Wednesday, December 12, 2012

PEACE AND GOOD WILL



We're entering the Christmas season, the time when we'll be hearing and offering wishes for "Peace on earth" and good will toward all people -- Christians, Jews, Muslims, and many others. The cards we send one another will convey those messages, and the hymns we sing will also include those words. Even the gift tags on those packages under the tree will often repeat them.

I send you wishes of peace and good will. To them, I add this advice from Mahatma Ghandi: "You must be the change you want to see in the world."

I think Ghandi meant that we must "walk the talk." Once we put the two ideas together, we find we've made a formidable challenge for ourselves: If I wish for peace on earth, how must I "be" to advance that cause? If I wish you good will, how must I act that toward you and all people? How would you do it? Isn't this what Jesus did?

And this is not just about peace with our nearest friends. It's about all the people in the world. If we want to see "peace on earth," peace in the whole world, how must we behave? What must we do? For some of us (like me, I confess), the question is also, "What must we not do?"

Much of what we do in our day-to-day lives we do competitively. We try for the best parking place, the best office location, the best seats in the sanctuary... The rub comes when we lose these little competitions -- how do we treat the winners? Do we respond peacefully, with good will, and showing respect? Or do we respond angrily, or aggressively?

Scale it up. We lose the "perfect" job to another candidate, or worse, we lose the job we've had for a while. Or, we lose a spouse or significant other to another person. Or, we lose our home to the bad economy.... Do we react to the loss peacefully? Do we react with good will toward those whom we blame for the loss?

Bigger still. We lose a child, or a friend, or a fellow citizen, or many fellow citizens in a war or a far-away attack. Do we/Can we react peacefully, with good will? Or do we make war instead?

Jesus taught about this dilemma in Matthew 5 (and 6 and 7): "Blessed are the peacemakers...Blessed are the merciful...Everyone who is angry with [someone] shall be liable to judgment..." Clearly, it is desired that we be makers of peace, purveyors of mercy, free of anger.

But if we look at some of our (my) usual behaviors, we find that we're not really making peace but confrontation, and unhappiness. We're not showing mercy but perhaps contempt. And we might often be angry. In other words, we're not being "blessed."

And I'm including here our behaviors as we support or oppose public policies by our involvement in the public discourse; and as we support or avoid certain companies and industries by our investments in them and purchases from them. Are these behaviors of ours also bringing peace and good will to the world, or are they bringing something else?

So if we really mean what we say in those wishes for peace and good will, let's each try to change our individual and societal behaviors to be that way -- peaceful, and merciful, and of good will toward all people. Merry Christmas now and all year long!

INVESTING FOR GOOD

I've just read Amy Domini's book, SOCIALLY RESONSIBLE INVESTING: Making a Difference and Making Money. (Chicago: Dearborn Trade, 2001) As I understand it, investing in a socially responsible way means earning an acceptable return on our money, without hurting other people or damaging our environment.

Within the faith-based world, socially responsible investing (SRI) dates back more than 200 years, with Quaker immigrants arguing against investing in war and the Methodists managing their money using what is known in modern investment lingo as “social screens.”" Sure enough, Domini begins her discussion of the history of SRI referring to John Wesley's 50th sermon, "The Use of Money," based in Luke 16:9. My Methodist friends frequently remind me of one part of that sermon: "Gain all you can, save all you can, and give all you can." 

But I hadn't heard from them about the limits Wesley placed on how to make those gains. Wesley said:

"We cannot, if we love everyone as ourselves, hurt anyone in his substance. We cannot devour the increase of his lands, and perhaps the lands and houses themselves, by gaming, by overgrown [sic] bills ... or by requiring or taking such interest as even the laws of our country forbid. We cannot, consistent with brotherly love, sell our goods below the market price; we cannot study to ruin our neighbour's trade, in order to advance our own; much less can we entice away or receive any of his servants or workmen whom he has need of.

"Neither may we gain by hurting our neighbour in his body. Therefore we may not sell anything which tends to impair health.

"[Nor should we can gain by] hurting our neighbour in his soul by ministering either directly or indirectly, to his unchastity, or intemperance, which certainly none can do, who has any fear of God, or any real desire of pleasing Him. You can read the entire sermon here.

