lost the ability to exercise fairness.
You called Hesp a narcissitic loon, but do you own a mirror? My gosh, when I read that comment from you I had to laugh, since that describes you to a T! ...ha ha. Wow, you are completely blind to how self-centered and egotistical YOU are.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I mean you no ill, "gravenimage", in fact I really like you, but I did want to set the record straight regarding your comment. Take care :)