>> From the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C.

[ No audio ]   >> Good afternoon, everyone.

That's nice, usually people don't respond back.
Just sort of goes into the ether and stays there.
I am Caroline Brown, I direct the Office of Scholarly Programs
at the John W. Kluge Center here at the Library of Congress.
And it gives me great pleasure,
and I can say without exaggeration delight, to welcome you here
for this very, very special presentation
by His Eminence Cardinal Theodore McCarrick,
distinguished visiting scholar at the Kluge Center,
who will be speaking on the Amman Message,
a Magisterium for Islam is the question.
But before we begin, let me ask you if you have a cell phone
or any other electronic device, if you would please turn it off
so it doesn't interfere with the speaker or with the recording.

This afternoon's program is presented here
at the John W. Kluge Center at the Library of Congress.
If you don't know about the center I should tell you it was founded
in the year 2000 by a very generous endowment from John W. Kluge
who wanted to create a scholarly venue on Capitol Hill,
where the world of ideas and the world
of affairs could come together, where the thinkers
and the doers might have opportunities
for informal conversation.   And for that purpose we invite some

of the world's most senior scholars and thinkers.
In addition, we have many
of the world's most promising rising younger scholars who join us
and all come together for a wonderful intellectual community.
We think, as you know, the synergy of minds
and people talking together is really greater than any
of the single voices by themselves.
And so we seek to create that kind of atmosphere.
All of our senior scholars
and our post doctoral fellows also give public presentations.
And so you'll see that the center has a number of lectures
and small conferences and other kinds of events.
You can get information about these by going to our --
just go to the library's homepage and on the right-hand side look
for the Kluge Center and you can sign up for additional information.
But of course here, today we're here
for a different purpose, a special purpose.
I'm sure most of you know, but in case you don't,
that Cardinal McCarrick of archbishop of Washington,
D.C. he was trained as a sociologist, having a Ph.D.
in sociology from the Catholic University of America.
And after serving in several capacities became president
of the Catholic University of Fredrico.
Just to recite a few things, he's been auxiliary Bishop of New York;
bishop of Metuchen, New Jersey; archbishop of Newark;
installed as archbishop of Washington in January, 2001.
And even weeks later elevated to the college of cardinals.
He's probably most well known, though,
for his work on international human rights and religious freedom.
He's traveled all over the world on diplomatic missions,
he has worked tirelessly in helping the poor and disenfranchised.
He and I have many conversations about his work
with Catholic relief missions.
All over the world he's traveled and stood for justice, promoted peace,
and worked tirelessly for an interfaith dialogue.
He's supposed to be retired.   And if you know anything about him,

you'll know the one thing he's really bad at is retirement.
And I can testify to that.
Because during his time at the Kluge Center, by prior arrangement,
he stepped away I guess on average maybe about a week a month
to keep his other activities going, flying all over the globe
on his really tireless missions in interfaith dialogue,
especially with the holy land and the Middle East.
Most recently, many of you may know this, or may not,
he was one of a very, very small delegation that traveled to Iran
and was instrumental in release of the last two American hikers.
I could also speak about the gifts of spirit that he's brought
to the Kluge Center, even though we're an intellectual organization.
We do take note of spirit.
But you didn't really come to hear me, you came to hear the Cardinal.
And so I'm going to step aside and ask him to speak with us.
Thank you.   [ Applause ]

>> Thank you very much, Dr. Brown.
I'm so pleased that the community that I live with is here.
They are really only here for the reception afterwards, they come --
they didn't have lunch today, so they're --
I gave them only one instruction,
that is not to snore during my -- during my talk.
But that doesn't apply to you.   You may snore.

It's perfectly all right.
I am -- I am really delighted to give this lecture.
Let me -- let me go right into it, though, and we can talk later
on at the question period.
I want to start by saying how grateful I am
for that very nice introduction that Dr. Brown gave me.
I don't deserve all the nice things she said, and I really embarrassed
and a little bit pleased by the extraordinary amount
of publicity I received from the library about this talk,
or just generally in the last few months.
Not only did I have this huge photo on the front page of the Gazette,
but I noted the other day my profile is on the November calendar.
I've never been on a calendar before.
And I hope it doesn't turn anybody away
from the more interesting program of talks that are going on,
which the calendar is presenting to us.
I'm not sure whether this talk of mine will be one
of those interesting reports.
But I will do my best, and be grateful for your patience.
If I may just add another note, or one of two notes, or three --
indeed, this is a confession -- I'm not really a scholar.
I have been living a long life of -- of different kinds of activity.
Once in a while by some remarkable flare of chance,
including a couple instances of scholarship,
but basically I'm a tinker or a carpenter of facts and figures,
or perhaps a merchant who strives to bring those facts
and figures to other people.
So I -- I have to confess that I -- this is --
I'm out of my depth with all these great people here.
And I am like a fish out of water.
Or like the story of the little boy who his father found
in the apartment one day very anxiously
and energetically drawing something.
And the father looked at him, he said oh, Johnny, Johnny,
that's wonderful that you're drawing.
What are you drawing?
And the little boy looked at him, and he said,
I'm drawing a picture of God.
And the father said oh, that's very interesting.
But you know, we've never seen God.   Nobody knows what God looks like.

And the little boy said well, they will when I'm finished.
And I hope something of the Amman Message will be able to get through,
and you might say we -- we will when you're finished,


I am so honored to be able to talk about this very fascinating
and important world of Islam, which numbers, as you know,
about a billion-and-a-half of our brothers and sisters of this planet.

