The bishops of Spain argue the decision of the authorities of 1 of the localities that prohibited the usage of sports infrastructure for Muslim public prayers. The Hierarchs' restrictions on “religious freedom” hinder more than seeing false worship on the streets of cities. From the hunt against the right, the average Oviedo, Archbishop Jesus Sanz Montez, broke out. Hierarch doubts whether liberal treatment of Muslims in European countries is simply a fair consequence to the situation of Christians in muslim countries.
The City Council located in Murcia Jumilla, together with the representatives of the right-wing VOX organization and the centre People's organization voted to ban the usage of sports infrastructure for public prayer, to which Muslims regularly gathered there.
The decision of the authorities inhabited by 25 1000 people of the village warmed the Spanish political scene. The earthquake even caused the Church. The decision-makers were surrounded by crowds of national bishops. The Hierarchs with 1 voice with the left-wing government of Pedro Sanchez criticized the decision as limiting “religious freedom”. In this article, Cardinal Jose Cobo Cano stated that a akin decision constitutes an attack on the fundamental right of all man.
The Spanish Episcopal Conference brought together the decisions of the city authorities in Jumilla. The bishop published a paper in which the decision was presented as an unacceptable example of discrimination, which does not be in democratic society.
Much more reason than his brothers in the bishopric, he retained seen as 1 of the more conservative ordinaries of Archbishop Oviedo Jesus Sanz Montes. The clergyman distanced himself from criticizing Jumilla's decision.
"An unusual dispute over Muslim prayer in sports centers. What about reciprocity for Christians who are murdered in churches in their lands? Should we behave politely by citing legal texts and the church so that they can proceed to kill us?” asked the social media shepherd in Asturias of the archdiocese.
It is worth remembering that the Church consistently, from enlightenment to the 20th century, spoke against the “freedom of religion”. The decision to choose religion is, in the end, to accept the revealed truth, or to reject it, a key moral choice in which obedience to the teachings of the Church is simply a duty. besides in the social dimension, the Church was reluctant to compare the law of sacred religion with mistrust and correct and incorrect worship. The statements of the Magisterium which mark liberal views are without question.
For hundreds of years, the church required a state that was conducive to sacred religion and reduced the growth of non-Catholic beliefs. The attachment to the state's imagination for hundreds of years supported by popes and the most prominent Christian teachers cannot be banned due to the attachment of hierarchs to the post-revolutional form of society.
Sources: religionenlibertad.com, PCh24.pl
FA
