Monday, May 31, 2004

Posted by Christopher at 3:06 PM

Powerful Memorial-Day reflections from William Luse ("Apologia").

Saturday, May 29, 2004

Happy "Blogiversary" to Lane Core! 
Posted by Christopher at 5:20 PM

Speaking of birthdays, congratulations to Lane Core, who celebrated the second blogiversary of his blog on the 26th!

Happy Birthday to G.K. Chesterton! 
Posted by Christopher at 11:06 AM

Gerard reminds us that 129 years ago today the great English writer and theologian Gilbert Kieth Chesterton was born!

• "Who is this guy and why haven’t I heard of him?" -- Dale Ahlquist of the American Chesterton Society gives a brief introduction.
• Catholic Apologist Dave Armstrong's extensive compilation of links on The "Colossal Genius"
• Chesterton's Works on the Web, a comprehensive list of e-texts.
• For those discovering Chesterton for the first time, an excellent biography and introduction to the many facets of his thought is Wisdom and Innocence: A Life of G.K. Chesterton, by Joseph Pearce (Ignatius Press, 2001).
• Of the many books Chesterton wrote, there are two that I think should be read in one's lifetime: the first is Orthodoxy, a collection of essays accounting for Chesterton's turn from agnosticism to traditional Christianity, is a classic philosophical defense of the faith.

  The second is St. Thomas Aquinas: The Dumb Ox, of which the great Thomist scholar Ettienne Gilson said: "I consider it as being without possible comparison the best book ever written on St. Thomas. Nothing short of genius can account for such an achievement.... Chesterton was one of the deepest thinkers who ever existed; he was deep because he was right; and he could not help being right; but he could not either help being modest and charitable, so he left it to those who could understand him to know that he was right, and deep." A good introduction, even for those who are intimidated by the writings of the great Saint himself.

An Anglican's Conversion to the Catholic Faith 
Posted by Christopher at 2:45 AM

Canon Edward Norman, ecclesial historian and chancellor of York Minster, has converted to the Catholic faith, declaring in the online newspaper telegraph.co.uk: "There is a big hole at the centre of Anglicanism - its authority. I don't think it's a Church; it's more of a religious society," and ""Catholicism is what I have always believed, though I did not have the wit to realise it . . . You might call it a shaft of light before the sun sets."

In 2001 Canon Norman wrote An Anglican Catechism, which the Church Times praised as "coupling innovative sexual views with traditionalist church teaching, and which Richard McBrien described as "A very Protestant view of the Christian faith" in his review for The Tablet. This year he published Anglican Difficulties: A New Syllabus of Errors, which the telegraph described as "one of the most ferocious assaults ever launched on the Church of England," marking, in the space of 4 years, a radical development in his thought.

Apparently Canon Norman has been wrestling with the question of authority and an infallible teaching office for some time now. The Anglican blog Pontifications picks up the rest of the story, posting some choice excerpts from his 1998 lecture "Authority in the Anglican Communion". Well worth reading.

Thursday, May 27, 2004

Oklahoma Catholic Worker: Bush, Kerry equally "Anti-Life" 
Posted by Christopher at 12:29 AM

The following tirade was posted to a 'Catholic Worker Blog':

Both Bush and Kerry are equally anti-life. The Bush administration opposition to abortion is feeble and entirely politicized. They have not made any kind of a serious move to protect unborn children, Bush no more understands the humanity of the unborn human person than Kerry does, that is obvious in the way he addresses -- and prioritizes -- the subject. Nothing happens until just an election year. Always too little, too late, and yet we hear no end to the praise of these feeble gesturess, the praise is so loud it drowns out the screams of all those children who are still being aborted. This orgy of self-congratulation among Catholic Republicans distracts us from the weakness of the Republican position -- and political performance -- vis a vis abortion. George Bush and the Republican majorities in both houses of Congress have not managed to save the life of even one unborn child in four years. The best thing I can think of to say about that is "pathetic".

