NEW YORK — Controversy surrounding plans to build an Islamic mosque and cultural center two blocks from Ground Zero prompted Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York to offer his services as a mediator — even as he avoided taking sides in the dispute.
Almost a textbook example of a moral dilemma, the debate over the future of the proposed mosque calls on Americans to choose between the constitutionally protected right to religious freedom and reasonable accommodations for post-9/11 sensitivities and security concerns.
That balancing act is especially delicate for U.S. Catholic bishops, who still confront anti-Catholic prejudice and political challenges to the religious identity of Catholic social institutions — most recently in legislative battles over same-sex marriage and a health bill that included federal funding of abortions.
This week, Archbishop Dolan addressed the competing perspectives of the mosque’s opponents and supporters during an unscheduled press conference at Covenant House, a Catholic social agency for homeless youth. A solution to the impasse remained his “major prayer,” he said. But while the archbishop stopped short of opposing or endorsing the plan, he seemed to lend support for an alternate site.
“Those who wonder about the wisdom of the situation of the mosque, near such a wounded site, ask what I think are some legitimate questions that I think deserve attention,” the archbishop said.
John Paul’s Example
Setting aside the issue of religious freedom, the archbishop underscored the need for flexibility while emotional wounds inflicted by the 9/11 attacks remain unhealed. He recalled the adroit leadership of Pope John Paul II who intervened in a protracted eight-year dispute between Jewish leaders and Polish Carmelite nuns residing in a convent on the grounds of the German concentration camp at Auschwitz, where millions of Jews were exterminated during the Holocaust.
In 1993, the Pope essentially ordered the nuns to relocate to a convent in a new location, after acknowledging the extent of Jewish opposition to their presence.
Pope John Paul is “the one who said, ‘Let’s keep the idea, and maybe move the address,” said the archbishop in a reference to the Holy Father’s intervention in a dispute that drew the attention of Jews throughout the world. “It worked there; might work here.”
The archbishop said he was pleased that New York Gov. David Paterson recently called for the mosque’s supporters to find a new site. But Archbishop Dolan also applauded New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg for endorsing the right of Muslims to build the mosque.
The archdiocese declined a request for further comment or clarification regarding the archbishop’s remarks or related issues.
Earlier this month, Bloomberg confirmed the importance of securing religious freedom for all faiths in a diverse nation that has witnessed the long predominance and recent decline of mainstream Protestantism, even as Catholics and Jews struggled to overcome deep prejudice that once excluded them from the legislature, certain neighborhoods and elite institutions.
“In the 1700s, even as religious freedom took hold in America, Catholics in New York were effectively prohibited from practicing their religion — and priests could be arrested. Largely as a result, the first Catholic parish in New York City was not established until the 1780’s,” Bloomberg noted during his remarks that supported the mosque initiative and traced the inclusion of various religious groups during the course of American history.
“Political controversies come and go, but our values and our traditions endure — and there is no neighborhood in this city that is off limits to God’s love and mercy, as the religious leaders here with us today can attest,” said the mayor.
Subsequently, President Obama also lent his support to the Ground Zero mosque. But the explosive public reaction to the president’s initial endorsement, which he qualified twice in the following days, underscored the extreme sensitivity of this issue.
Yet critics of the mosque plan say the stakes are higher and the issues more complex than an open-shut matter of religious freedom.
Nina Shea, the director of the Center for Religious Freedom at the Hudson Institute, a Washington, D.C., think tank, has been a stalwart defender of religious liberty. But she contends that Americans are still learning to distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate interpretations of religious belief.
In a recent commentary posted on NationalReview.com, Shea wrote, “It is important to remember that shutting down a particular religious establishment — or preventing it from being built — does not constitute barring a religion as a whole.”
Archdiocese Nixed Other Mosque
While the Ground Zero mosque provoked national attention, Archbishop Dolan was directly involved in a similar, but more contained local controversy resolved in July, following three months of negotiation and review. At that time, the board of St. Margaret Mary Church in Staten Island, a New York City borough, voted against the sale of its vacant convent to the Muslim American Society.
Father Keith Fennessy, the pastor of St. Margaret Mary, had initially agreed to the proposed sale, until strong local opposition forced the parish board to reverse its decision. Archbishop Dolan is on the parish board, but he has said little about the decision — except for a recent post on his blog regarding the Staten Island and Ground Zero mosques.
“Legitimate and understandable concerns about these two endeavors have arisen, and it is good these are being aired and discussed,” wrote Archbishop Dolan.
He wrote that it was “acceptable to ask questions about security, safety, the background and history of the groups hoping to build and buy.” But he rejected attempts to “prejudge any group, or to let fear and bias trump the towering American (and for us Catholics, the religious) virtues of hospitality, welcome, and religious freedom.”
Regensburg Lecture
In the wake of the 9/11 attacks and the attendant increase in Christian-Islamic tensions, the Catholic Church has encouraged multilateral initiatives to defuse conflict, though at times, the Church also had fueled it — if unintentionally.
