Trends and Developments in Interreligious Dialogue

VIMAL TIRIMANNA, CSSR

POPE BENEDICT’S PRAYER IN THE BLUE MOSQUE

In the Light of Recent Roman Catholic Teachings on Interreligious Relations

Introduction Pope Benedict XVI’s visit to the well-known “Blue Mosque” in Istanbul last November was surely a turning point not only in interreligious dialogue in general but also in Catholic-Muslim relations in particular. Although his immediate prede- cessor, Pope John Paul II, was the only other pope to enter a mosque’s enclosure in Damascus in 2001, Benedict XVI will go down in history as the only pope so far to “invoke God” inside a Muslim mosque side by side with the Grand Mufti of Istanbul and the imam of the mosque. This is not only a prophetic gesture that symbolizes the harmony and brotherhood that one would expect to exist between Islam and Christianity, but it also points to the fact that the adherents of both these great religions do invoke the same God in their prayers or “invocations of God.” It is also a great symbol that encourages healthy, authentic, interreligious dialogue.

In this article we will first analyze briefly what it means to pray to the ultimate Absolute reality whom Christians (together with believers from some other religions) call “God.” We will then highlight what it means to pray as adherents of the three monotheistic Abrahamic religions. Finally, we will try to establish that, when the pope prayed in the Blue Mosque, he was not only well within the Catholic tradition but that he set an exemplary gesture that will surely enhance interreligious dialogue that is aimed at world peace.

Praying to God the Father Christian tradition has always held that God is the Father of all humankind and, consequently, all human beings are brothers and sisters. The Second Vatican Council was also very clear on this point when it said: We cannot truly pray to God, the Father of all, if we treat any people in other than brotherly fashion, for all men are created in God’s image. Man’s relation to God the Father and man’s relation to his fellowmen are so dependent on each other that Scripture says: “He who does not love, does not know God” (1 Jn 4:8). There is no basis, therefore, for

29 STUDIES IN INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE 18 (2008) 1 any discrimination between individual and individual, or between people, arising either from human dignity or from the rights which flow from it. (Nostra Aetate, No. 5) Pope John Paul II also affirmed that God is the Creator and Father of all when he wrote: The Old Testament attests that God chose and formed a people for himself, in order to reveal and carry out his loving plan. But at the same time God is the Creator and Father of all people; he cares and provides for them, extending his blessing to all (cf.Gen.12:3); he has established a covenant with all of them (cf.Gen. 9:1-17). (John Paul II 1991: No. 12) Moreover, the same cherished Christian tradition has always maintained that one of God’s main attributes is His omnipresence, according to which not only is He present everywhere but one can also relate to Him from anywhere and everywhere. If so, He should be close to those who invoke Him irrespective of religion or the place of worship. In his great classical and theological work, his Confes- sions, St.Augustine narrates the process through which God “called, cried out and rid him of his deafness” until he was converted. We should note here that even before his baptism, which made him a believer in the Christian religion, he had been having endless encounters with God even though he (Augustine) tried to avoid Him (God)! It is in this sense that Augustine asks the rhetorical question and re- sponds himself: “Where wert Thou, then, in relation to me at that time, and how far away? . . .Thou wert deeper within me than my innermost depths and higher than my highest parts” (Augustine, Confessions III.6.11).

Thus, according to the Christian tradition, God is not only the Father of all humanity, but He is also present everywhere, and one can adore him and pray to him anywhere, for he is omnipresent. Omnipresence is, as mentioned above, a basic quality of God. As such, the pope could also pray anywhere, but when he prays in a Muslim mosque, it has special significance (perhaps, unique significance) precisely because it is not just anywhere but a place where Muslims normally pray, and also because it is not anybody who prays, but the “head of the worldwide Catholic Church.”

Praying to the Ultimate Transcendental Reality (“God”) in Different Religions There are different definitions of and thousands of treatises on prayer in the different religions of the world. But a common characteristic of prayer according to all the religions is that it is basically a relationship with the transcendental (God) in whom one believes. Accordingly, this relationship is not only an expression (either in thoughts or words) of dependence on the providence of God but also an expression of worship of the same God. In view of this basic common characteristic of prayer, can we say that all adherents of the different religions pray to the same God? The response definitely has to be in the negative, at least on the particular

30 POPE BENEDICT’S PRAYER IN THE BLUE MOSQUE level, for one main, obvious reason. The belief in the divine (“God”) is not the same in the different major religions themselves. Thus, for example, in Hinduism, one believes in many “Gods,” while in Buddhism, belief in a “God” is absent. The so-called “religions of the book,” namely, Judaism, Christianity and Islam, believe in one God, “the God of Abraham.” In view of such a wide variety in the very perception and belief of the divine reality in particular religions, it should be evi- dent that adherents of different religions praying together does not amount to praying to the same God perceived in a same way by everyone who invokes God from his/her particular religious perspective.

