BBC: Pope sorry for offending Muslims (has apologised in person)

[CJCRANE]

"Pope Benedict XVI has apologised in person for causing offence to Muslims in a speech in Bavaria last week.
He said the medieval text which he quoted did not express in any way his personal opinion, adding the speech was an invitation to respectful dialogue.

The Pope has been under intense scrutiny amid angry reactions from throughout the Muslim world.

The 14th Century Christian emperor's quote said the Prophet Muhammad brought the world only evil and inhuman things."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/5353208.stm

[jean]

1. that man is too old and out of touch to be in such a powerful position

retire, will ya?

[ShortnFiery]

4. If Pope John Paul II were alive and healthy today, he would NOT

have made such an inflammatory statement. From all the unyielding positions, I honestly believe that he LOVED his fellow human beings with all his heart and soul. I do not believe the same of our present Pope. I hope with time, my view will change ... that he will prove that he is doing his utmost toward gaining World Peace. I hope and pray but still wonder.

Unfortunately Pope Benedict may prove to be as detrimental to "World Peace" as our USA "Benedict" (Arnold) was to Operations Security. I want to believe that he was advised to give this statement and has since demoted whomever recommended it's airing to The World. :(

[ShortnFiery]

2. Good! That's what he could have done from the onset of outrage

There were several other quotes he could have used. Using something negative and Mohammad in the same sentence is absolutely insensitive if not blatant disrespect to the Muslim People.

Whomever advised His Eminence to make that inflammatory statement is a putz and should be replaced poste haste. :grr: :thumbsdown:

[toopers]

21. But what if it is true . . .

not saying that it is, but . . .

[CJCRANE]

3. My respect for him has increased

it takes a brave leader to admit his mistakes.

[bdamomma]

61. but he should have never said it.

or where are his PR people to go over what he says.

[IChing]

71. This was no mistake it was done on purpose

This coincided with the pResident's speech on the "Third Awakening"

The pope is a "brave leader" ?


Give me a break.

[Supersedeas]

86. he apologized for uttering it--did NOT dispute the Truth of the statement

or revise or recant the substance of the statement

[warrens]

89. He didn't. He lied

Unless you think calling a religion bloodthirsty and evil, under any circumstances, is a plea for a respectful dialogue. I call Smirking Sociopath a shitbucket, a murderer and a moron. Believe me, the last thing I want with that punk is a respectful dialogue.

[CreekDog]

97. #89, The pope didn't call Islam violent and bloodthirsty

But he did criticize religious conversion through force/coercion and quoted a scholar who said that nothing good comes from such conversions via force/coercion.

He was so spot on with these comments, that everyone who cherishes religious freedom should be cheering.

It's abominable that he should be expected to apologize by people who are kiling and acting violently in response to a comment they didn't even comprehend. Sure, not all who are protesting are acting violently. But those who are acting violently clearly don't even understand the purpose of their protest, except to say, how dare we criticize Mohammed. Well, in our societies he can be criticized and Jesus doesn't need our defense either. In their societies...well, they can have them if you can't criticize religious conversion by the sword.

If those committing violence did comprehend the message, then they are saying that violence is okay for Islam, but not okay for Christians.

[blm]

5. Guess that pushes the "infallability" meme out the window.

.

[Zynx]

7. Infallibility has to be specifically invoked and has only been done

twice. This is a common mis-perception often repeated rabid anti-Catholics.

[Pendrench]

8. Not really - papal "infallibility" doesn't mean that every statement the

pope makes is "infallable"...it is only when he speaks on certain matters of faith. In fact, I believe that this has only been used a few times in the history of the papacy (since it is a relatively new concept).

Anyway, that's my understanding - if I'm incorrect, I hope that someone else will reply to shed more light on this.

Tim

[5thGenDemocrat]

11. No, you're basically right

Papal infallibility is invoked when the Pope issues a writ of "bull." The last one, concerning Mary's immaculate conception, was issued in the 1870s, IIRC, and doesn't and never has meant that the Pope can't make mistakes. It only means that a binding opinion has been made from on high and that's the way it is. You are bound as a Catholic to accept it as a matter of faith (however firmly the tongue is pressed into the cheek).
John
There is actually very little one is bound to believe within the faith. Catholics tend to put more weight on actions, not beliefs.

ON EDIT: Changed "doctrine" to "matter of faith," which is more accurate.

[VegasWolf]

91. Huh??? If true, then this new and improved Catholic Church is far

different form the Catholic Church I rejected in the 60's because I was taught that unless one was a Catholic one has no chance of going to heaven. This was obviously absurd and I felt a church riddled with absurd beliefs was a waste of time. So much for beliefs over actions. I'm glad you enjoy the new and improved Catholic Church.

