William Kilpatrick a Roman Catholic professor and author states in one of his three posts that Catholics could learn more about Islam from the Egyptian president al-Sisi, than from a crowd of Bishops pontificating about their positive views on this religion.
Kilpatrick obviously cares very little about political correctness and peace at all costs, yet cares about the True Jesus, about liberating people from religious bondage and human rights. Can we learn from him? Can leaders learn from him? Consider the wisdom of this quote:
"Muslims who are disaffected from Islam aren’t likely to convert to
another religion which proudly proclaims its commonality with the
faith they would love to leave."
"One of the unspoken hopes of Church and secular leaders is that by
saying Islam is a religion of peace… eventually even the Islamists
will believe it and begin to act peacefully."
"Such an approach also tends to devalue the sacrifices of those
Christians in Muslim lands who have had the courage to resist
submission to Islam. It must be highly discouraging to be told that
the religion in whose name your friends and relatives have been
slaughtered is prized and esteemed by the Church."
"It’s ironic that a Catholic can get a better grasp of the Islamic
threat by listening to a short speech by Egyptian President el-Sisi
than by listening to a hundred reassuring statements from Catholic
“Church policy should at least be redirected toward telling the truth
to fellow Catholics. Right now, Catholics are being seriously misled
about the nature of Islam … The bishops don’t necessarily have to
censure Islam, but they also don’t have to talk about their esteem for
it … You can express your respect for Muslims, but do you really want
to express your respect for Islam?”
“If we are seeing the beginning of a worldwide attack on Christianity,
then the first duty of bishops is not to preserve Muslims from
offense, but to preserve Christianity.”
“We should work at discrediting Islam just as Western leaders, clergy,
and intellectuals once worked to discredit other totalitarian
ideologies such as Nazism and communism.”
“Jihad for the sake of Allah is not some unfortunate deviation from
the true faith, it’s an integral part of that faith."
“What I am recommending is not an in-your-face … frontal assault on
everything Muslims hold dear, but rather a slow process of
desensitization by which Muslims get used to the idea of Islam being
subject to criticism.”
“The case against Islam is, as Fr. Botros points out, embedded in
mainstream Islamic sources.”
“The first time a Muslim hears the flaws of Muhammad discussed, he
might well be angry. But how about the third time? The twentieth
“The objective is not to make Muslims angry, but to make them
uncomfortable with their faith …"
“Our aim should not be to separate Muslims from radical
manifestations of their faith, but to separate them from their
faith — albeit gradually.”
"Theologically, Islam is a house of cards. It can’t stand up to
examination, which is why Islam’s guardians go ballistic at the least
hint of criticism. Nevertheless, Catholics should start making the
case while there is still time — before the questioning of Islam
becomes a crime, or before the Islamic world goes ballistic in the
literal sense of the term."
He quotes the friend of a Russian Orthodox priest, Daniel Sysoev who was valiant in his witness:
"Among those who call themselves Orthodox, I have met such strange
people who say that Fr. Daniel should not preach to Muslims, that one
must respect their religion, and that there is no benefit from his
preaching. But Fr. Daniel thought, as did the Lord, the Apostles, and
all the saints, that one must respect mistaken people but not their
mistakes. Truth is one, that which contradicts and negates truth is a
lie, and respect for a lie is contempt for the truth."
"Once you’ve studied up on Islam, the first thing you realize is that
the key to sowing the seeds of disbelief is Muhammad himself … If he is
discredited, Islam is discredited."
"Revelations about Muhammad’s character are the main reason that
Muslims leave Islam."
"If Muhammad is the key to casting doubts about Islam, Jesus provides
the path out of Islam."
"In using Jesus for his own ends, Muhammad neglects to give him any
personality. The Jesus of the New Testament is a recognizable human
being; the Jesus of the Koran is more like a phantom. When did he
carry out his ministry? There is not a hint. Where did he live? Again,
there is no indication. Where was he born? Under a palm tree. That’s
about as specific as it gets in the Koran. In short, Muhammad’s Jesus
is a nebulous figure. He seems to exist neither in time nor in space.
In the Gospels, you meet Jesus of Nazareth; in the Koran, you meet
someone who can best be described as Jesus of Neverland."