The Independent News Source
Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Papal example a rebuff to Swiss vote on minarets
by John L Allen Jr on Nov. 30, 2009
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
PDF version
Printer-friendly versionSend to friendPDF versionIn a surprise result, Swiss voters yesterday approved a constitutional ban on the construction of minarets, the tall spires on Islamic mosques from which the call to prayer is issued five times a day. The initiative was approved 57.5 to 42.5 percent by some 2.67 million voters. Only four of 26 cantons, or states, opposed it, granting the double approval that makes it part of the Swiss constitution.
The ban had been proposed by far-right political forces, and was denounced in the run-up to the vote both by the government and by a wide cross-section of religious leaders – including the Catholic bishops’ conference in Switzerland, which had issued a statement warning that “fear is a poor counselor.”
Passage of the measure is considered the clearest expression to date of mounting anti-Islamic backlash in Europe, fueled by rising levels of immigration. Though counts vary, some analysts predict the overall Muslim population will level off at 15 percent of the European total.
In the context of yesterday’s result, it might be worth a brief trip down memory lane to June 21, 1995 – the day that Europe’s largest mosque opened in Rome, complete with a 66-foot dome and a minaret. The Vatican actually supported the construction of the mosque against far-right opposition in Italy, and in some ways its response remains paradigmatic for the issues raised by the Swiss vote.
Italian Muslims first floated the idea of building a mosque in the 1930s, but were turned down by Mussolini unless a Catholic church could open simultaneously in Mecca. They asked again in 1973, when the Italian government was led by the ultra-Catholic Giulio Andreotti, who quietly consulted with Pope Paul VI. The response was that the Second Vatican Council (1962-65) had endorsed freedom of religion, so the church would have no grounds for opposing the Muslim request.
The Saudi government largely funded construction of the mosque, which was completed more than twenty years later. It opened on June 21, 1995, and Pope John Paul II sent a message of both congratulations and challenge during his General Audience that day. (The event happened to fall on a Wednesday.) The pope praised the opening of the mosque, but also insisted on what’s come to be known as “reciprocity” – that Christians and other religious minorities in Islamic nations ought to have the same freedoms as Muslims now enjoy in the West.
The following is the full text of what John Paul had to say that day:
“Today, a great mosque is inaugurated in Rome. This event constitutes an eloquent sign of the religious freedom recognized for every believer. It’s significant that here in Rome, the center of Christianity and the seat of the successor of Peter, Muslims have their own place of worship in full respect of their freedom of conscience.”
“In an important moment such as this, unfortunately one must also emphasize that in some Islamic nations, similar signs of recognition of religious freedom are missing. How the world, at the threshold of the third millennium, is waiting for these signs!
“Religious freedom has by now become part of numerous international documents, and represents one of the pillars of contemporary civilization. In being happy that the Muslims may come together in prayer in the new mosque of Rome, I also express the lively hope that the right to express their own faith will be recognized for Christians and all believers in every corner of the world. To this end I pray to the Lord, and I invoke the intercession of Mary, his ever-virgin mother, who is also honored by the faithful of Islam.”
* * *
The minaret controversy in Switzerland seems likely to become a new sticking point in the relationship between the West and Islam, one of the ten trends I outline in The Future Church. In his own recent book The Difference God Makes, Cardinal Francis George of Chicago wrote: "Among the dialogues [involving religions], that between Christians and Muslims promises to be the most significant for the future of the human race."
Europe is in many ways the new front line of this relationship. Here's some background on Islam in Europe from The Future Church:
"Rising Muslim immigration in Europe has set off special alarms across the Catholic world, raising the specter in some quarters of a demographic reversal of the Battle of Lepanto in 1571, which preserved Christendom from the Ottoman threat. In his book The Cube and the Cathedral, George Weigel imagines a future in which the meuezzin calls Muslims to prayer from St. Peter’s Basilica, and the Cathedral of Notre Dame in Paris has been turned into “Hagia Sophia on the Seine – a great Christian church become an Islamic museum.” Weigel is exaggerating to make a point, but his image nevertheless captures real fears held by many people.
