Dr Larycia Hawkins (1972- ), an associate professor of political science at Wheaton College, was put on leave after she started wearing a hijab, the headscarf some Muslim women wear. She is a Christian who wants to show support for Muslims in these Islamophobic times. Wheaton is an Evangelical Christian liberal arts college in suburban Chicago.
Hawkins on December 10th:
“I love my Muslim neighbor because s/he deserves love by virtue of her/his human dignity.
“I stand in human solidarity with my Muslim neighbor because we are formed of the same primordial clay, descendants of the same cradle of humankind–a cave in Sterkfontein, South Africa that I had the privilege to descend into to plumb the depths of our common humanity in 2014.
“I stand in religious solidarity with Muslims because they, like me, a Christian, are people of the book. And as Pope Francis stated last week, we worship the same God.
“But as I tell my students, theoretical solidarity is not solidarity at all. Thus, beginning tonight, my solidarity has become embodied solidarity.
“As part of my Advent Worship, I will wear the hijab to work at Wheaton College, to play in Chi-town, in the airport and on the airplane to my home state that initiated one of the first anti-Sharia laws (read: unconstitutional and Islamophobic), and at church.”
Advent is the four weeks before Christmas.
Before doing any of this, she checked first with the Council on Islamic-American Relations (Cair) to make sure that it was not offensive, patronizing or forbidden by Islam.
Wheaton, five days later:
“Wheaton College faculty and staff make a commitment to accept and model our institution’s faith foundations with integrity, compassion and theological clarity. As they participate in various causes, it is essential that faculty and staff engage in and speak about public issues in ways that faithfully represent the College’s evangelical Statement of Faith.”
Translation: They do not like her saying that Muslims and Christians worship the same God. Yet that is not clearly contrary to the Statement of Faith, which is boilerplate, Anglo-Protestant stuff.
Ahmed Rehab of Cair in Chicago:
“We’re dismayed by [Wheaton’s] decision because essentially [what Hawkins is doing] is an act of human solidarity meant to be rooted in theological compassion – to stand with students, Muslim students at Wheaton and elsewhere who are the victims of this current backlash of Islamophobia and anti-Muslim bigotry.”
Miroslav Volf, professor of theology at Yale Divinity School (in an article Hawkins linked to):
“The fact of the matter is this: fearful people bent on domination have created the contest for supremacy between Yahweh, the God of the Bible, and Allah, the God of the Quran. The two are one God, albeit differently understood. Arab Christians have for centuries worshiped God under the name ‘Allah.’ Most Christians through the centuries, saints and teachers of undisputed orthodoxy, have believed that Muslims worship the same God as they do.”
Students are protesting both for and against her.
Having tenure, she has the right to a full review.
– Abagond, 2015.
Update (February 12th 2016): Wheaton College and Dr Hawkins could not agree whether the Statement of Faith allows one to believe that Christians and Muslims worship the same god. She thinks it does, Wheaton authorities do not. So they have agreed to “part ways” in a secret agreement. Wheaton will start a scholarship in her name and, once every year, invite a Jewish or Muslim scholar to speak at Wheaton.
See also:
532
Thanks for this story. Would really like to hear how it unfolds.
Does anyone know if there has ever been any institution of higher learning in the USA that was originally founded on Islam?
LikeLiked by 1 person
[…] Sourced through Scoop.it from: abagond.wordpress.com […]
LikeLike
She makes a completely valid point, they DO worship the same God. However, I wonder if somewhere in the Muslim world, there is a Muslim wearing a cross to show solidarity with a persecuted Christian community. I’m not saying this to be sarcastic or anything, I genuinely wonder if any have.
LikeLike
@ Benjamin
No, it’s strictly forbidden by Islam to wear a cross. Islam considers the cross as an object that Christians worship, and therefore wearing it is haram. Moreover, according to Islam the cross is a symbol of falsehood, perpetrating a lie (the Quran says that Jesus was NEVER crucified). OTOH, the hijab is virtually the same as the veil worn by Virgin Mary, as she is usually depicted, and Christian women are encouraged to dress and behave like her. So, there is nothing wrong in a Christian lady wearing the hijab. In fact, women are still required to cover their heads when they enter some churches.
LikeLike
Do we have a link to the exact wording for Wheaton College’s Statement of Faith?
LikeLike
@George
Thanks for the information about the cross in Islam. I personally have never heard of a churches that require women to cover their hair, but I believe it. I know that in some Pentecostal churches women can’t cut their hair. Anyways, perhaps what I should have said, is there any examples of Muslims showing solidarity with a persecuted Christian community in the Islamic world? Like, for example, attending a joint religious service with them, or perhaps wearing clothing traditionally associated with their country’s Christian community?
LikeLike
@ Benjamin
I think it was common at least in Europe until Vatican II.
I have never understood what that is supposed to mean. We worship the same god, so?
LikeLike
@Benjamin
Muslims are not allowed to wear a crucifix, but I think comparing it to the veil is not a good comparison. The veil is not uniquely muslim.
A better comparison would be the star and crescent or the Arab word for Allah (الله). You would not see a Christian or Jewish person wearing these symbols (nor would I expect them to).
@Kartoffel
I think the basic idea with people saying we all worship the same God is to stress that the Abrahamic religions are not mutually exclusive and can live side by the side in the same society.
I reject the idea of religious competition, where religions try to increase their influence at the detriment of other religions.
LikeLike
So what’s the consequence. Christins and Muslims (and Jews) should band together to beat up Hindus? (I’m aware that it’s not you saying that, I’m making fun of that line of thinking.
Also the theological differences between Catholics and Protestans are even smaller, yet they made each other’s lives miserable for centuries.
