I must tell you that I found out something just this week that really surprised me. I'm finding it distracting. Monday, you'll know what it is.
Meanwhile, some of the dialogue about Pope Benedict remarks which inflamed a number of Muslims has been addressed in one of the blogs that the local paper has posted, Perspectives on Islam for September 18. I find myself largely agreeing it, but also sympathetic to one of the replies:
Although it is true that Mohammad did conquer the Arab world by the sword, (as did the Catholic Church I might add - - they took religion seriously in the old days), I don't see the relevance in using this quote by Benedict. Wasn't he trying to "open a dialogue" between Christians and Muslims?
Actually, I believe was trying to do just that. But it seemed injudicious to assume that people are going to recognize the nuance he seemed to be attempting to achieve, and naive to think that the inflammatory language wouldn't be the lead story, rather than the speech as a whole.
Also, his "apology" referred to being sorry for the "reaction" to his quote, not using the quote itself!
And why did it take four days to even respond at all?
So what do you think? More importantly, how can we achieve greater communication among peoples of various religions and faiths? I've always been a fan of ecumenical and interfaith services and activities, but those heal the world only a little at a time, while an event such as the Pope's speech, even if it has been exploited by certain parties, only widens the gap.
I suppose I want to ask you if you think George W. Bush IS the devil, as Hugo Chavez said at the UN, but not even I believe that. I don't THINK I do. The event did generate one of those classic New York Daily News headlines" "Zip It!"
Blog posts with legs: And then I wrote
1 day ago