Churches and National Flags

On Memorial Day weekend this year, I attended a United Methodist church service, in a church sporting the American flag to the left (from the congregation’s perspective) of the altar, and just behind the pulpit. Although that was the norm where I grew up, I was startled to see the flag in that church. Imagine my surprise when the choir sang their anthem, “America, The Beautiful.” And what happened next? The offertory was – you guessed it – our National Anthem, “The Star Spangled Banner.” Worshippers stood to sing, and to salute the flag.

Why was I offended by a practice that, as a child, I accepted without thinking? Perhaps I was made uncomfortable by the mixed message: Whom do you serve?

“The display of a national flag can be intended to convey [one of] several distinct messages:

1. The person flying this flag is acting under the authority of the sovereign the flag represents.

2. The place where this flag is flying is under the authority/sovereignty of X.

3. The person flying this flag owes allegiance or obedience to the sovereign the flag represents. Its display is an expression of loyalty or submission.

4. The person flying the flag wants to show respect, hospitality, genealogical connection, linguistic facility, etc., etc., having to do with the country the flag represents.“[1]

The interesting and important distinction here is: “under the authority” of a sovereign vs. “owes allegiance or obedience” to the sovereign, vs. “show respect” to the country.

“In the United States, people tend to gravitate to messages 3 and 4. In other words, an American Baptist congregation that puts the stars and stripes inside the church is not asserting the government's temporal power over the church but expressing the allegiance that the members of the church as U.S. citizens owe to the country.”[2]

Perhaps I am simply over-reacting to the presence of the American flag (or its image) seemingly everywhere I turn. It’s found in lapels, and on car bumpers and truck windows. Still, it feels to me the flag in that church says that church owes allegiance and obedience to the President. But Christians also claim to owe their allegiance first and foremost to God alone. We’re warned (Matthew 6:24 and Luke 16:13) against trying to serve two masters.

When Muslim leaders in Australia called for support to fly the Australian flag outside (not even inside) mosques in that country, as a symbol of loyalty and commitment to their nation, some Muslims labeled the idea as “politicizing a place of worship.”[3]

The Jewish Reconstructionist Congregation in Evanston, Ill., took down its Israeli and U.S. flags about five years ago in response to a congregant’s petition to the synagogue board. “He said they were political symbols, and the sanctuary is sacred space,” Rabbi Brant Rosen recalls.[4]

I wonder. Would Jesus have stood and sung our National Anthem with us that Memorial Day morning? I think he was clear about which master he served, as were Moses and Mohammed.

---

[1] See http://flagspot.net/flags/rel.html#sanct. Written by Joe McMillan. Retrieved 5 June 2008

[2] Ibid.

[3] http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21239882-601,00.html

[4] http://www.jewishsf.com/content/2-0-/module/displaystory/story_id/32512/edition_id/604/format/html/displaystory.html

Modest Dress

I recently attended a family funeral in central Wisconsin. Both Amish and “English” (the word used by Amish to refer to non-Amish) members of the community attended. We could easily identify who was who – Amish men in beards, hats, dark suits with suspenders; and Amish women in dark long dresses, with long sleeves and caps covering their hair. We also saw Amish women working at their farms and walking to church services. They were cloaked with their heads covered and their hair pinned up. No other conclusion could be drawn than that these women were dressed “modestly.” The Amish men were also dressing modestly. As a practice they retain the dress code of the time of their founding.

I was reminded of how we can identify ourselves today – Orthodox Jewish men with their black suits, hats, beards; and Muslim women with their hijab or head scarves. Dressing as a kind of identity is old as in this example from Iran: “Fadwa El Guindi, in her book on the history of hijab, locates the origin of the Persian custom in ancient Mesopotamia, where respectable women veiled, and servants and prostitutes were forbidden to do so.” [2]

When I was growing up, Roman Catholic Nuns who taught at nearby Catholic schools, or nursed at the city’s Catholic hospital, wore “modest clothing.” Their habits were long and black; their hair was covered. We could see only their hands and their faces – the rest of them was clothing. What was “religious uniform” to me back then was really Christian women dressing modestly, according to their beliefs.[3]

Like the Nuns, the Amish women and men I met or saw in Wisconsin also trace their heritage to the Roman church, but the Amish come from the Mennonite Anabaptist tradition.

