O padre que inspirou Steve Jobs e católicos contra Trump

Um grupo de 40 personalidades católicas nos EUA publicou uma carta aberta a criticar Donald Trump, que consideram perfeitamente inapto para ser presidente dos EUA. Entre os signatários encontram-se dois colaboradores do The Catholic Thing, incluindo o seu editor Robert Royal.

A Conferência Episcopal Portuguesa espera que não haja aproveitamento político da questão da eutanásia e diz que tem dois documentos prontos a sair sobre o assunto. Os bispos, reunidos em Fátima, também dizem que não se devem erguer barreiras contra os refugiados que procuram uma vida melhor na Europa, e que a Igreja terá particular atenção para com os cristãos que chegam a Portugal.

Morreu o padre Robert Palladino. Nunca ouviu falar dele? É natural. Mas se não fosse ele, não estaria a ler este texto da mesma maneira!

Publiquei hoje a transcrição integral da minha entrevista com o responsável do Ordinariato de Nossa Senhora de Walsingham, monsenhor Keith Newton. Nesta entrevista ele fala sobre a questão de ser um padre casado, ainda por cima de tendência conservadora, na Igreja Católica, e também sobre o que pensa do Papa Francisco, entre outros assuntos.

"She says she's the Monsignor's wife. It's a bit odd..."

This is a full transcript, in the original English, of my interview with Monsignor Keith Newton, of the Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham, who was recently in Portugal. The news report, in Portuguese, can be read here.

Esta é uma transcrição integral, no inglês original, da minha entrevista com Monsenhor Keith Newton, do Ordinariato de Nossa Senhora de Walsingham, que esteve recentemente em Portugal. A reportagem, em português, pode ser lida aqui.

What numbers are we talking about nowadays, both in terms of Our Lady of Walsingham and of the three ordinariates together? Is this within what you expected when Anglicanorum Coetibus was announced?

There are currently three ordinariates, one in America, one in Australia and one in the UK. And the one in the UK is still a very small structure. We have 90 priests, but only a couple of thousand lay people, altogether, and they are divided over about 40 groups of varying sizes around the country. 

So that is the size of it. But of course some diocesan Catholics often come and worship us because they quite like the community and the feel of the liturgy, so there are a number where that happens, and there are a couple of parishes which we are looking after in which the Ordinariate group and the local diocesan Catholic group worship together, so it’s difficult to say what the actual numbers are worshiping with Ordinariate priests, but the actual registered number is about 2000.

So that is 90 priests including the six former bishops?

Yes.

How about worldwide?

I think there are probably a bit less in America, because they started a year after us, so I think there are about 60 or 70 priests in America and about 20 in Australia. I don't know about the numbers in the USA, they are probably a bit bigger than ours, but not enormously bigger.

Obviously, all this has very much to do with internal strife in the Anglican Communion, which you as a bishop experienced first-hand, and which I imagine you still follow closely. The Episcopal Church was recently suspended from the communion, what do you have to say on that?

I don't think they were suspended from the communion, what they have decided to do is not to allow the Episcopal Church to send any representation to any major dialogue or any commission within the Anglican Communion, so they have not actually been suspended from it, and it’s only a temporary arrangement for three years. And they have done this before, actually, so it is not unusual. I think the Archbishop of Canterbury… I understand he is desperate to keep the communion together, but whether he can achieve this, I rather doubt it because you've got two groups which are going in very, very different directions. 

We know that many of the more disgruntled and conservative minded Anglicans are from the African churches. But there has been no enthusiasm from Africa for the Ordinariate… Why is this?

Because most of the people in Africa and some parts of Asia who are particularly upset about the direction of the Anglican Communion do not come from an Anglo-Catholic background. They come from a very Evangelical background. So although they would agree with the Catholic Church on many questions of morals, attitudes to marriage and sexuality, generally, and they would agree with the Catholic Church in terms of what we say in the Nicene Creed, their ecclesiology would be very different and their sacramental life would be very different, so I don't think they would naturally move towards the Catholic Church.

