Actually, I wasn’t so much scolded, as merely surprised to learn how flimsy the story was, and that some disbelieved it.
Apparently, on May 14, 1999, Pope John Paul II received a group of visitors from Iraq. At this time, he received a green book as a gift and kissed it. The IRAQI TELEVISION coverage reported that the pope had kissed the Koran. (In other languages, “kiss” has the same meaning as “embrace” does in English. In fact, the English word “embrace” comes from the French word, “embrace,” meaning to kiss.)
The Chaldean patriarch was then quoted by a single western news source, three weeks later, explaining that the pope was not, in fact, “embracing” Islam, but was embracing the largely Islamic Iraqi people. This was the same patriarch who would later call the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq the greatest miracle in the middle east in the last 2,000 years. The traditionalist and sedevacantist factions of the American Catholic church then went absolutely nuts, however, when they got wind that the Pope had kissed the Koran.
Since the Chaldean patriarch was a witness at the event, I initially took his witnessing at face value. Then I realized:
* The physical evidence of the event, apparently, is a single photographic still,
* The Koran was not presented to him by the organizers of the event (the Chaldeans), or as part of an event function, but merely on a receiving line,
* The Chaldean patriarch’s comments were not made after the event, but after the Iraqi news media spent weeks showing the image.
* The Vatican normally is quick with an explanation of any gestures the pope has made that they deem significant. There was never any mention from the Vatican; the Iraq news photo and the Patriarch’s comments were the only news sources.
This suggests to me that
(1) despite having been present in the room when this took place, the Chaldean patriarch may have been relying on Iraqi news coverage for his belief that the pope kissed the Koran, and
(2) even if it was a Koran, since it was a largely Christian delegation that the Pope was receiving, it may not have occurred to the Pope that that’s what it was, since it doesn’t look like a Koran, being in merely a binder, and doesn’t appear to be labeled as one,
(3) but at least we KNOW this was NOT the planned event that many make it out to have been. This was a pope kissing the gifts presented to him by people who he is trying to demonstrate how greatly he loves. If he KNEW it was a Koran, and he kissed it, it was a lapse of judgment; it was NOT a planned communication. This is what I’ve said all along, that it was a lapse of judgment. Now, I’m seeing where possibilities 1 and 2 are real possibilities. I was rather hoping someone would help me find out which one of the three was the truth.
In case there is anyone else here not familiar with the story, and it's present lack of working links back to the original, here's another link to the story, this one being the oldest I could find after a hour or so of searching;
with an embedded internal link to their own page's published "copy" presently singularly; They claimed they obtained the story from FIDES.
You mention that the only physical evidence we have is the photo. In one sense, we don't even have that.
But we presently can find enough instances of the photo, and in one location I came across, including a purported link to the photo itself, leading to a 404 page at FIDES.
Also can be found multiple instances of links shown to the original article at FIDES, but with that destination link also becoming apparently
404 at some later date, around or after the year 2006, or so it seemed to me from comparing multiple mentions and discussions referencing the item.
After that time, mentions, if there is a link provided, most frequently point to the CatholicCulture.Org page which is still active.
It is of note that all of these copies match with the earliest copy I have been able to find, which is dated June 6, 1999.
The Daily Catholic links, in light of the rest, is strong enough support that at this juncture, it is acceptable to assume that the "interview" was indeed run by FIDES,
and first published by them.
It is most likely that the interview itself was conducted by FIDES also, as is mentioned in the headlines at Daily Catholic;
How convenient now for them the story is no longer accessible on FIDE servers. The story launched a thousand web pages, much weeping, wailing and wide-spread crankiness, then some years later 'poof'.
You do otherwise raise many good points. I was almost convinced, until considering them in detail.
I had particular problem with #'ed point(1) Not a planned event? Ok, I'll concede it is doubtful the pope planned on or intended to kiss a koran on purpose. But the event was otherwise "planned", in that it was a scheduled audience of religious leaders, one of them, the Chaldean patriarch being an affiliate of sorts.
It was certainly "planned" by the giver of the book to bring and present a book to the pope, that seems obvious.
As to;
That only appears possible if one assumes that the Chaldean never caught a direct, close look at the gift that was to be presented?
Really, what are the chances of that? They were all members of the same delegation. It's possible they may have traveled together. One would think that they traveled together, on the Iraqi 'dime'.
It's likely they shared enough common language to be able to communicate, before and after the event. The Chaldean, one cannot imagine,
is incapable of reading Arabic. It is doubtful the patriarch would mistake something else for a koran. I'm sure he's seen a ton of them, for he would have been living in a culture surrounded by them, all his life...
For all we know, the gift could have even been mentioned or talked about by the giver of the book, to the other delegate members.
Rather than his relying upon Iraqi television accounts to having informed him of what the book was, it would make more sense to argue that the Chaldean simply had to have noticed the book some time previously to it being actually handing directly to the pope.
---how can anyone miss it? it's a big book!---
We would have to believe that he didn't see it for what it was, didn't realize that the most likely book a Muslim religious authority figure would present one of JPII's religious stature, would be a finely made Koran. (or Hadith?)
If we go down that road, it would begin to rely upon it all being elaborate subterfuge on the part of the Muslim members of the delegation. That sounds tempting, I know...
What seems much more plausible, is that the Iraqi TV coverage after-wards was more like the Iraqi's trying to make Islamic supremacy hay out of the affair, or read other meanings into it which would be to their own liking.
In some ways, in the hearts of some Iraqi's, it could have well back-fired, as it would help prepare the hearts & minds of some Iraqi's, to the idea that the coming invasion was NOT one of religious war nature, with the West coming in the name of religious Crusade against Islam itself.
In the world of discussion as to the unintended consequences of the alleged book kissing, that is a possible one on the positive side of the ledger that may have been overlooked, and may have helped serve to save a few lives which would have been otherwise lost, hurling themselves against overwhelmingly superior firepower.
Guys like Osama Bin Laden WANTED the West to come against Islamics in the form of religious strife & war. That's why he and his minions did what they did. The Iranians, with their stooge Muqtada Al Sadr, worked very hard at trying to stir up the religious part, which in the face of superior firepower, would only lead, and did lead, to the greater loss of life among the Iraqi populace.
I'll grant you that it doesn't seem very likely that it was a "planned event" if the plan portion included anyone from the Vatican, Pope included, deliberately organizing or planning upon him being brought that book so that he could kiss it, to 'show his love'.
The Chaldean patriarch's statements concerning the event are a first person witness account of the proceedings, which corroborate what was shown and claimed on television.
If we are to contemplate the witness to somehow have been in error, we must also recognize that at this time, there is no evidence whatsoever that supports that speculation. What we do have evidence of, is a FIDES interview, and a photograph.
That being said, I'm more than willing to otherwise accept, and consider as most plausible explanation, the sort of explanation you enclosed in your point #3.
It would beggar belief that is was calculated move on the Vatican's part.
I do however, have strong suspicions concerning the disappearance of the item at FIDES. Accident, or on purpose?