What the pope really said
I’m sure some of my readers have been reading about the bru-ha-ha that is growing regarding the Pope’s speech last Tuesday. What most people have not seen is what the Pope actually has said. Here is the pdf of the speech itself. However I’ll go beyond that to show the quote that is the source of this outrage for those who don’t want to read the whole thing:
In the seventh conversation edited by Professor Khoury, 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…”.
Note: Italized quote is what is drawing the criticism, bold is my emphasis.
I will not deny that the Pope chose a poor quote for the point he was trying to make considering today’s political climate. However, it is clear from reading the document that the Pope’s intent was clearly NOT to defame Islam, but to stress the importance of dialogue over violence. The Pope makes it clear that he is quoting someone else and both prepends and postpends a disclaimer speaking to the harsh language being used (see bolded phrases).
What strikes me about this is how much the Pope’s point is being made in the events since the speech. While his speech calls for dialogue, those who codemn him have responded with violence and hatred. One influential Muslim going so far as to say “Anyone who describes Islam as a religion as intolerant encourages violence.” (source)
If that isn’t an ironic statement, I don’t know what is.
When I first read about this controversy, I didn’t think much of it. I figured it would blow over in a couple of days. Sadly this has not been the case and violence in the middle east towards Christians is on the rise.
This is a time for prayer:
Heavenly Father, forgive me my sins and help me to rise above my weaknesses. Help all of us to see the precious gift of life that you have given us all. Help us to see that violence in your name is not your Will but an offense against your Will. Give us all the strength to forgive those who have wronged us and that same strength to those we have wronged. Lead us to peace in your Holy Name.
September 18th, 2006 at 6:39 pm
This whole thing is just a bunch of hooey. It seems like the people in the middle east are just looking for anything, ANYTHING with which to become upset about. Ok, in hindsight, knowthing that these people are VERY sensitive, the Pope made a dumb mistake saying what he did. He should shell out some of the mountains of gold the church sits on to hire a properly PC speechwriter. However, one thing I will never understand is why A) derogatory comics or slightly insensitive wording of speeches = horribly bad and yet B) killing people, threatening to kill even more people and destroying tons of physical property in retaliation is totally ok. Huh?