| By JOHN L.
ALLEN JR.
Two recent books
unintentionally make an important point about the Western grasp of Islam.
The first, “Terror and Liberalism” by Paul Berman, argues
that islamism, the fundamentalist current that fuels terrorism, is an
Arabic-language version of the irrational anti-modern impulse that produced
Nazism and Stalinism. On this theory, there’s little intrinsic to Islam that
generates violence.
The second, “Islam Unveiled” by Robert Spencer, argues for
the opposite conclusion. Almost everything about Islam, he believes, militates
against pluralism and peace. Spencer’s chapters are rhetorical questions: “Is
Islam compatible with liberal democracy?” “Does the West really have nothing to
fear from Islam?” The implied answer is “no.”
What point do these books make about how the West
understands Islam? Basically, that we don’t.
Both Berman and Spencer are keen analysts, but both seem
concerned with intra-Western debates about pluralism, using Islam as a foil. One
probably doesn’t learn much about real Islam from either.
Where are the voices to which we should listen?
Part of the answer may have come in a May 19-23 seminar
sponsored by SEDOS, a Rome-based consortium of Catholic missionary orders. The
event was entitled “Call to a New Vision of Others and of Ourselves Through
Interreligious Dialogue: Focused on Islam.” It brought together Muslims with
Catholic experts on Islam.
SEDOS, for the record, tilts slightly to the left, and
hence exalts tolerance and diversity. The treatment of Islam at times could seem
a bit rose-colored.
That said, the week offered invaluable perspectives.
Three young Muslims studying Christian theology in Rome
addressed the group: Lejla Demiri and Betul Avci from
Turkey, plus Adnane Mokrani from Tunisia. Avci said that
Rome has been her first experience of Christians who take their faith seriously.
The encounter, she said, has deepened her commitment as a practicing Muslim.
Since images of young Muslims in Western
media today are largely of suicide bombers, listening to Demiri, Avci and
Mokrani was salutary. They suggest a generation rooted in faith, but anxious for
dialogue.
One point of reference throughout the week was Jesuit Fr.
Tom Michel, who worked in the Vatican on Islam for 13 years and who now runs the
Jesuit office for inter-religious dialogue. He teaches courses on Christian
theology for Islamic faculties in Turkey. He has spent time in almost every
Muslim-majority nation and has passed long hours in discussions with Muslim
scholars, religious leaders, politicians, students and countless ordinary Muslim
believers. His judgment, therefore, merits attention.
His message: “Dialogue is not just possible, it’s
wonderful.”
Michel introduced a Turkish friend, Cemal Usak, who
chairs the Intercultural Dialogue Platform. Usak came across as an apostle of
tolerance. When he finished, Michel said, “Some of you may be thinking that this
is an exceptional Muslim.”
In fact, Michel argued, Usak is representative of most
Muslims. Michel described speaking to 4,000 young Turkish Muslims during a
celebration of the birth of Mohammed, which fell this year on Easter Monday. The
youth were enthusiastic to hear about Christianity, and positive about a future
of peace.
“I am convinced that the vast majority of Muslims
would agree that these committed, open-minded, modern believers … are the hope
of the future, rather than the terrorists whom they clearly and openly condemn,”
Michel wrote afterwards.
David Shaheed, an
America Muslim from Indianapolis, and Jo-Ellen Karsten of the Focolare movement
in Chicago spoke about a rather remarkable dialogue in the United States between
Focolare and the American Muslim Society.
Shaheed said that
when he and fellow Muslims first visited the Focolare center outside Rome at
Castel Gandolfo, some were worried about how they were going to handle their
five daily prayers. When they arrived, however, the focolarini had
already set up a prayer room and organized the schedule so they could break for
prayer seamlessly.
“They weren’t trying to convert us,” Shaheed said. “They
were trying to help us become better Muslims.”
Two women from Algeria, Missionary Sr. of Africa Lucy
Provost and Muslim lawyer Amina Kebir, spoke about their experiences of dialogue
in a country where Christians and Muslims both have deep historical roots.
