The Pope SHOULD Apologize

[estesbob]

Just for the record, one cannot profess the Catholic faith and accommodate in one’s beliefs a personal outlook that “deviates from Catholicism” in faith and morals. Struggles with, yes, but deviates from, no.

However, it is certainly consistent that one who would feel free to pick and choose from the teachings of the Church – even passively, by accommodating deviations of “personal outlook” – would withhold support from the successor to St. Peter. In that, at least, there is no real mystery to unravel.

Personally, I have “my spiritual reasons” for supporting the Holy Father, and denying it be necessary for him to apologize; I am a Catholic.

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[Contarini]

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.

Contrary to many denials, that does seem to be its primary and original meaning.

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.

And I don’t dispute this for a minute. However, historically and today the term has been used to refer to warfare. I salute those Muslims who spiritualize the concept, and I recognize that this has roots going back to Muhammad himself (though Muhammad didn’t use this meaning to replace the “holy war” meaning, only to enrich it). But the fact is that there is a long tradition of holy war in Islam, and the Pope was quite right to address this.

I don’t know if the Pope is aware of this or not, but I wish he had made this distinction.

I agree that it might have been wise. But what he said was fair enough for any reasonable person. Muslims who react to this speech are simply showing that they have no interest in the kind of reasoned dialogue for which the Pope was calling. In the end no amount of care with one’s terminology will mollify such people.

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.

LOL! If you were in the shoes of poor Emperor Manuel, surrounded by an aggressive Ottoman Empire intent on destroying you as a sacred duty (the Ottomans certainly did not reduce “jihad” to “a personal struggle in their walk with God”!), you might be informed rather differently. I think the Emperor was quite well informed about one aspect of Islam. Did he have a one-sided perspective? Yes, and that’s why I (and the Pope, apparently) would never endorse his blanket denial of value to Islam. But neither can I blame him for making that statement under the circumstances. I wish the Pope had omitted the “has brought nothing but evil” part, or had made it clearer that he completely disagreed with it. But again, in context the Pope’s intention was clear.

Mohammed did not bring evil.

I beg to disagree.

Yes, Islam did bring much evil in ITS NAME,

I’m not sure what this “in its name” business really means. Christians pull the same dodge, I know. But I’m not sure it’s valid, no matter who does it. Religions are as their members do. This is one of my big problems with Catholicism (including the Pope’s remarks about nominalism)–Catholics often make this same distinction between what “the Church” does and what her “members” do. I think it’s a bogus distinction.

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?

Well, Islam. Though I admit that at times we’ve given them a run for their money. However, the Pope’s point in quoting the emperor was that a critique of religious violence has been present in Christianity for centuries, based on the concept of divine reason. He invited Muslims to a respectful dialogue based on this concept. And look how they have responded!

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.

No, they wouldn’t. That was stupid policy. Most 7th-century conquerors weren’t that bloodthirsty. The Persians and Byzantines had just fought a very vicious war with each other. There was plenty of bloodshed, but I’ve never heard that it was any worse than Mohammed’s.

Mohammed deplored that, he only defeated his enemies, he did not slaughter them or destroy them completely.

On several occasions he killed the men and enslaved the women and children. That’s fairly drastic. Not as bad as killing everyone–but as I said that was actually a very rare extreme resorted to by folks like Genghis Khan.

Sure, he was quite merciful to Mecca–but they were his own people and it made more political sense to have them as allies. Look at what he did to the Jews of Medina!

 

[Contarini]

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.

I agree that he should have mentioned Christian violence. But his point was primarily concerning faith and reason. And on that score he did recognize that Christian “nominalists” made arguments similar to those he was attributing to Islam. I don’t think he was hypocritical at all. He wasn’t making a systematic comparison of violence in the two religions.

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?

Of course I would. Why on earth not? Claiming that people are “not really Christians” or “not really Muslims” because they do bad things is the silliest form of political correctness.

But if the Pope has misunderstood Islam and its concepts, I agree with the Muslim leaders that he should educate himself on the matter.

Muslims should do him a favor and educate him by making rational arguments. So far I have not heard any refutation of his remarks–only irrational anger. This simply proves his point. In fact the response to the Pope’s remarks is itself a condemnation of Islam that makes the remarks themselves look extremely mild!

I’m Anglican, BTW. I have no brief for the Pope being always right and I agree that he could have been more diplomatic here. But the substance of what he said was right on, and frankly I think there’s a time when it’s cowardly to try to be diplomatic with vicious bullies.