There are no pro-life votes on the American ballot this year, only a choice between two evil, wealthy, and powerful politicians who will murder, burn, and destroy their way through their term. Clinton murdered and burned and destroyed his way through his term. Bush the first, Reagan, and Carter did the same in the 1970s and 1980s. Kerry will do the same as will George Bush. Many innocent people will die for their grandiose schemes.

Thankfully, the author of the Catholics for Bush blog has referred me to a list of President's Bush's pro-life exploits compiled by Father Peter West, of the Catholic organization Priests for Life, who describes his compilation as follows:

Below is a list of President Bush's pro-life efforts and accomplishments in regard to protecting children in the womb and promoting the sanctity of life. I include some accomplishments in other areas but mostly focus on his pro-life record. This list is by no means comprehensive. When considering other issues much more could be added to the list of positive things that Bush has done since he has been in office.

I started to compile this list shortly after the President was reinaugurated after hearing from many, who consider themselves pro-life, that Bush was not really pro-life. I disagreed and began compiling this list. I had no idea when I started that it would be so long.

Some may ask if President Bush is so pro-life why hasn't abortion ended. President Bush has not had an opportunity to appoint a Supreme Court Justice. Also, in practically every effort to protect the unborn President Bush has been opposed mostly by pro-abortion Democrats.

Is President Bush perfect? No. Do I agree with him on everything? No. But I look at his overall record and consider the alternative. Senator Kerry is a pro-abortion extremist. He has pledged to only appoint pro-abortion judges to the Supreme Court who will uphold Roe vs. Wade.

I plan to vote for President Bush for re-election and I hope you will do the same.

President Bush's Pro-Life Record as of May 18, 2004

What would the Catholic Workers of Oklohoma suggest that Catholics do in this election? -- Refrain from voting and relenquish ourselves to having Senator Kerry in the White House, who is dead-set on promoting abortion and repealing every single advance the pro-life movement has made under the Bush administration?

The author of the Catholic Worker blog has been made aware of Fr. West's list and implicit challenge to his position. We'll see whether a retraction is forthcoming.

Wednesday, May 26, 2004

H.W. Crocker's Triumph 
Posted by Christopher at 2:25 AM

Smirk all you want, but I'm finally getting around to reading H.W. Crocker's Triumph: The Power and the Glory of the Catholic Church and just thought I'd jot down some initial impressions.

The title couldn't be more appropriate, because this is a raucous, triumphalistic and unapologetic history of the Catholic Church, which First Things notes will be "welcomed by readers who are weary of being told that defeatism is a virtue."

Where so many contemporary accounts of Catholicism seem overtly preoccupied with apologizing (for the Crusades, the Inquisition, etc.), Crocker seems almost wistful when he writes of religous warfare and slaughtered heretics, praising the warrior-kings of the Middle Ages as "[by the Church's standards] bloodstained fornicators . . . but their hearts were in the right place."

Crocker is apparently a Catholic convert from Anglicanism -- which, I think, is noticeable in his zealous and perhaps overly-vindictive manner of writing. Where the Holy Father and others since Vatican II advocate friendly relations with the Orthodox Church, such that we may "breathe with the other lung" (oft-quoted metaphor of Yves Congar), Crocker's preference would be to dig in his heels and return to an ecumenical Cold War, peppering his text with such endearing references to the East as: "the tradition of Greek openness to heretical ideas," Eastern Bishops "bowing to imperial demands like reeds beaten by the wind"; the Eastern Church "a cauldron of bubbling sectarians," possessing "febrile, hate-filled, fissiparous tendendies" which, in Crocker's opinion, justified "the whip-hand of the emperor to keep them in line." ¹

Having reached the chapter where he turns his attention from the Renaissence to the Reformation, beginning with "the disgruntled monk" Martin Luther (whom he goes on to describe as "a turbulent, semi-barbarian from beyond the Danube" and "a violent rhetorician, pounding his cudgels wherever they would make the most resounding racket"), I wasn't at all suprised to see that Crocker's contempt is equally distributed among Orthodox and Protestants.

