opening up a path beyond fear

8/9/2019 Opening Up a Path Beyond Fear

1/32


2/32

a path beyond fear

OPENING UP

entru Fidi u ustizzja2010


3/32

Introduction: The need to go beyond our fears ................................05

Peace, Violence and Religions ...........................................................09

H.E. Cardinal Renato Raffaele Martino(St Aloysius College: February 2007)

Living with Others who are Different: ................................................17A Christian perspectiveProfessor Andrea Riccardi(Mediterranean Conference Centre: November 2007)

The Priority of Culture in Us and Them .............................................31President Emeritus Edward Fenech Adami(Cyprus: November 2008)

The Contribution committed Lay Persons ........................................37are called upon to make in Public LifeFr Fernando Franco SJ

(Phoenicia Hotel: April 2009)

Epilogue ...............................................................................................49

The Main Contributors of this book ...................................................57

Table of Contents

Copyright 2010First published in 2010 by Centru Fidi u ustizzja

entru Fidi u ustizzja227, Triq il-Merkanti

Valletta VLT 1170Tel: 2125 1538Email: [email protected]/justice

All rights reserved. Except for the quotation of short passages for thepurpose of research and review, no part of this publication may bereproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any formor by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording orotherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher.

ISBN 978-99932-0-846-4


4/32

Introduction

Malta is the smallest State in the European Union. Our population isaround four hundred thousand and the area of the Maltese archipelagois three hundred and sixteen square kilometres.

Two recent events have had an impact on Malta in the past few years.These have been our joining the European Union and the recent largeinflux of irregular immigrants from sub Saharan Africa in precariousboats. Both these events have provoked fears: fears o f losing our

identity as Maltese; fears of losing our religion and traditions. In the caseof our joining the Union most of these fears were counterbalancedby the prospects of greater economic stability.1 The process leadingup to joining the European Union was quite a delicate and difficultprocess since it polarized the country. However, after the referendumand election of 2003 there has been a very positive outcome: Maltawent beyond its fears and joined the Union and the main political partiesbecame united in accepting the will of the majority. They are now bothbickering over which one of them is most able to make the best out

of European membership for the benefit of Malta and the Maltese.

However, with regards to the issue of irregular immigration our fearshave grown beyond proportion. We are witnessing the developmentof a mainstream discourse which pictures sub Saharan Africans as theepitome of all our ills and problems, a discourse that is pervading thepublic sphere, from party politics to newspapers to blogs.

1. Due to the world recession economic stability is threatened even in the EU. However, it is clear thatMalta would have suffered much more economically had it not joined the EU and the Euro zone.


5/32

6 Opening up A Path Beyond Fear 7

Malta is therefore today at a crucial crossroads. I t could choose tobecome overwhelmed by its fears or it could look at these new realities

as a golden opportunity to grow and to break out of its closed and

insular mentality. Whether we like it or not we must accept that we are

no longer a remote island, shielded by the white foam of the waves thatbatter our shores. We have entered the global village. Rather thanbeing taken up by paralyzing and destructive fears we must look at

these changes as a new opportunity to open up; to try to understand theworld around us in order to discover our new role as a people living onthe crossroads of different civilizations. We were a strategic colony underone important power or other, for thousands of years. We were a fortresson the border of one or other strong empire. Since Independence wedeveloped into a tourist attraction. This development has helped us toopen up, with the prospect of economic necessity. However on a deeperlevel our mentality has remained somewhat closed: accepting touristsfor their money is one matter; opening up to the world around us andlooking at this positively may be quite another.

When Pope John Paul II visited Malta in 2001 he told us that Malta has aspecial vocation:

Malta is at the centre of the Mediterranean. You therefore have a

unique vocation to be builders of bridges between the peoples

of the Mediterranean basin, between Africa and Europe. The

future of peace in the world depends on strengthening dialogue

and understanding between cultures and religions. Continue in

your traditions of hospitality, and continue in your national andinternational commitment on behalf of freedom, justice and peace.2

It is a fact that due to its very rich history Maltese culture has manycommon elements with peoples living both in the North and the Southof the Mediterranean. With the majority of the Maltese people being

2. Farewell Ceremony- Gudja International Airport (9 May 2001) http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/travels/sub_index/trav_greece-syria-malta-2001_it.htm

practicing Roman Catholics, Malta can surely be a witness to therichness of its religious roots within the European Union.3 If it is to be acontinent which fosters peace, it is essential that Europe goes beyondstrengthening its economic infrastructure and rediscovers its soul.

In recent years there has been a sharp increase of persons mainly fromSub Saharan Africa leaving the North African coast in overcrowdedboats to seek a new life in Europe. Malta has received a relatively large

number of irregular immigrants. In 2008 alone a total of 2,775 irregularimmigrants reached Malta. In 2009 (until November) the numbers werelower, with 1.475 migrants who were intercepted at sea or landed in

Malta.4 The Maltese authorities feel abandoned by other countries,especially those of the European Union in facing this issue alone.Another worrying fact is that many Maltese now see irregular immigrantsas a threat, and racist sentiments are on the increase.5 There were alsoarson attacks mainly on the property of persons who have spoken up for

the rights of these immigrants.

With this publication the Jesuit Centre for Faith and Justice is presentinga series of lectures which help place the fears of foreigners, whichpeople have in Malta today, in a wider context. These lectures challengeus Maltese to go beyond our fears and reflect on the tenets of thediscourse which is pervading the way we think today. What does it mean

to be Maltese? What does it mean to be Christian and Catholic? Howcan we reconcile our fears with our Christian, or at least, humanistic

values? Are we really experiencing a cataclysmic invasion by Africansin Malta today? Or is it rather a wake-up call to make the leap from apost-colonial mentality, marked by fear and isolation, towards a neo-

European mentality infused by a sense of self-confidence and solidarity?

3. A clear example of this is the rejection by the European Parliament to include any reference toEuropes Christian roots in drawing up its Constitution (A Constitution which has not been ratified)

4. See: Jesuit Refugee Service: Do they know? Asylum seekers testify to life in Libya, Malta 2009 p.3.5. See: Fundamental Rights Agency: European Union Minorities and Discrimination Survey Data in

Focus Reports 2009. The number of votes which extreme right parties have obtained during the lastEuropean Elections in Malta are another indicator.


6/32

8 Opening up

Peace, violence and religions(The authors of these lectures are eminent persons of faith who have avery wide experience of social issues.)These are some of the questions that are addressed in the lecturesbeing included in this publication. H.E. Cardinal Martino, ProfessorAndrea Riccardi and Fr. Fernando Franco were the guest speakers

at the annual lecture organised by the Centre for Faith and Justice in2007, 2008 and 2009 respectively.6 The lecture has become an annualoccasion that offers the opportunity to explore crucial themes that lieat the core of the Centres work. H.E. Dr. Fenech Adamis contribution

was delivered at the International Meeting for Peace organised by theCommunity of SantEgidio.

In disseminating these lectures in printed form, the Jesuit Centre for Faithand Justice hopes that a serious reflection is initiated in Malta so thatwe move beyond our fears, and look at globalization positively and as a

challenge to open up. What we are proposing here is a serene reflectionon a possible way forward into a world where cultures are more than everon the move, not following centuries-old silk roads anymore but swaying

across deserts, mountain ranges and the open seas.

I would like to thank all the distinguished contributors of this publication.

As well as Mario Cardona who shared his experiences in the Epilogue. Abig thank you also to Fr Mario Jaccarini SJ and Ms Maria Agius for their

work in translating the second lecture which was originally delivered in

Italian and to Christine and Sandro Rossi for proofreading all the text.

Fr Edgar Busuttil SJDirector, Jesuit Centre for Faith and Justice

6 The Centre invited Cardinal Martino together with the Diocesan Commission for Justice and Peace

and Prof Andrea Riccardi together with the Commission for Justice and Peace and Discern.

A Lecture delivered by His Eminence Cardinal Renato Martino

at St Aloysius College, on the 17 February 2007

I am very happy to be here at St Aloysius College to offer a reflection onthe theme of Peace, Violence and Religions. This is not a simple subjectto discuss because it involves some of the most complex situations ofour contemporary world: the new look of war and peace. Conflict in

general and war in particular, have, in fact, changed their appearance.They are more horizontal than vertical, more widespread than localizedmore fragmented than united, seen almost daily rather than rarely,closer than they are distant and they are more immaterial (and evenvirtual) than they are material.

