The Pope, Islam, and Context

The Pope makes comments in a philosophical discussion on violence, religion, and the relationship between the two. He uses a conversation between 14th Century Byzantine Emperor Manuel II Paleologus and an educated Persian to make several points about the nature of violence used to spread religion being a direct contradiction to the nature of God, essential truths of Islam and Christianity, and also how Islam and Christianity have been at odds since Islam came into creation. For full text of the lecture, see here.

So what happens?

Calls for apologies are quickly superseded by scenes of demonstrations wherein banners call for Benedict's head. I'd say that Benedict touched a raw nerve in his speech alright.

Palestinians firebomb churches in Nablus. And the media has a hard time figuring out who was behind the attacks and why they were done.

Effigies of the Pope are burned.

The New York Times thinks the Pope needs to give a deep and persuasive apology. I think the Times needs to buy a clue.

The Anchoress thinks that Benedict's speech is much like lancing a boil. It was necessary and it will be messy, but the end result should be a clarifying event. She also takes the media to task for trying to condense a very dense and philosophical discussion and condensing it into a few choice soundbites and headlines, which only serve to exascerbate the situation further.

The real question is wondering when is the Islamic world not angry at the West. They always seem aggrieved over something, regardless of how small or large the issue may be.

Sensible Mom wonders whether Catholics will take up arms and commit acts of violence in response to the calls for the Pope's head by the Islamists. I think we know the answer to this. It's no. They wont. And the Islamists know this quite intuitively, which is why they think that they can win the long war with the West.

All Things Beautiful has a very thoughtful posting on the subject.

Melissa posting at Protein Wisdom sums things up thusly:

Once again, true believers adhering to the “religion of peace” fail to see the irony of rioting over what violent, barbarian behavior their religion promotes. So sweet. So docile. Such nice pictures, too.

If Islamists get offended by the Pope noting the long history of conflict between Islam and Christianity and how violence is not part of God's essential nature, what conclusions can and should be drawn. The Islamists have already drawn their conclusions. Have you?

Others blogging: The Moderate Voice, Steven Bainbridge, and Blue Crab Boulevard.

UPDATE:
Instapundit has a roundup of opinion, including the possibility that Benedict's comments were Dowdified.

LaShawn Barber thinks the Pope should not apologize under any circumstances. So does Coalition of the Swilling.

Stop the ACLU notes that the violent backlash against the Pope proves his precise point.

Macranger thinks the Pope has already caved with the backtracking from the Vatican.

I think the most instructive thing is the overwhelming silence from those Muslims who are offended by all the violence done against other Muslims in the name of Islam. If they're silent on that issue, can we really expect them to do any different when the victims are Christians or Jews or Hindus or Buddhist? Iraqpundit has more on that.

Others blogging: GOP and the City, Pierre Legrande, Sweetness and Light, Flopping Aces,