Having said that I think there are some who see that the Catholic Church may be the only place in the long run which will actually defend the faith of the apostles. 

So should we expect more ordinariates in the future?

I don't know. There has been some interest, I know, from some Lutheran countries which want something very similar, with small groups of Lutheran Christians. I suppose that another ordinariate could be erected in some parts of Africa, like South Africa, or India, but not that I know of at the moment.

Having established the ordinariates, is there not a danger that within a few generations these will be assimilated into regular Latin Catholic communities?

Well that is certainly a danger, but that was not the vision of Pope Benedict. I think the vision that he had was that there should be a structure within the Catholic Church which would value and recognize legitimate patrimony, so long as it was compatible with the faith of the Church, which could enrich the life of the Church.

Now, we've already got that in the Catholic Church, within the Eastern rites, which are quite separate jurisdictions. This is the first time it’s happened in the Latin Church, so it could be very easy for that to happen, but I think it’s very important that Ordinariate priests and people realise that we have two things to do. One is to try and maintain a distinctiveness, because if there isn't a distinctiveness, what's the point of the Ordinariate? 

They've got to maintain that distinctiveness while also cooperating and being fully part of the wider Catholic Church. Now that is a balance we have to work at, and who knows, in God's time, what will actually happen, but the vision, I think, is a vision for unity. We talk about unity, we have lots of commissions and meetings and documents produced, but this is an opportunity to show what realized ecumenism is, the ecumenism which has actually taken concrete form, could be like. Where people are in communion with each other, they believe the same faith, they share each other's sacraments, you can go to mass at one place or another, but it shows there is a recognition of the gifts that other ecclesial communities have brought to the wider Catholic Church. Now I think that is a great vision, and it’s a great hope for unity, so we have a big job to do. So, what will happen in the future? I don't know, I'm not prophetic in that sort of way. 

There was much debate at the time of Anglicanorum Coetibus about the ecumenical implications. In hindsight, do you think it aided ecumenism or made it more difficult? Or was it perhaps a way of saying that ecumenism, with a goal to full reunion, with the Anglican churches is no longer seen as possible?
I think that is absolutely true. I don't think anybody would say that the hopes and dreams of the original ARCIC meetings, which began with Michael Ramsey going to see Paul VI in 1966, have actually borne fruit. The dream of a united church, of corporate union, has not been fulfilled. 

But I think that is what Our Lord prayed for and I think everybody recognizes that the ARCIC, which still meets, has a much more limited goal now. We want to try and understand each other, and there is nothing wrong with that, to understand how the Church governs, how it comes to decisions and all that sort of thing, but I don't think anybody thinks it’s likely that union is around the corner. Now that may the long term goal, but we are talking about a long, long, long, way in advance. 

I think the Ordinariate happened because of those conversations, I think they are a fruit of that, and wouldn't have happened without them, but they are also a pointer to what is possible in the future, for other people to look at. One of the interesting things about the Ordinariate, is that people may have been suspicious about it, but it has forced those who are still Anglicans to ask the question "what is our Anglican patrimony? What is it we would like to preserve within a united Church? What is important and significant?”

At the time we kept hearing about waves of Anglicans who might be ready to join the Ordinariate. There was a first which came in immediately, there were others who seemed to be waiting to see what the arrangements would be and came in later... Do you think there are still people waiting in the wings?

I think there are, but I think that now it will be more of a trickle. I think when it was something new, there were 1.000 in the first year and about 500 in the second year, and so forth. But it is much more difficult now for an Anglican priest who wants to explore this to do so publicly.

The Church of England bishops, for the most part, when we spoke to them and said some of us were thinking of doing this, may not have been happy, but they allowed it to happen. I think that now if an Anglican priest went to his local bishop and said he wanted to have meetings in his parish about joining the Ordinariate, I think he would be very unhappy. So it is very difficult for priests to actually bring a group together now, five years later. 