The events of September 11, 2001 showed that the death of threethousand people was easily carried out as easily as a hijacker

carrying a knife onto a plane. In this regard a careful observer spoke of

democratic wars.1 These significant changes were brought about bythe phenomenon of globalization. It is necessary to take into account the

completely new context in which the problems of peace and of war arefound, in order to identify the negative conditions in the quest for peaceand to discern the new opportunities to be employed with evangelical

hope to create better conditions for peace.

Globalization has changed the social meaning of peace, but has not

changed the anthropological and ethical dimension of peace. Anadditional interpretation of todays world, in its main dynamics andprophetic courage is needed to announce the call for peace in this

1. A. GLUCKSMANN, Dostoievski Manhattan, Robert Laffont, Paris 2002; tr. it., Dostoevskij a Manhattan,Liberal Libri, Firenze 2002.


7/32


new globalized context. At the same time, it also serves as a means forrecovering the full meaning and understanding of peace.

We are then able to seek out the new requirements of peace, along with

the roads we can travel to build it and to better realize where we havefallen short in our quest. In this new context we must ask ourselves, above

all, what is to be the role of religion in the promotion of peace?

Religion, every authentic religion, must never become a pretext forfuelling conflict, hatred and violence. I am deeply convinced that asincere religious sentiment is the principal antidote for violence andconflicts. In this perspective, individuals and religious communities mustclearly manifest a complete and radical rejection of violence, all violence,starting with the violence that would wrap itself in the mantle of religion,even appealing to the Holy Name of God as it commits offences against

humanity. There is no religious end that can justify the practice of mancommitting violence against man. Indeed, in the present moment ofhistory, humanity is waiting to see believers make gestures of peace and

solidarity, and humanity is waiting to hear words of hope.

At this time, I would ask you to allow me to call to mind the great Pope

John Paul II. The beloved Pope John Paul constantly invited believers tocultivate dialogue, and to sustain it with the concrete commitment never tostop listening to one another. He indicated mutual listening as a responseto the disturbing questions that we face, as a form of behaviour useful for

dispelling atmospheres of distrust and misunderstanding. John Paul IIinvited us to take note, everyday with renewed wonder, of the variety bywhich human life is manifested and of the great number of unique gifts,proper to different cultures and traditions, that form a multifaceted andmany-shaped linguistic, cultural and artistic cosmos: this immense variety

is called to form an integrated whole in an exchange of ideas and indialogue, for the enrichment and well-being of all people.

This enlightening teaching of John Paul II is very useful for meeting theproblems of our day. With the situations of conflict facing our world asit moves into the third millennium, dialogue between religions must findits loftiest and most noble motivation in the promotion of justice andsolidarity. The believers of the various religions need to have a profoundawareness of the degree to which wounds are still open and bleeding: thewounds of injustice; of ethnic and social conflicts; of violence and war;of disregard for the rights of individuals and of peoples, which are thesource of suffering and endemic poverty; of unemployment and a loss ofdignity; of large migratory movements and of new threats of war that arealways lying in wait. Believers need to pray so that we may come to know

the way of just relations among ourselves. There can be no true peacewithout respect for the dignity of individuals and peoples, for the rightsand duties of each person, without an equitable distribution of benefitsand burdens between individuals and society as a whole. Oppressionand marginalization are often the origin of manifestations of violence andterrorism. Tragic situations, found in many parts of our world, demonstratethe absolute necessity of dialogue and negotiation. We must open ourhearts and minds to the great challenges that await us: the defence of thesacredness of human life under all circumstances; the promotion of thefamily, the fundamental cell of society; the elimination of poverty, thanks

to efforts made to foster development, reduce debt and open up channelsof international trade; respect for human rights in every situation, withspecial attention to those people who are most vulnerable children,women and refugees; disarmament, the reduction of the sale of arms to

poor countries and the consolidation of peace after the end of conflicts;the fight against widespread diseases and access for the poorest to basichealth care and medicines; safeguarding the environment and preventingnatural disasters; the rigorous application of international law andinternational conventions.

Dialogue between religions is a necessary prerequisite for meeting thecomplex and difficult needs of our world. Above all, dialogue makes it

possible for us to overcome the danger of religious fundamentalism,


8/32


which today is very threatening and widespread. Not long ago, there wasa certain political fundamentalism that was predominant; today, however,there is often the risk of falling into forms of religious fundamentalism. Just

as in the recently ended twentieth century certain ideological conceptscorrupted the truth of politics, so the power of men over other menthreatens today to exploit religions, deeply disfiguring their intrinsic truth.The true face of religion is tarnished if religion is used to justify men fightingagainst other men. Despite this years tragic terrorist attacks, with their

devastating toll of death and suffering, we can nonetheless take solace in

the enormous progress that the human conscience continues to make,

strengthening the conviction that no authentically religious cause can bringus to treat another person as an enemy against whom we must fight.

The message of Jesus invites us to place value on what we share incommon and on what unites us, and to see these as the foundationand measure of those things that set individuals and peoples apart. Ofcourse, considering various and diversified forms of social and politicalorganization can have a powerfully innovative and liberating value withrespect to mechanisms of oppressive and unjust force. Looking beyond

borders, of whatever type these may be, and learning from others seeing a value in their and our own diversity are elements that free usfrom narrow limits and that allow people to come together and appreciateeach other. All of this promotes peace and solidarity. In certain momentsof history, however, a proper awareness of just how much we are allalike in our inner-most being, despite our differences, will have an even

more innovative significance for relations among peoples. This samepositive effect will result from correctly seeing the value of our differences,that is, understanding them as representing the inexhaustible richnessof our shared human nature. Political regimes are sometimes afraid ofthis demanding truth. But they can overcome this fear by being open toconsidering the value of the diversity of others, by welcoming a spirit ofdialogue; but even more, they can overcome this fear by recognizing thecommon bonds uniting all men and women in the one human family. Thiskind of recognition represents a great service to humanity and to human

rights. There is a time to learn from diversity; there is a time to learn fromthose things that we share in common. In our present day, it is this secondscenario that must be more prevalent.

In the light of this demanding perspective it is possible to meet the mostdangerous challenge of our time: terrorism. Terrorism is among the mostbrutal of behaviours tearing the international community apart today andsowing death, hatred, desire for revenge and retaliation, and a spirit ofopposition. This malevolent social phenomenon has always been present,even in the past, but in recent years, especially after the end of the ColdWar, it has shown alarming new outbreaks. It has been transformed

from the isolated acts of single extremists into a sophisticated network of

political, technological and economic cooperation; it often has access toimmense financial resources and plans strategies on a vast scale, striking

innocent people who are in no way connected with the issues involvingthe terrorists. Places of daily life are targeted and not military objectiveswithin the context of a declared war. Terrorism plans its activities insecrecy and strikes surreptitiously, outside the scope of the rules by which

men have always tried in some way to regulate their conflicts. Using theirown followers as weapons to be unleashed against defenceless peoplewho are not forewarned, terrorist organizations show forth with evergreater vehemence the death-instinct that drives them, an instinct that is

already implicitly found in their choice of terror as a political and militarystrategy. All of this makes terrorism unacceptable in the most absolute of

manners. It is based on contempt for human life. No end can justify the

sacrifice of human life, since man is always an end and never a means fora further end. The absolute dignity of the human person derives from thefact that men and women are, in the entire universe, the only creature thatGod has willed for itself.2

Terrorism, besides killing innocent victims, gives rise to isolation, distrust

and closed-mindedness, all of which inevitably lead to a climate of

2. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, 24.


9/32


perennial hatred. Individuals and nations struck by terrorism are tempted

to turn to retaliation and revenge: in this way, violence engenders furtherviolence and brings into its tragic vicious circle even future generations,which inherit the hatred that divides the present generations. Terrorism isan attack on human dignity: it is an aggression committed against every

person because all people can be targeted by it; it is for that reason anoffence committed against all humanity. And it is for this same reasonthat there exists a right to defend oneself against terrorism. Internationalcooperation in the fight against terrorist activity must also include aparticular commitment on the level of politics, to resolve with courageand determination the problems that, in certain dramatic situations, canadd fuel to terrorism. The recruitment of terrorists, in fact, is more easilyaccomplished in social contexts where hatred is sown, where rights aretrampled, and in situations where injustices have been tolerated for toolong.

