Mirror of Justice

Tuesday, April 22, 2008

Pope Benedict at the UN General Assembly

Last Friday morning I had the opportunity to hear Pope Benedict deliver his address to the UN General Assembly. My remarks today are designed to explain the contributions I believe the Holy Father has made so far to the continuing development of Catholic legal thought. It is relevant to point out that Pope Benedict expanded on themes dealing with international society, law, and organizations treated by his predecessors such as Benedict XV, Pius XII, Paul VI, and John Paul II. One of these themes that Pope Benedict XVI identified early in his intervention is that the UN is a “family of nations” rather than simply an organization of States. As he said in quoting from John Paul II’s 1995 address to the General Assembly, the UN should be “a moral center where all the nations of the world feel at home and develop a shared awareness of being… a ‘family of nations.’” The foundation for making this claim is his acknowledgement that the work of the UN, by implicit and explicit provisions of its Charter, is to advance the common good of the entire human family rather than the interests of specific groups or States.

While he spoke about many of the issues on which the UN was founded to address, he offered specific focus on concerns with which the social doctrine of the Church is particularly concerned in the present age. In this context, he emphasized the connection between the role of rules and structures that promote the common good and the protection of human freedom. This theme was initiated at the White House welcoming ceremony a few days earlier when the Pope spoke of the exercise of freedom and the responsibilities is carries. This nexus if founded on the reality that genuine human freedom belongs to all and can only be guaranteed by the common good which exists to protect the dignity of everyone rather than just some. In his own words Benedict stated that,

In the name of freedom, there has to be a correlation between rights and duties, by which every person is called to assume responsibility for his or her choices, made as a consequence of entering into relations with others. Here our thoughts turn also to the way the results of scientific research and technological advances have sometimes been applied.

In this regard, I recall the particular efforts of the Holy See during the human cloning debates that led to the adoption of the UN Declaration on Human Cloning in 2005. The Holy Father stated that the scientific and other gains made in recent years must be geared to serving all members of the human family. If this is not the case, it is possible to develop new forms of servitude that denigrate the inherent human dignity that belongs to every member of the human race. As he said, “This never requires a choice to be made between science and ethics: rather it is a question of adopting a scientific method that is truly respectful of ethical imperatives.”

The Holy Father spoke at some length on an issue that is receiving increasing attention in international legal discussions, i.e., the responsibility to protect. This responsibility has two dimensions. The more obvious one involves the rights of nations to protect their own populations from “grave and sustained violations of human rights” and from the consequences of natural and man-made humanitarian crises. However, if a State is incapable or unwilling to meet this responsibility, then the international community has an obligation to intervene. But this latter duty is not without limit for the proper sovereignty of peoples and their governments must be respected. The preferred means of addressing these needs is through diplomatic channels; however, other means, presumably including the use of necessary and proportionate force, may be considered if negotiations and diplomatic efforts fail.

It would have been surprising if the Holy Father did not address the role of the natural law that has been crucial to the growth of international legal norms. Pope Benedict began this portion of his discourse by reminding the audience of the contribution of the Dominican, Francis de Vitoria, to the foundation of international law. (I am sure that the question of time necessitated the deletion of the equally important contributions of the Jesuit, Francis Suárez!) It is within their noteworthy treatises on legal theory that both developed the idea of the “responsibility to protect” that is the product of natural reason that exists among all peoples. At the foundation of this “natural reason” is the principle that everyone bears the image of the Creator, the reality of which is at the core of human rights and the recognition of the dignity of the human person. The Holy Father lost no time in connecting this point with the sixtieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that will be celebrated later this year. Benedict emphasized that the Universal Declaration was the product of different cultural and religious traditions that were nonetheless capable of recognizing certain fundamental principles about human nature and the corresponding rights and responsibilities that were discovered through the application of natural reason, the bedrock of the natural law. As he said,

the universality, indivisibility and interdependence of human rights all serve as guarantees safeguarding human dignity. It is evident, though, that the rights recognized and expounded in the Declaration apply to everyone by virtue of the common origin of the person, who remains the high-point of God’s creative design for the world and for history. They are based on the natural law inscribed on human hearts and present in different cultures and civilizations. Removing human rights from this context would mean restricting their range and yielding to a relativistic conception, according to which the meaning and interpretation of rights could vary and their universality would be denied in the name of different cultural, political, social and even religious outlooks. This great variety of viewpoints must not be allowed to obscure the fact that not only rights are universal, but so too is the human person, the subject of those rights.

