September 22, 2006--Fanaticism XLXI--Mucous Slime
Pope Benedict for the fourth time either clarified his remarks about Islam or apologized. His first attempt did not have the effect he was seeking—it set off even more rioting on “The Arab Street,” including effigy burnings and death threats. Perhaps because his “apology” was in truth not about what he said but rather about “the reaction” to his lecture. Thus, it was viewed by many as inflaming an already incendiary situation.
Now, the NY Times reports, his series of clarifications/apologies are setting off dissent within the Catholic and Jewish communities. (Article linked below.) Some are saying that his comments about The Prophet and militant Islam were in fact true and that rather than backing down he should affirm what he said, albeit indirectly by quoting the words of a medieval emperor.
Out in Saint Peter’s Square, for example, someone said, “What should he apologize for? There is freedom of speech.” More suggestively, another added, “What he said in Regensburg was very carefully calculated, and the message still stands. He was challenging the Islamic world to take a seat at the table of reasoned religions.”
I’ve convened many meetings around various tables and what the Pope said did not seem to me to be a very enticing invitation. Nor by contrasting “reasoned Christianity” with “unreasoned Islam” is it likely that the Pope will engender a useful dialog. As we can see, it has led to quite the opposite. Talk about a self-fulfilling prophecy—how his words about Islamic violence contributed to violence which in turn right-wing commentators claim shows how violent Islam in fact is.
Though there is as yet no evidence that the Pope’s words have led to any additional physical attacks against Muslims, I have been shocked to see how violent and ugly the anger and bigotry is, how close to the surface.
I need to protect his identity quite carefully since he is a very well known public intellectual here and in Europe and he would be mortified to have me quote from what he assumed was a very private conversation. But when in the midst of a fairly reasoned discussion about “religions of the sword,” acknowledging that all three of the Religions of the Book during their long histories have records of considerable violence, all three have experienced genocide—as both victims and perpetrators, in the middle of that historical review he began to sputter about how Islam was the worst of all, the most violent, the least tolerant, the most bigoted, the most ignorant. He said that rather than clarifying and apologizing the Pope should reiterate what he said since it was true—“Islam is a despicable religion.”
“In fact,” he added, “do you know what ‘Muslim’ means?” He paused and then spat, “Mucous slime.”
Now, the NY Times reports, his series of clarifications/apologies are setting off dissent within the Catholic and Jewish communities. (Article linked below.) Some are saying that his comments about The Prophet and militant Islam were in fact true and that rather than backing down he should affirm what he said, albeit indirectly by quoting the words of a medieval emperor.
Out in Saint Peter’s Square, for example, someone said, “What should he apologize for? There is freedom of speech.” More suggestively, another added, “What he said in Regensburg was very carefully calculated, and the message still stands. He was challenging the Islamic world to take a seat at the table of reasoned religions.”
I’ve convened many meetings around various tables and what the Pope said did not seem to me to be a very enticing invitation. Nor by contrasting “reasoned Christianity” with “unreasoned Islam” is it likely that the Pope will engender a useful dialog. As we can see, it has led to quite the opposite. Talk about a self-fulfilling prophecy—how his words about Islamic violence contributed to violence which in turn right-wing commentators claim shows how violent Islam in fact is.
Though there is as yet no evidence that the Pope’s words have led to any additional physical attacks against Muslims, I have been shocked to see how violent and ugly the anger and bigotry is, how close to the surface.
I need to protect his identity quite carefully since he is a very well known public intellectual here and in Europe and he would be mortified to have me quote from what he assumed was a very private conversation. But when in the midst of a fairly reasoned discussion about “religions of the sword,” acknowledging that all three of the Religions of the Book during their long histories have records of considerable violence, all three have experienced genocide—as both victims and perpetrators, in the middle of that historical review he began to sputter about how Islam was the worst of all, the most violent, the least tolerant, the most bigoted, the most ignorant. He said that rather than clarifying and apologizing the Pope should reiterate what he said since it was true—“Islam is a despicable religion.”
“In fact,” he added, “do you know what ‘Muslim’ means?” He paused and then spat, “Mucous slime.”
posted by Steven Zwerling at
10:54 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home