Did the Pope apologize or did he craftily say: "Sorry you took offense to such an obvious truth?"?

Question

Now, after a period of time, since the dust settled and only a few radical Muslims killed or were killed because of "words", do you Muslims and Christians still think the Pope actually "apologized" or did he define the issue and draw a line in the sand for future discussions?

Answer 1

it is brazenly obvious that he craftily said:

SORRY YOU TOOK OFFENSE TO SUCH AN OBVIOUS TRUTH

seem like just another opportunity to be deceived all the way back to abrahams first born ishmael and how he teased and tormented abrahams second son issac to the point where the boys mother sarai demanded of her husband to rid himself of his first born child and its mother to cast them off into the desert and then to make such a big deal about a few years later when god asked abe to kill his son isaac

hellesbelles! ol abraham had all ready been through hell...doing the will of his wife

now faced with killing isaac

so did the pope apologise?

is he capable of apologising?

where is the fault?

where does the blame lie?



IN THE BOSSOM OF ABRAHAM




is better for my spirit or my flesh to be uncomfortable

in the bossom of abrahaim

having to make the decision to comply with his wife of so many years who had not been capable of giving him an heir then she in turn gives to abraham her servant hagar the mother of ishmael

in the bossom of abrahaim

sorry you took offense to such an obvious truth
such an obvious truth

truth

truth?

abraham loved his wife so much that he cast out into the desert first born son


such is the history of the middle east

Answer 2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Benedict_XVI_Islam_controversy

The pope appologized, even though he didn't need to. He was quoting a very old exchange to show the prejudices that we had to overcome. It was not his words. And I doubt anyone ever bothered to read the rest of the speech before they condemned him.

The passage originally appeared in the “Dialogue Held With A Certain Persian, the Worthy Mouterizes, in Anakara of Galatia”[3], written in 1391 as an expression of the views of the Byzantine emperor Manuel II Paleologus on such issues as forced conversion, holy war, and the relationship between faith and reason.

Specifically, the Pope (making clear that they were the Emperor's words, not his own) quoted Manuel II Palaiologos as saying: "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 Pontiff was comparing the Quranic passage that "There is no compulsion in religion" with an allegedly later one that, according to Manuel II, allowed "spreading the faith through violence"; the latter teaching being offered by Pope Benedict as an unreasonable one, on the belief that religious conversion should take place through the use of reason. His larger point here was that, generally speaking, in Christianity, God is understood to act in accordance with reason, while in Islam, God's absolute transcendence means that "God is not bound even by his own word", and can act in ways contrary to reason, including self-contradiction. At the end of his lecture, the Pope said, "It is to the great logos, to this breadth of reason, that we invite our partners in the dialogue of cultures."
(from the above artical)

Answer 3

Here is a link to the English translation of the Pope's controversial speech: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2006/september/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20060912_university-regensburg_en.html

In my opinion, although what the Pope said was true, he said it in the wrong way to the wrong people.

If you are going to give a constructive criticism to your neighbor (Islam) then you should do it to his face not behind his back.

The Pope's speech used Islam as a bad example of "faith and reason" to a group of Catholics when he probably could have found a better bad example in Catholicism.

Therefore it was appropriate for the Pope to apologize.

With love in Christ.

Answer 4

I think he apologized that some were unable to grasp such an obvious truth.

Answer 5

Hi didn't apologize, and he shouldn't have. He did tell them he was sorry that they took offense. I hope he continues to point out the basic violent nature of islam.

Answer 6

He never actually aoplogized for what he said. He apologized that the muslims reacted as they did -- which wasn't something he had to apologize for in the first place.

Answer 7

Indeed he didn't need to appologize. He was only citing, and they took it as his own opinion. He is definitely for, not against interreligional dialog.

Answer 8

He didnt need to appologize