Interreligious Relations - Our Common Call & Challenge

Inter-Religious Relations – Our Collective Call & Challenge

Fr. Eliseo R. Mercado, JR., OMI

The advances in Science and Technology and the leveling of frontiers and boundaries have all contributed to a greater awareness of the pluralism of faiths, culture and peoples not only in the world but also in our own community.

Yes, we live amid many and diverse faiths, cultures and peoples. Though many and different we are, we need not be hostile nor indifferent to each other. In fact, these diversities invite us to make a shift in our paradigm from hostility to partnership; from indifference to involvement; and from being close to being open to one another.

This relational paradigm teaches us that notwithstanding our differences and diversities we all live on this earth, in fact, on this piece of land. The bottom line is the affirmation that we are together in the journey through life. For better or worse, we are neighbors and we hope and believe that as neighbors, we can be partners in building not only of a better world but more so of a friendlier community where you and I, and our children live as brothers and sisters.

 The first step is to take our pluralism seriously. We need to seriously experience our “kinndredness”.

 Second is to be open to learn not only from each other but more so to live with each other in tolerance. Yes, our willingness to accept, to trust and to live together.

 Third, is our commitment to guarantee the rights and dignity of every person regardless of faith, gender, culture and color within our society/community.

The basis of this commitment is our belief that all peoples even though they belong to different religions, nations, etc. all form ONE human family, created by the ONE and same God, living in the same world/community, and destined for a common end.

In inter-religious relations there is one WORD that can describe our efforts and endeavors – TRUST! Trust is NOT a universal element in human relations. It has to be slowly, patiently and sometimes painfully built through time.

For emphasis, I take a portion of JP II’ s address at Casablanca Morocco on 18 August 1985.

“People do not accept their differences.

They do not know each other sufficiently.

They reject those who have not the same civilization.

They refuse to help each other.

They are unable to free themselves from egoism and

from self-conceit.

But God created all equal in dignity,

Though different with regard to gifts and talents,

Mankind is a whole where each one has his/her part

to play.

The worth of the various peoples and of the diverse

cultures must be recognized.

The world is as it were a living organism.

Each one has something to receive from the others

and has something to give to them.”

In his visit to the Grand Mosque of Damascus (May 2001), he again reiterated his message of inter-religious relations between Christianity and Islam…

“It is my ardent hope that Muslim and Christian religious leaders and teachers will present our two great religious communities as COMMUNITIES IN RESPECTFUL DIALOGUE, NEVER MORE AS COMMUNITIES IN CONFLICT”. It is crucial for the young to be taught the ways of respect and understanding, so that they will not be led to misuse religion itself to promote or justify hatred and violence. Violence destroys the image of the Creator in his creatures, and should never be considered as the fruit of religious conviction.”

“Better mutual understanding will surely lead to a more objective and comprehensive knowledge of each other’s religious beliefs at the practical level, to a new way of presenting our two religions NOT IN OPPOSITION, as it happened too often in the past, BUT IN PARTNERSHIP FOR THE GOOD OF THE HUMAN FAMILY.”

“Many serious obstacles remain, yet the first step towards peace must be a steadfast conviction that a SOLUTION IS POSSIBLE WITHIN THE PARAMETER OF INTERNATIONAL LAW AND THE RESOLUTION OF THE UNITED NATIONS. I appeal once more to all the peoples involved and to their political leader, to recognize that confrontation has failed and will always fail. Only a just peace can bring the conditions needed for the economic, cultural and social development to which the people of the region have a right."

We have embarked into this interreligious relation, precisely, to promote, advocate and “school” the basic concept of religious tolerance and partnership in our diverse world. You and I can and can spell the difference in making Cotabato and the whole Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao genuine zones of dialogue and partnership between and among Christians, Muslims and Indigenous peoples.

#Badaliyya-Philippines

July 31, 2019 – Feast of St. Ignatius of Loyola

18th Sunday in Ordinary Time (C)

Short Reflection for the 18th Sunday in Ordinary Time (C)

Readings: Ecclesiastes 1:2; 2:21-23; Psalm 90; Colossians 3:1-5, 9-11; Luke 12:13-21.