However, on the general level, all do definitely invoke the same transcendental reality, whether we call it “God” or use another term. Of course, Pope Paul VI had already hinted that all religions do raise their adherents towards the transcendental being. In his Easter message of 29 March 1964 he said: Every religion contains a ray of light which we must neither despise nor extinguish, even though it is not sufficient to give man the truth he needs, or to realize the miracles of the Christian light in which truth and life coalesce. But every religion raises us towards the transcendental Being, the sole ground of all existence and all thought, of all responsible action and all authentic hope. (In: Oesterreicher 1969: 87) Then again, in his first encyclical, Ecclesiam Suam (1964) explaining the con- centric circles of dialogue, the same pope says: Then we see another circle around us. This, too, is vast in its extent. . . . It is made up of the men who above all adore one, supreme God whom we too adore. We refer briefly first to the children of the Hebrew people, worthy of our affection and respect, faithful to the religion which we call that of the Old Covenant. Then to the adorers of God according to the conception of monotheism, the Moslem religion especially, deserving of our admiration for all that is true and good in their worship of God. And also to the followers of the great Afro-Asiatic religions. Thus, Pope Paul VI seems to indicate that all religions do “raise” people to the same transcendental reality, even though he also careful in such statements to highlight the important differences among the religions. Even in the citation above from Ecclesiam Suam, though the pope clearly implies that the different religions do adore the same, one supreme God, he carefully makes distinctions among them, thus indicating clearly the different perceptions of the same God in those different religions from their specific, particular perspectives.

A similar sentiment was expressed by Cardinal Beam the head of the Commission responsible for drafting the conciliar document, Nostra Aetate, at its promulgation on 20 October 1965, when he told the news agency ANSA:

31 STUDIES IN INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE 18 (2008) 1

The Declaration on the Non-Christian Religions is indeed an important and promising beginning, yet no more than a beginning of a long and demanding way towards the arduous goal of a humanity whose members feel themselves truly to be sons of the same Father in heaven and act on this conviction. (In: Oesterreicher 1969: 130) This idea expressed by the cardinal has since become an essential tenet of the official magisterial teachings on other religions. One of the main organizers of the now well-known Assisi Prayer for Peace in 1986, Marcello Zago, wrote in his personal diary that the convocation of the Assisi Day of Prayer was based on the conviction that all mankind is God’s people, created by God and saved by Christ, even if it is not aware of it (Kedl 2006: 53).1 After the Assisi event he wrote: At Assisi, the welcome given to the religious representatives and people being present at the prayer offered by various religions were in some way a recognition of these religions and of prayer in particular, a recognition that these religions and prayer not only have a so- cial role but are also effective before God. (Zago 1987: 2) His entries in this diary also clearly show that he was well aware not only of the differences among the religions and within the same religion, but also the sensitiv- ities that ensue from these differences (Zago 1986). In the days of preparation for the Assisi prayer in 1986, Pope John Paul II made several references to the up- coming great event. On 21 September 1986, at the Angelus gathering in St. Pe- ter’s Square, he said: No one should be surprised if the members of the different Christian Churches and of the various religions should come together to pray. Men and women who have a religious spirit can in fact be the leaven of a new awareness of the whole of humanity in regard to the common responsibility for peace. Every religion teaches the overcoming of evil, com- mitment to justice and welcome for others. Today, this common, radical fidelity to the respective religious convictions is more than ever a requirement for peace. Each one present at Assisi will pray to God according to his own religious tradition. We Christians, by virtue of the communion that already exists, shall be able to pray together (cf. L’Osservatore Romano (English Weekly Edition) 29 September, 1986: 2). Then, on 22 October 1986, which was also the eighth anniversary of his inaugur- ation as pope, after elaborating how the Second Vatican Council had spoken of the positive elements of non-Christian religions, John Paul II said: We know what we believe to be the limits of these religions, but that does not at all take away from the fact that they possess even outstanding religious values and qualities (cf. Nostra Aetate, 2).

1 Of course, Zago would develop this theme futher in a later article (Zago 1986; for the English translation cf. Kedl 2006: 64-73).

32 POPE BENEDICT’S PRAYER IN THE BLUE MOSQUE

These are precisely the “traces” or “seeds” of the Word and the “rays” of the truth. Among these there is undoubtedly prayer, often accompanied by fasting, by other penances and by pilgrimage to sacred places held in great veneration. We respect this prayer even though we do not intend to make our own formulae that express other views of faith. Nor would the other, on their part, wish to adopt our prayers. . . . What will take place at Assisi will certainly not be religious syncretism, but a sincere at- titude of prayer to God in an atmosphere of mutual respect. (As reported in L’Osservatore Romano (English Weekly Edition) 27 October, 1986: 1-2) So, it should be clear to the reader that, in the mind of the Pope John Paul II, when different groups pray together according to their own particular ways of praying (thus, without any syncretism), they are invoking the same God. At the ground- breaking Day of Prayer at Assisi, Pope John Paul II welcomed his guests from different religions reaffirming the same view when he said: Religions are many and varied and they reflect the desire of men and women down through the ages to enter into relationship with the Absolute Being. Prayer entails conver- sion on our part. It means deepening our sense of the ultimate Reality. This is the very reason for our coming together in this place. (In: Kedl 2006: 173) Then, in concluding the Day of Prayer, the pope went on to repeat more or less the same sentiments when he told the delegates: Yes, there is the dimension of prayer, which in the very real diversity of religions tries to express communication with a Power above all our human forces. Peace depends basically on this Power, which we call God, and as Christians believe has revealed himself in Christ. This is the meaning of this World Day of Prayer. (In: Kedl 2006: 181) Surely, in all these statements, the pope seems to be reflecting the very sentiments expressed by St. Paul when he entered the Areopagus in Athens, as reported in Acts 17:22-28. While he acknowledges that all invoke the same God, he also sub- tly proclaims the unique difference in the Christian belief in God. Consequently, although the different religions do perceive the transcendental Absolute or “God” in very different ways and do pray to him in equally different ways, all of them pray to the same God or the ultimate transcendental Absolute, at least in general.