About eight or nine years ago when they began working
on the Amman Message, His Royal Highness Prince Gazi Bin Mohammad
of Jordan, who is really one of the major authors
of the Amman Message pointed out so often that the --
almost half of humanity belongs either to Christianity or to Islam.
And therefore the need for them to get together to an understanding
who they are in themselves and who they are with relation
to each other is really an essential element in the striving for peace,
and even for survival in our global society.
I want to begin by acknowledging that I have been really overwhelmed
by the library's remarkable gathering of resources on the theme
of Islam and the Middle East.
And the historical, philosophical, theological,
and all the learning-related facets
of this extraordinary part of the world.
Of course, Islam and Christianity both extend far beyond the Middle
East, although my thrust to a great extent has been centered
around the ancient city of Amman, which was the first Philadelphia.
And the message that came from that capital century in the first decade
of this new third millennium.
But before I talk about the Amman Message may I offer my truly sincere
thanks to my superiors and my colleagues here in the Kluge Center.
They've been so extraordinarily generous to me in their time,
in their wisdom, in their kindness to me over this past year.
I am totally overwhelmed by the amazing treasure of resource
as I've relied on so heavily in the Middle Eastern division
of the library's splendid staff.
And I need to thank most sincerely Dr. Mary Jane [Inaudible]
who not only was a friendly councillor to me,
but also made it very possible for her associates
to give me a large amount of time
and an extraordinary amount of wisdom.
I want to thank, therefore, Dr. Chris Murphy
and Dr. Muhammad Sudlivi [Phonetic]
for their constant help and great guidance.
If I have taken a path that leads
to nowhere it is certainly not their fault.
It's just that sometimes 81-year-olds are not always --
I don't want to say awake, but able to absorb all
of the rather extensive
and extraordinary learning that they offer me.
In a special way, I want to thank the leaders of the office
of scholarly research and in a special way to our brilliant chief,
Dr. Caroline brown, who we just heard, and to our wise councillor,
Mary Lou Reccer and all those who have been so extraordinarily helpful
to me, even putting up with my lack of electronic aptitude,
as well as my inadequate resources of cerebral gray matter.
But I am most grateful, I want to add also, to the whole list.
We have such wonderful people working here that so --
to Joanne and Yvonne and to Evelyn and to Denise and Sally,
and to Alicia and so many others.   And also to -- to Corinthia and Tom,

who keep my office looking so wonderfully.
And so I think all of them have been so very great to me.
They've not only been good friends and good guides,
but have made this time of study
for a non Scholastic a very pleasant one.
And finally, I'm grateful to the other scholars, or I should say
to the really authentic scholars of the Kluge Center, as well as,
and I was so happy that Caroline mentioned them,
as well as to the splendid gathering of fellows,
those sparkling young people
in whose brilliance I see a great future for learning in our society.

Some of you were kind enough when they knew I was speaking today
to ask about if I would talk about my recent journey to Iran
and the return of the two young American hikers.
May I leave that to a question period,
if there is some interest in pursuing it?
The only point I'd like to make is to insist
on what I believe is very important in the continuing viability
of the religious channel in American diplomacy,
American foreign policies.   Sometimes we forget that.

And we -- we find about everything else that's going
on in another country except where they are as far
as their religion goes, and as we have come to learn,
certainly in the last decade, the vital importance of religion
in every facit of society in the nations that we deal with.
And so I just would like to say that we could talk
about it later if you have questions.
The -- to a certain extent, I think for a --
a non-Muslim to speak about something which is so important
in the life of Islam requires a certain chutzpah,
and I feel a certain uneasiness that I, as a Christian, presume to dwell
on a subject of great moment to my brothers and sisters who become
to the Ummah, the Nation of Islam.
May it be enough that I approach the subject with care and attention,
as well as with affection.
I will take refuge in the Thicksuria [Phonetic] of the holy Quran,
wherein the 82nd verse we read nearest among them in love
to the believers you will find those who say we are Christians.
Because among them are men devoted to learning,
and men who have renounced the world.
And they are not arrogant.
May I happily, please God, fall into that category.
The specific occasion that brought me to the study
of the Amman message was a reaction
to several tragedies involving Christians at the hands
of very radical fundamentalist groups who self-identify themselves
as true followers of Islam and as devout Muslims.
A couple of these sad events were massacres
in several Christian churches, both in Iraq and in Egypt,
as well as the murders of some Christians and Muslims in Pakistan,
men who had raised their voices to challenge certain legislation
such as the blasphemy laws of that country.
As to the death of these very brave individuals, Muslim leaders
in different countries of the world, many of whom I had come to know
and appreciate, spoke out courageously and quickly
to denounce this religious terrorism in very strong words.
I'm sure that every person of good will respects and is grateful
for their valiant voices.
And yet at the same time one read statements or even sermons preaches
in mosques where the perpetrators of these crimes were lionized
and heralded as true Muslims and true followers of Islam.
As I lived to and read all these stories it became clear to me
that Islam did not have a central religious teaching authority
which could speak in a strong and united voice against the voices
of hatred and counter in a more authoritative way those
who were praising and taking pride in criminals who were trying
to clothe themselves in a cloak of Orthodoxy.
Recalling that in our Catholic community we have what is called a
Magisterium, I began to wonder if there were anything
like that similar in Islam.
Let me talk for a minute about the Magisterium, because I think some
of you have never heard of a Magisterium.