Provost, who grew up in Algeria before the civil war, said the very first person
she ever saw praying was the Muslim mother of a farmhand. “She taught us to have
respect for anyone who prays,” Provost said.
A couple notes of realism were struck by Msgr. Khaled
Akasheh, a Jordanian and a Latin Rite priest who is Michel’s Vatican successor.
On Monday, he pressed Dominican Fr. Claude Geffré, who had argued that other
religions play a positive role in God’s plan. When the teachings of other
religions contradict Christian revelation, Akasheh insisted, the Church cannot
simply accept them as valid alternatives. (Akasheh was not hostile to Geffré’s
aim. He agreed the church needs “a new theology for new times.”)
Akasheh recounted a visit from imams of the American Muslim
Society to the Vatican. Some were ex-Catholics. Akasheh noted this fact to Imam
Warith Deen Mohammed. What would be the response, Akasheh provocatively asked,
if Muslims wanted to convert to the Catholic Church? (He knew full well that
many Muslims consider conversion a form of apostasy, and this is one of the most
serious problems with religious freedom in Islamic societies).
Mohammed pondered, then responded: “The heart wouldn’t
accept it, but the head has to accept it.”
“It was the most convincing response I’ve received from a
Muslim in nine years of work in the Vatican,” Akasheh said.
The overall message of the week seemed to be this: Do not
take your impressions of Islam from media images of mayhem and fanaticism. There
are Muslims all around the world committed to dialogue. If there is to be a
better future, they and their Christian counter-parts will be its architects.
One footnote: I have often said to my colleagues in the
press that they ought to draw more on religious orders, especially missionaries.
They can be found in every nook and cranny of the planet, living with real
people. The SEDOS seminars underlined the value of seeking this expertise.
* * *
One of the most fascinating, and most heartbreaking, jobs
in the Vatican belongs to a Czech-born layman and U.S. citizen named Karel
Zelenka. He works for Caritas, the Vatican’s charitable arm, and it’s his job to
coordinate response when major disasters happen. He just returned from five days
in Iraq, and as we sat in his office reflecting on the experience, he was
fielding phone calls urging his presence in Algeria to organize relief from the
earthquake.
His job is to be on the frontlines wherever people suffer.
Zelenka brought back a message for the West, and especially
for Americans, from Iraq. It boils down to this: Baghdad is out of control, and
something has to be done.
“It’s a humanitarian disaster,” Zelenka said. “It’s chaos.
People are afraid to go into the street. They rarely leave home, and when they
do, they can’t wait to get back. A society can’t function like this.”
Most Iraqi Christians, Zelenka said, seem glad the
Americans toppled the Hussein regime, but they are fearful of what may come
next. In recent days the Shi’ite community has exerted a kind of civil authority
based on Islamic law, demanding that women wear scarves and ordering liquor
stores to close. These are small steps, but they herald a possible
fundamentalist Islamic state that would represent the Christian community’s
worst fears.
In this context, Zelenka said, Christians may increasingly
opt to leave. He said many Christians he met had contacted relatives in Canada
or the United States to make preparations in case things get out of hand.
Outside Baghdad, he said, conditions are better. In Mosul,
for example, life is back to normal – shops are open, restaurants are crowded,
and the air conditioning works in the hotels. But Baghdad, with its 6 million
people, represents 25 percent of the country, and as long as it’s stuck in the
Wild West, Iraq can’t rebuild.
Of course, Iraq has other problems. There’s a lack of food,
especially infant formula. There are few jobs and little income. There’s a need
for fresh water and sanitation. The 14 Caritas centers in the country, with
roughly 100 employees, are struggling to respond.
Yet until security is restored, Zelenka said, little can be
done. In that sense, he said, Americans would be well advised to worry less
about grandiose rebuilding schemes and concentrate on getting police, ideally
Arabic speakers from other Islamic countries, into the streets.
“Give us security,” Zelenka quoted one Iraqi as having told
him. “We will take care of the rest.”
* * *
Sometimes events in the Catholic Church are most noteworthy
for what doesn’t happen.