Selected Passage: "Then he said to the crowd, "Take care to guard against all greed, for though one may be rich, one's life does not consist of possessions." (Luke 12: 15)

Meditation:  Often, we measure the person's worth by his/her possession. We are wrong! The most important is to be rich in what truly matters to God.  When we were younger, we are anxious over many things and these are matters of consequence.  When we grow older, we learn how to prioritize and pay attention to things that matter.  Wisdom tells us that in the final analysis what is MOST important is the very HEART of the matter!  This is the reason that we really need to be on guard against all greed and corruption. Cf. www.badaliyya.blogspot.com

DHIKR SIMPLE METHOD...

1st step: Write the Dhikr (the Arabic word for REMEMBRANCE) in your
heart.
2nd step: Let the Dhikr remain always in on your lips and mind -
RECITING the Dhikr silently as often as possible...
3rd step:  Be attentive to the disclosure of the meaning/s of the
Dhikr in your life.

Jesus Takes Away the Sins of the World

HOW JESUS TAKES AWAY THE SIN OF THE WORLD

We should be careful not to fall into a common misunderstanding about what this means. Because of certain biblical and doctrinal ways of expressing this, the impression can be given that Jesus' suffering and death took away the sins of the world by somehow paying off a debt to God, namely, that God took Jesus' suffering as compensation for our sin - implying that God had lived in anger since Adam's sin, waiting for someone to adequately pay the debt before that sin could be forgiven. The images and metaphors used to express Jesus' expiation for sin can, if taken literally, give that impression, but that is not what they mean.

Jesus takes away the sin of the world away by transforming it, by changing it, by taking it inside of himself and transmuting it. We see examples of this throughout his entire life, although it is most manifest in the love and forgiveness he shows at the time of his death.

In simple language, Jesus took away the sin of the community by taking in hatred and giving back love; by taking in anger and giving out graciousness; by taking in envy and giving back blessing; by taking in bitterness and giving out warmth; by taking in pettiness and giving back compassion; he taking in chaos and giving back peace; and by taking in sin and giving back forgiveness.

This is not an easy thing to do. What comes naturally is to give back in kind: hatred for hatred, anger for anger, coldness for coldness, revenge for hurt. Someone hits us so we hit back.

This dynamic is not just something we are asked to admire in Jesus. The incarnation is meant to be ongoing. We are asked to continue to give flesh to God, to continue to do what Jesus did. Thus our task too is to help take away the sin of the world.

We do this whenever we take in hatred, anger, envy, pettiness, and bitterness, hold them, transmute them, and eventually give them back as love, graciousness, blessing, compassion, warmth, and forgiveness.

To read more click here or copy this address into your browser http://ronrolheiser.com/how-jesus-takes-away-the-sin-of-the-world/#.XIuhgBMzZN0

17th Sunday in Ordinary Time (C)

Short Reflection for the 17^th Sunday in the ordinary time (C): Our Father Sunday

Readings: Genesis 18: 26-32; Colossians 2: 12-14; Luke 11: 1-13

Selected Passage:  "And I tell you, ask and you will receive; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks, receives; and the one who seeks, finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened.” (Luke 11: 9-10)

Meditation:  We need to hold on to our belief that our God is a Merciful Father.  And we do not tire praying, asking, seeking and knocking, because Jesus tells us “everyone who asks, receives; the one who seeks, finds, and the one who knocks, the door will be opened’.  More than ever, we need to reflect on the prayer – Our Father to remind us who God is to us and to the whole creation. Cf. www.badaliyya.blogspot.com

DHIKR SIMPLE METHOD...