Catholics define Magisterium very precisely.
The Catholic church defines its teaching on this subject,
and I quote from an authoritative source, Magisterium is the authority
to teach in the name of the Lord the truths of the Christian faith
and all that is necessary and useful for the proclamation and defense
of that -- of those truths.   For us, who are Catholics.

This teaching authority is vested in the college of bishops,
under the leadership of the Pope.
Because he is, as we say, the concrete center of unity
and the head of the whole Episcopate.
Of course, this is a Catholic
and not basically a Christian Magisterium since it is obvious
that our protestant brothers and sisters, as well as millions
of Orthodox Christians, would not accept this definition.
Some of the churches would accept a number
of the Catholic church's teaching, but not accept others.
It is therefore mainly a Roman Catholic church
and a Roman Catholic concept which defines the --
and brings into active life -- the specific concept of Magisterium
in its teaching and in its practice.
I sought for vein, within vein, for a Muslim Magisterium.
Certainly, one did exist in the days of the prophet, peace be upon him.
And perhaps in the days of the caliphs.
For many centuries, however, this has not been true of Islam.
Certainly since the death of the caliph Ali, and since the division
in Muslim between the Sunnis and the Shiites.
There are probably 80% of Islam is Sunni, but there are vast numbers
of Shiite Muslims in many parts of the world who,
where they do accept the basic principles of Islam,
have some other teachings as well.   So it's not we Christians alone

who regret this lack of a central authority.
Because although we Catholics have it, Christians do not have it.
But even as I say, it --
when I found this I realized that we were --
we did not have an opposite number of -- in the halls of Islam.
But we are not alone to -- to feel this lack.
Prince Gazi Bin, who I mentioned earlier, probably the major author
of the Amman Message, himself writes in his explanation of the importance
of that document, the Amman Message, as follows.
Islam has no central authority or church.
It has been held together over the centuries and generations
across geographic, judicial, and intellectual diversity by text
and by established authoritative interpretations of these texts,
along with the holy Quran itself.   End of quote.

This interpretation of these texts, the prince goes on,
and a misunderstanding of the methodologies
of their interpretation -- these are the words of major,
major Muslim teacher --
misunderstanding of the methodologies
of their interpretation can have very dangerous consequences,
and can lead to an entirely different civilization from that
of traditional Orthodox Islam, end of quote.
So my concerns, I found in a certain sense to be echoed by the concerns
of this very prominent Muslim leader.
And as I moved more into the study of the Amman Message,
and the situation in Islam today, I think there are many
who would say we need some sort of a Magisterium.
And I think that was maybe ultimately the cause
of the moving into the Amman Message.
Which in a certain sense, limited sense how, you know,
the limited comparison, but in a certain sense is
like a Muslim Magisterium.
I would not say that if I were preaching in a Muslim mosque,
but I would say it here because I don't think it would be offensive
because I think, even though the word Magisterium might not be
something that they would look for as a guidance, yet the possibility
of having something which they could call on,
and which they could depend on, would for many in Islam today,
I believe, and from what I have studied,


Now, you will find as we talk about the Amman message
that it does present an authentic Islam.
But it -- it presents an authentic Islam which is pluralist.
Not like in the Catholic church, we are not a pluralist church.
And even in Christianity, although there are many things
where we are all together, the -- we would not have the kind of pluralism
that we find in Islam today -- I think -- that's --
I'm not finished, my studying.   I have six weeks more.

And by that time I will find out exactly what I need to say.
But Caroline will give me some guidance in that,
and it will all work out.   Now I want to say that there's a --

