Religious Leaders In America Worried That Their Flock Is Becoming Too Liberal
"When you examine the internal discussions among conservative Muslim leaders or pundits in America today, they don't come across as concocting some "Protocols of the Elders of Mecca." Instead of cheering for any creeping Shariah, they seem worried about a creeping liberalism within American Islam."
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/18/opinion/america-islam.html
The elders of the religion are concerned. The old ways are falling by the wayside. Inclusiveness is being accepted.
Muslim religious leaders in the United States are concerned that America's Muslims are becoming too liberal, too tolerant of change and assimilation, too "American".
Case in point - a higher percentage of Muslims in America accept gay marriage than the percentage of Evangelical Christians that do so.
-
In the wake of 9/11, and especially in the Trump era, Mr. Patel writes, worrying about Islamophobia has required the Muslim community to show that it really fits America. Hence, the center of gravity has shifted from "traditional Muslims," whose authority derives from knowledge of religious sources, to a new group of media-savvy "social Muslims," whose strength is interpreting the Muslim experience for the broader society. The interesting twist is that the progressive narrative of the "social Muslims" is having an impact on the whole American Muslim community. "Once you invoke diversity as a value," Mr. Patel writes, it is hard to deny a place to "gay Muslims, Shia Muslims, non-hijabi female Muslims, less-observant-than-you Muslims."
Tags
Who is online
77 visitors
Creeping Liberalism In American Islam: [Op-Ed]
Since 9/11, a recurrent theme in the far-right circles of America has been "creeping Shariah." It reflects the fear that Islamic law will silently spread through the land of freedom to ultimately overtake it -- to put all women in burqas and all adulterers to death. In this scenario, American Muslims, who make up only 1 percent of the population, will pursue this grand scheme because they are here not for freedom and opportunity, but to form a fifth column in it, as Steve Bannon seriously claimed in 2016.
Those with deeper knowledge of American Muslims, a minority that is much better integrated than some of their counterparts in Europe, can easily see such sordid fantasy as paranoia. Those with some knowledge of American history can also see that this new calumny about Islam has precedents, in the McCarthyism of the Cold War era and the anti-Catholicism of the 19th century.
But here is something even more ironic: When you examine the internal discussions among conservative Muslim leaders or pundits in America today, they don't come across as concocting some "Protocols of the Elders of Mecca." Instead of cheering for any creeping Shariah, they seem worried about a creeping liberalism within American Islam.
Read Mikaeel Ahmed Smith, for example. He's an imam in Virginia who has titled an internet article "A Spiritual Disease in American Muslims, Making Them Gods Above God." His criticism targets a new genre of Muslim bloggers and writers who he says "challenge or outright reject the traditionally normative Islamic view on social issues and Muslim life." These young people care less about traditional religious texts, the imam warns, because of "a rejection of any authority other than one's own intellect."
Or read Butheina Hamdah, an academic, who sees alarming signs of "liberal individualism" among American Muslim women. She thinks the hijab (the Islamic head scarf) is becoming a mere "cultural marker of identity" while losing its "deeper theological dimensions." That is why "trendy" or "sexy" versions of the hijab are emerging, she argues, while young Muslim women embrace feminist notions of "bodily autonomy" and "individual choice."
Perhaps nothing marks this liberal trend more than the skyrocketing acceptance of gay marriage, which, as a 2017 poll showed, is now stronger among American Muslims than among white evangelical Christians. It is also reflected in the pro-L.G.B.T.Q. stance of two new Muslim congresswomen, Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar. (This month, Ms. Omar took a lesson in how to integrate into America's pluralist politics when she apologized, after heavy criticism from her own Democratic Party's leaders, for a tweet that insinuated that American support for Israel is fueled by money from a pro-Israel lobbying group. "Anti-Semitism is real and I am grateful for Jewish allies and colleagues who are educating me on the painful history of anti-Semitic tropes," she said almost immediately, adding, "I unequivocally apologize.")
There are two distinct lines in this trend toward American values. One is a kind of anything-goes social liberalism, spearheaded by small groups like Muslims for Progressive Values. The other, larger line is a political liberalism that accepts a pluralist framework for society while preserving its own social and moral conservatism. Jonathan Brown, a convert to Islam and scholar of Islamic studies at Georgetown University, theorized the latter approach in a much-discussed article in which he accepted gay marriage of non-Muslims by making an analogy to traditional Muslim empires' noninterference in what he called "incestuous Zoroastrian marriages."
Of course, all this is happening within a political context, which Eboo Patel, an interfaith leader, explains in a chapter on "the American ummah" in his book "Out of Many Faiths: Religious Diversity and the American Promise." In the wake of 9/11, and especially in the Trump era, Mr. Patel writes, worrying about Islamophobia has required the Muslim community to show that it really fits America. Hence, the center of gravity has shifted from "traditional Muslims," whose authority derives from knowledge of religious sources, to a new group of media-savvy "social Muslims," whose strength is interpreting the Muslim experience for the broader society. The interesting twist is that the progressive narrative of the "social Muslims" is having an impact on the whole American Muslim community. "Once you invoke diversity as a value," Mr. Patel writes, it is hard to deny a place to "gay Muslims, Shia Muslims, non-hijabi female Muslims, less-observant-than-you Muslims."
The conservatives are understandably worried that this may go too far. For example, Rashid Dar, a thoughtfully committed Muslim academic, fears the prospect of an irreversible transformation in his community. A life of "adhering to political liberalism in the public sphere but social conservatism at home or at the mosque very easily runs the risk of creating severe cognitive dissonance," he told me. "I used to fear that this might lead to widespread 'reform Islam' movements. What I fear now is widespread nihilism and apathy toward faith."
I think that while this concern is understandable, the opposite may also be true: Young generations may lose the faith if Islam remains too closed to rationality, individuality, tolerance and freedom.
For that reason, I find the American Muslim quandary fascinating -- and promising. "Liberalism" as a framework for a free society is painfully lacking in large parts of the Muslim world today. If the Muslim community in the United States, what Mr. Patel called the "American ummah," can embrace that by reinterpreting its traditions without losing itself, it could contribute to the broader ummah by offering new perspectives and a lived example.
Charles Taylor, one of the most prominent thinkers on religion today, reminds us of a historical precedent in an essay from 2011: In the 19th century, American Catholics were seen by the Protestant majority as "inassimilable to democratic mores, in ways very analogous to the suspicions that nag people over Islam today." But, Mr. Taylor added, "American Catholicism evolved and, in the process, changed world Catholicism in significant ways."
A similar transformation took place within American Judaism, as Steven R. Weisman shows in his recent book, "The Chosen Wars: How Judaism Became an American Religion." Rabbinical authority waned, women became empowered, practices were modernized and Reform Judaism flourished.
To say that change would never happen in Islam would be a view too unfair to this third big Abrahamic religion. It would also underestimate America's great potential to attract, and also transform, people of all faiths and races under a simple but rare principle -- equal justice under the law. Shouldn't some of those who call themselves "American nationalists" know this better than they seem to know these days?
Mustafa Akyol is a senior fellow on Islam and modernity at the Cato Institute and the author, most recently, of "The Islamic Jesus."
I think it's a good thing that American Muslims are becoming more secular. Now maybe some folks will lighten up about their fears of Muslim Sharia law
Religion the world over is declining in it's influence. The reasons are many. Perhaps 'the flocks' are wising up to the pipe dream promises and the never ending specter of being afraid of everything that might be different? Not to mention the lopsided affluence religion brings to the top.
I'm sure there are many reasons, but the main one is education. Educated people can tell the difference between fact and fiction.
"Educated people can tell the difference...………………." ? ?
Did not the Trump say he has the best education and the biggest brain? An explanation is warranted.
Which raises the question, how many times did Einstein (an actual genius) tell people that he was a genius?
Of course, the answer is never.
This really shouldn't surprise anyone as it's been the same for every other wave of immigrants that's come along. 1st generation sticks to the old ways, may not even learn English, 2nd generation respects the old ways but adopts some new ways as well and is generally bilingual, 3rd generation has knowledge of some old ways but otherwise is pretty much assimilated and may know a few words/phrases of the old language, 4th generation more assimilated probably English only, etc. While this generally applies to culture, I'm certain the same adaptation is true for religion.
Only religion and/or ignorance would find change, tolerance, or acceptance to be bad things or something to be avoided. Especially among more conservative portions.
I was about to say you forgot politics in your definition of ignorance.......
Oops, I spoke too early, so you do reference politics, but only the side you disagree with.....
What were you saying about tolerance? acceptance? or is it your view that only those who inhabit your side are tolerant and acceptable?
Big hole in your argument there.
Right..... According to you.... {chuckle}
Well.......
No, only the side which has been shown to oppose change more. This has been no more obvious in recent times when it comes to LGBT rights, abortion rights, scientific progress or ideas, ect..
I've said no such thing.
Not even a little.
You know what they say about opinions. Everyone's got one.....
My only issue is that some think theirs smells better than the ones they think stinks.....
Right, according to you........
No hole in your argument cause you say so...... {chuckle} You can really be really funny sometimes....
No, according to history and recent events.
So a hole in my argument just because you say so?
Speak for yourself.
I generally do..... And I unlike some, can see the humor at times....
Others take things way too seriously.....
I have opinions yes at least I don't claim them as facts or truth.....
I guess that is a difference between you and I.
We will just have to learn to live with it won't we...
Yeah, you prefer opinion and I prefer facts.
I know, and if you think about it you will realize we are in agreement on this one point.....
YOU consider YOUR opinions as FACTS.....
I don't....
Trying to deflect from that fact proves the understanding of the point and the truth of it....
Logic isn't your strong suit is it?
You presume too much.
So now you have to resort to making things personal?
So do you....
Geese! you've been making it personal for several comments already! {chuckle}
What are you complaining about!
You're not like that but there are conservatives here who are intolerant of others
Point out where I made anything personal!
ok,
Lets see, yourself, you & you. three comments where you use the positive singular tense referring to me......
Yeah, both sides are saddled with them unfortunately....
agreed
Those aren't personal attacks. I'm not even sure how you can interpret those as personal. But if you think they are, go ahead and flag them as such and let a moderator make the determination.
{chuckle} please point out where I used the word "attack"
you asked me why I was making it personal, I responded you already had, you asked where, I pointed it out...
Neither side has "attacked" the other.....
I don't get it?
So you really don't know what I meant by personal? not surprising.
Really? maybe you can answer a question?
Why is it that your side when they feel offended when they really aren't, always turns insultive?
You guys don't understand when you start using personal context it may be used back? It's not an attack any more that your using it?
Or is it just easier to be perpetually offended?
It's a real bummer to having decent fun conversations...
Why is it that "Liberal Types" constantly talk down "Religion" if a conservative speaks of it, But if the "Other Guy" (the HAPPY "Other Religion ONE I suppose) talks about Religion, They is just AOK !!
Are Liberal types just a-skeered
of the "Other Religions" to say the same, or is that STILL a ……….. NO-NO in Blog Land ?
It isn't that people are becoming too liberal, its that people are realizing that following religious texts too closely tends to make you act like a dick head.
Religious Leaders In America Worried That Their Flock Is Becoming Too Liberal
Or it may simply be the case that their brain stems are beginning to attach and fire on their own.