THREE TIMES POLEMICALLY
A good friend of mine expressed lately an opinion that made me confused, even though since the September 12 I have heard it oftentimes in various disputes. The claim being that it was very rash of Benedict XVI to publicly judge jihad during his speech at the Ratisbonian University, which proved him lacking JPII’s sensibility and his ecumenical talent even more. The way followers of the Prophet react to such statements is widely known. It immediately brought to my mind last autumn polemics that appeared after the publications of cartoons with Mahomet along with experts showing a great deal of understanding stepped out for the sake of protesting Muslims and flooding everybody with explanations and justifications of Islamists’ behaviour. Then the “wild and proud” Oriana Fallaci was still alive and her voice was not that placating.
Following the principle of comparing press facts with sources, I was truly interested to read Wojciech Pięciak’s article titled Triumf fanatyków (The Triumph of Fanatics) in the current issue of “Tygodnik Powszechny” (39/2006). There I found convincing (for me) arguments that the case in question may be viewed from a peaceful, balanced angle, though not deprived of definite stands and, luckily, far removed from the currently popular journalistic practices of seeking sensation in Pope’s speeches. According to the author of the article, it was not necessary for Benedict XVI to apologise Muslims for his words as they were used contrary to his intentions. He did not launch a critique of Islam and the Prophet but expressed his disagreement to conversion by force, which is against the essence of God and of the human soul.
Moreover, in numerous comments and acts of indignation expressed for the sake of the attacked Muslims, a very important fact passed hardly noticed. The infamous reference to the ideological 14th C dispute between the emperor of Byzantium and the Persian theologian, in which reputedly “offensive expressions” appeared, was preceded by Pope’s overall critical evaluation of the Western civilisation, which, according to him, is arrogant and ‘deaf’ to the word of God. “Where lies the boundary between fanaticism and rationality?[…] Is there any point in the dialogue between the two religions if only one side (the Christian one) is to be criticised? Is there still any space for such a dialogue?” the author asks rhetorically. The fanaticism visible in abrupt reactions of Muslim politicians foretells not too bright a future, the form of relating pope’s speeches, suspiciously one sided, even a darker one.
Also in the issue, the text by Paweł Bravo appears devoted to the late Oriana Fallaci, titled Wściekła i dumna (Raging and Proud), the title referring to her famous book that grew out of her reflections on the meaning of the terrorist attacks carried out by Islamic fundamentalists in Western countries since 2001. However, this written tribute to the Italian journalist and columnist is noticeably different from typical obituaries because of, among other things, the currency of Fallaci’s ominous speeches about possible (for her even already taking place) invasion of Islamofascism on Europe. The Saturday press from the Sep.16 published, apart from the obituaries of Fallaci, the news of “the Muslim street’s” preparations to burn figures of Benedict XVI as well as some specialists in Arabic culture’s expertise about the possible growth of hostility towards the Catholics. It is a convincing evidence for the necessity of waging a war against the radical political Islamism (which Fallaci identified with Islam itself), a war deprived of false, cowardly gestures of western politicians. With time, Fallaci added to her views the deep conviction that Islam’s resignation from violence is “against reason, against life, against our survival” that means absolutely impossible.
Tough words? To my mind, their ferocity does not outdo fundamentalists’ threats but they sound disagreeably to the European ear nevertheless. Paweł Bravo reminds us that Fallaci knew the Muslim world from its darkest – martial – side she got in contact with as a reporter relating the war in the Middle East. Her biography teems with activities directed against those holding power and violently enforcing selected behaviours and views. Among her calls for action, the loudest one was for courage in the face of the immediate threat. That is why “it is difficult to disregard her claims, even though the fierceness of expression made some shrug their shoulders and pigeonhole those calls as eruptions of hostility by a madwoman” we read in the tribute. The additional argument for not counting Fallaci together with other not dangerous but loud weirdoes is the fact that this “Christian atheist” as she became to be called by people sensitive to the question of religion managed to find audience among the Church authorities. A constructive case to think about.
I suggest to end the reading of “Tygodnik Powszechny” with priest Adam Boniecki’s review of Andrzej Seweryn’s movie Kto nigdy nie żył (Who Never Lived). The picture already arose some special emotions, which, I regret to say, recur with successive religious movies. Temperature amplitude does not go to extremes but the prevailing attitude is that of sharpness and reluctance, especially when faith is concerned. In the mean time priest Boniecki proposes in his article Sami, ale nie samotni (Lonely But Not Alone) not to treat the story of the HIV positive priest as a document based on somebody’s actual life because then one gets overwhelmed with simplifications of the history of the illness and church traditions. “…this movie is not about priests, the Church, nor drug addicts” the author remarks “it is about a man in an extreme situation who struggles with, above all, loneliness, which he manages to overcome with the help of friends and support he was given”. It turns out that the love surrounding the main character is a great force, rescue from despair, even though it does not guarantee overcoming all monsters of the illness days and nights bring. For many Boniecki’s thesis is unpopular, its argumentation even more so. This reluctance is a typical reaction to movies evoking hope, Seweryn directorial debut included. I join Boniecki’s appeal for understanding. Faith and love may hopefully follow.
Beata Pieńkowska
Translated by Anna Skrajna
Discussed journals: Tygodnik Powszechny