Categoria: Idiomas

Intolerance in present day Brazil and in the world

Leonardo BoffDeixe um comentário

The recent murder in France of the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists, and the last Presidential elections in Brazil, have highlighted a latent fact of Brazilian culture and the world: intolerance. I will restrict myself here to intolerance in Brazilian culture, because my previous article dealt with that reflected in the Charlie Hebdo murders. Brazilian intolerance is part of what Holland’s Sergio Buarque characterizes as «cordial» in the sense that hate and prejudice, like hospitality and sympathy, come from the heart. But rather than cordial, I would prefer to call that of Brazil passionate.

What the last electoral campaign showed was «cordial-passionate», in the form of class hatred (contempt of the poor), and racial discrimination (Blacks and Northerners). To be poor, or to be Black and a Northerner, was deemed a defect, hence the absurd desire of some to divide Brazil between the South «rich» and the North-East «poor». That class hatred derives from the archetype of La Casa Grande and the Senzala that persist in some social sectors, well expressed by a wealthy madame from Salvador: «the poor, not satisfied with meeting basic family needs, now want to have rights as well». That presupposes that if previously they were slaves, they should do everything for free, as if the abolition of slavery had not occurred and rights meant nothing. Homosexuals and other LGBTs are insulted even in official debates between candidates, revealing an «intolerable» intolerance.

To better understand intolerance we must delve deeper, to the crux of the problem. Today’s reality is contradictory at its core, and complex, because it is the convergence of the most varied factors. In it is found original chaos and cosmos (order), light and shadows, the sym-bolical and the dia-bolical. In fact, they are not construction defects, but the very real condition of in-plenitude that exists in the universe. This forces universal coexistence with differences and imperfections, and tolerance of those who do not think or act as we think and act. Expressed in direct language: they are two opposing poles, but the poles of a singe and unique dynamic reality. These polarities cannot be suppressed. All attempts at suppression result in terror by those who presume to have the truth and try to impose it on others. The excess of truth ends up being worse than error.

What everyone (and society) must know is how to distinguish one pole from the other and to make one’s choice. Humans show themselves to be ethical beings when they take responsibility for their actions and for the consequences of those actions.

One could think: but then, is all good? Is there no longer difference? It is not that all is good or that differences are erased. Distinctions must be made. Weedy grasses are weedy grasses, and not wheat. Wheat is wheat and not just a weedy grass. The torturer can not have the same fate as the tortured. Humans must not equate and confuse them. Humans must be discerning, and make decisions.

To achieve coexistence without confusing these principles we must nourish tolerance in ourselves. Tolerance is the ability to positively maintain this difficult coexistence and tension between the poles, knowing that they are opposite, but that they are part of one unique dynamic reality. Even though they are opposite, they are the two sides of the same whole, the left and the right.

The ongoing risk is intolerance. Intolerance diminishes reality, because it only accepts one pole and denies the other. Intolerance forces everyone to adopt one pole and annul the other, as the Islamic State and Al Qaeda do in a criminal form. Fundamentalism and dogmatism deem their truths to be absolute. Thus they condemn themselves to intolerance, and neither recognize nor respect the truth of others. Their first action is to suppress freedom of opinion, pluralism and to impose their unique thought. Attacks such as the one in Paris derive from this intolerance.

One must avoid passive tolerance, the attitude of accepting the other’s existence, not from choice, and recognition of its value, but because it cannot be avoided.

Rather, active tolerance must be encouraged, consisting of coexistence, with an attitude of positive coexistence with the other, out of respect, and an awareness of the value of difference, through which we can enrich ourselves.

Above all, tolerance is an ethical experience. Tolerance represents the right of all people to be who they are, and to continue being that. That right was universally expressed in the golden rule: «do not do to others what you would not have them do to you». Or positively stated: «Do unto others as you would have them do unto you». This principle is obvious.

At its core, the truth found in tolerance is summarized thusly: each person has the right to live and coexist on planet Earth. They all have the right to be here with their specific differences. That right precedes any expression of life as a vision of the world, a belief, or ideology. This is the great difficulty of European societies: the lack of acceptance of the other, be it an Arab, Muslem, or Turk, and in the Brazilian society, it is the lack of acceptance of the African descendant, the Northerner, the Indigenous. Societies must be organized in such a way that, by right, everyone may feel included. Hence peace is born, that according to The Earthcharter, is «the plenitude created by correct relationships with oneself, with other persons, with other cultures, with other lives, with the Earth and with the main Whole of whom we are part» (n. 16 f).

