Ads




Russell E. Saltzman

view all featured authors »

Seeking the Good Caliphate

Al-Jumuah is my favorite Islamic magazine. There are several publications geared to Arab-American concerns, but like many publications with an immigrant readership they seem bent on showing how successful Arab-Americans are at getting their slice of the American pie. They are completely secular, complete with photos of folks attending the latest Arab cultural heritage gala and announcing who’s moving up with the latest promotion at work.

But Al-Jumuah (roughly “day of the congregation”) is decidedly Muslim and at the same time oddly familiar. There are sections in it on family life and youth that with only slight revision could make easy transition to any generic Christian publication. Readers of Al-Jumuah deal pretty ordinarily with the ordinary vexations of family life in America: How to stay connected with your kids, how to raise good kids who know the value of study and hard work, how to improve a marriage, all these from a Muslim perspective are explored, more or less in the same way they are examined in a Christian family magazine.

There is even a section that might best be described as “Ask the Pastor.” In this case it is titled “Fatawa: Islamic Answers to Contemporary Questions.” Of course it depends on how you define contemporary and the questions and the answers do seem unconnected to any concerns Christians might express to their pastor.

Does incontinence, for instance, “nullify” the state of purity necessary to make a “correct” salah (the prescribed formalities in prayer)? This gets involved; nearly all the answers do, but, well, technically, yes. Yet people who “cannot restrain their urine or gas” may continue to make salah after making ablution each time. This advice is offered by Dr. Salah Al-Sawy, general secretary of AMJA, the Assembly of Muslim Jurists in America.

I have looked without success for any rulings on cell phones ringing during worship, but I hope the penalties, if any, are quite harsh.

Health insurance, surprisingly, is the subject of another lengthy response. A simple question, “Is it permissible to pay for health insurance at work?” Here Shari’a law, that bugaboo of Oklahoma legislators (the state declared itself a Shari’a free-zone), comes into practical play. Commercial insurance contracts are forbidden because they are based on “ambiguity” and “gambling,” betting on mortality tables, it would appear.

Before you scoff, there is hardly a fraternal church-related insurance company—Thrivant for Lutherans, for instance—that does not have in its history from a century and a half ago the early experience of stern opposition from pastors on exactly those same grounds. Once upon a time, having any sort of insurance was to doubt the providence of God. It sounds ridiculous nowadays, what with Thrivant selling a dozen load funds and annuities galore, but there it is.

But there are some exceptions, says Dr. Al-Sawy. Insurance is permissible “in cases when the [U.S.] law enforces it and one cannot ... avoid it,” and—this will curl some hair, betcha—“if it is from the government (my emphasis) and is not implemented to make a profit but to assist employees and look after their affairs,” all insurance can be lawful. As for what that answer might do to quash the silly rumors that Obamacare in fact is a secret plot by Muslims (a rumor I have invented right here on the spot), Dr. Al-Sawy does not go into it.

Al-Jumuah is written for Muslims trying their best to live in America and not become whatever equivalent of mainline Protestantism exists for Islam. It is not easy and sometimes the cultural ties to the old country seem to trump everything. An earlier article in Al-Jumuah explained why no true faithful Muslim could ever be president of the United States. The constitutional oath precluded a Muslim’s first loyalty to Allah. There is nothing at all in my reading suggestive of any appeal to radicalization, but the perspective clearly is live in the West, but do not be conformed to it.

This is one of the reasons Al-Jumuah was caught completely off-guard by the Arab Spring in Tunisia and Egypt. The December/January issue this year contained a lengthy article on the concept of Islamic justice in society, and that includes an independent judiciary. Otherwise, liberally sprinkled with Quranic verses, things lean toward a “strong man” of justice, a single leader leading, governing well and restraining corruption for the benefit of the people.


The ruler who administers justice among his people . . . and carries out his responsibility toward them is found to earn his people’s love and affection. His people will certainly take what he says into account, obey his orders, be loyal to him and sincere in whatever they say and do when dealing with him, consider him a blessing that God has bestowed upon them . . . and strive hard to give him full support in undertaking his duty.

