An Iraqi insurgent group threatened the Vatican with a suicide attack over the pope’s remarks on Islam, according to a statement posted Saturday on the Web.

“We swear to God to send you people who adore death as much as you adore life,” said the message posted in the name of the Mujahedeen Army on a Web site frequently used by militant groups. The message’s authenticity could not be independently verified. The statement was addressed to “you dog of Rome” and threatens to “shake your thrones and break your crosses in your home.”

The lecture that has elicited so much negativity

from the Muslim world

APOSTOLIC JOURNEY OF HIS HOLINESS BENEDICT XVI TO MÜNCHEN, ALTÖTTING AND REGENSBURG (SEPTEMBER 9-14, 2006)

MEETING WITH THE REPRESENTATIVES OF SCIENCE
LECTURE OF THE HOLY FATHER
Aula Magna of the University of RegensburgTuesday, 12 September 2006

Faith, Reason and the UniversityMemories and Reflections

Your Eminences, Your Magnificences, Your Excellencies,Distinguished Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is a moving experience for me to be back again in the university and to be able once again to give a lecture at this podium. I think back to those years when, after a pleasant period at the Freisinger Hochschule, I began teaching at the University of Bonn. That was in 1959, in the days of the old university made up of ordinary professors. The various chairs had neither assistants nor secretaries, but in recompense there was much direct contact with students and in particular among the professors themselves. We would meet before and after lessons in the rooms of the teaching staff. There was a lively exchange with historians, philosophers, philologists and, naturally, between the two theological faculties. Once a semester there was a dies academicus, when professors from every faculty appeared before the students of the entire university, making possible a genuine experience of universitas - something that you too, Magnificent Rector, just mentioned - the experience, in other words, of the fact that despite our specializations which at times make it difficult to communicate with each other, we made up a whole, working in everything on the basis of a single rationality with its various aspects and sharing responsibility for the right use of reason - this reality became a lived experience. The university was also very proud of its two theological faculties. It was clear that, by inquiring about the reasonableness of faith, they too carried out a work which is necessarily part of the "whole" of the universitas scientiarum, even if not everyone could share the faith which theologians seek to correlate with reason as a whole. This profound sense of coherence within the universe of reason was not troubled, even when it was once reported that a colleague had said there was something odd about our university: it had two faculties devoted to something that did not exist: God. That even in the face of such radical scepticism it is still necessary and reasonable to raise the question of God through the use of reason, and to do so in the context of the tradition of the Christian faith: this, within the university as a whole, was accepted without question.

I was reminded of all this recently, when I read the edition by Professor Theodore Khoury (Münster) of part of the dialogue carried on - perhaps in 1391 in the winter barracks near Ankara - by the erudite Byzantine emperor Manuel II Paleologus and an educated Persian on the subject of Christianity and Islam, and the truth of both. It was presumably the emperor himself who set down this dialogue, during the siege of Constantinople between 1394 and 1402; and this would explain why his arguments are given in greater detail than those of his Persian interlocutor. The dialogue ranges widely over the structures of faith contained in the Bible and in the Qur'an, and deals especially with the image of God and of man, while necessarily returning repeatedly to the relationship between - as they were called - three "Laws" or "rules of life": the Old Testament, the New Testament and the Qur'an. It is not my intention to discuss this question in the present lecture; here I would like to discuss only one point - itself rather marginal to the dialogue as a whole - which, in the context of the issue of "faith and reason", I found interesting and which can serve as the starting-point for my reflections on this issue.

In the seventh conversation (*4V8,>4H - controversy) edited by Professor Khoury, the emperor touches on the theme of the holy war. The emperor must have known that surah 2, 256 reads: "There is no compulsion in religion". According to the experts, this is one of the suras of the early period, when Mohammed was still powerless and under threat. But naturally the emperor also knew the instructions, developed later and recorded in the Qur'an, concerning holy war. Without descending to details, such as the difference in treatment accorded to those who have the "Book" and the "infidels", he addresses his interlocutor with a startling brusqueness on the central question about the relationship between religion and violence in general, saying: "Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached". The emperor, after having expressed himself so forcefully, goes on to explain in detail the reasons why spreading the faith through violence is something unreasonable. Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul. "God", he says, "is not pleased by blood - and not acting reasonably (F×<>

The decisive statement in this argument against violent conversion is this: not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to God's nature. The editor, Theodore Khoury, observes: For the emperor, as a Byzantine shaped by Greek philosophy, this statement is self-evident. But for Muslim teaching, God is absolutely transcendent. His will is not bound up with any of our categories, even that of rationality. Here Khoury quotes a work of the noted French Islamist R. Arnaldez, who points out that Ibn Hazn went so far as to state that God is not bound even by his own word, and that nothing would oblige him to reveal the truth to us. Were it God's will, we would even have to practise idolatry.

At this point, as far as understanding of God and thus the concrete practice of religion is concerned, we are faced with an unavoidable dilemma. Is the conviction that acting unreasonably contradicts God's nature merely a Greek idea, or is it always and intrinsically true? I believe that here we can see the profound harmony between what is Greek in the best sense of the word and the biblical understanding of faith in God. Modifying the first verse of the Book of Genesis, the first verse of the whole Bible, John began the prologue of his Gospel with the words: "In the beginning was the 8`(@H". This is the very word used by the emperor: God acts, F×<>

In all honesty, one must observe that in the late Middle Ages we find trends in theology which would sunder this synthesis between the Greek spirit and the Christian spirit. In contrast with the so-called intellectualism of Augustine and Thomas, there arose with Duns Scotus a voluntarism which, in its later developments, led to the claim that we can only know God's voluntas ordinata. Beyond this is the realm of God's freedom, in virtue of which he could have done the opposite of everything he has actually done. This gives rise to positions which clearly approach those of Ibn Hazn and might even lead to the image of a capricious God, who is not even bound to truth and goodness. God's transcendence and otherness are so exalted that our reason, our sense of the true and good, are no longer an authentic mirror of God, whose deepest possibilities remain eternally unattainable and hidden behind his actual decisions. As opposed to this, the faith of the Church has always insisted that between God and us, between his eternal Creator Spirit and our created reason there exists a real analogy, in which - as the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 stated - unlikeness remains infinitely greater than likeness, yet not to the point of abolishing analogy and its language. God does not become more divine when we push him away from us in a sheer, impenetrable voluntarism; rather, the truly divine God is the God who has revealed himself as logos and, as logos, has acted and continues to act lovingly on our behalf. Certainly, love, as Saint Paul says, "transcends" knowledge and is thereby capable of perceiving more than thought alone (cf. Eph 3:19); nonetheless it continues to be love of the God who is Logos. Consequently, Christian worship is, again to quote Paul - "8@(46¬ 8"JD,\"", worship in harmony with the eternal Word and with our reason (cf. Rom 12:1).

This inner rapprochement between Biblical faith and Greek philosophical inquiry was an event of decisive importance not only from the standpoint of the history of religions, but also from that of world history - it is an event which concerns us even today. Given this convergence, it is not surprising that Christianity, despite its origins and some significant developments in the East, finally took on its historically decisive character in Europe. We can also express this the other way around: this convergence, with the subsequent addition of the Roman heritage, created Europe and remains the foundation of what can rightly be called Europe.

The thesis that the critically purified Greek heritage forms an integral part of Christian faith has been countered by the call for a dehellenization of Christianity - a call which has more and more dominated theological discussions since the beginning of the modern age. Viewed more closely, three stages can be observed in the programme of dehellenization: although interconnected, they are clearly distinct from one another in their motivations and objectives.

Dehellenization first emerges in connection with the postulates of the Reformation in the sixteenth century. Looking at the tradition of scholastic theology, the Reformers thought they were confronted with a faith system totally conditioned by philosophy, that is to say an articulation of the faith based on an alien system of thought. As a result, faith no longer appeared as a living historical Word but as one element of an overarching philosophical system. The principle of sola scriptura, on the other hand, sought faith in its pure, primordial form, as originally found in the biblical Word. Metaphysics appeared as a premise derived from another source, from which faith had to be liberated in order to become once more fully itself. When Kant stated that he needed to set thinking aside in order to make room for faith, he carried this programme forward with a radicalism that the Reformers could never have foreseen. He thus anchored faith exclusively in practical reason, denying it access to reality as a whole.

The liberal theology of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries ushered in a second stage in the process of dehellenization, with Adolf von Harnack as its outstanding representative. When I was a student, and in the early years of my teaching, this programme was highly influential in Catholic theology too. It took as its point of departure Pascal's distinction between the God of the philosophers and the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. In my inaugural lecture at Bonn in 1959, I tried to address the issue, and I do not intend to repeat here what I said on that occasion, but I would like to describe at least briefly what was new about this second stage of dehellenization. Harnack's central idea was to return simply to the man Jesus and to his simple message, underneath the accretions of theology and indeed of hellenization: this simple message was seen as the culmination of the religious development of humanity. Jesus was said to have put an end to worship in favour of morality. In the end he was presented as the father of a humanitarian moral message. Fundamentally, Harnack's goal was to bring Christianity back into harmony with modern reason, liberating it, that is to say, from seemingly philosophical and theological elements, such as faith in Christ's divinity and the triune God. In this sense, historical-critical exegesis of the New Testament, as he saw it, restored to theology its place within the university: theology, for Harnack, is something essentially historical and therefore strictly scientific. What it is able to say critically about Jesus is, so to speak, an expression of practical reason and consequently it can take its rightful place within the university. Behind this thinking lies the modern self-limitation of reason, classically expressed in Kant's "Critiques", but in the meantime further radicalized by the impact of the natural sciences. This modern concept of reason is based, to put it briefly, on a synthesis between Platonism (Cartesianism) and empiricism, a synthesis confirmed by the success of technology. On the one hand it presupposes the mathematical structure of matter, its intrinsic rationality, which makes it possible to understand how matter works and use it efficiently: this basic premise is, so to speak, the Platonic element in the modern understanding of nature. On the other hand, there is nature's capacity to be exploited for our purposes, and here only the possibility of verification or falsification through experimentation can yield ultimate certainty. The weight between the two poles can, depending on the circumstances, shift from one side to the other. As strongly positivistic a thinker as J. Monod has declared himself a convinced Platonist/Cartesian.

