UK London Times: Why the Pope was right
One editor's viewpoint:The question is whether the emperor is justified in what he said. His main thrust was at least partly justified. There is a real problem about the teaching of the Koran on violence against the infidel. That existed in the 14th century, and was demonstrated on 9/11, 2001. There is every reason to discuss it. I am more afraid of silence than offence.
The Pope’s actual quotation is not just a medieval point of view. It is a common modern view; even if it seldom reaches print; it can certainly be found on the internet. "Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and then you shall find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached."
Is it true that the Koran contains such a command, and has it influenced modern terrorists? The answers, unfortunately, are "yes" and "yes".
The so-called Sword Verse from Chapter 9 must have been in the emperor’s mind: "So when the sacred months have passed away, Then slay the idolaters wherever you find them."
"And take them captive and besiege them, and lie in wait for them in every ambush." There is the additional problem of "development of doctrine" within Islam, and whether it exists. The Koran is meant to be read with the last sayings of Mohammed holding more precedence over the first teachings, so the suras that preach violence are those that hold pre-eminence.
Can there be a development of doctrine within Islam? Christian theologians hold out some hope, but most do not see this as permissible -- or in some cases amongst the more extreme Muslim sects even desireable. Still, let us not forget there are those in the Muslim world who do believe the Five Pillars of Islam do preach mercy, almsgiving, and so forth.
No where in the Five Pillars is a call for violence. Perhaps there lies hope, but first and foremost it remains to Islamic scholars to recapture the spirit of the Islamic philosophers of the Middle Ages.
Whether Christian calls to emphasize reason are helpful or harmful is up for debate, but regardless as to whether or not the reflections of Pope Benedict XVI are welcomed, Islamic scholarship must understand that non-believers are indeed watching with a fearful mix of trepidation and hope.
|
 |
James Atticus Bowden 
3 Comments:
Ask American Muslims if they want to change the laws of the land and live under Sharia or not.
You can't base your understanding as to what is permissible by taking a poll of what the common muslim on the street thinks in theological matters. That would be like asking the average Catholic in America if they would like to change the laws of the land and live according to Catholic morality (ie. no contraception, no abortion, etc.). Whether an abundance wishes to live under American laws over Catholic laws is irrelevant ... Catholics not wishing to adhere to the teachings of the Catholic Church are no longer Catholic.
What I am driving at - forgive me for writing obtusely - is that my reading of the Koran says that you aren't a Muslim if you don't live under Sharia. So, if Muslims re-interpret that or are fine with that (living under non-Sharia law), then all is good. If not, then we have another challenge in the West.
Catholic canon (church)law and the Sharia are very different. Catholics can live under secular laws. Not sure that Muslims can when secular laws conflict with the Sharia - and still be fully Muslim. The Sharia includes civil and administrative law that is our secular law (based on a Judeo-Christian worldview and culture among other things).
Post a Comment
Home