Today's West is by far the most heterogeneous society the world has ever seen. Yet despite the crossing of ethnic boundaries and progress toward cultural integration, there is still one enclave of reactionary separatism that holds a great deal of global influence: the Vatican.
Pope Benedict XVI's Sept. 12 speech referencing a Byzantine emperor's belief that Islam is composed of "things only evil and inhuman" is a clear example of the current Vatican leadership's inability to encourage a healthy relationship between members of the Church and followers of other faiths. The Vatican has since repeatedly claimed that the Pope's remarks were taken out of context. Regardless of his intent, the Pope has called upon old prejudices in an age where striking down such prejudices is of great importance. By now, Vatican speechwriters should have the tact to recognize that such a remark will provoke a violent backlash from the Muslim world. This blunder led to the killing of a Somalian nun and the declaration of war against Christianity by an al Qaeda-linked group, among other reactions. The fact that some within the Church have decided to use these responses as validation of the Byzantine emperor's belief is representative of the ethnocentric attitude that is surprisingly common within Catholicism's upper ranks.
What may be even more egregious than the use of the quote itself is the lack of a true apology from the Vatican. The Church has tiptoed around apologizing, choosing to express regret for the reactions that the speech provoked instead of directly apologizing for the offensive statement. In attempting to excuse the pontiff's remarks, the Vatican's website defers to a papal declaration from 1965 which esteems Islam as a valid Abrahamic faith. One would hope that 41 years later, the two faiths would be trying to work together and that the respect proclaimed in 1965 would be taken as a given, but unfortunately this is not the case. Catholicism and Islam seem to be no closer to a mutually beneficial relationship, at least at the official level.
The Vatican may never be a liberal institution, but it needs only to look to its recent past to find a model of progressive thought regarding the necessary relationships between world religions. To quote the Jordanian newspaper al-Dustone, "The difference between Pope John Paul and Pope Benedict is that the former had opened the door of Islamic-Christian dialogue and closed the doors of the past so that everyone would look to the future, but the latter has done totally the opposite." Indeed, Pope John Paul II became the first pope since biblical times to enter a synagogue and the first pope ever to enter a mosque. The current Vatican leadership risks undoing the goodwill these visits have fostered. Examination of the administration of Pope Benedict XVI reveals that he is reactionary in more ways than one. He is a proponent of saying mass in Latin, a practice that was done away with over 40 years ago. Symbolically, he has made the decision to wear conservative papal garb that neither Pope John Paul I nor Pope John Paul II chose to wear. Benedict XVI's recent actions demonstrate that his beliefs are as dated as his vestments. Under his leadership, the Vatican is at best tentatively upholding the progress made by John Paul II. At worst, it is slipping backward in time and beginning to lose relevance in our progressive society.
Ironically, the Church felt the need this March to reiterate that it is solely Catholic and not "western." But the Vatican's recent actions have shown that it rejects not only the materialism of Western culture, but also the prevalent desire for integration and cross-cultural understanding. The Pope needs to go further than showing respect for other religions and display a genuine interest in studying them and maintaining a dialogue with them. The time when mere acceptance was enough is over — the Church and representatives of other faiths should acknowledge that at the core they have many common interests and beliefs and work together to ensure a new age of understanding among all faithful. Michael Medeiros is a freshman from Bethesda, Md. He may be reached at mmedeiro@princeton.edu.
Read More
Keep academic authority in human hands
Lily Halbert-AlexanderThe Trump administration’s attacks on research and higher education as well as a blind reliance on AI chatbots are reflective of a societal backslide: a commodification of knowledge that prioritizes “efficiency” over the messy process of getting to an answer, where nuances are flattened and the truth is fungible.
The Trump administration’s attacks on research and higher education as well as a blind reliance on AI chatbots are reflective of a societal backslide: a commodification of knowledge that prioritizes “efficiency” over the messy process of getting to an answer, where nuances are flattened and the truth is fungible.
What do we owe society for a Princeton education?
Jia Cheng ShenThe social and moral responsibility that comes with receiving a degree subsidized by both private generosity and public trust is significant.
The social and moral responsibility that comes with receiving a degree subsidized by both private generosity and public trust is significant.
Notes from a so-called enemy’s classroom
Jennifer JenningsIt wasn’t revolutionary. It was homework. But it was homework that asked: how do we build schools that work for all kids? Inclusion, after all, is the “I” in DEI. That’s what we’re thinking about together. And caring about each other’s experiences and opportunities, it turns out, isn’t something you can outlaw.
It wasn’t revolutionary. It was homework. But it was homework that asked: how do we build schools that work for all kids? Inclusion, after all, is the “I” in DEI. That’s what we’re thinking about together. And caring about each other’s experiences and opportunities, it turns out, isn’t something you can outlaw.