This gives rise to two principles which are crucial for the issue we have raised. First, only the kind of certainty resulting from the interplay of mathematical and empirical elements can be considered scientific. Anything that would claim to be science must be measured against this criterion. Hence the human sciences, such as history, psychology, sociology and philosophy, attempt to conform themselves to this canon of scientificity. A second point, which is important for our reflections, is that by its very nature this method excludes the question of God, making it appear an unscientific or pre-scientific question. Consequently, we are faced with a reduction of the radius of science and reason, one which needs to be questioned.

I will return to this problem later. In the meantime, it must be observed that from this standpoint any attempt to maintain theology's claim to be "scientific" would end up reducing Christianity to a mere fragment of its former self. But we must say more: if science as a whole is this and this alone, then it is man himself who ends up being reduced, for the specifically human questions about our origin and destiny, the questions raised by religion and ethics, then have no place within the purview of collective reason as defined by "science", so understood, and must thus be relegated to the realm of the subjective. The subject then decides, on the basis of his experiences, what he considers tenable in matters of religion, and the subjective "conscience" becomes the sole arbiter of what is ethical. In this way, though, ethics and religion lose their power to create a community and become a completely personal matter. This is a dangerous state of affairs for humanity, as we see from the disturbing pathologies of religion and reason which necessarily erupt when reason is so reduced that questions of religion and ethics no longer concern it. Attempts to construct an ethic from the rules of evolution or from psychology and sociology, end up being simply inadequate.

Before I draw the conclusions to which all this has been leading, I must briefly refer to the third stage of dehellenization, which is now in progress. In the light of our experience with cultural pluralism, it is often said nowadays that the synthesis with Hellenism achieved in the early Church was a preliminary inculturation which ought not to be binding on other cultures. The latter are said to have the right to return to the simple message of the New Testament prior to that inculturation, in order to inculturate it anew in their own particular milieux. This thesis is not only false; it is coarse and lacking in precision. The New Testament was written in Greek and bears the imprint of the Greek spirit, which had already come to maturity as the Old Testament developed. True, there are elements in the evolution of the early Church which do not have to be integrated into all cultures. Nonetheless, the fundamental decisions made about the relationship between faith and the use of human reason are part of the faith itself; they are developments consonant with the nature of faith itself.

And so I come to my conclusion. This attempt, painted with broad strokes, at a critique of modern reason from within has nothing to do with putting the clock back to the time before the Enlightenment and rejecting the insights of the modern age. The positive aspects of modernity are to be acknowledged unreservedly: we are all grateful for the marvellous possibilities that it has opened up for mankind and for the progress in humanity that has been granted to us. The scientific ethos, moreover, is - as you yourself mentioned, Magnificent Rector - the will to be obedient to the truth, and, as such, it embodies an attitude which belongs to the essential decisions of the Christian spirit. The intention here is not one of retrenchment or negative criticism, but of broadening our concept of reason and its application. While we rejoice in the new possibilities open to humanity, we also see the dangers arising from these possibilities and we must ask ourselves how we can overcome them. We will succeed in doing so only if reason and faith come together in a new way, if we overcome the self-imposed limitation of reason to the empirically verifiable, and if we once more disclose its vast horizons. In this sense theology rightly belongs in the university and within the wide-ranging dialogue of sciences, not merely as a historical discipline and one of the human sciences, but precisely as theology, as inquiry into the rationality of faith.

Only thus do we become capable of that genuine dialogue of cultures and religions so urgently needed today. In the Western world it is widely held that only positivistic reason and the forms of philosophy based on it are universally valid. Yet the world's profoundly religious cultures see this exclusion of the divine from the universality of reason as an attack on their most profound convictions. A reason which is deaf to the divine and which relegates religion into the realm of subcultures is incapable of entering into the dialogue of cultures. At the same time, as I have attempted to show, modern scientific reason with its intrinsically Platonic element bears within itself a question which points beyond itself and beyond the possibilities of its methodology. Modern scientific reason quite simply has to accept the rational structure of matter and the correspondence between our spirit and the prevailing rational structures of nature as a given, on which its methodology has to be based. Yet the question why this has to be so is a real question, and one which has to be remanded by the natural sciences to other modes and planes of thought - to philosophy and theology. For philosophy and, albeit in a different way, for theology, listening to the great experiences and insights of the religious traditions of humanity, and those of the Christian faith in particular, is a source of knowledge, and to ignore it would be an unacceptable restriction of our listening and responding. Here I am reminded of something Socrates said to Phaedo. In their earlier conversations, many false philosophical opinions had been raised, and so Socrates says: "It would be easily understandable if someone became so annoyed at all these false notions that for the rest of his life he despised and mocked all talk about being - but in this way he would be deprived of the truth of existence and would suffer a great loss". The West has long been endangered by this aversion to the questions which underlie its rationality, and can only suffer great harm thereby. The courage to engage the whole breadth of reason, and not the denial of its grandeur - this is the programme with which a theology grounded in Biblical faith enters into the debates of our time. "Not to act reasonably, not to act with logos, is contrary to the nature of God", said Manuel II, according to his Christian understanding of God, in response to his Persian interlocutor. It is to this great logos, to this breadth of reason, that we invite our partners in the dialogue of cultures. To rediscover it constantly is the great task of the university.

***
NOTE:
The Holy Father intends to supply a subsequent version of this text, complete with footnotes. The present text must therefore be considered provisional.

© Copyright 2006 - Libreria Editrice Vaticana

Experts say pope's 'jihad' remarks signal greater push into Islam's internal struggles
Updated 9/15/2006 By Brian Murphy, Associated Press

Pope Benedict XVI's comments on religious radicalism are another sign of his intention to bring his voice into one of the world's most critical showdowns: Islam's internal struggles between moderates and extremists. The remarks — tucked into an address at a German university where he formerly taught theology — were interpreted by many experts in interfaith relations as a signal that the Vatican is staking a new and more demanding stance for its dealings with the Muslim world.

Benedict, they say, appears to increasingly view the West's confrontation with radical Islam as a fateful moment in history that demands the Vatican's moral authority — just as his predecessor, John Paul II, reshaped the dimensions of the papacy by openly taking sides in the Cold War.
The risk for the Vatican is whether it will be perceived in the Muslim world as part of a broader Western cultural and political campaign against Islam.

"We have seen a hard line from this pope," said Ali El-Samman, president of the interfaith committee for Egypt's High Islamic Council. "It's a disappointment for many Muslims. But just because we are disappointed in a pope doesn't mean we are against all Christians."
The Vatican said Benedict did not intend the remarks to be offensive and sought to draw attention to the incompatibility of faith and violence.

The pope quoted from a book recounting a conversation between 14th-century Byzantine Christian Emperor Manuel Paleologos II and a Persian scholar on the truths of Christianity and Islam.

"The emperor comes to speak about the issue of jihad, holy war," the pope said. "He said, I quote, 'Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.'"
Benedict, who is supposed to visit Turkey this fall in his first trip to a Muslim nation, did not explicitly agree with the words nor did he repudiate them.

In the backlash, some of the more subtle — yet potentially far-reaching — references have been overshadowed.

The speech suggested deep dismay over the current conditions of Christians in the Middle East and the rest of the Muslim world, said John Voll, director of the Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University in Washington.

"This reflects the intention of Pope Benedict to distinguish himself from his predecessor on his approach to interfaith dialogue," said Voll. "And by this, it means more reciprocity."
Voll said the pope may increasingly instruct Vatican envoys to stress issues of forced conversions of Christians and limits on Christian rights and worship.

"It's the next step after John Paul began opening doors" with historic pilgrimages to Muslim nations, including a visit to a Syrian mosque in 2001, Voll said.

As John Paul's chief watchdog on Roman Catholic doctrine, Benedict — then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger — had little role in shaping the Vatican's contact with Islam and other faiths.
Some experts say Benedit's theological scholarship gives him an affinity for Orthodox churches and Judaism because of many shared traditions and holy texts, but leaves him less equipped to deal with Islam at a time when suspicions dominate relations between the West and Muslim world.

The speech, some say, shows the pontiff intends to carry on with his strong defense of the values of the Christian West rather than compromise for the sake of building bonds with Islam.
"They went to the speech expecting to meet Pope Benedict, but instead they met Professor Ratzinger," said the Rev. Khalil Samir, a Vatican envoy for interfaith links in Lebanon.
In July 2005, about two months after assuming the papacy, Benedict was asked if he considered Islam a religion of peace. He said: "Certainly there are elements that favor peace. It also has other elements."

The Rev. Robert Taft, a specialist in Islamic affairs at Rome's Pontifical Oriental Institute, said it was unlikely the pope miscalculated how some Muslims would receive his speech.
"The message he is sending is very, very clear," Taft said. "Violence in the name of faith is never acceptable in any religion and that (the pope) considers it his duty to challenge Islam and anyone else on this."