[5thGenDemocrat]

104. Well, lots of stuff changes in forty years

I can't think of a single doctrine which says only Catholics are going to heaven. In fact, the RCC has been busy lately in both healing schisms amd finding common communion (the Anglicans come to mind) and increasing dialogues with other faiths -- both Christian and not.
You need to read what I wrote, my friend. I didn't say "beliefs over actions," I said "actions over beliefs."
Frankly, I'm not sure you rejected the church in the 1960s or the 1460s. I went to Catholic school in the 1960s (right smack during Vatican II) and while I can't speak to what official doctrine was before that, I can assure you that the church today teaches that all persons who live and profess their faith as God gives them the wisdom to see that faith are Children of God. That includes Lutherans, Baptists, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Shintos and who all else. And it is precisely why we place our stock on actions over beliefs.
John
Yes, I do enjoy the new and improved Catholic Church. Every Easter and Christmas.

[VegasWolf]

106. You missed the church's teachings on Limbo I guess. You need to do more

research on your chosen religion. I know that you were attempting to stress actions over beliefs, in spite of my mistyping. That is why I was pointing out the error of your ways. And yes, I attended Catholic schools in the 60's, but I guess I was a great student.

[5thGenDemocrat]

108. Well, I guess you were

Bully for you.
John
I guess we can all stop evolving now. I bow to your perfect and all-encompassing intellect.

[VegasWolf]

109. Nah! Just a straight A student who made a lot of right decisions. nt

[VegasWolf]

92. BTW, you mentioned the Papal Bull defining Mary's Immaculate Conception

as an example. Other notable examples are the three Papal Bulls calling for the First, Second, and Third Holy bloody Crusades which are the source of the current Muslim anger. Lot's of infallibility floating around the Catholic Church.

[5thGenDemocrat]

105. Funny -- I was just chatting with a Muslim man here on DU

And he said, in his opinion, the Pope's words have been taken out of context by those usual suspects who wish to stir up anger. He also noted that Muslims in the Middle East usually refer to the Crusades as "The Frankish Wars," and don't blame Christians, per se, for them simply because no true followers of Christ could or would behave in such an anti-Christian way.
Papal Bulls have been issued that were good, horrible or mundane. But no Crusade was called for through one -- ever. You could look it up, but I'm sure you won't.
John
Oh, and to point out just how fallible I am, the Papal Bull concerning Mary didn't have to do with the Immaculate Conception, except indirectly. It concerned her ascension into heaven, body and soul, and was issued in 1950 (still before I was born). There has been only one issued since -- establishing the reforms of Vatican II as official church doctrine. So feel free to fire up that cheeseburger on Friday (except during Lent).

[VegasWolf]

107. You appear very ignorant of Catholic history - check out these Papal Bulls

Quantum praedecessores Pope Eugene III calling for the Second Crusade
Audita tremendi Pope Gregory VIII calling for Third Crusade

but since you never even heard of Limbo, how can one expect you to know about any sophisticated aspects of your church. Keep those rosy glasses on tight, you apparently need them.

Signed, a proud atheist.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MindMatter]

9. The devil made me say that.

But I'm all better now.

[AusTexDem]

10. Is this an apology?

"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,"

What does that mean? " Sorry for the reactions" Sounds like a non apology.

"These in fact were a quotation from a medieval text, which do not in any way express my personal thought.

Is there a difference between his personal thought and the thought of the church?

"I hope this serves to appease hearts and to clarify the true meaning of my address, which in its totality was and is an invitation to frank and sincere dialog, with mutual respect."

Clarify? not so much. An invitation for dialog. Lets see,

"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."


I guess either you agree or not. Doesn't seem like a good way to start a sincere dialog about Islam in the current world environment.

I guess if a Muslim leader made a speech and quoted an old text that said that the Catholic church brought evil to the world and was spread by violence the Pope might not think that was very helpful.

I don't believe for one second that the Pope was surprised by the reaction to his statement.
This Pope is not stupid or out of touch.

[bbgrunt]

13. no, it is not an apology and it was not a mistake

his youthful nazi leanings are coming to the fore. The world is now settting up for the war of civilizations. The church's involvement in the last election was evident also.

[toopers]

22. Just out of interest . . .

How do you feel about Senator Robert Byrd?

[bbgrunt]

25. I don't understand the connection, unless you are referring to his

youthful dalliance with the KKK. But for the record I think he is past his prime and much too interested in earmarks.

This pope was known as the "enforcer" before he was elected. His authoritarian tendencies are obvious. Add to that the church's involvement in the 2004 election (harrassment of Kerry by priests) and the general authoritarianism of the church in general, I think it is clear that the pope's background is not irrelevant.

[toopers]

102. A youthful dalliance?

That lasted well into his adulthood. Byrd may not have been an enforcer, but he was a recruiter. Byrd's background is just as relevant as the Pope's.

[humbled_opinion]

66. I like Senator Byrd ... Get over his past he has done much more

for civil rights then he did with past actions... My point is those that would hold this over his head forever have more personal issues with him then his past associations.

