web analytics
October 1, 2014 / 7 Tishri, 5775
At a Glance
InDepth
Sponsored Post
Meir Panim with Soldiers 5774 Roundup: Year of Relief and Service for Israel’s Needy

Meir Panim implements programs that serve Israel’s neediest populations with respect and dignity. Meir Panim also coordinated care packages for families in the South during the Gaza War.



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.

A golden opportunity was missed here, and one may only speculate how long it will take for the Vatican and others to recognize this. Pope Benedict XVI is, by all accounts, a courageous and honorable man. But wittingly or not, he failed to stiffen the spines of beleaguered Christians throughout the Western world. Instead, he filled them with gelatin.

Marvin Folkertsma, Ph.D. is a professor of political science and Fellow for American Studies with The Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College. He is the author of several books including the recently released novel “The Thirteenth Commandment.” He can be contacted at mjfolkertsma@gcc.edu.

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.

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Current Top Story
Peace partners for hate: Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas (R) and chief negotiator Saeb Erekat.
PA Chief Negotiator Compares Netanyahu with ISIS
Latest Indepth Stories
isis-open-graph

With $2 billion on hand the Islamic State is an extremely well-funded terrorist group that may pose a major international crisis for the U.S. and the world. Learn about their rise to power and the toll they’ve taken thus far.

In the recent Gaza war and its aftermath, we saw a totally illogical reaction from the world.

champions

A., a teacher: “I do not know a single Gazan who is pro-Hamas at the moment, except for those on its payroll.”

terrorists

Is the global community clear in its response to these extremist groups?

Like our fabled character, Don Quixote, President Obama has constantly spawned his own reality.

Boroujerdi was informed that “the pressures and tortures will increase until he has been destroyed.”

Fatah: Hamas stole relief aid for Gaza and distributed it amongst its followers in mosques.

Can teenagers seriously be expected to behave properly when they are surrounded by so much suggestive material? Is it fair to expose them (and ourselves) to so much temptation and then tell them, “Just say no”?

Washington remains ignorant of the need to dismantle alliances with various Muslim countries.

Defeating IS requires bombing its strongholds and recognizing the violent nature of Islam.

Abbas again used the UN to attack Israel, distort history, and undermine prospects for peace.

Israel and the Palestinian Authority cannot even agree to move their clocks back on the same day.

Shemita is about relating to each other by temporarily eliminating gaps of wealth power & status

David transcended adversity to become a leader; Who are we to make excuses for a lack of greatness?

sympathy: Feeling sorrow or pity for another’s tribulations; Empathy:sharing an emotional experience

Last week the president announced a four-point plan. Unfortunately, there’s little buy-in from our European and Middle Eastern allies. Here’s my own four-point plan that may be more palatable to our allies.

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: