G. K. Chesterton on Islam

I thought my tiny but select group of readers might find these comments by the great G. K. Chesterton (1874-1936) of interest:

“…but out of the desert, from the dry places and the dreadful suns, come the cruel children of the lonely God; the real Unitarians who with scimitar in hand have laid waste the world. For it is not well for God to be alone.” -- from Chesterton's wonderful book, Orthodoxy, a book every human being should read. It was written 108 years ago, in 1908.

“There is in Islam a paradox which is perhaps a permanent menace. The great creed born in the desert creates a kind of ecstasy out of the very emptiness of its own land, and even, one may say, out of the emptiness of its own theology. It affirms, with no little sublimity, something that is not merely the singleness but rather the solitude of God. There is the same extreme simplification in the solitary figure of the Prophet; and yet this isolation perpetually reacts into its own opposite. A void is made in the heart of Islam which has to be filled up again and again by a mere repetition of the revolution that founded it. There are no sacraments; the only thing that can happen is a sort of apocalypse, as unique as the end of the world; so the apocalypse can only be repeated and the world end again and again. There are no priests; and yet this equality can only breed a multitude of lawless prophets almost as numerous as priests. The very dogma that there is only one Mahomet produces an endless procession of Mahomets. Of these the mightiest in modern times were the man whose name was Ahmed, and whose more famous title was the Mahdi; and his more ferocious successor Abdullahi, who was generally known as the Khalifa. These great fanatics, or great creators of fanaticism, succeeded in making a militarism almost as famous and formidable as that of the Turkish Empire on whose frontiers it hovered, and in spreading a reign of terror such as can seldom be organised except by civilisation…” -- from Chesterton's brief book, really a eulogy, on Lord Kitchener (1917).

“When people talk as if the Crusades were nothing more than an aggressive raid against Islam, they seem to forget in the strangest way that Islam itself was only an aggressive raid against the old and ordered civilization in these parts. I do not say it in mere hostility to the religion of Mahomet; I am fully conscious of many values and virtues in it; but certainly it was Islam that was the invasion and Christendom that was the thing invaded." -- from Chesterton's book, The New Jerusalem (1920)

The above comments make one wonder what Chesterton would have thought of Islam today, particularly those expressions of Islam that manifest themselves as ISIS, al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, et al.

Chaos Rising

Here I am, just a few weeks shy of my 70th birthday, and I can't recall a time in my life when both the nation and the world seemed to be moving so rapidly toward the brink of total chaos. One can only marvel at those in the affluent, self-absorbed West who bury their heads in the sand believing all is right in the world.

You'll quickly discover what I mean if you spend a morning or afternoon watching the business shows on CNBC or Fox Business Channel. The denizens of these networks, whether bulls, bears, or creatures in-between, distill everything down to economics. Money and high finance rule. Each apparently believes that, at its core, every problem is related to the economy. Party affiliation or political labels seem to matter little. Their solutions certainly vary, from the libertarian's "anything goes" approach that borders on anarchy to the don't-call-me-a-socialist's "turn it all over to the government" approach that leads only to Orwell's Big Brother. And as they talk, and predict, and cheer and jeer, the stock ticker runs across the bottom of the screen, a constant reminder of the current state of these tiny pieces of the economy. For those worried about the condition of their 401Ks, or who hope their penny stocks will soar into Apple territory, I suppose it's all very addictive. The viewer comes to believe that ultimately  the shape of the future will be determined by the Dow Jones Average.

In truth, the future of civilization will be determined by the battles being waged between ideology and religion, between the many brands of totalitarianism and freedom, between a horrific brand of Islam and civilization itself, between those who worship man as a god and those who worship a Man as God. If you were to ask an al-Qaeda leader or an ISIL follower (or ISIS or whatever these barbarians call themselves today) why they wage war against the West, I'm pretty sure the answer wouldn't focus on economics or NASDAQ futures. They know we are in the midst of a global war, a spiritual war that most people in Western Europe and the U.S. blithely ignore. 

