Posted on 11/27/2005 3:36:57 PM PST by NYer
As car fires (and nursery school fires, hospital fires and parish fires) still blaze in France, I’m reminded that recently, Pope Benedict XVI asked Muslim leaders to do something that many in the West have been clamoring for Muslim leaders to do: Make it very publicly clear that the kind of violence so prominent in the Islamic world is to be condemned and repudiated.
One person to respond to the Pope’s call was King Abdullah of Jordan, who issued a strong statement condemning the Bronze-Age fanaticism of so many of his co-religionists, and calling for Muslims of good will to actively oppose it. It was a real step forward, and in remarks of gratitude for the king’s willingness to work for peace, Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, Archbishop of Washington, D.C., said:
“A few months ago, when I was privileged to pray for you on another occasion in this capital city, I asked Allah, the compassionate and merciful Lord of all the world, to bless you, and to help you make your country a bridge across which all nations might walk in unity, fellowship and love. As I listened to your words today, I believe my prayer is being answered.”
He then briefly thanked the king for being a courageous voice of reform in the Islamic world and closed with this brief prayer.
“Your Majesty’s call and that of the Holy Father are in so many ways the same. May Allah, the merciful and compassionate, continue to guide your steps along this noble path. May he guide and protect you, your family and your beloved country and may peace and justice come to all lands and all peoples through your efforts, your vision and your courage. In the name of Allah, the merciful and compassionate God, we pray. Amen.”
The Catholic blogsophere (commonly known as “St. Blog’s parish”) promptly went nuts over this. Several members of St. Blog’s took it for granted that Cardinal McCarrick is an “apostate and hypocrite” and the worshipper of a “moon god.” “Diogenes,” a frequent poster on the Catholic World News “Off the Record” blog, took it as a foregone conclusion that this is grounds for dismissing the cardinal from office, and the baying hounds in the comment box growled their threats of excommunication, not only at the cardinal, but at the Holy Father himself.
Questions: Why would a successor to the apostles hide the fullness of the faith by praying as a non-Christian? In the Name of God the Father, Son & Holy Spirit, why has the Holy Father not accepted Cardinal McCarrick’s resignation?
As one member of St. Blog’s aptly summed up the mind of the tribunal:
“I don’t buy ... the Lumen Gentium version of things. We worship the Triune God, Moslems don’t. And the adherents of Islam refer to non-Moslems as ‘infidels.’ (See a good dictionary here; if one isn’t a Moslem, one is an infidel.) If I am an infidel, then I don’t share the same faith with these folks. How, then, can anyone say we worship the same God? And, please, don’t try that ‘God of Abraham’ stuff on me. That’s ecumenistic tripe (in my humble opinion).”
Here are a number of basic problems with this “Fire ... Aim ... Ready” approach to the Church’s teaching.
First, the “moon god” charge is what is known as the “genetic fallacy.” Catholics have to put up with this every time we are told “Easter” is a “pagan holiday” (because the word derives from Eostre, a pagan goddess). The reality is, whatever the obscure etymology of a word may be, the important thing is, “What does the word mean now?” Try it with the word “gay” and you’ll see what I mean.
In Arabic, “Allah” does not mean “moon god.” It means, “the one God of Abraham, merciful and compassionate Creator and judge of the world.” If it was idolatrous for Cardinal McCarrick to pray to Allah, then the entire Maronite Catholic Church is likewise idolatrous, because they have prayed to Allah in Arabic for centuries.
“But McCarrick was living out the ecumenical tripe of Vatican II, which tries to pretend that all religions are the same. It’s a complete departure with Tradition!”
As to Tradition, here is modernist indifferentist heretic Pope St. Gregory VII, burbling stupid ecumenical Vatican II tripe to the Muslim Sultan of Bougie in North Africa in 1076:
“Most certainly you and we ought to love each other in this way more than other races of men, because we believe and confess one God, albeit in different ways, who each day we praise and reverence as the Creator of all ages and the governor of this world.”
How could the good saint sound so much like Lumen Gentium? Because all he is doing, all St. Thomas does when he cites Muslims and pagans with approval, all the Church has ever done, is affirm what can be affirmed in common with non-Catholic religious and philosophical tradition, while being careful not to affirm what cannot be affirmed in common.
As Vatican II puts it, “The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions.” It does not therefore follow that the Church thinks all religions are alike.
“But Muslims deny that Jesus is Allah’s son!” And right here’s the problem.