Take the Mass celebrated May 24 at the basilica of
St. Mary Major according to the 1962 missal. That’s the traditional rite that
was in use before the Second Vatican Council (1962-65). It’s known in popular
parlance as the “Latin Mass,” although this is misleading, because there’s
nothing preventing the current rite from being celebrated in Latin. The May 24
event was billed as the first time since 1970 the old Mass had been offered in a
major Roman basilica.
For weeks, the Mass had been the object of feverish
speculation. Some conservatives believed it would mark a reconciliation with the
Society of St. Pius X, the breakaway faction of Latin Mass devotees led by
French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. Liberals in the liturgical world, meanwhile,
heated the Internet with rumors that the Mass was the beginning of the end of
the reforms that followed Vatican II.
In the end, there was no big bang – no universal permission
to celebrate the old Mass, no suppression of the new Mass, no return of the
Lefebvrite prodigal sons.
Cardinal Dario Castrillón Hoyos, a Colombian who heads the
Vatican’s Congregation for Clergy, said the Mass. In his homily, Castrillon
affirmed both the old and the new rites.
“The so-called rite of St. Pius V cannot be considered
extinct, and the authority of the Holy Father has expressed his benevolent
welcome towards the faithful who, although recognizing the legitimacy of the
rite renewed according to the indications of Vatican II, remain attached to the
preceding rite,” Castrillon said.
A statement of good wishes from the pope was read out at
the beginning of the Mass, drawing scattered applause.
“This is very, very significant,” said Marygold Turner of
Kent in England. She was at the May 24 liturgy wearing the traditional veil that
Catholic women were obliged to use in church prior to Vatican II.
“This is the rapprochement the pope has asked for, and at
last his words are going to be heard,” Turner told NCR. “The pope wants
it, and Our Lady wants it.”
Turner’s group of approximately 25 persons had been
given permission to hold a Mass according to the pre-conciliar rite in St.
Peter’s Basilica the day before, Friday, May 23. It was celebrated by Fr. Andrew
Southwell, a priest of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, an order set up by
Pope John Paul for Catholic priests attached to the old rite.
Also in attendance at St. Mary Major’s on May 24 were
several figures from Italian social and political life, including Mario
Borghezio, a member of the far-right Northern League Party.
Borghezio said the Mass was a gesture “against every
modernism and every relativism,” and a defense of “the values of tradition,
threatened by the modern world and by the aggression of globalization.”
Signs of traditional devotion were clear. When it came time
for communion, a statement was read indicating that in keeping with the old
rules, the Eucharist would be distributed kneeling and only on the tongue. Near
the door was a box of black veils for women to put on as they entered.
In addition to the crowd of 2,000, some 150 priests
and seminarians took part in the Mass. The only other head of an office of the
Roman Curia in attendance was Archbishop Julian Herranz, president of the
Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts.
* * *
One sidebar to the Mass was the presence of Boston’s
emeritus archbishop, Cardinal Bernard Law, who resigned Dec. 13 under fire for
his handling of sex abuse allegations against Boston priests.
I saw Law enter and positioned myself to say hello. Given
that I had spotted Law at the Cecilia Metella restaurant last December, marking
the first confirmation of his presence in Rome, I was prepared for a less than
enthusiastic response. In fact, Law was quite gracious. He told me he was in
Rome for meetings of two Vatican congregations to which he belongs, and had
decided to come to the Mass.
All told, there were six cardinals present. One was another
American, William Baum. The others besides Law and Castrillon were Chilean Jorge
Medina Estevez, Austrian Alfons Maria Stickler and Madagascar’s
Armand Gaétan Razafindratandra.
Law and the other non-celebrants
wore crimson liturgical vestments and the beretta, a traditional
four-cornered cardinal’s hat.
After the Mass, Law brushed reporters aside, saying only,
“I thought it was a very moving Mass.” Asked if he could comment on his
post-resignation situation, he said, “I really haven’t been doing that.”
