Four Word Quotes And Sayings

Verso un nuovo Areopago

by Lorenzo Fazzini

February 25, 2010 - Future

The Holy See announced a stable exchange between secularists and Catholics the intellectual non-believer demand new initiatives for dialogue. Monsignor Gianfranco Ravasi : "In a Foundation we structure comparison" - Giuliano Amato : "Meet, Catholic lay confidence and open '

Monsignor Gianfranco Ravasi, "In a Foundation we structure the comparison

'll our ministry is setting up a foundation called" The Court of the Gentiles "which is inspired by the Pope's speech to the Curia December '. The announcement of Monsignor Gianfranco Ravasi, president of the Pontifical Council for Culture. A first realization of the expectation of Benedict XVI for a renewed dialogue with the men and women who do not believe but want to approach God

What are the objectives of this new institution?

"First, create a network of people who agree agnostic or atheist dialogue and how to enter States in the Foundation and therefore of our department. In addition, we want to establish contacts with atheistic organizations to start a debate (with some Italian Uaar, which is folk). Third, study the space of spirituality without God in which he had already investigated the Chair of the unbelievers of Cardinal Martini in Milan. Finally, develop the themes of the relationship between religion, society, peace and nature. We would, with this initiative, helping everyone to get out of a poor understanding of belief, to show that theology has scientific dignity and epistemological status.
The Foundation would like to organize an annual big event to address, from time to time, one of these issues. "

debut?

"In the second half of this year, probably in Paris, very much alive on these issues, we have already had the availability of Julia Kristeva (known linguist and psychoanalyst, ed).

But among non-believers there is availability in comparison to their God?

"We must take into account the different forms of atheism, not reducible to a single model. On the one hand there is the great atheism of Nietzsche and Marx that unfortunately went into crisis, made an explanation of the alternate reality to the believer, but with his work ethic, a serious and courageous vision, for example in considering the man alone in the universe. Today we atheism in the presence of a sarcastic ironic that address issues of belief or marginal fundamentalist positions, such as reading the Bible. You Onfray's atheism, Dawkins and Hitchens. Thirdly, there is absolute indifference daughter of secularization well summarized by the example that Charles Taylor is now in old age when he says that if God were in our city, the only thing that would happen is that demand the documents' . How can we reconcile

proclamation and dialogue?

'identity. As in dialogue with other religions, which requires the maintenance of mutual identity, there must be strict with atheism. More than a demonstration to those who are poor, religiously, perhaps we need to show the richness of this oasis that is the belief. Each faith has not only informative but also performative, that provides human data but at the same time tells them with warmth. If you have religion so rich, dialogue fulfills the task of presenting the faith in an effective manner, without any points on basic needs, such as religion as a "drug" in a disease. The exchange has already been successful with science as claimed by Michel Heller, today we are witnessing a true "theory of dialogue" for which, in some environments, science and faith, and here I would say atheism and faith intersect. Just think the theory of relativity, which needs the space and time in their philosophical meaning, that is symbolic. Here is the space of a real dialogue in friendship. "

Giuliano Amato: "Let's meet, Catholic lay confidence and open '

" I think those who have faith should be trust and resist the temptation to say: "World, vade retro". Who has the sense of the sacred can not escape the comparison. " In saying Giuliano Amato, now chairman of the Institute of the Italian university after a long career and politics (he was several times Prime Minister), expresses the hope that the "Court of the Gentiles" to materialize in new opportunities for words and comparisons.

In "Dialogues post-secular" (Marsilio) with Monsignor Paglia she wrote: "Christian love gives a higher gear." Why?

"It's a historical fact that, if he loses the religious element, a company loses the attention inexorably to another, by way of closure of the self that becomes an unstoppable tide. But today we are facing a sectarian form of Enlightenment reason why you want to see religion as a superstition of pre-modern. " Why

back in fashion this position, anti-religious?

"This" preaching ", which I call" enlightenment sectarian ", reappears for understandable historical reasons, or as the result of impatience of post-secularism. In fact, one thing is to accept that in public space that everyone can have their say, another to admit the consequences of this. Found that in the public sphere religions have the title, here come the same impatience with religious themes. But the question is whether the reduction of heteronomy by hierarchies of liberty as emancipation, their experience of liberal democratic institutions, is inspired by the abolition of restrictions reasons of utility or collective responsibilities allocated to each the right choices. "

What's the answer?

"I think of two characters: Isaiah Berlin, for which the exercise of freedom is always a moral choice. And Pope John Paul II: to make us more free, he said, God became impotent. Now we are faced with the sin of technology and ethics for which the limit to my freedom is in itself abusive. But we must remember that the limit, even that which comes from the hierarchy, it is also a reminder. Indeed, many lay people fall into the trap where freedom does not tolerate limits. But there are not crossing the Pillars of Hercules: the history and they are moving further and further. Today we perceive in our potential destruction against others. "

For example?

"The issues" green, "warned the man to what is the nature as a carrier of unknown consequences. GMOs or medication they do not know the outcome. Or we can do research on humans even in its embryonic state? ".

Do not you think that the lay-Catholic dialogue is "bipartizzato": everyone chooses the audience?

"I see that danger. It's easy to find interlocutors lay careful about solidarity, immigration, poverty, Darfur or Haiti. But, on bioethics, has been lacking mutual trust and there is more spoken at the time of the law 40 perceived mistrust on both sides. I lived through that period as a break. I felt, in particular, by the intolerance of the laity towards the starting point of the speech, which assume that the human embryo is a nascent state. We had talked so much about dialogue but until then we had come to trust enough. " How

revive the comparison?

"I urged stakeholders to secure the faith to keep confidential meetings to address the issues" hot "without noise, to try to understand. Unfortunately, lay people are still often the equation "religion = backward society." So it is that believers can be seen in a society that respects religion and close in a minority condemned the minority. "