 |
| Ghana Catholic Bishops |
By
Ekow Mensah
In
a statement to mark “May Day” the Catholic Bishop conference has called on the
Mahama administration to expiedite action on solving the youth unemployment
problem.
The
Bishops recognized that the Savana Accelerated Development Authority (SADA)
could help prevent the unbridled migration of youth from the North to the South
and encourage Government to remove all the bottle necks in the implementation
of the project.
They also wrote extensively about the
introduction of 17.5 VAT charges on non-essential banking services.
The full text of the statement is published
below;
Preamble
On
the occasion of this year’s May Day celebration marked on May 1 as a universal
Day for all workers across the globe, we, the members of the Ghana Catholic
Bishops’ Conference, wish to salute all workers of Ghana and congratulate them
on their commitment to work and their readiness to sacrifice time, talents and
energy to help Ghana to become a prosperous nation. We take this
opportunity also to encourage all workers of Ghana to continue to work hard to
increase productivity and improve the living standards of our people.
Theme of this Year’s
Celebration
The
theme chosen for this year’s celebration of Workers’ Day in Ghana is,“Ghana’s
Economy: A Concern for All.”Undoubtedly, this theme is an appropriate one
and it could not have been chosen at a better time than this.
Ghana
is enjoying relative peace and calm compared to other parts of Africa which are
witnessing insecurity, violence and destruction. While we are happy about
the fact that Ghana is relatively stable and peaceful and while we pray that
wewill do all we can to maintain it and even improve upon it, we also believe
that the time has come for the country to translate its peaceful, stable and
investor-friendly climate into concrete and real economic transformation. In
this vein, we believe that something has to be done about the state of our
economy which, in our opinion, is not in the best of shape.
Many
Economists and Civil Society Organisations have expressed worry and
reservations about the sustainability of the Single Spine Salary Scheme
currently in place. Government itself has also admitted that it is a huge
burden on the public purse and something needs to be done with regard to its
sustainability. We recall that these concerns culminated in a high level
stakeholders’ dialogue in Ho last year.
While
commending the Government for facilitating that dialogue and the stakeholders
for participating in the process, for sharing ideas and recommendations on the
way forward for the Scheme, we wish to encourage Government to share the fruits
of that dialogue with all relevant stakeholders, including Religious Bodies and
Civil Society groups, and to put in place the necessary measures to implement
the recommendations that came out of that meeting. In this way, we will all be
contributing to helpsecure the way forward for the pay structure of the
Ghanaian working public.
Employment and Related
Issues
We
are concerned about the rising incidence of youth unemployment and call on
Government and the private sector to help find practical solutions to this
phenomenon. The GYEEDA programmeif structured and implemented well could
go a long way to solve youth unemployment in our country. It is, therefore,
urgent to fast track the proposed restructuring of the Authority so as to serve
its intended purpose. In the same vein, we wish to encourage our Government to
do something about the Savannah Accelerated Development Authority (SADA)
programme to help bridge the poverty gap between the North and the South as
well prevent the unbridled migration of some youth from the North to the South
to seek non-existing jobs.
Knowing
that unemployment can and often leads to many of our youth engaging incriminal
activities, including, cyber fraud, armed robbery and prostitution, and having
been witnesses to political upheavals in other parts of Africa and the Middle
East due partly to youth unemployment , we wish to appeal to Government to
expedite action on this problem of unemployment.
As
Religious Leaders, we are also very concerned about the issue of street hawking
engaged in by a number of our youth. We know that this phenomenon of
street hawking has been with us for a long time now but theincreasing numbers
of our youth on the streets selling all kinds of items, from dog chains to
toothpicks, is a big worry to us. We call on all stakeholders to help find
practical solutions to this phenomenon as soon as possible.
We
have also noted with anxiety and worry the increasing incidence of people
erecting “stores” and “containers” all over the place, especially, in our cities
and towns. This is an indication that our economy is fast becoming one of
buying and selling, and we know that no economy can develop by buying and
selling the wares of other countries.We are of the opinion that what we need is
structural transformation to accelerate the process of producing goods in Ghana
and the patronage of same by all Ghanaians.
It
is our opinion that one way to address youth unemployment, unbridled migration
and food insecurity is for Ghana to make policy priority for Rural Agricultural
development. International agencies, including the UN, AU, G8 and ECOWAS, are
articulating priority for agriculture in 2014. However, we are yet to see how
this translates into domestic policy prioritization and programme development.
We urge that nothing untoward be done to compromise Ghana’s food sovereignty
and security. This is one reason why we continue to advise the need for caution
in passing new legislation that will affect our food value chain.
Economic Partnership
Agreement
We
wish to join the calls made by other individuals and groups for the exercise of
caution by Government on the signing of theEconomic Partnership Agreement (EPA)
with the European Union. We must study carefully the contents of this
agreement to know its merits and demerits before proceeding to sign or not to
sign it. In this way, we would have taken care to forestall any
challenges or difficulties that may arise out of any of the decision we take on
this issue.
17.5% VAT on
Non-Essential Banking Services
The
furore surrounding the introduction of the 17.5% VAT charges on non-essential
banking services is yet to die down. Admittedly, the lack of proper education
on the matter is to blame for the confusion that has characterized the
exercise. We are happy that the same exercise has been suspended to allow for
more education on the matter and hope that the right thing will be done to
avoid further confusion. Knowing that the vast majority of our people are
unbanked, we trust that the banking sector will collaborate with the Government
to resolve this problem amicably to erase any fears that customers may have and
to pave the way for workers who may yet not have bank accounts to proceed to
have them.
CONCLUSION
Since
the state of the economy is the concern of all, irrespective of one’s political
affiliation, tribal or ethnic background, we call on all Ghanaians to discuss
the issues of the economy in a dispassionate manner,always devoid of rancour
and political mischief.The state of Ghana’s economy should be the concern of
all Ghanaians and we all must help find solutions to it.
While
saluting our gallant workers on this day, we call on them to work hard to
increase production to place Ghana’s economy on a sound footing to accelerate
our forward march to become a Middle Income Country in the next few years. We
also urge organized labour to exercise restraint in negotiations on the minimum
wage and the Government to engage in dialogue always.
Once
again, congratulations to all workers of Ghana. May St. Joseph the Worker, the
Patron Saint of all workers, whose feast we celebrate today, intercede for us
and for all workers.
God
bless our homeland Ghana and make our nation great and strong!
SIGNED
MOST
REV. JOSEPH OSEI-BONSU
BISHOP
OF KONONGO-MAMPONG &
PRESIDENT,
GHANA CATHOLIC BISHOPS’ CONFERENCE
Climate Change, Foreign Assistance, and Food
Sovereignty in Ghana
By
Joeva Rock
Recent
reports on climate change have continuously stressed the unequal burden small
states experience in comparison to their relatively low energy consumption. For
many developing and low-income nations, this imbalanced and undue drain is the
continuance of on-going historical injustices. In countries like Ghana,
environmental destruction by foreign forces is no recent phenomena. For
hundreds of years Ghanaian soil has laid waste to mineral extraction, and its
forests at the mercy of the timber market. Additional techniques of extraction
have taken the form of gold, oil, bodies, and more.
Moreover,
many land preservation schemes have been at the behest of western mediaries.
Thus, many “green” projects, be it conservation or eco-tourism, have revolved
around western logics and development discourses, which often frame problems
“in tightly defined, bounded terms that suggest logical, linear solutions,
strategies and methods used to achieve scientific objectivity” (Johnson 1995:
115). Approaching environmental conservation from a western and development
standpoint not only infers the use of capitalist logics, but also creates what
Barbara Rose Johnson calls a “conceptual distancing mechanism” (1995: 115),
framing conservation in scientific, objective and achievable terms. Often times
such distancing is without regard to the human and eco-systems implicated in
conservation efforts.
Amidst
the list of consequences of climate change are increased climate
irregularities, droughts, warmer temperatures, and as such, food insecurity. In
order to tackle current and future uncertainties, scientists and development
practitioners are searching for ways to strengthen crop resilience and reduce
risks to farmers. One solution that has been proposed is the use of
genetically-modified (GM) and genetically-engineered (GE) seeds. Companies such
as Monsanto, DuPont and Syngenta are creating seeds which are meant to weather
through climate crises, and are promoted under the promise of Africa’s ‘green
revolution’ (Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa).
The
push for genetically engineered approaches to agricultural challenges is largely
a Western effort, backed by big-name actors such as the Gates Foundation, the
Rockefeller Foundation, Bono’s ONE campaign, and Millennium Villages (Mittal
and Moore 2009: 2). Accordingly, the United States incorporates GM seeds in
their agricultural and food aid programs. Currently, Ghana is one of 19
countries receiving assistance from USAID’s newest food security venture, Feed
the Future. USAID is promoting GM seeds and technology as innovative, smart
products which “incorporate tolerance to disease, heat, and drought [in order]
to increase production while maintaining or improving the nutritional quality
of food” (USAID).
While
at first glance modified seeds and improved crops appear to be a productive way
to tackle agricultural insecurities, a large debate is taking place over the
use of modern biotechnology in agriculture. Recently, adversaries have called
for a more holistic approach to address hunger, and “concluded that agriculture
policy and practice must be changed to [also] address … poverty, social
inequalities, and environmental sustainability” (Mittal and Moore 2009: 1). The
International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for
Development reported that “GM crops are unlikely to play a substantial role in
addressing the needs of poor farmers” (Mittal and Moore 2009: 1).
In
Ghana, the anti-GMO movement is led by Food Sovereignty Ghana (FSG). The
organization’s focus is multifaceted, having grown out of conversation
surrounding the increasing phenomenon of land grabs, the right to water and
sanitation as a fundamental human right, water privatization issues,
deforestation, climate change, carbon trading and Africa’s atmospheric space,
and in particular, the urgent issue of the introduction of GM food technology
(“About Us”).
Core
to FSG’s work is public education and placing pressure on the government to
enact a moratorium on GM seeds. Along with allies, FSG and their wide coalition
have testified before parliament, penned editorials and articles for Ghanaian
print media, appeared on television and radio shows, organized protests, and
regularly work across civil and political sectors to build partnerships and
alliances. This past summer FSG turned down an invitation to the American
embassy to discuss biotechnology, citing that the closed-door nature of the
meeting was not conducive to engaging public conversation around the matter.
Similar
to Krista Harper’s Hungarian subjects, FSG’s concerns partially “stem from a
growing awareness that integration into the global economy [renders
postcolonial] countries vulnerable to environmental degradation and other
risks” (Harper 2005:230). Of course, environmental dilapidation for profit is
nothing new, yet, its continuance is magnified in the current globalized,
hyper-capitalist economy. Moreover, for FSG, Western encroachment on food
sovereignty is a perpetuation of the colonial past. GE technology is colonial
partially in that it “foster[s] dependency on a corporate, [foreign] seed
supply” (Mittal and Moore 2009: 34). In order to emphasize the coloniality of
GM food aid, FSG regularly uses terms such as “genetically modified
colonialism” to invoke colonial imaginations. Hence, the struggle against GM
seeds and technology is much larger than addressing food safety: it is about
moving towards true post-colonial independence.
FSG
is not alone. The Oakland Institute explains that “Africa has been largely
united against GM crops, [choosing] to protect biodiversity over accepting GM
food aid” (Mittal and Moore 2009: 7). Thus, a conundrum arises: is USAID
obligated to revise its programming if the host country rejects its means of
implementation? In this case, if Ghanaian farmers do not want to use
genetically modified seeds, are they automatically disqualified from USAID
assistance, or does USAID have a mandate/obligation to work with them in other
ways?
African
actors have continually emphasized rights to their land, crops, and foodways,
arguing that food security, sovereignty and development require structural
changes. Such an undertaking does not necessarily correlate with development
aid programs, and hence requires re-orienting amongst major development
practitioners like USAID, the Gates Foundation, AGRA and the World Bank.
Moreover, such debates call on governments to pass legislation which protects
its farmers, peoples, and food-systems, and places value on national wants over
foreign companies.
************************************
Joeva
Rock is a PhD student in the Dept. of Anthropology at American University in
Washington, DC focusing on colonial legacies in West Africa. Follow her on
twitter: @southsidetrees
Even the Catholic Church is against the EPA
By
Dr. Michael J.K. Bokor
Folks,
I am in the mood to step on big toes. I will rumble on a few issues that have
helped me know why Ghanaian politicians can’t solve problems. Clearly, such
issues shed much light on what has befallen us in Ghana and will continue to
doom us because our leaders appear to be more interested in pushing us deeper
into the labyrinth than doing anything to free us. And they have the
constituency to help them do so because Ghanaian politics is full of nonsense.
