If ever one needed proof of the shallowness and intellectual laziness of the mainstream media, the hysteria they’ve managed to gin up over remarks by the Pope regarding the Islamic faith, taken wildly out of context, serves as a potent reminder of just how sorry is the state of journalistic ethics and integrity in the west.
Reporters and editors have a duty to reveal not only what is said but accurately tell us what is implied – especially when a hot button subject like religion is involved and when the words are uttered by eminent personages such as a Pope or President. By lifting one quote out of context made by Benedict in a long, thoughtful speech on religion and reason, the western media has once again inflamed the passions of intolerant, hypersensitive Muslims and caused even moderate Islamic governments to condemn the Pope and demand an apology lest more radical elements gain politically over what is certainly a non-issue.
Even a cursory reading of Benedict’s speech reveals the Pope to have a passionate and firm belief in tolerance. His elegant thoughts on God and reason have a beauty that transcends any individual faith and speaks to the spiritual in all of us. Not blessed with the towering intellect of his predecessor, Benedict nevertheless lays out a case for a God that, rather than being in conflict with science, in fact defines reason itself. The universe exists as it does because God is perfection. And being perfect, it is impossible for Him to exist in contradictory terms.
The Pope made a strong case that science and faith can exist side by side in the modern world, that there is nothing inherently wrong with exploring the mysteries of the universe because finding answers will ultimately reveal God as pure reason:
The positive aspects of modernity are to be acknowledged unreservedly: we are all grateful for the marvellous possibilities that it has opened up for mankind and for the progress in humanity that has been granted to us. The scientific ethos, moreover, is – as you yourself mentioned, Magnificent Rector – the will to be obedient to the truth, and, as such, it embodies an attitude which belongs to the essential decisions of the Christian spirit. The intention here is not one of retrenchment or negative criticism, but of broadening our concept of reason and its application. While we rejoice in the new possibilities open to humanity, we also see the dangers arising from these possibilities and we must ask ourselves how we can overcome them. We will succeed in doing so only if reason and faith come together in a new way, if we overcome the self-imposed limitation of reason to the empirically verifiable, and if we once more disclose its vast horizons. In this sense theology rightly belongs in the university and within the wide-ranging dialogue of sciences, not merely as a historical discipline and one of the human sciences, but precisely as theology, as inquiry into the rationality of faith.
This is the essence of the Pope’s address; a call for a new definition of reason that surmounts what he considers to be artificial barriers between science and faith. Truly remarkable in its depth and subtlety, the Pope has come down firmly on the side of tolerance and freedom.
Then why the reference to Islam’s violent history? Why speak at all of the “forced conversions” in the early years of Islam? If the Pope is guilty of anything, it is perhaps in choosing one school of Islamic thought to make his point about the difference between a God who is reason and a God who transcends reason:
The decisive statement in this argument against violent conversion is this: not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to God’s nature. The editor [of the text where this debate appears], Theodore Khoury, observes: For the emperor, as a Byzantine shaped by Greek philosophy, this statement is self-evident. But for Muslim teaching, God is absolutely transcendent. His will is not bound up with any of our categories, even that of rationality. Here Khoury quotes a work of the noted French Islamist R. Arnaldez, who points out that Ibn Hazn went so far as to state that God is not bound even by his own word, and that nothing would oblige him to reveal the truth to us. Were it God’s will, we would even have to practise idolatry.(HT: Quote from the Pope’s speech courtesy of a grad student at a Catholic Seminary in an email to Michelle Malkin)
Juan Cole points out that there are other schools of thought in Islam that are in opposition to this thinking:
The pope says that in Islam, God is so transcendent that he is beyond reason and therefore cannot be expected to act reasonably. He contrasts this conception of God with that of the Gospel of John, where God is the Logos, the Reason inherent in the universe.But there have been many schools of Islamic theology and philosophy. The Mu’tazilite school maintained exactly what the Pope is saying, that God must act in accordance with reason and the good as humans know them. The Mu’tazilite approach is still popular in Zaidism and in Twelver Shiism of the Iraqi and Iranian sort. The Ash’ari school, in contrast, insisted that God was beyond human reason and therefore could not be judged rationally. (I think the Pope would find that Tertullian and perhaps also John Calvin would be more sympathetic to this view within Christianity than he is).
