Madam, - The furore caused by Pope Benedict XVI's recent lecture in Bavaria provides an appropriate opportunity to reflect on the true differences between the Islamic world and the West.
It is evident upon reading the Pope's speech that his words were carefully selected. Arguably his key message was that "violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul". Sadly, however, it is his quotation of the Byzantine emperor Manuel II that some Muslims understand the Koran to mandate them to "spread by the sword the faith" which has attracted most attention. The fact that the Pope twice explained in the course of his speech that these were not his own words has clearly been lost on the many Muslims now demonstrating across the Islamic world.
However, the Pope's comments provide a stark contrast between the values of Western civilisation and the values of the Islamic world. On an almost daily basis, modern Christianity faces challenges in the media and popular culture to its central tenets. Dan Brown's bestseller The Da Vinci Code provides proof of this, if such were needed. But crucially, freedom of expression has long been celebrated in most Western countries.
The eminent American jurist Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes famously observed that "discussion affords ordinarily adequate protection against the dissemination of noxious doctrine", adding that "the greatest menace to freedom is an inert people". The "marketplace of ideas", where competing viewpoints are challenged as a means of testing their merit, was championed by Justice Holmes as a fundamental quality of free speech.
In Handyside v. the United Kingdom, the European Court of Human Rights stated its position on the right of freedom of expression in a democratic society. The Court explained that this right was "applicable not only to 'information' or 'ideas' that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a matter of indifference, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb the State or any sector of the population".
In recent months the vitriolic and violent response, in some quarters of the Islamic world, to the publication of "offensive" cartoons has demonstrated the sharp divide between the West and broad strands of Muslim society on the importance of free expression. It seems that such a divide will be enormously difficult to bridge, especially when open and free dialogue must be so carefully constructed to avoid any potential for offence.
However, one must also wonder whether such sensitivity is always warranted. In an unsettling poll last March, 40 per cent of British Muslims indicated their preference for the introduction of Sharia law in the UK. Such poll results, which suggest a far more serious threat to inter-religious relations than the fairly reflective comments of the Pope, could well have been treated with alarm across Western Europe. But many commentators observed that the poll raised questions as to the effectiveness of Britain's integration policies, rather than the radicalisation of British Muslim society.
It seems that the clash of our times will not be one of political philosophy, like the Cold War, but one between religious fundamentalism and the West. It will take calm heads on all sides to ensure that the hotspots of today, so recklessly stoked in recent times by Anglo-American foreign policy, do not develop into the global battlegrounds of tomorrow. - Yours, etc,
GERARD KELLY, Newcastle, Co Down.
Madam, - Practising no religion, I am an apologist for none, but I detest hypocrisy and selective outrage.
Muslims never cease to complain of "insults" to their faith in the media, yet even non-Israeli members of the Jewish faith are referred to daily in the press of Islamic countries as "pigs", "monkeys" and "dogs". That's not an insult to Judaism? Or perhaps Judaism doesn't count.
The outraged crowds that poured on to the streets of the world to protest at the insult to Islam occasioned by the Danish cartoons were nowhere to be seen when their co-religionists the Taliban methodically shelled to rubble millennia-old giant statues of the Buddha. That wasn't an insult to Buddhists? Or perhaps Buddhists don't count.
In the hated West, surrounded by splendid mosques and prominent imams, Muslim leaders complain of anti-Islamic government policies, while conveniently ignoring the fact that in Saudi Arabia, the site of their spiritual home, it is actually against the law to practice any religion other than Islam, even in private. And those "criminals" unfortunate enough to be caught by the matawa (religious police) in possession of non-Islamic religious symbols or paraphernalia will have nothing but their faith to succour them in their subsequent tribulations. That's not an insult to all other faiths? Or perhaps all other faiths don't count.
But the most insidious "reasoning" of all is delivered in the seemingly rational tones of "moderate" Muslim leaders in the UK. They calmly point out that, as it is young Muslims' anger at UK government policy that gives rise to carnage such as the London bombings, the only way for the government to end to these outrages is to make sure the UK's policies, both foreign and domestic, are not inflammatory to Muslims. In other words, UK policy should reflect, perhaps even be dictated by, Muslim interests and aspirations. They make this demand sound reasonable: Do as we want and nothing bad will happen to you; don't, and face the consequences.
And, when such an outrage happens again, as it will, presumably the same "moderates" will say: "Well, you can't say we didn't warn you." Oh, and by the way, the British police must also stop investigating young Muslims, because that's also likely to upset them. Checking up on and raiding suspected "activists" of the Real IRA, the BNP, neo-Nazis, etc is called security. If the "activists" being checked on or raided happen to be Muslims, it's called Islamophobia. Bah! - Yours, etc,
MAURICE O'SCANAILL, Clifden, Co Galway.
Madam, - It's a great pity that Pope Benedict, in his Regensburg address, did not concentrate on Francis of Assisi's encounter with the Sultan Maliki of Egypt during the fifth crusade in 1219. Francis abhorred violence, especially as it was blessed by the pope at the time. Francis first travelled to where the crusade was assembling and tried to convince its commander, Cardinal Pelagius, to abandon this officially sanctioned holy war against the Muslims of Egypt. The cardinal refused, so Francis, together with a companion, left the protection of the crusade and decided to go and meet the Sultan. He crossed the battle lines to be captured and in many conversations with the Sultan he established a lasting friendship. The encounter between Francis and Sultan Maliki had a profound effect on both men, especially on their understanding of each other's religious views. The Sultan as a result always treated Christian prisoners of war with great respect while Francis, on his return to Italy, used the Sultan's gift of an ivory muezzin's horn to call his friars to pray.
This great historical and ecumenical meeting in 1219 and its significance has been largely forgotten, as it challenges the notion of the Crusades as holy wars sanctioned by official Christianity and indeed the use of violence on behalf of any religion. - Yours, etc,
BRENDAN BUTLER, Malahide, Co Dublin.
Madam, - The Pope quotes a 14th-century text in a university talk that concludes by saying that "we invite our partners in the dialogue of cultures". The result: Muslim governments and populations misinterpret the quotation as an offence, people take to the streets in anger, and demand official apologies.
An Islamic government in Sudan lays waste to its western province and its Muslim population, scattering millions and murdering hundreds of thousands. The result: indifference in the region, praise for the slaughter from Osama bin Laden, and tacit support from Arab League governments.
Has there yet been a more bizarre or disgusting disjuncture in sympathy and reason? Sunday was the Global Day for Darfur. Let the voices of humanity, in the Arab and Islamic world and beyond, be heard in an effort to halt something that is truly offensive. - Yours, etc,
SEAN COLEMAN, Brian Avenue, Dublin 3.