there are many views on this subject,
and I wanted to see what Dr. John Esposito said.
Dr. Esposito is probably the leading American Islamist,
at least at our time, teaches at Georgetown, and has been helpful
to me along the way of trying to learn more about the Amman Message.
In his book The Future of Islam, he writes, quote, a common charge is
that the fight against Muslim extremism and terrorism is effected
by the Islamic lack of a central religious authority.
Muftis can render different opinions in fatwas.
Inviting both -- involving both personal and public life,
involving business contracts, or obligations of marriage and divorce.
As well as in fighting and warfare.
So it is possible for a Mufti who would be like a church Pastor,
to issue a statement that would carry with it a certain amount
of importance for his parish.
The man in the next parish, the man in the next mosque,
may have a totally different -- not a totally different,
but an appreciable different guidance and may issue a fatwas
that for his people would be very different than the other one.
Moderate religious leaders can counter the fatwas
of those who support extremists.
But fatwas on both sides may still be considered valid
by their followers.
Thus, this source of healthy diversity and flexibility
in Islam can have a dangerous downside.
The war of fatwas is reflected in diverse and conflicting rulings
about suicide bombing and sharp differences
between mainstream senior religious leaders.
For example, in Iraq, the differences of opinion
between the grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani,
who is one of the major voices of Islam, certainly of Shiite Islam
and militants like Muka al-Sadr, and in the rulings
of recent grand Muftis in Saudi Arabia, even though it is the home
of was Habi Islam, condemning violence and terrorism,
versus the views of many of the actors of Al-Qaeda,
who came from that whole area.
So there is maybe a beauty in the pluralism that Islam finds.
But there is always a danger.
If you have no one to say this you cannot do, then you do it.
So we will talk about this as we go along.
Suddenly, or perhaps not quite suddenly as I continued my research,
I came across this document that was not widely known
in the United States and even now it seems in many parts of the world.
And maybe less known in the United States,
perhaps after this talk it will be perhaps less known
in the United States.
But anyway, the Amman Message was drafted and published
by the Hashima kingdom of Jordan.
There is a special amount of prestige
that in the religious life, that that gives them.
Because the Hashimites are direct descendants of the prophet Muhammad.
So they are -- what we say is the black hats.
You know, when the Islamic leaders gather the one
who wares the black turban is one who is a descendant of Muhammad.
The ones who wear the white turbans are not.
There's always a special reverence for a teacher
who can say he is a descendant of Muhammad.
So it was drafted and published by these --
by king Abdullah who was a black hat.
And counting on the extraordinary learning of many of the teachers
of Jordan, which is the last many years had gathered a --
an appreciable and impressive amount of theological
and historical information in a number of their --
of their centers, the agbaits centers, and other centers of Islam
in Jordan have been very important in guiding the teaching of Islam
in that part of the world.
Well, he counted, obviously, on the help of those
who he had gathered around him.
And he in a very special way, watching the signs of times,
began to realize that the Islam of today truly needed a document
that might bring together at least the most essential elements
of Islam.
The teachings of the Quran and the prap
and the hadith of the prophet Muhammad.
King Abdullah's motivation was based on many factors.
There were some voices in the modern world of Islam who felt
that a moment had been reached when the concerns of the modern world
and the teachings at the core of Islam needed to be presented
and promulgated in a way that would prevent this major world religion
from falling into the hands of teachers who were not faithful
to the basic documents of which the teaching of Islam was based.
Because of some of the work that I've been able to do
in central Asia, just to see the tremendous influence of Al-Qaeda.
Not as just a terrorist group, but as a teaching agency.
And because they had access to a great deal of money they had access
to television, they had access to the media of communications.
The teaching of Al-Qaeda was something much more powerful
and much more prom mentally received than the teaching
of the major figures of Islam, the grand Mufsis and the grand sheiks.
So I think this is one of the factors that really --
I won't say frighten, but cause great concern among the major
leaders of the -- major political leaders,
as well as the major theological leaders of Islam in the Middle East.
And so it is true that king Abdullah's motivation was based
on many factors.
There were some who as I said were worried
about where the teaching was going.
It's interesting that way back in 1979 a major scholar,
Abdul azi Shahid [Phonetic] in a study published
by John Hopkins University back in 1979 already looked
at this historic period with some concern.
He writes, quote, Islamic states are attempting
to telescope the achievements
of the Industrial Revolution into one generation.
This is a fascinating thing.
You would do a -- at least I say to our fellows up on the top floor,
you could do all kinds of wonderful studies on this.

The achievements of the Industrial Revolution into one generation.
This a period of maximum transition in the Islamic world.
Now, he's talking about 40 years ago, but he looks at it
and says this is a period of maximum transition in the Muslim world
in contrast to the two previous hundred years,
two hundred years previous.   When it remained much outside the --

the Islamic world remained much outside the political forces
operating in the west.
And because of that, remained also outside the commercial development
and the -- in a way, the intellectual,
certainly the material development of the economies of the west.
So Islam found itself
for two hundred years basically outside of this.
And in a -- in an Ottoman empire that was falling apart.
And we saw that in the Balkans, we saw that in other countries.
So I think it's -- Sahid writing 40 years ago has an insight
for us which is very important.
The present experience of the Islamic world, now this is present
for him 40 years ago, with western cultural supremacy complicates the
task of transition.
Now maybe the 40 years have changed that.
Maybe there is no longer western culture supremacy
to the same degree it was 40 years ago.
Forty years ago China was not the cultural factor it is today.
And Iran is not the cultural factor it is today.
So that the world has changed.
However, I think his statement has still great accuracy.
The present experience of the Islamic world
with western cultural supremacy complicates the task of transition.
The transition from being a back water,
which would be the last 200 years of Islam , into the modern Islam
that -- ma may be brought out in the Arab Spring last year.
Western attitudes of cultural superiority
which were still very strong reenforce an alien system
of cultural values to the western system, an alien system
of cultural values, and thus accelerate the displacement
of already weakened Islamic cultural norms.
This is an interesting -- an interesting consideration,
because Islam in those days was -- was weakened by many factors.
And colonialism had just about broken up.
If I may, just to -- I found this just last week and I want to --
this is not always accepted by all of Islam,
by all the scholars, Sahid's position.
This is a quotation from another scholar who is more political,
Mahmud Mung Shapur [Phonetic].   He writes, the assumption

that Muslim countries will eventually grow more secular
as they are exposed to western notions of rationality,
and this is sort of indicated or enumerated by what Sahid is saying
to us, that has proved unfounded.
The secular relation process has failed to deepen
in the Muslim world, and has instead contributed
to the resurgence of Islam.
He's writing within the last decade, so he has a different perspective.
Another 30 years have changed.
While a small group of leaders has adopted a western secular world
view, the vast majority of Muslims has not embraced the
secular perspective.   Whereas in Europe, no, we

