It is about religion

"This is a religious war."

[10-16-01]

Andrew Sullivan, writing in the New York Times Magazine for October 7, 2001, argues against those who are saying that the current conflict is not a religious war, but reflects political and economic tensions and resentments. The religious roots of the current conflict are found in fundamentalism, he says, and we need to understand the dynamics of fundamentalism and violence - in Islam and in our own tradition.

It's fine, he says, to be clear that this is not simply a war of Islam against the West or vice versa, and it is vital that we continue to make this clear. But religion is profoundly involved in the conflict.

"In that sense, this surely is a religious war -- but not of Islam versus Christianity and Judaism. Rather, it is a war of fundamentalism against faiths of all kinds that are at peace with freedom and modernity. This war even has far gentler echoes in America's own religious conflicts -- between newer, more virulent strands of Christian fundamentalism and mainstream Protestantism and Catholicism. These conflicts have ancient roots, but they seem to be gaining new force as modernity spreads and deepens. They are our new wars of religion -- and their victims are in all likelihood going to mount with each passing year."

Sullivan notes Osama bin Laden's appeals to Islam and the Quran as the basis for violence against unbelievers, even though such teachings are a minor part of Islamic teachings. And he adds that we must recognize how Christianity has accepted similar contradictions:

"This use of religion for extreme repression, and even terror, is not of course restricted to Islam. For most of its history, Christianity has had a worse record. From the Crusades to the Inquisition to the bloody religious wars of the 16th and 17th centuries, Europe saw far more blood spilled for religion's sake than the Muslim world did. And given how expressly nonviolent the teachings of the Gospels are, the perversion of Christianity in this respect was arguably greater than bin Laden's selective use of Islam. ... It seems almost as if there is something inherent in religious monotheism that lends itself to this kind of terrorist temptation. And our bland attempts to ignore this -- to speak of this violence as if it did not have religious roots -- is some kind of denial."

It is important, then, to understand fundamentalism, and not simply to dismiss it as ignorant rejection of modernity. After all, fundamentalism "has attracted millions of adherents for centuries, and for a good reason. It elevates and comforts. It provides a sense of meaning and direction to those lost in a disorienting world. The blind recourse to texts embraced as literal truth, the injunction to follow the commandments of God before anything else, the subjugation of reason and judgment and even conscience to the dictates of dogma: these can be exhilarating and transformative."

America has had its own experiences of fundamentalism, although it has been moderated by our tradition of separation of church and state. But during recent decades that barrier has come under attack. "As modernity advanced, and the certitudes of fundamentalist faith seemed mocked by an increasingly liberal society, evangelicals mobilized and entered politics. Their faith sharpened, their zeal intensified, the temptation to fuse political and religious authority beckoned more insistently."

And violence has been a part of this shift, as seen in the murders of abortion providers. "And indeed, if people truly believe that abortion is the same as mass murder, then you can see the awful logic of the terrorism it has spawned. This is the same logic as bin Laden's. If faith is that strong, and it dictates a choice between action or eternal damnation, then violence can easily be justified. In retrospect, we should be amazed not that violence has occurred -- but that it hasn't occurred more often."

"The critical link between Western and Middle Eastern fundamentalism is surely the pace of social change. If you take your beliefs from books written more than a thousand years ago, and you believe in these texts literally, then the appearance of the modern world must truly terrify. If you believe that women should be consigned to polygamous, concealed servitude, then Manhattan must appear like Gomorrah. If you believe that homosexuality is a crime punishable by death, as both fundamentalist Islam and the Bible dictate, then a world of same-sex marriage is surely Sodom. It is not a big step to argue that such centers of evil should be destroyed or undermined, as bin Laden does, or to believe that their destruction is somehow a consequence of their sin, as Jerry Falwell argued."

"The other critical aspect of this kind of faith is insecurity. American fundamentalists know they are losing the culture war. They are terrified of failure and of the Godless world they believe is about to engulf or crush them. They speak and think defensively. They talk about renewal, but in their private discourse they expect damnation for an America that has lost sight of the fundamentalist notion of God."

Sullivan concludes that the crucial resource that has enabled religion to flourish in America, with minimal lapses into violence, is our constitutional principle of separation of church and state. So today, "we are fighting not for our country as such or for our flag. We are fighting for the universal principles of our Constitution -- and the possibility of free religious faith it guarantees. We are fighting for religion against one of the deepest strains in religion there is. And not only our lives but our souls are at stake."

Check out the whole essay!

Note: You will need to register to access the Times web site, and may need to pay to download the article.

Thanks to PresbyWeb for listing this article.

ALSO:

Karen Armstrong discusses Islamic fundamentalism in an interview with Salon e-magazine.