Thursday, July 14, 2011

“Leave Stiklestad Alone”

The Battle of Stiklestad in 1030

Our Norwegian correspondent The Observer sends this translation from a Norwegian paper about the controversy over a proposed interfaith center at a site that is important to the history of Christianity in Norway. He includes this introduction:

The article concerns the lengths various official Church representatives in Norway are willing to go to in order to please the Religion of Peace and its practitioners. With “friends” like these, who needs enemies?

The idea has been debated in the media for the last couple of days, and I can say with my hand on my heart that the majority of Norwegians are opposed to it. If the plans were to go ahead it would be akin to an act of treason, and needless to say, it would be very offensive to Norwegians.

Vebjørn Selbekk is of course the former editor of the newspaper Magazinet, who published the Motoons in 2005 and was forced to make a public apology by the Norwegian political establishment.

Below The Observer’s translation from Utrop, a newspaper for the immigrant community in Norway:

Nidaros Bishop supports Stiklestad proposal

Tor SingsaasGunnar Stålsett recently proposed the establishment of an interfaith centre at Stiklestad. The proposal was categorically opposed by editor of Dagen, Vebjørn Selbekk, but now the bishop of Nidaros Tor Singsaas has entered the stage and has expressed strong support for the proposal.

by Are Vogt Moum

Former bishop of Oslo Gunnar Stålsett suggested last week that an interfaith centre be established as a part of the process of religious dialog and reconciliation. Stålsett wants to build the centre at Stiklestad in Verdal municipality in Northern Trøndelag.

Vebjørn Selbekk, the editor of the conservative Christian newspaper Dagen, has attacked the location of Stiklestad, and questioned the need for dialog between the religions.

Doesn’t believe in interfaith dialog

“Stiklestad has a very strong symbolic place in Norwegian history, and it is closely linked with Christianity. Gunnar Stålsett seems to be more concerned about other religions than focusing on Christianity and the special position it has in Norway. Let the interfaith dialog take place in the mosques in Oslo, and leave Stiklestad alone,” says Selbekk, who according to Dagen is not a big fan of dialog between religions.

“Religions are different, and so they should be,” Selbekk says to Trønder-Avisa.


Bishop of Nidaros, Tor Singsaas is positive towards the proposed centre.

“I’m deeply opposed to the idea that Christians and Muslims shouldn’t be engaging in dialog. It is essential in order to respect each other. One of the criteria for such dialog about faith and values is that we need to be secure in our own values. I need to convey this, to make clear the religion of my church so that others know where I and my Church stand. And I expect the same from others. This is essential for a good dialog about common values in a society where we’re living side by side in peace and mutual respect,” says Singsaas, according to Dagen.

The battle of Stiklestad in 1030 was the decisive incident that paved the way for Christianity in Norway. King Olav Haraldson died in this battle and the following year he was canonized.


goethechosemercy said...

"Interfaith dialogue" without the iron-clad commitment of interfaith tolerance is nothing more than a smokescreen for conquest and replacement of the indigenous with the foreign.
Islam is foreign.
Let it be called what it is.
Here and everywhere, let there be silence toward this invader, Mohammed and his followers.
The Muslims must be made to know that they are and always will be unwelcome in the West.

Siegetower said...

"Former bishop of Oslo Gunnar Stålsett suggested last week that an interfaith centre be established as a part of the process of religious dialog and reconciliation."

Reconciliation of WHAT? What issue have the Norwegians from their past that would warrant the use of such a term.

South Africa had its' issues that have been under reconciliation for decades. The Australian Aborigines and government have been trying to reconcile for decades. Norway just doesn't have such issues of its' past that needs 'reconciliation.'

Unless they mean in the accounting sense where everything is balanced and EQUAL. If the Norwegians think islam is equal to Christianity and mohamhead to Christ...they have problems.


How is "interfaith"dialoge possible?If i as a Christian were to accept that a different faith were equal to mine,i can no longer believe in mine,all religions must be the "true" religion to thier followers,so the others are and must be false,unless one is intent upon converting the "other"what do we have to say to each other?These proposals are an attempt to overwhelm and dominate the indigenous peoples history,and what do these "centers"eventually become?Just another mosque,because no white european is going to spend time in a place where the very atmosphere screams that he is hated,despised and lower than excrement,these muslims are just looking for a new mosque,paid for by the finns,tell them to shove it.

Gary said...

Interfaith dialogue with Muslims is an absolute waste of time. The Muslims want to build bridges to Christians for Christians to cross-over to the Muslims, never the other way. Read what a what a Muslim scholar has to say about interfaith dialogue.
"For the Muslim, constructive dialogue is not only permitted, it is commendable. In the Qur'an we read, 'Say, 'O people of the book' (a term which particularly refers to Jews and Christians) 'come to common terms as between us and you: that we worship none but Allah; that we associate no partners with Him (in His powers and divine attributes); that we erect not from among ourselves lords and patrons other than Allah.' If then they turn back say you 'Bear witness that we are Muslims.' (Bowing) to the will of God." (al-i-Imran;3:64)

goethechosemercy said...

Muslims conquer.
They never reconcile with the dar al Harb.
If anything, the Christian, Norwegian clergy shold be laughing out loud at this.
Here is an example of Muslim-Christian interfaith dialogue:

Muslim: Islam is a great religion.
Christian: Islam is a great religion.

end of interfaith dialogue.

Nick said...

Islam teaches that Jesus was not crucified. Islam teaches that the resurrection did not take place. Islam teaches that Jesus was not the Son of God.

How can these fundamental Islamic teachings be 'reconciled' with Christianity?

If there are any real Christians at at 'interfaith' do then they ought to start off by laying out these core Islamic doctrines, and then DEMANDING that Muslims throughout the Islamic world cease from persecuting Christians immediately. (See link.)

If the FACT that Islam is completely contrary to Christianity cannot be stated, and the FACT that Muslims throughout the world persecute and brutalise Christians simply because they are not Muslims cannot be stated, and Muslims told that this must cease immediately, then what good is 'interfaith dialogue'?

Ratatosk said...

Let the muslims have it. It is a fitting proposal. Olav Haralsson converted Norway to christianity with sword, fire and torture, and for reasons of power an gold solely. He will be much more at ease in the company of Muhammed than with the bishops of the christian church.

Sol Ta Triane said...

I wish that there was much more "inter-faith" discussion going on between

Sikhs, etc.

This would be excellent,and there is much to learn, that is, IF IT IS A REAL DISCUSSION.

Add Islam to the mix and it a mockery. Anyone wanting a real comparative religious discussion (like me) must exclude the supremacist Muslims 100%.

Anyone including Muslims in an "interfaith dialogue" should be exposed as a front group for political purposes and also harm by obscuring the real connections that do in fact exist between real religions.

In fact, if real inter-faith discussion was going on, they could work on the Islam problem they all have. Shouldn't they put their heads together?

Zenster said...

You New: I wish that there was much more "inter-faith" discussion going on between

Sikhs, etc.

I agree. If any of these legitimate faiths wish to survive, they had best set about providing a unanimous and adamantine front in opposition to Islam. Every one of them is in Islam's cross hairs and its long past tea to reverse that situation.

Only a comprehensive and absolutely existential threat to Islam's continued presence on this earth will get even passing notice from Muslims. The time to make that happen is long overdue.