First Steps

From Charles Kimball’s Striving Together: A Way Forward in Christian-Muslim Relations...

“Far from being impartial or dispassionate, I begin with the conviction that achieving new, more positive relations between Christians and Muslims is a major and urgent item on the world’s agenda. ... Together, these two communities of faith encompass nearly half of the world’s population. Both communities are present in all parts of the world and both are growing rapidly. Without question, the ways in which Christians and Muslims relate and interact will shape the future of this planet -- for better or worse.” 

“It makes all the difference if one begins by recognizing that the world’s political order is necessarily changing and new forces (including Muslims inspired by their religious tradition) are at work in the process or, instead, one begins with the assumption that Islam itself is a problem that threatens stability and order in the world. The media coverage... [has served to reinforce] the latter assumption. In the process, a longstanding stereotype in the West was perpetuated, namely: Islam is inherently intolerant, fanatic, violent, and menacing. This image of Islam differs dramatically from its historical reality as a dynamic tradition, inspiring and nurturing hundreds of millions of adherents for centuries. To understand the difference between Islam as a complex, living religious tradition and the stereotypical images of Islam (particularly in the West) is the critical point of departure for those who wish to pursue a more constructive future in Christian-Muslim relations.”

“Never mind that the overwhelming majority of Muslims are horrified by a Lebanese truck bomber acting in the name of Islam, the negative image of Islam is perpetuated by the extremist, misguided actions of individuals and groups. Sadly, such behavior is a familiar component in the respective histories of both Christians and Muslims. But, the chilling examples of violence, even slaughter, in the name of God should not be equated with the religious traditions, even if the perpetrators claim to take inspiration from their faith. Such individuals and groups comprise a part of the mosaic, but they are surely not representative of the moral and ethical teachings of the larger religious communities, both of which have stood well the test of time.”

“There are real and substantial differences between Christians and Muslims. Fundamental disagreements exist, for example, in the respective theological views on the nature and efficacy of Jesus’ life, death and resurrection. In the political realm, wide disparity is evident when adherents advocate theoretical understandings of the role of their religious tradition in shaping and governing contemporary nation-states. These and other points where minor or radically different positions exist should, by no means, be pushed aside or glossed over. Muslims and Christians must each deal openly with such matters of concern. The challenge and requirement for both communities is to engage one another honestly and in the light of accurate information. The bias and misinformation permeating the history of relations between the world’s two largest religious traditions must be understood and overcome.”

[The story below is especially fascinating in light of the recent and ongoing political upheaval throughout the Arab world. The context is the 1979 U.S. hostage situation in Iran. ...for those of us who know more about today’s entertainment than yesterday’s history, it’s the story of the film Argo.]

“In the early morning hours of January 1, 1980, I sat with six other American clergy in a small room deep inside the U.S. embassy compound in Tehran. Having already met with many of the top religious and political leaders in the country, we were invited to meet with the Iranian student militants who had seized the U.S. embassy two months earlier and were still holding 53 Americans captive. About two hours into the wide-ranging discussion with their leaders, one of the students declared, "The taking and holding of these spies is a great Islamic act!" To the mild surprise of several of my colleagues, I immediately replied, "That is nonsense."

     The student looked at me and, after a moment, asked what I meant. My response: "I think I understand your political motivations for seizing this embassy and holding people hostage. You have made clear your anger and frustration with U.S. intervention in Iran over the years. Given this history, I can well understand why you fear a possible U.S. military effort to reinstate the Shah [who was in the United States at the time]. Even so, you must know that your actions here are not only illegal, they are immoral. And, they are certainly not Islamic. Your responsibility as Muslims is to protect the foreigner in your midst. Although a few embassy personnel may have some connection to U.S. intelligence gathering activities [what embassy doesn't? And, Tehran was known as the center of U.S. intelligence activity in the region], the overwhelming majority are surely not spies. While I strongly disagree with what you are doing and believe it ultimately will hurt, not further, the image and understanding of Islam in the world, I must also say that your rhetoric is far from helpful. To call hostages 'spies' and declare your actions Islamic in no way helps you protect or further the fragile process of your revolution."

     After a longer pause, the student said softly, "What we are doing may not be Islamic, but it is revolutionary!"