Monday, February 11, 2008

Progressive Islam

We’ve been saying in recent columns that fundamentalists fear that modernity will erode or even eradicate their faith and morality. Perhaps the opposite of “fundamentalist” is “progressive.” What is meant by “progressive?” One on-line dictionary gives 12 definitions, the first being, “favoring or advocating progress, change, improvement, or reform, as opposed to wishing to maintain things as they are, especially in political matters.”[2]

I’ve been following the development of the progressive kind of Christianity. Progressive Christians believe they are improving or reforming the traditional faith -- they live by a particular understanding of their faith. The Center for Progressive Christianity, for example, publishes 8 principles by which they define themselves. [3] One of the eight points says that they “know that the way we behave toward one another and toward other people is the fullest expression of what [they] believe.”

Are there “progressive” groups in Islam? Yes. According to Omid Safi[4], “Progressive Islam encompasses a number of themes: striving to realize a just and pluralistic society through a critical engagement with Islam, a relentless pursuit of social justice, an emphasis on gender equality as a foundation of human rights, and a vision of religious and ethnic pluralism.” Moreover, he suggests that, while liberal Islam might be interested in intellectual considerations and visions of beauty and peace, progressive Islam requires action, a “willingness to remain engaged with the issues of social justice as they unfold on the ground level, in the lived realities of Muslim and non-Muslim communities.”[5]

Here’s an example of someone I would call a progressive Muslim. A recent convert to Islam, American Melissa Robinson writes, “The Islam I have embraced is one that protects the rights of women, is tolerant of multiculturalism, promotes peace among mankind, and encourages spiritual enlightenment through religious practice, critical thinking, and the quest for knowledge. The Islam I practice is egalitarian and just and is not a religion of blind followers, but of conscientious believers . . . I have committed to developing a community . . . that will encourage studying, discussion, and diversity of thought [and] promote cooperation between faith groups and charitable organizations.” [6]

Melissa and her friend Kelly have established the "American Islamic Fellowship" in Georgia. “Through studying, critical analysis, and thoughtful interpretation, we attempt to make educated and conscious decisions concerning tradition. We . . . hope to demonstrate the progressive tenets of Islam through tolerance, education, equality, and the democratic process. We aim to focus our efforts on studying the similarities between various groups rather than focusing on the differences. “[7]

In earlier columns, I’ve mentioned several writers on Islam who have taken a “progressive” view of their faith. Here are three, and I hope you’ll find time in the coming days to read some them for yourself, and think about how these authors’ writings might parallel (or differ from) your own views.

El Fadl, Khaled Abou, ed., THE PLACE OF TOLERANCE IN ISLAM, a collection of eleven essays on the topic. Boston: Beacon Press, 2002

Manji, Irshad, THE TROUBLE WITH ISLAM: A Muslim’s Call for Reform in Her Faith. New York, St. Martin’s Press, 2003

Nasr, Seyyed Hossein, THE HEART OF ISLAM: Enduring Values for Humanity. HarperSanFrancisco, 2002.

[1]This is one of a series of occasional columns in which the author, raised in the Christian tradition, searches for common ground and common history among the teachings, beliefs and practices of adherents of the Abrahamic faiths -- Islam, Christianity and Judaism.

[7] ibid.

Posted by at 2 comments:

Monday, January 28, 2008

FUNDAMENTALISM IN JUDAISM

Last time, we said, “The term “fundamentalism” often is used to

"characterize embattled forms of spirituality, which have merged as a response to a perceived crisis" - namely the fear that modernity will erode or even eradicate their faith and morality. . . [or] identify the most conservative wing of a religion. . . ,as a general-purpose "snarl" word to denigrate a religious group, implying that they are intolerant or prone to violence.”[2]

Rabbi Aron Moss[3] redefines fundamentalism for Judaism. He says, “A fundamentalist is someone who believes that theirs is the only true path, and anyone who does not follow their ways is evil. The fundamentalist sees only two options for the rest of humanity - join us or suffer the consequences. . . It is when you cannot accept that there may be another road to truth, that not everyone has to fit in to your own world view - that is when you have strayed into the realm of fundamentalism. . . Judaism can never tolerate fundamentalism. Quite simply, we don't believe that Judaism is for everyone. Jewish thought is comfortable with the belief that there are many paths to G-d; Judaism is the path for Jews, and non-Jews can find Him in different ways.” [4] But, Moss says, “A fundamentalist is not the same as an extremist.”

In his article, “Pursuing the Millennium,” David Hirst[5] asserts a different view, that Jewish fundamentalists in Israel, especially the settlers in the disputed lands taken in the 1967 war, are extremists. Although a minority within the nation, they have considerable influence within the government, and especially with the conservative leaders within the government. Hirst writes of a theoretical Jewish state which, if run by Jewish fundamentalists, would be governed by Jewish religious law. He describes religious police as enforcers of the laws, penalties (including stoning) for violations, etc. His article tries to tell us how frightened we should be of the Jewish extremists, the Zionists, whom he aligns with the fundamentalists.

And we should be concerned. Remember when in 1994 the Jewish gunman killed 29 worshippers in the mosque in Hebron? Remember when in 1995 the Jew assassinated Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin? Both killers seem to have been influenced by fundamentalist beliefs. Still: Believing in religious fundamentals is quite different from acting in an extreme and violent way.

Wikipedia, the on-line encyclopedia, uses the term “fundamentalist” to define groups “characterized by a sense of embattled alienation in the midst of the surrounding culture.” This definition resembles Karen Armstrong’s perspective. Also, fundamentalists hold that their religious texts are “infallible and historically accurate . . . Orthodox Judaism is characterized by a fervent belief in the divine origin of the Torah (i.e., that the five books of Moses were literally given by God to Moses). Most Orthodox rabbis describe the Torah as literally being one long quote from God himself.” [6] Well, maybe not all Orthodox Jews hold this belief. Moreover, most people within Reform Judaism and Conservative Judaism more likely believe that the Rabinical interpretations (Talmud) – perhaps divinely inspired but not divinely given – are critical to their understanding and applying the laws of the Torah.

Rabbi Moss asks us all – fundamentalist or not, Jew or not - for tolerance and acceptance. He says, “Judaism poses a challenge to the fundamentalist: If you really love G-d so much, shouldn't you also love all His children, who are created in His image?”[7] Now, what was it that Jesus taught?


[1]This is one of a series of occasional columns in which the author, raised in the Christian tradition, searches for common ground and common history among the teachings, beliefs and practices of adherents of the Abrahamic faiths -- Islam, Christianity and Judaism.

[3] Rabbi Aron Moss teaches Kabbalah, Talmud and practical Judaism in Sydney, Australia.

[7] Op. cit.

Posted by at No comments:

Tuesday, January 1, 2008

Fundamentalism

We often read in our newspapers, or see reports on our televisions, of religious “fundamentalists” doing some or another awful thing. What does “fundamentalist” mean in today’s common usage?

“One of the most controversial religious terms in North America is "fundamentalist." Within academic circles, the term is generally used in a precise manner. For example, Author Karen Armstrong defines fundamentalist movements as "embattled forms of spirituality, which have merged as a response to a perceived crisis" - namely the fear that modernity will erode or even eradicate their faith and morality. That concern is shared by Fundamentalist Christians, Jews, and Muslims, Sikhs, and others. Within Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and other faiths, the media generally use the term to refer to the most conservative wing of the religion. For example, fundamentalist Christianity is often described as the most conservative wing of Evangelicalism. However, sometimes the term is used as a general-purpose "snarl" word which is intended to denigrate a religious group, implying that they are intolerant or prone to violence.”[2]

Fundamentalists believe that “...the words of the holy book of their religion are the exact truth and are not open to different interpretations.” They are quite strict about just what must be believed. For example, according to the 12 pamphlets issued as the “Fundamentals of the Faith” between 1915 and 1920, all Christians must believe in (1) the infallibility of the Bible; (2) the sinfulness of humanity; (3) the virgin birth of Jesus; and (4) salvation through Jesus’ death.[3]

According to the same source, [4] the term “fundamentalism” was invented in 1920 by Curtis Lee Lewis, an American preacher. He was describing the “anti-modern” movement of the American Protestants during the late 1800s. Christian fundamentalism, an American phenomenon, may have begun with the so-called First Great Awakening (1730 to 1780, approximately), which stressed how humans could not achieve salvation without God’s intervention. The Second Great Awakening in the early 1800’s centered on the “born again” option of achieving salvation through the acceptance of Jesus as a personal savior. The “millennium” movement (mid-1800’s) focused on the second coming of Christ, which would be followed by 1,000 years of peace.

As Karen Armstrong asserts, these movements may have been reactions to perceived threats to the church. America was changing – modernity was advancing. As the Industrial Revolution proceeded in this country, Protestantism lost traction. Population centers changed from small rural areas (which had often centered on churches) to larger cities, places with less focus on a church. Moreover, America welcomed more and more immigrants who brought their religions with them, and these were often not the protestant faiths of the founders, but more likely Roman Catholic and Orthodox religions, and Judaism, and Islam.

During the 1950’s, Christian fundamentalism strengthened in reaction to “Godless communism.” About the same time, evangelical Christians, led by Billy Graham, began to oppose some of the social consciousness movements of the 1960’s: the anti-war movement, the women’s movement; gender equity; and liberalizing views of homosexuality. Evangelicals worked with non-protestant conservatives under the rubric of “family values.” As it evolved, this larger group of evangelicals and conservatives spoke out in favor of lower taxes, more defense spending and less support for welfare. By the late 1970’s, Jerry Falwell’s “Moral Majority” was encouraging conservatives of all kinds to join together. They helped elect a conservative government in 1980, but they were soon replaced by the Christian Coalition, whose leader, Pat Robertson, lost a bid for the Presidency.

Christians aren’t the only ones. Next time, we’ll explore a bit about Judaism’s and Islam’s fundamentalists.


[1]This is one of a series of occasional columns in which the author, raised in the Christian tradition, searches for common ground and common history among the teachings, beliefs and practices of adherents of the Abrahamic faiths -- Islam, Christianity and Judaism.

[3] Woolf, Alex, FUNDAMENTALISM. Chicago, IL: Raintree 2004, p. 5

[4],Ibid., p.4

Posted by at 1 comment:

Thursday, December 13, 2007

May Peace Be Upon You

A few years ago, I participated in a seminar entitled, “Everyday Speech in Service of Peace.”[1] The speakers, a Jew, a Muslim, and a Christian, addressed how their traditions teach us to speak and listen in ways that help further peace within ourselves, our families and communities, and in the world. The seminar taught us the powerful lesson, that both what we say AND how we say it can make us and those around us feel more peaceful. We really can create peace among people, as well as within ourselves.

“Are there two kinds of peace?” Is internal peace different from peace in the world, or peace between people? One Orthodox Christian view maintains, “The peace of the gospel is internal, a state of serenity and inner stillness, which reigns in the soul of the faithful man, of the man that has friendship and communion with God in Christ Jesus. It is peace between men and God and not among men themselves.”[2]

Perhaps that’s true. I believe internal peace proceeds from acting peaceably toward others, and vice versa. That feeling of peace can leave me as soon as my feelings are hurt, or I’m deprived of something I desire, or I see forces arrayed against me that I cannot overcome. At any of those times, saying something peaceful to someone else - wishing peace for them - helps me regain that internal feeling.

In my experience, we American Christians seldom greet one another by wishing the other(s) peace. Not that we’re without feelings for others – we usually say “hello” and ask how they are. When we leave we wish them to “have a good day,” or a good bye. People of other cultures often greet one another differently, usually wishing them peace before inquiring about their conditions.

Our Jewish friends often greet one another saying Shalom Aleichem, a Hebrew phrase meaning “may peace be upon you.” The response returns the greeting: Aleichem Shalom. Just the word, Shalom, is often used as a closing in written correspondence. Moreover, a traditional song to mark the beginning of Shabbat (the Jewish Sabbath) translates in part as, “Peace be upon you, ministering angels... Come in peace... Bless me in peace... Depart in peace...”[3]

Muslims use a similar greeting from the Arabic , As-Salāmu `Alaykum, with the same meaning. And this greeting is used in the Middle East by both Muslims and Christians – it seems to have a cultural as well as a religious basis. However, the Qur’an reports the angels’ greetings to the faithful in Paradise:

And angels shall enter unto them from every gate (saying) Salaamun ‘Alaykum (peace be upon you) for you persevered in patience! Excellent indeed is the final home!’— (Ar-Ra'ad 13:23-24)[4]

Nowadays, Christians often find, within their worship services, a time to greet one another, offering the peace of Christ. One pastor sees passing the peace as “a kind of a blessing or prayer. Though speaking to a person, we're really asking God to bless that person with the peace that passes understanding.”[5] It need not be only within a church service context either.

During this Christmas season, try greeting friends with a word of peace, or shalom, or salaam. Speaking a word of peace, a blessing, might be your first step toward achieving peace within yourself, and creating peace among those around you. May peace be upon you.


[1] This is one of a series of occasional columns in which the author, raised in the Christian tradition, searches for common ground and common history among the teachings, beliefs and practices of adherents of the Abrahamic faiths -- Islam, Christianity and Judaism.

Posted by at 1 comment:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)