The Internet Monk
"Read.Think.React.Write.Live."
A Webjournal edited by Michael Spencer
If You Can't Say Something Nice, Talk About Islam
Let's all try and learn to not sound like blithering idiots, shall we?
by Michael Spencer
In
a previous issue of this journal, I took on the Reverend Jerry Vines
following his tirade about Mohammed's interest in having sex with
children. I will admit that, at the time, I regarded the Reverend Vines
matter as somewhat of a fluke. Part of the continuing Southern Baptist
effort to keep the public perception of evangelical Christians right up
there with phone solicitors and IRS agents. Little did I know that
Brother Vines was just the advance party of a vast invading army of
people who can't say anything about Islam without sounding like the
Crusades are about to recommence after the halftime show.
I am not a scholar of Islam. I've known a few Muslims, but none were particularly serious. I have read more than most people, and I pay attention when most other people are on their cel phones. My opinions about Islam come from my teaching vocation, and from my own consideration of what is going on in the world.
For the record, if I had the opportunity to throw the switch, push the button or shoot at close range any of the 9-11 gang or those who bankrolled them, I would do it in a second and sleep soundly at night. Such barbarians have forfeited the right to live on this planet with the rest of us. Good-bye and good riddance. I am for invading Iraq tonight, and if Syria, Saudi Arabia or Iran don't like it, then just get in line.
I will confess to being perplexed as to why so many people talk about all of Islam when they mean to talk about terrorists or Islamic fundamentalist nut cases. There is a difference, and you don't have to be a PhD in Arabic to notice it. I know that most terrorists are some kind of Muslims, but I also know that by most any standard you want to use, they are bad Muslims, extreme fringe Muslims, listening to other bad Muslims say what it means to be a Muslim. The Aryan Brotherhood and the KKK claim to be Christians, but if someone described the lynching of a black man by such racists as "an action that points out the inherent problems in Christianity," I would comfort myself that such comments prove the speaker to be ignorant.
What we have currently is an interesting stand-off between four sides of a conversation. Side one is the President of the United States, who has made it plain that he separates Islam and terrorism. He has continually said Islam is a religion of peace, which has caused many people who voted for him to say things fairly identical to what most Democrats were saying in the year 2000. He has often visited mosques, hosted a Ramadan celebrations and welcomed many Muslim leaders to the White House. Unless one is oblivious to world political reality, it doesn't take much thought to understand the value and importance of what he is doing on the world stage.
This has brought out the ire of the second group, made up of various self-appointed spokespersons for the conservative Christian community. Prominent among these is Pat Robertson, who has read the Koran twice and is very alarmed. It is safe to say that Mr. Robertson will not be traveling to any Muslim countries in the near future, and he probably is not comfortable with a Pakistani dentist. Robertson represents a large group of conservative evangelical Christians who are talking in terms of a religious war between Christianity and Islam. They are publishing, preaching and prophesying about the dangers of Islam as a religion.
The third group is primarily American intellectuals, academics and some media elites, who, in a startling departure from liberal protocol, have decided that Islam is a religion that ought to be appreciated, praised and exonerated at every opportunity. Perhaps this is a knee-jerk siding with the underdog, or a discovery that it is easier to portray America as the cause of all the world's problems if they side with Islam. Whatever the motive, their generosity does not extend as far as commending the President for his stand, but you can't expect everything to be served up perfect.
The fourth group in our conversation is the Islamic lobby in our own country. These Muslims keep saying they are not terrorists, but they do not support Israel, so that makes them terrorists in the minds of most conservatives. These Muslim spokespersons sound pretty upset when they say thousands of Muslims are being harassed and harmed in a scape-goating reaction to 9-11. It's hard to listen to these people right now, for obvious reasons. They sometimes have frightening sympathies for the very people we are fighting, yet they claim to be on our side. It's confusing, at least to me.
The conversation we are listening to is about Islam. It is, in many ways, a fearful conversation to listen to because virtually everyone in the conversation is an outsider of some kind. Most of the people in the first three sides of the conversation had no real experience with Islam prior to 9-11. Many couldn't have passed a high school quiz about Islam. Yet, as often happens in conversations of this type, things have gotten very loud, the same things are being repeated over and over, and no one is listening to learn. Most everyone is offended and most everyone has at least one other agenda going. This ain't easy.
