That’s a question that some in St. Blog’s need to be asking themselves. If they don’t understand the question then the answer is "No" or, more properly, La’.
The question means "Do you understand Arabic?" and the reason that they need to ask themselves this is that some folks in the Catholic blogosphere have been freaking out over the fact that Cardinal McCarrick has (again) used the word "Allah" when referring to God in a speech made to a Muslim audience.
To tell you the truth, I wasn’t happy when I saw the transcript of his remarks. Since it’s vanished from the main server at CUA, here’s what he said:
Remarks by Cardinal Theodore McCarrick
Archbishop of Washington and CUA Chancellor
CUA Columbus School of Law
Sept. 13, 2005Your Majesty, King Abdullah
Your Majesty Queen Rania
Prince Ghazi
Members of the delegation from the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan
Father President
Distinguished guests from many faith communitiesDear friends all,
Your Majesty,
A few months ago, when I was privileged to pray for you on another occasion in this capital city, I asked Allah, the compassionate and merciful Lord of all the world, to bless you and to help you make your country a bridge across which all nations might walk in unity, fellowship and love. As I listened to your words today, I believe my prayer is being answered.
Indeed, the Amman Message of November of last year is a blueprint and a challenge not only to the great world of Islam, but to the whole human race. Your thoughtful leadership is a stirring invitation to all of us, especially to the people of the Book, the family of Abraham, who share so much and who are called to be brothers and sisters in God’s one human family.
You have taken to heart the words of Pope Benedict XVI when he addressed the Muslim leaders gathered with him in Germany last month and invited them all to join him in eliminating from all hearts any trace of rancor, in resisting every form of intolerance and in opposing every manifestation of violence. As you quoted in your splendid talk to us today, Pope Benedict called his listeners, in this way, to turn back the way of cruel fanaticism that endangers the lives of so many people and hinders progress for world peace.
Your Majesty’s call and that of the Holy Father are in so many ways the same. May Allah, the merciful and compassionate, continue to guide your steps along this noble path. May He guide and protect you, your family and your beloved country and may peace and justice come to all lands and all peoples through your efforts, your vision and your courage.
In the name of Allah, the merciful and compassionate God, we pray. Amen.
Now the reason I wasn’t happy when I read this is that I knew it would be taken the wrong way by a great many Catholics. Had he asked me if he should refer to God in this way in this speech, I would have advised against it. I suspect that the confusion it would cause would outweigh whatever slight diplomatic edge it might give the talk.
But one should not freak out about this, as some in the blogosphere have been doing.
The fact is that Allah is simply the standard Arabic word for "God." It is used by Arabic-speaking Muslims and Christians alike–including Arabic-speaking Catholics. If you read an Arabic New Testament, it’s going to have Allah where "God" appears in the English version. When they say prayers in Arabic (e.g., the Rosary) and the prayer refers to God, they use the word Allah.
I have more experience on this point than many English-speakers do since I have a lot of Arabic-speaking Catholic friends (Chaldeans, Maronites, etc.). I hang out with their priests, go over to their houses, spend time at their churches, go out to lunch with them, work on projects with them, discuss the situations in their home countries, inject snatches of Arabic into talks I give at their parishes, etc., etc., etc.
And this is just not a big deal.
Not only do Arabic-speaking Christians use Allah amonst themselves, they use it when speaking to Muslims . . . just like Cardinal McCarrick did!
So no freaking out is required over this issue. In fact, it’s counterproductive.
Then there are some folks who see past the word "Allah" but are bent on committing the genetic fallacy, claiming based on dubious historical arguments that the word "Allah" is originally derived from the name of a pagan mood god. This is open to severe objection, but even if it were true it would prove exactly nothing regarding whether the word today is being applied to the true God or not.
Fact is, it doesn’t matter where the word came from. It matters how it’s used. If the word is today used for the true God then that is what it refers to when people today use it. It doesn’t matter how their ancestors may (or may not) have used it.
If it did, we’d be in big trouble because parallel arguments can be made that the divine names Yahweh and Elohim were also based on terms originally applied to pagan deities.
When it comes to the question of whether the word Allah is being used today by Muslims to refer to the true God (y’know, the one who created the universe and appeared to Abraham), not only does the Qur’an indicate that the answer is yes, the Catechism of the Catholic Church does, too (CCC 841).
The Catechism doesn’t always say things perfectly, and I’d say that this passage is one that itself could stand some clarification, but the basic conclusion is correct: Whatever flaws Muslims have in their understanding of God (e.g., failing to believe that he is a Trinity, as our Jewish friends also don’t when they worship the true God), they still intend by their use of the word Allah to pick out the being who created the universe and who appeared to Abraham, and that’s a definite description of the true God.