Western elitists, the descendants of a Christendom that no longer exists, are apparently oblivious to the ramifications of what's taking place in the world's unenlightened corners. They don't take the idea of spiritual warfare seriously because they don't take the idea of God seriously. In their enlightened progressivism they believe that society, especially their society, is moving unrelentingly forward. And they believe this despite the global barbarism of the past hundred years. I suspect such thinking often arises from a subtle form of racism that views events in the so-called Third World and the Southern Hemisphere as unimportant or certainly far less important than what happens in the developed world. At best it's the product of a myopic parochialism that prevents one from seeing beyond its self-defined borders. And for some it stems from simple ignorance, abetted by the political correctness that controls much of what passes for education these days.

And yet the war rages and continues to expand. One thing is certain: unlike many in the developed West, the people of Africa and the Middle East know they are in a war zone. Although the Middle East will always be the primary battleground, Africa might eventually rival the Middle East because Christianity on that continent has experienced such remarkable growth. This growth is perceived as a real threat by those who would destroy Christianity. Based on the common, erroneous belief that Christianity, and more specifically Catholicism, is in decline, few Westerners, including Western Christians, are aware of the extent of this growth. For example, how many know that Catholics in sub-Sahara Africa increased from 2 million in 1900 to over 130 million in 2000? -- a remarkable growth rate of over 4% annually. Or that Gallup estimates the total number of African Catholics today at over 200 million? The fact that the growth of the Catholic Church in Africa has outpaced the growth of the continent's overall population is a sign of some very healthy evangelization. 

According to recent study by CESNUR (The Center for the Study of New Religions), among African countries, 31 have Christian majorities, 21 have Muslim majorities and 6 have populations which adhere mostly to traditional African religions. In 1900 Christians in Africa totalled ten million; in 2012 this number reached five hundred million. In 1900 only 2% of Christians in the world were African; today, this figure has risen to 20%. In ten years time Africa will be the largest continental bloc within Christianity, outdoing Europe and the Americas. “This data is still not widely known," stated sociologist Massimo Introvigne, CESNUR’s founder, "but they have a profound historical, cultural and political significance. There are now more practicing Christians in Africa than in Europe. In the long run, this will not only change Africa but Christianity as well, as John Paul II had intuited..."

“Of course, not everyone is happy about this development,” Introvigne added. The sociologist claimed that this growth in the number of Christians across the African continent is likely behind many of the attacks on Christians. “Some Islamic ultra-fundamentalists consider it scandalous that there are more Christians than Muslims in Africa and proceed to persecute and kill Christians in countries such as Nigeria, Mali, Somalia and Kenya. The way the ultra-fundamentalists see it, today the battle which will determine whether the world will be Muslim or Christian is being fought in Africa. And that Islam is losing. This is why they are responding with bombs.” In Egypt the Muslim Brotherhood's primary target has been Christians and Christian churches. The same is true of Boko Haram in Nigeria. And the Islamists who carried the Nairobi mall massacre made a point of singling out Christians.

This desire to destroy Christianity isn't restricted to Africa. It's even more apparent in the Middle East. We've heard a lot of talk out of Iraq recently about the potential "genocide" of the Yazidi people by ISIL. And what is happening to that people is certainly horrendous. But how many Westerners realize what's happening to the larger Christian community in Iraq? Indeed, how many know what's been happening to Christians throughout the world, particularly in Muslim-majority countries? Christians in Pakistan and Iran are persecuted, imprisoned and murdered simply because of their beliefs. In Iraq the Islamist jihadists of ISIL are beheading young Christian children and displaying their severed heads on pikes. They are crucifying Christians and staging mass executions of anyone who resists converting to their vicious form of Islam. As a result Christians are fleeing the Middle East and their once-thriving communities have all but disappeared.

About all this our nation has done little, and said even less. Indeed, our selective concern seems almost arbitrary. In 2011, we joined the British and the French and bombed Libya's Gaddafi regime out of existence. Ironically, it's likely more Libyan civilians have died since Gaddafi's overthrow than before. And as the power of the Islamists has increased in that country, so too has the persecution and exodus of Libyan Christians.

Only a year later, when confronted by a far worse situation in Syria, we did virtually nothing, other than draw some imaginary red lines in the sand. The result has been the deaths of tens of thousands of Syrian civilians and the growth of ISIL into a formidable military force. And now, with half of Iraq in the hands of ISIL, we limit our response to humanitarian assistance and highly selective air strikes that have only driven ISIL underground where they will resort to classic insurgency tactics. I suspect ISIL, flush with cash and modern weaponry, will only grow stronger. And in the meantime the Christians of Syria and Iraq are being slaughtered by the jihadists. 

After Mass yesterday morning a parishioner asked me, "Are we in the end times? Do you think Jesus will come soon?" I told her I had no idea. Indeed, Our Lord made a point of reminding us that no one knows when the end will come. But He also told us not to ignore the signs. Read Matthew, Chapter 24, and pray for our world, for yourself, and for those you love. Pray that in the midst of the chaos, we will remain true to Jesus Christ and His One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.

I conclude with the words of Pope Benedict XVI:

"...from the beginning the Church lives in prayerful waiting for her Lord, scrutinizing the signs of the times and putting the faithful on guard against recurring messiahs, who from time to time announce the world's end is imminent. In reality, history must run its course, which brings with it also human dramas and natural calamities. In it a design of salvation is developed that Christ has already brought to fulfillment in his incarnation, death, and resurrection. The Church continues to proclaim this mystery and to announce and accomplish it with her preaching, celebration of the sacraments, and witness of charity." [The Joy of Knowing Christ, p. 115]

Irish and Islamist Terrorism

Not long ago a friend, speaking of what he called the "tensions in the Middle East", told me that eventually the Israelis and Palestinians would follow the example of the Irish and come to a "reasonable solution" that would no doubt lead to lasting peace. I thought this was more than little Pollyannish and suggested that the two conflicts were not at all alike. He, however, countered that there was little difference between the IRA and Islamist groups such as Hamas or Hezbollah or the Muslim Brotherhood or even al-Qaeda. "We just need to get them all together with the Israelis," he argued, "apply some serious diplomacy, and they will come to see that violence never leads to success." When I said that World War II was a rather obvious example of the successful application of violence, he got personal and said, "That's the sort of warlike talk I'd expect from you." (He knows I am a retired naval officer.) At this point I concluded there was little reason to continue our argument.

Sadly this all occurred before I read the following article by Clifford May, or my (rhetorical) weapons would have been considerably more effective. May is president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a policy institute focusing on national security. The article appeared this week on National Review Online. I intend to share it with my friend, who I am certain does not read this blog or NRO.

Dublin — In 1978, I was a young foreign correspondent assigned to cover “the Troubles,” the conflict in Northern Ireland between Protestants and Catholics, between those loyal to the British Crown and those determined to make Ireland a united and independent nation. There were “paramilitaries” on both sides. Terrorism — bombings, assassinations, and other forms of violence targeting civilians for political ends — was among the principal weapons employed.

But in at least one way, terrorism was different then: Although I sometimes worried that I might end up on the wrong Belfast street at the wrong time, I was confident that no one saw me as a target. Journalists were neutrals. “Loyalists” and “Republicans” alike were eager to tell me their stories, and have me retell those stories to distant audiences. Without fear, I would sit down with hard men and ask tough questions.

At some point over the years since, new technologies and ideologies brought changes that became obvious when the Wall Street Journal’s Daniel Pearl took his notebook and pen to a 2002 meeting with terrorists in Karachi. They had a different approach to shaping the narrative — one that would entail beheading Pearl on camera and posting the video on the Internet.

The Troubles wracked Northern Ireland for almost 30 years. More than 1,500 people were killed. In those days, that was a serious number. But early in the new century, nearly twice as many innocent people would be killed on a single day in New York, Pennsylvania, and Arlington, Va. Meanwhile, in Syria over the past year, a conflict with ethno-religious-political undercurrents has taken some 20,000 lives. Perceiving this as an inflationary trend does not inspire optimism.