Nature offers us the main lesson: no matter how diverse the beings are, they all coexist, interconnect and create the complexity of reality and the splendid diversity of life.
Free translation from the Spanish by
Servicios Koinonia, http://www.servicioskoinonia.org.
Done at REFUGIO DEL RIO GRANDE, Texas, EE.UU.

Understanding the terrorist attack on Charlie Hebdo in Paris

Leonardo BoffDeixe um comentário

It is one thing, and it is justifiable, to be indignant over the terrorist action that killed the best French caricaturists. It was an abominable and criminal act, which no-one can support.

Trying to understand analytically why such terrorist acts occur is different. Such acts do not fall from a clear blue sky. The sky behind them is dark, comprised of tragic histories, great massacres, humiliations and discrimination, and not just from true wars, such as those in Iraq and Afghanistan, that sacrificed the lives of thousands upon thousands of people, or forced them into exile.

The United States and several European countries were involved in these wars. Millions of Moslems live in France, the majority in the peripheries of the cities, in precarious conditions. Many of them, although born in France, are discriminated against to the point that it appears to be true Islamophobia. After the attack on the offices of Charlie Hebdo, a mosque was sprayed with gunfire, a Moslem restaurant was set on fire, and an Islamic prayer house was also shot at.

The issue is one of overcoming the spirit of revenge, and renouncing the strategy of confronting violence with still more violence. That creates a spiral of never ending violence, that produces countless victims, most of whom are innocent. And it will never achieve peace. If you want peace, prepare the means of peace, which is the fruit of dialogue and of the respectful coexistence among all.

The terrorist attack of September 11, 2001 against the United States was paradigmatic. The reaction of President Bush was to declare “endless war” against terror and to pass the “Patriot Act” that violates citizens’ fundamental rights.

What the United States and her Western allies did in Iraq and Afghanistan was a modern war with the loss of countless civilian lives. If in those countries there had only been large date palm and fig plantations, nothing like that would have occurred. But in those countries there are great oil reserves, the blood of the world system of production. Such violence left a residue of rage, hatred and a desire of revenge in many Moslems who lived in those countries and elsewhere, all over the world.

Starting from that background one can understand that the abominable Paris attack was the result of this prior violence, not a spontaneous act. Not that this justifies it.

The effect of this attack is to instill widespread fear. That is the what terrorism seeks: to occupy the minds of the people and make them prisoners of fear. The principal point of terrorism is not to occupy their territory, as Westerners did in Afghanistan and Iraq, but to occupy their minds.

Sadly, the prophesy the intellectual author of the September 11 attempts, Osama Bin Laden, made on October 8, 2001 was realized: «The United States will never again have security, never again have peace». To occupy people’s minds, to keep them emotionally destabilized, to make them distrust any foreign gesture or person, is the essential objective of terrorism.

To reach its objective of dominion of the minds, terrorism follows this strategy:

(1) the actions must be spectacular, otherwise they do no cause widespread commotion;

( 2 ) the actions, in spite of being hateful, must inspire admiration for the ingenuity involved;

( 3 ) the actions must show that they were meticulously prepared;

( 4 ) the actions must be unexpected, to give the impression of being uncontrollable;

( 5 ) the authors of the actions must remain anonymous (using masks) because when there are more suspects, the fear is greater;

( 6 ) the actions must cause lasting fear;

( 7 ) the actions must distort the perception of reality: anything that is different can produce terror. It is enough to see some poor children walking into a commercial center, and the image of a potential assailant is produced.

Let us formalize the concept of terrorism: it is any spectacular violence, done with the purpose of filling people’s minds with fear and dread. Violence itself is not important, what is important is its spectacular character, its capacity for dominating everybody’s mind. One of the most lamentable effects of terrorism was that it promoted the terrorist State that the United States is now. Noam Chomsky quotes an official of the North-American security apparatus, who confessed: «The United States is a terrorist state and we are proud of it».

Hopefully this spirit does not predominate in the world, especially in the West. If it does, we are headed for the worst kind of encounter. Only peaceful means have the secret strength to overcome violence and war. That is the lesson of history, and the counsel of wise humans, such as the Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr, Francis of Assísi, and Francis of Rome.

