Every month the GARNET brings together a working group comprised of faculty from the Elliott School of International Affairs and the Religion Department at the Columbian College of Arts and Sciences to discuss topics that weave together aspects from both fields. These blog posts summarize topic discussions from past Faculty Working Group events.
There is a history of trying to marry climate activism with religious tradition and theology. This is an intuitively satisfying combination because climate change is a fundamental existential threat, and religion is a powerful force shaping culture, beliefs, priorities, and behaviors – especially around important moral and existential questions. Moreover, religious leaders and organizations often wield substantial ideological and financial power to shape policy. It seems that religion should have something useful to say about climate change.
This talk touches on the history of climate activism as it relates to Christianity and Islam. Interestingly, there are many points of parallelism between the two. In both cases, climate activists have sought to promote climate action as a necessary corollary of existing theological narratives such as stewardship of the earth (Christianity) or core religious principles such as Khalifa or Maslahah (Islam). In both cases, we see three basic conceptualizations among practitioners: acceptance of climate change as real and a responsibility of humanity; skepticism about climate change; or acceptance of climate change as real but caused by the will of God (e.g. as a punishment or a precursor to the end times) rather than humanity. And in both cases, there appears to have been little/extremely limited success in using theological arguments to persuade religious practitioners not already convinced.
Why might this be? Aside from the general difficulty of persuasion, it is also that case that religion, though a powerful force, may be ill-suited to this kind of persuasion. First, religion tends to involve a complex set of ideas – a single religious text tends to offers multiple narratives that can be exploited to justify multiple viewpoints or political stances, making it difficult to argue for the primacy of any one interpretation, especially if it clashes with existing biases. Moreover, attempts to do this may evoke in-group/out-group tensions if the narrative being promoted is seen as tied to “outsiders” to the religious community.
Second, there is likely some cognitive dissonance between religion and climate change. Religious belief tends to be immediate, personal, and relational; by contrast, climate change is big, remote, and scientific/technical. In case evidence, religion seems to connect more readily to local conservation efforts with indirect connections to climate rather than to climate policy itself. For this reason, I postulate that it may be easier to mobilize the power of religious faith in promoting climate adaptation efforts (which tend to be focused on solving immediate local problems) than on preventing climate change.
For additional information, you can click through Prof. Kelsey’s presentation here
Sufism is not one of these New Age movements that seek to detach itself from Revelation. It is the inner and mystical dimension of Islamic tradition. As such it is deeply rooted in the Qur’an and the tradition of the Prophet of Islam. While the word Sufism (tasawwuf) is not mentioned in the Qur’an, the concept of inner life is frequently discussed in one way or the other. Many verses indeed speak of man’s special relationship with God as friendship, hence the concept of wila>yah, (2: 115, 2: 186, 88: 25, 57:4, 50: 16).
The Goal of Sufism is to integrate body and soul: In other words, transforming man from what man is to what man can be. This can be accomplished through understanding the doctrine, method, and certain practices. Such a journey is potentially possible for every man and woman, but in every generation only a few attain such an exalted station.
For man to get to know his self, Sufism poses several major questions and provides proper answers for them in its doctrine, its method, and its practices:
Where did we Come from?
I am the bird of the Sacred Garden, not from this lowly earth
they built a cage for my body for a few days in this world (Rumi)
2. Why did we Come?
The theophany of Your beauty on the day of eternity
manifested Love and set fire to the entire world. (Hafiz)
3. Where do we go from Here?
How happy a day it will be that I fly to the abode of the Friend,
In the hope of arriving at Him I will fly day and night
Give me the wine of union so that,
In an intoxicated state
I would break the gate of this eternal prison. (Rumi)
The idea of man being from God and returning to Him is present in all traditions and in the Qur’an it is repeated frequently. In this connection the most often cited verse in the Qur’an is 2: 156: “We are from God and to Him is our return.” Every believing Muslim waits until the moment of death to experience this. Sufis want to experience this HERE and NOW while they are alive and well in this world.
Like any other genuine spiritual tradition Sufism is comprised of a doctrine, a method, and some practices.