I think this line of thinking rests on the false premise that the conflict is about objective differences and that it could be explained or educated away.
LikeLike
@Kartoffel
I think, perhaps, you are reading too much into it.
In times of religious tension, it is best to stress the similarities that unite people rather than the differences that separate them.
I think that’s what Larycia Hawkins is trying to do, whilst Donald Trump has done the opposite.
It is also important to dissociate religion from power struggles (I know, it is very hard to do).
The conflict between Catholics and Protestants often rested on the conflict between national Kings and the Pope.
Now that Western nations, primarily, have secular governments, where religion and power are not dangerously intertwined, there is no reason why people of different religions cannot peacefully coexist.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Benjamin
“I personally have never heard of a churches that require women to cover their hair”
mennonites, for sure
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ somali prince
Ok. I see that she has good intentions. But I think it is such a weak sauce point that it annoys me. It reminds me of books I read as a child that were supposed to be against xenophobia/racism. The underlying assumptions were always tht if we would just know each other better, the conflicts would subside.
LikeLike
Do Christians and Muslims worship the same God? Possibly, but consider that Christians believe that God is the Holy Tirinity. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. In John 10:30, Jesus says “I and my Father are one.” Christians believe that Jesus is God. Muslims don’t. They believe that Jesus is just a prophet.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@somaliprince
“I think the basic idea with people saying we all worship the same God is to stress that the Abrahamic religions are not mutually exclusive and can live side by the side in the same society.”
You make a valid point. Members of the three Abrahamic faiths lived in harmony for centuries in Muslim dominated areas of North Africa (The Maghreb and The Horn of Africa) and Western Asia. They often lived next door to one another—–peacefully. Current tensions were often initiated by outside actors bent on power grabs and resource grabs.
“I reject the idea of religious competition, where religions try to increase their influence at the detriment of other religions.”
I agree. The dynamic of religious competition was introduced into African societies because of the numbers based conversion strategies of Christian missionaries (e.g. Catholics, Mormons and Evangelicals). They don’t care how their activities tear apart families, communites and nations as long as they meet their convert quotas. It is all about extending their own sect’s influence and income.
LikeLiked by 1 person
At least as recently as the 1980s, a woman had to cover to attend a mass in Vatican City, especially one officiated by the pope–or so I was told by friends who went there.
I think there’s an additional aspect to the professor’s actions beyond “we worship the same god.” Wearing the hijab marks Muslim women, turning them from an invisible religious minority into a visible one. Women who wear hijab in the US put themselves at increased risk for discrimination and violence.
Prof. Hawkins has chosen to take onto herself this visible risk for a short period of time. She’s already being discriminated against for doing so.
LikeLike
@George
“the Quran says that Jesus was NEVER crucified” this statement is debatable. Many muslims believe Jesus the Christ was crucified.
http://antiochbeliever.blogspot.com/2011/07/what-does-quran-say-about-jesus-death.html
LikeLike
I would argue that if Christians believe that Jesus is equal to, or greater than Yahweh, then Christians and Muslims do not believe in the same God. Muslims and Jews believe in the one God the Almighty (Yahweh or Allah), while Christians believe in the trinity with Jesus Christ being equal or greater than Yahweh.
LikeLike
My grandmother always covered her head in church, but she grew up before Vatican II.
From what I understand, the Bible says women should cover their head (St Paul in one of his letters) while the Koran does not. In practice, it boils down to local custom.
LikeLike
@ Jefe
Wheaton College’s Statement of Faith:
http://www.wheaton.edu/About-Wheaton/Statement-of-Faith-and-Educational-Purpose
LikeLike
@ Katoffel
Here is the Miroslav Volf article that she linked to. It talks about not just whether Christians and Muslims worship the same god, but why it is an important question to more than just theologians:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/miroslav-volf/god-versus-allah_b_829955.html
LikeLike
interesting, i kinda got the 2nd half of the ot stacked up now before i get to the quran…
https://www.alislam.org/quran/tafseer/?page=581®ion=E1&CR=EN,E2&CR=EN,E2
LikeLike
@ Somali Prince
Although secular on paper, they still function as Christian-majority democracies. That makes Islamophobia a cheap way to get votes. That means they are structurally more likely to persecute Muslims at home (or turn a blind eye to it) and wage war against Muslims abroad.
LikeLike
hmm that link broke sura 4 157-158
LikeLike
@abagond
Christian majority democracies, sure, but they aren’t governed by religion. It isn’t like in much of the Muslim world, where crossing Islam isn’t a smart thing to do, even in the more “liberal” Muslim majority countries.
LikeLike
@ Benjamin
Crossing Christianity isn’t always a smart thing to do, even in the more “liberal” Christian-majority countries. Here is a good example:
LikeLike
In the top photo she actually looks pretty in the hijab. (Why does the woman behind her look like she’s throwing shade though?)
Many people look for differences in times of trouble – Ms Hawkins seems to be trying to diffuse the situation.
Yes, I think we do worship the same God and that we are all trying to say the same thing only in different languages (religions) and dialects (denominations).
LikeLiked by 1 person
@abagond
Fair enough, but at the end of the day, she hasn’t lost her job, she hasn’t been jailed. What if a Christian teacher in the Islamic world started to adopt an article of clothing associated with the Jews, and started teaching their class about the similarities between Judaism and Islam? Think all they would get is a suspension?
I realize that I’m probably coming off as increasingly Islamophobic, that isn’t my intention. I actually agree that what she did is a positive thing, and that the school is absolutely in the wrong with regards to what they did to her. It just baffles me that some people find what this school did to her outrageous, but probably wouldn’t be angered if they heard something similar done to a Christian in the Muslim world.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“You make a valid point. Members of the three Abrahamic faiths lived in harmony for centuries in Muslim dominated areas of North Africa (The Maghreb and The Horn of Africa) and Western Asia. They often lived next door to one another—–peacefully. Current tensions were often initiated by outside actors bent on power grabs and resource grabs.”