Free translation from the Spanish by
Servicios Koinonia, http://www.servicioskoinonia.org

Standing up to Pope Francis’ detractors as the writter Vittorio Messori

Leonardo BoffDeixe um comentário

In several places in the world, but primarily in Italy, among the Cardinals and members of the Roman Curia, as well as conservative lay groups, a strong resistance to, and denigration of, the figure of Pope Francis is developing. They display their discomfort, while hiding behind Vittorio Messori, a famous lay converted writer.

So it was with sadness that I read the article by Vittorio Messori in Milan’s Corriere della Sera, titled: “The options of Francis: doubts about the path of Pope Francis” (12/24-2014). He waited for the vespers of the Nativity to cut deeply at the Pope. Messori especially criticizes his “unpredictability that continues to disturb the tranquility of the moderate Catholic.” Messori admires the linear perspective “of the beloved Joseph Ratzinger” and among pious phrases insidiously injects a great deal of poison. And he does it, as he himself confesses, in the name of those who lack the courage to expose themselves.

I would like to propose a counterpoint to the doubts of Messori. He does not grasp the new signs of the times brought by Francis of Rome. Moreover, he displays three errors: two of a theological nature, and one of interpreting the relevance of the Church in the Third World.

Messori has been scandalized by the “unpredictibility” of this pastor because “he continues to perturb the tranquility of the moderate Catholic.” One must question the quality of the faith of this “moderate Catholic”, who has trouble accepting a pastor who brings the aroma of sheep, and who announces “the joy of the Gospel”. They, in general, are cultural Catholics used to the Pharaonic figure of a Pope with all the symbols of power of the pagan Roman emperors.

Now a “Franciscan” Pope appears who gives centrality to the poor, who does not “wear Prada”, who courageously criticizes the system that produces misery in much of the world, who opens the Church to the people, without judging them, and welcoming them in the spirit he called a “revolution of tenderness” when he spoke to the Latin-American bishops.

There is a great emptiness in Messori’s thinking. His two theological errors are: the near absence of the Holy Spirit, and Christ-monism, this is, that only Christ counts. There is no proper place for the Holy Spirit. Everything in the Church is resolved only through Christ, which does not correspond to what Jesus taught. Why do I say this? Because what Messori laments in the Pope’s pastoral actions is his “unpredictibility”. Well then, that is the characteristic of the Spirit, as Saint John affirms: “The Spirit blows where the Spirit chooses, you hear the voice of the Spirit but you do not know whence it comes, nor whither it goes” (3,8). The nature of the Spirit is its unpredictable appearance.

Messori is hostage to a linear vision of his “beloved Joseph Ratzinger” and other prior Popes. Unfortunately, this linear vision turned the Church into a fortress, incapable of understanding the complexity of the modern world, isolated in the midst of other Churches and other spiritual paths, without dialoguing and learning from others, also illuminated by the Spirit. It blasphemes the Holy Spirit to think that others’ thoughts are all erroneous. For that reason, an open Church, such as Pope Francis wants, is key to perceiving the appearances of the Spirit throughout history. Not without reason do some theologians call it “the fantasy of God”, because of its creativity and novelty for history and for the Church.

Without the Holy Spirit, the Church would become a heavy institutiion, lacking creativity. In the end, she would have little to say to the world, except doctrine upon doctrine, and could not lead to a living encounter with Christ or elicit hope and joy in living.

It is a gift of the Holy Spirit that this Pope came from outside the old and tired European Christianity. Pope Francis is not a subtle theologian, but a pastor who understands the mandate Jesus asked of Peter: “Confirm the brothers and sisters in the faith,” (Lc 22,31). Francis brings the experience of the Churches of the Third World, particularly of Latin America.

There is another deficiency in Messori’s thinking: he does not value the fact that today Christianity is a Third World religion, as German theologian J. B. Metz has repeated so often. Catholics are less than 25% of the population in Europe, while in the Third World, Catholics are almost the 73%, and in Latin America, nearly 49%.

Why not accept the newness that comes from these Churches, that no longer are mirror-Churces of the old European ones, but source-Churches, with their own martyrs, confessors and theologians?