Sufi Doctrine speaks of a metaphysical Truth, that is, to discern between the Real and unreal. As such it is in fact a commentary on the foundational principle of Islam “There is no God but God/la ila>ha illa’l Alla>h.” Belief in God’s oneness (tawh}i@d) is the center of all traditions. Sufis indeed believe in the universality of revelation in the sense that all religions share the universal truth in the domain of meaning. It is only in the domain of form (rituals, rules, etc) that they differ. According to Sufis the above formula is the meaning of Divine Unity as understood by the common people. The Sufis understand that verse as saying, “There is no reality but He/la ila>ha illa Huwa;” that we are nothing and God is. Such an experience enables Sufis to see God everywhere and in everything as the Qur’an states, “Wheresoever you turn, indeed you will see the face of God.” (2:115). To be able to attain this station one must struggle against one’s carnal soul, cleans his soul from all impurities, so that eventually he would realize his nothingness before God, a station that Sufis call faqr (spiritual poverty). Only then can a person become worthy of earning God’s friendship (wila>yah)and divine light descends on his heart and illuminates his being. Such a person becomes like a mirror reflecting divine qualities on this earth. To attain this station man must know his self as the saying (possibly a Hadith) denotes, “He who knows himself knows his Lord.”
The METHOD: Contemplative Concentration (fikr) and Remembrance of God (dhikr)
Through contemplation and reflection of the marvels of creation both within one’s own being and in the universe around him man realizes the meaning of divine oneness (tawh}i@d). Some travelers may start this process intuitively and before initiation into an order. Once one is initiated one is given permission to recite the Supreme Name (Allah) in a systematic way.
The significance of remembering God is emphasized in the Qur’an frequently (33: 41, 2: 200, 29: 45, 8: 2)
This phase entails a death and a rebirth as the hadith of the Prophet denote (Die before you die). One dies to one’s old self and to the world and is reborn into a new self . With this “death and rebirth” the traveler indeed starts a new life when he/she is give permission to invoke the SupremeName Allah. Life and the world will never be the same as it was before. Now all thoughts in his heart are replaced with the love of God and the longing to experience proximity and union with Him. Consistent practice of invocation gradually transforms the heart. Certainty replaces anxiety and doubt as the Qur’an promises, “Indeed, those who believe and their hearts find certainty, beware that only with the remembrance of God hearts find certainty.” (13:28) The traveler reaches a station that is honored with God’s friendship (wila>yah) and when this is attained, the Qur’an tells us that “Indeed for friends of God there is no fear nor sorrow.” (10:26)
PRACTICES: The Operative Aspects of Sufism:
An aspirant is expected to observe the Shari@‘ah and perform all obligatory duties that every practicing Muslim does. This includes all daily prayers, fasting, and other pillars of Islam. He/she must follow the tradition of the Prophet to the extent possible. However, dogmatism, prejudice, and pride have no place in this journey.
The Sufis also take regular retreat (khalwah), sometimes in a Sufi center and sometimes in nature during which they detach themselves from ordinary daily functions and devote their time to invoking the Divine Name. The period of retreat can be from a few hours to many days. The longest and most difficult one can last as long as 40 days. These and all other practices in Sufi order are what the Prophet did when he was with a small circle of his trusted companions.
I cannot overemphasize the central role of invocation in spiritual journey of Sufis. The Prophet said,
“For ever thing there is polish, and the polish of the heart is the remembrance of God”; and.
“The example of the one who remembers God (dhikr) and he who does not, is like the example of a living and a dead man.”
The entire method and practice of Sufism is summarized in a saying attributed to Ali ibn Abi@ T}alib when he wrote, “O You! Whose Name is the medicine and whose remembrance is the cure….” The Divine Name is the medicine of every heart that suffers from the disease of negligence and ignorance. To cure the disease one has to take the medicine diligently and consistently. This is the essence of Sufi doctrine and practice.
The dhikr session can be performed individually or in group, loud or silently. The remembrance of God has an alchemical effect on the heart and soul of the aspirant and a transformative quality preparing the heart of the traveler to welcome the decent of the King of the universe.
I might also add that this is a very difficult and demanding journey and that is the reason many masters in the past discourage aspirant from joining them and accepted them after many trials and tests to make sure they are apt for the journey for indeed Sufism is a lifelong undertaking.
