RSS Feed
Parsley's Mindset Not All That Needs to Change
The Question: John McCain's spiritual guide, televangelist Rod Parsley, calls Islam a "false religion" that should be "destroyed." Should McCain renounce Parsley? Will Islam be an issue in this year's U.S. presidential election?
That John McCain courts the counsel of Christian ideologues is not terribly surprising. Previous support-seeking solicitations at the steps of Jerry Falwell’s Liberty University show McCain’s proclivity for right-of-center piety. Though it is unlikely that McCain would ever follow Falwell’s folly in calling Prophet Muhammad a “terrorist”, it is no secret that McCain is theologically misguided on Islam. McCain’s recent confusion in differentiating Shia and Sunni groups in Iraq and eagerness to substantially ramp up the U.S. war on Islamic extremists could combine for an accidental war on the whole lot of them. The unfortunate fallout of such a war footing is that McCain, like President Bush, often fails to nuance his rhetoric vis-à-vis Islam. As a result, the current perception of America among Muslims worldwide would only deteriorate further.
But as other “On Faith” bloggers have already observed, the real issue here is not whether or not McCain should renounce Rod Parsley. Yes, the comments are inflammatory and abhorrent and, theologically-speaking, incorrect. And yes, Parsley undermines prospects for improved relations between Muslims and non-Muslims in the U.S. and broadly speaking, between the West and the Muslim world. Any U.S. president should have zero tolerance for intolerance – whether it is John McCain, Barack Obama, or Hillary Clinton. Renouncing Parsley’s poorly parsed prejudice, then, is essential and McCain must quickly act to preclude further damage to his campaign.
Beyond renouncing Parsley, however, what looms largely over the presidential election is the general trend towards upholding the Bush administration’s policies vis-à-vis the Muslim world. Here, all three candidates are culpable. Obama vehemently denies any Muslim affiliation, professing, in contrast, his Christian identity. Clinton responds to this issue as if Obama was plagued with an incurable disease. And McCain’s near total ignorance on Shia and Sunni differences is a throwback to US Congress’s ill-informed approach to Islam post-9/11. His association to Parsley will no doubt ring loudly throughout the Muslim world.
For America’s new president to maintain the Bush status quo with the Muslim world puts West-Muslim world relations on even more fragile precipice. The U.S.-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (Islamic republics), the brewing wars on Iran and Pakistan (also Islamic republics), and crippling boycotts in Gaza, creates a dangerous brew of resentment within the Muslim world. The persistent and pervasive perception amongst Muslims is that America has its sights set on Islam – and people like Parsley only reinforce this fear.
What is needed, then, from a President McCain, Obama or Clinton is to balance one of America’s greatest values – that of the freedom of religion – with a solid and sound assessment of religion. In separating church and state, the founding fathers’ primary intent was to ensure the rights and freedoms of even the early American Atheist, not to strip from the State the wherewithal to understand and navigate religious dynamics influencing politics.
Current U.S. foreign policy, consequently, seems to be dangerously devoid of due diligence when it comes to dealing with Islamic states and Muslim. Equipping U.S. government representatives, whether from the State Department, Defense Department or Congress, with the knowledge and skills to deal adeptly with religious leaderships abroad would radically alter, and ultimately improve, West-Muslim world relations. This should be top priority for presidential hopefuls McCain, Obama and Clinton. Additionally, the millions of Muslims in America, if courted respectfully, are perfectly positioned to be the new President’s greatest asset in building bridges between the fractious and divide West-Muslim world relationship.
At minimum, that is what is needed if America wants to see less, not more, anti-U.S. sentiment surge in the Muslim world. Renouncing Parsley is important, but a more fundamental shift must follow if the new American president is to be taken seriously.
By
Feisal Abdul Rauf
|
April 4, 2008; 1:30 PM ET
Share This: 
Technorati
| Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook
Previous: Who Claims Martin Luther King Jr? |
Next: Nonviolence Still the Way
Posted by: Thomas Baum | April 8, 2008 12:37 PM
Report Offensive Comment
You believe he reversed it to appeal to the religious right precisely why? Because you think every Republican conservative is a member of the religious right?
Sorry but there are a lot of people in this country who aren't even Republicans let alone Christians who think that water boarding is nicer treatment than the likes of Al Zawahiri deserves. And you aren't a liberal you're a leftist. Historical liberalism supports the notion of limited government.
Posted by: Garyd | April 8, 2008 12:08 AM
Report Offensive Comment
"Though it is unlikely that McCain would ever follow Falwell’s folly in calling Prophet Muhammad a “terrorist”, "
Frankly, sir, if he took what he said was a strong stand against torture on the basis he was *tortured himself* ...and then reversed it to appeal to the Religious Right...
Well, I count nothing unlikely with that dude.
Posted by: Paganplace | April 7, 2008 9:25 PM
Report Offensive Comment
GeorgiaSon:
You must learn to respect other people's faith. The fact that 9-11 was/is celebrated throughout Islam or the author carelessly failed to notice any of that sort of thing does not relieve you of the duty as an American to respect the great Islamic faith and all faith as well. This is not a Christian nation but it is a faith nation. No faith is same as no count.
Posted by: BGone | April 7, 2008 9:23 PM
Report Offensive Comment
On the whole, I agree with the writer. The United States needs a more nuanced, sophisticated approach to Islam. But I have a major caveat. Mr. Rauf, in his catalog of alleged US missteps, has nothing to say about Muslim faults and Muslim contributions to creating the current tensions.
"The US led wars in Afghanistan and Iraq"?? Does Mr. Rauf have anything to say about why we are in Afghanistan to begin with? About the continued freedom of the leaders who brought us 9/11? About the apparent willingness of Muslims on the Afghan-Pakistan border to allow Al Qaeda freedom of operation? Pakistan's failure to crack down on Al Qaeda's bases in Pakistan?
Does Mr. Rauf have anything to say about the repressive police state in Iran and its defiance of international opinion to continue building its nuclear option? "Crippling boycotts in Gaza"?? Does Mr. Rauf have anything to say about Palestinians' choosing to be led by a terrorist organization, Hamas? About the sleaziness and corruption and all around lack of leadership in Fatah?
In fact, does Mr. Rauf have anything to say about the fact that virtually every Muslim country on earth is a repressive police state? About the fact that the single largest bloc of countries on earth that have not made even a token bow to democratic elections but are still ruled by kings, queens, princes, princesses, ruling families, sultans, and sheikhs are Muslim countries? About the lack of freedom of expression in those countries? The dearth of publication of books and scholarly treatises?
The United States could show more enlightenment, for sure. But doesn't the real source of tensions between the US and the Muslim world stem from the incompatibility of Islam with liberal democracy and with modernity?
Posted by: GeorgiaSon | April 7, 2008 10:00 AM
Report Offensive Comment
All religions are false. Look at the precepts of any and you will see how silly they all are. Rode into heaven on chariot. Virgins for martyrs. Talking burning bushes, and virgin births. Even the more pacifistic religions are silly in the precepts. Unfortunately, the big three are not pacifistic, but are violent.
Virgins for martyrs? I question any and all men who place such high value on virginity, rather than a person's inner self. Give me a break.
Posted by: Jim M | April 7, 2008 1:33 AM
Report Offensive Comment
You say:
"Yes, the comments are inflammatory and abhorrent
and, theologically-speaking, incorrect."
There is a verse in the Koran that says if the Koran has any inconsistencies it could NOT be from Allah (Quran 4:82). I agree. Well it has inconsistencies and outright contradictions (abrogation) by the Quran’s admission (Quran 2:106) therefore it could not be from Allah. Since Muslims believe it is from Allah , then it is a false religion.
