I don’t think Muslims have such a concept. Which added to their definition of “insult to religion” means quite a few noses are going to get punched by them. So we just better shut up I guess. (That last was Sarcasm writ large).
Here is my big problem with what the Pope said. Yes it is wrong to go beyond satire into the scatological when discussing or lampooning or debating a religion. It is wrong because civilized people who want there to be free and open faith in their society should be civil. We should be able to weigh pros and cons truthfully and have answers to those who throw objections at us. This is adult behavior. When you sink to the level of bandying gross insults at each other the listening stops.
This is true even if it does not provoke a reaction. If we are supposed to determine the rightness of a behavior by whether it makes people angry, we Christians should plan on shutting up right now. You see the Gospel lays out some hard truths that people just plain don’t want to hear. It might be because the whole idea of needing salvation does not sit well. It might be because the idea of Christ being divine is blasphemy to them. It might be because the very thought of there being a Holy Trinity smacks of polytheism. It might be because the moral behavior demanded by Scripture interferes with the altar of personal pleasure they worship at. It is often just too much to ponder.
Doesn’t really matter. What matters is ever since Jesus gave so many their comeuppance Christianity has been stirring up reactions. Reactions which were often not very favorable to the faithful. Whippings, burnings, beheadings, imprisonments, the list is long. It is still long. Every age of Christian must ask “What price am I willing to pay to declare the Gospel?”
That the Pope does not see how his remark could mean for us to hush up about it already, really worries me.
“I don’t think Muslims have such a concept.”
Indeed: last time “cartoons about Mohammed” made the news, many Muslims interviewed were surprised that Christians would not likewise violently retaliate against the Pope being similarly insulted. Concerns me that the current Pope _would_ (and admits it) violently retaliate against his mother receiving such treatment. Which axiom does he hold?
If he were merely observing the human propensity toward weakness/sin of lashing out at endearing targets of bullying, and including himself as just another base sinful human, fine ... but I’m not quite sure that’s what he meant. Sounds too much like excusing/condoning the Charlie terrorists (btw, do we have a proper term for them yet?).