The Regensburg address: reason amid certainty

His point in all this is to assert vigorously the place of reason in religion, and of religion in the university. The address is aimed at those such as Richard Dawkins who assert that only science has meaning, that religion is irrational.

It is not without significance that shortly before he left the Vatican to visit Germany, the Pope had held a meeting of scientists, to raise similar issues to those addressed in the Regensburg lecture. Moreover, he concluded the lecture by once more quoting Manuel II: "Not to act reasonably (with logos) is contrary to the nature of God. It is to this great logos, to this breadth of reason, that we invite our partners in the dialogue of cultures."

There has not been much dialogue in the overwrought reaction to the Regensburg address. Many have questioned whether the Pope wants dialogue with Islam at all. This is a rather different question to whether or not he insulted the prophet, and a much more complex one. On this issue Muslims have more reason to be suspicious.

When Pope Benedict was elected in April 2005 many thought there would be swift changes to the Roman curia - the departments in the Vatican that run the Catholic church. As Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, he had himself been in charge of one for a quarter of a century. It was argued that, unlike John Paul II who came from a pastoral post in distant Poland, he knew the way the system worked, and would want to improve it.

Despite these prognostications there have been relatively few changes. But there has been one particularly surprising move. Archbishop Michael Fitzgerald, who headed the Vatican department which dealt with relations to non-Christian religions, was removed from his post and sent as papal nuncio (ambassador) to Egypt. This not only deprived Britain of a potential additional cardinal (Fitzgerald is English), but deprived the Vatican of its most respected expert on Islam. In the present context this was unfortunate. Fitzgerald might have alerted the Pope to the pitfalls of the quotation he used in his Regensburg speech. But the transfer was odd as well as unfortunate.

When Karol Wojtyla became John Paul II in 1978 the Catholic church was in conflict with communism. That adversary has disappeared. Now the significant "other" - for Christianity in general as well as for Catholicism - is Islam.

When Pope Benedict XVI was still Joseph Ratzinger he expressed the view that Turkey ought not to be a member of the European Union. He is, of course, a German, and the German Government tends to hold a similar view.

Shortly before the start of his trip to his native Bavaria he received a visit from the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, who flew in by private plane and stayed for a long discussion. Angela Merkel wants to revive the fraught issue of a European constitution and, like the Vatican, she wants the Christian roots of Europe to be written into the constitution's preamble. European Muslims, with or without Turkey, obviously feel uncomfortable with the notion of Europe as a Christian club.

This was not something addressed directly by the Regensburg address, but it underlies papal thinking. Benedict XVI wants to re-Christianise Europe. He believes that culture should be the vehicle for Christian evangelism. Clearly that will be much more problematic if the culture of Europe is increasingly imbued with the culture of Islam. This is not to accuse the Pope of Islamophobia, but to recognise that his approach to it is likely to be more cautious than that of his ebullient, and less theologically alert, predecessor.

Benedict believes that the culture of Europe should be one of open, rational debate in which, pace Richard Dawkins et al, religion has a place. In any such debate, religion will be exposed to critical questions. Christianity, certainly in the form espoused by Pope Benedict XVI, has become accustomed to this form of confrontation. The question must be, after the reaction to the Pope's Regensburg discourse, how ready for it is Islam?