release_our_blogs_final
Scattered_Posts Wal_Kourtassou_Wal_Kalamou zPress

Friday, September 15, 2006

Benedict in the news.

Not surprisingly, the pope's last lecture at the University of Regensburg has found appeal within Arab media services, as the we-are-under-attack feeling is getting stronger among Muslims day after day. And as every other event of our life, different interpretations by the major media services plays - unfortunately - an important role in formulating one's opinions about these events.

I first heard the news on some popular Arab TV, It sounded as if the pope has called for an urgent press conference where he criticized Islam, accused Muslims of endorsing terrorism and more of this Bush-y blabla. It's simply not the case.

In my opinion, the lecture has much more to say, especially about the relationship between faith and reason, between Christianity and Greek philosophy, between theology and modernity.

The intention here is not one of retrenchment or negative criticism, but of broadening our concept of reason and its application. While we rejoice in the new possibilities open to humanity, we also see the dangers arising from these possibilities and we must ask ourselves how we can overcome them.

His message was clear: Christian faith is not in contradiction with reason, they are in perfect harmony. The church sees no shame in admitting it's profound roots in the Greek philosophy while also asserting it's own importance to scientific reasoning:

Yet the world's profoundly religious cultures see this exclusion of the divine from the universality of reason as an attack on their most profound convictions. A reason which is deaf to the divine and which relegates religion into the realm of subcultures is incapable of entering into the dialogue of cultures. At the same time, as I have attempted to show, modern scientific reason with its intrinsically Platonic element bears within itself a question which points beyond itself and beyond the possibilities of its methodology. Modern scientific reason quite simply has to accept the rational structure of matter and the correspondence between our spirit and the prevailing rational structures of nature as a given, on which its methodology has to be based. Yet the question why this has to be so is a real question, and one which has to be remanded by the natural sciences to other modes and planes of thought - to philosophy and theology.

I'm not defending the guy, but I insist that things should be considered maturely, and that people should not take a defense position. Being aware of the sensitivity of this issue, the pope twice said "I quote" before mentioning the 6 centuries old controversial commentary about Jihad, which clearly indicates that he does not nessessarily endorse this historical point of view as a whole. Still, he stated that "The decisive statement in this argument against violent conversion is this: not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to God's nature." Then he continued his arguments about the reason/faith question and the other points I mentioned above. After all, Christianity and Islam are different regarding a lot of subject, this is not a shame, this is not a reason for disrespect or a reason of conflicts between followers of each religion. We should not pretend to agree on stuff while we really don't. This is a precondition to any mature dialogue between us, we should admit our differences.

Now Suppose the pope really gave all this lecture just to criticize Islam, What would the reaction be? The same as the reaction to the cartoons thing? This is maybe the most ironic thing that would ever happen, as it will be nothing but a direct proof of the point he was - supposingly - criticizing: violence!

Technorati Tags: , , , , ,, , , , , , .

12 comments:

Fares said...

Shadi, I admire your courage in writing this post.

However The pope (although I still have not fully read and analysed his sayings but I am judging from people's reactions) should have been more careful to not create any controversy. Specially during these sensitive times where our friend Bush is bashing Islam left and right and justifying his horrible wars.

This pope has not really impressed me yet and I miss John Paul the 2nd, even though he became too old at the end. I think he sould apologize or explain himself and use the opportunity to emphasize the good will between religions.

Dialogue should prevail between religions, no religion is better than another, and people should be open minded about diversity specially religeous. I wish that Muslim and Christian leaders spend this very high level of enery to try to combat misusing Islam or Christinity and their values by the extremists from both sides!!!

But from your writings I can't tell your age, you have great talent my friend.

Shady Zayat said...

@Fares:
"Specially during these sensitive times ..."
hmmm, It didn't sound like you. Let's remember our friends who are now in prison for saying some right things at the wrong sensitive time, let's also remember that we Arab consider every moment to be a sensitive time and a "Historical Corner" ;)

Anyways, I think we all miss John Paul II, and this is one thing that makes Benedict's work harder, let's just give the guy a chance.

And thanks for the compliment!

Ahmad Nassri said...

