11-27-05
Whatever
Happened to Thanksgiving?
Easter has the Easter Bunny;
Christmas has Santa Claus, but what can possibly
overshadow Thanksgiving? How about confusing the
historical Thanksgiving with ethnic studies focusing on
the white man's oppression on the Indians? How about
materializing it and reducing it to one more shopping
holiday? How about near complete omission? I
live in a small, rural town in the hill county that prides
itself on its history, its buildings, and it quaint German
look. It was the middle of November when I first
noticed that rather than decorating for Thanksgiving the
garland and lights of Christmas were on display.
What Santa and the Easter Bunny have done to Easter and
Christmas, ethnic studies and Christmas materialism have
done to Thanksgiving. So let us now remember what
Thanksgiving is about. It is about a group of devout
puritans who fled the old world is search of religious
freedom. Through periods of severe hunger God showed
his mercy and stayed their troubles and they
survived. Thanksgiving was a joint celebration
between the Puritans and the Indians. But perhaps
that is why there is little real recognition of
Thanksgiving. Perhaps it is because the characters
in the story were Christians who were not oppressing
minorities. Perhaps it is just because they were
Christians and that is too much for our tolerant culture
to tolerate.
11-15-05
A
Quick Word on Secularization
In my previous post, I wistfully
stated that the continuation of bombings by Muslims,
particularly between Muslims, might cause
polarization among Muslims and as a result the secularization
of Islam. But what is secularization and what
would it do for the world? The main cause of the
problem between Islam and politics is precisely the
close relation between the two. Countries where
there is no separation of church and state leads to
similar problems, regardless of the state
religion. For some reason the Spanish Inquisition
and the crusades come to mind. In a joined
church-state society all members of the society must be
members of the "church," by the point of the
sword if necessary. Citizenship in the nation and
"church membership" are synonymous. As a
result of the church state union, the church also has
great power in society. It can oppose political
leaders, banish scientists, and with national
citizenship being equal with church membership,
excommunication takes on a whole new meaning-a complete
loss of identity. When the church no longer has
the state to strong arm the people, then there is great
loss of power and influence. Influenced is reduced
purely to "the faithful." Without any coercion
from the state, people-with the exception of the
devout-become less devout and more absorbed with
whatever they would be doing had it not been for the
interference of the church. This shift of power
from the church to people who are not on church business
limits the political influence of the church reducing it
to a private organization. Thus the status quo is
shifted from monolithic church-state religious fervor,
taking lawmaking and enforcing powers out of the hands
of purists giving it to moderates. If secularization
were to happen to Islam it would begin with a mass
exodus. People who had been converted by the point
of the sword-which is how many people and converted to
Islam-would revert to their pre-conversion belief
system. This alone would deprive Islam of a great
deal of political influence. Without this
political influence, Islam will have to lure converts on
the basis of merit/appeal-and in a modern pluralistic
world Islam has little. Take Islam in the United
States as an example. There is no religious
monopoly here, but rather equality of opportunity to
believe and practice any faith. How does Islam
fare here? Not as strong as in other countries
under other political systems. Not many American
nationals have converted to Islam reducing the influence
of Islam to those whose ethnic background is more
inclined to already be Islamic. That is not to say
that and American Muslim could not take the Quran, read
it, and practice Jihad as outlined therein. But
the percentages of those who are strong and committed
Muslims are greatly reduced. Rather that a joint
church-state religion being practiced, Islam, at least
in America, is being reduced to a kinder more gentler
Islam that views Jihadists as something
non-Muslim. Although even that statement is
hopeful at best and can definitely be
debated
11-11-05
Islam
Gone Mad; Politics gone madder!
Bombings in France, Jordan, and Iraq by Muslims have
shaken the headlines today. The faithful have died
alongside the infidel today. Rather than incite
extreme measures of protection and self preservation,
Chirac, in praise of socialism, said that equal
opportunity may need reform. In spite of the
series of attacks, President Bush in a speech today said
that radical Islam was not the same as true Islam, all
the while quoting the Quran and from an Imam. It
may be true that average Muslims do not see a connection
between themselves and Al-Quaida. All flavors of
Islam come from the same source-the only real difference
between them is their individual level of
dedication. Perhaps the best thing for Islam and
the modern world is that these attacks would polarize
the committed and not so committed Islamic groups.
Perhaps this would start a reaction in the Islamic world
that would lead to the secularization of Islam.
Again, the foundation between extreme Islam and what is
now being viewed as normal Islam are the same. The
difference is commitment. Essentially, even a
secularized Muslim could pick up the Quran and read it
and follow it. However, with the secularization of
Islam perhaps greater levels of commitment will be
shunned. Perhaps all they need is a few liberal scholars...
and we have a few to spare!
|