It continues. I’m going to plan on 4 more posts for Sunday – this one, which will continue to list threats and warnings of one sort or another against the Holy Father, then one which will cover the Sunday editorial responses in the US plus any European responses, then a third for non-violent Muslim responses, and then the fourth, on today’s Angelus.
And keep praying for the Holy Father – and the Christians throughout the world who maintain their faith in repressive circumstances, who are worshipping, somehow, any way they can today, sharing in the sufferings of the Body of Christ.
One must keep returning to this over and over and over again – the "condemnations" and demands for "apologies" and retractions are coming from people who have not read the Pope’s address. The outrage is being stoked is at a purported "slam" of Islam, as the Western headline writers put it.
But the question at hand, within the broader context in which (as we tirelessly repeat) the Pope decried the Western separation of faith from what is called "reason," is the rather interesting question: if a religion’s text says no compulsion in religion, yet that religion has employed compulsion of various types…what does that religion make of that earlier text? What does the presence of both of these texts and claims say about this religion’s concept of God? And, as Julia aptly pointed out below, if no reasoned explanation can be given for the actions of this God and implications of belief in Him, then how can dialogue happen?
But that’s not what the reactors are reacting against – in their own words. They are reacting against…what? Against what they say is the Pope’s declaration that Islam is inherently violent. So in protest of the Pope’s unfair characterization, the following has happened today:
An Iraqi group threatens…attack.
"We swear that we will destroy their cross in the heart of Rome … and that their Vatican will be hit and wept over by the Pope," said Jaish al-Mujahideen (the Mujahideen’s Army) in the statement, whose authenticity could not be confirmed.
The statement lashed out at "Zionised Christians and loathsome crusaders" and was accompanied by six films showing attacks against US military targets in Iraq, which it said were "dedicated to the dog of the crusaders (an apparent reference to the Pope) in retaliation for his remarks".
"We will not rest until your thrones and your crosses have been destroyed on your own territory," said the group, which has claimed many attacks against US and government forces in Iraq.
Somali cleric says the Pope must die:
"We urge you Muslims wherever you are to hunt down the Pope for his barbaric statements as you have pursued Salman Rushdie, the enemy of Allah who offended our religion," he said in Friday evening prayers.
"Whoever offends our Prophet Mohammed should be killed on the spot by the nearest Muslim," Malin, a prominent cleric in the Somali capital, told worshippers at a mosque in southern Mogadishu.
"We call on all Islamic Communities across the world to take revenge on the baseless critic called the pope," he said.
Sheikh Taj al-Din al-Hilali, the Mufti of Australia, said the Pope’s statement "did not come across as the way of the prophet Jesus."
"It’s not what I expect from a holy person. The church needs to re-examine its thoughts about someone who doesn’t have the qualities or good grasp of Christian character or knowledge."
Speaking outside a conference of Australian Islamic leaders, Sheikh Hilali said the Pope’s comments would add fuel to the fire of fundamentalism and terrorism. "The result is to all but destroy the moderates, whereas the fundamentalists gain traction," he said.
Read Previous Post