 |
|
|
||
|
September 18, 2006 5:00 PM
Benedict and Islam: A Supernatural Gambit?
The Anchoress meditates on the Pope’s speech and proposes that, when it comes to the Church, there is always more there than meets the eye:“While governments ‘think as human beings,’ Benedict, the Bishop of Rome, the man who sits on the Throne of Peter (whom Jesus advised to ‘think as God does,’) is perhaps uniquely qualified to deliver to these supernaturally-focused people something they cannot fail to understand, a supernatural challenge.” Catholics who attended mass on Sunday, September 17 heard a reading from the Gospel in which Jesus admonishes St. Peter, “you are thinking not as God does, but as human beings do.” It was an interesting admonishment in light of Pope Benedict’s Regensburg speech and the swift conflagration it ignited within an Islamic world that seems increasingly more tinderbox than spiritual refuge. If you are late to this story, on September 12 - the day after the fifth anniversary of the most shocking and deadly act of terrorism yet perpetrated upon the infidel world by fundamentalist Islamists - Pope Benedict XVI made a thoughtful and scholarly presentation which discussed, among other ideas, the commingling of faith and reason, the negative effect of western secularism and the futile and irreverent application of violence as a modern means of religious persuasion. Those bothering to take the time to read the speech in its entirety cannot help but be struck by the intellectual and pastoral tone of the piece. The speech is - at its core - an invitation to dialogue, extended to the world, in hopes that religious and secular people, and religious people of differing creeds, might forego talking past each other and pursue real understanding. Benedict included in his remarks the 14th century observations of Byzantine Emperor Manuel II Paleologus in his chats with “an educated Persian.” In the seventh conversation…the emperor touches on the theme of the holy war. The emperor must have known that surah 2, 256 reads: “There is no compulsion in religion”. According to the experts, this is one of the suras of the early period, when Mohammed was still powerless and under threat. But naturally the emperor also knew the instructions, developed later and recorded in the Qur’an, concerning holy war. Without descending to details, such as the difference in treatment accorded to those who have the “Book” and the “infidels”, he addresses his interlocutor with a startling brusqueness on the central question about the relationship between religion and violence in general, saying: “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.” The emperor, after having expressed himself so forcefully, goes on to explain in detail the reasons why spreading the faith through violence is something unreasonable. Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul. “God”, he says, “is not pleased by blood - and not acting reasonably is contrary to God’s nature. Faith is born of the soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats… To convince a reasonable soul, one does not need a strong arm, or weapons of any kind, or any other means of threatening a person with death…”. [All emphasis mine.] Read within context, one can clearly see that Benedict is providing a framing text for the over-riding theme of his speech; the application of reason to faith. Note that the Pope even remarks that he finds Manuel’s observations made with a “startling brusqueness,” which indicates that Manuel’s rhetoric would be too harsh for Benedict. None of these careful qualifications by Benedict mattered one whit. Within hours of the speech, urged on by Muslim clerics claiming insult and too many press reports focusing on Manuel’s words instead of Benedict’s, the crowds of enraged Muslims - most of whom were highly unlikely to have actually read the speech - began congregating on the streets, shaking their fists for the cameras and burning the Pope in effigy. The calls for the head of Benedict XVI began shortly thereafter. While Benedict has not taken back anything he has said, the Pope did quickly express regret for the reaction to his words, and he later made a second statement in which he attempted to clarify that in quoting Manuel he was not speaking for himself: “I am deeply sorry for the reactions in some countries to a few passages of my address,” the Pope told pilgrims at the summer papal palace of Castel Gandolfo, “which were considered offensive.” That not-subtle point has been completely lost on the Islamic hotheads who are disinterested in serving anything but their rage. At this writing, the Associated Press is reporting that Sr. Leonella Sgorbati, an Italian missionary sister has been martyred in Somalia, deliberately targeted, probably in response to the Pope’s speech. Catholic priests are missing in Iraq, and Catholics going to Sunday Mass are facing Muslims demonstrators bearing placards that demonstrate some odd thoughts for a so-called “religion of peace.” Security for the 79-year-old Pope, we are told, has been “beefed-up.” That is where we stand at this hour, and there is no reason to believe that this firestorm will simply burn itself out by next weekend. But while we’re watching events unfold, it is a good time to wonder what exactly Benedict was about, making this speech, at this time? Any intelligent human being understands that one does not - in the 21st century - publicly touch on the subject of Islamic jihad and religious compulsion, no matter how delicately or distinctively, unless one wants to deal with a reaction that is both primitive and intimidating, by a group demonstrably closed to dialogue. And yet Benedict, clearly an intelligent man, has done so. He has, in essence, dared to say to Islam, “Is this really what you want to be doing, in this century? The rest of the world’s religions have put away the swords…how about we talk?” Up to now, no one has come out and said that to Islam. The Pope is the first. While violence and Islam have gone together hand-to-glove since, perhaps, the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy, politicians have repeatedly used the phrase “Islam means peace.” As befits our mania to “celebrate diversity”, a great deal of “due deference” has been accorded the followers of the prophet. They have been invited to the White House. They are upstanding members of the United Nations. They are offered a place at every economic summit, every national day of prayer. Good heavens, the US Post Office has created stamps for their religious holiday of Eid, and yet it has never been enough. The world has more than amply demonstrated that it would like to see Islam put away its swords and get on with the business of simply living life - which is difficult enough without having to worry about jihad - and yet Islam will not comply. With Benedict’s words, the world is finally free to come out and ask, “Okay, short of our surrender and our conversions, what is it going to take to get you folks to settle down?” That is the quintessential question of the age, for without the answer we will continue to pussy-foot and dance around the whole issue of Islamic violence for another few decades. A clear question and a clear answer will finally and fully tell the West what it needs to know in order to either defend itself seriously, or simply capitulate. It might seem odd to some that the Bishop of Rome, a preacher of peace, is the man confronting Islam. But the secular world has been appealing to Islam - and Islamic governments - in political and ideological terms, in strictly secularist fashion; a fashion they might find hard to understand. “Let’s keep God out of this and talk as men,” has been the tactic of governments and nations for decades, and it has not worked. Ultimately it cannot work for the plain and simple reason that Islamists are not secular-thinking people living in what is thought of as a “natural” world. In fact, much of Islamic thinking - much of Islamic perspective - is utterly given over to the supernatural, to those things “seen and unseen.” And while governments “think as human beings,” Benedict, the Bishop of Rome, the man who sits on the Throne of Peter (whom Jesus advised to “think as God does,”) is perhaps uniquely qualified to deliver to these supernaturally-focused people something they cannot fail to understand, a supernatural challenge. And he does so while fully understanding that within the supernatural realm there are forces for the light, and for the darkness. According to the Associated Press, as she lay dying, Sr. Leonella Sgorbati followed the example of her lord, murmuring, “I forgive, I forgive…” about her murderers. That is an action of grace; it is supernatural in origin. Her death will have repercussions throughout the world, as will the Pope’s speech - as will any attempt on his life - and none of it will reflect well on Islam, which may finally be forced to look within to identify its enemies. It is worth wondering if what we are witnessing here is a cosmic chess game, in which Benedict has seen a few moves ahead. Perhaps. More likely though, given Benedict’s apparent surprise at the vehement reaction of the “Muslim street,” and at the inability of so many to take his words in context, what we are seeing is a spiritual surgeon’s delicate probing of a supernatural psyche, one which perceives the examination as a finger being thrust into a wound. Benedict’s careful probe may well prove to be the catalyst which shames Islam (currently finding itself unable to murmur “I forgive, I forgive,” about anything at all) into finally putting down its swords. ——— Comments (32)Jack Haley :Jim McCullough :Well done! For a while I went back and forth on whether Benedict really understood what the reaction might be, but, finally, it doesn't matter. The speech is providential. DrDon :If I read, see or hear one more story about the pope "apologizing" for his remarks, I'm going to break my TV/computer screen. Benedict said he was sorry for the reaction; read the headlines and you'd swear he was sorry for what he said. This has gone on for several days. I