SOMMARIO RASSEGNA STAMPA |
Come la Chiesa di Roma risponde alla lettera dei 138 musulmani di Sandro Magister -http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it Per ora parlano solo gli esperti, mentre si studia la risposta ufficiale. Ma intanto un parallelo scambio di messaggi è in corso tra il cardinale Jean-Louis Tauran e il teologo libico Aref Ali Nayed. Eccone i testi integrali L’ultima firma è arrivata il 26 ottobre ed è quella di Tariq Ramadan, il più controverso pensatore islamico in terra d’Occidente, domiciliato a Ginevra, presidente a Bruxelles dell’European Muslim Network, professore a Oxford, ma anche nipote e discepolo del fondatore dei Fratelli Musulmani, storica fucina del fondamentalismo. Tra i dotti musulmani che hanno firmato la seconda lettera al papa, Ramadan non è il solo a suscitare allarme. C’è il rettore dell’università di al-Azhar al Cairo, Ahmad Muhammad al-Tayeb, c’è lo shaykh Izz al-Din Ibrahim fondatore dell'Università degli Emirati Arabi Uniti, ve ne sono altri come loro che elevano a “martiri” i terroristi che si fanno esplodere in un mercato, su un autobus, in una scuola. Il contrasto è stridente, con una lettera che fin dal titolo vuol fare dell’amore di Dio e del prossimo la “parola comune” tra musulmani e cristiani. Ma ai vertici della Chiesa di Roma la consegna è di guardare alle effettive novità e agli elementi positivi dell’iniziativa musulmana, e di preparare una risposta all’altezza.
Mai prima d’ora dei musulmani di così diverse tendenze si erano trovati concordi, per di più sul terreno minato del rapporto con i cristiani. L’iniziativa è partita da Amman, da re Abdullah di Giordania e soprattutto dal principe Ghazi bin Muhammad bin Talal, presidente dell’Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought, un dotto musulmano che il gesuita Samir definisce “quanto di meglio oggi esiste nell’islam”, sposato con una induista. L’obiettivo iniziale del comitato di Amman era di rafforzare il consenso dottrinale e pratico nel campo musulmano, soprattutto tra sciiti e sunniti. Nel 2004, un documento d’intesa in tre punti fu sottoscritto da più di 500 leader islamici di tendenze anche opposte, compresi il grande ayatollah antikhomeinista al-Sistani, lo shaykh di al-Azhar Tantawi, il leader ideologico dei Fratelli Musulmani al-Qaradawi e persino il presidente iraniano Ahmadinejad.
http://www.islamicamagazine.com/Common-Word/CNS-interview.html ... on the Occasion of the Encounter "For a World Without Violence: Religions and Cultures in Dialogue", Naples, October 21-23, 2007 We greet you with God’s peace. We wish to thank the hosts and organizers from the community of Saint Egidio. They have been working very hard for many years now, and we appreciate and support their peace-loving endeavors. Ma Nayed è tornato di nuovo sull'argomento in un'intervista del 31 ottobre a Cindy Wooden del "Catholic New Service", l'agenzia della conferenza episcopale degli Stati Uniti, intervista pubblicata integralmente in "Islamica Magazine": Aref Ali Nayed Interview with Catholic News Service Following the delivery of "A Common Word", the ground-breaking and historic open letter to Christian clergy, scholars and leaders calling for peace and greater good-will between Muslims and Christians, responses varied from open acceptance to soft rejection. Cindy Wooden of the Catholic News Service recently spoke with Aref Ali Nayed, the chief spokesperson on behalf of the open letter, about what he believes will be achieved by this interfaith initiative, what theological foundation dialogue between Muslims and Christians should rest on, and how Muslim and Christian scriptures are windows rather than walls for increased understanding CINDY WOODEN: How would you describe the dialogue the “Common Word” project hopes to initiate? AREF ALI NAYED: The dialogue, or rather set of dialogues, we hope “A Common Word” will initiate are multifaceted, multilayered, multidisciplinary, and multilateral. It is more a set or matrix of polyphonic discourses that are united through their exclusive focus: Loving worship of the One God, and Love of our neighbors. The matrix includes theological, spiritual, scriptural, juridical, and ethical discourses. It is to be conducted in cooperation with a broad range of partners from all active Christian Churches and denominations including the Catholic, Protestant (both traditional and evangelical), and the Orthodox communities. The discourses will be with Church leaders, centers of theological studies, spiritual communities, scriptural reasoning and reading groups, and grassroots organizations. We are very much encouraged by the fact that positive responses have already come in abundance from such a multiplicity of nodes of Christian communal life including top Christian leaders, and the world’s top Theology, Divinity, and Islamic Studies centers. (For Christian responses, please click here). Would you make a distinction between a "theological" dialogue and a dialogue focused on common moral values and social concerns? Of course, there is a distinction between theological dialogue and ethical/social dialogue. However, for people who believe in divine revelation as the ultimate font and ground for righteous living, as Jews, Christians, and Muslims do, theology and theological dialogue must be the foundational ground of all other forms of dialogue. Mere ethical/social dialogue is useful, and is very much needed. However, dialogue of that kind happens everyday, through purely