Christian-Muslim Relations in the United States: Reflections for the Future?

By: Frank H. Tryon, Jr. (Captain, U.S. Navy, retired). Anthony J. Sacco, JD contributed to this blog.

5/22/18 – CHEYENNE, WY:

In December 2003 the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) published an article written by John Borelli, who earned a Doctorate in History of Religions and Theology from Fordham University in 1976. The article is entitled Christian-Muslim Relations in the United States.

The article, a longish piece sub-titled Reflections for the Future After Two Decades of Experience, begins with these sentences from Nostra Aetate 3) 1: “Over the centuries many quarrels and dissensions have arisen between Christians and Muslims. The Sacred Council now pleads with all to forget the past, and urges that a sincere effort be made to achieve mutual understanding for the benefit of all men; let them together preserve and promote peace, liberty, social justice and moral values.”

In the article Mr. Borelli makes several statements which raise questions in my mind and which I am going to explore in these few paragraphs.

To start with, that first sentence is a gross understatement which ignores the Muslim goal of conquest of the entire world for Allah. It may qualify for the number one position on a list of the gross understatements of all-time.  

Then Borelli says this about Christians and Muslims in the United States “. . . we fundamentally agree on the nature of peace and justice and the essential need of all to work for peace and justice.”[1] Based on my fundamental knowledge of Islam I think that the above statement is probably true as long as we are agreeing with the Muslim concepts of peace and justice.  But the Muslim concept of justice comes from Sharia law, while our concept of justice comes from Natural Law and is explicitly expressed by the ideas of our Founding Fathers in our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution, and our legal system as developed for centuries by the British Common Law.

Another point: Mr. Borelli says “we will offer our criticisms of one another when we believe there is a violation of integrity of faith in God.”[2]  While I don’t know what that means, I do know that the two Muslim organizations the Bishops are dialoguing with are very closely tied to the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s stated goal in the United States is . . . “a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”[3]  To me this is a “violation of integrity of faith in God”.  Since we are a nation founded on God’s “Natural Law,” any movement with a stated goal of destroying the United States from within (and thus God’s Natural Law) must come from a place where there is no “. . . faith in God.” And thus “no integrity of faith in God.”

But wait. If there is not a faith in God, can there be a violation of integrity of faith in God?  Hmm.

Mr. Borelli goes on to say that the points of consensus he enumerates earlier in his article, “. . . suggest some steps for the future in relations between Christians and Muslims, but also express a sentiment or spirit for building a culture of dialogue between Christians and Muslims. “[4] OK, but he does not explain how we do this in a spirit of love and trust with a people whose stated goal is “destroying Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah’s religion is made victorious over all other religions?”[5]

Borelli does not explain this obvious problem. I guess he and the Bishops should be warned against “mirror imaging,” that is, viewing their dialogue partners as they view themselves.  Also, maybe he and the bishops need to consider the Muslim concept of “taqiyya;” that is, lying to an enemy in order to advance the Islamic ideal.  It seems to me that both concepts apply here.

__________________

[1] Borelli, John,  Christian-Muslim Relations In The United States, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops,  p. 2. available at http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/ecumenical-and-interreligious/interreli.

[2] Ibid, p. 2.

[3] Center for Security Policy: Muslim Brotherhood’s 1991 Explanatory Memorandum, The General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America: “Unlike in the Middle East, where HAMAS’ Gaza operation confronts Israel kinetically and constantly, inside the U.S., the preferred method thus far has been “civilization jihad” – the stealthy, subversive use of infiltration, subversion and deception to pursue the destruction of the pillars of American society ‘from within.’ By posing as ‘moderate’ Islamic alternatives to the vicious violence of the likes of al Qaeda, the Islamic State or Taliban, the U.S. Brotherhood front groups have enjoyed remarkable success in advancing this agenda.”

[4] Borelli, op cit., p. 2

[5] Center For Security Policy. Op Cit.

Advertisements

The Catholic-Muslim Dialogue Examined. What is its Purpose?