work for a major media member and almost blew a fuse tonight when we talked about the Pope's "apology." BTW: The freeSpeech segment on the Katie Couric show had a fascinating piece from a female Muslim author who basically told her co-religionists to grow up, stop the crap and read the Koran while accusing them of doing the same thing with Benedict's remarks that non-Muslims do when they focus only on the violent aspects of the Koran. Terry Gain :Freedom of religion also includes freedom from religious compulsion. Freedom of speech includes freedom to question the beliefs of others, whether those beliefs are based on a blind acceptance of religious dogma, years of intense study or the kind of intelligence or background that, say a Rosie O'Donnell or a Bill Maher brings to any issue. In a democracy one should be free to question the divinity of Christ, the authenticity of Mohammed and the sanity of Dowd, Krugman and Keller. And anyone who disagrees with me can go to hell-after they are beheaded. Don Meaker :It is because the criticism of Islam is accurate that the Imans take offense. A lie would hurt less. Truth is salt in the bleeding sore. Lexington Green :"...may well prove to be the catalyst which shames Islam (currently finding itself unable to murmur “I forgive, I forgive,” about anything at all) into finally putting down its swords." Sorry, but you were going along great until you lost me there. There is no way there can be "mutual" respect, so there is no way that Muslims can feel shame at using violence to spread their religion. It is the essence of their religion to spread it by force of arms. They can no more give up jihad to compel submission to their religion, just for the sake of getting along with non-believers, than we Catholics can give up the seven sacraments or the three theological virtues or the virgin birth just to get along with non-Catholics. Their religion is what it is, and we should respect it enough to see that these elements of it that we don't like cannot be wished away. As a consequence, it is giving Muslims no less than the respect they are due, by taking their beliefs seriously, to recognize that their Allah and their Mohammad requires them to do whatever is necessary to destroy our religion and exterminate from the face of the Earth those who insist despite coercion on practicing it. So be it. That is their religion. I respect it. They believe that God has ordered them to do these things. I would not expect them to disobey such a command. Part of my respect for Islam is recognizing that there is no point in having a conversation with people who hold such beliefs. I am only interested in proposals to defend ourselves and use all legitimate means to defeat our enemies. We are already engage in an existential war and conversation, other than to obtain tactical advantage, is pointless. narby :I once new a girl, a very baaad girl, who would disapear for days at a time and not answer a phone. When I finally would see her again, she would instantly admonish me about why I did not try and call her. It always put me on the defensive, and left me trying to explain that it was she that had be absent. But it was to no avail, she would pretend to be the injured party and would never admit her guilt. Islamists are practicing the same game. I caught on eventually. When will we catch onto the Islamists game? sevenstarhand :Hello PJM and all, The straw that breaks the camel's back always follows the results of earlier deeds. The Pope's choice of words was brain dead, in my humble opinion, if he was seeking to spread peace. He could have appealed for cooler heads and humility from all sides using any other words, but instead he chose to quote Crusade era hypocrisy that was guaranteed to inflame Muslims. Now we see the backtracking and spinning that always follows the gaffes of those afraid of simply telling the truth. More proof that religion is the opposite of truth, wisdom, and justice The "infallible" Grand Inquisitor (the pot) sought to lecture Islam (the kettle) about spreading religion through dark deeds by quoting a Dark Ages text while the USA and Europe are in the midst of the Neo-Crusades. The irony and absurdity in this situation is amazing, to say the least. It evidences both the fallacy and fallibility of those who vainly and arrogantly pretend to serve the Creator. Dear Pope, ever heard of Karma or the golden rule? Ever stop to remember how the Vatican and western nations became so rich and powerful over the centuries? Ever consider giving up your blood drenched wealth and earthly power to end the blatant hypocrisy of your vane, materialistic, and duplicitous empire? Ever think of forgoing your peacock's robes to walk the walk instead of simply talking the talk? Remember the "eye of the needle" and "log and mote in the eye" parables? Is this a demonstration of your infallibility, wisdom, or utter blindness? As another wise one once said; What goes around comes around! The West has killed far more Muslims (and other dark skins) than they have killed westerners, yet