NEW YORK — The controversy over Pope Benedict XVI’s remarks on Islam in a speech last week continues to simmer on a low fire. It could move towards a greater global backlash by angry Muslims against the Pope and Christianity itself, or it could fade away in light of his sincere but slightly clipped public expression of regret and sorrow. The issue reveals as much about the sensitivities of Muslims as it does about the insensitivities of non-Muslims.
The response to the Pope’s words around the world has been mixed, with scattered incidents of violence heavily overwhelmed by a sense of pain that has not been translated into acts of aggression or protest. The potential for sustained damage among Muslims and Western Christians remains strong, especially where political leaders would exploit this situation. The Iranian leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei this week charged that Pope Benedict’s words were “the latest link in the chain of a crusade against Islam started by America’s Bush.”
I have been in the United States as this controversy unfolded, where the prevalent view of the matter seems closer to perplexity than anything else. People here and in most other Western countries are slightly surprised by the fact that the Pope’s quotation of a medieval Christian emperor would cause so much anger, and that the Pope’s apology did not end the matter.
The explanation rests largely in the central place of religion in the life of most Muslims, where faith is not only about worship of the Divine but often spills over to play many other roles it does not assume in the West. The fact that the Pope’s quote was critical of the Prophet Mohammad also explains much of the anger, given the prophet’s revered status.
The Pope’s comments came in that part of his lecture where he referred to a discussion of Christianity and Islam between a 14th-century Byzantine Christian emperor, Manuel II Paleologus, and an unnamed Persian scholar. The Pope said, referring to Paleologus: “He said, I quote, ‘Show me just what Mohammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.'”
The Pope also mentioned the Islamic concept of jihad as “holy war,” adding that violence in the name of religion is against God’s nature and to reason.
These are indeed deeply insulting ideas to Muslims, even if they were used in a context in which the Pope did not mean to cause offense and, in fact, sought, as he later said in his apology, to promote frank and sincere dialogue, in a spirit of mutual respect. The Pope is obviously a greater theologian than he is a practitioner of political and cultural sensitivities. Maybe he just needs better public relations advisers.
If this issue passes away soon, as the Danish cartoons controversy eventually did at the start of this year, we should all learn from it. The single most important lesson from both cases strikes me as relating to the place and role of religion in people’s public and personal lives. The anger that Muslims often express when their faith or prophet are insulted goes beyond their reverence for their religion, touching another important element that Western leaders and ordinary people need to appreciate more clearly. It is that religion replaces many of the attributes of statehood in societies where the role, credibility and legitimacy of the state are often thin.
The sad fact of modern history is that the post-colonial European retreat from many Islamic societies left behind convoluted nations that mostly did not correspond to ethnic and demographic realities. For reasons that historians will long debate, many Islamic countries have suffered economic stress and political autocracy, leading to the sort of extremism and militancy that we witness today in many parts of the Middle East and Asia.
The harsh reality is that in many Islamic societies, ordinary people find themselves living in police states, gangster states, failed states, or occupied or sanctioned states. In such abnormal conditions of chronic distress, tension, deprivation and vulnerability, religion emerges as the central instrument of protection in personal and public life. Religion provides identity, a system of justice, hope, and communal solidarity and the sense of security that it brings with it.
So when the leading Christian figure of the entire world chooses to refer to an obscure Medieval Byzantine emperor’s remarks disparaging Islam and the Prophet Mohammad, one can understand why some Muslims would be deeply angered, even threatened. The Pope should be better advised on Muslim sensitivities. How would he react if the world’s top Muslim religious leaders recommended screening the DaVinci Code movie in all schools?
If the Pope’s slur against Islam was unintentional, which I believe was the case, he should have made a more explicit and forceful apology. Religion for many Muslims who live in dysfunctional countries remains the central organizing and defining principle of their lives. It should not be treated lightly, especially if we truly aim to promote sincere dialogue in a spirit of respect.
Rami G. Khouri is an internationally syndicated columnist, the director of the Issam Fares Institute at the American University of Beirut, and editor-at-large of the Beirut-based Daily Star.
Copyright ©2006 Rami G. Khouri / Agence Global
—————-
Released: 19 September 2006
Word Count: 845
——————-
For rights and permissions, contact:
rights@agenceglobal.com, 1.336.686.9002 or .212.731.0757