[toopers]

101. When you say he has done much more . . .

like filibuster the 1964 Civil Rights Act? Or vote against the appointment of Thurgood Marshall?

[Malikshah]

28. Nope-- it remains the same. First out of the mouths of his minions

we get a non-apology.

Now out of his mouth.

Result= non-apology.

What is so difficult in stating:

What I said was offensive and wrong. It was wrong for me to say these things. I am sorry and will seek to make amends.

[humbled_opinion]

67. Because he is not sorry. He stated historical fact n/t

[NOLADEM]

12. First the Jews in his youth, and now Muslims

What christian tolerance. :eyes:

This kind of bigotry and stupid "my invisible friend is better than yours" is why I have never and will never consider religion anything more than misguided intentions, soft pedaled isms and a social appendix, ready to burst and poison its host at any time.

Fuck this bigot.

[951-Riverside]

14. and fuck those muslim bigots who shot that nun and fire bombed churches

over what this old cracker said.

[NOLADEM]

16. Absolutely.

All violence is an unnecessary stain on humanity.

[ShortnFiery]

53. Yeah, can't ya just feel the love?

That's no way to tap down the rhetoric.

Separate Church from State and realize, as Americans, it's our occupation of Iraq and BLIND support of Israel that fuels the Arab's (Muslims R Us) ANGER FAR more than any ole' thing our INSANE blathering Religious leaders say.

IMO both Fundy Christian and Muslim are EQUALLY bat shit INSANE. :grr:

[humbled_opinion]

69. OK on the equally tolerant about each others religious beliefs however,

Radical Christians aren't blowing anybody up or cutting anybody's heads off so get some reality checks going on. If the Pope cannot speak freely and for that matter if anyone cannot speak freely to criticize the radical portion of the Muslim religion then we have some serious problems.... How can words inflame reaction so badly as to kill... What has the world become when people cannot express what they believe... I am totally disgusted at all of it.

[CJCRANE]

73. But do you think

if a major religious leader had said that Hinduism or Catholicism was "evil and inhuman" and had it blasted worldwide over the MSM for several days that there would be no reaction?

There's six billion people on this planet and we're all connected via internet and satellite news, it's the reality that in a global village there are going to a lot of global village idiots.

I can understand your disgust at islamic terrorists but see it from the other side too: a radical christian has launched a "crusade" on a muslim country that has killed in excess of 30,000 civilians and also advocates torture and kidnapping...it's not a pretty world we're living in right now.

[humbled_opinion]

74. My Points

1. Bush doesn't speak for this Christian. Politics and religion are distinctly separate here in the U.S.
2. The Pope only spoke historical perspective about Islam i.e., Muhammad called to spread Islam by the sword.
3. Many people and groups criticize Christianity, Catholicism, Hinduism, etc and not one reply is with death threats or violence... Yes not a pretty world we live in and mainly due to the intolerance of the Muslim groups.. Where are their leaders decrying the threats against the pope ? Where are their calls for restraint....

[CJCRANE]

79. 1. Religion and poltics

are not separate in the Bush Republican Party, I think most DUers would agree with that.
2. Show me one example of a major muslim leader who has called christianity "evil and inhuman" in any context (it's unlikely because muslims revere Jesus).
3. show me an example of a muslim country that has invaded a western country in the last 50 years. Also if you think muslims are responsible for everything that's wrong in the world I suggest you tune your TV to a few foreign TV stations to see what else is going on in the world. Plus I've seen calls for restraint, it depends where you get your news from.

[humbled_opinion]

83. Huh get a clue

1. Regardless of GOP politics the Church and State are seperate in the U.S.
2. Muslim Leaders have been calling for the destruction of Israel and the U.S. for the last 30 years.
3. Iraq invaded Kuwait and Iran, Pakistan Invaded India, Indonesia invaded East Timor and Aceh Sumatra, Syria invaded Lebanon... Should I go on... I get my news mostly from internet sources including DU.

[CJCRANE]

84. You answered #1

but the answers to the other questions doesn't address what I asked.

If we look at the War on Terror we find that Coalition has killed approx 50,000+ civilians whereas muslim terrorists have killed about 4,000.

(BTW I'm LIHOP about 9/11 and hold the B*sh administration to be complicit in it).

Then there were approx 60,000,000 civilian casualties in World War Two so somehow I don't think the West has the moral highground when it comes to killing and voilence.

On edit: BTW I'm not happy either about the nearly 3,000 American troops and 20,000 injured in Iraq either, or the people left to die in the Twin Towers or affected by respiratory problems in the aftermath.

[humbled_opinion]

85. example of a muslim country that has invaded a western country in the last

You asked for an example of Muslim country that invaded another country in the last 50 years I gave you some examples.