By: Captain Frank H. Tryon U.S. Navy, Retired, and Anthony J. Sacco, JD.

CHEYENNE, WY. May 20, 2018:

Last week Frank came across an article in the January 10, 2017 Catholic Spirit by James Martone, a Catholic News Service writer, entitled “Catholic-Muslim dialogue opens to support Islamic American Communities”.  The article states “The regional dialogues – mid-Atlantic, Midwest and West Coast – have been effective in creating a better understanding among Muslim and Catholic leaders on a theological level . . . ” said Anthony Cirelli, associate director of the Secretariat for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs at the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

That statement struck Frank as absolutely astonishing.  Why? Because two of the organizations with whom the Bishops are dialoguing, are the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA).  Both of these organizations are very closely associated with the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States and that organization has declared the United States an ENEMY.

Additionally, the Muslim Brotherhood’s strategic plan specifically states that their goal is to destroy the United States from within.  In his position with the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, (USCCB), how can Mr. Cirelli not know the background of the organizations with whom the Bishops are dealing?  If he does know the background, then almost certainly, he and the Bishops are giving legitimacy to the Muslim Brotherhood in its effort to destroy the United States from within.

Mr. Martone does go on to say later in the article, that Catholics who read Catholic media were more likely to view Muslims unfavorably than those who did not read Catholic media.  Martone reveals what he believes is a priority of the Bishops, with this quote from Mr. Cirilli: “The bishops’ priority at the moment is to listen to (Muslims’) concerns, their fears, their needs . . . and so discern how we as Catholics can help them achieve their goals of full participation in their communities.”

Could it be that those who read Catholic media know the background of the ICNA and ISNA and are aware of the strategic goals of these Muslim Brotherhood affiliated groups?

We have a question for Mr. Cirilli: “Please ask the Bishops about their concern for legitimizing these groups and their goals, and how their dialogue is facilitating the ICNA and the ISNA  and the Muslim Brotherhood’s  goal of destroying the United States from within.”

That would be one of our MAJOR concerns. But we are not Muslims, and therefore our concerns are not important in this process of dialoging that the Catholic Bishops have undertaken. Right?


 

Should the Catholic Bishops be Dialoging With the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA)?

5/1/18 – By: Frank H. Tryon and Anthony J. Sacco

The Islamic Circle of North America is an organization that is modeled on the Jamaat-e-Islami and its Pakistani offshoot, Jamaat-Al-Islami. The latter was founded on principles laid down by Maulana Mawdudi. Mawdudi was an Islamic philosopher and theologian who, before his death in September 1972, taught that every social order in the whole world needed to be reformed and restructured to conform to the ideals and principles of Islam.

Was he correct? The Charter of the Islamic Circle of North America supports Mawdudi’s teaching. It says in part:

“The goal of the ICNA shall be to seek the pleasure of Allah                                                   through  the struggle for Iqamatud-Deen (establishment of the                                                 Islamic system of life as spelled out in the Qur’an and the                                                           Sunnah of Prophet Mahammad.”

The Charter then interprets this goal to mean,

“Not only it ensures the Divine pleasure and success in the                                                    hereafter, but also, its establishment provides the best system of                                              life for proper solution of all worldly problems, and righteous and                                          progressive reconstruction of individual and collective life. Iqamat                                          of this Deen implies that this Deen should be sincerely and exclusively                                  implemented in all aspects of human life.”

Further, paragraph 6 of the ICNA by-laws says,

“6. It shall be the duty of the Ameer (the leader of the ICNA) to b:                                        Consider achieving the goal of ICNA as his primary obligation.”

These written statements of goals and responsibilities are clear. And one need not look far to find that the ICNA is reported to be directly connected to the Muslim Brotherhood and encourages its members to deceive people in its proselytizing campaign to help fulfill their goal. The ICNA and the Muslim Brotherhood have the same goals: the establishment of Islam by the use of terrorism. It may have been this knowledge which prompted the government of Egypt to outlaw the Muslim Brotherhood some years ago.