Edwin

 

[Lance]

Islam is a religion of peace! What a crock, just read the following and come to your own conclusion. This just what happened on 9/18 since 9/11/01.

9/18/05 Thailand Tanyong Limo Militant Muslims stage a shooting attack on a tea shop, killing two men.
9/18/05 Pakistan Wana al-Qaeda shoots a 50-year-old schoolteacher to death.
9/18/05 Iraq Kirkuk Four Iraqi security force personnel are killed by a roadside bomb planted by Jihadis.
9/18/05 Iraq Baghdad Sunnis open fire on a group of Shia civilians, killing at least one.
9/18/05 Afghanistan Khost Two secruity officers are killed by the Taliban in an ambush.
9/18/04 Bangladesh Jamalpur A Christian convert from Islam has his throat slashed by Muslim fundamentalists.
9/18/04 Algeria Kalous Armed Islamic extremists set up a fake road block on a remote road. They shoot to death four people that stop there and also abduct a woman.
9/18/04 Iraq Kirkuk Nineteen people waiting in line for jobs are blown to bits by a Fedayeen suicide car bomber.
9/18/04 Iraq Mosul Gunmen pull beside two cars carrying oil executives. Five are shot to death, four wounded.
9/18/03 India Kashmir Four civilians are killed in separate Mujahideen attacks, including one who was beheaded.
9/18/03 Iraq Tikrit Three U.S. soldiers are killed in a Sunni terrorist ambush and two others are injured.
9/18/03 Afghanistan Ghazni Taliban car bomb kills four in front of the home of a local police commander.
9/18/02 India Golibud A forest worker is abducted and beheaded.
9/18/02 India Srinagar Two political leaders are murdered by Lashkar-e-Toiba.
9/18/02 India Katarmal Ten people are killed by a Mujahideen ambush.

How many people did Christians murder on 9/18 in the name of God?

 

[stellina]

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.”

Great explanation. This will peter out like the uproar over the Danish cartoon and if anything, it will add more evidence to the fact that the followers of Islam are anything but peaceful or reasonable. Anyone who can’t see that, notwithstanding what His Holiness said, is willfully and abjectly ignorant of reality.

 

[tequilamac]

Why should the Pope apologize? I understand he apologized for the reaction his words caused, but is the reaction his fault? If anything the reaction to his words in the Muslim world clearly illustrated his speech. It is the photograph if you will of what he was talking about. That is hardly his fault. The Muslims are reacting violently with violent threats to the concept that there might be something violent in their religion. It seems illogical to presume then that Islam is a peaceful religion.

 

[Brian_C]

I’m getting so tired of all the Muslim apologists on this forum.

All Benedict needs to apologize for is being so brilliant he makes other people look silly and lame in comparison.

This man probably knows more about Islam than most “Imams.”

 

[Richardols]

Islam is a religion of peace! What a crock, just read the following and come to your own conclusion. This just what happened on 9/18 since 9/11/01.

Some of your examples aren’t valid, Lance. Yes, those were all killings or murders, but there’s a war on in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the motives of the insurgents in both countries may have more to do with regaining lost power (taliban) and getting revenge (shias vs sunnis). In Kashmir and India, it may have more to do with the border dispute than with religious faiths.

How many people did Christians murder on 9/18 in the name of God?

Many of the incidents you mentioned weren’t motivated by religion.

 

[Richardols]

I’m getting so tired of all the Muslim apologists on this forum.

This Forum is open to hearing many points of view, not to stifling them.

Indeed, I personally would appreciate hearing from an actual Moslem on this Forum.

 

[Brian_C]

Many of the incidents you mentioned weren’t motivated by religion.

Yes but they are motivated by a culture formed by Islam which allows such actions. When’s the last time a border squabble between Mexico and the US ended with train bombings? When’s the last time the Republican Party went door to door killing Clinton supporters. Our culture, formed by our Judaeo-Christian values, doesn’t condone it.

As for stiffling other viewpoints, I don’t think I said I was for it. I said I’m tired of hearing Muslim apologists on here. I don’t think I said they should be banned. But I’m tired of seeing political agendas disguised as Muslim sympathy to the detriment of our Church and our Holy Father. It makes me want to do a cathartic liturgical dance.:dancing: Anyone got any bongos?