our press and leaders can only see Muslim and "third world" desperation in the face of western military and economic dominance and oppression, (in the name of God and country, by the way), as sources of evil in this world. Guess what guys and girls, war, violence, and injustice are evil, no matter what the excuse or cause or who is doing it to whom. Anyone who thinks the Creator would judge religion, war, or any other profiteering at the expense of others as wise or acceptable activities has a very big surprise in store. DRJ :It is ironic and appropriate that this call for introspection comes from the Pope, the modern leader of the same Catholic Church that in the Dark Ages refused to let its followers read or interpret the Bible. The Catholic Church and its followers suffered many hardships until the great awakening. Today, Muslim imans command Islam's followers regarding what is and is not holy. Let's hope that a Muslim equivalent of Martin Luther will emerge or that Muslims heed the Pope's words. For, truly, the Pope knows of which he speaks. Dick Stanley :Wonderful analysis. Benedict must have known that the rent-a-mobs would hit the streets--though he must feel awful at the murder of the sister--and he certainly has the stature, as one believer to another, to get what Islamic moderates there are to thinking harder about what they are allowing to happen. gkirk :Actually this is one of those bleak times where I fear a war of civilizations seems inevitable. Joan :It is worth noting that Sr. Leonella had a bodyguard for some time before she was murdered. She was obviously a target in Somalia, and the timing of her murder, so close to the uproar ginned up after the Pope's talk, of course makes us think they are connected. But I am not so sure they are, and we would all do well to take a closer look at her murder in context. MlR :There's a guy whose messages I generally follow who uses the tag line: "Islam will never be able to take being laughed at." Seriously, we should just laugh at these clowns. Their rituals, their fanaticism, everything about them. Get with the 21st century or stfu. Al Maviva :>>>>Lexington Green Says: We are already engage in an existential war and conversation, other than to obtain tactical advantage, is pointless. Get over yourself, Lex. It isn't pointless. If we're to have an existential war, it behooves us to try every reasonable available possible solution short of genocide to remedy the problem, to give the enemy every last best chance to avoid the slaughter. We are morally compelled to do so, and if we do not do so the guilt will haunt our society, and will haunt many of us individually. I say this as a defense hawk and as a fellow roman catholic, and if what we believe is true then there will also be a moral price to pay for not offering Muslims peace - even the chunk of radicals or true believers, clal them what you will, who are most in love with jihad. Just as Saul saw the light so too might some of our fellow humans. Yep, we should sharpen our swords, but we should continue praying and brave leaders like Pope Benedict - who has stood by the essential truth of his statement (i.e. "God's way is reason, and reason is incompatible with violence") - need to keep standing up for that truth, which is religious truth and which is also embodied in our failing but still somewhat vigorous post-enlightenment western culture. This adds an interesting gloss to Pope John Paul II's commentary on the "Culture of Death," does it not? Twok :Thank god for the pope finally calling a spade a spade. Pope John Paul had a huge role in the defeat of communism. Let's hope Pope Benedict can do the same here. mrsizer :sevenstarhand, go back to your toys. When you grow up, you can come back out and talk with the adults. Violence is evil no matter the circumstance? Please. If you insist on not understanding the difference between doing something (hacking off heads, for example) generations ago and doing something now, 9/11, 1565 was an interesting date. I have very little doubt the Pope chose his words with great care. He might have been surprised by the ferocity of the response but a negative response seems to have been inevitable. Paula Cella at RedState points out the historical context that makes Manuel II a very interesting choice to quote. Jenn M. :"Sevenstarhand" is right! We should surrender our "blood drenched wealth" to appease the inflamed Muslims ("and other dark skins"). Hah! Sevenstar, you write like a bad "Dungeons & Dragons" manual. These Islamic Fascists are the biggest misogynists, racists and supremacists of all time. They have to be challenged and held responsible for their crimes. Peter :Let's bottom line it: People who answer words that they find offensive with murder arson and pillage are barbarians. People who support such actions are supporting barbarians. It is unlikely that you can change barbarians via words. Those of us who are religious should use prayer but should be prepared to take action if necessary to defend ourselves. It is however very much in our power