So, have our Bishops read the ICNA Charter and by-laws? It would seem that they should do so prior to any further “dialogue,” especially if  Robert R. Reilly, author of The Closing of the Muslim Mind, and a Senior Fellow at the American Foreign Policy Council is correct when he states that our Bishops are really uninformed about Islam.

And since they are uninformed. they tend to use mirror imaging when dealing with Muslims. That is, they tend to view others as they view themselves. And they also tend to disregard the Taqiyya, a Muslim tactic of lying for the purpose of gaining the upper hand over an enemy.

If the Bishops do not understand their Muslim counterparts, then these meetings between them, both nationally and locally, serve the Islamic goal by providing an undesirable platform for legitimization of an organization that has been investigated by the FBI, and is well-known for its ties to terrorism.

Given the above goal and primary responsibility of ICNA’s leaders, it would seem that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has no useful purpose in conducting these “dialogues.” If the USCCB continues this process, it seems that to avoid being taken advantage of, it is essential that the Bishops need to be aware of Islam’s (ICNA’s) objectives; i.e. the establishment of Islam around the world, and they should at least realize the harmful appearance these meetings are creating in the minds of other Christians.

 

 

 

 

Is The President’s Plan to Send The National Guard to the Border “Morally Irresponsible and Dangerously Ineffective?”

4/19/18 – Cheyenne, WY: By Captain Frank H. Tryon, U.S. Navy, Retired.

Last week I came across an article in the Catholic News Service reporting that the Bishop of El Paso and the Bishop of San Antonio were criticizing President Donald J. Trump’s decision to send the National Guard to help secure our Border with Mexico.  In fact El Paso’s Commission on Migration said the plan was “morally irresponsible and dangerously ineffective.”

Why is our President’s plan to strengthen our border security “morally irresponsible” and the U.S. Council of Catholic Bishops’ (USCCB) “dialoguing” with the Islamic Society of North America and the Islamic Circle of North America, both of which are very closely associated with the Muslim Brotherhood, a designated terrorist organization, morally upright?

What are the leaders of the Catholic Church in this country thinking?  I used to believe the Bishops were very well educated, sound thinking people who believed in “truth, justice, and the American way”.  However, their failure to recognize the terrorist roots of their dialogue partners, whose goals seem to be to open our borders to drugs, gang members like MS-13, and human trafficking is astonishing. The “dialoging” partners  have, for years, been making it easier for illegal immigrants, many of them criminals, to flee their own countries, cross our borders, and take advantage of the benefits of the United States that are paid for by honest, hard working, tax-paying citizens.

This leads me once again to conclude that the Bishops are suffering from what William Kilpatrick, in his excellent September 25, 2017 article in Crisis Magazine, called “the normalization of delusional thinking.”

Where was the Bishops’ opposition to the National Guard on the border when President George W. Bush sent the “Guard” to the border in  2006 for “Operation Jump Start,” or when President Barack Hussein Obama sent the “Guard” to the border in July 2010 for “Operation Phalanx?”

The only other explanation for the opposition to this absolutely lawful, precedented, and necessary reinforcement of the Border Patrol is that this is another incipient and disgraceful move to overturn the election of 2016 and oppose the Administration of Donald Trump by either getting him impeached and thrown out of office or to force him to resign.

Do our Bishops believe, along with the people who don’t like Trump inside the Beltway, that it’s offensive that he won? Did they also want Hillary Rodham Clinton, the Socialist/so-called Progressive? Do they want President Trump gone and his presidency over, despite the many great things he’s already done for the nation?

Why is this step to defend our borders and protect the citizens of this country considered “morally irresponsible?”

Stealth Jihad And the Manipulation of Christianity by Islam.

4/6/18: CHEYENNE, WY – By: Captain Frank H. Tryon, (U.S. Navy Retired), and Anthony J. Sacco, JD.

The recent meetings between members of our local Catholic community and Muslims in Cheyenne, are of major concern.