In his message for the World Day of Peace 2006, the Holy Father

Benedict XVI warned that at the roots of terrorism we often findfundamentalism or nihilism. Fundamentalism consists in the belief thatone is in complete possession of the truth, such that one can imposeit by force. Truth, however, must be continually sought; it can onlybe contemplated and never possessed, because God is truth (cf. Jn

14:6). For this reason, any kind of fundamentalism is a behaviour that

is radically contrary to faith in God. To the nature of the truth that one

presumes to possess, whether this truth is philosophical, political or

religious in nature, there correspond different forms of intolerance thatcan result in terrorist violence. Nihilism too, that is, the belief that no truthand no real objective foundation exists, can be used to justify terroristviolence as the extreme cry of desperation or as the lone affirmationof a single individual. Every authentic believer knows that the Truth is

larger than the believer himself. For this reason, it is profanation andblasphemy to proclaim oneself a terrorist in Gods name, to kill and visit

violence upon people in Gods name. In such cases, not only are men

and women being exploited, but God too is the subject of exploitation,

in that one believes to be totally in possession of Gods truth rather than

being possessed by that truth. In the end, terrorism is a new chapterin the history of a mankind that wants to make itself God by definitively

ridding itself of God.

No religion can tolerate terrorism, much less preach it. This is particularlytrue for the great monotheistic religions. Terrorism, in fact, is contraryto faith in God the Creator of mankind, contrary to a God who cares for

people and loves them, contrary to a God who is Father of all men and

women. It is totally contrary to faith in Christ the Lord, the One who, sentby the Father, said to us: Love one another; even as I have loved you,so also must you love one another (Jn 13:34); the One who prayed to

the Father that we may all be one (Jn 17:21) in him. For this reason, theChristian faith, the great monotheistic religions and the great religionsof mankind should all work together among themselves to spread a

greater awareness of the unity of the human race, in order to eliminatethe cultural causes of terrorism, teaching that the dignity of the humanperson is great in Gods eyes and that violence can never be done in the

name of the One who is Love. From an ever greater cooperation therecan arise a common effort, a spiritual and educational effort, againstfundamentalism, regardless of the guise under which it may operate.

Public opinion is often led to believe that there is a connection betweenterrorism and religion. Nothing could be further from the truth. Such anerroneous conception can only be effectively corrected by cooperation

between religions with the intention of showing in the behaviour oftheir own members the complete incompatibility between religion andviolence. This is a new area for ecumenical and inter-religious dialogue

and cooperation, a new form of service that religions can render tohumanity and to peace among peoples. A commitment of this typeon the part of religions should be particularly careful to follow the pathof constant dialogue that opens the participating parties to mutualunderstanding, respect and trust. There is a right to defend oneselfagainst terrorism, but we must not forget that the true defence against


10/32

16 Opening up

terrorism is found in the spiritual and cultural order. Even when humanjustice has been restored, we must not forget that, as Saint Gregory the

Great wrote, human justice, when compared to divine justice, is injustice;

it is like a lantern shining in the darkness: placed in the bright splendour

of the sun, its light can no longer be seen.3 Love passes through justiceand, in a certain sense, seeks justice and sustains it, but it is not reduced

to justice. Love fosters and assists reconciliation, bringing it ever closerto absolute justice, which is Divine Mercy. The service that religions canrender to peace and to the fight against terrorism consists precisely in thepedagogy of love and reconciliation.

Peace, which is an enormously great good, although sometimes difficultto achieve, is the result of a just order in the relationships existing betweenhuman beings, regardless of their race, colour, culture or social class.This peace is possible on the condition that the dignity of the humanperson and fundamental human rights are respected. It is a peace thatcalls on all people to fulfill their own duty towards others. This entails asincere cooperation, an attitude of responsibility, a society built on truth,justice, freedom and above all on love. Everyone must make their proper

contribution to the promotion of peace through daily gestures of peace.Gestures of peace, at every level, are one of the most effective means

for bringing about peace. Such gestures arise in the heart and are an actof the will; they find expression in generous decisions aimed at mutualunderstanding, reconciliation and forgiveness. The hearts of those whomake gestures of peace become oriented to the common good and

such gestures are a powerful source of social and civil education. Peace,besides being the result of political decisions made at various nationaland international levels, is also the fruit of countless gestures of peacemade by each one of us: it is here that we find the secret of that spiritualrevolution that is so urgently needed in our modern day, a spiritualrevolution capable of renewing hearts and minds, and therefore capableof making the world a place of greater solidarity and of greater goodness.

3. Moralium, V, c. 37, par. 67; PL, LXXV, 716-717.

Living with others who are different:a Christian perspective1

A Lecture delivered by Professor Andrea Riccardi

at The Mediterranean Conference Centre, Valletta, on the 29th November 2007

1. The original lecture was delivered in Italian and has been translated into English

The sea unites and mountains divide. This is the underlying thesis ofthe thinking of Ferdinand Braudel, the great Mediterranean historian,

when he examined the history of this sea. The sea facilitates exchanges,

voyages, movement of populations, but the sea also facilitates intrusionand even invasions. There are no frontiers in the sea.

This is also the story of Malta: a history of exchanges, of meetings andof clashes. This is the history of an island in the sea. It is also the storyof the conflict between Christians and Muslims around Malta. We know

that Christians and Muslims were not (and are not) two blocks but are

two composite realities; nevertheless they are very different religious andcultural universes.

Malta, throughout her troubled history, had to choose to which of thesecultural universes she would belong. The choice was made for herby the armed battles and resistances. It was however also made byMalta through the participation of her people in the Christian faith thathas permeated the everyday life and culture of the Maltese people.

Christian faith is not rooted in weapons but in peoples choices. Andyet, Malta is also united to the Arab world. One has only to considerher linguistic heritage. Through this choice, even in difficult times, Maltahas shown that she can create for herself an identity in the heart of theMediterranean, but can also be a bridge-reality with other worlds. Malta

does not live on her own; she is European, Mediterranean-European,


11/32


energised by the Christian religion of her people. But Europe needsto discover that there exists a southern European frontier towards theMediterranean.

The Mediterranean was the sea of conflicts during the Second WorldWar, the sea of the Cold War; Then came the age of globalisation. Weremember, at least we of a certain age, though not that old, how in1989 we hoped for the great peace, but this did not happen. Todaythe globalised world has changed everything for us. Today everythingapproaches each other. Not only through the media, the distant drawsnear in a surprising way. We are no longer alone with others similar tous. What was once distant comes closer and can also be threatening,as happens with terrorism. What is distant knocks on our doors through

immigration.

Different peoples live together. Yet often it is difficult to live together, ascan be seen in the history of the Balkans. The great cities of the world

have become places where people of different ethnicities and religionslive side by side. This does not happen only in Europe, not only in thewest, but also in Asia and in Africa. The fact that one lives together withothers has become one of the greatest problems of our times, but is alsoa reality.

However I have to say while people are mixing together, throughoutthe world, all countries and communities are rediscovering their own

identities. Globalisation has led us not to a generalised cosmopolitanismbut to new self-discovery of identity. Because one cannot live in a

large world, confused, open to all currents, bombarded by the media,without asserting who one is, which is ones true identity, which is ourtrue identity. Therefore identity is like clothes: you cannot live naked,

unless in a nudist camp, in everyday life you do not live naked, because

it is cold, because you feel exposed and vulnerable, and also becausewithout clothes we are all the same. To live in a large world that is full ofcold currents we need clothes.

I know that identity also brings degenerative processes, such as

conflicts, national conflicts, and fundamentalism. Identities oppose eachother; reawaken ancient hatreds, ancient fears, and ancient mistrusts.

Our world is a globalised world populated by many different identities.That is why there is the risk of conflict. And this is the problem: how can

we live together, with all these identities that are so different from eachother?

The politics of meeting with the other, that of neighbourhood, ofdialogue, becomes a necessity both in local communities and ininternational communities. We need to invest in this. The one who hasa strong, serious, true identity has the duty to manage the contactbetween those who are near and those who are far away. How can onelive in a world of many identities? This problem is found everywhere: itis the problem of how different ethnicities live together in Africa: think

about the famous conflict between the Hutu and Tutsi in Rwanda. It isthe problem of minorities. It is also the great question of immigration.