For not just Muslims deny that God has a Son. Jews deny that Adonai has a Son too. So if we grab at the “Allah has no Son” trope to insist that Muslims worship a “false god,” we inevitably must also commit ourselves to the proposition that the Jews, too, are idolaters.
Now the vast majority of conservative Catholics retain enough sanity to reject this latter-day Marcionite theology. Most are cognizant of the long miserable history of anti-Semitism in the Church. Indeed, not a few of them say that Israel must be supported at all costs, precisely because they are allies in the war against radical Islamic terror. But because many Catholics view their faith through the lens of American politics, they find themselves in an acutely uncomfortable bind when they declare that Muslims, but not Jews, worship “another god” due to their rejection of Jesus as God’s Son.
For, of course, what really drives this discussion is the simple fact that Jews did not fly airplanes into the World Trade Center. Nor did they light up the suburbs of Paris with car fires. Muslims did.
So we would very much like the Church to please stop saying that monotheists who make us angry have something in common with us, but we grant the Church our permission to say, “Monotheists who do not make us angry are fellow worshippers of the one God.”
The obvious and overwhelming danger of this approach is that, in addition to being false, this keeps Jews safe from the charge of idolatry for exactly as long as Jews do not anger Christians. Basing our theology on a mood is a very bad way to proceed. And the proof of this is precisely the sorry history of Christian persecution of Jews, which not infrequently found false justification in the charge that Jews, in not believing in Jesus, could legitimately be called the worshipers of a false god.
All Vatican II (or Pope St. Gregory VII or Cardinal McCarrick) are doing is affirming what can be affirmed in common with Muslims. To say, “We have something in common,” is not to say, “We have everything in common.” However, to cry, “Apostate! Heretic!” at one who rightly affirms such commonality is to commit a sin of rash judgment.
Really? That is utter nonsense!! Abraham's name appears twice in the Maronite Divine Liturgy - during the Incensation Hymn of the Altar and during the Intercessions. In neither instance is a prayer offered to Abraham.
To a degree the author is correct, not about the Maronite Liturgy, but about Allah being the name for God in Arabic. I know that Christians in the Middle East refer to God the Father as Allah since Allah means God. They are certainly not "surrenduring" themselves to Allah as it means in common circles, that is the Islamic God. I hope I am making the distinction clear.
The greater problem that Cardinal McCarrick delved into, was using their words of worship, and failing to make a distinction that while God in Arabic is Allah, the Christian God is NOT the same as the Allah of Islam. The author is thus disengious because they pretend that there is no real difference between God the Father (Allah) and Allah of Islam. There is a radical difference.
I don't think he's saying Maronite's pray to Abraham, I think he's claiming that Maronite liturgies in Arabic use "Allah" for God in Arabic. I have never been to any Liturgy in Arabic, so I am unfamiliar with this question.
Again to reiiterate my point. Refering to God the Father as Allah is not in itself heretical or apostate. But using the words of a false religion (Islam) in reference to Allah (God), one does begin to tred on dangerous ground. Had he prayed, "I pray in the name of Allah the Father, Allah the Son, and Allah the Holy Spirit" no problem would have existed because no syncretism can even be drawn wherein refering to Allah the most compassionate . . . uses Islamic words of prayer and praise rather than Christian ones.
I think Shea is missing the bigger problem. If Cardinal McCarrick had an orthodox understanding of what he was saying and taught that way it would be one thing. But that's not the case. I don't believe that Cardinal mCCarick is a Muslim, but I'm not so sure that he isn't a deist or worse. Clearly, though, he believes in indifferentism when it comes to Catholicism.
Wrong!!! The word "Allah" is NEVER used in the Maronite Divine Liturgy. All prayers are offered to our Lord. Here is an example from the Maronite liturgy.
English
Hymn of the Angels - Glory to God
Glory to God in the highest and peace on earth and good will to all.
Aramaic
Al-Majdoo
Almajdoo lil lahee fil ola wa-ala ardees salam warraja oo saleh leebaneel bashar.
You should write to Mark Shea about this.
NYer,
You've given English and Aramaic, but my understanding is that the Maronites in Syria do sometimes use Arabic in their liturgy. The Chaldean Catholics certainly do, and their Liturgy uses "Allah" to refer to God. ("Allah" is a derivative of the ancient Semitic term for God, "El". It isn't a proper name and was already widespread before Mohammad ever invented his religion).