The Holy Father continued his examination of the foundational relevance of human rights by noting that their source is not of human origin, including the actions of the State and international organizations, but from the author of life, Himself. Otherwise, rights become impoverished ideas, subject to human caprice, that are separated from their essential ethical and rational foundations and objectives. This is why the Universal Declaration was established on an eternal rather than a utilitarian form of justice.

One human right given particular attention by the Holy Father is religious liberty. Even in the present day western democracies of the United States and Europe, religious liberty and its inevitable partner, conscience, are under assault. One important reason for protecting religious freedom is that it promotes dialogue between and among peoples that is founded on certain commonly held principles. But it is necessary to keep separate from government control and protect religious belief and practices that concern the common good from the oversight of political action. It is also the further duty of the UN to draw from the truth, coexistence, rights, and reconciliation that emerge from religious beliefs and their exercise.

The Pope expressed his concern over the efforts of civil society and State mechanisms which attempt to regulate or suppress religious beliefs and actions in order to “preserve” other “rights.” This is evident in the U.S. and some western European States today when “abortion rights” are being allowed to trump the conscience of doctors, nurses, and pharmacists who are opposed to participation in the termination or prevention of nascent human life. The suppression of religion, including belief and practices based on belief, should never be the price individuals and religious communities must pay to enjoy the right of participation in public life. As Benedict said, “It should never be necessary to deny God in order to enjoy one’s rights.” In this regard, there should never be a preference for secular ideology over religion nor the partiality of one religion over another. It is vital that both religious worship and the public role of religion in building the social order are protected. I am certain the Holy Father had in mind that contributions made by universities, schools, hospitals, members of professions, and charitable organizations that have a foundation in religious belief also need to be protected when the State, including western democracies, attempt to dictate how these contributions can and cannot be offered to society.

It was no coincidence that Pope Benedict concluded his address by encouraging “Peace and Prosperity with God’s help” to the representatives of all God’s peoples. As we are reminded in scripture when the question who can be saved is raised, Jesus answers, “With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”

RJA sj

Monday, April 21, 2008

Gas Prices and Sprawl

By Eduardo Penalver

I got the sense during our discussion of my sprawl op-ed a few months back that there was some skepticism about the initial premise of my argument -- that rising gas prices were affecting the market for housing. This story from NPR is still somewhat anecdotal, but it adds some more data points in support of the notion that sustained high gas prices might have an impact on our country's appetite for car-dependent development patterns.

Academic Freedom and the Pursuit of (God’s) Truth

By Robert John Araujo, SJ

First of all, I would very much like to thank Patrick (who initiated the thread), Rick, Steve, and Susan for their earlier thoughts and reflections on the Pope’s address delivered to Catholic educators last week. I would like to offer a few additional thoughts about academic freedom in the context of the Catholic university—including its law school, should it have one—and the search for truth, which is ultimately God, for the Catholic educator in the Catholic academic institution and the kind of freedom with which he or she should be concerned.

For any institution to call itself Catholic, it must think with, not against, the universal Church. It must be an institution where the teachings of Christ and his Church (the Body of Christ) provide the guiding influences on how its members are to conduct their affairs in relation to one another and all others. It is crucial in this regard to understand where humanism plays a role—for “humanism” is often a guise that leads the work of the academy astray. In this task, reason and faith are crucial. That is why Benedict said, “It is important therefore to recall that the truths of faith and of reason never contradict one another.” It is the Catholic dimension of the search for truth, in an authentically humanistic environment, which focuses the lens through which Christian humanism is taught, learned, and lived. And the reason for exercising this form of humanism is to seek that which is true and to know that which is false. In this regard the Holy Father noted, “Education is integral to the mission of the Church to proclaim the Good News” because he also exhorted that, “Only through faith can we freely give our assent to God’s testimony and acknowledge him as the transcendent guarantor of the truth he reveals.”

Christian humanism—rather than some other variety of humanism—must be the project of the Catholic college and university and, therefore, be imbued with the understanding and appreciation of the great deposit of the Church’s teachings. The sources of these teachings are, of course, scripture and doctrine as developed over the history of the Church. It should necessarily follow that the community of scholars, who are aligned with this long Catholic tradition of seeking the truth rather than falsehood (which masquerades as truth), must be aware of God’s existence and what He teaches and embrace both if the college or university that calls itself “Catholic” is to be authentic to its Catholic identity.