One would think that the debates over the issues of land ownership, economic rights, political equality, and social reconstruction that have been occurring in an ongoing way during the last 60 years in the Catholic Church in Latin America would be impacting the political debates and conflicts in Colombia. And in some ways, and to some degrees, this is true. For example, the current head of the national Truth and Reconciliation Commission is Father Francisco de Roux, a Jesuit priest placed in the position because of his widely recognized moral authority. However, religion in general, and Catholicism in particular, play a much more modest role than what might be expected in terms of the Colombian people’s understanding of and thinking about the conflict and the formal and informal peace processes undertaken during the last 30 years.
This discussion focused upon the initial findings of my research, which shows that Colombians talk about the politics of the conflict. They talk about the pluses and minuses of the existing political system. They talk about economics, a lot. They talk about corruption. They talk about arms supplies. They talk about the role of the cartels. They talk about Venezuela. They talk about the people in their own family who have been killed or kidnapped. They talk about the relationship between the conflict and human trafficking. They talk about racism. They talk about gender. And on and on…. But they never talk about religion. Or, rather, that is to say, they never talk about Catholicism. This talk delved into the ways that Catholicism has and has not interacted with the conflict in Colombia.
Economics is the study of resource allocation – budgeting – as we try to fit everything we want to do into a constrained lifetime. The economics of religion looks at how religious behaviors are affected by the constraints imposed on a consumer’s time and money budgets. The analyses are concerned primarily with religious observances independently of the beliefs (faith) associated with a specific religion.
Religious experience is an economic “good” for any consumer who is willing to spend time and/or money to acquire it. For purposes of analysis, it is helpful to understand religion as an inseparable bundle of three distinct types of economic good. Spirituality – the essential defining characteristic of religious experience – is self-produced; it cannot be bought or hired, requiring the personal engagement by the consumer in its very production. Affiliation with a particular religious set of beliefs (theology) or community (church or church-equivalent) is like membership in a club. The defining characteristic of a “club good” is that its members interact with each other in ways that enhance the productivity of whatever time and money each individual consumer spends. Religions also talk about an “afterlife” – that is, an understanding of the human experience as part of a larger universe of time and space that can be affected for good or evil by an individual’s behavior during his or her lifetime. From this perspective, religious observance is like an investment, although unlike all worldly investments this one yields fruits only in the post-mortem future.
Like any other good, “production” of a religious experience combines labor and capital (time and money) in a process referred to as a production technique (theological tenets). The efficiency of this process depends on the skill of the producer, who in a self-produced good is the same as the worker. Each consumer brings to bear two types of human capital (skill), a set of general skills useful in all economic activities and a set of religion-specific skills that are relevant only for producing the religious good for a specific religious affiliation. The formation of religion-specific human capital begins with the family life of young children and is the main objective of religious education. For any given religious affiliation, synergies (or conflicts) between general education and religious education can also affect its members’ socio-economic success (or disadvantage).
Empirical analysis of grass-roots religious behaviors confirms the importance of these economic processes. Whether over the life-cycle or during the process of economic development, time spent on religious observance is more costly for high-wage than low-wage consumers. As time becomes more costly, people seek religious practices that are less time-intensive and they want the “quality time” that religious human capital can provide. Clergy sensitive to their members’ changing needs often respond by adapting ritual practices accordingly, while others oppose such changes as “untraditional” or even “irreligious.” This process explains how large and persistent changes in the economic environment can generate and support institutional changes, schisms, and perhaps even new religions.
Donald Trump’s consciously distorted vision of reality is nothing new. Casting the world in stark black and white terms and falsely depicting oneself and one’s followers as victims of threatening powers also characterize the writing of the early Christian, John of Patmos—the author of the New Testament’s Book of Revelation. With his rhetoric, John attempts to shore up his flagging leadership by portraying his followers as victims, presenting Rome as a serious threat, and depicting his prophetic rival as a Roman collaborator. This presentation examines in detail the weaponized rhetoric of that early Christian writer.
