HomeReading – Sep 17, 2006
If we could but talk;
If we could share our hearts’ pains and hopes, you and I;
If I could learn from you and you from me;
Then maybe peace could be.
If I could tell you of the depth of my love for life;
If I could tell you of the depth of my rages and fears;
Then you would know me.
Tell me of the sorrows of your losses;
Speak to me of the dreams you strive for;
Share with me the vision you hold for your future,
And the future of your loved ones;
And I will hold and cherish your gift.
Be gentle with my openness;
See it for the fragile thing it is.
Here, I give it to you.
I give you my inner truth; I give you me; I give you myself.
Be gentle with my openness.
Naively, and with the innocence of children, let us begin to speak.
SERMON
Good Morning!
I decided on Friday to change my sermon topic for this Sunday. The sermon I intended to deliver on the history of Religious Education I will preach later in the year.
For today, I want to speak to something that arose during the week, something “live”, if you will.
On Tuesday in a speech in Germany, Pope Benedict XVI
“…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.’” (NY TIMES, Fri Sep 15)
That quote comes from the New York Times but I read the full statement of the Pope’s words on the BBC website and they report the same.
The Pope’s comments have stirred rage in much of the Muslim world.
As someone who can be said to engage in public speaking on a regular basis, I know the risks involved. And there are several. For one, no matter how carefully one crafts one’s message, someone will mishear or misinterpret what you have said. For another, we all are sometimes prone to be awkward or rushed in what we are saying and therefore to stumble or bumble a bit and say something we wish we had not. For another, if we quote someone we can be thought to believe with everything that person said.
It is also true that we live in a different world than we used to. Once upon a not so long time ago, the Pope’s words would have been heard in Germany and hardly anywhere else. It would have been an “in-house” conversation. Today, a person of his influence has his words beamed around the world within moments of being stated.
The major point that Pope Benedict was attempting to make was that in his opinion religion should not be separated from reason and that reason should not be separated from religion. To highlight this, he was quoting a dialogue between a Byzantine Emperor and a Persian philosopher, as reported by the Emperor. He goes on to quote the Emperor as saying that conversion forced by violence is not reasonable and is not the will of God.
One message the Pope may have been attempting to make was that interfaith dialogue is possible and has already happened. The work he quotes describes a conversation between a Byzantine Emperor and a Muslim philosopher who are able to sit and talk about religion and theology. But if that was his point, it was not clear.
Because the Pope did not explicitly separate himself from the words of the emperor describing the achievements of Muhammad as “only evil and inhuman”, his speech is being interpreted to mean he agrees with the Emperor. If his desire was to say that violence in the name of religion is wrong, he could have pointed to and criticized some of the past practices of Christians in general or of the Catholic Church in particular (the Inquisition comes to mind) rather than going outside his own tradition to illustrate his meaning.
But perhaps this is an example of the fact that it is easier to see the faults in others than to see our own failings, and it is easier to point out the faults of others than to point out our own.
I do not pretend to know whether or not the Pope agrees with the quotation; that is for him to know and speak to but his speech implied that he does. As long as he does not explicitly say that he disagrees with it, it will be assumed by many that he shares the Emperor’s opinion of Islam and Muhammad.
I do not raise up this issue either to criticize or to defend the Pope. Rather, I raise it up to point to the difficulties we all face when it comes to discussing sensitive topics. This is true whether the dialogue is global and intercultural or interfaith, as in the Islamic/Christian international conversations taking place; it is true in national and denominational conversations about such things as race; and it is true in personal conversations around these or similar issues or around personal conflict.
This Pope has made clear that he desires to engage in interfaith dialogue. It would be a shame if those willing to do so are so hurt by the attempt that dialogue ceases. One of the dangers that we risk if we attempt to speak with one another is that we will say something “wrong”. If such attempts are met with hostility and anger, then those efforts will end. Ironic, isn’t is, that if may be those willing to make the effort, willing to take the risk of reaching out, who are most in danger of being derided and disparaged.
The world is full of pain and conflict, and conversation is a good and important way to avoid conflict. As has been pointed out many times by others, when people are talking at least they are not fighting. But conversation entered into without proper care on both sides can lead to or can increase conflict.
Take any conflict: the Middle East, Northern Ireland, race relations here in America, or debates about the place of religion in government here in America or whether abortion should be legal. If we are to have constructive conversations with one another about these things, we must enter into those conversations carefully and with the proper groundwork within ourselves. And we should be honest with ourselves and acknowledge that too often when we enter into dialogue with others what we are really after is to have them listen to us so that they will think as we do. Having acknowledged that, we then should set it aside as a goal and enter into talks with a desire to learn from the other.