I understand the appeal of Crocker's style of writing. I also understand how, given the theological confusion, moral corruption and bloodletting that came as a result of the Protestant reformation (or, more appropriately, revolution) one might be disposed to such vehement criticism. At the same time, there are points in the book where I believe his spirited defense of the Church crosses the line into condescension, dripping sarcasm and barely veiled animosity toward our brothers and sisters in the faith who, while they may not be in full communion with Rome, are no less sincere in their faith in Christ.

John Hannity of Fox News in proclaims Triumph as "the most essential Catholic book since the Catechism of the Catholic Church," I can't say I share the enthusiasm of Mr. Hannity and other reviewers, I do regard Triumph as a readible and engrossing history of the Catholic Church; a good introduction, best supplemented by further investigation.

Additional Reviews:

• Robert Spencer, reviewing for Catholic Exchange, loved it, proclaiming "critics will be hard-pressed to find any inaccuracy in his portrayal of the events."
• Amy Welborn offers a typically measured response. =)
• Georg Sim Johnston, reviewing for Crisis, says:

  Catholics need to know their own story but balk at opening those multi-volume Church histories by Daniel Rops or Philip Hughes. H.W. Crocker III has written a book that solves the problem. I am still scratching my head over how he did it, but in Triumph he has told 2,000 years of Catholic history in fewer than 500 highly readable pages. The book has all the virtues of a good novel while packing an enormous amount of information. Not since Paul Johnson’s Modern Times has edification been this pleasurable—and I ought to add that this book is superior to Johnson’s own History of Christianity!

• Two Centuries & Counting, H. W. Crocker III's Q&A w/ Kathryn Jean Lopez. National Review March 29, 2002.

Wednesday, May 19, 2004

Good news from Iraq? 
Posted by Christopher at 9:41 AM

Prisoner abuse, Shia uprising, prisoner abuse, Fallujah, prisoner abuse, lost heart and minds, prisoner abuse... Oh, did I mention prisoner abuse?

The news from Iraq has been consistently bad for two month now, with one "quagmire" after another cheering up the media, the left and the "Arab street", and depressing the hell out of most conservatives.

So, for a change, here's some good news from Iraq that you might have missed . . . READ MORE

Blogger Chrenkoff takes it upon himself to give a "fair and balanced" portrayal of Iraq, given the media's lack of emphasis on the positive.

Tuesday, May 18, 2004

Apologetics (X2) 
Posted by Christopher at 10:33 PM

Karl Keating announces in his latest e-letter that the Apologetics organization Catholic Answers has launched a forum for what is sure to be a very lively and vocal discussion of various topics in theology.

Catholic Answers are also publishers of This Rock, a magazine I devoured as a college student and instrumental in leading me to the faith. Karl Keating has also mentioned that they are working on putting the entire contents of past issues of This Rock online -- 14 years worth! A long and arduous task to be sure, but which would ultimately be a great service to Catholics on the internet.

Testimony has a religious character. The witness addresses us actively, placing us in the position of recipients who must seek to understand. Personal address can suprise and challenge us, furnish us with new categories, and thus dispose us for conversion. To the extent that we open ourselves up to testimony, we learn to rely on trustworthy witnesses and submit to their authority. This fiducial attitude prepares us for conversion as a personal submission to the divine witness who speaks to us in Christ.

While I applaud the resurgence of apologetics . . . I suggest it could benefit from the personalism that Pope John Paul II professes. I hae for some years been advocating an apologetics of religious testimony. It could capitalize on the personalist categories with which Christian philosophers such as Gabriel Marcel have familiarized us: testimony, invitation, response, engagement, fidelity and communion. These categories attune us to biblical thinking and especially to the Gospels as documents of faith.

Saturday, May 08, 2004

Abu Ghraib Pt. II -- Media Sensationalism & the Iraqi Response 
Posted by Christopher at 4:29 PM

Besides the nature of the incidents themselves, the media's handling of Abu Ghraib is also deserving of criticism. According to Bill Cork:

Something that struck me as I read the Taguba Report is that while we are just now hearing about this abuse and seeing the pictures (and are rightly shocked at what we are seeing), this is, in a sense, old news.