And Cole points to forced conversions in the history of Christianity as well (some of them on this continent) which undercuts Benedict’s point about violence and reason to some extent.
Cole believes Benedict should get himself some new advisors on Christian-Muslim relations for making what he considers to be an ill-considered point. This is pure sophistry. As are western calls for the Pope to “apologize.” These calls echo those from what Malkin correctly refers to as “The Religion of Perpetual Outrage.” And for the western media to lazily fall into the trap of the professional grievance mongers in the Islamic world who are always ready to work themselves (and their ignorant followers) into a lather over “insults” to Islam only shows how frighteningly naive and truly shallow many in the media are – especially about matters pertaining to faith and religion.
Case in point; the New York Times:
The Vatican issued a statement saying that Benedict meant no offense and in fact desired dialogue. But this is not the first time the pope has fomented discord between Christians and Muslims.In 2004 when he was still the Vatican’s top theologian, he spoke out against Turkey’s joining the European Union, because Turkey, as a Muslim country was “in permanent contrast to Europe.â€
A doctrinal conservative, his greatest fear appears to be the loss of a uniform Catholic identity, not exactly the best jumping-off point for tolerance or interfaith dialogue.
The world listens carefully to the words of any pope. And it is tragic and dangerous when one sows pain, either deliberately or carelessly. He needs to offer a deep and persuasive apology, demonstrating that words can also heal.
It is indicative of the politically correct, nonsensical attitude of many in the media that the Times would have found the Pope’s historically accurate statement describing the vast religious, cultural, and political differences between Turkey and the western European nations in NATO a cause for friction between Muslims and Christians. It isn’t that the differences don’t exist mind you. One just doesn’t voice those differences in public. Such statements are considered impolite in the PC world occupied by the Times and other western media outlets and are best left unspoken.
As for the rest, the Pope, after all, is Catholic. And as we’ve discussed here before, it riles the Times and others that the Catholic faith refuses to change its dogmas and canons to reflect the enlightened views of the Times’ editors.
No, the Pope should not apologize. Instead, the MSM should be covering the wildly out of proportion response by militant Islamic nutters who are tearing up the streets in the Middle East and elsewhere to “protest” what they consider to be this insult to their faith.
If only they could get half as worked up over those who murder in Islam’s name, the world would certainly be a much more peaceful place to live.
UPDATE
Malkin also has a gruesome reminder from the internet jihadists about what happens to those who “insult” Islam.
UPDATE II: POPE APOLOGIZES
Ed Morrissey has the latest statement from the Pope where he “is very sorry that some passages of his speech may have sounded offensive to the sensibilities of Muslim believers.”
This probably won’t satisfy the Islamist nutters rioting in the streets (now that they have the media’s doting attention) but it was perhaps inevitable given the controversey that erupted over the taking of his words out of context.
Also, check out my favorite Catholic’s take on this. The Anchoress echoes some my themes while making this point about the apology:
Now, we read Benedict blunder shows he has failed to master media machine. This is Benedict’s blunder, you see. As if he has any control over how the press presents a story.
Indeed.
10:49 am
[...] I wrote earlier in Pope’s speech stirs muslim’s anger, that I didn’t think that the Pope was being direct enough in his criticism of Islam, and I stand by that. But it seems like that I was also not getting the subtler points of the Pope’s speech, namely that it wasn’t intended as much as a criticism of Islam, as pointing out that science and reason can live together side by side, and that God is not beyond reason. Thanks to Right Wing Nut House for making this clear. However, no matter how the Pope’s speech was intended, it didn’t warrant the outrage from the muslims, but then again many of them have been waiting for the next opportunity to air their rage and anger, after the Muhammed Cartoon Affair. And let it be known that Denmark stands behind the Pope in this matter, we might not all agree with his statements or the way that they were put, but there is no doubt that he has the right to say what he did! This sentiment is also present in the editorial of one of Denmarks leading newspapers BT: “The Pope and Muhammed“: The muslim leaders, who now furiously are taking offense to quotes out of context from the Pope, are obviously engaged in preventing an open dialogue, instead the want a state of fear and oppression stemming from notions of honor, offense, and insults, which triggers threats.Even though the Pope felt that he had special diplomatic considerations to follow, when it was the Danish society, that were the object of the muslim leaders unreasonable rage, he shall not lack Danish support at a time when he goes though a similar experience. [...]
