Alessandro Litta Modignani
(published in "L'Opinion" 8 January 2009)
In these days of fiery debate between secular and Catholic culture culture , tries to make his way with difficulty an intermediate position, array tolerant and liberal, far from sleeve and extreme opinions. He interprets last Riccardo Chiaberge, with the beautiful book "The variable" God "(Rizzoli), which compares the astronomer Father George Coyne Catholic and secular Arno Penzias, Nobel laureate discoverer of the Big Bang. The result is a delightful read, interesting and instructive, as far as possible free from bias. In the final chapter Chiaberge try to arrive at a synthesis acceptable to all, about the conflict between science and faith. The author clearly defends the freedom of research to be packing, especially of religious and ecclesiastical. At the same time, however, distanced itself from some point of atheism and some extremist 'hysterical to Richard Dawkins, or in Italy, with Piero Odifreddi. Chiaberge hopes a "bilateral disarmament" and an attitude of openness on both sides, against "the worst instincts clerical and anticlerical." A prerequisite for this dialogue is to "share the sense of limits," which the author identifies the rule "Socratic Popper: I know I do not know."
A similar proposal is also to Dario Antiseri Giorello and Julius, with the book "Freedom - A poster for believers and nonbelievers" (Bompiani). The two philosophers - the first Catholic, the second atheist, both liberal matrix - talk of pluralism, opposed to absolutism and any claim to truth, propose secularism as a "common ground" for the comparison between secularists and Catholics, believers and unbelievers, on the themes of science, faith, church and individual freedom. Finally, a few weeks ago in the Corriere della Sera, Claudio Magris comes out against any kind of fundamentalism, "it matters little whether or triumphant triumphantly atheistic bigot." At the bottom of Benedict XVI condemned on ethical relativism, but recognizes its validity on the political front, as the foundation of democracy, Magris observes. Thus a comparison would be possible, indeed desirable, against "opposing fundamentalisms."
These observations apparently shared and full wisdom, however, collide with the fact that, across the Tiber, the Vatican hierarchy are not willing to compromise. They have other ambitions, and many other projects.
in inaugurating the meeting last summer in Rimini of Communion and Liberation, Cardinal Bagnasco said it clearly enough: we must not accept the idea of \u200b\u200bbeing tolerated because we are bearers of truth. We are constantly asked to put aside our faith, but we can not and will not give it up. Christianity is not a crossing point in history, but history itself. In other words, the Catholic Church requires its leadership and does not admit that faith is considered review among many, is no longer willing to accept the distinction between sin and crime, the basis of the secular state and of law does not recognize even more the thought cross, "we can not call ourselves Christians" is simplistic and dangerous. "We call ourselves Christians" is the title of the last book of peremptory Marcello Pera, where he said: "Liberalism is not without God," the enthusiastic foreword by Benedict XVI. Other
that "bilateral disarmament", but Socrates and Popper: the opponents of the secular culture does not intend to "share" any sense of limits. E 'seriously propose illusory to them "secularism as common ground for comparison, just knowing how to read the words of Bagnasco. The open and conciliatory attitude of Chiaberge, the Antiseri, Magris shows the great tolerance surely, but inevitably collides with a party much more aggressive and threatening, unwilling to compromise. In this sense, it is likely to be a dangerous underestimation of the most powerful enemies of open society.
0 comments:
Post a Comment