Cartoon Theology

Regarding the recent incendiary Mohammed cartoons.

1. Mohammed has been depicted by Muslims historically and without complaint. Obviously these were not mocking depictions, but it is oversimplistic to say that NO depiction of Mohammed is acceptable.

2. Freedom of expression does go along with the idea that we should not try to offend others. A right is a moral power which is not indifferent to truth and falsehood or justice and injustice. It is likely however that we WILL offend others with our beliefs if they are divergent enough from theirs. So, there is an emotional and intellectual component to deal with here. Freedom of expression is supposed to allow everyone to bring their ideas out, so that the best ideas win. Along with that should be respect for the other, even if we strongly disagree with their ideas, or the exchange will get bogged down in the emotional and (importantly) because there is a chance that our own ideas are incorrect. First principle: read sentence #1 of this para.

3.The Vatican statement says the above imprecisely. The article quotes the first and worst sentence, which would better read if the word intentionally were added. To paraphrase the right to free expression does not mean we should intentionally offend others feelings. It should have been said that free expression often WILL lead to unintentional offense and that in a free exchange it is best to give the other party the benefit of the doubt that they are not trying to offend.


((Actual text of the Vatican statement.
1. The right to freedom of thought and expression, sanctioned by the Declaration of the Rights of Man, cannot imply the right to offend the religious sentiment of believers. This principle applies obviously for any religion. 2. In addition, coexistence calls for a climate of mutual respect to favor peace among men and nations. Moreover, these forms of exasperated criticism or derision of others manifest a lack of human sensitivity and may constitute in some cases an inadmissible provocation. A reading of history shows that wounds that exist in the life of peoples are not cured this way. 3. However, it must be said immediately that the offenses caused by an individual or an organ of the press cannot be imputed to the public institutions of the corresponding country, whose authorities might and should intervene eventually according to the principles of national legislation. Therefore, violent actions of protest are equally deplorable. Reaction in the face of offense cannot fail the true spirit of all religion. Real or verbal intolerance, no matter where it comes from, as action or reaction, is always a serious threat to peace.))

4. Even atheists can take offense at free expression of ideas and try to suppress same. As evidenced by many who would silence the high school student who wants to give thanks to God at his commencement etc.

5. So, was the cartoonist wrong? I don't think so. He put forward a common idea that many people have of a connection between terrorists and Mohammed. Not having read any comments he may have made about this, it is reasonable to conclude that he did not mean to offend Muslims, but rather to challenge them. If he WAS trying to merely piss off Muslims, then I do think he was wrong. The artist/author/cartoonist should to the extent possible not seek to simply offend others, because that is not respectful to the free exchange of ideas, as described above. (Besides which it is not very productive.) It is perhaps offensive to a Christian to be challenged by an atheist, but the atheist might feel strongly that he is doing the Christian a favor in warning him of his self delusion. Similarly the Christian may feel he is doing the atheist a favor by warning him of the dangers of hell. Accompanying the statements that might offend, there is nothing contradictory in adding that they are not meant to offend. Cartoons are by their nature simplifications. This can provide clarity, but often it can oversimplify.

6. Augustine's quote that "In essentials unity, in nonessentials liberty, in all things charity" is harder to apply when there are so many things in which the Muslim world and the West differ. It is fair to say that we often disagree profoundly on the essentials. But the last line still holds.