If you were only speaking of U.S. aggression as a single point then I concur. Iraq war is a huge misstep by the U.S. however, to think that even if we pulled out of Iraq and did our best to make reparations that the Muslim extremists would be content than my friend you are seriously naive.

My grandmother had a wonderful saying "The egg cracked cannot be cured".

[CBHagman]

17. Do you notice the poison in yourself?

With but a few words, you've revealed your attitude towards fellow DUers, the depth (or lack thereof) of your analytical powers, and the ease at which you curse and judge others.

We are in constant danger of becoming that which we despise in others.

[LordLovesAWorkingMan]

24. But they're a bigot for the left, which is OK.

Seems to be the pervasive message...

[ShortnFiery]

54. This person is correct that The Vatican abetted The Nazis and

was "in the lead" in the Torture Arena during "The Inquisition" ... let's not even get started on the horrific acts BY CHRISTIANS during those ole' Crusades? :blush:

[humbled_opinion]

75. Don't invoke things that happend hundreds of years ago as relevant...

Obviously keeping people as slaves is inhuman, disgraceful but those in the U.S. did it up until just over a hundred years ago.... My point is we grow as a civilization and learn from our mistakes... Get over the crusades for God's sake.

[TankLV]

29. I agree. Fuck this asswipe.

A horrible creature thru and thru.

What bugs me most, is that out of all the noble persons available, the church chose this horrible creature.

He is an "intelligent" man. He know EXACTLY what he is doing and saying.

FUCK this pope and his non-apology apology.

Just like the repukes he worships...

[humbled_opinion]

68. No he is only speaking historical fact. Islam is not a tolerant religion

[NOLADEM]

93. And Christianity is?

Please.

Spare me.

Ask Galileo how tolerant they are of opposing views. Ask any woman seeking the pulpit.

All religion is dressed up bigotry masked in ceremony to validate the isms of the flock, for the profit of the church leaders.

[Karenina]

15. Better late than never.

Benny is no dummy, he KNEW what he was unleashing. I'm just happy he's made this effort as this "clash of cultures" shit chaps my ass.

[crim son]

47. I'm not "happy" about anything he does.

Thus far there have been two murders of Christians which may very well be a result of his speech. If he didn't understand the consequences of what he was saying he should have kept his mouth shut. But he did: that's the point. Like many religious dogmatics, he didn't care because he believes that he is righteous and can do no wrong.

[cyberpj]

18. This article said he apologized for "the reactions" - he did not apologize

for making the statement that started them.

[tedzbear]

23. The pope is being an ass.

Is he apologizing for their reaction? Why is he apologizing for THEM? He should be apologizing for his own inflamatory remark.

He's just as bad as Bush when it comes to demonizing Islam. They both are insinuating that every Muslim on the planet is a member of Al Qaeda. Why millions of people respect these two clowns is beyond me.

:shrug:

[mwb970]

46. That's what they all do.

People who say hateful things later "apologize" by saying "I'm sorry people were offended." That's NOT an apology, folks.

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

19. Pope Political I

Toeing the party line, always saying the expedient thing to that particular person for that particular moment.

Hindsight's a bitch, Holiness. You need to practice your FORESIGHT.

[cambie]

20. I thought this guy was going to be a caretaker

until they found someone suitable. Last week it was that clumsy use of the Intelligent term that was so appreciated by the ID shysters. At best and with most charity he could be excused for that as a bumpkin. If the Vatican wants to survive they had better start writing his scripts and booting his holiness in the ass when he slips up.

[marshall]

52. Catholics and Italians are not safe

Because of the Pope's clumsy comments, Catholics and Italians in particular are not safe worldwide. This is all so unecessary--nuns and priests will be under attack and the Pope is the one who is to blame!

[fedsron2us]

26. Pope announces global intinerary of apology

Apparently he will be accompanying Boris Johnson, the foppish blond British Tory MP, who has also recently got into hot water over some unfortunate comments about cannibalism in New Guinea.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5327984.stm

Mr Johnson, who is great-grandson of Ali Kemal, the last interior minister of the Ottomon Imperial Turkish government, will presumably be giving the Pope some much needed advice about how to survive his forthcoming trip to Istanbul.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Johnson

On edit - Let us hope His Holiness Pope Benedict is more successful than Johnson's ancestor who sadly was unwise enough to sign an arrest warrant for Ataturk (the founder of modern Turkey) and subsequently got lynched for his pains by a mob in Izmit.

[Eugene]

27. AP: Pope's Response Accepted by Some Muslims

Pope's Response Accepted by Some Muslims


Sunday September 17, 2006 9:31 PM

AP Photo PPC101

By FRANCES D'EMILIO

Associated Press Writer

VATICAN CITY (AP) - Some Muslim leaders accepted Pope Benedict XVI's
explanation Sunday of his remarks on Islam and violence. Others said
it wasn't enough, but cautioned followers against a violent backlash
after attacks on churches in Palestinian areas and the slaying of a
nun in Somalia.