However, this is not to be construed as people coming together to pray to their respective divinities by the believers of different religions, for this is precisely what took place so successfully and so edifyingly in Assisi in 1986 and 2002, under the leadership of the late Pope John Paul II. Of course, the pope himself did meticu- lously clarify that the Assisi prayer gathering was a coming “together to pray” and not a “praying together,” when he said: Praying together, that is, saying a common prayer, is out of question, but it is possible to be present when others are praying. . . . This “being together to pray” takes on a particu- larly deep and eloquent meaning insofar as all will be the ones next to the others to im-

33 STUDIES IN INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE 18 (2008) 1 plore God for the gift that all humankind most needs today in order to survive: peace. (In: Dupuis 2001: 236-37) One of the fears expressed in view of the 1986 Assisi event was that it could be wrongly perceived as if all the religions believe in and pray to the same divinity (God). Moreover, it was pointed out that some could easily become misled into different types of syncretism and indifference, as if all religions and their beliefs were the same (cf. e.g. Benedict XVI 2004: 106-09). These were very timely, relevant and valid concerns. The then Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) very correctly pointed out that, by definition, prayer is something between two persons, and so there is a difference between “praying” to a personal God and an “impersonal” God: “‘Praying’ in the case of an impersonal understanding of God (often associated with polytheism) obviously means something quite different from praying in faith to the one personal God” (Benedict XVI 2004: 106).

However, the types of prayer as at Assisi in 1986 and 2002 led by Pope John Paul II (if they were to be conducted elsewhere with caution and sensitivity to avoid the above-mentioned obvious dangers), are surely the first steps towards fruitful interaction among religions in the form of what is popularly known as interreligious dialogue. Already, in 1984, the magisterial document entitled Dialogue and Mission had mentioned the four forms of dialogue among religions, of which sharing diverse religious experiences, including prayer, is one (cf. Nos:28-35). Seven years later, the magisterial document Dialogue and Proclamation, which was is- sued jointly by the Sacred Congregation for the Evangelization of the Peoples and the Pontifical Council for Inter-Religious Dialogue, repeated the same teaching and identified prayer as a form of interreligious dialogue when it enumerated the fourth form as “The dialogue of religious experience, where persons, rooted in their own religious traditions, share their spiritual riches, for instance with regard to prayer and contemplation, faith and ways of searching for God or the Absolute” (No: 42).

Commenting on this form of prayer, Edmund Chia writes: How do we pray? Why do we pray? Who is God for us? What motivates us to live virtu- ously? These are some of the questions addressed in this category of dialogue. Our experiences in pilgrimages, a spiritual insight, a religious vision or a prayer image are some of the contents of this dialogue. As dialogues of spirituality entail the sharing of personal experiences which can at times be intimate, it is generally understood that there will be no arguments nor discussions on what is shared. Instead, each dialogue partner is encouraged to share about the depths of her/his religious experience, with no direct preoccupational concern for the “rightness” or “wrongness” of those experiences. This category of dialogue is by no means an occasion for debates or discussions and neither are they occasions for study or analysis. As sharings of religious experience, they remain personal and subjective

34 POPE BENEDICT’S PRAYER IN THE BLUE MOSQUE and can only add to the treasury of how people experience their God and religion. (Chia 2003: 256-57) Already, at their Second Plenary Session of the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences (FABC), held in Calcutta in 1978, the Asian bishops had said: Sustained reflective dialogue with them [persons of other religions] in prayer (as shall be found possible, helpful and wise in different situations) will reveal to us what the Holy Spirit has taught others to express in a marvellous variety of ways. These are different perhaps from our own, but through them we too may hear His voice, calling us to lift our hearts to the Father.2 It is needless to emphasize here that such forms of interaction among adherents of different religions would surely be a stepping stone towards understanding, and at times even towards appreciating and admiring, one another. By themselves, religions do not and cannot interact or dialogue with each other; rather, it is the adherents (human persons) of different religions who interact or dialogue with one another. It is in this sense that the sharing of their experiences, especially their personal experiences go a long way towards enhancing this mutual understanding, appreciation and admiration, which would eventually lead believers of different religions to become engaged in working towards common human concerns, such as peace in our contemporary world. Hans Küng points out the vital importance of peace among religions for world peace: “There can be no peace among the na- tions without peace among the religions. There can be no peace among religions without dialogue between the religions” (Küng 1991: 105).

