The Pope's Issue - Strictly Unreligious

  • Thread starter Thread starter homemars
  • Start date Start date
H

homemars

Guest
I know the Pope is a religious figure but in todays world there is more politics in religion then there is religion in politics. This is to provide a strict unreligious view of this event still unfolding.

At First; "The Pope was facing angry demands for an apology after a speech in which he quoted a medieval ruler who said Mohammed's innovations were "evil and inhuman", The Guardian says.

The Pope is the at the top of the Protestant's Christian pyramid much like Shia Muslims who have a spiritual leader.


1) The Pope is a source of knowledge and wisdom. Its like a supreme leader in this world. Such a figure putting forward these comments at such a moment when the US and UK + Nato are sweeping the world off muslims. Attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq are underway, Lebanon is now a political mess while others wait for their turn.

2) I think this is an act of furthering the movement which had seen the caricatures of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), the Van Gough Movie "Submission", and now the Pope's comments.

3) The timing is crucial. The reaction all the more interesting. Countries and places witnessing the most infuriating responses are worth a note.

a) Greek-Orthodox church in the predominantly Muslim West Bank town of Tulkarem was gutted in a reprisal attack.

b) Members of the new Hamas Government Security Unit guard this church in Gaza.

c) Palestinian Greek Orthodox priest George Awad inspects the damage made to the walls of his church after it was hit by firebombs in the West Bank town of Nablus. Molotov cocktails were thrown at two churches.

d) Iranian Muslims hold a portrait of Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei during a protest about the Pope's comments.

e) The worst violence was in Somalia where an elderly Italian nun was shot dead. Sister Lionela worked for the SOS hospital in Mogadishu.

f) Iraqi policemen search a car on a checkpoint in Basra, where a church was bombed.

Note: In all such events the countries involved are of much interest to the US.

In Somalia the muslim government recently formed is against Americas interest who supports the opposing warlord. Somalia is indeed a thorn for the US, pretty soon they would declare an Al Qaeda presence in that region.

Palestinians who dont have enough food to live a healthy life are sucked into this whirlpool. They are always hiding and running for their lives with only thing on their minds; the Isarel Military.

Iran and Iraq do not require much introduction.

Those who have burned or attacked the churches, killed a nun, are those who cannot even DEFEND themselves. How can a person who knows that any moment he can be killed aither by Israeli attack or by another US sponsored bullet. The iranians who can defend themselves havent burned anything. Those who did, have never been ACTIVE in any of the past protests. You look back in history and tell me what these people have stood for other than starvation in somalia, fighting amongst warlords and throwing stones at IDF.

Is this an attempt of starting a Holy War or even inciting Christians after inciting the muslims. And we all know who owns the West bank. It reminds of a recent news story depicting The murders committed in broad day light, inside the Gaza and Infront of a large crowd consisting of civilians and policemen. Whereby the murderers after emptying their guns calmly left to cross the border to Israel. Unharmed and untouched.

Muslims and christians should keep religious sentiments aside to understand the happenings of our times.
 
homemars said:
Muslims and christians should keep religious sentiments aside to understand the happenings of our times.
I'd go even further than that, and say if Muslims and Christians really want to understand the happenings of our times, ie to become more objective, they will need to understand the origins of their religious sentiments (rather than attempting to ignore them or put them to one side), and so be able to see the real reasons for them and to see beyond them. This could have world-changing effects - Unfortunately that is an extremely difficult thing to do.

edit: for example, if all Moslems and Christians immediately recognised that the Pope's words were simply a deliberately calculated 'dig' to antagonise Christians versus Muslims, and in fact had no bearing on reality, and if they also realised why it was attempted, then its effect would be entirely diffused.
 
"Danish cartoons" all over again, trying to put images of muslims screaming blue murder on the tv so when Iran is invaded - the masses roll their eyes and comment "those damn muslims complaining AGAIN!"
 
sleepyvinny said:
homemars said:
Muslims and christians should keep religious sentiments aside to understand the happenings of our times.
I'd go even further than that, and say if Muslims and Christians really want to understand the happenings of our times, ie to become more objective, they will need to understand the origins of their religious sentiments (rather than attempting to ignore them or put them to one side), and so be able to see the real reasons for them and to see beyond them. This could have world-changing effects - Unfortunately that is an extremely difficult thing to do.

edit: for example, if all Moslems and Christians immediately recognised that the Pope's words were simply a deliberately calculated 'dig' to antagonise Christians versus Muslims, and in fact had no bearing on reality, and if they also realised why it was attempted, then its effect would be entirely diffused.
Word! Amen to that brother.
 