It thrives on deception, which destroys more than builds.
I
am particularly motivated (or incensed) by the ongoing controversy over the
Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) with the European Union that our
Mahama-led government is more interested in signing than discussing with the
generality of Ghanaians for them to know what the entailments are. Why hasn’t
the government been bold and honest enough to place that EPA in the public
domain for discussion so the citizens (whose electoral decision put it in
power) can know the ins-and-outs, the nooks and crannies of such an engagement
before endorsing it to consign Ghana to another phase of colonialism in this
21st century? An irony of sorts!!
Many
decades after independence, why should those in authority in Ghana be more
interested in tightening the noose around the necks of their own people than
doing so to those “faceless forces” whose interests they are serving? Neither
the European Union nor our government has been bold enough to lay the contents
of this EPA bare in the public domain for the people to know what is at stake.
Why so?
And
why the indecent haste to sign it when the people (whose lives will be
affected) can’t get the chance to reflect on it? Is that what our kind of democracy
has to offer the citizens? Wherein, then, lies the justification for upholding
it? Why should the government arrogate unto itself the power of thinking for
the people when the people know full well that it is incapable of thinking
rightly for them (in trying circumstances when the economic situation is
deteriorating right in front of their eyes and their living conditions worsen)?
Forget
about the (mis)treatment given to the European Union representative at the
recent forum on the EPA in Accra. He deserved what he got as the one attempting
to bell the cat!! When a people find it difficult to dance to the tune called
by faceless people enunciating exotic rhythms, they won’t have the patience for
such characters to poke them right in the eye on their own soil.
In
effect, our own government thinks that it can best serve our interests by
keeping the citizenry in the dark about this EPA and by playing a
self-defeating game of hide-and-seek. All the justification given by the
various government spokespeople on why Ghana should sign the EPA is a clear
testimony to the petulance with which governance is done in our part of the
world. A useless paper tiger called constitutional democracy!! Fie on all those
government officials muddying the waters about this EPA!!
When
ordinary mortals complain about issues negatively affecting their existence,
their political leaders take umbrage and do things with reckless abandon; but
they have a huge price to pay. It has been so and won’t change just because
times have changed. History has a whole lot to tell us about the fate of
political leaders (whether appointed by popular acclamation, universal adult
suffrage, self-imposition, hereditary on the basis of privileged status, or
with the blessing of those portraying themselves as God’s representatives on
earth). So has it been all these years, especially for those in authority,
buoyed up by the quaint belief that “It is God who appoints Kings/rulers over
the rabble”.
We
in our part of the world have had enough of such gimmicks to know how the tide
flows. We have— whether by design or accident—subjected ourselves and been
subdued by forces beyond our control to all forms of treatment for our weal or
woe, depending on where one stands to make knowledge of our plight. Truth be
told, our experiences speak volumes. We have ever been subjected to the worst
form of dehumanization and fleecing by forces that descended on us to subdue us
just because we don’t know how to use the natural endowments on which we sit—or
even of which we are made.
Our
forebears suffered the scourge and passed it on to us. We are grappling with it
and don’t know how to get rid of it for the good of posterity just because we
have put in office those who are more interested in making hay while the sun
shines than ensuring that the sun shines on everyone. Ours is a done deal.
Bosh!
Decades
after managing to free ourselves from bondage, we are still stuck in the
thickest parts of the woods, expending energy fighting each other instead of
doing what will get us out of the woods. Such is our sorry state that we still
cannot separate the trees from the woods. We remain stuck in the woods, still
groping about while the rest of the world runs, just because we lack capable
leaders.
Friends,
the Mahama-led administration is bent on signing the EPA in the teeth of stiff
opposition from Ghanaians, except some nonentities who have today become vocal
public figures by virtue of the weaknesses in our political dispensation. One
or two of them came to notice yesterday as supporting the EPA and entreating
Ghanaians to support it too. Lame thinkers (if ever they are at all) to be
pooh-poohed!
I
am happy that the Catholic Bishops’ Conference has also come out strongly to
caution President Mahama and his government not to sign the EPA “in haste”. A
very strong admonition to be obeyed, especially if one values hindsight.
