Talking to Tariq Ramadan Before the Swiss Minarets Vote

With Islam and Europe back in the headlines following the Swiss vote over minarets, readers might be interested in this unpublished interview I did earlier this year with Tariq Ramadan, the well known Muslim apologist and scholar who also is Swiss.

Ramadan was in Rome to speak at a conference on the Holy Sites in the Holy Land. The interview was originally for Newsweek but got bumped by something else, though excerpts were used in The Holy Land Review.


How useful was the Catholic-Muslim Forum [the meeting had just been held]? Did it match your expectations?

We must take it for what it was. It was the first step of a dialogue and we decided we would continue in a Muslim majority country and now there are also other countries willing to work with us. I spoke with Cardinal Jean-Louis Tauran [head of the Vatican’s interreligious dialogue council] about this. We started with love of God and love of neighbour which was a starting point, but some of the questions this raised were quite important – reciprocity, freedom of belief and worship. All of these issues will be part of the discussion, but the starting point was to acknowledge the fact that we are living in a period beyond the tension created after the Pope’s lecture and the channels are open.

Would you agree that that lecture was actually the stimulus for this and other dialogues taking place today?

Yes. I responded to the Pope’s lecture by saying that the heart of the lecture is not violence. All of the discussion within it is about the roots of Europe - Greek, Christian rationality. At the end it was a philosophical lecture, which many people didn’t even read, but it was a very important one because he is very knowledgeable and very serious about what he said. So we needed a very serious discussion. Then, the consequences in the long term have been much more positive than negative because it’s opened doors to deep discussions on many important levels.

Would you agree that it went very much to the roots of a possible clash of civilizations? If we take the current tensions in Europe over the building of mosques: the West sees these as a threat because Christian identity is so weak, while Muslim identity is very strong. As someone said: the Pope was pointing out that we have people belonging to a religion that has gone ‘cold’ in danger of clashing with one that is now ‘hot.’

Exactly. By being scared of the present, you rebuild the past by saying these are our roots. But I think it’s not only this. Christian, Greek, Jewish, Muslim – all this heritage is there, so I think he’s putting forward a ‘reduction’ of the past, because there are some fears of the present. So this is what the Pope said, but at the same time, Cardinal Tauran said recently in southern Italy that God is coming back [into society] through the presence of the Muslims. So it’s positive.

But wouldn’t it be right that Christianity be re-born in the West to give the West a stronger identity, and thereby minimize such tension?

I think you’re completely right. There’s a sense of alienation with regard to its own societies, and they are saying: ‘The Muslims are coming and they are perceived as assertive and confident, so we are on the defensive.’ So I think it’s up to Muslims to make it clear that what they want is to remain themselves and not to colonize the country or Islamize Europe. This is what I have been saying for years now – that I’m just trying to be a ‘European Muslim.’ But by being a ‘European Muslim’, I want to help Christians to be better Christians, and even the rationalists to be better rationalists, by having more consistency. What we need today is a world of witnesses of their own philosophy and beliefs.

And to be genuine, too?

Exactly. This is what I would like and this is what the world needs to be today – a world of testimony. It’s quite clear there is a sense of witness that’s losing ground in the Christian tradition and this is why we have to take the Pope’s statements very seriously and very sincerely, because he’s very sincere on that.

Yet many Muslims still say, including yourself, that the Pope’s Regensburg lecture was a mistake and that you regret what he said in quoting the Christian emperor’s words.

I never said it was a mistake.

But many Muslims have said it and still say it.

Yes, in many instances. But I said it was not a mistake because I knew him when he was a cardinal. He’s very consistent. He’s a theologian of the highest level. This morning Cardinal Cottier was here [former theologian to the Pope]. Cardinal Cottier was my professor of theology. I studied Kierkegaard with him and he was my professor there for three years. He’s consistent as well and there’s a philosophy here, a religious understanding that you just have to respect the other. I may disagree with this reconstruction of the past, but I disagree out of respect and with respect. I think this is what Muslims should understand. It was not a mistake but a statement on two things: a take on history, and a take on the current situation facing Christians in Europe.