The norms of the Ordinariate say that the ordinary “may also petition the Roman Pontiff, as a derogation from can. 277, §1, for the admission of married men to the order of presbyter on a case by case basis, according to objective criteria approved by the Holy See”. What criteria are these? 

Well, we haven't got any at the moment. One priest was ordained, who hadn't been previously an Anglican priest, and that was because when Anglicanorum Coetibus was published he was in his final year of seminary training for ordination and was already married, with two children, so we petitioned for his ordination, and we sent him to seminary for two years, he had already completed his training for the Church of England, at the College of the Resurrection in Mirfield, then we sent him on to Wonersh for two years and petitioned the Holy See and Pope Benedict signed his dispensation, and allowed the ordination to go forward.

So that was just one, there haven't been any others, we haven't worked out any criteria and I think at the moment it is unlikely we will be able to do that, but it is still part of the norms.

Ordenação de três ex-bispos anglicanos
na Igreja Católica

Do you see married clergy in the long term future of the Ordinariate?

Well, to be honest I don't know the answer to that. 

It's true to say that married clergy are part of the Anglican patrimony, I think everybody sees that. But I think if we had married clergy in part of the Latin Church, which the Ordinariate is, I think it would raise all sorts of questions for the whole of the Latin Church which are probably not ready to be answered at the moment. 

The Holy Father has talked about opening this question. I think if the question was opened we'd have a contribution to make. But I don't think it is for us to raise the question. 

Married clergy is one of the big and more divisive issues within the Catholic Church, with opinions usually split along conservative/liberal lines. In this debate you and other former Anglican priests are a bit of an anomaly, as you tend to be more conservative or traditional, theologically and liturgically, yet you are living examples of how a priest can exercise his ministry faithfully, yet have a family at the same time. What is it like to be in that position?

It's a bit odd...

I was talking the other night at a meeting here in Lisbon about Anglicanorum Coetibus, and I think that I was the first ever married ordinary in the Catholic Church. At least for centuries. Because every bishop, who are the ordinaries, and there are not many ordinaries who are not bishops, are all celibates. So it is quite unusual. 

My wife says she is the Monsignor's wife, which is a bit odd. 

But I have not found, particularly amongst the more traditional minded Catholic priests, that they find this difficult. They know it is a pastoral exception, it's the Church opening its arms to the difficulties of people who want to be in full communion and found themselves in a difficult theological place. The Church has been warm and generous and I think that many priests have gone along with that and become our friends and supporters.

But I don't think they want us to raise the question, generally, about married clergy.

You were a bishop in the Anglican Church. Becoming catholic meant being “reduced” to priest and, as far I understand it, cuts in pension and payment… How easy was it to decide on moving? 

Oh that was easy! The decision was easy.

Once the Apostolic Constitution was published I could see no reason for not going forward and exploring this. It had been my prayer and dream, for all my ministry as an Anglican priest, that there would be corporate unity between Catholics and Anglicans, and I saw that, over the years of my ordained ministry in the Church of England, being frustrated in all sorts of ways, so that it was no longer a realistic hope. 

When Pope Benedict said “you don't simply have to come as an individual, you don't have to leave your history behind! You can bring that with you into the Catholic Church, to enrich the whole Catholic Church”, and I couldn't see why you'd say no to that, it just seemed to be such a generous and incredible structure that was being offered! 

So the decision wasn't difficult. And I'd been thinking about my future for some years, I have to be honest, and there were practical difficulties, but then you just trust in the Lord, I suppose... I remember we went through some fairly difficult times with my wife and at one point she said: “I don't know why you are worried about this, we have done this before. We went to Africa, the two of us”. I was a missionary, and we went with two young children, aged four and one, and that was pretty challenging, but it all worked out fine. You just have to trust!

