Reverberations from Regensburg

Sandro Magister considers the ongoing effects of Benedict XVI's Regensburg lecture:

During the four days Benedict XVI spent in Turkey, neither he nor anyone else said in public the taboo word “Regensburg.” But the “lectio” delivered by the pope in that city remains at the center of relations between Catholicism and Islam, with its pros and cons.

For example, the head of religious affairs in Turkey, Ali Bardakoglu, actually marked the Regensburg lecture “return to sender” when, speaking to the pope on November 28 in Ankara, he asserted that “freedom and rational thought” are inherent in Islam, condemned those who “represent Islam as a religion that brings violence, spread throughout the world by the sword,” and stressed that “the Muslim who belongs to a religion that has the word ‘peace’ at the root of its name feels strongly offended by the accusations made against him.”

But other Muslim leaders reacted in a more positive way. Beside Ali Bardakoglu, in front of the pope, there was the grand mufti of Istanbul, Mustafa Cagrici, who is one of the signatories of the open letter commenting on the Regensburg lecture written in mid-October by 38 illustrious Muslims from various countries, a letter very respectful toward the pope and his reasoning.

Read the entire piece.

The usual line taken re: B16's trip to Turkey was that he risked offending Muslims even further, or that (according to some Muslims) his visit was part of a "crusade" against Islam. But in an op-ed in today's LA Times, Raymond Ibrahim insists that the Pope actually made important and wrong-headed concessions to Islam during his time in Turkey:

When Islamists wage jihad — past, present and future — conquering and consolidating non-Muslim territories and centers in the name of Islam, never once considering to cede them back to their previous owners, they ultimately demonstrate that they live by the age-old adage "might makes right." That's fine; many people agree with this Hobbesian view.

But if we live in a world where the strong rule and the weak submit, why is it that whenever Muslim regions are conquered, such as in the case of Palestine, the same Islamists who would never concede one inch of Islam's conquests resort to the United Nations and the court of public opinion, demanding justice, restitutions, rights and so forth?

Put another way, when Muslims beat infidels, it's just too bad for the latter; they must submit to their new overlords' rules with all the attendant discrimination and humiliation mandated for non-Muslims. Yet when Islam is beaten, demands for apologies and concessions are expected from the infidel world at large. ...

The Muslim world would undergo a "paroxysm of fury" if a Christian pope dares pray in the conquered church; what would the Muslim world do if Hagia Sophia were actually converted back to a church?

But perhaps Muslims cannot be blamed for expecting special treatment, as well as believing that jihad is righteous and decreed by the Almighty. The West constantly goes out of its way to confirm such convictions. By criticizing itself, apologizing and offering concessions — all things the Islamic world has yet to do — the West reaffirms that Islam has a privileged status in the world.

And what did the pope do in his controversial visit to Hagia Sophia? He refrained from any gesture that could be misconstrued as Christian worship and merely took in the sights of the museum. Moreover, when he was invited into the Blue Mosque nearby, he respectfully took off his shoes and prayed, eyes downcast, standing next to the the grand mufti of Istanbul like a true dhimmi — a subdued non-Muslim living under Islamic law and acknowledging Islamic superiority.

And therein is the final lesson. Muslims' zeal for their holy places and lands is not intrinsically blameworthy. Indeed, there's something to be said about being passionate and protective of one's own. Here the secular West — Christendom's prodigal son and true usurper — can learn something from Islam. For whenever and wherever the West concedes ideologically, politically and especially spiritually, Islam will be sure to conquer. If might does not make right, zeal apparently does.

What do you think?  Does he overstate his case? Misunderstand what the Holy Father did in Turkey? Where is the line between proper respect and concession?

Comments

[Thomas A. Gill]

Once again, here's a religious story that was inaccurately or incompletely reported by the media, and therfore, subsequently misinterpreted by many. In the mosque, the Holy Father did not pray a Muslim prayer with other Muslims. He clearly said a Christian prayer while holding the large Cross around his neck. In the Hagia Sohpia he wrote a prayer of pewtition in the guest book: "In our diversity, we find ourselves before faith in the one God. May God enlighten us and help us find the path of love and peace." He also blessed some disabled children(Muslim or Christian?) there.

[Brian John Schuettler]

I believe that Mr. Ibrahim does indeed overstate his case. Let's put this is context. B16, prior to his visit to Turkey, had just delivered a lecture that addresses to the world the necessity of returning to a meaningful, reasonable center that has been essentially usurped by secular materialism and atheistic dogmatic nihilism. Within that address B16 also called upon the leaders of the religion of Islam to join in a dialogue the focus of which is the exclusion of violence and hatred as attributes of religion in general and Islam in particular. Now comes B16 to Turkey with the immediate goal of meeting with the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew in an act of, shall we say, solidarity. Secondarily Pope Ratzinger was invited by the secular state of Turkey to enjoy an officially approved visit to the Hagia Sophia and the Blue Mosque.
By his actions His Holiness did not desire to make of statement of power to Islam. Wouldn't that actually contradict the very point he is making that it is faith and reason, not power and irrationality, that are the foundation for our actions with each other? As the saying goes, there is a time and place for everything. By showing respect for Islam the pope practiced what he preached and thereby set the example for those who would be his enemies. He offered the olive branch, not the sword, and in so doing opened the door for the Holy Spirit to touch the hearts and the minds of the followers of the Prophet. There will certainly be those on both sides who will view B16's actions as being weak and not strong but it is not strength that that the Vicar of Christ is charged to bring to the world...it is the love and the mercy of Our Saviour.

[Carl Olson]

Wouldn't that actually contradict the very point he is making that it is faith and reason, not power and irrationality, that are the foundation for our actions with each other?

Excellent observation, Brian.

[Harry Potter]

Yes Brian. Also may I add that Turkey's obsession with Heavy Metal Bands like Pink Floyd and the Eagles are both the cause AND result of Islamic violence. Similarly the Pope's instruction to Europe to both admit AND not admit Turkey to the EU shows that he possesses a mind capable of grasping a complex Hegelian synthesis of ideas.