to call those who from the safety of the west support barbarians, excuse barbaric acts and demand respect for barbarians feelings. They must be confronted directly, in the media, in the streets and at the ballot box. The Pope invited Islam to look in the mirror. Islam threw a rock at the mirror and used the shards as a knife. By this very action the Pope sounds the warning call to the rest of us, it isn't as if we haven't already been warned over and over again, but our window to act is shrinking. gm :The ignorant among us point to hundreds -year old crusades as a war upon islam. In truth, Islam made war upon the west for 300 years before there was a reaction. It was "Reconquista" in Spain. Charles the Hammer defeated them in Tours France. Saving Vienna was a close thing. Yes, Christianity was bloody. But it also invented hospitals and ultimately science, enlightenment and freedom. You who hate it will love islam with its oppression of women and execution of gays. Or perhaps you prefer pagan-Nazi germany, or godless Russia with their noted respect for life. Cronaca :Looking at it as an historian, the constant singling out of the Crusades as a Western crime is simply absurd. From the seventh century on, a clash of monotheisms convulsed the Mediterranean. For about a thousand years, the steady winners were the armies of Islam. The Crusades were an extended series of Christian counteroffensives that ultimately failed (though the Reconquista in Spain was another story). The fighting was nasty and brutal, as was typical of the time. You don't have to be a westerner or a Christian to see that the much-criticized "Crusader mentality" is just one side of a two-sided coin. Gayle Miller :If CATHOLICS took to the streets in rage every time our faith was insulted, we'd be out there 24/7/365. I am grateful to be 65 years old and without children. There are days (today is one of them) when the state of the world pains me deeply and the future of civilization thanks to these jihadist primitives with access to modern weaponry seems in doubt. If I didn't believe so strongly in God, I would be in despair! Vinny Vidivici :Sure, sevenstar. And as soon as some mythical body count reaches parity, everything'll be cool. The Islamic world, with its seats of authority in Araby and Persia, has been the recipient of the largest transfer of wealth in human history. For the most part, they've pissed it all away. To boot, for the past several decades, we've gotten non-stop murder and mayhem, along with several attempts at holding hostage a global economy upon which billions of people around the world -- including hundreds of millions in developing countries which the terminally-concerned claim to care so much about -- are utterly dependant. ". . . economic dominance and oppression . . ."? On the contrary. No amount of neo-Marxist narrative or blameshifting apologetics can whitewash such catastrophic failure. And judging by the reaction to this latest episode of made-for-TV high-chair banging and grievance-mongering, the world is growing weary of the Muslim world's all-too-frequent temper tantrums. Janice :Thanks, Anchoress. By the way Sevenstarhand: since when it is impermissible to use a text from the Crusades, or any other era? Have the Muslims so blackmailed and cowed those of us in the West that there are subjects, quotations, and eras that we may not broach? I don't think so and neither did the Pope. Good for him to speak out so seriously and clearly on the issue. Unlike any other leader, Benedict XVI has articulated the problem of our age and he doesn't have any armies to back him up. He simply has spiritual strength and deep holiness. It's good enough for me. philmon :I'm always wary of people who use the term "more proof" instead of "more evidence", as it peels back the curtain attempting to cover their intellectual bankruptcy, woven from shrill threads of half-baked and typically borrowed ideas. Sevenstarhand peppers his/her tirade with soundbites of psuedo-wisdom (such as "the straw that breaks the camel's back always follows the results of earlier deeds") and immediately applies them (as the faith of The Left requires) to the West. Basically, that religion goes like this: Mankind bad. White mankind worse. Wealth is finite, a zero-sum equation in which if one entity gains, it must be at the expense of others. (Demonstrably not true, for there are far more people in the world than there were, say, 500 years ago, and yet much, much more wealth and many more wealthy). Sevenstarhand has obviously not read the Pope's speech, either -- just the headlines and the excerpts. And I note he/she has no problem going on a tirade against today's Catholic Church as bloodthirsty and evil without fear of death threats from Catholics and other Christians. On the assertation that "The West" has killed far more Muslims ("and other dark skins") than Muslims ("and other dark skins???") have killed westerners, I imagine this person has little idea what he/she is talking about. It just "sounds" good. It has that element of "truthiness" and