My Response to a Muslim Call for Common Ground (by Jim Wallis)
Christianity and Islam comprise the world's largest communities of faith - 2.1 billion Christians and 1.5 billion Muslims. If these two religious traditions cannot find ways to keep peace between themselves, the world will be in very serious trouble. As Brian McLaren posted earlier on this blog, a group of 138 Muslim scholars and clerics recently sent an open letter to Christians around the world, A Common Word Between Us and You. In it, they proposed that
Muslims and Christians together make up well over half of the world's population. Without peace and justice between these two religious communities, there can be no meaningful peace in the world. The future of the world depends on peace between Muslims and Christians.
The basis for this peace and understanding already exists. It is part of the very foundational principles of both faiths: love of the One God, and love of the neighbour. These principles are found over and over again in the sacred texts of Islam and Christianity. The Unity of God, the necessity of love for Him, and the necessity of love of the neighbour is thus the common ground between Islam and Christianity.
A group of scholars at Yale Divinity School's Center for Faith and Culture wrote a response, Loving God and Neighbor Together. To date, the response has been endorsed by almost 300 Christian theologians and leaders, and it appeared on Sunday as a full page ad in The New York Times. The response begins by acknowledging that
… we were deeply encouraged and challenged by the recent historic open letter. … We receive the open letter as a Muslim hand of conviviality and cooperation extended to Christians world-wide. In this response we extend our own Christian hand in return, so that together with all other human beings we may live in peace and justice as we seek to love God and our neighbors.
After affirming the Muslim letter's emphasis on love of God and love of neighbor as central to both faiths, the Christian response concludes
"Let this common ground" – the dual common ground of love of God and of neighbor – "be the basis of all future interfaith dialogue between us," your courageous letter urges. Indeed, in the generosity with which the letter is written you embody what you call for. We most heartily agree. Abandoning all "hatred and strife," we must engage in interfaith dialogue as those who seek each other's good, for the one God unceasingly seeks our good. Indeed, together with you we believe that we need to move beyond "a polite ecumenical dialogue between selected religious leaders" and work diligently together to reshape relations between our communities and our nations so that they genuinely reflect our common love for God and for one another. Given the deep fissures in the relations between Christians and Muslims today, the task before us is daunting. And the stakes are great. The future of the world depends on our ability as Christians and Muslims to live together in peace.
Religious communities should not resolve their differences by killing each other. We must prevent the "clash of civilizations" that some predict or even desire. Irresponsible calls to war against "Islamo-facism," even by some Christian leaders, must be countered with the spirit of the above declarations. That's why I signed this response to our Muslim counterparts and would encourage each of you to find ways to enter in to this dialogue. It's time to stop shouting and start talking. Out of that might come something even better than mere peace and dialogue - like actual interfaith collaboration in resolving some of the planet's most dangerous threats and challenges. Isn't that a better role for religion?
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Comments
This is a good begining and the first of many stones to be fitted into a foundation for understanding.
I as a Christian will do my level best to see that 'radicals' of our faith do not fly planes into buildings in countries controled by Islam. I will expose any atempt by fringe groups of my faith in their desire to bomb innocent civilians on trains, buses or Discos around the world. I will make sure that Muslims in my country are afforded the same opportunity as I to worship freely in my country. I will do whatever it takes so that Islamic people in my country are respected not only in soceity but also in our Courts of Law and Halls of Congress.
Can and will they be able to deliver the same?
Will they be able to stop or expose any terror against non-Muslims and I have said I will do for non-Christians?
Blessings -
.
Posted by: Moderatelad | November 20, 2007 3:16 PM
Moderatelad,
Let me introduce you to someone. His name is Dan Holman.
http://www.armyofgod.com/danholman.html
This fellow lives 45 minutes from my family. We have received mail from him and his wife in response to our activism on local civil rights issues.
This is the same Dan Holman who made the following statement: “Even at the threshold of death he never wavered in his belief that the unborn were entitled to the same justifiable use of force as post-born children. He has set the standard of what being pro-life should mean. There is no one, including myself, who is as true a man as Paul Hill. I hope some day to be as true a man as he is.” "
http://www.armyofgod.com/PHillMessageBoard.html
""Some day, I hope I will have the courage to be as much a man as he was," he told The New York Times. "I haven't killed anyone yet, but I believe they deserve to die," he told the Orlando Sentinel."
