• Share this on Facebook
• Email this to a friend?
• Share this on Reddit
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!
• Send this page to Print Friendly
• Digg this!
• Email this via Gmail

By Kate Daley-Bailey

“Marley was dead: to be begin with. There is no doubt whatever about that.” (Dickens 45)

Thus begins perhaps one of Charles Dickens’ most popular works. One need not be an avid reader of Victorian literature or an English major to be struck by this short story (total, its length is less than 100 pages). Even if you never sat down and read A Christmas Carol, if you live in the U.S. or Britain, you probably know the major components of the story: an elderly miser, Ebenezer Scrooge, undergoes visitation from a series of ghosts, each attempting to woo or terrify Ebenezer to reform. Who could forget Scrooge’s kind hearted clerk Bob Crachit, or his crippled and beloved son, Tiny Tim, who, despite his hardship, proclaims “God bless us, everyone!”? Among the plethora of versions of the Carol are Disney’s latest version starring Jim Carey, a modern remake starring Bill Murray called Scrooged, and, one of my personal favorites, A Muppets’ Christmas Carol. This is not even to mention the numerous black and white versions gracing TV screens every December. Upon my reading of the classic this Christmas, I was intrigued by something I had never noticed on previous readings: a woodcut image gracing the pages across from the description of Marley’s ghost. The title of the woodcut, done by John Leech, is Ghosts of DepartedUsurers. This image title haunted me because, despite the popularity of the term during Dickens’ time, one hardly ever hears the term “usurer” today. Albeit the infrequency of the use of the term today, the concepts behind “usury” are at the heart of what plagues our modern economies and religious lives. Here is the description which provided the inspiration for the woodcut mentioned above:

“The air filled with phantoms, wandering hither and thither in restless haste, and moaning as they went. Every one of them wore chains like Marley’s Ghost; some few (they might be guilty governments) were linked together; none were free.” (65)

The description of Marley’s Ghost is even more harrowing:

“The chain he drew was clasped about his middle. It was long, and wound about him like a tail; and it was made (for Scrooge observed it closely) of cash-boxes, keys, padlocks, ledgers, deeds, and heavy purses wrought in steel.” (57)

The spiritual burdens these spirits are bound by are symbols of their greed… and they appear to represent a particular type of sin greatly condemned throughout Christian history (that is until today), usury.

As mentioned earlier, “usury” as a term, is hardly a household name anymore and yet postmodern culture is greatly plagued by its effects. The term itself has developed a long history, especially among the Abrahamic traditions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam). Interestingly, Islam still vehemently opposes “usury” and has developed special banking principals to guide devout Muslims. Like other ancient concepts, the word “usury” has been defined differently by various scholars and theologians. Usury, in its most common use today stands for “interest.” Could it truly be the case that earning interest could make someone culpable of a grievous sin in the eyes of the Christian Church? Yes and no.

For thousands of years, the Christian Church has identified “usury” as a sin… however various theologians and scholars living within these thousands of years disagreed over exactly what “usury” was and was not. A brief exploration of the term “usury” (and its multiple manifestations) may lead us to a better understanding of what was actually being prohibited by various religious communities, especially Christian ones.

In his book, Usury, Interest, and The Reformation, Eric Kerridge, gives us some insight into the intricate and sometime tedious art of trying to pin down a definition of “usury”:

“Usury or fenory is the taking of payment over and above the amount lent merely and solely in return for a secured loan.”(5)

Kerridge presents the definition explicated by the famed church father, Thomas Aquinas, to further clarify the concept of “usury”:

“To take money as the price of money lent, that is to take usury…the price for use, that is called usury.” (5)

Given this definition of “usury”, it seems that any interest on a loan is usury and therefore a sin in the Christian church. Aquinas bases his condemnation of “usury” in Biblical and Classical texts. For example, Aquinas’ view was in part dictated by Aristotle’s remarks on money:  “Aristotle… comments that money was not intended for this, but for buying and selling; usury merely produced money out of money, and so of all the ways to wealth was the most unnatural.” (15)

If one was not convinced by Aristotle’s argument against “usury”, one could always look to the multiple Biblical injunctions against “usury”:

“If you lend money to one of my people among you who is needy, do not treat it like a business deal; charge no interest.” (New International Bible, Exodus 22:25)

“Do not take interest or any profit from them, but fear your God, so that they may continue to live among you. You must not lend them money at interest or sell them food at a profit.” (Leviticus 25:36-37)

“Do not charge a fellow Israelite interest, whether on money or food or anything else that may earn interest. You may charge a foreigner interest, but not a fellow Israelite, so that the LORD your God may bless you in everything you put your hand to in the land you are entering to possess.” (Deuteronomy 23:19-20)

“Who lends money to the poor without interest; who does not accept a bribe against the innocent. Whoever does these things will never be shaken.” (Psalm 15:5)

“He lends at interest and takes a profit. Will such a man live? He will not! Because he has done all these detestable things, he is to be put to death; his blood will be on his own head.”(Ezekiel 18:13)

One might have noted that these injunctions are all found in the Hebrew Bible (which Christians refer to as the Old Testament). Another point to note is that these Biblical injunctions against interest apply only to taking interest from fellow Israelites (Jews), not other communities. Christianity, originally being a sect within Judaism, inherited these laws against taking interest but encountered a new dilemma due to the nature of the Christian community. Judaism fostered an exclusive religious and ethnic communal identity: there were Jews, those bound by the Covenant with the Hebrew god, and there were Gentiles, everyone else. Christianity, whose growth and strength depended on proselytizing to outsiders, viewed all outsiders as potential converts and thereby, potentially part of a worldwide community. The various Biblical laws mentioned above were ironically the very laws that allowed Jews to play the role of lender to European Christian communities (seen as Gentiles) and also the very same laws that prohibited Christians from playing any role but that of the borrower. The Christian New Testament is less lucid regarding the stipulations on lending and borrowing. Most theologians point to Jesus’ words as documented in the Gospel of Luke, chapter 6:35, “Lend, hoping for nothing again” as spiritual justification for legalized lending, although each may interpret these words differently. Some readers may interpret these words to mean that lending is allowed as long as no interest is charged. Others view these words as encouraging investment and others may read this passage as authorizing lending without any expectation of the principal being returned.

Unfortunately for Jewish communities in Europe and England, the livelihood that lending to non-Jews brought, also evoked a deep-seated hatred for the Jews among borrowing Christians:

“Not being Christians, they were debarred from the public exercise of lawful trades and occupations, but where allowed to practice them within their own community, which needed rabbis, physicians, surgeons, lawyers, butchers, bakers, and so on. Thus, while by no means all Jews were usurers, all lived by usury directly or indirectly, so the stigma attaching to usurers was extended to the Jews as a whole, and heightened by the general dislike of foreigners and foreign ways and beliefs.” (Kerridge 20)

In England, the words “Jew” and “usurer” became synonymous and one need only look to Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice, to see how Jews were often portrayed by Christian communities. From this vantage point it is easy, although disheartening, to see how easily the Christian condemnation of “usury”, meant originally to dissuade Christians from taking advantage of the poor, became a tool of propaganda used against Jewish communities. Dickens’ himself, although never naming Scrooge or Marley as “Jews” did include the Jewish villain stereotype, embodied in the infamous character Fagin, within his novel, Oliver Twist, referring to him many times simply as “the Jew”. However, there has been some mention of Dickens attempting to de-emphasize Fagin’s Jewish identity in later editions of the novel.

Kerridge notes that over time there are more distinctions made between “usury” and “interest”. For one thing, some writers commented that “interest” was not “usury” if it was charged as a penalty for not paying back the principal on an agreed date. Another distinction, albeit a rather murky one, is that “interest” requires that the lender or investor must share the risks of the business with the borrower or partner. The various terms linked with the concept of “usury”, such as “ochre”, “fenory”, etc., each had slightly different meanings and were often used interchangeably, making any definitive statement on the issue difficult. John Calvin, another significant Christian theologian, made a distinction between various kinds of loans and distinguished between who one could lend to based on the borrower’s economic status:

“Humanist that he was, Calvin knew there were two Hebrew words translated as “usury.” One, neshek, meant “to bite”; the other, tarbit, meant “to take legitimate increase.” Based on these distinctions, Calvin argued that only “biting” loans were forbidden. Thus, one could lend at interest to business people who would make a profit using the money. To the working poor one could lend without interest, but expect the loan to be repaid. To the impoverished one should give without expecting repayment.” Jones, Norman. “Usury”. EH.Net Encyclopedia, edited by Robert Whaples. February 10, 2008. URL http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/jones.usury

Calvin also notes that the Latins (Romans) viewed “usura” as honorable but detested “fenory”, which he describes along with others (such as P. Melanchthon) as the “biting” kind of loan mentioned above. Cato, according to Calvin, put “fenory” on the same level as murder and described those who practiced it as those who “suck the blood out of others”(from J. Calvin, Commentarii in Librum Psalmorum, Amersterdam, 1567, p. 47, translated by Eric Kerridge). These biting and blood sucking allusions link to the negative caricatures used to demonize Jews such as the bizarre charge brought against Jews in England and Europe referred to as “blood libel”, which according to the Internet Medieval Sourcebook was the belief that some Christians held that Jews used the blood of a Christian child to make Passover matzohs.

According to Joseph Shatzmiller in his book Shylock Reconsidered: Jews, Moneylending, and Medieval Society, not only was “usury” considered a sin and a crime throughout Christian history, according to the Council of Vienne (1311-1312), it made one a heretic and made Christians and Jews vulnerable to church inquisitors (46). Despite the declaration of such councils against “usury”, many European governments had, by the 14^th century, gained from the well-entrenched credit system and profited from the Jewish moneylenders’ activities. The more criminalized lending became, the more reticent lenders and borrowers were of admitting their involvement. Lenders and borrowers had to depend on unwritten agreements, interest percentages were not documented, and payment, nonpayment and indebtedness sometimes led to violence. In his book, Shatzmiller also notes that during the Black Death of 1348-1349:

“many believed that the Jews created the pestilence, and as a result Jewish quarters were attacked by fear-stricken crowds. But even in these circumstances the populace was intent on destroying notarial records and other evidence of indebtedness, as Pope Clement IV noted in a bull of 2 October 1348” (49).

The major thinkers of the Protestant Reformation (Luther, Zwigli, Calvin, etc.) were particularly critical of what they saw as the Catholic Church’s abuses of the poor. They, like their predecessors, did not approve of “usury”, although their definitions of what “usury” entailed differed. Martin Luther, often depicted as the “father of the Protestant Reformation”, critiqued any enrichment which came at one’s neighbor’s loss:

“That is the deepest depth of greed, that just looks upon a neighbour’s want and need as an opportunity not to help him but to enrich oneself and become wealthy through one’s neighbour’s loss. Those who do that are all daylight robbers, thieves, and ockerers.” (36-37)

Although there is much argument over the terminology used and what limits should be placed on lending, perhaps Luther’s condemnation can shed some light on exactly what was at the heart of the issue—how one dealt with others, especially those less fortunate than oneself. Perhaps the condemnation of “usury” was not all about how much money was gained but rather how much money was gained on the backs of others. The sin of “usury” might be that it sees other people as a means to end, instead of an end in and of themselves. “Usury”, in this sense, is predatory and pitiless… it not only makes the borrower destitute financially but it also makes the lender destitute in spirit. Think back to the description of Scrooge, Marley and the other “usurer ghosts” depicted in Dickens’ A Christmas Carol. Take the passage where Marley explains why he is fettered:

“I made the chain I forged in life,” replied the Ghost. “I made it link by link, and yard by yard, I girded it on my own free will, and of my own free will I wore it… My spirit never walked beyond our counting house- mark me!- in life my spirit never roved beyond the narrow limits of our money-changing hole; and weary journeys lie before me.” (61)

When Scrooge exclaims that Marley was always a good man of business, Marley remarks:

“Mankind was my business. The common welfare was my business; charity, mercy, forbearance, and benevolence, were, all, my business…” (62-63)

While many Christians may be reticent to abandon “usury” in the strictest sense, perhaps words such as those from the Church fathers and, in this case, Dickens, may make us think twice about what is, as Christians, truly “our business” in this world.