I suppose it was inevitable that Holy Father would get this sort of reaction. I was really hoping the muslim world leaders would pay better attention. Unfortunately, humankind continues to hear things through a filter and their world is just as guilt as ours.



Muslims Condemn Pope’s Remarks on Islam
By IAN FISHER
Published: September 15, 2006

ROME, Sept. 14 — As Pope Benedict XVI arrived back home from Germany, Muslim leaders on Thursday strongly criticized a speech he had given using unflattering language about Islam.
Some of the strongest words came from Turkey, possibly putting in jeopardy Benedict’s plan to visit there in November.

“I do not think any good will come from the visit to the Muslim world of a person who has such ideas about Islam’s prophet,” Ali Bardakoglu, a cleric and chief of the Turkish government’s directorate of religious affairs, said in a television interview there. “He should first of all replace the grudge in his heart with moral values and respect for the other.”

Muslim leaders in Pakistan, Morocco and Kuwait, in addition to some in Germany and France, were also critical, with many demanding an apology or clarification. The extent of anger about the speech may become clearer on Friday, the Muslim day of prayer, in which grievances are often vented publicly.

As the criticisms gathered force, the Vatican worked quickly to snuff out a potentially damaging confrontation with Muslims. It issued a statement saying the Roman Catholic Church sought to “cultivate an attitude of respect and dialogue toward other religions and cultures, and obviously also toward Islam.”

The statement, from the pope’s chief spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, said, “It should be said that what is important to the pope is a clear and radical rejection of the religious motivation of violence.”
He added, “It was certainly not the intention of the Holy Father to do an in-depth study of jihad and Muslim thinking in this field and still less so to hurt the feelings of Muslim believers.”
The remarks came on Tuesday, when Benedict delivered a major address — which some church experts say was a defining speech of his pontificate — saying the West, and specifically Europe, had become so beholden to reason that it had closed God out of public life, science and academia.
But he began that speech, at Regensburg University, with what he conceded were “brusque” words about Islam: He quoted a 14th-century Byzantine emperor as saying, “Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”

The pope also used the word jihad, or holy war, saying violence was contrary to God’s nature and to reason.

But, at the end of a speech that did not otherwise mention Islam, he also said that reason could be the basis for “that genuine dialogue of cultures and religions so urgently needed today.”
Father Lombardi said Tuesday that the pope did not intend to insult Islam. But many experts on Islam warned that Benedict ran the risk of offense in using such strong language, especially with tensions between religions so high.

On Thursday, the criticism began flowing the way of the 79-year-old Benedict, who has taken a more skeptical, hard-nosed approach to Islam than did his predecessor, John Paul II, who died in April 2005.

“I don’t think the church should point a finger at extremist activities in other religions,” Aiman Mazyek, president of the Central Council of Muslims in Germany, was quoted as saying in the newspaper Sueddeutsche Zeitung on Thursday, pointedly recalling the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition and the Vatican’s relations with Nazi Germany.

The French Council for the Muslim Religion demanded that Benedict clarify his remarks. “We hope that the church will very quickly give us its opinion and clarify its position so that it does not confuse Islam, which is a revealed religion, with Islamism, which is not a religion but a political ideology,” Dalil Boubakeur, the council’s president, told Agence France-Press.
In Kuwait, the leader of the Islamic Nation Party, Haken al-Mutairi, demanded an apology for what he called “unaccustomed and unprecedented” remarks.

“I call on all Arab and Islamic states to recall their ambassadors from the Vatican,’’ Mr. Mutairi told A.F.P., until the pope “says he is sorry for the wrong done to the prophet and to Islam, which preaches peace, tolerance, justice and equality.”

In Pakistan, Muslim leaders and scholars said Benedict’s words widened the gap between Islam and Christianity, and risked what one official called greater “disharmony.”

“The pope’s statement is highly irresponsible,” said Javed Ahmed Ghamdi, another ranking Muslim, and an Islamic scholar, in Pakistan. “The concept of jihad is not to spread Islam with the sword.”

The criticism from Mr. Bardakoglu, the Islamic leader in Turkey, was especially strong, and carried with it the prospect of particular embarrassment if Benedict were forced to cancel or delay his visit to Turkey. Many Turks are already critical of Benedict, who as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger in 2004 opposed Turkey’s entry to the European Union.

In Morocco, the newspaper Aujourd’hui le Maroc questioned whether Benedict’s call for dialogue between religions was made in good faith. “Pope Benedict XVI has a strange approach to the dialogue between religions,” an editorial said. “He is being provocative.”
The paper also drew a comparison between the pope’s remarks and the outcry in the Muslim world over unflattering cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad published around Europe beginning last year. “The global outcry over the calamitous cartoons has only just died down and now the pontiff, in all his holiness, is launching an attack against Islam,” the newspaper wrote.

Jihad is contrary to God's plan, pope says By Ian Fisher The New York Times
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 2006
REGENSBURG, Germany

Pope Benedict XVI weighed in Tuesday on the delicate issue of rapport between Islam and the West: He said that violence, embodied in the Muslim idea of jihad, or holy war, is contrary to reason and God's plan, while the West was so beholden to reason that Islam could not understand it.

Nonetheless, in a complex treatise delivered at the university here where he once taught, he suggested reason as a common ground for a "genuine dialogue of cultures and religions so urgently needed today."

In all, the speech seemed to reflect the Vatican's struggle over how to confront Islam and terrorism, as the 79-year-old pope pursues what is often considered a more provocative, hard-nosed and skeptical approach to Islam than his predecessor, John Paul II.

As such, it distilled many of Benedict's longstanding concerns, about the crisis of faith among Christians and about Islam and its relationship to violence.

And he used language open to interpretations that could inflame Muslims, at a time of high tension among religions and three months before he makes a trip to Turkey.

He began his speech, which ran over half an hour, by quoting a 14th-century Byzantine emperor, Manuel II Paleologus, in a conversation with a "learned Persian" on Christianity and Islam - "and the truth of both."

"Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread the sword by the faith he preached," the pope quoted the emperor, in a speech to 1,500 students and faculty.

He went on to say that violent conversion to Islam was contrary to reason and thus "contrary to God's nature."

But the section on Islam made up just three paragraphs of the speech, and he devoted the rest to a long examination of how Western science and philosophy had divorced themselves from faith - leading to the secularization of European society that is at the heart of Benedict's worries.
This, he said, has closed off the West from a full understanding of reality, making it also impossible to talk with cultures for whom faith is fundamental.

"The world's profoundly religious cultures see this exclusion from the divine, from the universality of reason as an attack on their most profound convictions," he said. "A reason which is deaf to the divine and which relegates religion into the realm of subcultures is incapable of entering into the dialogue of cultures."

Several experts on the Catholic Church and Islam agreed that the speech - in which Benedict made clear he was quoting other sources on Islam - did not appear to be a major statement on, or condemnation of, Islam. The chief concern, they said, was the West's exclusion of religion from the realm of reason.

Still, they said that the strong words he used in describing Islam, even that of the 14th century, ran the risk of offense.

Renzo Guolo, a professor of the sociology of religion at the University of Padua, who often writes about the church and Islam, said he was struck by the suggestion of Islam as distant from reason.
"This is maybe the strongest criticism because he doesn't speak of fundamentalist Islam but of Islam generally," he said, "Not all Islam, thank God, is fundamentalist."

The Rev. Daniel A. Madigan, rector of the Institute for the Study of Religions and Cultures at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome, said the central point was that "if we are really going into a serious dialogue with Muslims we need to take faith seriously."

But, he said of the quote from the emperor, "You clearly take a risk using an example like that."
Marco Politi, the Vatican expert for the Italian newspaper La Repubblica, said that "the text reveals his deep mistrust regarding the aggressive side of Islam."

"Certainly he closes the door to an idea which was very dear to John Paul II - the idea that Christians, Jews and Muslims have the same God and have to pray together to the same God," he said.

The speech was a central moment in Benedict's six-day trip home to visit Bavaria, where he grew up, became a priest, a prominent theologian and, finally, a cardinal. Earlier in the day, at an outdoor Mass here attended by some 250,000 people, he expressed similar concerns as in the speech, urging believers to stand up against the "hatred and fanaticism" that he said were tarnishing the image of God.

Again, this critique seemed aimed as much at secular Western society as at any other threat.
"Today, when we have learned to recognize the pathologies and life-threatening diseases associated with religion and reason, and the ways that God's image can be destroyed by hatred and fanaticism, it is important to state clearly the God in whom we believe," the pope said.
"Only this can free us from being afraid of God - which is ultimately at the root of modern atheism," he said. "Only this God saves us from being afraid of the world and from anxiety before the emptiness of life."

The speech at the university was the only significant secular event in a schedule packed with Masses, evening prayers and other religious occasions aimed at Catholics in Germany, where regular Mass attendance has plummeted to under 15 percent.

That low number is connected directly to many of Benedict's long-expressed concerns about Islam. He often urges people not to forget the Christian roots of a Europe waith fewer practicing Christians and more Muslim immigrants, over four million here in Germany alone.

The Rev. Federico Lombardi, the chief Vatican spokesman, said that Benedict's comments were not meant as any statement on Islam, but only as a small example, at the beginning of four tightly packed pages of text, of his argument of the dangers of the separation of reason and religion.

"I believe that everyone understands, even inside Islam, there are many different positions, and there are many positions that aren't violent," Father Lombardi said. "Here, certainly, the pope doesn't want to give a lesson, let's say, an interpretation of Islam, as violent.