Pope Benedict XVI’s Regensburg lecture provoked a firestorm of protests from Muslims who said he mischaracterized the faith during the academic talk. Critics blamed the scholarly Pontiff for his undiplomatic language, but two years later in 2008, the Vatican hosted a ground-breaking Christian-Muslim “summit” that provided a forum for discussion of issues raised by the Regensburg lecture, as well as theological and historical disagreements dating back to the Crusades.
Cardinal Jean-Louis Tauran, president of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, suggested in a published interview that the summit marked a promising “new chapter” in relations between the two faiths, and it surely served as a testament to the way controversy can be transformed into an unexpected opportunity for honest dialogue.
“This dialogue is not about finding the lowest common denominator, saying we’re all alike. It reminds us instead of the exigency of the truth, which for us is Jesus Christ,” the cardinal observed. “You need to look, listen and respect the other. But then, affirm your own identity.”
That may be the long-term goal of religious leaders who seek to defuse the Ground Zero dispute, but it won’t be easy to establish a framework for that kind of engagement.
Recent polls confirm broad opposition to the mosque, and it seems increasingly likely that the issue will emerge as an election-year litmus test. That prospect could make it tough to identify an alternate site and convince U.S. Muslims they should accept the plan with good grace.
Joan Frawley Desmond writes from Chevy Chase, Maryland.
Comments
Post a Comment
At this time, it is not wise to build another mosque or another of any other type of religious institution near ground zero. It is wise to move the mosque a little farther away from ground zero; so we can focus, instead, on “Healing New York City.” It is time for peace, enlightenment, LOVE, and HEALING at ground zero. I pray for love and healing to blanket the residents of New York City and America. Please allow me to share with you a video with a simple message of healing, hope, and love. If you are from New York City, you will recognize the familiar New York locations that are shown in this video.
Click on the link below or copy and paste this link into your address bar:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyK4ShANKnU&feature=player_embedded
“Love is Important”, quote from Michael Jackson.
While the debate continues over a mosque at the site of ground zero, the wars and the suffering of people in poverty rage on. I want peace, enlightenment, LOVE, and HEALING at ground zero. I want a monument at Ground Zero with the words and music to this song.
“Heal the World”:
In this place you’ll feel
There’s no hurt or sorrow.
There are ways to get there
If you care enough for the living
Make a little space, make a better place.
Chorus:
Heal the world
Make it a better place
For you and for me and the entire human race
There are people dying
If you care enough for the living
Make a better place for
You and for me.
Michael Jackson sings it better than I can write it.
Please click on the video link below (or copy and paste in into your address bar)
and read, listen, and pray to our creator for “Healing”.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WJrtms8EoQ&f eature=related
I do not believe that the constitution protects a religion’s right to build anywhere it wants- no matter the local restrictoins or feelings—it merely protects it’s practice from government intervention. I feel this way no matter the denomination. For example, I am a very faithful Catholic, yet I felt that the Archdiocese of Baltimore’s legal arguement that freedom of religion allowed it to tear down a historical landmark building in order construct the JPII prayer garden in downtown Baltimore had no legal merit. Such a misapplication of the religios freedom arguement merely weakens the constitutional right. And leads to its application in the mosque situation.
There sure are a number of ways to look at this. I understand and have felt the same knee jerk reaction of many who have pointed out that the men who flew those planes into the Twin Towers in New York were led by a strict inner interpretation of the Qur’an (Koran). So the initial thought of a group of Muslims meeting yards away from where such a tragic event happened can cause one to wince. But when the dust clears and the heart beat slows down, I believe the group in question ought to be allowed to carry on with their plans. But my main reason for such a position may not be easy to see at first. Here’s what I’m thinking.
1. The President has correctly stated that these people in NY have a Constitutional right to construct their center as long as they abide by the laws of the land. This is the same right of any other American religious group.
2. Not all Muslims in America have declared Jihad or live by the same interpretation of the Qur’an as the terrorist of 9/11 did. Not all Muslims hate the West or America. I don’t hate Muslims.
3. But the real reason is my faith in the power of the gospel (good news) of Jesus Christ. Paul stated that he was not, “ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes”. In short, I am not threatened or fearful of Islam. I have a friend from Iran who came from a Muslim faith. I believe that when the simple elements of Christ are placed alongside the basic tenants of Islam on an equal playing field, Christ will win. I say that not because Christ followers are better than Muslims. Rather I say that because Jesus answered the inner cry of our hearts like no one else ever has- how can we have peace with God? Islam says keep the Five Pillars and maybe you’ll get in. Judaism says keep the Torah and maybe you’ll get enough points. But Christ came and said that in and of ourselves we are bankrupt, but that he loves us anyway. We are unable to appease God, but Jesus came and took our brokenness and sin on the cross. That is where true transformation comes from. That’s love and power and true change. That’s why I’m not too hot and bothered by a Mosque two blocks from ground zero. I’m actually excited about more opportunities to share the love of Christ with those in New York and around the world who don’t know him.
The real answer for NY is not a court battle over property, but for someone to move there, share the love of Christ, and thus plant a living Christ centered community there. More at Kingdomology.com
I think John Paul set a very positive precedent when he asked the nuns to move,,,,
There are over 100 Mosques in New York City so I find it hard to believe that moving the location is an infringement on religious liberty
I think that Pope John Paul set a positive precedent with the convent situation.