I have worked on the Book of Revelation on and off for a couple of decades. I published a book about it in 2001.[1] But it’s never been my primary research focus; it’s been more like a hobby. However, every time I think I’m finished with it, something draws me back. Occasionally, it’s an invited book chapter, conference presentation, or looking over a paper at the request of a colleague. Most recently, it was Donald Trump’s rhetoric. During the presidential campaign of 2016 and throughout the Trump administration, I became intrigued (as well as appalled) by Trump’s weaponization of language. But, I was also struck by the way it compared with that of the author of the book of Revelation. The following is intended simply as a way of beginning a conversation about dualism, demonization, and propaganda.
***
A prominent scholar of early Christianity once identified apocalypticism as the mother of Christianity. That is to say, from the time of Jesus on, Christians believed that they lived at the end of a corrupt era, controlled by “the god of this age” (2 Cor 4:3)—i.e., Satan. At some point in the very near future, they assumed that God would institute his “reign” (βασιλεία—usually translated “kingdom”), an era of peace and justice. Apocalyptists tend to see things in terms of black and white, good and evil.
The intensity of apocalypticism and its stark dualism waxed and waned throughout the first century. Sometime towards the end of it, a seer named John described a series of frightful visions he experienced during a heavenly journey. John’s ascent was prefaced by messages to seven individual gatherings or assemblies (ἐκκλησίαι, usually mistranslated “churches”), purportedly dictated by the risen Jesus. Altogether, the messages and visions comprise what is typically known as the book of Revelation (or, in popular parlance, “Revelations”).
It has traditionally been assumed that the book of Revelation was written to strengthen the resolve of Christians in the face of Roman persecution. Consider, for example, the following vision described by the seer:
I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast that was full of blasphemous names, and it had seven heads and ten horns. The woman was clothed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and jewels and pearls, holding in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the impurities of her fornication; and on her forehead was written a name, a mystery: “Babylon the great, mother of whores and of earth’s abominations.” And I saw that the woman was drunk with the blood of the saints and the blood of the witnesses to Jesus. (17:3-6)
“Babylon” here stands for Rome and the depiction of her as “drunk with the blood of the saints and the blood of the witnesses to Jesus” clearly indicates persecution.
Despite this visionary claim (as well as others like it, scattered throughout the book), there is no evidence of empire-wide persecution at the time that the book was written. Although some have argued for a localized persecution (not recorded by ancient historians) as the backdrop for the book, a close look at the messages to the seven assemblies belies any such scenario. So, what is going on?
The ordering of the messages to the seven assemblies seems to follow an intentional pattern. For example, the second and second-to-last (i.e., sixth) messages are different from the others and, furthermore, are quite similar to one another both in their structure and descriptions of the assemblies’ situations. But more importantly, the central message (i.e., the fourth one) is the longest and most detailed of the seven. This suggests that it is the most significant message, framed by the less important ones. Surprisingly, the city addressed—Thyatira—was relatively small and hardly of the same order as most of the other cities mentioned, great metropolises like Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, and Sardis.
The content of the central message clearly points to its importance. Below, in a portion of the message, the seer repeats the words of the Son of God that he had experienced in his vision. Although the message begins positively, the tone quickly changes:
“These are the words of the Son of God, who has eyes like a flame of fire, and whose feet are like burnished bronze: ‘I know your works—your love, faith, service, and patient endurance. I know that your last works are greater than the first. But I have this against you: you tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophet and is teaching and beguiling my servants to practice fornication and to eat food sacrificed to idols. I gave her time to repent, but she refuses to repent of her fornication. Beware, I am throwing her on a [sick]bed, and those who commit adultery with her I am throwing into great distress, unless they repent of her doings; and I will strike her children dead. And all the churches will know that I am the one who searches minds and hearts, and I will give to each of you as your works deserve. But to the rest of you in Thyatira, who do not hold this teaching, who have not learned what some call “the deep things of Satan,” to you I say, I do not lay on you any other burden; only hold fast to what you have until I come.’ ” (2:19-25)
A quick breakdown of the message indicates a couple of important things. First, John had a rival, who he tagged with the name of a notorious, idolatrous queen of Israel, “Jezebel.” She was a prophet like John (he, of course, refused to grant her than status). Second, the community was divided. Some were followers of “Jezebel.” They were labeled her “children.” Others were in the Johannine camp (“the rest of you, who do not hold [her] teaching”). Still others—possibly a majority or at least a substantial minority—were attracted to “Jezebel’s” message. John called them adulterers, probably because he considered them to belong to him but they were—to continue John’s sexual metaphor—“flirting” with “Jezebel.” In business terms, John was losing market share to “Jezebel” and he had to somehow convince those flirting with “Jezebel” to reject her authority and accept his.