10:56 am
You are right on the mark here, Mr. Moran. Journalists, and indeed the main stream media as a whole, are nothing but a bunch of grievance mongers. That’s all they do—whine, complain—because that’s all they’re capable of doing.
Don’t look for reasoned thought and careful analysis among journalists. You won’t find it. Katrina proved this to be true. Everything the press reported—the levies breeched, sharks swimming the streets, cannabilism, gang rapes, shootings in the Super Dome—was wrong. None of it was factually correct. None of it. Yet to this day, journalists won’t admit it. They can’t, because to do so would be to admit they are incapable of doing other than blindly reporting rumor as fact.
It seems obvious to me that journalists believe they can “change the world” simply by being contrarians. No matter who says what and no matter what occurs, they are going to take the opposite position and throw a fit.
The Pope’s message, and the media’s coverage of it, illustrates more than anything else the great debate over intention vs. interpretation you have touched on occasionally. The Pope said what he meant and meant what he said. The meida, without any regard to the actual statement, any historical context or reasoned understanding whatsoever, interpreted it incorrectly and reported it contrarily, masquerading rumor as fact disguised by shallow grievances and false accusations.
But that’s about par for the course.
11:35 am
[...] Rick Moran ain’t too bad in thinking it through, either. [...]
11:50 am
Any Excuse for Violence: Choosing to Misunderstand the Pope
It is crystal clear that many Muslims around the world are choosing to overreact in wild, violent disproportion to the mild, scholarly comments made by Pope Benedict XVI this week. Everyone who has more than an ounce of common sense and fairness recogn…
12:21 pm
[...] And indeed the got it from AP. The same happened in Dutch newspapers and some so called critical islam blogs. Of course accusations of blasphemy and demands for apologies are not restricted to Muslims, but in someway the seem to stand out. And yes you can blame the media and not only the MSM. For example consider the headline of a NY Times article on the issue (which is by the way a very good article) Pope Assails Secularism, Adding Note on Jihad [...]
12:53 pm
[...] Right Wing Nut House [...]
12:59 pm
Your general supposition with this post implies that you think the (formerly) mainstream media has some passing interest in the truth. They have zero desire for truth. Seriously.
They want to sell newspapers, period. And sensationalism sells. Therefore, if they can make something look more violent or bloody, or even more interesting, they will do so, no matter what the truth may be.
They honestly do not CARE what the truth is. Their business is NOT the truth. Their business is entertainment.
2:20 pm
[...] Rick Moran walks us through the background of the manufactured outrage, here. Suffice to say, the Times hasn’t seen fit to ask for apologies from the Islamo-fascist wing of Islam. Guess they’re saving that for the Sunday edition. [...]
2:55 pm
I feel bad for this academic Pope. Note how all lament the lack of Rock Star John Paul II, yet neglect that this Pope was JP IIs doctrinal authority/enforcer.
For the speech in English, go to this Holy URL:
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2006/september/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20060912_university-regensburg_en.html
3:03 pm
Muslims Offended by an Inconvenient Truth
“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.”
–Pope Benedict, quoting 14th Century Byzantine Emperor, September 12, 2006
6:25 pm
I agree, any excuse to riot is fine for these lunitics and the lame stream media likes to pour gas on the flames.
If anyone is planning a trip to Rome, go now, cuz that city is on the terrorism hit list.
9:00 pm
I always find it interesting, when the Muslims get upset about being compared to “Fascists”!
President Bush used the term “Islamo-fascists” the other week, and it so upset the Muslims, it even came out when the Palestinian Group kidnapped Centani and Wiig of FoxNews!
Everyone should take a gander at this Article, to show EXACTLY how tied in, the Muslims were, and have been tied DIRECTLY in with the Fascists, since the 1930’s!
By the way, this guy, the Grand Mufti of Jeruselum, was Yasser Arafat’s distant cousin!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amin_al-Husayni
5:31 am
Round Up – Islamic (in)Tolerence Post
...