• Share this on Facebook
• Email this to a friend?
• Share this on Reddit
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!
• Send this page to Print Friendly
• Digg this!
• Email this via Gmail

Louis A. Ruprecht, Jr., Georgia State University 

I suppose it was inevitable. Since nature and the military both abhor a vacuum, the recent announcement of the military draw-down in Iraq almost inevitably meant that we’d soon be re-deploying our military forces somewhere else.

Still, the northern coast of Australia came as something of a surprise. President Obama announced yesterday that 250 US Marines will soon be shipping off for rotating six-month tours at an Australian military base on the north central coast of the island, near a city called Darwin. Their numbers are expected to escalate to 2500 in fairly short order, along with military equipment and long-range aircraft.

Since they’re headed to Darwin, it was also probably inevitable that this announcement, something of a curiosity on the evening news cycle, would be read as an exercise in the geopolitics of “survival the fittest.” In this case, the new troop deployment is seen as a symbolic check on growing Chinese influence in the region, especially noteworthy after several recent incidents prompted by the Chinese Navy’s intrusion upon the territorial waters of several neighboring states.

So the whole thing has been read as a check on Chinese power.

Perhaps it is that, but it is surprising that no one consulting the map has noticed what stands in between Darwin, Australia and the Chinese mainland… namely, the most populous Muslim country in the world, Indonesia. 

It is unclear that the Australians would accepted a deployment that had been framed for them in anti-Chinese terms. China is one of Australia’s biggest trading partners and they seem far less worried about an emergent China than American pubic officials have been of late.

But the Australians have been active and enthusiastic supporters of the War on Terror, and this deployment–assuming it is aimed at Indonesian-backed South Pacific terrorist networks more than the Chinese Navy–serves that purpose nicely.

This is not about a new threat but an old one. It is not about an emerging Chinese threat, whether miliary or economic at all.

No, this is about al-Qaeda and Islam.

• Share this on Facebook
• Email this to a friend?
• Share this on Reddit
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!
• Send this page to Print Friendly
• Digg this!
• Email this via Gmail

By Abbas Barzegar, Religion Dispatches

As millions of college students around the country begin the start of another school year most will encounter events, programming, and curriculum built around the tenth year anniversary of 9/11. Content will include paying honored respects to the victims and their families as well as interpreting the impact of the attacks on our nation’s history and identity. The events ten years ago will remain the defining moment of my generation and understanding how those events continue to shape the social and political landscape of our nation will be the responsibility of educators, politicians, and citizens alike.

As a professor of Islamic studies I will entertain a related (even if unwarranted) set of issues in the classroom because, whether we like it or not, Islam has become an indelible part of the culture and consciousness of 9/11. Ironically, the questions I regularly encounter have not actually changed much over the last ten years: Who was Muhammad, was he violent? What is Jihad? Why the scarves?

The problem isn’t about information. There is now a plethora of sophisticated resources available to educate the broader public about Islam. However, as the Center for American Progress has recently demonstrated, these resources are bettered by a sophisticated and well-financed misinformation campaign designed to singularly provoke fear and mistrust of Islam and Muslims. Even so, as I begin another semester teaching these subjects, I have come to accept that the limited capacity of public discourse to deal with Islam and the Muslim world isn’t about truths and untruths, media access, or political power. The problem is an epistemological one governed by what might be called the Dante/Deepak dichotomy and until we overcome this binary, I doubt a genuinely cosmopolitan and progressive post 9/11 America can be achieved.

The attacks on 9/11 unleashed a strain of anti-Muslim bigotry in this country that has roots not only in the classic structures of American racism and xenophobia but also in a centuries-old tradition of European anxiety with the Muslim world. Recall how the Italian poet Dante Alighieri depicted Muhammad suffering mutilation in the lowest depths of hell in his Divine Comedy. In the late 18th century such literary scenes were transformed into visual masterpieces by artists such as Gustave Dore. Dante and Dore were the inspiration, in turn, for the release of the first Italian feature length film, L’Inferno, in 1911 which became an outstanding success in the United States a year later. That the racist silent film The Birth of a Nation (which lionized the KKK and portrayed African Americans as unequivocally licentious) debuted at the White House just a few years later reminds us of an ever-looming undercurrent in American history.

While there is clearly much more to Dante’s epic poem than anti-Muslim angst, the embedded nature of such xenophobia into European and American national culture deserves recognition. Today, much of what manifests itself as anti-Shariah legislation, Muhammad cartoons, Quran burning, and the federally sanctioned policing of the Muslim community is a mere extension of these historic forces.

On the other hand the attacks of 9/11 have brought forth some of the best this nation has seen. I recall receiving flowers at the office door of our Muslim Student Association at the same time our members reported being spat on. Responding to such bigotry, civic leaders, faith-based coalitions, and academics charged the battle lines of public discourse in the best spirit of humanism to show that Islam, like all other religions, was at its core a force of good in the world corrupted by the ill-conceived actions of a few.

When opportunist authors and their presses released their provocations, Muslims and non-Muslim liberals launched their own visions of what Islam truly is. As universities around the country cut back hiring, departments in Islam and Arabic were funded enthusiastically.  New biographies of Muhammad and new translations of the Quran poured off the shelves. The minutest details of Islam’s origins and Muhammad’s life were the subject of documentaries and public forums. Even Deepak Chopra participated in the pluralist defense of Islam by writing a fictionalized account of Muhammad’s life and mission meant convey the humanism of Islam to a weary American audience. But as valiant as these efforts may be I am left wondering whether our society’s multicultural instincts are enough to get us out of the cultural quagmire 9/11 produced.

Between Dante and Deepak

Every Tuesday and Thursday morning this semester the product of this Dante/Deepak dichotomy sits before me in the form of 150 students. They are equipped with either their Dante-like prejudgments or their Deepak-like pluralist commitments looking for answers that will further their already hardened positions. For a swath in the middle the jury is still out and they look to me to answer, to level the playing field, to tell the truth: Who was Muhammad, was he violent? What is Jihad? and Why the scarves? It is precisely at this moment that all 150 of them turn on me…because, that is, I refuse to give them the cold hard answer they are looking for.

Islam is a religious tradition over fourteen centuries old that currently counts nearly a quarter of humanity among its adherents. As a civilizational force it has contributed to everything from water salinization and camera lenses to algorithms and medicine. I try to convey to my students that the first step to grasping the complexity of faith and history is precisely to forsake our quest for cold hard truths. Likewise, if America wants to deal with Islam after 9/11 we will have to let go of Dante and Deepak at the same time.

We will need to swallow the toughest parts of pluralism and see both the compatibility and contradiction of the Shariah with the Constitution, as we already do with countless other religious traditions. A post 9/11 America will need to know how and when to distinguish between the murderous acts of terror that mark the occasion of this anniversary and the spirited resistance of those choking under the heels of our empire. Our generation must be poised for a stout pragmatism that can manage gay marriage and Muslim face-veils in the same breath.

As an educator I am 100% certain that within six months 80% of my students will forget 90% of what they learn this semester. As a citizen I am sure that our society’s questions about Islam will not look much differently ten years from than they did ten years ago.

I am quite confident, though, that neither Dante nor Deepak will solve the problem.

• Share this on Facebook
• Email this to a friend?
• Share this on Reddit
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!
• Send this page to Print Friendly
• Digg this!
• Email this via Gmail

By Paul Brandeis Raushenbush, Huff Post Religion

Two religious responses from the days immediately following the attacks of 9/11 demonstrate how religion has been both a divisive and unifying force in America over the last ten years.

The first was from Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell who assigned blame for the attacks to God who, they explained, was angry at America because of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-CAcdta_8I

target=”_hplink”>Gays, Feminists and the ACLU, among others. While fires still smoldered at Ground Zero, Falwell and company were ironically fanning the flames of discord and division by blaming God and liberals instead of religious extremism.

The second response was different. As soon as reports made clear that the terrorists claimed allegiance to the fundamentalist Islam of Osama bin Laden, many feared violence might be directed toward the American Muslim population. Yet in the days after 9/11, reports came from all across the country that Christians, Jews, and other people of faith had called local mosques to offer support and solidarity. Instead of turning against Muslims, the religious community rallied for their fellow Americans of a different faith tradition.

These two examples show the simultaneous yet divergent directions that religious practice and thought has taken in America in the last ten years. 9/11 made it clear that religion, which had been ignored in global political calculations and overlooked by the media for decades, was still a force, and perhaps the force in people’s personal and communal lives.

While many still hold that religion is essentially divisive, since 9/11 it has been clear that religion has been an overwhelmingly positive force to bring people from different backgrounds together within American society.

I use myself as a case in point. Ten years ago I knew basically nothing about Islam, Sikhism, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc. I knew a bit about Judaism being from an interfaith background, but even that was minimal. I was an ordained pastor, yet my training had ignored other religious traditions. Ten years later, most seminaries require a working knowledge of other religious traditions to graduate. 9/11 impressed upon religious communities that to be an effective religious leader requires knowing the essential beliefs held by our neighbors of other faiths.

In fact, 9/11 gave me a new sense of my vocation as a pastor. From 2003 to 20011, my ministry consisted of promoting interfaith engagement at Princeton University. I worked with hundreds of students from different religious traditions who demonstrated a deep commitment to being with and learning from people of different religious and ideological backgrounds. Since 9/11, interfaith groups have been formed at colleges and high schools around the country. A new movement of interfaith cooperation is growing that values the uniqueness of individual traditions (increasingly including secular-humanist), while believing that people can and must respect one another across differences of belief. Groups such as Religions for Peace, the Parliament of the World’s Religions, Fellowship in Prayer and countless of others continue to bring people of different faiths together both in America and around the world.

Yet there is a sense of urgency that surrounds the mission of these groups. Eboo Patel, a Muslim leader who heads the Interfaith Youth Core acknowledged: “In the twenty-first century, faith can be a bomb of destruction, a barrier of division or a bridge of cooperation.” Even while there have been great strides among all faiths towards a more unified pluralistic America, there have been episodic physical attacks against Muslims and Sikhs, and there are many for whom religion provides a platform for proclaiming suspicion and division of people of different faith traditions, most notably Muslims.

Last year’s observance of 9/11 was marred by an intentional furor over a proposed Muslim community center at Park 51 even though the Imam was widely known for his interfaith cooperation and his rejection of Islamic extremism. A recent study showed that there is an organized and concerted effort to create a fear of Muslims which had led to anti-sharia (Muslim law) bills being proposed and passed in states where nobody was even proposing that sharia might be instated. While anti-Muslim sentiment appears to be increasing, even after Osama bin Laden was killed; Muslims in America have a general sense of well-being, and are actually more satisfied with the way things are going in this country than the average citizen.

In recent years we have also heard an increasingly loud insistence on the essential Christian (and more recently Judeo-Christian) nature of this country. When the interfaith director of a Hindu Temple was invited to open the Senate in 2007, there were protests against an invocation to a “non-theistic god.” And who can forget the mustachioed Florida pastor who decided to make a name for himself by burning a Quran.

Yet even the much publicized proposed Quran burning demonstrated how much America had come together across religious divides. As I wrote in an earlier piece, the Pastor was surprised to find himself completely isolated in his desire to desecrate another tradition’s Holy book. Both liberal and conservative religious and political leaders recognized that this was not the kind of America we envisioned, and instead as one people we showed our support for a genuinely pluralistic America.

Perhaps nothing has given me more hope in the productive possibilities of religious people coming together than my experience as the Senior Religion Editor of The Huffington Post. We have over 600 religious leaders and academics from across the religious and ideological spectrum who write for the site. Each of our writers is on the front line against extremist and destructive elements within all of our traditions; and are living examples of the possibility of honestly sharing the wisdom and truth of their own tradition without succumbing to the temptation to violate or denigrate the tradition of their neighbor.

We are all still healing from the wounds of 9/11. Religious communities and leaders must continue along a path that rejects division, violence and hate, and must instead harness all of the wisdom and compassion inspired by the world’s great traditions to create a more perfect America and world.

*****************************

Visit Huff Post Religion for more articles by this author and others.

• Share this on Facebook
• Email this to a friend?
• Share this on Reddit
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!
• Send this page to Print Friendly
• Digg this!
• Email this via Gmail

By Kenny Smith

While they presently remain at the level of fandom and  “just for fun,” elements from the Sci-Fi Channel’s Battlestar Galactica series have been re-crafted and re-presented in religious terms. See, for instance, the Church of the Cylon God Facebook page,  or the Church St. Gaius Baltar.   

“Pray at the Pump” founder warns President Obama, create jobs or face more earthquakes, a claim which God then quickly refuted.  Others have suggested that the divine reprimand said to be implied in recent earthquakes and historic hurricanes was in fact aimed at Virginia Congressman Eric Cantor, in whose district a major quake’s epicenter was located, perhaps in response to the steep cuts Cantor proposed to the U.S. Geological Service.  So, is God an angry geologist?

Moderate and liberal Christians are in fact Vampire Satanists sent to infiltrate churches, one Christian conspiracy theorist thinks so. 

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMAjdW-xinE

A recent mathematical model predicts traditional institutional forms of religion will soon be extinct in nine Western countries.  

Lesbian Pagans, a fundamentalist’s worst nightmare.   An African American Pagan priestess reflects on her experience in Christian and Pagan traditions and the lack of cultural resources she found in both.

A severe case of gender confusion seems to have baffled Islamic police in Indonesia.

Flash meditation mobs, sending peaceful vibes through the world’s cities, are increasingly common.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDTybVK76sg

The complexities of Scientology and celebrity continue, this time for Will Smith and Jada Pinkett Smith.  

Former Fox News personality Glenn Beck wrapped up his “Restoring Courage” campaign in Israel, an event which seems to have been of interest mostly to American Evangelicals, Jews and Israelis not so much.   Evangelical Michelle Bachman may already be “obsolete” as a 2012 Presidential candidate.  

For would-be Dudeists fallen on hard economic times, some free copies of the forthcoming Dudeist Bible, The Abide Guide, are available!  

After a very well-attended Go Topless day in Venice Beach, Ca. last week, the city of Toronto has denied GoTopless.org and members of the International Raelian Religion a permit for a public demonstration in a downtown park, though some plan to do so regardless.

• Share this on Facebook
• Email this to a friend?
• Share this on Reddit
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!
• Send this page to Print Friendly
• Digg this!
• Email this via Gmail

By Michael Vicente Perez, Huffington Post

With the anniversary of 9/11 fast approaching and the awareness that terrorism is still a real threat for the United States, we should consider what we might do differently to make our country a safer place.

Looking back on the last 10 years, one thing is clear: the violence of terrorism cannot be defeated with more violence. Afghanistan and Iraq are convincing proof of that; both countries remain ravaged by terrorism and al Qaeda forces seem much more resilient than the architect of the war on terror, George W. Bush, ever imagined.

We also know that counter-terrorism measures at home have produced mixed results. On one hand, the government has prevented several domestic attacks through various intelligence operations. On the other hand, the government has also failed to stop would-be terrorists including the Christmas bomber and the Times Square bomber. In both cases, it was the terrorists who failed, not the government that succeeded.

Faced with such realities, what other ways can we think of to address the problem of extremism, if not in the world, then at least at home?

Given the limitations of conventional approaches, I think we might do well to think unconventionally and take a radical untaken step: recruit Muslim women. 

As Americans, we’re used to thinking about Muslim women in various unflattering ways. The most common idea of a Muslim woman, for example, is that of the oppressed victim of Islam. In this manifestation, we usually find a veiled, silent woman imprisoned by her religion and policed by Muslim men. Passively waiting for her rescue, this tradition-bound woman draws significant American attention, if only to remind us how lucky we are to be Americans. 

But if Americans could see beyond the media, or at least see a media willing to highlight the truth about the Muslim world, then we would find that women of the Islamic hue are far from passive or silent. In fact, just a glimpse beyond the surface of American media stereotypes reveals that there are some pretty heroic Muslim women in the world doing some pretty amazing things, especially in the cause for peace.

Take, for example, one of Yemen’s most visible and active women today: Tawakul Karman. A 32-year-old mother of three, Karman is both a journalist and human rights activist active in the push for the right to free expression. A devout Muslim, Karman was inspired by the uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt and is now at the forefront of the effort to challenge Yemen’s authoritarian leader, Ali Abdullah Saleh. Beyond her work as a human rights activist, Karman supports alienated Yemeni youth, is a member of Yemen’s leading Islamic political party and hosts weekly sit-ins in support of political prisoners.

Another example is Manal Omar. Currently the director of Iraq, Iran and North Africa programs from the United States Institute of Peace, Omar has a long record of promoting the rights of Muslim women and working to address humanitarian crises for organizations including Oxfam Great Britain and Women for Women International. In addition to her tenure with UNESCO, Omar worked for three years with the World Bank’s development group conducting training groups in Yemen, Bahrain, Afghanistan and several Muslim-majority countries. More recently, Omar’s CV boasts a book, “Barefoot in Baghdad,” reflecting her time in Iraq working with Muslim women and witnessing their brave stance against the injustices of life under siege.

Karman and Omar are not alone. Throughout the Muslim world (including America), Muslim women are playing a major role in the promotion of justice, freedom and equality for their communities and countries. Indeed, efforts like the Arab Spring suggest that women are not passively waiting to be rescued. On the contrary, they seem to be quite busy planning their own salvation.

What Karman and Omar show is that, far from the clichés of American media, Muslim women matter. And they matter precisely because they’ve refused to be irrelevant. But Karman and Omar offer much more than a counter to the stereotypes of American media. They provide compelling evidence of a vibrant segment of the Muslim population that is unwilling to surrender in the face of violence and terror.

So what can America learn from these women and others like them? One basic lesson is that Muslim women are important players in their communities. Women like Karman and Omar didn’t just happen. Rather, they reflect a tradition — one often ignored — of women’s participation in their communities. If we look beyond the western idea of masculine leadership, we can begin to see that women are active leaders: as mothers, teachers, scholars, counselors and, as Ingrid Matson has shown, presidents of national organizations. With such dynamic points of access to Muslim communities, it seems that ignoring women in the grassroots fight against extremism in the U.S. would be a grave mistake.

Another point we can take from Karman and Omar is that women often choose the path of peace. Leaders like Karman and Omar know first-hand the impact of violence on society and see the need to struggle for peace in definitively nonviolent terms. They understand that peace is not the end point of violent conflict; rather, they see that peace is the consequence of a just social order. And thus they promote empowering forms of nonviolent resistance like sit-ins and human rights campaigns and, more importantly, institutional development. What Karman and Omar are doing is not just fighting; they are building. And what better way to reduce extremism in America than to establish new institutions that give voice to communities that want to be heard and are willing to work for positive forms of change.

Michael Vicente Perez is Associate Editor of Altmuslimah.com.

• Share this on Facebook
• Email this to a friend?
• Share this on Reddit
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!
• Send this page to Print Friendly
• Digg this!
• Email this via Gmail

By Kenny Smith 

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has appealed to indigenous spirits and deities for aid in healing his cancer.   San Francisco’s Yoda statue draws pilgrims from around the globe.  Are we all Jediists at heart?  (May the Force be with you.)

According to the Prison Literature Project, inmates most frequently request books on Buddhism, Wicca, and Islam.  Practitioners of minority religions continue to face many different forms of discrimination throughout American culture.

One writer recalls the Church of the Subgenius’ Prophet Bob and the balmy days of the 1980s.  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qt9MP70ODNw

Rather controversially, volunteers from the Church of Scientology have been seen on the streets of London after recent outbreaks of violence.   Religious disagreements and the religious education of their children (at a Scientology school) may be to blame for the breakup of Jennifer Lopez and Marc Antony.  

Fifty Pro-Islamic billboards go up across the U.S.  

Who would Jesus nuke? Apparently anybody.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2Vkj0mLI2M

The popularity of religion comes and goes with the times, a new study says.

Self-identified American Buddhist Geeks gather in Los Angeles for a conference.

Former Senatorial candidate Christine O’Donnell, infamous for her negative comments regarding Wiccans, (apparently) finds herself the victim of an online prank, hence her many vibrators and witchcraft books listed for sale on Amazon.

Is V for Vendetta functioning religiously for Anonymous members?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1K3XzzEICw

• Share this on Facebook
• Email this to a friend?
• Share this on Reddit
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!
• Send this page to Print Friendly
• Digg this!
• Email this via Gmail

By Kenny Smith 

Australians debate the validity of religions based upon popular culture, such as Jediism and Matrixism (based upon the film, The Matrix), and the blending of new and old traditions, such as “Islamic Jediism,” as the 2011 census approaches this August.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPZ77_vORPY

Also in Australia, The Dali Lama appeared as a surprise judge on the TV cooking show “Masterchef.” Sadly, while quite friendly, the Tibetan spiritual leader proved somewhat of a judicial disappointment, stating: “As a Buddhist monk, it is not right to prefer this or that food.”  

In Indonesian, some 4,500 couples were married in an extraordinarily interfaith fashion, with Islamic, Catholic, Protestant, Buddhist, and Hindu ceremonies. 

American Hindus have won the legal right to sue a New Jersey restaurant that accidentally served them meat. What’s at steak: trips to sacred sites in India to remove the impurities.  

An Amish teenager was arrested after leading police on a “car” chase, after officers observed him drinking beer while driving his horse-drawn buggy. 

The Learning Channel is developing a weekly show about Muslim American families. 

Want to be a Jedi Knight but can’t afford the cost of training? Ask fellow citizens for donations. After all, you’ll be a guardian of galactic peace and justice.  The Jedi may soon have available a remote light-saber training droid similar to that used by Luke Skywalker aboard the Millennium Falcon, as students at Stanford University have developed a “Jedibot” using Kinect technology.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuSCErmoYpY

Star Wars lunch boxes, “with real R2D2 sounds,” will also be available for the coming school year. 

Dudeists (i.e., members of Church of the Latter-Day Dude, which currently claims over 100,000 Dudeist ministers worldwide), have distilled the essence of The Big Lebowski’s teachings thusly: “The Way Of Fuck It,” a mantra said to ease the heart, mind, and spirit. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVdKQ0I35qo

The Dudeist Bible, Abide Guide: Living Like Lebowski, is due out this August (2011) offering a wide range of spiritual guidance.  

Meet mild-mannered police officer by day, Pagan priest by night, Sgt. Simon Wood.  A self-identified witch, who claims to have been wrongly imprisoned, is suing federal and state governments, demanding to be given land upon which to found his own country.  Texas Druids contemplate the emergence of their traditions in 18^th century English Christianity.  

Ricky Gervais is developing a new cable TV show (for HBO?), Afterlife, about an Atheist who dies and goes to heaven. Richard Dawkins has come under criticism from fellow Atheists, of the feminist variety, for comments seen as misogynist.  A new http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwTdChdy6yg

“Infomercial” is not well done, but it’s funny.   

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwTdChdy6yg

GOP presidential candidate, Michele Bachmann, in 2006 publicly predicted that the world would soon end, that “the last days” and God’s “harvest” of humankind would soon occur, and that therefore “nothing is more important” than converting others to her religious views.  In her new song, “Better Day,” country singer and devout Christian Dolly Parton responds to the doomsdays prophets such as Harold Camping (and, apparently, Bachmann), “No one knows when the end is coming,” Parton sings, so “in the meantime, let’s make things right.”

Check out the new http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cW_5sAKUl20

fund-raising video. It’s not very good either, but it’s funny.  It’s difficult to imagine the Church of Scientology as financially strapped, when one considers the numerous historic Hollywood properties it owns, paid for apparently with cash.    The Church responded to Janet Reitman’s new book, Inside Scientology: The Story of America’s Most Secretive Religion, with a detailed critique of Reitman’s research methodology. Reitman’s book, the Church argues, ought to have been titled Outside Scientology, as it has little to do with what Scientologists actually make of Scientology.  

The practice of creating “instant churches” in public schools is becoming controversial, and has also given birth to an emerging “portable church” industry.  In Virginia, county commissioners denied a zoning permit to a “communist, anti-Christian” religion that is “against God,” that is, an “interfaith retreat and social justice center.” County commissioners in Maryland have rescinded a “Wiccan-proof” policy regarding opening prayers that required prayer-leaders represent “established monotheistic faiths.”  

Mormon GOP candidate Mitt Romney has apparently fallen out of favor on the Fox & Friends morning show, where Mormons generally are now understood as “obviously not Christian.”   GOP candidate Herman Cain now believes that prohibiting Muslim Americans from building mosques is part of his right of religious freedom (yes, I’m serious). Has the Republican Party developed into “a full-fledged religious movement,” with its own myth, rituals, and theology? An Emory University religion scholar argues that it has.  

The image of Jesus appeared for a South Carolina couple on their Wal-Mart receipt. They consider it a miracle sent by God to renew their faith.  Plagued by satanic manifestations? Check out the ABC Primetime Nightline special report: “Beyond Belief: Battle with the Devil.” 

BTW, are you playing World of Warcraft with only a superficial grasp of its gods and goddesses? WoW aficionados hope to change that, with a “Know your lore!” campaign.

• Share this on Facebook
• Email this to a friend?
• Share this on Reddit
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!
• Send this page to Print Friendly
• Digg this!
• Email this via Gmail

By Lady Arsinoe

Well, Enemy No. 1 of the World is dead.  Osama bin Laden was killed by a Navy Seal team just over a week ago.  Goodie for us.  Yay!

Don’t get me wrong.  The guy deserved it.  He was the mastermind behind the murder of thousands of innocents around the world, not just here in the US.

America has lost the moral high ground, though.  Beginning on September 11, 2001, collectively as a nation, we condemned the celebrations in the streets throughout the Muslim world.  We denounced the carnival atmosphere in the Middle East as the World Trade Center collapsed.  We cried for the murder of over 3000 innocent people.  We said, how barbaric it was to celebrate death and destruction in that manner.  Those people aren’t human, we declared. 

Yet what did we do?  Celebrate in the streets that Osama bin Laden was dead.  We had a party.  He was assassinated in his home in a raid that also killed several other men, possibly even one of bin Laden’s sons, and a woman used as a human shield.  And we cheer.  We dance in the streets.  Who is barbaric now?

Life is precious.  As far as we know, this planet is it in the Universe.  All life should be cherished and protected.  That is not to say that bin Laden shouldn’t have been killed, though I would have preferred to see him face international justice.  If the death of one will save the lives of many, only after careful consideration, and with great solemnity, should that life be taken.  The nuclear plant workers at Fukushima understand this point very clearly.  They gave their lives, in a slow and painful death that will probably take years, for the greater good of the people of Japan and the world.  The Navy Seal team risked their lives to bring bin Laden to justice.  They wanted him alive, but they had to make split second decisions on the ground.  In the end, bin Laden was dead, and so were several others.

Yet the Barcalounger Warriors, who haven’t been off their fat asses in years, cheered.  We did it!  USA! USA! USA!” like this was a sporting event and their team won, not a surgical strike that killed people.  People that had families who loved them and they loved back.  Have you looked at pictures of Osama bin Laden?  He actually looks like a nice guy.  And apparently he was very generous with his friends and family, a loving father, who built roads and schools and hospitals in areas that were poorly served.  For some he was a humanitarian or freedom fighter.  It’s a shame his twisted views on religion got in the way of his goodness.

So, should we celebrate his death, or lament the fact that the deed was necessary?  Should we cheer revenge and call it justice, or mark with solemnity that he has received the fruits of his labors? Mourn those who have died because of this man’s actions?  Celebrate the lives that have been saved because of his death, but do not rejoice at his demise.

Osama bin Laden will not be mourned by those of us who find his actions reprehensible.  He will not be mourned by those people living with the results of his crimes.  He will be mourned by those who hold similar views, that their version of God and religion is better than everyone else’s version.  He will also be mourned, at least privately, by those who cherish and celebrate war, destruction, murder, retribution, and vengence.  Osama bin Laden became the Boogeyman for many, he became the face of Evil against which, the Good were fighting.  With him removed, who or what will take his place?

**************************************************

In addition to our regular academic and news articles, Religion Nerd also offers a forum for the religious “insider.” Lady Arsinoe’s thought provoking articles and commentaries allow RN readers an intimate opportunity to “hear” the voice and perspective of a Wiccan High Priestess. 

Lady Arsinoe’s Bio:

I was initiated into the Wiccan spiritual tradition as a First Degree in 1993.  Over the years, I continued my studies and increased my involvement.  In 2000, the members of OakSpring (www.HouseOfOakSpring.org) separated from Ravenwood to go our own way.  In 2006, I became the High Priestess of OakSpring, with my husband serving as High Priest.  OakSpring is large by Wiccan standards, and has been blessed to own and maintain our covenstead on 38 acres of woodland in the Metro-Atlanta area.

Like most Wiccans, my mundane life is similar to anyone else’s:  I go to work each day (for a large engineering firm), bear with traffic, and go home to relax with my family and pets.  Living a magical life isn’t always about the spells; it’s about living in a way that is harmonious with Nature, the Universe, and ourselves.  I do my best to live in accordance with Wiccan principles every day of my life.  I think that is the best way to show the world what Wicca is all about.

• Share this on Facebook
• Email this to a friend?
• Share this on Reddit
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!
• Send this page to Print Friendly
• Digg this!
• Email this via Gmail

By Teo Sagisman

I lost both my parents at what I consider a young age.  My religious background is that of a secular Turkish Muslim but I now consider myself a spiritual seeker more than religious.  I lost my father when I was only five years of age.  My paternal grandfather, originally from Eastern Turkey, had migrated to Istanbul in the early 1900’s.  His last name, Sagisman, I later discover belonged to a list of Jewish converts to Islam (Dönmeh) who followed Sabbatai Zevi (1626-1676) a 17th-century Jewish Kabbalist who claimed to be the Jewish Messiah but was eventually forced by the Ottoman Sultan Mehmed IV to convert to Islam.  After Sabbatai’s conversion, a number of Jews followed him into Islam and became the Dönmeh.  Since the 20th century, many Dönmeh have intermarried with other groups and most have assimilated into Turkish society.  Although a few still consider themselves Jews, the Dönmeh are not officially recognized as such by Jewish authorities.   

My father was a secularist who dedicated his life to service in the Turkish army, which upheld the ideals of Kemal Ataturk, the founder of the Turkish Republic, who recognized the danger of Islamic fundamentalism. Dad was a young colonel at the time of his passing. My mother, Nezahat Candas, came from an Anatolian family in Ankara (Ancient Angora), which practiced a form of Islam not yet spoiled or corrupted by 20^th century politics.  Their version of Islam was innocent and lacked political agendas of today’s divisive environment.  I was thirty-four when she passed at the young age of sixty-nine, even though I miss her immensely, I consider myself lucky to have spent the amount of time I had with her.  

My maternal grandparents were devout Muslims who wanted their daughters to have an education in basic Islamic principles.  To that end, they hired a Quran tutor for my mother and her sister so that they could learn the tenets of the Islamic religion.  These lessons with the local imam began, I believe, when my mother was about fifteen and her sister, my Aunt Aysel, was eleven.  My mother immediately rejected the idea of covering her head, a choice that she was free to make.  She received no argument or pressure from her tutor and imam who understood and accepted her decision.  He explained that modesty lies within the one’s heart and actions, not how one dresses.  My grandfather was also supportive of both his daughters’ resistance to wearing the hijab and he never insisted.  The current societal pressures of donning a headscarf did not exist in the Turkey of my mother’s time; women were given the option without worry of pressure from neighbors or society in general. 

Growing up in a Muslim country with a single mother was strange at times.  When my father passed in 1970, my mother was a beautiful and vibrant forty-year old living in a Muslim society that monitored the behavior of attractive young widows.  My mother was always vigilant about her encounters with men even those she allowed into our home to make repairs. 

Our apartment keeper, Sehriban, was a tough-ass rural Anatolian migrant woman who chewed tobacco and wore traditional Anatolian clothing.  Sehriban worked hard to chase away predatory married Muslim men who sometimes stalked my mother.  From the moment Sehriban met our family and learned that my mother was a widow raising two young sons, she determined to ensure our protection.  Aunt Sehriban would spread the rumor that our father was with the (MIT) Turkish Special Services, a governmental agency that was the Turkish equivalent to the Soviet KGB.  The Turkish Special Service members enjoyed notorious reputations at the time, working to quell the communists and Kurdish separatism that threatened the very existence of Ataturk’s Republic.   

I remember the time when my mother and Aunt Sehriban laughed joyfully about a certain married merchant who approached Sehriban about the single woman who lived in her apartment with her young boys.  Sehriban told him not to fuck with my mother, as her husband was a colonel who went underground to fight the communists and separatists on behalf of the government.  She told him that there was a chance he would go missing if he messed with my mother.  Sehriban gleefully relayed how the fearful merchant ran for his life.       

A few weeks after my father’s passing my mom decided to get a driver’s license so that she could drive the family car. My father had signed up to purchase a primitive Turkish made car through the army’s loan program, paying on it in advance for years before the car was finally delivered.  Unfortunately, a few weeks after the car arrived, he died never able to enjoy his clunker Soviet style car named “Anadol”.  Pissed off at one guy’s remarks about women not capable of driving, my mom wanted to make a special point of learning how to drive so that we could all enjoy the car in his honor.  

During the 1970’s in Turkey, there were only a handful of women drivers as most women were seen as incapable of such a task by the macho-minded men mostly guided by the Islamic principles.  I remember the time after she received her license, how people used to stare at us while she was driving.  Curious kids would run behind us screaming, “look at the woman driving, look at the woman driving!”  They may as well have screamed “space aliens.” I realize that in mother’s determination to drive, she was making a point; she was capable of caring for herself and her children, and the macho-minded Islamic society was going to have to accept her independence. 

The present religious climate in Turkey is very different from the one my mother encountered and challenged.  There is a sense of resentment between the religious and secular groups.  Forget about the Christian, Jewish, and Muslim strife that dominates so much of our news. In present-day Turkey, the secularists resent the Islamic rise of power and the Islamic government is slowly eroding the rights of a secular republic.  A secular Muslim can be hateful towards conservative Muslim women who may chose to cover, and conservative Muslims often belittle and demean those who choose not to wear a headscarf.  When taking all these in consideration, I have realized the importance of moderation and the need for moderate women everywhere—women like my mother.  Instead of following religion and culture blindly, sometimes the rules need to be bent and customs tweaked. 

Even though my mother read the Quran daily and performed her daily prayers, she never pressured her sons to do the same.  She never forced us to go to a Mosque or told us we were going to hell for Islamic theological reasons.  She raised us with basic moral values that did not include a passage from Quran with every other sentence.  She bent the rules occasionally to adapt the realities of life and yet still kept her faith, which was a very important part of her life.   

On one occasion, when she came to United States for a visit, I remember her meeting my girl friend Heather and her dog Zen.  In Islam, dogs are frowned upon.  Many devout Muslims somehow consider the dog dirty creatures.  This may be due to the Prophet Muhammad’s personal dislike towards the dogs.  After meeting Zen, my mother told me that in order for her to perform her prayers in my house, the dog had to go.  She said, “the angels won’t come to the house!”  I think it was superstition speaking on her behalf.  I agreed to her wishes without difficulty as Heather and Zen had their own apartment.  A few weeks later, Heather and I had to go out of town on an overnight trip and I asked my mother if she could watch over Zen.  She reluctantly took him as she was always eager to help me, especially if she knew I was in a bind.   

We returned to find Zen lounging in bed with my mother, and she reacted as if we had caught her in bed with a strange man!  She said that she bathed had him, made him a floor bed surrounded with stuffed animals in her room, talked to Zen about not disturbing her while she prayed, and pronounced him good company.  My mother no longer understood dogs as unclean nor could they keep her from creating a pure space to perform her prayers.  Afterward, Zen was a part of her life along with her prayers.  She took him for walks everyday and insisted he stayed with her during her visits.  She saw him as an angel on earth contrary to most Muslim’s belief.

