See other Religion Articles
Title: Et tu, pontiff?
Source:
Asia Times Online
URL Source: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/HI20Aa01.html
Published: Sep 19, 2006
Author: Ehsan Ahrari
Post Date: 2006-09-19 08:17:33 by Arete
Keywords: None
Views: 293
Comments: 17
Pope Benedict XVI knows a lot about Catholicism and Catholic doctrines. But no one would consider him even a lightweight authority on Islam. So it is hard to understand why he decided to conjure up a controversy regarding Islam at a time when insulting that religion seems to have become a regular indulgence of a number of people in the West who would never dare to insult any other things sacred. In a speech at Regensburg University in Germany last Thursday, the pope quoted from a 14th-century Byzantine emperor, Manuel II Paleologos, and said, "I quote, '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'." Now Muslims all over the world are deeply offended by one more incident of insulting their religion and their Prophet. The saddest aspect of it is that it is done by a man of religion who is also respected in the world of Islam. As much as the world press depicted Benedict as an erudite theologian at the time of his election to his current position, in this particular speech he did not demonstrate any evidence of erudition regarding Islam. At the same time, it is also possible that as a propagator of his faith, he is required to develop rather simplistic, if not outright incorrect, perspectives about other religions. In attempting to condemn violence, Benedict associated it with Islam and the Prophet Mohammed. Before questioning the veracity of that statement, it is worth pointing out that as a man who has dedicated his life to studying and comprehending his own religion, he should have remembered how much violence has been associated with his own Church. One needs to recall the enormous bloodshed and human misery caused during the Inquisition. According to one source, one of Benedict's predecessors, pope Gregory IX, "established the Inquisition in 1231, and burning was quickly decided upon as the official punishment. Administrators and inquisitors were all answerable directly to the pope - which essentially made him directly responsible for their actions. In 1245, the pope gave inquisitors the right to absolve their assistants of any acts of violence which they might commit in the fulfillment of their duties." The same source adds, "Torture of suspects was authorized by pope Innocent IV in 1252, and thus inquisition chambers were turned into places of abject horror." So by simplistically relating violence singly to Islam, he is indulging not only in assigning stereotypes, but also in pretending that Christianity does not have a bloody and violent history of its own. The "seventh conversation" to which Benedict alluded in his speech - in which Emperor Paleologos so eagerly and harshly expressed his sheer ignorance and contempt for Islam - took place in a different era. Considering the inanity of that era, one can overlook Paleologos' remark as just another example of silliness and prejudice of the West regarding Islam. But the question that deserves an answer is, why did Benedict decide to quote that "conversation"? Before narrating that conversation, Benedict insisted that he was quoting it. However, by not telling the audience that he did not share Paleologos' perspectives, he signaled that he agreed with it to listeners all over the world, but did not have the moral courage to come out and say so. Even that demonstration of moral timidity did not win him any friends in the world of Islam, to put it mildly. In the same speech, Benedict depicted Christianity as the "profound encounter of faith and reason". Since he was also making references to Islam, it also created an impression to Muslim readers that he was implying that Islam was not. If the purpose of Pope Benedict's speech was to initiate a dialogue with Muslims by quoting such a reprehensible example of insulting the Prophet of Islam, he certainly defeated all prospects of his participation in that dialogue as an honest representative of the Catholic faith. What Benedict needs is major help in the exercise of public relations and diplomacy. More important than that, he needs a fresh approach toward developing a real understanding of Islam that is not based on stereotypes from the 14th century. A powerful but only partially correct Western stereotype is that Islam was spread with the sword. Historically speaking, Islam did spread through conquest. However, the real purpose of Muslim conquests, especially from the 11th century on, was more for the establishment and expansion of dynasties than to spread that religion. It is possible that citizens of newly conquered territories might have felt the psychological urge (or even pressure) to adopt the faith of Muslim conquerors, but most if not all of the latter generally followed the Koranic diktat, "There is no compulsion in religion" (2:256). The Moors ruled Spain for about 800 years. If they had given the Christians of Spain the same choice that was given to Muslims (and Jews) during the Spanish Inquisition - convert or die - the entire population of Spain would be Muslim today. One can debate the merit of this type of argument ad infinitum. But a very relevant question about Benedict's speech is, why raise that issue now? This question is especially pertinent considering that Christianity has an equally strong record of riding on the victories of the military forces of Christian lands even as recently as the days of European colonization of Muslim countries in the 19th and 20th centuries. The issue of jihad will (and should) be discussed, but only by Muslims and without any condescending presence or supervision of persons of any other faith in that debate. That is the basic requirement of ijtihad - religious renewal through reinterpretation. Even now, Muslims at large do not share the Islamist perspectives of jihad that Pope Benedict has so cavalierly stamped on 1.4 billion followers of the Islamic faith. Finally, as a religious scholar, Benedict is expected to check the veracity of the repulsive and obnoxious observation of Paleologos in which he accused the Prophet Mohammed of having commanded his followers to spread Islam by the sword. As a factual matter, there is no command in which the Prophet of Islam enjoined his ummah (community of followers) to spread Islam by the sword. All of us are the products of our environment. In Europe, there have long prevailed strong feelings of antipathy toward Islam and Judaism. The hatred toward the Jews saw its darkest moments through the Holocaust. Today, strong prejudice is being readily and frequently expressed about Muslims. However, to be on the safe side, those who express it invariably couch it in the context of terrorism, which, in the environment since September 11, 2001, gives it the semblance of respectability at least among the Western audience. As wrong-headed and reckless as such a linkage is, its frequent expression by prominent persons provides it a high degree of visibility - and even a modicum of respectability - that it certainly does not deserve. Just one more observation about Pope Benedict: since, unlike his immediate predecessor John Paul II, he refuses to put Islam on the same moral footing as Catholicism, his prejudice toward Islam is already a well-known fact in Muslim countries. Considering that background, when he makes additional offensive remarks, even by quoting others, he is not winning any friends in that part of the world. The sad outcome of this episode is that the Muslim-Catholic dialogue might have to wait until another pope is at the helm of the Catholic Church.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Arete (#0)
We cannot be telling the truth now can we? Of course the Pope failed to mention the bad things about his brethern.
the neocon pope
What is going on is that the "windmill" of 1 billion-plus fire-breathing Islamic radical members of Al CIAda (when, in reality, the figure is in the hundreds) is being conjured up by the magic sorcerers of the neocon/corporate media and publicized megaphone-style to the masses of "The West" and especially to those of us who live in USrael. Now we are supposed to embark on a "Quixotic" quest to tilt at and destroy these windmills wherever we may find them (or even just a fantasy will do, as in the original story by Cervantes, as the massacred women and children of Iraq are finding out) for the next 100 years or until the oil runs out, whichever comes first.
Like Bush and the CIA now.
Neocon pope
"If there’s another 9/11 or a major war in the Middle-East involving a U.S. attack on Iran, I have no doubt that there will be, the day after or within days an equivalent of a Reichstag fire decree that will involve massive detentions in this country." - Daniel Ellsberg Author, Pentagon Papers I wonder if Pope Ratz' speechwriter is connected with one of Michael Leeden's P2 Lodge pals...
I think he's trying to prevent the French from noticing that most of their problem Muslims are black.
I think he could be beholden to them, one way or another. No place for the lily-livered.
"If there’s another 9/11 or a major war in the Middle-East involving a U.S. attack on Iran, I have no doubt that there will be, the day after or within days an equivalent of a Reichstag fire decree that will involve massive detentions in this country." - Daniel Ellsberg Author, Pentagon Papers That's George Allen's job, to raise the macaca problem.
I think it's pretty obvious that Benedict does not have the "common" touch. He is no Pope Paul and we can expect more decidedly un-PC "mis-steps" to follow. In fact, I read in a Sept.18 Guardian article that shortly after Benedict made controversial Islam related speech and apology, he subsequently offended the Jews by asking (rhetorically) why the cross was such an important symbol for the Catholic Church. Then he proceeded to answer his own question by quoting from St. Paul using original Italian language (ie. pre-King James Bible sanitized version)that roughly stated as follows: "...In the Italian translation, used by the Pope, it runs as follows: "We preach the crucified Christ - a scandal for the Jews, a folly for the pagans"... http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,329579048-110881,00.html "Pope's remarks about Jews 'unwise in current climate'" So that's Benedict for you - he's a theologian, a scholar and I have no doubt that along the way Benedict will make speeches that will piss off Catholics as well as he has done with the Muslims and Jews, perhaps when he quotes from historic texts that deal with the Inquisition or the Crusades. I find it kind of refreshing to hear a high profile leader speak with so little care or interest in "pleasing" or rather "not offending" anyone. Now if you hold the opinion that Benedict is a manipulative neocon, here's a good article from the IsraeliInsider that addresses that position - basically it says that Benedict purposely alienated the Muslims to get the reaction he wanted to prove that Islam is a violent primitive religion and that no Muslim country ( read: Turkey) should be allowed into the EU and that recognition of Christianity as a prime religion of EU countries should be written into the EU constitution and that Benedict and Merkel "cut a deal" in this regard before his speech. http://web.israelinsider.com/ Views/9462.htm "The Pope takes on the Prophet" Sept. 17, 2006
Screw 'em if they can't take a joke. ;0)
"Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth." Henry David Thoreau
In the Italian translation, used by the Pope, it runs as follows: "We preach the crucified Christ - a scandal for the Jews, a folly for the pagans". St Paul is next. Foxman doesn't like the NT.
"If there’s another 9/11 or a major war in the Middle-East involving a U.S. attack on Iran, I have no doubt that there will be, the day after or within days an equivalent of a Reichstag fire decree that will involve massive detentions in this country." - Daniel Ellsberg Author, Pentagon Papers The zionists are begging for money "for the needy and ill jews." www.jewishvoice.tv Has anyone see the pali's or the Lebanese broadcasting commercials for jack? (Looks like .tv needs to be added to the hyperlink menu)
Vatican opens prewar archive The Vatican opened its archive covering its early relations with Hitler and Mussolini to scholars. The material covers the 1922-1939 reign of Pope Pius XI. Scholars are particularly eager to examine the prewar writings of the future Pope Pius XII, who was the Vatican’s ambassador in Berlin in the 1930s and has been criticized for not taking more action as pope to protect Jews during the Holocaust. The archives from the Holocaust era remain closed.
I'm sounding like a broken record the past few days, but the Catholic Church is just another front for Judaism, and not only that, but the Vatican invented and controls Islam. They are the fathers of all revolutions [B'nai B'rith speech, in red, at the bottom of the page THE JEWS AND THEIR LIES at http://biblebelievers.org]. Since they control the three main false religions, they can use them in the dialectic process to move the herd this way and that, as the need arises, no matter their "lesser brethren" get caught in the crossfire. They have always been in the mission to destroy true Christianity. Genesis 3:15. Psalm 2. I can't help but think Ratzinger is acting as agent provocateur. The Catholic Church has never apologized for the millions of Christians it has slaughtered, and will never rest until she absorbs or kills the Protestant Church, or is destroyed in the process. "....the gates of hell will not prevail...." "....We might add to the list of current prominent crypto-Jews, Osama bin Laden, whose mother is Jewish according to another Israeli source. “Bali, Australia & The Mossad” by Rose Cohen appeared in an Australian publication on October 17, 2002. “BIN LADEN IS JEWISH, full stop. A very close friend and a MOST eminent Israeli journalist told me recently, that according to Jewish law - bin Laden is Jewish, as his mother is Jewish(!). “AND –– if that is not enough, this irrefutably honest Israeli journalist, disclosed to me personally that bin Laden’s mother’s family lives in Israel (I will not print here the exact address which he provided me). I knew that bin Laden was Jewish long time ago, but with the current war hysteria I never mentioned to anyone except to my husband. The fact that bin Laden is Jewish, is known in Israel, but the ‘free’ ‘democratic’ ‘press’ of Israel will NOT publish it, as we have to continue to promote the myth that he is a ‘villain’. “Actually, I