 

[henrywood]

The Pope should not have to apologise, this is the Supreme Pontiff of the Catholic Church we are talking about here. He is one of the most important people in the world. He has the right to say whatever he wants and ought to have the support of the entire Catholic church. Apart from this, it would be absurd if the Pope were endorse Islam. As to the point of the ambiguity of jihad as a word; so what if it can also mean struggle: the fact remains that it can mean “holy war” therefore it is not wrong to use the word in that context.

 

[rlg94086]

Hi Mike,

Good posts regarding Nostra Aetate…not sure who actually looked it up and read it (possibly none, based on other posts), so here’s an excerpt and link:

vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651028_nostra-aetate_en.html

1. The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems. They adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all- powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth,(5) who has spoken to men; they take pains to submit wholeheartedly to even His inscrutable decrees, just as Abraham, with whom the faith of Islam takes pleasure in linking itself, submitted to God. Though they do not acknowledge Jesus as God, they revere Him as a prophet. They also honor Mary, His virgin Mother; at times they even call on her with devotion. In addition, they await the day of judgment when God will render their deserts to all those who have been raised up from the dead. Finally, they value the moral life and worship God especially through prayer, almsgiving and fasting.

**Since in the course of centuries not a few quarrels and hostilities have arisen between Christians and Moslems, this sacred synod urges all to forget the past and to work sincerely for mutual understanding and to preserve as well as to promote together for the benefit of all mankind social justice and moral welfare, as well as peace and freedom. **

Regarding the current flap, I think the Holy Father was trying to heed this very call. Unfortunately, the quote he used as an example that violence and religion don’t mix was a poor choice. He has stated his regret, and I hope the Muslim leaders will calm down and realize that they are just fueling the extremist fires.

We need dialogue, not efigy burnings, jihad, etc.

God bless,

Robert

I don’t think he apologised for using the quote in the first place, but he expressed regret for the fact that it had been misinterpreted as being his own belief and expressly said that he didn’t agree with the quote. He couldn’t agree with the quote, of course, because that would be completely opposite to the opinion of the Church as expressed in Nostra Aetate. He’s made that clear now - and one possible fortunate side-effect is that a lot more people will now have heard of Nostra Aetate and our official view of Islam.

I’ve not seen anyone argue that. If the absolute truth offends, than you can’t do much about that. If our Pope had said that ‘spreading religion by violence is unacceptable’ - without the unnecessarily inflammatory quote - then that may still have offended some Muslims, but it would have been the truth, and we can’t have a problem with stating the truth. My only problem is with the use of an insulting quote when it wasn’t necessary to make the point. You shouldn’t cause unnecessary offense.

Mike

 

[Richardols]

When’s the last time a border squabble between Mexico and the US ended with train bombings?

Never, but one such squabble ended in a war between the two.

When’s the last time the Republican Party went door to door killing Clinton supporters. Our culture, formed by our Judaeo-Christian values, doesn’t condone it.

Who suggested that the GOP do so?

As for stiffling other viewpoints, I don’t think I said I was for it. I said I’m tired of hearing Muslim apologists on here. I don’t think I said they should be banned.

Good. A free exchange of ideas is always a good thing.

 

[Brian_C]

Never, but one such squabble ended in a war between the two.

Oh wait, the one last week? No, I think you mean perhaps the war 160 years ago or the small skirmish 90 years ago.Let’s talk about the 21st century.

Who suggested that the GOP do so?

You were talking about how there are other motivating factors in many of these mass killings. Even other motivating factors typically don’t promote widescale violence here in the west. Sure we have street gangs, but I’m given the impression the violence in Iraq is more than street gangs “popin’ a cap” in each other.

Good. A free exchange of ideas is always a good thing.

Even if some of them seem quite naive to me.

 

[Richardols]

You were talking about how there are other motivating factors in many of these mass killings. Even other motivating factors typically don’t promote widescale violence here in the west.

How about the Watts riots? How about political riots in South America? There have been riots in Africa, and in India on a mass scale over various perceived problems. We in the West are perhaps less prone to rioting than there (could it have something to do with better police?) but are not free of the malady.

Even if some of them seem quite naive to me.

I supose we all have that opinion of someone or other’s posting, even if we keep it to ourselves - as we should to avoid Forum vacations.

 

[tequilamac]

How about the Watts riots? How about political riots in South America? There have been riots in Africa, and in India on a mass scale over various perceived problems. We in the West are perhaps less prone to rioting than there (could it have something to do with better police?) but are not free of the malady.