A timeline will give some perspective (compiled from the Taguba report, the Hersh article, and a couple of other news reports). The offenses occured "between October and December 2003." Then an MP, SPC Joseph M. Darby, saw a CD with pictures--and immediately turned it in to higher authority. On 17 January 2004 LTG Ricardo S. Sanchez suspended Bn. Cdr. LTC (P) Phillabaum and admonished BG Janis Karpinski; two days later he asked CENTCOM for an investigation of "detention and internment operations by the [800th MP] Brigade from 1 November 2003 to present." CENTCOM so ordered on 24 January. Taguba was appointed on 31 January. Taguba was on his way to Baghdad with his team two days later. They conducted interviews and read reports and completed their report by 29 February, and presented it a few days later; the report includes recommendations for administrative punishments and further investigations. Article 32 proceedings were taking place against others involved within a month.

It was only after these proceedings had begun that The New Yorker and "60 Minutes" found out and told the world.

These reporters, in other words, told us this past week about things that had happened six months ago and which the Army had investigated thoroughly and fairly and had begun taking action against those involved.

The situation was tragic. But it was dealt with. It is being dealt with. Apart from the lurid expose by the media. You wouldn't know this from the news reports.

More commentary on Bill Cork's blog Lincoln & Liberty.

Likewise, writing for the NRO, Jonah Goldberg questions the double-standards of CBS' enthusiasm for displaying atrocities commmited by American soldiers, and reluctance in publicizing the crimes of others:

The media decide which images are too disturbing, too sensational, too dangerous all of the time. Ms. Goldberg, for example, spoke for the establishment media when she declared that the Danny Pearl murder-video was "too sickening to broadcast even once."

So the question is, What was gained by releasing these images [of Abu Ghraib] now? CBS could have reported the story without the pictures. They could have still beaten their competition to the punch.

But these pictures are so inflammatory, so offensive to Muslim and American sensibilities, whatever news value they have is far, far outweighed by the damage they are doing. "Context" — the supposed holy grail of responsible journalism — is lost in the hysteria and political grandstanding.

Jeff Jarvis gives a wrap-up of Iraqi bloggers' reactions on his blog Buzz Machine. I was especially pleased to read this Iraqi blogger report that not all have let the reporting of this incident color their perception of the American mission, and seem to be doing a better job -- more so than some critics -- of distinguishing between the actions of a minority of soldiers and the military as a whole.

Finally, if the reactions of this Iraqi mirror those of others, perhaps there is hope that we can get beyond this, and not let Abu Ghraib have the last word on Iraq-U.S. relations:

. . . The media seems to be always trying to exaggerate things and to describe any violent action from Iraqis (or Arabs) as "resistance" and any violent action from the coalition as "crimes of the occupiers" to make a good story that sells or that serves their masters' objectives. Anyway, this is not the subject I want to talk about today.

I want to tell you that I felt great relief when I saw and heard the highest-ranking officials in the coalition apologize to the Iraqi people for what a small group of their soldiers did and assuring us that there will be serious investigations to expose those who committed the atrocities and to punish them the way they deserve.

What happened was awful, that's true but I feel comfortable with the good intentions of the coalition leaders and people who rejected the crimes against the detainees.

Let me tell you this, under the past regime Iraqis were the victims of worse atrocities (by the hands of Iraqis) everyday but no one could say a word about that, now, nothing can be hidden from the people and no one can get away with his crimes. For the first time, law is starting to govern our country and this will force anyone to think twice before he plans to harm someone or break the law in any way.

The crime was a step backwards but the way it's being dealt with is -- in my opinion -- a step forwards on the way to strengthen the trust between the coalition and the Iraqis.

Abu Ghraib - A Betrayal and Symptom of the Times 
Posted by Christopher at 2:30 PM

The text of the military's investigation of prisoner sexual abuse in Iraq has been made public, about which Bill Cork, posting to his political blog "Lincoln and Liberty", offers some good analysis.

Personally, I hope they take every single person complicit in the affair, from the top all the way to the bottom of the ranks, and prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law. Those photographs spell the betrayal of the U.S. mission in Iraq -- an insult to every citizen and soldier working to achieve peace, freedom and democracy in the Middle East.

