Established 1826 — Oldest College Newspaper West of the Alleghenies

Pope's comments should elicit dialogue, not violence

Nick D'Amico

Last month, Pope Benedict XVI made comments during a speech at the University of Regensburg that ignited a controversy that finally now shows signs of settling after a near constant month of protest. During the speech, the pope quoted the 14th century Byzantine emperor during his dialogue with a learned Persian. The pope quoted the emperor as saying with astounding brusqueness, "Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only bad and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." The quote was not the central part of the pope's speech but a jumping off point from which he described that violence is inherently unreasonable and thus contrary to faith, describing faith and reason as intimately linked. The pope then advocated a greater study of religion rather than its mockery. This point was lost and instead the West and Muslims around the world heavily criticized the pope, with the incident resulting in some violence against Christians.

There is an unfortunate irony to the incident, with Muslims choosing to respond to the pope's speech with the killing of a nun and firebombing of numerous churches. Muslims protested the speech with a vehemence that is totally lacking for other instances, like the murder of innocent Muslims by sectarian forces in Iraq. This incident raises the issue of just how the West should engage the Islamic world in dialogue.

Many Muslims, particularly those in the Middle East and Asia, have adopted a siege mentality. They feel that their religious traditions, not to mention their political and economic sovereignty, are under assault from the globalization of secular modernization. Muslims pinpoint the United States and other Western nations as the originator of this attack on their values. The history of colonialism, as well at the United States' recent record of interference and intervention in the region, gives unfortunate credence to their idea of a Western assault on Islamic values. But, this is no justification for violence as a response to criticism.

If dialogue and greater understanding are to be achieved between Muslims and the rest of the world, criticism cannot be answered with violence and protest, but with reason and discussion. While it would be an exaggeration to say that all Muslims prescribe to a radical interpretation of Shar'ia law, there is still a significant minority of the Islamic community that does. Dialogue with the West must be predicated by dialogue between Muslims over their own beliefs and the violence some Muslims with faith as their justification.

This dialogue will naturally bring a discussion of what role religion plays in government. Combining religious and political authority creates a system where many basic human rights, such as a freedom of speech or religion, are mutually exclusive from a theocracy. This type of system helps legitimize violence and punishment against the nonbelievers and will forever be opposed to the values of Western states.

Religion certainly has a place in society, a place whose centrality varies according to the societal circumstances, but minority rights for nonbelievers must be established. Acknowledging these tough questions and criticism is the first step toward dialogue and a greater understanding between both sides and is the option that must ultimately be chosen over threats and violence.