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/10/29/abortion.foe.ap/
Tell me, Moderatelad. Who should my family fear more: the Muslim terrorists or this Christian terrorist?
What are you doing about people like him, who share your religious faith?
Posted by: ds0490 | November 20, 2007 3:38 PM
Squeaky, you are exactly right.
Further, the extremists aren't the ones that are reaching across the table. The Muslim leaders who drafted this document probably don't have the respect of the extremists anyway. They may not even be regarded by them as "true" Muslims. Similarly, many extremist Christians probably think the Christians who have signed on in support of this Call for Common Ground are aiding and abetting the future anticrhrist and aren't true Christians. (That's what they think of the ecumenical Christian movement.)
So the extremists on both sides are irrelevant to this discussion. In fact, the entire purpose of this proposal is to help find a way to make the extremists irrelevant in fact. By engaging in mutual discussion and frienship, we demonstrate how wrong the extremists are.
Peace,
Posted by: Don | November 20, 2007 4:05 PM
Posted by: squeaky | November 20, 2007 3:36 PM
No sarcasm
I am willing to make sure that we as Christians act that way. Will they? The evening of 9-11 I was the only one in my community that went to the home of an Islamic family in my neighborhood and talked with the dad. I gave him my business card that had my work number and I wrote my cell number on the back as that is the one number that is with me 24/7. I told him that if he or his family were ever threatened, the first call is to 911 the second was to me and I would be there to stand and protect as soon as I could. Did my neighbor - the former Wellstone Aid do anything to assist this family - no. Did the couple a few houses away who have had a 'Bush is the President 'Selected' sign in their front yard since Bush took office do anything - no.
I will do whatever I can to make sure that people of other faiths have the same chance to express themselves in worship as I and my family have. Will these Islamic people and their letter do the same?
No sarcasm - just sincerity
Blessings -
.
Posted by: Moderatelad | November 20, 2007 4:06 PM
Posted by: Don | November 20, 2007 4:05 PM
Further, the extremists aren't the ones that are reaching across the table.
Granted - but people are still dying around the world because of the extramists. Until the mainline leaders of Islam can gain influence over these groups - I don't think things are going to change. Our fight against terrorism has never been with the moderates or mainline Islamists - it is with the radicals. We in the US have courts that will protect the Islamic people in the US from the radicals here. Where are the Islamic Courts putting the people on trial who beheaded Danial Pearl? Are the gov't law enforcement groups in those countries even looking for them? Do they even care that a US citizen was murdered by people abiding within the borders of their country?
I will gladly build the bridge between the two of us. But there needs to be an understanding that we have to be willing to make the world a safer place together. Bringing people and groups to justice that would murder in the name of 'God' to further an objective.
Blessings -
.
Posted by: Moderatelad | November 20, 2007 4:18 PM
ds0490 - It's your faith as well. We all need to reach out to people like that.
Posted by: Eric | November 20, 2007 4:38 PM
Also in todays Daily Digest:
"Hate crimes in the USA increased 8% in 2006, but some groups, including gays, Muslims and people with mental disabilities, experienced larger spikes in attacks."
Contrast this with Moderatelad's question: "Will they be able to stop or expose any terror against non-Muslims and [sic. I think he means 'as'] I have said I will do for non-Christians?"
Let us remove the log in our own eyes as well as demanding that Muslim's remove the log in theirs.
Put it another way: we Christians can't guarantee that we can control extremists that act under the Christian banner any more than Muslim's can guarantee control of extremists that act under the Islamic banner. Let's not spike this effort by demanding the impossible of 'them' before we are willing to put forth our own effort at peace.
Posted by: steve | November 20, 2007 4:39 PM
Posted by: ds0490 | November 20, 2007 3:38 PM
Your analogy is flawed in my estimation and really not worth response. But...I do not know of a single leader of a denomination in the Christian faith that would support or affirm that murder of someone that works in the abortion industry. Yes - there are groups out there that advocate these type of actions. But there are law enforcement agencies that will bring them to justice and our courts will put them on trial and based on the evidence - convict them.
Do you remember the news from around the world on the evening and days after 9-11? The Islamic people, mothers, fathers, etc dancing in the streets after the distruction of the WTC and Pentagone. Significant leaders in the Muslim world smiling and happy about what had been done to the US.