The particulars of the endeavor of studying and living Christian humanism in a Catholic context provide the members of the university with the deeper insight into authentic human nature that is essential to the survival of the world. This insight enables the unique individual who bears God’s image to encounter the magnificence of all God’s creation as relayed in the teachings of Christ and further taught over the centuries by his Church. This encounter inexorably connects the individual with the other, who is God and who is also the neighbor. This is the most fundamental teaching of Christ, the Great Commandment—two elements conflated in one directive of right relationship: love God and your neighbor as yourself. It is the Great Commandment, so understood, that is at the core of the faith and the promotion of the just world with which the Catholic academy is inextricably connected. I question whether this is the enterprise of even the greatest universities in the world who make no effort to assert that they possess something in their nature which identifies them as “Catholic.”

Having said this, what is the particular role of the Catholic university in forming its members as those who are called upon to live and implement this basic tenet of life, the Great Commandment? It is seeking the wisdom of God rather than some passing fancy or fad or currently popular theory that is here today and gone tomorrow. This is a point emphasized by Pope Benedict when he said,

With regard to the educational forum, the diakonia of truth takes on a heightened significance in societies where secularist ideology drives a wedge between truth and faith. This division has led to a tendency to equate truth with knowledge and to adopt a positivistic mentality which, in rejecting metaphysics, denies the foundations of faith and rejects the need for a moral vision. Truth means more than knowledge: knowing the truth leads us to discover the good. Truth speaks to the individual in his or her entirety, inviting us to respond with our whole being. This optimistic vision is found in our Christian faith because such faith has been granted the vision of the Logos, God’s creative Reason, which in the Incarnation, is revealed as Goodness itself. Far from being just a communication of factual data—“informative”—the loving truth of the Gospel is creative and life-changing—“performative”... With confidence, Christian educators can liberate the young from the limits of positivism and awaken receptivity to the truth, to God and his goodness. In this way you will also help to form their conscience which, enriched by faith, opens a sure path to inner peace and to respect for others.

The charge of the Catholic intellectual inquiry, therefore, is to understand better one’s self and one’s world not from any narrow or individualized perspective but, as best as the human being and human community can, i.e., to understand it from God’s perspective. In a Catholic context, our learning, our seeking must be simultaneously humble [I/we do not know it all] and uplifting [seeking through prayerful relationship union with God]. Gerard Manley Hopkins once commented that, “The world is charged with the grandeur of God.” It is the Catholic intellectual, academic tradition which seeks to better understand the world not for itself but with the grandeur of God in mind. And this search requires freedom. But, freedom essential to the academic enterprise is not well-understood. As the Pope observed in this context, the notion of academic freedom is the object of distortion. In must not be the means to “opt out” but, rather, the desire to “opt in”—to participate “in Being itself.” Pope Benedict observed that “authentic freedom can never be attained by turning away from God. Such a choice would ultimately disregard the very truth we need in order to understand ourselves.”

It seems evident that the university—including the Catholic one—is a place of liberty and free inquiry. Without fetter, the inquiring mind must be free to search for what is true. But, in the Catholic context, how is the freedom essential to this task to be understood? This was a question asked and answered by Benedict. What follows is intended to complement what he said about the need to turn to God in the exercise of this genuine freedom.

Freedom is often viewed as the independence of the sovereign, autonomous individual from regulation or control. So, without any external restraint, the mind can wander without inhibition. By itself, this may be viewed as desirable because it enables the person to proceed unconstrained by the control of some external force. But is this the only kind of freedom with which we of the Catholic university are to be concerned? I would like to suggest that there is another dimension of freedom that is more important to the inquiry of the Catholic intellectual tradition, and that is the freedom for the truth, the truth which is God. And why is this link between God and the truth to be pursued by Catholic educational institutions so critical? Benedict gives us the answer: “Once their passion for the fullness and unity of truth has been awakened, young people will surely relish the discovery that the question of what they can know opens up the vast adventure of what they ought to do. Here they will experience ‘in what’ and ‘in whom’ it is possible to hope, and be inspired to contribute to society in a way that engenders hope in others.”