But how could this possibly happen? -- The lack of military discipline and disrespect for the law is one thing, but beyond that, I'm concerned about the inspiration for such actions? Those responsible are pleading ignorance of "The Geneva Conventions"; but how can people be so ignorant of basic codes of simple human decency? -- Writing for the National Review, Donna Hughes offers reasonable speculation:

President Bush and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld have condemned the acts and the abuse of the Iraqis. They said that these acts do not represent American values. I want to believe that is true. Yet, I see the common themes and methods used by other types of perpetrators on different victims. These similar images are what the young American soldiers from the Internet generation have grown up with and learned to call "adult entertainment." Did they become desensitized to the harm of doing such things to people by seeing multiple images of similar abuse to women? Did they learn how to violate someone by being a voyeur to abuse, and in Abu Ghraib they had the chance to become perpetrators — and pornographers? Did they fully comprehend the harm they were doing?

Dave Morrison ("Sed Contra") might concur with Ms. Hughes:

I am afraid that this represents the....increasing depravity abroad in this country. The U.S. armed forces in Iraq now has a larger percentage of reservists among its ranks in recent history. And while I, as a former Navy man myself including time in the reserves, draw back from blaming anyone as a group for what happened - I think these two facts are connected. It is not a twisted "military culture" that allowed these things to happen. It was men and women whose lives are essentially civilian and who are more 90% of the time NOT in the military who allowed it to happen. And I deeply fear this says more about us than we would like to admit.

Abu Ghraib is simply a reflection of the worst elements of our own culture. If citizens of Iraq and neighboring countries regarded proposals of democracy and the benefits of "Western civilization" with skepticism before, they have ample reason to do so now. The necessary response is to back our Government's apology to the Iraqi people with swift and sure justice to those who have committed these crimes . . . followed, if we are up to it, by an examination of the moral and spiritual degeneration that has led us to this place. Mark Shea proposes what should be the most obvious solution:

. . . What this girl -- and our culture -- needs is, quite simply, Jesus Christ. Being American and being military do not save us from sin. Being "against the terrorists" does not save us from sin. Being conservative does not save us from sin. Even being a communicant in the Catholic Church does not save us from sin. All those things are good. Some of them are necessary. But none of them automatically make us saints. And being a saint by having a living awareness of our great capacity for evil and our desperate need for Jesus to save us from our sins is the doorway into salvation from our sins. That's not anti-American. That's simply Christian.

Justice For All. 
Posted by Christopher at 1:38 PM

Paul McCain of the Lutheran blog directs us to this startling reminder of just what abortion is:

Lest we forget precisely what is going on during an abortion, Justice For All offers a bracing, chilling, gripping, shocking, arresting...horrifying...reminder of what this is all about. Spend some time on this web site and return to it whenever you feel yourself beginning to wax just a bit cold on the issue.

Thursday, May 06, 2004

Mark Shea kills me . . .  
Posted by Christopher at 11:49 PM

Glad I wasn't drinking coffee when I read Mark Shea's latest post, or it'd be all over the keyboard:

One of my readers writes:

When I converted to Catholicism, it was the statue worship that appealed to me the most, but banner worship has its appeal as well. Historians have been able to show that pagans also worshipped primitive banners so either one has authentic Catholic-pagan connections.

I also liked that I didn't have to read the Bible any more and that I would have to earn my way to Heaven. Besides that, I really appreciated the fact that I could check my brain at the door and blindly follow the leaders.

A really cool part of Catholicism is that now I can commit all of my favorite sins and then go to Confession right before I go out and do them again!! Actually, while I was Protestant, I guess I did that too, but without the Confession part. But sitting in that little room just feels so holy, especially with the statues nearby.

Then at Mass I usually get to listen to my favorite song, "On Eagles Wings" though I must admit I don't like it now as much as the first 67,000 times I heard it. The cannibalism aspect, I have to admit, grosses me out a little, but I comfort myself by knowing that it is a false doctrine anyway and so it is only really bread.