* * *
Two of the Vatican’s key spokespersons during the Iraq war,
deputy Secretary of State Jean-Louis Tauran and president of the Pontifical
Council for Justice and Peace Renato Martino, were among the featured speakers
at a conference, “The Church and the International Order,” May 23 and May 24 at
the Gregorian University.
Both men emphasized that the unity of the human family is
the key principle underlying the Vatican’s approach to international policy.
The international community, as Martino put it, is a
“natural and necessary community” that requires political institutions capable
of governing a common life. While these institutions should be guided by
subsidiarity, meaning respect for lower levels of authority, this is
nevertheless a vision that goes well beyond theories that see the nation-state
as the highest level of sovereignty.
Martino also argued for the abolition of war.
“Liberty and the respect of law have never been achieved
through the use of force and war,” Martino said.
Tauran, the pope’s top diplomat, began his talk by citing a
French phrase to characterize the current world order, the gist of which is “too
much power, too little sense.”
Tauran defined the aim of Vatican diplomacy as “giving
voice to the conscience of persons and of peoples.”
Like Martino, Tauran argued that a proper world order would
rule out violence. His text read, “Experience has demonstrated that violence
generates violence.” As he spoke, he added the present tense “and demonstrates,”
suggesting a link with current events. It was one of several subtle adjustments
where Tauran seemed to edge closer to explicit criticism of the Iraq conflict,
and thus of American policy.
“During the Iraq crisis, the Holy See said it did not share
the principle of ‘preventive war’ – an ad hoc concept – and solicited
respect for the United Nations Charter, in particular chapter VII, which
stabilizes criteria of behavior in case of threats or aggressions against
peace,” Tauran said.
His speech amounted to a plea for the respect of
international law.
“Only a rigorous application of the law, on the part of all
in every circumstance, can prevent the weak becoming victims of ill will, force
and manipulation by the strong. Thus the Holy See exerts itself so that the
force of law will prevail over the law of force.”
The conference, which was co-sponsored by the International
Jacques Maritain Institute, also featured an ecumenical panel, with Lutheran,
Anglican and Orthodox representatives. George Carey, the former archbishop of
Canterbury, argued that Christians should promote a “theology of ecology” that
would explore means for people to live in peace.
“The church’s power is in community,” Carey argued. “We’re
not involved in the state, but we are in the society. We’re there with suffering
people. Let’s not forget that the majority of Anglicans, the majority of Roman
Catholics, are poor, and we’re in solidarity with them.”
Carey will be spending six weeks in Rome next year as a
guest lecturer at the Gregorian, and I told him I’d like to sit down over a
couple good meals for a wide-ranging interview about Anglican-Catholic
relations. He agreed, which should make for fascinating conversation.
One footnote: Archpriest Vsevolod Chaplin of the Russian
Orthodox Church was scheduled to join this ecumenical panel. On Friday before
the conference began, however, he sent a terse fax to Fr. Franco Imoda, rector
of the Gregorian, saying he could not come. No explanation was supplied, but
most observers believe the withdrawal was related to the May 17 announcement of
the elevation of two Roman Catholic apostolic administrations in Kazakhstan to
dioceses. The move was taken by the Moscow patriarchate of the Russian Orthodox
Church, which claims Kazakhstan as its “canonical territory,” as another
indication of Catholic plans for proselytism.
* * *
I had the pleasure of attending a reception on the terrace
of a Rome hotel on Monday, May 26, hosted by Georgetown University’s President
John DeGioia for alumni and friends of the university.
I was especially struck by the presence of Cardinal Francis
Arinze, since the Nigerian prelate’s last experience of Georgetown was a bit
rocky. Arinze had been invited to speak at Georgetown’s May 17 commencement
ceremony on the subject of Christian-Muslim dialogue. In the course of his
remarks, Arinze spoke about threats to the family in modern culture, triggering
protest.
“In many parts of the world, the family is under siege,”
Arinze said. “It is opposed by an anti-life mentality as is seen in
contraception, abortion, infanticide and euthanasia. It is scorned and banalized
by pornography, desecrated by fornication and adultery, mocked by homosexuality,
sabotaged by irregular unions and cut in two by divorce.”