Dhikr is an Arabic word for remembrance. In the “tariqa” (the way) movement, dhikr developed into a form of prayer… It is a prayer of the heart… following three simple steps:

1.    Write in one’s heart a certain passage of the Holy Writ…

2.   Make the same passage ever present in one’s lips. 

3.   Then wait for God’s disclosure on the meaning of the passage…that interprets one’s life NOW…!

It takes a week of remembering (dhikr)…or even more days to relish the beauty of this method…

A Second Look at the Approaches to Militant Islam

A Second Look at the Approaches to Militant Islam…

Part of my present work is peace advocacy and the study of Militant Radical Islamists.  This study, inevitably, leads to the varied and many approaches to a perceived threat that is called Extremist thread in Islam, at times labeled simply as Islamist.  The term covers a lot of ground, as news reports tend to lump together Islamic movements regardless of ideology and persuasion.   My approach deals with an open and frank discussion with scholars, peace practitioners, and policy makers that deal directly or indirectly with the much the “feared” Islamic movements aka violent extremism. 

To begin with, Militant Islamic movements are NOT monolithic organizations forming a sort of international front (al-Qaeda, Jama’a Islamiyya, ISIS/DAESH, ASG or otherwise).  I recognize the legitimacy of the greater majority of Islamic movements that attempt to articulate in various ways a more authentic Islamic identity both in private and in public sphere.  There is always the need to remind people, especially policy makers in the West, that the militant Islamic movements or violent extremism form a small (albeit very assertive) minority in the Muslim world.  

There are now more than a billion Muslims in the world.  Of this number, more than two third lives outside the Arab world.  The biggest Muslim population is to be found in Indonesia.  Muslims differ linguistically, ethnically, racially and culturally, but also by the major divisions in Islam between the Sunni and the Shiites and by various schools of laws therein.

Following the tragedy of 9/11, there is always the danger of falling victims to over simplistic responses or reactions to militant Islamists or violent extremism in Islam. The US and its allies (the so-called the “coalition of the willing”) have launched the now famous slogan, “War against Terror”.  The slogan without depth becomes a new reductionism that leads not only to a naive response to a very complex reality but also to certain myopia in facing the challenges of militant Islam.  In fact, the myopia and naiveté fuel the prevailing paranoia in viewing militant Islam. Time and again, we need to emphasize that Islam and even the majority of the so-called militant Islamic movements do not constitute the new “ism” confronting the West or threatening world peace. 

There is the danger that the Cold War of the recent past is NOW replaced with a new war between Islam and the West (following the school that propagates the clash of civilizations).  The Crusade is long over…! The “war against terror” and the “coalition of the willing” approach often are interpreted in the Muslim world as new crusade against Islam.  Thus, it is crucial to differentiate in words and deeds (policy and commitments and actions) the mainstream Muslims and “legitimate” Islamic movements on the one hand and Muslim individuals and groups that among others advocate for “terrorism” and violence, on the other. 

Majority of the militant Islamic movements, including the more militant ones, are rooted on the perceived or real injustices and poverty.  The disillusionment with the West and the US in particular, has material basis.  Many people claim and believe that the singular US policy, which leads to Islamic radicalism and its anger, is its continued all-out support to Israel in the Israel-Palestine question notwithstanding the many UN Resolutions to the contrary.  On this one particular issue, the US is, tragically, always pitted against the entire Muslim world. (By the way, the Organization of the Islamic Countries emerged following the occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, Sinai and Gaza post 1967 Arab-Israeli War.)

Burning issues that fuel this growing frustration and  hopelessness are the following:

·      the continuing occupation of the West Bank;

·      the absence of forward movement in the Arab-Israeli Peace Process;

·      the ambiguity of other “Muslim homelands” in many parts of the world;

·      the inclination to “lump” Islamic movements into “terrorists circles”; and

·      the widespread poverty and lack of development in the world of Islam despite the almost limitless petro-dollars controlled by the few families in the oil producing countries in the Middle East and North Africa.

These and the continuing decline of Islamic world power following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire make the more militant radical groups more popular in the Muslim communities.  Militant Islam, like the ISIS/DAESH, attracts adherents and this may pose serious implications for the moderates – individuals and nations.  The failure to address these burning issues “satisfactorily” provides the fertile ground for a “dangerous” militant brand of Islam.

