Published on: Thursday, February 18, 2010 |
Kota Kinabalu: Preacher to the Papal Household, Rev. Father Raniero Cantalamessa, admits being surprised over the "Allah" issue in Malaysia and its consequences.
"I can't judge why the Catholics in Malaysia took this decision of using the word 'Allah' for God. I don't know why the local church chose this particular way of talking of God.
"Maybe the person concerned (the publisher of the Catholic Herald newspaper) can answer that in a better way.
"I simply got the news that here the people were using the name 'Allah'.
I don't know whether in other Muslim countries, the same applies. Where English is spoken, of course people use 'God'. But where local languages are at work, to convey to the people the version of God, they use the most common," said Father Raniero, 75.
Muslim leaders and NGOs in Malaysia had argued that Allah had been used exclusively by Muslims and saw it strange for the Catholic church to suddenly switch its preference from using "Tuhan" to describe God to that of "Allah".
Father Raniero, who was here on a visit, said prior to coming to Sabah, he heard of the trouble in Malaysia (burning of churches) because of unhappiness over this issue. He said the Pope is also aware as news like this reaches the Vatican.
"Certainly this was the first occasion when the problem arose. Maybe there are other places but as there was this reaction (burning of churches), the news went around," he told Daily Express.
He also expressed surprise at the strong Muslim objection to Catholics using the name "Allah".
"It's strange enough. One could expect even the opposite reaction of being happy that other people want to share the name of 'Allah'. But I suppose there was no intention of any competition. It was just to use the name of God most common in a region because 'Allah' means God. So it's just a question of God."
Quoting Pope Benedict, Father Raniero said God is always the same.
"As the Pope said in the mosque of Istanbul, we have but one single God.
We have different names but God is always the same. As you are aware, there are always groups of people who are more sensitive than the others, who act in a different way."
Asked whether he thinks Christian communities in countries where Christianity is not the official religion should compromise on an issue like this, he said:
"I don't think this is compromise. It's more a question of terminology than doctrine. I should say we should dialogue and appreciate each other and share what is good common concern for peace and justice."
"And in this sense, dialogue is something¬ just compromise.
It's something positive. In this case, it's a question of language usage," he asserted.
He cited how the word "Ojala" came to be in the Spanish Language "In Spain, where the Muslims were present for centuries, the word 'Allah' ended up in the Spanish Language. Even today, when the Spanish want to say, 'May the Lord Do This', they say 'Ojala' (a word of Arabic origin).
"Ojala" is partly formed by "Ala" from Insya'allah (or "God Willing").
So, "Ojala" is an expression used to mean 'God Willing' ". It comes from the Arabic expression 'Oh, Ala', usually followed by the hand-to-forehead and then to-the-heavens gesture. Today, 'Ojala' is a Spanish expression and used even in the Bible.
"This tells that the name of 'Allah' is presented even in other countries in their common language."
Saying Catholics in Europe were not happy that some churches in Malaysia were burnt, Father Raniero described this as something "extreme".
However, he said, such behaviour can be explained "because everywhere there are people, even in Europe, who react in this manner.
"But I don't think there was any criticism addressed to Malaysia.
The criticism was addressed to these specific people who committed the act," he noted.
The burning of churches followed the High Court's ruling on December 31, 2009 that the Catholic weekly magazine, Herald, can use the word 'Allah' in its publications.
Justice Datuk Lau Bee Lan, in her oral decision, held that the Herald had the constitutional right to use the word in the magazine to propagate the Christian religion but not Islam.
She said that pursuant to Article 11 (4) of the Federal Constitution, it was an offence for non-Muslims to use the word 'Allah' to Muslims to propagate the religion. But it was not an offence for non-Muslims to use the word the purpose of religion, she added.
On January 7, 2009, the Home Minister approved the Herald's publishing permit for the period January 1 to December 31, 2009, on condition that the world 'Allah' was not used in it.
And on Feb 16, Archbishop Tan Sri Murphy Pakiam filed for a judicial review on the usage of the world 'Allah' in the church's publications, naming the Home Ministry and the Government as respondents.
He claimed that the word 'Allah' was not exclusive to the religion of Islam.
Incidentally, this was the second case in which Justice Lau had presided on a matter which some quarters deemed to be sensitive.
Last year, she dismissed an appeal by the Selangor and Federal Territory Angkatan Pelopor Islam Muslim (Apim) against a Dec. 29, 2003 decision by Senior Asst Registrar Nik Isfahanie Tasnin Wan Abdul Rahman.
Apim's contention in a civil suit against the Dewan Bahasa Dan Pustaka was that it was wrong in allowing the word "Keling" in the third edition of its Kamus Dewan.
Apim filed the suit to get the word "keling" dropped from the Kamus and from the names of villages, buildings, resorts and roads as it claimed the word was shameful, insulting and degrading to the Indian Muslim community.
However, in her ruling that the word "Keling" was permissible in the Kamus Dewan, Justice Lau said that DBP was only carrying out its statutory duty by inserting the word in its dictionary.
She said Article 8 (2) of the Federal Constitution does not cover organisations but individuals.
Article 8 (2) of the Federal Constitution provides that there shall be no discrimination against citizens on the ground of religion, race, descent, place of birth or gender.