For this very purpose, Kung proposes an Ethic of World Peace which “manifests the values on which the great religions of the world converge, despite all the differences” (ZENIT 2005 (September 26th, 2005)).3 When Pope Benedict XVI met with Küng just four months after his election to office, this was one project by Küng that the pope approved and encouraged him to go ahead with (ZENIT 2005 (26 September, 2005). As such, there is no denying what interreligious prayer encounters could mean positively and what such prayer could signify prophetically and bring about in our world today. But one has to keep in mind that such interreligious prayer gatherings are surely not gatherings where all pray the one and the same prayer or that all perceive “God” or the absolute divine reality, to whom the prayers are addressed, in “the same unique way.” That is, the differences between religions and their cherished beliefs are not ignored.

2 No.35 of the Final Document of the Second Plenary Assembly of the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences, as reproduced in Rosales and Arévalo 1997: 35

3 This daily news bulletin called ZENIT: The World Seen from Rome will be referred to henceforth in this paper simply as ZENIT.

35 STUDIES IN INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE 18 (2008) 1

Praying to the One God in the Abrahamic Monotheistic Religions However, when it comes to the believers of the monotheistic religions (especially Judaism, Christianity and Islam)4 praying together, then things need to be construed very differently. To begin with, all these three religions claim Abraham as their “Father” and they all claim to worship “the God of Abraham.” The first official Church document to recognize this fact was Nostra Aetate of the Second Vatican Council (cf. Nostra Aetate Nos. 3, 4). However, the Church is also aware of the main serious theological differences among these three religions. First, the Church is well aware that, in spite of the many common tenets of faith in the One God between Christianity and Judaism, the latter, for example, does not accept the divinity of Christ, which is indeed the central truth of the former. Irrespective of such fundamental differences, there are certainly many similarities between the two religions. Addressing a group of American Jews in October 1960, Pope John XXIII said: There is a great difference between the man who only accepts the Old Testament and the man who joins to the Old the New as the highest law and teaching. These differences, however, do not extinguish the brotherhood that springs from a common origin [of Christians and Jews]. We are indeed all children of the same heavenly Father and the light and work of love must always shine among us all. Signatum est super nos lumen vultus tui, Domine! (O Lord, thou hast put more joy in my heart !) ([Psalm] 4:7). (Osservatore Ro- mano (19 October, 1960) in: Osterreicher 1969: 6-7)

Having already spoken about the positive elements of Islam in Nostra Aetate No. 3, the Council goes on to say: But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place among whom are the Muslims: these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day. (Lumen Gentium No. 16) Again, the Church is aware of the main serious theological differences between Islam and Christianity. For example, the Church is well aware that Islam denies not only the divinity of Christ but also such basic concepts in Christianity like the concept of the Holy Trinity. But the Church continues to acknowledge that since Judaism, Christianity and Islam are all basically heirs of Abraham, they all adore the “God of Abraham”—that is, they all adore the one and the same God.

During the Second Vatican Council sessions, one of the Council’s theological ex- perts, John Oesterreicher said once when addressing the press: “Abraham, the

4 One should note that these three are not the only monotheistic religions in the world. For example, Sikhism is also monotheistic.

36 POPE BENEDICT’S PRAYER IN THE BLUE MOSQUE father of the Jewish people, is at the same time the father of all who believe in the living God, in the ‘goodness and loving kindness of God our Saviour’ revealed to us in Jesus Christ ([Titus] 3:4)” (in: Oesterreicher 1969: 59). In other words, the three monotheistic religions do adore the one and the same God, the God of Abra- ham. Referring to these three religious traditions, Archbishop Fitzgerald, the former President of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue describes this fact as follows: Each tradition has a liturgical expression of this primary article of faith. Judaism makes use of the Shema: “Listen, Israel . . . I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. You shall have no gods except me’ ([Deut- eronomy] 5:1, 6-7). Christians proclaim Credo in unum Deum, I believe in one God. Muslims, at every ritual prayer (salat), recite the shahada: La ilaha illa Llah: There is no divinity except God. (Fitzgerald and Borelli 2006: 163) Cardinal Karl Lehmann points out the commonalities of the three major Abra- hamic religions when he writes: Judaism (Hebrewism), Christianity and Islam are bound together in a special way. On the geographical and historical levels, they all come from the same milieu. They all appeal to the same religious experiences and traditional narratives. All of them venerate Abraham as the father of faith. Christianity has taken in the Hebrew tradition as the first part of their Bible. Islam keeps to the tradition of the patriarchs and of the prophets, and recognizes also Jesus as a prophet. All three religions profess their faith in one God who has created the world and who is for human beings a merciful saviour but also a judge. . . . Precisely as “the father of faith” in which he clearly represents that which means to believe, Abraham belongs to the common patrimony of Hebrew-Christian tradition and the Muslim tradition. (Lehmann 2006: 652; translation mine) However, Lehmann also correctly points out the different types of theological relations that exist between Christianity and Judaism and Christianity and Islam (Lehmann 2006: 652-53). Consequently, the Church officially recognizes that, although there exist important theological differences among the three Abrahamic religions, all three nevertheless do indeed worship the one and the same unique God. Thus, Popes John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul II and Benedict XVI proclaim in one voice with the Second Vatican Council that the believers of these three religions do worship the one and same loving, merciful God. If so, an obvious corol- lary is: whenever the believers of these three religions do pray (individually or together), are they not praying to the one and the same God (on both particular and general levels)? Given the above clear-cut premises and the statements of the Ma- gisterium, the answer to this question should obviously be in the affirmative, for this is the certain conclusion to be drawn from the above premises. Theoretically, such a conclusion may be deduced easily, but in the lived practical reality, it takes a very long time to arrive at such a conclusion, even though it should also be drawn immediately in a logical sense. This is precisely what happened in the dis-