The pontiff said he was "deeply sorry" his speech last week in Germany
offended Muslims, particularly his quoting of a medieval text that
characterized some of the teachings of Islam's founder as "evil and
inhuman" and referred to spreading Islam "by the sword."

He said those words did not reflect his own opinions.

-snip-

Full article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6086689,00.html

[goclark]

30. He must either be as stupid as Bush

or just like him.

Any 4th grade child would know that those words coming out of the mouth of the head of the Catholic church would spell trouble.

We are not talking about Rocket Science!

[rodeodance]

31. Pope issues rare statement of regret

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060917/ap_on_re_eu/pope_muslims

Pope issues rare statement of regret

By FRANCES D'EMILIO, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 4 minutes ago

VATICAN CITY -
Pope Benedict XVI said Sunday that he is "deeply sorry" his remarks on Islam and violence offended Muslims, but the unusual expression of papal regret drew a mixed reaction from Islamic leaders as the
Vatican worried about a backlash of violence.
A

Some Muslim leaders accepted the statement. Others said it wasn't enough, but urged Muslims to avoid violence after attacks on churches in Palestinian areas and the slaying of a nun in Somalia.

Benedict said he regretted causing offense with his speech last week in Germany, particularly his quoting of a medieval text that characterized some of the teachings of Islam's founder as "evil and inhuman" and referred to spreading Islam "by the sword."

He said those words did not reflect his own opinions.

"I hope that this serves to appease hearts and to clarify the true meaning of my address, which in its totality was and is an invitation to frank and sincere dialogue, with great mutual respect," the pope said during his weekly Sunday appearance before pilgrims.

[beyurslf]

32. A statement of regret that people got offended.... not that he was sorry

he said something so bigotted and stupid.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

41. Exactly...

He won't admit it ever.

[DoYouEverWonder]

33. So much for being omnipotent

Wouldn't being omnipotent mean never having to say you're sorry?

[charlyvi]

34. Yeah. That Doctrine of Infallibility thingy seems to have a

few kinks in it.

[LostinVA]

37. That's not how that works

It doesn't mean everything the Pope says is infallible. It only means Papal Writs/Bulls are considered infallible. Those are few and far between.

[TrogL]

40. Didn't we just have one?

Something about reproduction?

(as if the Pope knew anything about it)

[razors edge]

35. Any word on the

inquisition or the child rapes?

[NOLADEM]

38. Nah

They will never apologize for that. It is ingrained in the institution. Never trust anyone who says they are celibate. They are either warped or lying. Neither of which are qualities of men you leave your children alone with in anything called a rectory.

:hide:


I keed, I keed.

[razors edge]

39. father oriely's a fairy but it don't bother mary,

catholic girls, at the cyo,

catholic girls, don't you know how they go?


frank zappa/joe's garage

[wiley]

44. Vatican trying to resurrect the Crusades or something?

Was that what * was talking about when he said we are entering a new "phase" of Chritianity? It's hard to believe that someone who has studied and pondered religion and how people relate to it for so many decades (after the Nazi thing, that is) could casually bring up a 12th century dialog between a Muslim and a Catholic that contained an obviously inflammatory question about Islam. Really smart way to start a dialog.

Will the Republican Party now warn all Catholics and Christians to live in fear, keep their mouths shut and go along with anything * proposes in order to receive protection?

Stupid. It's like the Vatican has their own Cheney.

[LostinVA]

36. I am sure the murder of the Italian nun in Somalia prodded him

He should have watched his words more, but the nun's murder is inexcusable... even more so because she was a hospital worker helping women and children.

[autorank]

42. That's not an apology...of course they'll continue to be offended.

"I hope that this serves to appease hearts and to clarify the true meaning of my address, which in its
totality was and is an invitation to frank and sincere dialogue, with great mutual respect," the pope
said during his weekly Sunday appearance before pilgrims.

OK, he is "appeasing" their emotions - as in what...what the heck does that mean;

he's "clarifying" because they just can't understand;

AND this is part of a "frank and sincere dialogue"
- WHICH MEANS HE MEANT WHAT HE SAID IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Terrific...and for my next trick...

This guy is pretty tough. He knew exactly what he was saying and he's not backing off.

[ShortnFiery]

55. "This guy is pretty tough. He knew exactly what he was saying and he's ...

not backing off."

:wtf: over! We're talking about the man who is supposed to be the "human form" of Jesus on earth labeling an entire religion as EVIL! Did you not read that Paragraph? Sports' Coaches are lauded for being "tough" but The Pope is suppose to represent ---> The Prince of Peace!

