IN THEORY:Papal apology, controversy

Do you think Pope Benedict XVI has done enough to address the controversy that followed his recent remarks about Islam?

In the Roman Catholic faith, the pope is essentially the vicar of Christ. Therefore, it is difficult for Muslims to understand why Pope Benedict XVI, a former professor and intellectual, resorted to citing a 14th century Byzantine emperor, knowing full well that the emperor held deeply bigoted views on Islam.

As the pope claims, his intention was to stimulate an academic discussion on religion and violence, but considering the climate of Islamophobia today and the pope’s stature, was it necessary for the pope to cite the faith of Islam in such a derogatory fashion?

Although the pope has made some gestures of reconciliation, he has fallen short in taking the right step by apologizing for his remarks, not just the reaction.

SAYED MOUSTAFA AL-QAZWINI

Imam of the Islamic Educational Center of Orange County

Costa Mesa

The question should rather be what are the profound reasons for Christian-Muslim dialogue which Pope Benedict XVI proposed in his Regensburg lecture.

The best interpreter of a text is its author and the pope has explained what he meant. It is mere fairness to take him at his word. The reality that he brilliantly elucidated is that intolerance and violent acts are being directed at people and communities of different religions, violating their human rights.

The words which the same Holy Father spoke in the same country at the 20th World Youth Day in Cologne in August 2005 seem to have been forgotten that “the lessons of the past must help us to avoid repeating the same mistakes. We must seek paths of reconciliation and learn to live with respect for the other’s identities.” His university address should be viewed as advancing, not hindering, this plea.

It would be tragic, in the midst of current polemics, to ignore the three critical issues the pope highlighted for a rational conversation. Firstly, he contextualized his remarks in stating that all the great questions of our lives, are ultimately theological. In our everyday lives, how we think about God effects our actions.

Secondly, believers in the One God cannot justify the killing of innocents in the name of the same God, and such actions must be repudiated as antithetical to both the Muslim Koran and Christian and Jewish scriptures. Such extremist individuals must be condemned as unfaithful to our commonly held religious beliefs, and Islamic reformers who preach and live for peace among us must be encouraged.

Thirdly, the pope critiqued Western secularism and religious irrationalism with its ambiguous interpretation of the concept of truth. He challenges us in the West to recover an appreciation of the relationship of religion and reason.

The Roman Catholic Church is the Muslim world’s respectful friend and partner in dialogue about God and all things related to God. A quotation from a 14th century emperor should not be an obstacle to our colloquy in the twenty first century.

MSGR. LAWRENCE J. BAIRD

Pastor

Our Lady of Mount Carmel Church

The pope has responded to his remarks with an apology. Now it is time, as Jews observe Yom Kippur and Muslims observe Ramadan, to look at themselves.

Since your question addresses the Muslim world, let us look at the Muslim world from a Jewish standpoint. Before the pope apologized, there was violence. At present, most Muslims are good righteous people. Yet many Muslims around the world think of America as the “big devil,” and Israel as “the little devil.” In fact, the concept of jihad is found in the Koran. It will always be there. It can be used against Israel, America, or any other people, at any time.

The worldwide war against “terrorism” since Sept. 11, 2001, is a war in which the only enemy of America who has died has been of the Muslim faith. Is this not true? Therefore, I have a very hard time accepting that there are Muslim women who want to birth babies to murder Jews. There are many Muslim men, women and children who want to die because Allah wills it. “Leaving Islam,” a book written by a Muslim, Ibn Warraq, states that Muslims are leaving Islam in droves. He quotes 50 Muslims who are branded by the Islamic world as apostates. Warraq recounts from all parts of the Islamic world, how many Muslims who are against terrorism slowly came to realize that their religion was in many respects unbelievable and sometimes even dangerous. These memories of personal spiritual journeys, recounted in the book, brought them to enlightenment and intellectual freedom.

All should know that under Islamic law in many Arab countries, an apostate who leaves Islam must be put to death; but not before cutting off his hands and feet. Warraq quotes the Koran: “Whoever disbelieveth in Allah and goes after another belief will meet an awful doom.” And, “If they desert Islam, seize them and put them to death, wherever you find them.” In my opinion, the pope has made his statement. Iran’s nuclear threat is growing. Every day there are more Islamic terrorist acts and Americans die.

Therefore, it is not only time for Jews to repent before Yom Kippur, but time for Islam and all faiths to do so as well. We can, of all faiths, make a much better world to live in. I think the predicament of Western civilization is that it has ceased to be aware of the values which it is in peril of losing to a growing part of militant Islam.

For a better and more peaceful world in the year ahead.

RABBI MARC S. RUBENSTEIN

Temple Isaiah

Newport Beach

I think the pope is caught in a rhetorical trap. His comments about the difficulties associated with the dialogue between Christian and Islamic cultures were a sincere attempt to examine and express his own logic, perhaps even his own confusion. The danger of such public examination is reflected in exactly what happened: comments taken out of context, extreme amounts of anger, a whole lot political posturing, and a hungry media waiting to pounce upon any controversy it can find.