"Given the struggles facing institutional Christianity in Europe, combined with the very real dangers of Islamic radicalism – the Paris riots, the London bombings, the Theo van Gogh murder in Holland – the case for panic is depressingly easy to make. Some Christian leaders, however, are more sanguine about how things might shake out in the long run. Realistically, they argue, Europe hasn’t been Christian for some time, so protecting the continent’s 'Christian identity' may be an anachronism. In that context, they believe the arrival of a large pool of new Europeans who share some basic spiritual and moral values with Christians may prove to be a boon, if a growing number of Muslims enter the middle class and make their peace with pluralism."
"No one knows exactly how many Muslims are in Europe today, in part because some are undocumented, and in part because several European censuses do not inquire about religious orientation. Drawing upon various sources, the U.S. National Intelligence Council estimates that the Muslim population in the European Union rose from 5 million in 1985 to 15 million in 2005, representing 200 percent growth. The largest Muslim community in the EU zone is in France, with five million Muslims, or 8.3 percent of a population of 60.4 million. Germany is in second place with 3.5 million Muslims, or 4.3 percent of its population, and the United Kingdom has 1.6 million, or 2.7 percent of its population."
"By 2025, the National Intelligence Council projects a Muslim population in the EU of 28 million; by 2050 it anticipates 40 million, which would represent 15 percent of a population of roughly 500 million Europeans. (That estimate does not include the possibility of Turkey’s admission to the EU). In some nations, the Muslim share may be higher. By mid-century, Muslims could be 25 percent of the population in France and Germany."
"In Europe as a whole, however, some experts believe that the Muslim total will level off at around 15 percent. Philip Jenkins says that the best parallel may be to the Catholic population in the United States, which rose to 25 percent of the country quickly in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and has subsequently remained stable. Among other things, declining fertility rates in the Middle East and North Africa suggest that current levels of immigration may not continue."
"Aside from fears of jihadist violence, today’s Catholic anxiety about Muslim immigration in Europe is also related to politics. So far, swelling Muslim populations have benefitted the secular left in most countries, on the basis of support for multiculturalism, strong social welfare systems, and the Palestinians. Yet there’s also a rising chorus on the European left today critical of accommodation of Muslims, insisting that the secular values of the Enlightenment must be defended against what they see as religious extremists. In 2006, twelve left-leaning European intellectuals put out a manifesto suggesting that the real fault line runs between “theocrats and democrats,” a taxonomy that seems to lump Muslims and observant Christians together. Many analysts believe the natural home of a European Muslim middle class will ultimately be center-right parties that defend traditional morality and a strong role for religion in public life. To some extent this future is now in Germany, where, as ironic as it may sound, a small but growing number of Muslims are becoming Christian Democrats."
"That this is not mere fantasy is suggested by the Philippines, where the current ruling party is known as the “Christian Muslim Democrats,” a fusion of center-right parties of both Christian and Muslim inspiration. A historic peace deal in 1996 granting broad autonomy to the majority Muslim Mindinao region prompted many Filipino Muslims to reject armed insurgency, accepting peaceful insertion into the political system. Some experts see the experience as proof that antagonism can be converted into partnership under the right conditions."
Good news. Islam is a
Good news. Islam is a religion dedicated to conversion of the world (in some ways, like Christianity) by any means necessary (completely UNLIKE Christianity). Muslims attempted to conquer Europe by force of arms during the 10th-15th centuries and were defeated. They have attempted to conquer by force of persuasion since the religion was founded by Mohammed. They have failed. And so, what they cannot conquer by force of arms or force of ideas they conquer by force of population -- massive waves of immigration and procreation, while the West practices contraception on nearly extinction levels.
Islam is diametrically opposed to Western Civilization and is at war with it. Sharia Law, if implemented, would mean the end of freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of press. It would mean the end of equal treatment for women under the law. It would lead to capital punishment for homosexual persons (something the Church certainly would never advocate!). It would mean the end of Western Civilization.
Thus, steps such as the ones taken by the Swiss people are necessary efforts to draw lines in the sand and defend Western Civilization. The fact that the Swiss Bishops Conference did not see this move for what it was is somewhat sad, but not utterly surprising.
