The Washington Post (Link) - Anthony Stevens-Arroyo (June 10, 2009)
The political experts will decide if President Obama's speech at the University of Cairo on June 4 was a factor in the unexpected electoral defeat of Hezbollah in Lebanon's elections on June 7. But while the international effects may be murky, a clear and immediate result of the Cairo speech is its impact on Muslims living in the U.S. Pride about praise of one's religious traditions from political leaders often adds votes and voices within U.S. society. Catholic America should know: this was part of our past journey to inclusion.
But more than a touchy-feely sort of thing is the likelihood that the Cairo speech will produce greater support for socialized health care and an end to Israeli settlements. Those Catholics in America who agree with the bishops and the pope have long supported a universal health care plan and a two-state solution for Palestine and Israel. With the President's speech, Muslims in the U.S. have been invited to make an alliance with Catholics.
Obama's speech aligned the U.S. treatment of Muslims and the Muslim world with the vision of Pope Benedict XVI. That's not my opinion, but one found in the Vatican's newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano and echoed by Archbishop Wilton Gregory who speaks for the U.S. bishops: "Both the pope and president concur that a dialogue of civilizations must supplant the specter of a clash of civilizations ... All Catholic Americans who hope for a more secure world, and peace among the religions, can feel grateful that the president underscored the indispensable role of religion in advancing educational, economic, and scientific goals."
I laud here the wisdom of Church leaders in seeing how domestic political effects are joined to international ones. In fact, just as Obama "spoke Catholic" at Notre Dame in May (E.J. Dionne's expression), he "spoke Muslim" in June. This is an insider's observation. For instance, Obama said not just "the Qur'an" but "the Holy Qur'an," which is more or less akin to saying "the Holy Father" instead of "the pope." He quoted from the hadith about "when Moses, Jesus and Mohammed (peace be upon them) joined in prayer." Adding "peace be upon them," I think, is akin to how Catholics bow their head at the name of Jesus. Recalling his life in Indonesia, Obama used the Arabic word, "azaan," for the repeated call to prayer much like a Catholic insider might cite "the bells of the Angelus" three times a day recalling the Incarnation. Praising Islam for the tradition of charitable giving called "zakat" is similar to citing papal social encyclicals and using a Latin title like Rerum Novarum. Perhaps more important than his words was the president's promise to make Muslims a part of his revised faith-based initiative for community social services. Obama plans a shift away from Bush's plan to fund a single player - often an Evangelical congregation. The strategy now is the one employed by the Campaign for Human Development (CHD). It was the Catholic-funded CHD grant to a Chicago neighborhood, after all, that brought Obama to Chicago and gave him a room in a Catholic rectory. Coming out of the Obama White House, this new faith-based initiative brings together players as varied as Catholic parishes, Jewish, Protestant and Evangelical congregations, the YMCA, the Salvation Army and now -- Muslim mosques.
I expect the most difficult issue for both Catholics and Muslims in responding to the Cairo speech will be the two-state solution in Israel. Clearly, any resolution depends upon actors in the Holy Land, but public opinion in the U.S. affects how Washington reacts. Some critics, like Charles Krauthammer have sharpened the knives, claiming Obama is "dishonorable" and is betraying Israel. Krauthammer does not speak for America's Jews, nor all Israelis, but using cute legalisms like "natural growth" to expand illegal settlements in occupied lands directly attacks the pope's position, takes on the Catholic bishops, dismisses most Muslims, and undercuts the Obama Administration's team led by Secretary of State, Hilary Clinton. (Few have ever accused Dr. Krauthammer of lacking chutzpah!) Whatever the final outcome, an emerging Muslim-Catholic coalition on these matters may ultimately outweigh the vociferous Evangelical-Catholic coalition that dominated in the Bush years.
I am not Catholic nor do I align myself with the thrust of this author, but I feel that this article is telling in several things. I won't go into the whole two-state -- rights to the land -- dividing Israel thing (read From Time Immemorial), or the idea of universal, government health-care as our debt reaches 10 trillion and climbing. I believe the dividing of Israel is prophesied to happen and America's absence in Bible prophecy leads me to one of two conclusions -- either we lose our power or we become indiscernible from a global governance body centered in Europe that IS in Bible prophecy. Where our country is headed could mean either or both of those options.
Given the furtherance of this global unity, there is a push within religion for an "Alliance of Civilizations," in fact, that is exactly what those in Europe and Islam have been working on for several years now. I recommend checking out Richard Peterson's blog, A Time, Times, and a Half a Time for more updates and information on this movement. I believe this is one arm of the New Age, its ecumenism arm, that is working to intermingle beliefs to the point that they are essentially less discernable from each other and more prone to take bits and pieces from many beliefs effectively wiping out the Truth. The very claim of there being one Truth then becomes the enemy of those who prefer to "have it their way" rather than deal with reality. In reality there are those from the respective religions who will refuse to bow the knee to anything but what they believe is Truth and so those beliefs with the most Truth in them will have those willing to stand for their beliefs. That is where the "war on the saints" will come into play as the world continues to fall apart and shake the foundations of belief of all those alive. I believe the Alliance of Civilizations will play a role in combating exclusivist Ideology. Here's a post from Constance Cumbey citing Richard's blog from December 27, 2006:
An article by our reader and contributor affectionately known to us as “Rich of Medford” The final report of the United Nations’ Alliance of Civilizations (AoC) initiative was released last month. In addition to its usual goal of combating exclusivist ideology, the report contains some interesting elements:
1) Exclusivist ideology is defined as “those who feed on exclusion and claim sole ownership of the truth. (Christians, read John 14:6 as you consider this statement.)
Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
2) The core issue identified to be the bridge between the West and Islam is resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
3) The global and problematic players in this conflict have been identified as the adherents of the three monotheistic faiths.
4) Failure to resolve this conflict will result in a failed Alliance of Civilizations.
Also noteworthy is that the AoC has identified the European Union’s Barcelona Process as one of the frameworks in which it intends to operate. For those unfamiliar with the Process, it is the foundation of the EU’s political, economic, and social policy. The Process, also known as the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership, is represented as the only platform that can solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The social dimension of the Process, with implementation facilitated by the Anna Lindh Foundation, cooperates with the AoC and shares the common goal to combat religious fundamentalism worldwide. So what happens to the adherents of the monotheistic faiths if the peace process fails? Lucis Trust, one of the contributors to the AoC initiative gives us an idea. In its publication The Rays and the Initiations, Lucis Trust says that those faiths are but three dead and gone religions with Judaism being old, obsolete, and separative. Christianity, they say, has served its purpose and the new age Christ will replace the Gospel with a new truth. As for Muslims, they will accept the new age Christ as their Imam Mahdi “who will lead them to light and to spiritual victory.” The objective of the AoC, therefore, is “to enforce an Alliance of Civilizations against all those who…give prevalence…to a logic of division and confrontation.” Since the Alliance intends to be fully prepared to enforce its objectives by 2009, I suspect that’s when they will introduce their symbol. Timing is everything. The European Commission has just submitted a document to the author of the Barcelona Process that it is time to deliver. If the planners of the AoC really mean what they say, may God help us all.