The Cardinal's point is well-taken, and one we have made many times here: violent jihad and Islamic supremacism are deeply rooted in the Qur'an, so the only way Muslims could possibly reject them would be to reject Qur'anic literalism -- and that is extremely unlikely. And unfortunately, when he says, "There is no worldwide authority who can interpret the Qur'an, so it depends on the person you have in front of you," he is perhaps unaware that there is a broad consensus (ijma, إجماع, which is a very important concept in Islamic theology) among the schools of Islamic jurisprudence that it is part of the responsibility of the Islamic umma to wage war against and subjugate unbelievers.
"Cardinal urges Muslim leaders to oppose violent jihad," by Riazat Butt for The Guardian, May 29 (thanks to all who sent this in):
Muslim leaders must be more outspoken about violence in the name of religion, a senior Vatican official urged yesterday.Cardinal Jean-Louis Tauran, the Pope's principal adviser on Islam, said that while the majority of Muslim clerics condemned acts of terrorism, they needed to be more vocal about jihad, especially because of its frequent appearances in the Qur'an.
The cardinal made the remarks after a lecture, given in London to an audience of students, Catholic clerics and figures from other religions. It was one of several public appearances during a rare visit to the UK.
He said: "In the Qur'an you have several interpretations of jihad - violent and holy. Most Muslims are condemning war made in the name of religion. The problem is that in the Qur'an you have good and bad jihad, so you choose.
"There is no worldwide authority who can interpret the Qur'an, so it depends on the person you have in front of you. Sometimes you should like religious authorities to be more outspoken about violence in the name of religion. But Muslims believe the Qur'an is the divine word of God, so it is a problem."
Indeed it is.
Hey, I believe that the Old and New Testaments are the divine Word. Maybe it helps if your Holy Scripture is easily interpreted in a non-violent manner.
And just where is this list of peaceful-jihad-preachers?
Who are these Muslim clerics who constitute a "majority"?
If they're a majority, if they're so influential, why are their voices not drowning out the infantile rage of the "minority"?
You mean, Islam is unlike any other religion................
"There is no worldwide authority who can interpret the Qur'an, so it depends on the person you have in front of you.
Or personssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss...
"violent jihad and Islamic supremacism are deeply rooted in the Qur'an, so the only way Muslims could possibly reject them would be to reject Qur'anic literalism -- and that is extremely unlikely.
--RS
As there are more than a billion Muslims around the globe, with no unifying voice in Islam, I can't even imagine that happening within the next few centuries.
At what point would the number of holdouts be too limited to continue the jihad?
A million? One Hundred Thousand? Five Hundred?
One?
This is why, except for compassionate grounds, we must stop immigration of Muslims. The expulsion of any Muslims who support violent jihad (basically treason by another name) is the wise course of action.
Fear not, in time, the world will get that while all Muslims are not violence, the lack of a hierarchy combined with the schizophrenic nature of the Koran, makes Islam a perpetually unstable and toxic religion. A nice couple can move to North America with a strong ethos of peaceful jihad but their children suddenly choose to interpret jihad in a treasonous manner. There is little to provide theological stability.
Islam is chaotic! Much like Mohammad.
PRCS:
Right. Although no one can predict the future, it is extremely unlikely that this will happen. And that's why James M. is right also.
Cordially
Robert Spencer
Yep.
Thanks.
OT re: Mark Steyn
http://covenantzone.blogspot.com/
Good that higher up Christians are commenting like this. It's unfortunate that whenever the screaming and shouting starts, they all then grovel on their bellies, rather than saying, "I said what I said and meant what I said"
Still maybe the beginnings of rationalism are beginning. Judging a faith, political persuasion not by its talk but by its deeds. Stranger things have happened.
He said: "In the Qur'an you have several interpretations of jihad - violent and holy. Most Muslims are condemning war made in the name of religion. The problem is that in the Qur'an you have good and bad jihad, so you choose.
--
Problem is.. how do you know that "most muslims" do indeed "condemn war made in the name of religion"?
When, when, oh, when, is Mr Robert Spencer going to receive that Invitation to an Audience at the Vatican?
The Kuran teaches violence. That is all there is to it. Notice if you haven't already that virtually every single Islamic nation state is soaked in human blood. That bloodshed comes as a direct result of what Islam teaches via the Kuran being practiced.
If you are riding a bus and a Muslim person boards it, you're better off getting off that bus IMMEDIATELY. And that is the best analogy I can make for the entire world situation vis-a-vis Islam: get as far away from this murderous thing as you can (and keep it away)--while the getting away is good.