Christian or Muslim Theocracy: Which Would Be Worse?

Rev. Paul Beckel

First Universalist Unitarian Church ~ www.uuwausau.org

April 9, 2006

 

 

When I was younger, almost all Baptists were strongly committed on a theological basis to the separation of church and state. It was only 25 years ago when there began to be a melding of the Republican Party with fundamentalist Christianity, particularly with the Southern Baptist Convention. This is a fairly new development, and I think it was brought about by the abandonment of some of the basic principles of Christianity.

Jimmy Carter

 

 

The delusional is no longer marginal. It has come in from the fringe, to sit in the seat of power in the Oval Office and in Congress. For the first time in our history, ideology and theology hold a monopoly of power in Washington.

Ordained Baptist Minister, Bill Moyers

 

 

I trust God speaks through me. Without that, I couldn’t do my job.

George W. Bush July 16, 2004

 

 

In 2004, forty-eight out of fifty-one Republican Senators

voted with the Christian Coalition 100% of the time.

            theocracywatch.org

 

 

OPENING WORDS

This is the day celebrated around the world by christians as “Palm Sunday.” It commemorates Jesus’s triumphant entry into Jerusalem, when he was met by crowds hailing him as savior -- a growing crowd who adored him, who swore their allegiance to him, who begged him to become their King.

 

So is this day to be celebrated because it marks the height of Jesus’s popularity? ...Because this popularity confirms that he must have been a pretty good guy? No. I celebrate Palm Sunday because of how Jesus responded to the crowd. Because of his humility, his foresight, and his integrity. When offered the chance to merge his spiritual leadership with political power... when offered the chance to be the people’s ruler, even their God... Jesus said, “No.”

 

GATHERING HYMN            Come, Come, Whoever You Are           #188

lyrics by 13th century Afghan/Sufi poet, Jalaluddin Rumi

[Though you’ve broken your vows a thousand times...]

Come, come, whoever you are, wanderer, worshipper, lover of leaving

Ours is no caravan of despair. Come, yet again, come.

 

READINGS   

 

(Sources: wikipedia.com; theocracywatch.org; NRSV Bible; Kevin Phillips, American Theocracy; Sydney E. Mead, The Old Religion in the Brave New World; Sam Harris, The End of Faith)

 

The Book of Exodus, in Hebrew scripture, conveys a strict code of justice:

o                    Whoever strikes father or mother shall be put to death.

o                    When a slaveowner strikes a...slave with a rod and the slave dies immediately, the owner shall be punished. But if the slave survives a day or two, there is no punishment; for the slave is the owner's property.

o                    If you lend money to my people, to the poor among you, you shall not deal with them as a creditor; you shall not exact interest from them.

o                    You shall not wrong or oppress a resident alien, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt.

 

Exodus even speaks about having steps in a place of worship: “You shall not go up by steps to my altar, so that your nakedness may not be exposed on it."

 

Ancient Christian scripture, rooted within a similar cultural setting, offers this guidance:

Wives, be subject to your husbands as you are to the Lord. [Ephesians 5:22]

 

Islam honors both the Jewish and the Christian heritage, whose followers are recognized as “People of the Book”... then adds its own stamp on social and legal principles:

o                    In theory, Islamic law allows husbands to divorce their wives at will, by clearly saying "I divorce you" three times in public. In practice divorce is more involved, and state proceedings vary. For example, a Malaysian court has ruled that, under Sharia law, a man may divorce his wife via text messaging as long as the message was clear and unequivocal.

o                    In most interpretations of Sharia, the death penalty is applied for homosexual acts. According to the opinions of scholars, acceptable means of performing the execution included burning, throwing from tall buildings, and stoning.

o                    Many African Muslims believe that female circumcision is required by Islam, but a large number of Muslims believe this practice has no basis in Islam. Nevertheless it is justified on religious grounds both by Muslims and Christians who practice it.

 

Text messaging is one of many ways that practitioners of these traditions have embraced the modern world. And yet, certain Enlightenment ideals remain elusive:

o                    Christian Evangelist Jerry Falwell: “I hope to live to see the day when, as in the early days of our country, we won’t have any public schools. The churches will have taken them over again, and Christians will be running them.”

o                    Federal judge James Leon Holmes, appointed in July, 2004 has stated: “The final reunion of Church and state will take place at the end of time, when Christ will claim definitive political power of all creation, inaugurating an entirely new society based on the supernatural.”

o                    U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia writes: "When God brings Noah through the flood to a new earth, He re-establishes the Dominion Mandate but now delegates to man the responsibility for governing other men in order to protect human life. He does this by instituting capital punishment - the backbone of civil government."

o                    John Whitehead, president, Rutherford Institute: "The challenge of the Christian attorney is to be a vocal, dynamic spokesman for the true legal profession - the one with Christ at its center, and stop at nothing less than reclaiming the whole system."

o                    Rev. Sun Myung Moon, head of the Unification Church, owner of The Washington Times, and co-host of George W. Bush’s 2001 inaugural prayer lunch has said: “we must have an autocratic theocracy to rule the world.... We can embrace the religious world in one arm and the political world in the other.”

o                    Gary North, writing in Christianity and Civilization: “We must use the doctrine of religious liberty to gain independence for Christian schools until we train up a generation of people who know that there is no religious neutrality, no neutral law, no neutral education, and no neutral civil government. Then they will get busy in constructing a Bible-based social, political and religious order which finally denies the religious liberty of the enemies of God."

 

]]]

"A woman came to the prophet and asked for purification by seeking punishment. He told her to go away and seek God's forgiveness. She persisted four times and admitted she was pregnant. He told her to wait until she had given birth. Then he said that the Muslim community should wait until she had weaned her child. When the day arrived for the child to take solid food, Muhammad handed the child over to the community. And when he had given command over her and she was put in a hole up to her breast, he ordered the people to stone her..."

 

]]]

A vicious email I received this week went on at length about why Muslims cannot be good Americans. It’s conclusion: ...we should be very suspicious of ALL MUSLIMS in this country.... Pass it on. The war is bigger than we know.”

 

]]]

Sidney Mead writes: “My country right or wrong is the ultimate idolatry in politics....”

 

SERMON

There has been a great deal of talk in the news lately of “Sharia,” which is the Arabic word for Islamic law.[1] The stereotype of Sharia is that of harsh punishment and little respect for due process, evidence-gathering, or the rights of the accused. Sadly this image is based on real practices in some countries. However, practices vary a great deal. Countries with the largest Muslim populations, including Indonesia, Bangladesh and Pakistan, follow only a few Islamic provisions -- in family law. Turkey, though predominantly Muslim religiously, has a secular constitution.

 

Most countries of the Middle East and North Africa maintain a dual system of secular courts and religious courts, in which the religious courts mainly regulate marriage and inheritance. Saudi Arabia and Iran maintain religious courts for all aspects of jurisprudence. And religious police enforce compliance.

 

Depending on the country, Sharia may address anything from criminal law to dietary law. Sharia ensures that animals are butchered cleanly, humanely, and in the name of God. Properly butchered meat is called “halal.” Most Muslims will also accept kosher meat as halal.

 

In regard to marriage under Sharia, a Muslim man may marry any woman of the “People of the Book” (Jewish or Christian); however, a Muslim woman cannot marry a non-Muslim man unless he converts to Islam.

 

Islam does not prohibit women from working, but emphasizes the importance of housekeeping and caring for the families of both parents. And according to most interpretations, authorization for the husband to physically beat disobedient wives is given in the Qur'an.

 

Theft can be punished by amputation of one or both hands, adultery can result in stoning, and conversion from Islam to Christianity, as we’ve been reminded recently, can be punished by execution in Afghanistan.

 

Some will say that these laws are barbaric; others say they are a helpful deterrents to crime. Regardless, we should be aware that without constitutional protection of individual human rights, and religiously-neutral governments, holding elections in Afghanistan and Iraq will not prevent this kind of thing.

 

]]]

Kevin Phillips’ recent book American Theocracy is dedicated to the millions of Republicans who have opposed our national slide into disenlightenment. Phillips had been a principle theorist in the ascendancy of the Republican majority over the past 40 years. But he expresses dismay and deep regret that the majority he worked to build is now controlled by religious zealots rather than fiscal conservatives. He sees today’s Republican Party as a party of apocalyptic fear mongers and end-time prophets who care little for the long-term viability of our system of government.

 

Phillips compares America today to powerhouses of the past: Rome, Hapsburg Spain, the 17th century Dutch Republic, and 19th century Britain. The decline of each of these commercial and military empires -- the most powerful of their own time -- occurred in the context of five factors clearly prevalent in America today:

1.                   widespread public concern over cultural and economic decay

2.                   growing religious fervor, church-state relationship, or crusading insistence

3.                   rising commitment to faith as opposed to reason, and a downplaying of science

4.                   considerable popular anticipation of a millennial timeframe: that is, the emergence of an antichrist, and the expectation of the end-times, Armageddon, or a second coming of Christ

5.                   hubris-driven military over-reaching

 

Rome declined approximately 400 years into the Common Era -- a few decades after becoming a Christian theocracy. Things started going downhill after 325, when the Nicene creed was written into stone. Now you may wonder if my comments are those of a sore loser -- since the Council of Nicea rejected both unitarian and universalist approaches to christianity. But I’m not sad that the unitarians and universalists lost that doctrinal battle. If unitarianism or universalism had been officially adopted by the Roman Empire and had been enforced by threat and coercion...this would have corrupted a couple of pretty good ideas. The entanglement of christianity with the Roman empire was of benefit to neither church nor state.

 

The Church gained imperial power once again in the 15th century under the Hapsburgs, culminating in the reign of Ferdinand and Isabella and highlighted by the brutalities of the Inquisition. The Spanish monarchy, which had controlled much of Europe, was ruined within a few decades.

 

But we think we’re different. We’re God’s new chosen people. Some say a modern Christian theocracy wouldn’t be like Sharia...wouldn’t be like the medieval crusades. Others say Christian theocracy would be as bad as any other theocracy, but it’s is never going to happen here -- our system has checks and balances to prevent that.

 

And it’s true we do have a strong system of checks and balances. We are not highly centralized. We have a marvelous web of overlapping legal and commercial and civic and religious life. And within and between each of these arenas are countless more overlapping arenas: counties and school districts and congressional districts not like concentric circles in a hierarchy, but a collage of power-sharing. Within the religious arena we have coalitions which may seem a bit strange, such as Unitarians and Jehovah’s Witnesses who share little in theology, but who work together for religious freedom. And we have cross-arena coalitions, like the AFL-CIO supporting the gay rights folks to oppose amending the Wisconsin State Constitution.

 

You may roll your eyes at this idealistic notion of a “collage of power sharing.” I admit it’s a pretty light-hearted image. An equally valid image would be that of a web, and not a delicate web but a tug of war in every direction. Take your pick of images. The point is that, yes, there are checks and balances. Whether because of our stubborn independence or conscientious interdependence, our political and cultural and religious choreography unite us, and keep us accountable to one another.

 

However, in crisis, or when threatened from the outside, we tend to subvert our independent spirit. We tend to slacken our commitment to persuasion as opposed to coercion. We tend to fall back into the pit of American exceptionalism -- the belief that we have a manifest destiny, we are not bound by the rules that apply to others (not even bound by the rules that we apply to others), and we need not worry about the lessons of history, the consequences suffered by other nations who arrogantly thought they, also, were exceptions.

 

One month after 9-11, President Bush gave a speech to the nation not terribly different in tone from that of Osama Bin Laden. Both described, in effect, a battle between good and evil, “where Sons of Light confront Sons of Darkness, and all must enlist on one side or the other, without possibility of neutrality, hesitation, or middle ground.”[2]

 

We fall so easily into this trap. Instead of facing the complexities of real life, we sing Hosanna for the King, the Savior, who will give us clean crisp answers. A Superhero who will carry us through to safety. Isn’t that much easier than having to listen to one another, and negotiate our differences; isn’t that much easier than trying to apply broad principles on a messy reality?

 

So this is what we get: HIV treatment which has been identified as medically unsound by the National Institutes of Health, the American Medical Association, and the American Academy of Pediatrics. What “treatment” is that? Abstinence-only sexual education. 

 

We get hearings before the Food and Drug Administration regarding a pregnancy pill, in which rather than hearing the testimony of the forty-five-thousand-member American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the FDA invites the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

 

We get a statement by 62 preeminent scientists including Nobel laureates and former advisors to the administrations of both parties which charges the Bush administration with a widespread and unprecedented “manipulation of the process through which science enters into its decisions.”[3]

 

We get a government which is unable to focus on our real crises in health care, economy, education and environment, and regulates instead: family, sex, and who can die when. We get a government which looks to faith-based solutions for natural disasters.

 

I’m not suggesting that the present administration is like the Taliban, with its public executions held as half-time ceremonies at soccer matches. But it is no secret that those who would have Christ return to rule both heaven and earth have tremendous influence in public life today.

 

Both the Texas and Arizona Republican parties have recently passed platforms calling us to Christian nationhood. “Dozens of other related pronouncements have been made by state parties .... The Oklahoma GOP, for one, came out against the separation of church and state.”[4]

 

The Texas state GOP platform also called for elimination of the income tax, the inheritance tax, the gift tax, the capital gains levy, the corporate income tax, the payroll tax, and state and local property taxes. I’m not saying that these are inherently bad ideas. But instead of proposing an alternative, the goal appears to be: to dismantle secular government altogether.

 

[[[

Religious conservatives have every right to promote their causes and to win in political battles if they can pull together a majority. The problem is when the winners then dismantle the system, in order to lock out everyone else.

 

Those who are elected hold in trust the temporary right to govern -- only as long as they ensure basic constitutional protections for individuals, and uphold basic systemic structures designed to prevent the abuse of power, and to ensure perpetual peaceful revolution.

 

Instead we now see the dismantling of the first amendment non-establishment clause, dismantling of the right to privacy, dismantling of our free and fair electoral process... and a congress made extraordinarily rigid by the high cost of running for office.

 

We have elected leaders, including Bill Frist, Tom DeLay, and influential religious leaders like James Dobson, who have all suggested shutting down the courts when the courts disagree with them. And we have Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, who claims that the American courts pose “a greater threat to representative government” than “terrorist groups.”

 

We have a veil of secrecy called “national security” behind which government can do whatever it wants.

 

[[[

Is there an alternative? Is there a way to be religious and a good citizen and supportive of your neighbor’s religious quest?

 

I think there is. A 1977 study by the 3 largest Lutheran synods revealed that 75% say belief in Jesus Christ is absolutely essential for salvation. AND 75% asserted that all roads lead to god and it doesn’t matter which way one takes. That is, 50% held two mutually exclusive positions at the same time. Is this a sign of insanity? I don’t think so. I think it simply points to the paradoxical nature of religion. That is, most Americans understand that when we talk about such intangible abstractions as god and salvation, we need to take everything with a grain of salt.

Religious pluralism came to be in these United States not by grand principle but simply by realistic pragmatism -- by people giving each other some slack where necessary. In order to survive in a hostile new environment, they had to turn a blind eye to religious heresy and non-conformity. Many of the colonists, fleeing religious oppression from elsewhere, would have loved to stick it to their neighbors here. But it would have cost too much to enforce. They would have lost their unity and their ability to pursue practical ends. Giving one another slack is no less necessary for our survival today.

Yes, there can be a conflict between a strict interpretation of one’s religious doctrine and the necessity of civil tolerance. But when the conflict arises between love of country and love of humanity -- which is more christian? Alexander Hamilton stated that love for mankind must always temper love for country. That is, national security is not always the ultimate consideration.

 

Theocracy is not just bad politics, it is bad religion. It is idolatry. It is worshipping the form rather than the substance, the transient rather than the permanent.

 

[[[

How do religious liberals contribute to this mess? Unfortunately, in our commitment to tolerance we become reluctant to criticize religion, when necessary, when it interferes with the common good.

 

In our difficulty articulating the promise of individual authority, we slip into promoting “you can believe anything you want”... which makes it impossible for us to meaningfully critique absurdity and anti-scientific public policies.

 

Our ongoing task, then, is to better understand, articulate, and teach Enlightenment principles... to communicate and promote these principles in public schools, public elections, and through alliances with Christians and Muslims and Humanists.

 

What principles? The ideals which support religious pluralism and neutral civil authority, transparency, open debate, competition, science, and human rights.

 

Throughout history theocrats have picked over scripture to find words to support their point of view. I don’t fault them for this. We do the same thing. The important difference is that we are up-front about our process of acquiring knowledge. We allow our evidence to be aired openly and to be subject to contradiction.

 

Which brings us back to Sharia. Fareed Zakaria writes: “Little is to be gained by searching the Qur’an for clues to Islam’s true nature.... Islam, like any religion, is not what books make it but what people make it.

 

So one can be a good Muslim without “going by the book.” Turkey has shown that mosque and state can co-exist peacefully without entanglement.

 

As I see it, that’s what Jesus was criticizing -- going by the book; following the laws but losing the spirit of the law.

 

And the spirit of law in America is Freedom. Sharia does not allow freedom of speech when it comes to criticizing the prophet Muhammad. There, I believe, is a fatal flaw. For life to thrive in both the civil and religious arenas, no one may be above criticism. Neither god nor man nor country.

 

Benjamin Franklin prayed God would “grant that not only the love of liberty, but a thorough knowledge of the Rights of Man, may pervade all the Nations of the Earth, so that a Philosopher may set his foot anywhere on its Surface, and say “This is my Country.”

 

CLOSING HYMN                  This is My Song                          #159



[1] Much of this explanation of Sharia is from wikipedia.com

[2] Bruce Lincoln in Holy Terrors

[3] “Scientific Integrity in Policymaking: An Investigation into the Bush Administration’s Misuse of Science,” February 2004, Union of Concerned Scientists; www.ucsusa.org

[4] Phillips