Frank asked one member of this group what his background was that enabled him to participate in these meetings. He told Frank he had no specific background and knew very little about Islam. This is most dangerous, not only to our Cheyenne Catholic community but to our local community in general, Christians and non-Christians. Given the incredible amount of public information available about the religion of Islam and about Muslim organizations operating in the United States, it seems impossible that anybody, but especially bishops of the Catholic Church and other Christian denominations, could be so uninformed.

It’s also dangerous because of the stated WRITTEN goals of the Muslim organizations that the Catholic church has chosen to “dialogue” with. As noted writer and Senior Fellow at the American Foreign Policy Council, Robert R. Reilly has written in The Catholic Thing, The Muddled Catholic-Muslim Dialogue, Monday, March 21, 2016: “The problems are several: Like most Americans, the Bishops know almost nothing about Islam. Therefore, they don’t understand the context in which their Muslim interlocutors are speaking. As a result, they engage in mirror imaging, i.e. viewing and understanding Muslims as the good Bishops understand themselves. A big mistake. See also the series of articles about this subject in http://www.myturntosoundoff.wordpress.com, co-authored by Frank and Anthony.

This kind of thinking, i.e. mirror imaging, was exemplified by Catholic Cardinal Timothy M. Dolan’s visit to the Albanian Islamic Cultural Center in Tompkinsville, on Staten Island in late 2013. The Cardinal asserted the astonishing proposition that Catholics and Muslims pray to the same God. This is another of those liberal platitudes which, on the surface, sounds good, but once it is examined, it is seen as a very broad generalization, which quickly breaks down. Muslims deny the Holy Trinity. They also deny that Jesus is the Son of God. They deny the crucifiction of Jesus and a multitude of other Catholic beliefs common to all Christians.

Cardinal Dolan also said that Catholics and Muslims share a mutual love of marriage and the family. Nothing could be further from the truth. While Catholics do value marriage and the family, and view marriage as one of its Seven Sacraments, Muslims look upon marriage as simply a contract designed to meet the sexual desires of men.

A Muslim man can have as many as four wives, and both the wives and children are regarded as property, a view that was abandoned over a hundred years ago by law in the West, and by Christians around the world. According to hadith sources, Muhammad married Aisha when she was only six years old and consummated that marriage when she was nine. Although it was not common, apparently it was not looked upon as a form of pedophilia, as it is today, and since Muhammad is looked upon as the ideal man in the Koran, it is a practice not condemned by Muslims. In fact, in Iran, lawmakers are  now seeking to have the age of marriage lowered from thirteen to nine.

Also, married Muslim men are able to murder any female family member they think sullied the family ‘s honor. These “honor” killings are protected under Sharia law, which many Muslims in the United States are now demanding as a duel system of law here.

And then there is the matter of religious freedom, a concept which is not accepted or respected under Islam. Any Muslim who leaves the Islamic religion can be murdered, and will not be prosecuted under Sharia law. How is this “religious freedom?” See William Kilpatrick’s excellent article in the New Oxford Review, Has the Church in the U.S. Succumbed to the Charms of  Islam? January 2014. For all of these reasons Islam and Christianity are two separate and distinct religions.

Stealth Jihad is the process of spreading Islam by means of cultural rather than armed warfare. As many of us know, Islam has tried twice before in human history, to conquer the world for Allah. It has failed militarily, so now it is turning to this new tactic. While Bishops practice mirror imaging and may regard their Muslim counterparts as “dialogue partners,” it is quite likely that their Islamic partners regard them as pawns in the very serious game of  Islamic expansion now going on throughout the world, and especially in the West.

 

The Colonization of the United States – Again: The Religious Front.

