Islamic scholars dissent with Pope - cordially

Vivificat! News, Opinions, Commentary, Reflections, from a personal Catholic perspective ^ | 17 October 2006 | Teófilo

[Teófilo]

A welcome development.

Folks, according to the Catholic News Service (CNS)...

...International Islamic scholars published an open letter to Pope Benedict XVI, taking issue with what they described as mistakes and oversimplifications of Islam in a recent papal speech to German academics.

The cordial critique of the pope's speech was offered in a "spirit of open exchange," said the 38 Muslim leaders who signed the text. It was published online Oct. 15 by Los Angeles-based Islamica Magazine.

The meat in the CNS report is found in these paragraphs:

The pope had also quoted an Islamic thinker, Ibn Hazm, on the idea that in Muslim teaching God is absolutely transcendent. That is a simplification that can be misleading, said the Islamic scholars, who described Hazm as a "very marginal" figure not representative of Islamic thought today.

They said it was a mistake to think that in Islam God is not tied to human categories, including reason, and to conclude that Muslims believe "in a capricious God who might or might not command us to evil."

The scholars said the relationship between reason and faith is rich and complex in Islam and not a simple dichotomy. Islamic tradition, they said, has managed to avoid two extreme forms of error: making the analytical mind the "ultimate arbiter of truth" and denying the power of human understanding to address ultimate questions.

In other words, they contend that the Pope's main assertion, that God according to Islam was so transcedent as to be "irrational," is a miscontruction, according to these Islamic scholars. CNS reports that Signatories of the letter included grand muftis of Egypt, Turkey, and several other countries, as well as Islamic authorities and academics from the Middle East, Asia, North Africa, Europe and North America.

Commentary. Finally, a much belated respectful, charitable, and scholarly response which stands in sharp contrast to the initial manifestations, rallies, threats, and violence coming from the too-easily-offended Muslim street.

I welcome this development. Now we can take the dialogue to a higher level which I suspect was what Pope Benedict XVI wanted in the first place, a dialogue which will marginalize the mob from the streams of meaningful, rational discourse. I think that the Pope will take this overture seriously and that pretty soon we'll see a coordinated reaction from the Holy See to open a serious civilizational dialogue with world-class Islamic leaders.

- You may read the entire letter here.

[Teófilo]

Typos. Blunders. Homophones. Mine.

[Teófilo]

PING!

[saradippity]

Thanks for posting that letter. I am grateful that respectful exchanges are starting to take place,I am sure that was the intent of Benedict XVI.

I hope it will serve as a model,and usher in a fresh and higher level of dialog between world leaders.

[Kolokotronis]

Now this is a good thing as it will require high level Mohammedan thinkers to examine their beliefs and articulate them, with back up, publicly and that might, just might, trickle down to the lower levels and make a difference, even if they us that "Taqya" lying ruse. In the end, Christian theologians will catch them at that.

[Maeve]

Never trust a Muslim to tell the truth about anything. They practice Taqqiya.

It is doubly true to never trust a Muslim theologian.

[Teófilo]

If we don't talk, the alternative will be wanton, unrestricted, and general killing.

We have to talk.

-Theo

[Maeve]

One can talk to a Muslim at any time in any place. My point is not to trust one word being said. Their religion is crafted from hellfire.

[Teófilo]

One can talk to a Muslim at any time in any place. My point is not to trust one word being said. Their religion is crafted from hellfire.

Talk is worthless is no one is listening.

Dialog can always start on the subject of Tawfiq.

-Theo

[Maeve]

You misunderstand again. One can listen and listen well. Just know that the truth is never what is in the front of any Muslim theological/political statement. Now if you think dialogue can take place at that level and be fruitful, good for you. As for me and my house, we ain't buying any of it.

[Publius]

Good move. It's been a very long time since the papacy was occupied by a serious theologian. Ratzinger is the right man for this dialogue.

[jo kus]

Although an interesting development, I see a problem with this whole line of thinking. There is NO central authority in Islam, thus, these theologians who responded to the Pope are what we would call "private opinions". Naturally, if the Pope would have said something else, another group of Islam theologians could conceivably argue again that the "Pope misunderstands Islam".

Since there is no centralized teachings of Islam except for the 5 pillars, how far can we expect dialogue to go? As far as I am concerned, Islam is similar to the doctrine of sola Scriptura of Protestantism. Each iman can interpret the Koran how they like. The problem will remain the fundamental interpreters who will refuse to be reigned in by "private theologians".

Naturally, Islam will always claim that the West "just don't understand..." The problem is that even they cannot come to agreement on major teachings of the Koran.

Regards

[Dajjal]

Some may recall that from the start of the Regensberg business, I have been critical of the way the Vatican and His Holiness have been handling things.

(See here (posts 26, 33, 94, 95, 110, 117, 118, 119 and 120.)

I hope that Pope Benedict considers the letter of these Muslim scholars with humility and scholarly interest -- for the sake of the safety of his flock.

It has been my contention that the Pope did not intend to stir up trouble with his digression at Regensberg, but that as soon as trouble began, his primary duty was to defuse the situation for the safety of his flock. Unfortunately, he has done very little in that regard, and that little was done quite late and quite poorly (imho).