There were practical things, such as where we were going to live, but the Church has been very generous and has found me somewhere to live, I took a cut in what I received, so I get paid the same as we pay the Ordinariate priests. I didn't lose much pension, only the few years I didn't serve in the Church of England, so I am in a fortunate position. Our younger clergy did not have that, but nothing was taken away, I have a right to that, so that was not too sacrificial.

And when people come to speak to us and ask what will happen to them, I say it won't be easy, and you go through some difficult patches, but none of our priests have been homeless, and none of them have been without food. So God provides.

Have any of the priests who came over decided to go back?

No.

Would you have changed if your wife was not on board?

Probably. But she'd have had to agree with it, because part of the dossier you send to the Holy See is your wife's declaration that she is happy that you will be ordained a Catholic priest, so whatever happened, she would have needed to agree to it. One or two of our priest's wives have decided not to become Catholics, so it had to be her decision, and of course I was delighted when she did, it's much easier and better that we worship together and she's a Catholic as well.

It was probably made easier by the fact that my daughter became Catholic before we did, so that probably helped a little. So yes, I think I would have done it, but it wouldn't have been such a happy thing.

How many children do you have?

Three, and two grandchildren.

Were you ordained or conditionally re-ordained? 

I was ordained absolutely. There have been one or two former Anglicans who were ordained conditionally, like Graham Leonard, who was bishop of London. He had to prove that his ordination was probably valid, mainly because of the Old Catholic bishops taking part in his ordination.

But I think the question of Anglican orders (Cardinal Kasper said this at a meeting at the House of Bishops that I was at) might well have been opened and examined again, but I think once the Anglican Communion started to ordain women to the priesthood and particularly to the episcopate, I think that was then put on the back burner. So it was very clear that we were ordained absolutely.

But nobody asked me to deny that God had worked through my ministry, nobody had anything negative to say about what I had done.

And how does that make you feel about your former ministry?

I think God does work in all sorts of ways through people. So I don't think there was not grace there, I think there was grace, where people serve him with integrity.

I look back at it in a different way. I read John Henry Newman, when he becomes a Catholic, at the end of his Apologia, he looks back at the Church of England and you can't help seeing it in a different sort of light. So I do see it in a different sort of light.

I am a Catholic because ultimately I do believe this is the Church of Jesus Christ and I do think that the Petrine ministry is essential to the life of the Church.

Celebração numa igreja anglo-católica

Some of us who are not used to Anglican atmospheres have difficulty understanding the difference between Anglo-Catholics, and Evangelicals, etc. In your case, you are obviously Anglo-Catholic, is that a family thing?

No. There is a whole range of traditions within the Church of England. From Calvinistic Evangelicals to what used to be called Anglo-Papalists. You could come anywhere on the spectrum.

I was brought up in a fairly middle of the road Anglican parish. It was sacramental. We had sung communion every Sunday morning, and the priest wore vestments, but it wasn't extreme. It wasn't until I went to university that I became much more Catholic in terms of doctrine.

I was never an Anglo-Papalist, I liked sacramental traditions and always valued good worship and ceremonies, and so forth. And when I was ordained I went to what you would probably call Anglo-Catholic churches, sung mass on Sunday, incense, statues of Our Lady and so forth. So that is the tradition I was brought up in.

But there are lots of Anglicans who come from very different traditions. It’s part of the problem, of course. There is one person who thinks that the Eucharist is the highest form of worship, that it is a representation of the Sacrifice of Christ, and within the same Church you've got somebody else who thinks it’s just a memorial meal.

Most of us just ignore the other traditions, but sometimes, when you seem them close at hand, you wonder how can the Church hold such divergent views about things you find so essential?

And of course, within the Anglican Church, not only have we got those views about sacraments, but you've now got a whole group of liberal people who deny basic Christian doctrines and are still ministering in the Church of England. There was one group, which seems to have disappeared now, called The Sea of Faith, in which most of them did not really believe in God in and traditional form that we might understand. 

And you have a well-known Anglican priest who was denying the Virgin Birth, in the newspapers over Christmas, so there is a whole range.