3/26/18: CHEYENNE, WY – By: Captain Frank H. Tryon, (U.S. Navy Retired), and Anthony J. Sacco, JD.
On March 16th, 2018, we posted that the United States is currently engaged in defending itself on two fronts against an Islamic offensive aimed at turning our nation into a sharia law colony without firing a shot.
The two fronts are the political front and the religious front. In that article, we described the battle raging on the Political Front, and Janet Levy’s article in American Thinker, October 8, 2017, entitled “Muslim Brotherhood: Political Infiltration on Steroids,” and we said, “It is no secret that the reason [all these] Muslims are running for office as Democrats is because the misguided leaders of the Democrat Party in this country have wholeheartedly welcomed Islamics, both legal and illegal, with open arms.” This week we will describe the battle raging on the Religious Front. Here are some pertinent facts:
  1. On February 8, 2016, The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB)announced the launching of a National Catholic – Muslim Dialogue.
  2. Archbishop  Blase Joseph Cupich, the liberal ninth Archbishop of the Archdiocese of Chicago, was named the Catholic Co-Chair, although his qualifications to lead such an endeavor were not described.

One of the dialoguing partners with the Catholic Church is the Islamic Society of North America. Based in Plainfield, Indiana, it is a Muslim umbrella group, described in the media as the largest Muslim organization in North America, and its annual national convention is generally regarded as the largest yearly gathering of American Muslims. Rather ominous is the fact that it is also an important front organization of the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States.

What’s wrong with that? Well, nothing if you know, but don’t care or don’t take seriously that the Muslim Brotherhood has declared the United States an enemy state.

This Muslim Brotherhood, outlawed in Egypt and several other countries, has published its mission in North America as “a process of settlement, a Civilization-jihadist process of conquest from within, without firing a shot.” Here’s a direct quote of its mission:

“The Ikhwan (the brothers belonging to the Muslim Brotherhood), must understand that their work in America [a dar al Harb – house of war country] is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah’s religion is made victorious over all other religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for jihad yet. It is a Muslim’s destiny to perform jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny except by those who choose to slack. . . . ”

Given this mission statement and the incredible amount of public information available about the religion of Islam, and about Muslim organizations in the United States, including the List of Unindicted Co-conspirators put together as a result of the litigation that took place a few years ago in the United States District Court for The District of Texas – Dallas Division, it would seem to be naïve and possibly even self-destructive to believe that we in the West and especially in the United States – we Christians – can dialogue with the followers of Islam. The fantastic difference in worldview is, by itself, a reason why this will not work. Indeed, every day in Muslim countries – the dar al Islam nations – the competitive cry of the Dhuhr, the second Muslim prayer of the day can be heard:  “Allahu Akbar! Our God is greatest.”

For several years, Catholics and other Christians have been told that terrorism has nothing to do with Islam; that Islam is a religion of peace. “To state otherwise you will be maligned as bigoted, Islamophobic, or prejudiced,” says Timothy D. Lusch, in his excellent April 2017 article, The U.S. Bishops’ Catholic-Muslim Dialogue. “Our collective witness of Muslim-perpetrated beheadings, bombings, mass shootings, vehicular assaults of crowds of bystanders, gang rapes, infibulation of young girls, burning alive of captives, and slaying of Catholic priests at Mass is explained away as an enigmatic nexus of mental illness and the ever-popular yet undefinable ‘violent extremism.’ One expects to hear this sort of thing from a religiously ignorant news media. But, as practicing Catholics, to hear it from our church hierarchy is disconcerting. One expects more from a highly educated clerical class.”

So we come to more recent times here in Cheyenne, where a group of local Catholics and Muslims spent eight weeks recently in an interfaith dialogue that produced “a greater understanding of similarities between the two faiths, (sic)” stated one of the facilitators, during which, he said they talked candidly about “the fear that too often blocked understanding.”

And they claimed that the more they learned the more similarities they saw in their texts and practices. But not mentioned, and probably left undiscussed, probably because this, if discussed, would produce a fear of the truth that would end the dialogue) was the fact that Islamic scholars teach that Muslims should generally be truthful to each other, UNLESS the purpose of lying is to “smooth over differences” or “gain the upper-hand over an enemy.” And that there are several forms of lying to non-believers that are permitted under certain circumstances, the best known being TAQIYYA.  These circumstances are typically those that advance the cause of Islam – in some cases by gaining the trust of non-believers in order to draw out their vulnerability and defeat them.

