Pope Speaks Truth -- Muslims Ready to Fight

Parent Cafe
21

<p>So exactly what DOES the Pope believe? He has gone out of his way to say that he doesn’t believe the substance of the quotation he made, but I have no idea what he does believe about Islam, or about the Crusaders for that matter - the model jihadists who slaughtered thousands of Byzantine Christians - or about Jesus coming to bring a sword to the world.</p>

22

<p>In today’s world, even the Pope can’t say what he really believes. Glad to hear they’re beefing up security around him.</p>

23

<p>Mini, if you were really interested in understanding the Pope’s views on Islam, it would be a fairly simple matter to find out. I’ll do some searches later, since I wouldn’t presume to speak for the Pope or the Vatican.</p>

<p>However, what if he (or anyone else, for that matter) DID say horrible things about Islam? Is that an excuse for the behavior of those who are threatening assasination, burning his image in effigy, bombing churches and murduring nuns?</p>

<p>Civilized people don’t resort to violence in response to words. (Salman Rushdie, anyone?)

<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salman_Rushdie[/url]”>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salman_Rushdie&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

24

<p>Here is a link to the Vatican’s position on Pope Benedict’s statements.
<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/16/AR2006091600231.html[/url]”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/16/AR2006091600231.html&lt;/a&gt;

</p>

25

<p>“Mini, if you were really interested in understanding the Pope’s views on Islam, it would be a fairly simple matter to find out. I’ll do some searches later, since I wouldn’t presume to speak for the Pope or the Vatican.”</p>

<p>He’s an intelligent guy. If he wants to say any of the above publicly, he can get on a balcony and say it publicly. But even the above does not speak to the quotation. If he believes “jihad” is a cultural manifestation (which is how most Islamic scholars view it), he could go to the nearest microphone and say so. He could talk at length about how the Crusades, which killed thousands and thousands of Palelogus’ subjects, was just a “cultural manifestation” of Jesus saying that he came not to bring peace to the world, but a sword.</p>

<p>World leaders have to take responsibility for the things they say. If he wanted to make a “clear and radical rejection of the religious motivation for violence”, he could start with 1700 years of Christian history, which ended with devout Catholics and Lutherans murdering the vast majority of my relatives.</p>

26

<p>I just think its hypocritical of the pope to denounce islam for being violent, when really during the time that islam came to power, it was christianity that was using religion as a reason for wars.</p>

27

<p>mini - I agree that the Pope’s choice of using Islam as an example to make his point was unfortunate…and certainly there are examples within the history books of other religions he could have used. But that would not have served his purpose. If anyone thinks these comments were not carefully considered, studied, revised for weeks, if not months, by political advisors to the Pope PRIOR to this sermon, they are naive. The speech was refined, delivered; and lo & behold, the goal has been realized. I can be a cynic sometimes, but I believe the purpose of the Pope’s sermon was to inflame Muslim extremists into actions which would be condemned worldwide by all Christian faiths, as well as those of the Jewish, Buddhist, Mormon, etc… faiths. I think the Catholic Church seeks to bind us all together against radical Muslims. Unfortunately, the collateral damage is that we cease to distinguish between extremists who do NOT follow the Quran, the Muslim imposters; and those who are peaceful, true followers of Islam. This speech was made by the Pope knowing this price.</p>

28

<p>browninfall - Probably answered by the other posts, but “we” would be the infidels.</p>

29

<p>“Unfortunately, the collateral damage is that we cease to distinguish between extremists who do NOT follow the Quran, the Muslim imposters; and those who are peaceful, true followers of Islam. This speech was made by the Pope knowing this price.”</p>

<p>Albert’s (that’s me) first law of government states that when there are two possible explanations for government (or government leaders’) behavior - one stupidity, the other Machaevellianism - try the first hypothesis first. If he truly wanted to inflame, he could have cited a Pope, not some obscure Byzantine Emperior whose people had been slaughtered by western Christians. On the other hand, if he had wanted simply to provide examples of religion being used to promote and support violence and intolerance, there are so many thousands of examples from his own tradition that he didn’t have to resort to such an obscure quotation. </p>

<p>So I prefer, simply, stupid, unthinking, a product of his “German” upbringing trained in the notorious Austrian Legion (which of course he now repudiates) and the Wehrmacht, and evangelical. He could simply apologize and get on with it, but Popes are, after all, infallible. And, after all, he didn’t have to “spew hate”, not when he had a handy Byzantine Emperor to do it for him.</p>

30

<p>ec1234, I ask you: Who, nowadays are cutting peoples’ heads of and blowing themselves up with explosives? Christians or Muslims? </p>

<p>The pope has the right to speak his mind - just like the millions of clerics all over the world are speaking out. However, the Pope was not spewing hate; he was quoting someone.</p>

31

<p>Since mini brought it up and I’m Lutheran. A little airing of dirty Lutheran laundry.</p>

<p><a href=“Beliefnet”>Beliefnet;

<h2>I do believe we have to find a way to look at our history, examine it and take responsibility while remaining peaceful. But I don’t think the time is right to pull out the Muslim vs. Christian examples…we are not at a place where healing will result from such comments. And as I mentioned, I don’t think healing or understanding was the intent of the Pope/Catholic Church…I think this was an effort to force moderate Muslims to take control of the radicals. Might work…might not.</h2>

<p>PS…crossed posts with mini. When it comes to religion and politics acting in concert, I’ll go with machiavellian. :-)</p>

32

<p>

It would be worthwhile to spend some time boning up on the Koran before making such a judgement. It’s not entirely clear who the “true followers of Islam” are, or why anyone should expect them to be peaceful.</p>