When Al-Jumauh did publish an article in the April/May issue addressing recent upheavals (“A Sea-Change in the Middle East”), it emphatically was not in praise of democratic movements in Tunisia and Egypt. Condemnation to be sure was heaped upon “ruthless and corrupt secular dictators [who had] become synonymous with tyranny,” and we can all be glad they are gone. But the word to watch here is “secular.”

Those rulers were all of a piece: ruthless, corrupt, and secular, Al-Jumuah’s trinity defining Middle East dictators. In Al-Jumuah the revolutions will succeed to the degree that “change brings people closer to Allah and gives them a chance to live their lives in accordance with His commandments.” There are other positive criteria for success, one being a return to the original Islamic principle of “no compulsion” in religion. But even that is tempered with the expectation that the virtues of Islamic justice—rule of law and equality before the law—will persuade non-Muslims to conversion, eventually, even if Islamic law does not compel it immediately.

Americans have this romantic feeling that every oppressed man, Arab and otherwise, at heart is an American like them, aching to go to the polls in Ohio and vote Republican. Reading Al-Jumuah through the years, I conclude, that is not quite the case. Instead, what Al-Jumuah might applaud is an honest caliphate.

A pastor of the North American Lutheran Church Russell E. Saltzman is the author of The Pastor’s Page and lives in Kansas City, Missouri. His previous On the Square articles can be found here.

RESOURCES

Al-Jumuah

AMAJ

Bookmark and Share

Comments:

5.12.2011 | 3:45am
brendahendon says:
wow. but i think it is impossible for non-muslims to be persuaded to become a Muslim. in reality, it depends upon the person whether he or she likes to be one.
5.12.2011 | 7:54am
Jay says:
One would find Islam attractive and convert, especially someone from a society with pervasive relativism to morals and ethics, because of the rules that governs prayer, life, and society.
5.12.2011 | 8:34am
The Islamic idea of a just ruler is not too far from the type of government strived for and achieved at times in Christendom. Al-Jamuah seems to have in mind what some Catholics call "throne and altar". That kind of thinking in the Church seems to have largely disappeared post-Vatican II, or perhaps post Pius IX.

Our Islamic brothers and sisters are catching up to us "Enlightened" Westerners with their revolution. But will it be an American revolution achieving a grand experiment of democracy or an European revolution coming with fire, despotism, and rivers of blood?

One major difference is that Americans threw off a colonial government, and made a point to retain religion as part of public life. Europe threw off both church and state, and for centuries were ruled by thugs.

America has something to offer the world by its achievement of religion in the public square. The Al-Jamuah is on the right track, but this "old world" idea of a strong, holy ruler to govern the polis is not going to work in the Middle East. It only leads to the House of Saud, the Taliban, or the Shah. The alternative, secular despots such as the Baathists, the Colonel, and the General -- don't work either. God help them. They should look to Israel for a good example of a religious democracy that works.
5.12.2011 | 9:52am
Fred Ataturk says:
There is a moderate Islamic country: Turkey. It works fairly well - because the founder of modern Turkey, Ataturk set up a strict "separation of Church and state."

Ironically that very separation - which really is the solution to many of our problems, is what Christian conservatives are in effect constantly fighting. Ironically therefore, "conservatives" are a major cause of the very problem they think of as entirely "other" than, external to, themselves.
5.12.2011 | 10:43am
Jay says:
It's interesting to note that Ataturk forced Turkey toward secularization; the Turkish people did not ask for it.

Turkey remains "moderate" because of its army. The question is: how long will the army stay strong to keep Turkey from becoming an Islamic state ruled by shari'a?
5.12.2011 | 8:50pm
Peter Fisher says:
I am a Muslim but not Turkish or Arab. I still want to have Islamic Khilafah. This is possible only by Turkish people. I have no faith in Arabs because they gave up the struggle to money and other opportunities. See how Egyptians are parting and enjoying Un-Islamic rule of dictator Mubarak.
5.13.2011 | 6:11am
Michael PS says:
Brian LeCompte

You are right. America had the Revolution, but not the Counter-Revolution - No Joseph de Maistre, no Boland, no Chateaubriand.