@Afrofem, just like Christianity did at other times, Islam spread as much by violence as by peaceable conversion. Violence is how some parts of North Africa and Western Asia became Muslim dominated in the first place. Certainly when Muslims invaded Spain, France or Eastern Europe they were not trying to live peacefully with anyone. And historically Christians and Jews were accepted in Muslim dominated lands at the (literal) cost of higher taxes and limited rights.
LikeLike
@ Benjamin
Whether she will lose her job is unclear. And remember that she has yet to spend her Christmas holiday in her hysterically Islamophobic home state. What she is doing is an act of courage – unfortunately.
LikeLike
@abagond
I agree that what she is doing is very courageous, and I support her. I suppose you’re right, perhaps things will in fact get worse for her, though I sincerely hope they do not. All I was trying to say is that I hope there are people in the Islamic World who would do the same thing. Show solidarity with the persecuted religious minorities in their own nations in a similar way.
LikeLike
@ Shady Grady
I feel compelled to point out that, historically, Arabs and Turks were models of religious toleration compared to Spanish and English-speaking Christians.
Compare:
– US: 0.003% Native by religion, 512 years after the arrival of Christianity.
– Egypt: over 50% Christian, 512 years after the arrival of Islam.
Even now, over 1300 years after the arrival of Islam, Egypt is still 10% Christian.
While the Turks ruled the Balkans, which are still Christian-majority, Anglos wiped out the people of North America and Australia and then, among the few that remained, took their children from their parents and sent them to boarding schools, in part to make them Christians. That is WAY worse than a tax.
It is not “just like”.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@abagond
Keep in mind, however, that the Ottoman Turks ultimately ethnically cleansed the native Christian communities of Anatolia within a period of about 12 years. It wasn’t just the Armenians they killed in the early 1900’s, but the Anatolian Greeks and Assyrians as well.
LikeLike
@ Benjamin
Keep in mind that Armenian Christians outnumber Native Americans who still follow a Native religion by at least 1,000 to 1.
LikeLike
@ Benjamin
There are, but CNN and Donald Trump are not going to tell you about them. It screws up their Islamophobic narrative.
LikeLike
@ Kiwi
Where did I do that?
LikeLike
@abagond
Indeed they do. However, it wasn’t just the Armenians the Turks killed. They also completely wiped out the Anatolian Greeks from their historic homeland. Sure, a minority were given over to Greece in a population swap, or fled the Ottoman Empire. But the vast majority of Anatolian Greeks were butchered, with conservative figures being in the 500,000 – 750,000 range.
@Kiwi
You’re right, Muslim Americans should be treated the same as any other Americans, irregardless of how Muslim nations treat their own religious minorities. However, I believe that how the Islamic World treats its religious minorities shouldn’t just be glossed over, as if it isn’t an issue. It shouldn’t have a bearing on how Muslims in the West are treated, but I think it should be acknowledged.
LikeLike
NOTE:
I meant acknowledged on blogs like these, I’m aware that mainstream media is rife with Islamophobia and pointing out how bad the Middle East and the Islamic World is.
LikeLike
@ Benjamin
I do have posts on atrocities carried out by Muslims, like the genocides in Armenia and South Sudan. But given how Islamophobic the Western press is, I hardly count that as adding some kind of “balance” to this blog.
LikeLike
@abagond
You do have posts about the atrocities carried out by Muslims. I should’ve remembered those, as I have read them before. However, I felt that you were almost downplaying the atrocities of the Ottoman Empire. They didn’t just kill Armenians, bad as that was, they also wiped out the native Greek population from its homeland. How is that really any different from what Whites did in the United States?
LikeLike
@Kiwi
From what I know about the Greek and Armenian genocides, they weren’t committed in retaliation for the actions of European Christian Imperialists elsewhere in the world. So if that is what you mean – if they were done in retaliation for crimes committed by the West – then I think the answer is no. If you mean something else, however, my apologies for misinterpreting your question.
LikeLike
@Kiwi
However, there may be a somewhat loose connection. With regards to the Greek genocide, the Ottomans seemed to want to get rid of the Greeks for two reasons: One was their nationalism, and the Ottoman fear that the Greeks would undermine their national identity, or something to that effect. The other was fear that the Greeks could ally with the Ottoman’s enemies (who were primarily European states) which were at this point more powerful than the Ottoman Empire. So I suppose that could be some connection, not really sure.
LikeLike
@Shady Grady
“Violence is how some parts of North Africa and Western Asia became Muslim dominated in the first place…historically Christians and Jews were accepted in Muslim dominated lands at the (literal) cost of higher taxes and limited rights.”
Yes, Islam was sometimes spread by violence. Yet, when Muslims dominated an area they rarely veered into genocide (the post-Ottoman Turks being a glaring exception) against communities of Jews, Christians and Roma (Gypsies). Higher taxes and limited rights on non-Muslim communities are in stark contrast to the horrendous persecution of Jews and Roma in Spain after the expulsion of the Moors in the 1490s.
Separdic Jews would have preferred higher taxes and limited rights to the forced conversion, torture, murder and expulsion Spanish Catholics used against them. The Roma would have preferred higher taxes and limited rights to the lack of rights, torture and murder the Spanish pelted them with after the Moors left. Even today, the Roma of Spain are hounded by the non-Roma majority and subject to official and non-official violence on a daily basis.