"He is saying, in the case of a violent interpretation of religion, we are in a contradiction with the nature of God and the nature of the soul," he said.

In the weeks after John Paul's death in April 2005, Islam and how to confront terrorism seemed key issues in the selection of a new pope. As a candidate, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who took the name Benedict after his election, embodied the more skeptical school inside the Vatican.
Unlike John Paul, Cardinal Ratzinger did not approve of joint prayers with Muslims and was skeptical of the value of interreligious dialogue, with a faith of many shadings and few representative leaders to speak with.

In 2004, he caused a stir by opposing membership in the European Union for Turkey, saying that it "always represented another continent throughout history, in permanent contrast with Europe." He has not repeated this opinion since he became pope, and he is scheduled to visit there in November.

Once he became pope, Benedict's new approach was apparent quickly: in his first trip outside Italy, he met with Muslim leaders in Cologne, Germany, and politely but clearly told them they had the responsibility to teach their children against terrorism, which he called "the darkness of a new barbarism." He said Catholics and Muslims had the obligation to meet and to overcome differences.

At the end of that summer, he devoted an annual weekend of study with former graduate students to Islam. In that meeting, and since, he has reportedly expressed skepticism about Islam's openness to change, given its view of the Koran as the unchangeable word of God.
As such, and despite Benedict's call for dialogue in the speech on Tuesday, several experts said they did not expect much real progress under Benedict in bridging the gap between Christians and Muslims.

"I expect that he will not push us very far in the way of dialogue," said Guolo, the Padua professor. "He has too many doubts."

National Catholic Reporter, September 8, 2006

Benedict's evolving thought on evolution
By JOHN L. ALLEN JR.

Presumably, Pope Benedict XVI asked his Schülerkreis, the circle of his former doctoral students, to discuss “Creation and Evolution” during the group’s annual meeting this month at Castel Gandolfo, Italy, because he wants to consult theologians, philosophers and natural scientists before addressing the subject -- if, indeed, he feels the need to say anything, a point which remains to be seen.

The fact the pope wants to hear from others, however, by no means implies that he lacks ideas of his own. Over the years, Joseph Ratzinger has wrestled with the theory of evolution in books, articles, lectures and interviews, including a 1990 book-length commentary on the Genesis creation stories.

Whether that past will be prologue to anything Benedict does as pope is still unclear, but these sources, examined at length by NCR in recent weeks, at least provide a picture of his approach.

What do they reveal?

First, Benedict XVI is not a “creationist.” He does not advocate a strictly literal reading of Genesis, nor has he ever made reference to teaching “creation science” in schools. A member of the prestigious secular French Académie des Sciences Morales et Politiques (inducted in 1993 along with then-Czech President Vaclav Havel as one of only 12 foreign nationals), Pope Benedict has no desire to launch a crusade against modern science.

Nor is Benedict XVI really an advocate of “intelligent design” in the American sense, since intelligent design theorists typically assert that data from biology and other empirical sciences, by itself, requires the hypothesis of a designer. Benedict may have some sympathy for this view; he has questioned the evidence for “macro-evolution,” meaning the transition from one species to another on the basis of random mutation and natural selection.

Ultimately, however, he sees this as a debate for scientists to resolve.

His concern cuts deeper, to what he sees as the tendency to convert evolution into “a universal theory concerning all reality,” improperly transposing Darwin from the scientific to the philosophical realm. Such a worldview, Benedict believes, excludes God, and therefore excludes rationality, as the basis of existence. In contrast, the pope insists upon the fundamental conviction of Christian faith: “ In principio erat Verbum -- at the beginning of all things stands the creative power of reason.”

Benedict acknowledges that this question “can no longer be decided by arguments from natural science.”

Beyond these essentials, one can outline the pope’s thinking in terms of four concepts.

Whatever the findings of the natural sciences, they will not contradict Christian faith, since ultimately the truth is one.

This confidence is expressed in Ratzinger’s 1990 book, In the Beginning: A Catholic Understanding of the Story of Creation and the Fall.

“What response shall we make to this view [evolution]?” he asked. “It is the affair of the natural sciences to explain how the tree of life in particular continues to grow, and how new branches shoot out from it. This is not a matter for faith. … More reflective spirits have long been aware that there is no either-or here. We cannot say: ‘creation or evolution,’ inasmuch as these two things respond to two different realities. … The theory of evolution seeks to understand and describe biological developments. But in so doing it cannot explain where the ‘project’ of human persons comes from, nor their inner origin, nor their particular nature. To that extent we are faced here with two complementary -- rather than mutually exclusive -- realities.”

n As a scientific matter, the evidence for “micro-evolution” seems beyond doubt; the case for “macro-evolution” is less persuasive.

“Micro-evolution” refers to developmental changes within a species, while “macro-evolution” is the transition from one species to another on the basis of mutation and selection. Some critics of evolution concede the former but dispute the latter, and Ratzinger has voiced support for this view.

His comments come in a Nov. 27, 1999, lecture delivered at the Sorbonne titled “The Truth of Christianity,” published in his 2003 book Truth and Tolerance.

“No one will be able to cast serious doubt upon the scientific evidence for micro-evolutionary processes,” he wrote. “R. Junker and S. Scherer, in their ‘critical reader’ on evolution, have this to say: ‘Many examples of such developmental steps [micro-evolutionary processes] are known to us from natural processes of variation and development. The research done on them by evolutionary biologists produced significant knowledge of the adaptive capacity of living systems, which seems marvelous.’ … The problem emerges at the point of transition from micro- to macro-evolution, on which point Szathmáry and Maynard Smith, both convinced supporters of an all-embracing theory of evolution, nonetheless declare that: ‘There is no theoretical basis for believing that evolutionary lines become more complex with time; and there is also no empirical evidence that this happens.’ ”

(Ratzinger here refers to the argument, often made by intelligent design theorists, that organic life reveals an “irreducible complexity” that cannot be ascribed to mechanisms of chance.)

The distinction between “micro-” and “macro-evolution” is apparently one Ratzinger began to make in the 1980s, after hearing a series of lectures at the Gustav Siewarth Academy, a small Catholic academy in Germany’s Black Forest. Dominique Tassot, head of a group of European Catholic intellectuals critical of evolutionary theory, told NCR that German Catholic intellectual Alma von Stockhausen has related that Ratzinger concluded macro-evolution is “impossible” based on this experience. Von Stockhausen is the founder of the Gustav Siewarth Academy and a long-time Ratzinger associate.

Whatever his personal views, however, Benedict XVI seems unlikely to render an official judgment on what he sees as a scientific question. In a 1992 Vatican news conference presenting the Catechism of the Catholic Church, he said that it is not the function of the church to pass judgment on the scientific merits of evolutionary theory.

Evolution has become a kind of “first philosophy” for enlightened thinkers, ruling out the possibility that life has any ultimate meaning. Here Christianity must draw the line.

Benedict’s deepest concern is that Darwinism has promoted scientific positivism, holding that only empirical science can produce certainty, and hence that religion, if it survives at all, can only do so as a subjective, emotional consolation against the cold indifference of the universe. In response, Benedict argues that Christianity relies on truths deeper than empirical observation, chief among them that life has purpose. In this sense, he believes in “intelligent design” -- not necessarily as the product of scientific observation, but as a metaphysical principle.

In the Beginning, Ratzinger writes: “We must have the audacity to say that the great projects of the living creation are not the products of chance and error. … The great projects of the living creation point to a creating Reason and show us a creating Intelligence, and they do so more luminously and radiantly today than ever before. … Human beings are not a mistake but something willed; they are the fruit of love. They can disclose in themselves, in the bold project that they are, the language of the creating Intelligence that speaks to them and that moves them to say: Yes, Father, you have willed me.”

On the moral level, evolution as a “first philosophy” is dangerous.

Benedict draws this argument out in Truth and Tolerance: “An evolutionary ethic that inevitably takes as its key concept the model of selectivity, that is, the struggle for survival, the victory of the fittest, successful adaptation, has little comfort to offer. Even when people try to make it more attractive in various ways, it ultimately remains a bloodthirsty ethic. … All this is of very little use for an ethic of universal peace, of practical love of one’s neighbor, and of the necessary overcoming of oneself, which is what we need.”

To put all this into a formula, the pope doesn’t want to repeat the Galileo case, but neither does he want to surrender to Auguste Comte -- who in the 19th century predicted a “physics of man” that would render religion obsolete.

With respect to Pope John Paul II’s famous 1996 statement that evolution is “more than a hypothesis,” therefore, it’s meaningless to ask whether Benedict XVI agrees or disagrees. Ever the professor, he would insist upon clarifying what precisely is meant by “evolution,” whether it’s being evaluated on a scientific or philosophical basis, and so on.

What seems clear, however, is that Benedict fears such nihil obtstats for evolution may inadvertently have accelerated the diffusion of a worldview that holds that it’s pointless to ask questions that can’t be settled by laboratory experiments, and that chance and meaninglessness are the ultimate laws of the universe. In that sense, one suspects Benedict would affirm that evolution is indeed “more than a hypothesis” -- for better, and for worse.

Perhaps the best optic on what Benedict is after in the discussion on evolution comes in this comment from Truth and Tolerance:

“This dispute has to be approached objectively and with a willingness to listen, by both sides -- something that has hitherto been undertaken only to a limited extent.”

John L. Allen Jr. is NCR senior correspondent. His e-mail address is jallen@ncronline.org.
On the Web
John L. Allen Jr. digs deeper into the writings of the then-Joseph Ratzinger to determine what Pope Benedict XVI might ultimately say about evolution. Go to Allen's column All Things Catholic at NCRonline.org to read more about this subject.