Given what I know and have read about the issue, I do think the pope has sufficiently apologized, explained himself, and should be forgiven. I also think that this event is a giant human resources issue that could benefit those who don’t know how to get out of the rhetorical traps they may be caught up in. My wife, Patty, is our human resources specialist and she is always coaching me in the art of “I” messages. The “I” messages have proven to be effective and helpful in stating my position without inferring that the other person is wrong or deficient in any way.

For example, if the pope — in his original address — had used some “I” messages about the comments he was reading from other historical sources, he might have avoided the rhetorical storm that seems to have damaged his credibility. He could have said — about irrational violence stemming from suicide bombings — “I am very troubled by such behavior and I grieve for Muslims who suffer from such trauma.” Or, in reference to the emperor Manuel II Paleologus, speaking in the 14th century, saying that Islam offered “things only evil and inhuman” and that Muhammad “spread by the sword the faith he preached,” the pope could have said, “I can see why the world is polarized and how deeply concerned I am that such polarization continues to harm and hurt innocent people. I want to heal this breach and live in peace with my Islamic brothers and sisters.”

I don’t know if the necessity to be so accurate about our feelings and our rhetoric is a good thing. I only know that everything I say and how I say it matters. This is why I pray daily that every word, thought and action I speak, think or initiate comes from a deep and abiding feeling of God’s peace. I’m not always successful, but with prayer, I’m better than I used to be, thank God!

SENIOR PASTOR JIM TURRELL

Center for Spiritual Discovery

Costa Mesa

Pope Benedict understands anew that many would prefer to confine forgiveness to the divine sphere. While the pontiff is in “serial apology mode,” forgiveness for his reference to Islam is elusive.

Either his apologies lack the ring of sincerity in the minds and hearts of Muslims or their refusal to accept them is evidence of hard-heartedness.

To this observer, the pope’s mea culpa seems to fall short of a forthright apology, no doubt deliberately so. His is the kind of regret that lies more in the area of defense, the expression of which begins, “I am sorry if what I said upset you.” This apology implies there was nothing wrong with what I said and that the hearer’s response was untoward and excessive. This verbal sleight conveys the appearance of an apology, without actually apologizing. Any apology containing the word “if,” as in “if you were offended,” is not an apology. Rather it puts the onus on the one who complains of being aggrieved. To those whose response is already inflamed, it adds fuel to the fire.

But if we assume the pope’s apologies to be motivated by genuine repentance, then we face a situation where no amount of contrition will satisfy the injured party. We all know people who are “injustice collectors,” eager to display victim-hood. They are always wronged, offended, and hurt. They are quick to identify the sins of others as purposely targeting them. They respond heatedly and nurse grudges until their response is magnified far out of proportion to the transgression, imagined or real. Islamist communities have, for centuries, cultivated an ethos of being vulnerable to assault in a global battle. They are convinced they are disempowered and are thin-skinned over words or cartoons that most of us would brush off. In a culture of incitement, responses overflow into violence that would be unthinkable to most people.

And shall we not consider another option? The pope’s speech reflected historical truth, for Islam was indeed spread by the sword and has often adopted other-than-peaceful means to achieve its goals. The pope taught that religion and violence are inimical and an affront to God. Should the pope’s life be threatened, his effigy burned, Roman Catholics murdered and seven churches attacked by Palestinian mobs over a statement that exalted peace?

Verbal remediation is a delicate undertaking. What to say, when and how to say it, how often to repeat it, are dependent on each situation and experience. There are times when an apology is genuinely proffered, while the recipient refuses to be mollified. There are circumstances when the apology is less than honest-to-God kosher, and the addressee is correct in his estimation of insincerity. But in either case, a more temperate and rational response is warranted.

All in all, Pope Benedict is learning a paraphrase of Alexander Pope’s dictum: “To err is human, to forgive … unusual!”

RABBI MARK S. MILLER

Temple Bat Yahm

Newport Beach

The pope will need to take dramatic action if he is to regain credibility as a world leader. He should meet with Muslim leaders, visit Muslim religious sites and make Vatican interfaith dialogue with Islam a top priority. I believe this misunderstanding will compel him to become a stronger advocate of interfaith cooperation and of respect for Islam. Too many people are poorly informed about Islam, are extremely prejudiced, and incorrectly equate terrorism with Islam. The pope’s leadership on these issues as he defends himself and clarifies his teaching will be beneficial to all.

I think the pope made a mistake when he tried to wear his former “theologian’s hat” rather than preserving his role as pope. He should have limited himself to papal statements that are carefully crafted and reviewed before being made public. He presented a complex, scholarly lecture more suitable for academia than “sound bites” on the evening news. I think it could have been foreseen that such an incendiary quote could easily be taken out of context and misinterpreted.

Religion is too often the cause of war and conflict, rather than a means for overcoming hostility and promoting peace. There are over a million Muslims in the U.S. We are used to living in a religiously mixed society that includes people of many faiths and people who profess no faith. Despite some instances of discrimination, the experience of so many Americans living peacefully amid religious diversity can serve as a model around the world.