After listening to this conversation, I would like to say a few things, both to the conversationalists and to the increasingly misled public. I particularly hope that my Christian brothers and sisters will pay attention, because we are doing very, very poorly in this exercise. Here goes.
First, let's ask ourselves what would happen if the President of the United States decided to talk like Jerry Vines or Pat Robertson. "My fellow 'mercans, I've asked for time to speak to you from the Oval office to let every American know that Islam is a violent and terrible religion that wants to kill all Jews and Christians. We are at war with Islam. Pure and simple. I've been reading the Koran and I've discovered that Mohammed was a pedophile and demon possessed. I leave the decision on what to do about this in your hands. Good night."
When Jerry Falwell called Mohammed a terrorist, there were dozens of deaths and hundreds of injuries. When some reporter said Mohammed should pick a wife from the Miss World pageant in Nigeria, it was a near apocalypse. So could we give the leader of the free world a break on this one? You may not agree with his analysis of Islam, but in the interest of a little less violence in the world, let's give him a pass. He believes this is the best way to turn mainstream Islam against the terrorists. Talk softly- or in this case tolerantly- and carry a big stick.
Of course, group number two is annoyed that the President has told them to be quiet. More precisely, Colin Powell, theologian in chief at the White House, was assigned to go bite the barking dog, and it only made the dog bark louder. This also is politics. But, it might behoove the right wing to listen to what they are saying, even if they disagree. So let us turn to the conservative Christian corner for a moment.
My friends, you sound like fools. Robertson and Falwell sound like they are writing an installment of Left Behind XXII. They sound like the people Tom Daschle thinks listen to Rush. They sound like freshmen in a world religions class who did bad research on the internet.
The problem with these people is their sheer ignorance. Ignorance of Muslim history, culture, accomplishments and complexity. To these clowns, Muslim history is Mohammed and 9-11. That's all. It is a bit more complex than that. There is a reason Bin Laden has a following and it's not because Mohammed carried a sword or had arranged marriages with children. In fact, talking about Mohammed just makes no sense in the context of the current situation. Talking about Mohammed is going to the one thing all Muslims respect and reverence, and trying to tie that one thing to the worst behavior of fringe lunatics. It smears all Muslims in the process. It puts all Muslims on the same side of the fence defending their religion and it sounds like we are attacking all Muslims. It is out of this matrix that Bin Laden and company can say that the West is seeking to destroy Islam.
Islam is a religion with a founder who advocated and practiced violence. It is a religion that defended itself with swords and attacked its enemies. It is a religion fixated on justice more than on co-existence. Islam is a religion that has inherent contradictions and tensions, but the fact is that for most of Muslim history and in the lives of most Muslims, those contradictions have been resolved peacefully. It is the secular Arab states that have failed to bring Muslims the civilization and freedoms they want. The Arab socialist states have failed and left millions of Muslims in poverty and despair. It is in that political failure that the false hopes of radical Islam are now prospering. To act as if radical Islam grows naturally out of the Muslim worldview is simply not the lesson of history.
What is most distressing about the conservative Christian rhetoric is the almost obsessive focus on an inevitable religious war, and it is a kind of rhetoric that will carry many ignorant Christians to a completely wrong opinion of the Muslims they see and know. The conservative fixation of an apocalyptic end-times scenario and its unconditional, uncritical support of Israel are further icing on this bitter cake.
Ignorant, radicalized Muslims have demonstrated that they can violently oppose Christianity as a threat to their vision of a Muslim world, but this is not the case in mainstream Islam, and it has very little to do with the relations of Christians and Muslims in America. While Christians should loudly object to the murder of Christians by Muslims terrorists or persecution by Muslim states, we must also say loudly that we are not in a war with Islam, and that Christians have no intentions of starting or propagating a war with Islam or peaceful Muslims. Believe me, radical Islamists will say the opposite so many times and in so many ways that our message may never get across, but that makes it doubly important that Christian leaders be clear and compassionate, not ignorant and provocative.
So, let's get to the bottom line. What should we say when we hear that Islam is a religion of peace? Here's my response: 1) For most Muslims, that is absolutely the case. 2) For some Muslims, Islam has provided a justification for terrible violence. 3) It doesn't matter what Christians say. What matters is what Muslims say to their fellow Muslims about Islam.
A few words now about group number three, the academic elite who have found it nearly impossible to criticize Islam. The most distressing development here is the growing unity of condemnation for Israel that is coming from the college and university campuses. Of course, how can anyone expect moral clarity from a community that has declared war on all sane morality for the last century? Ravi Zacharias has said that the academic community poses a more real threat to our culture than Muslim terrorism because of its undermining of all moral values and distinctions. It is predictable that these people would find a way to justify suicide bombings.
I suspect that the academic community has several agendas, from the decent to the innane. First, I think there is a general perception that Israel is a conservative cause, and has become a bully. That's reason enough to support the radicals. Second, the Palestinian cause has much to commend it- apart from Arafat's gangsterism. The academics are good liberals, and their particular brand of Big Brother compassion matches the plight of the Palestinian people, while the conservatives find it difficult to separate Arafat's abuses, the radical's terrorist tactics, and the deplorable condition of the Palestinian people. Conservatives want to see Democratic reform. Liberals want to see a victim and an oppressor.
Some of the academic efforts to foster a more informed appreciation of Islam are well founded. But putting Israel in the role of Nazi and Arafat in the role of victim is a ludicrously confused approach. As someone has said, the simple solution here is enough mutual respect and trust so that "live and let live" can finally gain more supporters than "live while the other fellow dies." We need fewer campus rallies denouncing Israel and more appreciation for the MORAL dilemma on both sides.
Finally, what can we say to group number four, the Muslim lobbies in America?
This group must face the fact that Muslim brotherhood and support of all other Muslims has to have some limits when people are involved in terrorism. Suicide bombers are not to be looked at sympathetically, no matter how much they use the language and symbols of Islam, or how much some of their grievances are legitimate. Next, realize that your religion is not impervious to being twisted. Christians have to say this all the time. You can, too. And don't take the route of becoming just another victim group. That is the path that the liberal establishment on the campuses would like you to follow. Whining faxes and angry press conferences. Jesse Jackson as your model. Don't go there. It doesn't work and it is beneath the dignity of your religion. Also, remember that terrorism is not a problem solver. It never has been in this situation. Without terrorism, things would be much better for your brothers and sisters. Please say that.
Perhaps most importantly, you are Americans and you can't abandon this when your community is going through a tough time in this country. There is no excusing or overlooking the backlash since 9-11, but you will have to admit, in the big picture of things, it has been rather mild. America has demonstrated its greatness even as it has had to come to grips with this tragedy, and when some of its citizens act far beneath our vision of greatness, this country is still the best place for a Muslim to find freedom, prosperity and practice a protected faith. Is it too much to ask that you keep these things in balance, and not portray all of America as your enemy? Don't be the caricature that so many ignorant voices are portraying.
There are some voices in this conversation that are being ignored to our peril. They are the voices of ordinary Christians and Muslims who live and work together in peace. For every story of a pastor preaching ignorance and bigotry towards Arabs, there are hundreds of examples of good and decent Christians and Muslims who continue to do the right thing. For every example of religiously inspired violence in America, there are thousands of examples of religiously inspired cooperation and good will. Those people- ordinary Americans- need to be heard more clearly.
Our missionaries need to be heard more clearly. Christians have a commission to take the Gospel to Muslims, and there are hundreds of Christians who are living out the Gospel in Muslim settings. These are the people whose lives and words are most in contrast to the ignorance and provocation of a Pat Robertson. These are people who say that they love Muslims for Christ's sake. Like the husband of the missionary recently killed in Lebanon, they are staying with the task of loving Muslims even at the risk of suffering and death. We need to hear those voices much more often. Their refusal to speak with the same shrill ignorance as Robertson and Falwell should prick our consciences.
The other voice is the voice of the Holy Spirit, speaking in scripture and in experience. What does the Holy Spirit say to us about the Muslims we know? About Muslims who hate Christians? About Muslims who do not know Jesus? There is no Spirit-inspired bigotry or hatred. There is no Spirit-inspired war with Islam. Would Jesus have lived and taught and spoken differently in a Muslim nation than in Galilee? If Jesus lives in his people today, how will we know?