The Ordinariate was very much a brainchild of Pope Benedict and his papacy, and when Pope Francis was elected there was mention that, as Archbishop of Buenos Aires he had been critical of the idea. As Pope he has since nominated an ordinary for the US Ordinariate, so he is obviously not denying the Ordinariate, but what feelings are you getting from Rome, under Pope Francis?

Well, under his pontificate the norms have been changed a little bit, to allow the evangelization to be recognized a bit more within the Ordinariate, he has said that people who belong to the Ordinariate don't have to come from an Anglican background, if they have completed the rites of initiation within the Ordinariate community then they can be registered as members.

So, that is a very positive thing, and the appointment of a bishop to be Ordinary of the American Ordinariate, shows that he is not against it.

I think the comments that were made to the Anglican Archbishop in Argentina, Greg Venables, were made privately, and I think Greg Venables was quite embarrassed about them when they came out publicly, in fact I spoke to him. 

What you have to understand is that Pope Francis comes from Argentina. The Anglican Church in Argentina is extremely Evangelical, therefore he would have found an ally in Archbishop Venables on moral questions, such as gay marriage, abortion and sexuality generally.

So it might have been very different if Pope Francis had been Archbishop of New York and what he saw of the Episcopal Church had been very different from his experience of Anglicanism in Argentina.

I think when you become Pope you have to have a much wider vision of things, so I suppose he has understood it a bit more, one hope's that is true, he has definitely not shown any negativity towards us.

O arcebispo anglicano de Buenos Aires com
o então arcebispo Jorge Bergoglio

How about your comment on the Papacy in general? There is clearly a very different style. Many of the members of the Ordinariate would, I imagine, have been very attracted to Benedict XVI's style in terms of worship for example. Has there been a shock there?

I don't think so. Every Pope is different!

Benedict was very different from John Paul II, his style and the way he taught. I think Benedict was a great teacher and in some years people will look back and realise just how great a teacher he was. His books are fantastic, his preaching was magnificent.

You've got a very different Pope in Francis, he comes from a very different background, he comes from Latin America. He is much more demonstrative. I think many of the things people have said that he has done, which have been received well, were things that actually Pope Benedict did, but nobody really recognized it when he did it. 

I mean, kissing children, this is not new. Going to the poor, visiting the sick... I think Pope Benedict did it, but he perhaps didn't do it quite with the panache, and I think what has happened is that Pope Francis is very popular with journalists.

I think every Pope brings something different and something new. Comparing one with another is not helpful, you have to thank God for what He has given you and the blessings we receive from that. No doubt the next Pope will be very different from Pope Francis.

Veja também: 

Anglicanos e Ordinariatos - Perguntas e Respostas

Uma missa extraordinária (celebração na igreja do ordinariato de Tunbridge Wells)

Freiras mártires e "a esposa do Monsenhor"

Monsenhor Keith Newton e a sua mulher, à esquerda

Na passada sexta-feira chegou a triste notícia de um ataque a um lar, no Iémen, em que foram mortas quatro freiras das Missionárias da Caridade, a ordem fundada por Madre Teresa de Calcutá. No fim-de-semana o Papa recordou o incidente no qual, veio-se entretanto a saber, também foi raptado um padre indiano.

Leia aqui a interessante entrevista de Aura Miguel a Henrique Leitão, sobre a Quaresma e outros assuntos…

No domingo tive o privilégio de ir dar um testemunho sobre “Matrimónio – Um Estilo de Vida” ao encontro anual dos Centros de Preparação para o Matrimónio, em Fátima. Esta notícia não é sobre a minha intervenção, mas sobre o encontro em geral.

Esteve recentemente em Portugal o monsenhor Keith Newton, responsável pelo Ordinariato de Nossa Senhora de Walsingham, para ex-anglicanos que entraram em comunhão com Roma. Newton é casado e admite que é um bocado estranho quando a sua mulher se apresenta como “a esposa do monsenhor”.

