|
Hi Sejs,
Thanks for the comment and question. I'm sure others are interested in what we think
as well.
My personal take on the issue is as follows.
The Pope is being threatened by radical Islamics for the very thing he was trying
to condemn:
Faith conversion by force.
The theology in this type of Islam is totally different than that of Christianity.
In Christianity there is a loving, Heavenly Father and a loving, incarnate
Son, Jesus. Jesus obeys the Father, not out of force but, because it
pleases His Heavenly Father.
The same is true in Judaism, the loving Heavenly Father loves and will
always love his Jewish people. Likewise, true Jews love the eternal Father not because they are forced
to but because they wish to:
- worship him,
- give thanks to him, and
- ask for petitions
to their Heavenly Father.
What I wish my Jewish brothers and sisters would see is that being Roman
Catholic is nothing less than being a fulfilled Jew. We have Passover too,
every day of the year!
In contrast, in Islam and radical Islam, there is a [Master/Slave] [relationship/theology]
between Allah and the worshipper.
There is a saying I've heard from a Catholic apologist friend of mine,
Scott Hahn:
You become like the one you worship.
So the worshippers of Allah wish to force others, as Allah forces his
worshippers. The result:
Radical Islam worshippers wish to force all Christians, the Pope included,
to be Muslim; whether they want to worship Allah or not.
Muslim worshippers who don't fall into this type of Islam, should look
into what the Catholic Church teaches. If you study and read up on what
the Catholic Faith is about and, afterward, believe Jesus is not God but
a phony, you are free to go on worshipping Allah. We would say it is your
choice.
In Christianity, including Catholic Christianity, no one will force you to be a Christian. If you are interested in learning more about what we believe, as Catholics, consider buying a cheap copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Now to answer your question:
- Do you think the Pope in his recent address said too much or not enough?
He could have said more, but was trying to be prudent.
I do know this is a very smart scholarly pope. Many of the writings of
JP II, I'm sure were done with the assistance of Pope Benedict XVI when
he was Cardinal Ratzinger.
I also sense that he wants very much to carry on the ecumenical gains made
by John Paul II. That said: I believe he would never say anything that
would hurt TRUE ecumenical dialogue between different faiths.
Hope this answers your question.
If someone wishes to read Our Holy Fathers Lecture at the University of
Regensburg they can find it here.
Mike
P.S. A colleague brought a column written by Jeff Jacoby titled "Muslim
violence" to my attention. Jeff made the following solid comments:
In his lecture, Benedict quoted the late Byzantine emperor Manuel II,
who had condemned Islam's militancy with these words: "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."
In the ensuing uproar, British Muslims demonstrated outside Westminster
Cathedral with signs reading "Pope go to Hell" and "Islam
will conquer Rome," while the head of the Society of Muslim Lawyers
declared that the pope must be "subject to capital punishment." In
Iraq, the radical Mujahideen's Army vowed to "smash the crosses
in the house of the dog from Rome" and the Mujahideen Shura Council
swore to ``continue our jihad and never stop until God avails us to chop
your necks." Arsonists in the West Bank set churches on fire, and
a group calling itself ``The Sword of Islam" issued a warning: ``If
the pope does not appear on TV and apologize for his comments, we will
blow up all of Gaza's churches."
In fact, the pope did apologize, more than once. Whether the studied
frenzy will now subside remains to be seen. But it's only a matter of
time until the next one erupts.
This time it was a 14th-century quote from a Byzantine ruler that set
off — or rather, was exploited by Islamist firebrands to ignite — the
international demonstrations, death threats, and violence. Earlier this
year it was cartoons about Mohammed in a Danish newspaper. Last year
it was a Newsweek report, later debunked, that a Koran had been desecrated
by a US interrogator in Guantanamo. Before that it was Jerry Falwell's
comment on "60 Minutes" that Mohammed was a "terrorist." Back
in 1989 it was the publication of Salman Rushdie's satirical novel, "The
Satanic Verses."
In every case, the pretext for the Muslim rage was the claim that Islam
had been insulted. Freedom of speech was irrelevant: While the rioters
and those inciting them routinely insult Christianity, Judaism, and other
religions, they demand that no one be allowed to denigrate Islam or its
prophet. It is a staggering double standard, and too many in the West
seem willing to go along with it. Witness the editorials in US newspapers
this week scolding the pope for his speech. Recall the State Department's
condemnation of the Danish cartoons last winter.
Of course nobody's faith should be gratuitously affronted. But the real
insult to Islam is not a line from a papal speech or a cartoon about
Mohammed. It is the violence, terror, and bloodshed that Islamist fanatics
unleash in the name of their religion — and the unwillingness of most
of the world's Muslims to say or do anything to stop them. |
|