Yes indeed.
You can also "look" from a different angle into this story. One could say - as so much media does in the Western World - that the pope has made a "mistake", and that something jumped into it, and took some "reference" out of it's "academic" sphere. But he cited the reference word by word, and than the media jumped along.

Muslims also jumped along. Is that curious? Of course not.

The pope only wanted to open a dialogue (or so he explains ... afterwards). And also, it has been recorded that this pope had a special "love" for the Muslim world (I wonder how exactly this special love is to be "felt"). I can understand that in certain circumstances it can be wise to try to open a debate or discussion by using a strategy of provocation. But you will never ever want to use such strategy with somebody who you personally happen to see as inferior. First of all, it says a lot about you, yourself. And it also could demonstrate to yourself that you actually do not have the intention to communicate.

He is supposed to be the major guidance for holding some coherence for what is supposed to be the Catholic Church. And see what he is doing. He is provoking a mass of people that have been played with, rubbed from their natural resources, and say it as it is... murdered. Of course such does not work, and he should know. Even if he does not know, he has an entire team of "advisors" that are very well enlightened.

I do not think it is wise of those masses to jump on that bandwagon for they should realize what exactly "religion" stands for. Religion comes from the Latin word religare which is to reconnect. In our exploding world into more and more little I's, the only way to reconnect is to go within. This is a foundation. One needs it to truly communicate, or to go without.

How would the Christian world have reacted if they were trampled on, stolen their natural resources, and then murdered? I am trying to stimulate the reader into trying to get into the skin of a Muslim, the standard Mohammed in the street. It's not such an easy exercise I think. And right at a time when people you identify with, are being murdered by the hundreds of thousands, there is this all powerful person who cites such text? And as he explains later, with the intention to provoke? And open some dialogue? Hmm ..

Simple, the Pope could have done that little empathic exercise. And he didn't, or he did and than his "mistake" had an entirely different intention, the one behind the face value.

Let us look at what exactly the reactions would be like when the reverse happens, or is actually happening? When Mohammed in the street, or an Imam or another well meaning human being is remembering the Western world (as a response to this little provocation) to what the Catholics did centuries ago with the crusades ? (nobody dared to say that it is happening, right now, but anyway). I am pretty sure you will hear something like: "Grmmpf, while squirming, "Well, I know yes" while cursing!! (so yes some mourn still), or something along the line of: "Oh well... we evolved beyond that point!", or a simple shrugging of the shoulders as in "hey, do I care, I am still a catholic", or even a smirk on their face, so typical, or a self righteous anger as in: "See? We should have finished the job back than". That is the situation,

terrible huh.

And that says a lot I think about "religion". Or at least the official version of it.
 
Just a wee addition to the debate here; If one is to become the leader, or nominal figurehead of a world religion, wouldn't it be pretty useful to have some or all of these things on a CV?

1: Spiritual purity.
2: An immoveable, conscious and permanent "I".
3: A genuine grasp of diplomatic values and ethics, particularly when addressing a world audience.
4: Compassion for the human race, regardless of colour, creed or denomination.
5: An adequate knowledge of one's own religious institution's historical misdemeanours.
6: An equal awareness of the contemporary political and religious landscape
7: The selflessness to apologise unreservedly when one has insulted others.

Pope? Poppycock! I score him 0/7 in the jobseeker test.

At best he is an unconscious dupe. At worst he is a hateful inciter of the masses.
 
Ratzinger is obviously a hypocrite -- he should've made worse digs, regarding violence, at the texts of Judaism and Christianity, at least, in the same breath. Now he's being warned not to visit Muslim countries unless he doesn't fear for his life, and today he's rolling around the Vatican in the popemobile with the top down, expressing "I'm not afraid."

Imagine if he were assassinated by a Muslim? What a way to heat things up in a hurry. It happened to filmmaker Vincent Van Gogh in the Netherlands two years ago, for similarly implying a double standard against Islam's holy texts in the film Submission. The story is here: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/03/11/60minutes/main679609.shtml
 
Back
Top Bottom