Dutch criticism of Benedict XVI on Islam


This video is called Gay Message to the Pope.

Dutch conservative to liberal “quality” daily NRC-Handelsblad has on today’s page 9, four criticisms of Pope Benedict XVI’s controversial speech on Islam.

(For which the pope himself has, by now, apologized … well … sort of … to an extent unique in papal history).

The editorial there has as its title “Unnecessary provocation”.

In it, the NRC‘s editorial board states:

On the eve of a visit to Turkey, to go back to a historically charged time with a quotation prone to be read out of context, is an unnecessary provocation.

Besides, the history of the Roman Catholic church is replete with coercion and violence.

So, modesty would have been better.

Veteran columnist Jan Blokker writes: “Would the Holy Father, with his unbelievable erudition, not very easily have been able to produce one hundred quotations on his pious theme [of the abuse of religion for violence], without the need to include even one mention of Muslims?”

Peter Raedts, professor in medieval history of the Roman Catholic university of Nijmegen, writes that in the relationship between faith and reason, in which the pope‘s speech favourably contrasts Christianity to Islam, the pope’s speech is historically wrong.

M.D. Koster writes: “Why put the blame solely on the supposed evil of the Other”?

Australian criticism: here.

Benedict XVI vs. Latin American liberation theology: here.

About these ads

2 thoughts on “Dutch criticism of Benedict XVI on Islam

  1. Chronicles Online September 26, 2006

    Pope Benedict and the Meaning of Words
    by Srdja Trifkovic …

    ISLAM AND REASON — If there is anything potentially offensive to
    a Muslim ear in the lecture it is not the Pontiff’s use of the
    opinion of a Byzantine emperor of Muhammad’s contribution to the
    history of ideas, but rather Benedict XVI’s implied hint that Islamic
    teaching is — or may be — unreasonable, and therefore at odds with
    God’s nature:

    “The decisive statement in this argument against violent conversion
    is this: not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to God’s
    nature. The editor, Theodore Khoury, observes: For the emperor, as a
    Byzantine shaped by Greek philosophy, this statement is self-evident.
    But for Muslim teaching, God is absolutely transcendent. His will is
    not bound up with any of our categories, even that of rationality.
    Here Khoury quotes a work of the noted French Islamist R Arnaldez,
    who points out that Ibn Hazn went so far as to state that God is not
    bound even by his own word, and that nothing would oblige him to
    reveal the truth to us. Were it God’s will, we would even have to
    practise idolatry.”

    Some Western commentators have attacked this part of Benedict’s
    lecture for inaccuracy. Daniel Martin Varisco, “Chair” of
    Anthropology at Hofstra University, thus argues that “Islamic
    doctrine nowhere teaches that Allah can contradict his own words or
    divine principles of justice. To say that Muslims worship a God so
    fickle as to contradict the Quran and force people to worship idols
    is, to borrow a phrase, beyond belief.”

  2. Pingback: BBC: Pope Ratzinger ‘covered up paedophile priests scandals’. Like US Republicans | Dear Kitty. Some blog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s