It a group of radical Amish had taken and driven their black buggies into buildings of gov't and commerce in a capital/major city of an Islamic country and cause the same kind of distruction. Do you think that Fawell - Kennedy and Dobson would be hi-fiving each other...no. Do you think that the clubs from New York to Los Angeles would have run out into the streets and danced up and down the Avenue in celetration...no.
I believe that you would have seen the Congress and White House burning the midnight oil to come up with a compensation package to rebuild. I think you would have seen the Atty. General on National TV promising to bring these 'radicals' to justice. We saw none of that on any station - broadcast or cable.
Blessings -
.
Posted by: Moderatelad | November 20, 2007 4:45 PM
Don and/or Squeaky,
How do you determine who is an extremist Christian? How do they compare to extremist Muslim in number and in influence?
The reason I ask is not to compare us to them but is more my concern for rights of believers here. There seems to be a need for some people to find balance. "The Muslims have their extremist we have ours." There is no comparison as Moderatlad points out. That doesn't mean we can't reach across the table to Muslims.
Jeff
Posted by: Jeff | November 20, 2007 4:46 PM
Moderatelad,
I have to agree with you, I think it is far to ask if those Muslim leaders will work to change the Muslim-dominated governments that obviously don't even attempt to protect the freedoms that the US tries to protect. Not that we always get it right, we don't, but in general I think it's fair to say we try to protect those rights in this country.
Now, our doing the things they ask shouldn't be dependent on them "holding up their end of the bargain", that should just be our response as lovers of Christ, as Moderatelad has already indicated he has done.
I also think we need to emphasize that freedom of religion includes the freedom to proselytize. I am willing to give them that freedom, I wonder if they will do the same. In some Muslin countries Christian proselytizing is punishable by death. I would never support the death penalty for a Muslim proselytizing in this country, and I think we should press for the same rights everywhere. That would include places like China which restrict proselytizing for non-religious reasons.
In His Love,
Dan
Posted by: Dan Barber | November 20, 2007 4:49 PM
Moderatelad, just one question - how do you plan on making sure that Christian terrorists don't commit the actions you describe?
As to the rest of your questions - since you do seem like a sincere seeker, let me encourage you to try to leave the shores of the US of A someday and do a little bit of travelling - you will hear stories and see things that you are hoping to see.
I grew up in a Muslim country and knew many kind and sincere Muslims. The Pashtun workers whom I knew (you know the kind who are protrayed on our news networs as frenzied fanatics) were some of the gentlest and kindest people that I've ever known. I also knew a great many thugs, who happened to be Muslim, and the lesson I learned is that thugs are thugs whatever shape or form they come in - and are especially dangerous when they wear religious disguises.
Posted by: splinterlog | November 20, 2007 4:54 PM
I want to make sure I understand the argument: "Unless the moderates make the extremists--who regard the moderates as infidels--behave, I won't support efforts to reduce the conflict between Christians and Moslems." Do I have that just about right?
Posted by: carl copas | November 20, 2007 5:26 PM
carl copas,
No, you don't have that right. No one here has said they would not support efforts to reduce the conflict between Christians and Muslims.
Jeff
Posted by: Jeff | November 20, 2007 5:39 PM
"Until the mainline leaders of Islam can gain influence over these groups - I don't think things are going to change."
Posted by: carl copas | November 20, 2007 5:54 PM
ds0490; did you read what modlad wrote? if so what are you saying? if not - read it.
don; wrong....christian leaders denounce terrorists. muslim leaders generally do not.
squeak; did you read the verse of the day today?
steve; i'm not asking for control just public denunciation by the muslim leaders of the terrorists.
splinterlog; we are asking that the muslim leaders denounce the muslim terrorists and publicly work to stop the terrorism.
carl; no you do not have that right. we are asking the muslim leaders to act like they don't like the terrorists. the conflict seems to me to be muslims against christians and anyone else they want to dominate.
Posted by: Anonymous | November 20, 2007 5:58 PM
What are you doing about people like him, who share your religious faith?
Posted by: ds0490
First I would suggest we put them in jail at first chance , keep an eye of them if they're are no laws broken . Sort of luike the Patriot Act but for them . They are cultists, that don't share my faith , and excuse me if that insults you . It is not meant to be , I am a believer in Jesus Christ ,and have a relationship with Him . He speaks to me , walks with me ,a nd no one He knows would get the directive to do this . This person you describe have been deceived .
What i would never do is subcribe to the belief of meeting the Paul Hills on common ground . There is no common ground for people like this or people who consider what he is doing is justifiable . There is much acceptance for suicidal bombers or abortion clinic bombers by people , that needs to be seen for what it is , support for murder .
Posted by: Mick sheldon | November 20, 2007 6:10 PM
the no name post was mine - sorry.
Posted by: jerry | November 20, 2007 6:14 PM
Moderatelad,
Think you're wrong on this one. My recollection is that post 9-11 that the bulk of Muslim countries did make gestures of support to the US and that many offered actual aid (not financial as you've little need of it) but intelligence aid and aid in tracking down and arresting their own Al Quaeda cells, and aid in terms of locating and seizing AlQuadea financial assets. One country that stepped up to support the US at that time was Iran. Do you remember?
Sure there were some Muslims who celebrated on the streets the attack on your nation. They received a lot of footage. There were probably non-muslims who gave a little cheer as well at the US getting their comeuppance. But do you doubt that there would be celebrations in parts of the US if Tehran was nuked?
Sure the Islamic moderates cannot control the islamic extremists. The Christian moderates cannot control the Christian extremists. What we can do together is push the extremists out of the picture, to make them irrelevant.
You also run the error of assuming that non-christians should act as christians do and that christians (and christian nations) should expect the same standards of behaviour and acountability from others. If our faith is genuine then we answer to a higher call on our own conduct and we have a higher power (the HS) by which we may live out that call.
So even with your misgivings about it's effectiveness it makes sense to support the effort that is being made. Provide the 'swinging' muslims (not yet committed as extremists or moderates) with an alternate view of the US and the west that helps them recognise the lunacy of their own lunatic fringe.
Be Blessed,
Posted by: Trent | November 20, 2007 6:30 PM
An unsigned post said "christian leaders denounce terrorists. muslim leaders generally do not."
It would probably have been more accurate to say (certainly in the UK context) that "Christian leaders are reported in the media when they denounce terrorists. Muslim leaders generally are not."
There is a bias against reporting those Muslims who reject what a young Muslim woman of my acquaintance described as "the hi-jacking of my faith by these fanatics".
There is also a bias against giving moderate Muslim opinion airtime. A recent edition of "Newsnight" (the BBC's flagship television news and current affairs programme) allocated less than 30 seconds to a prominent spokesperson for moderate Islam while allowing several minutes' airtime to the views of a representative of Al Muhajiroun (an extremist radical organisation). It seems that peace and love don't get you the ratings, alas!
Posted by: Tony Dickinson | November 20, 2007 6:35 PM
carl copas,
The quote you offer has absolutely nothing to do with your point. Again, no one here has said they would not support efforts to reduce the conflict between Christians and Muslims.
Jeff
Posted by: Jeff | November 20, 2007 6:51 PM
Moderatelad,
"I will gladly build the bridge between the two of us. But there needs to be an understanding that we have to be willing to make the world a safer place together. Bringing people and groups to justice that would murder in the name of 'God' to further an objective."
Well yeah, of course. I assume that would be part of the bridge building. You see to assume it would not.
I applaud your efforts at reaching out to Muslim neighbors. I wish you had resisted the temptation to throw stones at your Liberal neighbors who did not, however.
Have a nice Thanksgiving. I'm heading to MN tomorrow.
Cheers
Posted by: squeaky | November 20, 2007 6:57 PM
Of course, God calls human beings to peace and to the table of brotherhood (family). Insofar as possible, peace should flow from each person. I challenge my Muslim brothers and sisters to really embrace this call for unity and tolerance and speak out in countries where Christians are jailed and oppressed for their faith. I want to see a prevalence of this spirit of accord and reconciliation across the board. Let this call for accord be sung from every mosque in Saudi Arabia, while we sing it here in America. Let this call for peaceful coexistence and respect resound from The Dome of the Rock.
Even if no one except a Muslim is ever admitted into Mecca or Medina, let the world learn that the calls for peace and mutual respect are daily being resounded in those revered places.
As a Christian, I am willing and bound to honor the tenets of my faith which tell me to love all people. And like Dietrich Bonhoeffer, I reflect on the question, "Is God's love any less for my enemy, for whom God just as much came, suffered and died as God did for me?" Furthermore, I am quite unwilling to label those who are different from me as my enemy. However, I want an equitable sense of accountability and justice and vision for the future.
As Jim Wallis says, we cannot resolve our differences by killing each other. We have a duty before God to do everything possible to work for peace and justice. I am not advocating that Christians wait to see who goes first in helping to renew societies and seek solutions for our problems. I would just rather not be instructed by my Muslim brothers and sisters until I can be led by example and not rhetoric. Women are repressed and suffering in many Islamic countries, and Christians dare not show themselves. The challenge is for people of God to pray together over these issues as well as over the issues that make the front pages daily.
Posted by: Marsha Hansen | November 20, 2007 6:57 PM
Site Moderator,
Please explain to me why my post was removed. I have seen far more incendiary remarks than that persist for the entire life of the thread and are ignored. I didn't think I said anything that was worthy of removal, especially not in comparison to what others have said. A wee bit o balance would be nice, eh.
Posted by: squeaky | November 20, 2007 7:06 PM
I echo Squeaky's question--why was the post removed?
don; wrong....christian leaders denounce terrorists. muslim leaders generally do not.
I'd respect your disagreement more if you would dignify your posts with a name.
Regarding Mod'lad's comment:
I don't think it's reasonable to expect moderates to "gain control" of the radical elements within Islam, any more than it would be reasonable for moderate Christians to "gain control" of Christian fundamentalism. It's more reasonable for them to isolate them and socially ostracize them by building an Islamic society that teaches and practices that radical actions and ideologies are unacceptable. And I think that's something that this dialogue might help them do.
Peace,
Posted by: Don | November 20, 2007 7:17 PM
Don,
What is your definition of Christian Fundamentalism ?
And how and what control are you talking about ?
Posted by: Mick Sheldon | November 20, 2007 7:35 PM
In this dialog I see many references to what "they" must do in order to further peace.
Would,'t it be interesting , and obscene, had Christ demanded that a quid pro quo exist before he offer himself and that we could only set out together when we are assured that the "Other" would carry, what we consider, his obligation?
The question is NOT what "they" do, but what WE will do with this good opportunity.
Posted by: sig | November 20, 2007 8:14 PM
This exchange of open letters strikes me as a good start. It expresses our mutual belief in a single God and love for the neighbor which I find an expression of unconditional love. So, when one extends a hand in friendship it offers both the love of God and care for others with no conditions extended in sincerity.
Simply another son of Abraham
Posted by: Bod D. | November 20, 2007 9:14 PM
I'm very glad to see anyone who wants to lessen strife between people, whether the strife has to do with religion, or anything else.
But I have to confess to some pessimism, too: interreligious dialogue has been going on for at least decades (and, depending on how you look at it, possibly for millennia.) Yet we don't seem to be any closer to the "promised land," if you will, of human harmony. Islamic terrorists, Christian terrorists, violent and/or bigoted movements and philosophies of many sorts--does anybody have any ideas of what we can *do* about these things? I, for one, am tired of sitting on the sidelines watching events unfold with no idea of how to change things for the better.
Suggestions?
Conor
Posted by: Wanderer | November 20, 2007 10:51 PM
Posted by: squeaky | November 20, 2007 6:57 PM
I applaud your efforts at reaching out to Muslim neighbors. I wish you had resisted the temptation to throw stones at your Liberal neighbors who did not, however.
Throwing stones or just an observation. I just let you know how things worked out here. I miss my Wellstone neighbor very much. Even though were argued about many things - I had and still have great respect for the guy. They have moved away and our little community is poorer because of that.
Have a nice Thanksgiving. I'm heading to MN tomorrow.
Hey - get on line when you get here and maybe we can meet for coffee or an 'adult bev'. in a public place. Pleasent and safe travels as you come to the great white north. (OK - no snow yet)
Blessings -
.
Posted by: Moderatelad | November 20, 2007 11:23 PM
I don't really see a difference between Muslim Christology and the Christology of Marcus Borg, Walter Wink, and John Spong. It would be interesting to see how Muslims respond to more progressive understandings of Jesus and whether there's some basis there for dialogue.
Posted by: Ashpenaz | November 20, 2007 11:40 PM
Posted by: squeaky | November 20, 2007 7:06 PM
Site Monitor -
I can not imagine what squeaky could have said that would have made you remove it. I bet is was something about me and I am insulted that you would deprive me of her wit and wisdom.
Please put it on the blog -
(bet it was something to do with me and a turkey since it is Thanks Giving...)
Blessings -
.
Posted by: Moderatelad | November 20, 2007 11:52 PM
I'm all for building bridges of friendship with Muslims. I'm friends with a lot of diverse people. I respect the rights of others to form their own opinions. I will share mine with them - but how can you force your opinions on another human being?
Yes, all for friendship
Just as long...as I have the right to gently speak the truth in love. To respond, if Muslim friend asks me, "Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life." and "No one comes to the Father but through Me."
No morphing.
Posted by: Amazon Creek | November 21, 2007 12:34 AM
Shortly after 9-11 I happened to be interviewing Lorne Cunningham, head guy at YWAM, who indicated he was in one of the largest Muslim dominated cities in North Africa on 9-11.
I asked him what he had witnessed by way of reaction to the news. He said that scores of Muslims came up to him, asking if he was American, and said, "We are so sorry for what has happened. Those people do not represent us."
One story does not a case make, but it does help counter the image some would create that ALL or MOST Muslims were walking and leaping and praising God for what transpired that fateful day.
Posted by: canucklehead | November 21, 2007 1:16 AM
Site Moderator,
Please explain to me why my post was removed.
Squeaky
BECAUSE, Squeaker, you're going to Minnesota.
Posted by: canucklehead | November 21, 2007 1:22 AM
I have personally heard Christians (some in leadership positions) express heated opinions about the necessity of wiping man, woman and child off the map. It's often invoked as a righteous response of God's people (or the nation in which they reside) similar to the commands God was said to have given the children of Israel to commit genocide against their enemies. whether or not attacked first.
Let's not forget, in immediate memory, the Christian religious wars of Northern Ireland with all the attendant horrible terrorism.
Things have abated, but they wouldn't have if there is not a willingness to move forward - as there was not previously.
If you really desire peace you will make the effort. Now we know we're right, because we always are, but if we require that same perfection from everyone else before we try to see if we can get along with them, we will be waging a forever war that can never be won because by definition it never can cease.
Posted by: Anonymous | November 21, 2007 4:34 AM
I'm a Canadian Christian living in Egypt, where Christians make up 6-15% of the population. In this country there are isolated outbursts of violence between Muslims and Christians, (often incited by a local extremist imam); and the Churches face restrictions which Muslim worshippers don't; and there are often cases of discrimination. However, there is no wide-scale persecution. For the most part, Christians and Muslims tolerate each other, and some even have friendships that bridge the divide. Given this context, I would like to share a few comments made to me by Egyptian Christians concerning this Muslim letter.
One. In no way should it suggested that the majority of Muslims are terrorist, or hate-filled. However, historically, Muslims offer conciliatory words when they are the minority, and are much more dogmatic - only legitimizing the Muslim religion - in countries where they form the majority.
Two. The letter is certainly designed to fit the Western reader, not Christians who live in Muslim countries. In no way does it suggest that Christians in Muslim-dominated countries should be allowed full rights and protections.
Although the letter seems to accept Christianity as an alternative path to God - in reality, Muslims denounce Christians for their belief in "three Gods." This letter makes it sound as if they accept that Christians worship the same one true Allah..... Whereas, at least most of these signatories still denounce Christianity for its polytheism, and only issue a call to convert. A Muslim who converts to Christianity is - depending on the context - killed, fined, imprisonned, or isolated.
Three. They present the Qu'ran as if it's main focus is to call people to love God. In the Qu'ran, however, this word "love" is actually the word "submit" - which is the major thrust of Islam. This is not a "common word" as the letter suggests.
Nor should a Muslim live in peace with Christians, just because they "share a common ground." All of us should live in peace with those with whom we disagree.....
Four. The signatories represent a wide spectrum of beliefs within Islam. Most of them do not talk to each other. And, although the beginning of the letter seems to ask for dialogue with Christians, it doesn't actually suggest any steps towards such a dialogue. In fact, by the end of the letter, it is instead suggesting "just leave us in peace."
Five. A number of the signatories are people who in fact have recently, (the same day as the letter was published!), incited great violence against Christians in their own localities.
Six. Arab Christians, (and Christians living in other Muslim countries), wish that their brothers and sisters in the West would ask for their point of view and insight. While their experiences are not the only reality - their voices also need to be heard.
Posted by: Elaine | November 21, 2007 4:48 AM
What is your definition of Christian Fundamentalism ?
Good question. I'm not always sure myself what a Fundamentalist is. But I was specifically referring to those Christians I mentioned in my Nov 20 4:05 post above who think that Christians who would dialogue with anyone they disagree with can't be "real" Christians (and would use the fact of the dialgue as evidence that they aren't true Christians). Yes, I have talked to people who think like that, so I'm not just talking theoretically.
And how and what control are you talking about ?
Specifically, willingness to recognize that Christianity is multi-faceted and that their interpretation isn't the only valid one. I'm not any more hopeful that we could convince such people than I am that the Muslim leaders who signed this letter could stop terrorism in the name of Islam.
Elaine: thanks for your balanced perspective. While I welcome dialogue and discussion, I don't think I'm naive on this topic. It's a complicated subject and the tension between Islam and Christianity won't be resolved merely by exchanging letters. But it's a good start.
Gotta go--I'll be offline for the Thanksgiving holiday.
Have a blessed one, everyone!
Peace,
Posted by: Don | November 21, 2007 7:55 AM
Posted by: Elaine | November 21, 2007 4:48 AM
That you are a Canadian I would guess you look very 'Canadian'. Fair skined, more than likely European looking. Try being an Egyptian that is a Christian, I believe that your story would be very different. Blessings and be safe.
To all -
What is the equivalant in Christianity to the Muslim Fundamentalists/Extreamists. Let's see, wanting a simpler life, less dependance on moderan equipment, basic expression of Faith and mandated style of dress. Looks like we are talking about the Amish. But they live their lives and spread their message by living the example. Not blowing up trains, busses and buildings to send a message.
Foreign Policy in the 21st Century will be very different than in the past. The paradyme has changed as we will be dealing with gov'ts of various countries all around the world. But we will also have to learn how to deal with various groups that work outside of the box and greatly effect international affairs. We are going to learn how to deal with them directly or how to manage them by bring US and other countries together so to limit their abilities.
Have a great Thanks Giving with family and friends
Blessings -
.
Posted by: Moderatelad | November 21, 2007 8:22 AM
Elaine--Thank you very much for concisely and clearly sharing. You state, "A number of the signatories are people who in fact have recently, (the same day as the letter was published!), incited great violence against Christians in their own localities."
Jim Wallis--This is a difficulty I have with this kind of letter exchange in the New York Times (or wherever). If those signing really want to dialogue--have they no capacity to connect and dialogue? When you enter a public exchange like this which seems to have a purpose to call large numbers of persons to action/dialogue, and someone like Elaine highlights what she did above; then if you want me to take the letters seriously; then you have me trotting down this road figuring out who issued the letters and build an expectation that you have been (or are) considering the facts (or untruths) regarding what Elaine raises above.
Are you engaged in dialogue with Muslim leaders who the same day they issued the letter incited violence against Christians in their locales?? How is the dialogue going? How are the signers to these letters going to report back to the larger public you apparently hope to influence?
I appreciate that you and many other 'leaders' attempt to steward your voice/influence to engage larger number of persons in very important issues. My skeptic self doubts the integrity of such actions/calls when there is no follow-through/verification/accountability mechanisms reported--as to how the leaders are going to report back to those they are trying to mobilize to action.
For instance, saying, "We the undersigned are engaging in a series of dialogues over the next twelve months. This includes dialogue with persons A,B, and C whom we have some real issues with. We hope from this dialogue to accomplish X, Y, Z. In six month, twelve months, and eighteen months we will publish a similar ad giving a detailed report as to the results and further actions coming from this dialogue."----
would be profoundly helpful.
Would you flesh this out for us???
In fairness to leaders voicing need to war against 'Islamo-facism'-- I expect you consider it self-evident why this is not responsible. But it might help to specify why. Is it because there is no facism? Or because there is no facism with an underlying Islamic ideology? Or because there is, but a call to combat it is not responsible? Or are there certain tactics to the fight that are not responsible? Or is there no battle to fight? Or is there a certain responsibility of the State which is different than the responsibility of Christians--and hence a call by Christian leaders is confusing?
I believe those using such language about war and Islamo-facism are obligated to be clear about their reasoning, theology, and language; and demonstrate why it has anything to do with the love of Jesus. But to win the argument, you must take the time to specify as well--and not turn your opponent into a 'strawman' easily dismissed by a label (e.g. 'irresponsible').
