Pope Benedict gets into hot water with Muslims (Sept06)

Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Vatican secretary of state, said the Pope was "extremely upset that some portions of his speech were able to sound offensive to the sensibilities of Muslim believers and have been interpreted in a way that does not at all correspond with his intentions. The church esteems Muslims, who adore the only God".

German politicians tried hard to defend the Pope against accusations of blasphemy and provocation.
Chancellor Merkel said: "Critics have misjudged the intention of his speech. He was seeking a decisive and uncompromising rejection of all use of violence in the name of religion. The pope has expressly championed inter-faith dialogue, which I also support and consider to be urgently needed."

Volker Beck from the Green party described the comments as "bizarrely one-sided and historically ignorant."
Ayyub Axel Köhler, president of the German Council of Muslims, was dismayed.
"We are indignant at these remarks. Especially after the lengthy dialogues we have had. Now it is up to the pope himself to do what he can to mend fences with the Islamic world. The pope should apologize to Muslims for the crusades, and forced christenings and persecutions of Muslims. That would be an admirable gesture for peace and understanding."

New York Times (18Sep06)
While John Paul II, issued several apologies for the historical failings of the church, this seems to be the first time in recent memory that a pope had made such a direct statement of personal regret. “
Said Alberto Melloni, professor of history, University of Modena, author of several books on the Vatican.
“This is really, really abnormal; It’s never happened as far as I know.”

The pope’s comments have also provoked a debate in Italy and among many Catholics, on whether he is aware of the reaction he would provoke and whether his speeches, which he usually writes himself, are properly vetted by a Vatican undergoing a bureaucratic transition.

Several Vatican officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said they had expressed concern before the speech was delivered that it might be negatively received by Muslims or be misconstrued by the news media as an attack on Islam. The remarks of the pope — despite his own denial that he meant to criticize — amounted to a rare public airing of a delicate concern many of them share: whether, in fact, Islam is at the moment especially prone to violence.

Guardian (18Sep06)
Benedict said; "at this time I wish also to add that I am deeply sorry for the reactions in some countries to a few passages of my address at the University of Regensburg, which were considered offensive to the sensibility of Muslims."
A true apology would have been to simply retract his remarks. He regretted the way Muslims reacted but not the fact that he delivered a highly offending speech against Muslims.

It’s ridiculous to expect people to believe that this quotation came as a by-the-by, and wasn’t actually used as main element of his argument he was trying to make in his very well-prepared speech. To pick a quote that asserts one thing is essentially to exclude many, often hundreds or even thousands, others that assert the exact opposite. This is what makes Benedict’s “apology”, as most of the media outlets referred to it, meaningless. One must wonder why the Vatican has not played any significant role in the recent campaign aimed at building bridges between cultures and mend what politics destroyed in recent years.

Numerous Islamic leaders and organisations have been speaking out against violence and killing in the name of the noble religion, such efforts should have been supported by people of faith, especially figures like the Pope. The Pope conveniently ignored Christianity's own barbarous past, that during the time the Catholic church was cementing the barbarism of Europe's dark ages for centuries, sanctioning atrocities and heinous crimes with its blessings. In contrast, the Muslim world, from southern Europe to China, was setting milestones for literature, philosophy, art, architecture, medicine, chemistry, physics, biology, algebra and music.

Manuscripts on law, botany, etiquette and fashion were being produced and students from Europe, Africa and China converged in their tens of thousands upon the vast and illustrious universities and libraries of Baghdad, Damascus, Cordoba, Seville and Cairo. Charging Islam of intolerance is factually wrong and ignoring the 100 years of glorious co-existence among Muslims, Christians and Jews, which saw an outstanding leap on technology, medicine and science is unfair.

Muslim rulers employed Christian and Jewish ministers, advisors and ambassadors; they never resisted their existence as part of the governing force as long as they were the best suited for the job.

Islam didn’t spread by the force of sword. It spread many times more rapidly at times of peace than it ever did at times of war, both during the time of Prophet Mohammed and ever since, and that’s why it’s the fastest growing religion in the world until today.

LONDON 18Sep06
Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, the leader of the world's Anglicans, said Monday(18Sep) that Pope Benedict XVI's controversial remarks about Islam needed to be judged in the context of his record.

"The pope has already issued an apology, and I think his views on this need to be judged against his entire record, where he has spoken very positively about dialogue".

Williams, speaking on BBC radio, said there were "elements in Islam that can be used to justify violence, just as there are in Christianity and Judaism. These religious faiths, because they are held by human beings who are very fallible, can be distorted in these ways, and we all need to recognize that. There is always a temptation for Christians to say to Muslims 'I will tell you what your history is about,' just as Muslims sometimes say to Christians. Sometimes they get it deeply wrong.

"The example the pope took from the Middle Ages shows in its phrasing how in the Middle Ages people got it wrong on both sides, and Muslim distortions of Christian history are just as laughable as Christian distortions of Muslim history. The big question that comes out of this for me is how much are we prepared to listen to the other person telling their story and how much are both sides prepared to be self-critical in discussing aspects of their history that are not pretty and not edifying".