So one can, if one wants, think it ill-advised for a churchman to use this term for God in a public address given in English, but one does not have grounds for freaking out as if the term Allah were itself anathema or as if the Cardinal were deviating from what Church teaching is regarding the question of whether Muslims (however imperfectly) worship God.
Thank God for this sane post in a blogosphere gone nuts.
Or rather, thank Allah!
Jimmy, thanks for the helpful discussion.
And while I see your point about the creation of confusion, maybe good can come out of it as more people go back to the CCC or read posts like yours (and Mark’s) in response to the controversy. That would only help inter-faith dialogue in the long run.
I guess I’m saying sometimes it’s good to rock the boat if there’s misunderstandings out there. Whether that’s the case here, I don’t know, but I hold it out as a hopeful possibility. I know that I have gotten a new appreciation for the language issues involved over the past few days, and also a better knowledge of one side of the Eastern Catholic tradition.
I’ve heard that Allah and Elohim have the same base root word. Any basis to that?
In defense of Dom et al:
Why would one say “Allah” in a speech or introduction being given in English, and then revert back to English in the very next word, except from foolish religious indifferentism and/or the religious equivalent of radical chic?
The (correct in themselves) points about the usage of Arab Christians, the norms of inter-religious conversation among Arabic-speakers, and the genetic fallacy simply do not speak to that point, which I do not believe anyone has directly answered in two days of Stblogs-wide discussion.
Well, I am not a “mighty” apoligist, just a lowly cradle Catholic who not only survived 12 years of Catholic Schools in the Great Northwest but loved it, but perhaps what makes Catholics bristle hearing the words of “Allah” coming from our cardinal is our relationship with God as our loving and merciful father and maybe our misperception that Muslims view Allah as more distant and not a participator in their daily lives. Just a thought.
Jimmy, what is the origin of the English word God? I mean, I know it’s from the Germanic Gott, so I guess the question is what is the origin of the word Gott? Danke.
Then there are some folks who see past the word “Allah” but are bent on committing the genetic fallacy, claiming based on dubious historical arguments that the word “Allah” is originally derived from the name of a pagan mood god.
Is a “mood god” kind of like a “mood ring”? 😉
I think the word we need here is “moon”.
افهم عربي
While your point about Allâh is well-spoken and perfectly correct, the thing makes me twitch a little bit is the ending where the Cardinal says, “In the name of Allah, the merciful and compassionate…” If I may go off on a bit of a tangent, that bit, while theologically unobjectionable, quotes the Fâtiha or Exordium of the Qur’ân (بسم اللهه الرحمان الرحيم، bi’smi ‘llâhi ‘l-rahmâni ‘l-rahîm, and seems to me to perhaps bend a little far in the direction of too-cuteness, at least from a Prince of the Church.
I’ve studied Islam for more than 15 years and I have nothing but the highest respect for Muslims’ faith and dignity before God. However, there are serious theological and intellectual issues that deserve thinking about when invoking religious terms. I don’t want to be too hard on the Cardinal, but I think he may be gliding over them too lightly, though of course out of the best of motives on his part. (I do suspect he used Allâh not because it’s the Arabic word for God, but because it’s the Muslim word, if you see the difference. Call this “inter-faith dialogue” or “political correctness,” whichever you like.)
And, JohnH, I think that Allâh and Elohim do come from a common root. In Arabic, ilah is god, and al-ilah from which Allâh is likely derived simply means [the] God. Similarly, I think eloh is the root of Elohim (which is a plural in -im, I believe). And ilah and eloh certainly look like cognates to me.
Oh, and Alois, that’s about as far back as you can go. It’s an old Germanic word. See here for details (and a Sanskrit cognate).
Pam,
AFAIK, you’re right to point out that the Catholic understanding of God’s relationship with the believer is rather different (not absolutely different) from the Muslim understanding. Nevertheless, as Jimmy points out, this difference has nothing to do with the term “Allah.” “Allah” doesn’t mean “the Muslim God,” or “God as believed in by Muslims.” It just means “God.” The fact that the word “God” and its equivalents in other languages are used in different ways by different people with different understandings doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong with the word itself, especially since as Jimmy points out the same word is used by Arabic-speaking Christians.
I think people are upset that the good cardinal has shown that he is more than willing to please muslim sensibilities and liberal sensibilities and yet he finds it so difficult to please the the sensibilities of orthodox Catholics.
… and that’s why Allah created JimmyAkin.org.
Your Cardinal prayed AN ISLAMIC PRAYER! [this is a well-known stock Islamic prayer.
In the name of Allah, the merciful and compassionate God, we pray. Amen.
In fact this one is USED WITHIN THE ISLAM religion! It is NOt just someone using Allah for the word God in a Christian context.
Right here the prayer that your Cardinal said, is used!
