| Submit your comments on this article |
| Olde Tyme Religion |
| Vatican experts say Pope 'unrepentant' |
| 2006-09-19 |
| By Peter Popham in Rome As protests against the Pope continued to rumble around the Muslim world yesterday, Catholics began asking themselves if this highly intelligent man can really have been so crass as to have ignited the passions of millions of Muslims without realising that he was doing it. If the alternative version is more credible - that he knew exactly what he was doing - then the next question arises: why? The gloomy conclusion of some Vatican experts is that there was no inconsistency in the Pope's choice of the words "inhuman and evil" - quoted from the Byzantine emperor Manuel II Palaeologus - to characterise Islam. Such a negative view, they say, is consistent with all his words and actions with regard to Islam. Their claims make for a tragic contrast with the decades devoted by John Paul II to the challenge of bringing Islam, Judaism and Christianity closer together after many centuries of hatred and bloodshed. Now all that hard work, rowing against the tide of history, seems to be at risk. Marco Politi, Vatican expert at La Repubblica newspaper, wrote: "The debacle into which the Holy See has fallen after [the Pope's speech at the University of ] Regensburg ... is much more than an accident of communication. The unhappy anti-Mohamed quotation, followed by the violent reaction of the Islamic world and the bitter indignation of moderate European Muslims, has brought violently to the light the rupture completed by the Pope with the strategy conducted for more than two decades with success by John Paul II." Politi said John Paul II went out of his way to find points in common between the three revealed religions: "From Casablanca to Cairo, from Sudan to Syria, in every corner of the world in which there was a significant population of Muslims, John Paul II preached the common faith in the one God of the sons of Abraham, their common prayer and the common duty of Jews, Christians and Muslims in favour of peace and justice," he wrote. "It wasn't merely rhetoric. IE the fairy fable of the "Abrahamic religions"... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Massignon Massignon was an homosexual, fascinated by the virility of islam, by the way, IIUC... It was the wish to put together, in the name of spiritual brotherhood, a shared platform from which to repudiate religious violence, religiously motivated terrorism and any other manipulation of the name of God to justify sanguinary projects." But his successor indicated from the start that he would not continue down the same road, Politi said. "At his inaugural mass as Pope, Benedict XVI cut out any reference to a fraternal relationship" with Islam. The Pope is also, according to Politi, "tormented with worry born from the messages of violence woven into the Koran, and doubtful of the ability of Islamic religious leaders to get to grips with the problems of secularism." But if the Regensburg address was his way of airing those doubts, it has had the effect of multiplying them. "Now," Mr Politi concludes, "the Vatican must try to rebuild its strategy towards Islam from scratch." Writing in La Stampa, the political scientist Gian Enrico Rusconi said the Pope's apology on Sunday "was an act such as has not been recorded in the modern history of the papacy. It was an unheard-of gesture. But at the same time the discourse at Regensburg and its consequences indicate an irreversible break, not only in relations between Islam and the Catholic Church, but also in the public image of the Pope in the West." |
| Posted by:anonymous5089 |
| #15 Pope Benedict is trying to wake people up and get them to realize that violent Islam is a serious problem and credible threat. They mean what they say and are readily turn to intimidation, threats, coercion and violence to achieve their ends. That's what he pointed out, and that's what the writers of that article somehow do not comprehend. Oldspook, I think they know damn well what the Pope is saying. They seek to intentionally subvert Benedict's words so as to continue their campaign to palliate Islam. What will it take to get through their ignorant thick heads, a nuclear detonation? Yes, it will. Nothing short of the simultaneous death of thousands of Americans will wake these subversive morons up. Even then, they will cry, "America deserved it!" Too bad we can cluster up all of these fifth column journalists wherever Islam is going to light off this puppy. If Islam suceeds in detonating an atomic bomb in America, we should start stringing up these slimebag reporters and editors from lamp posts. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-09-19 22:27 |
| #14 TR, I've always like the clairity of though that comes from Texas! Get a rope! |
| Posted by: 49 Pan 2006-09-19 21:18 |
| #13 I wonder if these Vatican "experts" understand 1,900+ years of Christian theology even a tenth as well as Benedict does. Or if they're even Christian. I read the speech last night. It's brilliant, it's deep, and ninety-five percent of it has nothing to do with Islam. The quote itself refers to a dialogue which took place almost 700 years ago, and Benedict doesn't even champion it. He uses it to introduce a line of reasoning which champions the idea that God is a rational God, a reasonable God, and that wanton violence is disgusting to God. Violence is inherently unreasonable, and thus you cannot hope to permanently spread a religion through the sword. What I find most amusing about this whole situation, aside from the fact that the media obviously doesn't understand half of what he actually said, is that in reacting the way they have - in reacting unreasonably - Muslims have proved both their ignorance and the Pope's insinuation that an entity which seeks to promote and spread itself violently is inherently irrational. Benedict knew damn well what he was saying - and the subsequent reaction just proves his points true. |
| Posted by: The Doctor 2006-09-19 14:42 |
| #12 What will it take to get through their ignorant thick heads, a nuclear detonation? That might be overkill, but there's only one way to find out. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-09-19 13:56 |
| #11 "tragic contrast" REPORTORIAL BIAS! I call bullshit. Benedict is a careful theologian, and EVERY thing he said about faith, reason, God and Islam's fundamental and continued recourse to violence is TRUE. The Pope is not worried about building a relationship with a faith that demands that we Christians become slaves and abrogate our charge from Christ Jesus to grow the Church. In Jesus own words: "Then Jesus came to them and said, All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you." (Matthew 28:19-20) From John Paul II himself (since they use him as an example - and do so poorly): "No believer in Christ, no institution of the Church can avoid this supreme duty: 'to proclaim Christ to all peoples.'" This cannot be done under Islamic Dhimmi and Sharia law. So we are complete polar opposites. Indeed, anyone that believes that such a compromise can be made with Islam is a damned fool - and ignorant to boot. They obviously have not read Bin Laden, his supporting Clerics, the Pakistani madrassa speakers, and the Suras in the Koran itself. Those people mean what they say. Take them seriously. Pope Benedict certainly has. The reporter and the press have not. Dumbasses. Sheep. Ignoramuses. Pope Benedict is trying to wake people up and get them to realize that violent Islam is a serious problem and credible threat. They mean what they say and are readily turn to intimidation, threats, coercion and violence to achieve their ends. That's what he pointed out, and that's what the writers of that article somehow do not comprehend. What will it take to get through their ignorant thick heads, a nuclear detonation? |
| Posted by: Oldspook 2006-09-19 13:45 |
| #10 If the pope came out and said again that Islam is a bloodthirsty moon-god cult and Muslims everywhere could kiss his ass, I would become catholic. Well, I would, but being a Baptist, I think we're saying it loud and clear: Franklin Graham, Baptist Evangelist: The Qur'an does teach it [violence against non-muslims]. It is there. You can read it for yourself. And these verses from the Qur'an are not taken out of context, it's there. So we just don't want to admit [it], in this country. We would like that everything was in a bubble and everybody's nice and everybody's happy. I'm sorry, we don't live in that kind of world. This nation has been attacked, we've been attacked by men who claim to worship Allah. We have been attacked by a people, a group, in the name of Islam, and the clerics, the religious leaders of Islam have not denounced it. Many people after 9/11 said that "The Muslims, they worship the same god we do, they just have their way to God. Christians have their way to God. But it's the same God." No, it's not. They've even taken excerpts out of the Old Testament and New Testament, and thrown it into the Qur'an, to sprinkle a few Bible verses throughout to give it validity. But the Qur'an is not the word of God. The Holy Bible is God's word. Jerry Vines, Baptist Pastor: "Muhammed was a demon-possessed pedophile. Allah is not Jehovah. Jehovah's not going to turn you into a terrorist that will try to bomb people and take the lives of thousands and thousands of people." Dean Robinson, Baptist Pastor: "Islam claims to be a religion of peace and tolerance when in fact it is characterized by violence and religious bigotry. It is the Christian's duty to diligently witness to, not dialogue with the Muslims. We must stand for the true Gospel and against all other false gospels. Islam has rejected the essential teachings of the Word of God. The so-called prophet Muhammed brought an erroneous message from a false spirit that is totally opposed to the Gospel of God's grace. The message of Islam is a curse, not a blessing." |
| Posted by: mcsegeek1 2006-09-19 13:35 |
| #9 has anyone seen Benedict XVI and Fred Pruitt together at the same place? Nah, the Pope has more hair |
| Posted by: Steve 2006-09-19 13:13 |
| #8 The "reporter" is a fuckwit hand-wringing apologist for Muzzy Hate and deliberately misstating the facts. Fuck him and the "Independent". This is how I saw it! But I'm cynical. |
| Posted by: Texas Redneck 2006-09-19 13:03 |
| #7 for a second I thought that said "rantburg" Hey!!! Hummmmm... I wonder... has anyone seen Benedict XVI and Fred Pruitt together at the same place? Could it be that...? Nah... Still... |
| Posted by: anonymous5089 2006-09-19 12:36 |
| #6 If the pope came out and said again that Islam is a bloodthirsty moon-god cult and Muslims everywhere could kiss his ass, I would become catholic. |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2006-09-19 12:30 |
| #5 But at the same time the discourse at Regensburg and its consequences for a second I thought that said "rantburg". |
| Posted by: tabd 2006-09-19 12:27 |
| #4 The link's messed up... Nope, works for me. |
| Posted by: anonymous5089 2006-09-19 12:23 |
| #3 The link's messed up... On the charitable side: Seems to me that this "reporter" has made the same mistake the Muzzies are making - completely misunderstanding the situation. Seems to me that JPII tried the "nice" approach, and we got nothing but violence. Now Benedict is throwing off the blinders and giving them the chance to confront the truth - a challenge to reform themselves and their brutal ideology. This appears to be a logical next step. A final call for a peaceful resolution. Uncharitably: The "reporter" is a fuckwit hang-wringing apologist for Muzzy Hate and deliberately misstating the facts. Fuck him and the "Independent". |
| Posted by: flyover 2006-09-19 12:16 |
| #2 Why is it that the Catholic church has to build bridges with Islam when Islamic Scholars/Clerics do nothing to improve relations with other religions!!!!! |
| Posted by: Cheregum Crelet7867 2006-09-19 12:12 |
| #1 Time for the Pope to clarify his remarks. Being mis-understood, and leaving it grey is not good. He should say that Islam is a bloodthirsty, violent, non-tolerant religion which is not consistent with Western values, as proven by their response to his original non-threatening remarks. |
| Posted by: Master of Obvious 2006-09-19 12:07 |