You're the undisputed expert on the Maronites but this google search does seem to indicate that when the speak Arabic they use Allah...
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=safari&rls=en&q=maronite+arabic+allah&spell=1
Mr. Shea's mischaracterizations of those he chooses to demonize grow tiresome.
One can defend Cdl. McCarrick without having to use such tactics.
One can also suggest that what the Cardinal did was perhaps at least imprudent, without becoming a sedevacantist.
I just emailed him. As mentioned, there are only two instances where the name 'Abraham' appears in the Maronite Divine Liturgy.
Incensation of the Altar Prayer
(with the offerings on the altar, the celebrant blesses the incense and incenses the offerings and the altar chanting the following prayer).
Celebrant: Lover of the Penitent!
Congregation:
Show your mercy in our days
This pure incense, Lord, accept
That these priestly hands now raise
As gifts by the faithful children of your church
To atone and praise.
And as you received the ram
Sacrificed by Abraham
And from Aaron's hands
Sweet perfumes from distant lands.
Lord receive this incense which we pray may win
Mercy and release from sin.
The Intercessions include several prayers, amongst which is this one that mentions Abraham.
Celebrant:
Remember, O Lord, the faithful departed.
Accept this offering on their behalf.
They put their hope in your mercy and compassion
and await your graces.
Grant them rest in the bosom of Abraham,
and call them to be guests in your kingdom.
Grant also to us a peaceful death, and blot out our offenses,
for no one on earth is without sin
except your only-begotten Son,
through whom we hope, along with them,
to receive pardon for our sins.
And we pray to your, O Lord.
That's it! Do either of these instances impress you as a prayer to Abraham? I didn't think so.
Cardinal McCarrick is just practicing for dhimmi status. Since Christians, largely, no longer take their religion seriously and Muslims do. They will win.
I don't think he was saying that Maronites pray to Abraham; he was saying that when they pray in Arabic, they pray to Allah ("the God"), who is the same "God of Abraham" that Christians (and Jews) pray to, albeit with a different understanding. Which begs the question of whether a triune God can be the same as a non-triune God. But that gets into other questions, as he alluded to (Vatican II). One can certainly argue that this is merely a matter of revelation/understanding, because there can only be One Creator, after all. But then, what do you do about polytheists?
Regardless, forget heresy; this is a pastoral disaster. It confuses the faithful, by giving the appearance of the acceptance of Islamic theology by a Cardinal of the Catholic Church, because we do not normally refer to the triune God as Allah when speaking English, as the Cardinal was doing. In that respect, it gives scandal, IMO.
FWIW, I was not one of those who went ballistic on this. In fact, this may be my first comment on it. If this doesn't make any sense, please excuse as I'm kinda thinking out loud. :-)
I worded that poorly; it made it look like I was not including Maronites as Christians.
Let that read:
who is the same "God of Abraham" that all Christians, Muslims, and Jews pray to
Part of the problem here is the fact that Arabic is fractured into many dialects, such that "Allah" may not be pronounced exactly as written here. Another problem is inflection. For those of us who don't speak Arabic, the changes in the word's form as it's inflected through the various cases may render it totally "different" sounding to our ears. Sort of like "rex" and "regem" as the nominative and accusative of the same word in Latin.
The Melkites do use the word "Allah" from time to time in their liturgy in Arabic. It only means "God" in the same sense we would suppose as Christians. It's very similar, in fact, to the Aramaic word for God, clearly audible, for example, at least three times to my untrained ear, in Jesus' words in "The Passion of the Christ."
The problem I have with the Cardinal's words is his invocation of "Allah, the merciful and compassionate." This is formulaic for a Moslem, and comes straight from the Koran. The Cardinal can use "Allah" all day long, as far as I'm concerned. But when he uses that word in conjunction with others that clearly call to mind multiple verses in a book whose use is problematic for a Christian, and antithetical to our faith, THEN I have a big problem!
Sure, God IS "merciful and compassionate," but the phrase is an Islamic buzz-phrase, not a Christian one. No Arabic Christians use the phrase almost like punctuation, as the Moslems do. He should have known better.
I wish the hell ONE of our Cardinals or Bishops would read Spencer's books. They could read Islam Unveiled, Onward Muslim Soldiers, Islam for Catholics, The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Crusades and Stop molly-coddling our mortal enemies.
Damn straight. God is our Father. Allah is the Master for the Muslim slaves.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.