Posted on 09/17/2006 9:09:29 PM PDT by Petrosius
The Holy Father gave his Angelus address today at Castlegandolfo. At the beginning he departed from his text many times to console those present who were being treated to heavy rain. The press reacted instantly, stating that the Pope apologized. However, if you listen to what he said, he did not. Let’s look at the Italian and figure out what the Pope really said (which was broadcast live by Al-Jazeera, among others).
Yes, he spoke of the reaction of muslims to his address in Regensburg. He said that he was "vivamente rammaricato" ... "deeply regretful" about the reactions resultings over his use of a brief medieval text which, he stressed, did not express, in any way, his personal opinion of muslims. He underscored that he was citing a medieval text.
Benedict said that Card. Bertone, the new Secretary of State stated already the "real sense" ("autentico senso") of his words. He hoped that people would pay attention to what he actually said. He added that what we need is frank and sicnere dialog with great reciprocal respect. He said that the whole text was and is an invitation to dialog.
«Sono vivamente rammaricato per le reazioni suscitate da un breve passo del mio discorso all’Universita di Ratisbona, ritenuto offensivo per la sensibilita dei credenti musulmani».
Benedict did not use the stronger phrase "chiedere scusa", or "apologize". He did not use the construction "mi sono rammaricato" (rammaricarsi) , which would have meant "I am sorry about" something. He used "vivamente rammaricato" or "deeply sorry" but in the sense of "regretful" or "disappointed" about the reactions following his speech. In fact, the phrase "sono vivamente rammaricato per le reazioni" could really mean "I am deeply wounded by the reactions". [UPDATE: The official English translation released after the fact says: "I am deeply sorry for the reactions"]
It is true that he distanced himself from that text. He said that Paleologus’s words were not his sentiments. You can say that this was an apology if you add all the elements together, but …. there it is. It won’t be enough, of course, for many (for the "thick"). It can be interpreted as an apology and, in a sense, it MUST be. There are in Islamic countries Christian communities in grave peril. Had the Pope not said something like this, those people would be in even greater danger. He had to apologize without apologizing while keeping his agenda on the table.
He added some additional insightful comments about the liturgical feasts of the Exaltation of the Cross and of the Sorrowful Mother. He added that the scandel of the Cross, considered a foolishness to the pagans, helps man to overcome slavery to sign. The Cross, symbol of death and of love, defeats hatred and violence and generates eternal life. In the hype about the comments at Regensburg, don’t forget to read everything Benedict said about the meaning of the Cross for our own sufferings. It was wonderful.
I was very pleased that His Holiness did not grovel over this. Indeed, his words in German to the German pilgrims were rather poignant in his reference to suffering in difficult situations.
The upshot of today’s address was: "Read the whole text and then let’s have a real discussion based on what I really said, not based on a brief citation I used in the speech."
He said he would speak more at length during his upcoming Wednesday audience.
In the meantime, Corriere della Sera rushed to put on its website that the Pope "apologized" ... "il Papa chiede scusa" ... to muslims. Well… yes and no.
Of course, the reaction of the press and muslim world underscores the point the Pope made in Regensburg. Christians are not treated fairly by muslims, violence is used against them, and reason is not employed. The Pope wanted to bring the use of violence (read "jihad") onto the table. Muslims cannot critically examine their own texts, as Christians do. Real theological dialog with muslims is not possible. Benedict stated that Islam thinks that Allah can be contradictory, which is absolutely different from Christian thought about God. But more on that later.
In the meantime, the muslim goverment in Sudan is committing genocide at Darfur.
"I am extremely upset by the reactions [of the Muslims]."
He was critisizing their response, not being sorry about their hurt feelings.
Like it or not, it was read and accepted as an apology - and a fold.
I know the Pope has a lot of pressure. His words can get folks killed. But in the name of Heaven, when will we ever have a leader who will stand up and call theings as they are!!!!!
Wasn't John Paul pretty good about calling it like he saw it with regard to the major topics of the day?
By you, but not by most others. Being sorry for the reaction his words caused is not the same as being sorry for the actual words. That said, already there have been a dozen Churches burned, a nun and a priest killed, and death threats to Catholics all over the world. So even if the Pope did apologize, it would be only to save his flock from being killed by raging barbarians. But his feelings about islam are already well known, as he has condemned them several times already in his young pontificate.
Thank you for posting this.
|
"I regret that the charges against Islam that it embraces violence has been vindicated". (My own translation).
Good translation.
No matter what our religion (unless it is their particular brand of Islam), whether we like it or not, we are in a worldwide religious war with people who claim the religion of Islam and claim to be followers of Allah. These “Holy Warriors” are honor bound to kill or convert each of us to their own particular brand of Islam. Anyone who is not in their narrowly cast brand is an “infidel.” Not just Islamist against Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists and atheists, but Sunnis killing Shittes, etc.
For all practical purposes, Mohammedans, Moslems, Followers of Allah, by whatever name are divided into two camps:
• Those who follow the Koran
and
• Apostates
The followers of the Koran have the following values inconsistent with civilization as we know it:
• With regard to those they consider infidels, they have only three choices:
- Conversion
- Death
- Taxation until one of the above
• They only recognize an Islamic government as legitimate
Those who would appease the Islamofacists fail to recognize they will be the first to die when the Islamofacists take over.
