I confess that I am no fan of the papacy and its absoluteness about absolution (do you follow me?), and as a journalist, I am leery of claims that a speaker has been taken out of context. But fair is fair.

Speaking at a German university last week, Pope Benedict did not originate the words that have re-ignited outrage in the Muslim world. He merely repeated them, quoting Manuel II Paleologus, the 14th century Roman emperor of Byzantium, who had a running debate with a Persian scholar about whether violence in the name of God could be defended or deemed righteous.

Benedict’s lecture exalted the importance of reason in religion. “The decisive statement in this argument against violent conversion is this: Not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to God's nature,” the pontiff continued.

Too bad for him -- and for world peace -- that he didn’t stick to the meat of the argument rather than garnishing it with a quote that excoriates Islam’s founder and some of his teachings. Further, he did not repudiate the quote, leaving the implication that he endorses it. He now says he doesn’t share those sentiments, but protests rage, notwithstanding Benedict’s measured public apology.

It would have been nice had the initial news reports of the speech offered some context for the quote, but I’m not confident context makes much difference these days. The whole world seems on edge, suspicious, paranoid and ready to blow.

And of course, the Bush administration ramped up the anxiety in Muslim countries by launching an unfocused “war on terror” on specious grounds, adopting a dragnet mentality and installing policies that, as coincidence would have it, target Muslims most of all. 

Of course, Pope Benedict is not a part of the Bush administration, but he does represent a Western power and as such, is seen as part of the cabal that is itching to vanquish Islam. Seen that way, I should add, by people who are too busy, too angry, too ignorant or too isolated to bother with context.

This episode reminds me of an incident in the nation’s capital a few years ago when a white city official complained that the appropriation he had for administering a city program was “niggardly.” 

All hell broke loose -- again, among people unencumbered by context, in this case the accurate meaning of niggardly, which is “stingy, miserly, cheap.” The word was coined three centuries before the well-known racial epithet. But, that didn’t stop all hell from breaking loose over the man’s remarks -- so much so that he quickly resigned. Context, you see, is a bitch.

Just as there are ample reasons for the denizens of Washington, D.C. to be displeased with their government -- and niggardliness is one of them -- the Muslim world has plenty of reason to cry out.

Loosing the outrage over one misunderstood word or one misconstrued speech is wasted energy and it belittles the impact of honest protests over honest grievances.

Still, presidents, prime ministers, popes and such should choose their words more wisely, making sure they convey what they feel, while they’re at it, taking a new look at what they feel and why.  

Context, you see, is a bitch.