More on Maximus

Reuters journalist and long time university friend Aziz el-Kaissouni wrote a report on Bishop Maximus, who has led a recent controversial split in the Coptic Church.

US-based religious group challenges Coptic church
CAIRO, July 11- A Greek Orthodox fringe group based in the United States has angered Egypt’s largest and oldest church by sending an Egyptian bishop with liberal ideas to Cairo to win followers among Egyptian Christians. Continue reading More on Maximus

Wafa Sultan = Ann Coulter?

Wafa Sultan is pilloried by an American rabbi in this LA Times column, in which he calls her “Islam’s Ann Coulter”, after hearing her at a pro-Israel Jewish conference. Incidentally, while Sultan can speak wherever she wants, I find it a bit weird that, when American Jews get together to support Israel, they want to hear someone attack Islam. It’s a bit as if Israel Shahak (an equally controversial, but altogether more respectable figure than Sultan) was the keynote speaker at the Organization of the Islamic Conference. But the column asks the right question about Sultan’s warped world-view:

The more Sultan talked, the more evident it became that progress in the Muslim world was not her interest. Even more troubling, it was not what the Jewish audience wanted to hear about. Applause, even cheers, interrupted her calumnies.

Continue reading Wafa Sultan = Ann Coulter?

Who will be the next pope?

Does anyone find it weird that Pope Shenouda III was scheduled to Germany this week for an emergency spinal cord operation — the exact same pretext that Mubarak went to Germany last summer for? The pope’s kidneys are also in bad shape, apparently, and he might be heading to the US for treatment.

Nahdet Misr’s leading article yesterday worries about his health and wonder who would replace him. Valid question — the Coptic pope has been in power for longer than Mubarak himself (since 1971) and has played an overtly political role in Egypt, breaking with long-standing tradition by, for instance, endorsing Mubarak for re-election last September. That controversy also exists within the church, with a monastic tendency that tends to eschew temporal power that has been increasingly at odds — and come under attack — from Shenouda, notably embodied by the followers of Father Matta Al Miskeen and the monks of the monastery of Makarious.

Needless to say, the election of a new pope should something happen to Shenouda would come at an interesting juncture in Egyptian politics, especially when Copts are increasingly disgruntled (and vocal) about the discrimination they endure.

My friend Paul Schemm wrote an excellent article about the roots of this split in the church in the Cairo Times (Volume 6, Issue 39) a few years ago, I might post it at some point when I get back to Egypt.

Marx and Bin Laden

I came across an interesting article on Marxism and Terrorism. I recommend reading all of it. I couldn’t help but drawing parallels between the behavior of some of the 1800s European anarchists (discussed by the author in the beginning of the article) and the current Islamist Takfiri groups, especially in their justification of civilian casualties with the no-one-is-innocent approach. If you don’t have time, then just scroll down to the section on “Today’s Islamist terroristsâ€� that tackles Al-Qa3da and suicide bombings. The author argues there’s nothing unique about Islamic cultures that would produce suicide bombers, providing a secular analysis to the phenomenon. Continue reading Marx and Bin Laden

Dawa in Amreeka

Interesting NYT article on American converts to Islam who become imams:

Most American mosques import their clerics from overseas — some who preach extremism, some who cannot speak English, and most who cannot begin to speak to young American Muslims growing up on hip-hop and in mixed-sex chat rooms. Mr. Yusuf, 48, and Mr. Shakir, 50, are using their clout to create the first Islamic seminary in the United States, where they hope to train a new generation of imams and scholars who can reconcile Islam and American culture.

The seminary is still in its fledgling stages, but Mr. Yusuf and Mr. Shakir have gained a large following by being equally at home in Islamic tradition and modern American culture. Mr. Yusuf dazzles his audiences by weaving into one of his typical half-hour talks quotations from St. Augustine, Patton, Eric Erikson, Jung, Solzhenitsyn, Auden, Robert Bly, Gen. William C. Westmoreland and the Bible. He is the host of a TV reality show that is popular in the Middle East, in which he takes a vanload of Arabs on a road trip across the United States to visit people who might challenge Arab stereotypes about Americans, like the antiwar protesters demonstrating outside the Republican National Convention.