Queen Elizabeth & Martin McGuinness, former IRA commande

George Will, the venerable columnist, once cited Northern Ireland as one of the world’s two “intractable” conflicts. The other was what was then known as the Arab–Israeli conflict, today more usually called the Palestinian–Israeli conflict, though in reality it is now Islamist regimes and movements that are most seriously waging what they call a jihad against Israel.

Will was wrong about Ireland. The Troubles ended with the Good Friday Agreement of 1998. Two Northern Irish politicians, John Hume and David Trimble, were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize — a rare occasion on which the awards were actually deserved.

Today, Northern Ireland remains British. But a good road connects the Republic in the south with the United Kingdom in the north, and no border guards or checkpoints impede travel between the two. Former terrorists, reformed if not repentant, serve in Northern Ireland’s government. Rightly or wrongly, Queen Elizabeth II shook hands with one earlier this year.

On a brief return to Northern Ireland this week, it was apparent that there are still tensions, still segregated neighborhoods, still pubs where Protestants and Catholics do not mix. But the Troubles ended when most people on both sides accepted the idea of an imperfect peace, when they came to see compromise as preferable to more killing and dying, and when they tired of the poverty and degradation that chronic carnage brings in its wake.

Should that give us hope that peace in the Middle East also is possible and perhaps even imminent? Absolutely not.

At its worst, the IRA never sought the destruction of Britain and never vowed to wipe Protestants off the Irish map. The most extreme Protestant paramilitaries did not argue that southern Catholics had no right to self-determination.

These days, it is fashionably multicultural and politically correct to assign blame in roughly equal measure to Israelis and Palestinians. It also is patently false. Time and again, Israelis have demonstrated their willingness to compromise in order to achieve an imperfect peace with their neighbors, not least those in Gaza and the West Bank.

Hamas, by contrast, is openly committed to Israel’s annihilation, attacking those who would settle for less as traitors and apostates. Fatah’s spokesmen, at least in Arabic, express solidarity with Hamas on that score. Meanwhile, Iran’s rulers, Hezbollah, and the Muslim Brotherhood all continue to insist that they will never accept Israel, that they will not allow even the tiniest swath of the Middle East to be ruled by non-Muslims, least of all the despised Jews, who, it is charged with bewildering inconsistency, defied the Prophet Mohammed in ancient Arabia and have no roots in the region.

“There are fascist forces in this world,” David Trimble said in his 1998 Nobel Lecture. “The first step to their defeat is to define them.” In Ireland, enough people took that step, and what Trimble has termed “a sort of peace” has been the admirable result. In the Middle East, too many are still unwilling or unable to take that first step, and so no other steps can follow.

Here's a link to Clifford May's original article on NRO: Letter from Ireland

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

al-Qaeda Threatens Copts

The growing antipathy toward Christians in much of the Muslim world has taken a new twist. The leading jihadist terrorist group, al-Qaeda, has published the names, addresses and telephone numbers of 100 Egyptian-Canadian Coptic Christians it claims are responsible for encouraging Muslims to convert to Christianity. Calling those named the "dogs of diaspora" an al-Qaeda website threatens to "cut off their heads."

Such threats should not be taken lightly, particularly after a team of terrorists linked to al-Qaeda slaughtered dozens of Catholics in a Baghdad church a few weeks ago. Since then al-Qaeda has labeled Christians as "legitimate targets" and encouraged its supporters to kill them.

All of this, plus the seeming growing support among Muslims for terrorist groups like al-Qaeda, Hamas and Hezbollah, makes one wonder exactly where the majority of Muslims stand. And even if a majority reject terror, would that really make very much difference? I suspect not.

Is Islam a religion of peace?

Or is it something else entirely?











These seem to be questions only Muslims can answer for the rest of the world. I believe I can safely say that we Christians will never cease our peaceful evangelistic efforts, even among Muslims. To do so would be a rejection of the great commission Jesus gave us: "Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you..." [Mt 28:19-20] It would seem, then, we are faced with what appears to be an inevitable conflict, certainly one that cannot be resolved by human means. Recent history seems to bear this out, as one peace effort after another crumbles under the weight of hatred.

I'm reminded of the prayer Pope Benedict prayed at Ground Zero during his visit to New York in 2008:

O God of love, compassion, and healing, look on us, people of many different faiths and traditions, who gather today at this site, the scene of incredible violence and pain.

We ask you in your goodness to give eternal light and peace to all who died here — the heroic first-responders: our firefighters, police officers, emergency service workers, and Port Authority personnel, along with all the innocent men and women who were victims of this tragedy simply because their work or service brought them here on September 11, 2001.

We ask you, in your compassion to bring healing to those who, because of their presence here that day, suffer from injuries and illness.

Heal, too, the pain of still-grieving families and all who lost loved ones in this tragedy. Give them strength to continue their lives with courage and hope. We are mindful as well of those who suffered death, injury, and loss on the same day at the Pentagon and in Shanksville, Pennsylvania.

Our hearts are one with theirs as our prayer embraces their pain and suffering. God of peace, bring your peace to our violent world: peace in the hearts of all men and women and peace among the nations of the earth.

Turn to your way of love those whose hearts and minds are consumed with hatred. God of understanding, overwhelmed by the magnitude of this tragedy, we seek your light and guidance as we confront such terrible events.

Grant that those whose lives were spared may live so that the lives lost here may not have been lost in vain. Comfort and console us, strengthen us in hope, and give us the wisdom and courage to work tirelessly for a world where true peace and love reign among nations and in the hearts of all.

Here we encounter the Holy Father praying for the conversion of those who would carry out such horrendous acts of terror. Perhaps we should all make this our prayer as well.

God's peace...

Muslims and al Qaeda

Although Mark Twain borrowed the phrase, I believe it was Benjamin Disraeli who first said, "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics." I found this to be generally true when in graduate school I took a course in probability and statistics. Toward the end of the quarter our professor gave us an interesting assignment. Providing us with a large amount of data about some subject that I can no longer recall, he instructed us to manipulate and present the data in two ways that would support completely contrary conclusions. What amazed me at the time was how easy the task actually was. Success was obviously not determined by the data itself, but by how one presented the data -- what was included, what was omitted, and what words one used when presenting the conclusions. It was my introduction to what we now call "spin."

I begin with this anecdote because one can certainly come to different conclusions based on some recent polling conducted by the Pew Research Center. The survey in question was conducted this past spring by Pew's Global Attitudes Project and sought to determine, among other things, Muslim attitudes towards Hamas, Hezbollah, and al Qaeda -- all considered terrorist organizations by the U.S. and most western nations. Muslims in seven nations -- Jordan, Lebanon, Nigeria, Indonesia, Egypt, Pakistan and Turkey -- were surveyed. While the survey addressed a range of issues, the results that most interested me were the Muslim public's attitudes towards these three terrorist groups. I've included a Pew graphic below.

Pew reports in its conclusions that,

"While views of Hamas and Hezbollah are mixed, al Qaeda -- as well as its leader, Osama bin Laden -- receives overwhelmingly negative ratings in nearly all countries where the question was asked. More than nine-in-ten (94%) Muslims in Lebanon express negative opinions of al Qaeda, as do majorities of Muslims in Turkey (74%), Egypt (72%), Jordan (62%) and Indonesia (56%). Only in Nigeria do Muslims express positive views of al Qaeda; 49% have a favorable view and just 34% have an unfavorable view of bin Laden's organization."

This may sound like good news until one does the math by applying the percentages of those who view al Qaeda favorably to the overall Muslim population figures for these countries. As it turns out, in just these seven nations something like 130 million Muslims view al Qaeda favorably. (For more on this, see the commentary by Brian Fairchild at Pajamas Media.) Yes, those who look kindly on al Qaeda may be in the minority, but they still represent a lot of people. And if history tells us anything it's that a small number of dedicated and ruthless people can lead successful revolutions despite the opposition or apathy of a large majority.

I thought these survey results were particularly interesting given al Qaeda's recent statement that one of its goals in Iraq is the destruction of all things Christian, including presumably Christians themselves. It's disturbing to think that so many Muslims would agree with such sentiments.

To view the survey results as presented by Pew, click here: Muslim Public Divided.

Pray for peace and conversion.

Support for Sharia Law

There seems to be a widely held belief in the West that only a small minority of Muslims support Islamist terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda or the Taliban, that most Muslims do not want to live under the harsh reality of Sharia Law, and that Muslims are generally respectful of other religions. And yet, when one looks for evidence to support these beliefs, there is little to be found. Perhaps the opinion makers who believe these things speak only with Muslims who not only live in the West but have drunk the Kool-Aid of Western culture. Or maybe they just listen to front organizations like the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) who love to tell us what we want to hear. As I stated above, there's little evidence to support these beliefs which are contradicted by the facts.

For example, a series of polls in which Pakistani Muslims were asked about their religious and political beliefs indicated that a solid majority support the idea of "strict Sharia Law" being the law of the land in Pakistan. (See one poll result here: Reuters Cites IRI Pakistani Poll.) There's also widespread majority support among the general population in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and other Muslim nations for the strict application of blasphemy laws that call for the death of anyone who violates them. In Pakistan the blasphemy law is actually quite vague and has been frequently misapplied and even used by some to accuse others with whom they might have a dispute. Here's the core of the law as stated in the Pakistani penal code:

Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation or by any imputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine." 

Lots of room for misapplication in those words, and many Christians and others have suffered as a result, And yet a vast majority of Pakistanis support the strict application of this law.

Obviously, if a Pakistani Catholic were asked to state the Church's teaching as it relates to Muhammad, and he replied honestly, he would be guilty of blasphemy and risk the death penalty. Indeed, such a law would pretty much preclude any serious religious dialogue between Christians and Muslims, at least inside Pakistan where the law is enforced. Is it any wonder that Christians tend to keep a rather low profile in Muslim nations?

Another element of Sharia Law widely supported in Muslim nations is the prohibition against "apostasy" in which anyone who converts from Islam to another religion must be put to death. In other words, if you convert, you die.

The following video (in German, but translated with subtitles into English) addresses the plight of Egyptian apostates who converted from Islam to Christianity. The Gohary and Hegazy families are living in terror under the constant threat of being killed. Jussuf al Badri, the Egyptian Islamic jurist depicted in the video states that under Sharia “God has commanded us to kill those who leave Islam.” Such is the fragile and tragic plight of apostates in Muslim countries who daily face the threat of vigilantism and death.

Sharia is designed to govern all aspects of life, from relations between the sexes to business ethics. In some nations, aspects of Sharia have become part of modern legal codes and are enforced by national judicial systems, while others are a matter of personal conscience. Entirely secular law is not an option under a classical interpretation of Islam. David Powers, Professor of Islamic Law at Cornell, stated, 'In Islam, there is no separation between the secular and the sacred. The law is suffused with religion.'

The increasing support for Sharia Law among the general population in Muslim countries often puts the people at odds with their political leadership. For example, in Pakistan and Egypt, while those in power have created a division between secular and Sharia courts, the people overwhelmingly favor the idea of Sharia Law as the sole judicial system. In this, then, the people are more in tune with the teachings of Islam then are their leaders. Terrorist organizations like Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, by strongly supporting the imposition of Sharia Law, have cleverly exploited this disconnect between the people and their current political leadership in some Muslim countries. And although most Muslims reject al-Qaeda and the Taliban and their terrorism, support for them and their policies is growing. The situation doesn't bode well for the future.

News from Baghdad. The Christian churches of Baghdad have called on Iraqi Christians to participate in a day of fasting on December 9 to commemorate those Christians who were killed when al-Qaeda terrorists stormed Our Lady of Perpetual Help Cathedral on October 31. Women, children, and two priests were among the 46 Christians murdered in the attack. Over 70 others were wounded. More information here: IRAQ Churches Plan Day of Fasting. I think it would be a good thing for all of us to join our Iraqi bothers and sisters in the day of fasting and prayer.