RE: "Did you read the lecture?
Trust me my friend, Arab media is the last place you wanna get your information from.
"

Shady, Yes I read the lecture and no I'm not some stupid kid who will run his mouth before looking deeper into things ... (I know you didn't say that but that's what I felt your comment implied ...)

Anyways I first saw it on CNN ... the American CNN ... America where don't really like Muslims (and they have all the right not to!)
and THEY didn't like it either !!!

for someone in such a high and important place as the Pope, he should know better than to say something like that ...

just like presidents have writes running around them all the time making sure each and every word they say is accurate and doesn't cause some political issue somewhere !
I'm sure the someone as the Pope has this sort of writers who are always making sure all the speeches and lectures are good and will not anything slip by that might affect Christianity in any way ...

so the only explanation is that is was indeed intended and carefully put ...

so here's the deal with me .. I totally understand what he is saying and what you are saying in your post ... and like I said in my post (have you read it all ?)
I know he is not criticizing Islam ... all he wanted to say is make a point about the terrorism and how lazy WE are in stopping it ...
and I totally agree with him ... further more I believe Muslims all around the world (starting with me) SHOULD BE BLAMED for terrorism in the name of Islam !!!

we know it's wrong, we know it's hurting us as much if not even more than it hurts other people and still we did nothing about it ...

the point of my post however is totally different (yet again I ask did you read it all ?)
The pope knows as much as any other Christian the history of Christianity ... and I'm sorry to say it's stupid to throw stones at people's homes when your own is made of glass...

Christianity's history is filled with violence and blood, saying otherwise is a lie ... or stupidity ... take your pick, either way I don't care ...

Saying that Islam is a religion of violence is simple ignorance ... if they knew more about it they wouldn't say that...

But saying that Christianity is a peaceful religion and Islam was raised by the power of the sword or whatever ... is totally ignorant and stupid ... yes even for a pope...

I'm not angry at him ... I'm angry FOR him, and for all Christians out there whom I love and very much respect!

What do you think the result of such statements is? more terrorism for the crazy ass terrorist against Christians !!! That's something nobody wants. So why even go there?

Stay away as much as possible from all the small things that may trigger something bigger and bad!

I just expected someone to be much more educated and more knowledgeable to be pope, that's all...

Ahmad Nassri said...

do you have trouble reading english dude ?

qouted from the lecure:
"In the seventh conversation (*4V8,>4H - controversy) 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 (F×< 8`(T) 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 practise idolatry.


of course he is not saying those things directly cuz that would show that he wants to say that and believes it ... instead he qoutes other people ... and i believe it's common knowledge that when you quote other people, you believe in what they believe and think what they think ...

no more comments !

Anonymous said...

This kind of speech is not for a spiritual leader, his speech made things more difficult for both sides’ followers, although I am not any more fan of religions and ideologies. I appreciate JEAN PAUL the 2nd who was really exceptional, he began with his own history and this gave him credibility…he was a spiritual man …..Who tried to fill gaps and to bring people all people up, I remember his visit to Damascus how humble and respectful he was, Muslims of Syria was very happy to see him and they were very proud of what Syria represents to Christianity, and that was the best thing to do for Christians in Syria ….let me tell u shady that people are and can be so close to each others if leaders (any kind of them) did not try day and night to tell them that they are so different.

Shady Zayat said...

@Ahmad Nassri:
No Offense bro ...

All I meant is: This lecture should not be read as a speech to Muslims, he was discussing some very important issues concerning Christianity, that's how I read it, that's why I'm fine with it.

"Christianity's history is filled with violence and blood, saying otherwise is a lie ... or stupidity ... take your pick, either way I don't care ..."

Of course, and this is true for any religion.

"What do you think the result of such statements is? more terrorism for the crazy ass terrorist against Christians !!! That's something nobody wants. So why even go there?"

This is what I understood, correct me if I'm wrong:
"There's a bunch of assholes out there who can't be engaged in a dialogue, who can't accept others' opinions and who are ready to kill people they don't like. We as Muslims know how bad they are but can't find a way to deal with them. Please keep your mouth shut unless you wanna hail Islam."