37 STUDIES IN INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE 18 (2008) 1 cussions that ensued in December 2006 when Pope Benedict XVI entered the well-known Blue Mosque in Turkey and spent some time in silent reflective prayer side by side with his Muslim hosts. It is very interesting to read and analyze the way different personalities in the Church tried to interpret this prophetic gesture by the pope.

Pope Benedict XVI Praying in the Blue Mosque: A Prophetic Gesture To begin with, the pope entered the revered Islamic mosque with great respect, by removing his shoes, and was accompanied by Mustafa Cagrici, the Grand Muf- ti of Istanbul and Emanullah Hatiboglu, the imam of the mosque, among others. After explaining to the pope how the Muslims recollect themselves in prayer, the Grand Mufti himself began to pray. Next to the Muslim religious dignitaries who were accompanying him, and facing the mirhab, the niche pointing to the east, the pope “recollected himself for a few minutes in silence” (ZENIT (30 November, 2006), and on television clips one could observe him clearly moving his lips. At the end, the pope was reported as having told the Grand Mufti in an audible voice “Thanks for this moment of prayer!” (Politi 2006b: 21).5 The public discussion evoked by this great prophetic gesture of the head of the worldwide Catholic Church, eventually resulted in posing the poignant question: Did the pope really pray at the Blue Mosque in Istanbul? On the one hand, there were those who were hesitant, if not reluctant, to say that the pope did “pray” in the Blue Mosque, while, on the other hand, there were those who maintained vehemently that he did indeed “pray” in the hallowed mosque of the Turkish Muslims.

To the media personnel who accompanied the pope, there was no doubt whatso- ever that the pope did indeed go into a few moments of recollected prayer. The same opinion was held by the chief host of the pope, the Grand Mufti of Istanbul, Ali Bardakoglu, who accompanied him. In a press interview immediately after the papal visit to the Blue Mosque, the Grand Mufti (who first invited the pope to pray inside the mosque) said in response to a reporter who asked him what the most solemn moment of the papal visit was: I experienced an atmosphere of great intensity when we were united in prayer. I am not sure exactly as to what the contents of the pope’s prayer were. I chose the sura of Fatiha because this passage begins thanking God. I did so because I was together with the head of the worldwide Catholic Church, and so, I thanked God for having lived this special moment. To be courteous, I kept this moment of prayer very brief on my part. Although I had earlier thought of praying for about 45 seconds, when I had finished praying, the pope was

5 See also the news report, “Il Papa nella Moschea blu prega insieme al Muftìm,” La Repubblica (1 December, 2006): 2.

38 POPE BENEDICT’S PRAYER IN THE BLUE MOSQUE still continuing in his prayer. He was intensely concentrated and I did not wish to disturb him.6 However, as mentioned above, when describing the event even the ZENIT news agency used the phrase “recollected himself for a few minutes in silence,” and was very careful to avoid the word “prayer” in its initial accounts of the event (ZENIT 30 November 2006). The same news bulletin also did quote a clarification made by the official Vatican spokesman, Fredrico Lombardi, the director of the Vatican Press Office as saying that “the Pope paused in a moment of meditation and recollection” (ZENIT 30 November 2006). Father Lombardi was quoted as saying: “It was a moment of personal meditation, or relationship with God, which can also be called a personal, profound prayer. But it was not a prayer with exter- nal manifestations characteristic of the Christian faith” (ZENIT 30 November 2006). The well-respected theologian Cardinal Walter Kasper himself was ex- tremely cautious in calling it a “prayer” straightaway. The Italian media quoted him as saying that he did not really know what the pope was thinking during those silent moments inside the mosque, and that most probably it was a recollection, a meditation. The Cardinal is then supposed to have added immediately that, even if the pope did pray, it cannot be called an official prayer or a public prayer because it could not be that (In: Politi 2006b: 21). However, the President of the Commission for Ecumenism and Interreligious Dialogue in the Italian Episcopal Conference, Mgr. Paglia pointed out that “without falling into any type of confu- sion or relativism,” the pope made a step forward in keeping with the “spirit of Assisi” (Politi 2006b: 21), thus, implying that he did pray.

