I take Pipes's side. Agree with Benedict to an appreciable degree, but also believe he overstates it. With the right pressures, over the long haul - an inter-generational space, the right strategies, etc., fundamental social/political changes can take place. Not at all sure the West is up to it, but am aligned with Pipes on this one; though when he states "... huge efforts are needed to get it moving again," he frames it all too well.

As to whether the West is up to it, The New Criterion this month has a quintet of essays which variously address that topic, by Kimball, Scruton, Steyn, Windschuttle and Murray.

I think Dr. Pipes is way too optimistic. He seems to think liberal thinkers can convince enough people of softer, kinder and gentler interpretations of the Quran. I think the Pope is much closer to reality. If Islam is to reform it needs to change its core beliefs. I don't think that's likely at all.

Turkey may be our best hope, and deserves a bit of study, but I don't have many postive thoughts on their chances of an Islamic Reformation.

I'm with BXVI on this one. While it is conceivable that Islam could reform by, for example, eliminating the importance of the Koran written in Medina, it is hardly likely that such an interpretation would ever become mainstream. Unlike the Catholic faith, which is magisterial (meaning there is an accepted body of dogma and a mechanism for definitively sorting out questions of faith and morals) Islam has no such mechanism. Thus a kinder, gentler Islam would have no more greater claim to the truth that Wahabism, Sufism or any other strain of Islam.

Pipes's article has been updated, with a note from the very person (Christian Troll) who gave the presentation which Benedict responded to and which Fr. Fassio reported on (during the Hugh Hewitt program). He was there, he gave the presentation and he's indicating he does not recall Benedict saying what Fr. Fassio reported, specifically the immutable sense that "There's no possibility of adapting it or interpreting it." So it may be that Pipes and Benedict don't disagree nearly as much as previously understood, if at all.

If the choice were simply between "optimism" and "pessimism," I'd choose pessimism in the short-term and would avoid the term "optimism." Rather, I prefer to think in terms of a well grounded or well reasoned hope which can be constructively and realistically worked toward. That includes knowing when and how to apply the right political pressures, including military force, as necessary. As regards the idea of any "reformation," I'd avoid that term as well, at least in any unqualified sense, as it more typically references Luther's Reformation, initiated from within. However, it's worth recalling that the English Reformation was more of a top-down and politically initiated reform, and one which maintained, regrettably imo, the institution as a "state church." (Btw, in a different vein, Benedict too has stated the "state church" concept was/is regrettable and additionally has indicated the American model, emphasizing the separation of church and state, is the preferable model.)

The very subject matter being addressed is the theology of revelation/interpretation and the prospects for some change to be effected two, three and more decades into the future. It also includes how currect and near-term social/political pressures will work to effect some changes.

At any rate, those are all very broad brush strokes and none of that is to denote a too facile hope and certainly not an "optimism" as typically understood. Pipes himself indicates as much when he states "huge efforts" will be needed. I would however change Pipes's final formulation to be more reserved, essentially to read "Islam presently is stuck, and needs huge efforts to get it moving again."

Somewhat related to this discussion of long-term prospects for change is this WPO poll entitled Afghan Public Overwhelmingly Rejects al-Qaeda, Taliban: Strongly Supports US and International Presence. This is a single indicator, caught in a moment of time, so should not be over-weighted. Nonetheless it is one of those indicators which raises prospects for a measure of hope, even if it is a hope created, one initiated and aided, via outside political/military pressures as opposed to any type of "optimism" conceived in terms which are too simple or unguarded. It reflects, at least at some level, a receptivity to change throughout that society.

(This poll was briefly noted here at Solomonia, also American Future distills some of the poll numbers.)