Pope Won't Condemn Islam Over Bombings

[emad]

Monday July 25, 2005 2:01 PM


LES COMBES, Italy (AP) - Pope Benedict XVI said Monday he did not see an anti-Christian motive in the recent wave of terrorist attacks blamed on Islamic extremists, attributing them instead to ``a much more general intention.''

The pontiff also told reporters it was important to seek dialogue with the best elements of Islam.

He spoke while on vacation in the Italian Alps after visiting a church, brushing off a question about whether he believed Islam was a religion of peace.

``I wouldn't want to label (it),'' he said. ``Certainly there are elements that favor peace. It also has other elements.''

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-5165042,00.html

[Roland99]

1. Doesn't he have a worldwide church to tend to?

Why is he poking his nose into world politics/terror?

Time for the Catholic Church to clean out its own closets.

[SouthernDem2004]

2. He has just as much right to speak as anyone else and alot of ppl

listen to him.

[Sgent]

4. Cause

A major tenant of the Catholic Church is social justice. That means your involved with the world, not cloistered and praying (although the do a lot of that too).

I don't agree with the church on a lot of things, but they are one of the better institutions worldwide, and I would much rather live in a Catholic theocracy than a Fundie Protestant one. At least Catholics are intellectually consistant (usually).

[Roland99]

10. I'm sorry but it's like Clinton preaching about abstinence

He may have some good ideas on it but the history is tainted.

Clean house first and then start pontificating.

[Teaser]

11. It's his job to pontificate.

He is, after all, the pontiff.

[Xipe Totec]

13. * LOL *

Good one!

Never forget the root meaning of words.

[K-W]

14. Read your own post.

"Doesnt he have a WORLDWIDE church to attend to."
"Why is he poking his nose into WORLD politics"

If you arent a catholic, obviously the popes opinion on issues isnt going to matter to you, but if you are a catholic it is important.

So your comment serves only to belittle the beliefs of Catholics.

[arwalden]

19. Wait A Second... So The Opinion Of The Pope *IS* Important?

<<... but if you are a catholic it is important.>

Recently, when the current (and previous) Pope started up with their anti-gay remarks, I've often heard others around here arguing that his opinions are *NOT* important... and that "nobody pays attention to him anyway".

So which is it?

[K-W]

21. Different strokes for different folks.

Like any religion there is a wide diversity amongst catholics on how they treat thier faith.

The opinion of the head of one of the largest organizations in the world matters to the people in that organization. How much it matters and how it matters depends on the individual Catholics.

[arwalden]

22. So Why Did You Say...

<< So your comment serves only to belittle the beliefs of Catholics. >>

Your two positions don't make much sense. In one post you act as though any criticism of the Pope's words is an affront to all Catholics everywhere. Then you admit that there's a "wide diversity among Catholics".

Given that "wide diversity" you speak of... why would you accuse someone of "belittling" the beliefs of Catholics when the criticism of the Pope is likely to be an opinion that's ALSO held by many Catholics themselves?

It can't be both.

[K-W]

23. You are seeing inconsistancy where none exists.

My positions make perfect sense.

The Pope is the leader of one of the largest organizations in the world, therefore there are certainly plenty of people very interested in what he has to say about world events, and to ignore that is to insult catholics, the members of that organization.

Nothing in that statement relates in any way to whether or not all Catholics consider the popes views important. Which of course they dont ALL.

The Pope is a figure of great importance to many people, that does not imply that every Catholic takes his words as law. But it does mean there is an international desire to hear his views on issues.

[arwalden]

24. So Ignoring Or Dismissing The Pope's Words Is An Insult To Catholics?

<< My positions make perfect sense.>>

To you.

<< there are certainly plenty of people very interested in what he has to say about world events, and to ignore that is to insult catholics,>>

I see. So we should NOT criticize else we risk insulting Catholics.

<< Nothing in that statement relates in any way to whether or not all Catholics consider the popes views important. Which of course they dont ALL.>>

So it's OKAY to criticize. Got it.

<< The Pope is a figure of great importance to many people, >>

So we should NOT criticize. Got it.

<< that does not imply that every Catholic takes his words as law.>>

So it's OKAY to criticize. Got it.

<< But it does mean there is an international desire to hear his views on issues. >>

So we should NOT criticize. Got it.

Yeah... right. Okay. Got it! It's all very clear now. :eyes:

[K-W]

28. My post doesn't even address criticism. Did you bother to read it?

The phrase "there are certainly plenty of people very interested in what he has to say about world events, and to ignore that is to insult catholics" Does not in any way mean "we should NOT criticize else we risk insulting Catholics", which should be clear to anyone with a grasp of the english language.

