The Pope SHOULD Apologize

[cathgal]

The Holy Father should apologize.

Here’s why:

Jihad does NOT mean holy war. I also think the quote was a bad choice and ill informed on the part of the emperor who made it as well as the Pope who quoted it.

Ill informed on the part of the emperor? What would you know about the history of Islam? Are you saying that there was no such thing that Islam was spread by the sword??

Mohammed did not bring evil. Yes, Islam did bring much evil in ITS NAME, it is not an evil religion. Almost all religions have done this. What faith ahs brought more evil and bloodshed with it than our Christian faith over the years in the name of God?

Many would disagree w/ you.
What ‘over the years’ did the Christian faith brought more evil and bloodshed in the name of God??

Yes, Mohammed fought wars, but most people fail to realize he was an extremely merciful war leader. Most people of the day would have just gone into a city and killed every thing in it. Mohammed deplored that, he only defeated his enemies, he did not slaughter them or destroy them completely.

‘Extremely’ ?? Over-exaggerated don’t you think?

Now, I find it strange that the Pope would talk about holy wars in relations to the Muslims and this quote from a 14th century emperor but make NO MENTION of the Crusades by the Church. If he is saying that war in the name fo faith is completely unnaceptable (and therefore we should not try to justify the Crusades) then he should have condemned the Church’s actions in the Crusades as well as those of the Muslims in his lecture. The fact that he did not and did not say that both sides were wrong, is completely hypocritical of the Pope to me.

Obviously you don’t know your history. Have any idea why the Crusades were called for? Now I’m not saying all the Crusades were justified, but that is another issue.
Pope John Paul did loudly apologize for the wrongs done by the Church through her members, unlike the Muslims whom we don’t hear a peep ! To have Benedict pointing finger at the Church again is overdoing it. It’s past time somebody start pointing finger at the Muslims ! And it is well called for !

It should also be mentioned that his lecture cannot be declared infallible (if it can than its ridiculous that the Holy Father can have infallibility in declaring what another faith believes). I’ve seen some of you folks on this board calling the Muslims evil and a false religion. I’ve seen some fo you people say the Muslims cause all the problems in the world with the bombings and the violence. I have many muslim friends and they and I would say those extremists are NOT MUSLIMS AT ALL. They are radicals and are NOT good muslims.

Regardless what kind of Muslims did the bombing, if the good Muslims don’t speak up to condemn it, then is it a wonder that they warrant such a name as ‘evil’ ? Should have second thought why the emperor made such claim in the 14th century. False religion? Catholic Christians believe there is only one true religion and Islam is not the one. But you may believe otherwise.

I’ve seen some of you people defend the Pope just because he’s the Pope. He’s human and can sin and make a mistake. We should defend the Pope because he’s right, not try to find every which way to justify what he says just because he’s the Pope. He’s not infallible when it comes to what ever other religions believe, he’s only infallible when it comes to the teachings about our own Church. To that end, the Pope has made a mistake.

I highly doubt you’re infallible. So I’ll choose the Pope over you cuz he has more credentials than you.

I find it insulting and astonishing that the Holy Father has not apologized in person to the Muslim community but rather he came short of apologizing for his words and only did this through a Vatican official. The Muslim community told him they would accept nothing less than a personal apology. And yet the Vatican goes and does the one thing the Muslim community will not accept. Were they not listening?

Again, one apology from the Church is enough. We’ve yet to get one from them. Time for them to make their move ! Enough of kissing up ! It is what it is !

My Mother and I fight a lot. Now I’ll say things to her face that aren’t very nice about her but they are true. They get her very hurt and offended. Eventually I suck things up and apologize for my words because I want to heal relations with my mother, no matter if I’m right or wrong.

This is what the Holy Father should do, even if he’s right. He should just personally apologize if he wants to help heal the rift he’s just opened up.

Hello ??!! There are people being killed and decapitated out there ! We’re not talking about words fight !