There are over 100 mosques in New York City so I dont think this is an infringement on religious liberty,
Pope John Paul set a positive precedent regarding the convent situation. There are over 100 mosques in New York City so I dont find this is an infringement on religious practice.
When a proposal to open a gay bar across the street from the mosque was put forward the spokesman for Park51 said such an act would not encourage dialogue with the Muslim population. Can’t they see that the construction of this mosque, here, at this time, does not encourage dialogue? I think they do see, but it’s not about dialogue, it’s about proclaiming were here, we won, like they did in Spain in the 8th Century. That is certainly the way it will be seen in the Muslim world.
Islam has as much to do about 9/11 as fundamentalists have to do with Christ’s teachings. Americans like to pick and choose who gets freedoms and who don’t. Show some real Christian spirit for a change and let the mosque be. Show that you understand that Al Quaeda is not representative of Islam anymore than the invasion of Iraq has to do with Christianity.
I worry that there will be violence at the proposed site. Not necessarily from mainstream Catholics or Jews, but possibly from extremist muslims. Think of how many mosques have been bombed in the Muslim countries by opposing followers of Islam, or even pilgrimages where violence has occured.
It only takes a very small minority or even one person to cause a lot of trouble. And then how will the Muslim world react to the U.S.
We have a LOT of misunderstandings and problems now, and if something unfortunate occurs it’s going to really get worse.
We could have violent intra-muslim rivalry right in our own country.
God help no matter what happens.
For those who lost loved ones in this despicable attack, the healing continues. Any monument should be to those who were murdered that terrible day. They had committed no crime against anyone; they were innocent.
Between the mosque and that so called fundamental “pastor” down in Florida who’s going to torch all the Korans he can get his mitts on, it’s getting a little hot for Muslims.
Maybe if they converted, they’ll cool off.
What would John Lennon think?
The fear and hatred of Muslims is what is fostering terrorism. And the invasion of Muslim countries by the west threatens my security (and yours). I deplore the foreign policy of the US because it breeds hatred and recruitment of terrorism. There was no justifiable reason to invade Iraq (and don’t give me that “we got rid of a dictator B.S.”!).
Any show of generosity and good faith towards Muslims increases our security, it does not threaten it.
And there will be a monument to those Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Shintoists, atheists, etc, etc, etc at the site of the Twin Towers. Ever seen a New York block? This site is not that close and could never be construed as a monument or non-monument to anything related to 9/11.
I urge people to read Three Cups of Tea. Greg Mortenson is a man who is doing something concrete to conbat terrorism. The governments of the West are fueling it!
Timothy McVey was a Christian. Should all Christian churches that are within a three block radius of the bombed building in Oklahoma be removed in order to respect the families of survivors of that act of terrorism?
Tim McVey didn’t blow up a building because his Christian faith told him to do so, and don’t give me any of your B.S.
Hey Jim,
His interpretation of the bible did, though. Same junk, different religion.
There are none so blind as those who will not see…........
Sandra: the point is, he didn’t do what he did because his religion told him to. His act was one of revenge for Ruby Ridge, and other “perceived” government atrocities.
Islam is militant in it’s very core. The “March to Mecca” was not a peace march, it was “Conquest”, Cordoba was “Conquest”. Are there peaceful Muslims, yes, of course, people in their hearts are essentially peaceful, is Islam a “peaceful”, live and let live, religion, NO!
Is Christianity a peaceful religion, Yes, are there militant, aggressive, conquering Christians, Yes, you can’t equate the two. Was the Soviet Union a peaceful, compassionate, live and let live, nation, NO, were there peaceful, compassionate Soviet citizens, YES…
My vision is fine, you should worry about yours.
I, however, don’t suffer from RC myopia.
We could go back and forth regarding what Islam/Christianity teaches and can prove/disprove anything and everything as a result.
I still maintain that if you are going to allow/disallow people to build places of worship based on what their religion teaches, then Christianity does not score well.
I didn’t hear a peep out of Christians when the US invaded Iraq on trumped up pretenses.
And Tim McVey used the bible to justify his actions. You can justify anything with scripture if you try hard enough.
I don’t have an answer. I see both sides. I see how it could hurt people because of what a few radicals did in the name of the muslim faith but I also see that the freedom of religion is very fragile at this time in this nation. I do know Who has the answers and I am not Him. God knows better than any of us and I’m sure no matter what happens, in the end His Will will be done.
Thomas,
A point of clarification: the building torn down by the Archdiocese of Baltimore was a former hotel/apt. building that had no historic landmark status (it was barely 100 years old). Further, the Church, which owned the building, sought other options for exercising its religious mission without demolishing the building (affordable housing, etc.) but could not find a developer that could make it financially viable to do so. In the end, it chose to create a space on the same block as America’s First Cathedral, the Baltimore Basilica, where people who live and work in a too-violent city could come to pray and be nearer to God. That the Church was forced to fight its right under the constitution to use its own property to further its mission was unfortunate, but an exercise of its religious freedom rights no less.
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.