National Catholic Reporter, September 8, 2006

Pope discusses creation and evolution

Posted on September 03, 2006
From TotalCatholic.com

AS Benedict XVI begins a three-day symposium with his former students on creation and evolution, a philosophy professor in Rome says that the two theories are compatible.

The Pope's meeting is an annual one that the Holy Father has had with his doctoral candidates and former students for some 25 years, addressing various topics. This is the second one held at Castel Gandolfo. Fr Rafael Pascual, dean of philosophy at the Regina Apostolorum university, said "creation and evolution integrate one another, and do not exclude each other." Fr Pascual, who is also the director of the masters on science and faith, is the author of "L' evoluzione: Crocevia di Scienza, Filosofia e Teologia" (The Crossroads Evolution of Science, Philosophy and Theology) published in Italian by Studium publishers.

The volume is a collection of the minutes of an international congress on the topic held in Rome in 2002. Fr Pascual said that "the debate on evolution is open. A distinction must be made between the different levels: scientific-philosophical-theological, without confusing them or separating them completely." In regard to the debate on intelligent design, Father Pascual pointed out that "it isn't a scientific question, but rather a philosophical one." "But neither is the negation of finality, or recourse to pure chance and to necessity, scientific," that is why "it seems to be a mistake to present intelligent design as an alternative scientific theory to the theory of evolution," he said.

Asked if the theory of evolution should be taught in schools, Fr Pascual replied "yes, but as scientific theory, with the arguments in favor but also recognising the limits and still unresolved problems, and not as an ideology, as a kind of absolute, definitive and indisputable dogma." He continued: "Whereas creationism and evolutionism are incompatible in themselves, this is not so of creation and evolution, which are, instead, on two different levels, and are compatible."

The dean of philosophy cited the book "Creation and Sin," written by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Benedict XVI, which states: "We cannot say: creation or evolution. The exact formula is creation and evolution, because both respond to two different questions. "The story of the dust of the earth and the breath of God does not tell us how man originated. It tells us what he is. "It talks about his most profound origin, it illustrates the plan that is behind him. Vice versa, the theory of evolution attempts to specify and describe biological processes." It does not succeed in explaining, however, the origin of the 'project' man, his interior derivation and his essence.

Therefore, we are before two questions that integrate one another but do not exclude each other." Fr Pascual said that "we must distinguish between theory - or theories - of evolution and Darwinism, and then, within Darwinism itself, between the elements of a scientific character and those of a philosophical or ideological nature."


Pope and former students ponder evolution, not "ID"

By Tom Heneghan, Religion EditorSun Sep 3, 12:47 PM ET
From Reuter's News Service

Pope Benedict and his former doctoral students spent a weekend pondering evolution without discussing controversies over intelligent design and creationism raging in the United States, a participant said on Sunday.

The three-day closed-door meeting at the papal summer residence of Castel Gandolfo outside Rome ended as planned without drawing any conclusions but the group plans to publish its discussion papers, said Father Joseph Fessio S.J.

Media speculation had said the debate might shift Vatican policy to embrace "intelligent design," which claims to prove scientifically that life could not have simply evolved, or even the "creationist" view that God created the world in six days.

"It wasn't that at all," Fessio, who is provost of Ave Maria University in Florida, told Reuters by telephone from Rome. The Pope's session with 39 former students was "a meeting of friends with some scholars to discuss an interesting theme."

"We did not really speak much about intelligent design," said Fessio, whose Ignatius Press publishes the Pope's books in English. "In fact, that particular controversy did not arise."
Creationism -- the view that God created the world in six days as described in the Bible -- was "almost off the radar screen of the people in this group," he added. The Catholic Church does not read the Genesis account of creation literally.

Fessio said Benedict took part in the discussions but said nothing different from previous public statements, in which he has recognized evolution as a scientific fact but argued that God ultimately created the world and all life in it.

As the Pope put it at his inaugural Mass after being elected in April 2005, "We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God."

ANNUAL GET-TOGETHERS
Benedict, who taught theology at four German universities before becoming archbishop of Munich and then the Vatican's top doctrinal official, has held these annual get-togethers since the late 1970s. The international group debates in German.

Charles Darwin's theory of evolution has long been rejected in the United States by conservative Christians who want to have a Bible-based view of creation taught in public schools, where the church-state separation bars the teaching of religion.

More recently, Darwin's critics have campaigned to have "intelligent design" taught as a scientific alternative to evolution. President George W. Bush and other conservative politicians support this drive to "teach the controversy."

The "ID movement" does not name the designer as God, but its opponents say that is the logical conclusion and call this an unacceptable bid to sneak religion into the teaching of science.

Schools in some parts of the United States teach intelligent design as an alternative to evolution but a Pennsylvania court banned it there last year, saying it was religion in disguise.

Catholic teaching accepts evolution as a scientific theory but disagrees with what it calls "evolutionism," the view that the story of life has no role for God as its prime author.

Vienna's Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn, a close associate of the Pope, was one of four speakers who addressed the meeting. He raised eyebrows last year with a New York Times article that suggested the Catholic Church supported the "ID movement." Schoenborn and Benedict have said several times over the past year that intelligence in the form of God's will played a part in creation and that neo-Darwinists who deny God any role are drawing an ideological conclusion not proven by the theory.

They say they use philosophical reasoning to conclude that God created the world, not arguments which intelligent design supporters claim can be proven scientifically.

"Faith is stronger than currents that come and go. We must therefore be courageous as the church represents never ending hope."

Benedict XVI

For years, I've been comfortable with my beliefs regarding evolution. Rather than sit on the fence or take sides, I took both sides. It made no sense to me that God would not have a true hand in creation. It made less than no sense to deny the science of how our world came to be and developed (or evolved if you will). I raised my children with the notion that God's hand was at work and he was very busy playing a very complex game of creation. If one is going to deny tht God had a hand in the creation of our world, than one might as well deny God existance.

Now, this week, it seems that there will be a meeting or meetings to solidify the Church's position on evolution and the merits of Intelligent Design. I hope the outcome does not put me at odds with greater minds than I because I really want my science and my religious beliefs. I won't let go of the harmonious blending of faith and science easily because we really should not be underrating God. After all, he is capable of anything.

SOME INTERESTING ARTICLES

Here

Here

and Here

Merkel has 'intense' talks with Pope Benedict XVI
28 August 2006
CASTEL GANDOLFO, ITALY - German Chancellor Angela Merkel attended Monday a private audience with Pope Benedict XVI at the pontiff's summer residence at Castel Gandolfo near Rome. It was Merkel's first meeting with the German-born pope since she became chancellor. "I had very intense talks with the Holy Father," Merkel said after the 45 minute private audience. The two discussed the Middle East, Iran and Europe, the chancellor said.

Merkel expressed support for the inclusion of a reference to Christianity in the planned EU constitution (see below for expanded information) and said she is looking forward to the pope's September visit to his homeland. The chancellor said her party would always maintain good relations with the pontiff and she gave Benedict, a music fan, an old Mozart score.

Merkel grew up as a Protestant pastor's daughter in the former East Germany. Benedict, the former Joseph Ratzinger, was born in Bavaria and will be visiting there September 9-14.

************************************

EU needs constitution with Christian reference, Merkel says
29.08.2006 - 09:46
CET By Lucia Kubosova

German chancellor Angela Merkel has suggested Europe needs a constitution that makes reference to Christianity and God following her audience with Pope Benedict XVI on Monday (29 August).The German leader, the daughter of a protestant pastor, visited the Pope at his summer residence in Castel Gandolfo, Italy, to discuss several issues in European and international politics, ahead of the Pope's September visit to Germany, his homeland.

"We spoke about freedom of religion," Ms Merkel told journalists following the 45-minute meeting.She added "I underlined my opinion that we need a European identity in the form of a constitutional treaty and I think it should be connected to Christianity and God, as Christianity has forged Europe in a decisive way," according to press reports.

The Christian Democrat leader has previously spoken out in favour of reopening the debate on religion in the constitution as the EU considers how to tackle the deadlock after the treaty's rejection by French and Dutch voters last year.

Germany has been assigned by EU member states to come up with some kind of solution to the constitutional crisis during its presidency of the union in the first six months of 2007. Like Mrs Merkel, some leading figures of the European People's Party - the federalist centre-right pan-European group - have pointed out that a possible re-drafted treaty should include clear links to Europe's Christian heritage.

During earlier negotiations on the content of the new EU charter, Spain, Italy and Poland were among the strongest supporters of a reference to God in the treaty.But its opponents argued it could prove controversial in view of Turkey's potential membership of the EU as well as due to the strict separation of state and church in some countries, such as France.

Currently, the preamble refers to Europe's religious heritage only in general terms."Drawing inspiration from the cultural, religious and humanist inheritance of Europe, the values of which, still present in its heritage, have embedded within the life of society the central role of the human person and his or her inviolable and inalienable rights, and respect for law," it states.

Pope prepares to embrace theory of intelligent design
John Hooper in Rome
Monday August 28, 2006
The Guardian

Philosophers, scientists and other intellectuals close to Pope Benedict will gather at his summer palace outside Rome this week for intensive discussions that could herald a fundamental shift in the Vatican's view of evolution.

There have been growing signs the Pope is considering aligning his church more closely with the theory of "intelligent design" taught in some US states. Advocates of the theory argue that some features of the universe and nature are so complex that they must have been designed by a higher intelligence. Critics say it is a disguise for creationism.