The Catholic Church, since the Second Vatican Council, has proposeddialogue between other religious worlds in a new way. Pope Paul VI in1967, in the encyclical Populorum Progressio, presented dialogue as a

way of being Christian in the world. Paul VI, in 1967, spoke of dialogues

between civilisations. This was nearly thirty years, more than twentyyears, before Huntington. Dialogue is a new concept for Catholicism,but it has ancient roots. Dialogue sinks its roots in love: it is the way

in which, in spite of the fact that you are different, you live together inlove. But be careful, having dialogue does not mean that you lose yourown identity; rather, if you do not know who you are, you cannot create

true and effective dialogue. There is no dialogue without identity. WhenJesus asks us to love our enemies, he is speaking about a love that

knows no frontiers. But to love without frontiers, there is the need of

a Christian heart, because for us Christians, identity is not a vest, or auniform. Identity begins in the heart.


12/32


In this time of globalisation, it is a beautiful time to be a Christian: I amconvinced that to be a Christian is a great resource in a world that is fullof fears, with few ideas and much disorientation. Christians, with a heartfull of faith and love, can help fellow citizens who are lost and fearful,as long as they do not let fear make them hide their talent of being

Christians. Our time is a time of fear: fear of Islam, fear of terrorism,fear of invasion by others. Everybody has lack of security. We have a

problem of security: security towards those who enter our world. I mustsay that there is a culture of fear in our world that advises us to buildwalls. But fear is a bad counsellor because it exposes our weakness.

Remember that Pope John Paul II started his pontificate by saying:Do not be afraid. Can we succeed today, us Christians, to look at

our world, this great big world, without fear? I want to ask, why must

we be afraid? In the past there were many more reasons for one tobe afraid: think of Malta, at the frontline of a Europe that was militarily

under siege by overwhelming forces. Think of Malta, a poor country,

which produced so many emigrants, just as Italy did after all. Today thesituation has changed. We Europeans are rich, full of resources, and wehave the possibility of thinking of policies, of lifestyles, that are not solely

dominated by reflexes of fear. And yet we have fear, perhaps even morethan before: perhaps because we are richer, because we have moreto lose. And yet, there is another reason. Today through the media weknow everything and we see everything. Each piece of news, from any

part of the world, reaches us. Formerly we were sheltered, in a way, by

our own ignorance and lack of information. How can we assimilate allthe news that we receive today?

We look at the world from the south of Europe. This is a particular

chessboard. Of all European frontiers, only one is on land that towardsRussia. All the others border with the sea. But is the ocean a frontier?The Mediterranean frontier is truly particular. It is the frontier with theArab-Islamic world, as well as with Israel and Turkey. But immediately

behind the Arab world is the great sub-Saharan Africa, the poorest

of continents, the continent of wars, of AIDS. Yes, the Mediterraneanfrontier is not only looking towards the Arab world but also towards sub-

Saharan Africa. Spain, France, Italy, Malta, Greece, Cyprus are sections

of this frontier towards the south of the world.

To be a Mediterranean European is a particular reality. It remindsthe whole of Europe that there exists the great south. MediterraneanEuropeans unite the European Union with the great south. And I feel Ican say that we people of the south of Europe feel - have a particular

feeling - towards the south of the world that the bureaucracy of Brussels

cannot grasp. The Greeks have a saying about us Italians: Same face,

same race. It is true. And of how many Mediterranean populations canwe say: Same face, same race?

The world of the south is full of problems. I dont have to remind youof the Middle East: I like to bring to mind Iraq, from where 50,000 flee

each month; in Iraq, in 1987, there was a Christian community thatnumbered 1,400,000, but this is now reduced to 300,000. How many

Iraqis and how many Iraqi Christians are there in camps in Syria, Jordan,and Turkey? Then there is Africa... think of the enormous migratory

thrust that comes from Africa, because of wars, the European crisis, theaspiration to European well-being. This obliges entire populations to

move to the north.

Emigration? Immigration? I do not want to be alarmist, but I think one

must have the courage to say that it is truly entire populations that aremoving, nearly an invasion. History has known such movements ofpeoples: the Barbarians moved, the Mongols moved, the Normansmoved. This is a different situation to the emigration of the Maltese,Sicilians or Italians. It is entire populations that are moving. It will not bea mere frontier policy to stem this phenomenon; theres the need for agreater policy from the European Union, and theres the need for goodplanning.


13/32


Invasion? The community of SantEgidio started in Rome, but todaylives in more than twenty African countries. We experience the reality ofAfrican youths: they are people who no longer believe in their country.So they decide to leave to seek their fortune elsewhere. It is, very often,

imprudent at the very least. They undergo incredible journeys, crossingthe Sahara desert, the sea, paying enormous sums of money. I haveoften spoken to these youths, who want to leave. I say, But you have

a dignity here in the Ivory Coast. Why do you want to go to Paris orRome? But this is like a race towards a better life; it is the delusion with

your own country.

Fabrizio Gatti, a brave Italian journalist, infiltrated himself among these

immigrants and travelled with them on their journey. He wrote a book

Bilal. In his opinion this is truly a slave market. He wrote: Twelve per

cent of the people who leave from Libya towards Tunisia never arrive inEurope. And also, Twelve per cent means that of the 182 passengerstravelling with me in the truck, 22 were destined to die. How many

people have died in the desert or in the sea?

In 1999 two youths from Guinea Conakry were found dead in the

undercarriage compartment of an aeroplane that had landed inBrussels. They had wanted to reach Europe, and they left a letter inwhich they described the reasons why they had undergone this voyage.They wrote: You see that we are sacrificing ourselves and risking our

lives. This is because in Africa we suffer too much. We need you to

fight against this poverty and put an end to the war in Africa. The letterended with these words: We beg you, Europeans, to help us so thatwe could study, in order to be in Africa as you are over there. It is thedream of many who arrive in Europe and the dream of those who diealong the way: to live as the people of Europe live. And our televisionspresent a picture of an easy life in Europe. Who can stop the youths whodream in this way? What can be done?

What can be done about the desertification of the Sahel that pushes

entire populations? I ask today: What can little Malta do when faced with

such a challenge? Today the pressure of immigration is being felt onthis island. We cannot simply be carried away by a reaction of fear ashappens to so many people in Europe; but it is truly a grave problem.In addition to Maltas 400,000 inhabitants, one of the highest population

densities, 2,000 other people arrive in Malta yearly. I have made mycalculations: the 1,800 that arrived in the year 2005 would be felt asif more than 252,000 persons had arrived in Italy. Can you imaginewhat would happen in Italy if this happened? The sense of pressureis understandable. Apart from this, a community such as that of Maltawould want to keep its historic identity. This is understandable and is

also just, because to welcome you need to have your identity.

Faced with this pressure, the reply cannot be that of fear, but perhapsone needs to look at the problem in a different way. I tell my friends in

Italy: Let us not let insecurity be our first reaction. We have resourcesfor a true policy. But this policy cannot be the policy of Malta, becausein the end if Malta is left on her own, one arrives at having to pushaway without mercy, leaving people outside, and at this the Christianconscience rebels. What can be done? I have nothing to teach, I onlyhave reasoning, reflections, to place before you.

What can be done? New times and new situations require new choices.The pressure of immigration is a problem common throughout all thesouthern flank of the European Union. It can be felt in Cyprus, in Ceuta

and Melilla, Spanish enclaves in Morocco, and in the Canaries. Thecountries of first reception have a responsibility. But Italy and Spaincan spread the influx inland. Malta and Cyprus find themselves in greatdifficulty. In addition to be honest refugees and asylum seekers do

not want to come to Malta or Cyprus but want to go to mainland Europe.

There is therefore the responsibility of the European Union. Whatmust be done is what the Government of Malta does, in the offices o f

government of the European Union, so that the problem of refugees


14/32


does not remain solely the problem of the reception countries butbecomes a European question. The Mediterranean issue cannot besolely the problem of the coastal countries but is a great internationalissue, a European issue.

Here I want to speak of another problem. Europe, the Union, needs

immigrants. I do not think this is a problem for Malta at present, but the

rest of Europe, yes, is seeing a demographic decline. By the year 2030the population band between age 14 and 64 will decrease by twenty

million. Between 1995 and the year 2000 Europe lost four and a halfmillion inhabitants for demographic reasons, and replaced them withfive million immigrants. The labour market in Italy and Spain needs

immigrants. A few months ago Franco Frattini, vice president of theEuropean Commission, said that in twenty years Europe in going to needtwenty million immigrants. In 2005 Italy had a positive natural balancethanks to the birth of 52,000 children of foreigners. An Italian newspaper

has commented that between 1993 and 2006, if there had been no

immigrants, the population of Italy would have decreased by 650,000.