 

[AJV]

S.D.N. Benedict XVI just concluded the Angelus in which he said that the remarks did not reflect his own opinion. No news article up yet but there probably will be one in a few minutes.

 

[cathgal]

Well said. I was considering bringing up the issue of why the Pope is somehow right about everything but chose not to. However, I agree that being Pope doesn’t make him endlessly correct. He could say window are made of cotton, it wouldn’t make it correct.

Unfortunately, you are another fallible creature.

Yet somehow it’s perfectly all right to take a truly enlightened view toward warfare from centuries ago, apply it to people who hijack planes, and say “They’re one and the same!”
It is, in fact, a pretty sickening display of willful dishonesty and re-writing of history to support your opinions.

How did Islam get their reputation as a religion spread by the sword? Explain.

Could it be that the whole world was deceived in thinking that Islam is a violent religion?

This apply to past and present.

 

[AJV]

S.D.N. Benedict XVI just concluded the Angelus in which he said that the remarks did not reflect his own opinion. No news article up yet but there probably will be one in a few minutes.

S.D.N. Benedict XVI just concluded the Angelus in which he said that the remarks did not reflect his own opinion. No news article up yet but there probably will be one in a few minutes.

Ah, here it is:

A snippet from the article

CASTEL GANDOLFO, Italy - Pope Benedict XVI said Sunday that he was “deeply sorry” about the angry reaction to his recent remarks about Islam, which he said came from a text that didn’t reflect his personal opinion.

“These (words) were in fact a quotation from a Medieval text which do not in any way express my personal thought,” Benedict told pilgrims at his summer palace outside Rome.

The pope sparked the controversy when, in a speech to German university professors Tuesday, he cited the words of a Byzantine emperor who characterized some of the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad, Islam’s founder, as “evil and inhuman.”

“At this time I wish also to add that I am deeply sorry for the reactions in some countries to a few passages of my address at the University of Regensburg, which were considered offensive to the sensibility of Muslims,” the pope said Sunday

.

Full article here

 

[David_Paul]

Well said. I was considering bringing up the issue of why the Pope is somehow right about everything but chose not to. However, I agree that being Pope doesn’t make him endlessly correct. He could say window are made of cotton, it wouldn’t make it correct.

And on the subject of Islam; radical Islam is a corruption of the original faith. It’s the same as if a section of Christianity heavily beleiving in the teachings of Jack Chick or Fred Phelps suddenly became powerful and engulfed the whole .

What the Pope said is not new. From the Catholic Encyclopeida of 1910:

It is hardly necessary here to emphasize the fact that the ethics of Islam are far inferior to those of Judaism and even more inferior to those of the New Testament . . . That in the ethics of Islam there is a great deal to admire and to approve, is beyond dispute; but of originality or superiority, there is none. What is really good in Mohammedan ethics is either commonplace or borrowed from some other religions, whereas what is characteristic is nearly always imperfect or wicked . . .full text

To address your comment on the radicalism which, you say, has corrupted Islam–once again, the words of monsignor Walter Brandmüller, president of the Pontifical Committee for Historical Sciences:

But on the part of the Muslims, from the earliest times, even while Mohammed was still alive, conversion was imposed through the use of force . . .many Islamic countries have not accepted the declaration of human rights promulgated by the United Nations in 1948, or have done so with the reservation of excluding the norms that conflict with Qur’anic law – which means practically all of them . . .In Islamic tradition, in fact, the concept of the equality of all human beings does not exist, nor does, in consequence, the concept of the dignity of every human life. Sharia is founded upon a threefold inequality: between man and woman, between Muslim and non-Muslim, and between freeman and slave. In essence, the male human being is considered a full titleholder of rights and duties only through his belonging to the Islamic community: those who convert to another religion or become atheists are considered traitors, subject to the death penalty, or at least to the loss of all their rights.