Much of the violence plaguing Muslim dominated societies in the Middle East today is the direct result of European and Euro-American meddling in the internal affairs of various countries: colonial divide and rule tactics, propping up corrupt autocrats, politicizing and arming religious “freedom fighters” and invasions/occupations to secure oil resources.
LikeLike
An African-American woman in Seattle went much further than Dr. Hawkins in 2007 by practicing both Christianity and Islam. http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/i-am-both-muslim-and-christian/
The Muslims welcomed her. The Christians cast her out: http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/episcopal-priest-ann-holmes-redding-has-been-defrocked/
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ Benjamin
Do you have any sources on the Anatolian Greek genocide?
LikeLike
Kiwi, how can one sentence have so much wrong with it without you unnecessarily extrapolating… ?
Who is to say that there aren’t similarities between Christians and Hindus than can be stressed?
By definition, in order to have two different groups, they have to be different.
If two groups were the same, then they wouldn’t be considered two different groups.
Honestly forget it, no much of what you are saying makes sense.
….
So the answer is to emphasise differences?
How does emphasising similarities feed into prejudiced thinking?
According to you, Larycia Hawkins is feeding into prejudiced thinking?
You have it the wrong way round.
White supremacists are only too keen to stress that Blacks are different.
According to you, if white supremacists want to be prejudiced, they would emphasise how similar they are to blacks?
LikeLike
@abagond
Sure.
http://www.ncas.rutgers.edu/center-study-genocide-conflict-resolution-and-human-rights/genocide-ottoman-greeks-1914-1923
http://www.greek-genocide.net/index.php/overview
LikeLike
Also, this one as well:
http://www.greece.org/genocide/quotes/
LikeLike
Kiwi, honestly, I have to say this (sorry Abagond),
What are you on about?
I clearly stated that when religion and power become intertwined, that is when a problem arises.
If religion and power are not intertwined, there is no reason why religions can’t coexist.
People emphasise differences to justify committing crimes.
Implying that another group is so different as to be subhuman is when things like genocides occur.
You are not going to avoid genocides by stressing how different we all are.
LikeLike
@Kiwi
It honestly sounds like you are in a bad mood today and have just decided to straight out attack everyone.
You’ve made some nonsensical extrapolations from my statements and you appear to be doing it with Abagond as well.
You are also doing it with Benjamin.
You are are reading way too much into things.
LikeLike
@Kiwi
According to you, Larycia Hawkins is feeding into prejudiced thinking?
LikeLike
Kiwi, you are not making sense.
Emphasising differences is what legitimises the demonisation of a sub group.
According to your statement, when we say Christians and Muslims are similar, we are saying that it is okay to demonise Muslims?
LikeLike
Yes, which means we are all human. Therefore all the same.
In other words, you are now emphasising similarities.
The same thing you’ve just spoken up against.
You’ve tangled yourself up in a web.
LikeLike
@Abagond, If the Turks had had the superiority in military technology and disease immunity that the Europeans had enjoyed over the Native Americans doubtless Eastern and Central Europe today would still be under Turkish rule. As it tuned out though they didn’t. But they did expand into Europe via violence and remain there for the better part of 500 years. They weren’t invited in. And as with later European colonialism in Africa and Asia, few of the indigenous people or their descendant seem to have felt they were better off for the experience. My point is not that some forms of conquest are worse than others, clearly some are. My point is that conquest is wrong, regardless of the reason claimed. And historically Islam’s hands are just as stained as Christianity’s in that regard. Arabic is no more “indigenous” to Morocco than English is to the US. The languages are there because of invasion.
@Afrofem, Tamerlane was a Muslim leader whose whole reason for being seemed to be genocide. If he had lived later and had access to anything approaching modern weaponry his body count would have been far higher. But he did the best he can with what he had to depopulate swaths of the world. Supposedly he killed or starved a full 5% of the world’s population. And he was a quite religious man.
I don’t see how someone can justify the Muslim invasions of Spain or France by pointing out that some times Muslims treated some minorities better. That is the same logic that we reject today when people try to justify the invasions of Afghanistan or Iraq. Colonialists always claim they’re doing what they do to help people. Sometimes they might even be right. That still doesn’t excuse invading a country.
LikeLike
@Kiwi
Or you are being wilfully pedantic?
Your argument is that when two groups make a claim to similarity, they are, by extension, exluding other groups.
You are extrapolating.
It does not necessarily follow that two groups claiming similarity are by definition excluding a third group.
Larycia Hawkins is appealing to religious tolerance.
Yet you are arguing that by her stating the similarities between Christians and Muslims she is, at a stroke, excluding all other groups and being intolerant.
Except that no one said she was excluding other groups.
In other words, you are reading too much into it.
/Sarcasm on.
Yes, we are all humans right. Everyone is of the same human race.
But Kiwi when you say that, are you not excluding the animals?
What of the animals, Kiwi?
And the extraterresterials?
Stop claiming similarity between humans, you are showing intolerance to all other groups!
/Sarcasm off.
LikeLike
@ Shady Grady
By saying “just as stained” you are conflating genocide with conquest. It is possible to conquer a people without wiping them out. It has been done. In fact, in most of the world, that it is the way it is done.
For example, from genetic tests, we know that Egypt is mostly the same now as it was thousands of years ago. There are differences, of course, but not huge ones. You cannot say that of North America.
In North America, English and Christianity were spread by the sword. In North Africa, Arabic and Islam, for the most part, spread slowly from army bases to cities to the countryside. It took hundreds of years. English is far more uniform across North America than Arabic is across North Africa.
The Arab Empire itself did spread quickly across North Africa, but that was not done by wiping out most of the people who lived there. St Augustine’s mother was Berber. The Berbers are still there, as they have been for thousands of years. Where I live, there is not a single Delaware Indian that I know of.
