from Hal Berstram in his new role as 'religious presence':
Been thinking about this one for a few days before writing anything too hasty. Was the Pope deliberately attacking Islam in the speech he made on "Faith, Reason and the University" in Germany last week?
If he was, it seems a rather roundabout way of going about it. Quoting from a 14th Century Byzantine emperor's perception of Islam is not the most direct way of saying that Islam is a violent religion, if that's what he meant to say. It may have been that he thought this was a reasonably safe way of getting his point across, but the reaction to the speech shows that he would have been very wrong in that assumption.
I think it's more likely that the Pope was trying to make a genuine point that violence has no place in religion, but chose to illustrate that point with an example that singled out Islam, whereas in fact there are plenty of violent episodes in the history of the Catholic Church that could have been picked out. A case of the pot calling the kettle black, methinks...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Hey Hal
I don't think it can be construed as anything other than an attack on Islam by the mindset of the extremists who profess to be adherents of that faith but are in fact mindless fascists.
The quote has been taken out of context and whilst I think it was ill-judged, are we to be constantly at the mercy of people for whom even the slightest insult rouses to violence? What will be the future of free speech in this country if such beings are allowed to operate in this manner ad infinitum? Do we want a Taliban run state here?
I agree, Preston - which is why I'm no fan of the blasphemy laws or the new legislation which people like Rowan Atkinson have been jumping up and down about.
Post a Comment