But why are you opposed to the reconstruction of the past that the Pope advocates? Isn’t that what Christianity has in many ways lost, that connection with its past.

Yes. A reconstruction of the past based on an objective take on the past is fine. But a reconstruction of the past because you are scared of the present is problematic.

How do you know that’s the case? Isn’t the Pope wanting to reconstruct the past precisely to bring peace?

No, because by [him] saying objectively that the roots of Europe are Greek and Christian, it’s a reconstruction of the perception that there is an alien element in Europe today which is Islam which is problematic. If you’re serious about philosophy and the history of thought, you cannot say that.

But rather remembering that Islam is part of European history?

Of course. So I respect the fears that are reconstructing this past, but I disagree with the substance.

Turning to the election of Barack Obama, do you think his presidency could help bring great strides in terms of interreligious dialogue with Islam, and perhaps from that, bring peace in the Holy Land?

I wrote an article just after his election saying we have to be full of hope but without naivety. The room for manoeuvre is quite narrow. I am sure things are going to improve because, really, after eight years of the Bush administration, it cannot but improve. But still I doubt that we are facing a revolution and new things, and in interreligious dialogue in the Middle East, I don’t see him resisting the various lobbies. Let me be clear: I’m not speaking about the Jewish lobby but the pro-Israeli lobby and APAC.

You’ve said that religious leaders, academics, and politicians need to work together – do you see a forum of all of these leaders as the way forward to help build peace in the Middle East?

Yes, a platform I would say. Religious people should listen to politicians, and politicians should have in mind religious people and intellectuals, and intellectuals should be close to the reality.

Would you say a platform similar to that is already being pursued by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia?

No, I think it’s very far from that. It’s very formal, this ‘alliance of civilisations’. Now there is this competition between governments, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. I wouldn’t expect this platform to come from a specific government. A government could facilitate the process, but I would rather it were led by scholars, or something more independent.

Some have said that King Abdullah looks upon the Catholic-Muslim Forum as lacking authority because it’s just a group of scholars who have come together.

Yes, and the other group is saying that what King Abdullah is doing is just politics and it is not involving the communities. Both are right, in fact.

What is your view on the argument that the crisis within Islam must be resolved before any fruitful interreligious dialogue with Islam can take place?

I don’t think it’s a concomitant process. It’s not: just because you don’t have this, you cannot have the other thing. I think it’s even the opposite: by being involved in interfaith dialogue, it helps. This is my own experience. I’m dealing with the world and I’m living here so I’m challenged and I come back to my tradition and it’s a two-way process. I’m sure as well that through this process, we will be more open to the dialogue – it’s a virtuous circle. It’s two dimensions and we really have to go through both at the same time.

What is your view of Magdi Allam and his very negative comments about Islam?

He thinks that because of his origins – he’s from Egypt – he can be as critical as he is. He is an essentialist, he thinks that Islam poses a problem, and he’s very tough. He’s very much taking an American neo-con line. We have to take him for who he is and look at his ideas. His ideas are really neo-con ideas that Islam is a problem, per se, and he is building things that are not based on truth.

Would having someone like him, and extremists on the Islamic side, in the same forum be beneficial or is that impossible?

I think it’s impossible to do and it’s not beneficial because they would be caricatures of the true dialogue. They are representing polarisation, per se, and they are nurturing themselves on the two poles of the spectrum. I would say this is not the way forward.

But some would argue these groups are the protagonists of conflict so should be included?

Yes, but we are building peace.

But without them, is that possible?

Of course because we have to show that they have a political agenda, he [Allam] has a political agenda, and there are others nurturing each other. His legitimacy is coming from the other side, and the other side is using him. So I would say: ‘OK, go ahead, let us have a radical voice in between which is vocal, which is perceived and heard and which is constructive.’ I wouldn’t see anything positive coming from a dialogue [of extremists]. In fact, they dialogue by not talking – their dialogue is not to dialogue. This is exactly what they want.