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?cid=1119503545950&pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaEAskTheScholar
Fact of the matter is, it doesnt matter where the word came from but how its used. In this context, King Jordan had just praised Islam and your Cardinal backed it up using a commonly known Islamic prayer. He prayed to their god, not to Jehovah and that was made clear by the context.
So when addressing pagan Druids, can a Catholic bishop or Cardinal offer a prayer to Thor the Highest god or should one stick a pin in a doll to honor the Vooduns?
This really shows me how lost the Catholic clergy has become. Cant even distinguish Jehovah as the one true God. Im wondering when theyll start praying to Vishnu, and Kali next…Maybe thats just around the corner, have to have the Hindus “feel honored” next.
It is literally sickening to watch Catholic bloggers who basically are apologists for an apostate clergy EXCUSE everything they do including basically spitting on the first commandment.
If you cant distinguish between Allah of the Koran and the One True God and believe them to be the same being, you dont even know what Christianity IS!
This is not the first time that “How do you say ‘God’ in language X” has been a point of contention among Christians.
An example with which I am more familiar goes back to the work of Matteo Ricci and the Jesuit missionaries in China in the 17th century. Pope Clement XI ruled in favor of the Dominican position, and in opposition to the inculturation of the Jesuits.
From Decree of Pope Clement XI (1715):
So, 290 years ago the Church already decided.
Don’t use foreign languages’ terms for God, like Chinese “ShangDi” or “Shen” or “TienZhu”, or Arabic “Allah”, or English “God” because these all have pagan histories and introduce ambiguities.
God is “Deus,” by God!
Get with the program!
When McC referred to God (Allah) as merciful and compassionate, he was echoing not only the Quran, but also … Lumen Gentium – “along with us adore the one and merciful God.”
In fact, there’s nothing in any way un- or anti-Christian – nothing distinctively Muslim – about referring to God in that way. The Church – i.e., not only McC – recognizes this.
And as someone pointed out elsewhere, it doesn’t hurt to “remind” Muslims of this common belief.
+J.M.J+
Considering how much Mohammed took from Judaism and Christianity, he probably got the idea that God is “the Merciful (or Gracious) and Compassionate” from the Bible:
“Then the LORD passed by in front of him and proclaimed, “The LORD, the LORD God, compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in lovingkindness and truth” (Exodus 34:6)
“But You are a God of forgiveness, gracious and compassionate” (Nehemiah 9:17)
“But You, O Lord, are a God merciful and gracious, Slow to anger and abundant in lovingkindness and truth.” (Psalm 86:15)
“The LORD is compassionate and gracious, Slow to anger and abounding in lovingkindness.” (Psalm 103:8)
“The LORD is gracious and merciful; Slow to anger and great in lovingkindness.” (Psalm 145:8)
“Now return to the LORD your God, For He is gracious and compassionate” (Joel 2:13)
These claims that “Muslims don’t worship the same God as Christians” remind me of certain anti-Catholic Protestants who say that Catholics don’t worship the true God or the true Jesus. Oh, we poor deceived rubes may think we’re worshipping Jesus, we may even intend to worship the true Jesus, but we’re REALLY worshipping Tammuz.
Sound familiar? “The Muslims may think they’re worshipping the God of Abraham, they may even intend to worship the God of Abraham, but they’re REALLY worshipping some pagan moon god.”
That’s the problem I have with it. As though intention counts for nothing. As though it is impossible for a non-Christian to render any honor to his Creator, even if that honor is weak and partial, offered in ignorance to a God he barely understands. Sorry, you gotta belong to the true religion and know all there is to know about God in order to worship Him, otherwise your prayers are automatically diverted to some ancient, forgotten idol you don’t believe in.
I just can’t believe that. The Muslims do try to worship the true God, they simply “worship what they do not know” (John 4:22)
In Jesu et Maria,
“Not only do Arabic-speaking Christians use Allah amonst themselves, they use it when speaking to Muslims . . . just like Cardinal McCarrick did!”
Unless they use “Allah” when speaking in English to Muslims, then it’s *not* “just like Cardinal McCarrick did.” (I’m sure they use “Allah” when speaking Arabic, and if Cdl. McCarrick had been speaking Arabic, then I don’t think there would be any of this fuss. The fuss would then be about his reference to God as “the compassionate, the merciful,” and we could argue about whether *that* was appropriate. Since I don’t believe there can be any doubt that God is, in fact, both compassionate and merciful, the debate would have to turn on whether it was appropriate to use a formula that in practice is identified with a false religion. To be consistent, I would hope those who would object to that would also object to singing hymns by Martin Luther and Isaac Watts, to the Anglican Use, etc.)
“If you cant distinguish between Allah of the Koran and the One True God and believe them to be the same being, you dont even know what Christianity IS!”