REV. DR. DEBORAH BARRETT

Zen Center of Orange County

Costa Mesa

I am no fan of the pope, in theology or practice. However, I am amazed that his quotation of a few sentences has drawn international ire, while the killing of a nun and other global violence that has followed it has been treated as the legitimate reaction. How do these people believe that their violent reaction disproves the pope’s quote that Islam was spread by the sword? Why is the world being held hostage to the threat of violence of these extremists? Does it not seem shocking that less than a year ago we faced a similar global crisis as the cartoon controversy set the Islamic world in a tailspin? Wednesday’s Los Angeles Times had a cover story about a performance of an opera by Mozart that was canceled in Germany under this same kind of duress. The last time I spoke up about this issue in this column, my car was egged. Do I need to fear that if I raise a legitimate issue in the eyes of the public that I’ll need to place my family under armed guard? Why have we not heard an outcry from the Islamic moderates about peace and civility? Why are there no mass peace protests by Muslims decrying these semiannual riots?

When the crucifix was being used as an art piece and placed in a jar of urine in a New York museum, Christians didn’t riot and burn museums around the world and kill docents. Many protested, but no one died. No buildings were destroyed. When the Israelis who disapproved of their government’s politics and the war with Hezbollah protested, they were given a free voice to do so and the vote to change the policies of their government. There are Jews who disapprove of Israel, and they have the right to protest those they disagree with. There are Christians who disapprove of what other Christians are doing, and we protest to the appropriate leaders and levels. Is it not possible for Muslims to stand for peace without fear of retribution? Why is the world so afraid of blaming a Muslim, that whenever there is a riot, someone else has to take the blame? Why is this week’s question about the pope’s guilt and not about the guilt of the ones who killed the nun?

This is the beginning of a tyranny that, if it is not addressed, will explode in our faces. Yes, the Roman pope must be held accountable for his words, but so must the people who killed one of his nuns and have been burning church buildings and synagogues.

LEAD PASTOR RIC OLSEN

The Beacon

Anaheim

When a penitent seeks forgiveness she or he must mean not only, “I am truly sorry,” but also, “I firmly intend amendment of life.” This pope — or bishop of Rome as Episcopalians and Anglicans think of him — has articulately expressed regret and sorrow for the ways his citing a conversation between a 14th century Christian Byzantine emperor, Manuel II, and an Islamic Persian in his Sept. 19 lecture at the University of Regensburg were received; and Benedict XVI has reiterated well his “profound respect” for Islam. Assuming he truly seeks forgiveness and is willing to change, I wonder how he will demonstrate “amendment of life,” that is, how can he change his ways of living?

Is this pope able to be a real pastor? I think that Roman Catholic theologian and papal biographer George Weigel, quoted by Jon Meacham in Newsweek’s cover article last week, is correct when he says that this pope believes in having “a hard-headed conversation” about the role of faith in the life of the world and that, “He knew exactly what he was doing. He is saying that irrational violence is displeasing to God.”

Benedict XVI seems to fail to realize that violence can come through words as well as with actions. While I applaud his desire to examine the roles of faith and religion ideologically and politically, I think that must be done demonstrably as well as verbally. Wouldn’t Benedict XVI do well to follow the example of his beloved predecessor and visit mosques; show reverence toward all Muslims; hold dear and embrace Muslims pastorally, physically and publicly; and articulately express his respect for Islam in written and spoken words? Forgiveness requires words and deeds.

(THE VERY REV’D CANON) PETER D. HAYNES

Saint Michael & All Angels Episcopal Church

Corona del Mar

The uproar about the quotation, by Pope Benedict XVI, of words once uttered by the emperor Manuel Il Paleologus in the 14th century, seems even more absurd than the recent to-do about the cartoons that the Islamists objected to. The real trouble was created, not by the pope, but by the Islamists’ extreme and largely unjustified reaction to a simple quotation.

However, with the world full of various religions, most of which claim to be the only true and proper religion, such reaction is just a natural result. Once people are trained to be knee-jerk believers, and Islamists are certainly that, any statement that does not totally agree with their specific beliefs is bound to create animosity or worse. And since any compromise, or even a reasoned dialogue, cannot be accepted by the true believers, the mere mentioning of even something as far out as a comment from the 14th Century is clearly a fighting matter. And, perhaps, the pope should have been aware of that.

Also, I cannot agree with the pope when he claimed that religion and violence cannot be paired. Assuming that he really means what that says, how does he classify or justify the Crusades, the Inquisition and the 13th Century mass murder of the Albigensians (a Christian sect in the Pyrenees), an action that was actually ordered by another pope who had charged them with heresy? (It seems that the Albigensians had borrowed a belief that was earlier created by Zoroastrians, if not others before, and considered the Devil to be more like a fallen God than simply a fallen angel). Of such absurd religious distinctions is violence created! Religion and violence certainly embody the Catholic versus Protestant wars in Northern Ireland and elsewhere, and many other wars involving many faiths that have occurred throughout the world. Religion and violence have been irrevocably paired since religions were first created by mankind! Would not the world be much more peaceful and cooperative without all the rancor and distrust created by the extreme and fundamentalist type religions that believe that their particular religious views and rules should govern everyone?

JERRY PARKS

Member, Humanist Assn. of Orange County