<p>Interestingly, when Muhammed assumed the prophet’s mantle, he claimed that he had been chosen by God to reconstitute his Holy Word; the reason: the Old Testament had become corrupted through multiple translations over the centuries, and hence, its true meaning could no longer be discerned. So, God was going to re-transmit His Word, verbatim, and in Arabic, directly into Muhammed’s mind so that humanity could be set again upon the right path.</p>

<p>Of course, as Islam spread around the world, it gained many converts who did not speak Arabic; today, something like 80% of Muslims don’t. So, we have a bunch of different “corrupted” translations of that original celestial fax into Muhammed’s brain, and are right back at square one, from that standpoint. An interesting discussion of this can be found here:
<a href=“http://www.meforum.org/article/717[/url]”>http://www.meforum.org/article/717&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>A useful, online version of the M.H. Shakir translation can be found at the UVa web site: <a href=“http://etext.virginia.edu/koran.html[/url][quote]When”>The Koran

Machiavellian or not, in a “true” Islamic society, there is no distinction.</p>

33

<p>I realize there are many versions of the Quran. In fact, my husband and I just had that realization this morning when we were discussing that perhaps we need to read the words in Quran for ourselves (thanks for the link btw…I will check it out.) </p>

<p>But, we have Muslim friends and all have said to us that according to their faith, violence is wrong and faith by force is not true faith. They don’t disrespect other religions and they don’t believe nonbelievers are on a oneway bus to hell. There is something in the passivity of their words that reminds of the teachings of Jesus Christ. As a Christian, I have to believe they have it (Islam) right, and those who kill and maim have it all wrong.</p>

<p>Driver - Not trying to be mean, but sometimes the way you word your comments comes off as a bit condescending. I hope it was unintentional.</p>

34

<p>It’s not easy being as wonderful as me. It was unintentional (seriously). Sorry. Do check out the linked article before you buy, it’s very well done–particularly as to the translating-out of some of the original’s Judeo-Christian aspects. [note to self: must buy pair of kid gloves]</p>

35

<p>"“Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household.” (Matthew 10:34-36 NASB) </p>

<p>Ah, but what does it mean? For the first 300 years of Christian history, violence - all violence - including violence in self-defense, or defense of women and children - was unequivocally condemned. There were no exceptions. Canon 12 of the First Council of Nicaea (you can’t get much more orthodox than that!) called soldiers who became Christians and continued as soldiers “dogs who eat their own vomit”. There was no controversy, no differences of opinion, no theological debate. </p>

<p>After Constantine, and for a thousand years, Matthew 10:34 is quoted repeatedly in favor of holy wars, crusades, inquisitions, rape, murder, pillage, massacre. It was not to be understood metaphorically, but literally,</p>

<p>“I have come to cast fire upon the earth; and how I wish it were already kindled!” … “Do you suppose that I came to grant peace on earth? I tell you, no, but rather division; for from now on five members in one household will be divided, three against two and two against three.”… (Luke 12:49,51-53 NASB) </p>

<p>The “Sword of Christ” became a favorite phrase of Crusaders, from Richard the Lionhearted on down. Not slaughter only Muslims and Jews, of course, but anyone who was the political enemy of Rome (including, over time, tens of thousands of Byzantine Christians.) The “Sword of Christ” was a favorite phrase of Nazi Catholic apologists, about which Pius XII was conspicuously silent. In fact, Nazis from Goering to Goebbels to Bultmann to Frick proclaimed the “truth” of positive Christianity. </p>

<p>If it was the Pope’s purpose to speak about the role of religion in promoting violence and intolerance, he could have started by quoting the Catholic Bishop of Berlin, and worked his way backward. (It would have been a VERY long talk.)</p>

36

<p>I don’t doubt that there are reasons to criticize the Church’s behavior in the past, but I believe that both Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict have made an effort to heal the division between the Jewish people and the Catholic Church. <a href=“http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1198976,00.html[/url]”>http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1198976,00.html&lt;/a&gt;

</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>In any case, I don’t think that some words, whether calculated or casual, are an excuse to make death threats or murder innocent nuns.</p>

37

<p>You do realize that Ratzinger played a role, against that of Poland’s own bishops, in keeping erect a 26-foot cross at the Gate of Auschwitz, an insult to the remaining Jews of the world.</p>

38

<p>Why does no one demand an apology from Osama Bin Laden for perverting the faith of Islam with his terrorist murders?
I’d like to see those countries currently protesting the Pope’s comments on Islam, also be protesting and demanding that Bin Laden and his ilk stop doing their killing & cloaking it in the name of Islam.
Do you think any of them will burn Osama in effigy?</p>

39

<p>Is the Center for Dialogue and Prayer the site you find offensive?

<a href=“http://www.nationalcatholicreporter.org/word/pt052806a.htm[/url]”>http://www.nationalcatholicreporter.org/word/pt052806a.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Mini, no rational person, Christian or any other faith, would seek to minimize the Holocaust. It was the definition of evil, in my book. I remember watching films about the camps in my 6th grade Catholic elementary school which I will never forget.</p>

<p>I’m really not sure of your point here. Is it that you hate the Pope and the Catholic Church? You are entitled to your opinion, although I think it’s unfortunate. The Catholic church today views the Jewish faith as elder brothers and sisters.</p>

<p>Are you suggesting that the Muslim faith would treat Jewish people better? I don’t think that could be your point.</p>

<p>The point of this thread, I thought, was the disproportionate response to words spoken by the Pope. I’m not going to debate Church history – as I’ve said, there are certainly some low points, including the Crusades. But the Catholic Church today is working toward peace and reconciliation among the world’s faith traditions. There’s just not much more that I can say, if you don’t see that.</p>

40

<p>

If they do, I hope they come up with better effigies than those they made of Pope Benedict, which were incredibly lame, and made them look like they couldn’t even master basic American kindergarten skills.</p>