Besides being a woman—something that John would ultimately use against her—John attributes two specific crimes to “Jezebel”: first, practicing fornication (πορνεῦσαι, a term that covers a multitude of sexual sins) and second, eating food sacrificed to idols.
The latter of the two is easier to nail down. It has to do with appropriateness of eating meat that had been previously sacrificed to a pagan deity. Was the consumption of such meat to be considered idolatrous behavior? Could a monotheist eat it? John thinks that such meat should be forbidden. ”Jezebel’s” opinion differs. Although John claims that she encouraged the consumption of such meat, I suspect that she merely allowed it among her followers, perhaps in certain cases. Here “Jezebel” was in good company with Paul (St. Paul to Christians). He held a similar opinion.
The meaning of “practicing fornication” is more difficult to discern. It probably did not have to do directly with sex for John only uses sexual terms symbolically in the book (cf. his use of “commit[ting] adultery” with “Jezebel” in the above-quoted passage). If it does not point to sexual acts per se, what could it mean? I suggest that it refers either to marrying a pagan or remaining married to a pagan after one has converted. We see the Greek term for “fornication” (πορνεία—John uses the verbal form of this noun) employed in this manner in some Hellenistic Jewish literature. “Jezebel’s” opinion in this matter is, likewise, not too far from Paul’s.
To over-simplify things—John built strong walls between Christians and the surrounding society while Jezebel envisioned those boundaries as more porous. John’s way of thinking about such things is typical of intensely apocalyptic thinkers. They tended to see the world in black and white or in terms of good and evil.
So, what was John’s strategy? How could he regain his market share? His strategy was, in part, aimed at denigrating his rival. Although in the message to Thyatira, John’s approach is direct (but remember, it is the Son of God speaking there), elsewhere, he is much more subtle. I suspect that the subtle approach had to do with “Jezebel’s” popularity. If John took her on too directly, his strategy could backfire. So, he concocted a conspiracy theory of sorts. He implied that “Jezebel” was in league with Rome and that Rome represented a significant threat to Christians. Neither of these was true. The first was a lie; “Jezebel’s” association with Rome was a product of John’s imagination and a tool that he used in his propaganda war. The second was a gross exaggeration; with the exception of a few isolated cases, persecution targeting Christians would not happen for another century. But John not only tried to tie “Jezebel” to Rome. He also claimed that Rome derived her power and authority from Satan—a typical apocalyptic trope—and by that, he indirectly tied “Jezebel” to Satan. She became the enemy, not just of John but also of God.
The apocalyptic world that John constructed was (and is) typical of apocalyptic thinking. The universe is dualistic as the chart below indicates:
God
Jesus (raised from the dead)
Jesus followers
Satan
Rome
Those who followed the religion of the empire
John used his literary power—and he was a capable writer—to try to move “Jezebel” from the left-hand column to the right.
There are a number of ways that John attempted to implicitly connect “Jezebel” to Rome (and Satan) but the most obvious way is baked into the structure of the work.
Four important female figures appear in the book of Revelation, one towards the beginning (ch. 2), one near the end (ch. 21), and two in the central portion of the work (ch. 12 and chs. 17-18). Two of these female figures are depicted as evil (“Jezebel” and “Babylon”), and two, good (an unnamed woman clothed with the sun and “Jerusalem”). The good and evil figures alternate (bad-good-bad-good) and they are compared and contrasted with one another.
“Jezebel” (bad) The woman clothed with the sun (good) “Babylon” (bad) Jerusalem (good)
ch. 2 ch. 12 ch. 17 ch. 20
John subtly connects the passages in which these figures appear. By using similar language and themes he ties the good figures together. He does the same with the pair of evil figures. But he also has the evil and good figures distortedly reflect one another to establish contrast. The effect is illustrated by the chart below.