A prominent anti-evolutionist and Roman Catholic scientist, Dominique Tassot, told the US National Catholic Reporter that this week's meeting was "to give a broader extension to the debate. Even if [the Pope] knows where he wants to go, and I believe he does, it will take time. Most Catholic intellectuals today are convinced that evolution is obviously true because most scientists say so." In 1996, in what was seen as a capitulation to scientific orthodoxy, John Paul II said Darwin's theories were "more than a hypothesis".

Last week, at a conference in Rimini, Cardinal Christoph Schönborn of Austria revealed that evolution and creation had been chosen as the subjects for this year's meeting of the Pope's Schülerkreis - a group consisting mainly of his former doctoral students that has been gathering annually since the late 1970s. Apart from Cardinal Schönborn, participants at the closed-door meeting will include the president of the Austrian Academy of Sciences, Peter Schuster; the conservative ethical philosopher Robert Spaemann; and Paul Elbrich, professor of philosophy at Munich University.

Last December, a US court sparked controversy when it ruled that intelligent design should not be taught alongside evolution theory. Cardinal Schönborn said: "The debate of recent months has undoubtedly motivated the Holy Father's choice." But he added that in the 1960s the then Joseph Ratzinger had "underlined emphatically the need to return to the topic of creation".
The Pope also raised the issue in the inaugural sermon of his pontificate, saying: "We are not the accidental product, without meaning, of evolution."

A few months later, Cardinal Schönborn, who is regarded as being close to Benedict, wrote an article for the New York Times backing moves to teach ID. He was attacked by Father George Coyne, director of the Vatican Observatory. On August 19, Fr Coyne was replaced without explanation. Vatican sources said the Pope's former astronomer, who has cancer, had asked to be replaced.

ROME (AFP) - Pope Benedict XVI warned that damage to the environment had dire consequences for the poor and called for all Christians to work to save the earth.

The world "is exposed to a series of risks created by choices and lifestyles that can degrade it," the leader of the Roman Catholic Church said in his Sunday sermon given at his summer residence of Castel Gandolfo, south of Rome.

"Damage to the environment makes the life of the poor on Earth particularly unbearable," the pope said, calling on all Christians to take care of the earth and not deplete its resources, sharing them in solidarity.

The pontiff's call came a few days before Christian associations celebrate in Italy on September 1 a "day for the safeguarding of Creation".

Italian Environment Minister Alfonso Pecoraro Scanio, leader of the Greens, seized on Benedict's remarks. "It would be very useful if all the parishes in Italy equipped themselves with solar energy," he said.

He said it was very important that the Roman Catholic church did not confine itself to "the traditional message of respect for the human being" but also sent out "a message of love of nature and respect for the environment."

EDITORIAL
From National Catholic Reporter
Issue Date: August 25, 2006

The difficult case of the common good

Do a Google search for “common good” and it returns millions of entries. Perhaps that’s as good a sign as any of why we might, as a society, have trouble ever again talking about the concept.

For years we have lamented on this page that the notion of common good seems to have been scrubbed from our national vocabulary. We have been given over, intellectually, emotionally, financially and certainly politically to the individual good. We have taken individualism to the extremes of greed and self-aggrandizement, often with the tacit permission and even encouragement of our leaders.

From education to the workplace, from environmental policy to foreign policy, the emphasis is on the individual’s interest or, in the case of the state, U.S. interests, often to the exclusion of all else. This is not to denigrate individual initiative or success. But the individual, in the end, can’t exist without the community at large; and no matter how anti-government the rhetoric becomes, sometimes the only entity with the resources and power to bring needed change or to extend benefits throughout the entire community, is the government.

So, can the common good be revived? Do issues or causes exist, besides war, that can inspire a concern for and even a consensus about the common good?

Some, like American Prospect magazine, suggest the time is right. The neoconservative experiment seems to be unraveling in every direction, particularly in the projection of U.S. power abroad; the gap between rich and poor is expanding; the wide sense of confidence in the Bush administration is eroding. So what’s the big idea that will newly capture the imagination and swing our politics in a new direction?

“Liberal governance,” wrote Michael Tomasky in American Prospect in May, “is about demanding of citizens that they balance self-interest with common interest. Any rank-and-file liberal is a liberal because she or he somehow or another, through reading or experience or both, came to believe in this principle. And every leading Democrat became a Democrat because on some level, she or he believes this, too.”

That idea of service -- other than military -- had a brief time in the sun in our modern politics with President John Kennedy’s line, “Ask not what your country can do for you.” But does a party or an individual dare introduce the politics of discomfort in an era when the best instruction our president can muster at a time of unprecedented national tragedy is that we should all keep shopping?
Can a call to common concerns be heard in a country where more than 40 million people lack even the most basic health care coverage? If something like that won’t interest us in the common good, what will?

A recent Economist piece on inequality in America details the growing gap between rich and poor, a gap greater “than in any other advanced country,” but one that has elicited little outcry. “Americans do not go in for envy,” the Economist said. “Whereas Europeans fret about the way the economic pie is divided, Americans want to join the rich, not soak them.” And yet, some wonder, is the middle class disappearing, is the gap widening to a point where some may begin to see inequity, not opportunity?

The Democrats today, as Joe Feuerherd explains in his analysis (see story), are taking up the cause of the common good in their search for a theme in the upcoming congressional races and perhaps even for the 2008 presidential campaign.

It is, in many ways, their response to the religious right and all the God talk and alleged “values” voting of the 2004 presidential election.

But translating the common good into a political platform could be not only difficult but also dangerous. (And one might add a plea here that Democrats spare us any more incidents of Rep. Nancy Pelosi quoting Pope Benedict XVI on the floor of the House, as she did when invoking the pontiff’s blessing on her opposition to cutting the estate tax. Even from our far perch in the middle of the country it was transparently disingenuous.)

Talk of the common good by necessity becomes a broad and diffuse conversation. Whose good? How common?

It is a conversation that necessarily engages themes that are familiar to religious people: concern for the poor, for the least among us; the intrinsic value of every human being; the welfare of all, not only those who have the means to provide for themselves. Religion informs the debate and no one, particularly candidates, should run from the religion question. In fact, all ought to speak out of their own experience of the influence of religion and whatever else helped shape their ethics and thinking on public policy questions.

At the same time, no one should attach his or her religion to a political program; no one belief -- or lack of it -- should be made to feel more at home or influential. God doesn’t register to vote, nor does he carry the card of any political party.

It is good to see common good back in our public discussions. We can only hope that by the end of this political season it is not rendered as meaningless as was “values” in the last election or as splintered as a Google search.

Pope can only take so many long trips. Benedict finds travels can be tiring, but he still would like to visit the Holy Land 'in a time of peace'
ASSOCIATED PRESS

VATICAN CITY - Pope Benedict XVI says he does not feel strong enough to take many long trips, but that he would like to travel to a peaceful Holy Land.

In a wide-ranging interview aired Aug. 13 on German television, the pontiff spoke of Europe's role in Christianity and secularization in the Western world.

The pontiff also offered some insight into his own personality and ministry, saying being pope is "really tiring" and that it is important to "see the funny side of life."

"I have to say that I've never felt strong enough to plan many long trips," the pontiff said in the 35-minute interview. "But where such a trip allows me to communicate a message or where, shall I say, it's in response to a sincere request, I'd like to go."

The 79-year-old pope has made three foreign trips since assuming the papacy in April 2005. So far, all have been within Europe, with a pilgrimage to his native Bavaria, Germany, scheduled in September.

But the pope said he is planning to travel to Brazil to take part in the closing sessions of the Fifth Latin American Bishops' Conference, which takes place May 13-31, 2007.

"Then I'd like to visit the Holy Land, and I hope to visit it in a time of peace," said the pontiff, who had repeatedly appealed for a cease-fire between Israel and Hezbollah militias during fighting in southern Lebanon over the past several weeks.

The pope said he has also promised to travel to Austria, and he has scheduled a trip in November to Turkey.

"In the Western world today we are experiencing a wave of new and drastic enlightenment or secularization," Benedict said. "Humanity has rebuilt the world by itself, and finding God inside this world has become more difficult."

However, the pope said the West is also influenced by other cultures in which the religious element is very strong.

"We see how in young people there's the search for something 'more,'" Benedict said. "We see how the religious phenomenon is returning, as they say."

ContraCostaTimes.com

Aug. 17, 2006

Pope Says It's Important to "See the Funny Side" of Things
Posted on August 17, 2006

By Gerry O'Connell in Rome: "I'm not a man who constantly thinks up jokes, but I think it’s very important to be able to see the funny side of life and its joyful dimension and not to take everything too tragically." - Those were the words of Pope Benedict XVI in his third major interview since becoming Pope.

Speaking to Vatican Radio and German TV, Benedict disclosed that he did not “feel that lonely” in the Vatican, and drew strength from the crowds. And the 79-year-old pontiff revealed that although he did find the job physically tiring, it gave him joy as well.

Benedict said that he did not intend travelling much during his papacy as he did not feel strong enough to plan many long trips. He will, however, go to Brazil in May next year and will also visit Austria.In addition, he will return to his native Bavaria this September "to see again the places where I grew up, the people who touched and shaped my life. I want to thank these people."

Well aware that Germany, like other Western countries, is experiencing "drastic secularisation," he has chosen as his central theme of his visit the fact that "we have to re-discover God, not just any God, but the God that has a human face, because when we see Jesus Christ, we see God."