Good on the Swiss people. May the rest of Europe follow suit and may we follow their lead in holding the line against the darkness.
The historical ineptness of
The historical ineptness of Mr Green's post is mind-boggling.
"Good news. Islam is a religion dedicated to conversion of the world (in some ways, like Christianity) by any means necessary (completely UNLIKE Christianity). Muslims attempted to conquer Europe by force of arms during the 10th-15th centuries and were defeated."
Lithuania was "Christianized" by the sword in the 14th-15th centuries. Mr. Green, happily for him, ignores this. He sanitizes the history of Christianity and, if we took him at his word, Christianity has been a bastion of peace and harmony.
Why John Allen depends on the right-wing comments of George Weigel and Cardinal George is a mystery when there are so many other less partisan and more objective analysts. Beside their suspect comments about Europe and Islam both of these men are in the forefront of movements they would decry in Islam--the takeover of Catholic colleges and universities by religious superiors i.e. bishops, a tactic of the regime in Saudi Arabia.
In the 1950's books on the index were put in locked cages in Catholic University libraries.
It probably has something to
It probably has something to do with Opus Dei. Clint, this is not one of your better efforts.
I can't believe I would end
I can't believe I would end up on the side of Mussolini, but on this issue he was right: reciprocity is necessary. Religious freedom is a two-way street. One must also take into account the fact the mosques are not just places of worship, but are also traditionally political gathering places.
Well, I say good for the
Well, I say good for the Swiss! What little that is left of Christianity will remain in Europe. My blood kind of boils when I read the quote of JPII above. What kind of Pope welcomes a false religion to Rome anyway? Did it bother this Pope that Saudi Arabia which constructed the mosque in Rome won't even allow crosses to be displayed in that country? I guess he was too busy kissing the Koran to realize that! And this apostate is to be a saint? No wonder there is a Traditionalist movement!
John, You say "Passage of the
John, You say "Passage of the measure is considered the clearest expression to date of mounting anti-Islamic backlash in Europe, fueled by rising levels of immigration.".
However, I believe the subordinate clause may be an incomplete analysis. It is not the 'rising levels of immigration'. Rather, it is: 1. the lack of cultural integration; 2. the obvious lack of reciprocity in Muslim countries; 3. the albeit limited but sensational illegal activities (e.g., honor killings, bride selling, and; 4. the anti-Christian pogroms extant in Sudan,Pakistan,Iraq, etc. that is causing a backlash.
To frame it as you do perpetuates the liberal/left gestalt that the backlash is simply a "right wing", unintelligent, nativist reaction rather than a real problem that requires engagement by both sides.
Thank you, John, for this
Thank you, John, for this great article. Too bad the first part of it could not be spread widely in my country two weeks before a sorrowful vote. No doubt it was the people's fear that came out, but the cost of this "democratic luxury" might be high. Beside the failure of opinion polls and of politicians to capture the majority's feelings, I would like to stress the lack of intellectual honesty among those who served us a soup mixing "building minarets" with "islamic conquest, oppression of women, wearing veil or burka". Needless to say, the Kadhafi story played its part in it.
The result of the vote will enter into the country's constitution in a place occupied for more than a century by the so-called articles of exception. They were forbidding the creation of new catholic dioceses and the presence of Jesuits in Switzerland. What a great step forward we made last Sunday "in nomine Domini".
Jean-Pierre Chevrolet
CH 3968 Veyras
What John Paul II and many
What John Paul II and many fail to recognize is the hard-line injunction of Islam against ANY and ALL other religious expressions and churches in their countries. The Koran specifically forbids the tolerance of non-Islamic symbols and signs, including buildings, religious clothing (e. g., a religious habit) within the borders of Islamic countries for fear that these might be forms of evangelization.
There is NO HOPE for reconciliation with Islamic countries as long as such conditions persist. We allow them to build huge mosques in Rome and elsewhere in Europe while they have strictly forbidden the existence of even a single Christian church in many Islamic countries. What kind of equanimity is this?
The bottom line: in the eyes
The bottom line: in the eyes of the Vatican, even Islam is preferable to its bete noire, "secularism".