LikeLike
@Kiwi
You’re right.
To defuse tension.
LikeLike
@Abagond @Shady_Gray
I think the main point in which they differ is that Muslims ruled better.
They were more tolerant.
In Al-Andalus, they pretty much established the blueprint.
It wasn’t until 400-500 years later that Westerners realised treating minorities well might be a good idea.
It is true that may Arab countries are now intolerant.
But I dont think this is attributable to Islam.
I think it has more to do with the state of perpetual warfare the Middle East has been in with the West.
Every time a stable country establishes itself that treats its minorities well, it gets wiped out.
Whilst states that treat their minorities badly, like Saudia Arabia, get propped up by the West.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Shady Grady
Re: “just as stained”
Circa AD 2010:
Berbers: 36,000,000
Delaware Indians: 10,500
LikeLike
@ Shady Grady
I agree with Somali Prince: the Arab world is in an abnormal state due to US power and its need for oil. To project this period of history into the past for 1400 years would be a mistake.
LikeLike
@ Shady Grady
You can tell it is abnormal because ISIS is uprooting people who have lived in Iraq for thousands of years, like the Yazidis. Or like Chaldean Christians, who remember the Mongols from their own history and say ISIS is worse.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@abagond
Do you think that conquest is a universal part of human nature? Because most civilizations, even if they didn’t commit genocide or slavery, all tended to conquer other peoples lands and establish dominance over them.
LikeLike
She looks pretty in the hijab.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@Kiwi
The core issue between the Christian world and the Muslim world is conflict in the Middle East.
Unfortunately, many people forget this and believe that the two worlds are at odds for religious reasons.
This has led to a rise in Islamophobia in America.
Larycia Hawkins is stessing that, in religious terms, there is no need for Islam and Christianity to be opposed.
Secular societies tend to be more tolerant in the West. Very rarely has an overtly religious society been tolerant in the West.
Muslim societies, on the other hand, appear to have achieved it without having to resort to secularism.
Obviously, I think secularism works better but that doesn’t mean that, historically, Muslims weren’t more successful at it than Christians.
I think you made a mistake in that sentence, can you rewrite it?
LikeLike
@ Benjamin
Conquest is not part of human nature. Sweden, for example, is not trying to conquer its neighbours. Nor is Canada. Nor Jamaica. Nor most countries. The US is sick in the head. So was Rome. So was Athens. So was Nazi Germany.
LikeLike
@ Kiwi
This is a joke, right? Do you seriously think I would endorse beating up people because they are different?
LikeLike
Coexistence is about mutual respect. Early Islam abided by that.
Here’s a quote from Davi Barker one of my FB friends who converted to Islam.
“While Muhammad operated as arbiter in Medina there was a dispute between two Jewish tribes, and according to the constitution of Medina (Oddly, they used an enumeration of rights instead of the Quran as a constitution) Jews were subject to their own laws, not Muslim law, and so he suggested a Jewish arbiter, and the disputants agreed. The Jewish arbiter decided the dispute according to Jewish law, not Muslim law, and Muhammad showed approval and said the Jewish arbiter had ruled according to… sharia.”
“Wait what? Muhammad used the word “sharia” to describe application of Jewish law? Because the word “sharia” at the time was not Islamic vocabulary. It was just an Arabic word meaning “law” or literally “the broad road to water.” The entire point of the social order in Medina was to allow Muslims to follow their conception of divine law, and allow Jews to follow their conception of divine law, and allow pagans to follow their conception of divine law, provided they did not commit aggression against each other… and they all used the term “sharia.”
LikeLike
@Kiwi @Kartoffel @Abagond
Kiwi said,
Kartoffel said,
I think that Kiwi and Kartoffel are saying that if the Abrahamic religions claim similarity, they are by default excluding everyone else.
This is a bit of a straw man.
No one stated that non-Abrahamic religions should be excluded.
Yet Kiwi and Kartoffel are assuming that and knocking it down.
This post is about reconciliation between Muslims and Christians, two groups that have a history of antagonisms.
it is not because someone is trying to defuse tensions between two groups that the person in question is suddenly excluding all others.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Muslims protecting Christians
https://www.facebook.com/notes/benedict-xvi-benedetto-xvi/egyptian-muslims-form-human-shields-to-protect-christians/10150373945000521
or
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/08/muslims-form-human-chain-pakistan_n_4057381.html
Christians and Muslims fight against ISIS
http://www.christiantoday.com/article/christians.and.muslim.fight.to.protect.ancient.christian.town.against.isis/70286.htm
Westerners rallying against prejudice
Pegida (anti-Islam/Germany), Reclaim Australia (anti-Islam/Australia) are combated by anti-rascism counter protests/rallies
https://www.rt.com/news/310164-reclaim-australia-anti-islam-rally/
http://www.theguardian.com/world/gallery/2015/jan/06/anti-pegida-rallies-throughout-germany-in-pictures
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ somali prince
I think you missed mine and Kiwi’s point and I can’t think of a way expressing it more clearly than he did.
On the issue of the history of the Islamic World
Some islamic societies were more tolerant of minorities than their christian contemporaries, some muslim conquerors were rather lenient, some were violent on a genocidal level. But all in all these societies have very little to do with the present and unless you argue with a bigot who thinks Islam is inherently and unredeemable violent and oppressive, I don’t see the relevance.
The current conflict has a certain contingency with colonialsim and the imperial struggle of the Cold War. But that doesn’t excuse anything.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Kartoffel
I’m just not sure why stressing similarities is bad thing but we’ve argued that point enough.
I’m not sure how get sidelined on the issue of history.
I don’t think anyone has brought up the Cold War and colonialism in this post so far.
The destruction of the Middle East by the West isn’t a historical issue, it is a contemporary issue.
