We approach with trepidation the third edition of the Assisi interfaith conference. The Vatican has made changes to the program compared to the first two exercises – such as eliminating joint prayer. Thus, to a limited extent, the conservative criticism of the last quarter century would appear to have been acknowledged. Another innovation is the invitation extended to several nonbelievers. Even if that would seem to call the entire rationale of Assisi into question by perhaps implying that peace can be sought – and achieved? – entirely apart from any religious belief. And if the intent of these changes is to avoid the appearance of “syncretism” I doubt if that goal has been realized either. The “religions” may no longer be praying together (although hierarchs in and outside of the Vatican continue to describe Assisi that way). But if, in Assisi III, we are all pilgrims seeking the way of truth, it would seem to me that result is equally conducive to indifferentism. The problem with the Assisi conference is, however, much deeper than these questions regarding the program and the attendees.
One of the atheist invitees was the British philospher AC Grayling. It would seem an odd choice – Mr. Grayling has profiled himself recently as a militant critic of religion, even authoring a “secular bible.” Last year he assumed a prominent role in the chorus opposing the Pope’s visit to England. On the other hand, he has had the courage to take positions not at all in conformity with the those of the Establishment and its public opinion. Such as when he showed the lack of moral foundations of the Allies’ bombing of civilians in World War II. So he is a man from whom we can expect a degree of frank speech – what a rarity today. Now, after an initial acceptance, Mr Grayling has rejected the invitation to Assisi. According to Mr Grayling, he initially thought it to be an opportunity to “discuss the place of religion in society.” Then, after he understood that what the Vatican really wanted was for him to accompany the Pope on a pilgrimage he withdrew his previous acceptance.
Now I think Mr. Grayling has hit onto something profound here. If I may take a stab at developing his insight further, the essence of Assisi not at all joint prayer, intellectual discussion or even pilgrimage . It is a show. One in which Mr Grayling understandably does not want to appear as an extra. So much of what the Vatican and the “Movements” place before the public today has the nature of a show: Cardinal Ravasi’s “Court of the Gentiles” in Paris; the “conferences” of San Egidio, the Neocatechumenal Way, and the Legion of Christ; many aspects of Papal visits etc. In putting on a show the Vatican is adopting a quintessential form of expression – and manipulation- of the culture of contemporary liberal society. A show is inherently secular, inherently spiritually problematic regardless of the explanations accompanying it or how the program has been tweaked.
This is all the more so since in the show what primarily counts are the visuals. Regardless of what the “delegates” actually do or do not do, what people will see is the Catholic Church acting as one among equals. The impact of that is already obvious from the statements and conferences swirling around Assisi in which the indifferentist flavor is very strong. It is not a message that a church needs that is now facing extinction in Western Europe and will be soon elsewhere.
Related Articles
1 user responded in this post
Thank you, Stuart, for your thought-provoking essay. Like so much in our post-Vatican II Church, it is indeed a show, one in which there is much more form than substance. You mentioned a number of examples and I’d like to add one more to that sorry list: the world youth days so unfortunately made popular by Pope John Paul II. These shows are designed to make people feel good rather than help them to be good.
One of the problems with the Assisi meetings has always been that of one hand clapping: you can’t have a dialogue if you’re the only participant. Sure, the Non-Catholics will come to the party, but the Catholics will be the only ones seeking to dialogue, to understand and be understood. As you say, the Catholic Church acting as one among equals.
Unfortunately, it is worse than that. One of the guests at the show, considers themselves not equal to the host, but superior. And, if history is any guide, they will be sure to upstage the host.
In 1999, the (now retired) archbishop of Izmir, Turkey, Giuseppe Germano Bernardini, called on the pope to convene a special Vatican meeting to find a common strategy toward Muslims living in Christian countries. This exhortation was the direct consequence of problems he had seen at other Christian-Muslim “dialogues”. As Archbishop Bernardini wrote in his letter to Pope John Paul II, “During an official meeting on Islamic-Christian dialogue, an authoritative Muslim person, speaking to the Christians participating, at one point said very calmly and assuredly: ‘Thanks to your democratic laws we will invade you; thanks to our religious laws we will dominate you.'”
Abp. Bernardini continued, “During another Islamic-Christian meeting, always organized by Christians, a Christian participant publicly asked the Muslims present why they did not organize at least once a meeting of this kind. The Muslim authority present answered the following words: ‘Why should we? You have nothing to teach us and we have nothing to learn.'”
On the contrary, the Catholic hosts — the Pope and numerous Cardinals and Bishops — have much they should teach, but they won’t. The only lesson will be to reaffirm to the Muslim attendees that Catholics don’t take the tenets of our faith as seriously as they do theirs. As Archbishop Bernardini said at the closing of his letter, “do not allow the Muslim to ever use a Catholic Church for their cult, because this would be, in their eyes, the certain proof of our apostasy.”
Chris Joliat,
Waterbury, CT
Leave A Reply