In order not to have conversation devolve into shouting slogans at each other (that is, if instead the intent is to work towards mutual understanding or towards reconciliation) then we must be willing to carefully consider what our words say and how they will be heard. And we must be open to feedback. Some years ago President Bush, speaking of our efforts in the Middle East, used the word “Crusade”. The reaction was strongly negative. President Bush learned from that event and has not used the word again. He was open to hearing that the word “Crusade” touches upon deep emotions and is felt as highly threatening and therefore does not move conversation forward. That is the goal for all of us, to learn from such events.
Yes, if we are going to have dialogue leading to reconciliation, then we must learn to be “politically correct”, and I use that phrase in the positive sense. To be politically correct means to be sensitive to other people’s emotions and to attempt to avoid giving offense.
But it is also true that if dialogue is to take place, I must be willing to take the risk of saying something that, unknown to me, offends. We cannot move forward without taking risks.
For that to be true, for me to take risks, I must have a sense that you will be tolerant to some degree. If I am trying to have a conversation with you and I use the wrong word and you explode at me that will probably end the conversation. And I in turn must be willing to let you say something that is offensive without overreacting to you. People on each side must be willing to teach and be taught about what hurts.
We must also be willing to hear that though a particular word or phrase or idea may be offensive to us, it is important to them.
In the west a Crusade is a struggle for that which is right and just, and a “Crusader” is someone who is willing to sacrifice themselves for a good cause, so Batman is “the caped crusader” and the Mother’s March of Dimes fought a “Crusade” to wipe out birth defects. In that sense, these are the Christian analogy to jihad and jihadist.
If conversation is to work, then we must be willing to take risks, and we must be willing to open the door to hearing things that are hurtful. Can we be hurt and still remain in conversation? That is not just a global question; it is a question about all of our interactions and relationships including our personal relationships, the relationships between siblings, between life partners, between parent and child: Can we be hurt and still remain in conversation? Can we allow ourselves to be willing to hear hurtful things and correct those that are correctable without yielding to rage and resentment?
The Pope may have stated or at least implied something offensive to Muslims, and that is worthy of feedback and concern. However, like the riots last year following the publication in a Danish newspaper of cartoons mocking Muhammad, the precipitating incident does not justify the over-reaction. To say of the Pope, as one Turkish leader did, that he now ranks with Hitler, is thoroughly inappropriate.
Dialogue allows people the opportunity to correct the stereotypes that others have about them. But it also opens up what may be the greatest risk: that we will learn uncomfortable things about ourselves. We may discover, in our dialogues with others, that we hold false stereotypes, that we hold certain biases, that we, perhaps, are afflicted with one or more “isms”. The good thing then, is that we would be able to take steps to correct this. And it is precisely there, in understanding and self correction that we grow and become more fully the selves we hope to be.
But if we engage in dialogue, we may also have to face the truth of some stereotypes. Westerners do not comprehend the Muslim anger that is directed against us. If we are open to listening, we may learn that we have done wrong to others, and that is difficult to accept.
And that works both ways. Muslims are upset by the quotation the Pope used; yet it is historical fact that after Muhammad gained enough adherents through preaching, Islam spread by the sword. That is undeniable historic fact. And it is fact that Islam came to the attention of Europeans when Muslim armies invaded Byzantine and other European controlled territories. That is fact.
And it is a fact that as we engage in discussions all or most of us will hear things and face truths that are uncomfortable. European settlers and their descendants in America stole the land that belonged to the Indians and engaged in ethnic cleansing and genocide against them. And we have never recompensed them for that. That is a truth, and many Indians still live with the resultant poverty and cultural dissolution that such conquest brings.
In race relations, if we are to have genuine conversations, then whites must hear—fully and truly—what the effects of slavery and ongoing racism are.
And then, beyond conversations, people must decide what to do now with the circumstances that exist. But we cannot move forward to that unless and until we have fully understood what has been done.
Such conversations are potentially painful. Yet it is only through that pain that genuine reconciliation can be achieved.
We sometimes move into dialogue with others not knowing their vision of truth, sometimes deaf to their words and ideas, and unaware of the hurts and rages within them and so prone to unwittingly giving them pain. Yet, if we would know peace in the world, we must go forward with our efforts to speak with one another.
Whether interfaith or interracial, international or interpersonal, it is in speaking from our heart that we each learn and teach.
The good news is that such conversations ultimately can and do bring reconciliation, understanding and justice; but only if we all strive to enter into them with gentleness, compassion and forgiveness in our hearts.
With the hopeful spirit of a child learning to speak, may we together, bound not by fears but each sustained and set free by our varied faiths, find the strength to speak and so heal the world.
Return to
Home
Return to Sermons Index