Groveling and Diplomacy

Pope Benedict has not, to my knowledge, issued an outright apology for remarks he made in an academic setting in a speech that so enraged the Muslim world (how can he apologize for what someone else said?) but instead, "regrets" the strong reactions. In meetings with Islamic diplomats recently, the pope encouraged Muslims to actually READ the entire text and then judge for themselves whether he was intentionally or recklessly disparaging Islam. For the time being, the pontiff is satisfied with continuing to reconcile and mend fences.

I am not an "in your face" theologian nor am I a confrontational politician. I believe that in order to be heard, one must be willing to hear. Am I perfect? Hardly. But I can also reach a point when, in the order of an apology, I will finally draw a line. I will not grovel and beg. If I am moved to apologize (and I often am because of my big mouth), my apology is sincere. Is it then my problem if others cannot, or will not, accept my apology?

I don't think it is any matter of pride in which I find myself finally fed up with those who won't listen to reason. It is easy for me to convince myself that, unless my words or act is a complete violation of reason and respect for others, if they will not accept my apology the first time it is very likely they never will.

So why is Benedict allowing himself to be continually beat over the head especially by those who seem intent on trying to convince the world that they have a legitimate beef and that they are being mistreated? Why is no one taking the pope's invitation to actually read the entire text of the "speech" seriously enough to actually read it? Prominent Muslims the world over act offended at the suggestion that Islam is not a violent religion, yet they refuse to take any stand against the violence this speech is purported to have provoked? How, then, can they expect to be taken seriously when they believe that Islam has something to offer to the world beyond bloodshed?

The pope cannot be held responsible for what someone said 600 years ago anymore than I can be held responsible for slavery in the United States in the early days of this republic. Why, then, must he or I apologize for something over which we had no control? I can speak of facts regarding slavery but if I do not specifically mention that I believe the practice to have been abhorent, does this then make me a proponent of that which I find personally and socially repugnant?

The pope has issued his regrets and I have no reason to believe that he is not sincere. Why can we not move along in favor of something else?