Do you feel threatened at all by extremists for your moderate position?

No, I’m criticised on both sides. Some Muslims criticise me by saying I have left Islam while some Westerners say I am too much of a Muslim fundamentalist. This is the very meaning of a bridge, that on both sides of the river we have people who not happy with you.

Isn’t a major problem here that there isn’t a central authority in Islam?

No, there is. To tell you the truth, people who like what I am saying say: ‘Oh, you are on your own.’ That’s not true. We are not structured, but the mainstream, the silent majority, is following this way. Everywhere I go, from Muslim majority countries to the West, there are always people coming and listening. But we are completely paralysed by the voice of the extremists who are polarising. This is why we have to come together.

And then you will have more central authority?

Of course, or we are not facing up to our responsibilities.

So you’re optimistic about the future?

Yes, I am always optimistic.

Argentina, Chile and Vatican Mediation

Pope Benedict XVI met the presidents of Argentina and Chile yesterday on the 25th anniversary of a peace treaty between the two countries.

The treaty followed the Church's vital contribution in mediating a territorial dispute between the two countries over the Beagle Channel in 1978.

It's one of the very few cases when the Church, thanks to the insistence at the time of John Paul II, has very publicly and successfully mediated in an international dispute.

Vatican diplomats are more often than one might think quietly operating behind the scenes to help avert international conflicts, but because of their discretion you rarely hear about them.

Photo: Chile's Michelle Bachelet (R) and Argentina's Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner (L) exchange gifts with Pope Benedict XVI (AFP)

The End of Dubai's Injustices?

One of the possible outcomes from the collapse of Dubai will be that many labourers who are employed on the vast construction projects in the city will no longer have to live as modern day slaves.

Reportedly a third have already left the city since the recession began. Others have not been paid for months but cannot leave because their employers often confiscated their passports/visas on arrival. Yet it's the sweat - and often the lives - of these people who made Dubai the fastest growing city in the world.

The Church in the Gulf has been concerned about this gross injustice for years. I tried to relay the extent of the problem in an article I wrote last year for the Catholic Herald.

But the problem for the labourers is that even if they can go back to their homes in southern Asia, they are still likely to remain in poverty. To escape the hardships of their own countries and earn a (relatively) decent wage to send home was, for many, one of the main reasons they chose to leave their homelands for the Gulf.

Photo - A typical scene on a Dubai motorway, June 2008: A limousine Hummer, and a non-air conditioned bus taking labourers to work.

Russian President to Visit Pope

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev is to meet Pope Benedict XVI for the first time next week while on a political visit to Italy, the Kremlin disclosed today.

The presidential office said Medvedev would meet the Pope on December 3, the Interfax news agency reported. Former president Vladimir Putin met Benedict in the Vatican in March 2007.

Medvedev’s visit will come at a time when relations between the Russian Orthodox and Catholic Church have never been better, although tensions still remain.

Moscow has still to permit a Pope to visit Russia, arguing among other reasons that it was feared the pontiff would try to lure faithful away from the Russian church.

But Medvedev is reported to be committed to improving relations between the Orthodox and Catholic Churches, and may even try to encourage an historic meeting between the Pope and the Russian Patriarch - probably on neutral territory - when he visits next week.

John Paul II's Self-Flagellation and Love of Prayer

An article I've written for Newsmax should appear here, but there seem to be some technical problems so I reproduce it below.

It focuses on reports that John Paul II scourged himself. The news is not that surprising as it used to be common practice among Christians, and many of the Church's greatest saints practiced corporal mortification including St. Francis of Assisi and Blessed Mother Teresa. Perhaps it would have been surprising if John Paul hadn't imposed on himself some kind of rigorous self discipline.

But it still makes an interesting story and is further proof of the late pontiff's greatness.

As John Paul II’s beatification cause moves forward, more is coming to light about the late pontiff’s life, including testimonies that he would occasionally flagellate himself and sometimes pray non-stop for many hours.

