Sandro Magister
Fr. Fessio agrees with his fellow Jesuits Troll and Samir. And he testifies together with them that, for Benedict XVI, Islam is capable of reform and can be harmonized with modernity. But at a steep price
ROMA, January 26, 2006 – A few hours after the previous article on Benedict XVI and Islam was published online by www.chiesa, the contrasting interpretations over the pope’s thought were smoothed out.
The disagreement hinged upon whether or not Islam can be reformed, and consequently upon the relationship between Islam and modernity.
The American Jesuit Joseph Fessio – who participated, together with other former students of Joseph Ratzinger, in a meeting with the pope for the purpose of studying the concept of God in Islam – had said in a radio interview on January 5 that, at the meeting, the pope had asserted that Islam and modernity cannot be reconciled.
But other participants at the meeting – Jesuit Islamic studies scholar Christian W. Troll, from Germany, and Samir Khalil Samir, an Egyptian – gave a different version of the pope’s thought. According to their testimony, Benedict XVI had judged the reconciliation of Islam and modernity as very difficult, but not impossible.
The pope’s drastic view on the impossibility of reform within Islam – as it was related previously by Fr. Fessio – did not pass by unnoticed in the United States. There were lively discussions on the online forums of “The Asia Times” and “The National Review,” and there were comments from two famous columnists: Daniel Pipes, in the January 17 issue of “The New York Sun,” and Diana West, in the January 20 issue of “The Washington Times.”
Meanwhile, the other version – that of fathers Troll and Samir – received little attention.
But this is the version that more correctly conveyed the pope’s thought, as Fr. Fessio himself now acknowledges.
In a January 20 letter to “The Washington Times,” and in a January 23 message to www.chiesa, Fr. Fessio admits having “misrepresented what the Holy Father actually said.” He acknowledges that “Samir Khalil Samir’s recollection is accurate.” And he explains:
“The most important clarification is that the Holy Father did not say, nor did I, that ‘Islam is incapable of reform.’ [...] I made a serious error in precision when I said that the Koran ‘cannot be adapted or applied’ and that there is ‘no possibility of adapting or interpreting it.’ This is certainly not what the Holy Father said. Of course the Koran can be and has been interpreted and applied. I was making a (too) crude summary of the distinction which the Holy Father did make between the inner dynamism of the Koran as a divine text delivered as such to Mohammed, and that of the Bible which is both the Word of God and the words of men inspired by God, within a community that contains divinely appointed authorized interpreters (the bishops in communion with the pope).”
Fr. Fessio adds that language difficulties were also involved:
“The meeting was an informal one of the Holy Father and his former students. The presentation and the discussion were in German, and the Holy Father was not speaking from a prepared text. My German is passable, but not entirely reliable. My later remarks in a live radio interview were extemporaneous. I think that I paraphrased the Holy Father with general accuracy, but my mentioning what he said at all was an indiscretion, and my impromptu paraphrase in another language should not be used for a careful exegesis of the mind of the Holy Father.”
In essence:
“I would like to set the record straight and avoid unnecessary embarrassment to the Holy Father. The truth is always crucial, but especially so here where the stakes are so high. I am disconsolate that I have obscured the truth by my ambiguous remarks.”
* * *
On January 17, Fr. Toll also intervened to clarify the pope’s thought, in a letter to Daniel Pipes.
Here it is:
“I took part in the seminar that Fr. Fessio mentions and I happen to be the person who presented the paper about Fazlur Rahman referred to by him.
“I can only say that the reported remark of the Holy Father, among others, points to the well-known point of essential difference between classic mainstream Muslim and classic mainstream Catholic theology concerning the Word of God and of revelation/inspiration. It also suggests that Muslim theological thinking must deal with the weight of this deep-rooted faith conviction and the theological vision it continues to shape.
“However, I cannot remember at all the Holy Father having said the words reported at the end of the indented paragraph in D. Pipes's report, ‘The Pope and the Koran,’ that ‘There's no possibility of adapting it or interpreting it.’
