Pope and Aftermath
I admit that I have been very busy lately and therefore I have not initially really followed the coverage of the speech and its aftermath in depth. The first reaction that came to mind was the Pope has spoken wrong words at a wrong time and he was not the right person to do it. Also judging how the media, religious and state authorities in Muslim countries and across the globe was on high alert hours after the speech and ready to defend the faith I started to expect the worse…
Another high level controversy, just like the Danish cartoons or worth in a very bad time, ready to be exploited big time by all kind of religious and authoritarian opportunists. These people lined up with their communiqués and speeches, ready to use the events in an international auction where the louder, most provocative and offensive words win, where violence is a must and blood and fire is needed to erase the humiliation and attacks that people sensed rightly or wrongly.
The problems I had from the pope’s direction were the followings:
1) This Pope is relatively new, inexperienced and has not established himself yet with any credentials. He was elected to preserve the legacy of John Paul the 2nd who has won the hearts and minds of so many people including a lot of Muslims and was cheered on when he visited the Arab and Muslim countries. John Paul was a great caller for Peace and dialogue, and he was a major anti war figure against the Iraq war and other Bush policies. The Vatican was considered on the Arabs side in so many issues including the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. Anyway the Pope had to continue on the line of his predecessor, which is hard to do, but had no business setting new policies and directions and sounding so offensive to Muslims and doing in that style.
2) The pope comes from Germany who is known to follow logic and reason more than emotions and has no real experience dealing with Muslims…had the pope being Asian, African or Latin American, meaning coming from the developed world, he would have probably avoided the controversy or approached the message in a totally better way,
3) The message came out at the worst possible time, with Bush justifying his wars by emphasizing the Islamo-Facist and the crusade angles. He sounded like he is an ally of Bush or the hawkish evangelical crowd of the US. It also came at a time where the Islamic and Arab masses feel so much injustice because of the Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine wars. It is bad times when the global war on terror is becoming synonym with war on Islam. Where the Iranians are trying to establish themselves as the new leaders of the Muslim world. Where the corrupt and oppressive regimes of the entire Arab world most specifically in Egypt and Syria single out the Islamists are their main rivals which means anything is allowed with them. But these Islamic forces are allowed to vent their angers at the world as long as the regimes are safe and not part of the target.
4) This message was not a basis for an inter-religion dialogue as it is now portrayed. It sounded like the Pope just like Bush is challenging calling for the reform of Islam which is not acceptable. Every religion should mind its own affairs and not interfere or impose on other religions.
5) My main concern was the aftermath which seemed to increase the gap between the different cultures and cause more understanding and frustration, which affects Arabs and Muslims living abroad as well as Christian communities in the Middle East.
Before I go on to the other side because I blame both sides, I want to say that although I am a Catholic Christian, I grew up in a mostly Islamic society, where Islam is a big influence and I am a great admirer of Islamic culture, values and history. I used to read so much about the early days of Islam and memorize the names of all the heroes and battles. I memorized the names of all the Caliphates from Abu Bakr to Al Motassem Billah, the last relevant one. I read all of Girgi Zeydan novels which cover most of the Islamic eras with some romantic spice. I was also an avid reader of Christian and Jewish (Pre-Christianity) history, and I was able to mix and accept everything together.
I was taught that the Arab Christians of Syria (Levant) and Iraq, the Copts of Egypt welcomed the Arabic conquests and were the main factor in the defeats of the ailing Persians and Byzantines empires. Islam was successful in spreading so quickly because of the decline and infighting between the empires that it replaced, the quality of message that was spread and the good values that people brought with them.
No one was forced to convert, Caliphate Omar Bin Khattab refused to pray in the Resurrection church in Jerusalem so it does not become a mosque. Christians played an important role in the new Umayyad empire, and the society was build on fair and equal values, someone said “Why enslave people when their mothers delivered them free”. I was taught that the Islamic states or different empires allowed diversity and all cultures to flourish and that some important cultural figures were non Muslim. Anyway, to many arab historians, the Islamic empires acted like a bridge between the glorious pasts of the Ancient civilizations of the orient, Greeks, Roman, Persians, Indian, Arabs and Chinese as well as other cultures toward the European renaissance that carried the torch afterwards.
It is really frustrating to be in the wrong receiving end of history, after such glorious pasts Arabs and Muslims have encountered all kind of declines, isolations, wars, defeats, invasions, colonization, oppression etc…So when people call for Jihad and the victory of Islam, they are yearning for that glorious past, they miss that part. The violent groups unfortunately are mainly influenced by the military side which mind you happened some 14-15 centuries ago when it was quite normal to fight in that way. The masses are blinding themselves to the fact that math and sciences, literature, philosophy, arts was a major factor of that glory. In fact, rare are the military powers which lasted long based solely on their military might.
That is what is frustrating about Islam in today’s world. I believe that the Muslim moderates have a duty to speak up against defaming Islam internally. My friend Ammar has written an amazing message on the subject, and with that article he is ready to enter new levels of world respect, Bravo Ammar, we moderates are proud of you. He wrote:
We do not review anything. We do not revise anything. All intellectual analysis in our parts has ceased to exist a thousand years ago it seems…The Islamic currents that exist today have no real intellectual component or analysis at its core…We cannot afford to be silent anymore. True, our protests have succeeded…but that is not because we manage to earn any understanding or appreciation for our point of view, but because we have found a way to terrify the world. We have become the barbarians of the modern world. People will fear us, but they will never respect us, or accept us as equals, or appreciate the legitimacy of many of our grievances, no matter how far and wide we spread our terror.
Unfortunately I got used to how Arabic and Islamic population behaves in similar occasions given how charged up the political atmosphere is. I am saddened to see national struggles slowly become Islamic struggles which are fueling fundamentalism and extremism. I am also every alarmed at how narrow minded some people are becoming and how they need to assert their Islam in any way possible regardless of how degrading it is to the faith and religion. How people behave like they won the lottery when somebody famous converts to Islam, or a celebrity woman hints at wearing the Hijab…how every small matter revolves around religion, how it is right to torture and oppress people in the name of Islam. Reem has written an excellent arabic post on that.
Where are the loud protests and actions when some extreme people tarnish the reputation of Islam? Did any condemn the recent attacks on Palestinian churches or Iraqi churches a while ago? These attacks are similar to the neo Nazis attacks in Europe. Since when Arabs didn’t accept the others??? Arabs are known for their generosity and fairness. Christians in the Middle East are an integral part of the society and its texture. Most of informed Muslims welcome this diversity and are proud of it. In fact Christian authorities in Syria were the first to condemn the pope’s perceived message.
I am glad that the Muslim authorities in Syria are showing more moderation and understanding of the situation than it was the case with the Danish cartoons. No need for Syria to be a pilot in riots and violence. I remember we used to pray for dialogue of religions in school. Religious figures never cease to play a constructive role in understanding and respecting each other. Shady and Philip have written great posts on the subject.
I wish Islamic masses become that energized to fight for better lives and better image. After all by definition God does not need any human to survive or exist. God should spread love not violence. God does not want to be embroiled in human wars. “Allah Akbar”, God is indeed great and I wish that these words are never used in any act of terror or violence. I also wish that the West plays fair and stop trying to dominate the world.
9 comments September 20, 2006