It is often said that universities exist so that their members may pursue the truth. In the context of the American university, it is further said that the greatest academic freedom is essential for the pursuit of this truth. However, this freedom is essentially viewed as freedom from control external to the investigator. By contrast, it is the particular role of the Catholic university, inspired by Christian humanism, to ensure that the pursuit of the truth is God’s truth rather than the truth that is simply human. This is where the greatest of freedoms is needed—the freedom for. Freedom from is inadequate to learn about the other or the beyond as accurately as possible. The freedom for God’s truth that is simultaneously transcendent, moral, and objective is essential to the work of the Catholic university if it is to be faithful to its mission. Freedom from insulates, whereas freedom for liberates thereby enabling the inquiring person to pursue this truth who is God. As Benedict argued, “Set against personal struggles, moral confusion and fragmentation of knowledge, the noble goals of scholarship and education, founded on the unity of truth and in service of the person and the community, become an especially powerful instrument of hope.”

It is this freedom for the greatest truth that enables those persons associated with Catholic higher education to bring such education that imbues the Good News to those not only near but those whom we do not see but with whom we assuredly do exist. It is faith in the Gospel of Christ, our common savior, that enables us to live the justice of the greatest commandment—to be in right relation with all others, our God and our neighbor. It is our Catholic faith that enables us to be the people who act justly, love tenderly, and live humbly with our God and one another. As the prophet Micah reminds us, this is the one thing that God asks of every person. This is the truth that we can come to know and the truth, as St. John proclaims about the freedom for discipleship, “you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.” [John 8:32] Again, what is that truth?

It is the way of and to God. It is the way that Jesus taught for the salvation of all. It is the realization that the exclusively subjective leads to forgetting not only the needs of others but also that we are bound with them—and this is crucial to Catholic legal theory. It is, in the context of the objective of the Catholic university, the pursuit of the transcendent and objective moral order that enables the fulfillment of the Great Commandment. Does this mean that Catholic institutions can talk about the views of those whose perspectives conflict with Catholic teaching? Of course it does. But, in doing so the members of the Catholic academy must not forget who they are, what is constitutive of their identity, and where the Truth exists. Once they forget, they will be like any university, famous and otherwise. And should they simply identify themselves as “just like any other academic institution,” the truth and the light of God will be simply be one possible course that can be discarded in favor of some other avenue of investigation. But the desire to pursue God’s rather than merely human, subjective “truth” is not censorship; rather, it becomes the quest of authentic precision about who we are, what we are about, and where we are going as beings who bear God’s divine image. RJA sj

On a lighter note....

By Elizabeth Schiltz

My eagle-eyed colleague, Elizabeth Brown, caught what may simply be a mistake in the coverage about Pope Benedict's visit to the U.S., but what may, instead, be a subtle sign of a Vatican shift in policy on the priesthood. Take a look at the caption to this photo. What do you think? http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/Pope-Benedict-visits-US-Pool-Yonkers2C-New-York-Pope-Benedict-XVI/ss/events/wl/033002pope/im:/080421/photos_ts/2008_04_20t101142_450x343_us_pope_usa/

Interesting essay on New Urbanism and "cool"

By Rick Garnett

MOJ-friend Philip "I was urbanist before it was cool" Bess passes on this City Journal essay, by Catesby Leigh. Among other things, it is noted that "the New Urbanists are to fulfill their movement’s vast potential as a force for cultural renewal, though, they must do a better job of addressing the public. One obstacle is their insular mentality." I would add, "they must do a better of job of incorporating the experience and insights of faith traditions, and of purging any even-implicitly anti-religious elements from their proposed vision."

"Who Will Save Catholic Schools?"

By Rick Garnett

Asks Mary Rose Rybak:

Every generation lives off the cultural inheritance of its predecessors. Among that inheritance for today’s American Catholics is a network of parochial schools built by their immigrant forebears, which served both to teach the faith and ground the community. . . .

But it’s worth noting that the men and women, religious and lay, who built America’s Catholic schools did so not to educate the poor but to educate Catholics. Catholic schools were formed as a means of passing down the faith to Catholic children and were a self-conscious attempt in the early to mid-1900s to wall off children from a mainstream culture that was considered hostile to Catholics. Given this fact—and given that, contrary to Fordham’s hopes, religious charter schools are not likely to become a reality anytime soon—perhaps it’s not too ungenerous to ask whether it is entirely fair to ask Catholics to shoulder the burden of educating the urban poor? . . .

On a similar note, I was struck, in Pope Benedict's address to Catholic educators (about which several of us have blogged already), the focus was not only on universities, but on the achievements and mission of Catholic schools generally.

And, for what it's worth, I think the report of the Notre Dame Task Force on Catholic Education (on which I served) had a lot of helpful suggestions to offer.

