|
|
I find it hard to believe that just when Pope Benedict needs our moral support, few Catholics have gone out of their way to publicly stand up for him, especially with letters to the editors. Maybe it’s politically incorrect for your readers to write anything good in support of the pope because -- some might say -- “The pope should be more deferential when speaking about the Muslims, should know his history of the crusades better, understand why Muslims get so aggrieved and upset with being the downtrodden of the world,” etc. History will show that Pope Benedict’s lecture at the University of Regensburg was a turning point in the relations of Catholics and Muslims. Some day sincere Muslims will realize that too. Benedict had the courage to force the issue. I think he knew exactly what he was doing in his address. Somebody had to say what he said. He was speaking not just to Muslim society but to Western society as well when in his talk he emphasized “faith and reason.” Simply put, Western society is ailing because it believes in reason alone to the exclusion of faith, while Muslim society is ailing because it believes in faith alone to the exclusion of reason. Couldn’t we dialogue about these things? But it takes reason to do so.
(Fr.) GINO DALPIAZ
Chicago
* * *
After John Allen’s article on the pope’s Muslim statement (NCR, Sept. 29), one question that still remains without an explicit answer is: How could he possibly drag in this insultingly inaccurate quotation? Here is my guess. First of all, he was back, probably for the last time, among his own, his fellow German academics. In a moment of self-indulgence, he spoke as if safely behind closed doors. His purpose was yet again to champion Western Catholicism (as it is in his mind) as the essentially true form of religion, having congruence with rationality as one of its defining characteristics. In a strong rhetorical move, he began by identifying the opposite view -- where God is totally beyond human rationality -- with what he knew would be the non-European “other” for his listeners: Islam, and Islam at its worst. A few paragraphs later we find him developing this line with the words, “But for Muslim teaching ...” speaking like the kind of theologian for whom this is a monolith. This only confirms Mr. Allen’s unease that Benedict -- who deals in conceptual monoliths and “essences” more comfortably than with the historical complexities of lived world religions constantly mutating within their large family identity -- may not be the right man for the dialogue that alone might prevent our further drift down the road toward the dreaded clash of civilizations, a war that, in a world of ever-more deadly weaponry, would be increasingly destructive for everyone.
BRIAN McCARTHY
Madison, Wis.
* * *
Speaking of the relationship between faith and Hellenism, the pope stated, “The encounter between the biblical message and Greek thought did not happen by chance. … Today we know that the Greek translation of the Old Testament produced in Alexandria, ‘the Septuagint,’ is more than a simple (and in that sense really less than satisfactory) translation of the Hebrew text: It is … a distinct and important step in the history of revelation, one which brought about this encounter in a way that was decisive for the birth and spread of Christianity...
“This inner rapprochement between biblical faith and Greek philosophy was an event of decisive importance not only from the standpoint of the history of religions, but also to world history. It is an event which concerns us even today. Given this convergence, it is not surprising that Christianity, despite its origins and some significant developments in the East, finally took its historical decisive character in Europe.”
In other words, despite the entire history of salvation as found in the Hebrew testament, despite the life, teaching, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, despite the descent of the Holy Spirit on the Christian community, it was only through the insight of Hellenism that revelation finally came to be properly understood. Benedict is correct: Christianity, as we know it today, did take its final form in Europe under the influence of Hellenism and it is to the life and teaching of Christ as Benedict’s crosier is to a shepherd’s staff -- an intricately designed, craftily executed, gold-plated imitation of the real thing.
BOB GLAVEY
Sebring, Fla.
* * *
In “What the pope should have said to the Muslim world” (NCR, Sept. 29), Rosemary Ruether made the outrageous suggestion that the pope should “ask for forgiveness from our Muslim brothers and sisters for having wronged them in the past for Crusades against them.” Actually, what the pope should have asked for is an apology from the Muslims for all the Christians they slaughtered and enslaved as they overran the Christian world of the Middle East, North Africa and southern Europe in the hundred years following Mohammed’s death. In other words, the Crusades were only a legitimate attempt by Christians to regain what had been stolen from them. Ruether conveniently omits that only the heroics of Charles Martel at Tours in 732 stopped the Muslim hordes from totally engulfing and possibly eradicating Christian civilization. If he had lost that pivotal battle, Ms. Ruether might now have a veil over her head and would not be enjoying those freedoms, including freedom of speech, still not readily available to women in Muslim-ruled countries.
SPENCER F. STOPA
Alamogordo, N.M.
Regarding the article, “With election looming, ‘values voters’ are back in the spotlight” (NCR, Sept. 29), in the Clinton years, values voters could not contain their rage over his sins, but they refused to punish Republican congressmen whose conduct had broken up homes. More recently, the values voters on the West coast had no problems backing a gubernatorial candidate accused of raping and groping women. It is not that these values voters are not concerned about morality; it is just that most of them have higher priorities. Even more important than morality is their conviction that there are liberal “elitists” who have contempt for ordinary Americans -- especially “Christians” -- and are plotting against their best interests. The values voters have been sold -- or bitten by -- right-wing populism with all its self-righteousness, anger, paranoia, rage and sense of victimhood.
