|
|
Pope Benedict XVI selected an inflammatory quote from a Byzantine emperor, using his views on the Quran’s teachings to point up the barbaric use of violence to compel religious conversion. However, in laying that practice at the foundation of the Muslim religion, the pope not only ignored our own church’s bloody history but also left the impression that the Muslim religion was unique in that regard. In fact, Catholic history is filled with instances wherein the church used force and violence to convert people.
We are living in a time when it is incumbent upon all the world’s religious leaders to step forward and teach their shared beliefs of peace, nonviolence and love, and to stop blessing wars and acts of violence done in God’s name, or by God’s people of any faith. Sadly, the pope’s remarks revealed a limited vision of the global challenges facing the Catholic church and overlooked the political, cultural and social realities facing us all. A simple apology just does not seem to be an adequate response.
FRANK CORDARO
Des Moines, Iowa
* * *
By quoting an obscure Byzantine Emperor on the “evils” of Islam, Pope Benedict XVI has needlessly alienated a large portion of humanity. The problem is that Benedict is such a total academic. He likes to display his learning but does so without proper regard for how ordinary people will take his words. Addressing a German university audience, he was in academic showoff mode. To make the point that violence shouldn’t be used to effect religious conversions he quoted a 14th-century figure who condemned Muhammad for advocating the opposite. This no doubt went down well enough with his audience, but the world was listening too, and that’s what should really matter to a pope.
A great many modern popes have made their way to the chair of Peter via the diplomatic route -- Paul VI, John XXIII, Pius XII -- and for that reason these chaps knew how to speak without giving offense. Benedict, the university professor, however, is a man who got ahead through clever displays of learning and he doesn’t seem to want to adopt a more papal voice.
TIM NAU
Toronto
* * *
I believe that the pope has been misunderstood. In his speech he was talking about the concept of jihad. To explain how the problem was resolved in the 14th century he quoted a wise king who had to make militants realize that killing innocents will give a bad name to the Prophet Muhammad. This is not insulting the Prophet but making militants respect his greatness and hence stop evil acts in order not to give him a bad name. Using this type of reasoning to stop militants from doing evil deeds would be regarded a good deed even now. The pope was trying to explain this misunderstanding but then decided to apologize. Kind people always apologize because they do not wish to hurt others, though probably his strategy was the only way to stop these misguided people. Can you think of a better way?
YOGESH RAJA
Aylesbury, England
* * *
When Benedict XVI was Cardinal Ratzinger, he was the “great scrutinizer” of theological texts and forced theologians to retract anything he deemed a threat to orthodoxy. Of all persons not to be sensitive to the damage texts can cause! He lifted an obscure medieval one to underscore violence in Islam. The texts he chose to unearth and present with the barest of context had the effect of tossing a religious grenade. He did not immediately disavow any personal agreement, as he has since backpedaled to do. His choice of an incendiary text instantly caused violent reactions and renders him, Catholicism and Christianity even more suspect to Muslims. Theologians have lost their jobs for a lot less damage.
Pope Benedict is in a position to exercise real leadership by challenging equally the “people of the Book” -- Jews, Christians and Muslims -- to exorcise and excise the violence inherent in all of their sacred texts. This might lead to a more fruitful dialogue and disarm religionists who scrutinize those texts to condone their use of violence.
EMMETT COYNE
St. Albans, Vt.
* * *
The most recent insensitive and cruel remarks by Pope Benedict XVI concerning Islam prove that this man is not fit to reign over the Roman Catholic world. Perhaps spending so much time in those Vatican offices, formerly known as the Office of the Inquisition, has kept the pope out of touch with the terrible realities that confront our world today; otherwise, why would he be quoting a medieval text when, as he says, the text did not express his personal thought? Why use it? Did someone write the speech for the pope who simply didn’t check it for content before he delivered it? It’s time for the men of the Roman Catholic church to stop speaking in parables, using ceremonial phrasing and quoting ancient texts. Why not try the direct approach, using the language of honesty and openness. I would also like to remind the pope that the history of our own church is written in blood, replete with torture, rape, enslavement and murder. In our most recent history, we see the physical and spiritual sexual butchery of the children of the Roman Catholic church, along with the conspiracy of deception and cover-up of these terrible crimes against children, by the hierarchy.
VICTORIA MARTIN
Long Beach, Calif.
Why are Protestant clergymen who are married and enter the Catholic church ordained as priests if they wish, while Catholic married men who have lived and been active in our church all their lives are denied the opportunity to become priests? I think it’s scandalous that bishops will close parishes and so deny easy access to participation in the sacrifice of the Mass rather than call ordained deacons to the priesthood. They have the responsibility and authority -- from God, not the Vatican -- to nourish the faithful.