Gee, then I guess that Pope Paul VI and those folks at the Second Vatican Council just didn’t “know what Christianity IS,” since they declared that Moslems “adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all-powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth.”
One more thing that Vatican II said: “The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these [i.e., non-Christian] religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men.”
So it sounds like the Council Fathers were saying it was OK to affirm what is true in non-Christian religions (and, a fortiori, in non-Catholic Christian religions), while rejecting what is false. Since it is beyond dispute that Moslems speak truth when they refer to God as compassionate and merciful, this would seem to be one of those points on which we (and Cardinal McCarrick) can legitimately express agreement with them.
(His use of the Arabic word for God still rubs me the wrong way, however, but not because I regard it as a sign of apostasy. Rather, it bothers me the way I’m bothered when I hear English speakers pronouncing the capital of France as Par-ee (unless done for jocular effect), or referring to the land of the Sandinistas as Nee-kaa-raaag-wa. Nosotros parlamos inglés aquí. Capisce?)
Another Neo-cath fool who the modernists take advanatge of day in day out. Get your head outta the sand. It was a Muslim prayer he was praying. Muslims don;t believe in the Trinity, they don;t worship the same God. McCarrick prayed to the false god of Islam.
Great points Rosemarie and Seamus, I agree totally.
I especially liked this:
“That’s the problem I have with it. As though intention counts for nothing. As though it is impossible for a non-Christian to render any honor to his Creator, even if that honor is weak and partial, offered in ignorance to a God he barely understands. Sorry, you gotta belong to the true religion and know all there is to know about God in order to worship Him, otherwise your prayers are automatically diverted to some ancient, forgotten idol you don’t believe in.
I just can’t believe that. The Muslims do try to worship the true God, they simply “worship what they do not know” (John 4:22)”
As I said in Michelle’s post earlier today, intention IS a huge deal. The whole prayer issue that you raise, Rosemarie, is something I’ve thought about for a while too, and I find myself on the same side of the question.
So, since everyone knew it was really a Christian prayer, you don’t think there would be a problem if he had ended his prayer “In the name of Allah incarnate, Jesus Christ our only Lord, Amen”?
I essentially agree with everything Seamus writes — that this is not a sign of apostasy, but dumb and annoying, and in a way that seems specifically calculated to pander to PC sensibilities and from a man whose pandering all seems to go one-way.
(His use of the Arabic word for God still rubs me the wrong way … the way I’m bothered when I hear English speakers pronouncing the capital of France as Par-ee (unless done for jocular effect), or referring to the land of the Sandinistas as Nee-kaa-raaag-wa. Nosotros parlamos inglés aquí. Capisce?)
Exactly, though I’d amplify this with one point very specific to Arabic and Islam. In a way that Christianity does not say (ever has said?) about the Bible, Islam claims that the Koran was literally written by God. Thus and also, Arabic becomes the language of heaven in a way that no Christian with a straight face has about Hebrew, Greek or Latin.
So there is in Islam and Arabic an inherent tendency to linguistic and cultural chauvinism which has no analogy either in Christianity or the languages of Christendom. It doesn’t do good to do things that might stroke said chauvinism like, for example, using the Arabic “Allah” in an English-language speech as if the (semantically equivalent, I agree, and that’s the point) English “God” doesn’t quite suffice. And like with all the hoo-ha about the Koran “desecrations,” 90 percent of which were only “desecrations” if you accord each Koran the status of a holy object that we don’t accord each Bible, we merely fuel their cultural/religious chauvinism (and invite their contempt) by altering our customs as if we need to because theirs are those of heaven and ours are not. They need to learn some cultural diversity tolerance.
As usual, I’m late to the party but just FYI:
The Egyptians Protestants who helped me study Arabic did not commonly use “Allah” as in Allahmaakum (Allah be with you) but instead would say “Arrabbumaakum” (The Lord be with you).
This may be a distinction between Arab evangelicals (who tend to be much more fastidious about using “non-Christian” terminology)and Catholics but the alternate usage is out there.
Indeed, I feel a verse of the old praise chorus that I learned in Jerusalem:
“Iffrahoo fil Rabbi dowman waqoolu iffrahoo.” coming on –
(“Rejoice in the Lord always and again I say rejoice” – sorry for my terrible transliteration but I learned it in Arabic).
+J.M.J+
>>>Get your head outta the sand. It was a Muslim prayer he was praying. Muslims don;t believe in the Trinity, they don;t worship the same God.(snip)
Jews don’t believe in the Trinity either. Do they worship the same God as us?
In Jesu et Maria,
+J.M.J+
>>>So, since everyone knew it was really a Christian prayer, you don’t think there would be a problem if he had ended his prayer “In the name of Allah incarnate, Jesus Christ our only Lord, Amen”?
