Speakers find glimmers of light in Dominus
Iesus
By JOHN L. ALLEN JR.
NCR Staff Rome
At Romes Waldensian Theological University, located just
around the corner from the Vatican, an enormous mural dominates the main
lecture hall. It shows a single candle burning above the Latin inscription,
A light shining in the darkness. The irony is rarely lost on
visitors to this tiny Protestant island surrounded by a vast Catholic sea.
During an Oct. 27 and 28 conference hosted by the Waldensians in
reaction to Dominus Iesus, the recent Vatican document asserting that
followers of other religions suffer grave deficiencies, the candle
seemed an appropriate emblem, both for the smiles it evokes and for the
conferences aim of dispelling interfaith shadows cast by the tough new
Vatican line.
The gathering, brought together Jews, Muslims, Buddhists,
Protestants, Catholics, Orthodox and even a representative of Christian Science
to discuss Dominus Iesus. It was clear that Catholics are not of one
mind on the perils and promise of religious pluralism. This document was
an attempt to close doors, said Amos Luzzatto, president of Italys
Union of Jewish Communities. But I know that many other Catholics are
working to keep the doors open.
Recent events here seem to lend support to Luzzattos sense
of a tug-of-war in the church.
Bolognas Cardinal Giacomo Biffi created an uproar in
mid-September by asking Italian legislators to favor Catholics in immigration
policy, because Italys national and cultural history is based
on its Catholic identity. Speaking specifically of Islam, Biffi warned that
Europe must either recover its Christian roots or become Muslim.
At the conference, Luzzatto said he found this sort of talk
alarming, given that Italian fascists in the 1930s justified anti-Semitic
legislation on the basis of protecting the national culture.
The powerful Italian bishops conference sent another
negative interreligious signal in mid-October with a document warning Catholics
against using alternative medicines, especially Eastern techniques
such as acupuncture, hydrology and shiatsu, which stem from Asian religious and
philosophical traditions. The bishops warned that such traditions are not
compatible with the Catholic faith and sometimes are even accompanied by occult
practices.
Since the same theologians often advise both the Italian bishops
and the Vatican, the statement carries significance beyond Italys borders
as an indication of current thinking.
At the same time, however, other Catholics have made a special
point of reaching out to other religions in recent days. Cardinal Carlo Maria
Martini of Milan held an interfaith gathering in Milan Oct. 25, marking the
anniversary of John Pauls historic summit of religious leaders in Assisi
in 1986. Some 3,000 people gathered in Milan for a ceremony that involved 22
religious leaders in a joint moment of silence for peace.
Also in late October, Jesuit Fr. Giovanni Notari of the Gregorian
University, Romes most prestigious papal academy, announced that the
university will offer a new course of study in 2001. It will bring Muslims,
Buddhists, Shintoists and believers in other religions together with Catholics
to analyze possibilities in interreligious and intercultural
relations.
The fissures in the Catholic world also surfaced at the
conference, where Fr. Gianfranco Bottoni, Martinis expert on ecumenical
and interreligious relations in Milan, offered what seemed the most direct
criticism of Dominus Iesus. He said the documents timing was
inopportune and that it had been a mistake to mix
ecumenical issues with analysis of Christ and other religions.
A Jewish participant argued from the floor that contradictions in
Catholic thought are actually visible in the document itself. She noted that
Section 6 calls the divine mystery transcendent and inexhaustible,
yet insists that the revelation in Christ is complete. How can both be
true? she asked.
Perhaps the most interesting analysis from the Catholic side came
from Fr. Carlo Molari, a well-known Italian theologian and expert on interfaith
issues. Molari argued that while the immediate impression created by Dominus
Iesus was of a clampdown, in fact the document leaves doors open for
further theological development at several key points.
Molari noted that Section 14 of Dominus Iesus invited
theologians to ponder in what way the historical figures and positive
elements of these religions may fall within the divine plan of salvation.
Molari insisted that Catholics have to carry this idea forward,
because if other religions have a role in Gods plan for human salvation,
they are essential, and hence dialogue becomes a fundamental
component of the mission of the church.
Molari also argued that Catholics who favor inculturation, or
allowing local churches to express the faith in ways appropriate to their
culture, should welcome the insistence in Dominus Iesus that Christ is
the universal savior of all humanity. If Christ is universal, then the
church cannot take on just one culture, one historical context, Molari
said.
Molari then made a comparison unlikely to cheer the authors of
Dominus Iesus, suggesting that it resembles Paul VIs 1968
encyclical Humanae Vitae reasserting the churchs ban on birth
control.
It created a big controversy for 10 years, Molari
said, and then people started to pick up on parts of the text that left
the way open for further progress.
Several Muslim and Jewish speakers noted that contradictory
attitudes toward interreligious relations also divide their own traditions. In
the end, the mood was perhaps best expressed by Mahmoud Salem Elsheikh, a
Muslim who teaches at the University of Florence.
Religions dont dialogue, people do, day by day,
Elsheikh said. We need to worry less about what institutions are saying
and get on with it.
The e-mail address for John L. Allen Jr. is
jallen@natcath.org
National Catholic Reporter, November 10,
2000
|