[lbo-talk] Pope "deeply sorry" about reaction to quotesinMuslimworld

Yoshie Furuhashi critical.montages at gmail.com
Mon Sep 18 09:09:30 PDT 2006


On 9/18/06, Carl Remick <carlremick at hotmail.com> wrote: <snip>
> Posted by lenin
<snip>
> What relevance did he think the
> Byzantine emperor's 14th Century ruminations had today, bearing in mind that
> at that time it was Christianity that was busily spreading by the sword?

The Pope conveniently forgets the Fourth Crusade of the 13th century, the beginning of the end of the Byzantine Empire: "Of all the turbulent events that occurred during its long life, the Fourth Crusade had the most devastating effect on the empire. Although the stated intent of the crusade was to conquer Egypt, the leaders of the Crusade ran in to trouble when they found that considerably fewer men had responded to the call than had been expected. As a result, they could not afford to pay the Venetians for all the ships they had hired. After some time spent arguing over what to do next, the Venetians came up with a new proposal, and under their influence the Crusaders sailed to Constantinople, sacking the town of Zara (which was an enemy of Venice) on the way. In 1204 the Crusaders were able to gain entry to the city, via deception, and soon their troops poured into the city of Constantine, a city that had withstood every siege for nearly a thousand years. The Crusaders ransacked the wealth of a millennium, stretching back to the days of the Roman Empire. Buildings were burned down, and the four bronze horses which famously stand in Saint Mark's Square in Venice today, were looted from the Hippodrome at Constantinople. As a result, a short-lived feudal kingdom was founded (the Latin Empire), and Byzantine power was permanently weakened" (at <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_Empire#The_Fourth_Crusade>).

Manuel II Palaiologos, the Byzantine Emperor whom the Pope quoted, and two of Manuel's sons, John VIII Palaiologos and Constantine XI Palaiologos (the last Byzantine Emperor), presided over the fall of their "empire" (by their time, their territories probably did not deserve to be called an "empire" -- see a map of their "empire": <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_Empire#Fall>).

On 9/18/06, Carrol Cox <cbcox at ilstu.edu> wrote:
> Doug Henwood wrote:
> > With which I completely agree, but it's not as if Islam is the
> > embodiment of reason either, is it?
>
> Actually, in comparison with Christianity, and overlooking the modern
> distortions under imperialist pressure, Islam is sort of an embodiment
> of reason. No Trinity! No incarnate God. Hence no mystery required to
> avoid polytheism.

The Pope cited what a Christian emperor said in a "dialogue" with a Persian scholar (what did the Persian say to him, btw?) in the 14th century, so let's take my favorite 14th-century Persian, Hafez. Here is one of his poems:

I have learned so much from God That I can no longer call myself a Christian, a Hindu, a Muslim, a Buddhist, a Jew. The Truth has shared so much of Itself with me That I can no longer call myself a man, a woman, an angel, or even a pure soul. Love has befriended Hafiz so completely. It has turned to ash and freed me Of every concept and image my mind has ever known. <http://www.poetseers.org/the_poetseers/hafiz/gift/i_have_learned_so_much/document_view>

Now, that's ecumenical and transgender Enlightenment! -- Yoshie <http://montages.blogspot.com/> <http://mrzine.org> <http://monthlyreview.org/>



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list