It could be described as the pope's "Muslim problem," but it really needs not be. Like many of you who watched Pope Benedict XVI on Easter Sunday baptizing Magdy Allam, I had conflicting emotions -- the least of which were about Allam's decision to become Christian. For years, Allam has been Italy's most famous Muslim. No doubt the public baptism was embedded with highly symbolic and spiritual connotations. Some pundits even argue that Allam, a known Muslim critic, has been considering conversion for years. He has written a book titled, "Viva Israele" (Long Live Israel) exalting Israel's virtues and condemning everything Arab or Muslim.

Still, Allam's baptism could have been performed lovingly and in so many other ways – none of which required that his face and story blanket the global media within hours of his reception. Being baptized did not require that he become the poster-boy for some Muslims considering Christianity, and there were a number of obvious reasons why he isn't a great candidate for that status anyway, and in fact the exercise may actually be counter-productive.

Doubtless, the pope baptizes no one, obscure or famous, during the Easter Vigil accidentally. And I didn't notice any Vatican spokesman offering comments and clarifications about the other six adults baptized in the same liturgy. Someone decided to use a globally streamed event watched by hundreds of millions to transform an individual act of conscience into a global phenomenon.

It is the wisdom of that decision alone that I question.

My chief gripe here is the overall effect on Muslim-Christian relations. I believe that this baptism unduly damages that relationship. There has been significant, even an unprecedented advance in Catholic-Muslim relations -- much of it spearheaded by the Vatican itself -- in the last year.

Why then, now, would the Pope revive antagonism in this way? Why such effort to revive relations after a strained several years (i.e., the Pope's 2006 Regensburg comments) if only to flush those efforts away with a single public provocation.

Somebody must have given Benedict rash advice that this public conversion would somehow advance the position of the Church in the Muslim world. I'm sorry, but I just can't see that happening. Could this even be related to the rumor of a church in Saudi Arabia?

It escapes me that the pope would not realize the potentially harmful effects this would have on the Church and its relationship with the Muslim world. Why add more fuel to the fire? Why give reason to the extremists?

Of course I am not arguing that Christians should not wear a cross or go to their churches or publicly declare their Christian faith. All I am asking is for a weighing of the implication of actions, especially if a more acceptable venue is possible to produce the same result.

Among Muslim clerics who shook hands with the pope in Washington, was Imam Qatanani of the Islamic Center of Passaic County. The imam, who is facing deportation from the U.S., has been a leading figure in interfaith dialogue. Would it not be a fitting opportunity for the pope to visit New Jersey's largest mosque, as a symbol of respect for Islam?

Aref Assaf, PhD, is president of American Arab Forum (www.aafusa.org), a think tank based in Paterson, specializing in Arab and Muslim affairs.