Prayer for VocationsO Holy Spirit, Spirit of wisdom and divine love, impart Your knowledge, understanding, and counsel to the faithful that they may know the vocation wherein they can best serve God.
Give them courage and strength to follow God's holy will.
Guide their uncertain steps, strengthen their resolutions, shield their chastity, fashion their minds, conquer their hearts, and lead them to the vineyards where they will labour in God's holy service.
Amen.
The month of July, also the month of the Most Precious Blood of Jesus, opens with the consecration of a new bishop for the Irish diocese of Down and Conor, a public religious apology, the honouring of 2 NI clergymen for role in peace process, WYD08 causing free speech troubles...
The Confraternity of Catholic Clergy, a national association of over 600 priests and deacons, has responded to the reported desecration of the Eucharist at the hands of a Minnesota biology professor and science blogger by asking for the Catholics of Minnesota and the entire nation to join in a day of prayer and fasting. “We find the actions of University of Minnesota (Morris) Professor Paul Myers reprehensible, inexcusable, and unconstitutional,” the group said in a statement.
“His flagrant display of irreverence by profaning a consecrated Host from a Catholic church goes beyond the limit of academic freedom and free speech.”
The confraternity argued that Myers’ claim to have acquired and desecrated a consecrated Host is a violation of the freedom of religion guaranteed in the Bill of Rights.
“Lies and hate speech which incite contempt or violence are not protected under the law,” they further asserted, arguing that freedom of religion means “no one has the right to attack, malign or grossly offend a faith tradition they personally do not have membership [in] or ascribe allegiance.”
The confraternity lamented the inaction of the University of Minnesota chancellor, who they said refused to reprimand or censure Myers.
“Tolerating such behaviour by university officials is equally repugnant as it lends credibility to the act of religious hatred,” they stated.
The confraternity said it would pray “that Professor Myers contritely repent and apologize.”
Officials with the foundation established by Pope John Paul II to assist the indigenous and poor farmworkers of Latin America expressed hope to expand its donor base in order to help more people.
Brazilian liberation theology advocate Leonardo Boff said the Vatican was facing a "great internal crisis" because it fails to represent the people it serves.Boff, a former priest the late Pope John Paul II sanctioned in 1985 for his leftist views, met here with Paraguayan president-elect Fernando Lugo, a former Catholic bishop who was also suspended by the Vatican for entering politics.
"The Catholic Church is heading toward a crisis because the Vatican has no place for all the world's real Catholic representatives," Boff told reporters after the meeting.
He said Latin America held the largest population of practicing Catholics in the world, and "those Catholics are not well represented" in the Vatican.
Boff said another reason fanning the Vatican's internal crisis is "the zero growth of the Catholic Church in our planet."
Boff was condemned to silence by Pope John Paul II in 1985 after he was sanctioned by then-cardinal and Prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, Joseph Ratzinger, who now presides as Pope Benedict XVI.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Church officials have placed a Roselle Roman Catholic priest on administrative leave after he allegedly misappropriated $112,000 church cash to fund a gambling habit, a spokesman said Wednesday.
The Lambeth Conference must exercise moral leadership on the issue of the environment and global warming, the chairman of the Anglican Communion Environmental Network, the Rt. Rev. George Browning of Canberra said last week.
NOBEL LAUREATE and former Archbishop of Cape Town, Desmond Tutu has apologized to the victims of xenophobic violence in South Africa that left over 60 dead and thousands homeless.
The director of the Vatican press office has told reporters that during his current vacation in Bressanone, Italy, Pope Benedict XVI might be drafting a new book, an encyclical-- or something entirely different. 
The Holy See has confirmed through the Apostolic Nunciature in Paraguay the loss of the clerical state of former bishop and President-elect Fernando Lugo. In a statement released today and signed by the Prefect of the Congregation for the Clergy, Cardinal Giovanni Batista Re, the decree granting a dispensation from the clerical state for Lugo was made public.
“His Excellency the Most Reverend Fernando Armindo Lugo Mendez, S.V.D., Bishop emeritus of San Pedro, requested dispensation from the clerical sate on December 18, 2006, in order to run in the elections for President of the Republic of Paraguay,” the decree states.
“The Holy See, after attempting to dissuade Bishop Fernando Lugo from running as a candidate for President of the Republic (cf. CIC can. 285&2), suspended him from the exercise of the priestly ministry,” the decree explains.
“The recent situation that has been created by the election of Bishop Fernando Lugo as President of the Republic of Paraguay,” the decree says, “requires that, for the good of the country and in order to clearly distinguish between the office of President of the Republic and the exercise of the episcopal ministry, the petition he presented requesting the loss of the clerical state be considered again.”
The decree goes on to affirm that, “in fact, his acceptance of the office of President of the Republic of Paraguay is not compatible with the obligations of the episcopal ministry and the clerical state.”
“Therefore, having carefully examined all the circumstances, His Holiness Benedict XVI has granted him the loss of the clerical state, with the consequent loss of the rights inherent therein, dispensing him as well from his religious vows made in the Society of the Divine Word, from clerical celibacy (cf. CIC can. 291) and from the other obligations that the clerical state entails (cf. CIC can. 292)."
Lastly, the decree underscores, “The Supreme Pontiff exhorts Mr. Fernando Armindo Lugo Mendez to be faithful to the Catholic faith in which he was baptized and to lead a life consistent with the Gospel.”
The Nunciature in Paraguay added that the Church’s action in the case of Lugo “is due exclusively to canonical and pastoral reasons,” and that “the Church, without abdicating her prophetic role, will continue in her relations with civil authorities as spelled out in the Constitution ‘Gaudium et Spes’ of Vatican II, according to which ‘the political community and the Church are independent and autonomous of each other in their own fields. Nevertheless, both, although under different titles, are at the service of the personal and social vocation of all people’.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
An exchange of letters between Cardinal William Levada, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and Archbishop John Hepworth, Primate of the Traditional Anglican Communion shows warming relations between the two Churches as they begin to consider proposals for corporate reunion. Archbishop Hepworth, writing in the Messenger Journal, has announced that he has responded to a letter “of warmth and encouragement” he received on July 25 from Cardinal Levada.
The archbishop said the entire Traditional Anglican Communion should be encouraged by Cardinal Levada’s letter, which was written to assure the archbishop that the Congregation is giving “serious attention” to the “prospect of corporate unity” raised in a 2007 letter from the Anglican primate.
In his letter, which was dated July 5, Cardinal Levada told Archbishop Hepworth that the Congregation has studied the proposals Archbishop Hepworth presented on behalf of the House of Bishops of the Traditional Anglican Communion.
The proposals had been presented during the archbishop’s October 9, 2007 visit to the Congregation’s dicastery offices.
“As the summer months approach, I wish to assure you of the serious attention which the Congregation gives to the prospect of corporate unity raised in that letter,” Cardinal Levada wrote.
The cardinal noted that the situation within the Anglican Communion in general “has become markedly more complex” since the archbishop’s visit.
He wrote that the Congregation will inform Archbishop Hepworth as soon as the Congregation is in a position to “respond more definitively.”
Cardinal Levada closed the letter with a blessing, saying “I assure you of my continued prayers and good wishes for you and your brother bishops of the Traditional Anglican Communion.”
In a July 25 message released to the Traditional Anglican Communion College of Bishops, Vicars General, and others assisting the Traditional Anglican Communion to achieve unity with the Holy See, Archbishop Hepworth distributed a copy of the cardinal’s letter and described his own reply to it.
“I have responded, expressing my gratitude on behalf of ‘my brother bishops,’ reaffirming our determination to achieve the unity for which Jesus prayed with such intensity at the Last Supper, no matter what the personal cost this might mean in our discipleship,” Archbishop Hepworth wrote in the letter published by the Messenger Journal.
He said Cardinal Levada’s letter should encourage “our entire Communion” and “friends who have been assisting us.”
Archbishop Hepworth said he was “particularly thankful” to Cardinal Levada for his “generous mention” of corporate reunion. The archbishop wrote that corporate reunion was a path “seldom travelled in the past” but one “essential” to fulfilling Christ’s desire for Christian unity.
He said his flock should be spurred to renewed prayer for the Holy Father, for Cardinal Levada and his Congregation’s staff, and for all their own clergy and people “as we move to ever closer communion in Christ with the Holy See.”
According to the Anglican Church in America’s website, the Traditional Anglican Communion claims 400,000 members worldwide.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
During the second day of his vacation at the historic Seminary of Bressanone in northern Italy, Pope Benedict XVI spent his time resting and studying at the famous seminary library. As he did on his first day of vacation, the Holy Father again preferred to remain indoors at the 400 year-old building—a living museum of sorts—instead of spending time in the gardens outside.
Meanwhile in Bresssanone, where the German-speaking population is celebrating the presence of the Holy Father, a new CD is set to be released which includes conferences from a 1990 congress in Bressanone on Choral and Polyphonic Music.
The Archbishop of Canterbury appealed to hundreds of bishops to demonstrate mutual generosity as the row over sexual ethics continues to embroil the Anglican Communion. In his second presidential address at the once-a-decade Lambeth Conference on Tuesday, Dr. Rowan Williams said that warring factions in the worldwide Communion were “threatening death to each other, not life.”
He said that some in the Communion regarded the independent actions of some provinces as “confused or reckless innovation” that were a “body-blow to the integrity of mission and a matter of literal physical risk to Christians.”
“The reaction to this is in turn felt as an annihilating judgment on a whole local church, undermining its legitimacy and pouring scorn on its witness,” the Archbishop said.
He acknowledged that demonstrating generosity would be costly for traditionalists and liberals, who remain at odds over a number of issues including the ordination of homosexual clergy, the blessing of same-sex unions and cross-border interventions.
“If both were able to hear and to respond generously, perhaps we could have something more like a conversation of equals – even something more like a Church,” said Williams.
He challenged bishops to take up the recommendations of the 2007 Dar-es-Salaam meeting of primates, which asked different factions within the Communion to take simultaneous steps towards each other.
“To the innovator, can we say, ‘Don’t isolate yourself; don’t create facts on the ground that make the invitation to debate ring a bit hollow?’ Can we say to the traditionalist, ‘Don’t invest everything in a church of pure and like-minded souls; try to understand the pastoral and human and theological issues that are urgent for those you are opposing, even if you think them deeply wrong?’” he asked.
Williams went on to reaffirm his support for the Anglican Covenant and the formation of an international body responsible for issuing guidance on what constitutes “a grave and lasting divisive course of action by a local church.”
“We need to speak life to each other, and that means change,” he said, adding later, “I find it hard at present to see another way forward that would avoid further disintegration.”
Around 650 bishops are gathered in Canterbury for the Lambeth Conference, which runs until Sunday. Around a quarter of the bishops in the Anglican Communion chose to stay away from the conference in protest of the presence of pro-gay bishops, including some of those involved in the consecration of the openly gay Bishop of New Hampshire, Gene Robinson.
Williams appealed to the bishops to remember their shared Anglican identity rooted in Jesus Christ as the “one unique center” and acknowledge “that the only responsible and Christian way of going on engaging with those who aren’t here is by speaking from that center in Jesus Christ where we all see our lives held and focused.”
He told the bishops: “I think we perhaps can, if and only if we are captured by the vision of the true Center, the heart of God out of which flows the impulse of an eternal generosity which creates and heals and promises.
“It is this generosity which sustains our mission and service in Our Lord’s name. And it is this we are called to show to each other.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
In the midst of the maelstrom of the 14th Lambeth Conference Dr. Rowan Williams, the archbishop of Canterbury, has affirmed the classical Christian doctrine on sexual morality.
Priests cannot fulfill their missionary mandate by staying in their rectories and churches waiting for people to come to them, said Brazilian Cardinal Claudio Hummes, president of the Congregation for Clergy.
A POWERFUL UN statement on church control of primary schooling in Irelandhas sparked alarm within the Catholic Church.
The Human Rights Commission said the Government needed to ensure that non-denominational primary education became widely available.
This was necessary in view of the increasingly diverse and multi-ethnic composition of the State.
It noted with "concern" the fact that the vast majority of Ireland's primary schools were privately-run denominational schools which had adopted a "religious integrated curriculum".
This deprived many parents and children who wished to have access to secular primary education.
The commission identified primary education as one of three priority areas on which it wanted an update within a year -- the other two dealt with detention and rendition.
The report is the strongest statement yet from the commission -- it suggested the integrated religious curriculum may be in breach of various articles of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
But last night the Catholic Primary School Management Association (CPSMA) said that there was a danger than the UN Commission's statement could end up depriving parents of the right to send their children to Catholic Schools.
General secretary Monsignor Dan O'Connor said CPSMA had consistently supported the notion of diversity in educational providers as had members of the hierarchy.
But the "one-size-fits-all" approach would deprive parents of the right to send their children to Church schools. This was already happening where there was no choice but Educate Together multi-denominational schools.
"Ireland is still a country of believers," said Mgr O'Connor, who added that the recent census showed an increase in the Catholic population, mainly due to newcomers.
There was also an increase in the Anglican community and in the Muslim community.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
A 63-year-old senior priest in Germany's Catholic archdiocese of Bamberg resigned Wednesday after four men said he had fondled them as boys when they were attending a Catholic boarding school.
The Anglican Communion needs to find a way to affirm the dignity of all people and encourage the active role of women in the church while remaining faithful to the Christian tradition and Scriptures, said Cardinal Walter Kasper.
A High Court action taken by RTÉ against the Broadcasting Complaints Commission over a decision made against the station in its coverage of the Ferns inquiry into sexual abuse has been settled. The court heard that the BCC upheld a complaint made by one viewer about a background image using religious symbols in a report on the findings of the Ferns inquiry.
The viewer had complained about what he claimed was a 'profane use of the sacramentals' referring to the appearance of rosary beads, a priest's collar and a bible or breviary as a background.
The BCC upheld the complaint on the basis that it was inappropriate and likely to offend taste and decency.
Under the terms of the settlement agreed today, RTÉ is no longer required to broadcast the terms of the BCC's decision.
The BCC will also put a statement in its annual report and on its website alongside the decision, stating that the decision was challenged by RTÉ in the High Court and a settlement was agreed by the parties.
CAMPAIGNERS have accused Catholic Church authorities of failing to spend hundreds of thousands of pounds of parishioners’ money donated to help save the iconic SS Peter and Paul Church in New Brighton. A pressure group set up to save the church - known by sailors as the Dome of Home - have now called for an investigation into church leaders by the Charity Commission.
Members of Soul (Save Our Unique Landmark) say they have donated hundreds of thousands of pounds through Gift Aid, which allows the church to reclaim tax on the money – but that money has not been spent as they believed it would be, such as on routine maintenance.
Soul says it has been left without key repairs being carried out for at least 10 years as the church prepared to find a way to close it.
According to Soul, a decision was made 10 years ago to “covertly withdraw maintenance” of the church.
Many in the congregation had continued to make Gift Aid payments which Soul says accrued “surplus income of approximately £35,000 per year”.
The diocese, they claim, continued to apply for Income Tax relief on these funds where Gift Aid was registered, but the money is in a bank account controlled by Shrewsbury Diocese, which refused all but the most essential repairs.
In a letter to the Charity Commission, Soul chairman Frank McGowan, said: “We accept that the trustees may decide to change their policy in regard to the maintenance and repair of a building that is under their care in the trust.
“However, we do not accept that, when such a decision impinges on the interests of our parishioners, the trustees have a right to keep such a decision secret.”
In a shock announcement last month, parishioners were told the church would close on August 17 – this despite a letter just a few months earlier from the Vatican reassuring them there were “no current plans” to shut SS Peter and Paul.
Father John Joyce, of the Diocese of Shrewsbury, said: “The bishop has announced his decision along with the trustees to close the church and there is no further comment to make. They have a right to pursue whatever they want, but the bishop has made his position clear on this.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Pope Paul VI's decision to uphold the ban continues to affect millions of families. SOME YEARS ago a mother of six wrote to recount the effects the Catholic Church ban on artificial contraceptives was having on her life.
"You have a two-month-old on one side of the bed, a 16-month-old on the other, and a 2 year old in another room. Beside you is your husband that you love and who has been using his 'self-control' for at least four months.
Verbal communication is of necessity cut down to a minimum and cosy chats together are out.
"So you take your chance and spend the next few weeks (longer if you are breast-feeding) worrying yourself sick and wondering if you are pregnant again. This is married life.
"What they never told me is what to do; the don'ts I am familiar with. 'Use your self control,' I was told.
"'Put your husband in another bedroom,' my gynaecologist said. Now that's all very well for a week, a month or two months - but forever?"
Helen wrote her letter because the Vatican banned all artificial methods of contraception and, at that time, the Irish government always bent its knee to the church.
That changed but the church's ban has not.
It continues to have a significant impact on the lives of women and their families around the world, Catholic and non-Catholic alike.
Last Friday was the 40th anniversary of that fateful day in 1968 when Pope Paul VI slammed the door on the hopes and needs of Catholics around the world, confirming a total ban on modern family planning methods.
When Pope John XXIII decided to open a discussion on contraception many believed the teaching would change.
But then he removed the Birth Control Commission from the main debates of the Second Vatican Council in an apparent attempt to control its findings.
His successor, Pope Paul VI, expanded the commission to include five (married) women as part of its contingent of 34 lay members.
Despite the pope's attempts to stack it with conservatives and retain the status quo, the commission took its job seriously, studying the history of Catholic teachings on contraception carefully.
It found that many of the scientific and theological underpinnings of the ban were faulty or outdated.
But conservative members of the commission held firm.
One illustrative exchange shows that they recognised the potential impact of their deliberations.
When Father Marcelino Zalba, a church expert on "family limitation," asked the commission in undisguised horror what would happen "with the millions we have sent to hell" if the teaching on contraception "was not valid".
Commission member Patty Crowley shot back: "Father Zalba, do you really believe God has carried out all your orders?"
However, the hearts and minds of even the conservative bishops were swayed by the impassioned testimonials from married couples who explained the realities of attempting a healthy sex life without the aid of contraception.
The vast majority of the commission voted to change the teaching and permit contraception.
Sadly, when faced with the proposal, the pope took a political decision to ignore the findings and instead adopted a minority report of the few members who opposed change. The impact of that fateful decision continues.
The ban has been particularly disastrous in the developing world where Catholic hierarchies hold significant sway over many national family planning policies, especially in Latin America and the Philippines, so obstructing good public health policies on family planning and HIV prevention.
The world is a very different place today to what it was in 1968. Then as now, Catholics can, in good conscience, make decisions that go against church teachings.
Catholics the world over support the use of contraception, and those who can access it use it. It would enable hundreds of thousands if not millions more families to make informed decisions about their futures if the church lifted this ban - not to mention the impact it would have on HIV prevention.
It is one thing to talk the talk on promoting a culture of life - and the bishops do that very well.
It is quite another to respect the reality of people's lives.
It would be truly compassionate and just for the church to change this fatally flawed teaching.
It would be the truly pro-life thing to do.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Sydney Cardinal George Pell has thanked Prime Minister Kevin Rudd for intervening to change Labor Party policy on the introduction of a Charter of Rights. The Australian reports that on February 14, the Cardinal Pell and his Anglican counterpart, Archbishop Peter Jensen, wrote to the Prime Minister to reiterate their concern over a Charter of Rights.
"You will recall our representations at the time of the ALP national conference last year on the potential dangers of a Charter of Rights," they wrote, in a letter obtained under Freedom of Information laws.
"You were good enough to have the draft platform amended."
Cardinal Pell has been an outspoken critic of calls for a Charter of Rights, and in April gave a speech to the Brisbane Institute in which he warned it could have serious and unintended consequences.
But Labor's 2004 policy platform included the introduction of a "legislative Charter of Citizenship and Aspirations" coupled with "constitutional reform to achieve a comprehensive recognition of the rights enjoyed by all Australians."
At the conference last year, however, the platform was amended as a result of a motion by then Opposition justice spokesman Joe Ludwig and George Williams from the University of NSW.
The 2007 policy platform, which Labor took to the election, committed only to "a public inquiry about how best to recognise and protect the human rights and freedoms enjoyed by all Australians."
A spokesman for Mr Rudd denied he had been lobbied by Cardinal Pell and Dr Jensen to intervene on the issue, saying Labor's policy platform was a matter for the party.
Mr Ludwig, now Minister for Human Services, and Professor Williams also denied being lobbied by church leaders on the issue.
Cardinal Pell and Dr Jensen took aim at Professor Williams in their letter, expressing concern that "the chief advocate of a charter" had been invited to the 2020 Summit, which put a Charter of Rights back on the agenda.
"Churches can make representations to elected MPs but there is no way to oppose or reverse social experiments enacted by the non-elected judges," they wrote. "This continues to be an area of concern."
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The bishop of Ardagh and Clonmacnois, Dr Colm O’Reilly, has moved to clarify Church rules about music and other practices at funerals. A series of leaflets issued in individual parishes recently criticising common funeral practices such as the singing of secular songs, the shaking of mourners’ hands at Mass and the bringing to the altar of personal effects and sports emblems, has generated controversy in the media, including on RTE’s ‘Liveline’ programme.
Among those who went public in the controversy was popular jazz musician Paddy Cole who said he was not allowed play at his mother's funeral Mass.
Bishop O’Reilly said he believed each case should be examined at an individual level and added that “rules are sometimes dangerous things”.
“Sometimes the bereaved want the departed to be remembered in an unsuitable way, but this is usually sorted out through consultation with their priest” he said.
He said one rule which was common in many churches was that ‘goodbye’ songs have been deemed unsuitable at funerals.
“Goodbye songs do not fit with the Catholic faith’s idea of eternal life, so we request that faith centred songs are used during the Mass instead” the bishop pointed out.
“However if a bereaved person wished to play a more popular song, such as the departed person’s favourite tune, they can do so after the priest has completed the ceremony of Mass”, he added.
Dr O’Reilly said that in some parts of the country – but not in his own diocese - eulogies have been removed from funerals.
“Like the personal songs, we request that the bereaved wait until after the Mass ceremony is over and then they can speak of their loved one in the church”.
The bishop said he had no objection to mourners shaking hands with the family of the deceased within the church.
“I think it’s more practical for people to shake hands with the bereaved in the church than in the car park as it would only make it more difficult to bring the coffin to the hearse”, he remarked.
The bishop said priests were sensitive to the needs of the bereaved and always try to get a consensus about what should happen during the funeral.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
DNA tests on a body found off Brazil's coast this month match that of a priest who went missing trying to set a flight record, the authorities say.Father Adelir Antonio de Carli lifted off from the Brazilian port city of Paranagua in April strapped to 1,000 brightly-coloured helium balloons.
The 41-year-old Roman Catholic priest wanted to raise money to build a shelter for local lorry drivers.
His attempt went wrong when unexpected winds carried him out to sea.
The body was discovered by chance earlier this month by tugboat workers.
Father Carli was attempting to break a 19-hour record for the most hours flying with balloons.
 |
Father Carli's bundle of brightly coloured balloons was found floating in the Atlantic Ocean off Santa Catarina state, near the point where he last made contact with authorities on the ground.
Father Carli had said he was having difficulty operating his GPS device, and was "very cold, but fine".
He was said to have reached an altitude of 20,000ft (6,000m), then descended to about 8,200ft for his planned flight to the city of Dourados.
But he was blown off course by winds. Before losing contact, he said he had to land in the sea as he was "losing height".
In January, the priest used the same mode of transport to fly over 110km (70 miles) in four hours between Parana and the nearby Argentine city of San Antonio. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Muslim world is showing increasing signs that it wants to engage others in dialogue. Greater tolerance is increasingly visible in Muslim countries, signs like the opening of a new church in Kuwait or one in Qatar, greater openness towards the Vatican, the letter signed by 138 Muslim scholars to Benedict XVI, the creation of a joint Islamic-Catholic commission; Saudi King Abdullah’s visit to the Holy See . . . . More signs of openness and tolerance have come from the Saudi monarch himself like the intra-Muslim meeting in Makkah (4-6 June 2008) and the inter-faith conference in Madrid (16-18 July 2008) as a start to inter-faith dialogue, one that includes Jews as well.
Dialogue seems to be the order of the day in a religion that since 11 September 2001 and the attack against New York’s twin towers has come to be regarded by the general public as the most intolerant religion.
What is going on?
Here is the analysis of Islam expert Fr Samir Khalil Samir.
I am certain that all these signals mean that something is changing and there are political and religious reasons for it. In this case the union between the two is not necessarily a bad thing.
First of all, religion has become an important factor in international politics. The whole world is in turmoil; all sorts of shocks seem to be produced by religion or anti-religious atheism. Whatever the case may be, religion is challenging past ideas and positions.
Let us take the collapse of Communism. It was a shock that pushed many people to ask themselves whether religion was the opium of the masses or its opposite, namely that ideology was the real opium of the masses. We also see this in China, thanks to news reported by AsiaNews for example, and the reaction and differences in the world over the issue of Buddhism in Tibet, over Nepal or Myanmar. In India fanatical Hindu and ultranationalists groups are pitted against other (Christian and Muslim) communities . . . .
Islam’s new image
In Europe Islam has unsettled the way Europeans look at religion. In France everyone was untroubled by French secularism based on the dogma of the absolute separation between faith and life with religion as a private affair. Now people realise that the link between faith and public life is still strong in Islam and this undermines some certainties in modern secularism. Along with this “discovery” has come religious fanaticism. For political and cultural reasons this has manifested itself with an unprecedented level of violence that was never reached in the past in the Muslim world.
Plus interest in the Muslim world has to do with its numbers since a billion and more people have a huge weight on world politics and demographics.
Similarly, there are pressures and violence in the Jewish world as a result of the collusion between Zionism and politics. Likewise among Hindus Hinduism and Indian identity are seen as one and the same.
Correcting Islam’s (bad) image
For years now in the Muslim world, at the meetings of the Arab League, at those of the World Islamic League, endless debates have focused on violence and terrorism in order to assert that neither has anything to do with Islam, that Islam is a religion of tolerance, etc.
Yet at the same time ministers from Muslim countries have claimed that their main task is to fight this same terrorism rooted in fundamentalism (the literal, de-contextualised interpretation of the Qur’an and the Sunnah, i.e. the traditions associated with the prophet) and in Muslim religious radicalism.
Unfortunately, all decisions taken so far have not led to a decline in terrorism, which remains alive and well; perhaps because one of the causes of Islamic radicalism is precisely that corruption, dictatorship and social injustice are so pervasive in Muslim politics. This might explain why Muslim political leaders, especially presidents and kings, are in favour of change. “If we want to defend Islam from the negative image that it is acquiring around the world we cannot go on like this. We must positively show that Islam is a religion of peace and dialogue,” they say.
The drive for dialogue thus rises from this attempt to show a new image of Islam.
According to a recent survey in the United States, 45 per cento of Americans view Islam as the most threatening religion that exists; in 2005 they were 36 per cent. If surveys were conducted in Europe we would probably get the same results.
Even in the Muslim world, albeit not openly, everyone knows that armed and militant form of Islam is the most terrible thing. In the Muslim world people have come to realise that Islam must protect itself against its own bad image.
This happened first at the 2005 Makkah conference (7-8 December) when Muslim government said “enough is enough!” and opted to fight Islam’s negative image and Islamophobia.
A word like Islamophobia has spread far and wide. For Muslims fear of Islam is a mistake, an unfair reaction. And yet it is true that much of today’s violence can be traced back to Islam, at least to its radical variety.
In Europe there is Christophobia, which might be even worse than Islamophobia. Still in the last few years Muslims and Europeans in Spain have come together to condemn Islamophobia. Even a UN document condemned Islamophobia (bit it said nothing about the contemptuous attitude towards all religions) . . . .
One common thread that comes up all the time in the Makkah and Madrid documents is as follows. We [Muslims] must fight against the false image that the (Western) media convey about us. No mention is made of “Islamic terrorism.” Thus for those who drafted the Makkah document, terrorism is not Islamic, even if people blame Muslims for violence.
Faced with such a situation Saudi King Abdullah has begun to act. In his meeting with the Pope last 6 November, he made an important statement in which he called for openness to engage Christians and Jews in dialogue as well as a willingness to cooperate with these religions on matters of the ethics and spirituality.1 It is interesting to note that whilst participating Muslim countries addressed Muslims at the Makkah meeting (4-6 June 2008) on inter-Muslim dialogue, they also tried to speak and open up to the entire world.
Muslims for ‘dialogue’
In the final declaration of the Makkah conference dialogue is justified as “central to Islam” because it was used by the prophet Muhammad. “Dialogue represents an authentic Qur’anic methodology and a prophetic tradition through which the prophets communicated with their people. The biography of the Prophet Muhammad presents a clear methodology in this regard through the dialogue of the Prophet and the Christians of Najran”2 as well as “his correspondence with great emperors and monarchs;”3 hence the statement that “dialogue is one of the most important mediums of spreading Islam throughout the world.” At face value such words are charged with much ambiguity. In order to convince Muslim countries that there is value in dialogue, the participants in the Makkah conference refer back to what the prophet did, and a bit disingenuously, confess that this serves the purpose of spreading Islam a little bit more.
The “Madinah society that was established by the Prophet is the optimal model of positive coexistence of the followers of divine messages,”4 says the Makkah document; words that are heavy with meaning. The optimal model of coexistence of the people of the Book (Jews, Christians and Sabians) is thus that structure, the precursor of the Dhimmi system.
It is clear that the Muslim world cannot free itself of the idealised model of the 7th century. This leads to contradictions such as what to do with atheists who are present in our modern societies. In Muhammad’s times atheists were fought and they could either submit to Islam or be killed.
Of course, none of this was mentioned in Madrid in the presence of representatives of other religions. But in Makkah, among Muslims, this is language that was used. Is it doublespeak or “pedagogical’ discourses?
It must be said that in the 7th century such coexistence had some positive aspects, but it was based on a political pact, not a religious one.
At present the issue is how to leave behind the 7th century Islamic system, which lasted through the Middle Ages, in order to build a new one of living together. Short of this the term “dialogue” remains ambiguous.
Some openness
Out of Makkah came a 12-point document. The first two are about rectifying Islam’s bad image, in a defensive mode. The third point is interesting because it “deals with challenges and offers solutions to humanity’s problems which are seen as the result of abandoning religion and estrangement from its principles.”
This is an idea that we Christians share but which must be closely looked at in all its nuances. The document for example emphasises that problems are “result of abandoning religion”, but no one should forget that some problems are associated with bad interpretations of religion. Card Jean-Louis Tauran, who was invited to Makkah and Madrid, made a reference to this aspect in his final address when he said: “Religion is accused of being the cause of violence. Religion is not the cause of violence; the cause is its [violent] use by its followers”. Modern society is not only afflicted by the decline of religion but also by the deformation and politicisation of religion. This has not yet been understood in the Muslim world.
The fourth point refers to human rights, namely the need to “support and defend the right causes in relation to human rights violations.” This, too, sounds very good, but it is essential that we define “human rights,” and accept the current universal definition. I refer here to the fact that in the Muslim world on several occasions human rights have been seen through Muslim eyes as in an Islamic charter, an Arab charter, etc. This means that for Islam there are no universal human rights. By contrast, I think it would be a good idea to take a closer look at what human rights are.
The document moves on to the clash of civilisation. The sixth point calls for the rejection of accusations that Islam is “the enemy of contemporary civilisation.” Accusations come however in different sizes; if a certain type of Islam sees itself as the enemy of modern civilisation, then the accusations are accurate.
According to the former, “such accusations lead to the hatred of Islam”. Once again we are back to the idea of “Islamophobia”, Islam’s self-victimisation, which has become a fixation in today’s Muslim world. As long as Muslims think that way, there will be no self-criticism and thus no in-depth reform.
Point seven is a good one because it calls for “learning to know people of other faiths and other cultures and establish common principles that allow for peaceful coexistence and provide human society with security.”
This is certainly something positive but it should have come at the beginning of the document. Perhaps those who drafted it psychologically felt it more important to respond to the criticism that Muslim world makes at the rest of the world, in order to later start building more solid bridges for dialogue.
Point number eight focuses on “mutual cooperation in spreading ethical values, truth, benevolence and peace to challenge hegemony, exploitation, moral degenerations, harm to the family and other evils that threaten society.” This is good as long as it is understood that such characteristics are not exclusive to any one group but are in fact found in all societies, in the West and in the Muslim world.
Point 11 looks at “understanding human cultures and civilisations”, a well-meaning idea calling upon Muslims “to take part in agreements between humanity’s civilisations to protect peace in the world.”
Point number 12 looks again at ecumenism within Islam, namely the “interaction and communication with the followers of [different] Islamic schools of thought to reach the unity of the Muslim Ummah and weaken fanaticism and antagonism.” The point on intra-Muslim fanaticism is a very strong one, especially if we consider that Saudi Arabia, main backer of the Makkah and Madrid conferences, is the stronghold of Wahhabism, a religious movement that has tried to exclude all other Islamic interpretations, whether Sunni or Shia. Perhaps this is an attempt by King Abdullah himself to push his own community towards greater tolerance.
Invited to Madrid
The Makkah meeting set the stage for the Madrid conference. In looking at the latter I should like to make a few remarks.
First of all let us take a look at the participants. More than 200 of the 288 who were invited showed up. But who were they? They were people with social and political functions, not strictly religious figures.
For instance, in the case of Belgium, three people were invited: two orthodox metropolitans and Abdul Aziz Muhammad Yahya, director of the Islamic Centre of Belgium; in short no Catholics, but a couple of Orthodox (who can hardly be said to be representative of Belgium).
In the case of France the list is surprising. Altogether 11 people were invited. No liberal Muslim was among the Muslims invited; instead we had the director general of UNESCO, four rabbis, and a representative of the Armenian Church. Not a single Catholic bishop or cardinal. I wonder what criteria were used to come up with that list.
On the other hand, many people came from the United States and Great Britain, 56 and 46 respectively, including many rabbis.
I can only guess that people with cultural ties to the English-speaking world drew up the list of invitations.
There were people from other religions as well, but Catholics were picked by and large from those who tend to hold an idealistic view of Islam and are never critical of it. Famous Catholic scholars like John Esposito of Georgetown University were among the participants as were many of those who during Islamic-Christian meetings always take the side of Islam.
I wonder whether for the future it would not be better to have people drawn from a wider spectrum, letting each religious group choose whom to send; this way participants could actually be representative of a real community.
Even for the Middle East, the choice of participants was unbalanced. A small country like Lebanon had nine representatives, like Spain, but not people as important for dialogue as Orthodox Bishop Georges Khodr. From Syria only one person came, a bishop (a former student of mine). From Sudan came Gabriel Zubeir Wako, the archbishop of Khartoum, know for his resolve, a choice that is something of an exception.
Generally speaking I think that the meeting had one main concern, Islam’s image. Only famous people were invited, like Tony Blair, or people who would not make waves for Islam.
Except for the opening ceremony, the Madrid meeting was in camera and thus little is known about its conclusions. I did try though to vet the reactions of some participants.
Cardinal Tauran’s thoughts
I was very touched by Cardinal Tauran’s final address when he quoted the Pope’s encouragement, convinced that “dialogue based on love and truth is the best path to bring happiness and harmony to the peoples of the earth.”
Cardinal Tauran said that he was happily surprised by two facts that emerged during the meeting:
1) “we have made our rich traditions and thoughts to the members of the other communities to which we belong;”
2) believers are something precious, a gift to society.
He added that it “is imperative that religious freedom include the possibility of believers to actively take part in the public debate by being given social, political and cultural responsibilities.”
This is very close to Muslim perceptions with regards to Western secularism. His focus is in line with what Benedict XVI has very often said.
For Cardinal Tauran dialogue has three simple but important objectives:
a) increase mutual awareness;
b) encourage the study of religion in an objective manner;
c) train people to engage in inter-faith dialogue.
In cardinal Tauran’s concluding address there is something else that I personally deem important. In it the prelate said: “I don’t mean that all religions are equal but that all those who seek God have equal dignity.” This is an unambiguous distinction.
Often Christians and Muslims are into wishy-washy “ecumenism.” Ultimately people end up believing that the two religions are equal and that conversion from one to the other is either unnecessary or secondary. Instead for him religions are not equal.
Then again saying that “those who seek God have equal dignity” is an important point in the Islamic-Christian dialogue. It means that all people of good will have equal dignity; every believer, not only Muslims, Christians and Jews (as it seems in the Muslim world).
Conclusion
From this point of view, one positive thing that came out of Madrid meeting was the fact that members of all religions were present and that conference sponsor was the king of Arabia. For that reason I think that this event will have an important impact on the dialogue between religions.
But the most important step in this meeting was the invitation of rabbis. Some rabbis, like two from the ‘Shalom Center’ in the United States, were very enthused for being able to talk freely during the meeting. It was a giant step forward in modern history. I believe that at this point in time the Muslim world is tired of the situation of endless war in which the Middle East and Islam are mired, namely the open wound that is the Palestinian problem to the entire Muslim world.
But it was not without ambiguities; for instance few women took part in the event (only one Spanish Muslim woman actually gave an address). Still the step was an important one. And every step with which we build world peace, especially between East and West, is welcome.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++