How wonderful and broad-minded and forward thinking. Woelki reflects the thinking of Pope Francis, and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, and all decent folk.
There’s just one problem: the Qur’an is specifically hostile to Christianity in a way that Christianity is not toward Islam. A sampling:
Christians have forgotten part of the divine revelations they received: “From those, too, who call themselves Christians, We did take a covenant, but they forgot a good part of the message that was sent them: so we estranged them, with enmity and hatred between the one and the other, to the day of judgment. And soon will Allah show them what it is they have done.” — Qur’an 5:14
Jesus is not the Son of God and the Trinity a false doctrine: “O People of the Scripture! Do not exaggerate in your religion nor utter aught concerning Allah save the truth. The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a messenger of Allah, and His word which He conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers, and say not “Three” – Cease! (it is) better for you! – Allah is only One Allah. Far is it removed from His Transcendent Majesty that He should have a son. His is all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allah is sufficient as Defender.” — Qur’an 4:171
“It is not befitting to (the majesty of) Allah that He should beget a son. Glory be to Him! when He determines a matter, He only says to it, ‘Be,’ and it is.” — Qur’an 19:35
Those who believe that Jesus is God’s Son are under the curse of Allah: “The Jews call ‘Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah’s curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth! ” — Qur’an 9:30
Jesus was not crucified: “And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah’s messenger – they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain.” — Qur’an 4:157
Muslims must wage war against and subjugate Christians: “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued” — Qur’an 9:29
What’s more, the statement that “Islam is in itself a political ideology that is not compatible with the constitution” is one that many Muslim leaders would proudly affirm. Woelki, and the Catholic hierarchy in general, are aiding and abetting the destruction of the free world.
Meanwhile, to say “Whoever says ‘yes’ to church towers must also say ‘yes’ to minarets” is just asinine. “Whoever says ‘yes’ to Merkel must also say ‘yes’ to Hitler.” “Whoever says ‘yes’ to peace must also say ‘yes’ to war.” “Whoever roots for the Yankees must also root for the Red Sox.” “Whoever roots for Manchester United must also root for Arsenal.” “Whoever roots for Real Madrid must also root for Barcelona.” “Whoever welcomes freedom must also welcome slavery.” “Whoever loves knowledge must also love ignorance.” “Whoever lives in Berlin must also live in Munich.” “Whoever says ‘yes’ to Muslims must also say ‘yes’ to Jews” — well, the illustrious Woelki probably wouldn’t go for that last one.
“Archbishop of Cologne Blasts Germany’s Anti-Islam Party: Churches ‘Same As Minarets,’” by Thomas D. Williams, Breitbart, April 27, 2016:
The Cardinal Archbishop of Cologne, Rainer Maria Woelki (pictured), has publicly criticized leaders of the Alternative for Germany (AfD) political party for their statements against Islam, insisting that “whoever says ‘yes’ to church towers must also say ‘yes’ to minarets.”
The Cardinal was reacting in particular to recent statements by AfD deputy leader Beatrix von Storch, who told the Frankfurter Allgemeine newspaper: “Islam is in itself a political ideology that is not compatible with the constitution.”
“We are in favor of a ban on minarets, on muezzins and a ban on full veils,” said von Storch, who is also a member of the European Parliament.
In his videotaped response, Cardinal Woelki suggested that all religions are equally well suited to German culture and law. “The religion of Islam is compatible with the German constitution just as Judaism or Christianity are,” he said.
“Anyone who denigrates Muslims as the AfD leadership does should realize that prayer rooms and mosques are equally protected by our constitution as our churches and chapels,” he said.
The AfD, a right-wing, populist, and Euro-skeptic party has steadily increased in popularity, especially among the many who believe that German Chancellor Angela Merkel has mishandled the migrant crisis.
Woelki, however, questioned whether “one really has to take the AfD seriously.”
“We do not need any such alternative for Germany,” he said. “The freedom of religion in our country is without alternative.”
“It is especially our painful German history,” he said. “Never again must people in this country be marginalized or persecuted for their race, ethnicity or religion.”
Another German prelate got into hot water in 2006 for suggesting that Islam might not be the religion of peace that many assume it to be.
In his now famous “Regensburg address,” Pope Benedict XVI commented on the historical relationship between Islam and violence.
In that talk, Benedict cited the 14th-century Byzantine emperor Manuel II Paleologus regarding the relationship between religion and violence. “Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached,” the quote read.
Pope Benedict XVI, a scholar who wrote extensively about religious freedom, insisted that all religions are not the same, and do not integrate equally well into western society.
In his 2009 encyclical letter Caritas in Veritate (Love in Truth), Benedict argued that not all religions contribute equally to the development of individuals and societies. Some, in fact, may obstruct it. “Religious freedom does not mean religious indifferentism,” he wrote, “nor does it imply that all religions are equal.”
Benedict also proposed that in order to safeguard society, political authorities must in some way distinguish among different religions. “Discernment is needed regarding the contribution of cultures and religions,” Benedict stated, “especially on the part of those who wield political power.”
Even before becoming pope, Joseph Ratzinger wrote on the differences between religions, noting that “anyone who sees in the religions of the world only reprehensible superstition is wrong” but also “anyone who wants only to give a positive evaluation of all religions… is equally wrong.”
In his own critical considerations of religions, Ratzinger wrote with brutal honesty, observing that there are “deviant, esoteric forms of religion on offer” as well as “pathological” forms of religion. He wrote of religions that are “obviously sick” and religions that are “destructive for man.” He asserted, moreover, that with the detachment of religion from reason, “pathological forms of religion are constantly increasing.”
In his critiques of Islam, Ratzinger suggested that the Muslim understanding of the human person and society, especially as regards the separation of church and state, is light years away from the Judeo-Christian worldview that undergirds western society.
Ratzinger wrote that the interplay “of society, politics, and religion has a completely different structure in Islam” than it does in the West. He went on to say that much of today’s discussion in the West regarding Islam “presupposes that all religions have basically the same structure, that they all fit into a democratic system with its regulations and the possibilities provided by these regulations.”
This would seem to be the position taken by Cardinal Woelki.
Yet this is not consistent with the facts, Ratzinger argued, but rather, it “contradicts the essence of Islam, which simply does not have the separation of the political and the religious sphere that Christianity has had from the beginning.”…