In view of this, did these Catholic facilitators consider this aspect of Islamic relations and its possibly destructive effect upon dialogue between Islam and Christian religions?

is it really true that “both religions share the same values of life, justice and caring for fellow human beings, especially those less fortunate, when Christians, Kurds, and others considered ‘infidels’ and ‘unbelievers’ in Muslim lands are offered three choices: convert to Islam, pay a tax to live there until they are told they can no longer live there, or die?

If not true and if TAQIYYA was not considered, it would be absolutely amazing that any Christians, but especially our Christian leaders, if informed, would advocate acceptance of anything said by Muslims.

 

The “Colonization” of the United States – Again: The Political Front.

CHEYENNE, WY – By: Captain Frank H. Tryon, (U.S. Navy Retired) and Anthony J. Sacco, JD.

The United States is currently engaged in defending itself on two fronts against an Islamic offensive aimed at turning our nation into a sharia law colony without firing a shot. The two fronts are the political front and the religious front.

Regarding the battle raging on the Political Front, Janet Levy’s article in American Thinker, October 8, 2017, entitled “Muslim Brotherhood Political Infiltration on Steroids”, is enlightening. She states the following facts:

  1. In 2014, the United States Council of Muslim Organizations (USCMO) was formed as a political party for Muslims living here and it is the first religious political party in our history.
  2. In 2015, the so-called Justice, Education and Technology Policy Advocacy Center (JetPac) was formed as a public call for Muslims living here to immerse themselves in local politics.
  3. In furtherance of this Islamic offensive, several Muslims have announced their intention of running for public office.

a) Tahirah Amatul-Wadud an Islamic operative, intends to run for governor of the Socialist Republic of Massachusetts.

b) Deedra Abboud is seeking the Democrat nomination to the U.S. Senate in Arizona. She has ties to CAIR, and the Arizona and Muslim American Society. BOTH groups are fronts for the Muslim Brotherhood, a confirmed terrorist organization.

c) Abdul El-Sayed, is running for governor of Michigan. He has strong ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, and is endorsed by Linda Sarsour, an advocate for the Hamas initiative for the boycott, divestment, and sanctioning of Israel. She is the activist who played a major role in pressuring the NYPD to discontinue surveillance of mosques and other Muslim organizations post 9/11, thus shutting down our intelligence eyes and ears to what mosques are doing by way of recruitment of radical Islamics. She is also a close friend of Huma Abedin, who was a very close associate of Hillary Clinton until recently, and who is also connected to the Muslim Brotherhood.

d) Nadeem Mazen, following his time as a Cambridge, MA city councilman, announced his plans to run for the Congressional seat in Massachusetts’ 3rd Congressional District. If Muslim tactics have been followed, this District has more than likely been populated by Muslims moving there from other places in the country and from Muslim nations. If elected, he will join two already elected Muslims; Keith Hakim Ellison (D-MN) and Andre Carson (D-IN).

e) Abshir Omar is running for the Des Moins, Iowa city council and if elected, will represent the city’s southwest side, where Muslims have congregated. He is running as a Democrat Socialist, if there is such a thing. Omar is a CAIR official.

It is no secret that the reason all these Muslims are running for office as Democrats is because the leaders of the Democrat Party in this country have wholeheartedly welcomed Islamics, both legal and illegal, with open arms.

It is also no secret that Islamic scholars teach that Muslims should generally be truthful to each other, UNLESS the purpose of lying is to “smooth over differences” or “gain the upper-hand over an enemy.” There are several forms of lying to non-believers that are permitted under certain circumstances, the best known being TAQIYYA.  These circumstances are typically those that advance the cause of Islam – in some cases by gaining the trust of non-believers in order to draw out their vulnerability and defeat them.

Therefore, it is absolutely amazing that Americans anywhere in the country, but especially our leaders, if informed, should advocate acceptance of or voting for a Muslim candidate for any office. Yet, the American advocacy of “fairness” has apparently been operating in various places, and Muslims are being elected to office by misguided voters, thus assisting the success of this Muslim political offensive, “without firing a shot.”