secular institutions such as the United Nations and its organizations. If religious revelation-based communities are to truly contribute to humanity, their dialogue must be ultimately theologically and spiritually grounded. Many Muslim theologians are not just interested in mere ethical dialogue of ‘cultures’ or ‘civilizations’. We take our Qur’anic/Prophetic revelation solemnly and seriously, as the very foundation of all our living and all our discourses. Islam is a great deal more than a ‘culture’ or a ‘civilization’. It is a prophetical revelatory religion and heart-felt faith that has been the rich font of multiple cultures and civilizations. If dialogue is to be serious, it must be theologically and spiritually deep. What is your reaction to Cardinal Tauran's statement about Muslims' understanding of the Qur’an? Cardinal Tauran’s statement to Le Croix was very disappointing indeed. It came at a time of high expectation of responsiveness, and on the eve of the important Naples Sant’Egidio encounter. Many people were expecting Pope Benedict XVI to say something positive about the Muslim scholars’ initiative. Alas, a truly historic opportunity for a loving embrace was simply missed. The ill-founded claim of the Cardinal (that dialogue is hindered by Muslim belief that the Qur’an is the very speech of God (exalted)) clearly suffers from being stuck in a double bind: First, the bind of misunderstanding and misrepresenting Islamic teachings regarding the Qur’an. Second, the bind of misrepresenting, through false contrast, the Catholic doctrine on Christian Scriptures. Let me explain how this double bind works. The Qur’an, is the very discourse (kalam) of our Exalted One God (Allah), as revealed to Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), and as faithfully preserved through uninterrupted communal transmission (tawatur). The Qur’an is eternal (qadim) in essence, origin, and as essential divine discourse competence (kalamullah as kalam nafsi). It is, however, also historical in its unfolding, as revelatory performance (kalamullah as kalam lafzi), and was revealed to the Prophet (peace be upon him) in intimate engagement with the historical and living circumstances and events of the Muslim community (tanzil and tanjim). (For more on this, see Al-Insaf and Al-Tamhid of Imam Abu Bakr Al-Baqillani, d. 1013 CE). Muslim scholars have always based their interpretations and exegeses of the Qur’an on the bases of several historical and philological sciences, including the science of the ‘circumstances of revelation’ (asbabulnuzul), the science of the history of the Qur’an (tarikhulqur'an), and the sciences that carefully study the linguistic modes familiar to the Arabs around the time of revelation (ulumulugha). Muslim scholars developed a comprehensive apparatus of historical-critical-linguistic methodologies for understanding the Qur’an (ulumulqur’an). (For more on this, see Al-Itqan of Imam Jalaluddin Al-Suyuti (c. 1445-1505 CE). Muslim scholars were always aware of the fact that the activities of interpretation, understanding, and exegesis (of God’s eternal discourse) are forms of human strenuous striving (ijtihad) that must be dutifully renewed in every believing generation. Solemn belief in the eternity and divine authorship of the Qur’an never prevented Muslim scholars from dealing with it historically and linguistically. On the contrary, belief in the revelatory truth of the Qur’an was the very motivation for spending life-times in close scholarly study of God’s discourse. (For more on this see Jami’ Bayan Al-Ilm of Imam Ibn Abd Al-Barr, b. 978 CE) Massive libraries of interpretative and exegetical discourses, theological, juridical, ethical, and spiritual were worked out by the successive generations of Muslim scholars from the earliest times and up to today. It is precisely on the basis of their solemn belief that the Qur’an is the very speech of God that Muslim scholars, through the ages, dialogically engaged Jewish, Christian, Zoroastrian, Hindu, Buddhist, and even skeptical and naturalist scholars. All the major manuals of Muslim theology be they Maturidi, Ash’ari, Mu’tazili, Ja’fari, Isma’ili, or Ibadi, exhibit remarkable broadness of vision and actively engage the beliefs of Philosophers, Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, Hindus and Buddhists. Interestingly, the exegetical Muslim historical-critical-linguistic apparatus, in synthesis with ancient Talmudic methodologies (such as the hermeneutic rules of Hillel and Rabbi Ishmael), was transmitted through Sephardic Jewish scholars like Hasdai ben Abraham Crescas (c. 1340 – 1410/1411 CE) and Baruch de Spinoza (1632 – 1677) to the earliest Protestant hermeneutical masters (like Johann August Ernesti (1707 – 1781)). The ‘High Criticism’ and ‘Historical-Critical Method’ that stemmed from Protestant Reformation Hermeneutics were directly influenced by Spinoza’s ultimately Andalusian Talmudic Hermeneutics, which was steeped in the Qur’anic Hermeneutics of Andalusian Muslim scholars. It is also interesting to note that the methodologies and conclusions of the Protestant High Criticism were, for several centuries, rejected by the Catholic Church. This rejection was most systematic and explicit in Pope Leo XIII’s Providentissimus Deus (1893) and Pope Pius X’s Anti-Modernist Pascendi Dominica Gregis (1907). Under the tremendous pressures of Protestant biblical scholarship, the Catholic Church finally, but only grudgingly, partially, and