It is going on right now.
Syria, for instance, is a constitutional republic that guaranteed freedom of religion back in 1973.
The Iraq War and the subsequent funding of Syrian rebels back in 2011 has directly contributed to the destruction of Syria.
LikeLike
True. But it is part of the lense many commenters on this blog see this conflict trough. You can see that on the other threads that discussed the issue. That’s why I brought it up.
But now it is as much the reaction to the turmoil as it is the cause of it.
I doubt it very much.
LikeLike
@Kartoffel
We appear to be skirting around a few issues, so I’ll just go straight to the heart of it.
Personally I’m not interested in proclaiming that the West is evil or that the White Man is sick.
I differ with Abagond and a lot of other people on this point.
I am much more interested in seeing how actors on the international scene go about furthering their interests.
The West has made a lot of mistakes but otherwise, they have been quite successful in destabilising nations that might oppose their interests.
And maintaining the presence of nations that might benefit their interests.
Obviously, Arab states have also made mistakes.
But they have also been trying to fight back.
Unfortunately, they have largely been unsuccessful so far.
Personally, I don’t think religion plays a major role. Religion is often exploited by the powerful to justify their actions.
As Europeans did during the crusades and ISIS is doing now.
It doesn’t really matter whether the religion is Islam or Christianity.
In other words, Islam has very little to do with the situation the Middle East now finds itself in.
The Middle East is of huge geopolitical significance due to its oil reserves.
Any Western military leader would be foolish to let the Middle East develop into an independent powerful entity.
For an entity as powerful and as reliant on oil as the West currently is, I would be surprised if the West was not continuously trying to destablilise the Middle East.
LikeLike
Religion in itself probably not. But ideology and identity do.
One might argue that the contemporary problems are the price the West has to pay for the victory over the communists. But that seems hardly relevant, unless you are talking to the “why-do-they-hate-us” crowd.
I think if you interpret Islamism only s a reaction to Western interference, you overlook the opressive nature of this ideology. If the anti-Western movement in the islamic world would solely be dedicated to fight Western influence (like the left-wing governments in South America), I would have no problem with them.
LikeLike
@Kartoffel
I think perhaps we are coming at it from different angles. I am referring more to the power play in international relations.
Naturally if you are referring to Islamist extremists such as those who committed the attacks in Paris, I am not at all excusing that.
European-born Muslims who hold French citizenship and decide to attack other French citizens are idiots.
The end goal is to remove the shackles of Western Imperialism.
A much better strategy to adopt is to study hard and acquire wealth in the West.
And then use that wealth and knowledge to help rebuild the home country.
Terrorist attacks achieve little.
If anything, they are detrimental.
When David Cameron tried to get the UK to attack Syria in 2013, he was defeated in the House of Commons.
After the Paris attacks, public mood turned in his favour and the attacks were authorised.
In effect, Syria is now being bombed by the UK because of those idiots who committed the attacks in Paris.
LikeLike
How many American movies do we see a woman wearing a head and neck wrap while wearing black shades as well? To cover up a domestic beating or to disguise themselves. It’s funny to think that people that do this will also get harassed.
LikeLike
@somali prince
I know that power play features strongly in your thought, but I think to not account for issues of identity and ideology is reducionist. Power play is an important aspect, no doubt, but alone it cannot explain international politics.
Terrorism achieves nothing? Depends on what your end game is. If you want to deepen the devide between muslims and non-muslims, it works pretty well.
LikeLike
If the college is fundamentalist die hard evangelicals they will not be tolerant of her actions and she will probably lose her job.
LikeLike
@Abagond, you appear to be making a consequentialist based (utilitarian) argument. I’m not making that sort of argument. Mine is much more based in deontological ethics. I’m judging actions not by their impact but by the motives of the actor. If I punch someone in the head to steal their property and they DON’T slip and hit their head and die I’m not a better person than if they DO hit their head and die.
The Arab invasions of North Africa, the Middle East, Spain, France, the Muslim invasions of Central and South Asia, the Turkish invasions of Italy, Eastern and Central Europe, and the attempted Muslim invasion of Ethiopia were all morally wrong things to do. You can read sources at the time to see that the people being invaded, killed, enslaved, subdued, raped or forced into the service of the conquering armies weren’t exactly happy about it.
If you don’t believe that conquest is part of human nature then you must also judge that just as Athens and Rome were sick societies then so were the Ottoman Turks and initial Arab caliphate. I am judging colonialism and invasion to be wrong, no matter who is doing it and no matter if the effects are horrific (as they were in North America) or relatively mild (as some would argue that they were in Spain-although the Spanish didn’t think they were mild and undertook a 700 year (!) project to throw the invaders out).
Whether someone ruled better or not isn’t the point. Every invader says that. Some white revanchists say that about Zimbabwe. The point is whether the ruler had legitimacy or not. And invading someone else’s country and forcing them to believe as you do at the point of a sword is wrong no matter if the invader is Timerlane or Charlemagne.
LikeLike
In thinking about this what if the Ottoman empire was Christian instead of Muslim ? Would the empire still have perused conquest ? I would think so because that’s what emoires do. Militarily occupy other countries to get access to resources. Even though religion can play a part in the expansion of Empire the primary motivation I would think would be the economic domination of an area.
LikeLike
@Shady Grady
While your points about invasion, colonialism and legitimacy have merit, e.g. “…invading someone else’s country and forcing them to believe as you do at the point of a sword is wrong….”; to me, they present a black and white, absolutist view of human affairs. My view of human affairs is quite different. Even within negative events there can be shades of gray. I also believe that is true of positive events.
