Pope Benedict the XVI is on a roll, but more in the way that a broken record is than a body which is picking up momentum. Since ascending to the Papacy in April of 2005, Benedict has been busy...
- Recruiting exorcists;
- Dissing other Christian churches;
- Reinstating the Latin Mass for the first time since Vatican II;
- Dissing Islam (inadvertently or otherwise).
He's making a list.Your religion's not on it.
The Pope went on to stress the importance of "intercultural dialogue which deepens the cultural consequences of basic religious ideas," and called for confronting "in a public forum the cultural consequences of basic religious decisions." Um... I have an English degree, but I can't really make a whole lot of sense out of that statement. Intercultural dialogue is important, interrelgious dialogue not so much? Don't you run the same risk with intercultural dialogue, e.g., having to put your own cultural beliefs in "parentheses"?
OK, I'm getting lost in the weeds here. Whatever else Benedict might have meant by his recent comments, they appear to be of a piece with the stance that he, and by extension the entire Catholic Church, currently take in relation to the other religions of the world. That is to say: You've Tried the Rest, Now Try the Best. If the Pope truly believes that the entire truth of who God is and what God wants starts and ends with Christ and His Church, why bother even speaking with our faiths or cultures who do not acknowledge or accept this? Even if you want to maintain dialogue for the sake of appearances, why come out with a public comment making it clear that you don't actually believe much good comes from the dialogue in the first place? Why make the comments to an atheist author (Marcello Pera) with a Christo-centric view of European history and who takes an antagonistic stance towards Islam?
It's too bad, really. Pope Benedict is a highly educated man who is clearly at home in the academic realm. But his insistence on absolutes blinds him to the fact that the world is not static, and that everything is dynamic. Including religious faith. This dynamism is fueled in large part by the revelations that emerge when different faiths interact with each other, when beliefs are challenged and reexamined, shared and studied. As I wrote in an earlier post:
"Last year, an Israeli friend of ours asked me about my Christian faith and why I loved Jesus. I thought for a moment, and then replied that I held Jesus in deep respect and reverence for his teachings and his sacrifice on the cross. I added that when I die someday, if I discover that Jesus was not in fact the literal Son of God and was not resurrected from the dead, I would not love or revere him any less. The example of his life is strong enough reason for me to believe in and appreciate Jesus, to borrow Hanh's phrase, as an ultimate door. From this point of view, the teachings and living example of Jesus Christ can be made much more accessible to non-Christians, which in turn furthers dialogue and understanding between different people. Is this not the aim of any faith that preaches 'stability, joy, peace, understanding and love'? How does exclusivity advance this aim?"
- Doug L.
FOR FURTHER REFERENCE:
Pope Calls for Greater Understanding Between Catholic, Hellbound (The Onion, January 14, 1998)
What is the point of interfaith dialogue? (dotCommonweal, November 24, 2008)
Pope Questions Interfaith Dialogue, by Rachel Donadio (The New York Times, November 23, 2008)
1 comment:
I was not a fan of Benedict's remarks either. Let's start an interfaith dialogue just to prove him wrong.
Post a Comment