“The Holy Father is well-informed enough to know that there have existed and that there exist today, probably increasingly, other interpretations of the Qur'anic evidence with regard to a theology of revelation. These considered Muslim views and approaches do not (yet?), it would seem, inform the thinking and approach of a sizable Islamic movement or organisation – and we do not know what future problems lie ahead in this regard – but it does exist and is vividly discussed in many places, both in academia and beyond.
“An open debate on these matters does not yet seem to be possible within the Arab world but Turkish and Indonesian society grant relatively more room for airing and discussing such ideas, and the so-called Western countries offer even more space.
“Recently, I published ‘Progressives Denken im Zeitgenössischen Islam’ (‘Critical Survey on Progressive Thinking in Contemporary Islam’), Islam und Gesellschaft, Nr. 4, that looks at such religious thinking. The German original (and the English translation of it) are available from Franziska Bongartz, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. D-10785 Berlin, Hiroshimastr. 17, e-mail: Franziska.Bongartz@fes.de.”
* * *
Finally, on January 24, the following clarification came to www.chiesa from professor Stephan Horn, from Germany. He is a member of the Society of the Divine Savior and coordinator of the Ratzinger-Schülerkreis, the group composed of the present pope’s former students:
“Dear Sandro Magister, regarding the private (not secret) meeting of the Ratzinger-Schülerkreis with the Holy Father I confirmed the correction which Father Joe Fessio sent to the editor of the Wahington Times. Your contribution ‘Islam and Democracy’ also is in need of correction. The topic of the gathering was not ‘Islam and Democracy’. Speaking about the contribution of Prof. Troll, Father Fessio referred to the proposal of a certain muslim theologian to explain the Koran to the modern western world. Doing this Father Fessio explained this to the participants of the Hugh Hewitt Show using also the word ‘democracy’. He alluded to a contribution made by the Holy Father which is in fact a theological topic: the difference of the concept of revelation in the Koran and in Christian revelation. So your article gives an erroneous impression to the reader regarding the thought of the Holy Father. Respect for the Holy Father and for the truth obliges me to offer this correction of your presentation, in the name of the Ratzinger-Schülerkreis”.
* * *
Other comments on these issues were sent to www.chiesa by Gerald E. Nora, of the United States, and by Stefano Ceccanti, of Italy.
Nora – who teaches law at Loyola University in Chicago – emphasizes that “it is important to distinguish the different contexts of separate statements by the pope on Islam. The pope's insight that Islam has an impediment to change that Christianity does not have (ie, a Quran that is the literal, non-interpretable word of God vs. a Bible containing multiple words of humans inspired by God) is important to raise when westerners over-optimistically anticipate Islam's reformation. Therefore, it was appropriate for the pope to raise the point when the discussion group at Castelgandolfo went off on the wrong track. This is not inconsistent with his other remarks that recognize the many forms (i.e., the non-monolithic aspects) Islam has assumed over its history within the strictures of Quranic law and different governmental systems.”
Ceccanti – who teaches constitutional law at the Rome university La Sapienza – recalls that “in studying the Islamic declarations on the law, I have noted that what is blocking the recognition of democracy and human rights is precisely the weight of the Koran, which is used directly as the applicable law, since it is seen as the unmediated word of God. In order to bring a lasting solution to this legal and political conundrum, we must first address and resolve the theological one. In fact, in examining the individual constitutions of the Muslim countries, one finds even today nothing but pragmatic concessions (such as defining Shari’a as ‘one source of law’) which do nothing to prevent these countries from turning in upon themselves. So the Muslim world’s progress toward democracy is possible, but it faces serious obstacles.”
__________
- The previous article on www.chiesa:
> Islam and Democracy, a Secret Meeting at Castelgandolfo
The article by Daniel Pipes in the January 17, 2006 edition of “The New York Sun”:
> “The Pope and the Koran”
Daniel Pipes is the director of the Middle East Forum, and an adviser for the Bush administration.
Diana West’s article in the January 20, 2006 edition of “The Washington Times” (it appeared under the title “Silence that speaks volumes”):
> “The Pope’s Unexploded Bombshell”
For the latest articles go to the English home page:
> www.chiesa.espressonline.it
Sandro Magister’s e-mail address is s.magister@espressoedit.it
No comments:
Post a Comment