I supose we all have that opinion of someone or other’s posting, even if we keep it to ourselves - as we should to avoid Forum vacations.

Oh come on, get real. Are you really trying to claim that the Watts riots took place because someone gave a speech about the necessity of peace and non violence? Why not stick to what really happened here. The Pope gave a speech emphasizing the unreasonableness of violent force in religion and the Muslims screamed off with his head. Hardly compares with the Watts riots, now does it?

As far as the tear gas goes, if I have to hear one more person defend the Muslims reaction to the Pope’s absolutely benign speech, I may riot. It would take tear gas to make me cry over the supposed insults they have received, really. Too many violins played off key here.

 

[MikeWM]

Hi Mike,

Good posts regarding Nostra Aetate…not sure who actually looked it up and read it (possibly none, based on other posts), so here’s an excerpt and link:

vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651028_nostra-aetate_en.html

Regarding the current flap, I think the Holy Father was trying to heed this very call. Unfortunately, the quote he used as an example that violence and religion don’t mix was a poor choice. He has stated his regret, and I hope the Muslim leaders will calm down and realize that they are just fueling the extremist fires.

We need dialogue, not efigy burnings, jihad, etc.

God bless,

Robert

Hi Robert,

I’m very happy to say that I fully agree with every word of your post. Thanks

Mike

PS. I just had to look up where ‘Camas’ was. So much for my 2-and-a-bit years living in Seattle!

 

[Brian_C]

could it have something to do with better police?

Or maybe better education? Which the Church has had no small part in over the years. And yes, while you’re free to argue that Muslims once held an advantage in this arena, it disappeared long ago.

But back on topic, in modern times, there’s no comparison.

I supose we all have that opinion of someone or other’s posting, even if we keep it to ourselves - as we should to avoid Forum vacations.

I don’t think I said anything worthy of a Carnival cruise.

 

[peary]

The Muslim response just proved that the Holy Father’s observation to be true LOL

 

[Oliviad]

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.

You are obviously as little conversant with the bulk of the hadithic material as most muslims are. The truly islamic aim is to eradicate all but islam, which is a little box into which satan wishes to sap all created strength, in a little world in which the finite thoughts of a pedaphile in a horribly written book are treated as the full extent of the deity, as if nothing exists beyond, trying to make all to groan under the unnatural burden of the nebulous allah.

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?

You are being duped by muslims and other heathens, who insult the Church and injure her children, then lay their guilt upon the victim. mohammad only brought evil. No one who is truly decent is fully walking in muhmammad’s footsteps. he was as satanic a human as ever could be. I have met maybe one muslim who doesn’t at least ignore the evil done to Christians and Jews, and say all is well while knowing acquaintances that perpetuate the nightmare islam imposes on the world.

Their women are kept in darkness. Of all those I have conversed with on forums, they either appraove of child brides, thinking it is an islamic right, or they lie to themselves that muhammad never committed that vileness. One asked me which people speaks “Hebrew” when I mentioned it as the language of my people. I said, “Israelis”. She asked, “Are they an Arabic people?” She is a modern student in Saudi Arabia! She never feels climatic heat, because her expensive home is always well air-conditioned, yet she is not permitted to drive, nor has been allowed to hear of peoples that all islamic men know of and hate!

Another, who has lived in Turkey, Uzbekistan, and other countries where Turkic and Mongolian islamic communities reside, said I was a liar when I told her I had read the quran and the hadiths. I asked her why on earth she would falsely accuse me like that. She said, as if she had never read what I already told her about reading those materials, “You should read the quran.” I repeated, “I just told you, I have - and it was when I read the quran that I no longer wondered whether or not perhaps muhammad had been a true prophet.”

I asked, “Have you read either the quran or the hadiths?” She said, “No, I have never read any part of either”. I asked, “Have you read the Bible?” She said, “I would never consider any religion but islam, which I am sure you will accept one day.” I told her that I never will, but saw supernatural proof of the True Religion, and she said, “Proof is worthless.” I asked her why on earth she so loved a book as though it were the greatest miracle in the universe, which she had not read a single word of? She said, “I know the quran of my heart!”

And so on and so on with regards to the satanic darkness clouding the minds of all the women from their community I have ever tried to dialogue with. The last mentioned eventually went from saying that she could never even think of giving thought to anything but islam, to abruptly ending arguments she started, by saying, “Let’s not discuss religion, I respect your religion, okay?” Earlier she had said my Religion was worthless, and would be destroyed by muslims on a regular basis.