In Islam, similar principles apply, allowing only ethical investing, and moral purchasing. For example, "Investing in businesses that provide goods or services considered contrary to Islamic principles is ... sinful and prohibited." These are not acceptable: Transactions exclude those involving alcohol, pork, gambling, etc. or businesses that produce media such as gossip columns or pornography. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_banking#Islamic_equity_funds.

About gambling: Shariah law prohibits contracts which depend on uncertain future events or other speculative transactions. Both concepts involve excessive risk and are supposed to foster uncertainty and fraudulent behavior. One of the world's leading experts on Islamic finance, Sheikh Hussain Hassan, argues the whole crisis in Western banking could have been avoided if these basic sharia principles had been followed. He said: "$600 trillion were wasted on options, futures and derivatives, all gambling. Sharia prohibited these kind of risks 14 centuries back."

"Within the Jewish community," writes Tamar Snyder, "many investors are re-examining their investment portfolios with an eye toward not only financial gains but also social impact." Snyder reminds us that, "One of every $9 under professional financial management in the United States is involved now in socially responsible investing — investments that take into consideration not just the financial but also the social and environmental consequences of investments."

I urge us all to review our investments, to assure that they reflect the faith we profess. I believe we can earn fair returns on our capital while protecting our neighbors (world-wide), developing our communities, and caring for our environments.

Monday, July 16, 2012

More About GENEROSITY and KINDNESS



Last time, I asked, "How should we behave toward our fellow human beings who are less fortunate than we?" I want to explore a related question this month. How do we become "ethical"? Where do we learn ethical behavior? Who or what teaches us respect for the other person?

The Abrahamic traditions benefit from a long and rich history of values development. Most of us recognize the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20, and Deuteronomy 5) given to Moses as a main basis for how we should relate to God and to one another.

I have a long-standing interest in the substance of the book of Proverbs, because it represents (for me) the distillation of our common sense about how our behaviors affect our lives and those around us. I remember hearing bits of the Book of Proverbs quoted in my home when I was growing up. Perhaps you do too. So I credit that Book as one source of my own training toward "right behavior."

Part of the "Books of Truth" section of the Hebrew Bible, Proverbs provides a basis for the education of young Jews. Its influence reaches more broadly, too, as it forms part of the basis of the values of Christianity and Islam. This is where we can find much good advice about how to behave with others. For example, Proverbs 1:10 says, "My son, if sinful men entice you, do not give in to them." The succeeding verses talk about ambushing someone, and taking his material possessions. Murder and theft are prohibited in the Ten Commandments, and the prohibition is reinforced here.

The Qur'an teaches the same lesson. In 5:105, we read, "Believers, guard your own souls. The person who has gone astray cannot hurt you if you are rightly guided." In both these teachings, we're warned to avoid following the lure of others whose behaviors do not reflect the scriptures' instructions.

Our Abrahamic traditions also teach justice -- fair treatment of others. For example, the Qur'an teaches that we should deal justly with all other people, regardless of how we feel about them. At 5:8, we read, "Do not allow your hatred for other men to turn you away from justice. Deal justly; that is nearer to true piety." And at 4:135, we see that Muslims are instructed to seek justice even when it goes against themselves or those they love: "Stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to Allah, even as against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin, and whether it be (against) rich or poor..."

Perhaps one of the most straight-forward instructions to act justly tells us to love our neighbors as ourselves. Christians accept Jesus' teaching of the "greatest commandment" in Matthew 22:36-40 as the most fundamental statement of what it means to act like a Christian.

Proverbs 11:24-25 teaches us how to love our neighbors, saying that generosity toward others will be a reward in itself: "One man gives freely, yet gains even more; another withholds unduly, but comes to poverty. A generous man will prosper; he who refreshes others will himself be refreshed." And the Qur'an emphasizes that point too, at 2:177: "The righteous man is he who ... gives away his wealth to his kinsfolk, to orphans, to the helpless, to the traveler in need and to beggars, and for the redemption of captives..."

Generosity, justice, and adhering to your sense of what's right -- these lessons are taught in all of our holy scriptures. It's up to us to learn our lessons, and to act accordingly.

Sunday, July 1, 2012

GENEROSITY and KINDNESS



How should we behave toward our fellow human beings who are less fortunate than we? In particular, what do we learn from our religious traditions about being generous to the poorer people in our communities? I have italicized a few of the words below, to emphasize them.