For the sake of time and convenience, I only provide two examples (below) of how this works. The first example describes how equivalence is established and the second, how contrast is shown.
Example 1—Equivalence: How the figure of “Jezebel” (John’s rival) was created to resemble “Babylon” (i.e., Rome)
“Jezebel” (ch. 2):
identified with a negative name from Israel’s past
described as an inappropriate mother (whose actions cause her children to be killed)
is shown to “lead astray” (πλανάω)
acts aggressively (i.e., like a man)
is connected to illicit sexual practice (e.g., she teaches Thyatirans to “commit fornication,” πορνεῦσαι)
is connected to defiling food (food sacrificed to idols)
will be destroyed
“Babylon” (ch. 17):
identified with a negative name from Israel’s past
described as an inappropriate mother (“mother of whores and abominations”)
is shown to “lead astray” (πλανάω)
acts aggressively (i.e., like a man)
is connected with illicit sexual practices (πορνεία “fornication”)
is connected to defiling food (human blood)
will be destroyed
Example 2—Opposition: How “Jezebel” (John’s rival) was described as the antithesis of the unnamed woman, “clothed with the sun” (NOTE: the identity of this figure is unclear, at times she appears to be the mother of Jesus, at other times, the protector of Jesus followers, at yet other times, she represents Israel).
“Jezebel” (ch 2):
mother whose children are under threat—by the Son of God
is connected to Ps 2:8
“leads astray” (πλανάω)
is aggressive
is connected to illicit sexual practice (“fornication”)
is connected to defiling and dangerous food (food sacrificed to idols)
Unnamed woman, “clothed with the sun” (ch 12)
mother whose children are under threat—by the great dragon (i.e., Satan)
is connected to Ps 2:8
has an opponent (Satan) that “leads astray” (πλανάω)
is passive
is connected to licit sexual practice (her motherhood, i.e., sex only for reproductive purposes)
is connected to dangerous food (the dragon [Satan] attempts to consume her child)
The world that “Jezebel” and her followers inhabited was, in John’s eyes, highly flawed. By means of his rhetoric, John portrayed it as a highly dualistic, apocalyptic one in the hopes of driving a wedge into an already divided community. He was the spokesperson (i.e., prophet) for God and the risen Jesus, “Jezebel” was not. John not only amplified the fear that Rome was the enemy, he promoted the lie that “Jezebel” was a false prophet in league with Rome. That purported alliance, in turn, made her an agent of Satan.
Although I have tried to demonstrate one of his strategies, there were a number of others. Among them was John’s misogynistic and cynical use of an ancient stereotype: the out-of-control, emotional female. By means of this stereotype, he implied that “Jezebel’s” public role, unmediated by a (rational) male, was inappropriate. In the Greco-Roman world, females were considered overly emotional and hence, irrational; only males were considered rational. That rationality allowed them to control their emotions. “Jezebel” should have been governed by a male, like a father or husband, who could have kept her worst impulses—like living in harmony with the demonic Roman society—in check.
But, in addition to denigrating “Jezebel,” John also John also described his followers (i.e., the faithful) as victims, in particular, victims of Rome. Throughout the work, Rome—backed by the power of Satan—enthusiastically harasses, imprisons, tortures, and murders innocent Jesus followers, just as it murdered its founder. The reality of the situation on the ground was, of course, different. But a small, counter-cultural community can easily be made to feel that it is—or is about to be—victimized.
How does all of this connect with Donald Trump?
For Trump, dualism and lies (not to mention misogynism) became effective rhetorical strategies. Trump’s followers, by and large, live in a dualistic world—constructed at least in part, by Trump himself. There was good (Trump and the MAGA crowd) and there was evil (his rivals during primary season in 2016; then Hilary Clinton; then the democrats, the “RINOs,” the socialists, the BLM movement).
Trump’s word was gospel (pun intended). Objective reality meant nothing. He built his dualistic world on lies. His followers believed him. In 2020-21, he perpetuated the big lie that he had won the election, a lie that his followers welcomed and continue to parrot. In his dualistic world, Trump regularly pushed people—often his cabinet members—out of the realm of the good into the realm of evil.