We are in agreement that at points in the past, some Muslims used violence to spread Islam. Where we seem to disagree is about their tolerance of those communities that refused to submit to their religion, even at the point of the sword. The Muslim armies of conversion seemed to have a sense of boundaries and limits, even when they invaded other people’s lands. As a rule, they did not opt for genocide against resistant communities, such as Christians, Jews and Roma. That does not justify their invasion, it merely shows they understood those shades of gray that rule human affairs.
In fact, members of the three Abrahamic faiths lived in harmony for centuries in Muslim dominated areas of North Africa (The Maghreb and The Horn of Africa) and Western Asia. They often lived next door to one another—–peacefully. That is in stark contrast to the behavior of the Teutonic Knights who “converted” the people of what is now Poland with the threat of violence and plunder. That is also in stark contrast to the English, French, Germans, Russians and Spanish who vigorously persecuted Jews, Roma and any non-believers of the Christian faith.
When those same European groups invaded Africa, Asia, Australia and the Americas they carried their black and white, “we’ll take it all and kill you if you don’t like it” mentality with them. The result was genocide, enslavement and massive plunder. The European Christians were not content to invade, tax and limit rights in those “new lands”. Total erasure was their goal.
LikeLike
@Afrofem,
I agree that the Islamic World, when compared to Christian Europe historically, was certainly more tolerant of religious minorities. But they were also notorious for their numerous slave trades. And while these slave trades weren’t as horrific as the Transatlantic Slave Trade, they were still pretty bad. Much worse than the sort of indentured servitude I’ve noticed a lot of people try to downgrade it too.
LikeLike
@ Afrofem
You will find both Muslim and Christian empires engaging in the full range of violent behavior. From rather benign overlordship to forced conversion to genocide.
Jews were allowed to live in Europe unbothered for long periods of time. Until they weren’t. Just as Christiansand Jews in the Muslim World they were always vulnerable and never equal.I would hrldy consider that harmony.
LikeLike
@ Shady Grady
Damn right consequences matter. White people hide behind their “intentions” all the time. It is a dodge. They also like to conflate genocide and conquest. Another dodge. You are doing both.
Genocide is WAY worse than conquest and proceeds from a much sicker mindset. You keep trying to equate them with your “just as stained” rhetoric. That is not just wrong, it is dangerous. It helps to make another genocide more likely:
You are doing #6:
See also:
LikeLike
@Benjamin
Discussion of the Arab slave trade (just as horrific as its European cousin) is superfluous and deflective in this thread. Abagond has an excellent post on Arab slavery here: https://abagond.wordpress.com/2013/01/23/arab-slavery/
To me, Arab and Muslim societies are human societies with all of the complexity, flaws and genius that other human societies possess.
LikeLike
@afrofem
I wasn’t trying to deflect from anything, nor was I saying that Arab or Muslim societies are worse than other ones. I was merely pointing out that while they were more tolerant to local minorities under their rule, they were also notorious slavers. So I’m not sure they were any better than the Christian West back in the initial early modern period.
LikeLike
@Kartoffel
“Jews were allowed to live in Europe unbothered for long periods of time.”
Your concept of “long periods of time” is vastly different from mine. From the English expulsion of Jews in 1290, http://www.bl.uk/learning/timeline/item103483.html
to the incredible mob violence in France and Germany against Jews blamed for the Black Death during the 1300s, http://www.jewishhistory.org/the-black-death/
to the Expulsion of Jews from Spain in the 1500s, Russian progroms in the
1800s to the Nazi Death camps in the 1900s there is hardly a century where European Jews were ‘unbothered’. They were certainly not living next door to Muslims and Christians in relative peace——for centuries.
LikeLike
To my knowledge Jews faced rarely prosecution in the Early Middle Ages. I would definitly consider that a long period of time.
I also find it a bit odd that the treatment of Christians and Jews is always presented as proof for the tolerance of the pre-modern muslim societies. Both were protected by the idea of the “people of the book”. The same tolerance was not afforded to pagans.
With that I agree. Yet you paint these societies as some sort of religious utopia. They werent. They experienced the full range of aggression to tolerance, like an other pre-modern society.
LikeLike
@Kartoffel
“…you paint these societies as some sort of religious utopia.”
Relative to Christian Europe, Muslim dominated lands were extremely tolerant.
As far as I’m concerned there are no utopias, religious or otherwise. All human societies are complex, flawed and brilliant.
LikeLike
Here’s a different perspective from Muslim women.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/12/21/as-muslim-women-we-actually-ask-you-not-to-wear-the-hijab-in-the-name-of-interfaith-solidarity/
“For us, as mainstream Muslim women, born in Egypt and India, the spectacle at the mosque was a painful reminder of the well-financed effort by conservative Muslims to dominate modern Muslim societies. This modern-day movement spreads an ideology of political Islam, called “Islamism,” enlisting well-intentioned interfaith do-gooders and the media into promoting the idea that “hijab” is a virtual “sixth pillar” of Islam, after the traditional “five pillars” of the shahada (or proclamation of faith), prayer, fasting, charity and pilgrimage.”
LikeLike
@ Afrofem
Another point that speaks against your idea of religious harmony in islamic societies is, that tolerance was not afforded to muslim dissenters.
LikeLike
@ Benjamin (way up there somewhere ^^)
Did you see the story today about Muslims protecting Christians in Kenya?
LikeLike
@Kartoffel
There is precious little tolerance of dissenters in any faith.
From 1517, when Martin Luther critiqued the corruption of the Catholic Church to well into the 1800s, European Christians literally went to war of over questions of doctrine and practice. http://www.biography.com/people/martin-luther-9389283#excommunication
LikeLike
So? I never said that the medieval and early modern European societies were more tolerant than their muslim counterparts. You described those as religiously harmonic which they devinitely weren’t.