Well, I wouldn’t have minded if he said that, since it’s true. “Allah” is the Arabic word for God, used by Arab Christians to refer to God. Thus Jesus is in fact Allah incarnate. Though I’m sure that would not have gone over very well with everyone in attendance there.
FWIW, I’m not thrilled with the fact that he ended the prayer “In the name of Allah,” since we Christians typically end our prayers in the Name of Jesus. I, too, would have advised the cardinal against doing this if he had asked me (but he didn’t, of course).
So I’m not giving a whole-hearted defense of this prayer. I’m just contending against the belief that Muslims don’t pray to the one true Creator-God when they pray to Allah, and that Cardinal McCarrick was therefore committing idolatry. Sorry, but that’s wrong; he was praying to the true God under the Arabic version of His name. I’m not completely thrilled with what he said, as I explained above; I think the prayer-in-question leaves something to be desired. But he was still not praying to a false god.
In Jesu et Maria,
“God is ‘Deus,’ by God!
Get with the program!”
Waitta minute…didn’t you just go against your own point? I’m sure “gott” was being used by pagans long before it was used for the true Deus.
In fact, Jupiter, Mars, Mercury, Pluto, and the rest of that crowd are all “deus”. Latin was being used by pagans long before Christianity existed. Also, the most common language of the Church was originally Greek–so shouldn’t we be calling God whatever the Greek word is? Or maybe we should just always say Yahweh? But wait! That might express too much ecumenism towards the Jews…
Zhou was being facetious.
Jimmy,
I think what bothers most people about this is the fear that Cardinal McCarrick has fallen prey to the errors of the Unitarians. They say the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
I am more concerned, however, in your contention that the Name of God derives from Pagan names. For “speakable” name such as Elohim, etc. this is certainly true, and there is great confusion on the part of Protestants with respect to Melchizedek’s use of the word El-Elyon, which is a pagan god (Gen 14,19). The names Adonai, El, etc. mean “Lord” (as does “Baal” by the way). But the unspeakable Name of God (YHWH) is holy because it is His True Name.
Ugh. Sorry. I sometimes have trouble picking up on that…use more emoticons :)!
I looked up the root for “God” back when the whole Pledge of Allegiance thing started up again for the tenth time and although I cannot remember how the original root was pronounced (something like “Gottenhein–“?) its meaning was:
the invoked one
or
the one who is invoked
It was good to see at the time because it showed how broad and inclusive the term actually is — as opposed to the chumps who dislike the pledge because it pushes a single state religion. The same term can be used to imply Jesus, Allah, YHWH, Jupiter, Buddha (whose name is invoked in prayers), Vishnu, Mormon God (also called just “God”), etc. The word “god” is not really a name at all when you think about it and its connotation is so broad in English it is a wonder that people do not get in an uproar over its use instead of the Arabic.
The Arabic actually sounds more distinct to me and less open to the myriad interpretations the English would have. I may be wrong on that point.
But I admit that had I not read Jimmy’s post first, I would have been outraged because the same people who bend over backwards to be diplomatic in the name of ecumenism are often the same types who turn the pews sideways so everyone can sit subway-style facing each other in Mass and have an excuse not to kneel (to each other).
If there is something to take from the angry outburst on the web, let it be a sign that more of the faithful are upset beyond reason at the liberties taken by aging hippy clergy to profane worship by sacrificing sincere oblation on their alters of personal pride and narrow-mindedness.
I mean, what do you do when you have to put up with this kind of stuff day in and day out? You try to grin and bear it, but these things build and build until a straw like this breaks your back.
If you flaunt your disrespect for the voices in your own flock but make a show out of diplomacy, you tend to get people’s goats. Ironically, the same clergy who think they are closing the gap of understanding between the laity and clergy are in fact widening that gap.
In the end, though, the Christian response is still virtuous patience and trust in the Will of the Lord.
Baruch Ha-Shem for an enlightening post.
I believe it was in poor taste (to say the least) for the Cardinal to have used ‘Allah’. Would any Muslim call on ‘Yahweh’ even though they claim Allah is the God of Abraham?
BTW, do English-speaking American Muslims say ‘God’ instead of ‘Allah’?
How about non-Arabic Muslims? Do they have their own word for God, or do they use ‘Allah’?
In Indonesia the word Allah are using both by Muslim and Christian. On the Holy Bible the term Allah is used to translating “Eloihim” on the Old Testament, but in the New Testament the word “Allah” is used to translating “Theos”.
On the Mass “Deus” is translating with “Allah” and “Dominus” with “Tuhan”.
And for your information the word Allah is used by Indonesian Catholics since pre-Vatican II Council.