In this context of the apparent reluctance by some to call the pope’s gesture “an act of prayer” explicitly, the crucial question asked was whether acts such as “silent reflection,” “personal meditation or relationship with God,” “acts of personal prayer,” etc., do not qualify as acts of prayer. The cherished Christian tradition has surely held that silent reflection or meditation whether done on a personal or public level, is surely prayer if it is in relationship with God. And on his return to the Vatican, the pope himself confirmed this understanding when he laid to rest any doubt whether he did indeed pray or not in the Blue Mosque, when he said at his weekly Wednesday general audience: In the ambit of interreligious dialogue, Divine Providence allowed me to carry out, almost at the end of my trip, a gesture that initially was not foreseen and which revealed itself ex- tremely significant: the visit to the Blue Mosque in Istanbul. Remaining recollected for a few minutes in that place of prayer, I turned to the only Lord of heaven and earth, merciful

6 In: “Noi due, fianco a fianco abbiamo ringraziato Dio,” La Repubblica (1 Decem- ber, 2006): 3; translation mine.

39 STUDIES IN INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE 18 (2008) 1

Father of the whole of humanity, and implored that all believers might recognize themselves as creatures and give witness of authentic fraternity! (ZENIT 6 December 2006) One should note first of all in this carefully prepared statement, which was read out by the pope, that he himself calls the visit to the Blue Mosque “a gesture,” in- spired by divine providence. Then, describing the central event of that gesture, he calls the mosque “a place of prayer” and goes on to say that he remained “recollected for a few minutes” and that he “turned to the only Lord of heaven and earth, merciful Father of the whole humanity” (a phrase dear to the Muslims, too, in addressing God) and that he “implored.” All these carefully chosen phrases and words indicate that, in his mind, the pope did indeed pray in the Blue Mosque in Istanbul. Since this clear statement by the pope, no one was ever heard again raising his or her doubts as to whether the pope did indeed pray or not in the Blue Mosque. But one needs to ask why there was this initial hesitancy or reluctance, why people were so overcautious in stating that the pope really did pray in a Mus- lim mosque. After all, both the Muslims and Christians do pray to the same living, merciful God.

This is a clear illustration of the gap between what the Christians claim to believe and what they practice with regard to interreligious dialogue.7 In theory, as pointed out above, the conclusion is reached without much difficulty (by official magisterial statements themselves, as highlighted above) that adherents of Juda- ism, Christianity and Islam do pray to the one and the same God. This was re- peatedly stated by the present pope himself even during his Turkish tour. But in practice or on the practical level, there still seems to be some reluctance, some hesitancy, to admit what it really entails in the practical sphere of praying together. In this particular case of Pope Benedict praying in a mosque, for some people, there is also the added “problem” of admitting that the pope, the head of the worldwide Catholic Church, could really “pray” in a non-Christian place of worship, such as the Blue Mosque—a mosque of the “Muslims”! The unwarran- ted fear and reluctance to admit that the pope did indeed pray in the mosque seems to be based on the crucial question: Could this give the wrong impression to the Catholics that they too could pray in a mosque or at the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem? Could it give the impression that the pope is syncretistic as well? Of course, as pointed out above, there is no theological problem as such, praying anywhere to one’s God, to say the least, if the believer holds that God is omnipresent. On this point Oesterreicher writes: God in his mercy has restricted his grace neither to those prayers that the Church has re- ceived from Christ, from the singers of Israel or from her own poets, nor has he restricted

7 Some years ago Paul Knitter did refer to this type of “a gap” between belief and practice. See Knitter 1999: 320,326-27,342

40 POPE BENEDICT’S PRAYER IN THE BLUE MOSQUE it to the Sacraments. Already the Schoolmen taught “Deus virtutem suam non alligavit sacramentis” – “God has not tied his power (to vivify and to sanctify) to the sacraments” (cf. Summa Theologica, III, q.64, a.7). The non-Christian religions, too, have a certain measure of sanctifying power, they are near to salvation because they share unconsciously in the grace of Christ which is ever active in the Church. As has been said, they are a challenge to the Church, reminding her that she owes all she is and has to God’s goodness alone. (Oesterreicher 1969: 92) Moreover, using the above magisterial statements themselves, one could conclude that all the adherents of these three monotheistic religions do indeed pray to the same God. If so, the places where these adherents pray to their God (though identified as places of this or that religion) are places where they pray to the one and the same God. That is to say, whether one prays (in one’s own way of praying) at the Wailing Wall, the Blue Mosque or St.Peter’s Basilica, if one is an adherent of one of these three major religions, one is praying to the one, true God in whom one believes. The reader needs to note seriously here that we are referring to private, personal prayer only (for as Cardinal Kasper pointed out in the statement quoted above), in the respective public liturgical worship of the three Abrahamic monotheistic religions, the modes of praying could be quite different. Since we are dealing with the silent, private, personal prayer of Pope Benedict at the Blue Mosque last December, we are limiting ourselves in this essay to such private, personal prayer, by the believers of these three major religions. Are they not praying to the same unique God, no matter the place where they pray?

Pope Benedict XVI was reported as having made undaunted efforts during his en- tire trip to Turkey to promote Christian-Muslim dialogue. He was reported as having said that Christians and Muslims shared a “common path” in helping society “to open itself to the transcendent” (Mickens 2006b: 38). Does this “common path” not begin with the very common concept of God as shared by the three religions, i.e. the one, loving, merciful God? If so, can one not pray to that God from anywhere in general, and in the very sacred places of worship of the three religions of the Book as well?