The most irrevocable of these inequalities is that between man and woman, because the others can be overcome – the slave can be freed, the non-Muslim can convert to Islam – while woman’s inferiority is irremediable, in that it was established by God himself . . .full text

I am not Catholic and have had no formal Catholic education (only Catholic classes here and there). So the following comment should be taken only as the situation appears to someone on the outside: What the Pope said this week does not differ in substance from how the church has always viewed Islam.

 

[FightingFat]

Brave post Nagoda, I’m glad the Pope obviously agreed with you and disagreed with the people here so willing to choose hatred of love and reconciliation.

 

[David_Paul]

Brave post Nagoda, I’m glad the Pope obviously agreed with you and disagreed with the people here so willing to choose hatred of love and reconciliation.

Who here expressed hate? Did the Pope apologize? What I read is he said he is sorry for the reaction his comments caused. If he did apologize, what did he apologize for? What did he say that is not true?

Care to address the history and content of Islam related by monsignor Walter Brandmüller? Do you believe what he wrote is in error? Do you believe the Catholic encyclopedia article ( also excerpted above) on the nature of Islam is incorrect?

 

[FightingFat]

No I don’t, but I don’t think we will find anything other than hatred and division down that road and I follow Jesus, sorry!

 

[mark_a]

The AP reported today:

“Palestinian Muslims hurled firebombs and opened fire at five churches in the West Bank and Gaza Strip Saturday to protest the Pope’s comments, sparking concerns of a rift between Palestinian Muslims and Christians.”

The pope has relayed the truth.

 

[davy39]

Well said. I was considering bringing up the issue of why the Pope is somehow right about everything but chose not to. However, I agree that being Pope doesn’t make him endlessly correct. He could say window are made of cotton, it wouldn’t make it correct.

And on the subject of Islam; radical Islam is a corruption of the original faith. It’s the same as if a section of Christianity heavily beleiving in the teachings of Jack Chick or Fred Phelps suddenly became powerful and engulfed the whole; just because it has prominence doesn’t mean you can peg every Muslim as being the exact same.
Ultimately, many Christians want to beleive all Muslim is evil. To this end, they go so far as to take modern day events and force them to fit in with ancient Muslim teachings. Someone could use God drowning the Egyptians as proof that Christians should drown non-beleivers, but a lot of Christians would sure throw a hissy fit if they did. Yet somehow it’s perfectly all right to take a truly enlightened view toward warfare from centuries ago, apply it to people who hijack planes, and say “They’re one and the same!”
It is, in fact, a pretty sickening display of willful dishonesty and re-writing of history to support your opinions.

If only ten per cent of the members of Islam are radical and violent, that adds up to about one hundred million of them. That’s enough of them to be concerned about. Their reaction to the Popes statement is to fire bomb churches and to threaten Vatican City with care bombs. That also is something to be concerned about. Pray for the Pope!

 

[gilliam]

If only ten per cent of the members of Islam are radical and violent, that adds up to about one hundred million of them. That’s enough of them to be concerned about. Their reaction to the Popes statement is to fire bomb churches and to threaten Vatican City with care bombs. That also is something to be concerned about. Pray for the Pope!

80% of Muslims support Jihad. So I don’t know where the 10% figure is coming from. But lets say it is only 1% that directly support Jihad financially or by fighting. Even support by 1% of the Muslim population would equate to over 12 million people.

 

[Nagoda]

Yes, Christians have acted violently in the past (the Crusades, btw, aren’t the best example. There were some quite legitimate reasons for them)

Legitimate reasons for the crusades? Are you saying you’re trying to find legitimate, justifiable reasons for violence in the name of God? And you’re a Catholic? But wait… despite the Pope’s mistake (btw, I’m glad he finally apologized personally, thankyou Holy Father) his message was that in NO WAY can you justify violence in the name of faith. And besides, JP2 already apologized for the Crusades for the Church. Based on that, there is absolutely NO WAY that you can justify or legitimize the Crusades.

Furthermore, what are your legitimate reasons? How do you justify such a blatant disregard for human well-being and simply humanity in general?