On Sept. 19th I offered a suggestion as to what Pope Benedict could have said on Wednesday, Sept. 13th when the worldwide news first broke and the protests began, but before the riots and violence and mayhem.

If, in the interest of temporal peace, the Pope considers this letter, taqqiya should not be an issue so long as the Muslim scholars back up whatever they assert with references and footnotes to traceable texts.

The Pope's main problem is that the content of what he said at Regensberg angered not only the Muslim extremists, but even the moderate Muslims and the most blase secularist Muslims.

Now, he might feel brave enough to put up with death threats to himself, but I cannot see any justification for him to unnecessarily endanger the lives of the poor Catholic greengrocer in Indonesia or the Catholic schoolgirl in Egypt or the Catholic grandmother in Lebanon. In the interest of their safety, he needs to do whatever he can to regain the trust of the moderate Muslims.

(And I will define a "moderate" minimally as a Muslim who currently does not have any plans to do violence to any non-Muslims in the forseeable future.)

[browardchad]

The scholars said the relationship between reason and faith is rich and complex in Islam and not a simple dichotomy. Islamic tradition, they said, has managed to avoid two extreme forms of error: making the analytical mind the "ultimate arbiter of truth" and denying the power of human understanding to address ultimate questions.

Interesting, and typically evasive, wording.

Unfortunately, denial of the all too obvious results of Islam in practice -- murder and violence in service of religion -- is not an entre to serious discussion.

[livius]

It takes absolutely nothing to rile up a Muslim, and I don´t see that it would do any good to say anything more. His challenge to them is exactly what has brought out this letter from the ¨moderates¨. Grovelling again would (a) still do nothing to tranquilize the foaming at the mouth crowd, and (b) make the moderates feel they were off the hook from really having to examine their religion and defend it rationally. Which is what he challenged them to do, of course.

[Teófilo]

Although an interesting development, I see a problem with this whole line of thinking. There is NO central authority in Islam, thus, these theologians who responded to the Pope are what we would call "private opinions". Naturally, if the Pope would have said something else, another group of Islam theologians could conceivably argue again that the "Pope misunderstands Islam".

I understand your point. The Orthodox offer a parallel situation in some respects. They too lack a "central authority." What one Orthodox jurisdiction may approve another one may deny. Many of their canonists insists that only a pan-Orthodox Council can properly deputize representatives to Ecumenical dialogues and the convocation of such a Council has been their Holy Grail since the minor--yet highly authoritative--Medieval Councils. Yet, we still talk.

Sure, the analogy breaksdown because we share a universe of beliefs with the Orthodox, whereas we share much less with the Muslims. Heck, we share another universe of ideas with the Jews, much more so that with the Muslims.

Personally, I am not interested in reaching theological agreements with the Muslims at this stage. The important thing is to bring them out of their shell once again and through structured dialogue and gentle challenge, force them to confront the fact that Christianity is not the whimpy religion they have brought themselves up to believe and while we do that, we don't kill each other.

The Islamic world has to prove that they are all up for sincere, respectful, and reciprocal dialogue. This provides an opportunity. I am all for that.

-Theo

[Teófilo]

Interesting, and typically evasive, wording.

At least--and at last--they are "words," not Molotov cocktails. The door is slightly ajar, let's push it and talk.

-Theo

[Teófilo]

You misunderstand again. One can listen and listen well. Just know that the truth is never what is in the front of any Muslim theological/political statement. Now if you think dialogue can take place at that level and be fruitful, good for you. As for me and my house, we ain't buying any of it.

I don't think I misunderstand at all. To "listen and listen well" to another is to have the expectation a priori that the other one will tell us the truth. That's one of the things that make us Christian. I see you mistrust them and frankly, so do I. But my Lord has set certain demands in my conscience that I'll have to obey in spite of my own misgivings. The alternative is bloodshed.

Islam has an Scholastic tradition preceding our own. I say that if we ever begin to talk, that we should start with Epistemology.

-Theo

[Kolokotronis]

"Personally, I am not interested in reaching theological agreements with the Muslims at this stage. The important thing is to bring them out of their shell once again and through structured dialogue and gentle challenge, force them to confront the fact that Christianity is not the whimpy religion they have brought themselves up to believe and while we do that, we don't kill each other."

Well said, Theo and might I add that this process will allow the Mohammedans to really look at their own beliefs while they answer our questions and repond to our Christian arguments. Theological agreement isn't anybody's end. I think this response presents a great opportunity.

[Maeve]

Islam has an Scholastic tradition preceding our own. I say that if we ever begin to talk, that we should start with Epistemology.

I cannot believe you wrote that. You really are totally lost when it comes to this subject.

Your personal interpretation of Christ's commands is well suited for a Protestant but it has nothing to do with the Catholic faith.

[Teófilo]

Your personal interpretation of Christ's commands is well suited for a Protestant but it has nothing to do with the Catholic faith.

I've been called many things, but seldom a "Protestant." A ridiculous, emotional, unfounded charge that I totally reject. I say this confident that my public record--as expressed in my blog and in this forum--backs me up completely.

If you want confrontation with the Muslims, fine. Just speak for yourself and don't dare to involve the Church in your personal vendetta against them.

-Theo