Info on this vote also came
Info on this vote also came this a.m. via the Wall St. Journal. After reading that article I concluded that, although it certainly signals unwarranted fear or "Islamaphobia" in the words of a quoted Muslim person, it really isn't that big a deal overall if it's not allowed to become so. The ban doesn't cover building of mosques and the few minarets already existing aren't included. Some Muslims question the use and need of minarets because of electronics. Loudspeakers do the trick and most Swiss mosques already built don't have minarets.
I fail to see that Pope John Paul's 9-year earlier statement constitutes a "rebuff" to the Swiss vote. Congratulations and challenge at that time constituted engagement in dialogue. If we wish it, the Swiss vote can open a new round of conversation. In fact it has already begun. Witness the WSJ article, this one, French radio for a few. Turkey weighed in both pro and con. It was a Turk who was quoted by the WSJ as being in favor of the vote saying it was "sensible. In this age of loudspeakers, I can't see the point of minarets anyway."
Cardinal George has a host of companions stressing the importance of Christian/Muslim dialogue in the near term. Everyday, for instance, African Bishops see and live its importance. If I remember correctly one bishop related in Synod that he and others engaged in interfaith dialogue for the past 15 years with fruitful results - basically respect each for the other. This same bishop urged the next step in light of the fact that although they differ on the basic issue of Jesus' identity, both Islam and Catholicism desire the same things for their people. He proposed the next step is to work hand-in-hand with one another on mutual problems (Cardinal Bernadin's Common Ground put into action it seems). This bishop didn't propose anything he isn't already doing; he regularly works with and appears publicly with the regional Imam on issues of mutual concern. For this reason I had a bit of a problem with the Weigel quotes which play to fear of the unknown. On the other hand the quotes from your book, fact based as they are, are neutral and that can be a good thing.
Finally, I'd like to mention that the WSJ article mentioned a couple of other issues that the right-wing party wants to pursue in the near future, and I quote: "Peoples Party leader Walter Wobman said the group will now fight to ban the burqa as well as to institute a law against forced marriage." These are quite different from minaret construction. Question: How and/or how forcefully will the Swiss government and cross-section of religious leaders including the Swiss Catholic Bishops Conference oppose these proposals if and when these fights become public? Will you be able to point to a historical papal "rebuff" of the vote in the event these fights are won by the Peoples Party?
Joan - thank you for a
Joan - thank you for a wonderfully thoughtful and interesting commentary on the matter. It would be helpful to the entire Church to have the Bishop's Conferences from all over the world, but particularly in Sweden, Africa and the US, conference on the issue, rather than the right-wing politics that fill their agendas now. Again, than you for your contribution!
Go try and build a Roman
Go try and build a Roman Catholic Church in Saudi Arabia. See how far you will get. Islam is more than a religion, it is a theo-political ideology and it is incompatible with Western Democracy. We have no duty to accomodate the instrument of our demise.
A few years ago Muslims
A few years ago Muslims erected a Mosque in a Michigan city previously heavily Polish Catholic. Just having a Mosque in their town was not a problem. However when the call to prayer was blasted out over loud speakers at high decibel levels five times a day, the local Christians became irate.
This article does not present a root cause for the Swiss reaction. Could it be exactly the same objection in Switzerland as in Michigan? A population used to a relatively quiet environment would almost certainly consider such sounds as invasive and threatening. Rather than attributing the Swiss vote to "backlash"or other abstractions, look to more clear and concrete reasons. Therein one might very well discover a clear and concrete solution.
The pope thats welcome other
The pope thats welcome other religions is also the guilty of freedom and peace in my god damn country, who was ruled by a Dictator who was "deeply" catholic. If the Muslims religion Leaders would act the same Then the war would end.
I dont care about western civilization, They destroyed the memory of our ancesters, West is the father that raped our mother, we are not unlike but a sin like that it cant be forgiven that easely.
Islam was the peak of civilization trhough medieval and reanaissance times, It lead to the decay of their people and religion wars killed all their intelectuals at almost the same time that the Catolic church was having its own problems of corruption. Islam didnt survive, the last point of sanity remained in Spain but fell not by the forces of Castilla but by the emperors of Muslim Africa.