Specifically, how can you justify the purge of the Cathars? Which, unless I’m mistakened, is classified as a Crusade. How can you justify Catholics killing other Christians to spread the Catholic faith?

And as to your statement, "Any religion that leads people to believe that there is any other way to the Kingdom of Heaven apart from Christ and His sacrificial and atoning death is false, evil, a deception of Satan. Any rudimentary comparison of Christianity and Islam would reveal in short order that the two are irreconcilable. Either one is true and the other false or vice versa. There’s no middle ground when you’re talking about revelation. If OUR reveleation is true, then their’s is a deception. If theirs is true, then we are truly misguided and deceived. This isn’t a matter of “you say toe-may-toe and I say toe-mah-toe.”. This goes against the words of the Holy Father and Church teaching. Remember, the Holy Father did state that members of other religions can be saved through their faiths. They do not reject God and are saved through Christ indirectly. Thusly, this means that these religions lead to God although they are indirectly using Christ as a mediator. That means that there is goodness and truth in them (if there wasn’t, how could they lead to God?) This would include Islam as well because the Holy Father did apply this to the major world religions, of which Islam is one (oh and for the record as I understand it, the Islamic faith holds Jesus in high respect as a a religious figure just not to the degree we do). Based on this, Islam cannot be evil, false or as you so put it, “a deception of Satan”.

And finally as to this "It would have been far more honest for them to have just said,“Yeah, we’re violent, so what?” "idea, it is rather limited of you to specify that to those of the Islamic faith. It is in fact an aspect of our fallen nature as the entire human race to be violent as a whole regardless of religious associations.

Oh yeah and the “Absolute Bilge” line was the best comeback ever, only once though. I would wager it loses its flair once repeated.

 

[Riley259]

History shows original Islamic thought to be very different from kill all non-beleivers. It also shows Muhammed did not do this or advocate it. Therefore, the idea that true Islam demands mass murder is wrong on both a theological and historical grounds.

Then please explain the passage (surah) given by the poster earlier that advocates killing the infidels and non-believers. Islam is very contradictory in it’s teachings and there are passages in the Koran that do not advocate violence but there are some that do. Muhammed’s own journal (the hadith (sp?) does have many troubling passages that promote pretty dastardly things including violence in the name of Allah.

 

[Riley259]

Legitimate reasons for the crusades? Are you saying you’re trying to find legitimate, justifiable reasons for violence in the name of God? And you’re a Catholic? But wait… despite the Pope’s mistake (btw, I’m glad he finally apologized personally, thankyou Holy Father) his message was that in NO WAY can you justify violence in the name of faith. And besides, JP2 already apologized for the Crusades for the Church. Based on that, there is absolutely NO WAY that you can justify or legitimize the Crusades.

Furthermore, what are your legitimate reasons? How do you justify such a blatant disregard for human well-being and simply humanity in general?

Specifically, how can you justify the purge of the Cathars? Which, unless I’m mistakened, is classified as a Crusade. How can you justify Catholics killing other Christians to spread the Catholic faith?

And as to your statement, "Any religion that leads people to believe that there is any other way to the Kingdom of Heaven apart from Christ and His sacrificial and atoning death is false, evil, a deception of Satan. Any rudimentary comparison of Christianity and Islam would reveal in short order that the two are irreconcilable. Either one is true and the other false or vice versa. There’s no middle ground when you’re talking about revelation. If OUR reveleation is true, then their’s is a deception. If theirs is true, then we are truly misguided and deceived. This isn’t a matter of “you say toe-may-toe and I say toe-mah-toe.”. This goes against the words of the Holy Father and Church teaching. Remember, the Holy Father did state that members of other religions can be saved through their faiths. They do not reject God and are saved through Christ indirectly. Thusly, this means that these religions lead to God although they are indirectly using Christ as a mediator. That means that there is goodness and truth in them (if there wasn’t, how could they lead to God?) This would include Islam as well because the Holy Father did apply this to the major world religions, of which Islam is one (oh and for the record as I understand it, the Islamic faith holds Jesus in high respect as a a religious figure just not to the degree we do). Based on this, Islam cannot be evil, false or as you so put it, “a deception of Satan”.

