web analytics
July 6, 2015 / 19 Tammuz, 5775
At a Glance
InDepth
Sponsored Post


Home » InDepth » Op-Eds »

The Pope’s Lose-Lose Choice


Representatives of the religion of peace had their hands full earlier this month organizing demonstrations, burning the pontiff in effigy, promising to assassinate him, instigating church bombings, killing at least one nun, and generally threatening the annihilation of Christian civilization because of the pope’s remarks about Islam nurturing “evil and inhuman” acts. A Turkish cleric declared that the pope’s statement reflected a terrible ignorance of Islam.

Dr. Muhammad Abdul Bari, general secretary of the Muslim Council of Britain, said that while the pope’s apology was a “welcome step,” he still needed to repudiate critical statements of Islam, even quoted ones, because of “the hurt his speech caused.”

And with logic suggesting that the beatings would continue until morale improves, Bari also threatened the country with “two million terrorists” unless the Brits stopped making all those ridiculous connections between Islam and terrorism.

The irony of all this is lost on no one, except The New York Times, of course, which seems only in favor of free speech if the results harm national security. The Gray Lady’s editorial writers offered this piece of pabulum on Sept. 16:

The world listens carefully to the words of any pope. And it is tragic and dangerous when one sows pain, either deliberately or carelessly. He needs to offer a deep and persuasive apology, demonstrating that words can also heal.

Sure, that should help, but let’s consider some consequences of all this.

Benedict did in fact apologize for his remarks, on Sunday, Sept. 17, by saying that he was “deeply sorry” and that the “evil and inhuman” phrase did not reflect his own opinions. He wanted simply to encourage a “frank and sincere dialogue, with great mutual respect.”

Didn’t matter: a whole slew of Muslim organizations from Morocco to Indonesia wanted more; in fact, Islamic theocracies and their terrorist lackeys throughout the Middle East want him to grovel, not apologize, and here’s where the real problem is with Benedict’s remarks. Either a) he should not have uttered them at all, which still would have left him with a pretty good speech; or, b) if he wanted to retain those few words, regardless of how well buried they are among other points in his address, he should not apologize for having spoken them.

Quite the contrary, he should have chided his critics for misunderstanding what he was trying to say.

The first option would have left the pope with an articulate but meaningless address, for the simple reason that it is impossible to carry out a sincere dialogue with those who have contempt for any actions on the part of their opponents other than abject surrender. The result would have been just another innocuous addition to the vacuous palaver that has taken place between Christianity and Islam over the past century or so.

So, Option A is neither win-lose nor win-win; it’s more like nothing-nothing.

Option B could have been win-win, for these reasons. First, he would have demonstrated that a Western spiritual leader had the guts to proclaim what is developing into the prevailing view among Western publics. Second, by not apologizing, he could have demonstrated to political leaders the importance of stating harsh truths and, in the process, defending Western civilization.

Now that would have provoked a real dialogue, perhaps even shaken a regime or two, but at least the menagerie of EU prime ministers would have been forced to stand up for Western values against continued attacks before the disastrous demographic trends in Europe make their comments all but irrelevant.

As it turned out, Benedict XVI chose Option C, which without question is lose-lose. That is, he chose first to declare Islam guilty of “evil and inhuman” acts – it really doesn’t matter when, by the way – after which he backed down, and is continuing to back down.

Islamic radicals can smell the rot of weakness and defeatism half a globe away; and Europe is right next door. Indeed, everything Islamic radicals have learned about Europe since the Second World War has convinced them that Western civilization, regardless of its material comforts and technological sophistication – or perhaps because of those things – is in decline. Just continue to exert pressure and wait, they must conclude; eventually the West will melt into the arms of Islamdom, probably apologizing all the way.

About the Author:


If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.

Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.

No Responses to “The Pope’s Lose-Lose Choice”

Comments are closed.

Current Top Story
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.
Russia Steps Up in U.S.-led Nuclear Talks with Iran
Latest Indepth Stories
President Obama

Sources say seemingly irreconcilable differences between the 2 main parties, Washington and Tehran.

Seder at the White House. The one without the kippa is President Obama.

Instead of accepting reality, the President is trying to hold on to an illusion.

peace in our time iran

Those who suggest further capitulation to Iran are wrongly harming the interests of the West.

Haneen Zoabi (L) and Basel Ghattas (R), Arab members of Israel's parliament, both participated in flotillas attempting to break Israel's legal naval blockade of the Gaza strip.

Few Arab Israelis found anything positive in the decision of its MKS to join any Gaza flotilla.

US Jews prefer to be like their non-Jewish liberal friends complaining about “settlements” and Bibi

New Israel Fund & its supporters must be countered; Israel’s in the midst of an unprecedented storm

PM Netanyahu this week identified ISIS and Iran as Israel’s primary threat. It is a planetary threat that carries the promise of peace.

Haym Solomon, overlooked hero of the Revolutionary War, was America’s “Funding Father.”

Latvia, July 4, 1941 they forced many Jews in the shul putting it on fire; everyone was burned alive

There’s blood on the reporters’ hands AND New Israel Fund for funding groups feeding lies to the UN

Respect & appreciation for our country is not only a civic value but an essential Jewish one as well

When words lose meaning, the world becomes an Orwellian dystopia; a veritable Tower of Babel

Israel, like the non-radical Islamic world. will be happy see the ISIS beheaded for once.

Kids shouldn’t have “uninstructed” Internet access, better to train them how to use it responsibly

What if years from now, IS were to control substantial territory? What world havoc would that wreak?

Rambam writes the verse’s double term refers to 2 messiahs: first King David; 2nd the final Mashiach

More Articles from Dr. Marvin J. Folkersma

If President Reagan were to give a speech today, what might he say? Perhaps something like the following. Let’s hear one more from the Gipper:

Representatives of the religion of peace had their hands full earlier this month organizing demonstrations, burning the pontiff in effigy, promising to assassinate him, instigating church bombings, killing at least one nun, and generally threatening the annihilation of Christian civilization because of the pope’s remarks about Islam nurturing “evil and inhuman” acts. A Turkish cleric declared that the pope’s statement reflected a terrible ignorance of Islam.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/opinions/the-popes-lose-lose-choice/2006/09/27/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: