Monday, November 06, 2006

Pope Benedict Roundup!

Pope Benedict XVI and Christian-Muslim Dialogue

Among the interpretations of Benedict's Regensberg address are those which see a historical relevance to Benedict's citation of Manuel II Paleologus -- but an earlier stage of the "clash of civilizations" and the Islamic threat which now threatens the West.

In "Paleologus and Us: What Benedict Really Said" (The New Republic Post date: 09.28.06 / Issue date: 10.09.06), David Nirenberg's poses the question:

[W]hy in our troubled times did Benedict choose to bring the world's attention to the unoriginal words of this Byzantine emperor?

One answer is that Turkey has long been on the pontiff's mind. Readers may recall then-Cardinal Ratzinger's interview with Le Figaro in 2004 in which he commented that Turkey should not be admitted to the European Union "on the grounds that it is a Muslim nation" and historically has always been contrary to Europe. Courtesy Bibliotheque NationaleLike Ratzinger, Manuel II Paleologus also worried about keeping the Turks out of Europe. As the antepenultimate emperor of Byzantium and the last effective one (he ruled from 1391 to 1425; Byzantium fell in 1453), he spent his life fighting--sometimes in the Muslim armies, but mostly against them--in the final great effort to keep Constantinople from becoming Istanbul.

Andrew G. Bostom, author of The Legacy of Jihad, makes a similar judgement in The Pope, Jihad, and “Dialogue” (American Thinker Sept. 17th, 2006):
When Manuel II composed the Dialogue (which Pope Benedict excerpted), the Byzantine ruler was little more than a glorified dhimmi vassal of the Ottoman Sultan Bayezid, forced to accompany the latter on a campaign through Anatolia. . . .

During the campaign he was conscripted to join, Manuel II witnessed with understandable melancholy the great metamorphosis—ethnic and toponymic—of formerly Byzantine Asia Minor. The devastation, and depopulation of these once flourishing regions was so extensive that often, Manuel could no longer tell where he was. The still recognizable Greek cities whose very names had been changed into something foreign became a source of particular grief. It was during this unhappy sojourn that Manuel II’s putative encounter with a Muslim theologian occurred, ostensibly in Ankara.

Whether intended by the Pope himself or not, the historical context of Paleologus' 'debate' are worthy of consideration, and in themselves pose something of a challenge to the assertion that Islam has forever and always been a "religion of peace."

At the same time, there are some who go too far in their speculation that Benedict's remarks were intended only to accentuate the division between Islam and the West, to deliberately provoke a confrontation. That, unlike his predecessor, Benedict is not genuinely concerned with advancing Christian-Muslim relations and dialogue between the two. David Nirenberg closes his essay with just such a conclusion, asserting:

What we cannot accept without contradiction or hypocrisy is the pope's presentation of the speech as an invitation to dialogue. It is true that the talk concludes with an invitation: "It is to this great logos, to this breadth of reason, that we invite our partners in the dialogue of cultures." But it also concludes with the claim that "only through [rationality of faith] do we become capable of that genuine dialogue of cultures and religions so urgently needed today." The bulk of "Faith, Reason, and the University" is explicitly dedicated to the thesis that European Catholicism has effectively mixed faith and reason in the logos, and that other religions, specifically Islam, have not. Forget for a moment the historical inaccuracies (not just about Islam, but about other religions as well) in such a statement, and focus only on the logic. What kind of invitation begins by denying its guests the qualifications for attendance at the party? The pope's "invitation" at Regensburg was not to a "dialogue of cultures" at all. What he was advocating was a kind of conversion, or at least a convergence of all religions and cultures toward a logos that is explicitly characterized as Catholic and European.

Just like Manuel's medieval "dialogos" with a Muslim (the Greek title of the emperor's treatise means "controversy" or "debate" rather than "dialogue" in our modern sense), Benedict's lecture was a polemic posing as a dialogue.

As pointed out by Prof. Robert Aurujo in his Preliminary Response to Professor Nirenberg, such an assertion is made either in ignorance or exclusion of the many invitations that Benedict has made to the contrary.

Likewise, the Vatican has published the final draft of the Regensberg address, together with footnotes. Referencing the quote from Paleologus, Benedict observes:

In the Muslim world, this quotation [from Paleologus] has unfortunately been taken as an expression of my personal position, thus arousing understandable indignation. I hope that the reader of my text can see immediately that this sentence does not express my personal view of the Qur’an, for which I have the respect due to the holy book of a great religion. In quoting the text of the Emperor Manuel II, I intended solely to draw out the essential relationship between faith and reason. On this point I am in agreement with Manuel II, but without endorsing his polemic.

Significant events in October provide illustration for Pope Benedict's genuine commitment to Christian-Muslim dialogue:

  • On September 25, Pope Benedict met with Muslim clerics and ambassadors from 21 predominantly Muslim countries at Castelgandolfo. According to the Catholic News Agency:
    The Pontiff, who invited the Muslim representatives to his residence at Castelgandolfo to reaffirm his respect and esteem for their religion and people, told the leaders that the dialogue between Christians and Muslims, “cannot be reduced to an optional extra. It is, in fact, a vital necessity, on which in large measure our future depends.”

    Benedict clearly indicated his desire to forge ahead with interfaith talks, barely mentioning the comments which have caused an uproar in the Muslim world. “The circumstances which have given rise to our gathering are well known,” Benedict commented, reminding them that he has already offered his regrets that offence had been taken and his assurances that the views of emperor Manuel II in no way reflect his own.

    In a substantial analysis, Holy Challenge: A new chapter in Christian-Muslim relations? (National Review Sept. 29, 2006), John F. Cullinan examines Benedict's remarks on Sept. 25 and finds that they are "fully intelligible only in the light of the four ecclesial texts he cites or quotes from," and from which we can discern "his very precise bottom line for future dialogue with the Muslim world."
    1. Jews and Muslims occupy wholly separate categories in Catholic thought. Lacking a "common spiritual heritage" such as shared between Christians and Jews, purely theological dialogue is counterproductive and should be subordinated to an examination of how to exist peacefully in a pluralistic world. That’s the meaning of Benedict’s September 25 exhortation in favor of “sincere and respectful dialogue, based on ever more authentic reciprocal knowledge which, with joy, recognizes the religious values we have in common and, with loyalty, respects the differences.”

      Likewise, the assignment of responsibility for past conflicts (such as the Crusades) is not so important as -- citing an April 2005 address -- "[the] imperative to engage in authentic and sincere dialogue, built on respect for the dignity of every human person, created, as we Christians firmly believe, in the image and likeness of God.”

    2. As indicated in his Cologne 2005 address to Christian & Muslim leaders, Benedict believes that "religiously-motivated violence [is] an urgent agenda item" in Christian-Muslim dialogue. In contrast to the Christian traditions of just war or pacifism, "Jihad — in the sense of armed conflict for religious reasons — remains a living element of Islamic thought and life."
    3. Benedict identifies religious freedom as perhaps the most urgent single issue for Christian/Muslim dialogue. Benedict cites a 1985 address of his predecessor, John Paul II: “Respect and dialogue require reciprocity in all spheres, especially in that which concerns basic freedoms, more particularly religious freedom.” The plight (and in some cases outright persecution) of Christian minorities in Muslim states remains a persistent concern.
    4. Benedict quite delicately raises the pressing question of who exactly speaks for Islam. Lacking a papal counterpart in the Islamic world or a Muslim equivalent to the ecclesial hierarchy, the Vatican has opted in favor

    From the Vatican, here is the complete text of Pope Benedict's Sept. 25 address to Muslim clerics and ambassadors. American Papist has a roundup of coverage.

  • In the Sept. 29 edition of National Catholic Reporter's "All Things Catholic", John Allen, Jr. commented on "Pope Benedict's damage control":
    The encounter was carried live both on CNN and its counterpart in the Arab world, Al-Jazeerah.

    It seems to have been partially successful. The ambassadors applauded as the pope entered the room, and beamed as he moved down the reception line afterwards. Later, several Muslim participants told the media that they believe the dialogue is "back on track."

    "Today begins a new phase," said Abdellah Redouane, secretary general of the Islamic Cultural Center of Rome.

    "We overcame the tensions of recent days, and now we must intensify initiatives, on the part of both Christians and Muslims, that favor dialogue among the two great religions, which is important for the serenity of the entire world," Redouane said.

    Not everyone, of course, was ready to forgive and forget.

    Just 24 hours later, the 56-nation Organization of the Islamic Conference, meeting in New York on the margins of a session of the United Nations, adopted a resolution calling upon Benedict "to retract or to correct" his Sept. 12 comments. In Egypt, officials of the Al-Azhar mosque and university threw cold water upon the idea of inviting Benedict XVI to deliver a lecture, and a spokesperson told Italian media that the pope's comments to date "are not the clear apology that Al-Azhar has requested, but merely a way of placating [Muslim] anger."

    Nevertheless, the wide popular outrage across the Muslim world seems to be ebbing, and many commentators have said it's time to move on. The question now is, move on to what?

  • Commonweal magazine invited Kevin Madigan, SJ, president of the Institute for the Study of Religions and Cultures at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome, to comment on the meeting as well (The Pope & Islam Sept. 25, 2006). Pointing out that Christian scriptures contain their fair share of violent passages, Madigan asserted that "It is nonsensical to say to someone who claims that Islam is a peaceful religion that he may not believe such a thing because the Qur’an says such-and-such." He went on to reject the idea of "reciprocity" in dialogue -- the curious notion put forth by John Paul II that ""Respect and dialogue require reciprocity in all spheres, especially in that which concerns basic freedoms, more particularly religious freedom" -- as counter to the spirit of dialogue and the gospel itself:
    There is a world of difference between reciprocity as a condition for dialogue, and reciprocity as a hoped-for outcome of dialogue. However, that distinction tends to be blurred, not only in press reports of Vatican policy, but also among some theologians. Reciprocity is not a Christian value. Gratuity is. The teaching of Jesus (Matt. 5:39-47) could not be more explicit on this subject: we give without hope of return, and we open our tables especially to those who will not repay our hospitality (Lk 14:12-14).
  • At Castelgandolfo, Benedict also remarked on the Christian witness of Sr. Leonella Sgorbati, who was killed along with her bodyguard in Mogadishu, Somalia. Benedict praised Sr. Leonella Sgorbati for pardoning her killers (Catholic News Agency Sept. 25, 2006):
    "Some are asked to give the supreme testimony of blood, just as … Sr. Leonella Sgorbati, who fell victim to violence," the pontiff said.

    "This sister, who for many years served the poor and the children in Somalia, died pronouncing the word 'forgive,'" the Pope said. "This is the most authentic Christian testimony, a peaceful sign of contradiction which shows the victory of love over hatred and evil."

Further Commentary to the "Regensburg Address"
  • On October 3, 2006, Zenit News Service interviewed Father James V. Schall, on Benedict's address and the world's reaction:
    My own opinion is that Benedict was not surprised by these reactions. Indeed, I suspect it is precisely this unreasoned reaction that has made his point so clearly that no sane mind can deny it. It was a point that had to be made.

    It could not have been made by the politicians, who in fact did not make it even when they needed it. Politicians talked about "terrorists," as if a more fundamental theological problem was not at issue. Until this deeper issue was spelled out, which is what the Regensburg lecture was about, we were doomed.

    This address is probably one of the most liberating addresses ever given by a Pope or anyone else. As its import sinks in, those who were unwilling to consider what it was about will find themselves either embarrassed -- if they are honest -- or more violent, if they refuse the challenge of reason.

    Make no mistake about it: This address illuminated, more than anything that we know, the problems with a modernity based on an explicit or implicit voluntarism that postulated that we could change the world, our nature, our God according to our own wills.

  • Benedict at Regensburg: Islam, War, Death, Apostasy, Weapons of Mass Destruction and the Poverello, by Michael D. O'Brien. October 4, 2006 Feast of St. Francis of Assisi:
    I believe that the Pope’s brilliant, spiritually discerning talk was perfectly timely and potentially quite fruitful. Whether or not the Pope was aware of the furor that would ensue from his talk, the Holy Spirit was guiding it and divine providence is working it to the good. Above all, Benedict is a man of charity and of truth, and rarer still, he is a man who has integrated both within his life and teaching. In a sense he is like St. Francis of Assisi, who in 1219, during the Crusades, walked into the midst of the Saracen camp and preached for days, and eventually spoke with the Sultan of Egypt in the hope of converting him. . . . He was a sign of contradiction to all parties in the wars. He was unarmed. He was a presence of Christ to the major adversary of Christian civilization in those times.

    So, too, Pope Benedict continues to be a sign of contradiction. He has crossed the lines of our normal categories of thought regarding the world situation. He has made possible a dialogue with Islam. He is unarmed. He speaks the truth in a spirit of love. He calls all mankind to turn to the only true source of peace, to Jesus Christ himself. He is not naïve about the nature of radical Islamics, and indeed his Regensburg speech has been the catalyst of clearer vision about the nature of militant Islamism — its irrationality, its spirit of relentless hatred and contempt for human dignity. Yet we must remember that neither is the Pope naïve about the other beast — the one that is killing us from within the parameters of our civilization, the secular humanism of Late Western Man. Neither is he naïve about that most subtle and corrosive beast, the spirit which would compromise the Church from within, the legion of people who betray Christ in the name of Christ.

  • On October 5, the The Jesuit journal Civilta Cattolica charged that Muslim fundamentalists distorted the meaning of Pope Benedict's speech in Regensburg "to stir up Islamic peoples against the Pope and Christians."

  • On October 9, Chaldean priest Fr. Paulos Iskander (Paul Alexander) was kidnapped. Among the demands, that "signs be posted once again on his church apologizing for the Pope's remarks as a condition for negotiations to begin." The priest was later beheaded. (Report: Another victim of Pope Rage, by Michelle Malkin. October 13, 2006).

  • Two significant Muslim responses to Benedict's address have been published. According to Sandro Magister,
    The first was published on September 13 in the most important liberal Italian newspaper, “la Repubblica.” Its author is Khaled Fouad Allam, an Algerian-born Italian resident, professor of Islamic studies at the universities of Trieste and Urbino, and widely read and listened to in Catholic circles.

    The date of this commentary should be noted. The article was published the morning after the pope’s address in Regensburg, when much of the Muslim world had not yet unleashed the onslaught of invective and violent acts that would fill the newscasts of the following days, and force the Islamic voices not in agreement to be silent.

    The central thesis of Allam’s commentary is that Benedict XVI has legitimately brought up “an immense problem concerning the real position of the Qur’an toward the question of violence”; that on this question the Qur’an “can be read according to opposite interpretations”; and that therefore “it is necessary to break the terrible chain of fundamentalism” that ignores the Qur’an’s condemnation of violence and “proclaims itself the only bearer of the truth.”

    The second response is by Arab theologian and philosopher, Aref Ali Nayed, also introduced by Magister:
    Nayed is also known and listened to within the Catholic Church. Born in Libya, he is currently the managing director of a technology company headquartered in the United Arab Emirates. He studied hermeneutics and the philosophy of science in the United States and Canada, has taken courses at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome, and has given lectures at the Pontifical Institute of Arab and Islamic Studies. He is a consultant for the Interfaith Program of the University of Cambridge. He is a devout Sunni Muslim, and describes himself as a “theologian of the Asharite school, Maliki in jurisprudential tendency, and Shadhili-Rifai in spiritual leanings.”
    Here is the full text of A Muslim’s Commentary on Benedict XVI’s “Faith, Reason and the University: Memories and Reflections”, by Aref Ali Nayed.

    But that isn't all. According to Sandro Magister (A Sprig of Dialogue Has Sprouted in Regensburg (www.Chiesa Oct. 30, 2006):

    . . . Some of the passages of Aref Ali Nayed’s exposition received a reply from an Italian Catholic scholar who is an expert in medieval philosophy and theology, Alessandro Martinetti, from Ghemme in the province of Novara. Martinetti insisted in particular upon the relationship between God and reason, and on the radical difference in this relationship as seen by Islam and by Catholic doctrine. . . .

    Aref Ali Nayed, in turn, replied to Martinetti’s theses. And this extensive reply is also presented in its entirety on this page, in its original English version. Aref Ali Nayed’s counter-thesis is that it is wrong to oppose a “God-as-pure will” in Islam against a “God-as-Logos” in Christianity. In his view, the theology of Thomas Aquinas himself on the relationship between God and reason “is very close to Ibn Hazm and Asha’rite Muslim theologians.”

    Magister's article publishes both the comments of Aref Ali Nayed and Alessandro Martinetti. These are in turn followed by the quasi-unpublished remarks of Vatican secretary of state, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone. The complete text of Bertone's is due for formal publication in 30 Giorni's issue devoted to the Regensburg address.

  • On October 12, 2006, an Open Letter to His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI was conveyed by 38 leading Muslim religious scholars and leaders around the world to the Pope:
    All the eight schools of thought and jurisprudence in Islam are represented by the signatories, including a woman scholar. In this respect the letter is unique in the history of interfaith relations.

    The letter was sent, in a spirit of goodwill, to respond to some of the remarks made by the Pope during his lecture at the University of Regensburg on Sept. 12, 2006. The letter tackles the main substantive issues raised in his treatment of a debate between the medieval Emperor Manuel II Paleologus and an “educated Persian”, including reason and faith; forced conversion; “jihad” vs. “holy war”; and the relationship between Christianity and Islam. They engage the Pope on an intellectual level concerning these crucial topics—which go well beyond the controversial quotation of the emperor—pointing out what they see as mistakes and oversimplifications in the Pope’s own remarks about Islamic belief and practice.

    The online text of the letter can be found here, courtesy of Islamica magazine.

  • Stratford Caldecott heralds the Open Letter to Benedict XVI as a positive sign in the Dialogue with Islam (Godspy.com October 24, 2006):
    I have suggested that the suppression of Sufism and the whole ihsani dimension of Islam (leaving only Creed and Law) in recent times represents the corruption of the religion as a whole by ideologies of resentment and violence. Unfortunately Islam has no infallible center of authority, as Catholicism does, to preserve it against error on this scale. The solution, if there is one, is therefore up to individual Muslims and Muslim leaders. What Christians can do is avoid making matters worse. We need to be realistic about the scale of persecution Christians are currently experiencing in Islamic countries, and the danger of growing Muslim fanaticism in our midst, but we must encourage and assist moderate Muslims to raise their voices and speak on behalf of Islamic traditions that may be more “rational” than we suppose. Neither Islam nor Christianity is going away, so we need to find ways of speaking together. The Open Letter recently addressed to the Pope may demonstrate that a moderate and rational consensus is beginning to emerge. At any rate, the Pope’s speech has created an opportunity to take the debate concerning religious and cultural diversity to a much deeper level.
    Caldecott is editor of Second Spring and a member of the editorial board of Communio, and European Director of the Chesterton Institute for Faith and Culture. For more of Caldecott's writing on Islam and interreligious dialogue, see His Seed Like Stars: The Dialogue Between Christians, Jews and Muslims Second Spring Spring 2002 and "The Mystery of Islam: Further Reflections", in which he speculates provocatively on "the providential role or “participated mediation” of Islam."

  • The Regensberg address has been "widely discussed, but far less widely understood," says Lee Harris. In Socrates or Muhammad? Joseph Ratzinger on the destiny of reason (Weekly Standard ), he focuses not on Benedict's encounter with Islam but rather the lessons Benedict can teach Western academia, likening the Holy Father's role to that of Socrates ("not to preach or sermonize, but to challenge with questions") or St. Clement of Alexandria:
    St. Clement argued that Greek philosophy had been given by God to mankind as a second source of truth, comparable to the Hebrew revelation. For St. Clement, Socrates and Plato were not pagan thinkers; they prefigured Christianity. Contrary to what Tertullian believed, Christianity needed more than just Jerusalem: It needed Athens too. Pope Benedict in his address makes a strikingly similar claim: "The encounter between the Biblical message and Greek thought did not happen by chance." This encounter, for Benedict, was providential, just as it had been for St. Clement. Furthermore, Benedict argues that the "inner rapprochement between Biblical faith and Greek philosophical inquiry was an event of decisive importance not only from the standpoint of the history of religions, but also from that of world history." For Benedict, however, this event is not mere ancient history. It is a legacy that we in the West are all duty-bound to keep alive--yet it is a legacy that is under attack, both from those who do not share it, namely Islam, and from those who are its beneficiaries and do not understand it, namely, Western intellectuals.
  • And, from Fr. Richard J. Neuhaus' "The Public Square" (First Things 167. November 2006): 59-76): "The Regensberg Moment":
    In the Vatican and in the Catholic journalistic world, there were voices that joined in the tut-tutting of an uncouth and unlearned pope who had disrupted the dialogue with a “religion of peace.” The nitpicking pedantry of some Catholic experts on Islam was given prominent display in the world’s press. But, from Catholic and other Christian leaders, along with Jews and some secular intellectuals, there was also an outpouring of support for what the pope had the wisdom and courage to say. They recognized that momentous issues of long-term consequence had at last been joined in a way that made possible and imperative continuing debate.

    Regrettably, the official response of the Catholic bishops conference in this country, issued by Bishop William Skylstad, the conference president, was not helpful. The tone was condescending and patronizing, almost apologizing for the pope’s inept disturbance of our wonderfully dialogical relationship with our Muslim brothers and sisters. We are assured that, despite his unfortunate statements, he really does want peaceful dialogue. I paraphrase, of course, but the statement was anything but a firm defense of the pope, never mind an effort to explain what he actually said. It might have been written by a public relations firm engaged in damage control, and possibly was.

    But for many others, the words spoken on September 12, 2006, and the responses, both violent and reasonable, to those words may, five or twenty years from now, be referred to as “The Regensburg Moment,” meaning a moment of truth. As I say, it is by no means certain, but it is more than just possible.

In Other News . . .

  • After Verona: How to “Restore Full Citizenship to the Christian Faith”, by Sandro Magister. www.Chiesa Oct. 26, 2006:
    From October 16-20, the Italian Church gathered in Verona the full spectrum of its members: bishops, priests, and faithful. And the German pope placed his bet precisely on what distinguishes Christian Italy: its being, not a minority Church, but a Church of the people, “a very lively reality, which retains a grassroots presence among people of every age and condition.”

    For Benedict XVI, Italy’s uniqueness is not residual, but the forerunner of the Christian rebirth of the West, for which he hopes intensely. He assigned a very demanding project to Italian Catholics. “If we are able to do this,” he said, “the Church in Italy will render a great service not only to this nation, but also to Europe and to the world.”

    But in the meantime, broad sections of the apparatus of this same Italian Church are looking at Benedict XVI’s program with fear and amazement. . . .

    For context, see also A Church of the People or a Church of the Elite? Verona’s Dilemma, by Sandro Magister. Oct. 13, 2006; and Pope Benedict's address "On the Occasion of the Fourth National Ecclesial Convention" Oct. 19, 2006.

  • "B16 On The 12", by Jimmy Akin:
    Pope Benedict recently completed a series of audiences on the Twelve apostles. I thought these were particularly interesting and well done. He covers what we know about them, what is speculated about them, what their writings contain, and what their example says to us today.

    Now that the whole series is finished, I thought I'd provide links to the audiences so that you can read through them as a group if you wish. . . .

  • "It is unfortunate," says Teresa Polk (Blog by the Sea), "that, amid the tumult of the past couple of weeks, the important messages of the Holy Father's week in München have prompted less reflection than otherwise might have been the case. After yesterday's meeting with envoys from Muslim countries, now that the controversy seems to be passing, I want to do a series of posts that reflect back on some of the addresses other than the lecture at Regensburg." A very fruitful project and well worth reading:

  • Rumors abound that Pope Benedict XVI has signed a universal indult allowing celebration of the Mass according to the 1962 Missal (i.e., the Tridentine rite) by any priest in the Church. Click the link for a roundup by the American Papist of news and reactions from St. Blog's parish; also Amy Welborn's "Old/Classical/Tridentine Mass/Rite Roundup" (Open Book Oct. 19, 2006).

    In Liturgical Reform, Latin, LeFebvrists, and the French and U.S. Bishops (Blog by the Sea Oct. 29, 2006), Teresa Polk takes a look at "the potential wider use of the Latin Tridentine Mass as well as concern over the new Institute of the Good Shepherd, which was organized in September for Le Febvrists returning to the Catholic Church."

    Teófilo (Vivificat Oct. 31, 2006) examines The prospects of the Tridentine Mass in the light of the impending new indult, and its potential as an aid for reunion with Eastern Orthodoxy (as asserted both by Archbishop Raymond Burke and Bishop Fernando Rifan of Brazil (Teófilo disagrees).

    According to Fr. Z (What Does Prayer Really Say), an expansion of the Tridentine Mass "would be the right thing to do."

    Responding to concerns, Rorate Caeli asks: Can the existence of two rites fracture unity? -- Drawing from Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger's remarks at the Conference on the Tenth Anniversary of the Motu Proprio Ecclesia Dei, the answer is no. (Stay tuned to Rorate Caeli for regular, substantial coverage of this issue).

    Also of relevance: Ignatius Insight's republication of How Should We Worship?, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger's preface to The Organic Development of the Liturgy, by Alcuin Reid, O.S.B. Appended to the article is an excellent compilation of resources on the subject.

  • Intellectual Charity: On Benedict XVI and the Canadian Bishops, by Fr. James V. Schall, S.J. Ignatius Insight Oct. 2, 2006 -- a substantial explication of Pope Benedict's Ad Limina message to the Canadian Bishops:
    One has to say that Benedict XVI chooses his targets very carefully. This time, in what might be an otherwise little noted short lecture, he speaks to the Canadian bishops from Ontario. They will, I hope, long ponder the notion of intellectual charity and its relation to their own polity and academic heritage. As in Regensburg, this address can and will, hopefully, be read by many. Its thesis is that religious minds also have to think correctly. It is an act of charity, as I think Aquinas said, to teach, or even to point out, the truth to another. This pointing out is where we begin, now at the University of Regensburg, now in the Consistory Hall of the Apostolic Palace in Castel Gandolfo to about twenty bishops from Ontario in Canada.
  • The Story of Joseph Ratzinger 1969-1977: "It seemed the end of the line. And instead ...", by Gianni Valente. 30 Giorni [30 Days] August 2006:
    Former students tell of Ratzinger’s last period of teaching at the recently opened Bavarian University. Surrounded by the respect of the students and the affection of colleagues, the professor of Dogmatic Theology believed he had achieved an ideal situation. But Paul VI was to upset his plans.
  • Coming soon from Ignatius Press: The Way of Love: Reflections on Pope Benedict XVI's encyclical Deus Caritas Est :
    In response to Benedict XVI's first encyclical, the Pontifical John Paul II Institute for Studies and Marriage and Family reflects, together with the Holy Father, on love. From the very beginning, the fundamental work of the Institute has been pursuing a deeper understanding of God's plan for marriage and family. In these twenty-five years various generations of students and professors, following the legacy of John Paul II, have been able to discover and communicate the beauty of the vocation for which all men have been created: the call to love. ' Twenty-six professors from the Institute's various sessions express what in their understanding are the main themes of the document, approaching the topics raised by the Holy Father with different theological and philosophical perspectives; by so doing they have highlighted the significance and fecundity of the lines of thought suggested by the Pope. This book is offered as a path towards a fuller understanding of the profundity and richness of the love with which God fills us and wants us to communicate in our turn.

  • Pope Warns Theologians to Not Seek Applause (Zenit.org Oct. 6, 2006):
    A theologian prostitutes himself when he subjects himself to the "dictatorship of common opinions," Benedict XVI told members of the International Theological Commission. [...]

    "To speak to meet with applause, to speak oriented to what men want to hear, to speak obeying the dictatorship of common opinions, is considered a sort of prostitution of the word and of the soul," said the Holy Father quoting the First Letter of St. Peter.

    The theologian needs a form of "chastity," which implies "not to be subjected to such standards, not to seek applause, but to seek obedience to the truth," the Pontiff said.

    Benedict XVI continued: "And I believe this is the fundamental virtue of the theologian, this discipline, even hard, of obedience to the truth, which makes us collaborators of the truth, a mouth of truth, so that we will not speak in this river of words of today, but that we are really purified and chaste through obedience to the truth, so that truth may speak in us."

  • On October 17th, the Office for the Liturgical Celebrations of the Supreme Pontiff published Benedict XVI's calendar for the remainder of 2006, which includes two trips -- one in Italy and one to Turkey (Nov. 28, to Friday, Dec. 1) -- and a full Christmas agenda.

    Speaking on the Holy Father's intentions for his trip to Turkey, Bishop Luigi Padovese asserted the Pope's focus on dialogue:

    "The Pope is not coming to missionize, as the Turkish press claims, but to speak with Muslims, the Turkish government, and obviously with Catholics, but especially with Orthodox Christians."
    On November 2nd, Police detained a man who fired shots into the air outside the Italian consulate yesterday in protest against the Pope's impending visit (Source: The Herald Nov. 3, 2006):
    The suspect later told a reporter he wanted to murder the Pope.

    "I don't want him here, if he was here now I would strangle him with my bare hands," said Ibrahim Ak, 26.

    "I fired the shots for God," Ak said as he sat handcuffed inside a police van. "God willing, he will not come. If he comes, he will see what will happen to him."

    Turkish online paper Zaman reports that Benedict will get "Bush-Like" Protection on his visit:
    Strict security measures will be taken during Pope Benedict XVI’s official visit to Turkey scheduled for November 28 to December 1, 2006.

    The Security General Directorate, in cooperation with the National Intelligence Agency (MIT) and the Gendarmerie, is working on security plans in an effort to prevent any provocations or even assassination attempts against the Pope.

    Preparing us for the coming trip with his column, Benedict’s gamble with Islam National Catholic Reporter Oct. 12, 2006:
    Pope Benedict XVI heads to Turkey next month, his first visit to a majority Muslim state. Of all the question marks surrounding the trip, perhaps the most consequential is this: Which Benedict will show up?

    Will it be the Benedict of Regensburg, challenging his Muslim hosts to embrace rationality, hence to renounce violence and to respect religious freedom? Or will it be the post-Regensburg Benedict, seemingly determined to project a "kinder, gentler" face to Islam, missing no opportunity to send signals of reconciliation?

    Can he, in some fashion, be both?

    Please pray for our Holy Father this November.

On a Lighter Note . . .

  • Does the BBC enjoy being so far behind the fact curve? asks Edward N. Peters (), taking on a manifestation of the media's anti-Catholic hysteria:
    Apparently the BBC thinks that if the Vatican publishes a document in 2001, (which the Catholic press reported on in early 2002), but the BBC only notices it five years later, the document must have been a deep dark Vatican secret till then. Quick, what's British English for "Get real"?

    Britain's Evening Standard reports that the BBC just aired a "Panorama" story about how Pope Benedict XVI, as head of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, sent a "secret Vatican edict" to bishops around the world (right, like that's a group that could keep a secret if it tried), an edict so secret "that bishops had to keep it locked in a safe at all times", which ordered a massive cover-up of clergy sexual misconduct. . . .

  • "More than two and a half million people have met Benedict XVI in Rome or at Castel Gandolfo since the beginning of the year," reports AsiaNews (Nov. 1, 2006):
    According to statistics of the Prefecture of the Pontifical Household, which organizes the audiences, the number of faithful who have met the pope in the first 10 months of the year was exactly 2,674,820.

    Specifically, 938,500 took part in the Wednesday general audiences; 349,120 took part in particular audiences; 502,200 were present at liturgical celebrations, which took place in Rome. Meanwhile, 885,000 listened to the Angelus in Rome and Castel Gandolfo.

  • Italian journalist praised Benedict XVI for having made the Church "the greatest bulwark of reason" (Catholic News Agency Oct. 27, 2006):
    In an article published by the Spanish daily “La Razon,” Messori said the “intellectual prestige” of Benedict XVI, “which was not lacking in his predecessors,” seems to be the unique characteristic of the current Pontificate.

    Messori said that the idea of Pope “as professor” seems to prevail in the minds of the people. This is evident during each of his public appearances in which “the masses of the faithful” do not come to get emotionally charged up, “but rather to learn, almost to attend the lecture of a wise and at the same time generous professor, who breaks down and offers his knowledge to those who do not have it.”

    Vittorio Messori is known for the first publication of a book-length interview with a pope (Crossing the Threshhold of Hope, 1994, with John Paul II), as well as a book-length interview with then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (The Ratzinger Report, 1985).

  • The Vatican mission at UN headquarters in New York is organizing a conference on Pope Benedict's critique of contemporary relativism, to be held Nov. 20, 2006. The event, co-sponsored by Ignatius Press and the Path to Peace Foundation, will include presentations by George Weigel of the Ethics and Public Policy Center and Marcello Pera, a member of the Italian senate. (Catholic World News Nov. 2, 2006).

    On a related note, here is a positive review Fr. John Jay Hughes of Without Roots: Europe, Islam and the West -- and from the National Catholic Reporter, no less. Thank God for small miracles.

Special Recognition and Personal Thanks to two bloggers for their daily and/or regular coverage of Pope Benedict XVI, and which I made particular use of in compiling this roundup: The Papa Ratzi Post (Michael S. Rose); Argent by the Tiber.

Sunday, September 24, 2006

Pope Benedict Roundup!

But surely there must be something other to talk about than Islam's love-hate relationship with the Roman Pontiff -- here, then, is a roundup of a few articles you might have missed over the past month in all the commotion and controversy. . . .
  • Behind Benedict's Vatican Overhaul, by Jeff Israely. Time Sept. 11, 2006:
    So while the Pope enjoys his homecoming this week (Monday he traveled to the small Bavarian town of Marktl am Inn where he was born), Vatican insiders say the beginning of the Benedict era back at the Roman Curia begins in earnest this fall. Some, in fact, predict that Bertone — a longtime trusted confidante of the former Cardinal Ratzinger — was handpicked to be Secretary of State in order to usher in a virtual revolution in the way Catholic Church headquarters operates. Through an effort that will be part downsizing, part priority overhaul, the theologian pontiff is said to want Church headquarters to be both a more holy and a more efficient entity.

    Though the changing of the guards has been more deliberate than some had wanted — especially those critical of the power that Sodano had amassed in the last years of John Paul's papacy — the new Pope has nonetheless already made some notable personnel moves, with others sure to come. Here are five key changes that have taken place since Benedict took over in April 2005, and five more shifts that may be on the horizon. . . .

    See also " The Pontificate Begins", by Jeffrey Tucker (New Liturgical Movement).

  • September 8, 2006. In his Ad Limina meeting with the Bishops of Ontario, Canada, Pope Benedict once again touched on the perils of relativism:
    Today, the impediments to the spread of Christ’s Kingdom are experienced most dramatically in the split between the Gospel and culture, with the exclusion of God from the public sphere. Canada has a well-earned reputation for a generous and practical commitment to justice and peace, and there is an enticing sense of vibrancy and opportunity in your multicultural cities. At the same time, however, certain values detached from their moral roots and full significance found in Christ have evolved in the most disturbing of ways. In the name of ‘tolerance’ your country has had to endure the folly of the redefinition of spouse, and in the name of ‘freedom of choice’ it is confronted with the daily destruction of unborn children. When the Creator’s divine plan is ignored the truth of human nature is lost.

    False dichotomies are not unknown within the Christian community itself. They are particularly damaging when Christian civic leaders sacrifice the unity of faith and sanction the disintegration of reason and the principles of natural ethics, by yielding to ephemeral social trends and the spurious demands of opinion polls. Democracy succeeds only to the extent that it is based on truth and a correct understanding of the human person. Catholic involvement in political life cannot compromise on this principle; otherwise Christian witness to the splendour of truth in the public sphere would be silenced and an autonomy from morality proclaimed (cf. Doctrinal Note The Participation of Catholics in Political Life, 2-3; 6). In your discussions with politicians and civic leaders I encourage you to demonstrate that our Christian faith, far from being an impediment to dialogue, is a bridge, precisely because it brings together reason and culture. . . .

    A particularly insidious obstacle to education today, which your own reports attest, is the marked presence in society of that relativism which, recognizing nothing as definitive, leaves as the ultimate criterion only the self with its desires. Within such a relativistic horizon an eclipse of the sublime goals of life occurs with a lowering of the standards of excellence, a timidity before the category of the good, and a relentless but senseless pursuit of novelty parading as the realization of freedom. Such detrimental trends point to the particular urgency of the apostolate of ‘intellectual charity’ which upholds the essential unity of knowledge, guides the young towards the sublime satisfaction of exercising their freedom in relation to truth, and articulates the relationship between faith and all aspects of family and civic life. Introduced to a love of truth, I am confident that young Canadians will relish exploring the house of the Lord who "enlightens every person who comes into the world (Jn 1:9) and satisfies every desire of humanity.

    (Hat tip: Rocco Palmo @ Whispers in the Loggia).

  • September 5 was the memorial of Mother Teresa of Calcutta, recognized as a model of Christian love in the Pope's first encyclical -- two of the three times in connection with the mention of saints. Teresa Polk has the references.

  • Generation Benedikt - The PRF (Papa Ratzinger Forum) reports that
    A group of 12 young Catholics from Germany, France, Italy, Mexico and the USA decided to start on the first anniversary of WYD in Köln an international platform for young people identifying themselves with the message of Pope Benedict XVI. The inauguration took place 26/08 in the Archdiocese of Köln. [website: Generation Benedikt].
  • In our July 2006 roundup we linked to Pope or Heretic? An Evaluation of Pope Benedict XVI, LumenGentleman Apologetics' examination of "radtrad heresy hunters" who are plumbing the writings of then-Joseph Ratzinger, just as they did with his predecessor. In The Hunt for Heresy: Dr. Droleskey vs. Cardinal Ratzinger, LumenGentleman Apologetics' Jacob Michael revisits the topic, addressing a new attack on the Pope by Dr. Droleseky:
    Lately, Dr. Droleskey has gotten cozy with the Sedevacantist position, which appears to have emboldened him to step up the harsh invective against the Roman Pontiff. His August 21, 2006 article, "A New Theology for a New Religion", tops out at some 75 pages of single-spaced text, 50 pages of which are filled with interminably long quotes from other writers.

    The weakness of Dr. Droleskey, one he shares with many critics of the Pope, is that "he does not understand what he is reading in Ratzinger":

    Whatever suspicion might remain that Droleskey just "doesn't get it" is confirmed by the few words of commentary that he does interject. The article purports to be a kind of analysis of Ratzinger's book, Principles of Catholic Theology, but in reality it is little more than a collection of lengthy quotes from Ratzinger's work, juxtaposed against equally lengthy quotes from 19th-20th century popes, with a few of Droleskey's own words of righteous indignation serving as a shaky bridge between the two. . . . READ MORE
    Droleskey was profiled in a recent e-letter by Catholic apologist Karl Keating, asking:
    Once he was able to get the attention of a third of New York's Republican voters. Now he struggles to get anyone's attention. It is not likely that many of those voters would recognize the candidate of 1998 in the itinerant essayist of 2006. What happened?
    Dr. Droleskey: a warning to those who presume themselves to be "more Catholic than the Pope."

  • Benedict, The Peace Pope. National Catholic Register Sept. 3-9, 2006. Angelo Matera (editor of Godspy.com), takes a look at Pope Benedict's response to the August-2006 conflict between Israel and Hezbollah/Lebanon and takes a swipe at "Catholic “hawks” in the United States." (Discussion of the article at Amy Welborn's).

  • The Pope Rewrites the Handbook of the Good Pastor, by Sandro Magister. www.Chiesa. Sept. 5, 2006:
    Fielding questions in public and responding spontaneously is one of the hallmarks of pope Joseph Ratzinger’s communication style.

    He used this method on October 15, 2005, with the children who had received their first communion that year crowded into Saint Peter’s Square. And he did so on April 6 of this year, again in Saint Peter’s Square, with the young people preparing for World Youth Day.

    Each time, the pope seeks to adapt his responses to the audience in front of him.

    To the priests of the diocese of Albano, in fact, he delivered what almost amounted to a handbook on good pastoral ministry: how to celebrate Mass, how to recite the breviary, how to administer the sacraments, how to draw near those “far away,” how to be faithful to the duty of chastity, how to show to married couples the beauty of matrimony, and to young people the conversion of a Saint Francis. . . .

    According to Magister, the complete transcript of his conversation with the priests of Albano numbers a good 6,000 words in length, was released by the Vatican press office the following day, and appeared in the September 2 edition of L’Osservatore Romano in Italian only. Magister produces about a third of the exchange; Teresa @ the Papa Ratzinger Forum has another transcript, and here is the complete Italian text of the exchange from the Vatican Website. (Hat tip, Amy Welborn).

    Previous transcripts of spontaneous "Q&A's" with the Holy Father are archived here @ the Pope Benedict XVI Fan Club.

  • Dissident Kueng criticises pope during German visit Deutsche Presse Agentur. Sept. 13, 2006. Speaking at his home in Tuebingen, Germany, disgruntled theologian Hans Keung berated the Pope for being an old fuddy-duddy and neglecting the path of reform:
    [Kung] slammed Pope Benedict XVI on Wednesday for not offering dialogue during a six-day visit to Germany. There had not been "a single future-oriented signal" from the pope, nor were there any suggestions of reforms on the way, Kueng told Deutsche Presse-Agentur dpa in an interview.

    Kueng, who was invited to a long lunch and talk with Benedict in Italy last year, said the visit had made a contradictory impression.

    "He didn't fulfil any of the hopes of reform-oriented Catholics. . . .

    I find that it's easier to understand Kung if you understand his reference to "dialogue" as a keyword for "capitulation". For instance:
    [Kung] said Benedict had been "tactically smart to stay silent about the rule of celibacy for priests, or the ban on contraceptives and other uncomfortable Roman rules.

    "He was always stressing the nice side of faith and the church and leaving the harsh church rules that still exist unmentioned."

    Kueng added, "I don't see dialogue in practice."

    And to think it was only last September and in the first year of his pontificate that Pope Benedict had invited his former academic colleague for a friendly four-hour-long chat over dinner, culminating in the Swiss theologian's praise of the invitation as a "sign of hope for many in the church with the same vision as mine."

    Past articles on the Ratzinger-Kung relationship, see The Effluence of Kung, The Brevity of Ratzinger Against The Grain January 5, 2005; "Kung's Gripe" (in which he accused Cardinal Ratzinger with "manipulating the papal conclave with a campaign to have Pope John Paul made a saint") and the Sept. 27, 2005 Pope Benedict Roundup on the Benedict-Kung meeting.

On a Lighter Note . . .

  • Recollections from Pope's former housekeeper Independent Catholic News Sept. 21, 2006. Sister Agapita, of the Sisters of Mercy convent in Munich, was a housekeeper to Cardinal Ratzinger, before he became Pope Benedict XVI. She was one of 50 people who received Communion from the Pope during his recent Mass at Munich-Riem. Sr Agapita reminisced with journalist Tess Crebbin:
    "We spent many joyful moments together," she said by phone. "It was much more than just your average housekeeper-Cardinal relationship, because he really involved us in his daily life and we also used to pray together." [...]

    Sister Agapita related how, when the Pope John Paul II was shot, Cardinal Ratzinger immediately " gathered all of us around to say the rosary together with him for the Pope's recovery. I thought it was really significant that he had asked his staff to join him in prayer, fostering among us the feeling of community and union."

  • Also interviewed this month by the Catholic News Agency is Thaddäus Kühnel, the Pope’s “courier,” chauffuer, friend, and confidant Munich, Sep. 07, 2006 (CNA):
    Kühnel, who is Director of the Bank of Munich, met then Cardinal Ratzinger in 1978 at the home of the Sisters of Mercy at Bad Adelholzen. In an interview with German television, Kühnel explained that he is known as the “Pope’s courier” because when Cardinal Ratzinger was called to work in the Roman curia, he offered to bring “Bavarian things” to him in Rome, which he did and still does to this day.

    “The first thing I brought to Rome, in my car, was a paschal candle, as well as some fruit from Adelholzen and mineral water. For Christmas I brought him his Advent wreath, as they can’t be easily found in Italy. Up to now I have brought some 40 different objects,” Kühnel explained. “He likes the Christmas cookies that women from Bavarian parishes bake at home as well as those made at certain monasteries. He also likes the chocolates made in Aachen”, he added.

    Kühnel said he’s also acted as Cardinal Ratzinger’s chauffuer and that he often picked him up at the airport and “brought him to Pentling or Ratisbona to his brother’s home. Sometimes I drove the whole family—the cardinal, his brother Georg and their sister Maria. The little trips we took to Mallersdorf, Brixen, Linz, Klagenfurt, and Bad Hofgastein—most of the time with the entire family—were very beautiful,” Kühnel said. . . .

    According to Tess Crebbin of the Catholic News Service, Kühnel was invited to spend the night in the Regensburg seminary with the pontiff during his Sept. 9-14 trip to Germany:
    "I was very surprised and honored when I received a letter stating that I am to stay overnight at Regensburg," Thaddaeus Kuehnel, director of the Hauck and Aufhauser private bank in Munich, told Catholic News Service. "The request came from the Regensburg seminary, by letter."

    Kuehnel said he did not know why he received an invitation when so many of the pope's other friends remain uncertain if they will have a chance to meet with him.

    "It may have something to do with the fact that our friendship goes back some 30-odd years," Kuehnel said. "Long before he became pope, when he faced controversy at home and abroad, I always spoke out for him, and I think he never forgot this.

  • The Associated Press tried to downplay Benedict's homecoming with some pre-emptive liberal spin, claiming that "Many Germans [are] still skeptical about native son Pope Benedict XVI" (International Herald Tribune Sept. 8, 2006):
    "I think he's a man of the past, and he's trying to cement these conservative tendencies in place," said Rupert Kreuzpaintner, a churchgoing Catholic from Landshut in Benedict's home region of Bavaria who sees the pope as too authoritarian within the church.

    Although he is critical of Benedict, "my faith is not affected by that," said Kreuzpaintner, 45. "But for me it is a revolting thing, that a Godlike cult is made around such a person who stands for exactly the opposite of what the message should be."

    Prompting some readers to wonder just which parish the "churchgoing Catholic" Kreuzpaintner has been attending? -- The article goes on to note that "Munich police expect at least 500,000 visitors in the Bavarian capital."

    On the other hand, Germany is "Finding Religion" (TheTrumpet.com Sept. 21, 2006):

    Germans’ warm reception to Pope Benedict’s visit to his native Bavaria last week, coupled with the broader trend toward recognizing the religious underpinnings of Europe, are signs that the secularism of Europe is on the way out.
  • Benedetto, der Leuchtturm" ["Benedict the Light House"] Der Spiegel Sept. 9, 2006. Gerald Augustinus (Closed Cafeteria) provides us with a english translation. After describing the Catholic Church as having been "the boogeyman in the eyes of the average progressive German, the incarnation of a spirit hostile to enlightenment, the head of the worst reactionary bigotry, representative of the Middle Ages, holding on stubbornly", Der Spiegel observes a "sea change" in the relationship between church and society, "the motor of which", suprisingly, was the Catholic Church:
    n 2005, the year of the change of Popes and World Youth Day in Cologne centuries-old abilities of Catholicism coincided with new styles of expression fo the media and event society. In contrast to the liturgically, spiritually and ritualistically rather stuffy Protestantism, Catholicism has always been a religion of senses, theater and demonstrative stagings. With the Pope as its hea it could and can personalize its message worldwide.

    This potential to produce images, to create a charismatic aura, to move masses of people to pilgrimages has been fully used by Catholicism in its nature of a robust, global, organized and experienced institution - and the media hungrily bought it. The pictures of the Polish Pope went around the world - his folksy approach to the faithful, dignified blessings and his increasing suffering that he defied like a grand martyr, who even and especially in his dying electrified the Catholic masses.

    World Youth Day became an image-rich spectacle, where the charismatic cult of the Pope with its vivacious waves of hundreds of thousands of young people even captivated the cool intellectual Joseph Ratzinger. "We are Pope" the Bild newspaper famously headlined - and the young crowds chanted "Benedetto, Benedetto."

    As one reader notes, "It looks as if one typical stereotype is still prominant. Nothing is said about the Church's intellectual appeal."

    Still, Gerard observes about another Spiegel article on the Pope's visit:

    [Der Spiegel is] definitely friendlier since Pope John Paul II. died. It used to be the magazine for all the whiners - Kueng, Drewermann, Ranke-Heinemann etc. The latter two have since left the Church. Rebellion suddenly isn't that cool anymore but rather something very old-fashioned. Heck, the article's even called "Joseph's Return" and misses the usual snarky remarks.

  • Coming to us by way of Jimmy Akin), New Zealand website OddStuff relays the story that Pope Benedict's father met his mother by advertising for a wife in a local Roman Catholic newspaper:
    Bild am Sonntag (BamS) said 43-year-old Joseph Ratzinger senior placed an advertisement as a "low-level civil servant" seeking "a good Catholic girl, who can cook and sew a bit ... to marry as soon as possible, preferably with a picture," in a Bavarian paper in March 1920.

    Four months later – by now a "mid-ranking civil servant" – he posted a similar notice in the same paper, and this time received a reply from Maria Peintner, the Pope's future mother, BamS reported, citing documents from Bavarian state archives.

    Joseph Ratzinger senior and Maria Peintner were married in November 1920.

    Click here for the original article from Bild am Sonntag, with photos of Joseph's parents and a shot of "baby Ratzinger."

  • "Benedictwiser, the Pope of Beers", by Curt Jester / Photo via Greg Krehbiel:
    This beer has a real great head and talk about theology on tap. Plus it is not weak like those heretical dissident beers. You know the ones that are all watered down. Pope Benedict Beer is fine with fish, meat, biblical exegesis, Magisterial documents, and spiritual reading. Great also for preparing to talk with dissidents or anyone you know you will be at lagerheads with.

Saturday, September 23, 2006

Pope Benedict and "Regensburg Rage" - The Islamic Reaction (Pt. III)

It has been over week since Pope Benedict gave his now-infamous Regensburg address on "Faith, Reason and the University". Muslims are marching, pundits are pontificating, and by now everybody and their next door neighbor and their neighbor's dog has weighed in on the Pope's reference to 14th century Byzantine emperor Manuel II Palaiologos' commentary on "spreading the faith by the sword."

Benedict has been nothing if not gracious, devoting devoting a portion of his Wednesday General Audience to clarifying the nature of his speech:

It was a profound reflection, as he did last Sunday before the Angelus prayer, Benedict XVI reiterated the substance of what he had already said: everything took place in an athenaeum, and hence in language that would be employed for a university lecture. In the text of the address, there is a note that the pope intended to add footnotes. Further, the controversial phrase was a quote referring to Muhammad “in a way that is incomprehensible and brusque for us” and which served to “introduce the drama and actuality of the topic.” The pope said that “in no way did I wish to make my own the negative words of the emperor”, that he has “profound respect for world religions and for Muslims, who worship the one God and with whom we promote peace, liberty, social justice.”

Benedict XVI also expressed the hope that “after the initial reaction”, his words may “constitute a push towards positive, even self-critical, dialogue between religions and between modern reason and Christian faith.”

In addition, Benedict "invited Muslim envoys to meet with him at his summer residence, for what the Holy See says is urgently needed dialogue" (AP, Sept. 20, 2006). Turkey and Iran accepted his offer, but apparently not everybody is satisfied.

Continuing Muslim Reactions

  • Waving Hamas banners at the al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem's Old City, Palestinians have denounced the Pope as a coward and a Jew.

  • In Tripoli, a son of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi urged the Pope to "embrace" Islam and "learn the truth" (Reuters, Sept. 20, 2006)

  • In Hamas-controlled Gaza, Muslims have formed an ad hoc terrorist group promising to attack Christian targets (Arutz Sheva Israel National Times Sept. 19, 2006):
    The group, which calls itself the “Army of guidance,” sent an announcement to news agencies based in Gaza saying that “every place relevant to Christians will be a target until the cursed infidel – the Vatican – apologizes to Muslims.”
  • In Pakistan, 1,000 Muslim clerics and religious scholars demanded pope's removal (Associated Press. Sept. 21, 2006):
    Benedict "should be removed from his position immediately for encouraging war and fanning hostility between various faiths" and "making insulting remarks" against Islam, said a joint statement issued by the clerics and scholars at the end of their one-day convention.
    Needless to say, the Vatican is not likely comply with their demand.

  • The Anti-Defamation League has chronicled continuing Allegations of Jewish Conspiracy Behind Pope's Comments in the Arab/Muslim media, together with some outrageous anti-semitic political cartoons:
    ADL also found a growing trend in editorials and opinion-pieces in the Arab/Muslim media that claim the Pope's statements should not surprise anyone, since they are the long-lasting natural discourse of international Zionism against Islam. Some maintain that after September 11 a new Rome was erected, one that aims at converting Christianity and God to Judaism under the watchful eyes of the evil American-Israeli alliance that was established by the international Zionism, which eventually seeks to enflame a full confrontation between Islam and Christianity.
    (Hat tip: Bill Cork, who wonders "Where's the Outcry" over this by the US Media?).

However, not all the reactions from the international Muslim community to Benedict's Regensburg speech have been negative:

  • Asia News reports that the Sunni Grand Mufti of Syria has said that “The clarifications supplied by the Pope are more than sufficient":
    “The clarifications supplied by the Pope are more than sufficient, although I would ask for, if possible, more explanation.” With these words, the Sunni Grand Mufti of the Arab republic of Syria, Ahmad Badr El Din El Hassoun summed up a meeting yesterday – Tuesday – with the Apostolic Nuncio of Syria, Mgr Giovanni Morandini. In a statement to AsiaNews, he added: “The disapproval of Pope Benedict XVI and his bitterness after the recent reactions are more than an ‘apology’ for us and a great sign of respect towards the Islamic world.” El Hassoun called on “all to respect this great personality, Pope Benedict XVI.”
  • In an editorial for the Washington Times (Sept. 21, 2006), Farid N. Ghadry, President of the Reform Party of Syria, insists "The words of Pope Benedict should not be examined with scorn but with scrutiny":
    As a moderate Muslim living amongst Muslims, Christians, and Jews, I am asking myself what have we, Muslims, brought forth to today's civilizations that would appeal to other religions and prompt them to imitate us or praise us? We have but TV beheadings and barbaric killings of innocent people in the name of our great religion. Are we then surprised to hear other religious people with followers all around the world ask us, through factual history, why we are so violent?
  • "Irresponsible Comments; Abhorrent Response" Arab News Sept. 22, 2006. Lubna Hussein is critical of the Pope, but equally (if not more) repulsed by the response of her fellow believers:
    It is tragic that we lose our power to reason and allow emotions to dictate our response whenever a situation like this arises. Instead of referring to the teachings of the Qur’an and the Prophet (peace be upon him) a few deviants take it upon themselves to perform atrocities and injustices in the name of Islam.

    Since when has the desecration of churches and threats against Christians been acceptable in our religion? . . .

    [It is] nothing short of pathetic to watch the mob mentality of some Muslims who, instead of extending this message of peace to the outside world, show a very ugly face when they burn effigies of the pope and attack the lives and property of innocents. Who can blame those who have no understanding of Islam if they cannot see the beauty of the religion through this shameful veneer inspired by hatred and intolerance?

  • It is also reported by Asia News that Pakistanese Christians and Muslims met to study the Pope’s speech together:
    The meeting, which took place at the Bishop’s residence, is the initiative of the local bishop, Mgr Joseph Coutts, and Fr Aftab James Paul, director of Interfaith Dialogue and Ecumenism for the diocese of Faisalabad. A committee was formed that includes Bishop Coutts himself, two Catholic priests, four ulemas and another Muslim, Pir Muhammad Ibrahim.

    In opening the meeting, Mgr Coutts expressed his “joy” to see Muslims and Christians together, but at the same time “sadness” for the overall misunderstanding of what the Pope said in Germany. . . .

    The article goes on to note the positive response of some Pakistanese Muslims:
    Members of the Muslim community said they appreciated the initiative of the local Church.

    For Rana Khalid Mehmood it is necessary to release Mgr Coutts’s remarks to the Pakistani press so that “people can understand the real situation”.

    Pir Muhammad Ibrahim is convinced that it is urgent to proceed logically. First, find the real issue; then, if there are problems clarify them through dialogue with our Christian brothers.”

    “We have decided to translate the original speech into Urdu so that Muslim clerics can study and better understand it,” he added.

    Perhaps all Catholic bishops experiencing similar unrest in their diocese' should issue a similar invitation to dialogue?
Reactions from the Christian community

Moving on to some commentaries of the week . . .
  • "Should Vatican aides have warned the Pope?, asks Malcolm Moore of the Telegraph UK (Sept. 19, 2006). Pointing to the recent departures in the papal curia, Moore has the audacity to suggest that an incompetent Benedict might have been kept in line by those well-versed in Islamic etiquette:
    Since the exile of Archbishop Michael Fitzgerald to be the papal envoy to Egypt, there are few high-ranking Islamic experts close to the Pope. Yesterday, Archbishop Fitzgerald declined to comment on the row, saying that he was "on retreat" in France.

    Robert Mickens, the Vatican correspondent of the Tablet, the Catholic newspaper, said the biggest problem was a lack of checks and balances within the Roman Curia under Benedict.

    He said that the Pope was surrounded by a cabal of "yes-men" who "hold him in such high regard that they are unlikely to challenge him".

    John Paul II was regularly guided either by Cardinal Angelo Sodano, the former secretary of state who resigned this month, or by Joaquin Navarro Valls, the Vatican's press secretary, who served 22 years before retiring earlier this year.

    Fr. Richard J. Neuhaus responds in "The Pope and His Cultured Advisers" (First Things' "On the Square" Sept. 22, 2006):
    You recall those awful years of John Paul II’s authoritarian and repressive pontificate when the ailing pontiff, taking advice only from a cabal of right-wing intimates and yes men, turned the Catholic Church into a one-man show.

    Surely you remember. . . . But now the story line has turned on a dime. After the imbroglio over the Regensburg lecture, we are told that “the authoritarian nature of Pope Benedict’s papacy” [he means pontificate] can be attributed to the fact that he, unlike John Paul, is surrounded by people who are not “brave enough to tell the pope that he has made a mistake.”

    Over at Insight Scoop, Carl Olson takes on similar criticisms by Rev. Thomas J. Reese, SJ in the Baltimore Sun (The Usual Suspects with the Usual Suspect Stuff Sept. 20, 2006), and in The Pope's Censor (Open Book ), readers respond to the suggestion by Jesuit Father Tom Michel, who served on the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, that this whole mess could have been averted "had the Pope's talk been reviewed and controlled by any competent staff person."

  • The Pope, Faith, and Reason - In the hands of the press, it was more like Will and Grace. National Review's Denis Boyles takes aim at the characteristically-incompetent digestion of papal documents by the mainstream media:
    Part of the problem journalists face when they have to report on complicated, somewhat obscure topics, such as Roman Catholic dogmatic theology, is that graduate journalism courses like JOM926 may stress spelling & grammar, but completely at the expense of “faith & reason.” So maybe it’s not fair to blame journalists for the inanities in the week’s reporting of what was a very complex discussion by a scholarly pope concerning faith and reason in Christianity and in Islam. . . . Within hours, the BBC World Service had started skipping the complicated bits and simply reported that “the Pope described Islam as evil and inhuman” making the story a much simpler one to report.
    Boyles examines the disappointing trend in supermarket tabloid-esque reporting on the story by the New York Times, the London Times, the Guardian, the Telegraph, Le Figaro and the Daily Mail.

  • For Robert Moynihan, Benedict's speech has been misinterpreted by almost everyone -- by those who condemn him, but also by his defenders ("Reaping the Whirlwind" Inside the Vatican October 2006):
    [Benedict's] address is not a "bashing" or "blasting" or "indictment" of Islam but rather a profound reflection on the need for the West to return to religious faith.

    Benedict's main point -- and few have noted this -- is that the West, unless it recovers a vision of God, cannot engage in a fruitful dialogue with the other great cultures of the world, which have a basic religious conviction about reality. Among these great cultures, of course, is Islam.

    His entire talk is focused on this point.

    He attempts to persuade his academic audience that giving theology a voice in the modern Western university would be of immense benefit to Western society, because it would lead to a rational dialogue on the central meaning of human existence; namely, an investigation of the nature of God. Such an inquiry, he says, would counter Europe's destructive denial of its own origins.

  • "The Pope was Right!", agrees George Weigel. (L.A. Times Sept. 20, 2006):
    CAN ISLAM BE self-critical? Can its leaders condemn and marginalize its extremists, or are Muslims condemned to be held hostage to the passions of those who consider the murder of innocents to be pleasing to God? Can the West recover its commitment to reason and thus help support Islamic reformers? These are the large questions that Pope Benedict XVI has put on the world's agenda. Men and women of reason and goodwill should be very glad that he has done so.
  • "Benedict the Brave" Wall Street Journal Sept. 19, 2006:
    This is not an invitation to the usual feel-good interfaith round-tables. It is a request for dialogue with one condition--that everyone at the table reject the irrationality of religiously motivated violence. The pope isn't condemning Islam; he is inviting it to join rather than reject the modern world.

    By their reaction to the pope's speech, some Muslim leaders showed again that Islam has a problem with modernity that is going to have to be solved by a debate within Islam. The day Muslims condemn Islamic terror with the same vehemence they condemn those who criticize Islam, an attempt at dialogue--and at improving relations between the Western and Islamic worlds--can begin.

    See also Pope Provocateur, by Brett Stephens (Wall Street Journal Sept. 20, 2006), insisting that "That speech deserves to be read in its totality, and not simply as the spark that set fire to churches across the West Bank because some Muslim fanatics object to the suggestion that there is too much violence in their religion."

  • Der Spegiel publishes a lengthy interview with Cardinal Kasper on the Vatican's relations with Muslims and the furor over the pope's recent remarks, conducted by Peter Wensierski and translated from German by Christopher Sultan. Sept. 19, 2006.

  • Putting the Pope's Remarks on Islam in Context - [audio] National Public Radio Sept. 19, 206. The fallout continues from Pope Benedict XVI's recent speech addressing Islam, and the Pope's subsequent apology. The Pope's approach to Islam is rooted both in the history of the church, and in the world's modern realities. Lynn Neary talks to author James Reston and reporter John Allen about the Pope's remarks.

  • "A Challenge, Not a Crusade", by John Allen Jr. New York Times Sept. 19, 2006:
    The new pope is tougher both on terrorism and on what the Vatican calls "reciprocity" - the demand that Islamic states grant the same rights and freedoms to Christians and other religious minorities that Muslims receive in the West. When Benedict said in his apology on Sunday that he wants a "frank and sincere dialogue," the word "frank" was not an accident. He wants dialogue with teeth.

  • Michael Novak invites us to "Tune out the static and hear Pope's challenge to us all": "People are missing the point, Pop," Novak imagines himself saying to his father. "The Pope just pulled off a triple play and they are still arguing about a single pitch early in the inning." In keeping with Novak's analogy, those interested in the remainder of the game can turn to our central post on the Regensburg address.

Catholic Londoner relays a stirring tribute to Sister Leonella Sgorbati, of the Institute of Consolata Missionaries from the African Catholic Information Service:

She was born in 1940.

She entered the religious order in 1963.

She worked training nurses at a children's hospital in Mogadishu.

Men gunned her down outside the hospital this Sunday.

Her last words before dying: "I forgive, I forgive."


For more roundups on "Regensburg Rage," see After Friday's "Day of Rage" then what? and Popes, Dopes and General Prattle from The Anchoress.

John Allen Jr. provides substantial commentary on the Fall out from Benedict's comments on Islam; What's next for Christian-Muslim relations? "All Things Catholic" (National Catholic Reporter Sept. 22, 2006) and Why Benedict XVI Did not Want to Fall Silent or Backpedal, by Sandro Magister. (www.Chiesa) Sept. 22, 2006.

On a Lighter Note . . .

Tuesday, September 19, 2006

Pope Benedict's Regensburg Address and the Muslim Reaction (Part II)

Entering the week after the Pope's Regensburg address and the media-spawned controversy over his statements on Islam, and the fires of outrage are still going strong. Effigies of the Pope were burnt in Basra, Iraq (Reuters); protests practically shut down the Kashmir Valley, paralyzing "educational institutions, government offices, banks, markets and transport"; Muslims in the Gaza strip told the pope he must "accept Islam", and the Mujahideen Shura Council, an umbrella group led by Iraq's branch of al Qaeda, vowed "jihad":
"We shall break the cross and spill the wine. ... God will (help) Muslims to conquer Rome. ... God enable us to slit their throats, and make their money and descendants the bounty of the mujahideen," said the statement.

It was posted on Sunday on an Internet site often used by al Qaeda and other militant groups.

Also today, the German Chancellor Angela Merkel conveyed her support -- a lone voice in the wilderness of European heads-of-state?

And now, another roundup of commentary on the ongoing controversy:

  • Islam’s Unreasonable War Against Benedict XVI, by Sandro Magister (www.Chiesa Sept. 18, 2006):
    Anyone who is an expert in the art of diplomacy and a proponent of “realism” in international relations would certainly have censured as inopportune and dangerous many passages of the homilies and speeches delivered by Benedict XVI in Germany.

    But this is not a pope who submits himself to such censorship or self-censorship, which he sees as being inopportune and dangerous indeed when it concerns the pillars of his preaching. His goal on his trip to Germany was to illuminate before modern man – whether Christian, agnostic, or of another faith; from Europe, Africa, or Asia – that simple and supreme truth that is the other side of the truth to which he dedicated the encyclical “Deus Caritas Est.” God is love, but he is also reason, he is the “Logos.” And so when reason separates itself from God, it closes in upon itself. And likewise, faith in an “irrational” God, an absolute, unbridled will, can become the seed of violence. Every religion, culture, and civilization is exposed to this twofold error – not only Islam, but also Christianity, toward which the pope directed almost the entirety of his preaching.

  • From Fr. Fessio of Ignatius Press (and one of the Pope's former students), offers his reflections on the Regensberg address, asking Is Dialogue wit Islam Possible? Ignatius Insight Sept. 18, 2006:
    Yet there is a crucial underlying principle that needs to be enunciated. Christianity and Islam make incompatible truth claims. Despite the difficulty in determining who can speak authoritatively for Christianity or for Islam, there are elements of belief common to all Christians which are incompatible with elements of belief common to all Muslims. The two most obvious and most fundamental are the Trinity and the Incarnation.

    I would expect an intelligent and informed Muslim to consider me a blasphemer (because I introduce multiplicity into the one God) and an idolator (because I worship as God a man named Jesus). Should I be offended if he says so publicly? Should I not rather be offended if he conceals his position for the alleged purpose of fostering dialogue?

  • On the blog of Domenico Bettinelli, Jr., the question is raised: Who Will Stand with the Pope?:
    It’s been 5 days and still no official statement from the USCCBureaucracy. Has anyone’s individual bishop spoken out?
    Some of his readers respond with mentions of recognition and prayer at Mass in their parishes. Another mentioned these words from Cardinal Pell of Sydney, Australia.

    Bill Cork (Built on a Rock) posts a link to Audio of yesterday's homily by the Rev. Stephen B. Reynolds on "the latest Papal-Muslim bru-ha-ha.". Reynolds is pastor of St. Theresa's Church in Sugar Land, TX. A clear exposition of the Holy Father's Regensburg address. Well worth listening to (and more priests like this, please!)

    Also mentioned, this statement from Fr. Julián Carrón, President of the Fraternity of Communion and Liberation (The CL Press Office Milan, September 15, 2006):

    “Concerning the accusations against Benedict XVI, three things are evident: 1) The Pope certainly did not want to offend Islamic believers, but to call everyone to a correct use of reason; 2) the Pope has a clear awareness of some extreme aspects of the vicissitudes of Islam, which are truths of history before the eyes of all; and 3) there is an intolerance of peaceful criticism that is intolerable, both in terms of the preconceived positions of certain Islamic exponents, and in terms of the indifference and superficiality of many Western commentators.

    “We stand by the Pope. In affirming that “not acting according to reason is against the nature of God,” Benedict XVI said a true thing that holds for anyone, beginning with we Christians.

    “This position of the Pope saves the possibility for an authentic religious experience for every man, and permits an encounter in peace. It is not a question of a clash of civilizations, but the elementary experience of the “poor of spirit” of every religion: those who live a reasonable relationship with God, beginning from the needs for truth, beauty, justice, and happiness that are in the heart of every man, and precisely for this cannot follow the violent degenerations of those who, in the name of an ideology, reject reason for a power, be they in the West or anywhere else.”

  • Father Peregrinator (Canterbury Tales) draws our attention to The Man of the Hour: Manuel II Paleologos.

  • From Amy Welborn, another survey of mixed reactions from the Arab press.

  • From Muslim author believes "Pope should not have apologized CBSNews.com Sept. 18, 2006. (Via Rod Dreher @ CrunchyCon):
    As a faithful Muslim, I do not believe the pope should have apologized. I've read what’s been described as his inflammatory speech. Actually, he called for dialogue with the Muslim world. To ignore that larger context and to focus on a mere few words of the speech is like reducing the Koran, Islam's holy book, to its most bloodthirsty passages. We Muslims hate it when people do that. The hypocrisy of doing this to the pope stinks to high heaven.
    Irshad Manji is a Muslim, a feminist, and a best-selling author of The Trouble with Islam Today: A Muslim’s Call for Reform in Her Faith (St. Martins, 2005). She is based at Yale University as a Visiting Fellow with the International Security Studies program.

    Amy Welborn is rounding up reactions from clear-headed, fair-minded Muslims who are challenging those who have embarassed their faith and tradition.

  • First Things' Fr. Richard J. Neuhaus weighs in (he, too, was reminded if Benedict's Cologne 2005 address to the Muslim community. On Benedict's choice of Manuel II Paleologos as an illustration:
    I have had the opportunity of many extended conversations with Ratzinger-Benedict over the years, and he is a man of great gentleness and deliberation and extremely careful to say what he means. What he said at Regensburg he has said many times before. Contrary to many reports, he has not apologized or retracted his argument. He has indicated sincere regret that many Muslims have reacted to his statement as they have. The response of those who are properly called jihadists is, “If you don’t stop saying we’re violent, we’re going to bomb more churches, kill more nuns and priests, and get the pope too.” In short, the reaction has powerfully confirmed the problem to which Benedict called our attention.

    Some think that Benedict was not as judicious as he might have been in quoting a medieval emperor of the East who, faced by Islamic conquest that succeeded in turning Christian Constantinople into Islamic Istanbul, declared that Islam has produced only inhumanity and evil. That is arguable. Benedict did say at Regensburg that the emperor’s words were excessively “brusque.” But the citation was also a way of reminding everybody that this conflict with Islam bent upon conversion by the sword is very long-standing.

    And his conclusion:

    Benedict’s responsibility is to set forth clearly and uncompromisingly the Christian understanding. At Regensburg he said: “God acts with logos. Logos means both reason and word— reason which is creative and capable of self-communication, precisely as reason. John [the Evangelist] thus spoke the final word on the biblical concept of God . . . In the beginning was the logos, and the logos is God.”

    As history is turning out, this theological truth is at the very core of what is likely the greatest political and cultural struggle of this century, and maybe beyond.

    But was it a "Papal Blunder"?" -- That is the question, as presented by the media, and up for discussion by readers at Amy Welborn's Open Book.

    Among those affirming the judgement that yes, a blunder was made:

    • Mark Shea:
      The bishop, and supremely the Universal Pastor, has responsibility for the care of *all* the souls in his jurisdiction--including the Muslim ones. Benedict said nothing untrue--which is why he has not apologized for what he said, nor should he. But he is trying very hard to counter the bad effects of what he need not have said, but did. If he did not think those ill effects of his words were, in some sense, his responsibility, he would not be saying anything. The last thing Benedict wants is to destroy the Church's ability to speak to both East and West. He may already be too late, but only time will tell.
    • Jimmy Akin:
      in the process of taking a detour to say something meant to help break the link between religion and violence, he happened to quote a particularly inflammatory line from 600 years ago that could and has stirred up the potential for religious violence. And the line isn't even necessary to his speech!
    • Robert Miller of First Things:
      Given the exquisite sensitivity that European politicians generally show for Muslim sensibilities, when a pope, speaking in public and before television cameras, quotes a text embodying a statement that will predictably result in explosive anger in the Muslim world, does so without needing to quote the specific language to make his point, does not expressly disavow the offending statement when quoting it, and even endorses a larger point that the author of the quotation is making, a decent respect for the intelligence of the man on the Throne of St. Peter demands that we conclude that he quoted the text intentionally, knowing what the consequences would be, and did so for a reason.
      See also Pope Benedict Clarifies - Jimmy Akin unpacks the Pope's words in his Sunday remarks on the Regensburg speech, and concludes: "From the original speech itself and from the way the Vatican has handled this matter, it is clear that the present situation was unexpected and that the Holy Father did not foresee this reaction to his speech."

  • Meanwhile, Turkish bishops confirm trip of Benedict XVI will go ahead, by Mavi Zambak. Asianews.it September 18, 2006:
    Istanbul (AsiaNews) – The bishops of Turkey today followed Ankara’s Foreign Affairs Minister, Abdullah Gul, in confirming that the visit of Benedict XVI will take place as planned, from 28 November to 1 December, according to the set itinerary. . . .

    And this morning, the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Turkey, as planned, met in Istanbul to discuss details of the trip’s itinerary. They were joined by Mgr Piero Marini, head of the Office of Papal Liturgical Celebrations. They share the view that at this point, there is no reason to call off the visit . . .

    But according to John Allen Jr., Some are justifiably anxious about the Pope's visit to Turkey:
    A potboiler novel currently on bestseller lists in Turkey titled Papa'ya suikast ("Attack on the Pope") predicts that Benedict will be assassinated.

    Written by novelist Yücel Kaya, the book is subtitled, Who will kill Benedict XVI in Istanbul?

    In a little more than 300 pages, Kaya manages to weave the Turkish Secret Service, the infamous Masonic lodge P2, and (of course) Opus Dei into his plot line. Inevitably, Mehmet Ali Agca, the Turk who shot Pope John Paul II in 1981, also makes an appearance.

    All this might seem comical were it not for the fact that in the last seven months, three Catholic priests have been attacked in Turkey, beginning with the murder of Italian missionary Fr. Andrea Santoro on February 5. Bishop Luigi Padovese, a 58-year-old Capuchin from Milan who serves as the region's apostolic vicar, and who was Santoro's superior, has warned of a "rising tide" of anti-Christian propaganda in Turkey.

    Pray for our Holy Father.

Sunday, September 17, 2006

So what DOES Pope Benedict XVI think about Islam?

Benodette, from the RatzingerForum, reminded all of us today of a much-overlooked address by Benedict to representatives of some Muslim communities, whom he met while visiting Cologne for World Youth Day on Saturday, August 20, 2005. A portion of the address is printed below. You can find the full text on the Vatican website.

In light of everything that has happened in the past several days, the words of our Holy Father appear all the more striking and relevant for us today.

Dear Muslim Friends,

It gives me great joy to be able to be with you and to offer you my heartfelt greetings. . . .

I am certain that I echo your own thoughts when I bring up one of our concerns as we notice the spread of terrorism. I know that many of you have firmly rejected, also publicly, in particular any connection between your faith and terrorism and have condemned it. I am grateful to you for this, for it contributes to the climate of trust that we need. [...]

If together we can succeed in eliminating from hearts any trace of rancour, in resisting every form of intolerance and in opposing every manifestation of violence, we will turn back the wave of cruel fanaticism that endangers the lives of so many people and hinders progress towards world peace.

The task is difficult but not impossible. The believer - and all of us, as Christians and Muslims, are believers - knows that, despite his weakness, he can count on the spiritual power of prayer.

Dear friends, I am profoundly convinced that we must not yield to the negative pressures in our midst, but must affirm the values of mutual respect, solidarity and peace. The life of every human being is sacred, both for Christians and for Muslims. There is plenty of scope for us to act together in the service of fundamental moral values. [...]

Only through recognition of the centrality of the person can a common basis for understanding be found, one which enables us to move beyond cultural conflicts and which neutralizes the disruptive power of ideologies. [...]

Past experience teaches us that, unfortunately, relations between Christians and Muslims have not always been marked by mutual respect and understanding. How many pages of history record battles and wars that have been waged, with both sides invoking the Name of God, as if fighting and killing, the enemy could be pleasing to him. The recollection of these sad events should fill us with shame, for we know only too well what atrocities have been committed in the name of religion.

The lessons of the past must help us to avoid repeating the same mistakes. We must seek paths of reconciliation and learn to live with respect for each other's identity. The defence of religious freedom, in this sense, is a permanent imperative, and respect for minorities is a clear sign of true civilization. In this regard, it is always right to recall what the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council said about relations with Muslims.

The Church looks upon Muslims with respect. They worship the one God living and subsistent, merciful and almighty, creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken to humanity and to whose decrees, even the hidden ones, they seek to submit themselves whole-heartedly, just as Abraham, to whom the Islamic faith readily relates itself, submitted to God.... Although considerable dissensions and enmities between Christians and Muslims may have arisen in the course of the centuries, the Council urges all parties that, forgetting past things, they train themselves towards sincere mutual understanding and together maintain and promote social justice and moral values as well as peace and freedom for all people" (Declaration Nostra Aetate, n. 3).

For us, these words of the Second Vatican Council remain the Magna Carta of the dialogue with you, dear Muslim friends, and I am glad that you have spoken to us in the same spirit and have confirmed these intentions.

You, my esteemed friends, represent some Muslim communities from this Country where I was born, where I studied and where I lived for a good part of my life. That is why I wanted to meet you. You guide Muslim believers and train them in the Islamic faith. [...]

Christians and Muslims, we must face together the many challenges of our time. There is no room for apathy and disengagement, and even less for partiality and sectarianism. We must not yield to fear or pessimism. Rather, we must cultivate optimism and hope.

Interreligious and intercultural dialogue between Christians and Muslims cannot be reduced to an optional extra. It is in fact a vital necessity, on which in large measure our future depends. [...]

I pray with all my heart, dear and esteemed Muslim friends, that the merciful and compassionate God may protect you, bless you and enlighten you always.

May the God of peace lift up our hearts, nourish our hope and guide our steps on the paths of the world.

Saturday, September 16, 2006

Pope Benedict XVI on "Faith, Reason and the University" - Regensburg, 2006

In 1969, following a tense period at the University of Tübingen (see The difficult years, by Gianni Valente 30 Giorni May 2006), Joseph Ratzinger received the invitation to teach at the University of Regensburg in Bavaria.

Having turned down the initial invitation in 1967, he remarks in Milestones that "I was still dean [of the faculty of theology at Tübingen], but the exhausting controveries I experienced during academic meetings had changed my attitude". So it was with understandable relief that he accepted the invitation. Ratzinger would later reflect on his years as "a time of fruitful theological work" and of "acquiring a theological vision that was ever more clearly my own" (Milestones p. 149/150).

The website of the University of Regensburg proudly features a section devoted to Pope Benedict's years at Regensburg, where he was appointed in 1969 as a professor of dogmatic theology. For B16 history buffs, the website posts a number of wonderful artifacts, including a newspaper announcement and certificate of his appointment, along with his later appointment to the International Papal Theological Commission.

On September 12, 2006, Pope Benedict XVI was again welcomed to the university, to give an address to students and faculty. His lecture was titled "Faith, Reason and the University: Memories and Reflections", the text of which is available at the Vatican website.* While I'll highlight a few points, I recommend a reading of the full text -- it is "vintage Benedict": at once stimulating and provocative.

The Pope spoke about his days teaching at the University of Bonn, of the dialogue between departments, "working in everything on the basis of a single rationality with its various aspects and sharing responsibility for the right use of reason." By way of illustration he mentions an exchange "by the erudite Byzantine emperor Manuel II Paleologus and an educated Persian on the subject of Christianity and Islam, and the truth of both, and proceeds to mention one point, "itself rather marginal to the dialogue as a whole," as a starting point for his reflections on the relationship between faith and reason:

In the seventh conversation edited by Professor Khoury, the emperor touches on the theme of the holy war. The emperor must have known that surah 2, 256 reads: "There is no compulsion in religion". According to the experts, this is one of the suras of the early period, when Mohammed was still powerless and under threat. But naturally the emperor also knew the instructions, developed later and recorded in the Qur'an, concerning holy war. Without descending to details, such as the difference in treatment accorded to those who have the "Book" and the "infidels", he addresses his interlocutor with a startling brusqueness on the central question about the relationship between religion and violence in general, saying: "Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached". The emperor, after having expressed himself so forcefully, goes on to explain in detail the reasons why spreading the faith through violence is something unreasonable. Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul. "God", he says, "is not pleased by blood - and not acting reasonably is contrary to God's nature. Faith is born of the soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats... To convince a reasonable soul, one does not need a strong arm, or weapons of any kind, or any other means of threatening a person with death...".

The decisive statement in this argument against violent conversion is this: not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to God's nature. The editor, Theodore Khoury, observes: For the emperor, as a Byzantine shaped by Greek philosophy, this statement is self-evident. But for Muslim teaching, God is absolutely transcendent. His will is not bound up with any of our categories, even that of rationality. Here Khoury quotes a work of the noted French Islamist R. Arnaldez, who points out that Ibn Hazn went so far as to state that God is not bound even by his own word, and that nothing would oblige him to reveal the truth to us. Were it God's will, we would even have to practise idolatry.

At this point, as far as understanding of God and thus the concrete practice of religion is concerned, we are faced with an unavoidable dilemma. Is the conviction that acting unreasonably contradicts God's nature merely a Greek idea, or is it always and intrinsically true?

In answer to this question, Benedict contends that there exists "the profound harmony between what is Greek in the best sense of the word and the biblical understanding of faith in God," pointing to the Christian understanding that "God acts with logos. Logos means both reason and word - a reason which is creative and capable of self-communication, precisely as reason."


Benedict goes on to discuss the significance of the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament -- the Septuagint -- which fosters this encounter between biblical faith and Greek philosophical inquiry ("From the very heart of Christian faith and, at the same time, the heart of Greek thought now joined to faith, Manuel II was able to say: Not to act 'with logos' is contrary to God's nature.")

According to Benedict, this integration of faith and reason is at the heart of the Christian conception of God. He notes that there arose in the history of Christianity itself schools of thought which have endangered this very conception, and which, when taken to their logical conclusion, are found to be profoundly incompatible. I personally found the following passage one of the more provocative and stimulating:

In all honesty, one must observe that in the late Middle Ages we find trends in theology which would sunder this synthesis between the Greek spirit and the Christian spirit. In contrast with the so-called intellectualism of Augustine and Thomas, there arose with Duns Scotus a voluntarism which ultimately led to the claim that we can only know God's voluntas ordinata. Beyond this is the realm of God's freedom, in virtue of which he could have done the opposite of everything he has actually done. This gives rise to positions which clearly approach those of Ibn Hazn and might even lead to the image of a capricious God, who is not even bound to truth and goodness. God's transcendence and otherness are so exalted that our reason, our sense of the true and good, are no longer an authentic mirror of God, whose deepest possibilities remain eternally unattainable and hidden behind his actual decisions. As opposed to this, the faith of the Church has always insisted that between God and us, between his eternal Creator Spirit and our created reason there exists a real analogy, in which unlikeness remains infinitely greater than likeness, yet not to the point of abolishing analogy and its language (cf. Lateran IV). God does not become more divine when we push him away from us in a sheer, impenetrable voluntarism; rather, the truly divine God is the God who has revealed himself as logos and, as logos, has acted and continues to act lovingly on our behalf. Certainly, love transcends knowledge and is thereby capable of perceiving more than thought alone (cf. Eph 3:19); nonetheless it continues to be love of the God who is logos. Consequently, Christian worship is λογικὴ λατρεία - worship in harmony with the eternal Word and with our reason (cf. Rom 12:1).

According to Benedict, this "inner rapprochement between Biblical faith and Greek philosophical inquiry" is not only at the very heart of Christianity, but in the historical origins of Europe as well: "this convergence, with the subsequent addition of the Roman heritage, created Europe and remains the foundation of what can rightly be called Europe."

In the latter half of his lecture, Benedict voices his concerns with the call for the "dehellenization" of Christianity -- of severing Christianity from its Greek heritage. He observes three stages of this program of dehellenization:

  1. the fundamental postulates of the Reformation in the sixteenth century, countering what they perfecived to be a philosophically-conditioned and corrupted Christianity with a wholesale reliance upon sola scriptura -- "faith in its pure, primordial form, as originally found in the biblical Word";

  2. the "liberal theology of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries", with Adolf von Harnack as its outstanding representative. -- Harnack positing a "return simply to the man Jesus and to his simple message underneath the accretions of theology," thereby bringing Christianity back into harmony with modern reason through the purging of its theological elements (the divinity of Christ and the Trinity). This is in accord with what Benedict describes as the "modern self-limitation of reason," which confines itself to that which is scientifically (mathematically and emperically) verifiable -- thereby dismissing as irrelevant (subjective) "the specifically human questions about our origin and destiny, the questions raised by religion and ethics."

  3. the proposition of "inculturation" -- that, in light of experience with cultural pluralism, "the synthesis with Hellenism achieved in the early Church was a preliminary inculturation which ought not to be binding on other cultures . . . [who] have the right to return to the simple message of the New Testament prior to that inculturation, in order to inculturate it anew in their own particular milieux." To this Benedict responds:
    The New Testament was written in Greek and bears the imprint of the Greek spirit, which had already come to maturity as the Old Testament developed. True, there are elements in the evolution of the early Church which do not have to be integrated into all cultures. Nonetheless, the fundamental decisions made about the relationship between faith and the use of human reason are part of the faith itself; they are developments consonant with the nature of faith itself.
Against this program of dehellenization, Benedict does not propose a rollback of the Enlightenment. He acknowledges "the positive aspects of modernity", pointing out that the scientific ethos is itself "the will to be obedient to the truth, and, as such, embodies an attitude which reflects one of the basic tenets of Christianity").


Rather, what is called for is a "broadening of our concept of reason and its applications," overcoming "the self-imposed limitation of reason" to that which is emperically verifiable, and a true restoration of theology to its place in the university, in genuine dialogue with the sciences -- "not merely as a historical discipline and one of the human sciences, but precisely as theology, as inquiry into the rationality of faith." Only then, says Benedict, "do we become capable of that genuine dialogue of cultures and religions so urgently needed today."

In the Western world it is widely held that only positivistic reason and the forms of philosophy based on it are universally valid. Yet the world’s profoundly religious cultures see this exclusion of the divine from the universality of reason as an attack on their most profound convictions. A reason which is deaf to the divine and which relegates religion into the realm of subcultures is incapable of entering into the dialogue of cultures. . . .

The West has long been endangered by this aversion to the questions which underlie its rationality, and can only suffer great harm thereby. The courage to engage the whole breadth of reason, and not the denial of its grandeur – this is the programme with which a theology grounded in Biblical faith enters into the debates of our time. “Not to act reasonably (with logos) is contrary to the nature of God”, said Manuel II, according to his Christian understanding of God, in response to his Persian interlocutor. It is to this great logos, to this breadth of reason, that we invite our partners in the dialogue of cultures. To rediscover it constantly is the great task of the university.

The subject of this lecture is certainly a familiar one to Benedict. Shortly after his election, Zenit News featured an interview with Timothy O'Donnell, president of Christendom College, who spoke on Benedict XVI's Commitment to Faith and Reason in Universities. O'Donnell predicted that the Holy Father's experience as a university professor would have an influence over his pontificate, and that he would carry on Pope John Paul II's legacy "by stressing the synthesis of faith and reason in the Catholic intellectual tradition."
. . . I think that our current Holy Father will continue the good work initiated by Pope John Paul II in his apostolic constitutions "Sapienta Christiana" and "Ex Corde Ecclesiae."

I think he will find it particularly important to continue to speak to the vital role that must be played by Catholic institutions of higher learning in an effort to once again re-engage the culture and communicate effectively to the world the great synthesis of the Catholic intellectual tradition, which unites both faith and reason and recognizes in both of them a common source in Almighty God.

Responses to the 2006 Regensburg Address
  • Mark Scott (Rome of the West) ignores the tangential sound-byte approach of the media and gets to the heart of the address in his post, Holy Father's Speech on De-Hellenization of Religion:
    This is the critical question: "Is acting according to reason also acting according to the Will of God?"
  • Prof. Stephen Bainbridge comes to the point:
    Pope Benedict XVI's speech at the University of Regensburg is a challenging read - it's dense and, in a way, highly technical. Yet, it rewards close scrutiny. . . .

    [T]he Pope is staking out a set of claims about the relationship of man and God that stand in opposition not only to the Islam of Ibn Hazn, but also that of the Protestant Reformers, the Jesus of History crowd, and (an area of particular concern for this pope) post-Christian Europe. The Pope is also renewing the claims of the Church Universal to have a truth that is transcendent, rather than culturally-bound.

  • Oswald Sobrino (Catholic Analysis) has also been taking a look at the speech in its entirety -- part 1 examines the Pope's opening remarks on the use of coercion to spread religion; part two tackles Benedict's critique of the loss of reason in the West:
    . . . the major part of the speech is not about Islam at all but about a wider trend: the abandonment of reason in the modern world. Fanatical religious violence is but one manifestation of that trend. To judge by the number of paragraphs in his speech, what concerns the Pope more is the abandonment of the fullness of reason in the West. The Pope begins his discussion in the fifth paragraph by posing the question: "Is the conviction that acting unreasonably contradicts God's nature merely a Greek idea, or is it always intrinsically true?" For the Pope, the idea that acting unreasonably contradicts God's nature is an intrinsically true idea that is a perennial contribution of ancient Greek culture for all the world, whether Western or not.
    Thanks in large part to the irresponsibility of the media, the Vatican is preoccupied in a public relations venture to safeguard the lives of Christians. But this -- the loss of reason in the West; the integration of biblical faith and philosophical reason at the heart of Christianity, at (according to B16) the very foundation of Europe itself, the question of "dehellenization" -- is what we should be talking about, and I hope what many will be returning to this topic, once the fires of controversy have subsided. (Update 9/18/06) - Here is Part III on Oswald Sobrino's reflection on the Pope's address.

  • The Regensburg Lecture: Thinking Rightly About God and Man, by Fr. James V. Schall. Ignatius Insight September 15, 2006:
    . . . with this lecture we are in heady academic surroundings. All is genteel. All is formal. All is, yes, "intellectual." But it is here where the real battles lie hidden. What we see in Regensburg are, after Deus Caritas Est, the second shots of the new pope at the heart of what is wrong in our world and its mind. These "shots," however, are designed to do what all good intellectual battle does, namely, to make it possible for us to see again what is true and to live it.

    The Regensburg Address, I suspect, will go down as one of those seminal and incisive analyses that tell us who we are and where we are. It will remind us of what we are by teaching us again to think about the God that the skeptics, the dons, the theological faculties, including Muslim faculties, have too often obscured for us. Civilization depends also on thinking rightly about God and man -- all civilization, not just European or Muslim. Such is the reach of this lecture.

Update! 9-23-06


* In reading Benedict's speech I was relying on, and quoting from, the Provisional Text of the Regensberg address, on the website of Vatican Radio. In comparing it to that which is posted on the Vatican website, I see there are some minor variations in translation but I trust the meaning is essentially the same.