So the Latin “Pater in caeli Deus” in Indonesian will sound “Allah Bapa di Surga”, so as “Credo in unum Deum” sounds “Aku Percaya akan satu Allah”.
While your point about Allâh is well-spoken and perfectly correct, the thing makes me twitch a little bit is the ending where the Cardinal says, “In the name of Allah, the merciful and compassionate…” If I may go off on a bit of a tangent, that bit, while theologically unobjectionable, quotes the Fâtiha or Exordium of the Qur’ân (بسم اللهه الرحمان الرحيم، bi’smi ‘llâhi ‘l-rahmâni ‘l-rahîm, and seems to me to perhaps bend a little far in the direction of too-cuteness, at least from a Prince of the Church.
Exactly (and hardly a tangent)! The controversy really shouldn’t be centered on the use of “Allah”, it is on how he closed the prayer in a decidely Islamic fashion -in the name of Allah, the compassionate and merciful, rather than the Christian close – In nomine Patrii, et Filii, et Spiritui Sancti. With good intentions no doubt.
More of a cringe factor than hysteria. But we sure do seem to have a lot of occasion to cringe of late.
Athanasios: Cool, thanks! I knew the Indonesian word Tuhan for God, but I didn’t know about the usage of Allah. I also didn’t know that Surga means “heaven.”
Terima Kasih!
Athanasios, I was about to remark on the use of “Allah” in Indonesian Christian context when I saw your comment! I always thought it has a unifying effect because we believe in the same God.
Recently, there was a radical group in Indonesia who threatened a Catholic organization (or a priest, i can’t remember…) for using “Allah”, because they considered it a sacrilege for ‘infidels’ to invoke the name of He-who-shall-not-be-called-in-vain, until a sane voice reminded them that we are People of the Book!
Btw, “Surga” (or ‘syurga’) is another Arabic-related word that is used by both Muslims and Christians in Indonesia to mean “Heaven”
Dear Antonia those groups are comes from Protestans denomination and not from Catholics. They have published a Bible which they delete all Allah from the Bible translation.
Yes, Syurga is also comes from Arabic. But in Indonesian Bible there are some Biblical name in the Bible are written with Islamic spelling such as Hawa for Eve, Musa for Moses, Daud for David and Firdaus for Paradise.
And on some old Protestan translation are using Isa for Jesus and Yahya for John ( in the new translation which is ecumenical between Catholic and Protestan we use Yesus for Jesus and Yohanes for John).
So in Indonesia you will found a Protestant (i think they are Pentacostal) denomination call themselves “Gereja Isa Almasih” (The Church of Isa the Messiah)
perhaps what makes Catholics bristle hearing the words of “Allah” coming from our cardinal is our relationship with God as our loving and merciful father and maybe our misperception that Muslims view Allah as more distant and not a participator in their daily lives.
Refer back to Jimmy’s post. “Allah” is a word used by Arabic-speaking Catholics, not just Muslims, so there’s no point in bristling because of Islam. Arabic-speaking Catholics have the same understanding of the holy Trinity as we.
what is the origin of the English word God?
Catholic Encyclopedia on “etymology of God”
Online Etymology Dictionary entry
Wikipedia has some etymology info on “God”
Wahiduddin’s collection of etymological info on “God”
seems to me to perhaps bend a little far in the direction of too-cuteness, at least from a Prince of the Church.
In which case the objection is to “too-cuteness” and not the terms themselves.
Your Cardinal prayed AN ISLAMIC PRAYER! [this is a well-known stock Islamic prayer.
In the name of Allah, the merciful and compassionate God, we pray. Amen.
In fact this one is USED WITHIN THE ISLAM religion!
Newsflash: Catholics believe Allah is compassionate and merciful too. In fact, Catholics believe that Allah is more comassionate and merciful than Muslims believe He is, because Catholics believe that Allah Himself came down to suffer as one of us (compassion means “suffer with”).
Don’t use foreign languages’ terms for God, like Chinese “ShangDi” or “Shen” or “TienZhu”, or Arabic “Allah”, or English “God” because these all have pagan histories and introduce ambiguities.
God is “Deus,” by God!
Hee hee! 😀 Of course, “Deus” also has pagan origins.
The Egyptians Protestants who helped me study Arabic did not commonly use “Allah”
That’s just ridiculous self-righteous posturing, as far as I’m concerned.
I think what bothers most people about this is the fear that Cardinal McCarrick has fallen prey to the errors of the Unitarians
I’ve met Cardinal MCarrick on more than one occasion and heard him preach about the holy Trinity. He’s definitely not a Unitarian, and it would be uncharitable (to say the least) to jump to such unfounded conclusions.
“I’ve met Cardinal MCarrick on more than one occasion and heard him preach about the holy Trinity.”