According to Sister Tobiana Sobodka, a Polish nun who worked for Pope John Paul in his private Vatican apartments and at his summer residence in Castel Gandolfo near Rome, John Paul II would “several times” put himself through “bodily penance.”

“We would hear it – we were in the next room at Castel Gandolfo,” said Sister Sobodka who belongs to the Order of the Sacred Heart of Jesus. “You could hear the sound of the blows when he would flagellate himself. He did it when he was still capable of moving on his own."

Emery Kabongo, a secretary of John Paul II, also backed up the claim. “He would punish himself and in particular just before he ordained bishops and priests," he said. “I never actually saw it myself but several people told me about it.” The testimonies appear in ‘Santo Subito’, a new book by Andrea Tornielli, a Vatican correspondent for the Italian newspaper Il Giornale.

The Catholic Church’s tradition of corporal mortification is founded on the Christian belief that Jesus Christ, out of love for mankind, voluntarily accepted suffering and death as the means to redeem the world from sin. The church teaches that Christians are called to emulate Jesus and join him in his redemptive suffering. This means that they try to “die to themselves” every day.

Usually, such mortifications take the form of fasting and abstinence, especially during Lent. But some people in Church history have undertaken greater sacrifices, such as frequent fasting or using a hairshirt, a cilice (a small, light, metal chain with little prongs worn around the thigh), or discipline.

John Paul II used to whip himself, according to the recent testimonies. In 1986, in his annual Letter to Priests, John Paul wrote: “What one must see in these forms of penance – which, unfortunately, our times are not accustomed to – are the motives: the love of God and the conversion of sinners.”

Many of the church’s greatest saints would flagellate themselves. They include St. Francis of Assisi, St. Teresa of Avila, St. Ignatius of Loyola, Blessed Mother Teresa and St. Thomas More. Some members of the church group Opus Dei are also known to wear a cilice – a practice made famous by the Da Vinci Code. “Mortification helps us resist our natural drive toward personal comfort which so often prevents us from answering the Christian call to love God and serve others for love of God,” said Father Michael Barrett, a priest of Opus Dei. “The Da Vinci Code's masochist monk, who loves pain for its own sake, has nothing to do with real Christian mortification.”

As well as this corporal discipline, Tornielli’s book also recalls the late Pope’s love of prayer. “When Karol Wojtyla prayed, he was not distracted by anything,” said Kabongo. “I remember that when serving in the papal apartments, you were told that when the Holy Father was praying, even if it was something important, you had to wait to tell him because for him prayer came first. God came before everything else, even the world’s problems.”

Arturo Mari, for many years the Pope’s personal photographer for L’Osservatore Romano, recalled how the late pontiff would make a point of praying hard for the local people of the countries he visited. “It seemed that he identified with them in their suffering,” Mari said. “I remember in Vilnius, he remained praying on his knees for six hours without stopping.”

Meanwhile, John Paul II’s cause for beatification has moved closer following news that the Vatican Congregation for the Causes of Saints voted last week to approve a decree testifying to the late Pope’s “heroic virtue”. This means that Pope Benedict XVI could, in a matter of weeks, declare John Paul II “venerable,” the penultimate step to beatification. But there is a growing consensus that it is wise not to hasten the cause.

Cardinal Stanislaw Dziwisz, John Paul’s long serving private secretary and a keen proponent of a speedy beatification, told reporters in Argentina last week that the Polish bishops “do not want the Pope to rush [the cause], he should analyze it properly.” One Vatican official said there is still much to know about John Paul and a hasty beatification would amount to “beatifying the personality, not the person.”

On the Black Nobility

The Catholic Herald have this week published my piece on the 'black nobility' - aristocracy who for centuries played a key role in assisting the papal court. They still have important duties, but their influence is much diminished.

To many, particularly republicans, this can all seem very bizarre and perhaps distasteful; to others the thought of an ecclesiastical aristocracy can seem a world away from the Gospel. But it is all in keeping with the Church's revealed tradition, and the important fact that the Pope is a monarch, as indeed is Christ. Tomorrow the Church celebrates the Feast of Christ the King.