conditionally accepted some aspects of the historical-critical method. Pope Benedict XV did start this process of conditional acceptance in Spiritus Paraclitus (1920), but it was not until Pope Pius XII’s Divino Afflante Spiritus (1943) that Catholic scholars were finally allowed to catch up with the advanced state of Protestant biblical studies. Thus, it is quite ironic that Cardinal Tauran now accuses Muslims of an imaginary theological/hermeneutical closure that is more appropriately attributable to the Vatican’s own pre-1943 closure to historical-critical methodologies. What is even more ironic is the fact that Cardinal Tauran, not only imagines such Muslim closure, but goes on to attribute it to the Muslim belief in the divine authorship of the Qur’an (i.e. that the Qur’an is the very speech of God). This is very strange indeed, and comes down to thinking that one who believes in the divine authorship of a sacred text can not possibly be a dialogue partner on theological matters! In making this strange claim about the Muslim creed regarding the Qur’an, the Cardinal seems to forget the Roman Catholic dogmatic position regarding Christian Scriptures. Since at least the Council of Trent, the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church has again-and-again re-affirmed a very strong, dictation-like, position regarding divine revelation, and has always maintained that “For holy mother Church, relying on the belief of the Apostles (see John 20:31; 2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Peter 1:19-20, 3:15-16), holds that the books of both the Old and New Testaments in their entirety, with all their parts, are sacred and canonical because written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author and have been handed on as such to the Church herself.” (Vatcian II, Dei Verbum, Chapter III.) (emphasis added) Pope Leo XIII’s Providentissimus Deus (1893) makes it clear that a strong belief in the divine authorship of the Christian Scriptures has been ‘perpetually held and professed’ by the Church. “This supernatural revelation, according to the belief of the universal Church, is contained both in unwritten Tradition, and in written Books, which are therefore called sacred and canonical because, "being written under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, they have God for their author and as such have been delivered to the Church" (2). This belief has been perpetually held and professed by the Church in regard to the Books of both Testaments; and there are well-known documents of the gravest kind, coming down to us from the earliest times, which proclaim that God, Who spoke first by the Prophets, then by His own mouth, and lastly by the Apostles, composed also the Canonical Scriptures (3), and that these are His own oracles and words (4) — a Letter, written by our heavenly Father, and transmitted by the sacred writers to the human race in its pilgrimage so far from its heavenly country" (5). (Emphasis added) It is true that the Catholic Church since 1943, and especially since Vatican II, and in light of the findings of historical-critical scholarship, began to also stress the involvement of the human authors of the Christian Scriptures. However, and even in De Verbum, God’s own inerrant authorship has always been affirmed by the Church. Even Pope Pius XII’s Divino Afflante Spiritus (1943) re-affirms the same creed, and expands rather than cancels the scriptural creeds of Pope Leo XIII’s Providentissimus Deus (1893). Therefore, given the dogmas of the Catholic Church regarding Christian Scriptures, it is strange, and ironic indeed, that Cardinal Tauran holds that upholding the divine authorship of a sacred text is a hindrance to theological dialogue! If such belief in divine authorship prevents its adherents from theological dialogue, then the Cardinal would have the same dialogical inhibitions that he imagines Muslim scholars to have. Unfortunately, Cardinal Tauran’s statement turns out to be based on ill-founded ‘Islam versus Christianity’ ‘contrast tables’ developed and advocated by some ‘Islam experts’. Rather than unilaterally declaring the impossibility of theological dialogue with Muslims, Cardinal Tauran would have been wiser to ask Muslim scholars themselves as to what kind of dialogue they feel is possible, from their point of view. To unilaterally pre-determine what is possible and not possible for the other, on behalf of the other, is one sure way of achieving closure in matters dialogical. What is your hope for the next step in the conversation? Our hope is for a multifaceted and multidimensional matrix of discourses with multiple nodes of Christian leadership, scholarship and wisdom. That matrix is already rapidly emerging, as is evident by the multiple positive responses and initiatives (documented on the open letter's official website). Muslim scholars are most appreciative of such great responses. There is already advanced Muslim-Christian planning for multiple workshops, seminars, meetings, and conferences. May our One God bless the efforts of all men and women of good will, as they strive to sincerely live together in Love of God and Love of all neighbors. CINDY WOODEN is a reporter for the Catholic News Service, which is an editorially independent and financially self-sustaining division of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. It is the main news agency serving Catholic newspapers in the United States and Canada |
SOMMARIO RASSEGNA STAMPA |