Some of our early teachings are found in the Torah, for example, in Deuteronomy 15:7-8, 10: "If anyone is poor among your fellow Israelites in any of the towns of the land the Lord your God is giving you, do not be hardhearted or tightfisted toward them. Rather, be openhanded and freely lend them whatever they need. . . Give generously to them and do so without a grudging heart; then because of this the Lord your God will bless you in all your work and in everything you put your hand to." (HOLY BIBLE, New International Version)

Proverbs 19:17: "He who is kind to the poor lends to the LORD, and he will reward him for what he has done." (HOLY BIBLE, New International Version)

In Acts 20:35, Paul teaches us, "You yourselves know that these hands of mine have supplied my own needs and the needs of my companions. In everything I did, I showed you that by this kind of hard work we must help the weak, remembering the words the Lord Jesus himself said: ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’ ” (HOLY BIBLE, New International Version)

Qur'an 2:267-272: "Believers, give in alms of the wealth you have lawfully earned; not worthless things which you yourselves would but reluctantly accept. . . To give alms in public is good, but to give alms to the poor in private is better . . . Whatever alms you give shall rebound to your own advantage, provided you give them for the love of God. And whatever alms you give shall be paid back to you in full: you shall not be wronged." (NOBLE QUR'AN, translated by N.J. Dawood)

To whom should we give? The poor. Jesus told the rich young man to sell all of his possessions and give the proceeds to the poor. (Matthew 19:16-30, Luke 18:18-30, Mark 10:17-31) And how should we give? Qur'an 76:8-9: ". . . [servants of God], though they hold it dear, give sustenance to the poor man, the orphan, and the captive, saying, 'We feed you for God's sake only; we seek of you neither recompense nor thanks.' " (NOBLE QUR'AN, translated by N.J. Dawood)

From Deuteronomy 15:11, "There will always be poor people in the land. Therefore I command you to be openhanded toward your fellow Israelites who are poor and needy in your land." (HOLY BIBLE, New International Version)

And from the Qur'an 4:36-37: "Be kind to parents, and the near kinsman, and to orphans, and to the needy, and to the neighbor who is of kin, and to the neighbor who is a stranger, and to the companion at your side, and to the traveler, and to [slaves] that your right hands own. Surely God loves not the proud and boastful such as are niggardly, and bid other men to be niggardly, and themselves conceal the bounty that God has given them." (NOBLE QUR'AN, translated by N.J. Dawood)

All of these Abrahamic scriptures teach us to give, cheerfully, to the poor, from our abundance; and God will bless us for sharing and giving.

Sunday, June 3, 2012

"LIBERAL VALUES AND INSTITUTIONS"

A friend recently told me about the book, SOULS IN TRANSITION, in which the authors, Christian Smith and Patricia Snell, suggest that students today are less skeptical about religion than in the past, but also less interested: “Liberal Protestantism’s core values –individualism, pluralism, emancipation, tolerance, free critical inquiry, and the authority of human experience—have come to so permeate broader American culture, that its own churches as organizations have difficulty surviving.”

Do those students -- less skeptical and less interested in religion -- represent the larger population? Are we all becoming less invested in those religious institutions? The decline in interest in the organizations seems real enough. "The United Methodist Church’s U.S. membership has continued to shrink, ... membership decline tracks with that of other mainline denominations since 1966." (http://churchexecutive.com/archives/umc-membership-reaches-12-million-worldwide) Similarly, "According to this year’s National Rabbinic Survey, declining involvement in Jewish activities was cited as the most pressing issue." (For more on this, see http://www.jewishpost.com/culture/Synaplex-A-Creative-Response-to-a-Decline-in-Synagogue-Identification.html) I think reformed Judaism in America shares liberal Protestantism’s values.

 Decline in membership among the mainline (liberal) churches implies that people spend less of their time, money, and energy on those religion-centered activities -- going to church (mosque/synagogue) or going on missions; supporting the church/mosque/synagogue's programs with their time and money; attending religion-affiliated schools and colleges; etc. Such decreases certainly threaten the continued strength of those institutions.

If liberal values are responsible for the declines of mainline Protestant church membership and involvement in Jewish activities in America, can those liberal organizations survive? How? Must they resort to preaching less tolerance and pluralism? Squelch free inquiry? In short, be less liberal?

Imagine what we'd have if our churches and synagogues did that. How would it be in our communities if our fellow citizens rejected pluralism, accepting only traditions exactly like theirs/ours? How would it be if we couldn't explore other beliefs, or try out new ways of worship, or allow different kinds of people into their/our church hierarchies? In fact, we do have some of those conditions now, here. People of one faith want to destroy the written holy scriptures of another faith, or deny them the ability to build their worship and service buildings in certain places, or refuse membership or leadership positions based on gender or gender-orientation. Some faiths claim that their ways are the only right ones; other ways are wrong, or worse.

Total church membership may not be declining. According to the WASHINGTON TIMES newspaper (http://www.washingtontimes.com/weblogs/belief-blog/2010/feb/12/latest-church-growth-stats-in/), overall membership among the largest 25 denominations in the USA rose by about one half of one percent from 2009 to 2010. Also, the number of new mosques in the country is increasing very rapidly.

What does this all mean for the broader American culture if liberal Protestant and Jewish institutions decline and the remaining (presumably less liberal) ones grow? Who will teach those liberal values? Ultimately, will "liberal Protestantism’s" core values be lost?

Tuesday, May 8, 2012

“FOREIGN”

I saw this sign on an airport wall recently: THE WORD "FOREIGN" IS LOSING ITS MEANING. The sign advertized the latest long list of cities outside the USA to which this particular airline flies.

What does "foreign" mean in our global environment? An on-line dictionary gives twelve definitions. Did that airport sign mean to convey that the word "foreign" is losing all its twelve meanings? Let's consider just two of the definitions: "strange or unfamiliar," and "of another country or nation."

My granddaughter studied in Europe as an undergraduate student. After graduation, she lived in Korea, and now she plans to spend this summer in Europe again. She lived in places which, at first, she found "strange or unfamiliar," but to which she soon acclimated. That is, those places lost their strangeness and became familiar to her. It's as Nicole Frehsee reminds us in "Twain Tracks," published in Hemispheres Magazine, March 2012, page 23: Mark Twain wrote that, "travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness."

Our world often gives us mixed messages. Unlike the airline's encouraging sign on the wall, traditional religious teachings may discourage "getting to know them." In the Old Testament (called by some the "Hebrew Bible" or "Jewish Bible") we find many references to "foreigners." For example, in the Torah, where many commandments are found, we read in Genesis 17, "Every male throughout your generations, whether born in your house or bought with your money from any foreigner who is not of your offspring, ... shall surely be circumcised." Could it be that foreign males might be changed from foreigners to people "like us" by the ritual of circumcision?

In still another example, the last two chapters of Ezra report how that prophet dealt with the great sin of "not [keeping] themselves separate from the neighboring peoples...We have been unfaithful to our God by marrying foreign women from the peoples around us." It seems that God had commanded the Israelites not to "give your daughters in marriage to their sons or take their daughters for your sons."

In Luke 10: 33-37, Jesus, a Jew, tells the well-known parable of the Good Samaritan, a member of the minority, someone who might have been considered a "foreigner" to the majority of Israelites. In fact, Jesus referred to Samaritans as foreigners (Luke 17:18). In Matthew 10: 5-6, Jesus sends out the 12 disciples saying, "Go nowhere among the Gentiles and enter no town of the Samaritans, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." He seems to be saying, "Avoid those foreigners."

But in Genesis 23, Abraham negotiates with foreigners to buy a burial plot for Sarah. As a result, that place became less foreign for him and his family. The book of Ruth tells us how she, as a foreigner, earns acceptance and becomes part of King David's lineage.

As my granddaughter has done, both Abraham and Ruth got past the "strange and unfamiliar." It is true for me and for others I've known, and maybe for you too: As we come in contact with foreign people, practices, customs, beliefs and worship traditions previously unfamiliar to us, they feel no longer so strange or different, but increasingly comfortable. We come to "know" them. In that sense, the word "foreign" really can lose that part of its meaning. So maybe the airline with its sign, and Mark Twain, are right: Going there and meeting those who are strange, unfamiliar, or from another nation or country, can reduce our prejudice and narrow-mindedness.

Wednesday, April 4, 2012

VALUES SEEM TO SEPARATE US MORE THAN BELIEFS

Over the past 10 years, I've been writing about similarities and common ground among the several Abrahamic faiths. During that time, I've come to the conclusion that we are more divided by our values than by our specific beliefs. What do I mean by that? For example, I don't see much difference in the way liberal or progressive believers act about inclusion (e.g., including others as "acceptable" in our systems of tolerance). More conservative believers tend to exclude others. It seems there's a spectrum, with the most liberal on one end, and the most conservative on the other.

And it seems that, the closer one is to one end of the spectrum, the more likely that one is to call names. Here's an example: In 1995, after the Republican takeover of the House of Representatives, a local Baptist preacher, the Rev. Dr. Amos C. Brown, pastor of the Third Baptist Church in San Francisco, said, "...[Jerry Falwell], Pat Robertson and their colleagues in the Christian Coalition have worked mightily to prostitute Christianity, putting the religion of Jesus Christ into the service of the conservative politics of the Republican Party, in the process abusing prayer for political gain." (See Brown, Amos "Christianity and Rightist Politics." SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE, May 3, 1995, p. A-19. See http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/1995/05/03/ED2259.DTL, retrieved 2 March 2012) Brown makes no bones about calling the Christian Coalition an organization which uses Christianity to further its own goals. He has no use for their approach to Christianity.

Here's another example of the spectrum. The Taliban in Afghanistan try to enforce very conservative rules on women - how to dress, where they may go (with male escorts) and not go , what educational opportunities they might be allowed, and what work they might do. (Others, like Greg Mortenson, have challenged the Taliban's positions about women's education by building schools for young women and men in Afghanistan and Pakistan. I would call his actions "progressive" and others might refer to him and his actions as "liberal.")

At the liberal end of the spectrum, an American Muslim woman has founded the Islamic Networks Group (ING) which works to "...counter prejudice and discrimination against American Muslims by teaching about their traditions and contributions in the context of America’s history and cultural diversity..." The need for their work is highlighted by the recent controversy over the building of a mosque in New York City, and by the planned Qur'an burning by a Florida pastor. Both those who resisted that building, and those who supported the burning, represent a more conservative, less tolerant perspective. See the two ends of the spectrum?

Muslims for Progressive Values (MPV), are "an inclusive community rooted in the traditional Qur’anic ideals of human dignity and social justice." (See http://www.mpvusa.org/) This group addresses, among other issues, "human rights, freedom of expression, and separation of church and state — as well as inclusive and tolerant understandings of Islam." Their statement of concerns could easily reflect concerns of, for example, The Center for Progressive Christianity (See http://www.tcpc.org). It's not that Islam and Christianity are the same, but it's true that Progressives in both faith traditions share the same or similar concerns. The web page for the World Union for Progressive Judaism (See http://wupj.org) says that it "is rooted in the Bible, [and stresses] ... desire to learn what God expects from us: justice and equality, democracy and peace, personal fulfillment and collective obligations." See the similarities? Social justice, not social control, is a common goal of these progressives.

Sunday, March 4, 2012

“EXTREMISTS EVERYWHERE? MAYBE MODERATES TOO?”

I've been troubled for a long time by the seemingly overwhelming number of religious extremists in the world. And I've ranted for years about the media's too-frequent connection of the words "Muslim" and "extremist" in their reporting of events in the Middle East. Seldom do they seem to report about Muslims without connecting to extremism somehow.

Well, here's a change for the better. On Christmas Day 2011, the SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE reported on Muslim families who celebrate Christmas. In his article, "Muslims Who Celebrate Christmas" (San Francisco CHRONICLE, December 25, 2011, p. C9) author, Raja Abdulrahim, tells of several families who view Christmas as a "happy time," or a "fun holiday," or a way to celebrate the "magic of Christmas." These people are taking a moderate view of the differences between their faith and the majority's religious traditions. They are seeking to assimilate, or to be good neighbors. They resonate to the message of "peace on earth and good will to all." Because they can maintain their religious beliefs, they don't feel the "imposition" of non-Muslim ways on them. (We must remember too that Jesus is an important Prophet in Islam.)