Anybody
who knows about the post-Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade happenings will tell you
about the role of the Christian missionaries in preparing the way for the wave
of mental colonization that has so far entrapped us under neo-colonialism. The
so-called recourse to “legitimate trade” in which the Christian missionaries
played an instrumental role explains everything as they prepared the grounds
for the colonization of our minds. We have remained as pliant, well-endowed but
short-sighted people to be exploited through and through. That is what this EPA
will perpetrate. No elaboration.
But
if you are still incredulous, go and read the “Romanus Pontifex” to know how
the Catholic (Universal) Church (in Spain) blessed the massive colonization
that would reduce Africa to rubble. Then, you should appreciate why the call
today by the Ghanaian Catholic Church establishment is eye-opening. The
Catholic Church began it and knew the outcome. Today, the Ghanaian Catholic
Church is asking President Mahama not to rush to sign the EPA; and its call is
meaty. If he fails to heed this timely call and goes ahead to do as his
handlers wish, woe-betide Ghana!!
The
Catholic Church is powerful and cannot be under-estimated. It blessed
colonialism in those days and hasn’t regretted ever doing so; but in our time,
our Ghanaian clergy in that sect seem to have seen the hidden danger inherent
in this EPA and have been conscientious enough to alert the government to it.
Will President Mahama heed this call to prevent subjecting us to another phase
of “colonialism”? I hope he will.
My
final thought: What has become of Africa’s own development agenda encapsulated
in the acronym NEPAD? Can’t this framework be utilized for better intra-African
collaboration and economic growth than the EPA can help us accomplish? Is
anybody in government really thinking right at all?
I
shall return…
E-mail:
mjbokor@yahoo.com
Join
me on Facebook at: http://www.facebook.com/mjkbokor to
continue the conversation.
Muslims name mosque after
Jesus
The name "Jesus son of Mary" written
in Islamic calligraphy followed by "Peace be upon him" (Wikipedia
Commons)
Holy
Trinity Catholic Church in Syracuse, New York, was sold in December to a Muslim
group and will be turned into a mosque. The Muslim organization requested that
six stone crosses be removed from the top of the century-old historic church,
and the Syracuse Landmark Preservation Board has complied. However, as Syracuse.com explains in
an April 6, 2014 article, “Plans to turn a church into a mosque bring pain and hope to changing
neighborhood,” everything evens out because the mosque will be
named the Mosque of Jesus, Son of Mary “to build a bridge between the old and
the new.”
So
that’s all right then. Or is it? The news story is written to the theme that
Islam and Catholicism share much in common—two sides of the same coin, so to
speak. A diocesan spokeswoman is quoted as saying that “the building is once
again being used to meet the needs of a growing population on the North Side,
just as Holy Trinity did as it served the Catholic faithful.” In this telling,
immigrant Muslims are just like immigrant Catholics of a hundred years ago.
After all, both believe in Jesus, the son of Mary. “The Muslims could not keep
the crosses on the church,” the Syracuse.com
report concludes, “But they chose the mosque's name to build a bridge between
the old and the new: The Mosque of Jesus, Son of Mary.”
Why
do the crosses have to come down? The reason, as explained by one of the Muslim
organizers, is that “crosses are not an appropriate representation of the
religion of Islam.” Why is that? Because the Koran maintains that Jesus was
never crucified and therefore never rose from the dead (4:157).
In
short, there are reasons to wonder if the Jesus, son of Mary that Muslims revere
is the same Jesus that Christians revere. For instance, the Syracuse.com story reports
that some of the Holy Trinity parishioners are worried that the massive stained
glass windows which depict scenes from the life of Christ might be removed
next. And well they might worry. Many of the scenes from the life of Christ do
not pass the “appropriate representation of Islam” test. Naturally, the
crucifixion scene would have to go, along with any representations of Christ’s
resurrection, but so also would any depiction of Christ’s baptism or the
Transfiguration. Both of these events identify Jesus not just as the son of
Mary but as the Son of God, and from the Islamic point of view that is a
blasphemous thought. On top of that, Islam prohibits the artistic
representation of prophets. Have you ever seen a portrait of Muhammad? Probably
not. And if you have any ideas about sketching one of your own, you’d be
well-advised to keep it in your private collection. All things considered, the
future of Holy Trinity’s rose-colored windows does not look too rosy.