Did you ever hear McCarrick preach the Trinity to Jews or Moslems?
Did you ever hear McCarrick preach the Trinity to Jews or Moslems?
I don’t have to hear him preach to Jews and Muslims, though there were probably some present. I know he’s not a Unitarian because he believes in the Trinity.
Catechism of the Catholic Church
“did you ever hear McCarrick preach the Trinity to Jews or Moslems?”
of course not. And compare the apostate cardinal who recently claimed that Catholic teaching forbids us from trying to convert Jews. (Sorry, St Paul, but you really goofed on that one)
imho, Cardinal McCarrick did not explicitly contradict Christian teaching by referring to “Allah” and by closing with a Muslim prayer
but it’s hardly preaching Jesus Christ “in season and out of season”
A point has been missed.
While it’s true that maybe in Arabic countries, “Allah” simply is the word for God, that is not true in the English language.
Here the word “Allah” has clear ties to Islam, and implies Islamic beliefs.
Similarly, if I talk about “Our Lord” people think of me as referring to Jesus, even though God is obviously everyone’s Lord.
So in using “Allah,” if speaking in English, one appears to be patronizing a false relgion, and a false conception of God.
That’s the concern, I don’t see why it should be poo-pooed, people who have these concerns aren’t idiots.
Now if the entire speek the Cardinal gave was in Arabic, perhaps there’s little reason for concern, but otherwise one is certainly entitled to object to the use of “Allah” in the context of the English language, and in the context of the Latin rite of the Catholic Church.
The real question, is not one of the Arabic language, but of the English language. “Allah” simply has more baggage in English, especially during the war on terror, than it does in a native Arab-speaking environemnt. It would be puzzling if one were to deny this. There is also the question if Arabic has any alternate words for God, and if Muslim’s have aggregated a neutral word to their own usage.
And let us remember, if you make a speech and everyone misinterprets you, perhaps it’d time to improve your language. Language is for the purpose of communication, it doesn’t with meaning in a Platonic vacuum. Words have their meaning by convention, not by whatever definition one can find in a dictionary. In America the use of “Allah” is in the main inappropriate, it has become associated with Islam, and in vain does one appeal to how the word is used thousands of miles away. That’s not the point.
Noone is saying the Cardinal has lost the faith, just that that was an inappropriate and patronizing way to speak, I way clearly designed to placate his Islamic audience by bending to quotations from their Holy Book, while steadfastly avoiding his own spiritual tradition.
People are naturally upset that a Cardinal can speak like Muslims within the bounds of orthodoxy, while many in the episcopacy have difficulty clearly enunciating Catholic truths for the public. It seems everything is in some sense, upside down.
Here the word “Allah” has clear ties to Islam, and implies Islamic beliefs.
No, here the word “Allah” is the Arabic word for “God,” nothing more. A handful of ignorant people are trying to make it into something more, but it isn’t.
Similarly, if I talk about “Our Lord” people think of me as referring to Jesus, even though God is obviously everyone’s Lord.
No, only Christians and people who knew you to be a Christian would think you meant Jesus. Jews and Muslims would think you mean God (but not Jesus), Hare Krishnas would think of Krishna. Hindus, likewise, would probably think first of the personification of Brahman to which they are most devoted (Siva, Visnu, etc.). Many Buddhists would think first of the Buddha. “Jesus” is definitely not the primary referrent for the phrase “Our Lord” among all people. You may have had better luck with the phrase “Our Lady” for Mary.
if you make a speech and everyone misinterprets you, perhaps it’d time to improve your language.
I certainly didn’t misinterpret it, nor did many people here (or elsewhere).
Blogworthies LXIX
Blogworthies: A round-up of noteworthy entries from a variety of weblogs on a variety of topics.
How would the Muslim world take it if one of thier top clerics adressed a Christian gathering by saying,” May the Holy Trinity Bless us all, and bring us peace.” —My Guess is that Muslims would say that the Holy Trinity is NOT interchangable with Allah.
Second Question: The Bishop was adressing adults who are educated.–Would it have really offended his audience if he simply prayed to his Christian God for all present? –I would think not, since he was invited, as a representative of the Christian Faith. The Bishop blew it.
No, here the word “Allah” is the Arabic word for “God,” nothing more. A handful of ignorant people are trying to make it into something more, but it isn’t.
Ah — the requirement to interpret other people’s remarks as charitiable as possible is a general requirement.
That “Allah” is Arabic for “God” is all very well, but using a foreign word when speaking English is to raise question of why — especially when English does have a word meaning that very thing.
He could have used “God,” which is English for “God.” He didn’t.
Obviously “God” does not have the connotations he wanted and therefore would not have been the same; therefore “Allah” is indeed something more than the Arabic word for God in this context.
