![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Excuse me?
Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | Muslim world divided over Pope's apology
Now, it is possible to argue -- and I've seen several attempts over the last couple of days -- that Muslim terrorism has a higher bodycount during the last couple of centuries than Christian. Possibly even if you omit 09/11 and the IRA. I'm not sure about the crusades. But the former head of the organization once known as the Inquisition is hardly in a position to cast stones, and he damned well ought to know better.
Pope Benedict's admission that he was "deeply sorry" for offending the sensitivities of Muslims does not necessarily mean that the worst crisis of his papacy is over yet. Speaking in Rome yesterday, the Pope said that the views of the 14th-century Byzantine emperor Manuel II Palaeologus that he quoted last week - describing Islam as "evil and inhuman" - were not his own....but presumably he wouldn't have quoted them if they didn't say what he wanted to say.
Now, it is possible to argue -- and I've seen several attempts over the last couple of days -- that Muslim terrorism has a higher bodycount during the last couple of centuries than Christian. Possibly even if you omit 09/11 and the IRA. I'm not sure about the crusades. But the former head of the organization once known as the Inquisition is hardly in a position to cast stones, and he damned well ought to know better.
no subject
Here's a link to the speach
http://212.77.1.245/news_services/bulletin/news/18792.php?index=18792&po_date=12.09.2006&lang=it#TRADUZIONE%20%20IN%20LINGUA%20INGLESE.Unlike Bush, the man is not stupid, and I, too, have trouble believing that there was anything unintentional about the choice of quote.
In the seventh conversation (*4V8,>4H - controversy) edited by Professor Khoury, the emperor touches on the theme of the holy war. The emperor must have known that surah 2, 256 reads: "There is no compulsion in religion". According to the experts, this is one of the suras of the early period, when Mohammed was still powerless and under threat. But naturally the emperor also knew the instructions, developed later and recorded in the Qur’an, concerning holy war. Without descending to details, such as the difference in treatment accorded to those who have the "Book" and the "infidels", he addresses his interlocutor with a startling brusqueness on the central question about the relationship between religion and violence in general, saying: "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". The emperor, after having expressed himself so forcefully, goes on to explain in detail the reasons why spreading the faith through violence is something unreasonable. Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul. "God", he says, "is not pleased by blood – and not acting reasonably (F×< 8`(T) is contrary to God’s nature. Faith is born of the soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats... To convince a reasonable soul, one does not need a strong arm, or weapons of any kind, or any other means of threatening a person with death...".
no subject
and, wondering where the heck 212.77.1.245 leads to ...
Blessed name servers!
no subject