The
same Jesus? In places where religiously observant Muslims are in the majority
and especially in places where they hold political power, there is much more
emphasis on the differences between the two faiths than on the similarities.
Christians are looked upon as inferiors, and they are well-advised to keep
crosses, icons, and statues out of sight. When they are in power, observant
Muslims seem less interested in building bridges than in desecrating churches
and burning them down.
In
the West, it’s a different story. When Muslims are first establishing
themselves in a community, they tend to emphasize the commonalities between the
two religions, and thus we get mosques named “Jesus, Son of Mary” and
billboards that proclaim “Muslims Love Jesus Too.” Indeed, the supposedly
shared love for Jesus is a primary recruitment tool for bringing Christians to
Islam. A few years ago, Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for the Council on
American-Islamic Relations, wrote an essay titled “Muslims and Christians: More
in common than you think,” which is reprinted in many publications around
Christmastime. Hooper writes: “It is well-known that Christians follow the
teachings of Jesus. What is less well understood is that Muslims also love and
revere Jesus as one of God’s greatest messengers to mankind” (Washington Post,
12/17/10).
Muslims
love Jesus too? If so, why do Muslims [official disclaimer: not all of them, of
course] display so much contempt for Christians when they gain power over them?
Why are they so quick to charge Christians with blasphemy? To desecrate their
churches and religious symbols? Could it be that the Jesus they believe in is
not the same Jesus Christians worship?
While
the Koranic portrait of Jesus borrows some elements from Christianity—the
virgin birth, a handful of miracles—the differences are more striking than the
similarities. The Jesus of the Koran is not a Jew or a Christian, he is a
Muslim. He is not the Son of God, and to say that he is is the greatest of all
blasphemies. He was not crucified. He did not rise from the dead. He is not the
savior of mankind. And, although Ibrahim Hooper says that Jesus is “one of
God’s greatest messengers,” his message differs markedly from that brought by
Jesus of Nazareth. Other than the message that people should serve God, there
is not much in common. The Muslim Jesus announces that he is a prophet sent by
God; that he is not God and never claimed to be; and that he brings “news of an
apostle that will come after me whose name is Ahmed [Muhammad]” (61:6). So, on
the one hand you have the message, “I am the way and the truth and the life,”
and on the other hand you have the message, “I am a messenger.” That’s no small
difference.
Those
who are looking for more from the Jesus of the Koran—more wisdom, more
development of doctrine—will be disappointed. The Muslim Jesus has remarkably
little to say about anything. There is nothing like the Sermon on the Mount in
the Koran. In fact, that one sermon far exceeds in length the sum total of
everything said by the Jesus of the Koran.
He
also has remarkably little to do. When Christians hear that Jesus is in the
Koran, they tend to assume that the Koran must contain some account of his
life. But other than a strange and truncated account of his birth, there is
nothing in the Koran that could remotely be called a life of Jesus. You will
find considerably more scenes from the life of Jesus in the stained glass
windows of Holy Trinity Church than you will in the Koran.
The
Jesus of the Koran is nothing more than a disembodied voice. There is no
information about where he lived or when he carried out his ministry or who his
disciples were. In short, there is no attempt to portray him as recognizable
human being. Judging by the cursory attention given to Jesus in the Koran,
Muhammad seems to have had little interest in him as a person.
Nevertheless,
Muhammad couldn’t afford to leave Jesus out of the picture. Why? Because if
Christ is who Christians say he is, then there is no need for another prophet
and another revelation. In other words, the claims made by Jesus of Nazareth,
if true, would have put a major crimp in Muhammad’s prophetic career.
Muhammad’s solution to this problem was to include Jesus in the Koran and
recast him as a messenger, rather than as the Messiah, understood as the Son of
God.
