Holy See Press Office Responds to Complaints About Baptism
Professor Aref Al Nayed has complained about the baptism by Pope Benedict XVI of Magdi
Allam on the Easter Vigil. the Director of the Holy See Press Office, Father Federico
Lombardi, SJ, issued this note in response...
27.3.08. 14.00h.
The
note by Professor Aref Ali Nayed concerning the Baptism administered by the Pope to
Magdi Allam on the Easter vigil merits close consideration.
Let us, then, make
a few observations.
Firstly, the most significant statement is without doubt
the author's affirmation of his will to continue the dialogue towards a more profound
mutual knowledge between Muslims and Christians. He in no way questions the journey
that began with the correspondence and the contacts established over the last year
and a half, between the Muslim signatories of the well-known letters and the Vatican,
in particular through the Pontifical Council for Inter-religious Dialogue. This process
must continue, it is extremely important, it must not be interrupted, and has priority
over episodes that may be the subject of misunderstandings.
Secondly, administering
Baptism to someone implies a recognition that that person has freely and sincerely
accepted the Christian faith in its fundamental articles, as expressed in the "profession
of faith" which is publicly proclaimed during the ceremony of Baptism. Of course,
believers are free to maintain their own ideas on a vast range of questions and problems,
on which legitimate pluralism exists among Christians. Welcoming a new believer into
the Church clearly does not mean wedding all that person's ideas and opinions, especially
on political and social matters.
The Baptism of Magdi Cristiano Allam provides
a good opportunity specifically to underline this fundamental principle. He has the
right to express his own ideas. They remain his personal opinions without in any way
becoming the official expression of the positions of the Pope or of the Holy See.
As
for the debate concerning the Pope's lecture at Regensburg, explanations for interpreting
it correctly in accordance with the Pope's intentions were given some time ago and
there is no reason to question them once more. At the same time, some of the themes
touched upon then, such as the relationship between faith and reason, between religion
and violence, are naturally still the subject of reflection and debate, and of differing
points of view, because they concern problems that cannot be resolved once and for
all.
Thirdly, the liturgy of the Easter vigil was celebrated as it is every
year, and the symbolism of light and darkness has always been a part of it. It is
a solemn liturgy and its celebration by the Pope in St. Peter's Square is a very special
occasion. But to accuse the Pope's explanation of the liturgical symbols - something
he always does and in which he is a master - of "Manichaeism" reveals perhaps a misunderstanding
of Catholic liturgy rather than a pertinent criticism of Benedict XVI's words.
Finally,
let us in turn express our own displeasure at what Professor Nayed says concerning
education in Christian schools in Muslim-majority countries, where he objects to the
risk of proselytism. We feel that the Catholic Church's great educational efforts,
also in countries with a non-Christian majority (not just Egypt but also India, Japan,
etc.) where for a very long time the majority of students in Catholic schools and
universities are non-Christian and have happily remained so (while showing great appreciation
for the education they have received), deserves a quite different evaluation. We do
not think the Church today merits the accusation of lack of respect for the dignity
and freedom of the human person; these suffer entirely different violations to which
priority attention must be given. Perhaps the Pope accepted the risk of this Baptism
also for this reason: to affirm the freedom of religious choice which derives from
the dignity of the human person.
In any case, Professor Aref Ali Nayed is an
interlocutor for whom we maintain the highest respect and with whom a faithful exchange
of views is always worthwhile. This allows us to trust in the continuation of dialogue.