I wonder if the world is in for another bout of Islamic anger of the kind directed against all things Danish earlier this year.

I have the impression that this rage is a bit of cult.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/5347876.stm

Hmmmm, although Pope Benedict stressed that he was quoting someone else, I tend to agree with his critics that the words were inflammatory. They will of course be taken out of context and used to fuel more religious hatred and gain more recruits for al-Queda and other militant organisations.
While most Islamic governments and authorities are trying hard to clamp down on hate filled zealots, the Pope has not helped by using such provocative words in his speech. He is a highly educated and intelligent man, and must have realised the reaction such quotes would produce.

Wow. Yes, I think they were inflammatory. I mean, if you didn't mean to offend, why bother bringing up the quote at all, in what context would that have been an appropriate reference, except, perhaps, to say "in the past, popes have felt this way, but I want everyone to know that I do not." And if that wasn't the context, then those comments really can only be taken badly, I think. And really, in today's climate, it's provocative for two reasons. Muslims will (rightly) take umbrage, and some will take it too far, as those types always seem to do, and Catholics will take it the other direction. I know enough Catholics in my area who are really only in a disjointed sort of touch with current world issues, but will hear the Pope say something like that and they won't CARE what context it was in, they'll only assume that they are now justified in their dislike (or worse) of the Pakistani, Indian, Afghan, Iranian... down the street, and nothing good can come of it. Nothing. What a stupid thing to say.

And we have our first Godwin:
Turkish Official compares Pope to Hitler

Amazing, it really is true, almost any discussion will turn to Hitler at some point.

So Germany and Italy had better watch out, and increase their terrorism protection.

I was a bit astonished at what he said - what was the point? I must say, even though I was not really a huge fan of John Paul II, this guy makes me miss him. This is the kind of Pope who makes moderate Catholics slide from the Church - if I were still a practising Catholic, I would be rethinking my position.

Here's a link to excerpts from the Pope's speech and to a link to the full text:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/5348456.stm

It's also a rather uneducated comment to make, seeing the contributions in medicine and other sciences that the Muslim world has brought to Europe during the Middle Ages (also known as the Dark Ages for good reason). I suppose one can understand this comment from a medieval emperor who after all had a certain self-interest to protect, but the Pope of today should know better.

The speech seems to me more generally odd. After all, there have been times when Christian powers have spread Christianity 'by the sword'. For example, does anyone think that Latin America was converted by rational persuasion? Moreover, just before that, Spain ordered its Jewish and Muslim populations to accept Christianity - or leave the country.

These are by no means the only examples.

Bloomsby, thanks for pointing out the link to the Pope’s complete speech. If one reads it, it’s fairly clear that although the Pope is basing his argument on a passage that condemned the notion of “holy war,” he is not himself endorsing the notion that everything that’s distinctive about Islam is evil. Indeed, his argument develops into a critique of what he sees as the essential irrationality of our allegedly rational scientific Western culture.

None the less, it’s difficult to see why the Pope felt it necessary to quote his source as extensively as he did. Since the extract is, as it were, the “text” for his “sermon,” it’s not surprising if some people assume that he endorses every word that he quotes. If he really believes that Manuel II (a man I’d never heard of until now) is the best authority on which to base his lecture, then he would have done better to limit direct quotation to "Not to act reasonably, not to act with logos, is contrary to the nature of God." Surely he must realize that quoting the passage about “things only evil and inhuman” (which is not essential to his argument) can only offend sensibilities (and not only Muslim sensibilities) without helping his own case.

Some of the reactions to the Pope's comments are somewhat baffling:

September 16, 2006
2 West Bank Churches Hit by Firebombs
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Filed at 4:56 a.m. ET

NABLUS, West Bank (AP) -- Two West Bank Christian churches were hit by firebombs early Saturday, and a group claiming responsibility said it was protesting Pope Benedict XVI's remarks about Islam.

Relations between Palestinian Muslims and Christians are generally peaceful, and clergy played down the attacks on an Anglican and a Greek Orthodox church in the city of Nablus as isolated incidents.

But they said they'd worry if more Christian sites are targeted. On Friday, two small explosions went off near a Greek Orthodox church in Gaza, causing minor damage.
--------------------------------------
-------------------------------------

Because the Pope made provocative remarks, people firebombed an Anglican church? A Greek Orthodox church? Does that make any sense? Do these people just not like Christians? Are they just looking for a reason to vent anger at any Christian symbols in their midst?

Firebombing churches is really a great way to prove the Pope was wrong in linking Muslims with violence, isn't it?

I think the Pope should personally apologize for any unintentional insult to Muslims, and he should re-clarify the point he was trying to make in his original speech. It is ridiculous for the Vatican to allow this situation to fester when a direct apology will likely calm things down.

Quote:

---

Firebombing churches is really a great way to prove the Pope was wrong in linking Muslims with violence, isn't it?

---

It's become something of a cult. It really takes some beating for sheer ineptitude.

I guess the Pope listened to me.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

September 16, 2006
Pope Expresses Regret for Remarks
By REUTERS
Filed at 7:57 a.m. ET

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - Pope Benedict told Muslims on Saturday he was sorry they had found his speech on Islam offensive, expressing his respect for their faith and hoping they would understand the ``true sense'' of his words.

``The Holy Father is very sorry that some passages of his speech may have sounded offensive to the sensibilities of Muslim believers,'' Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone said in a statement.

The statement came amid mounting anger from Muslims over remarks by the Pope in a speech in his native Germany on Tuesday that was seen as critical of their faith. Calls for him to apologize had spread beyond the Islamic world.

In that speech, the Pope appeared to endorse a Christian view, contested by most Muslims, that the early Muslims spread their religion by violence. Islamic fury erupted on Thursday and has cast doubt on a visit the Pope plans to Turkey in November.

But the Vatican statement said: ``Confirming his respect and esteem for those who profess the Islamic faith, he hopes they will be helped to understand his words in their true sense.''

Hmmmn, not a complete retraction, I doubt that it will be enough, then I doubt if any apology will actually make people forget what he said.

From the head of a Church that places so much emphasis on repentance, that seemed more like the apology of a politician than a spiritual leader.

Sue, he couldn't offer a complete retraction, because the offensive comments were quotes of a statement made by someone else.

I think his expression of respect for Islam, and his regret at having offended those of the Muslim faith, should be sufficient.

Who are the "people" who firebombed churches? Are they representative of all Muslims? Is the Pope representative of all Christians? Some people will use any pretext to commit violent acts, or sometimes there is no "rationalization" at all. Some people are opposed to peace. That doesn't mean every child, man or woman that happen to share their faith or ethnic background feels the same.

I have to agree with Catamount. Some Muslim leaders will attack non-Muslims at the drop of a hat. To take offence at the quote the Pope made is ludicrous. The quote was from Emperor Constantine made centuries ago. However, it is the truth. All of Mohammad's deeds can be found on numerous websites, some by Muslims and former Muslims.

Christians did their fair share of "religion by the sword", but that doesn't say it was right. Do you think that Christians would hold huge anti-Muslim demonstrations and burn down mosques if someone said King Richard III spread religion by the sword during the Crusades. Not hardly. Nor would there be Catholic riots and mosque burnings if some Muslim leader condemned the Spanish Inquisition. The problem with Muslims is that they will not accept history when it comes to the life and times of Muhammad.

Having lived in the Middle East for 5 years, back in the 70's, I would just like to add that the majority of Muslims are peace loving people. Unfortunately it only takes one or two zealots to 'give them a bad name' and unfortunately we all tend to 'label' the whole religeon.

I do agree though that the Pope should never have mentioned that quote. The world is very fragile at the moment and we dont need any more fuel for the fire.

Peace to all.