Morreu o cónego liturgista José Ferreira, do Patriarcado de Lisboa.

Let him rock!

Imã roqueiro da Turquia

É uma invenção portuguesa e vai agora chegar a todo o mundo. A aplicação Click to Pray, desenvolvida pelos jesuítas portugueses, vai ser adoptada pelo Vaticano a partir de amanhã.

O jornal Audácia e o iMissio estão a publicar testemunhos de pais ao longo do mês de Março. Hoje é o meu, que podem ler aqui, em que explico porque é que sou um Rei, um herói e um génio, mas acima de tudo muito feliz.

Plácido Domingo quer cantar para o Papa. O cantor encontrou-se ontem com Francisco, em Roma.

Quem também só quer cantar é Ahmet Muhsin Tuzer, o “imã roqueiro” da Turquia, que foi convidado para actuar em Serralves. A autoridade que tutela a actividade dos imãs naquele país não o quer deixar vir. Ele diz que vai tentar vir na mesma. Mais rock é difícil.

Fique a conhecer o livro “Clavis Bibliothecarum”, um instrumento fundamental para investigadores, que contém o acervo de todas as bibliotecas religiosas em Portugal.

Não deixem de ler o artigo desta semana do The Catholic Thing, em que Howard Kainz tece considerações sobre a atitude da Igreja Católica para com o Islão.

Spotlight, Templeton e dinheiro sujo

And the winner is...

Como já saberão o filme Spotlight venceu dois Oscares no domingo à noite. Ontem o Cardeal Sean O’Malley de Boston, a diocese retratada no filme, veio dizer que se trata de uma produção importante. Por cá, João Reis, dos Catholic Voices Portugal, também explica porque é que é importante os católicos prestarem atenção a filmes destes, mesmo que doa.

Esta quarta-feira o Papa disse que dispensa o dinheiro “sujo” de quem explora trabalhadores, numa audiência geral em que falou também do acolhimento dos refugiados e da misericórdia.

Já ontem, Francisco recebeu uma delegação da fundação Ajuda à Igreja que Sofre, a quem agradeceu o trabalho desenvolvido por esta organização.

O rabino britânico Jonathan Sacks venceu o prestigiado Prémio Templeton. Se não conhecem as suas obras, não percam tempo! Acabei de ler o último livro e é interessantíssimo.

O Estado Islâmico, que entretanto se entretém a executar os seus próprios militantes, está a proporcionar uma nova ideologia a milhares de europeus, considera um especialista espanhol.

Não deixem de ler o meu mais recente artigo sobre a Eutanásia, em que explico porque é que, não sendo nazis os que a defendem não podia ser mais nazi o conceito em si, e leiam também o artigo desta semana do The Catholic Thing, em que Howard Kainz questiona a atitude da Igreja Católica para com o Islão.

A Igreja e o Islão

Howard Kainz

O pastor evangélico Franklin Graham – filho do lendário Billy Graham – caracteriza o Islão como “uma religião cruel e muito má… uma religião de ódio, uma religião de guerra.” Ao longo dos últimos anos outros pastores conhecidos fizeram declarações semelhantes. Acontece que vários papas também.

No Século XIV Clemente V lamentou que em terras cristãs ainda se ouça a “invocação pública do nome sacrílego de Maomé”; no Século XV, Calisto III denunciou o Islão como sendo uma “seita diabólica”. Pio II criticou Maomé como “falso profeta” e o Papa Eugénio condenou a “seita abominável de Maomé”; no Século XVI o Papa Leão X disse que os muçulmanos tinham substituído a luz da salvação por uma “cegueira total e obstinada”; e no Século XVIII o Papa Bento XIV criticou os cristãos que promovem, indirectamente, “os erros de Maomé” quando adoptam nomes muçulmanos para evitar impostos ou outras penalizações por parte das autoridades islâmicas.

Também santos de séculos passados, como Tomás de Aquino ou João Damasceno, apelidaram o Islão de “diabólico”.