This therefore is the contradiction of Europe: to push away those whoknock while calling for others to enter. In consequence, if the need

of immigrants is combined to the need of Europe for immigrants, itcannot happen that the problem of asylum seekers is dumped on the

southern frontier countries. Europe needs to take on the problem, take

upon herself the role of countries of first reception, as an entity that has

complete responsibility of welcome. In this sense the problem of Maltaand Cyprus needs to become a European issue.

The Italians, Sicilians and Maltese certainly have a great responsibility.The reception must be humanised, because many asylum seekers

come from stories of great sadness and hardship. Their stay in Malta,while awaiting recognition of their status, must not be a waste of time. Ibelieve that Malta, supported as should be by the European Union, canbe an opportunity for many refugees to enter into the culture of Europe.

I am thinking here of the possibility of teaching the English language

(as many of us already come to Malta to learn). Malta would then beremembered for ever as a beautiful stage in the troubled journey of theimmigrant.

Now, when I state that this is a European issue, am I saying that Maltahas no responsibility towards the immigrants? Your islands, as youknow better than I do, entered the history of Christianity through the

reception they gave to St Paul when he was shipwrecked here: There is

written in the Acts: Once on shore we learned that the island was calledMalta. The natives showed us extraordinary kindness by lighting a fire

and gathering us all around it, for it had begun to rain and was growingcold. (Acts 28: 1, 2) If Paul were to arrive on these islands today,would he say the same words, that the Maltese are people who showextraordinary kindness towards the shipwrecked?

It is a question that troubles all Maltese Christians I have spoken to: on

the one hand there is the problem of an island exposed to the arrival ofmany, but to be an island is also a responsibility. This is therefore thequestion of conscience on which we have to work a lot in the coming

years, because the pressure is not destined to diminish. There is theneed of a Christian contribution: intelligent, generous, creative, thatrefuses all simplifications. Nothing is easy in life. And the Christianconscience can be leaven.

Many may say: In Malta we are already too many; we do not havespace to receive others! I remember that during the Second WorldWar, Switzerland, surrounded by countries at war, was besieged by thedemands of many seeking to enter, especially Jews fleeing persecution

and Nazi extermination. I have to say that the response was not generous.Many Swiss said: The boat is full ... The boat is full. It was a terribleresponse that condemned to death many human beings whose only crimewas to be Jews. Today Switzerland repents and asks for forgiveness. I

treasure requests for forgiveness, I like them a lot, but I believe that it would


15/32


be much better if one would think carefully beforehand than to ask for

forgiveness later. In reality the boat was not at all full, so much so that afterthe war many Italians went to Switzerland as emigrants, because they wereneeded. The response of that day, the result of fear of invasion, of the fearof causing irritation, was a mistaken response.

Certainly Switzerland is big, and Malta small. But perhaps there isnever the need to say, The boat is full. It is not up to me to say whatMalta should do. But since I have been invited to speak, I want to say

something about emigration. The community of SantEgidio has beenfeeling for more than twenty years that immigration is an opportunitythat we can utilise. We have been working for years so that reception

is made in a humane way. We started a movement, Gente di Pace, that

welcomes immigrants of all ethnicities. A stranger, if he lives well the firstyears of his life in a country, continues well on his path. The immigrant isvulnerable and can therefore be easily caught up in the net of criminality,or fall into marginality. If frustrated, he may also become aggressive.There are then the different attitudes of the people who emigrate: forexample Africans tend to emigrate in a definitive way. Great journeys

require a complete detachment from your homeland. It is the choice ofliving with others.

Malta on her own, as I have said, is unable to receive all immigrants,because she must also preserve her peoples historic identity. Identitymust be enriched, it cannot disappear. And I insist that the Union needs

to increasingly take upon itself the responsibility of the southern frontier.

But let us also look into the faces of those who arrive here. The face of

the immigrant is a book that tells a drama. Behind that face is suffering,

war, famine, persecution, there is a question, and there is a dream. Forthe Christian, each human being, even if a foreigner, even if an enemy,remains a human being.

Our Lord, in the parable of the Last Judgement, says to those who arecalled into his kingdom, I was a stranger and you welcomed me

And to those who are condemned he says, I was away from homeand you gave me no welcome Because of this choice towards the

foreigner, as towards the naked and the hungry, one can risk eternal

life. Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or away from home ornaked or ill or in prison ? And He replies, as often as you did it

for one of my least brothers, you did it for me. (Mt 25: 31 ff) When thehungry or foreigner knocks on our door, it is as if it is the Lord himself

who is knocking. This tremendous affirmation shakes our conscience.

But here we could say: in order to respect this Evangelical truth, mustwe allow our country to be invaded by strangers who are not evenChristian; must we risk the security of our children? Others may say: that

what you are saying, is Christian fundamentalism.

No, it is not fundamentalism, dear friends. Christian truths are not easy:they are not flags to hold aloft and compare to others, but like a worm

gnawing in our conscience that makes us think and be creative. There

are no simple solutions to what is complicated. But never inhumanity!Never hatred! Never humiliating treatment! The best times in the historyof Christianity are those when we were creative in finding new solutions.

Israel itself, a people that did not want to lose its identity and worshipforeigners, received this commandment: You shall not molest or oppressan alien, for you were once aliens yourselves in the land of Egypt. (Ex 22:20) The ancient word of Exodus, which I have just read, resounds in the

hearts of todays Italians or Maltese: we were foreigners in many countriesof the world; we know what it means to be ill-treated, what it means to bewithout rights, the unease of being foreigners. I have met Maltese peoplein all parts of the world: from Tunisia to the United States.

Therefore, to come towards a conclusion, which in effect is noconclusion at all, as each country must find its own conclusion; I believethat the word of the Gospel is a stimulus to find a concrete and humane

way of facing such a complex problem.


16/32


And I want to add our European societies have the responsibility ofrich countries. Often the stranger is like the foreign woman in the gospel

who asked Jesus for help; but Jesus replied, It is not right to take the

food of sons and daughters and throw it to the dogs. And she replied,even the dogs eat the leftovers that fall from their masters tables.

(MT 15: 26, 27) Many ask us for the scraps not for our childrens food.

That is why I say; we rich have at least the responsibility for the scraps.

This is the great problem of aid to countries in the south. I say it to Italy,my country, which had promised the 0.07% of the GDP to developing

countries, but never kept its promise. I feel the problem of Africa very

deeply the wars, but also AIDS. The community of SantEgidio takes

care of about 30,000 ill Africans. I say this with pride, because I think of

our poor resources that force us to be beggars wherever we go. Listento this, if I may take a few minutes: if you ask for aid to build a hospital,

you will find it; if you ask for aid to build a bridge, you will find it; but

if you say, I would like to ensure that an AIDS patient receives all the

medical help he requires, and this means that you help him for the restof his life unless a vaccine is developed, people will say, But for howmany years? And I reply, For many, I hope. They would reply, But Iwant to create a memorial, dedicate it to my parents. It is difficult to findthis kind of aid. But excuse me; I have been sidetracked by something

personal.

I think that our European countries need to have a policy, a way of

looking at things, towards the south of the world. They need to activatenew policies of cooperation. If new policies of cooperation towards thesouth of the world are not implemented, the endless line of immigrantsand refugees is not going to stop. We need to offer opportunities tothese youth from the south of the world, here I am thinking of Africans,

to study in their own countries or in Europe, in order to create a wellprepared class of leaders. In Africa a diploma is still enough to ensureemployment. Through cooperation, the forces that push people toemigrate are weakened. That is why I believe that as Christians we need

to work on the financial logic of our countries, demanding a policy of

solidarity. Cooperation for development, through effective projects,helps people to remain in their own countries.

To conclude. I love Malta deeply, because Malta for me representsmy dream for Europe: a Europe for the south, in the heart of theMediterranean. According to Giorgio La Pira, the great Italian Christian

who was mayor of Florence and promoter of dialogue between differentreligious worlds, now on the road to beatification, for Giorgio La Pira

the Mediterranean is the sea of the three monotheistic religions and theMediterranean unites Europe not only to the Arab world but also to black

Africa. Malta is a place of dialogue and peace where different worlds canmeet. Maybe we Europeans need to invest more in this. Malta, small,frightens no one, but is a place where people from the south, from theArab world, and also Europeans feel at home. In the globalised world itis not only the large that have a ro le in the international picture; but alsothe small that have a vocation. You can never be so small as to not havean ambition to help the world a little bit. You can never be so small as tonot be able to do a lot to help the world.

