Pope Benedict XVI - Statements
As the spiritual leader of 1.3 billion Catholics worldwide and enjoying respect as well from non-Catholics, the Pope wields an unparalleled moral megaphone. He uses it carefully, speaking publicly in generic, neutral terms about the need for peace and social justice rather than criticizing individual states.
Pope Benedict XVI's 12 September 2006 speech in Regensburg caused an unwanted firestorm in the Islamic world because of the pope's quoting, in passing, an insulting reference made by a 14th-century Byzantine emperor. The Holy See, and the pope himself, responded with statements of clarification and regret in the ensuing days. While the pope surely did not intend such an outcome, his own approach toward Islam and toward interreligious dialogue is cooler than that of his predecessor.
Pope Benedict XVI pointed out in a lecture he delivered at the University of Regensburg in Germany on 12 September 2006, the key theological move that underwrites today's jihadist ideology (and practice) is the identification of God as Absolute Will. If God is absolute will, God can command anything - even the murder of innocents. The lecture received ample doses of both condemnation and praise from political and religious authorities. International media reported that the pope implied that Islam was spread by the sword .
Following a bit of personal reminiscence about his own university days, the pope embarked on the lecture with the following passage: "I was reminded of all this recently, when I read the edition by Professor Theodore Khoury (Munster) of part of the dialogue carried on -- perhaps in 1391 in the winter barracks near Ankara -- by the erudite Byuzantiine emperor Manuel II Paleologus and an educated Persian on the subject of Christianity and Islam, and the truth of both. It was probably the emperor himself who set down this dialogue, during the siege of Constantinople between 1394 and 1402; and this would explain why his arguments are given in greater detail than the responses of the learned Persian. The dialogue ranges widely over the structures of faith contained in the Bible and in the Qur'an, and deals especially with the image of God and of man, while necessarily returning repeatedly to the relationship of the three Laws: the Old Testament, the New Testament, and the Qur'an. In this lecture I would like to discuss only one point -- itself rather marginal to the dialogue itself -- which, in the context of faith and reason, I found interesting and which can serve as the starting-point for my reflections on the issue.
"In the seventh conversation edited by Professor Khoury, the emperor touches on the theme of the jihad (holy war). the emperor must have known that surah 2, 256 reads: There is no compulsion in religion. It is one of the suras of the early period, when Mohammed was still powerless and under threat. But naturally the emperor also know the instructions, devloped 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 turns to his interlocutor somewhat brusquely with the central question on the relationship between religion and violence in general, in these words: "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 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 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 pope went on to quote French Islamist R. Arnaldez, "who points out that Ibn Hazm 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 practice idolatry."
Muslims would argue that the pope, as the head of the Catholic Church, should have at the very least been more careful in his choice of words. Many Christians would counter that the problem lies not with them, but in the hypersensitivity of Muslims, who cannot see an academic discussion for what it is. Observers of the pope and his previous comments on Islam will argue that the pope has always supported strong relations with the Muslim community.
In September 2006, Pope Benedict XVI said to diplomats accredited to the Vatican: "Democracy can only succeed when it is based on the truth and the correct understanding of the human person."
Despite media reports to the contrary, the Vatican remains officially neutral on the subject of Turkey's EU bid. It maintains its position that it sees "no obstacle" to Turkey's entry if the GoT fulfills the Copenhagen criteria on religious freedom. Holy See officials were quick to speak out and clarify the Holy See's stance following media reports on Turkish PM Erdogan's claim of new support from Pope Benedict. Referring to the Copenhagen criteria, Cardinal Secretary of State Bertone did make a statement of "hope" that Turkey would be able to fulfill the conditions put before it regarding its EU bid. While this should not be interpreted as an endorsement of Turkey's entering the Union, it was certainly encouragement for the GoT to enact needed reforms and continue to work towards integration. Top officials including Deputy Foreign Minister equivalent Pietro Parolin have spoken frankly in private, confirming that the pope's statements in Turkey did not represent a shift in the Holy See's stance.
Holy See Secretary of State Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone said he hoped Turkey "could fulfill the conditions put before it to join the European Union." Bertone's statement should not be interpreted as an endorsement of Turkey's entering the Union, but was certainly encouragement for Turkey to enact needed reforms. It was significant as a rare public voicing of the Vatican's long-held position on the issue. A list of particular problems -- outlined in a document put out by the Turkish Catholic bishops two years earlier -- remained valid today as an explanation of the troubles Catholics face in Turkey.
Benedict XVI's letter to bishops for his apostolic letter, "Summorum Pontificum," announcing greater use of the Tridentine Mass was made public at the Vatican 07 July 2007. Motu Proprio is the name given to certain papal rescripts, on account of the clause motu proprio (of his own accord) used in the document. The words signify that the provisions of the rescript were decided on by the pope personally, that is, not on the advice of the cardinals or others, but for reasons which he himself deemed sufficient. The document has generally the form of a decree: in style it resembles a Brief rather than a Bull, but differs from both especially in not being sealed or countersigned.
Benedict XVI's letter stated that "the missal published by Paul VI and then republished in two subsequent editions by John Paul II obviously is and continues to be the normal form -- the "forma ordinaria" -- of the eucharistic liturgy. The last version of the "Missale Romanum" prior to the council, which was published with the authority of Pope John XXIII in 1962 and used during the council, will now be able to be used as a "forma extraordinaria" of the liturgical celebration.... it soon became apparent that a good number of people remained strongly attached to this usage of the Roman rite, which had been familiar to them from childhood. This was especially the case in countries where the liturgical movement had provided many people with a notable liturgical formation and a deep, personal familiarity with the earlier form of the liturgical celebration. We all know that, in the movement led by Archbishop Lefebvre, fidelity to the old missal became an external mark of identity; the reasons for the break, which arose over this, however, were at a deeper level. "
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
