Pope remarks are an opportunity to dialogue

First the Danish cartoonists, and now the Pope?
This was the initial reaction of many Muslims upon learning Pope Benedict XVI insulted their religion and beloved Prophet Muhammad. However, the world of soundbites differs from that of reality. A careful reading of his lecture and a subsequent comments should be seen as an invitation to dialogue, rather than clash.
The Pope was giving an address at the University of Regensburg in Germany on the relationship of faith and reason. The Pope gave an insightful analysis regarding the natural affinity of religion to reason, and argues that this affinity transcends both cultural and geographic traditions.
As a pretext to this discussion, the Pope quotes Dr Theodore Khoury, a Lebanese German, who is known for his interfaith research. Dr Khoury described a dialogue between Manuel II a 14th century Byzantine Emperor and a Persian Muslim scholar. The Pope wished to make a distinction between Christian and Muslim understandings of God by using the example of violent conversions
The Pope feels that there is a difference between Islamic theology and Christian theology on this issue, although many Muslims would disagree. The Pope, recognizing the language of Manuel II as being “startlingly brusque,” quoted the emperor in his remark, “Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached” The Pope goes on to say that violent conversions are wrong because they are incompatible with God’s nature, who abhors violence and is bound by reason.
The Pope did not explicitly condone the views of Manuel II. He actually remarked upon their hostile tone. However, the example he cited without further explanation was a serious miscalculation in today’s current environment. The Pope did recognize that Islamic law declares, “there is no compulsion in religion,” but the Pope made a disputable qualification, claiming that this command was later abrogated later when Prophet Muhammad came into a position of power.
Most Muslim scholars would disagree that the verse was ever abrogated. At the very least, the Pope should have recognized that these views did not represent the mainstream. Instead, through his lack of clarification he implied agreement that Islamic law allows spilling blood for the sake of conversions and spreading religion.
The Pope and the offices of the Vatican have recognized the offensiveness of the remarks, and clearly stated that the statements of Manuel II do not reflect the opinion of the Pope. The Pope has apologized for any injury his words have caused and has invited further dialogue. Muslims should recognize this conciliatory gesture and engage Roman Catholics.
Unfortunately, this is the sort of opportunity extremists in the Muslim and Western communities exploit to increase tension. Many extremists on both sides of the ocean believe that Islamic and Western worlds must inevitably clash, and that they have deep differences. In America and Europe, the myth that Islam is inherently violent fuels misunderstanding and becomes a self fulfilling prophecy, particularly when accompanied by violent images and statements.
Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury correctly stated, “There are elements in Islam that can be used to justify violence, just as there are in Christianity and Judaism.” Islam is not the cause of violence: most major world conflicts of the last century did not involve religion. The great religions can actually be a source of peace and reconciliation with far-sighted leadership. It should be a priority for the great religions to dialogue with each other and show a common front in supporting the value of faith and the importance of tolerance.
Muslims and Catholics, particularly in America, share many common goals. Both are committed to improving the welfare of our society, through services, education and advocacy. Both are fighting to show the important role of faith in forming a prosperous and peaceful community. There is far more to gain with constructive engagement than hotly disputed historical discussions.