09-19-2006, 11:58 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>The Pope on the Prophet </b>
<i>Why is Sonia Gandhi silent on the Pope's remarks against Islam and Mohammed, asks S Gurumurthy </i>
He said that violence, embodied in the Muslim idea of jihad, or holy war, is contrary to reason and God's plan". This is not a news report on what Jayendra Saraswati said. But these are the words of the head of the Roman Catholic Church, Pope Benedict XVI.
And this is how the International Herald Tribune opened its report on his speech. Thus it was no ordinary mortal's comment. The Pope said more, and more emphatically and openly. The newspaper said: "He began his speech by quoting a 14th century Byzantine emperor, Manuel II Paleologus, in a conversation with a 'learned Persian' on Christianity and Islam - and the truth of both." "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 Pope quoted the emperor".
The Pope did not quote the 14th century emperor characterising Islam as 'evil' and 'inhuman' as a matter of fact like a professor of history would. He did not quote him to disagree with him but to approve him! The Pope, says the newspaper, went on to say that violent conversion to Islam was contrary to reason and thus "contrary to god's nature".
These were not unguarded words in an extempore speech but words carefully chosen and incorporated in a written speech of the Pope at the University of Regensburg in Germany. The Pope does not speak except after deep contemplation by his establishment especially on an issue like this. Thus, before the Pope theorised and uttered his critique on Islamic doctrines and the Prophet, the papal establishment must have burnt midnight oil over every word and syllable of his speech.
Actually, these are not the words of the Pope, but words uttered through the Pope. Those who configured these stinging words in his speech must have contemplated deeply and minutely on consequence of the speech, on what signal they expect the words to convey to the Christians all over the world and on what should be the follow up. So the words of Pope Benedict XVI must be taken seriously as a policy statement of the global Christian establishment.
The Pope did not stop just at these anti-Islamic remarks. He went a step further and takes on the secularists in the West. Says, The Tribune "he devoted the rest of the speech to a long examination of how Western science and philosophy had divorced themselves from faith - leading to the secularisation of European society that is at the heart of Pope Benedict's worries". The Pope said that secularisation of the society has impeded the West from a full understanding of reality. Secularism, he said, has made it difficult for the West to communicate with cultures for whom faith is fundamental, thus making secularism incompatible with faith. He said, "The world's profoundly religious cultures see this exclusion from the divine, from the universality of reason as an attack on their profound convictions."
<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>Yes, the Pope sees secularism as a risk and a danger to faith - read the Christian faith. But the other day when the very Pope Benedict XVI advised the Indian Government to reject the anti-conversion laws of the State Government's as against the secular constitution of India. So Pope insists on secularism in India, and abuses it in the West. It means that, where Christians are in majority the Pope sees secularism as poison and where, however, Christians are in minority, he sees secularism as life vest. This is the logic of the papacy. </span>
Yes, the papal establishment through its head has declared its policy on Islam and secularism. First, in so far as Prophet Mohammed commands spreading of Islam by sword it is 'evil' and 'inhuman'. And the Muslims idea of jihad is violent and anti-god. Second, secularism is an attack on the most profound religious convictions. But, why are our secularists, leftists, and intellectuals deafeningly silent on this clear and unambiguous declaration by the pope against Islam and secularism?
Why does Ms Sonia Gandhi, fountainhead of Indian secularism and the 'abhimanaputri' of the previous Pope as a leading newspaper had described her when Pope John Paul II had come to India, remained silent when Pope trashed Islam and secularism? Will she condemn him as a bigot, violent? What about the media, which keeps pontificating only to the Hindu leaders on the virtues of secularism? Does it agree with the Pope or disagree with him? But, why this funereal silence all around?
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<i>Why is Sonia Gandhi silent on the Pope's remarks against Islam and Mohammed, asks S Gurumurthy </i>
He said that violence, embodied in the Muslim idea of jihad, or holy war, is contrary to reason and God's plan". This is not a news report on what Jayendra Saraswati said. But these are the words of the head of the Roman Catholic Church, Pope Benedict XVI.
And this is how the International Herald Tribune opened its report on his speech. Thus it was no ordinary mortal's comment. The Pope said more, and more emphatically and openly. The newspaper said: "He began his speech by quoting a 14th century Byzantine emperor, Manuel II Paleologus, in a conversation with a 'learned Persian' on Christianity and Islam - and the truth of both." "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 Pope quoted the emperor".
The Pope did not quote the 14th century emperor characterising Islam as 'evil' and 'inhuman' as a matter of fact like a professor of history would. He did not quote him to disagree with him but to approve him! The Pope, says the newspaper, went on to say that violent conversion to Islam was contrary to reason and thus "contrary to god's nature".
These were not unguarded words in an extempore speech but words carefully chosen and incorporated in a written speech of the Pope at the University of Regensburg in Germany. The Pope does not speak except after deep contemplation by his establishment especially on an issue like this. Thus, before the Pope theorised and uttered his critique on Islamic doctrines and the Prophet, the papal establishment must have burnt midnight oil over every word and syllable of his speech.
Actually, these are not the words of the Pope, but words uttered through the Pope. Those who configured these stinging words in his speech must have contemplated deeply and minutely on consequence of the speech, on what signal they expect the words to convey to the Christians all over the world and on what should be the follow up. So the words of Pope Benedict XVI must be taken seriously as a policy statement of the global Christian establishment.
The Pope did not stop just at these anti-Islamic remarks. He went a step further and takes on the secularists in the West. Says, The Tribune "he devoted the rest of the speech to a long examination of how Western science and philosophy had divorced themselves from faith - leading to the secularisation of European society that is at the heart of Pope Benedict's worries". The Pope said that secularisation of the society has impeded the West from a full understanding of reality. Secularism, he said, has made it difficult for the West to communicate with cultures for whom faith is fundamental, thus making secularism incompatible with faith. He said, "The world's profoundly religious cultures see this exclusion from the divine, from the universality of reason as an attack on their profound convictions."
<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>Yes, the Pope sees secularism as a risk and a danger to faith - read the Christian faith. But the other day when the very Pope Benedict XVI advised the Indian Government to reject the anti-conversion laws of the State Government's as against the secular constitution of India. So Pope insists on secularism in India, and abuses it in the West. It means that, where Christians are in majority the Pope sees secularism as poison and where, however, Christians are in minority, he sees secularism as life vest. This is the logic of the papacy. </span>
Yes, the papal establishment through its head has declared its policy on Islam and secularism. First, in so far as Prophet Mohammed commands spreading of Islam by sword it is 'evil' and 'inhuman'. And the Muslims idea of jihad is violent and anti-god. Second, secularism is an attack on the most profound religious convictions. But, why are our secularists, leftists, and intellectuals deafeningly silent on this clear and unambiguous declaration by the pope against Islam and secularism?
Why does Ms Sonia Gandhi, fountainhead of Indian secularism and the 'abhimanaputri' of the previous Pope as a leading newspaper had described her when Pope John Paul II had come to India, remained silent when Pope trashed Islam and secularism? Will she condemn him as a bigot, violent? What about the media, which keeps pontificating only to the Hindu leaders on the virtues of secularism? Does it agree with the Pope or disagree with him? But, why this funereal silence all around?
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->