“The Amish are a Christian religious group who originated in Switzerland around 1525. They were known as Swiss Anabaptists . . . The Swiss Anabaptists were persecuted because of their refusal to follow the Swiss Church requirements on baptism. In 1690, some Anabaptists broke away from the Swiss Anabaptist Church, which are now the Mennonite. The group that broke away was lead by Jacob Amman. The Amish migrated to North America in the 1700s because William Penn was promoting religious tolerance.”[4]

Although Christian, the Amish look, live, and dress very differently from most of the rest of us Christians. They appear more different from us than do some our Muslim and Jewish sisters and brothers.

Dressing modestly has changed over time, not for the Amish, but certainly for most of the rest of us. Cole Porter[5] wrote, “In olden days a glimpse of stocking was looked on as something shocking but now, God knows, anything goes.” Nuns seen now in the USA often do not wear the black habits common in my youth. Many modern Mennonite women no longer wear the dark, long-sleeved and long-skirted clothing of earlier generations.

Similarly, Muslim women dress according to local norms as they try to meet the Qur’an’s requirements for modest dress. “It goes by many names -- hijab, niqab, abaaya, burqa, chador. It can be anything from a simple scarf draped around the face and neck to a shawl...”[6] For example, for Persians, hijab becomes chador, a full-length semi-circle of fabric open down the front, which is thrown over the head and held closed in front. Traditionally, light colors and prints have been used, but now in Iran, black is a favored color.

It’s not just culture or religious authority either. Some women are just choosing to dress more conservatively.

"It's not only Muslim women who are making attempts to be modest when they go out . . . There's also a contingency of Christian women and Jewish women and others who just don't feel that they need to show their bodies. Other women are striving to be modest as well." [7]

---

[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.

[2] El-Guindi, Fadwa, Veil: Modesty, Privacy, and Resistance, Berg, 1999. Cited at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chador

[3] For example, see 1 Corinthians 11:5

[4] http://ezinearticles.com/index.php?The-Amish---A-Step-Back-in-Time&id=1127006

[5] from his song, “Anything Goes” for the show of the same name, first produced on Broadway in 1934

[6] http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20011028muslimwomennat3p3.asp

[7] http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/04/0427_060424_muslim_sports_2.html

Be Not Afraid

During the Easter sermon this year, it was pointed out that, when Mary Magdalene and the other Mary (perhaps the mother of James)[2] approached the tomb to anoint the body of Jesus, they found not the body but a heavenly presence, the “Lord’s angel.” That angel admonished them, “Do not be afraid.” The women were “frightened.” When they encountered Jesus, He too said, “Don’t be afraid.” (Matt. 28:5-10)

When the angel Gabriel first spoke to Mary about Jesus’ birth, he said, “You are truly blessed....Do not be afraid.” (Luke 1:30) When the angels announced to Joseph that he should marry Mary, who was pregnant, they said, “Do not be afraid to take Mary...” (Matt 1:20) We can understand how that marriage could have frightened Joseph. When the angels announced the birth of Jesus to the shepherds, they said to the shepherds, “Do not be afraid.” (Luke 2:10) In fact, Luke tells how Gabriel also visited Zechariah to announce that Elizabeth, his barren wife, would have a son, John (the Baptist). In Luke 1:13, Gabriel begins, “Do not be afraid.” In verse 19, he says, “I was sent to tell you this good news.”

This all got me to thinking about fear, about being afraid and what it might mean in the Gospel context of receiving good news. Do not be afraid of what? Angels? Good news (which might not seem so good at the time)? Perhaps it just means, “do not be afraid” of the unexplained, the unexpected bright light, the “presence.”

But how about being afraid of God? Many citations in the Qur’an admonish us to fear God, and those admonitions often point to the consequences of disobeying the commandments. Many places in the Old Testament also advise us to fear God. Psalm 33:8, for example, tells us to “Fear the Lord everywhere,” or “Let all the earth fear the Lord.” The warning to be fearful is widespread in the Psalms. Yet, my Contemporary English Version says, “Everyone in this world should worship and honor the Lord!” Does “worship and honor” equate to “fear?”

Robert Darr,[3] who was raised a Christian, writes of his experiences in Northern Afghanistan when he was doing relief work during the war between Soviet Union and the Afghan rebels. He has studied Christianity and Islam, and the Sufi way, and he says that “Religious people usually are afraid of their God. They fear punishment from God.”[4]

Perhaps “Do not be afraid” was needed when most people were (are?) fearful of God. Yet Jesus taught us to love God and to love your neighbor. Moreover, the Torah tells us 36 times to love (not fear) the strangers among us as well as our neighbors. The Qur’an requires that we care for ”our kin, for orphans, for the needy, for the wayfarer, for those who ask, and for the ransom of slaves” out of love of God. (2:177). According to Darr, the Sufi poet Rumi became, “a teacher of love . . . he treated everyone the same...”[5]

Christians are taught that “God is love.” (1 John 4:8 & 16) Can we/Should we fear the God of Jesus, the God he might have called “Abba?” Or “Yahweh,” a vengeful and jealous God “I am a jealous God...” (Exodus 20:5) Yahweh punished whole races of people. For example, He caused the floods. (Genesis 6:7) How can we simultaneously NOT fear such a God? Or are we really talking about fearing one God and loving another?

The Sufi way points inward, to God who dwells within each of us and is always with us. Closer to us than we can accept sometimes, perhaps especially when we feel far away from God. So, is it that we should we fear the God which is outside us, and removed from us, and greater than we are? Can we love the God within us? I’m thinking we should not be afraid to love as God (by whatever name) has commanded; AND we should not be afraid of receiving God’s good news, even if unexpected or unexplained. But we should be afraid of God and the consequences if we don’t love, and if we don’t receive and act on His good news.

---

[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.

[2] The Gospel of Mark includes Salome here; and Luke mentions Joanna and “some other women.”

[3] Darr, Robert, SPY OF THE HEART. Louisville, KY, Fons Vitae, 2006

[4] Darr, page 51

[5] Darr, page 98

Golden Calves

I awoke this morning thinking about the golden calf story. Moses had been leading the Israelites through the desert, back to the holy mountain. The Israelites had agreed to the covenant with YHWH (“...all that YHWH has spoken we will do...”, Exodus 19:8). Shortly thereafter, Moses received the commandments on stone tablets, “written by the hand of God,” and brought them to the people, only to find them worshipping a golden calf they had made.

God was furious! The Israelites had received the commandment to worship God alone, and have no other gods “before Him.” “Have no other gods” was important enough that Torah (the first five books of the Hebrew Bible) repeats it several times. For example, Exodus 34:14: “You are not to bow down to any other god! For YHWH – Jealous-One is His name, a jealous God is He....”

The Israelites were not the only ones to have received that commandment. The Qur’an is filled with such admonitions. Here are three:

“Allah! There is no god but He, (and no one deserves to be worshipped except Him);” (4:87) and, “Do not take with Allah any other god for worship...And your Lord has commanded you to worship none but Him.” (17:22,23) Also, “”God will not forgive idolatry. He will forgive whom He will all other sins. He that serves other gods besides God has strayed far indeed.” (4:116)

We who were raised in the Christian tradition know well Jesus’ answer when he was asked which is the most important commandment:

“Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.” (Mark 12:29, 30. See also Deuteronomy 6:4,5)

These words begin the Shema, the morning and evening prayer of many Jews (Deuteronomy 6:4-9). The one-ness of God, and the commandment to worship only God, when taken together with the prohibition against having other gods, leaves pretty much no doubt for any believer in any of the Abrahamic faiths.

What other gods? There is the golden calf, of course, built perhaps because Moses had been too long away from the Israelites. Perhaps the people were just following their leaders. Read Deuteronomy 13 about what to do with people who say, “Let us follow other Gods and let us worship them.”

We often make claims about what we believe, and believe IN. And then we act in totally differently ways. It’s as though we’re following other gods, seeming to love our (fill in what’s most important to you right now) more than God. Others’ golden calves (bigger houses, newer cars, higher position, “truer” faith) are easy to point out. Our own are harder to see, but they are real. We could do much worse than to recognize our calves as the “other gods” they are, and move them back to their proper places. That can be our major step toward loving our God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength. With Moses’ help, God, although furious, forgave the Israelites. (Exodus 32: 11-14) It’s just that we don’t have Moses to argue on our behalf!

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.

[2] http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/progressive, retrieved 4 Feb. 2008

[3] http://www.tcpc.org/about/8points.cfm, retrieved 3 Feb. 2008

[4] http://www.muslimwakeup.com/main/archives/2005/04/what_is_progres_1.php, retrieved 4 Feb. 2008

[5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberation_Theology, retrieved 4 Feb. 2008

[6] http://www.muslimwakeup.com/main/archives/2007/11/american_islami.php#more, retrieved 8 Feb. 2008

[7] ibid.

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.

[2] http://ric-childrenofabraham.blogspot.com/

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

[4] from http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/248166/jewish/Jewish-Fundamentalism.htm , retrieved 8 Jan 2008

[5] http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=20040216&s=hirst

[6] from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_fundamentalism, retrieved 8 Jan 2008

[7] Op. cit.

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.

[2] http://www.religioustolerance.org/reac_ter9.htm, retrieved 4 December 2007

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

[4],Ibid., p.4