LikeLike
@Uglyblackjohn
Yes, I did! I actually thought of this thread when I was reading about it.
LikeLike
Abagond, some white people also make consequentialist arguments about the benefits of enslavement for the New World descendants of the enslaved or talk about how much materially better off South Africa and Zimbabwe were under white rule. Presumably you would reject those arguments, as most people do. Consequences are meaningless from a moral standpoint. What’s important is doing the right thing.
I haven’t equated genocide and conquest. What I have stated is that trying to excuse one group of conquerors while coming down hard on another is morally wrong and hypocritical. What I have pointed out is that there have been Muslim conquerors who practiced genocide. This evil all starts from the idea that it’s okay to invade someone else’s land, kill them, rape the women and steal their stuff. That’s the idea that humans need to get rid of.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Kartoffel
You can continue to argue fine points until Mount Everest slides into the Marianas Trench, but I’ve made my points.
I hope you enjoy a great holiday season and a healthy New Year!
LikeLike
Wheaton is moving forward on firing her. At a news conference on Wednesday Hawkins said:
She says one reason they give for firing her is “her unqualified assertion of religious solidarity with Muslims and Jews” and that Muslims and Christians worship the same god.
More:
http://newsone.com/3319789/wheaton-professor-responds-to-schools-plans-to-fire-her-over-muslim-support/
LikeLike
@ Shady Grady
The 9/11 hijackers thought they were doing the right thing. Sure, they killed nearly 3,000 defenceless people, but morally speaking that does not matter – according to you.
You did conflate them with your “just as stained” rhetoric and, by the end of this paragraph, you are at it again by blaming genocide on conquest.
LikeLike
@ Abagond: It more than likely Larycia Hawkins will probably lose her job. She was naive to think she could support Muslims in a fundamentalist institution. Evangelical Christians are not tolerant of the teachings of Islam it is conflicting. The only way the college would have been okay with Hawkins being among the Muslims is if she were trying to convert them to Christianity. Other than that Fundamentalist Christians don’t advocate mixing up spiritual beliefs like Hawkins was doing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Mary
What a shame. I am no theologian, but she seems to understand Christ better than they do. Wheaton will be the poorer for it if they fire her.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“The 9/11 hijackers thought they were doing the right thing. Sure, they killed nearly 3,000 defenceless people, but morally speaking that does not matter – according to you.”
That’s an asinine statement. Show me where I wrote that the 9-11 hijackers actions did not matter morally. You can’t do it because I didn’t write it. You can’t engage in discussion by responding to what people didn’t write.
My point is and always has been that making arguments about the relative benefits of Muslim conquest as compared to European conquest is a morally questionable undertaking. The exact same argument you would make to downplay the conquests and genocides of Muslim conquerors you would reject if that argument was made by an Afrikaner who pointed out that the standard of living of Africans in South Africa and Zimbabwe was higher under white rule.
“You did conflate them with your “just as stained” rhetoric and, by the end of this paragraph, you are at it again by blaming genocide on conquest.”
You’re all over the place. Logically I don’t see how my statement that humans would be better off if they stopped invading, murdering and raping makes anyone think that I am excusing or supporting *genocide”. Quite a reach.
LikeLike
Wheaton is already spiritually impoverished. They are too blinded by anti-Muslim bigotry to understand what “people of the book” really means. The god Jewish founder, Abraham worshipped is the same god that Christians and Muslims worship. The same god and the same book, no matter if it is called the Torah, the Bible, or the Quran.
A tenured professorship is a serious thing to lose. I hope Dr. Hawkins can find a comparable position elsewhere. I hope some other organization can see her worth, her integrity and her courage, like I do.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ Lord of Mirkwood
LikeLike
“But how does it apply in this case?”
“The Book” is respectable hence so are its people, I guess.
LikeLike
Mirkwood.
I don’t know if this is what Kiwi was getting but repsectablity politics emphasize that the ‘other’ whether it be Black, Muslim or Latino need to assimilate comfortably within white western culture.
In this case Ms. Hawkins wore a Hijab in solidarity with the Islamic community in an attempt to “normalize” the wearing of Hijab
LikeLike
The sister looks so lovely and divine in a hijab.
LikeLike
Update: Wheaton College and Dr Hawkins could not agree whether the Statement of Faith allows one to believe that Christians and Muslims worship the same god. She thinks it does, Wheaton authorities do not. So they have agreed to “part ways” in a secret agreement. Wheaton will start a scholarship in her name and, once every year, invite a Jewish or Muslim scholar to speak at Wheaton.
Wheaton College Statement of Faith:
http://www.wheaton.edu/about-wheaton/statement-of-faith-and-educational-purpose
LikeLike
read that in the light of what Volf said:
And what you get is that Wheaton does not worship the god that most Christians and Muslims worship. Which fits nicely with Frederick Douglass’s belief that many White Americans practise a fake Christianity.
LikeLike
“Which fits nicely with Frederick Douglass’s belief that many White Americans practise a fake Christianity.”
.
Fake Christianity? That’s with FAKE SPIRITUALITY, FAKE HOLINESS..
With a WHITE God & Jesus, WHITE biblical characters, WHITE hosts of heavens and a WHITE style of making a joyful/holy noise (Milquetoast music) unto the Lord. WHITE evangelism.
Did I forget something?
LikeLike
“Which fits nicely with Frederick Douglass’s belief that many White Americans practise a fake Christianity.”
.
Speaking of fake…
Another FOURTH of YOU-LIE quickly approaches.
Are you going to write a NEW (updated) post about that, Abagond?
LikeLike
@ Fan
Good idea. It deserves a proper post, not the quick little thing I wrote.
LikeLike