Much of the article touches on heraldry, something of particular personal interest as my great grandfather, Sir Gerald Woods Wollaston, was Garter Principal King of Arms from 1930 to 1944. The College of Arms, which the Garter heads, plays a key role in the planning and preparation of the coronation - not currently occupied by a Catholic monarch, of course, but nonetheless considered to be the most 'Catholic-rooted' ceremony in English public life.

The Herald article can be found here

Image: Benedict XVI's coat of arms.

Apostolic Constitution Published

The Apostolic Constitution for Anglicans has been published by the Vatican and can be found here. At first glance, there don't appear to be any surprises, and the Church's teaching on celibacy remains unchanged.

Rev. G P Taylor to Cross the Tiber

The children's author G P Taylor is to become a Catholic.

Vicar-turned-author Rev G P Taylor says he will desert the "sinking ship" Church of England, which he said was the "spiritual arm of New Labour", for Roman Catholicism.

More on this here.

TAC's British Province Unanimously Supports the Apostolic Constitution

The Traditional Anglican Communion’s province in Great Britain has become the first to accept Pope Benedict XVI’s Apostolic Constitution for Anglicans.

Its members voted unanimously Oct. 29th to come into communion with Rome under the terms of the new provision, which allows them to retain their Anglican patrimony.

An undated statement on the province’s website reads:

“That this Assembly, representing the Traditional Anglican Communion in Great Britain, offers its joyful thanks to Pope Benedict XVI for his forthcoming Apostolic Constitution allowing the corporate reunion of Anglicans with the Holy See, and requests the Primate and College of Bishops of the Traditional Anglican Communion to take the steps necessary to implement this Constitution.”

A statement from Bishop David Moyer of the Traditional Anglican Communion reads:

“The well-attended Assembly was a grace-filled gathering where all in attendance became aware of the movement of the Holy Spirit. The bishops, priests, ordinands, and lay representatives were brought to a place of “being in full accord and of one mind,” as St. Paul prayed for the Church in Philippi.

“The questions and concerns that were expressed in regard to what had been read and heard about the forthcoming Apostolic Constitution were addressed by Archbishop John Hepworth. Bishop Mercer and myself.

“The Resolutions unanimously passed by the Assembly were carefully written and clearly reflect TTAC’s corporate desire and intention. All present realized that the requirement for the days ahead is patience, charity, and openness to the Holy Spirit.”

Significantly, this vote took place in the birthplace of the Anglican Communion, and its members voted in favor despite the Apostolic Constitution having not yet been published.

Recently, the Traditional Anglican Communion has been looking at establishing a mother house in England, possibly a former monastery in Lincoln which hasn’t witnessed the ordination of a Catholic priest since the Reformation.

********


When there was a possibility that the news of Apostolic Constitution could be announced during the Pope visits Britain next year, Lord Monckton of Brenchley - someone who has for many years observed Catholic-Anglican relations - gave his opinion on the possibility. His remarks never got published because they were superseded by the annoucement, but they're still relevant now, I think:

"Though we are instructed by the Lord of Life to declaim His good news of salvation from the rooftops," he said, "we are also instructed not to pester those who do not wish to hear His message, but to shake their dust quietly off our feet and move on. So there will be no crowing triumphalism from us, and, however much of a publicity coup it might appear to be if the Traditional Anglicans were to rejoin the one household of the faith while Christ's Vicar on Earth was here in Britain, in my opinion neither the See of Westminster nor the Holy See would do anything to encourage that timing, precisely because it would pointlessly hurt those who are not yet ready to walk with us once again towards the Light."

Looking ahead to the Pope's visit and how it might help bring people back to the Church, he said:

"I have not the slightest doubt that what he says in the UK will have a similarly electrifying effect not only on Catholics but also on those who have begun to think that they can no longer be our separated brethren, but must once again be one with us. I pray that they, and all Christians of goodwill, will be reunited as soon and as completely as possible with the Church that Christ founded, to whose first bishops He said, "He that heareth you heareth Me."

Photo: Christopher Monckton