The
reason Jesus is so frequently referred to as “son of Mary” in the Koran is to
reinforce the point that he is not the Son of God. Likewise, whenever Jesus
appears in the Koran or whenever he is mentioned by Allah, it is almost always
for the purpose of denying his divinity. Take Chapter 5, verses 113 to 117. It
is one of the few places in the Koran where the narrative about Jesus rises (well,
almost) to the level of a scene:
“Jesus
son of Mary,” said the disciples, “Can your Lord send down to us from
heaven a table spread with food?”…“Lord,” said Jesus son of
Mary, “send down to us from heaven a table spread with food…” (5:
113-114)
The
interesting thing is what happens next. Allah agrees to send the table, but
first he interrogates Jesus: “Jesus son of Mary, did you ever say to mankind:
‘Worship me and my mother as gods besides God?’” Jesus, the faithful Muslim,
replies, “I could never have claimed what I have no right to. If I had ever
said so, You would surely have known it” (5:117).
So,
a demonstration of Jesus’ power to produce a tableful of food is used as an
occasion to reject the central tenet of Christianity. As for the table of food,
we are left guessing. Does Allah actually send down the meal? There is no
further mention of it. Muhammad has made his point, and having made it, moves
on to the next lesson.
Notice
that the phrase “Jesus son of Mary” is used three times in the table scene. Was
this because Muhammad had a deep Christian-like love of Jesus and his mother?
Or was there another motive? Given that almost every page of the Koran contains
reminders of Muhammad’s prophetic role, it seems highly likely that the
Jesus-son-of-Mary motif was simply a device for enhancing his own importance by
reducing the status of Christ.
The
irony is that this self-serving stratagem has become the main plank for keeping
Muslim-Christian dialogue afloat. One would think that Christians would be sore
about Muhammad’s appropriation of Jesus and Mary for his own purposes—that is,
to deny the Sonship of Jesus. Instead, this is sometimes put in positive terms
that seem to overlook, for whatever reason, the problem at hand. For example,
the Vatican II document Nostra Aetate says, “The Church regards with esteem
also the Moslems,” and two of the five reasons given for the esteem is that
Muslims “revere” Jesus and “honor Mary.”
But
a close reading of the Koran suggests that its inclusion of Jesus and Mary may
not be the sign of hope that many Christians take it to be. John the Baptist
said of Jesus, “He must increase, but I must decrease” (Jn 3:30). Muhammad
preferred it the other way around. For him to increase, it was necessary that
Jesus decrease. Thus, what we find in the Koran is a diminished portrait of
Jesus, who is not completely repudiated, but used to bolster Islamic claims.
Up
in Syracuse, some Catholics have apparently taken the transformation of Holy
Trinity Church into Jesus, Son of Mary Mosque to be a sign of continuity
between Christianity and Islam. They might be less sanguine on that score if
they knew the rest of the story.
Urine
The specialists working on the ISS can still receive everything they need from the Earth. However, space travelers of the future that will fly to Mars and other planets will be forced to recycle water and other liquids. No wonder that urine will be the largest source of water in a manned spacecraft. Each cosmonaut produces an average of about one and a half liters of urine, which makes up more than 81 percent of wastewater on board the spacecraft.
Currently, ISS astronauts and cosmonauts recycle used liquids, thus obtaining pure water. Processing urine can produce 75 percent of pure water, but it is planned to increase this number to 85 and then to 100 percent.
The process of recycling urine into water involves the utilization of urea, diamide of carbonic acid. Nevertheless, the author of the new study Eduardo Nicolau notes that this compound can be used as fuel.
Together with his colleagues, Nicolau developed a new technology that will use urea to improve the efficiency of wastewater on board spacecraft.
For the first stage, engineers used osmosis - a process, in which substances flow through a special membrane that separates water from organic compounds, such as urea and other small dissolved molecules. Afterwards, the separated material is directed to a bioreactor filled with activated carbon and urease, an enzyme that breaks down urea.
In laboratory tests, scientists were thus able to convert about 86 percent of urea into ammonia. The researchers wrote about it in an article that was published in the new issue of the journal ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering.
During the final step, obtained ammonia is collected and transferred into the fuel element, which in turn breaks down ammonia into nitrogen and water, with the release of energy. For the time being, experiments have not given impressive results: about 0.2 V voltage and about 2 milliamperes of current. But Nicolau is sure that in the near future it will be possible to significantly increase these figures.
The only thing that confuses researchers, is relatively low concentration of urea in the urine, which can be a problem. Therefore, scientists have yet to think through all the intricacies of the process to convert "waste" into fuel.
No comments:
Post a Comment