And finally as to this "It would have been far more honest for them to have just said,“Yeah, we’re violent, so what?” "idea, it is rather limited of you to specify that to those of the Islamic faith. It is in fact an aspect of our fallen nature as the entire human race to be violent as a whole regardless of religious associations.

Oh yeah and the “Absolute Bilge” line was the best comeback ever, only once though. I would wager it loses its flair once repeated.

There was definitely some things that occurred during the Crusades that were wrong and misguided but the original and general idea behind the Crusades was a defense against Muslims who were fast encroaching (through conquering) on Christian areas.

 

[gilliam]

Legitimate reasons for the crusades? Are you saying you’re trying to find legitimate, justifiable reasons for violence in the name of God?.

Defense is justifiable (see the Catholic Catechism). The 1st Crusade was begun as a defense of Byzantium against the Muslims who where taking over Christian cities. Now once it started, there were a number of nobles who did terrible things, but the purpose for the Crusade, I am pretty sure was just.

And IMHO, a lot of what is done under Islam, today, is undeniably evil.

 

[proudnifi]

Now I say the Pope was wrong. You folks will probably say he’s right. Either way, whether he’s right or wrong, IT DOESN’T MATTER. He should still apologize even if it turns out he’s right. I’ll explain it with an example.

My Mother and I fight a lot. Now I’ll say things to her face that aren’t very nice about her but they are true. They get her very hurt and offended. Eventually I suck things up and apologize for my words because I want to heal relations with my mother, no matter if I’m right or wrong.

It does matter if the pope was right or wrong. Can someone make an true apology if he was right and knows it? I read the speech and it didn’t sound like the pope was trying to be offensive or rude. And if Muslims choose to look for offense where none was given, that’s their choice and not the pope’s fault.

With regard to apologies to one’s mother, that’s a different matter. For one thing, there are good and bad ways to fight - if one uses words to deliberately hurt one’s mother, that’s not part of “good” fighting even if the words were true. Second, one’s mother is owed respect due to her position (4th Commandment).

The pope has said he regrets that some people feel bad about the truth. There’s not much else to say.

 

[Eden]

What the Pope gave was not an apology. Essentially, he reiterated that he was quoting someone else and that he regretted that many Muslims were (read: chose to be) offended. It is regrettable that millions of Muslims are incapable of engaging in honest dialogue about their faith with non-Muslims.

 

[Detroit_Sue]

I’m sure that you are aware that Islam teaches its followers to lie to no-believers about their teachings when necessary.

Yup! Yup! Yup!

People need to know that Islam is a religon of bloodshed and violence, and not the “religion of peace” that they try to spin.

 

[Ridgerunner]

It would serve no purpose for the Pope to “apologize”:

1. Nothing he can do or say will cause Islamists to hate him or Christianity less. This was true before, and it will be afterward.
2. Muslim “outrage” will shut down fairly soon anyway because:
   a. The inciting clerics will have stirred up the worst instincts of the ignorant populace, as they always do, opportunistically, even when they have to invent the precipitating event. But it’s too expensive to continue it indefinitely by hiring protest crowds and thugs to control the crowds.
   b. Their primary audience is the western media anyway. They hope it will have some propaganda value, as the western elites hate Christianity as much as the Muslim clerics do, and will join them in condemning the Pope. But “News” of Muslim outrage will only have an audience so long. The Muslim clerics understand this at least as well as the Western secular elites do.
   c. They might be barbaric, but they are not stupid. There is some possibility that many in the West will see the Islamists for the bullies they are and react with firmer resolve to resist them. If that becomes evident, which it seems it is beginning to do, they will shut the whole “protest” thing down and pretend that they got an abject apology from the Pope. They will send out a “moderate” cleric or two to say “Oh, this is a terrible misunderstanding. We really want dialogue, to tell everyone how peaceful Islam is.”

