I have to admit that I haven't been following much of the news lately. I was talking to one of my friends after a long day of nothing but studying. Suddenly, he mentions Pope Benedict, the current presiding spiritual leader of the Roman Catholic Church, and a current speech he gave out. While many have criticized the Pope for his apparent incompetency, I have actually had mixed impressions about him, and I have yet to fully understand his character.
The speech in question was made on Tuesday September 12, 2006, in a German university. However, I will focus on some key excerpts from that entire speech. Regarding the concept of Holy War, he said,
The Danish cartoon controversy was a clear-cut attack on Islam and its Prophet. This one, however, was an implicit reference that sparked a reaction... just because the Pope was taken out of context. However, such anger might seemingly be jusitifed. The Pope has shown ambivalent stances regarding Islam. On one hand, he spoke of radical Islam as a "new barbarism" that threatens the "civilized world", and opposed Turkey's bid to the EU as Turkey was part of a "different cultural sphere". On another, he actually condemned the anti-Muslim cartoons from Jyllands-Posten, encouraged Christian-Muslim interfaith dialogue, among other things as mentioned in this article. The thing is, it seems that the Pope was taken out of context, and, as I've said before, hundreds of times (even when it comes to Ahmadinejad's speeches or verses from the Holy Koran), CONTEXT IS EVERYTHING!!! I guess context is not important anymore in such press releases, eh? The media is certainly manipulative when it comes to such issues, and should focus more on the context.
But for now, I reserve my judgement. Did Benedict/Ratzinger quote the emperor Manuel II for the sake of proving that God requires a Logical approach, or as an attack on Islam? Most of the speech was on logic, faith and reason, so singling out that line might have been incidental. However, I reserve my judgement. Considering his interfaith/political stances, I'd say he most likely meant it just for the sake of his argument, and not an attack on Islam. His ambivalence on certain issues (opposition to war and to Turkey's EU bid at the same time) makes him seem more centrist, not "theologically conservative" as BBC pointed out. While it is most likely that he never meant to offend Islam, I will wait for a reply from the Pope. Like him, I also believe in interfaith dialogue. As a Muslim, I believe in God, and I believe that there are other people out there who approach Him in so many ways that need to be understood by myself. The more I understand from others, the more I understand from myself and how it sets me apart from others in my beliefs and practices. Does this make me better? Probably not. But I hope the Pope believes this, too, and actually makes up for this awry speech and engages in serious interfaith dialogue. That would prove not only beneficial to other religions, but to the Catholic Church as well, and probably all of humanity.
Salaam, from
Saracen
The speech in question was made on Tuesday September 12, 2006, in a German university. However, I will focus on some key excerpts from that entire speech. Regarding the concept of Holy War, he said,
"I was reminded of all this recently, when I read... of part of the dialogue carried on - perhaps in 1391 in the winter barracks near Ankara - by the erudite Byzantine Emperor Manuel II Paleologus and an educated Persian on the subject of Christianity and Islam, and the truth of both.Now, you see where he obviously ticked off a lot of Muslims. But before we rush to judgement, take a look at the first boldened phrase. Benedict said that the emperor said that Muhammad (peace be upon him) brought "evil" and "inhumanity" to this Earth. Therefore, he quoted the emperor. He also speaks of how this hellenistic emperor claimed that spreading faith through violence is irrational. Islam actually agrees with this, but I couldn't see why the Pope would miss this notion about Islam, for, given his stance on interfaith dialogue (supposedly favorable), he (the Pope) should have known this. However, there is another part in his speech at which he implicitly seems to insult Greek Orthodoxy on the same note:
In the seventh conversation...the emperor touches on the theme of the 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 Muhammad 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."
Today we know that the Greek translation of the Old Testament produced at Alexandria - the Septuagint - is more than a simple (and in that sense really less than satisfactory) translation of the Hebrew text: it is an independent textual witness and a distinct and important step in the history of revelation, one which brought about this encounter in a way that was decisive for the birth and spread of Christianity. A profound encounter of faith and reason is taking place here, an encounter between genuine enlightenment and religion. From the very heart of Christian faith and, at the same time, the heart of Greek thought now joined to faith, Manuel II was able to say: Not to act "with logos" is contrary to God's nature.Hmm... That confused me a bit. I know that translation issues are quite common between Christian sects, but it seems to me, though, that he refers to "religion" as "faith", and "reason" as "genuine enlightenment". I don't know if that's insulting, but if anything, many people view religion with both faith and reason ("logos"). Turning back to the reference to the Prophet of Islam (peace be upon him), the Pope seems to have randomly quoted a figure to point out that God is Logical, and His Commands are Logical. While I agree with this, I don't agree with the use of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). The Pope should have known better.
The Danish cartoon controversy was a clear-cut attack on Islam and its Prophet. This one, however, was an implicit reference that sparked a reaction... just because the Pope was taken out of context. However, such anger might seemingly be jusitifed. The Pope has shown ambivalent stances regarding Islam. On one hand, he spoke of radical Islam as a "new barbarism" that threatens the "civilized world", and opposed Turkey's bid to the EU as Turkey was part of a "different cultural sphere". On another, he actually condemned the anti-Muslim cartoons from Jyllands-Posten, encouraged Christian-Muslim interfaith dialogue, among other things as mentioned in this article. The thing is, it seems that the Pope was taken out of context, and, as I've said before, hundreds of times (even when it comes to Ahmadinejad's speeches or verses from the Holy Koran), CONTEXT IS EVERYTHING!!! I guess context is not important anymore in such press releases, eh? The media is certainly manipulative when it comes to such issues, and should focus more on the context.
But for now, I reserve my judgement. Did Benedict/Ratzinger quote the emperor Manuel II for the sake of proving that God requires a Logical approach, or as an attack on Islam? Most of the speech was on logic, faith and reason, so singling out that line might have been incidental. However, I reserve my judgement. Considering his interfaith/political stances, I'd say he most likely meant it just for the sake of his argument, and not an attack on Islam. His ambivalence on certain issues (opposition to war and to Turkey's EU bid at the same time) makes him seem more centrist, not "theologically conservative" as BBC pointed out. While it is most likely that he never meant to offend Islam, I will wait for a reply from the Pope. Like him, I also believe in interfaith dialogue. As a Muslim, I believe in God, and I believe that there are other people out there who approach Him in so many ways that need to be understood by myself. The more I understand from others, the more I understand from myself and how it sets me apart from others in my beliefs and practices. Does this make me better? Probably not. But I hope the Pope believes this, too, and actually makes up for this awry speech and engages in serious interfaith dialogue. That would prove not only beneficial to other religions, but to the Catholic Church as well, and probably all of humanity.
Salaam, from
Saracen
Comments
Post a Comment