The President, I am pleased to note, is hosting a White House summit on Catholic schools this week:

President George W. Bush said his concern about the growing loss of urban Catholic schools was a prime reason he was convening a summit on inner-city and faith-based schools the week of April 21. Speaking to the fifth annual National Catholic Prayer Breakfast April 18, Bush said the summit would highlight the lack of educational options low-income urban students are facing. "I am concerned about the loss of a major national asset, and that is the decline of Catholic schools, particularly in inner-city America," he told an enthusiastic crowd of 2,000 gathered at the Washington Hilton hotel. The summit is expected to draw educators, clergy, funders and business leaders to begin discussing options for public, private and parochial urban schools. Bush said the goal was to urge Congress to develop "reasonable legislation" and practical solutions to "save these schools and, more importantly, to save the children." Citing the long history of Catholic education in the U.S., Bush commended those in the audience who are working to preserve Catholic education.

I hope the President's successor will share his appreciation for the importance of Catholic schools.

Tancredo Blasts the Pope on Immigration

By Thomas Berg

As the New York Times reported, the Pope spoke in favor of immigrants several times during his visit, including in his speech to the American bishops, where he urged them and their communities "to continue to welcome the immigrants who join your ranks today, to share their joys and hopes, to support them in their sorrows and trials, and to help them flourish in their new home. This, indeed, is what your fellow countrymen have done for generations." He also spoke of the need to prevent the breakup of families in the immigration context, since the separation "'is truly dangerous for the social, and human fabric' of Latin and Central American families."

One of the Pope's comments -- that the U.S. should do "everything possible to fight . . . all forms of violence so that immigrants may lead dignified lives" -- set off anti-illegal-immigration obsessive Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO), who issued a statement saying, "I would like to know what part of our lax immigration policy is violent" and claiming that the Peope had "encourag[ed] Bush to provide blanket amnesty to all illegal immigrants in the United States." (HT: Kathryn Lopez) Tancredo went on, as described by the Times:

Accusing the Pope of "faith-based marketing," Mr. Tancredo said Benedict's comments welcoming immigrants "may have less to do with spreading the Gospel than they do about recruiting new members of the Church." Mr. Tancredo, a former Catholic who now attends an evangelical Christian church, said it was not in the pope's "job description to engage in American politics."

Obviously there are legitimate arguments for strengthening anti-illegal-immigration policy in various ways. No one could reasonably criticize Benedict for his calls for humaneness in treatment of illegal immigrants -- which has implications for the policy issues like deportations (although I'm quite confident he's never urged "blanket amnesty"). But one can colorably argue that a call, like his, to "welcome immigrants" must always be qualified by recognizing the need for legal-immigration requirements to manage the flow of incomers in an orderly way.

But my preexisting impression that Tancredo carries beyond these arguments to foment prejudice has now been strengthened by his rush to beat off any challenge by invoking, explicitly or implicitly, other prejudices: that the Church is mostly concerned to "recruit" rather than uphold human dignity, and that the Pope should not comment on American moral-political issues (combining allusions to "religion should stay out of politics" and "the Pope is a foreigner").

Tom

Benedict XVI's Visit with Youth with Disabilities

By Elizabeth Schiltz

My favorite part of Pope Benedict's pilgrimage to the U.S. was his visit with the group of young people with disabilities, which I was lucky enough to watch live on Saturday afternoon. The visual contrast between this visit and the Mass at St. Patrick's earlier that morning was quite something. At St. Pat's, I was struck by how neat and orderly everything looked when the camera panned the whole crowd. The order was accentuated by the fact that groups of men and women from different orders were all sitting together, so the high overhead shots showed neat, orderly, patterns of groups of people in identical habits. Everything was beautifully choreographed, and from what I saw, there were no flaws in the execution of any part of the ceremony.

In the equally ornate room in which the Pope visited with the young people with disabilities and their parents, in contrast, the high overhead shots showed chaos -- clumps of people clustered around wheelchairs, papers (presumably programs) strewn all over the floor. You could just sense that this was a room in which a group of parents had been fighting a losing battle in keeping their high-spirited kids in check for the (probably) hours they had to be there before the Pope's arrival.

When Pope Benedict plunged into the group to shake hands, share kisses and blessings, there was just as much chaos and disorder, but so, so, much love and tenderness. The kids looked mostly nonchalant, but pleased, but the parents were just radiant. I'm sure every one of those kids was coached on proper Papal etiquette, yet I distinctly saw one young fellow with Down Syndrome belt out "Hi, Pope!" when Benedict came close. And the Pope was beaming, too, obviously enjoying himself. His remarks (included below) were almost incidental to the visual manifestation of the Pope and these beautiful young people showing us how "our faith helps us to break open the horizon beyond our own selves in order to see life as God does."