 

[Steven_Edwards]

I know many of you will disagree with me on this, but please hear me out. I am a faithful and devout Catholic and I was saddened to hear the Pope’s remarks and the reactions of Muslims worldwide and the Vatican’s response.

The Holy Father should apologize.

Here’s why:

I agree with the Pope that Holy War in the name fo religion can never be justified. However I found itsad that the Pope associated the word jihad with holy war in what seems to be an exclusive manner. Jihad does NOT mean holy war. Although a jihad can be a holy war, the word simply means struggle. I have many Muslim friends and they have told me time and time again that a jihad can simply be a daily struggle in their walk with God. I don’t know if the Pope is aware of this or not, but I wish he had made this distinction. I also think the quote was a bad choice and ill informed on the part of the emperor who made it as well as the Pope who quoted it.

Mohammed did not bring evil. Yes, Islam did bring much evil in ITS NAME, it is not an evil religion. Almost all religions have done this. What faith ahs brought more evil and bloodshed with it than our Christian faith over the years in the name of God?

Yes, Mohammed fought wars, but most people fail to realize he was an extremely merciful war leader. Most people of the day would have just gone into a city and killed every thing in it. Mohammed deplored that, he only defeated his enemies, he did not slaughter them or destroy them completely.

Now, I find it strange that the Pope would talk about holy wars in relations to the Muslims and this quote from a 14th century emperor but make NO MENTION of the Crusades by the Church. If he is saying that war in the name fo faith is completely unnaceptable (and therefore we should not try to justify the Crusades) then he should have condemned the Church’s actions in the Crusades as well as those of the Muslims in his lecture. The fact that he did not and did not say that both sides were wrong, is completely hypocritical of the Pope to me.

It should also be mentioned that his lecture cannot be declared infallible (if it can than its ridiculous that the Holy Father can have infallibility in declaring what another faith believes). I’ve seen some of you folks on this board calling the Muslims evil and a false religion. I’ve seen some fo you people say the Muslims cause all the problems in the world with the bombings and the violence. I have many muslim friends and they and I would say those extremists are NOT MUSLIMS AT ALL. They are radicals and are NOT good muslims. If Christians were to do the things the extremists did, would we consider them to be Christians still if they persisted? NO.

I’ve seen some of you people defend the Pope just because he’s the Pope. He’s human and can sin and make a mistake. We should defend the Pope because he’s right, not try to find every which way to justify what he says just because he’s the Pope. He’s not infallible when it comes to what ever other religions believe, he’s only infallible when it comes to the teachings about our own Church. To that end, the Pope has made a mistake.

I find it insulting and astonishing that the Holy Father has not apologized in person to the Muslim community but rather he came short of apologizing for his words and only did this through a Vatican official. The Muslim community told him they would accept nothing less than a personal apology. And yet the Vatican goes and does the one thing the Muslim community will not accept. Were they not listening?

Now I say the Pope was wrong. You folks will probably say he’s right. Either way, whether he’s right or wrong, IT DOESN’T MATTER. He should still apologize even if it turns out he’s right. I’ll explain it with an example.

My Mother and I fight a lot. Now I’ll say things to her face that aren’t very nice about her but they are true. They get her very hurt and offended. Eventually I suck things up and apologize for my words because I want to heal relations with my mother, no matter if I’m right or wrong.

This is what the Holy Father should do, even if he’s right. He should just personally apologize if he wants to help heal the rift he’s just opened up.

However, despite all of this, I applaud the Pope for wanting to open up dialogue between the Church and Muslims concerning jihad as holy war. But if the Pope has misunderstood Islam and its concepts, I agree with the Muslim leaders that he should educate himself on the matter. Either way, I know that God will forgive him IF he has sinned. And I pray that he will do the right things and apologize personally to the Muslim community.

Thank you all for listening to what I’ve had to say. God Bless.

-Mike