Posted by: letjusticerolldown | November 21, 2007 10:14 AM
I think the word 'extremist,' whether applied to Christians or Muslims is causing confusion on this issue.
There is not one 'extremist' Christian position, but many, all of which are extreme in different aspects. The comparison between extremist Amish and extremist Muslim militants is therefore a tad silly.
There are extremist mystics (both Christian and Muslim); extremist traditionalists (KJV and no drums please); extremist legalists; extremist liberals; and extremist militants.
And really when we talk about Muslim extremists we're just talking about militants and any Christian comparison has to also be about Christian militants (who've been around for ever, one of them was an apostle - Simon the Zealot). A brief survey of religious history would easily illuminate many militant extremists from both religions (watch the new Elizabeth movie for one small example).
And there are still militant extremists on both sides who want nothing more than to kill all of the other (be they Christian or Muslim). Do a quick google on 'kill all ...' and insert the name of your favourite group. Or look up the websites ds0490 listed at the top. But don't pretend that 'our' extremists are all like the Amish. And don't decry the fact that these 'Christian' extremists are probably not 'real' Christians, unless you're willing to allow Muslims the same defence.
Be Blessed,
Posted by: Trent | November 21, 2007 7:11 PM
"Abandoning all "hatred and strife," we must engage in interfaith dialogue as those who seek each other's good, for the one God unceasingly seeks our good."
This is so profound. It gives me chills.
And I write from Cuba.
Continuing to extend the hand to my sisters and brothers to the North (174 v. 4)...
-Marcos
Posted by: Mark | November 22, 2007 4:31 AM
Elaine raises very important questions and points. No where in the teachings of Christ can be found justification for the things of which "Loving God and Neighbor Together" rightfully apologized.
I find no similar apology in "A Common Word Between Us and You" for violence done in the name of Islam for to apologize for such violence would be to deny the Quranic commands to smite the necks of the unbelievers they meet in battle (47:4) and to kill them wherever you find them (2:191), et al.
Nor is there apology for the practice of dhimmitude which is the Islamic version of "mercy" for the survivors among the conquered who agree to submit but not convert.
Christians and Muslims do not worship the same God, for the God of the Christians is "the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ" (Eph 1:3) while Islam denies the deity of Christ.
Let us have dialog on how we can we can live together, but let us not deny the fundamental differences between Christianity and Islam.
I fully expect that this post will be severely edited (as have other of my posts to the point of making them appear to be in agreement) or eliminated.
Posted by: Steve | November 22, 2007 10:11 AM
Steve,
Then guess what we don't worship the same God as the Jews either. They deny the deity of Christ too. Everything Muslims have done we have done as well. Every same practice, forced conversions check, brutal massacres check... We aren't doing it now but history is just as brutal. Not only that but in many muslim countries there has been a sizable Christian population well until we got there and made it impossible for them to stay.
p
Posted by: payshun | November 22, 2007 2:57 PM
Payshun - are you suggesting that there really is no difference then between Christianity and Islam because adherents of both have committed atrocities in the name of their faith? Thoughtful Christians have apologized for the abuses that have occurred in the name of Christ because there is a recognition that those abuses bear no resemblance to the teachings of Christ. My point is that Muslims may find it hard to apologize for the conduct of their fellow religionists because one would be hard pressed to ignore the numerous passages in the Quran that are used as justification for their conduct.
As to your first comment, may I refer you to John 8:19ff.
Posted by: Steve | November 24, 2007 10:21 AM
Are you familiar w/ the Sufi movement w/n Islam? They too have apologized and are fighting for the soul of Islam. Thoughtful Christians may have apologized but did next to nothing to fix what they started. We tend to make things worse (ie our deposing of the Sha of Iran, the War in Iraq...)
Theologically there is a ton of difference between Christianity and Islam. But fundamentalist versions of both religions have a lot striking similarities ranging from an insane belief that they are always right to a belief that God is always on their side to...
19Then they asked him, "Where is your father?"
"You do not know me or my Father," Jesus replied. "If you knew me, you would know my Father also." 20He spoke these words while teaching in the temple area near the place where the offerings were put. Yet no one seized him, because his time had not yet come.
Evem Jesus said they did not know him or his father. So what are you talking about?
p
Posted by: payshun | November 24, 2007 7:48 PM
Post a Comment
Are you aware of our Rules of Conduct?