The phrase "Nothing in that statement relates in any way to whether or not all Catholics consider the popes views important. Which of course they don't ALL." Does not in any way mean "So it's OKAY to criticize." Which should again be clear to anyone with a decent mastery of english.

I could go on, but needless to say not a single phrase of mine you isolated expressed any opinion on the issue of criticism. Your comments are completely bogus interpretations of what I wrote.

[arwalden]

30. Yes I Did Read It. -- Did You Proof-Read It?

<< "My post doesn't even address criticism. Did you bother to read it?" Posted by K-W Just so you don't embarrass yourself in the future,>>

Holy cow! Any message that starts off with the phrase "just so you don't embarrass yourself" certainly scares me. Anyone who says that is certainly BETTER than I am... so "WATCH OUT ALLEN!" Ooooo!

<< The phrase "there are certainly plenty of people very interested in what he has to say about world events, and to ignore that is to insult catholics" Does not in any way mean "we should NOT criticize else we risk insulting Catholics", which should be clear to anyone with a grasp of the english language.>>

Ah yes... the passive-aggressive personal attacks and insinuations that I don't understand English. Nice touch.

Well for the benefit of those people that you believe cannot understand the English language.... Can you please tell us what that phrase is supposed to mean? Is the Pope irrelevant or not? When is it okay to dismiss papal rants and ramblings? And how can this be done without "insulting Catholics".

<< The phrase "Nothing in that statement relates in any way to whether or not all Catholics consider the popes views important. Which of course they don't ALL." Does not in any way mean "So it's OKAY to criticize." Which should again be clear to anyone with a decent mastery of english.>>

Once wasn't enough, eh? Clearly the fault is not with the writer, right? Your personal slam about "anyone" not having a "decent mastery of English" has been noted.

If not ALL Catholics are unanimous in whether they consider the Pope's views as being important, then logically, NOT ALL Catholics will be offended when someone criticizes, scorns, or dismisses the Pope's views. If not ALL Catholics will be offended by any condemnation of the Pope's views, then it should be safe to do so (without risk of being branded a "Catholic-Hater" or other such nonsense.)

Apparently, that's not what you "really" meant... So again, here's your opportunity to clarify what you really meant by your previous statement.

<< I could go on, but needless to say not a single phrase of mine you isolated expressed any opinion on the issue of criticism, nor could be mistaken for one by any reasonable person. >>

I don't share the high opinion you have of your writing ability. I think you're being intentionally vague and when someone tries to pin you down on what you really mean, your response is become even more aggressive and insulting to them.

<< Nothing I have said on this thread has anything to do with the validity of criticism.>>

Really? Wow.

<< If you cant see the difference between criticizing the pope, and belittling him and his importance to millions of people, there isn't much point having this discussion. >>

Just as there will always be people who cannot separate themselves from the church (and are "personally" offended whenever someone criticizes the RCC) so too there will always be people who cannot separate the man from the words (and any criticism--whether deserved or not--will always be interpreted as "belittling him" and will be taken as a personal insult.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[arwalden]

37. K-W... That's Not Nice.

Stick to attacking the message and not the messenger. Please try to to get so personal with your comments about me.

[K-W]

38. I didnt get personal, what are you talking about?

Everything in my post related to your message.

[arwalden]

42. You Stated That I Am Dishonest. That's A Personal Attack.

<< but ive had enough of your dishonesty regarding my posts. >>

[K-W]

46. No, as I clearly stated,

I was referring to your dishonesty regarding my posts. Which is a statement about your message.

I dont know anything about you as a person, I do know that your replies to my posts were dishonest. You claimed I said things I never said.

[arwalden]

47. That Doesn't Matter.... Now You're Splitting Hairs...

... and while we're on the subject, I should probably go ahead and tell you that the way you're being so careful in the parsing of your words only serves to convince me that you know such things are against DU rules.

Don't try to argue your case with me. Take it up with the administrators and moderators.

[K-W]

48. No, im correcting your misstatments.

You accused me of commenting on you and not your message when I was very clearly referring to your post.

[arwalden]

51. I See It's Been Deleted... Take It Up With The Moderators.

Your problem is not my problem.

[K-W]

52. Take what up with the moderators?

I have no beef with them, they are just doing thier jobs. I have a beef with you for blatently misstating my positions.