On another occasion, I took her to a café to have lunch.  We ordered her first American style pizza covered in sausage, pepperoni and cheese.  She loved it and helped me devour every little piece.  For those of you who may not be familiar with Islamic tenets, it is a huge sin for a Muslim to eat pork or pork products.  By some accounts, you are condemned to hell!  As you guessed, the pepperoni and sausage was made of pork.  After enjoying her pizza, she asked about the unidentified meat she had just eaten.  I paused and tried to weigh my response, fearing how she would respond to knowing she had consumed pork.  Not wanting to lie, I blurted out that the delicious meats were indeed pork!  She was silent for a moment and I still remember the big smile on her face as she waved her hand in the air, like she always did when she wanted to say screw it, and said, “That was very tasty.  My God won’t count this as a sin!”   

My mother was a great example for me and later in life, I would appreciate her strength and her need to question the rules.  My mother believed that God endowed us with a mind and will of our own and that mind was meant to question the rules society, tradition, culture, and religion force upon us.  This, my friends is moderation in religion and in life, and any one of us could learn from her open, curious, and practical approach to life.

• Share this on Facebook
• Email this to a friend?
• Share this on Reddit
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!
• Send this page to Print Friendly
• Digg this!
• Email this via Gmail

By Michel-Camille Bordeau

CJ Werleman

If you ever wonder what’s the future of freethinking and who’s leading the charge; if you are curious to know what Freethinkers of today are doing to ensure that tomorrow’s secular world is on the right path; if you want to know what’s good to (free) think about these days; or, if you simply want to read a mind-bending interview, tune in to Religion Nerd for my series, Freethinking Tomorrow: In the Words of Today’s Freethinkers.

The format is simple: I read a book, contact the author with a lengthy email, invite him/her to answer half a dozen questions, and then I wait eagerly to see if blind confidence gets rewarded.  And it does.

The first Freethinker I decided to interview for this series was the Australian born author of God Hates You, Hate Him Back: Making Sense of The Bible and  Jesus Lied-He was Only Human: Debunking The New Testament, C.J. Werleman. When I initiated contact, after a brief introduction, I made sure to explain to some length how much I understood, enjoyed, and had a willingness to share with fellow Religion Nerd readers his rationalist take on the Bible.

My hopes were very soon answered. CJ sent responses to my questions in less than twenty-four hours—I like to think we are on a first name basis. I am a fan, if you haven’t notice.  And after this, I hope you will be one too.

MC:  Do you think rationalists, freethinkers, and secular scholars have to resort to in-your-throat titles in order to be heard?  How did this marketing strategy work for you? What other titles did you consider? Anything Twitter worthy? [CJ Werleman--@rationalists-- is very active on Twitter]

CJ: Interesting question.  I guess a captivating title is essential for any book these days, no matter the genre. Especially when you consider the vast number of new titles released every year, which is a result of improved self-publishing ease and accessibility.  Now days, anyone can write a novel, for example, and then self-publish on Kindle within two minutes of completing their manuscript.  Thus, with a litany of available titles on the market, an attention grabber is a must.  Unless you’re a Dan Brown, of course. Coming up with the title for God Hates You. Hate Him Back was as difficult as writing the book itself.  I wanted something that conveyed the objective of the book, that being to demonstrate the God of the Bible is arguably the most wicked character of all fiction, using the sixty-six chapters of the Holy Book to validate that claim.  For a long time, every title that either I came up with or my publisher suggested, didn’t meet the litmus test I had set.  Then, with less than four weeks to release I was watching Lethal Weapon 2, of all movies.  And there is a scene where Danny Glover’s character says, “I think God hates me!” In reply Mel Gibson says, “Do what I do, hate him back.” That was the light bulb moment, while eating nachos and enjoying a beer watching a crappy movie.

MC:  God Hates You. Hate Him Backis refreshingly humorous considering the seriousness of your project—plowing through the Bible for a non-apologetic, textual analysis. Was there a particular point in your research where you wanted to toss humor out the window and empty your lungs? Can you recall particularly frustrating passages?

CJ:  Ha. Well, yes, the Bible can be a tediously boring endeavor.  For example, reading Leviticus is like watching golf on valium.  It reads as an ancient cookbook, providing every minuscule detail for preparing bread offerings.  I’m sleepy just thinking about it. But overall I love the Bible. It remains the most significant book in all of Western civilization, but no one reads it. Christians don’t even read it. In my book I cite one study that shows 93% of American households own at least one copy of the Bible but 75% of Americans can’t name the four gospels. So I wanted to write a summary of the Bible in a manner that makes it enjoyable and entertaining, and not just for theologians, but for the man in the street. Like me.

MC:  By the end of the Old Testament, your precise count reveals that Satan is not in God’s league when it comes to genocidal mania—40 innocent victims versus 31 million is a shocking discrepancy. What social, cultural, if not economical mechanisms must be set forth for people to realize that (1) the Bible is a toxic, if not dangerous read, and that (2) their interests are better served outside the influence of Religion?

CJ:  Absolutely the Bible is a dangerous book if you do what God commands you to do.  For example, if my daughter says, “God damn it!” I’m to take her to the edge of the town and bash her brains out with large rocks.  If I wish to sell my daughter into sexual slavery, not only does the Bible not say there’s anything wrong with that, it gives commercial terms and conditions for doing such a thing.  When we look at places like tribal Pakistan, for example, there they routinely execute people for blasphemy, a victimless crime.  Now, are they barbaric, evil people?  No they’re not.  In fact, according to biblical law, of which the Koran is based, they’re more pious and pleasing to God than those who ignore that command. When people become cognizant of these kinds of issues, people realize this ancient book has no relevancy in today’s times.

MC:  You make a point of demonstrating that authors of the Bible were ‘family-challenged.’ What’s your reaction to contemporary theists who are still convinced that the Bible is a moral barometer in matters of marriage, family, parenting?  What would you like (to tell us) to tell them?

CJ:  Well, similar to my answer in the previous question, the Bible only provides moral guidance if you wish to live in a world of tribal barbarism.  If you don’t think slavery, misogyny, racism, xenophobia, and homophobia are good values, then the Bible is not a great reference for morality.

MC: Which argument in God Hates You. Hate Him Back shows your greatest strength as a thinker?  Is this the strength most recognized by your readers or critics?

CJ:  I’d hate to second guess or presume my reader’s thoughts, but based on the feedback I do receive, and at the risk of being a presumptuous turd, it would seem people admire the way I do go question the taboo and sacred in a no-holds barred manner.

MC:  Tell us about your new book, Jesus Lied-He was Only Human: Debunking The New Testament. You don’t beat around the (burning) bush with that one either; do you consider it a continuation of God Hates You, or an entirely new project? What should your readers be excited about?

CJ:  Jesus Lied He Was Only Human is somewhat of a sequel to my first book.  With God Hates You. Hate Him Back I examine all sixty-six chapters of the Bible, but as the Old Testament comprises more of the Bible than the New, it’s the former that gets most of the attention, and therefore a closer examination of the Jesus myth had to be its own, stand-alone book, as there was just too much to cover. Using the New Testament, and some Gnostic gospels, I break down Jesus’ life into the respective milestones of birth, baptism, childhood, ministry, arrest, trial, execution, and resurrection.  I then show readers how wildly the gospels contradict one another with their respective accounts. Bearing in mind we have no biographies of Jesus outside of the Bible. When one sees the gospels examined side-by-side, or horizontally, one sees how absurd the Jesus biography is hacked together.

MC: What’s next for CJ Werleman? 

CJ:  My next book tackles Islam, which is due for release in the Fall 2011.  I provide a biography of Muhammad, from childhood to his prophethood, while explaining the entire Koran alongside the things Muhammad did and experienced.  The ultimate objective is to provide readers with a contextual understanding of the Koran. For example, when Muhammad said, “Jews behave like apes”, people will accuse the Koran of being anti-Semitic, and it seems that way when you take that passage in isolation. But this verse is contained within an entire chapter that refers to one specific Jewish clan in the city of Medina, a clan that went behind his back to offer assistance to the people who were trying to kill him, the Quraysh.  Hence, this verse is Muhammad expressing his disappointment with that particular tribe he thought was friendly to his mission and is not directed to the entire Jewish people.

In this first installment of ‘Freethinking Tomorrow: In the Words of Today’s Freethinkers,’ I thought it fitting to start with CJ Werleman, a man who dared to plow thru the 770000 words of the Bible never lost his sense of humor, au contraire! Good (free) thinking always begins with a thorough analysis of primary texts, which is rarely something to smile about. So, it only makes sense to conclude that with God Hates You, Hate Him Back: Making Sense of The Bible and Jesus Lied-He was Only Human: Debunking The New Testament, C.J. Werleman has been responsible for an incredible tour de force.  And we (free) thank for that!

Please, follow CJ Werleman on Twitter (@rationalists) and keep an eye on this busy man on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/CJ-Werleman/207324500344

***************************************************

About Michel-Camille Bordeau

Michel-Camille Bordeau is the founder and author of The School of Seshata (www.scriptotheism.net), a blog about secular spirituality and the home of the Scriptopedia Project. Michel earned an M.A. in French Studies from The Ohio State University (1998).  Mid-life crisis oblige, he is returning to college in August 2011, to pursue an M.S.W. with a specialization in Mental Health & Drugs of Abuse.

Before relocating to Atlanta, Michel was an Academic Advisor at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor campus, for nearly ten years. He has advised many students (and parents) on academic and life matters. He taught English, Public Speaking, Humanities, and French at various colleges and universities. In 2002, Michel published Poire Sucrée, Salée, Epicée, a short novel about a dance teacher forced to face the demons of her past. He is currently seeking representation for Seeing Purple, a dystopian novel set in Anaïs Abelard’s hometown, the New Orleans of tomorrow, also home to the power-hungry mega church known as the Calvinistry. Michel considers himself an amateur ‘atheologist’ and he often writes under the nom de plume Anais Abelard.

• Share this on Facebook
• Email this to a friend?
• Share this on Reddit
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!
• Send this page to Print Friendly
• Digg this!
• Email this via Gmail

By Lady Arsinoe

Terry Jones has a right to free speech, regardless of how repugnant.  Just as I lauded the Supreme Court’s decision regarding Snyder vs. Phelps, I will stand beside Terry Jones (way far away!) to protect his right to free speech.  Any limitation on his free speech is a limit on my free speech.  The government has no business telling anyone what to say or not to say.  The First Amendment to the Constitution explicitly states:  “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”  How difficult is that to understand?

This is not to say that there should be no repercussions for the actions of Terry Jones and his Dove World Outreach Center.  Not in the least.  He and his followers need to understand that there are consequences for their actions, regardless of how much they believe they are in the right.  Congress shall make no law, but people can act.  Just as people fought legislated injustice during the Civil Rights Movement, people can fight this injustice.  “There’s only one way to stop me,” Jones told his followers, “and that’s to kill me.”  I don’t ascribe to this line of thinking.  I have a better idea.  Get to ‘Pastor’ Jones where it hurts, in his pocket book.  Boycott his used furniture business out of existence.  Boycott any business associated with him and his hate.  Find out who donates to his brand of ‘Christianity’ and boycott!

This plan is already working:  “During his months out of the spotlight, Jones flew to California to protest the massacre of Coptic Christians in Egypt. He also wrestled with a more personal problem: His anti-Islam platform had been great for publicity but bad for church finances.”  Because of his actions, the church’s membership had plummeted (he had only 30 to begin with). So has its income from selling furniture on eBay. The church’s Internet service provider and insurance provider have canceled their services.  Good for them!

I have to wonder what kind of reaction Jone’s deplorable act may engender in the rest of the world?  How will we as a nation react when someone from Pakistan, hoping to cash in on the $2.4M bounty, comes to the US with the intent to kill Terry Jones and/or his family?  I doubt anyone in this country will have the courage to stand up and say the bastard deserved it.  But let’s face it; killing in the name of religion is nothing new, and is never, ever right.  Yes, Terry Jones is to blame for his ignorance and arrogance (a terrifying combination).  The Taliban and radical Muslim leaders are equally to blame for the murder of 20 UN members.  Where does the insanity stop? 

The religious other is under attack here and abroad.  Unfortunately, hatred of the religious other is all too apparent in the United States and the popularity of Islam bashing makes me pause.  It is all too easy to forget one’s own violent past when heaping hatred and blame on another.  Christianity and Judaism have had their share of horrifically violent acts performed by those claiming to be acting in the name of God.  It would take lifetime to list the individual and collective atrocities that have been carried out in the name of the Hebrew and Christian Bibles.  Islam has not invented religious violence. 

I won’t say that more people have been killed in religious wars than for other reasons because the numbers don’t add up.  However, religious wars have, and continue to, cause great devastation.  We have an ongoing War on Terror.  Dress it up in patriotism all you want, this is a war between religions—religions that came out of the same philosophy!  Remember, there are three branches of the Abrahamic tradition—Judaism spawned Christianity, as well as Islam.  All trace their roots to the patriarch Abraham.  Family fights are often the most violent because each party has so much at stake. 

The best, most practical, and constitutionally legitimate way to defeat this kind of hatred is through education and discourse.  Religious violence and hatred is due to fear of the other—this fear inflames the incessant need to kill anyone who disagrees with you!  Only when no one is the other, have won the War on Hate.

Sources and other articles:

• http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/church-that-torched-koran-has-divided-pastors-family-and-others/2011/04/03/AFuXx6XC_story.html?hpid=z3
• http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/spirited-atheist/post/terry-jones-and-afghan-mullahs-who-is-responsible-for-violence/2011/04/04/AFBwa5bC_blog.html
• http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/florida-pastor-terry-joness-koran-burning-has-far-reaching-effect/2011/04/02/AFpiFoQC_story.html

*****************************************************

Lady Arsinoe’s Bio:

I was initiated into the Wiccan spiritual tradition as a First Degree in 1993.  Over the years, I continued my studies and increased my involvement.  In 2000, the members of OakSpring (www.HouseOfOakSpring.org) separated from Ravenwood to go our own way.  In 2006, I became the High Priestess of OakSpring, with my husband serving as High Priest.  OakSpring is large by Wiccan standards, and has been blessed to own and maintain our covenstead on 38 acres of woodland in the Metro-Atlanta area.

Like most Wiccans, my mundane life is similar to anyone else’s:  I go to work each day (for a large engineering firm), bear with traffic, and go home to relax with my family and pets.  Living a magical life isn’t always about the spells; it’s about living in a way that is harmonious with Nature, the Universe, and ourselves.  I do my best to live in accordance with Wiccan principles every day of my life.  I think that is the best way to show the world what Wicca is all about.

• Share this on Facebook
• Email this to a friend?
• Share this on Reddit
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!
• Send this page to Print Friendly
• Digg this!
• Email this via Gmail

By Kenny Smith & Heather Abraham  

In his superb book, The Muslim Jesus (2001), Tarif Khalidi observes that Jesus of Nazareth plays an important role in Islamic religious worlds.  As is well known to students of Islam, within the pages of the Qur’an, Jesus (Isa) is “the word and spirit of God,” a prophet sent by Allah (in 7th century Arabia, Allah was the Arabic term local Christians used when speaking of God) to call humankind back to the proper religious path, one who demonstrates his spiritual authority by performing numerous miracles, including the healing lepers and the blind, and raising the dead. Although the Qur’anic Jesus is not crucified and resurrected, nor is he understood as God himself in human flesh (in traditional Islam, Allah transcends the world entirely and thus nothing in the world could be Allah), he was born of a virgin (Mary), fulfilled important messianic prophecies of the Hebrew Bible, and was physically taken up into heaven by God at the end of his life.   

A “Muslim Gospel,” Khalidi points out, even overflows the pages of the Qur’an: for nearly a thousand years (from the 8th-18th centuries CE), stories and sayings attributed to Isa continued to emerge in Islamic written and oral traditions.  While this Jesus is Islamic in tone, a clear Biblical voice is evident.  In one of the earliest of these, “Jesus said to his people,”             

Do not talk much without the mention of God, lest your hearts grow hard; for the hard heart is far from God, but you do not know. Do not examine the sins of people as though you were lords, but examine them, rather, as though you were servants. Men are of two kinds: the sick and the healthy. Be merciful to the sick and give thanks to God for health. (52)   

Similar arguments could be made for a vast number of important Biblical figures. Noah (Nuh), for example, is the first of five super-important prophets in Islam (along with Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad).  Noah, the Qur’an explains, spent centuries preaching to the sinful, begging them to mend their ways or face the wrath of God. His efforts attracted some willing to embrace the strict monotheism of Islam, and it was with resignation that Noah builds the ark and awaits the coming deluge, able to save only a small number.    

Moses (Musa), like Jesus, appears in both the Qur’an and in hadith (sayings and stories about the Prophet Muhammad that have come down from the time in which he lived, 7^th century Arabia).  In one of these stories, Moses steps out of Biblical history and intercedes on Muhammad’s behalf.  As Huston Smith re-tells the story, one night the arch-angel Gabriel visits and takes Muhammad into the seven heavens to the presence of God, who instructed [Muhammad] that Muslims were to pray fifty times each day. On his way back to earth [Muhammad] stopped in the sixth heaven, where he reported the instruction to Moses, who was incredulous.  “Fifty times a day!” he said in effect. “You’ve got to be kidding.  That will never work. Go back and negotiate. (245) Muhammad accepted Moses’ counsel and appealed to God successfully decreasing the mandated daily prayers from fifty to five.    

The figure of Mary (Maryam) is also a highly revered figure, recognized for her devotion and obedience to God, and belongs to an exclusive group of women who are considered ‘Perfect’ because of their strength of faith and their unquestioning submission to God’s will.  Aliah Schleifer, in Mary the Blessed Virgin of Islam, points out that, “Mary’s position is not just that of the most exalted category of women, but she is ranked in the highest category of all human beings,” with a degree of spiritual development equal to that of Jesus and approaching that of Muhammad. (95) In what is perhaps the most well-known Qur’anic story about Mary, the young heroine retreats to the desert for an extended period of prayer and meditation.  When she returns home, villagers are scandalized when the unwed Mary returns with her infant son, Jesus.  As they accuse her of deep sinfulness (sex outside of wedlock), the infant Jesus speaks up and defends her!   

So, what?   

We have struggled with the implications of this discussion for the current climate of intense, anti-Muslim sentiment within a still largely Christian America, epitomized especially well by recent “Qur’an burning campaigns,” and by the larger numbers of Americans that (we suspect) tacitly support such actions.   

On one hand, we would hope that the stories discussed above would provide compelling illustrations of “common religious ground” that would give pause to those who might otherwise support the social marginalization that Qur’an burnings (or the quiet support of such actions) suggest.   

Mary & Jesus

At the same time, while ecumenically-minded Christians may be intrigued by, and appreciative of, these shared religious resources, religious conservative are likely to find them irrelevant, if not spiritually deceptive and dangerous. “If it is not of the Bible,” this perspective often insists, it is simply not from God.  Little is accomplished by demonizing conservative perspectives. More, as Russell McCutcheon has astutely pointed out (in recent Facebook communiqués), to insist that religious conservatives become more ecumenically-minded is to insist that they practice a very different kind of religion, one that gives up a “Bible-only” perspective for one that sees other religious traditions as cousins rather than antagonists.  Just as religious pluralists (like us) insist from a kind of transcendent, God’s-eye view, that overlapping Qur’anic and Biblical stories represent resources to be celebrated and explored, Bible-only religious conservatives may adopt this same transcendent perspective to authoritatively declare precisely the opposite!  

Still, as history amply demonstrates, cultural boundaries are never static, and American history especially displays all sorts of exchanges between communities that had little to celebrate in common.  Thus, while it may appear exceedingly naïve to expect that the above discussion has any chance of persuading those who support Qur’an burnings to re-think their position, it is at least possible that such discussion might, by who knows what unexpected and counter-intuitive paths, arrive at positive ends.   

Sources:   

• Tarif Khalidi ,The Muslim Jesus (2001)
• Aliah Schleifer, Mary the Blessed Virgin of Islam (Kentucky: Fons Vitae, 1997)
• Huston Smith, The World’s Religions (New York: HarperCollins, 1991)

• Share this on Facebook
• Email this to a friend?
• Share this on Reddit
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!
• Send this page to Print Friendly
• Digg this!
• Email this via Gmail

Sheema Khan, The Globe and Mail

During a brief visit to Cairo last week, I was struck by the willingness of Egyptians to offer spontaneous criticism of the previous regime. From our felucca guide on the Nile to the Egyptologist providing commentary of the pyramids, conversations would begin with a cathartic rant against former Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak, followed by the explanation: “We could have never said this before.”

Egyptians are savouring the taste of freedom after decades of dictatorship, following 18 wondrous days of dignified protest at Tahrir Square. Men, women, Muslims, Copts, rich, poor, educated, illiterate – all were united in their heartfelt desire for a life free of oppression. The spirit of Tahrir Square spilled over into the March 19 referendum on constitutional changes designed to ensure free and fair elections. At 41 per cent, voter turnout was much higher than in past elections, which were seen as rigged in favour of the incumbent. Parliamentary elections are set for September.

Yet, it seems the revolution may be leaving women behind.

During the protests at Tahrir Square, women worked alongside men, organizing, demonstrating, calling for Mr. Mubarak’s ouster. Endemic sexual harassment, like dictatorship, seemed a thing of the past. Many revelled in the new-found societal respect and appreciation of women as partners.

Then came the March 8 rally to commemorate International Women’s Day. About 200 women, along with a smattering of men, gathered in Tahrir Square to urge Egypt to give women a voice in building its future. Many had been alarmed by an ominous turn of political events deemed unfavourable to women: Only one woman had been selected to the interim cabinet; the eight-member committee tasked with formulating constitutional amendments was all male; one of the proposed amendments suggested that future presidents could only be male; and the quota of 64 parliamentary seats for women had been abolished.

The reaction in Tahrir Square that day was swift and brutal, as groups of men accosted the women, hurling insults, and much worse. They were told to go home and wash clothes, that their actions were “un-Islamic.” Some of the women were sexually harassed or groped.

Things didn’t get any better the next day, when the army cleared Tahrir Square of encamped protesters. Amnesty International reported that at least 18 female protesters were arrested, tortured and subjected to “virginity tests.” One 20-year-old, Salwa Hosseini, described her humiliation when she was forced to take off her clothes in a room while male soldiers looked in and took photographs of her. Later, a man carried out a “virginity” exam, and she was threatened with prostitution charges.

The army has denied culpability. Nonetheless, there are trepidations about the army’s lack of accountability in postrevolutionary Egypt. While constitutional amendments pave the way toward a robust system of political checks and balances, some worry about the lack of scrutiny of the military, which enjoys widespread popularity.

The threat of organized retaliation against women continued. On March 28, panicked women contacted the Egyptian Centre for Women’s Rights, complaining that fundamentalist Salafist groups had ordered all Egyptian women (including Copts) to cover themselves from head to toe, or face harassment. A few days earlier, some women reported that Salafists were blocking their cars when they tried to drive to work; they were told to stay in their houses.

Although a tiny minority, Salafists are growing in numbers and influence. By comparison, the Muslim Brotherhood seems downright moderate, although its conservative platform alarms many women’s groups.

Undaunted by the challenges, Egyptian women continue to speak out, repeating the demands of the revolution: justice, freedom and dignity. Hoda Badran, chair of the Alliance for Arab Women, told me that, with better organization, women’s groups can make a difference. There’s also a new level of confidence and self-awareness among women as a result of their integral role in the revolution.

Having tasted the fruits of their efforts, they’re determined to ensure their rightful place in the future of their nation.

• Share this on Facebook
• Email this to a friend?
• Share this on Reddit
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!
• Send this page to Print Friendly
• Digg this!
• Email this via Gmail

By Roger Cohen, New York Times

• Share this on Facebook
• Email this to a friend?
• Share this on Reddit
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!
• Send this page to Print Friendly
• Digg this!
• Email this via Gmail

By Eboo Patel, Huffington Post

Lately, Congress appears to be obsessed with Muslims.

Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., is holding hearings Tuesday (March 29) on “Protecting the Civil Rights of American Muslims,” and Chairman Peter King has announced a second set of hearings on “Radicalization in the American Muslim Community” in the House Homeland Security Committee, this set focusing on radicalization in prisons.

Although the word “Muslim” is the one getting the most media play, I believe these hearings are really about America, and whether we value the contributions of, and cooperation between, our many different communities.

Our founding fathers were emphatic on where they stood. When George Washington was asked about his preferred workers at Mount Vernon, he replied: “If they are good workmen, they may be from Asia, Africa or Europe; they may be Mahometans (Muslims), Jews, Christians of any sect, or they may be atheists.” For Washington, it wasn’t just about the principle of freedom, but the practicality that in a diverse nation, bigotry toward any community not only hurts that group, but weakens the nation.

As the leader of the Continental Army, the first truly national American institution, Washington took a strong stand against anti-Catholicism. He banned insults to Catholics (including burning the pope in effigy) and told his officers to make sure Catholic soldiers were welcomed. He scolded those who disobeyed: “At such a juncture, and in such circumstances, to be insulting their religion, is so monstrous as not to be suffered or excused.”

Later, as president, Washington took a stand against another prevalent form of religious bigotry: anti-Semitism. In 1790, he received a letter from Moses Sessius, the leader of the Hebrew Congregation of Newport, R.I., who was worried about the fate of Jews in the new nation.

Would they be harassed, hounded and hated as they had been for so many centuries in Europe?

“The government of the United States … gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens,” Washington replied. “May the children of the stock of Abraham who dwell in this land continue to merit and enjoy the good will of the other inhabitants — while every one shall sit in safety under his own vine and fig tree and there shall be none to make him afraid.”

Do these words still ring true today?

The King hearings in the House presented Muslims as a problem and, even worse, a danger. Yet that flies in the face of the best evidence. A recent study by Charles Kurzman at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill shows American Muslims were the key group in disrupting attempted domestic terror plots, and that domestic terrorism actually has multiple sources. Targeting the Muslim community — especially while ignoring the multiple sources of risk — hampers us from finding productive solutions to homegrown threats.

Furthermore, focusing on Muslims as a problem both ignores and frustrates the very real contributions Muslims make to America. An American Muslim, Muhammad Ali, is one of America’s most celebrated sports icons. Another, Fazlur Rahman Khan, helped design the Sears Tower and the John Hancock Building in Chicago. A third, Salman Hamdani, rushed to aid his fellow Americans during the 9/11 attacks, and died when the towers fell. Don’t we want young American Muslim kids seeing Congress focus on the heroes of their community rather than the villains?

George Washington welcomed the contributions of many communities because that’s what America is built on, and not simply in a theoretical way. Think about Catholic schools and hospitals, or Jewish philanthropic groups — it wasn’t that long ago such efforts were viewed as seditious threats. Today, America would be unimaginable without such institutions.

President Obama, for one, realizes this. “We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus, and non-believers,” he declared in his inaugural address. “We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth.”

The Durbin hearings — focusing on Muslim Americans as citizens, not some outside threat — should be applauded. It’s not just about protecting a minority religious community, but strengthening American society and reminding us of the tradition of pluralism set forth by those who built this great country.

• Share this on Facebook
• Email this to a friend?
• Share this on Reddit
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!
• Send this page to Print Friendly
• Digg this!
• Email this via Gmail

By Heather Abraham

Atop a distant mountain in southwest Turkey, overlooking the ancient city of Ephesus, lies a shrine shrouded in mystery.  Called Meryem Ana Evi (House of Mother Mary) by the native Turks, it is believed to be the last earthly home of the Virgin Mary.  Unlike the Marian shrines of Lourdes, Fatima, Guadalupe and Knock, which are held to be the locations of apparitions of Mary, Our Lady of Ephesus is a shrine connected to Mary’s physical historical presence.  Pilgrims who journey to Nightingale Mountain to visit the shrine believe it to be the site of her last earthly residence, the place of her death, and, for some, the location from which she was bodily assumed into heaven.  Although sought out by more than a million Christian and Muslim pilgrims annually, Our Lady of Ephesus has received little attention from the academic world.

House of Mary (Our Lady of Ephesus)

“Discovered” in 1891, Our Lady of Ephesus is a comparatively recent Marian phenomenon and was little known outside of the Izmir region of Turkey until 1906 when it received the first pilgrims from abroad.  The Ephesus tradition of Mary’s last years is supported in the traditional belief that Mary, after Jesus’ crucifixion, came to live with and be cared for by the Apostle John who Jesus commanded from the cross to care for his mother.  John 19:26-27 is witness to the event.

When Jesus saw his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing beside her, he said to his mother, “Woman, here is your son.”  Then he said to the disciple, “Here is your mother.”  And from that hour the disciple took her into his own home.

To the Christian faithful, it is reasonable to assume that John would have honored Jesus’ request to care for his mother and as Church tradition holds that John’s ministry was based in and around Ephesus, some have concluded that Mary, at the very least, spent time in Ephesus.

Although Mary is mentioned by several early church fathers as having lived in Ephesus in the years following the death of Jesus, the Jerusalem tradition, as the place of her death and Assumption, overshadowed and eventually replaced the Ephesus tradition and through the centuries, Mary’s connection to Ephesus was forgotten to all but the local Greek Christian population. With the silting up of its harbor, Ephesus, an important Christian center, port city, and banking center for centuries, became a shadow of its former self.  After facing economic hardship, earthquakes, and catastrophic soil erosion that forced a significant portion of its population to flee, the city fell in to a state of decline from which it never recovered. The conquest of the Ephesus and Izmir region by Seljuk Turks, in the eleventh century CE, saw the remaining Christian population’s flight to the isolated mountains surrounding the Ephesus valley.  These Christians, known at the Kirkindje, would keep the Marian Ephesus tradition alive whereas outside of the Ephesus valley, sources containing information about the Ephesus tradition were lost in the silt of the centuries until revived in the visions of an eighteen-century stigmatic Augustinian nun.

Anne Catherine Emmerich’s visions of Mary’s life in Ephesus add yet another layer of mystery to the elusive ruins atop Nightingale Mountain.  Emmerich’s visions, as recorded by the German Poet Clemens Brentano, were instrumental to the shrine’s ultimate discovery in 1891.  In Our Lady of Ephesus, Father Bernard Deutsch stresses the importance of Emmerich’s visions as a catalyst for the discovery of the shrine.  He writes,

It is altogether proper to say that without Catherine Emmerich, Mary’s home would in all probability not be known to the world today.  Without her, then, this house of the Holy Virgin, where already hundreds of thousands have venerated Mary, would still be nothing but a relatively deserted ruin, known only to a few.

Anne Catherine Emmerich

Born in 1774 in a small town in western Germany, Emmerich lived a pious but difficult life filled with poverty and illness.  At the age of twenty-eight, Emmerich entered a small Augustinian convent at Dulmen as a novitiate, and one year later she took her solemn vow becoming an Augustinian nun. With the rise of Napoleon and France’s domination over Europe, the convent at Dulmen was closed by the state, leaving the destitute Emmerich alone and homeless.  With nowhere to go, Emmerich remained at the abandoned convent, until her health deteriorated and she could no longer care for herself.  Hearing of her plight, a compassionate woman from a nearby village took her into her home and cared for Emmerich until her death in 1824.

In 1812 Emmerich allegedly began to bear the stigmata, including a cross over her heart, and wounds from the crown of thorns.  Witnesses to the event reported, “that as she prayed her face became flushed and she was seized by high fever.  Then all of a sudden she was infused by a brightness that specifically illuminated her hands and feet, which were seen to be covered with blood, as if they were punctured.”(Carroll)  After reports of the appearance of the stigmata, Emmerich began to attract visitors including the German Poet Clemens Brentano who spent the next six years recording the visions that ensued shortly after the onset of the stigmata.

Emmerich’s visions consisted of detailed accounts of the Passion of Christ and the life of the Virgin Mary after of the Crucifixion, including the location of her home on Nightingale Mountain overlooking the city of Ephesus.   Brentano spent six years at the bedside of Emmerich, recording and documenting her visions. His manuscripts entitled The Life of the Blessed Virgin Mary and The Dolorous Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ (inspiration for Mel Gibson’s The Passion of Christ) were published in 1842.  Both books would become and remain classic Catholic literature, but it was Brentano’s The Life of the Blessed Virgin Mary that some believe ultimately led to the discovery of Our Lady of Ephesus.

While perhaps filled with lore, the circulated story of the modern “discovery” of the shrine is a fascinating one.  In 1891, Sister Marie de Mandat-Grancey presented visiting priests to her convent in Smyrna (Izmir) with a copy of Clemens Brentano’s The Life of the Blessed Virgin Mary.  After reading and discussing Emmerich’s visions, Sister Mandat-Grancey challenged the priests to go to nearby Ephesus and investigate the validity of Emmerich’s visions, which included detailed descriptions of Mary’s House and its location on a mountain overlooking the ancient city.  Taking up the challenge, Father Jung and his fellow adventurers embarked on an expedition they believed would prove Emmerich’s visions false.  Armed with only the book to guide them, the skeptical Catholic Priests set off for the ruins of Ephesus.

The expedition left Smyrna and traveled to the seaside town of Kusadasi where they hired a local guide, Mustapha, to take them to Ephesus. After touring the ruins of the ancient city of Ephesus and some of the area surrounding the city, Jung and his expedition spent the night in nearby Seljuk.  The next morning, armed only with the accounts of Emmerich’s visions, Jung chose Nightingale Mountain as a target for exploration. At Jung’s instruction, Mustapha led the expedition on an arduous climb up the side of Nightingale Mountain.  Upon reaching the crest, the exhausted and overheated party went in search for water and a place to rest.

Finding a group of Turkish women harvesting tobacco on the side of a hill, the party inquired as to where they could find water and shade in which to rest.  The locals directed them farther up the mountain to the “monastery where there is a fountain.”(Poulin)   Curious, as they were not aware of any monastery in the area, the expedition continued up the mountain until they came upon a well.  After quenching their thirst and resting, they set about exploring their surroundings.  A short distance from the well, they discovered the ruins of a small stone house.

Remembering Emmerich’s description of the house and geographic location, Jung asked Mustapha if one could see both the Aegean Sea and the city of Ephesus from this place on the mountain. Mustapha went off to investigate and retuned with an affirmative answer; both could be seen only from this place on the mountain. Emmerich had described the location, the house, and the surrounding grounds in great detail.

A little way behind the summit of the rocky hill from which one could see over the trees and hills to Ephesus and the sea with its many islands.  The place is nearer the sea than Ephesus, which must be several hours’ journey distant from the coast. (Palairet)

Regarding the house itself, Emmerich described St. John as building a house of stone on the mountainside where several Christian families where living in nearby caves.  After several days in the area, the priests stumbled upon caves and other geological features included in Brentano’s book.  In The Holy Virgins House, Father P. Eugene Poulin, a member of the expedition, writes, “I confess I was quite astonished when, at first sight, details one after another, details of great value appeared all of a sudden, just as C. Emmerich had indicated.  Truth surpassed conviction. There was nothing to say.” (Poulin)  Convinced they had uncovered the impossible, the expedition returned to the Convent in Smyrna (Izmir) and announced that they had found Mary’s House.   Father Vervault, another member of the expedition, recorded in his journal these words: “We looked, and we have found it.”(Caroll)  Reporting their “discovery,” the priests awaited further instruction from the Vatican.  Reacting immediately to the report, Vatican officials authorized a secession of expeditions and ordered a thorough investigation of the ruins and the surrounding area.  The priests would soon encounter, in a nearby mountain village, the Kirkindje Greeks, descendents of the Ephesian Christians who were not only aware of the sacred ruins atop Nightingale Mountain, but had kept the tradition of Mary’s home alive through the centuries with an annual communal pilgrimage to Our Lady of Ephesus.

Today, Our Lady of Ephesus receives more than a million pilgrims a year and it boasts a century of interfaith pilgrimage.  This unique Marian shrine not only attracts Christian pilgrims from a multitude of traditions but also Muslims who journey to Our Lady of Ephesus to connect with and pay respect to one of the Four Perfect Woman in Islam.

For more information on Mary in Islam, see Religion Nerd article entitled “Mary, A Bridge Between Christianity and Islam”

Sources:

• Father Bernard F. Deutsch, Our Lady of Ephesus (Milwaukee, WI: The Bruce Publishing Company, 1965)
• Carroll, Donald,  Mary’s House ( London: UK: Veritas Books, 2000)
• Eugene Poulin, The Holy Virgin’s House: True Story of its Discovery (Istanbul, Turkey: Arikan Yayinlari, 1999)
• Sir Michael Palairet, The Life of the Blessed Virgin Mary (Rockford, IL: Tan Books and Publishers, Inc., 1970)

• Share this on Facebook
• Email this to a friend?
• Share this on Reddit
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!
• Send this page to Print Friendly
• Digg this!
• Email this via Gmail

By Joshua Stanton, State of Formation

Rabbi Rachel Kahn-Troster, Executive Director of Rabbis for Human Rights, may have said it best:

Ever since the September 11, 2001 attack on the United States, hatred and discrimination against Muslim Americans has been growing. Over the past year, the rhetoric has only gotten louder and more violent. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights protects the freedoms of religion, speech, and assembly. These are also essential American values. Yet across the United States today, we see attempts to prevent the construction of mosques, laws outlawing Sharia law, and the vilification of our Muslim neighbors and friends as un-American. Jewish historical experience remembers that not too long ago, we too were the victims of suspicion and hatred based on our religion and ethnicity. The actions of the few should not condemn the many, and every religion has its teachings both of violence and of peace. Jewish tradition demands that we remember the heart of the stranger, because we were strangers in the land of Egypt. If one minority can be singled out for congressional hearings or restrictions on places of worship, anyone can be. These are not American values. These are not Jewish values. It is time to Stand Together and speak out against Islamophobia.

Rabbis for Human Rights then organized 25 of the leading rabbinic voices in the country to explain why it is so dangerous, immoral, and runs contrary to our beliefs as Jews. I was fortunate to be one of two students who — with luck and a history of inter-religious work — were able to join in the rabbinic course against Islamophobia. I pray that it becomes a groundbreaking moment for Jewish-Muslim relations in America and proves to be a lasting “good” forged in what might otherwise be seen as a spate of ignorance.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmbjOpRwCec

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmbjOpRwCec

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmbjOpRwCec

Here are my thoughts, particularly regarding Representative Peter King’s wrong and misguided hearings on supposed Muslim “radicalization.” What are yours?

Joshua Stanton serves as Program Director and co-Editor of the Journal of Inter-Religious Dialogue at Auburn Theological Seminary. He is also a Schusterman Rabbinical Fellow and Weiner Education Fellow at Hebrew Union College.

• Share this on Facebook
• Email this to a friend?
• Share this on Reddit
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!
• Send this page to Print Friendly
• Digg this!
• Email this via Gmail

By Miroslav Volf, Huffington Post

Muslims and Christians can work together to depose dictators and assert the power of the people. We’ve seen it happen on the Tahrir Square in Cairo during the 2011 revolution in Egypt, with devout Muslims and Coptic Christians protesting side by side. But can Muslims and Christians work together to build a democratic society in which rights of all are respected, the rights of minority Coptic Christians no less than the rights of majority Muslims? They can, if they have a common set of fundamental values. But do they? They do, if they, both monotheists, have a common God.

Ever since 9/11, the most common question I am asked when I speak about these two religions is whether or not Muslims and Christians worship the same God. Muslims don’t push the question. But Christians do, vigorously — in Europe, Asia and Africa no less than in North America. Maybe that’s not surprising. In the manual of the terrorists who flew the planes on a suicidal mission it read: “Remember, this is a battle for the sake of God.” In the name of God and with expectations of glory in this world and rewards in the next, they killed themselves and thousands of innocent civilians. To many Christians it seems obvious that the God who spills the blood of the innocent and rewards suicidal missions with paradisiacal pleasures can’t be the God they worship.

The question, however, isn’t mainly about the terrorists and their God. It’s about Muslims generally. It draws its energy from a deep concern. To ask: “Do we have a common God?” is to worry: “Can we live together without bloodshed?” That’s why whether a given community worships the same god as another community has always been a crucial cultural and political question and not just a theological one.

Here are the realities we all face:

• Christianity and Islam are today the most numerous and fastest growing religions globally. Together they encompass more than half of humanity. Consequence: both are here to stay.
• As a result of globalization, ours is an interconnected and interdependent world. Religions are intermingled within single states and across their boundaries. Consequence: Muslims and Christians will increasingly share common spaces.
• Since both religions are by their very nature “socially engaged” and since their followers mostly embrace democratic ideals, they will continue to push for their vision of the good life in the public square. Consequence: tensions between Muslims and Christians are unavoidable.

Growing, intertwined and assertive — communities of Muslims and Christians will live together. But can they live in peace building together a common future?

At the height of the Iraq War in 2004, influential TV evangelist and former U.S. presidential candidate Pat Robertson said: “The entire world is being convulsed by a religious struggle. The fight is not about money or territory; it is not about poverty versus wealth; it is not about ancient customs versus modernity. No. The struggle is whether Hubal, the Moon God of Mecca, known as Allah, is supreme, or whether the Judeo-Christian Jehovah God of the Bible is supreme.” Fighting words these are! Two supreme divine beings always means war.

The fact of the matter is this: fearful people bent on domination have created the contest for supremacy between Yahweh, the God of the Bible, and Allah, the God of the Quran. The two are one God, albeit differently understood. Arab Christians have for centuries worshiped God under the name “Allah.” Most Christians through the centuries, saints and teachers of undisputed orthodoxy, have believed that Muslims worship the same God as they do. They did so even in times of Muslim cultural ascendency and military conquests, when they represented a grave threat to Christianity in the whole of Europe.

After the fall of Constantinople (1453), the city named after the first Christian emperor and a seat of Christendom for more than 1,000 years, Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, a towering intellect and an experienced church diplomat, affirmed unambiguously that Muslims and Christians worship the same God, albeit partly differently understood. Significantly, in response to the fall of Constantinople and the Muslim threat, Nicholas of Cusa advocated “conversation” rather than “crusade,” a strategy pursued doggedly though unsuccessfully by his friend, Pope Pius II. For Nicholas believed that war could never solve the issue between Christendom and Islam.

We live in a different world than Nicholas and Pius II did, but our options are roughly the same. We should resolutely follow Nicholas. The terrorists must be stopped. As to the 1.6 billion Muslims, with them we must build a common future, one based on equal dignity of each person, economic opportunity and justice for all and freedom to govern common affairs through democratic institutions. Muslims and Christians have a set of shared fundamental values that can guide such a vision partly because they have a common God.

On Feb. 18, during the “Day of Celebration,” Sheik al-Qaradawi — one of the most influential Muslim clerics in the world, exiled from Egypt since 1961 — addressed the crowd of over one million. He began by noting that he is discarding the customary opening “Oh, Muslims.” In favor of “Oh, Muslims and Copts.” He praised both for bringing about the revolution together. And he added, “I invite you to bow down in prayer together.” Such prayer, addressed to the common God in distinct ways, lies at the foundation of hope for a new Egypt.

Whether Muslims and Christians worship the same God is also the driving question for the relation between these two religions globally. Does the one God of Islam stand in contrast to the three-personal God of Christianity? Does the Muslim God issue fierce, unbending laws and demand submission, whereas the Christian God stands for love, equal dignity and the right of every individual to be different? Answer these questions the one way, and you have a justification for cultural and military wars. Answer them the other way, and you have a foundation for a shared future marked by peace rather than violence.

Miroslav Volf is the author of ‘Allah: A Christian Response‘ (HarperOne; February 2011), the Henry B. Wright Professor of Theology at Yale Divinity School, and the Founding Director of the Yale Center for Faith and Culture.

• Share this on Facebook
• Email this to a friend?
• Share this on Reddit
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!
• Send this page to Print Friendly
• Digg this!
• Email this via Gmail

By Bob Smietana, USA Today

A proposed Tennessee law would make following the Islamic code known as Shariah law a felony, punishable by 15 years in jail.

State Sen. Bill Ketron, R-Murfreesboro, and state Rep. Judd Matheny, R-Tullahoma, introduced the same bill in the Senate and House last week. It calls Shariah law a danger to homeland security and gives the attorney general authority to investigate complaints and decide who’s practicing it.

It exempts peaceful practice of Islam but labels any adherence to Shariah law — which includes religious practices such as feet washing and prayers — as treasonous. It claims Shariah adherents want to replace the Constitution with their religious law.

A dozen other states are considering anti-Shariah bills, and there’s a federal lawsuit in Oklahoma over one.

Imam Mohamed Ahmed of the Islamic Center of Nashville on 12th Avenue South said Islam teaches its followers to obey the law of the land. Shariah law, he said, teaches moral values.

“What do you mean, really, by saying I can’t abide by Shariah law?” he said. “Shariah law is telling me don’t steal. Do you want me to steal and rob a bank?”

The Attorney General’s Office had no comment.

It is unclear whether the bill will go before lawmakers in its current form. The measure was filed Thursday to beat the deadline to introduce bills for the current session, Matheny said. It has not been assigned to a committee.

Changes considered

Matheny, the House speaker pro tempore, said he is concerned that aspects of Shariah law might conflict with the U.S. Constitution, but he does not intend to criminalize practices such as the preparations for prayer or dietary rules. He said he would consider amending the bill before asking the legislature to consider it.

“I’m still researching it,” he said. “My intent is to educate and to look at it.”

Most anti-Shariah bills in other states would ban courts from citing Shariah law. Oklahoma voters approved a referendum in November that banned state courts from using Shariah law in their rulings. A federal judge blocked the Oklahoma law from being implemented, pending a federal lawsuit claiming it is unconstitutional.

The Tennessee bill goes further by proposing criminal penalties for following Shariah. Matheny said the bill was model legislation, given to him by the Tennessee Eagle Forum, a conservative advocacy group.

Bobbie Patray, state president of the Eagle Forum, confirmed that the law had been drafted by David Yerushalmi, a Chandler, Ariz.-based attorney. Yerushalmi runs the Society of Americans for National Existence, a nonprofit that says following Shariah is treasonous.

He also has close ties to Frank Gaffney, president of the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Security Policy, a key witness for the plaintiffs in a lawsuit against a mosque being built in Murfreesboro.

Backers, critics sound off

Rebecca Bynum, editor of the New English Review, a Nashville-based website that is critical of Islam, supports the bill.

“I applaud Senator Ketron for his effort to protect the citizens of Tennessee from the real and present danger presented by Shari’a and for the deep knowledge and thoughtful consideration that produced this bill,” she wrote in an e-mail. “Even if this bill does not pass, it will have done our citizens a great service by provoking informed discussion of this issue.”

Charles Haynes, a senior scholar with the First Amendment Center in Nashville, disagrees. He said the bill is based on a complete misunderstanding of Shariah law, which he described as a set of voluntary religious rules, similar to Catholic canon law or Jewish religious law.

The bill is wrongheaded, he said.  ”It’s complete nonsense,” he said.

The bill also is unnecessary, Haynes said, because people of all faiths have to follow secular law.

“Civil law and the Constitution of the United States trumps religious law,” he said. “The government can’t label religious laws as wrong or treasonous or evil. The government may not take sides in religion. It may not say what is a good religion or a bad religion.”

Selah Sbenaty, a member of the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro, said state legislators have bigger problems to worry about than Shariah law. He wishes they would spend more time trying to fix the state’s economy and less time worrying about Islam.

“I believe this bill is a waste of our tax dollars, and I am sure the bill will not pass,” he said. “The people of Tennessee are good, loving, hospitable, and do not tolerate bigotry.”

Contributing: Chas Sisk, The Tennessean

See also The Tennessean article “Bill Ketron proposes law to make following Shariah law a felony”