Swiss bishops criticize ban
on construction of new minarets
By John Thavis
A typical minaret; campaign poster by advocates of the ban says "STOP! YES to the ban on minarets"; and one of the four Swiss mosques that have a minaret.
This story has been getting much play in the Italian media since the Sunday referendum in which 57% of Swiss voters opposed the construction of new minarets (mosque towers) in Switzerland - only the towers, not the mosques. And now, there are protests from around the world, including the United Nations, but so far none as vicious and violent as those that followed the Danish cartoons nor the Regensburg lecture.
Initially, one might see it as a protest against 'Islamization' of the landscape by Swiss who are suddenly conscious, perhaps, that they want to keep their country's traditional European look, i.e., this was not so much a religious statement as a cultural one.
Most reactions see it as a violation of religious freedom.
My beef with all this worldwide outrage against a vote freely taken by a free people in one of the world's most democratic nations is this: Where were all these outraged is people when a Strasbourg court upheld an idnividual's protest at the display of the Cross in Italian public schools, a tradition that had been incorporated into Italian law? Everyone is too ready to rally to the Muslims, but none other than the Italians to the Cross????
VATICAN CITY, Nov. 30 (CNS) -- The bishops of Switzerland said the country's ban on the construction of minarets, the Muslim prayer towers, represents an obstacle to interreligious harmony.
The ban aggravates interfaith tensions and could have negative repercussions on Christian minorities in Muslim countries, the bishops said in a statement Nov. 29.
The prohibition was adopted by Swiss voters in a referendum that passed Sunday with a 58 percent majority. There are about 150 mosques in Switzerland serving some 400,000 Muslims; only four have minarets and, unlike in Islamic countries, they are not used to call Muslims to prayer.
The bishops said the referendum campaign, promoted by right-wing parties, had used exaggeration and caricature, and demonstrated that "religious peace does not operate by itself and always needs to be defended."
"The decision of the people represents an obstacle and a great challenge on the path of integration in dialogue and mutual respect," the bishops said. Banning the building of minarets "increases the problems of coexistence between religions and cultures," they said.
The bishops said the measure "will not help the Christians oppressed and persecuted in Islamic countries, but will weaken the credibility of their commitment in these countries."
Swiss authorities said after the vote that the four existing minarets would be allowed to stand, and that there was no ban on the construction of new mosques.
The Osservatore Romano carried this item in today's issue:
Swiss bishops say
'No' to new minarets
damages religious freedom
Translated from
the 11/30-12/01 issue of
BERN, Switzerland, Nov, 30 - "A severe blow to religious freedom asnd to integration"; a development that will "complicate things for Christians" who live in countries where religious freedom is already 'quite restricted'; a hiundrance "but also a great challenge" on the path of integration through dialog and reciprocal respect.
Those were some comments from the statement of the Swiss bishops' conference on the referendum on Sunday in which 57.5% of Swiss voters opposed the construction of new minarets in the country.
Only four of 26 six cantons (Basel, Geneva, Neuchatel and Vaud) voted in favor of the proposition presented by the governing centrist party.
The country's rightist political party campaigned against the proposition, saying minarets are "a symbol of Islam's claim to political and social power".
The bishops' statement issued by their spokesman Walter Mueller said, "this increases the problem of coexistence among cultures and religions", which are not limited to Switserland.
Before the refrendum, the Church in Switzerland underscored several times that a ban against new minarets would not be good "for Christians who are oppressed or psersecuted in Islamic countries" but would dmage "the credibility of their civic commitments in those countries".
The note also states that the campaign against new minarets "with its exaggerations and caricatures, showed that religious peace does not happen by itself and that it must always be defended".
The bishops said "the people must be given the necessary confidence in our juridical order and its adequate attention to the itnerests of everyone" and said it was now important "to be committed even more" to stand up for Christians who live in countrties with a Muslim majority.
Fr. Felix Gmür, secretary general of the Swiss bishops conference, explained the referendum results this way: "People are afraid of those who come from afar, those whom they do not understand, and therefore, they close up."
[That's disingenuous! The opponents are only against the towers, not the mosques! The opposition is aesthetic and cultura, not religious. Besides, most European mosques no longer use the minaret which was traditionally used by a muezzin to call the faithful to prayer five times a day. Perhaps this should be seen as a stage in the evolution of mosque architecture in keeping with - since only four of Switzerland's 150 mosques have minarets now, i.e., the Muslims themselves don't consider it obligatory. Calls to prayer chanted over a sound system are now used routinely by most mosques, so the minaret has outlived its use.]
He adds that the campaign agains the minarets was "rather harsh", arguing not only against minarets but against Muslim extremist groups.
He likened banning minarets to banning the Curcifix, in an interview with Vatican Radio.
"Those who support the ban claim that religion should be a private matter - that everyone can pray where they please, but not in public places. At the same time, they call themselv es Christians, but for Christians, worship cannot simply be a private matter."
He said this should open a debate to "make things clear, because society is disoriented, there are contradictions throughout all of European society, as demonstrated by the controversy over the Cross in Italy."
He said the four cantons where the vote for the minarets prevailed were those that have the largest Muslim populations.
The Swiss Federation of Evangelical Churches expressed regret at the refendum outcome, saying "the ban against constructing new minraets will not resolve any problems but will only create new ones".
It must be made clear that the ban does not affect the four minarets already existing in the country, much less the construction of new mosques.
But the disappointment among Swiss Muslims was great. Imam Youssef Ibram, who is in charge of Geneva's Islamic Cultural Center, called it "a catastrophic event. We were confident in the clearheadedness of the Swiss people, and this is an enromous disappointment".
The Grand Mufti if Egyot, Ali Gomaa, called the referendum outcome 'an insult' to all Muslims and 'an attack' on religious freedom.