While in Germany, Benedict said he wanted to present a "positive and joyful" vision of Christianity and Catholicism, as he did in Valencia last month. Responding to comments that "Pope Benedict was different from Cardinal Ratzinger," the pontiff said that like everyone else he was influenced by "circumstances and situations and even people" as new responsibilities were taken on.

"Let's say that my basic personality and even my basic vision have grown, but in everything that is essential I have remained identical," he added.

“I’m happy that certain aspects that weren’t noticed at first are now coming into the open.”

From totalcatholic.com

Vatican Sends Special Envoy 'to Bring Hope' to the People of Lebannon
Posted on August 16, 2006
By Gerry O'Connell in Rome:

In an extraordinary expression of concern, Pope Benedict XVI has sent Cardinal Roger Etchegeray as his special envoy to the Lebanon to convey his "concrete solidarity" and "spiritual closeness" to 'the martyred population" of that war-destroyed land, and to "all those who are suffering" in the Middle East.

Before leaving Rome on Sunday morning, the 83-year-old French cardinal was tightlipped and would only say that his mission was "to bring hope" to the Lebanese people. The Vatican emphasised that the cardinal's visit was "strictly religious" but sources suggested that he hopes to meet with the country’s political leaders. He will convey to them Pope Benedict's concern, solidarity and closeness to all the people of the Lebanon – Christian and Muslim alike.

Shortly after his departure for Lebanon, the Israeli Cabinet voted to accept the UN resolution envisaging an end to hostilities on Monday morning.The Lebanese Cabinet had reached a similar agreement the day before the cardinal departed. From Beirut, the cardinal drove to Harissa, to the mountain top shrine of Our Lady of the Lebanon overlooking the Bay of Jounieh. He celebrated Mass on August 15 – the feast of the Assumption - at the Pope's request. The country’s Maronite Patriarch, Cardinal Nashrallah Sfeir, concelebrated with him.

The French cardinal, a former president of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, also acted as Pope John Paul II’s special envoy to many of the world’s trouble spots, and the Lebanese were delighted that the Pope sent his envoy to their country. Cardinal Sfeir told Vatican radio: "The Pope's envoy will be able to see with his own eyes what is happening in the Lebanon. "We will join him in pray to ask God to inspire and enlighten our (political) leaders, so that they can put an end to this war. We thank the Holy Father for this paternal gesture towards our people."

The Vatican did not ignore the fact that more than 100 Israeli citizens in Lebanon and Israel died as a result of Hezbollah rockets and fire and that many thousands were displaced from their homes.To recognise this, the Apostolic Nuncio to Israel, Archbishop Antonio Franco, and the Palestinian-born Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem Michel Sabbah, concelebrated a Mass for Peace at the Basilica of the Annunciation in Nazareth.

Pope says Church not a string of "nos"
By Philip Pullella, Sun Aug 13, 2:25 PM ET

Pope Benedict said in an interview aired on Sunday that Catholicism should not be seen as a "collection of prohibitions" because of bans on gay marriage, abortion and contraception but as a Church with positive values.

In the long and rare interview with German television and Vatican Radio, he also offered some personal insights, saying he was not lonely in his job but did not feel strong enough to plan many long overseas trips like his predecessor John Paul.

He also said he was happy that the world was now noticing other aspects of his personality to correct the stern image many people had of him while, as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, he was the Church's chief doctrinal enforcer before his 2005 election.

The interview, which will be posted on the Vatican Web site www.vatican.va, was recorded last week at his summer retreat south of Rome and broadcast ahead of a trip to his native Germany next month. Benedict said while he would not be traveling as much as John Paul, he yearned to visit the Holy Land, but only "in a time of peace."

"Christianity, Catholicism, isn't a collection of prohibitions," the 79-year-old Pope said. "It's a positive option ... We've heard so much about what is not allowed that now it's time to say: we have a positive idea to offer ..."

Benedict, responding to a question about the Church's positions against abortion, contraception and homosexual marriage, said: "So, firstly it's important to stress what we want. Secondly, we can also see why we don't want something. I believe we need to see and reflect on the fact that it's not a Catholic invention that man and woman are made for each other, so that humanity can go on living: all cultures know this," he said.

Asked if the Church should not come out of some of its defensive positions, the Pope acknowledged it had to learn better how to stress the positive. "We need to do this, above all, in dialogue with cultures and religions," he said, adding that some Africans and Asians were "horrified by the coldness of our (Western) rationality."

GREATER ROLE FOR WOMEN?
Benedict also said the Church was reflecting much about the role of women but repeated that they could not become priests because Christ chose only men as his apostles. He suggested, however, that canon (Church) law, which currently restricts high-level decision-making roles to ordained males, might someday be changed to give women more power in the Church short of the priesthood.

"We will have to try and listen to God so as not to stand in their (women's) way," he said.
He said he would call more meetings of cardinals from around the world to consult and hear their opinion on Church issues. Asked about AIDS, the Pope said he believed public opinion had treated the Church unfairly because of its position against condoms to stop the spread of the disease, mainly in Africa.

"In many areas (in Africa), following the destruction of war, the Church is the only structure that remains intact. This is a fact. We offer treatment, treatment to AIDS victims too, and we offer education, helping to establish good relationships with others," he said. "So I think we should correct that image that sees the Church as spreading severe 'nos'."

The Pope freely discussed personal aspects of his job. "To tell the truth, I'm not that lonely," he said when asked if he sometimes felt separated from the world because of the rigors of his job, which he said "really is tiring."

On planning future trips, he said: "I have to say, I never felt strong enough to plan many long trips." Apart from Germany in September, he is scheduled to visit Turkey in November and Brazil next year.

Copyright © 2006 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon.

Copyright © 2006 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.

Indonesia: Stay of execution after papal plea
Aug. 11 (CWNews.com)

The Indonesian government has announced a stay of execution for 3 Christians who were scheduled to face a firing squad on August 12, the AsiaNews service has reported. The reprieve for the condemned men is said to be for at least one week.

Pope Benedict XVI had sent a last-minute appeal to Indonesia's President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, asking for a "an act of clemency" to stop the scheduled execution of three Christian men sentenced in connection with the religious violence that swept the eastern Sulawesi region in 1999-2001.

The Pope's appeal-- contained in a telegram from Cardinal Angelo Sodano (bio - news), the Vatican Secretary of State-- cited both "humanitarian grounds" and "the particularity of the case." The message also reminds the Indonesian leader of the Vatican's consistent opposition to the use of capital punishment.

Fabianus Tibo, Dominggus da Silva, and Marinus Riwu were due to face a firing squad on Saturday, August 12, after being convicted of plotting massacres during the religious warfare in Indonesia's eastern islands. Their appeals and the pleas of international leaders-- including previous pleas from the Vatican-- have been fruitless.

Human-rights groups have protested that the three men were convicted after a trial in which heavy pressure from Islamic militants influenced the court. Indonesia's minority Christian population has also pointed out that their conviction was the result of selective prosecution, since no Muslim has yet faced trial in connection with the violence that cost more than 2,000 lives.

The bloody conflicts in the Sulawesi region-- where Christians and Muslims live in roughly equal numbers-- were marked by militia activity on both sides. However, Christians frequently complained that the Indonesian military provided aid for the Muslim militia groups.
Despite the Pope's appeal, and the popular demonstrations calling for a reprieve, Christians in Indonesia had little hope that the executions will be called off. Plans were already in place for funeral services for the three condemned men, to be held in the cathedral of the Manadau diocese.

The government of Indonesia-- the world's most populous Muslim nation, with 85% of the people embracing Islam-- had been under pressure from militant Islamic groups to proceed with the execution, especially in light of the pending execution of terrorists convicted of the Bali bombing. A week-long reprieve for the Christian men would still leave open the possibility that they could be put to death before the scheduled execution of the Bali bombers on August 22.
Christians in Indonesia have welcomed the government's decision to postpone the executions, but continue to organize prayer vigils and public demonstrations asking for a new, fair trial for the 3 men.

Vatican Recruits African, Asian Priests as Fewer Italians Serve

Aug. 10 (Bloomberg) -- Jess Marquina Marano is a godsend for Pope Benedict XVI.

The 41-year-old Filipino head of the parish of Nosta Signora di Fatima, in a working-class area of Rome, does a job the pope can't find an Italian to do. With a dearth of local priests, the Vatican is turning to Asian, African and Latin American clergy for churches in the shadow of St. Peter's Basilica.

The shortage reflects the faith's decline in Europe and the U.S. amid unpopular stances on issues such as contraception, abortion and women in the Church. The demographic shift among the world's 1 billion Roman Catholics raises the possibility that the next pope will be the first non-European pontiff and may threaten the Holy See's $271 million annual budget, most of which comes from Catholics in the U.S. and Europe.

``The future of the Church is clearly in the developing world,'' said Kevin F. Pecklers, theology professor at Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome. ``The Vatican very much looks to the U.S.Vatican.'' for financial help. If Americans stopped giving, it would be very deeply felt by the

Apathy toward the Vatican, the independent papal state on the Tiber River within Rome, became a subject of debate in Italy after the release last year of the ``The Parable of the Cleric,'' a study of the country's priesthood. It showed that one of every five churches in the Rome area is led by a non-Italian.

Some bishops say easing the ban on celibacy or allowing women into the priesthood might help the vocation appeal to more Catholics in the U.S. and Europe.

Pope Benedict XVI has made it clear that those changes aren't in the cards. Just days before being named pope, he said in a Rome sermon that the Catholic Church mustn't surrender to a ``dictatorship of relativism,'' adding that a smaller, more orthodox church is favorable to compromising on Catholic rules.