“Diabólico”? “Cruel”? Serão exageros? Muitos de nós conhecemos um bom número de muçulmanos individuais que são boas pessoas. Mas poderá ser que a sua religião seja má? Pode-se distinguir entre a bondade dos membros individuais e a sua religião?

O Papa Bento XVI toucou ao de leve na alegada “maldade” do Islão no seu famoso discurso de Ratisbona em 2006, sobre a necessidade de se unir a razão e a religião. Citou o exemplo de um imperador do Século XIV que descrevia o Islão como inerentemente violento e irracional, logo, mau. Isso provocou uma revolta mundial e vários episódios de violência, levando o então cardeal argentino Jorge Mario Bergoglio, futuro Papa, a comentar: “Essas afirmações servirão para destruir em vinte segundos a relação cuidadosamente construída com o Islão, ao longo dos últimos vinte anos, pelo Papa João Paulo II”. Acrescentou que tais declarações “não reflectem as minhas opiniões”.

E o que dizer dos relatos de atrocidades islâmicas, tanto no passado como no presente? A “World Watch List” de 2015 deu conta de 4.344 cristãos mortos por razões ligadas à fé e 1.062 igrejas atacadas. A lista de 2016 documenta casos de 7.106 mortes e 2.425 igrejas atacadas. Há literalmente milhares de casos de violência contra cristãos e destruição de igrejas no Egipto, Paquistão, Síria, Iraque, Irão, Indonésia, partes de África e noutros locais do mundo islâmico.

O Papa Francisco deve estar bem informado sobre tais eventos, mas na sua exortação apostólica “A Alegria do Evangelho”, diz que “frente a episódios de fundamentalismo violento que nos preocupam, o afecto pelos verdadeiros crentes do Islão deve levar-nos a evitar odiosas generalizações, porque o verdadeiro Islão e uma interpretação adequada do Alcorão opõem-se a toda a violência.”

Ao assumir esta posição Francisco, um “filho fiel da Igreja” está a ecoar o Concílio Vaticano II. No Concílio o Papa João XXIII, como parte do seu objectivo de “abrir as janelas da Igreja” pediu aos participantes para reconsiderarem a relação da Igreja com o Judaísmo, evitando as posições teológicas e litúrgicas que tinham um historial de contribuir para o anti-semitismo. Inicialmente não havia qualquer ideia de fazer pronunciamentos sobre o Islão; mas como já referi noutro artigo, alguns padres conciliares e teólogos no concílio queriam incluir o Islão em documentos oficiais sobre “religiões não-cristãs”.

Louis Massignon

Nisto pesou muito o trabalho de Louis Massignon (1883-1962), um católico especializado no Islão e pioneiro de esforços de compreensão mútua entre católicos e muçulmanos. Massignon ensinava que era preciso fazer uma “revolução copernicana” na nossa abordagem e compreensão do Islão. Devíamos colocar-nos no centro da mentalidade islâmica, compreender a sua espiritualidade e conduzir um diálogo a partir dessa perspectiva.  

Durante o Concílio um dos discípulos de Massignon, o teólogo dominicano egípcio Georges Anawati (1905-1994) liderou os esforços, juntamente com outros, para se incluir afirmações positivas sobre o Islão nos documentos oficiais. O sucesso deste grupo vê-se na Nostra Aetate e na Lumen Gentium, que contêm comentários laudatórios sobre o Islão: “Mas o desígnio da salvação estende-se também àqueles que reconhecem o Criador, entre os quais vêm em primeiro lugar os muçulmanos”, uma religião abraâmica e monoteísta, que se submetem de todo o coração aos “decretos, mesmo ocultos,” de Deus, partilhando muito com o Cristianismo no que diz respeito a crenças básicas e ensinamentos morais.