According to news reports, Theresa Sanders, a professor of
theology, left the stage when Arinze mentioned homosexuality, prompting other
students to walk out. A letter of protest over Arinze’s remarks signed by 70
faculty members was later drafted.
I jokingly said to Arinze at the reception that he was
brave to show up at another Georgetown event. He smiled graciously and said, in
effect, that the affair was no big deal. “Had I known what effect it was going
to have, I would have used another word,” he said.
Though I didn’t press him, my guess is that Arinze did not
mean to attack homosexual persons. In Vatican parlance, when one mentions
homosexuality in connection with the family, the reference is usually to issues
such as same-sex unions and the definition of marriage. One can debate whether
they amount to “mockery” of the family, but this is not hate speech. (See more
about the story in the June 6 issue of NCR.)
Other ecclesiastical VIPs at the Georgetown reception
included Archbishop Giuseppe Pittau, a Jesuit and secretary of the Congregation
for Catholic Education; Archbishop Michael Fitzgerald, president of the
Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue; and Archbishop John Foley, an
American and president of the Pontifical Council for Social Communications.
* * *
I reported last week that at a May 16 round table at Santa
Croce University on church history, Bishop Cipriano Calderón, a Spaniard who
directs the Pontifical Commission for Latin America, asked a question about the
beatification of Queen Isabella of Spain.
Intrigued, I rang up Calderón and asked to talk more. I met
him in his Vatican office on May 23.
Calderón, it turns out, is a devotee of “Isabella the
Catholic,” a title awarded her by Pope Innocent VIII. He said he had spoken with
the pope about her cause just a few days before our interview. John Paul was
interested but non-committal.
Officially speaking, the process has been on hold since
1991. During Isabella’s reign both Jews and Muslims were expelled from Spain,
and some question whether a beatification might open old historical wounds.
Calderón said such concerns should not prevail. The
decision to canonize heads of state, he argued, does not amount to an
endorsement of their political program, any more than canonizing doctors
ratifies their diagnoses.
Calderón sees Isabella as a patron saint of evangelization.
“When Colombus discovered the New World, her first concern
was not money or land, but evangelization,” Calderón said. “She wanted the
gospel of Christ to be known in America.”
In that sense, Calderón argued, the beatification would be
an impulse for “new evangelization.” Specifically, it would encourage Latin
America to make the transition from “a continent evangelized five centuries ago,
to an evangelizing continent.” Today, Calderón said, Latin American Catholicism
is “very alive, very strong,” and it can help to reawaken the faith in Europe.
Next year marks the 500th anniversary of
Isabella’s death. While Calderón says 2004 is too soon for the beatification, he
hopes the remembrance will jar the process loose.
* * *
In recent weeks “The Word from Rome” has hosted an exchange
between Neville Lamdan, the outgoing Israeli ambassador to the Holy See, and
Franciscan Fr. David Jaeger, a negotiator for the Holy See and spokesperson for
the Franciscans in the Holy Land. Subjects have included the April 2002 standoff
at the Shrine of the Nativity in Bethlehem, and the overall Israel/Vatican
relationship.
A final comment from Lamdan on Jaeger’s May 16 response to
his May 2 interview.
“Having read David Jaeger’s reaction to your recent
interview with me, it seems to me that, like Shakespeare’s lady, Jaeger protests
too much!
“Particularly unwarranted is his apparent claim to
omniscience regarding the role which the President of Israel proposed to
Cardinal Etchegaray during the Palestinian terrorist takeover of the Church of
the Nativity in Bethlehem.
“Equally out of place is his attempt to reinterpret His
Holiness the Pope’s clearly positive intent in his conversation with the
President of Israel on 12 December 2002, when he expressed the hope of making
the year of 2003 a ‘turning point’ in Vatican-Israeli relations.”
The e-mail address for John L. Allen Jr. is
jallen@natcath.org
Copyright
© The National Catholic Reporter Publishing Company, 115 E.
Armour Blvd., Kansas City, MO 64111
All rights reserved.
TEL: 1-816-531-0538
FAX: 1-816-968-2280 |