| |
| Join Our Newsletter |
 Please Select sub-criteria |  |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
23 December 2004
Dear Editor
I note that the aim of New Civilisation is to present 'Islamic political thinking, hitherto unrecognised in the western world'. Your editorial also describes the magazine, or its contents, as a 'gauntlet', so as a 'Westerner' I am responding to that challenge.
First of all, though, I would like to challenge that label. I may be Western but I follow a Middle-Eastern religion - Christianity. This need not createany tension with Western living, however it may also mean that identification with 'the West' is not everything. Additionally, there are plenty of 'alternative' movements within the West which challenge the dominant Western ethos, e.g. the anti-globalisation campaign, or the work of environmental organisations, which also inform my personal/political stance, alongside my faith position. The question I would like to pose is: how distinct is 'Islamic political thought' (apart from the khilafah concept) from other outlooks? Looking through your magazine there are articles challenging globalisation, abuses at Abu Ghraib; capitalism and consumerism; the 'War on Terror'; political extremism and lack of provision for the elderly. In none of these situations are Muslims the only ones who see injustice and seek to achieve change. In fact this is a feature of good religion and good will (amongst those who do not profess a religion); all of the world religions have in common a concern for the wellbeing of humanity, justice and mercy. I acknowledge that sometimes we need to be reminded of these things by people of other faiths, sometimes of the riches in our own faith (e.g. Gandhi), and that has been my own experience in my contact with Islam and Muslims, though I have not seen us as so different, long-lost cousins perhaps.
One small point where I feel that I need to take issue is the mention of ‘Jesus' words 'War on Terror': “render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's”. This statement can be endlessly misinterpreted by both Christians and Muslims (I don't know what a Jewish perspective might be and I do not intend any offence to Jewish believers). In fact, in its way, this is an Islamic statement, Jesus no more associated anyone with God (without getting into arguments about the Trinity) than Muhammad (pbuh) did. There is no logic to the claim that he compares God and Caesar as equals, even in different spheres. Caesar's authority, compared to God's, is precarious, he has to label his property so that people know it is his, especially coins, thus entitling him to his share of tax. Jesus could also have been trying to subvert the practice of the 'moneylenders' (those who changed secular coin into religious coin) by suggesting that there was no problem with secular coin - surely it would be better to give this money directly to God than to allow intermediaries to make a profit on money-handling (also not very Islamic). The other side of this is that the religious coin used for Temple offerings, although approved by God, wasn't official money. So Jesus is also making a subversive observation, as he often did, rather than issuing a fatwa to his followers. Finally, the religious leaders weren't asking Jesus a serious question anyway; they were trying to trap him somehow. Note also that Jesus doesn't say what belongs to God (though Psalm 24 gives the answer - 'the earth is the Lord's') again it is obvious, Jesus could not be describing any kind of limitation of God's sphere of interest.
I hope that in future editions you may engage more with those with whom you have common cause, whether Friends of the Earth, Christian churches or other faith organisations, or even the 'Buy Nothing' campaign. Perhaps there can be more recognition of our shared historic European Judaeo-Christian-Islamic heritage and our future legacy of insights from Hindu, Buddhist and Sikh traditions. This heritage, and future inheritance, provides the foundation for the challenge that all faiths can, and often hope to, bring to our secular spaces. With some minor differences, there are many that think as you do.
Best wishes and success from God for future editions.
Julian Bond
| |
|
|