Let it be written that we have no real options in dealing with followers of the Koran; they must all die. The only other choice is for us to die.
Like World War II, we did not start this war. Unlike World War II, it will not be over in six years, unless the end starts with a sunrise like that seen in Japan. It would be best for those “Moderate Muslims” to reflect on the words of Yamamoto, “We have wakened a sleeping giant. I fear we have but six months to rage like a wild boar.” Then think further on to realize that once awakened, the sleeping giant will take no prisoners and turn their homelands into a glass lake.
Christianity is based on Christ’s words, “My kingdom is not of this world” and “Cast not your pearls before swine.” We cannot accept the presence in this world of suicidal forces who believe in the forcible spread of their cancer.
You are with us or against us.
You make the choice, but remember Radiation is our Friend.
Thank you for your reasoned post.
I believe that the Pope knows exactly what he is doing. Until we have walked in his (red) shoes, we are on shakey grounds accusing him of "caving".
He has under his care over a huge multitude of Catholics world-wide and he is keenly aware of his responsibility. I would rather trust to his prudent judgment regarding his own words than to give credence to Sunday-morning quarterbacking.
Viva il Papa!
Literally translated from Italian, the words "sono rammaricato" would mean "I am embittered", but the meaning and the best translation of that phrase would be "I am disappointed".
See the column by Mary Katherine Ham at Townhall.com
He did no such thing.
"By you, but not by most others."
I don't read it exactly as an apology, but as a fold. Islam is a bully, and rather than stand up to the bully, the Pope issued a statement that, while not being an apology, would be read as an apology by the ignorant masses - thereby strengthening the bully.
I find it interesting how Jesus responded to the claims of a competitive religion:
"The woman said to him, "Sir, I perceive that you are a prophet. Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, but you say that in Jerusalem is the place where people ought to worship." Jesus said to her, ... You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews."
- “At this time I only wish to add (note the “solo” ("only") —he has no interest in responding fully to the tempest that has arisen, but to make only the simplest clarification.
- "that I am truly/ genuinely/ actually downheartened" (“vivamente” reflects his active emotions on this matter. His choice of verb, “rammaricare,” is complicated. It reflects feelings that are a combination of sorrow and confusion.)
- "on account of" (this is the meaning of the preposition “per” —note that he is downhearted not by what he said but by the reaction)
- "the reaction brought about by a brief section of my lecture at the University of Regensburg" (“un breve passo” suggests a very small section, something not central to the thesis of the thing; the phrase establishes a contrast: what a reaction to such a small section of the lecture)
- "determined to be offensive on account of the sensitivity of the Muslim believers" (note, not on account of what he said, but on account of the sensitivity of the audience)
- "even if it concerned a quotation of a medieval text" (“mentre si trattava”—this is a real put-down of the kind of reaction that occurred: such a reaction, even if it were such a minor part of the lecture)
- "[a quotation] that in no way expresses my own personal thought. (note: his “pensiero”—his thought, not his judgment or his feelings)
- "Yesterday, the Cardinal Secretary of State made public, in this matter, a declaration in which he explained the real meaning of my words. I hope that this serves to ease the minds" (“placare”—has a meaning very close to the English “to placate”—and also conveys something of the sense of superiority upon the scene felt by B XVI)
- "and to clarify the true significance of my lecture, which taken as a whole was and is an invitation to honest and sincere dialogue, with great reciprocal respect. That is the point of the lecture." (The final sentence is important and is spoken with true “Ratzingerian” clarity.)
Far from an apology, B XVI’s statement yesterday is a forceful call to someone (anyone? Bueller?) who wants to be a dialogue partner to start thinking and acting as a reasonable adult.
The problem with quoting from Scripture in any debate is that we can each choose a select line that strengthens our position. I could say, for example, that Jesus told us to 'love your enemies', and 'turn the other cheek', etc. In all honesty, I don't know how the Pope should have acted after he quoted that 13th century condemnation of islam. But I give him great credit for saying it in the first place, something no other Western leader has the courage to say. I also keep in mind that the Pope is not really a Western "leader", he is a spiritual figurehead who leads the Catholic Church, a spiritual organization without arms or military strength.
It's also interesting to note that after Pope Benedict made the statement that caused the burning down of Catholic churches and the killing of a priest and nun; he received NOT A SINGLE WORD OF ASSURANCE, COMFORT OR SODALITY from any Western government. He stood completely alone, watching his flock get attacked and murdered, so a half-hearted "apology" was probably the only thing to do, to stop the carnage. The question the Pope must have asked himself was: "I am ready for the consequences of what I said, but is the rest of the world ready"? Since I read no condemnations from Western leaders of the bloody islamic response to his speech, I cannot imagine what it felt like for him to watch his people get murdered because of something he said, while the West left him (and his flock) abandoned to the wrath of islam. I will not judge this man.
His later comments were clearly backtracking from his earlier MARVELOUS comments. Comments I wished my own denomination's leaders had the courage to make.
In a way, intended or not, I believe he accomplished this. The Pope spoke the truth and islam responded with fire and murder, exactly what one would expect from Satan. The world's Christians saw what happened, and while most people are too timid or self-absorbed to say anything, they observed this dual between God's emissary and Satan's army, and it had to have woken up many a sleeping Christian.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.