I will pray for Pope Benedict's soul because his ILL WORDED paragraph was clearly inflammatory to The Muslim Faith. If he does not resign *he has blood on HIS hands.*

I fail to find anything tough about "talking like a bully" by flatly labeling Their Blessed Prophet as a Force For Evil. :nuke: If Benedict don't resign he will go into History with the other Tyrannical Popes who value "their authority" over the hope for World Peace.

The Pope should resign as soon as possible. What he said is understandably NOT easily forgivable. :(

[Psephos]

43. The irony of Islamic violence because of the Pope's address is rich

One might even say, delicious.

Peace.

[ShortnFiery]

48. Yes, equating the Muslim's #1 Prophet to EVIL is what really gets

me off, NOT! These statements were incredibly stupid and Pope Benedict should resign before more violence breaks out. I hope someone advised him to make such inflammatory remarks, otherwise I fear that His Eminence has literally gone INSANE. :(

[Bridget Burke]

45. Has anyone read the Pope's whole speech?

Here it is. www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=46474

A bit too intellectual for most. But it's easy to take words out of context.

[TomChicago]

49. Pope

The Pope speaking about "reason" is what is so laughably incongruous here. Furthermore, he does not address the "sword" of Christendom and the sea of bloodshed through history that has produced.

[ShortnFiery]

50. Out of Context or not ... the following paragraph was INFLAMMATORY

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.

No Doubt! Out of context don't mean squat when you call their Prophet as bringing forth EVIL! :thumbsdown:

This paragraph was INSANE for any religious leader to quote, much less The Leader of The Entire Catholic Faith!

Does The Pope or An Adviser feel that The Vatican needs to out under-class Our Dear Leader with his OWN "Bring em' On" rhetoric? :crazy:

[Marie26]

63. It's better in context

But you still have to wonder why he included that quote at all. It was inflammatory & he could have easily made his point w/o it. With that quote, a speech about ending religious violence ended up inspiring it. Oh, the irony.

[plasticsundance]

51. The men that run the Church/Vatican

Should just shut up and be content with cross dressing.

[Woolwich]

56. Yeah right.

"A notorious Muslim extremist told a demonstration in London yesterday that the Pope should face execution.

Anjem Choudary said those who insulted Islam would be "subject to capital punishment".

His remarks came during a protest outside Westminster Cathedral on a day that worldwide anger among Muslim hardliners towards Pope Benedict XVI appeared to deepen."

Source - The Daily Mail

[plasticsundance]

58. So are you for the cross dressing or against it?

:shrug:

[Woolwich]

59. Personally?

In favour.

[plasticsundance]

64. Well ... see? That's all I'm saying.

Instead of inflaming the Arab and Muslim world, be content with the simpler things in life. You know, instead of doing things like what the British did to Iran during the 50's. Trying to overthrow a freely elected government of Iran, and finally convincing the Eisenhower Administration to help the British obtain that goal. Why? So a British oil company could continue its imperialistic practice of keeping the Iranian workers of its oil company in abject poverty and squalor conditions. We all know how that ended leading up to the Iranian revolution in 1979.

Read about the British despicable behavior in "All the Shah's Men" by Stephen Kinzer. I don't condone the Arab/Muslim anger, but I do understand it.

[humbled_opinion]

70. Sorry I don't even understand the relationship. So someone

speaks words which lead to bombings and killings.... You seriously can't believe that what someone says should invoke murderous reaction and thats ok.... That my friend is what is wrong.

[plasticsundance]

77. The Arab/Muslim world is inflamed

The everyday actions of the US and UK further inflame that anger. Pope didn't help matters. It hardly matters what any pseudo self-righteous philosophy does to condemn the behavior of Arab/Muslims. The pope is a voice in the world that represents a large portion of Christians. For such a leader to voice criticism of another religion that faces occupation by Israel and the US, years of imperialistic exploitation, and Western pundits that place Arab/Muslim vs. Judeo/Christian in the terms of a clash of civilizations. The Arab/Muslim world also witnessed their land being partitioned by Western powers for years. It's a simple matter of cause an effect. This anger and violence of the Arab/Muslim world is no product of the culture. It's a simple matter of pushing back.

You deflect the argument with false piety by not addressing the issue of what I previously posted, i.e. I don't condone the Arab/Muslim anger, but I do understand it.

Your argument is like the Arab/Muslim represents a man watching some neighbors burn his house down. The person having their house burned down complains and screams for some help. The neighbors only watch. No one calls the fire department. Someone goes in and pours gas on the fire. The person becomes incensed and threatens the person who threw gasoline on the house. And some religious cross dresser comes along and accuses the person having his/her house burned down and threatening people of acting out of hand and needs to check his/her behavior. The person whose house is burning down becomes more incensed and threatens the religious cross dresser. Then you come along and accuse the person who is having his house burned down that his behavior is unacceptable.

Question: If their wasn't such outrage in the Arab and Muslim communities, do you think the cross dressing pope would have actually apologized? I doubt it. Dumb shit only now realizes how volatile his words were.