who are religious people know the secularization of Europe has gone
so fast and has really made an impact
on religious life in Europe, certainly.
On philosophical life in Europe as well.
In the Muslim world this secularism is often viewed
as an externally-opposed agenda,
emblematic of European strategic interests.
While in the Muslim worlds,
secularization preceded religious reformation in the European case,
it resulted more and more from such reformation.
The modernizing experiences of many Middle Eastern cities,
it's fascinating as a sociologist, I find this fascinating --
the modernizing experiences of many Middle Eastern cities were typified
by urban sprawl, detailing socio-cultural fabric,
high unemployment rates, poverty, poor services,
frustrated expectations, economic failures
of assorted kinds undermined modernizing secular states
and culminated in the emergence of a counter-veiling force
in Muslim society, Islamic revivalism.
Now, isn't that a description of the Arab Spring?
And he's writing about six, seven years before the Arab Spring.
And he's finding it in the -- not destruction of secularism,
but in the weakening and of the ability of people
to see there is no real agenda in secularism that will help the poor.
And I think he's seeing that, and he -- his last sentence is powerful.
The battle for culture is being fought --
in the Islamic countries -- was being fought in the homes,
the streets, the shops, the mosques,
and the work places of the Islamic world.
And it was on these battle fields that Islam was at its most powerful.
So now, he would be -- he would not be of the same mind as Sahid.
But he's talking 35 years later, and he's looking at a world
that has changed very much in those 35 years.
He's talking about a world that politically has seen the --
both isolation and strengthening of Iran,
that has seen the Holy Land situation draw on closer and closer,
perhaps hopefully not to a third [Inaudible]
but the frustration level that he sees, that he talks of going
on in Muslim areas, which probably gives rise
to the Arab Spring, is present everywhere.
And the -- the westernization in a certain sense
of Islam is now -- takes a back seat.
Because it is not powerful enough to move --
to move out of the situation.
So this is the situation that the leadership of many
of the countries of Islam faced.
Some of the teachers had not yet emerged from the colonial period
and still had the understanding and the understanding --
understandable anger within them that those years,
when Islam was not respected by the colonial powers.
Others had moved on, hopefully most of them into an understanding
of the world of the third millennium,
but others being driven not just by the memories of colonialism,
but by the perceived and actual injustices in today's world.
Forced, driven to take up arms in the name of Islam against those
who would wield unfair advantage over the Muslim peoples.
In some case because they represented the western powers,
or by governments in the Muslim world, which according
to this group were just puppets of powerful anti non-Muslim states.
It was in this world that king Abdullah and his advisors sought
to understand, and sought at the same time to find a way
in which the disparate strands of Islam could be pulled together
and play its authentic role as a great religion throughout the world.
Once again, in the introduction of the Amman Message,
the leaders wrote Islam today, as the religion faces many challenges
and many problems, perhaps one of the greatest
of these is misunderstanding and confusion about the true nature
of the religion of Islam among Muslims and non-Muslims alike.
This misunderstanding has led to an erroneous interpretation
of Islamic text, and thus, illegitimate religious edicts
by people who are intellectually and morally unqualified
to make religious edicts.
Therefore, after months of discussion and meetings,
a committee named by king Abdullah, and including one Christian
who in a determined effort to produce a document
that the Christians would understand,
they issued the Amman Message.   It was November, 2004 of our era.

And it described, quote, what Islam is and what Islam is not.
And what actions represent it, and what actions do not.
Its goal, and this is very beautiful, was to clarify
to the modern world the true Nation of Islam
and the nature of true Islam.
In the interest of time I will read just a short preamble to this.
Quote, in order to give this statement more religious authority
king Abdullah sent the following three questions to 24
of the most senior religious scholars from all over the world,
representing all the branchs and all the schools of Islam.
The three questions were who is a Muslim.
Is it permissible to call someone an apostate, and who has the right
to undertake issue Asian fatwas or legal rulings.
Based on the fatwas provided by these great scholars,
because they came back with rulings
after he asked those three questions --
based on the fatwas provided by them,
who including the grand Sheikh Allah had hijja [Phonetic] of Gintaki,
who just died, a great loss for us, the grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani
from Iraq, and Sheikh Qaradawi from Amman, who is recognized
as one of the major voices.
In July of 2005 after having done all this preliminary work
of two hundred of the world's leading Islamic scholars
from fifty countries, and they issued a ruling
at fatwas on these three issues.   The Amman Message, therefore,

has just three questions and three answers.
To answer the question who is a Muslim,
they indicated the following.
The scholars specifically recognize the validity
of all eight legal schools of Sunni, Shiia, and Ibadi Islam.
And all of the traditional Islamic theology, of Islamic mysticism,
or Sufism, and a true -- and this is important --
and true Salifi thought, and came
to a precise definition of who is a Muslim.
I say true Salifi thought, because we found now
in Egypt the Salafis seem to be moving more and more
into the fundamentalist camp.   But Salifi basically means faithful.

Faithful to the Quran, faithful to the original teaching of Muhammad.
This is one of the weaknesses of the document,
because it is a pluralistic document.
It does not say everybody has to do this, or everybody has to do that.
That's one of its strengths.
You wouldn't get it through if you didn't do that.
But it's also one of its weaknesses,
because it doesn't finally decide what Islam is
and who can -- who can speak for Islam.
And secondly, based on this definition, they forbid takfir,
or declarations of apostasy.
You have to realize, some of the leaders
of the nations were afraid they were going to be named
by these extreme groups, they were going to be called apostates.
And according to the --
the old practice, an apostate could be killed,
because he would be a traitor to Ummah, to the nation.
And so to prevent them being called apostate, Takfi, it was important
that they try to escape this, and that they try
to make sure who can be called Takfi.
And then based on all the religious schools and their teaching,
they set forth the subjective and objective precondition
for the issuing of fatwas.
Thereby exposing ignorant and illegitimate edicts
in the -- in the name of Islam.
The Amman Message, in the Amman Message the authors describe the
principles of Islam.
Because this is part of the definition, obviously,
this is the basis of the definition of who is a true Muslim.
The true definition of a Muslim is as follows.
Is one who is faithful to Islam.
Islam is founded on these basic principles.
Attesting to the unity of God and the belief in the message
of his prophet, there is no God but God, but Muhammad is prophet.
This constant refrain is the faith of Islam.
That's Number One.
You have to be -- you have to have that faith,
that willingness to live it.
Two, continuous connection with the creator through ritual prayer.
We've all seen it, we've travelled in Muslim countries,
we've all seen this most impressive time when all the men are
down on their knees at once, enjoined, it is most impressive.
And third, the training and rectifying the soul
through the fast of Ramadan.
Every year this fast comes along, and its purpose is to bring you back
to where you should have been before.
Stop going through luxury, stop eating all the things,
stop doing the things you shouldn't be doing.
Go back, take that month and renew your self every year.
And then one which is very important, which I've seen going
through Muslim [Inaudible] safe-guarding one another
by paying the Zakat, the charity tax.
And the poorest in Islam must pay this.
We say in Christianity, we say the tithe.
But very few people pay the tithe.
But the Zakat is a very strong tax, and I've seen it collected.
And I've seen it supporting old people's homes and the poor,
and feeding them because of the Zakat.
And then fine, for those who can Hajj, the annual pilgrimage.
So those are the five things.
The profession of faith, there is no God but God, Muhammad the prophet.
The five prayers a day.   The fast of Ramadan.