Tayeb, Muslims think they know Jesus' preaching better than Christians, They call them "Mushrekeen" ... etc, etc.
Did you ever hear that Italy asked Saudi Arabia to change these ideas? Did you ever hear a Christian complaning that the Islamic preaching is offensive? That would be insane.

Shady Zayat said...

@Anon:
"people are and can be so close to each others if leaders (any kind of them) did not try day and night to tell them that they are so different."

Well, my point is: To stay close doesn't mean to become identical.
Different yet close.

Ahmad Nassri said...

"There's a bunch of assholes out there who can't be engaged in a dialogue, who can't accept others' opinions and who are ready to kill people they don't like."

yep totally correct!

"We as Muslims know how bad they are but can't find a way to deal with them."

well not exactly ... most of us lazy ass muslims only know about them what we see in the TV .. and our glorious arab media barely show anything, cuz it also happens that those terrorists groups are against our arab goverments ... (which is the core of the problem of course)
but still, even though most muslims don't really see what is going on and to what extend the blood shed has reached, we all are still guilty as shit for not doing nothing about it ... in the day of judgment, those terrorists will have one more laugh at us since we will be the ones goin g to hell BEFORE them !

"Please keep your mouth shut unless you wanna hail Islam."

i didn't say that, and i didn't mean it either ... do you see me hailing islam ? does the previous paragraph count as hailing islam ?????

nope !

you missed the entire subject of my comments ... i do not have nothing to say about islam and christianity or the relationship between the two ...

as a matter of fact i think both sides are stupid, since both religions (as we all really know) call for peace love and brotherhood, yet we still find excuses not to practice that and drift away from each other ...

the purpose of my comments was that a man in such a high place like the Pope should not be saying such things ... or even discussing them.

if he's a man of love and peace he wouldn't even mention such stuff !!!

correct me if i'm wrong ...

if you wanna discuss islam and the stupidity of arabs and muslims world wide ... then i'm your man ... i'm the anti-arab-islam-of-the-20th-century !!!

frankly to put it short ... i have no clue why the rest of the world has put up with us so far ... the should have dropped a nuke on our asses a loooooooooooooooong time ago ..

Anonymous said...

yes i agree staying close is not beeing identical, no one is 100 per cent someone else, u r not identical to ur brothers and sisters..but no one is using ur differences to make problems in contrary..all ur loving ones see ur similarities first..and ur diffrences as a source of richer life

Ihsan said...

First, no one represents any religion. Yet, if we want to believe so, then if anyone wants to speak about the history of ANY religion, they should start with their own. Blood is all over the 3 main religions. To speak about other's and ignore yours, is total ignorance.

Shady Zayat said...

"... we cannot fail to recognize the infidelities to the Gospel committed by some of our brethren, especially during the second millennium. Let us ask pardon for the divisions which have occurred among Christians, for the violence some have used in the service of the truth and for the distrustful and hostile attitudes sometimes taken towards the followers of other religions..."
John Paul II
Sunday, 12 March 2000

Fares said...

Shadi and others, great dialogue and discussion going on here.

Back to Shadi, I think the pope commited a great mistake by sounding like he wanted to reform Islam...he did it in a very provocative way. Also what I meant by sensitive times, is that the good muslims have witnessed the last few years, a lot of undeserved negative publicity and being protrayed in the worst way. He had no business to go there, trying to reform, sounding like Bush, him a religous leader of his caliber from a rival religion. I hope he did not do it for political purposes to gain support among Europeans and westerners because he did a lot of damage.

Few weeks ago I attended a meeting with coptic Pope Shnoda outside of Boston...there was an open question session after some lecture. The 86 years old pope full of humor stayed out of politics big time...I tried to ask him a tricky question (you write the question on paper and you pass it to a list of questions that he reads and answers live) about the political future of Egypt after Mubarak and to talk about the Islamic extremism in Egypt. The guy just ignored the question, period. He knew better not to cause any not needed controversy.

Now I am also having a big problem with people commiting violent acts like burning churches in palestine or killing old nuns in Somalia because they are just proving the point. It is very disgusting specially in Palestine where Christians and Muslims have coexisted peacefully throughout the centuries.