Distinctly Welcoming

Ten Commandments of Mission?

Yesterday, the Christian-Muslim Form launched their "Ten Commandments of Mission". The title is a bit of a press spin as the protocol agreed between some leading Christians and Muslims is a list of "guidelines" only. But they are great conversation starters; significant steps forward in establishing honest and workable relations between faiths that allows for freedom of conscience. Here they are, anyway:

1) We bear witness to, and proclaim our faith not only through words but through our attitudes, actions and lifestyles.
2) We cannot convert people, only God can do that. In our language and methods we should recognise that people’s choice of faith is primarily a matter between themselves and God.
3) Sharing our faith should never be coercive; this is especially important when working with children, young people and vulnerable adults. Everyone should have the choice to accept or reject the message we proclaim and we will accept people’s choices without resentment.
4) Whilst we might care for people in need or who are facing personal crises, we should never manipulate these situations in order to gain a convert.
5) An invitation to convert should never be linked with financial, material or other inducements. It should be a decision of the heart and mind alone.
6) We will speak of our faith without demeaning or ridiculing the faiths of others.
7) We will speak clearly and honestly about our faith, even when that is uncomfortable or controversial.
8) We will be honest about our motivations for activities and we will inform people when events will include the sharing of faith.
9) Whilst recognising that either community will naturally rejoice with and support those who have chosen to join them, we will be sensitive to the loss that others may feel.
10) Whilst we may feel hurt when someone we know and love chooses to leave our faith, we will respect their decision and will not force them to stay or harass them afterwards

I couldn't resist posting the photo of Mel Brooks doing his Moses turn...If you've seen the film, he walks down from Sinai with 20 commandments, stumbles as he proclaims to the people of Israel, "Here are the twe...., no ten commandments" as half of the stone tablets come crashing down. I thought i'd run with that image as a little prod to us that in our relations with other faiths, there is a frequent tendency to expect high standards of "them" whilst overlooking the high ethics that we are called to in the church. Too often our desire for power and privilege causes us to stumble and trip, dropping those values that should be integral to the Christian faith.  So, yes, it should be ok for Muslims to try to evangelise,to commend their faith, to build places of worship, to seek a presence in the public square. When we acknowledge these freedoms, we then have the credibility and authority to challenge Muslims in turn on issues such as how converts to Christianity are dealt with. In that conversation, we will also see some clear markers on how Christians view freedom as distinct from other faiths. This statement is not assuming that Christians and Muslims agree how religious freedom is founded but on what we ought to expect of each other in our respective behaviour.     

Stop Press - Muslims and Christians agree that evangelism and conversion are ok

This Wednesday, the Christian-Muslim Forum, a bilateral network of Muslim and Christian leaders set up by the Archbishop of Canterbury, are making an important announcement. The network covers a range of Christian and Muslim traditions and reflects real grassroots communities and, wonderfully, they are publishing a statement on the mutual commitment of both Muslims and Christians to the practice of evangelism. Shaykh Ibrahim Mogra, one of those involved and representing many mainstream Sunni Muslims in Britain, says in the press release: "Islam and Christianity are two world religions that are missionary - and therefore are ever vying with each other for converts. But we should be able to speak of our faith honestly and with conviction without demeaning or ridiculing others. There is no place for coercion or manipulation and when a person does convert from either faith that decision should be respected." Amen, Hallelujah!

On Wednesday, a proposed list of "ethical guidelines" for evangelism will be issued. These are not intended to be the "last word" on the subject but to generate a momentum around mission, conversion and ethics that helps to remove fear and bring hope and transformation to communities struggling for religious freedom. I think it is a very exciting step forward that should be welcomed by us all. This, to me, is a concrete example of Muslims and Christians working together for the common good, and doing so despite their differences and not by suppressing them. I'll post the guidelines when they become public and do please engage with these robustly: look at your own practice of evangelism, whether in the Christian-Muslim interface or not and let me know whether you agree.

Muslims Ask, Christians Answer - Christian Troll

I was at a seminar presentation at Heythrop College this week by Revd Dr David Marshall on the work of the renowned German Jesuit scholar of Islam, Christian Troll. David was my supervisor for the Masters thesis I completed, has been chaplain to the Archbishop of Canterbury and taken a leading role in the Building Bridges dialogue programme set up by Lambeth Palace. He's a wonderfully astute and precise academic and it was wonderful hearing him give an overview of someone who has been a mentor to him on Christian-Muslim relations.

Christian Troll worked on a structure of Christian-Muslim dialogue that takes seriously the similarities and differences of the respective faiths; always engaging respectfully and seeking to get behind the reasons for the questions we bring to each other. This method was published in the book "Muslims Ask, Christians Answer", which David translated from the German and is available to download here. It was a reminder of what an invaluable resource this tool is in bringing deeper understanding. I will provide a permanent link to this resource on my blog as it also provides ongoing questions from Christians and Muslims which Christian Troll continues to respond to. The site is a fascinating window into the bemusement that Christian theology and belief often provokes in Muslims, and in Christian Troll's accessible and authoritative style you have a world class Catholic scholar sensitively walking through some of the foundations of, for example, Trinitarian beliefs.

Take a look at the site and let me know what you think. I have to go along with Christian Troll's view that peaceful coexistence between Christians and Muslims demands this kind of constructive and respectful interaction; an interaction that braves the difference and the proclamatory claims of our respective faiths rather than diminishes them. 

Carl Madearis - follow-up

  After plugging Carl Madearis' presence at the New Wine leaders' conference, I've begun hearing that he's got hold of my book Distinctly Welcoming and been recommending it... We're not working a commission here, (have not met or corresponded yet!) but it's just so encouraging to encounter voices that are full of "grace and truth" whether in the UK or abroad. It's confirmation that the challenges of making our faith real in the midst of a plural context are not just for a post-Christian Britain (some would call it more accurately "post-secular"). This is the stuff of church in the world today. Carl has a blog and has a neat post on the cross-cultural realities of Tennessee!

Muslims, Christians and Jesus - Carl Madearis

 After some of the unpleasantness of recent discussions, it is so encouraging for me to hear that someone like Carl Madearis is being given a platform by the New Wine network, offering a perspective on Christian mission and Islam. He will be a main speaker at the New Wine leaders conference and comes with a mission background and credibility yet clear mandate to model the life of Jesus in truthfulness and service to Muslims. A friend has been reading through his book, "Muslims, Christians and Jesus", reading to me various chunks that sound like "just what the doctor ordered". If you're off to New Wine, go hear him.

Additionally, Ray Gaston , CofE minister, lecturer at the Queens Foundation here in Birmingham and West Midlands Methodist interfaith adviser, has launched a new blog: Pure, Unbounded Love Thou Art. He's a great thinker and challenge in the interfaith movement. We have some interesting discussions, don't always agree, but he shares a similar distaste for the typical "threefold typology" of religions (exclusivist, pluralist, inclusivist) and wants to see Christian engagement with the other utterly rooted in our faith tradition whilst utterly open in love to the other. His blog looks like it will be a great resource AND he has a book coming out soon.

NB - Ray will be amused to have been mentioned in the same post as a New Wine conference....I wonder, is there a trend towards understanding of other faiths and cultures that cuts across the normal labels of the Christian faith that is actually just more inherently trinitarian and missional?

Taqiyya - unpacking the truth?

Taqiyya is this knotty Islamic concept that has been highlighted in some of the Barnabas Fund literature that suggests Muslims condone lying as a way of deceiving a majority non-Muslim population as to their intentions. Ben White's review of Global Jihad, which caused some controversy was merely questioning the sources that justify this idea of taqiyya as normative to Islam. Mark Durie contributed some sources that countered Ben's views on this blog and I promised to come back to him so here goes some heavy early Islamic theology!

It is important to be aware of the dangers of proof-texting and I think there is a tendency to do this, as Ben shows, with some of the sources used to demonstrate taqiyya. We must remember that the concept as described by Patrick Sookdheo is the deliberate misleading of others in order to gain advantage in society when in a position of weakness, not generic ethical debates about white lies and so our sources should reflect that. The adoption of taqiyya as a deliberate strategy was something that arose in Shi'ite communities when being persecuted by Sunni Muslims and evidence is being asked for to prove that it is not a Sunni concept (the majority Muslim community around the world).

Let me refer to Yohanan Friedmann's important work: "Toleration and Coercion in Islam: Interfaith Relations in the Muslim Tradition", CUP 2003. Friedmann is a Jewish scholar, acclaimed as the authority on early Sunni Muslim tradition. This book created a stir by being so scholarly and forensic, prepared to recount and examine the persecution and coercion that was characterised by early Islamic advances, so it is not popular amongst Muslims seeking a sympathetic study.

Even so, his analysis of the earliest Islamic tradition and the practice of taqiyya (defined as "precautionary dissimulation") specifically, amongst Sunni Muslims merits two pages in his 230 page analysis. Let me quote the authorities he cites:

Zamakhshari - "abandonment of precuationary dissimulation and willingness to suffer violent death increase the honor of Islam"
Ibn Kathir - "it is more meritorious and better for a Muslim to cling firmly to his religion, even if this causes his death"
Fakr al-Din al-Razl's "commentary is the same. Uttering words of infidelity is permissible only under extreme conditions"
Al-Aurtabi - "takes a similar view"
In summary "The prevalent principle is that standing firm under pressure is better than acting upon [the concession of taquiyya]"
all on page 156

It would seem from Friedmann's work that the formative Sunni tradition basically does not countenance speaking half-truths or lies as a way of deceiving a majority population about your true beliefs and intentions.

At the very least, there is debate to be had here; and I hope that we can do this well and constructively. There is the real possibility of an impression given to the average church member that each and every Muslim, even with the guise of "niceness" and "moderation" is out to get you and secretly plotting our downfall in the aspiration to a Muslim state, (some are). But once doctrines like taqiyya get bandied around without qualification, we can quickly see monsters lurking everywhere. Those of us studying Islam at some level have a huge responsibility as our church members are rightly hungry for knowledge and guidance. This responsibility rests both in our bearing of true witness (in accuracy of scholarship and the weight we give to evidence) and to the pastoral implications for Christians seeking to relate in confidence to Muslims. This is why the discussion is worth having and I hope that this can continue in an attitude of respect and openness.

My primary concern is as a Christian working with and amongst Muslims and hopeful that others in the Church will share that call. A constructive discussion of the realities on the ground as well as the accuracy of our perceptions will surely aid Christian confidence to love, bless, proclaim and challenge without fear or favour.

Responding to the Barnabas Fund

Over the last week or so, a minor spat has been escalating across the internet around the actions and intentions of some of us who have sought to provide slightly different perspectives on how we engage Islam as Christians committed to the gospel: seeking to relate constructively and openly to the reality of diverse Muslims. I would want to reaffirm, as I trust the history of my posts on this site would demonstrate, my concern for the plight of persecuted Christians around the world and want to add my support to the advocacy of the suffering church, particularly in many Muslim-majority contexts and for that aspect of the work of the Barnabas Fund. The post that referenced Ben White's review on the Fulcrum site, and my earlier post about the Barnabas Fund has merely provided a suggested alternative reading of some elements of Islam and the consequent appropriate Christian response to that presented in some Barnabas Fund publications.

A number of statements have had to be published following the circulation of an article by the Barnabas Fund. You can read the statement issued by Global Connections, the network of evangelical mission organisations including Interserve, Arab World Ministries, CMS and Crosslinks among others, here. The open evangelical network, Fulcrum, have been obliged to publish a statement, too, here. And my own mission organisation CMS have a statement here.

I trust this clarifies the position somewhat. Shortly, Global Connections, through the Christian Response to Islam network ("CRIB") will be publishing a set of guidelines on a gracious response to Islam that I hope to be be posting on this site. This should add some specific points for discussion that I hope and pray will sharpen our Christian ethic and witness as we aim to engage Muslims after the manner of Christ. It will be good to have a document with which all of us from across the church can discuss and engage with robustly, conscious that we are all called to account for the manner in which we follow our calling and not merely the ends we are striving for.

Anyway, it's been a messy week for evangelical Christians working with Muslims and I couldn't help but chuckle wrly at this cartoon.

Fitna - freedom of speech or community cohesion?

...that's the simple equation we're being presented with the screening in the House of Lords of the notorious Fitna film. It links acts of Islamist terrorism with verses from the Qur'an and statements from extremist preachers. But is it really so simple? I'm disturbed by the weight that some Christian leaders are giving to the need to show the film and would like to suggest that we do a bit of reverse hypotheticals here. How would we feel if a film were produced of ethnic cleansing in Bosnia (or the Soweto township killings, or Hutu genocide) to a soundtrack from the book of Judges? (each of these episodes had overtly Christian justifications). We would be rightly horrified as Christians and be claiming: 1. that our scriptures were being misinterpreted 2. that an unfair juxtaposition of the worst of our faith with certain sources of that faith were beng presented. Some may even say that Christians are already being put in that negative light, and therefore why should Islam get preferential treatment? Well, I might reply that just because the Christian faith is villified does not mean standards of public judgment should automatically fall for all. Are we not setting a dangerous precedent by allowing a far-right politician with the endorsement and encouragement of the BNP party to be hosted in the chambers of executive government? We would then have no grounds to stop someone doing the same about the church...Do unto others as you would have done to you......

The thing is, it is not merely about freedom of speech, nor even about community cohesion. It is about wanting the good of all and treating others how we would like to be treated. I heard one of the Christian hosts of the film presentation speaking about the damage done to the British values of freedom of speech today. Too often we invoke religious arguments when our Christian base is threatened only to resort to secular liberal arguments to condemn others. Since when did freedom of speech become the ultimate measure of Christian pronouncements?

When we consider the Samaritans in the Bible, we must recall that they were a cultural and religious "other" to the Jews. For the Jews, they were impure and dangerous. Josephus, the historian, records a number of "terrorist" atrocities perpetrated against Jews. So you get the context for the mutual suspicion in some of the gospel encounters. What a wonderfully challenging and humbling parable we have in that story of the Good Samaritan....that symbol of uncleanness and violence becomes the agent of God's mercy to the suffering Jew! If our only understanding of Islam is the film Fitna, the parable of the Good Samaritan (the Good Muslim?), maybe what we need to read again.

There are real issues within Islam about the texts of violence. I would be the first to advocate and speak directly and confidently to Muslims that those texts should be abrogated. But showing an emotive film that suggests Islam is inherently violent in the chambers of government was rightly seen as provocative and engendering of hatred. As Christians, maybe we need to ask ourselves: "does this make me love my next door neighbour Muslim more?" If not, then let's be free not to see it....

Share the Guide

Recently I was asked to write a brief post for a blog resource called "Share the Guide" on fresh expressions of church. You can find it here and it looks to be a great, user-friendly, accessible way in to the subject of church planting in the emerging culture. The wonderful Beth Keith wanted me to say something about 360 degree listening that she's heard me speak about before, so I had a go at writing something pithy and profound, (isn't that just the most difficult thing to do?)

Coincidently, the Church of England General Synod debates a lay motion next week on the "uniqueness of Christ" and evangelism to other faiths. It's likely to attract some media attention because it sets up a potentially stark division. Doubtless the media version of the discussion will be a contest between aggressive evangelicals and soppy liberals. The trajectory of the Church of England is one that is inevitably more nuanced. The uniqueness of Christ calls us to speak of the hope of our faith, and the final measure of the life of Jesus. But that finality also calls us to peace and dialogue. It's a nuance that may escape radio and tv coverage, and sadly sometimes escapes Christians. So, listen carefully....

The Barnabas Fund, Taqiyya and Islam

Ben White has just written an excellent review of Patrick Sookdheo's latest book, "Global Jihad". You can see the review on the Fulcrum site here. I've posted before on my quesions about some of the content and tone of Barnabas Fund publications and Ben does an excellent and fair job of assessing potential weaknesses that the Church in the West needs to be aware of. Patrick commands considerable influence and it is good to discuss and debate the use of some of his sources.

Ben assesses Patrick's use of the doctrine of taqiyya (deliberate dissimulation) as a reason for mistrusting any pronouncements and intentions of Muslims. He rightly highlights that it was a doctrine that arose in the shia community consequent upon their persecution by sunni Muslims. I would add, also, from some of my own recent research, that taquiyya was always a last resort when life was under threat; the far better way, in all the early Islamic authorities, was an honest and robust proclamation of Islamic intent.

Another point to add is the suggestion that Patrick may sometimes conflate classical Islamic doctrines of power and the more recent ideas within the al-Qaeda movement. Mainstream analysis of the political theology of the likes of Bin Laden suggest a Marxist/Western overlay of Islam that is influenced as much by secularism as by any traditional notions of Islamic power.

So check out Ben White's review....