The Zakat of charity , and the Hajj when it is possible.
So these three points were then unanimously adopted
by the Islamic world's political and temporal leader ship.
See, there's always been this close leadership in Islam
between church and state.
And there was a meeting of the organization
of the Islamic conferences, which is the top organization of Islam, in --
it met in December of 2005, and they unanimously adopted the
Amman Message.
So it's going -- going wonderfully now.
It's going -- getting more and more important.
The promoters of the Islam message heralded it as good news,
not only for Muslims, for whom it provides a basis for unity
and a solution for in-fighting, that's quote,
but also for non Muslims.
They thought that by preserving traditional Islam's internal checks
and balances, it assured balanced Islamic solutions
for essential issues like human rights, women's rights,
freedom of religion, legitimate jihad, good citizenship of Muslims
in non Muslim countries and just, democratic government.
Now people take some exception to that.
That that was their whole -- one of the major roles of this message was
to expose the illegitimate opinions of radical fundamentalists
and terrorists from the point of view of true Islam.
Foreign minister of Singapore, George Yale declared
at the 68th session of the United States General Assembly he spoke
about this, and this is a quote.
Without this classification of the Amman Message,
the war against terrorism would be much harder to fight.
I've gone long in trying to present this short
but important document in its context.
It was heralded by some as an instrument of consensus or Ishmael
of the Ummah of Islam in our day.
It has been called a consolidation of traditional Orthodox Islam.
Its significance for many is that for the first time
in over a thousand years the Ummah, the nation, has formally
and specifically come to such a pluralistic --
can't be [Inaudible] -- pluralistic, mutual recognition,
and also that such a recognition is religiously binding on Muslims
since the prophet has said my Ummah will not agree on an error.
This is from the hadith of Muhammad.
So the fact that they all agreed, they said okay, that is why we have
in Christianity, [Inaudible] that when you --
all the people say the same then it is -- this is the voice of God.
As I indicated earlier, the document was approved time and time again
by organizations and international compacts.
It truly was put out there for the world to see as a true example
of authentic Ishmael, if it is that, for the world
and for the Ummah to follow.
Unfortunately, its great potential was never realized.
The key to the hopes of the king and his advisors was
that having received all of these approvals in the national
and national levels, the words would seep down to the mosques and schools
of Islam throughout the world.   It does not seem that this happened.

My travels, I talk about the Amman Message, they have
yet to start from the beginning.
You know more about the Amman Message, more than you need to know,
perhaps, but you know more about it than they do in the Arab countries.
Even in the Arab world where it received great support from some
of the leading Arab scholars, and great support from governments,
it never made it to the level of the Imans and the mullas [Phonetic]
in the local communities and the teachers
of Islam throughout the world.
I've been trying to determine why the Amman Message did not have
that influence that one would have expected from the many groups
that explored it and approved it.
Besides the fact that it did not get into the grass roots
where obviously it would do the most good, it also entered into a world
where the scholars of Islam were struggling to make sure
that their teaching was appropriate as the trends revealed.
As we said before.
There is a -- through Islam even now,
the Amman Message does not settle the differing understandings
of Islamic thought today.
There is a growing, although far from predominating,
reformist School of thought in Islam.
The Muslim world also has a still very powerful fundamentalist group,
center, voice in the world of Islam today.
The problem that Islam faces, that the -- not that Islam faces,
that the Amman Message faces,
hinges on its Islamic character and authenticity.
In the same way, there was hope that there's a --
I just give you another interesting comment on -- on why Islam --
why many in Islam feel that it has to reflect the changes in society.
Teric Ramadan [Assumed spelling], whom many of you may have heard,
a major scholar, young Muslim scholar today, quoted in the 19 --
2006 edition of new voices of Islam says faithfulness
to principles cannot involve faithfulness
to historic models because times change.
Societies and political and economic systems become more complex.
And in every age it is in fact necessary to think
of a model appropriate to each social and cultural reality.
What he's saying is you have to update.
And Islam must update.
Christianity has updated in many ways,
the Second Vatican Council was an updating of Christianity,
was an opportunity to bring out of the --
out of the modern day the role of the laity in Christianity.
Because [Inaudible] the Second Vatican Council came up suddenly,
when I was first a priest,
lay people could do almost nothing in the church.
Now they are doing much more.
I know some feel that they have not gone the final way
with women priests.
I don't think we ever will, I don't think that's possible.
But all of this has been part of the --
of the development of the modernization.
Islam has not had that to the same extent.
And here are some new scholars, some young scholars, saying it is time
to do that, you have to do that.
So the Amman Message probably sought to be a melding
of these different points of view.
But in actually, it ended up bringing up more devotion
to principles than differing interpretations.
This may be one of the reasons why it failed
to have the extraordinary effect we all thought it would.
Its strength as well as its weakness was that ultimately,
it really was nothing new.
Or may be better to say ultimately, its teaching was nothing new.