BUD HOLECEK
Los Angeles
It is somewhat shocking that in her response to letters objecting to her portrayal of Hezbollah, Margot Patterson states, “There exists a diversity of opinion as to [the] scope and significance … [of] Hezbollah’s anti-Semitic statements” (NCR, Sept. 15). Embedded in the core of Hezbollah’s ideology is frank anti-Semitism. At a time when the language of anti-Semitism throughout the world is growing more virulent, Ms. Patterson effectively encourages hatred by denying its “significance.” Given the almost 2,000-year history of Christian anti-Semitism, when a Catholic publication tries to downplay terrorism and hatred expressed towards Jews or the Jewish state, people of goodwill really must object.
(Sr.) RUTH LAUTT, OP
Jericho, N.Y.
[Sr. Ruth Lautt is the National Director of Christians for a Fair Witness on the Middle East.]
* * *
The letters you published in response to Margot Patterson’s article on Hezbollah were all against it. I hope you continue this dialogue. The letters have a common theme: the destruction of Israel and the coming of a second holocaust. I am sympathetic towards our Jewish friends about what Hitler did to them. The trauma and the scars of those terrible events are with us today. One has to hope some healing will come, though it may be some time off, just as the healing of the girl who was abused by her father is often taken to the grave. Divorce groups always hope that anger and hatred will subside in time and that parents stop trying to hurt each other. We’re urged to show progress, move on. Some do; some don’t. It’s the same with the Jewish people. We pray that they will make progress in getting rid of hatred that is eating them up.
Psychiatrists see it all the time: Consumed with the pain of divorce, a woman develops paranoia, seeing all men as evil. Or the person who committed the initial evil, the abusing father, gets off lightly; the brunt of the fury falls on others. We see this in the Middle East, for as an Arab man once said to me: “Why don’t they attack the Germans and leave us alone?” Such issues have to be confronted if we are to have peace between Jews and Arabs. We must ask what pain confronts the Arabs and the Jews. Both sides feel constantly threatened, each fearing the other side, poisoning their relationship. We have to hope and pray that some healing will come to both of these peoples.
GERRY DUNPHY
Washington
While my information will not alter the value of the editorial on stem cell research (NCR, Sept. 15), accurate information in such a volatile area is important. Your editorial states that 35 percent, and possibly as high as 50 percent of fertilized ova, miscarry naturally. However, I looked in a standard current medical textbook, The Developing Human: Clinical Oriented Embryology by Keith L. Moore and T.V.N. Persaud. This book indicates that some 86 percent of all fertilized ova are naturally aborted. This information does nothing to diminish the thrust of your editorial, but it does give emphasis to the reality of natural abortion at its earliest period.
LARRY BOUDREAU
San Antonio
George Bush says he is a Christian. In the book The Faith of George W. Bush, author Stephen Mansfield writes that Bush “really believes Jesus is taken up in his heart and soul.” In his first inaugural speech President Bush stated “abandonment and abuse are not acts of God, they are failures of love,” and that the “proliferation of prisons, however necessary, is no substitute for hope and order in our souls.” So do his actions as president reflect his stated beliefs as a follower of Christ? He runs secret prisons in other countries where our laws are violated with impunity. He seeks to immunize CIA and military officials from lawsuits resulting from barbaric behavior. He authorizes the “rendition” of suspects to other countries where torture is routinely used for interrogation.
Christians must remind the president that Jesus wouldn’t sanction physical beatings, water-boarding, isolation, mock executions, dietary manipulation, sexual or religious humiliation, whippings with electrical cables or interrogation by electrical shock. Why must we be so forthright in our denunciation of torture in any form? Christians follow one who was tortured to death by the state based on trumped-up charges and false evidence. He was whipped, humiliated and deprived of basic human dignity. Jesus rejects abuse in any form; so too must his disciples.
We must not let President Bush’s torture program move forward in our name or with even the least imprimatur from the Christian tradition.
(Rev.) DAVID C. JAMES
Olympia, Wash.
Your editorial on the United States and Iran was right on target (NCR, Sept. 22). Too few pundits are even mentioning that our troubles with Iran began with our inexcusable overthrow of the Mossadegh government in 1953. It’s probably too late to put the toothpaste back in the tube, but we might start with an apology to the people of Iran.
EDD DOERR
Silver Spring, Md.
Letters to the editor should be limited to 250 words and preferably typed. If a letter refers to a previous issue of NCR, please give us that issue’s date. We reserve the right to edit all letters. Letters, National Catholic Reporter, PO Box 411009, Kansas City, MO 64141-1009. Fax: (816) 968-2280. E-mail: letters@natcath.org (When sending a letter via e-mail, please indicate "NCR Letters" in the subject line. We've installed a new spam filter on our letters e-mail account. If it's not clear to us that yours is a letter, we might delete it.) Please be sure to include your street address, city, state, zip and daytime telephone number
National Catholic Reporter, October 6, 2006 [corrected 10/13/2006]