I know exactly how you feel. For me, it's the chance to worship Mary and adore her as the Creator of Almighty God that is so appealing. And, of course, I really love knowing that salvation is completely up to me and my righteousness apart from the grace of God. Also, the deep pride I feel in the Church's many Inquisitors, cold-blooded killers, persecutors, perverts and criminals was a big draw. Some people think this is problem, but I frankly have no idea what they are talking about. I am aware of no commands of God against these things because, of course, I never read the Bible.

Which reminds me: I just *love* adding absurd human traditions, myths and legends to the pure word of God. Also, I get a real kick out of enslaving myself to little rules and regulations so as to chain myself with fear and cut myself off from the love of God.

If *you're* an ignorant benighted Catholic like me, feel free to add your favorite spiritually crippling legend, lie, or practice to the pool. The more the merrier! That's what makes enslavement to the traditions of men and blindness to the saving gospel of Jesus Christ fun!

And that's just the beginning . . . check out the comments as other readers explain why they enjoy being Catholic! ;-)

Tuesday, May 04, 2004

Catholic-Mennonite Dialogue Revisited: "Purification of Memory" 
Posted by Christopher at 9:55 PM

Back in February I blogged about discovering Mennonite-Catholic Dialogue and an article on the history of the dialogue by Ivan J. Kauffman. As I mentioned, the dialogue is of particular interest to me since my background on my grandfather's side is Swiss Mennonite.

Mr. Kauffman contacted me today to inform me of the publication of the official report of the first five-year series of international-level ecumenical dialogues (1998-2003) between the Mennonite World Conference (MWC) and the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity. The report, titled "Called Together To Be Peacemakers" can be found on the Catholic-Mennonite relations website Bridgefolk.Net.

In the preface to the report, the authors note that Mennonites and Catholics have lived through over four centuries of separation. The purpose of the dialogue was not to strive for full communion (an impossible goal, given the circumstances and the tenants of Mennonite belief) but rather "to assist Mennonites and Catholics to overcome the consequences of almost five centuries of mutual isolation and hostility, [and] to explore whether it is now possible to create a new atmosphere in which to meet each other. After all, despite all that may still divide us, the ultimate identity of both is rooted in Jesus Christ." The authors of the report affirm the possibility of achieving the "purification of memory" called for by the Holy Father, and in so doing moving beyond mutual hostilities to a more honest recognition of where we stand and how we may better our relations:

The experience of studying the history of the church together and of re-reading it in an atmosphere of openness has been invaluable. It has helped us gain a broader view of the history of the Christian tradition. We have been reminded that we share at least fifteen centuries of common Christian history. The early church and the church of the Middle Ages were, and continue to be, the common ground for both our traditions . . .

Our common re-reading of the history of the church will hopefully contribute to the development of a common interpretation of the past. This can lead to a shared new memory and understanding. In turn, a shared new memory can free us from the prison of the past. On this basis both Catholics and Mennonites hear the challenge to become architects of a future more in conformity with Christ’s instructions when he said: “I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another” (Jn 13:34-35). Given this commandment, Christians can take responsibility for the past. They can name the errors in their history, repent of them, and work to correct them. Mennonite theologian John Howard Yoder has written: “It is a specific element in the Christian message that there is a remedy for a bad record. If the element of repentance is not acted out in interfaith contact, we are not sharing the whole gospel witness.”

Present day Mennonites find their origins in the non-violent Anabaptist groups of Switzerland, southern Germany and the Netherlands, which were part of the broader "Radical Reformers" who split from not only the Catholic Church but classical Protestantism as well. The Anabaptists possessed sharply divergent understandings of baptism, ecclesiology, church-state relationships and social ethics, (especially an insistence on radical nonviolence), and the formation of Mennonite identity, spirituality and tradition was fueled by a bitter opposition to the institutional Catholic Church, which they regarded as "fallen" from the time of Constantine. Subsequent persecution and martyrdom of countless Mennonites at the hands of Catholics and Protestants had a major influence in their self-consciousness as well.