And I cannot but remind you, this I have already mentioned to Mr.President, that actually in Malta, in 1989, a historic meeting wascelebrated, when you were Prime Minister, between Bush andGorbachov, a meeting that brought the Cold War to an end. That is why

I feel that countries like Malta are precious bridges. A tiny country, that is

so rich in human resources, populated by people who are so generousand hard working, can be a decisive place of encounter. Malta, port inthe Mediterranean, can be a port of dialogue. In the globalised worldthe role of a port has changed. The port may have lost its importance asa service to ships; but on the other hand it has great importance to theroutes of history, of cultures and of peoples.

A creative force of hope and love emanates from the Christianexperience. Listen carefully, the Christian faith does not want utopia,


17/32

30 Opening up

does not lead us to seek paradise on earth. Reality is often tough.

But when I say tough, I do not want to say that we cannot make it

better. Christian love is not stopped by walls and nets: it worries,seeks, hopes, thinks, creates, works until in the end the most humane

solution is found. Nothing is impossible to those who believe. Whatseemed impossible yesterday becomes possible. I believe, and I sayit with conviction, that the Christian faith is a great resource that canbe the creator of new opportunities and new courage. The Christianfaith releases our hearts from the prison of fear that makes us either

aggressive or inert.

Our world today seems to be turning into a world o f clashes betweencivilisations. But I believe that we, men and women of good will,we Christians, have another role: that of building the civilisation oftomorrow. And the civilisation of tomorrow is not one of conflict but is acivilisation of peace.

The civilisation of tomorrow will not be that of victory of the civilisation ofthe West over Islamic culture, not the victory of the Chinese civilisationover the West, and so on, but the civilisation of tomorrow will be thecivilisation of living together.

I am convinced that we Christians have a great role to fulfil towards thisgoal, and I am convinced, dear Maltese friends and Mr. President, thatyour so beautiful Maltese islands have a great historic opportunity, for

us Europeans and for us of the Mediterranean. And I am convinced thatMalta, with her humanity and hospitality, can do a lot.

The priority of culturein us and themContribution by the President of Malta Dr. Edward Fenech Adami

at The International Meeting for Peace organized by the Sant Egidio Community together

with the Church of Cyprus, in Cyprus on the 17th November 2008

When Pope John Paul II visited Malta in 1990 he was met at the airportby our Minister of Tourism, among others. The Pope told him: Nodoubt you are grateful to St Paul for having provided the occasion for

the first advertisement of the hospitality of the Maltese in the Acts ofthe Apostles. The Minister replied: Of course, we are grateful, but theActs of the Apostles are not the first to carry that advertisement. Beforethat Homer in the Odyssey describes the welcome given to Ulysses byCalypso when he was shipwrecked on the island of Ogygia which we

believe to have been Gozo.

The Pope did not make any comment. Probably many of you could

easily formulate some retort or other that the Pope had refrained frommaking. There is however a connection between the two episodes with

their two versions of hospitality to strangers that is worth bringing out.Indeed, it has often been by Maltese orators who love to refer to St Pauland to the wily Ulysses as predecessors of the thousands of migrants,that some call clandestine and others undocumented, who have latelybeen reaching our shores in shapes as wretched as those of Ulysses

and Paul.

Apart from indecisive geographic indications, there is one main reasonfor identifying Homers Ogygia with Malta, or more precisely Gozo

(Ogygia implies roundish, which fits Gozo); it is that Calypso, the

daughter of Atlas, is presented as an earth goddess, linked to the

prehistoric matriarchal fertility cult, that had prevailed almost throughoutthe Mediterranean, until it was displaced by the Greek pantheon, with

the very masculine Zeus at its apex, thanks to his superior weaponry


18/32


namely the lightning bolts that he hurled down from the skies, with a

cunning that was well above that of the Earth Goddess.

In the case of St Paul, the question asked is: Why, when it is made

crystal clear that Providence wanted Paul to urgently confront Caesar,should a diversion caused by a heaven-sent storm make him delay

his arrival in Rome by several months? The answer given is that Paulsessential mission was to preach the Gospel outside the frontiers

of Israel; He was now close to the end of his life and so far he hadpreached the Gospel extensively but almost exclusively within the

Greco-Roman world, the spiritual domain of Zeus and his fellows. His

detour to Malta demonstrated that the Good News was also to be taken

beyond the Greco-Roman as well as the Hebrew world, even to such

areas as the Maltese Islands where the ancient culture and religionof the Mother Goddess still flourished despite Roman conquest. The

Maltese are in fact described in the Acts as barbaroi, meaning that theydid not speak Greek or Latin. Their culture and religion was the same as

that of Calypso.

Thus, the connection between Homers portrait of Calypso as Queenof Malta and Lukes portrait of Paul as the Apostle of all Nations is the

following: The welcome that both Ulysses and Paul received in Maltashows plainly the universality of the belief that hospitality to strangerswas a most basic duty of all human beings to all other human beings.The Calypso story is perhaps the best foreshadowing in pagan literature

of the recognition of the universal dignity of all human beings that Paulmost explicitly proclaimed for the first time in human history (as theagnostic philosopher Alain Badiou has emphasised in a recent book).

A particularly striking point common to both the episode in the Odyssey

and the episode in the Bible is that the frontiers crossed by the twoprotagonists are cultural and religious, not political or legal. Actually onetheme which the present phenomenon that looms so large in the mindsof many Maltese today is precisely the changing significance of frontiers.Instead of the Customs House as the typical building symbolising the

Frontier, the detention camp now stands ambivalently in our peoplesmind. These places make it clear that frontiers are not just invisible and

abstract lines separating two worlds as though by a merely legal fiction.They are concrete definitions of space, tangible places enabling controlto be exercised and compelling aliens to a phase in their lives ofwaiting in grievious uncertainty.

The ambivalence of the meaning of these zones is due to the twopossible outcomes of the experience that the people confined withinthem undergo. These outcomes could be either frustration, amountingeven to the exasperation of a Freudian death-wish; or the cradling of an

intercultural exchange that could be taken as a harbinger of a positive

turnabout in the ongoing process of globalization.

It is this paradoxical image of the Frontier that has emerged in theminds of the younger generations particularly in our part of the world,but also more generally throughout the world.

It is in sharp contrast with the Frontier image that took shape in the

minds of the older generations among us. That image was fashionedmostly by the Western films that dominated our imaginations whenthe cinema was still unrivalled in its power to capture the imagination.The frontier was the imaginary line that the cowboys and pioneers inAmerica were constantly pushing westwards at the expense of the RedIndians. The others beyond the frontier were by that very same fact

branded as baddies.

The global situation has radically changed. There are now no morelands to conquer. It might seem to some that situations like Iraq or

Georgia are counter-examples. But, in fact, they are in part generally

perceived as anachronistic and in part as exhibiting the cultural orcivilisational form that the libido dominandi, to use Augustines idiom,has taken as its post modern dress. It does not seem that the creation of

any mythical art-form comparable to the Western has yet been provided


19/32


by any mass medium. Nevertheless, the sheer coming into existenceof global networks such as Internet are fostering the idea that frontiers

are made to be traversed with ever greater ease, and perhaps to besuppressed completely in the not too distant future.

So, at present the topic of frontiers seems to be haunted by a doubledanger. On the one hand, there is the illusion that the trend towardsglobalization, even in its lopsided current form, has already madefrontiers unimportant, even if there is still no keeping in step between

world-wide commerce and world-wide governance. On the other

hand, there are situations in the world where the strengthening offrontiers appears to be highly desirable. Tibet is a case in point. Thenon-existence of legal frontiers in such cases constitutes a threat to

the survival of valuable cultural identities. Another case where againthe juridical establishment of frontiers would be a positive occurrenceat least for the time being is that between Israel and Palestine. Themultivalence of the possible meanings of frontiers is a function of thedifferent figures that the outsider can take.

There are of course many other cases throughout the world wherefrontiers are the cause of international as well as intra-national

conflict such as Ireland or Kashmir and many areas in Africa, andthese questions are among the major cause of the massive refugeemovements occurring at present. The frontier disputes can also beilluminatingly seen as related to the concept of what constitutes a

stranger, a foreigner, a xenos. Most of the millions of refugees arebeing constrained to become outsiders in some part of the world orother because their right to preserve a cultural identity, often significantlymarked by a religion, is not being respected or even recognised. It is

therefore necessary for us to acknowledge that legal frontiers may be

a positive necessity at the stage of development that the sense of ouridentity as human beings has reached.