The overall positive reality in the world of Islam notwithstanding the existence of the radicals is the fact that the great majority of Muslims and Islamic countries are moderates.  No doubt, they can serve as positive forces and potential “bridges” not only between the Muslim masses and the moderates but also between Islam and the West.  In the final analysis, it is truly a “battle” for the minds and the hearts of the masses.  And this war is never won in the battlefield, even when couched with glorious slogans like “Operation Iraq Liberation/Freedom” or “War against Terror”.  In fact, battlefields simply produce more martyrs and thereby further reducing the option to one, that is, more violence. 

Another approach is the “policy of containment”.  Containment has different meanings depending on perspectives.  The common understanding is the military version that builds more fences, more road checkpoints, more blockades, and more blowing of bridges that separate peoples and communities.  This type of containment exacerbates the tensions and the anger that push people to extremism.  The other understanding of “containment” is not “geographical” but “paradigmatic”.  It is said that the best way to contain the spread of militant Islam that is akin to virus is not to build more fences and walls but to come up with a “vaccine” that presents a better image and hermeneutic of Islam and traditions.

The biggest obstacle in grappling with the militant Islam is the prevailing widespread of Wahabbism not only in its traditional geographical sphere (Saudi Arabia) but the preponderance of Wahabbism spread through petro-dollars among the scholars trained in Saudi Arabia and in many madaris and foundations funded and supported by Saudi’s petro-dollars. 

Wahabbism is the root to a taqlid-like approach to Islam that abhors any innovations (bid’a) and consciously promote a sort of return to the early Islam or the Medinan period  (the Salafiyya movement is precisely a return to the “early fathers of Islam” referring to the Medinan Period)..  Any departure from the practice of the early Islam is considered “haram” or forbidden.  This is an ideological and paradigmatic approach of Wahabbism is the singular reason for the decline of Islam that reached its pinnacle of enlightenment during the Umayyad era that merged the ideas, philosophy and innovations by way of adaptation to the wisdom and knowledge of the great civilizations of the Greek, Latin (Rome), Indic and Chinese including the old Persian Empire.  With Wahabbism, the approach is, simply, to repeat all that happened during the Median Era or simply return to the past that condemns any changes and innovations!

No doubt, there is also the urgent need to address the underlying socio-economic and political realities (real or perceived) that reduce the vast majority of Muslims to poverty and powerlessness. Petro-dollars and all the beneficence of the God-given oil/petrol must again be considered as the “patrimony” of the Ummah. There is a need to engage rulers of these petrol-producing countries and sheikdoms that it is a scandal in the Islamic Ummah to have the opulence of brought by petroleum being enjoyed by few families and treat these opulence as family owned that can be dispensed with according to the whims and caprices of their sheiks, emir and king and princes.

There is a growing rejection of interpreting faith as something limited to personal and private sphere.  The exclusiveness of the billion petro-dollars and the prevailing politics of oil within the Ummah are not acceptable. The more enlightened Muslims should take the lead in asserting a more egalitarian and religious message of faith in the public sphere.  Believers, governments, NGOs and community of nations should challenge the use of the multi-billion petro-dollar and make the blessing of petrol/oil more responsive to the needs of the Ummah everywhere thereby establishng a more equitable economic growth and distribution of wealth within the Ummah. 

Is it not precisely the “reclaiming” of the public sphere that forms the concrete basis for the inter-religious dialogues among the peoples of the BOOK?  Ultimately, the dialogue of life and dialogue of action make us all, Believers of Living Faiths, partners not only in our critique of the earth and our relationships but also in that great faith “enterprise” of building a new earth and forging new relationships.

In conclusion… I quote Fr. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, SJ: “The age of nations is past. It remains for us now, if we do not wish to perish, to set aside the ancient prejudice of ethnicity, religions, nations, cultures, civilizations, and build the earth.”

Fr. Eliseo ‘Jun’ Mercado, OMI

#Badaliyya-Philippines

Institute for Autonomy and Governance

Professor – Notre Dame University Graduate School & San Beda Graduate School of Laws

July 2019