But the author reminds us that "Most clerics, however, will argue that followers of Islam should not participate in the Christian holiday." This is certainly a more conservative (but not extreme) point of view.

More troubling are reports in the same newspaper of "...growing extremism inside Israel's insular ultra-Orthodox community." Author Aron Heller uses the terms "religious extremists" and "Extremist sects" in his reports. (See "Protest's Use of Nazi Images Condemned" in the San Francisco CHRONICLE, January 2, 2012, p. A2.) It's clear, in this Associated Press article, that the media can and does use this term to describe groups of believers in faith traditions other than Islam.

Heller characterizes the concern caused by these "extremists" this way: "...[Ultra-Orthodox Jews] have become increasingly aggressive in trying to impose their ways on others as their population has grown and spread to new areas." That's troubling for me and you (I presume) as we realize we have to face people who want to impose "their ways" on us by threatening or violent means. But that's what societies have always faced, and that is why we have armed forces to defend us.

Indeed, Heller attempts to "size" the problem by informing us that Ultra-Orthodox Jews "make up 10 percent of Israel's population." That's about 730,000 people, a large number. But Arabs in Israel number about twice that, and Jews who are not Ultra-Orthodox comprise about two thirds of the entire population. So we can see that most Israeli citizens - Jews and Arabs - are not extremists.

The CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR reports that the dialog between Christians and Jews is becoming ever more open. And dialog proceeds from a position of tolerance rather than extremism. So while extremists may threaten, and even destroy and kill others, moderates discuss and understand the points of view of others. Rather than rant, I can applaud dialog.

And I can applaud these authors' reporting which tries to inform rather than scare us.

Wednesday, January 4, 2012

“SEPARATING CHURCH/MOSQUE/SYNAGOGUE AND STATE”

I often think about how religious practices affect our lives in our secular world. For example, we're just completing the season where we have seen the conflicts over displaying religious symbols on our public property; and arguments about why we should say "Happy Holidays" to one another rather than "Happy Hanukah" or "Merry Christmas." I think we're just seeing the to-be-expected frictions among our citizens in this multi-cultural society of ours. We're still learning that there are more views of the world, and of God (Allah, G-d, etc.), than those we heard about as children. Open your daily newspaper and read about these differences of opinion, and how they can intrude on your routine.

Here's another example. Many of us eat meat, and most of us meat-eaters consume beef. I had forgotten how important, to some segments of our society, is the method of slaughtering our cattle and other livestock. We're not talking here about performances of archaic rituals, but about day-to-day operations. How do you kill the cow that I'll eat?

Observant Jews and Muslims require that their foods be Kosher or Halal, according to their specific laws. In the Netherlands, the private sector's slaughter process has changed , while still accomodating those requirements. "...changing public attitudes towards animal welfare forced a rethink" of how religious slaughter is done for the Jewish and Muslim communities.

When can you work or shop? Can stores be open on Sunday, the Christian day of rest? In my home town, back in the day, and today as well, many stores close to observe the Sabbath. Nowadays, of course, most large stores are open according to market conditions rather than according to religious considerations. In observant Jewish communities, most work must be forsaken on the Sabbath. No cooking, no driving...

But in Israel, it's daily transportation that can be affected by beliefs. Some buses are gender-segregated.

According to one Rabbi, segregated buses are not required by Jewish law. Still, some ultra-Orthodox Jews are pushing for segregation in areas of Israel where they comprise a majority. (Some of us remember when, in the USA, conservative Christians in the south believed that races must be segregated, and only 50-some years ago did Rosa Parks disobey the rule, thereby fueling the civil rights movement.)

We've just witnessed what has been called the "Arab Spring." We're now learning about the possible coming to power in Egypt of a religion-based political party. In this article , the author, Sarah El Deeb, writes, "The Nour Party, a more hard-line Islamist group, captured 24.4 percent [of the votes in the recent Parlimentary election]...Its members say laws contradicting religion can't be passed.” Meanwhile, the (relatively more moderate) Muslim Brotherhood's party has won about 36.6% of the votes. And the liberal parties, to whom credit has been given for leading the revolts, have won only around 20%.

We'll have to see how it pans out in Egypt. But suffice to say the tensions between secular and religious values and practices are likely to continue in Egypt, and as certainly in all our societies.