Muslim anger, angry Muslims, very angry Muslims, amazingly angry Muslims, suicidely angry Muslims,outraged Muslims, very outraged and amazingly angry Muslims. Don`t these people ever get mildly irked? I`ll be very happy when I read a headline that reads "Mildly irked Muslims Stop And Think About What They Are Irked About".

Not being angry myself I cannot for the life of me understand angry Muslims. The Pope (Part-time Prada model) has said something that Muslims don`t agree with, well well what a surprise. Is there much that can be said that Muslims agree with non-Muslims about except that "gee it`s hot today"? ( I honestly hope that the word "gee" isn`t a deadly insult to Muslims, I would JUST hate to see any of them blow themselves up on my account).

The question isn`t if the Pope should have said it as far as I`m concerned.The question should be.... Is what he said the truth? If the answer is yes then what`s the problem?

Well, I think he should not have said it, but I also don't think it is the truth, so there IS a problem. And really, Roos, yes Muslims get only mildly irked, but the headline you mention probably doesn't sell newspapers as well.

I don't know about angry Christians, but you might get a bunch of annoyed Ricardians picketing your house. King Richard III had absolutely nothing to do with the crusades.

As for the truth in emperor Manuel's statement, the Byzantine Empire was in fast decline from about 1180 on, under attack from Muslim armies as well as European ones. In Manuel II's time it was tiny. Makes his comment sound just a tad like sour grapes, or the war propaganda used even today that aims at dehumanizing your enemies. I doubt that he or his own armies were too worried about acting in a humane and civilized fashion.

I'm afraid the Pope has done some damage to his credibility here, much as if he had quoted from Malleus Maleficarum, the "Witches' Hammer" without any explanatory context.

News reports like these clearly show that some of the venom being expressed has little relationship to what the Pope actually said:

Quote:

---

In the southern Iraqi city of Basra, protesters burnt an effigy of the pope, and an Iraqi group linked to Al Qaeda posted a warning on a Web site threatening war against “worshippers of the cross.”

Ayatollah Ali Khameni, the top cleric in Iran, called the pope’s remarks “the latest link” in the “chain of conspiracy to set off a crusade.”

---

This is general hostility toward Christians, and not just a reaction to the Pope's comments.

Other protesters have burned the American flag.

These are expressions of hatred by some who see Western (particularly American) interference in the Middle East as an attempt to spread Christianity and Western values. Bush did initially refer to the invasion of Iraq as a "crusade", and he could not have chosen a more inflammatory, or unfortunate, word. In addition, each time he talks about bringing democratic freedoms to the Middle East, he mentions religious freedom, which militant radical Muslims may well view as a "conspiracy" to promote Christianity in that part of the world. And, truthfully, I'm not sure that they're entirely wrong about that. This then becomes a direct threat to their own religious views and beliefs. Similarly, there exist wide-spread beliefs in the Muslim world that Israel, backed by a world-wide Jewish conspiracy, wants to dominate the entire Middle East with the intention of wiping out Islam and Muslim culture (although not necessarily replacing it with Judaism, since Jews don't actively proselytize) . When you are already pre-disposed to seeing those kinds of profound conspiratorial threats to your very deepest religious and cultural values, you are likely to pounce on anything and everything that will support such perceptions. The Pope's remarks, interpreted as an insult to Islam, just gave them another reason to pounce.

That's why I think some of these protesters, particularly the radical extremists, are just using the Pope as a scapegoat, and his speech as an excuse, to vent the hostility which was there long before the Pope made his recent remarks.

The more reasonable leaders seem to be accepting the Pope's apology, and understand that he was calling for a dialogue between religions, with the ultimate goal of establishing some sort of peace between them.
The fanatics, on the other hand, who are currently responding with aggressive acts, are ironically demonstrating a connection between Islam and violence, which is allegedly the inference in the Pope's remarks that they are protesting about. Rather an odd way to say the Pope was wrong. At the moment, the Pope is just their scapegoat. His comments simply added a little more fuel to a fire which was already blazing.