Catholic church was torn by Lutero and Calvino, but It served (and serv) a proupose, To mantain a strong pilar in faith. Just ask yourselfs in how many other religions besides Islam the emperors, politics and royalties have so many power among the belivers. Christians survived the chrisis because even if Roma was rotten, the real church that is the comunity was still alive.
Islam powers tell the comunity how to act, so as far as we can know they are all poisoned, an antidote can only be found by the belivers of Islam, but we christians have to be aware of the poison. If we can recognize the Church was rotten and corrupt then the Muslims would have to recognize without fear the true of their religion and what has become, If there is Islam after that then Mahoma can rest in peace, if not then may the fatwa be upon me, I can fight as well as them.
Islam is not THE enemy, not their belifes or their scriptures. Islam is NOT the work of the devil, and Muslims are not demons. Terrorist do Have a soul and a Mind, and they have reasons, It doesnt matter if it doesnt make sence we have to be aware that the enemy is a human being, If you are not afraid of admiting it then you can fight.
Even if the wes destroyed my culture, now I am western too so I still care, But the Western Civilization is not a flag that I would fight for not now not never.
In a world where it took
In a world where it took Muslim invaders months to journey to Christian lands or Christian Crusaders a similar time to reach "The Holy Land" such parochialism was tragic, and unfortunate, but perhaps not "earth shattering."
In a world where an jet plane laden with people determined to do harm to others crosses the world in just hours, and where a nuclear warhead can be crafted and then sent skyward to arrive across oceans in minutes, we really cannot afford to continue treating any race, religion, or nationality as "the others."
And all sides had better stop shaking their fists and proclaiming themselves adherants of the "one true faith."
Otherwise we might all just go up in self-righteous flames.
Or, perhaps, down.
The vote in Switzerland- as
The vote in Switzerland- as far as I am concerned- has nothing to do with defending Christianity. As an African who have spent time in Europe, I can say that what is happening in Switzerland is a general dislike for any kind of religion. In most European nations, there is an aggressive vocal campaign against religion which is damned as "irrational" . Islam is particularly hated because it is seen by many Europeans as the "ultimate antithesis of rationality". Unlike Christianity which is tolerated as a "benign irrationality", Islam is seen as a "dangerous irrationality" that drives its adherents to commit terrorist activities, promote Jihad and issue fatwas against authors or commentators perceived to have insulted Prophet Mohammed. So it is no surprise that the Swiss acted as they did. In any case, my candid opinion is that there is no cause for alarm: Muslims still have the right to practice their faith (even without the minarets).
This is a clear indication
This is a clear indication why a "theocracy" is ill equipped to govern in a democratic society. A religion that dictates and denies man's free will is bad for the world peoples no matter where it resides. FEAR is the guide for discrimination in this issue. A burqa is perfectly acceptable in a mosque and in homes of Islam, it is unsafe garb in a modern society of planes, trains and automobiles. But then Catholicism has abused peoples for centuries around the world in the name of GOD. IT IS OUTRAGEOUS THAT THERE IS NO OUTCRY AGAINST THE "KILL GAYS BILL" under consideration in UGANDA at this time. Uganda is 42% Catholic and nothing is being said to stop this outrage against humanity. And it is a bill introduced by Christians who perceive themselves to be men of god and of course their actions are blessed by an American society called the C street Family. By the way, this group, believes that they are in positions of power because of Jesus and therefore can do no wrong, because their actions no matter the consequences are blessed by GOD. People wake up!! Theocracy no matter its label is oppressive and stifling to the free will that God has bestowed on mankind.
Freedom of religion is never
Freedom of religion is never a right of any man. God never gives us any right to reject Him. We have the freedom to reject God, but this freedom is NOT a right. To promote and defend religious freedom means to reject the 1st Ten Commandment and to disobey Jesus' final instruction: "Going therefore, teach ye all nations..." With no shame, Vatican defends the 'right' of false religions, but deny the RIGHT of Traditional Catholics.
Bells and whistles do not
Bells and whistles do not religion make.
Post new comment