Posted by: Ibrahim Mahfouz | April 6, 2008 11:44 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Peace, Paz, Shalom, Ahimsa, Salaam..!
Posted by: O.ne U.niversal R.eligion is "IT" (not a he/Him nor a She/Her) | April 6, 2008 11:05 PM
Report Offensive Comment
"If Islam is a 'false religion' then so, too, must Christianity and Judaism," Rev. John Bryson Chane, Episcopal bishop of Washington.
The Rev. is absolutely wrong. Islam came after Judaism and Christianity and depends on these religions for its legitimacy. Therefore, if both these religions are wrong, then Islam is wrong.
But Islam's illegitimacy will not nullify Judaism and Christianity, as these relgions do not depend on Islam to justify their existence.
Posted by: Mohammad Asghar | April 6, 2008 10:25 PM
Report Offensive Comment
link to the text of the Hamas Covenant
Posted by: valerie | April 5, 2008 7:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment
How can you say all this, when even King Abdullah has not dared specifically repudiate the recent fatwa by Sheik Abdul-Rahman al-Barak, calling for the murder of Abdullah bin Bejad al-Otaibi and Yousef Aba al-Khail? The latter two are writers who published newspaper articles taking the position that Muslims need not regard adherents of other faiths, such as Christians and Jews, as apostates.
If Muslims want outsiders do develop a more positive view of their religion, they need to do something about the violence and foul language being poured out from it in the name of Allah. A good first step would be repudiation of the Hamas Covenant
Hamas Covenant
Posted by: valerie | April 5, 2008 7:28 PM
Report Offensive Comment
The comments to this entry are closed.
TO FEISAL ABDUL RAUF:
You wrote: "Yes, the comments are inflammatory and abhorrent and, theologically-speaking, incorrect."
If you are referring to the statement that islam is a false religion as being "theologically-speaking incorrect", you don't have a clue what "Christianity is even about and for that matter there are many so-called "Christians" that don't have a clue what "Christianity" is about.
If Jesus is not God-Incarnate, then Christianity does not even exist, the big picture, so to speak, of Judaism is that by the obedience of a few that God became One of us and lived long enough to die for ALL OF US, and the big picture of Christianity, so to speak, is that Jesus invited us to "Come follow Me" and carry on the work begun by God and to be completed by God and with whoever wishes to be, a willing and active participant, in God's Plan.
God's Plan is for ALL OF HUMANITY and for ALL OF CREATION, it is called "GOOD NEWS", it is not called 'good enough news'.
The seventh day shall arrive [the new heavens and the new earth] but the night of the sixth day will come first, be ready.
Jesus taught LOVE, He did not teach tolerance, there is a big difference.
Jesus said, "I have come to fulfill the Law not to abolish the Law" and you know what, that Law is God Himself, LOVE.
God is a Being of Love, Pure Love and God is a Trinity and Jesus is God-Incarnate.
The Jews are the chosen people for the simple reason that God chose them and formed them.
There are many that think just because they claim Jesus as their "Saviour", that it doesn't matter what kind of utter bile that they spew out of their mouth in God's Name.
Like I have said, "God is a Being of Love" and it doesn't matter what kind of "religious" or "non-religious" label you put on yourself, but it does matter what you do, and why you do it and what you know.
Being a Christian is not telling others how to live or trying to force yourself on others or trying to force your beliefs on others, it is at least trying to accept Jesus's invitation to "Come follow Me".
God is a searcher of hearts and minds, not of religious affiliations or lack thereof.
I guess you could group [political correctness and watered-down christianity] as that luke-warmness spoken of in Revelations.
God is not the ego maniac that some "christians" think that He is.
We have free will and we are responsible for what we do, is that such a hard concept to accept?
Repenting is being sorry for the wrong that one does and also taking personal responsibility for what one does.
God knew that not all would repent and that is why God has a PLAN.
Take care, see you and the rest of humanity in the Kingdom [the new heavens and the new earth].
Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.