[humbled_opinion]

81. We disagree... My point is that the Pope who repeated words of an

historical figure which accurately described the views of Muhammad based on the Koran preaching that Islam could be spread by the sword. The quote the pope made was historically accurate. Whether his view or not have a nun murdered and calling for the death of the Pope in retribution of simple words goes far beyond any rational response and in your example even the man who has his house burned down has no right to kill the person that did it. We are a nation of laws as is the world. Condemning someone on the words they choose to use just shows me how intolerant a religion Islam is. Where are the Islamic leaders in condemning those that call for assassination of a religious leader? i.e., in the post 911 world how many Christian leaders publicly called on the assassination of Muslim leaders. None...

[plasticsundance]

90. Many religions were spread by the sword

That's not what the Islamic world rebellion is about in today's world. I gave you the reasons why the Arab and Muslim world his outraged. Read the history, and spare me the characterization. I suggest you pick up the Old Testament and read how the nation of Israel was established. I suggest you take a look at how indigenous tribes were brutally converted to Christianity. Pl-ueeze.

The Western world it is now in control, so they define the terms ... but look at the history of how the Western got to where it is today. Ask the native Americans what a swell Christian deal they got.

Maybe the pope should be more concerned to smote the evil in his own eyes before he does it for his fellow human being that don't happen to share his religion.

[Karenina]

82. What YOU said!!! BEST POST ON THE SUBJECT!!!

:yourock::yourock::yourock::yourock::yourock::yourock:

Western powers are TODAY committing GENOCIDE in Arab nations. Any wonder they may be just a tiny bit testy??? Any wonder that fundamentalist lunatics would exploit that testiness???

Pope Benny is a VERY WELL-EDUCATED man. He KNEW EXACTLY what he was doing.

[Woolwich]

103. Fair Enough

but I prefer to attribute the despicable actions of a government to that government rather than to the entire nation. That tends to lead to unhelpful generalizations such as all British people are imperialist maniacs, or all Americans are gun-toting insular idiots with no understanding of the wider world. Or even that all muslims are suicide bombers or all christians intolerant bigots.

[confludemocrat]

57. What a weasel. It's a BS, "sorry you feel that way" kind of "apology"

Since he's supposedly infallible he can't truly admit he's is wrong and that his attack on Muslims was stupid. And so the world pays for it.

[bdamomma]

60. this Pope went over the line with this comment, way over the line

[humbled_opinion]

72. Over the line I think not all he did was speak historical fact.

Radical Islam is a problem in the world. They have no right to kill in the name of religion... Would we tolerate killing in the name of Christianity and don't give me the crusades argument we also enslaved people just over a hundred years ago.... Obviously we learn from our mistakes.

[Marie26]

62. Non-apology

"I'm sorry for the reaction," like "I'm sorry you feel that way." It abdicates personal responsibility. I am so tired of non-apologies from all our leaders. Either you're sorry, or you aren't. I don't think Pope Benedict is really sorry at all, and he meant what he said.

[Julius Civitatus]

65. I'm divided over this matter

This is how I see this issue:

- On one hand, I think the pope was not prudent by bringing a quote from the renaissance to criticize those who (in this day and age) use violence for religious purposes. Out of curiosity I have read the full quote that Ratrzinger read in his speech, and I actually don't think it is all that offensive, but that's just my opinion (It is a historical fact that Islam did spread by the sword. There is no question about that.) Again, being the pope, he should be more savvy at dealing with other religions or even looking like he may be criticizing other religions. He should exercise maximum diplomacy.

That said...

- On the other hand, I'm getting SICK AND TIRED at the violent overreaction of Muslims around the world every time anyone says something they don't like. Whether it is an editorial cartoon or a speech by the pope, their reaction is just predictable. Burning churches in Palestine, shooting elderly nuns on the back? WTF? For a f*cking comment?

Enough of this shit. This is not acceptable, and the international community should figure out a way to deal this crap. These INTOLERANT attitudes are medieval and have no place in today's world.

Am I the only one that finds it ironic how these radical Muslims go on violent riots every time someone in the Western world mentions that they use their religion for violent purposes? Hello????

[RiDuvessa]

76. I'm not saying that the Pope was right...

but doesn't anyone here think that the Muslim reaction to his words is completely out of line? I mean, the Pope quotes an ancient ruler who was about to see his kingdom fall to Muslim invaders, and the Muslim world explodes in violence? Doesn't the reaction seem a little out of proportion to the offense? Calling for jihad, calling for his death, firebombing churches, killing nuns, and burning him in effigy? No one sees that this is over the top?

[CJCRANE]

80. The reaction of quite a few people is out of line

but it's not quite on the scale you depict.

[Megahurtz]

95. Not only that, but

who knows, there is probably some truth to what he was saying, although in a position such as his,
he probably should have kept his comments to himself, or amongst a smaller crowd.