Its full development would mean that on the one hand there wasbetween us all the solidarity that would flow from consciousness ofbelonging to one species and on the other hand full recognition ofevery groups right to enjoy its chosen cultural identity in a pluralistworld. Thus the issue on which we are trying to focus our attention Xenophobia, Philoxenia is not so much a matter of physical changes offrontiers as of conceptual and functional changes. A proper conceptionof what constitutes human identity should lead us to change ourconcept of the function of a frontier from that of a divisive barrier to thatof a heritage-marker, preserver of an original cultural identity.

It is difficult to avoid the impression that since September 11th ourgeneral frontier behaviour has taken a regressive turn. Previously,

an evolutionary change had been taking place in the direction that

certainly Christians are committed to, but also all those who subscribeto believe in universal human dignity. The increasing technologisation offrontier- crossing-control has led the more fearful among us to see in it a

foretaste of the realization of Michel Foucaults nightmare of a universalonslaught of plague. Biometric identity cards and total body radiologicalexamining devices at the frontiers are indicating that security worriesare becoming much more intense than respect for human dignity.Experience has amply proved that it is impossible to prevent the criminaloccurrences that the sort of big brother surveillance of everybody aremeant to guard against by such means. Anything like a return to the

elementary traditions of hospitality can only be secured by eradicating

the extreme conditions that strain the resources of human beings anddrive them to violent reactions.

On the other hand, there are several developments occurring whichare enabling frontiers to change from being only devices of enclosureor waiting places into becoming meeting places for cross-cultural as

well as interpersonal communication and exchanges. There is howeverpressing need for more general support of all initiatives that promote theuse of frontiers that goes with a balanced concept of human identity.


20/32

36 Opening up

For instance, it is clear that the steps that have been taken to reduce

the divisiveness of frontiers in Europe need to be complemented by thestrengthening of media communication across the Continent in order tostrengthen dialogue and understanding.

Perhaps even more important would be efforts to establish effectivenetworks of communication across the Mediterranean. Europeans

should remember that, at least one of the great founders of theEuropean Union, De Gasperi, emphasized that the frontiers of Europe

were not geographical, but cultural. He defined as European anyonewho embraced the humanistic heritage that came out of the conjunctionof Greco-Roman civilization with the traditions coming from Abraham

and shared by Jews, Christians and Muslims in common. Each of thecultural groups inhabiting this area has its own culture and, in a veryrelative sense, members of one group have become relatively strangersto each other; this only means that they need to recognise and respectthe differences between them, while ever intensifying their awarenessof what they share. When they have fully mastered the art of thiscreative co-existence through reciprocal hospitality, they will be ready

to extrapolate the experience that they will have accomplished on acontinental and transcontinental scale, to the planetary.

Perhaps Maltas greatest contribution to world affairs was the proposalto preserve ocean space from the need of frontiers by establishingfor it in international law the status of common heritage of mankind

and therefore enabling it to continue to be a place where no-one isa stranger, but everybody is at home. The idea has been applied bythe United Nations to the moon and to outer space, which are not yetquite habitable by human beings of any culture. Our idea from thestart had been that the oceans could be a laboratory in which onecould experiment with systems of governance that it might then besuccessively possible to implement also on land. After all, that is the waythat life went. It is the course that already Ulysses partly envisaged andthat after him St Paul fully conceived and proclaimed.

The contribution committedlay people are called upon to makein public life

A Lecture delivered by Fr. Fernando Franco SJ

at The Phoenicia Hotel, on the 24th April 2009

My dear friends in the Lord, if I may greet you in this very Jesuit wayhere today, I must tell you that I am a very simple man, and the thingshe has said about me in the in the introduction seem too grand to applyto me. Let me also, at the very start, confess a limitation - I suffer from

a problem of identity. I was born in the Basque country, but given thehistorical circumstances of that time, was not allowed to speak the

Basque language at school. I am Spanish by citizenship, but I lived37 years in India and wanted to become an Indian; but the colour ofmy skin betrays me there at any railway station or bus terminus. Then

suddenly one day, about 6 years ago, as I was getting on with my

ordinary duties in New Delhi, I received an email we are in the era ofemailswhich said Would you consider the possibility of coming toRome and doing this job? I almost had a heart attack! This was how I

was parachuted into Borgo S Spirito close to the Vatican City where Inow live, in the General Curia. You will understand from this that I have

distinct limitations, imbalances, peculiarities, call it what you will.

I begin my talk with an introduction where I clarify certain terms. I then

go on to discuss three main points. The first is that we live in a context orworld that has dramatically changed, and unless we understand a littlethe main characteristics of this world, we may not be able to understandwhat our commitment as lay persons should be. My second point isabout the new understanding of the relationship between religion andpublic life today, not so much within the Church but outside the Church.And finally, I make my third point tentatively and humbly, through a few

suggestions for what I call a methodology to shape public policy. I amnot an expert in public policy and while I am grateful for the invitation, I


21/32


am aware of my lack of expertise. I come here as a visitor, not here to tell

you what is to be done, but as a companion, as a traveller, to help youreflect on a number of issues confronting us today as Catholic Christiansand as human beings.

Introduction

Let me begin by clarifying in my introduction what I understand by bothterms, committed lay persons, and public policy.

What is meant by a committed lay person? I must confess that I wastouched by the word committed placed before lay persons. We do notsay committed Catholic priests we assume that priests are committed but apparently a lay person needs to be qualified by the adjectivecommitted. I attempt a definition with two quick examples.

Three weeks ago I was in Quebec, French Canada, visiting a work of

the Jesuits run by a lay person called Henry. A convinced Catholic,a practising Catholic. He ran a centre for youth, the kind that dresses

entirely in black with chains everywhere, tattoos down the arms, hair

all spiked up. It was the first time I had entered such a place and I was

somewhat scared, and I asked Henry who they were. His answer only

increased my apprehensions for it was obvious that many of the youngpeople coming to that open house, come well filled up, and not withtea ! When I asked Henry, what the hell, why are you doing this? he

replied, These young people, you see, they think that they are still inadolescence. They think that life is permanent adolescence, even when

they are 26, so I try to be an adult who loves them. I love them, but I am

an adult, I am not an adolescent. That was a committed lay person--

Henry.

Let me give you another example of a committed lay person-- Dinesh,

the director of ActionAid in India. Not so long ago, in 2002, terrible riots(called communal riots) broke out between the Hindu and Muslim

communities in Ahmedabad where I lived. Dinesh is a Hindu working

with the NGO called Action Aid and a respected leader in civil society.

During those riots of 2002, for two whole days, 2000 Muslims werebutchered with the connivance of the police and the state government.We Christians, a persecuted minority at the moment in India, did whatwe could to help the Muslim community but it was very difficult for us tofunction. This man, after two day of rioting, was the only Hindu in the cityof Ahmedabad, a city of 2 million people, to go to the radio station andmake a public appeal, saying, I appeal to you, my Hindu brothers, to be

first and foremost human beings, then you can be Hindus. I considerDinesh to be a committed lay person. I trust these two examples clarifymy understanding of the phrase committed lay person.

Next, public life. What do I mean by public life, by being engaged inpublic life? By public life I mean the actions that I take individually, and

sometimes collectively, to affect the shaping of public policy directly. Aperson engaged in political life is definitely engaged in public life. It isalso true that a very important section of civil society in the form of NGOs

tries to shape public policy, sometimes indirectly, sometimes directly.People in public policy would be, for example, first, those who balancepublic policy between maintaining border security and upholding thedignity of asylum seekers. Another example would be those shaping

public policy to ensure equal and quality education for all. People whoshape a nations policy on these two issues seem to me to be engagedin public life.

I

I turn now to the first of my reflections, our changed world. We live in anew world, a world that has changed profoundly. I believe that many ofthe problems or the issues that agitate you here in this country are partof the broader canvas of what is happening in the world.


22/32


First of all, whether a country is small or big, is located in the North orSouth, is democratic or non-democratic, makes no difference to the

fact that today we are all interconnected. We cannot shape our futureindependently of what is happening all over the world. Take China,

a communist country. The economic crisis begins in the US, in thesub-prime financial markets, and the effect is felt thousands of miles

away Over the last two months, 20 million Chinese workers living near

the coast where industries are located have left the cities and goneback to their villages. The reason is this: there is no more work. China

cannot say that, being a communist country, it is independent of whathappens elsewhere. What happens in Africa is going to affect the wholeof Europe. In fact, one of my presuppositions is that something veryserious is happening in Africa which is affecting us one way or the other.

