A Schism over Shari'a in the Church of England
By David J. Rusin of the Middle East Forum. From here.
The debate over the trajectory of the Western sociopolitical system
and its strained relations with Islam is the most pivotal of our time,
as approaches decided upon today will impact billions not yet born.
Two prelates in the ever more fractious Church of England provide a
microcosm of this discourse.
Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams and Bishop of Rochester
Michael Nazir-Ali have emerged as central combatants in the dispute
between two fundamentally opposed models of social organization:
multiculturalism and universalism. The former bestows equal standing
upon different cultures in the public square. The latter bestows equal
standing upon individuals who wield a common set of rights and
responsibilities. Which system prevails will ultimately determine the
level of danger that homegrown Islamists pose to Britain, Europe, and
the broader West.
Nazir-Ali believes that Britain's campaign to reconstitute itself as a
multicultural society has failed, and he explained why in a January 6
op-ed. By emphasizing differences over common values, his country has
promoted alienation among Muslims, many of whom are "living as
separate communities, continuing to communicate in their own
languages, and having minimum need for building healthy relation****ps
with the majority." Since segregation breeds extremism, Islamist-
dominated "no-go areas" now dot the map.
Indeed, as Britain increasingly accommodates the strictures of Islamic
law in both welfare and finance, the radicalization of its Muslims
continues apace. According to a 2006 Channel 4 survey, nearly one-
quarter see the 7/7 London bombings as justifiable. A 2007 Policy
Exchange poll found that 40% of Muslims under 24 prefer to be governed
by Shari'a, while a shocking 36% believe that apostates from Islam
should be "punished by death." Extremist views are far more common
among younger Muslims, ****tending trouble on the horizon.
The death threats that followed Nazir-Ali's essay only bolstered his
thesis. "The irony is that I had similar threats when I was a bishop
in Pakistan," he noted, "but I never thought I would have them here."
The rejection of reason is particularly disturbing to this learned
man: "If you disagree, that must be met by counterarguments, not by
trying to silence people. It was a threat not just to me, but to my
family. ... It gave me sleepless nights."
Rowan Williams was likewise losing sleep -- over the "damage" done by
Nazir-Ali's frank *****sment of multicultural pieties. Speaking to the
BBC on February 7, he ignited a firestorm of his own by suggesting
that the official acceptance of some facets of Shari'a not only "seems
unavoidable," but could actually improve social cohesion. To Williams,
the idea that "there's one law for everybody and that's all there is
to be said, and anything else that commands your loyalty or allegiance
is completely irrelevant in the processes of the courts -- I think
that's a bit of a danger."
In one sentence, Britain's most influential cleric effectively
discarded the primary achievement of Western civilization: a system in
which all live as equals before a single standard of law. The logical
consequences of his worldview were underscored by Melanie Phillips:
"If there is no one law, there is no one national identity and
therefore no society but instead a set of warring fiefdoms with their
own separate jurisdictions."
Williams and Nazir-Ali also illustrate how one's preferred method of
social organization -- multiculturalism or universalism -- frequently
boils down to whether one acknowledges the righteousness of the
Western enterprise. Preoccupation with the real and imagined crimes of
the West can serve as a gateway to Islamist apologetics. And the
archbishop is Exhibit A. < href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/
comment/thunderer/article479366.ece">free market, Williams sees only
suffering: "Every transaction in the developed economies of the West
can be interpreted as an act of aggression against the economic losers
in the worldwide game." And America's role on the international stage
is, of course, the height of iniquity. In contrast, he often excuses
horrors committed in the name of Islam. While condemning terrorism, he
has suggested that terrorists can "have serious moral goals." He also
laments the challenges faced by Middle Eastern Christians, but
****trays them as victims of Western policies rather than of the
Islamists threatening their lives.
Unlike Rowan Williams, Michael Nazir-Ali witnessed the realities of
Shari'a law and radical Islam firsthand as a young Pakistani. These
experiences eventually led him to Britain's shores -- and to an
admiration for the freedoms nurtured in the West. Like Magdi Allam,
Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na'im, Salman Rushdie, and Ibn
Warraq, the future bishop escaped the stifling oppression of Shari'a
to become an outspoken champion of Western values.
Shari'a "would be in tension with the English legal tradition on
questions like monogamy, provisions for divorce, the rights of women,
custody of children, laws of inheritance and of evidence," Nazir-Ali
said in response to Williams' BBC interview. "This is not to mention
the relation of freedom of belief and of expression to provisions for
blasphemy and apostasy." His statement reveals a keen understanding of
the two groups that suffer an inferior status under Shari'a: women and
non-Muslims.
Not satisfied with abstract musings, Nazir-Ali applies this knowledge
to contem****ary problems. In March he quizzed a Home Office minister
on whether women threatened by forced marriages are being adequately
protected, and last year he urged Muslim leaders to condemn violence
against apostates. Williams, in contrast, has said little about either
issue. The bishop of Rochester has also criticized amplification of
the call to prayer, demanded that Britain carefully scrutinize foreign
imams, and spoken out against face-covering veils-- even as Williams
insists that an attempt to limit them would be "politically
dangerous."
Nazir-Ali contends that the Western ethos did not arise by chance, but
proceeded from "the Bible's teaching that we have equal dignity and
freedom because we are all made in God's image." Islamist
encroachments are therefore symptoms of a more fundamental problem.
"The real danger to Britain today is the spiritual and moral vacuum
that has occurred for the last 40 or 50 years. When you have such a
vacuum something will fill it," he recently warned. "Do the British
people really want to lose that rooting in the Christian faith that
has given them everything they cherish -- art, literature,
architecture, institutions, the monarchy, their value system, their
laws?"
Only time will tell.
Historians may one day look back on these two prelates and the church
they serve -- a body faced with plummeting attendance and approaching
disestablishment -- as symbols of the early twenty-first-century
discourse over the future of the West. For now, Michael Nazir-Ali and
Rowan Williams illuminate the diverging paths before us: one paved
with an ardent defense of Western liberties, the other with a nihilism
that leads inexorably to dhimmitude.
David J. Rusin is a research associate at Islamist Watch, a project of
the Middle East Forum. He holds a Ph.D. in Physics and Astronomy from
the University of Pennsylvania.
http://babybluecafe.blogspot.com/
|