Conscience at Guantanamo

By Rob Vischer

Relating to our conversation on conscience in the military, Kim Daniels of the Thomas More Law Center sends along a reminder that a physician in today's American military may face clashes of conscience that have nothing to do with abortion or birth control:

[One of our clients was a] Catholic OB/GYN serving as a lieutenant in the Navy, he originally sought our help crafting an accommodation that would allow him to continue to serve as a Navy doctor without having to write prescriptions or perform procedures that violated his conscience. Several years later, I got a call from him again: he was now about to be transferred to Guantanamo as a general practitioner, and there expected to be called upon to supervise the use of feeding tubes on hunger-striking prisoners, something that he viewed as a violation of their human dignity and thus barred by his faith.

Fortunately for him, the transfer to Guantanamo never came through. But he's now out of the Navy practicing as a GP; I'm sure the conflicting lines of authority that he faced had much to do with that switch.

A World Without Islam?

By Michael Perry

Sightings 4/21/08

An Islamless World

-- Martin E. Marty

An early deadline prevents our commenting on the papal visit, the religious theme of the week. So, another topic: Last week we sighted the hard-to-miss, politically-minded preacher Rod Parsley of Ohio, who wants the Christian United States to wage war for the "destruction" of Islam. Suppose he and his "theonomist" allies succeeded? Ex-CIA man and Vancouver professor Graham E. Fuller gets cover treatment in the January/February Foreign Policy, for his mental game treatment of "A World without Islam?" The sub-head reads: "What if Islam had never existed? To some, it's a comforting thought: No clash of civilizations, no holy wars, no terrorists. Would Christianity have taken over the world? Remove Islam from the path of history, and the world ends up exactly where it is today."

That word "exactly" refers to civilizations, wars, and terrorists, and commits Fuller to having to spell things out exactly. "Is Islam, in fact, the source of the problems? If not Islam, Then What?" First, ethnic wars: Religious or not, "Arabs, Persians, Turks, Kurds, even Berbers and Pashtuns would still dominate politics in the Middle East." Before Islam, their ancestors were fighting and, apart from Islam, they still have plenty of issues.

After ethnicity, "it's too arbitrary to exclude religion entirely from the equation." Without Islam, "most of the Middle East would have remained predominantly Christian, in its various sects, as it had been at the dawn of Islam." A few Zoroastrians and Jews were the only representatives of other religions. Would harmony with the West have reigned if Christianity had kept a near-monopoly? Hardly. The Crusades were a Western adventure driven by political, social, and economic needs. Christianity was only a potent bannered symbol, "a rallying cry to bless the more secular urges of powerful Europeans." Eastern Christians would not have welcomed the Westerners, and Western Christians as readily killed the Orthodox and burned their cities as they did those of Muslims.

That was long ago. More recently, in the age of oil, would Christian economic interests in the Middle East have welcomed Western dominators? He cites chapter and verse before he answers "No!" "Then there is Palestine." Would Christians, after millennia of anti-Semitic impulses, have suddenly welcomed Zionists? "And the new Jewish state would still have dislodged the same 750,000 Arab natives of Palestine from their lands even if they had been Christian—and indeed some of them were." No peace there.

As for intra-Christian rivalry, Eastern Orthodoxy and Western Christianity have always had trouble, often lethally expressed. Orthodox Christians mistrust and fear the West as did their ancestors. These Orthodox would dominate a Middle East had it remained Christian. Roll calls: "We would still see Palestinians resist Jews, Chechens resist Russians, Iranians resist the British and Americans, Kashmiris resist Indians, Tamils resist the Sinhalese in Sri Lanka, and Uighurs and Tibetans resist the Chinese." Summary: "It is not an entirely peaceful and comforting picture."

Nor would the "New Atheists" who want a non-religious world have anything to offer. The twentieth century horrors "came almost exclusively from strictly secular regimes: Leopold II of Belgium in the Congo, Hitler, Mussolin, Lenin and Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot." In truth, the conflicts of such a world would parallel those of a world with Islam. Rather than seek to "destroy" Islam and the Muslims, one infers, it might be better for all peoples of faith to look more in the mirror and less out the window, to promote peace.

----------

Sightings comes from the Martin Marty Center at the University of Chicago Divinity School