The question, then, is whether secularism is the best possible condition for living virtuously and remaining open to grace, outside of Catholicism itself. On some level it’s an empirical question, and I suppose JSP has in mind something like this: secularists are like a blank slate just waiting for the Church to write on it. Protestants, Jews, Muslims, etc. already have lots of mistaken beliefs and habits that would need to be unlearned first. So the secularists are really closer to the right condition.

I see the logic in principle, but in practice I don’t think it hits very near the truth. Certainly, it is possible for a person to be vehemently committed to the errors of his native faith, and this could well be a stumbling block along his path towards the truth. But secularists are really not blank slates; they have all sorts of erroneous commitments of their own, and quite possibly a much larger body of things that need to be unlearned and relearned. As I say, the question is largely empirical, and secularism might not be the worst possible state, but it’s by no means clearly the best (or second best) one.

Those who suppose that it’s better to be a good Jew or Muslim or Protestant, than to be a bad Jew, Muslim or Protestant are presumably thinking that a genuine desire to worship God and do right has to be healthy, and better than apathy towards all things spiritual. This supposition seems to get support from Our Lord’s words in the Sermon on the Mount, when he said, “Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled.”

The Turkısh lady referenced above ıdolızes Ataturk.

I also wanted to add that I had a stern lecture gıven to me be an elderly Turkısh lady. She ıs a thoroughly committed secular Turk, idolizes Attar, and despises the excesses of fanatical Islam. She blames the rise of Islamic fundamentalism as a political force within Turkey squarely on President Bush’s shoulders. I don’t know personally the details of which she was speaking, but supposedly even before coming to power in the parliament, the pro-Muslim political party received high praise and prestige from Bush(ınvıtıng to the White House supposedly) thereby adding to its influence at home.

Upon reflection the only thing I took away from this as how many Christians (including Catholics) feel the need to support other ‘religious’ people especially over secular, non-religious people. I’ve heard this from protestants and from Catholics - how they think it’s somehow good for a Jew to be a ‘good’ ‘observant’ Jew or the goodness of faithful Mormons, etc.

Perhaps this ıs the trap that our evangelıcal presıdent ıs fallıng ınto? The false belief that there ıs some bond among ‘men of relıgıon’ - rather than realızıng that our best ınterest, short of establıshıng the Socıal Reıgn of Chrıst, ıs ın promotıng purely secular regımes.

Regardıng the ‘beıng a good Jew’ ıdea. The Early Church Fathers condemned thıs notıon. Beıng a good Jew actually angers God more than beıng a non-observant Jew. Before the comıng of Chrıst, they refused to follow the Law; and now that Chrıst has come and offered freedom from the Law, they (the Jews) try to follow ıt scrupulously

Ahmet Hakan:The Pope and Gulen

Whether you want to interpret it as an omen or as a very realistic view of things to come, it doesn’t matter! If only Pope Benedict XVI hadn’t made those unfortunate statements….He would have arrived in Turkey and be greeted by this sight: A group of school children waiting for him as he descended his airplane. And it would have emerged that those children, waiting with flowers in their hands, were studying at religious schools funded by Fethullah Gulen. And what’s more, no one would have been surprised by this all. Because for a long time now, the Gulen groups have been systematically making an effort to become closer to the “other sacred books.” And what is this situation being called: Dialogue between religions.

The basic aims of the international Gulen movement are clear: they want to bring about global peace. They want to bring about an atmosphere or tolerance and dialogue. According to the Gulen movement, it is not the time for a struggle between religions, but for “saving religious belief.” After all, the “winds of atheism” are gaining ground every day, right? Which is why Gulen has chosen to focus on the struggle against atheism above all else. Which is also why he has written books now explaining the similarities, rather than the differences, between the Bible and the Koran.
Which is also why, in recent history, Gulen met with Pope John Paul II at the Vatican. Work on this front was going well for him at the time.

******

However, no matter how well things were going, there were those who were very much annoyed by the road Gulen was taking. They saw the Vatican visit by Gulen as a sign that things were “out of control.” They accused the CIA of being involved with the Gulen visit, and in fact some sect members even wanted to force Gulen out. Despite all this though, Gulen forged ahead with his efforts for dialogue. And Vatican circles in particular were being very careful not to enagage in any behavior that would makes business more difficult for Gulen. That is, until Pope Benedict’s last controversial round of comments.

*****

Attention! Attention! Benedict XVI’s statements about Islam have collapsed the foundation for this “dialogue between religions” enterprise. Because one end of the dialogue has not put its views about the other end clearly on the table. There is clearly some serious ground which has been lost. And so, Gulen’s work from hereonin is going to be more difficult. And now, not only can you forget about Gulen’s children, with flowers in their hands, greeting the Pope at the airport; you might also have to forget about the Pope even coming to Turkey.