Seems like a pretty misogynistic Religion to me anyway,
the men going to heaven to get their 72 Virgins and all LOL!:rofl:
So what do the women get out of the deal??? LOL!:rofl:

Now THAT, is over the top!!!

Hey! To each their own! LOL!
If the women want to put up with that shit then, good luck!

That's why it doesn't bother me that he said this stuff.
Everyone has a right to their own opinion, even the Pope.

[newspeak]

78. well, I see the Catholic Church

will never again chose a progressive pope, like Pope John XXIII or Pope Paul I--I was hoping the Cardinal from South America would become the next pope--you know, a pope who believes in social justice and against poverty--but, looks like we got the one that this administration can go along with. I was a Catholic under Pope John XXIII, but no more. If he wanted to contain violence in his speech, maybe he shouldn't have quoted that passage, as it so easily was taken out of context. Why thrust a stick in the lion's cage, unless your wanting a reaction?

[Spinoza]

87. It's hard to disagree with the simple statement that

'the Prophet Muhammad brought the world only evil and inhuman things.' As did all world religions including Christianity.

[Spinoza]

88. I am waiting for a SINGLE

Muslim cleric to issue any form of apology, or any form of regret, for bigoted remarks against Christians and Jews.

[oasis]

94. Pope helps Chimpy to underline the so-called clash of ideologies.

Perfect timing. :eyes:

[CreekDog]

96. The Pope should not apologize for the following remarks

The pope is arguing against violent religious conversion of any sort and arguing against the shedding of blood to spread one's faith. If anything, the people on this board should be applauding him for such a peaceful message. The person he quoted is saying that faith spread through violence produces nothing of value --THAT IS THE POINT. The point is not that Islam has no value, the point is that faith spread through coercion is not really faith, but force and doesn't produce what faith can produce, the fruits of faith of which we recognize many good things. The fruits of forced religious conversion are null.

Those that are protesting this speech using violence are mocking their own protestations. And I'm Lutheran and I still think he was right.

And the countries where protests are most vociferous don't even try to educate most of their people (especially not women). It's hard to understand what the pope is getting at, especially without education and I'm sure that his finer points are not understood by many protesting masses.

The full speech is at:
http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=46474

quote from Pope Benedict XVI:

<snip>
"I was reminded of all this recently, when I read the edition by Professor Theodore Khoury (Münster) 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. It was probably the emperor himself who set down this dialogue, during the siege of Constantinople between 1394 and 1402; and this would explain why his arguments are given in greater detail than the responses of the learned Persian.

The dialogue ranges widely over the structures of faith contained in the Bible and in the Qur'an, and deals especially with the image of God and of man, while necessarily returning repeatedly to the relationship of the three Laws: the Old Testament, the New Testament, and the Qur'an. In this lecture I would like to discuss only one point-- itself rather marginal to the dialogue itself-- which, in the context of the issue of faith and reason, I found interesting and which can serve as the starting-point for my reflections on this issue.

In the seventh conversation edited by Professor Khoury, the emperor touches on the theme of the jihad (holy war). The emperor must have known that surah 2, 256 reads: There is no compulsion in religion. It 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 turns to his interlocutor somewhat brusquely with the central question on the relationship between religion and violence in general, in these words:

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 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 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....

The decisive statement in this argument against violent conversion is this: not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to God's nature. The editor, Theodore Khoury, observes: "For the emperor, as a Byzantine shaped by Greek philosophy, this statement is self-evident. But for Muslim teaching, God is absolutely transcendent. His will is not bound up with any of our categories, even that of rationality." Here Khoury quotes a work of the noted French Islamist R. Arnaldez, who points out that Ibn Hazn went so far as to state that God is not bound even by his own word, and that nothing would oblige him to reveal the truth to us. Were it God's will, we would even have to practice idolatry."
<snip>

[CJCRANE]

98. Don't you think the Pope

sort of ignores issues like the Inquisition, the Crusades and the treatment of witches etc?

Good for him that he's against violent conversion but it's slightly disingenuous to use only Islam as an example of this.

[CreekDog]

99. His comments are against the Spanish Inquisition

Even without mentioning them.

And burning so-called "witches" also fits.

But let's face it. What's happening today? What is the point of establishing Islamic Republics? Which is the greater threat now, burning witches, or the establishment of more autocratic Islamic governments?

I'm as liberal as most here and many here just have to stop apologizing to people who cannot handle any criticism of their leaders, religious or not.

Mohammed is not above criticism.

[CJCRANE]

100. The only Islamic Republic

I see being established is the one facilitated in Iraq by "shock and awe".

I'm not apologizing for anyone who can't handle criticism. I've seen many muslim groups refute the Pope's comments in a polite manner and ask him for a civilized debate. Just as the Pope would if a major religious leader had implied his religion was "evil and inhuman".