A Response

Thank you for your response SD Papist.

I agree with you about the state of affairs between Muslims and Christians, and lament the "thinly disguised totalitarianism" that relativism has become in Europe.

But SD, you did not address the Church's social doctrine. Is what you're saying Pope Benedict did consistent with the teachings of the Catholic Church? Please excuse the length of this response, but precisely because I want the Church to speak for herself in these matters, I am devoting a large portion of this blog to a text from Vatican II.

The union of the human family is greatly fortified and fulfilled by the unity,
founded on Christ,(10) of the family of God's sons.

Christ, to be sure, gave His Church no proper mission in the political, economic or social order. The purpose which He set before her is a religious one.(11) But out of this religious mission itself come a function, a light and an energy which can serve to structure and consolidate the human community according to the divine law. As a matter of fact, when circumstances of time and place produce the need, she can and indeed should initiate activities on behalf of all men, especially those designed for the needy, such as the works of mercy and similar undertakings.

The Church recognizes that worthy elements are found in today's social movements, especially an evolution toward unity, a process of wholesome socialization and of association in civic and economic realms. The promotion of unity belongs to the innermost nature of the Church, for she is, "thanks to her relationship with Christ, a sacramental sign and an instrument of intimate union with God, and of the unity of the whole human race."(12) Thus she shows the world that an authentic union, social and external, results from a union of minds and hearts, namely from that faith and charity by which her own unity is unbreakably rooted in the Holy Spirit. For the force which the Church can inject into the modern society of man consists in that faith and charity put into vital practice, not in any external dominion exercised by merely human means.

Moreover, since in virtue of her mission and nature she is bound to no particular form of human culture, nor to any political, economic or social system, the Church by her very universality can be a very close bond between diverse human communities and nations, provided these trust her and truly acknowledge her right to true freedom in fulfilling her mission. For this reason, the Church admonishes her own sons, but also humanity as a whole, to overcome all strife between nations and race in this family spirit of God's children, an in the same way, to give internal strength to human associations which are just (Gaudium et Spes, par. 42, emphasis mine).

The Pope and therefore the Church are pro-humanity and pro-dignity of the human person before being pro-Europe, even if the European culture is predominantly Christian.

Because this blog is already very long, I will address one last issue where you say, "Islam may have a few truths, and insofar as they live in accordance to that truth, Islam has dignity, but even that is a double-edged sword. The truths they do have only make their untruths all the more potent." The Church is the champion of the dignity human person. We have to presume upon that dignity ALWAYS even when the person exhibits violence and irrationality.

Explain to me how what you propose the Pope is doing is consistent along these lines, especially when you yourself describe the situation as the Muslims "falling for it." The Pope did not only say, "I'm sorry you were hurt"; he also said, "In no way did I wish to make my own the words of the Medieval emperor...I wished to explain that not religion and violence, but religion and reason go together."

For me, Pope Benedict exhibits humility and strength. On this point SD, I second your "bravo."

And another thing!

That last point I think needs clarification.

While we would hope that Pope Benedict is incapable of making a diplomatic mistake, no amount of hope can change the reality that it is in fact possible.

What is the alternative? A "carefully" orchestrated plot to call the bluff of militant Islam? This is not the role of the Church, and it contradicts the Church's social teaching. We should not forget that the Church is the "sacrament of the salvation of the world," and that it is in fact possible for Muslims to be saved only because of the Church. The Church exists for the Muslims just as much as she exists for us.

The Church does have the moral responsibility of educating the world of those things that are against the dignity of the human person, violence being one of them. But the Church through her Vicar should not be the one to strong arm her way into the inner workings of Islam, especially when there is nothing intrinsically evil about the practice of Islam as a religion. Are we to expect from now on that the Pope will be addressing the evils of other religions haphazardly in obscure academic gatherings? I think this would be a subversive move on the part of the Pope for ecumenism everywhere: "so that's how the Pope wants to deal with things."

The humble apology of the Pope did not in my opinion look to be one of mere diplomacy or just "good PR." As Pastor of the entire world, he is in a certain (but real) sense, responsible for the salvation of everyone--including the Muslims. I do not think the Pope would have sacrificed authentic dialogue with peaceful and rational Muslims, nor do I think he would have endangered the lives of Christians so haphazardly. This would not be in accordance with the dignity owed to Muslims, nor would it be in accordance with the role of the Pope.

The Church can never be used as a "means" for anything. It doesn't seem reasonable to me that if Pope Benedict was so fed up with intellectual terrorism, that he would take it upon himself to use his position to effort a change in this way, especially when--as Christopher J said--the Pope has exhibited a pacific stance in regards to Lebanon AND Iraq, both having ties with radical Islam.

While I do think that the clash between Islam and the West is problematic and may one day lead to apocalyptical happenings, I don't think this is what the Pope hopes to achieve, nor do I think that he despairs of the possibility.

Any thoughts out there?

-CS

An attempt at a humble disagreement

I reprint here a response I made to Christopher J's Blog.

I've been fighting with this for awhile. While I'm trying to presume upon the wisdom of the Pope, while observing potential fruits from this "misunderstanding", I still do find myself thinking he was perhaps unintentionally careless about some of his phraseology. Check out this response:

Religion, Reason and Violence: Pope Benedict XVI and Islam

This line from Benedict makes me wonder:"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."Words like "marginal" and "interesting" do not match the subject matter in my opinion. Granted, context context context. This is an academic presentation intended to promote PEACEFUL but by no means passive discussion and disagreement in regards to some serious issues undermining the process as a whole.In my limited vision, I think Pope Benedict still could have stated the same issues differently, more pastorally. For instance, where he discusess Mohammed and jihad, I think he could (should) have exhibited more sensitivity--like pretending he was speaking to a Muslim in the audience.

My point is, I think Pope Benedict was trying to speak as an academic presuming upon an academic audience, a freedom he probably once had. As Pope--especially in our media saturated times--I think he has to show a different side.I mean, let's be honest, if the Pope was going to really speak about Islam and the violent issues, he would have done so much more pointedly and convincingly. That he deals with it in this cursory manner, lends me to think that he was making an academic presumption, a presumption all of us academics can respect and enjoy, but not one suitable for these times.

To say that after the fact, almost as a felix culpa, the "true colors" of the antagonistic side of radical Islamic movements have been conveniently manifested, would be (for me) reading into Pope Benedict's speech a duplicitous agenda unfitting for a Vicar of Christ of his virtue and character.