Mr. Shakir mixes passages from the Koran with a few lines of rap, and channels accents from ghetto to Valley Girl. Some of his students call him the next Malcolm X — out of his earshot, because he so often preaches the importance of humility.

Both men draw overflow crowds in theaters, mosques and university auditoriums that seat thousands. Their books and CD’s are pored over by young Muslims in study groups. As scholars and proselytizers of the faith, they have a much higher profile than most imams, as Muslim clerics who are usually in charge of mosques are known. Their message is that both Islam and America have gone seriously astray, and that American Muslims have a responsibility to harness their growing numbers and economic power to help set them straight.

They sound like American Amr Khaleds.

The Missionary Position

Laila Lalami, aka Moorishgirl, has a long review essay in the Nation about Irshad Manji and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, two women we’ve written about here before. It’s the most intelligent review of their work I’ve seen so far, particularly as people tend to either dismiss them (as I tend to) or praise them as Courageous Reformist Arab Personalities (CRAP). The late unpleasantness over Hirsi Ali beyond stripped of her seat in parliament and Dutch citizenship was a rather pathetic affair I didn’t feel like commenting on, but it did highlight the manipulative nature of at least some of these people. But that’s beside the point. Lalami’s critique goes to the heart of the problem:

Meanwhile, the abundant pity that Muslim women inspire in the West largely takes the form of impassioned declarations about “our plight”–reserved, it would seem, for us, as Christian and Jewish women living in similarly constricting fundamentalist settings never seem to attract the same concern. The veil, illiteracy, domestic violence, gender apartheid and genital mutilation have become so many hot-button issues that symbolize our status as second-class citizens in our societies. These expressions of compassion are often met with cynical responses in the Muslim world, which further enrages the missionaries of women’s liberation. Why, they wonder, do Muslim women not seek out the West’s help in freeing themselves from their societies’ retrograde thinking? The poor things, they are so oppressed they do not even know they are oppressed.

The sympathy extended to us by Western supporters of empire is nothing new. In 1908 Lord Cromer, the British consul general in Egypt, declared that “the fatal obstacle” to the country’s “attainment of that elevation of thought and character which should accompany the introduction of Western civilization” was Islam’s degradation of women. The fact that Cromer raised school fees and discouraged the training of women doctors in Egypt, and in England founded an organization that opposed the right of British women to suffrage, should give us a hint of what his views on gender roles were really like. Little seems to have changed in the past century, for now we have George W. Bush, leader of the free world, telling us, before invading Afghanistan in 2001, that he was doing it as much to free the country’s women as to hunt down Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar. Five years later, the Taliban is making a serious comeback, and the country’s new Constitution prohibits any laws that are contrary to an austere interpretation of Sharia. Furthermore, among the twenty-odd reasons that were foisted on the American public to justify the invasion of Iraq in 2003 was, of course, the subjugation of women; this, despite the fact that the majority of Iraqi women were educated and active in nearly all sectors of a secular public life. Three years into the occupation, the only enlightened aspect of Saddam’s despotic rule has been dismantled: Facing threats from a resurgent fundamentalism, both Sunni and Shiite, many women have been forced to quit their jobs and to cover because not to do so puts them in harm’s way. Why Mr. Bush does not advocate for the women of Thailand, the women of Botswana or the women of Nepal is anyone’s guess.

This context–competing yet hypocritical sympathies for Muslim women–helps to explain the strong popularity, particularly in the post-September 11 era, of Muslim women activists like Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Irshad Manji and the equally strong skepticism with which they are met within the broad Muslim community. These activists are passionate and no doubt sincere in their criticism of Islam. But are their claims unique and innovative, or are they mostly unremarkable? Are their conclusions borne out by empirical evidence, or do they fail to meet basic levels of scholarship? The casual reader would find it hard to answer these questions, because there is very little critical examination of their work. For the most part, the loudest responses have been either hagiographic profiles of these “brave” and “heroic” women, on the one hand, or absurd and completely abhorrent threats to the safety of these “apostates” and “enemies of God,” on the other.

It’s one of these long pieces that present a structured argument over multiple pages, so this excerpt won’t do it justice. Read the whole thing.

