The decision to freeze dialogue
with the Vatican by the Islamic University of Al-Azhar, seems to many a
bolt from the blue, which threatens to cause a clash between Christians
and Muslims worldwide.
The dialogue – heretofore always friendly -
between the Holy See and the world’s highest institution of Sunni Islam,
dates back to the '90s.
Its positive progress was undoubtedly thanks to
the personality of the imam of the time, Muhammad Sayyed Tantawi, who
died last March 10, 2010.
As of March 19 of the same year, his successor
became Imam Mohamed Ahmed al-Tayyeb.
He, January 1st last,
criticized Benedict XVI for expressing solidarity with Coptic
Christians, accusing him of "interference" in the internal affairs of
Egypt.
In fact, the tension with Al-Azhar dates to January 1. In the
run up to a meeting that should have taken place in the coming weeks,
the Islamic University had requested that the Vatican remove one person
in particular from its delegation: Fr. Khaled Akasheh, from Jordan, an
expert on Islam, a member of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious
Dialogue, who to date had been in charge of relations with the Islamic
University.
Msgr. Akasheh is among the most qualified people in dialogue
with Islam. He was in the Catholic-Muslim Forum in 2008, following the
famous letter of 138 Muslim scholars to the Pope, and engaged in
dialogue with Tehran’s Organizations of Islamic Culture.
The Vatican pointed out that in prior arrangements for
dialogue, it is written that each delegation has the right freely to
choose its members. But Al-Azhar had insisted that if his name is not removed, it would interrupt dialogue.
However, this friction - and threats to freeze dialogue - have
far deeper roots. Al-Azhar’s reasons for not wanting Fr. Akasheh are
unclear. It is probable that they do not want someone who understands
Arabic, who is an Arab, who understands Islam (Mgr Akasheh knows the
Koran in depth), in order to feel free, not to be judged (or held to
account).
The criticism of the pope, his expression of solidarity for the
Coptic community judged as "interference in internal affairs" of Egypt,
are thus only instrumental, a way to ostensibly cover up, the most
petty of reasons.
But there is another element to consider: the link between
Al-Azhar and its traditional support for the Egyptian political power.
Hosni Mubarak, is a moderate Islamic leader, eager to advance the
country towards secularism – also a demand of Coptic Christians,
continually discriminated against in terms of legislation and social
development.
To this end, Mubarak is pushing ahead in his attempt to
exclude fundamentalists from the political framework, especially the
Muslim Brotherhood. In an attempt to determine the next presidential
election in his favour, Mubarak is trying not to upset the Muslim world.
Critics of the Vatican have this aim: lay the blame on the Christian
and Western Pope, thus stroking the frustrations of the Muslims towards
the (so called) Christian West. Al-Azhar has simply latched on to this
trend.
How much weight will this decision carry? Will the rest of the
Muslim world follow the line of the "splendid" Sunni university? In our
opinion it is not likely.
Al Azhar, which is funded almost entirely by
Saudi Arabia, is representative of a very traditional Islam and is seen
by many Islamic institutions as "too dusty and outdated”.
While Tunisia
and the Arab world grapple with the struggle and suffering for the
future of Middle Eastern society, tackling the problems of human rights,
democracy, despotism, poverty and the economy, Al-Azhar has limited
itself to merely stating that Islam is against suicide, in some way
condemning all those unfortunates who have set themselves on fire out of
a despair caused by poverty and injustice.
And yet, the sacrifice of
these people has fuelled the revolt that led to the fall of Ben Ali and
is shaking the Middle East.
SIC: AN/INT'L