[arwalden]

54. That's Why You Made Personal Attacks? Can't Do That. Not Allowed.

[K-W]

57. Indeed, yet you are allowed to distort my statements all day long.

Funny how rules work.

[arwalden]

60. Yes... The Rules Apply To Everyone. Including You.

If you don't want your words to be "distorted" then the sentences you write should be less vague. And instead of simply saying "you're-distorting-my-words"... you could instead actually try to clarify and explain what you actually meant.

Tell us... why should the Pope be exempt from criticism, scorn, or even belittling? What makes him so special that others cannot voice their concerns or suspicions about him and his actions?

[emad]

45. I wish previous Popes had been as media-conscious

about sectarian murders in Ireland/Northern Ireland.

I think Papa Ratzi just waits for those soundbite ops to give him some street cred.

[Roland99]

31. And that church he leads has exactly what to do with the war on terror?

What is the Pope doing to combat it other than issue some quaint press releases?

[K-W]

33. Gee, I dunno, maybe because their are Catholics impacted. EOM

[Roland99]

34. And Muslims and Jews and Hindus and Atheists and.....

Your point?

[K-W]

35. My point,

is that terrorism impacts catholics who look to the pope for spiritual and ideological leadership. Thus it is very much the Pope's job to give opinions about the things that impact the lives of Catholics.

What on earth do muslims hindus and jews have to do with this?

[Roland99]

39. So, issuing a press release makes them feel safe?

:shrug:

[K-W]

40. Do I look like a pyschic? EOM

[Roland99]

41. Then you're beginning to see my point.

[K-W]

43. Hardly.

I am not, btw Catholic, far from it, I just dont see exactly what is gained by belittling thier beliefs.

Dont you have people in the world you look to for opinions about things? I do, and I would feel very insulted if someone told me that those people shouldnt be speaking out.

[Roland99]

58. How in the hell am I belittling "their beliefs"?

I'm talking about ONE PERSON. The head of the Catholic Church, popping his head up to make some inane press release that will do nothing and have no effect.

He needs to check his closets before he starts criticizing others.

[arwalden]

59. You're Right Roland... The Pope Is Grandstanding!

You know... so that when he makes another idiotic statement against homosexuals, the apologists can say "Well at LEAST he opposes TERRORISTS". (As if that makes everything all right.)

[arwalden]

18. I Imagine It Must Get Tedious To ALWAYS Condemn Gays...

... this is just a diversion for the Catholic Church's REAL work of making sure that the the climate of hostility and intolerance and hatred towards homosexuals remains in full force.

[etherealtruth]

3. Why would he condemn Islam .... ?

The entire religion is not responsible for acts committed by the religiously insane (claiming to commit heinous acts for some crazed contortion of Islam).

[jrthin]

8. My question exactly.

You can condemn the criminals and terrorists who claim they belong to the religion, but certainly leave the religion alone. Heck, should we condemn ALL white people over the KKK and other hate groups? I think not.

[K-W]

15. Because conservatives are trying to scapegoat Islam for the violence. nt

[Ezlivin]

5. Pope Won't Condemn Republicans Over Bombings

Although the policies of a Republican administration has led to the deaths over 25,000 Iraqi civilians, the Pope said it was "important to seek dialogue with the best elements of the Republicans, if they can be found."

[habitual]

6. Walking With My

girlfriend in the park yesterday, my mind wandered to thinking about the new Pope when it hit me and I turned to her and said:

What the hell is wrong with this new Pope?? He seems like a total idiot on what he focuses on.

Now this.... what the hell???

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

7. Would the Pope like being condemned for IRA bombings?

[dArKeR]

9. Pope Tells Journalists To Search For 'Truth'

Pope Tells Journalists To Search For 'Truth'
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/23/AR2005042301372.html?nav=rss_world/europe

The Vatican has sought the intervention of the U.S. State Department to declare Pope Benedict XVI immune from a sexual abuse lawsuit filed here, according to court documents.
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/3201751

Vatican said Monday there was no investigation under way of allegations that the Mexican founder of a conservative religious order sexually abused seminarians
http://www.winktv.com/x466.xml?URL=http://localhost/APWIREFEED/d8a8vi600.xml

Vatican Reportedly Clears Priest
Vaca, a former priest, is one of at least eight men in Mexico and the United States who have accused the Rev. Marcial Maciel Degollado of molesting them when they were teenage seminary students in the 1940s, '50s and '60s.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/22/AR2005052200966.html?nav=rss_world/europe