This issue becomes even more acute when one takes Jesus as the model of Chris- tian prayer. The gospels clearly indicate that Jesus was in constant touch with God his Father, and he often withdrew by himself to be in explicit relationship with Him in prayer. But one also notices in the same gospels that Jesus did not have a particular or special “sacred place” reserved for His prayer. The Johannine gospel is very particular about this. Just as the Spirit moves where He wills (John3:8), so also God is present wherever He wills. One just cannot cage God or imprison Him within the churches, mosques, synagogues or any other holy religious shrine, let alone churches belonging to Christians or exclusively to the Catholics! Ac- cording to Jesus, the true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and in truth (John 4:23). Commenting on John 4:5-26, Neyrey says:

41 STUDIES IN INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE 18 (2008) 1

The Samaritan woman asks Jesus-the-prophet to settle a dispute about where to worship, “this mountain . . . or in Jerusalem?” (4:20). Jesus sweeps away the question with his answer: “neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem . . .” (4:21). Thus, Jesus broadly negates all fixed places of worship. (Neyrey 2006: 108). In fact, Pope John Paul II was very clear in recognizing the activity of the Holy Spirit even outside the visible bounds of the institutional Church when he wrote: The Spirit manifests himself in a special way in the Church and in her members. Nev- ertheless, his presence and activity are universal, limited neither by space nor by time (Dominus et Vivificantem 53). . . . The Spirit, therefore, is at the very source of man’s ex- istential and religious questioning, a questioning which is occasioned not only by contin- gent situations but by the very structure of his being (Dominus et Vivificantem 54). The Spirit’s presence and activity affect not only individuals but also society and history, peoples, cultures and religions. (John Paul II 1990: No. 28) For all these reasons, it should be more than obvious that, when the pope prayed at the Blue Mosque, he was not only well within the Christian tradition, but he also performed a unique prophetic gesture towards peace which is to be achieved in and through a fraternal dialogue with Islam. As a matter of fact, in this year’s World Day of Peace Message Benedict XVI reechoes the Second Vatican Coun- cil’s teachings when he says that peace is “both a gift and a task,” thus implying that, while it is God who grants peace, we human beings also have our own task to perform in promoting peace (Benedict XVI 2006). This is exactly what the pope put into practice (the “task” aspect) by his unprecedented gesture of “invoking God” in the Blue Mosque, asking Him for the “gift” of peace. As one author writing in the popular Italian Catholic weekly, the Famiglia Cristiana said, by praying side by side with the Grand Mufti of Istanbul, the pope not only over- came the backlash of his Regensburg discourse a few months before, but in doing so, he also launched anew a dialogue of words and gestures towards peace (Bob- bio 2006: 26). The same author went on to write: It looks as if this prayer is a tiny little thing, but, on the contrary it is powerful, and this image of the pope and the mufti praying together is more eloquent than any other uttered sentence. In fact, they were not praying together but side by side together, a prayer that becomes a dialogue. In this act, each of them maintains his own identity, but the passion for God and for the destiny of humanity is their common preoccupation, for God has never disappointed man. (Bobbio 2006: 28-29; translation mine) Cardinal Roger Etchegaray shared similar views when he said: “It is a gesture that has the same force as that of John Paul II at the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem when he slipped into a slot of the wall a small note with a prayer. Neither of these acts was premeditated” (Bobbio 2006: 28; translation mine).

In an interview with the Italian daily, La Repubblica, the well-known Swiss theologian, Hans Küng, while praising the theologian Pope Benedict XVI, said that

42 POPE BENEDICT’S PRAYER IN THE BLUE MOSQUE the pope is a “man of reflection” who is well aware of what he does, and said that he is a man who can meditate and elaborate small steps with great significance that would give massive strides forward to the Church as a whole, especially in this case with regard to Christian-Muslim dialogue (Politi 2006a: 21). As Arch- bishop Fitzgerald says, “in evaluating progress since Vatican II [of Catholic-Mus- lim relations] we should pay attention not only to the words of the popes but also to their actions” (In: Fitzgerald and Borelli 2006: 120). It is precisely in this sense that the present pope’s gesture of prayer in the Istanbul mosque goes a long way in strengthening not only Islamic-Church relations in particular but also interreligious dialogue towards peace and harmony in general.