Mas tendo em conta o ódio para com outras religiões que se revela nas escrituras islâmicas, bem como o enorme número de assassinatos, incêndios de igrejas e perseguições que temos visto nas últimas décadas, será tudo isto apenas uma mão cheia de boas intenções? Na Igreja de hoje as condenações de aspectos evidentes do Islão são praticamente inexistentes.

O Papa Pio XI publicou o Mit brennender Sorge, uma crítica aberta ao regime nazi e o Divini redemptoris contra o comunismo. Já Pio XII optou por trabalhar de forma discreta mas persistente, durante o seu pontificado, para derrotar o nazismo e salvar judeus. O que teria acontecido se tivesse publicado uma condenação firme ao nazismo?

Durante o Concílio Vaticano II a União Soviética era um flagelo global e Nossa Senhora de Fátima, nas aparições extraordinárias que coincidiram com o início da revolução comunista, avisou a Igreja sobre o perigo de a Rússia “espalhar os seus erros através do mundo”. Mas, incrivelmente, não houve um só cheirinho de crítica ao comunismo no Concílio. E se Paulo VI tivesse condenado a União Soviética, o leninismo e o marxismo? A cautela diplomática deve influir nos pronunciamentos papais? Ou devíamos seguir o lema do Imperador do Sacro Império Romano, Fernando I, “Fiat justitia, pereat mundus”, seja feita a justiça, nem que o mundo pereça?

No que diz respeito ao Islão actualmente, uma condenação clara da religião, tal como foi feita pelos papas nos séculos passados, resultaria, podemos estar certos, em graves perturbações por todo o mundo – talvez uma Terceira Guerra Mundial. E uma condenação dessas poderia ainda afectar injustamente os muçulmanos moderados a par dos extremistas. Mas mesmo sem se condenar, os elogios constantes parecem-me descabidos. Quanto ao termo “religião da paz” é altura de ter em conta a interpretação tradicional de “paz” no Islão: O mundo encontra-se dividido em duas “casas” – a Casa da Paz (Dar Al-Salaam) e a Casa da Guerra (Dar Al-Harb). Na primeira, cabem apenas os muçulmanos.

Howard Kainz é professor emérito de Filosofia na Universidade de Marquette University. Os seus livros mais recentes incluem Natural Law: an Introduction and Reexamination (2004), The Philosophy of Human Nature (2008), e The Existence of God and the Faith-Instinct (2010)

(Publicado pela primeira vez em The Catholic Thing na Quarta-feira, 3 de Março de 2016)

© 2015 The Catholic Thing. Direitos reservados. Para os direitos de reprodução contacte:info@frinstitute.org

The Catholic Thing é um fórum de opinião católica inteligente. As opiniões expressas são da exclusiva responsabilidade dos seus autores. Este artigo aparece publicado em Actualidade Religiosa com o consentimento de The Catholic Thing.

Black and White no Vaticano

O Papa encontrou-se esta segunda-feira com o Patriarca da Igreja Ortodoxa da Etiópia, proporcionando fotos muito giras.

Um homem saudita de 28 anos foi condenado a 10 anos de cadeia e 2.000 chibatadas por promover o ateísmo.

Entretanto no Paquistão o ex-guarda-costas que assassinou Salman Taseer por este ter apoiado a cristã Asia Bibi, acusada de blasfémia, foi enforcado na madrugada de hoje. Houve manifestações contra a execução por parte de apoiantes.

O debate sobre a eutanásia continua a dar que falar, depois de a bastonária da ordem dos enfermeiros ter dito que esta já é praticada no SNS (apesar de depois ter vindo dizer que não disse, ouça você mesmo e decida).

Pela minha parte publico hoje mais um artigo sobre este assunto. Há quem acuse os defensores da eutanásia de serem nazis só porque foram os nazis os primeiros a legalizar a prática. Não, os pró-eutanásia não são nazis. Mas a eutanásia é, como explico.

Nota para quem tem crianças. Thereza Ameal escreveu o livro: “Lúcia – A vida da Pastorinha de Fátima”. Conheça melhor o projecto aqui.