Another reason, and I'm closing here, another reason might be the --
the launching of a new document called the Common Word.
Shortly after the advent of the Amman Message,
the Muslim world began to turn its gaze
on more religious cooperation with the west.
At least on the part of leaders who were tending
to promote the Amman Message.
Some of those are the same authors of both documents.
The document of extraordinary importance
because it is called the Common Word.
It is important because it was written in response to comments
in the west, including those by Pope Benedict, when he said some words
that were not pleasing to our Muslim friends.
He expressed some hesitation
in commending the whole nature of Islam.
The Common Word has been a document
which has provoked much more interest in universities and center
of religious dialogue, the problem I think first of all is
that it came too soon before the Amman Message had a chance really
to spread about.
And also, if I may parenthetically remark, it may indicate
that in the long run it's easier to talk to your neighbors
than to talk to your family.
I think a lot of us have learned that over the years.
Ultimately, of course, the question of major teachers of Islam
and where they are now directing their thoughts
and official preaching in a way that is so rapidly changing.
I think that I will -- I will close here.
I didn't realize I had so much.   I probably could take tomorrow off.

I won't, I won't.
After the publication of the Amman Message, after it received
so many commendations throughout Islam and many parts of the world,
of course there were critics who felt
that it had not reached the level of Ishmael or consensus.
Consensus, I guess, is the closest we can get to Magisterium
in the concepts of Christianity and Islam.
But most of these critics were approving
of what the writers hoped to accomplish.
Perhaps a good example of this is an excellent study entitled Consensus
in Islam and the Amman Declaration, by doctors Jonathan Brown
who teaches over at Georgetown, and Dr. Hella [Phonetic].
We recognize that the Amman Message was an effort to establish
that religious authority, while pluralistic,
existed within a certain set of matrixes within Orthodoxy.
The question still remains whether the document was
in fact an Ishmael, a true consensus.
These two authors are skeptical.
They believe that it can be defined as Ishmael, as consensus,
only in the less absolute sense that it had an overwhelming agreement
of no religious authorities.
However, doctors Brown and Hella do admit that the cling
to consensus made by the Amman Message may resonate --
may resonate among Muslims and can even be taken
up by western policy voices as the authentic voice
of Muslim tradition in the 21st century.
This is why it is still important, important for us to know about,
important for us to understand.
They go on to ask whether the Amman Message is something worthwhile
to promote, and even though they had some criticism of it,
they are in agreement that for those who seek peace and co-existence
in the Muslim world the answer is an easy yes.
If we ask, then, to what extent the Amman Message successfully calls
for peace and for unity and for understanding in our world today,
and how effective it has been, it is probably still early yet to tell.
For me, it has been a fascinating, interesting adventure,
and a journey into a system of belief that has endured and grown
for more than a millennium and a half.
I took too long.   Thank you very much.


[ Applause ]
>> My superior said I can still take some questions.


Oh wow, yes?
>> I guess I haven't really studied a lot of what you said -- oh --
I haven't studied a lot of what you're talking about,
and I found the comments really interesting.
I learned quite a bit.
I -- and I don't -- you spent the time talking
about the Amman Message,
I'm not sure what the Magisterium represents,
and whether that represents something that all
of Christendom is supposed to agree to.
And you're specific, I think, on five points of the Amman Message.
Are there a similar five points that Christians are supposed to believe
in by some doctrine of some body.   >> I don't think so.

At least I haven't -- I'm pretty old,
and I haven't come across them yet.
But I think basically there is no Magisterium in -- in Christianity.
We have a Magisterium in Catholicism,
because Catholicism we're supposed to believe,
and hopefully we do, believe the same things.
But -- such as say women priests,
most of the protestant world would not accept that.
The Orthodox would be with us on that.
But the position of the holy father,
the Orthodox would not be with us on that.
So there is really, just as in Islam,
the Sunni who are the majority believe one thing,
the Shiites believe basically those five points that we mentioned.
But they have other things.
They believe in the coming back of the 12 Amman, they believe in the --
that Ali was really the only legitimate khalifa in those days,
because he -- because by -- he could have descended by family and not --
and the others descended by vote.
They would believe that they had really made --
that they have some ceremonies as they celebrate the death of Ali
and the death of his two sons, Hussein and Hassan,
and these are major feasts and really almost
like Christmas and Easter for us.
But the Sunnis have nothing like that.
So that there is -- Islam -- but what the Amman Message says,
this is why we say it is a pluralistic message,
because there are -- there are different --
different grades and different ways that -- that Islam comes together.
But they come together in those five things.
They all believe in that -- that profession of faith,
the need for prayer, the need for fasting, the need for charity,
and the possibility of the Hajj.
But you're right, there's a -- there's I different word,
it's not true, it's not a true Magisterium.
There are some who feel it's the Ishmael.
And Ishmael means a -- a concursus of a general equal understanding.