Right up until 1959, you could find conservative Catholics in France who disapproved of the bishops' policy of "Raillement" (Rallying to the Republic), regarded the Revolution as an unspeakable calamity, attended a Mass of Reparation every 25 January for the "parricide" of Louis XVI and referred to Marianne, the figure on notes and coins, as "la gueuse"
5.13.2011 | 6:18am
Sean says:
The thing about the caliphate is it's basically a call for a morally upright strongman. Sort of like the dream of many central and south americans. All it does is lead to dictatorship and disappointment. I mean, it should be patently obvious that you need political structures capable of restraining your leaders, not a political system dependent on the virtues of a ruler.
5.13.2011 | 9:55pm
James Conway says:
I think the pastor makes some interesting comments in the beginning of the article, but the similarities continue towards the end observation as well. In many respects the appeal to traditional values, traditional Quranic morality, and leaders that share this morality, is quite similar to the musings in Christian publications, including this one. I might add that we have heard many conservatives from Pat Robertson to Falwell to David Barton decry secularism and try to argue that this country was founded upon Judeo-Christian principles and must be governed by god fearing men. Why else the controversy over this Presidents faith? Or that of Mr. Romney? The conservative Christian argues that this nation cannot be secular, and that democracy and religiously inspired public policy go hand in hand, an argument made quite persuasively by Rev. Neuhaus, and it seems to be one conservative Muslims are making as well. Nothing to fear here, only religion in the public sphere.
5.14.2011 | 9:29am
JKoos says:
The long awaited caliphate, the Mahdi, bears a strking resemblance to the false prophet in Revelations. http://www.amazon.com/dp/0977102181/?tag=googhydr-20&hvadid=3144060257&ref=pd_sl_42jmdz8qzf_e
5.15.2011 | 4:11am
Russ, it is a sin for a Lutheran Pastor to spell THRIVENT incorrectly... head to confession...
5.15.2011 | 9:47pm
Most revolutions get rid of a bad government only to get a worse one, including the English Revolution (Civil War leading to Commonwealth). Given the Muslim countries' experience with self-rule, it is highly unlikely that any of the revolts of 2011 will result in anything good. The American Revolution was unusually successful BECAUSE the colonies had had their own assemblies beginning as early as 1619 in Virginia, and had largely paid for British troops to protect their frontiers. It is a misunderstanding to say Americans threw off colonial government: what happened was the George III and PM George Grenville decided to make tax laws in Parliament that had been previously made within colonial legislatures. American democracy worked because Americans already knew how to govern themselves. The French did not, so their Revolution resulted in a bloodbath.
5.16.2011 | 11:37am
"First, the Caliphate will be a strong, progressive state charting a new destiny for the Muslim people after liberating them from the political, military and economic hegemony of the West. The West weakened by this abrupt loss of control will struggle to maintain its dominance in world affairs.

Secondly, the Caliphate will swiftly harness the synergy between Islam and science, thereby surpassing the West in terms of inventions, technologies and new scientific discoveries. Given the West' s negative attitudes towards all things Islamic, it will find itself closing the doors to knowledge and shielding its people from progress and challenges of 21st century."
5.16.2011 | 11:39am
"First, the Caliphate will be a strong, progressive state charting a new destiny for the Muslim people after liberating them from the political, military and economic hegemony of the West. The West weakened by this abrupt loss of control will struggle to maintain its dominance in world affairs.

Secondly, the Caliphate will swiftly harness the synergy between Islam and science, thereby surpassing the West in terms of inventions, technologies and new scientific discoveries. Given the West' s negative attitudes towards all things Islamic, it will find itself closing the doors to knowledge and shielding its people from progress and challenges of 21st century." from http://www.khilafah.com/index.php/the-khilafah/khilafah/9939-cias-2020-vision-for-the-future-caliphate-is-short-sighted, gives a good article of vision on caliphate
9.8.2011 | 11:47am
AKO says:
I agree that the pastor makes some interesting comments in the beginning of this post, In a lot of ways, the appeal of traditional values and morality that Quaranic leaders share is almost identical to Christian publications. We have heard a lot about Pat Robertson recently and who feel that they must be governed by god fearing men. I personally believe that there is nothing to fear here, except the hatred of men and women towards other men and women.
type the text above in the box below

Links

Blogs

Find Us

Contact