RULE 3 VIOLATION
Hey, anonymous poster-
How about “Unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood, you have no life in you.”?
“Does this offend you?”.
How about “Unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood, you have no life in you.”?
Of course this doesn’t offend me. It’s in the Word of God, isn’t it? Jesus was talking in spiritual terms. I have ate His flesh and have drank his blood and I have His life in me. I have tasted and seen that the Lord is good.
“Does this offend you?” was not a question from me, but from Jesus to his disciples.
Many of them left him and refused to follow him any more because of this “hard teaching” about his body and blood.
Rather than explain away this statement, he simply asked his disciples whether they wanted to leave also.
I would be interested to hear your interpretation of this verse, also, which Jesus spoke to his disciples-
“If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.” – John 20:23.
It is another verse that I don’t think can be explained away.
Also this one, that Jesus spoke directly to Peter-
“I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”
Hi I am Ari from Indonesia. I am Christian (Protestant). Just to clarify a few things regarding the expression of Allah, we use it both in Catholic Bible as well as Protestant Bible as they are all issued by Lembaga Alkitab Indonesia (Indonesian Biblical Agency) except for the additional of books for Catholic Bible.
I thing the speech the Cardinal is good, as it could serve two purpose for the Christian listener and Muslim listener. I am also aware that in western country the usage of Allah to address God is not common, and yes it has consequences of the outcome or the interpretation of the Speech.
Allah,the merciful and the compassionate,is also often used in our pray.
Cheers,
Ari
Thanks, Ari!
Is Allah the Arabic word for Jesus? No. So why didn’t the Cardinal pray “in the name of ‘Isa”? I know that the Arabic word for the One God is Allah (there is another word for ‘a god’), but since the One God to Catholics is Jesus Christ (together with the Father and the Holy Spirit), and since Jesus Christ certainly is not God to Muslims, isn’t a little more than disingenuous for the Cardinal to substitute the word Allah for the name Jesus in this context?
Political correctness aside, Allah is the proper name of the moon god of the Quraish tribe of Mecca. Allah’s “wife” is called Allat. The symbol of the moon god is the crescent moon. It’s true to say that in the Meccan tradition (not Arab tradition, but local to the city of Mecca), that Allah was chief of roughly 360 gods worshipped at the Kabba in Mecca. Chief god just as Brahma is chief over Shiva and Vishnu for Hindu’s and just as Zeus was chief over Mercury and Apollo for ancient Greeks and Romans. As far as what people “mean” when they say it, if Baal is smart enough to get you to use his name to mean the “one true god” then Baal is a great deceiver indeed. As to those believing in a connection between Allah and Zeus, Brahma, or the Christian-Judaic God, I say there have been thousands who have stood on a chair in a crowd of people shouting “I have a new message from God!” May we first review the old message from God before determining if a new message is from the same God.
what does +J.M.J+ mean… especially when you always add In Jesu et Maria, to the last line?
just wondering… thats all.
thanks!
There’s nothing inherently wrong with referring to God by his name in another language– especially if the purpose of doing so is to affirm the praiseworthy religious beliefs of most of the speakers of that language. The question is whether using the word “Allah” for God is an implicit affirmation of false beliefs. I don’t think that’s something that can be decided from the bare text of a speech; you’d have to consider the totality of the circumstances. Given the fact that the speaker here was a Prince of the Roman Church, I think the most appropriate interpretation of his words is (1) as an affirmation of Muslim belief in the One God and in his mercy and compassion, and (2) as a catechesis to Christians about how much we have in common with Muslims.
Both of these are good in and of themselves. Whether the Cardinal is, in a broader sense, achieving the proper combination of ecumenism and evangelization is another question– but one that goes to the prudence of these remarks, and not to their truth.
addendum: I should add that of course there is a difference between using the word “Allah” in Arabic and using it in English. You may mean it to be the same thing, but depending on the situation it might not mean the same thing to your listeners. If a priest gave a homily using only the name “Allah” (never “God”), many congregants would reasonably wonder what the priest was getting at. Of course the context clarified things at least somewhat in the Cardinal’s situation– but this just goes to show that you have to consider not only a word’s denotation but also its situational connotation.
I think what the Cardinal said was fine. “Allah” means “The GOD”. Its used by muslim speaking arabs and christian speaking arabs. What we need to make sure from the cardinal’s perspective is, in what context did he use “Allah” in? I’m sure when he said Allah, he meant Triune GOD (Father, Son, Holy Sprit), which is also the GOD of Abraham. So. theologically speaking if the cardinal did not mean the Triune GOD, then we bigger problem.
Muslims believe in the One GOD and so do Christians and Jews, but how we define who GOD is where the issues lie with our Jewish and Muslim brothers and sisters.