Because Mennonites are at odds with Catholics on so many things, the challenges of carrying out successful long-term dialogue is significatly greater than, say, Lutherans or Anglicans, who have retained many elements of Catholic tradition. The fact that Mennonites and Catholics were able to participate in a 5-year dialogue involving close study of each other's religious history, frank recognition of injustices committed against the other, the renouncement of polemics and mutual stereotypes, and charting of areas in history and theology for further study and discussion is no small achievement in ecumenical relations.

It is my hope that "Called Together To Be Peacemakers" will be the subject of greater attention, reflection and critique by Catholics and Mennonites in the months to come.

Related Links

• Mennonite-Catholic International Dialogue Report Going to Churches, MWC Press Release. April 7, 2004.
• Chronicle of the Dialogue beginning with Cardinal Kasper's greetings to the Mennonite delegation, November 2001.
• An Exchange of Gifts, by Drew Christiansen, S.J. America March 3, 2003. One priest's survey of Mennonite-Catholic collaboration & dialogue.
• Bridgefolk describes itself as "sacramentally-minded Mennonites and peace-minded Roman Catholics" who engage in Mennonite-Catholic dialogue on a regular basis.

Saturday, May 01, 2004

The Muslim and The Passion  
Posted by Christopher at 6:15 PM

Zenit news published an interview with 38-year-old actor Abel Jafri this past week, in which he was asked about his experiences as a Algerian Muslim appearing in "The Passion of the Christ":

Q: What thoughts has your role inspired in you?

Jafri: I was the leader of the Temple guards who led the group in charge of arresting Jesus to condemn him after Judas' betrayal. I spat on Jesus, I mistreated him.

What impressed me most was the physical and moral suffering of this innocent man. Like a hurricane, blind and senseless violence knocked him down.

Today, people continue to let themselves be carried away by hasty judgments, without reflection, without a conscience, manipulated by pressure groups that defend their personal interests.

The current problem is summarized in a question: Why so much hatred? Why is love not loved? In our modern developed societies, it would seem that reactions are the same as they were 2,000 years ago. The film's message brings us directly to the present. . . .

Q: During the five months of filming, beginning in the autumn of 2002, how did you live this artistic experience?

Jafri: The filming was difficult; there were weather problems, but we were all immersed in Jesus' story in an extraordinary way, as witnesses of the event.

The film's violence is a mirror of the violence hidden in man's heart. All of us are, in a certain measure, accomplices of this wickedness, of this mystery of evil, and if we become conscious of it, it is never too late to turn around, to love.

Only the force of love can triumph over the absurd. We can be in solidarity in the good [and] decide that the light shines in the darkness through our daily actions.

Q: You are a Muslim. Who is Jesus for you?

Jafri: Jesus belongs to everyone; he is a model for all men; his message goes beyond the boundaries of beliefs.

The controversy over the film is a good sign, as it shows that Jesus continues to trouble us, as at the time he walked on the roads of Palestine. I am very happy to have contributed to give timeliness again to the call to universal fraternity.

During the filming, I was injured by the crowds, on my back and tibia. I received blows at the same time as the principal actor, Jim Caviezel, and we went to the infirmary together. I had bruises everywhere.

Now I feel closer, in greater solidarity with what the man Jesus suffered. It is a profound feeling, difficult to explain in words. . . .

Q: In your opinion, why did Judas betray Jesus? What inspired that betrayal?

Jafri: Money and villainy always poison human life. Today, the power of easy money is sacrificing our planet and humanity. It is time to consider the breadth of the damage, and to work shoulder to shoulder to change this.

The tenderness of Jesus opens the way to a future. A resurrection is still possible if we collectively give proof of courage and care for others.

Q: Is there a phrase of the film, from your point of view, that summarizes Jesus' message?

Jafri: The violence of this film has meaning. It makes us reflect, as opposed to the mindless violence that passes on screens throughout the day.

How is it possible not to respond to the phrase pronounced by Jesus on the cross, when he says to God: "Forgive them"? In these words he offers us the key to happiness and peace. Everything is said in this forgiveness.

Related Links:

• Christian Muslim Relations, readings & resources.