will not be surprised if bin Laden is living now in Israel, and the Mossad is ‘laughing all the way to the bank’ ! When Israel and Bush finally will control all world’s countries, I am confident that bin Laden will be invited as an honored guest. “We (should I say they?) the Jews NEVER brag about what we are doing, and the public (here and in Israel) is totally innocent and uninformed about the amount of terror that we are manipulating and releasing on the whole world at the moment. ****** “The strategy is simple: attempt to make our enemies suspect each other and then fight it out. It saves us the work. Keep in mind that our enemies are ANYONE WHO IS NOT JEWISH.” Maurice Pinay partly recognized the dialectical process at work, per the Protocols, when he posited that crypto-Jewry in the Islamic world accounts for the tumult in the Middle East today: “...the phenomenon of Crypto-Judaism did not remain only limited to the Christian world. One still finds in different parts of the Musleman world, communities of Crypto-Jews, as Cecil Roth observes, who records several examples of Jewish communities, in which Hebrews, who outwardly were Muselmen, are in secret still Jews. This means that the Jews have also introduced a ‘Fifth Column’ into the bosom of the Islamic religion. This fact perhaps explains the many divisions and the uproar which has occurred in the world of Mohammed.” (pp. 246-7) In other words, having infiltrated the Christian and Islamic worlds, the crypto- Jews were in a position to implement Protocol #17 of the Learned Elders of Zion, “Throughout all Europe, and by means of relations with Europe, in other continents also, we must create ferments, discords, and hostility. Therein we gain a double advantage.” To those who hesitate to believe that the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion represent a blueprint for world domination by a secret Jewish brotherhood, Mrs. Cohen offers some sensible advice: “Many efforts have been made to dismiss the Protocols as a hoax... frankly, it matters not whether they are or aren’t because of their astonishing reflection of reality. Read them and decide for yourself.” ............" MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT - CATHOLIC OR JEWISH? PART III
I can't keep up. I didn't see anything about George Allen last night on 4um, and I haven't had time to check the new threads, but apparently there was a big ruckus in Virginia, which I had not heard about until last night, about Allen just finding out about HIS Jewish roots. When the question was put to him in a debate or news conference, the crowd booed. He made some statement about the First Amendment and the right to freedom of religion. He didn't mention that the Jews are trying to remove freedom of religion for Christians. He claims he and his mother are Christians, which may very well be true, but that macaca statement would seem to belie that.
Here's the main 4um thread on it: Sen. George Allen Says He Embraces His Jewish Ancestry. Ironically, it was the macaca remark last month which put the spotlight on his Jewish heritage, because people started researching his background to see where "macaca" could've come from. Which also shows the impact of the youtube explosion of videoclips.
"I quote, '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'."
#2. To: Arete (#0)
the question that deserves an answer is, why did Benedict decide to quote that "conversation"?
#3. To: Arete (#0)
#4. To: Arete (#0)
In 1245, the pope gave inquisitors the right to absolve their assistants of any acts of violence which they might commit in the fulfillment of their duties."
I've already said too much.
#5. To: angle, Arete, MUDDOG, Sam Houston, ..., gengis ghandi, Zoroaster (#2)
#6. To: robin (#5)
“Yes, but is this good for Jews?"
#7. To: Arete (#0)
"Take him to the tree of Wobegon." -- Thulsa Doomshowitz
#8. To: Eoghan (#6)
#9. To: Tauzero (#7)
I think he's trying to prevent the French from noticing that most of their problem Muslims are black.
I've already said too much.
#10. To: Arete, Cynicom (#0)
As much as the world press depicted Benedict as an erudite theologian at the time of his election to his current position, in this particular speech he did not demonstrate any evidence of erudition regarding Islam.
#11. To: scrapper2 (#10)
"Pope's remarks about Jews 'unwise in current climate'"
#12. To: scrapper2 (#10)
In reply to his rhetorical question, he quoted a verse from St Paul, the New Testament author most often accused of anti-semitism.
#13. To: robin. everyone (#12)
Just seen on the History Channel -
#14. To: robin (#8)
Rabbis in the reading room...JTA:
“Yes, but is this good for Jews?"
#15. To: Arete (#0)
it is hard to understand why he decided to conjure up a controversy regarding Islam at a time when insulting that religion seems to have become a regular indulgence of a number of people in the West who would never dare to insult any other things sacred.
#16. To: MUDDOG (#9)
That's George Allen's job, to raise the macaca problem.
#17. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#16)
I've already said too much.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest