Faith and Fanaticism

Google Image
The terrorism events in Paris have generated debates about religion and fanaticism and provide ammunition to those who believe religion is irrational and violent. The debates are a good thing, but the view about religion, I believe, is misguided. 

A BBC reporter recently interviewed a woman in England who defended the brutal and lethal methods of radical Islamic groups like Al Qaeda and ISIS, which appear to favor mass killings and beheadings in their attempts to conquer parts Iraq and Syria.

When the reporter asked the woman, who had been accused of promoting terrorism in Great Britain, how she could justify breaking British law, she replied that she must obey God’s law rather than civil law. She seemed to apply that principle to the Middle East killings as well.

It reminded me of the passage from the Acts of the Apostles in the Christian Bible in which Peter and some other apostles were hauled before the Jewish Supreme Council in Jerusalem. Council members berated the apostles for preaching about Jesus after the Council had forbidden them to do so.

“Didn’t we give you strict orders not to teach in Jesus’ name?” the chief priest asked the apostles. Peter answered, “It’s necessary to obey God rather than men.”

Christians would likely classify the woman in Britain and the terrorists in Paris as fanatics, but not Peter and the apostles. There appears to be a fine line, however, between religious fervor and fanaticism, so what’s the difference?

The dictionary defines a fanatic as a person “marked by excessive enthusiasm and often intense uncritical devotion.”

The part about “excessive enthusiasm” is hard to deal with because “excessive” is subjective. I’ve noticed that in some Spanish-speaking countries, the name for "soccer fan" is “fanatico.” So fans are expected to be fanatics when it comes to their sport. Should religious people be any less enthusiastic about their faith?

It’s the second part of that definition that, I believe, is key here, especially the word “uncritical.”

The woman in Britain acknowledged to the reporter, who was evidently a Muslim herself and well-versed in the Quran, that she had not actually studied the Quran nor Islamic theology, but that “wise mullahs,” whom she respects, had and she had adopted their views.

Google Image
In other words, the woman had not done her homework, and that, in my view is what principally separates religious people from fanatics. Most religions, though steeped in mystery and subject to doubt, are rational. They require thoughtfulness and critical thinking. And although I haven’t read much of the Quran, no religion that I know promotes violence.

A few believers do, of course, and appear to be determined to impose their views on others.

If you’re thinking primarily of Islam, however, here’s what one Muslim leader recently had to say on the subject during a recent interview on Fox News. Ahmadiyya Muslim Community USA Spokesperson Qasim Rashid condemned the attack in Paris and refuted the notion that Islam is inherently violent.

"This is not an Islamic act of terror," he said; "this is just an act of terror done by people claiming to ascribe to Islam. When we study Islam, we see clearly that the Quran condemns this kind of violence categorically. That Prophet Muhammad said that a Muslim is one from whom all others are safe.”

Why, then, asked the interviewer, do “these Islamic extremists, these terrorists use the Quran as justification for committing these kinds of violent acts?”

Answered Rashid: “Well, it's the same reason why any extremist group uses scripture. There's no shortage of extremists in everything. Let's not forget the Lord's Resistance Army, a Ugandan terrorist group that claims to be Christian. And I would vehemently argue against anyone who would blame the Bible, or Jesus Christ, for their acts of terrorism.

This is not about religion,” he said. “This is about political power, this is about uneducated, ignorant youth who are being manipulated by clerics and extremists. And this is why it's all the more important for us, as the moderates, regardless of faith, to stay united and combat this.”

Besides Rashid, the French Muslim Council, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Arab League, and Al-Azhar, a 1,000-year-old seat of religious learning respected by Muslims around the world, issued statements condemning the Paris attacks.

People searching for God have sufficient struggles with faith, and have sufficient doubts about religion, without having to deal with the question of whether religion is inherently violent. Despite the few who want to impose their “faith” on others by force, the vast majority of religions are rational and teach love and peace, and the vast majority of religious people are rational, loving and peaceful.   


 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Gospel of The Little Prince

The Devil You Know

‘Spiritual but Not Religious,’ Revisited