Pope’s trip offers chance for reconciliation

Pope Benedict’s XVI’s trip to Turkey this week offers a rare opportunity to promote, in his words, “dialogue and brotherhood and the commitment for understanding between cultures . . . and for reconciliation.”
Granted, such values were in short supply in September, when many Muslims were insulted when the pope noted a medieval quote about Islam being an “evil and inhuman” religion.
Turkey, the most moderate and pro-Western majority Muslim nation, provides a good venue for the pope to clarify his views about Islam and Christianity and to work for reconciliation.
Benedict has said that he wants a “frank and sincere” dialogue with Islam. The question is: Does the Muslim world want it? Or are moderate Muslims willing to let the radicals set the terms of their relationship with the West?
The pope should continue to press his message about the dangers of fanaticism in religion, as well as the need for reciprocity, the principle that Christian churches should be as protected and welcome in the Muslim world as mosques are in the West.
It’s a risky trip, but the payoffs could be huge if Pope Benedict says the right things. Let’s hope that Muslims, too, see this as an opportunity for real dialogue.
Posted by Randy Scholfield

18 Comments

  1. Vaughn Tolle
    Posted November 28, 2006 at 12:29 pm | Permalink

    While the success of the Pope’s trip will become clear in the fullness of time, I fear it will be a case of “form over substance”.

    Reasons? 1) Benedict is, to my mind, an interim appointment, unlikely to do any long term good (but I recall this being said about John XXIII); 2) The Turks, and more particularly the Muslim community in Turkey, don’t appear to be too excited about the trip.

  2. GMC70
    Posted November 28, 2006 at 1:20 pm | Permalink

    Ya know, the Pope “said the right things” in September, but it was distorted and misquoted - purposefully - to serve the interests of the powerful and extremists they bankroll. These are the same folks who responded to cartoons by beheadings.

    THe ruling elites benefit from keeping the Moslem street wound up in opposition to the “Great Satan.” Keeping the Moslem masses’ hatred of the West boiling keeps the masses from noticing that they live in crap while their leaders swim in petro-dollars.

    The Eagle dutifully continues the distortion, I see.

    Can there be a dialogue with a society who’s power structures are intent in avoiding dialogue, and rather focus on keeping conflict going for their benefit? I doubt it. Until there is some sort of informed accountability in the Moslem world, this will never change. And I don’t know how to get there.

  3. sunny
    Posted November 28, 2006 at 1:45 pm | Permalink

    I think the Pope intentionally said what he said and the sad fact that he had to pull this quote out of some medieval time really said alot about his intentions.

    This Pope does not have the charisma of Pope John and cannot pull off any agenda without people suspecting his motive, especially now.

    What is the purpose of his visit? He has not apologized and he has said that he won’t apologize, so any purpose to this visit would be to run salt in the wound?

    Muslims over-reacted to the Pope but is that really out of their character? But I am reminded that Christians in the US over-reacted about the “Happy Holidays” rather than “Merry Christmas” nonsense. There really is no appeasing any religious group that likes to portray themselves as victims.

  4. GMC70
    Posted November 28, 2006 at 2:18 pm | Permalink

    Sunny -

    Why should he apologize? Go read the entirity of what he said, in the context of where and when he said it, and tell me, with a straight face, that he has anything to apologize for.

  5. Posted November 28, 2006 at 2:37 pm | Permalink

    GMC: “Keeping the masses’ hatred boiling keeps the masses from noticing that they live in crap while their leaders swim in petro-dollars.”

    Dude, that sounds like the Bush (TM) administration.

    In the voice of G. W. Bush: “The terrorists want to kill you! They want to kill you! Now where can I break this thousand dollar bill?”

  6. GMC70
    Posted November 28, 2006 at 2:52 pm | Permalink

    Capn:

    The difference, of course, is that “the terrorists” really did kill 3000+ of us. Yes, I know, not Saddam; Iraq was a blunder of collossal proportions.

    Radical Islam’s beef with the west is mostly self-serving, as noted above. Unfortunately, real people get killed in the process.

  7. rm6046
    Posted November 28, 2006 at 3:05 pm | Permalink

    In the ’50’s and the 60’s, the Turks were our allies. My uncle and aunt lived in Ankara and he was a pilot in the Air Force. He is gone now, but she still has fonds memories of the Turkinsh people and those times. Then, the Muslims began to take over the government. And slowly but surely…wll, need I say more.

    Apologize? Like hell, Benedict, call ‘em as you see ‘em !!!!

  8. rm6046
    Posted November 28, 2006 at 3:09 pm | Permalink

    In the ’50’s and the 60’s, the Turks were our allies. My uncle and aunt lived in Ankara and he was a pilot in the Air Force. He is gone now, but she still has fond memories of the Turkish people and those times. Then, the Muslims began to take over the government. And slowly but surely…well, need I say more??

    Apologize? Like hell, Benedict, call ‘em as you see ‘em !!!!

    Damn, I really blew that last one. I’m the one that needs to apologize!

  9. Vaughn Tolle
    Posted November 28, 2006 at 4:17 pm | Permalink

    rm, never in Turkey in my Air Force days, but fellow personnel who had been used to tell me that at Incirlik, off-base excursions were highly dangerous to personnel and dependents in the early 70s; a few older NCOs would reminisce about how friendly the Turks were in the 60s, much as your uncle and aunt appear to have experienced.

  10. sunny
    Posted November 28, 2006 at 4:46 pm | Permalink

    Actually, haven’t the Catholics done some things that were not so honoragble in the past? I don’t hear any apologies for that either.

    My point was that Pope Benedict knew what he was saying would start a turmoil - so why even say it?

  11. rm6046
    Posted November 28, 2006 at 6:12 pm | Permalink

    Because it needed saying, perhaps?

  12. Mary Caruso
    Posted November 28, 2006 at 8:39 pm | Permalink

    I think that the fact he wants to have keep communication going with the Muslims is admirable. I wish Bush would learn something from his example.You don’t always have to agree with someone else’s ideology in order to have open communication and meaningful dialogue.

  13. Mary Caruso
    Posted November 28, 2006 at 8:41 pm | Permalink

    That’s not true, Sunny. Pope John Paul II formally apologized to the Jews for not speaking out against the holocaust during WWII.

  14. Jed
    Posted November 29, 2006 at 11:17 am | Permalink

    Mary,If memory serves, the Pope, as Cardinal Ratzinger, was involved up to his eyeballs in the Vatican’s efforts to funnel money to Nazi war criminals in South America.

  15. sunny
    Posted November 29, 2006 at 5:30 pm | Permalink

    The Vatican has had absolute power for many years and with that much unquestioned power - there has to be dark secrets.

  16. Mary Caruso
    Posted November 29, 2006 at 8:41 pm | Permalink

    Sorry jed, you need to check your sources. Sounds like anti-Catholic propaganda to me. Being raised Catholic, I’ve heard it all. I’m amazed at the amount of prejudice against the Catholic Church, it’s a lot like being Jewish.

  17. Jed
    Posted November 30, 2006 at 10:23 am | Permalink

    Mary,I checked my sources. In 1998, the new Argentine government released a ton or so of papers from former regimes, documenting, among other things, the Vatican’s role in funnelling money and false papers to fugitive Nazi war criminals. Ratzinger was mentioned as one of the contacts.

  18. Mary Caruso
    Posted December 2, 2006 at 10:20 pm | Permalink

    I don’t think I’d trust your “sources”, Jed.