The Pope . . . and Truth
It
is not every day that I agree with the Pope.
After
all, to say the least, we have several non-trivial theological
differences. There is also the matter of
the history of the Church, and its relationship with our people, and frankly,
many more matters than I can list in this essay.
Today,
however, I must say that I stand firmly with the Pope in a position that he
took last week.
While
many of my co-coreligionists may not be aware of it, on October 27, 2011 Pope
Benedict XVI invited some 300 religious leaders, and tellingly, some
non-religious leaders, to the city of St.
Francis to commemorate the twenty-fifth anniversary of
one of the signature achievements of his predecessor. John Paul II convened a “ World Day of Prayer
for Peace” on Oct. 27, 1986; an event that was part of that pontiff's historic
opening to other faiths, the legacy of which is now known as the "Spirit
of Assisi." During that event one
could witness, along with a traditional Catholic prayer, Zoroastrians tending a
sacred fire, Buddhists chanting to the
accompaniment of gongs and drums, and a Native American medicine man in
traditional headdress calling down the blessings of the "Great
Spirit" while smoking a peace pipe.
The event was immortalized by a picture showing all the various
religious leaders standing together in their distinctive dress under the great
banner of peace. This convocation was
one of the great moments in cementing John Paul's place as a great promoter of
peace, coming as it did shortly before the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Interestingly,
however, not all of the Pope's Catholic brethren were positively infused by the
"Spirit of Assisi." Several prominent leaders of the Catholic Church
split with Rome
because of it. One of the strongest critics was then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger,
head of the Vatican 's
doctrinal office, who told an interviewer that Assisi "cannot be the model" for
such encounters. The cardinal later wrote that "multi-religious
prayer" of the kind offered there "almost inevitably leads to false
interpretations, to indifference as to the content of what is believed or not
believed, and thus to the dissolution of real faith."
In
other words, to believe that all faiths have an equal claim on the truth – that
in fact truth is a relative concept and there is no one absolute ultimate truth
– is to strip one's faith of any real content by giving equal validity and
credence to mutually exclusive points of view.
One cannot believe that the Christian Savior was the son of God, and at
the same time offer full validity to those who deny this claim; One cannot
accept Mohammed as a true prophet bringing a new truth to the world, while at
the same time rejecting his teachings as inconsistent with G-d's law, and so on
and so forth, if there is to be any real content to one's faith. As Cardinal Ratzinger wrote, he wished to
"make clear that there is no such thing . . . as a common concept of God
or belief in God, that difference not merely exists in the realm of changing
images and concepts" but in the substance of what different religions
claim." A seemingly obvious position, but
one that is rejected by much of the intelligentsia of the Western world, who
believe in moral relativism and the absence of an objective truth about G-d and
the universe.
Now
that Cardinal Ratzinger is known to the world as Pope Benedict XVI, he found
himself in a bit of a dilemma in squaring his beliefs with the honor that he
owed his beloved predecessor, recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize for his works
of Peace; including peace between and among the various faiths.
The
pope's solution was ingenious. Rather
than advertising this day as being about a “ Prayer for Peace”, the day was
advertised as a “Day of Reflection, Dialogue and Prayer for Peace and Justice in
the World”. Invited to participate were
not only religious leaders but agnostics who are seekers of Truth, and in fact
the pontiff devoted his concluding remarks to welcoming them and joining with
them in Unity. The various invocations
were not “prayers” so much as calls for a united stand for peace and against
war and terrorism, acknowledging that in our world today there are those who,
most unfortunately, kill in the name of religion as well as those who target
people of faith.
To
those listening carefully, this was masterful diplomacy in which: the cause of
Peace was truly honored, respect was shown to those who practice a great
variety of faiths, while at the same
time avoiding any joint prayer or acknowledgment of the truth of those other
beliefs.
As
we now begin the study of our Patriarch Avraham with the onset of Parshiot Lech
Lecha through Chayei Sarah, we see lehavdil, a similar tension.
On
the one hand, Avraham Avinu, through the force of his kindness, courage, and
integrity was universally acknowledged as a Prince of G-d among men, a beacon of light admired by all
(see Bereishis 14:18-21, and more so,
23:6). He more than held his own with
the Kings of Sodom, the Emperor Nimrod, Abimelech, and the Pharaoh, all of whom
had different beliefs than did he, and garnered their respect for the
Almighty. He sought good for all
mankind, praying even that G-d spare the
presumably atheistic and depraved society of Sodom
& Gomorrah .
Yet
on the other hand, Avraham is also known as Avraham HaIvri (Abraham the
Hebrew), which according to our Tradition means: Avraham was the one who stood to one side
against the whole world. Living in the
midst of their pagan and polytheistic, and even atheistic cults (the Tower of Babel was a formative experience of his
youth), Avraham stood tall for his monotheistic belief system and was even
thrown into a fiery furnace rather than recognizing the idolatrous cult of
Nimrod as the relative truth.
Avraham's
life is a testament to the importance of being able to live and proudly
proclaim the unique truth of one's faith while garnering the respect and
admiration of all the people of his time, very much including the religious
leaders.
So
kudos to the Pope. While I strongly
disagree with his religious views, I salute him for his honesty in not
pretending that he agrees with mine, and allowing us to hold each other in
mutual respect.