Conclusion By praying together side by side with the Grand Mufti of Istanbul in the Blue Mosque, Pope Benedict made history as the first pope to pray inside a mosque. As already mentioned above, he did not pray together with the Mufti the same prayer in a literal sense. Rather, each of them prayed their own way but side by side, thus offering the world a powerful symbol, a gesture towards peace and re- conciliation. Since each preserved his own unique identity, there was no question of syncretism or relativism. Each prayed in his own way, but to the one and the same God, with great solidarity in prayer. One needs to note here carefully that it is God who becomes the unifying factor, in this sort of prayer, just as He was in Assisi in 1986 and in 2002.8 Marcello Zago, the main organizer of the Assisi prayer expressed this point lucidly when he wrote just before that great event: At Assisi the heads of the Churches and religions will be together to pray. In point of fact, they will not all offer the same prayer, they will not be praying together; but they will be together to pray. This simultaneous unity and separation show that religions are not all equal to each other, even though they have converging aspirations and similar expressions. (Zago 1986) When the pope left Rome for Turkey amidst a very tense situation in the aftermath of the Regensburg controversy, he is reported to have told the journalists that “he did not expect great results, but wanted only to plant some seeds” (Mickens 2006a: 16). This is what he seems to have done—planting—and done with the sense of an efficient “farmer” who is aiming for a good “harvest.” For Muslim- Christian relations will never be the same as it was when he initiated the Turkish

8 Of course, there were some important criticisms of the Assisi prayer with, as point ed out above, in the vital question if different believers from different religious systems, with their different concepts of the Absolute, could pray to the same “God.” Since both the Christians and the Muslims adore and pray to the same merciful, creator God (“the God of Abraham”), this question does not arise in the case of Pope Benedict’s prayer at the Blue Mosque.

43 STUDIES IN INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE 18 (2008) 1 visit. This new development is important for peace and harmony in the contemporary multireligious world, for together, Christians and Muslims account for well over half the world population. As the pope himself wrote in the golden book in the former Christian Church, Santa Sofia, now turned into a museum, just before winding up his visit there: “In our diversities, we find before us our faith in the One God. May that God enlighten us and make us find the way of love and of peace.”9 In the aftermath of this visit to the Blue Mosque, world peace based on religious harmony does not seem to be impossible. This symbolic event could possibly pave the way for a renewal in understanding and an eventual interreligious dialogue between the two Abrahamic religions, i.e., Christianity and Islam.

LITERATURE Augustine. (1966). Confessions. In: Roy Joseph Deferrari et al. (eds.). The Fathers of the Christian Church: A New Translation. Transl. Vernon J. Bourke. Rpt. Washington: Catholic University of America Press Benedict XVI. (2004). (as Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger). Truth and Tolerance: Christian Belief and World Religions. Transl. Henry Taylor. San Francisco: Ignatius Press. (2006). “The Human Person, the Heart of Peace.” Pope’s World Day of Peace Message 2007; As Reproduced in ZENIT (December 13). Bobbio, Alberto. (2006). “Il Cuore a Istanbul.” Famiglia Cristiana (December 10): 26-29, Chia, Edmund. (2003). Towards a Theology of Dialogue: Schillebeeckx’s Method as Bridge between Vatican’s Dominus Iesus and Asia’s FABC Theology. Bangkok. Dupuis, Jacques. (2001). Christianity and the Religions: From Confrontation to Dialogue. Maryknoll: Orbis Books. Fitzgerald, Michael and John Borelli (2006). Interfaith Dialogue: A Catholic View Maryknoll: Orbis Books. John Paul II, Redemptoris Missio (1991). In: William Burrows (ed.). Redemption and Dialogue: Reading “Redemptoris Missio” and “Dialogue and Proclamation.” Maryknoll: Orbis Books. Pp. 5-55. Kedl, Aloysius. (2006). “Father Marcello Zago’s Role in the Celebration of the 1986 Day of Prayer for Peace at Assisi - I,” Vie Oblate Life 65: 47-73. Knitter, Paul. (1999). “Catholics and Other Religions: Bridging the Gap between Dialogue and Theology”, Louvain Studies 24: 319-54. Küng, Hans. (1991). Global Responsibility: In Search of a New World Ethic. London: SCM Press. Lehmann, Karl. (2006). “Il Metodo del Dialogo.” Il Regno 18: 650-54. Mickens, Robert (2006a). “Did Turkey Change the Pope?” The Tablet (December 9): 15- 16.

9 “Il Papa nella Moschea Blu prega insieme al Muftì,” La Repubblica 2006 December 1: 2-3; translation mine.

44 POPE BENEDICT’S PRAYER IN THE BLUE MOSQUE

2006b. “‘Non-political’ Pope says Turkey is Welcome in Europe.” The Tablet (December 2): 38. Neyrey, Jerome H. (2006). “Worship in the Fourth Gospel: A Cultural Interpretation of John 14-17.” Biblical Theological Bulletin 36: 107-17. Oesterreicher, John M. (1969). “Declaration on the Relationship of the Church to Non- Christian Religions: Introduction and Commentary.” In: Herbert Vorgrimler et al. (eds.). Commentary on the Documents of Vatican II. New York: Herder and Herder. Politi, Marco. (2006a). “Hans Kung approva Ratzinger:‘Un atto studiato, è stato abile’.” La Repubblica (December 7): 21. (2006b). “Nella Moschea ho Pregato il Dio Unico.” La Repubblica (December 7): 21. Rosales, Gaudencio and C.G. Arévalo (eds). (1997). For All Peoples of Asia: Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences. Documents from 1970 to 1991. Vol. 1. Quezon City: Claretian Publications. Zago, Marcello. (1986). “Religions in Favour of Peace.” Osservatore Romano (October 15): 64-73. (1987). “Day of Prayer for Peace: Assisi, 27 October 1986.” OMI Documentation (February): 2-4.