Demographic Shifts

In the five years through 2002, the Catholic population increased 22 percent in Africa and 5 percent in Asia, according to Fides, a Vatican news agency. In Europe, the number of Catholics declined 1 percent during the same period.

The number of priests in Europe and North America dropped 5 percent and 6 percent, respectively, from 1999 to 2004, the Statistical Yearbook of the Church shows. Asia's priesthood grew 13 percent and Africa's 18 percent.

The decline in priests began in the 1960s, when young people began questioning institutions such as churches and pursuing social change through protest rather than prayer, said Mary Gultier, a senior research associate at the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate, or CARA, at Georgetown University in Washington.

A Low-Paying Job

``The status of clergy has declined in the U.S. and around the world,'' Gultier said. ``People used to hold up the clergy as a pillar. Now it's seen as just another low-paying, white-collar job.''

The college of cardinals, once dominated by Italians, now gets more than a third of its 120 voting members from developing countries. Italian cardinals account for just 17 percent of the voters, down from 23 percent in the 1978 conclave that elected Pope John Paul II, a Pole. In the two previous elections, Italians had more than 30 percent of the vote.

The number of foreign clergy in Rome is five times the national average, in part because the region's 1,440 parishes are best positioned to tap the pool of foreign priests attending the city's 17 seminaries and Catholic educational institutes.

The higher number is also a result of the historical animosity between Romans and the Vatican. Centuries of Vatican authority created tensions, said Luca Diotallevi, a sociologist in Rome who edited the Parable study.

Tensions in Rome

Before Rome's territories were united with the rest of Italy, the Vatican was the region's biggest property holder, rulemaker, tax collector, and at times torturer and executioner. When the papal states were wrested from Pope Pius IX in 1870, many Italians turned their backs on the Church.

``Having a person so important living in your neighborhood can create a certain sufferance,'' said Marco Fibbi, spokesman for Cardinal Camillo Ruini, who fills in for the pope in administering many of his duties as the Bishop of Rome.

With Rome hostile, the Vatican finds itself turning more and more to the likes of Marano of the Philippines.

``The Church isn't getting basket loads of new priests, but on the other hand it's getting a steadily growing trickle of extremely loyal and motivated'' priests, said John Allen, author of ``The Rise of Benedict XVI: The Inside Story of How the Pope Was Elected and Where He Will Take the Catholic Church'' (Doubleday, 256 pages, $19.95).

Marano, who graduated from the Lateran University in Rome in 1996, prays in Italian and speaks the language with a slight accent. Since taking over the parish in September, Marano said he's been making home visits with the parishioners and developing community contacts.

The cleric attributes his decision to remain in Rome to a vision by his mother, who dreamed she saw him wearing black robes, surrounded by children. His mother's last words before dying were, ``I thank the Lord you came to Rome,'' he said.

To contact the reporter on this story:

Adam L. Freeman in Rome at  afreeman5@bloomberg.net

I've been watching Madonna's career since the beginning and the one thing that never changes about her is her anger toward the Church. She 's 40 something, has two kids, and still is raging over - well - whatever it was that ticked her off to begin with. It's nice to read that the clamor of the fans DID fall off when she did her crucifixion thing. Too bad they didn't boycott the concert but I suppose that was too much to hope for.

Madonna invited the Pope to her crucifixion. He didn’t come, but 70,000 of her devotees filled the Olympic Stadium just a mile or so from Vatican City in Rome on Sunday night for another performance in her worldwide Confessions Tour, Reuters reported. Wearing a fake crown of thorns, she was raised on a glittery cross during her two-and-a-half hour show, which included a display of photographs of Pope Benedict as well as of Mussolini. Before she invited the pope, the Vatican had accused Madonna of blasphemy and provocation for even considering the sham crucifixion. For the most part fans shrugged off the conflict by dancing, singing and jumping as she performed songs from her latest album, “Confessions on a Dance Floor,” and old hits including “Like a Virgin.” But the cheering diminished when she was raised on the cross. “The crucifixion was unnecessary and provocative,” said Tonia Valerio, a 39-year-old Roman. “Because this is Rome, I wish she’d cut it out. But it’s Madonna, she’s an icon, and that balances out her need to provoke.” More controversy is expected next month when the tour reaches Moscow, where the Russian Orthodox Church has advised followers to boycott the show because of the crucifixion scene, the Interfax news agency reported.

CASTEL GANDOLFO, Italy
Pope Benedict XVI

"There are moral forces which are ready to make it understood that the only solution is that we must live together," Benedict said in an interview with several German radio and television stations ahead of his visit to his native country in September.

"These are the forces we want to mobilize. Politicians must find the way in order that this can happen as rapidly as possible and especially in a sustainable way," said Benedict in the interview at his summer residence in Castel Gandolfo, excerpts of which were released by the
Vatican".

"Naturally the Holy See seeks no political power. But we want to address ourselves to Christians and everyone who feels in some way called on by words of the Holy See, in order that all the forces which recognize that the war is the worst solution for all are mobilized."

"It brings nothing good to anyone, not even for the apparent victors. We know that very well in Europe, following the two World Wars.

I was writing to Tara this morning in response to her comment at my other blog. Writing to her started to help me more fully formulate why I started this blog.

Benedict fascinates me. Much as I liked JPII, I find that when I read Benedict I hear him echoing some of my private thoughts that I've never been able to easily articulate; for example - religion should not be political. Faith is inspirational; it should be a guidepost for living. With inspiration comes good politics. Just that simple but also just that complicated.

For now, I'm just posting things that strike a strong note of recognition within me. This is such a freshman effort that I find myself responding to his writings at a really gut level but I still need to grow in discussion.

I can thank my son, Quanah, for this. His three years at Franciscan University have had a surprising effect on me and my own point of view. I suppose it has been a sort of vicarious education for me. He's done all the work but I've absorbed quite a lot of what he has been studying.

Jewish Shops in Rome Vandalized
Pope Repeats Call for Immediate Cease-Fire in Middle East
Associated PressThursday, August 3, 2006; Page A22


ROME, Aug. 2 -- Jewish shops across Rome were vandalized and defaced with swastikas in an apparent neofascist attack linked to fighting in the Middle East, officials said, while Pope Benedict XVI issued an impassioned call from Vatican City for an immediate cease-fire in the Middle East, saying that "nothing can justify the spilling of innocent blood."

Owners of about 20 shops in the center and outskirts of the Italian capital found door locks filled with glue, shutters nailed closed and swastikas on nearby walls Tuesday morning, said Riccardo Pacifici, a spokesman for Rome's Jewish community.

Although not all the shops targeted were owned by Jews, the vandalism was apparently a reaction to the fighting between Israel and Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon, Pacifici said. Fliers signed by a group calling itself Armed Revolutionary Fascists were left at the shops. They denounced "the Zionist economy" and included pro-Hezbollah slogans, Pacifici said. "There are still anti-Semites in Italy," Pacifici said. He said Italian Jewish organizations have been flooded with dozens of e-mails blaming Jews for violence in the Middle East. Mayor Walter Veltroni condemned the vandalism.

Police officials declined to comment on the investigation.

Last month, swastikas were spray-painted on walls in the Old Ghetto -- Rome's ancient Jewish neighborhood -- while hundreds of thousands gathered in the nearby Circus Maximus to celebrate Italy's victory in the World Cup.

The pope, speaking Wednesday to 50,000 pilgrims in sun-drenched St. Peter's Square, said, "Our eyes are filled with the chilling images of torn bodies of so many people, especially children -- I am thinking in particular of Qana." Benedict was referring to the Israeli attack Sunday in the southern Lebanese town of Qana that killed more than 50 civilians, mostly women and children.

It was the latest in a half-dozen peace appeals by the pontiff that have consistently included calls for an immediate cease-fire. He has spoken out on every public occasion since the fighting began three weeks ago, reminiscent of his predecessor, Pope John Paul II, who became a rallying point for critics of the Iraq war.

But Benedict has made clear that attempts to reach a settlement should be left to diplomats "because we don't enter politics. . . . Our goal is simply peace, and we will do everything to help attain peace." (my emphasis)

The German-born pope has repeatedly stressed his interest in good relations with Jews, and last year visited a German synagogue destroyed by the Nazis. The Vatican is also concerned about the large Maronite Catholic community in Lebanon.

This isn't terribly serious but it's a FUN story. I found it over at INSIDE LINE.

Ferrari Sells 400th Enzo and Gives Pope the Proceeds
Date posted: 12-06-2005

ROME — Italian supercar maker Ferrari raised $1.1 million from the sale of its 400th Enzo and donated the money to Pope Benedict XVI on Monday for humanitarian relief. The top-of-the-line Enzo, which was given to Pope John Paul II shortly before his death in April, was sold by Sotheby's for more than double the asking price to an unnamed American collector.

Ferrari president Luca Cordero di Montezemolo presented Pope Benedict XVI with the check, while Formula One driver Michael Schumacher gave the pope a steering wheel to commemorate the donation which read: "The Formula 1 World Champion's steering wheel to His Holiness Benedict XVI, Christianity's driver. "Benedict XVI reportedly turned down the opportunity to use the Enzo as his personal vehicle, saying he had enough trouble trying to "drive the church.

"What this means to you: The Enzo would have made the ultimate pope-mobile, but Benedict apparently prefers to see the money go to a good cause.

The concept of discrimination is constantly enlarged, and this means that the prohibition of discrimination can be transformed more and more into a limitation on the freedom of opinion and religious liberty. Christianity and the Crisis of Cultures by Joseph Ratzinger (Benedict XVI) page 35