And by the way Angry Arab once again proves that he’s a complete curmudgeon by whining in his take on the piece. Was The Nation ever a radical magazine? Did it ever pretend to be one? But it does not mean it’s not a good one, even if it’s gauche caviar. (For that matter there are good right-wing magazines too. The bad magazines are the ones who pretend they’re lefty but are actually rightly, like the New Republic.)

What fatwas are most often about

Here’s what happens when you get a (presumably) Arab-American journalist to do a story about something to do with Islam: a balanced, nuanced story that shows the full complexity of the question at hand for an audience not familiar with the topic. And it reads well and has a saucy lead.

Fatwas: Muslim religious edicts are rarely about violence, war

Monday, May 22, 2006

By Moustafa Ayad, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Imagine the latest videotaped message from Osama bin Laden. He’s scowling and raising a finger, but instead of taking aim at Americans he’s holding forth on the bleaching of Muslim women’s eyebrows.

While most Westerners think of religious edicts — or fatwas — as orders to fight Americans and infidels, Muslim scholars, evangelists and spiritual leaders across the globe issue them on a daily basis — on eyebrow bleaching and hundreds of other mundane topics.

Read on… Although the article doesn’t dwell on it, it’s interesting to contrast of how both Osama bin Laden and the various fatwa internet sites represent the globalization of fatwa-issuing — you don’t have to ask your local imam anymore. So what happens when an eminent sheikh with a website disagrees with your local imam, or even your country’s Mufti?

Hitchens, maker of prophets

Christopher Hitchens decides who can and can’t be a prophet:

Hitchens, an editor for Vanity Fair, described himself as an atheist and issued a sharp rebuke of the Muslim prophet Muhammad.

“Of course, he’s not a prophet,” he said. “He’s an epileptic plagiarist.”

He said the Quran — Islam’s holiest book — was full of “evil fairly tales” that were “unimaginably recycled.”

“It’s a boring plagiarism of the worst parts of Christianity and Judaism,” he added.

Hitchens said he has personally expressed concern to British Prime Minister Tony Blair about Europe’s accommodation of radical Islam. He said that some Muslim leaders have said their growing population means they will eventually take control of Europe.

Read on for the increasingly delusional mind-wanderings of a once-contrarian. It’s odd that the headline of the article says “Radical Islam criticized” when in fact it is Islam itself that is being attacked with apparently no other end but to offend and appear controversial. What a loss.

Bishop’s wife recants conversion

Wafaa Kostantin, the wife of a Coptic priest, has renounced her conversion to Islam and agreed to return to the Christian fold, Al Hayat reports today. The reason for her decision is that she “wanted to end the siege that had been imposed on her.” The problem here would be that Islam is an easy religion to join, but not such an easy religion to leave. On paper, the consequence of converting out of Islam is death. The Egyptian public prosecutor, who it seems is responsible for this affair, avoided this problem by saying in his report that she never actually converted to Islam, and therefore she “only retreated from seductive thoughts about converting to Islam.”

A group of Egyptian intellectuals, “most of them with Islamic leanings,” have released a statement criticizing the government for “submitting to the blackmail of Coptic extremists by surrendering her to the church to be detained against her will.”

The hypocrisy is plain as day here. A few days ago when it was thought that Kostantin had been pressured to convert to Islam by her boss in the civil service, there were protests and outrage in the Coptic community. The government, so as to avoid sectarian tensions, found the lady and handed her over to church officials who kept her under house arrest for 10 days while a team of four priests convinced her to return to the cross. Now who’s pressuring who?

More on the Coptic conversion to Islam

It appears that the conversion to Islam of Wafaa Kostantin, wife of a Coptic vice Bishop in Egypt, is a done deal. According to today’s Al Hayat, the woman responded to attempts to convince her to return to the Coptic fold by reciting aloud half of the Koran. She has also taken to wearing the hijab, Al Hayat reports. It appears that Church officials are now concerned that she will become a spokesperson of sorts for Islam. Coptic officials are requesting that she not appear in the media or work to spread the call to Islam, “so as not to provoke the feelings of Copts.”