Addressing Extremism Amidst Religious Plurality

 

Below is a written piece from Rev Dr Lewis Winkler, EAST resident faculty, originally as a response to the aftermath of 9/11. It was revised into a chapter of the book, Faith in an Age of Terror (2017), entitled “Christian-Muslim Dialogue: Challenges and Opportunities.” A further revised and truncated version is reproduced here in light of the recent religious extremism case by a Christian in Singapore. Dr Winkler’s article postulates practical approaches in interfaith dialogue between Muslims and Christians with its attending attitude and ensuing actions.

 

Christians, Muslims, and Religious Extremism: Where Do We Go From Here?

In 2004, Charles Kimball wrote, “[Because] Christians and Muslims today comprise well over 40% of the world population . . . Christian-Muslim relations have become a central concern in our interconnected world community. Without question, the ways in which Christians and Muslims understand and relate to one another in the 21st century will have profound consequences for both communities—and for the world.”[1] This is truer now than it was then as a recent event in Singapore illustrates all too well.[2] Sadly, without a deep and abiding concern for intentional and respectful interaction, interreligious harmony between Muslims and Christians will remain “somewhat vulnerable.”[3]

Read the rest of the article below.

What can be done to foster greater trust and cooperation between these two Abrahamic faiths? In a 2001, Mehmet Nuri Yilmaz, Turkish Minister of Religious Affairs stated, “To me, it is not the presence, but the absence or inadequacy of healthy debate that will have serious negative consequences. Therefore, debate should not be seen as an obstacle to genuine dialogue.”[4] Similarly, Christian scholar J. Dudley Woodberry said, “Meaningful dialogue does not require that the participants relinquish a witness concerning their faith. Nor does it mean we can’t disagree about how they understand their history and faith. But it does require that we listen and learn what they really think.”[5]

We should therefore welcome more traditional adherents from both religions who firmly hold to traditional doctrinal teachings and not merely those who will always agree with one another. This is risky, of course, but as Tariq Ramadan points out, the Koran explicitly states that human diversity is God-ordained and a necessary benefit for all. Thus, “if there were no differences between people, if power were in the hands of one group alone . . ., the earth would be corrupt because human beings need each other to limit their impulsive desire for expansion and domination.” In particular, “if there is to be diversity of religions, the purpose is to safeguard them all.”[6] Ramadan admits other Koranic verses suggest eliminating religious others but argues they must be read carefully to ascertain more appropriate meanings consonant with other more inviting passages. Thus, he believes there are four primary rules for successful interfaith dialogue:

1. Recognition of and respect for the legitimacy of each other’s convictions.
2. Listening to what people say about their own scriptural sources and not just what we understand (or want to understand) them to say.
3. The right, in the name of trust and respect, to ask all possible questions, sometimes even the most embarrassing.
4. The practice of self-criticism, knowing how to discern the differences between what the texts say and what our coreligionists make of them, and deciding clearly what our personal position is.[7]

Beyond these guidelines, Ramadan also contends, “Dialogue is not enough. . . . It is urgent that we commit ourselves to joint action.”[8]

Multicultural, multiethnic, and multireligious communities like Singapore demonstrate that people who disagree on a host of other issues and practices will willingly come together in a pluralistic society to support causes and ends deemed important enough to lay aside differences. How, then, can Christians and Muslims come together practically and effectively? We cannot and will not cooperate with one another if we continue to isolate ourselves and vilify one another using false caricatures and clichéd overgeneralizations about the “other.” Consequently, active dialogue is a critical part of avoiding such temptations.

But as Ramadan suggests, the goal is more than mere survival or a bare minimalist tolerance. Rather, the goal is understanding and cooperation with the other in the ongoing concerns of human life—even when we disagree. But in such an embrace, there must always remain genuine space for the presence and identity of the other. Thus, embrace is not consuming or subjugating the other, but acknowledging and affirming the other. It is an embrace which recognizes one another’s differences, diversities, limitations, and contributions as we struggle together to live in today’s societies. In Miroslav Volf’s words, “for embrace [of the religious other] . . . we need to make space for them in our own identity and in our social world (though how that space will be made remains open for negotiations). We need to let them reshape our identity so as to become part of who we are, yet without in any way threatening or obliterating us but rather helping to establish the rich texture of our identity.”[9] Thus, we not only receive, we also offer the enriching potential of goodness and truth to others.

As we interact, we both change the other and are changed by the other in a dialectical journey of exchange, incorporation, reorientation, and reinvigoration of the practices and truth claims we hold dear. There is, of course, risk involved which may result in the loss or gain of membership, depending on how things go in the contestation over time. But without such risk and opportunity, traditions become stagnant, closed off from the future of new possibilities, impoverished in their outlook, and in some tragic instances, even willing to engage in violent opposition to all who disagree.

How, then, do we pursue this kind of genuinely respectful mutuality in Christian-Muslim dialogue? One way to begin is through confession and forgiveness leading to spiritual and relational healing. We all have personal and historical culpabilities that warrant an admission of guilt alongside a sense of repentance and remorse. People on both sides have been vilified, subjugated, and even killed in the name of religion. The genealogical and spiritual connections to our religious communities mean that like the prophet Daniel, we have a responsibility to confess and mourn over the sins of our past as well as our present.[10] This confession includes face-to-face admission and the seeking of forgiveness and reconciliation with those who have historically been our enemies. This kind of forgiveness often requires interpersonal processing and may involve considerable initial investments of time and energy, but the long-term benefits for all are significant.

An additional dialogical virtue is humility, an attitude that recognizes the need to listen, learn from, and admit inadequacy, ignorance, and error.[11] Christianity, for example, recognizes that both sin and finitude corrupt and limit our understandings and moral sensibilities. Consequently, there are often rich resources available to one another through mutual interfaith dialogues which have yet to be appreciated and explored. People possess divinely-bestowed gifts and abilities which graciously enrich others, no matter where they are, who they are, and what religious or cultural tradition they are a part. Thus, God’s goodness is demonstrated in and to all humanity, and is not limited to Christianity or Islam alone.[12]

When done well, such interactions have the potential to produce more open, just, and peaceful human societies. Ultimately, both religions must be convinced at some level of the importance of prioritizing ongoing interreligious interactions. Long-term strategic planning among religious leadership is critical to avoid reactive versus proactive problem solving, and leaders and teachers must actively educate and encourage members of their respective faith communities to dialogue with and serve alongside others.

To make this happen, often a “champion” or point person is needed to raise commitment and interest levels for interfaith dialogue with other religions. Churches, denominations, organizations, religious schools, and mosques all need to initiate, support, and fund programs that encourage the acceleration of interfaith conversations as well as day-to-day interactions of Christians and Muslims with one another in their places of work, play, rest, and worship. This will improve the art as well as the science of interfaith dialogue. The more we discuss matters of faith, politics, education, ethics, law, etc., the better we can become at listening, understanding, articulating, defending, and incorporating the viewpoints of our own faith and others, and the more likely our claims about God and His world will be increasingly comprehensive, coherent, and therefore true. As progressive Muslim Amir Hussain argues,

It is important for . . . Muslim communities in general to return to the pluralistic vision of the Qur’an, and establish cooperative relations with other religious communities, particularly at this time. There are a great many negative stereotypes about Islam and Muslims, and it is only through dialogue that these will be slowly dismantled. And of course dialogue is also necessary for Muslims to learn about the beliefs of those around them. It is easy to be taught to hate Christians and Jews (as for example tragically occurs in Saudi Arabia) if there are few actual Christians and Jews in one’s country.[13]

He then concludes, “God speaks to us in the Qur’an about God willing our differences and our disputes. Our differences . . . are not to be feared, denied, or eradicated. God teaches us through our differences. It is through dialogue that we learn about ourselves, about others, and, in so doing, perhaps also about God.”[14]

Successful and long-lasting societies are built upon shared language, goals, ideals, practices, and values. These values and practices are, to greater and lesser degrees, embedded within world religions which have similarly prospered and grown through time. To ignore them is to impoverish and limit ourselves from time-proven, rich deposits of priceless communal resources. Consequently, religious people freely practicing the moral obligations of their faith tradition are more likely to be pillars for the betterment of society as a whole than those who ignore, deny, or distort religious values and resources. As Abdulaziz Sachedina puts it,

Human beings are subject to weakness, temptation, arrogance, narrow-mindedness, and, self-interest. . . . In this struggle, religion is the fount of inspiration. It inculcates ethical responsibility and personal accountability for one’s actions. Furthermore, it generates incentives to correct one’s social misconduct by emphasizing consequences of moral choices. The religious belief in the hereafter prompts human beings to identify actively with the cause of justice and work for it.[15]

Far from the secularist vision of pushing religious goals and ideals to the margins, cooperative interfaith dialogue can promote social cohesion and concretely demonstrate an ability to “agree to disagree,” living out the kind of unity in diversity contemporary communities and governments are seeking to achieve.

As the recent case in Singapore shows, religious extremism is still a major problem, and much work remains to ensure religious freedom for all is genuinely granted and that the state will permit a religious plurality that is not static or illusory, but dynamic and real. Careful criteria must be provided and enacted through the process of dialogue to help determine if and when the state should step into a religious dispute. It should be a policy which, as much as possible, reduces ambiguity and loopholes which might allow unjust governments and overly zealous religious adherents to penalize religious apostates inappropriately and ruthlessly.

In conclusion, the ongoing process of Christian-Muslim dialogue is daunting and will never be fully complete. Nevertheless, real progress can result even if, practically speaking, fundamental and intractable disagreements remain. Overall, Christians and Muslims are moving in the right direction, but such efforts must be accelerated and multiplied to provide communities with the resources they need to be ethical, free, peaceful, and plural. This will not be easy and requires a long-term view and a cooperatively creative mentality, but it will be worth the effort invested. Of course, interfaith dialogue is not a “cure all,” but it is a critical part of providing viable long-term solutions to the many social, ethical, and political problems so pressing in our world today. In the process, serious disagreements are inevitable, but inappropriate responses to them are not.

 

References

[1] Charles Kimball, “Toward a More Hopeful Future: Obstacles and Opportunities in Christian-Muslim Relations,” Muslim World 94, no. 3 (July 2004): 379.

[2] See https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/16-year-old-detained-under-isa-for-planning-terrorist-attacks-at-two-mosques-in-singapore

[3] Hugh Goddard, A History of Christian-Muslim Relations (Chicago: New Amsterdam Books, 2000), 186.

[4] Mehmet Nuri Yilmaz, “The Context for Reflection,” in Christian and Muslim Reflections, xii.

[5] J. Dudley Woodberry, “Can We Dialogue with Islam? What 38 Muslim Scholars Said to the Pope in a Little-Known Open Letter,” Christianity Today 51, no. 2 (Feb. 2007): 109.

[6] Tariq Ramadan, Western Muslims and the Future of Islam (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004), 202.

[7] Ramadan, Western Muslims, 210.

[8] Ramadan, Western Muslims, 211.

[9] Miroslav Volf, “Living With the ‘Other’” in Muslim and Christian Reflections on Peace: Divine and Human Dimensions, J. Dudley Woodberry, Osman Zümrüt, and Mustafa Köylü, eds. (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 2005), 17. This article echoes the themes of his earlier work, Exclusion and Embrace: A Theological Exploration of Identity, Otherness, and Reconciliation (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1996).

[10] See Daniel 9:1-15. Concerning this, Yohanan Friedmann, Tolerance and Coercion in Islam: Interfaith Relations in the Muslim Tradition (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 4, has the following encouragement for Muslims: “Rather than denying the existence of certain intolerant elements in medieval Islamic thought, modern Muslims might instead admit that such elements exist, while at the same time exercising their power to reject these and embrace the more liberal and tolerant principles in their tradition. Some modern Christian institutions have already taken this way: they grapple with their historical guilt for acts such as the massacres perpetrated by the Crusaders or for the excesses of the Spanish inquisition by decrying . . . ‘the hatreds [and] persecutions . . .’ rather than embarking on futile attempts to deny their historicity.”

[11] This is especially important for those from more exclusivistic perspectives since these tend to be more easily exploited by exclusionary ideologies. We stand within the tensions of holding to the truth of our faith while still giving humble recognition that we may have missed aspects of God’s comprehensive truth in the world. Until the eschaton, our comprehension of comprehensive truth is provisional, even if we believe our current limited grasp of it is very likely to be reliable and accurate, so far as we can see. We hold our views with conviction, but not without a willingness to explore alternative ways to explain and comprehend what we have experienced and grasped for ourselves. This is a stance of what I call, “confident humility.”

[12] This point is made by John Calvin in his Institutes of the Christian Religion, vol. 1, John T. McNeill, ed., trans. Ford Lewis Battles (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1960), 273-5.

[13] Amir Hussain, “Muslims, Pluralism, and Interfaith Dialogue,” in Progressive Muslims: On Justice, Gender, and Pluralism, Omid Safi, ed. (Oxford, UK: Oneworld Publications, 2003), 267.

[14] Hussain, “Interfaith Dialogue,” 267.

[15] Abdulaziz Sachedina, The Islamic Roots of Democratic Pluralism (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), 129.