>> Given what you just spoke about, can you relate
that to what you just did in Iran, like, when you went --
what they said, religious channels to try to get the hikers --
>> Okay, I can do that quickly, about the Iran story.
Two years ago, the State Department said to the mothers,
because the mothers were really the great leaders in this,
said to the mothers, we don't have any channel now.
Why don't you try a religious channel.
And they sent them to me.   So I began then two years ago to --

we got another group of religious leaders, we got them all together.
We sent them up, we tried to send them to Iran, that wasn't possible.
We sent a letter from the religious leaders.
It was Thanksgiving, right around this time.
We said it's a family -- a family holiday, families come home.
Why don't you let them come home?   Six months later I got an answer

from the grand -- from the supreme leader.
And he said if they're guilty, they can go home.
If they're not guilty, they have to suffer.
Kind personal regards.
Well, that didn't really answer anything.
But we kept at it, we kept at it.
And I saw Ahmadinejad last year and we spoke about religious channel.
He said you should come to Iran.
It took another year before we were able to go.
But our job there, and this is really the specific answer
to your question, our job there was not to be political but to talk
to the religious leaders, because they were the ones
who said no you can't do it.
The political thing, the president had said I'm going to let them go.
Politically, they said no, we're in charge.
You can't let them go.   We're in charge, with government --

with prisons and things like that, we're in charge.
Justice is ours, we're in charge.
So our job, my job, was to persuade the religious leaders,
going back to the Quran, where we say Allah the compassionate
and the merciful, to talk about the compassion of Allah.
And finally, they gave in.   Maybe I talked that much.

So they -- and thus we were able to bring them home.
It was wonderful.
I did not come home with them, because I had to get home,
and we didn't leave until we were sure
that they were going to come home.
And it was nice, about a week after they got home we got a call,
they wanted to see me and the two others who were with me.
So we came, and the families were there.
It was a wonderful experience.
You feel you can -- [Inaudible] you can do something good,
you know, you've got to try.
So anyway, another question?   Yes?


>> Very interesting.
My question is, I don't want to be provocative at all,
but as far as I understand the generation of universal Magisterium
for all the Muslim world would be like a way to moderate some
of the most extremist aspect of Islam.

My proposal or my counter proposal wouldn't be secularization,
another way to moderate the excess of Islam, and if it's so,
don't you think that if we compare how modernization
and secularization happen in Europe it's hard to believe
that it can happen in the Muslim world based on a --
on the Amman Message, there's still, like, religious message.
I don't know if it's clear enough.   >> It's very clear.

There are some who believe that.
Some of the secularists actually believe that.
They are sure this is the way to peace and harmony in the world,
get rid of the problems of religion.
This goes back to the philosophers that we have a whole bunch
of philosophers, we can tell you which philosophers said that.
And it goes back to modern philosophy.
So much of modern philosophy calls for that.
You know, even the Marxian position is very strong in that.
Get rid of that -- religion is the opium of the people.
Religion is going to prevent people getting together.
That's a philosophical possibility, they say.
And there are many who believe that.   I happen not to be of that school.

But life is like that.
And I certainly, even if I were ever to become like that school ,
which I don't think it would ever happen,
I don't see Islam doing it at all.
Islam is so locked into a theocrat's understanding of life and nature
and of God that it -- I think they would even be more --
be stronger, and this one article
that [Inaudible] wrote saying that's, you know,
secularism are not going to win in a battle with Islam.
Hopefully, they're not going to win the battle with Christianity.
Although in Europe they're making real progress.
But in Islam, will be a harder nut to crack.
Thanks be to God.
I think. Maybe one more, yes, please?

>> Your Eminence, thank you for your talk.
Clearly, it would be up to Islam to decide if they warrant
to have something equivalent to a Magisterium that we have
in the Catholic church, the Catholic faith.
But is there something that we Christians,
Catholics as people could do to encourage the message
of the Amman Message to our brothers in Islam?
>> I -- I think so.   And that's -- I have this saying

that I've been using [Inaudible] dialogue for like twenty years,
it's sort of gotten old now.
But we often begin dialogue by talking to people.
That's how we begin it.   We say I'm going to talk to you.

That doesn't work.
We've got to learn to talk with people.
So that's the first step, is beginning to talk with people.
The second is to get to understand people.
The third, once you understand people and see where they're coming
from you get to appreciate people.
And the fourth, you get to be able to work with people.
So I think that's what inter-religious dialogue has to do.
There's not enough of it going on in some areas,
Islam is not enthusiastic about it.
In other areas, Christianity is not enthusiastic about it.
But I think we have to breakdown the walls.
We are -- we are never not going to believe in --
Christians are never going to not believe in the divinity of Jesus.
And Muslims are probably not going to believe that Jesus is God,
because they are so convinced that the unisity --
this is what brings us together, the fact that we believe in one God.
Now we believe one God in three persons, Trinitarian.
They believe only in one God, that he has --
they have a wonderful [Inaudible] it's simpler, it's simpler.
He has no partners.   God has no partners.

But I think to understand --
there's so much that comes out from understanding, when --
in the [Inaudible] that I quoted, and there are so many others,
you know, where he says you have your religion, I have my religion.
And he doesn't condemn.
They feel that the people of the book, and we are --
Jewish friends and Muslims and Christians,
were all people of the book.
And the Quran has great respect for the people of the book.
So I think by building on that respect we can build a better world.
And that's what we have to do.   Thank you.

>> Please let us thank His Eminence, Cardinal McCarrick.
[ Applause ]
>> This has been a presentation of the Library of Congress.