Second, we live in a multicultural and pluri-religious world. You go to

Ireland now at the moment of the crisis and people are saying, Whatsgoing to happen to the Poles who migrated to Ireland and have beenworking here? Their calculation is that, over the last five years, almost

half a million Poles have come to live and work in Ireland. You travel on

a Saturday in the metro, and whether it is London or Madrid, you will findvery few people who are native inhabitants. I have had this experiencein many parts of the world. If you walk in Brazil today you can see

the whole Afro-descendant movement taking shape with tremendous

force before your eyes, and you realise that something has changeddrastically. You may close your eyes and say, Ah, but you see, fifteen

years ago it was not like that ..., but this is today, and things aredifferent.

Third, we live in a world in which inequalities have increased despitetremendous economic growth. Inequalities have increased withincountries, most strikingly in the US where they were great even before

the crisis began, to say nothing of other countries. In Nigeria you passfrom the an extremely luxurious and rich lifestyle in the middle of Lagosto the most wretched and miserable poverty some distance away.

The process of growth that has been accompanied in our societiesby increasing inequality, has been made worse by the financial andeconomic crisis.

Fourthly, we live in a world obsessed with identity-- cultural in some

cases, religious in others. You will find young people today on theoutskirts of Guatemala, or San Francisco, or anywhere in Europe for that

matter, who belong to groups which go in for tattoos. They are membersof street groups, of a mara or pandilla as they say in Latin America.They live out this identity having nothing else to live by or for; and thisleads to a lot of violence.

A more serious aspect of our contemporary world and our obsessionwith identity is the factor of religious fundamentalism. I lived for verymany years in a country that has practised tolerance, the countrythat produced and revered Mahatma Gandhi, the man of peace. That

country today is being polarised, as Hindu fundamentalists try to re-write

history using religion for political purposes. Muslims and Christians,both religious minorities, are being persecuted. Six months ago I visitedthe state of Orissa where I saw very poor Christians killed mercilessly

simply because they were Christians. Or take Buddhism in Sri Lanka.

The Buddha proclaimed compassion and peace. The plight of Tamilcivilians who have been butchered in the last few months is terrible.I hold no brief for the Tamil rebel group LTTE but I maintain that theBuddhist movement and the use of religion for political purposes has

made the political history of the last 15 years in Sri Lanka miserable andunacceptable.

Again, and I say this with humility and respect, I cannot pass over thisissue without mentioning some forms of Christian fundamentalism whichhave invoked the law of God to invade a country. Biblical statements

have been used for terrible purposes.


23/32


Racism is another form of fundamentalism everywhere on the increase.I come here now from Rome where the newspapers three days agocarried the story of a young boy who plays calcio, football for Juventus(though I am not quite sure of this last fact). He comes from Mali, hisparents came from Africa, he was born in Italy, he is an Italian, he has anItalian passport. The other day a section of the crowd started shoutingat him, You are not Italian, you are not Italian, you are a black. The

football federation came later and closed the Juventus stadium for aseason. This is what the texture of human life is made of today.

I turn to the next characteristic. We live in a fragmented world, a worldthat is post-modern both conceptually and socially. Nobody believes in

Utopias any more; we believe that the truth is partial. Belief in institutionshas gone. Long term commitments? A thing of the past. We live for theshort term, for today; about tomorrow we can affirm nothing. This affectsmany, families are broken, fragmented. This is the fearful and uncertain

world in which we live.

The last characteristic seems to me very important because it underliesmuch of what I have mentioned. Fear--we live in a world in which fear

and anxiety are fabricated and transmitted for political gain. I offeran example from outside Europe and leave it to you to make the

connections. For the last three years the constant refrain in India isthat Christians are a threat; they come with a religion that has alwaysbeen Western; they will destroy what? the culture of this country,

which is Hindu. Fear. The Muslims are seen as having destroyed thiscountry in the past. Again, fear. Analyse the facts, some of the facts. Thepercentage of Christians (not only Catholic) in India was 2.3% in 1948

after Independence. The 2000 census shows it to be 1.96. That shows

a clear decrease. 1.9% in a population of 1000 million people, and theChristians constitute a threat to the fabric of the country! If you sit quietlyand look at the facts figures, you will ask, How can this lie be sold? But

it is; it is sold and disseminated efficiently. India is a melting pot of manycultures, not only Hindu culture. In fact, invasion from outside was the

origin of Hindu culture. The indigenous people people living there werepushed out as the invaders marched in. What do we mean by original/not original? And yet, educated persons say, You people come here toconvert, you come here to change the demography, you come here todestroy Hinduism.

I have outlined six characteristics of the world in which we live and thelast one, the systematic policy of distributing fear seems to me to becrucial. I have given only one example from India but it is happening allover the world.

II

Turning now to religion and public life I think there has been a change,

a very interesting change in the way one understands the relationshipbetween the two. I do not discuss here Catholic social teaching which,while accepting difference, has held that the values of a Christian personmust influence the shaping of public policy. I shall speak instead briefly

about what I call the extreme secularist position. How would I define theexreme secularist position? Very simply, it is the belief that religion andfaith have to be driven out from the public realm and left secluded withinthe private and individual space. Religion is a private affair. Let bishops,lay people, speak about religion within their own communities. This is

obviously a strong reaction to a history in which the Church invadedthe public sphere, that is, the Church invaded the State. Today certain

schools of thought in some countries want a religious ideology to invadethe area of the State. I think the Church has quite clearly rejected thisposition, even if it took three hundred years to understand this.

What is happening today? Very briefly, here are three examples.

Tony Blair, the former Prime Minister of England, a recent convert toCatholicism, has launched a new foundation--Faith and Globalisation.

He proposes openly that faith and religion have a role to play today


24/32


in shaping public policy. And he makes five propositions which I think

may be interesting for us. He says first of all, we must not think that

having faith makes us abnormal or weird. Second, the fact that you are a

person of faith engaging in in public life does not imply that your religionmakes you act without freedom and without reason; having faith does

not mean that you respond automatically to some force pushing youfrom behind to act in a particular way. That is not the meaning of havingfaith. Third, to have faith does not mean that you wish to impose yourfaith on others. Fourth, being a person of faith engaged in public lifedoes not give you any right to assume that you are better than others.And finally, the fact that you have faith should not make you co-opt God

to legitimise your own political agenda. If these five points are kept in

mind, then faith, says Tony Blair, is absolutely essential in todays world.

My second example is also drawn from a person who converted toCatholicism, the Secretary General of the UN, Ban Ki-Moon. Among the

many thorny and difficult problems he confronts is climate change. Aboutthree months ago I received an invitation asking the Jesuits (along with

other religous leaders including the Vatican) to consider the possibility ofengaging in a dialogue with the UN. Before the crucial meeting towardsthe end of this year in Copenhagen to decide the final policy, the UNSecretary General Ban Ki-Moon wants to be familiar with the stands taken

on climate change by religions. He wants faith-based organisations to

engage in this process because he knows that merely tampering with,

and tweaking fiscal procedures and laws cannot change the relationship

of human beings to the Earth. Here religion and faith have a role to play.He wants us to take a position and make a commitment so that when theleaders of all nations gather together at Copenhagen, religious leaderscan say, You are not dealing with a problem that concerns only you, itconcerns all of us, and through our religious values, we strongly commitourselves to preserve our relationship with the Earth. It is not for us to tellyou what the optimal percentage of carbon dioxide for trade with eachother should be; those are things that you have to decide, but we wantto tell you, as religious leaders, that we believe we need to change ourrelationship with the Earth.

Finally, let us recognize the change that has come about in the role ofreligion in public life. Faith and religion today can shape public life in afar more positive and open way provided that certain perfectly ordinaryand acceptable conditions are met..

III

I come now to a more practical issue. What is the methodology weshould adopt to shape public policy? The ideas I offer here are based onwhat a number of people engaged in defining social ethics at a globallevel are saying. The methodology to achieve success needs to combinethree ways of acting: the prophetic, the dialogical and the pragmatic. Letme take each of these in brief.

I start with the prophetic way. We Catholics who are religious peopleneed to speak and to utter the truth. And the simple truth for us is this:

love your enemies, love those who suffer, and love the dignity of everyhuman being, no matter what the situation might be. Here is an exampleof this imperative followed under te

opening up a path beyond fear

Documents