In Indonesia - the world's largest Muslim nation -, the main Islamic organization Nahdlatul Ulama called it a sign of 'hatred and intolerance' but called on Muslims to react 'without excesses'.
A campaign poster depicting missile-like minarets was among those used by the Swiss People's Party which advocated the ban. Someone posted a 'Thank you' sign over it.
Minaret ban challenges
tolerant Swiss image
By Helena Bachmann
Geneva, Nov. 30, 2009 - The image of Switzerland abroad is of a place where peace, democracy and human rights are valued above all else. The Swiss were even instrumental in setting up the U.N. Human Rights Council, which is based in Geneva.
But this reputation has taken a massive hit now that a majority of residents have voted to ban minarets on mosques, which a right-wing political party likened to missiles on campaign posters.
After months of heated debates fueled by charges of racism and religious discrimination, about 57% of the Swiss electorate voted to ban the construction of new minarets in a nationwide initiative Sunday.
The result stunned the country's 400,000-strong Muslim community, especially since a poll conducted in late October indicated that a majority of Swiss voters were against the ban.
"We are trying to digest this terrible shock, hurt and disappointment," Saida Keller-Messahli, president of the Zurich-based Forum for Progressive Islam, tells TIME. "We see this as a rejection of our culture and identity."
The party behind the initiative, the right-wing Swiss People's Party (SVP), had argued that Islamic symbols should be forbidden in Switzerland because they were a danger to Swiss society.
The SVP claimed that minarets — the tall, thin towers on mosques that are used to call Muslims to prayer — in particular were dangerous because they were indicative of Islamic power and radicalism. If permitted, they could spark Islamic extremism in the country, the SVP said.
"[The vote] clearly shows that our citizens refuse to accept the rampant Islamization of Switzerland," the party said Monday in a statement, adding that those who don't respect the country's laws should leave.
Opposition to the proposal was fierce. The government, most other political parties and religious and human rights groups had urged voters to reject the initiative, insisting it would violate the section of the constitution guaranteeing freedom of religion and incite hostility toward Switzerland's various religious and ethnic groups. Many of these groups now share the Muslim community's outrage.
The Swiss Bishops Conference, backed by the Vatican, said the Catholic Church sees the decision as "an obstacle to a peaceful coexistence of different cultures and religions." The Protestant Church, meanwhile, called the vote "a violation of basic freedoms."
The vote is also a huge embarrassment for the Swiss government, which had launched a nationwide campaign promoting religious tolerance before the vote.
"The outcome of the vote is a reflection of the fears and uncertainties that exist among the population, and concerns that Islamic fundamentalist ideas could lead to the establishment of parallel societies," Swiss Justice Minister Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf said Sunday.
She added that "marginalization and exclusion on the basis of religious and cultural differences would be devastating for an open country such as Switzerland."
That acknowledgment won't lessen the criticism of leaders around the world.
French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said he was "shocked" by the vote. "It is an expression of intolerance," he told the French RTL radio station. "I hope the Swiss will reverse this decision quickly."
The Council of Europe, a 47-member human rights group now chaired by Switzerland, called the outcome "a source of profound concern" and said it goes against "the values of tolerance, dialogue and respect for other people's beliefs."
[The same Council upheld a Finnish-Italian woman's challenge to the Cross displayed in Italian public schools last month.]
Some have even voiced concern that the vote could spark the kinds of riots in the Muslim world that broke out after a Danish newspaper published cartoons lampooning the Prophet Mohammed in 2005.
Reaction in the Muslim world was swift. Maskuri Abdillah, the head of Indonesia's largest Muslim group, Nahdlatul Ulama, said the vote reflected "a hatred of Swiss people against Muslim communities," while Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa, Egypt's highest religious official, called it an "insult" to Muslims and an "attack on freedom of beliefs."
Keller-Messahli says she's concerned that radical Muslims could use the vote to convince other Muslims that Western societies discriminate against them. "They might use it as a ruse to stir trouble," she says.
Thus far, however, the initiative's opponents are taking a peaceful approach. On Sunday night, hundreds of people demonstrated on the streets of Zurich and Bern, carrying candles and carton minarets and waving signs reading, "This is not my Switzerland." That's a feeling many of the country's Muslims are undoubtedly sharing today.
Perhaps more concerning to Catholics is this story, which the OR does not carry:
Swiss bishop advocates married clergy
Translated from
BERN. Nov. 29 – Mons. Norbert Brunner, Bishop of Sion and incoming president of the Swiss bishops conference, said in an interview with the Zurich newspaper
NZZ am Sonntag that
there is no substantial connection between celibacy and priesthood, and that therefore, it should be possible to ordain married men as priests.
He says celibacy should be voluntary, and "I think that in our bishops' conference, there is near unanimity that this should be possible in Switzerland".
This photo of a recent Mass concelebration by the Swiss bishops, taken from their site, speaks volumes about their orientation.
Mons. Brunner, who starts his two-year term as president of the Swiss bishops in January, claims he has interevened several times with the Vatican in favor of abolishing mandatory celibacy for priests.
But what a hardheaded ideologue! Has he read nothing of all that John Paul II wrote - not to mention all previous arguments in recorded history for why celibacy is mandatory for priests?
To begin with, no one has a right to be a priest - just because he or she wants to. The Church has the right to say who it accepts to be priests.
And for centuries, anyone intending to be a priest, who heard the 'call', was never unaware that celibacy would be obligatory, and therefore, became priests knowing this.
Nothing has changed. Those who want to become priests but cannot promise celibacy should stay out and serve the Church in some other way.
Mons. Brunner needs a good spiritual retreat in Ars to clear his head.
[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 01/12/2009 17:42]