false moral high ground that comes with the loathing of one's own culture -- especially without any moral context pertaining to why who killed whom and when. All killing of any kind -- ever, according to sevenstarhand, is bad. Ergo, whoever killed more must be worse. As for the "the straw that breaks the camel's back always follows the results of earlier deeds" wisdom-bite, that might also be applied to the couple of hundred years before the first of the much maligned Crusades -- the history of the spread of Islam through the Middle East, northern Africa, Western Europe, and into Eastern Europe. You know, where brownish people killed brown people and white people in the name of Islam in order to spread it. Which is pretty much excactly what of Byzantine Emperor Manuel II Paleologus, the man the Pope was quoting, was talking about. If you read the Pope's whole speech, you see that even the Pope calls that quote rather brusque, and then goes on to talking about dialogue and reason being the better way to spread faith. The Church has changed since the days of (the unsanctioned) Inquisitions. Islam has not changed in 1300 years. KBK :The Vatican has corrected the English text to bring it in line with the original German: "...he addresses his interlocutor with a startling brusqueness, a brusqueness which leaves us astounded, on the central question about the relationship between religion and violence in general...." It's a shame this correction comes so late. JB :I think it was foolish to talk about holy war in history and not speak to the Roman church's involvement in holy war. To ignore the church's own use of war and holy warriors (crusaders) to convert pagans and heretics (Russian Orthodox and others) was to miss a opportunity as well as to leave himself open to the charge of hypocrisy. He would have done better to compare the Catholic churchs evolution from a past use of holy war to today. Ken :Even if they had read the speech, they were unlikely to understand it. The Pope's only mistake was talking in more than one syllable. Joel :Pope Benedict is a smart guy. He's exposed Muslim extremists for what they are: irrational, hot-headed facists. Juan Hervada :I have read the Pope's lecture in its entirety and I'm pretty sure that there is nothing improvised in it, least of all the quotation of Manuel II. He said it because he felt it was his duty to say it... don't forget that catholics believe the Pope to be divinely inspired when speaking on moral subjects... On the other hand, the riots in Muslim countries were just another show of unlimited power of the religious rulers over their canon fodder. Tom Grey - Liberty Dad :I think the Pope made a small mistake in his reason, by not fully understanding in advance how the Islamic reason-haters would respond. I think his faith, in the reasonableness of Islam, blinded him to their predictable rage. I think his faith allowed him to speak a greater truth, a more important truth, a more relevant and possibly catalyzing truth. "There is no compulsion in religion." Thanks for great analysis. S. Camponovo :Look, we have to get to the bottom of it. The real question is: What did the Pope know and when did he know it? Who put him in touch with Mr. Manuel Paleologus Jr.? If the Pope´s quotation is correct, why wasn´t Mr. Paleologus Jr. investigated for possible hate crime violations? Did somebody from Dick Cheney´s office leak that quotation to the Pope? If so, who was it? S. Camponovo j :I don't know that the anchoress will see this, but if so, two things: first, it's important to note that Islam does not mean "peace" but "submission" - theoretically to the will of God, but in any case to the word of the prophet (pbuh) and the body of interpretation and hadith. second, i only hope that you are right and that Benedict both intended to stand on this and to see it through to the end. press reports of his "apology" at first caused me to lose heart, but then i saw that he simply apologized for the dim-wittedness and belligerence of some of his enlarged audience. i hope he will continue not to dishonor the poor true martyr in somalia and any others who might join her. Comments have been archived for this page. |
Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers
RSS FeedsPajamas MediaThe Weather Nerd Has the Latest on Tropical Storm Cristobal Energy Independence: Shooting for the Moon Hollywood Loses the War in Iraq Obama-Gate (The Brandenburg Gate, That Is) Anti-Semitism Without Anti-Semites IndyMac: Not Such ‘A Wonderful Life’ Let’s Learn to Laugh About Obama Mamma Mia: A Movie to Laugh At (Not With)
Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers
|
digg this
del.icio.us
Re the pope and Islam -- either the quote is offensive to muslims or it is not truw -- so far the discussion -- read violent outbursts -- have focused on the offensiveness -- but no one has come forward to disprove the accuracy of the observation -- in fct the muslim community has demonstrated that it is in fact a very accurate description of their religion.
Sep 18, 2006 06:40 PM