Mel was drunk and said something bad that upset people; the pope was "doing theology" (which is almost as bad) and said something that upset other people.
Lots of people said that Muslims overreacted to the pope; almost noone claimed there was an overreaction to Mel.
It seems to me that they might have something to chat about (as well as the desirability of making the mass in Latin the norm....).
2 comments:
hmmm...except that what Benedict said was reasonable, even if it was unwise to leave it unqualified, while what Mel Gibson said, for all we know, was just hateful nonsense. I suspect your dislike for some of il Papa's positions might be making you something of a hostile interpreter.
Note, too, that while 'the Jews' sure haven't been responsible for all the wars in the world, significant segments of Islam have gladly associated themselves with the religiously sanctioned use of violence. So even if the Pope was out of line, as you seem to think, what he said was rooted in reality. Could the same thing be said for Mel Gibson? How many wars have 'the Jews' started recently?
I'd like to think that the best theology is a little bit like the best alchoholic intoxication, too. The worst of each kind certainly seem similar enough.
Please note that I don't usually allow "anonymous" comments. Clearly this poster has not read what I posted about the pope's comments: I clearly defended him.
Post a Comment