Allow me to begin by saying I do not think the Pope should apologize for any part of the now-ubiquitous Regensburg University address. My reason for thinking so is certainly not that I agree with Emperor Paleologus’ sentiments regarding Islam; not only are such comments brusque, as Benedict said, but also false, if not understandable from the position of a Byzantine ruler. The citation was made in a scholarly manner and meant to illustrate the process of thought the Pope followed in the substance of his speech. Unless someone can prove the quote is misattributed, Benedict has every right to stand by his remarks regardless of his regret concerning their consequences.
And what a speech it was. I am in full agreement with Peter Gardner, who wrote to this paper on Sept. 20 urging us all to take the comments in the context of the address as a whole. I think the message is a crucial one, delivered with great erudition and elegance by a genuine scholar. In that context, I see it as an invitation to people of all faiths to reclaim the practice of reason as an aspect of the divine, rather than leaving it simply the exclusive tool of secular thought. Coming from a Hindu tradition in which jnana yoga (roughly, the path of true wisdom) is regarded as one of the direct paths to liberation, I think the Pope is absolutely correct.
But let us pretend for a moment the Pope simply quoted the passage to provoke the wrath of Muslims. What would be the proper response to such a situation? I would see it as an opportunity for genuine students of Islam and followers of the faith to take the opposite intellectual stand and publish articles and pamphlets on what Islam has contributed to the totality of human religious expression. I am certain there are a great many admirable aspects of the religion of which myself and many others are ignorant, simply because everyone is so quick to take offense and demand apology rather than choose intellectual engagement. If the Pope made the reference deliberately, I think it may have been in the hope he might provoke reasonable and non-violent Muslims to reclaim territory from the jihadists and their gutless political allies who seek to gain from their ideology.
In 1917, an English drama critic named Archer published a work in which he roundly condemned all Indian culture, religion and philosophy as a “repulsive mass of unspeakable barbarism.” Sri Aurobindo, one of the great Indian freedom fighters, published in his journal a response drawing on numerous sources that refuted the claims of Archer in an equally round fashion. He discussed the uniqueness of the primarily spiritual mode of life cultivated in India as its unique contribution to world civilization. He did not demand an apology or declare a fatwa against the author for his insult. As a result of his intellectual efforts and those of many others, knowledge and respect for Indian spiritual traditions has increased exponentially in the West.
Of course, there will always be a large mass of people not interested in debate and the use of reason in religious matters. But I urge anyone disturbed by the Pope’s comments to first read the whole speech, and then direct whatever resentment is left toward joining the debate Benedict has begun. We have come to a time in history when shallow platitudes about tolerance will no longer suffice; the only way to achieve religious harmony is for all of us who have faith to unite in our use of reason and scholarship and to utterly reject the base passions and ultra-sensitivity that lead to religious violence. It is certainly unpleasant to hear criticism of one’s beliefs, but anyone who has reflected seriously knows what is unpleasant is often healthy.
Goutham Ganesan is a junior chemistry and biochemistry major. He can be reached at gganesan@umd.edu.