Despite the horrific drumbeat of child molestation revelations, however, sensible Catholics hoping for a more transparent and less sexually repressed church shouldn't hold their breath. The new pope is not only a longtime leader of vicious church attacks on "evil" gays, he also has shamefully blamed the molestation scandal on the media.
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/thenation/20050524/cm_thenation/20050606scheer0524_1

Vatican Accused of Child Molestation Cover-Up
http://atheism.about.com/b/a/098516.htm

Survivors Network says the overwhelming majority of its members have never sued and are too traumatized to do so. They say they adopted their tactics after bishops promised for years to take action against guilty clergy, then never did.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7463011/page/2

Pope's Nazi past
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7576505 /

[rocktivity]

12. I think he has the right end of the stick on this one

If the goal was to target Christians, I think the last thing they would have done was get on a subway.

:headbang:
rocknation

[VegasWolf]

27. Good comment! Not in England either, only about 20% of the

population is "churched" there or even bothers to attend
church regulary. Europe is way ahead of the puritanical U.S.

[stray cat]

16. Sounds like a legitimate position to me and he sounds right.

[DanCa]

17. Violence of any kind is wrong (nt)

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

20. Freeper mouth-frothing starting in 5... 4... 3...

[Hav]

26. ARE YOU A STUPID CATHOLIC?

AND NOT A GOOD CHRISTIAN LIKE ME? HUH??
NAZI POPE!!!!1111

[RPM]

25. Headline : The pope supports terrorists - US to bomb Vatican

since they aren't with us - they are against us. :eyes:

[blindpig]

29. at least he knows about glass houses........ n/t

[DemBones DemBones]

36. It's offical: ANYTHING any pope says

will be used by certain DUers to slam him and the Church.

[Terran]

50. Apparently you just hit the nail on the head

So I'm reading this thread and I am simply aghast. The Pope actually says something the suggests a position that most of us here would agree with, and YET some people find cause to criticize him for it. It's absolutely amazing, isn't it? Instead of actually discussing his position itself as, say, compared to Bush's, people are just finding any little thing to mess with. Get lives, people.

[Scurrilous]

56. I agree...

..."Pope says water wet."

@#$% the Pope!!

[Behind the Aegis]

44. Nor should he.

He should not even be asked to condemn an entire religion because of a few radical, fundamentalist criminals!

[varun]

49. What about Catholic "Inquisition" on S. America?

Pope has to look in his backyard first before pointing out the "terrorism of Islam"

[emad]

53. TERRORISM: POPE OMITS ATTACKS ON ISRAEL, NUNCIO CALLED

TERRORISM: POPE OMITS ATTACKS ON ISRAEL, NUNCIO CALLED

(AGI) - Rome, Italy, July 25 - The Apostolic Nuncio in Israel was called by the Israeli Foreign Affairs Ministry to receive an official protest on the contents, or rather, on the omissions made by Pope Benedict XVI in his Angelus yesterday. "With regards to the Pope's condemnation of terrorist bombings which caused deaths in Egypt, Turkey, Iraq and the UK - reports a statement of the Israeli Embassy in Italy - the Israeli government regrets that Israeli was not mentioned. The government reckons that such an omission will make the extremists stronger and those who want peace and the moderate weaker. It deems righteous that the Pope's condemnation of the vile terrorist attacks that strike innocent civilians should include Israel, one of the main victims of Islamic terrorism". (AGI) -
251857 LUG 05

http://www.agi.it/english/news.pl?doc=200507251857-1226-RT1-CRO-0-NF82&page=0&id=agionline-eng.italyonline

[emad]

55. Israel Criticizes Pope Over Terror Message

Israel Criticizes Pope Over Terror Message

Monday, July 25, 2005


(07-25) 10:02 PDT LES COMBES, Italy (AP) --


The Israeli Foreign Ministry expressed its outrage Monday that Pope Benedict XVI "deliberately failed" to condemn terror attacks against Israelis, and it summoned the Vatican envoy to a meeting.


On Sunday, the pontiff prayed for God to stop the "murderous hand" of terrorists. He made the noontime blessing from his Alpine retreat in Italy's northwestern Valle d'Aosta region, where he is vacationing.


Benedict referred to the recent "abhorrent terrorist attacks" in Egypt, Britain, Turkey and Iraq but did not mention attacks in Israel.


"The pope deliberately failed to condemn the terrible terror attack that occurred in Israel last week," a Foreign Ministry statement said.


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/07/25/international/i100256D21.DTL