It is good for progressives to talk about morality to these folks, but their emotions get in the way of reasonable discourse. It is more important to defuse right-wing populism because it is the anteroom to something far worse.
DON SWIFT
Erie, Pa.
In “Catholics to fast for Ramadan” (NCR, Sept. 29), it’s reported that Pax Christi USA proposes that Catholics should fast “alongside Muslims during the holy month of Ramadan.” Has anyone asked the Muslims what they think of this? Would anyone expect them to fast during Lent? Would such fasting during Ramadan be construed as participation in a mandatory non-Christian observance? My suggestion would be to invite a Muslim family for dinner one night during Ramadan, where a friendly exchange of ideas could take place in a positive environment. For many years, Muslim students enrolled in an evening class that I taught. During Ramadan, I told them that they were welcome to leave for a break at sundown or enjoy a sandwich and beverage in class, and nobody ever complained. The students were most appreciative. One taught me how to write and say the “Our Father” in Arabic, and another took me to his mosque and introduced me to his imam. To this day I treasure their friendship.
RICHARD ROSENBAUM
Bloomfield Hills, Mich.
Your editorial “Patriotism’s new profile” (NCR, Sept. 29) is a continuation of your policy of condemning the actions of our government and saying nothing bad about those dear people of al-Qaida who murdered almost 3,000 of our people and who perform other acts of gallantry like cutting the heads off innocent people. Neither President Bush nor any other responsible government official advocates the use of torture. The issue at hand is that of coercive interrogation, which involves subjecting the detainee to certain physical discomfort in an effort to obtain from him information that might save the lives of thousands of innocent Americans. Examples of such discomfort would be keeping the detainee in a cold environment (but not less than 40 degrees F.), limiting his food intake but not starving him, and subjecting him to loud and nerve-wracking noise of some kind, like rock music. None of these methods constitute torture. Torture would be stretching his limbs out on a rack, applying excessive heat or electric shock or total food and water deprivation. There is a radical difference. Coercive interrogation is legitimate if the lives of thousands are at stake. Apparently NCR’s editors would consider those deaths to be a lesser evil than would be subjecting a terrorist detainee to some discomfort. NCR editors can only be regarded as anti-American when they take this position.
JAMES P. WARD
Claymont, Del.
Recently we had the privilege of hearing Fr. Donald Cozzens, whose latest book is Freeing Celibacy. He enjoys an excellent reputation as an international lecturer and retreat master. And we can see why. He possesses a gentle charisma and there is a genuine peace about the man. Here is a faithful priest who loves our church and believes that Jesus Christ is calling us to adult discipleship. I am certain that the Holy Spirit is using the prophetic presence of Fr. Cozzens in the inspired renewal and resurrection of our Roman Catholic church. He has preached retreats for laity, nuns, priests, monks and bishops. Why not cardinals? My prayer is that he be invited to Rome, and there in the Eternal City to preach the annual retreat for the members of the curia working at the Vatican. If the Catholic faithful all over the globe are being blessed by hearing the Holy Spirit speak through this good and holy man, why not the men who lead the church?
JAMES NAGLE
Lyndhurst, Ohio
Church in South America, India
I recently read two articles that weeks later still stick in my craw and rankle my soul. The first was an article about the loss of Roman Catholics, in numbers of bodies, in South America and how those folks are fleeing to the evangelical churches. When asked why that was happening, a source was quoted as saying that the Catholic church had failed in “educating people in the faith.” Grrrrr. The church has joined the world in renaming things. Like modern day home designers who now refer to the kitchen as the “food preparation center,” renaming things is not only silly but new titles and labels often water down the beautiful simplicity of what our lives are about. The Catholic church has not failed in South America in educating people in the faith. We have failed in bringing people to Jesus, failed in announcing the good news of a personal God who cares in a personal way. That’s where the evangelicals have it over us. It’s about Jesus, plain and simple. The beginning and the end. A few pages later, in the same issue, I read that the Catholic church in India -- one of the poorest countries on the planet -- has a great new idea about how to increase membership in the church, by encouraging women to have more babies. Yes, that’ll work. At the risk of repeating myself: Grrrr again.
KATHRYN BEGNAUD
Woodbury, Minn.
Letters to the editor should be limited to 250 words and preferably typed. If a letter refers to a previous issue of NCR, please give us that issue’s date. We reserve the right to edit all letters. Letters, National Catholic Reporter, PO Box 411009, Kansas City, MO 64141-1009. Fax: (816) 968-2280. E-mail: letters@natcath.org (When sending a letter via e-mail, please indicate "NCR Letters" in the subject line. We've installed a new spam filter on our letters e-mail account. If it's not clear to us that yours is a letter, we might delete it.) Please be sure to include your street address, city, state, zip and daytime telephone number
National Catholic Reporter, October 20, 2006