We can imagine that in the not too distant future, the See of the Primate will no longer be Rome with the Curia, with all their contradictions Pope Francis recently exposed with courageous words, heard only from the mouth of Martin Luther, and in my 1984 book, Church: Charism and Power, that, if read with today’s eyes, is more innocent than critical. It would make sense that the principal See would be where the majority of Catholics are, which is in Latin America, Asia and Africa. That would surely be an unequivocal sign of the true Catholicity of the Church within this new globalized phase of humanity.

I was sincerely hoping for a greater intelligence of faith and more openness from Vittorio Messori, with his credentials as a Catholic, faithful to one type of Church and a well known writer. Pope Francis has brought hope and fresh air to many Catholics and to other Christians, who are very proud of him.

Let’s not waste this gift from the Spirit with analysis that is more negative than positive, and does not strengthen the “joy of the gospel” for all.

 

Free translation from the Spanish sent by
Melina Alfaro, alfaro_melina@yahoo.com.ar,
done at REFUGIO DEL RIO GRANDE, Texas, EE.UU.

The end of an era, a new civilization or the end of the world?

Leonardo Boff3 Comentários

Some well respected individuals warn that we already are within a Third World War. The most authoritative is Pope Francis. Last September 13, visiting a cemetery of Italian soldiers killed in Radipuglia, near Slovenia, Pope Francis said: “The Third World War may already have began, fought in pieces, with crimes, massacres and destruction.” On December 12, 2014, former German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt, now 95 years old, warned of a possible Third World War (Boletim Carta Maior, 22/12/2014). And other authoritative voices are heard here and there.

To me the most convincing analysis, which I consider prophetic because what he foresaw is already taking place, is by Jacques Attali in his well known book, Brief History of the Future, (Breve historia del futuro, Paidos 1999). He was an advisor to François Mitterand and now presides over the Commission of the «brakes on growth». He works with a highly qualified multidisciplinary team. Attali foresaw three scenarios: (1) The super-empire, composed of the United States and its allies. Its strength lies in its capacity to destroy all of humanity. But it is in decline, due to the systemic crisis of the capitalist order. It follows the Pentagon’s ideology of «full spectrum dominance» in every field, military, ideologic, political, economic and cultural. But it has been surpassed economically by China, and has trouble forcing its imperialist logic on others. (2) The super conflict: With the slow decline of the empire, a Balkanization of the world occurs, as is presently seen in the regional conflicts in Northern Africa, the Middle East, Africa and the Ukraine. Those conflicts can intensify, with the use of weapons of mass destruction (look at Syria, Iraq), then with small nuclear weapons (there are thousands the size of an executive briefcase) that destroy little but leave entire regions inhabitable for many years due to high radioactivity. With the wide-spread use of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, a time could come when humanity realized that it could self destruct. And then would come (3) the final scenario: the super democracy. So as not to destroy itself and a great part of the biosphere, humanity would develop a world social contract, with various instances of global government. With scarce natural resources and services we must guarantee the survival of the human species and the whole life community that is also created and maintained by the Earth-Gaia.

If that phase did not happen, we could see the end of the human species and a great part of the biosphere. The fault would lie with our rationalist civilization paradigm. Economist and humanist Luiz Gonzaga Belluzzo recently put it well: «The Western dream of building the human habitat based only on reason, repudiating tradition and rejecting all transcendence, has reached a blind alley. Western reason cannot simultaneously realize the values of universal human rights, the ambitions of technical progress and the promise of well being for one and all» (Carta Capital 21/12/2014). With its irrationality, this type of reason develops the means to bring about its own destruction.

It would probably then take the process of evolution thousands or millions of years for a being to appear that was sufficiently complex, and capable of sustaining the spirit that, first of all, is found in the universe, and only thereafter, in us.

But it could also bring about a new era that unites sensible reason (love and caring) with instrumental-analytic reason (techno-scientific). Finally there would emerge what in 1933, in China, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin called the noosphere: minds and hearts united in solidarity, in love and in caring for the Common Home, the Earth. Attali wrote: «I want to believe, finally, that the horror of the future mentioned above will help make it impossible. Then would be fulfilled the promise of an Earth that was hospitable to all the travelers of life» (op. cit. p. 219).

And in the end, he leaves this challenge to us Brazilians: «If there is a country that looks like that into which the world could convert, in both the good and the bad, that country is Brazil» (p. 231).

Free translation from the Spanish sent by
Melina Alfaro, alfaro_melina@yahoo.com.ar,
done at REFUGIO DEL RIO GRANDE, Texas, EE.UU.