Adrian Northrup

Muslims around the world are once again attacking the freedom of speech in Europe.

The last major eruption of anger took place after the Danish daily newspaper Jyllands-Posten published 12 offensive cartoons negatively depicting Islam and the prophet Muhammad.

This time, Pope Benedict XVI is blamed for the backlash because he invoked a controversial fifteenth-century document in which the Byzantine emperor Manuel II Palaiologos describes the prophet Muhammad as the deliverer of evil and later comments that violence is against reason and against God’s nature.

Theological preferences and opinions aside, the Pope invoked this particular text to illustrate the latter point and not to attack Islam. Instead of apologizing, and therefore admitting that his words were indeed offensive, Benedict XVI clearly explained his true intentions. Most neutral observers in Europe are siding with the Pope, and only some accuse him of being too careless with his choice of literary sources.

Unfortunately, in some parts of the world, ire was accompanied by active aggression and devastation. For example, two Christian churches located in the West Bank were torched on Sunday and the shooting of

Italian nun Leonella Sgorbati and her bodyguard in a Somalia children’s hospital was most likely a direct result of Benedict XVI’s recent comments. To date, many more related acts of violence have been reported worldwide. It did not help that the Pope expressed his deep regret that his words were misunderstood.

Moderates are also blaming the head of the Catholic Church for the stir. The Turkish
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan demanded an apology from Benedict XVI – a risky move for a leader of a country aspiring to join the traditionally Christian European Union.

He may have wanted to gain more political support from religious Muslims in his country.

But by doing so he chose not to speak out as a secularist in the Middle East, calling for understanding, intercultural dialogue, ideological pluralism and tolerance. An opportunity missed is usually an opportunity lost.

Is anger shared by many Muslims justified? Of course that depends on who you ask, but most people in countries where freedom of expression is exercised do not think so.

There are followers of Islam who dissociate themselves from the raging Muslim crowds as well. It may be too bold to criticize people who have honestly felt offended, but there are more peaceful ways to express dissent than killing Christians and attacking their places of worship.

That holds true especially given the fact that the Pope’s angering comments were taken out of context.

For instance, as controversial as Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell are in the United States, never have I heard about their fans burning down the headquarters of Comedy Central for airing the “This Week in God” segment of “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart,” or the “South Park” animated series. Fox Network’s buildings are still intact, even though the broadcasting giant continues to air “The Simpsons” and “Family Guy.” Anyone who has seen these programs and who even remotely knows what Christianity stands for will agree that the Pope’s comments (unfairly interpreted) and Jyllands-Posten’s cartoons pale in comparison to the above-mentioned TV shows.

Naturally, statements made by Benedict XVI carry much more weight than Stewie’s blasphemies, but the point is that there is a better way to express disapproval than that exhibited by most Muslims worldwide. A healthy sense of humor, some self-criticism and the ability to look at things from the third person’s perspective really facilitate discussions. Sometimes even silence is priceless. I know this because too often I lack those virtues myself.

Christians and Muslims around the world should not demonize each other, mutual respect and understanding ought to be actively sought by Islamic and Christian leaders of all denominations and actions should follow declarations. For example, the Great Commission (as it is understood by Christians today) is not a modern version of the medieval Crusades, and Jihad is not about killing those who do not follow Allah.

Is all this a collection of cliches? Not as long as saying “Allahu Akbar” aboard a transatlantic plane may result in its immediate emergency landing, evacuation and arrests – all of this with the graceful escort of a couple of fully armed and “ready to rumble” fighter planes.

Speaking of dialogue, if the majority of Muslims would have actually desired to communicate their standpoint peacefully, then perhaps they would have realized that the Pope did not even intend to discuss Islam in his speech. No apologies would be required or demanded, and there would be no conflict today.