Trump’s world also exhibited something akin to apocalyptic anxiety/fear, something that Trump stoked among his followers. As he described things, the MAGA crowd were victims. Their jobs were being stolen by illegal immigrants; government regulation—instituted by liberals—had deprived them of a decent living (e.g., coal mining was—as Trump told the story—regulated out of existence); their right to bear arms was under attack. So were Christian values. But the imminent apocalypse was not identified with the raging pandemic or the impending climate crisis. Rather, it was the specter of socialism. Only a messianic figure like Trump could save them.
[1]Who Rides the Beast? Prophetic Rivalry and the Rhetoric of Crisis in the Churches of the Apocalypse (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2001).
Hilary Silver gave an overview of the social exclusion and inequality of Muslims in post-Independence India. She then touched upon the Sacher Commission, massacres, lynchings, family law of religious communities, RSS/Hindutva, and other aspects of the religious interactions between Muslims and Hindus in India today.
This brief talk goes beyond the familiar story of suppression and destruction to examine how the Chinese Communist Party utilized religion to mobilize support and to construct a new form of legitimacy for its rule in the early Maoist times. In particular, the Communist propaganda used traditional ghost lore to develop a metanarrative of salvation to sacralize the Party-state and Mao. This historical discourse connects to what we see in today’s China and of the Soviet anti-religious discourse. Part of this talk has been previously published in an article, “Revising White-haired Girl: Women, Gender, and Religion in Communist Revolutionary Propaganda,” in Jinhua Jia, Xiaofei Kang, and Ping Yao, Gendering Chinese Religion: Subject, Identity, and Body (SUNY press, 2014).
In this talk, Rob argued that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has a religious component that has not been sufficiently examined or appreciated. On the Israeli side are religious Zionists, who, despite their small numbers in Israeli society, have been the impetus behind the settlement movement in the West Bank which they view as part of the land promised to the Jews by God in the Bible and must therefore be added to the state of Israel. On the Palestinian side is Hamas, which grew out of the Muslim Brotherhood, and wishes to reclaim all of historic Palestine. Most notably, Hamas would like to claim Jerusalem for Palestinians and also all land once ruled by Muslims for Islam. However, the religious dimension of the conflict is not just about these extreme groups. Israeli and Palestinian thinking have also been shaped by what one might call an “underdog narrative” in the Bible and the Quran that sees God’s people as perpetually fighting the forces of evil and triumphing at the end of history. It can be argued that even secular Israelis and Palestinians have been unwittingly influenced by this narrative.
In the ensuing discussion, there was a lively discussion about the extent to which the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is religious in nature. Some participants claimed that the conflict is really about nationalism, not religion. Rob, however, insisted that while nationalism is certainly a component of the conflict, religion is central as well. Religion and nationalism are so closely related that one cannot easily separate the two, but one must do so in order to have a true understanding of the conflict.
QAnon started its spread in the US in 2017, around a mysterious individual named “Q” who claimed to have classified information about a worldwide conspiracy. Information online from “Q” stated that Democrats and other liberal elites are Satanic pedophiles trying to control our media and our lives. These Satan worshippers are also involved in kidnapping children to derive a special substance from their blood. A messiah in the form of former President Trump is meant to combat these evils and bring perpetrators to justice. The conspiracy theories overlap significantly with anti-Muslim, and anti-Semitic concepts used over centuries. “Q” followers liberally use quotes from the Bible to justify action. In particular, Evangelical Christian ideas about the role of Israel, the end of days, and the second coming of Jesus play prominently in QAnon mythology. In this construct, Israel is key because Jews must return there in order for the second coming of the Messiah to occur.
White Nationalism and Christianity: Both in the United States and in Europe, we have witnessed a recent rise in white nationalist movements. Contemporary white nationalist movements, while a reaction to current events, also extend a long history of Christian churches’ complicity in systemic racism. This presentation highlights several of the key historical events that link Christianity and racism, as well as some current polling data from the US that reveals a strong correlation between evangelical Christianity and racist attitudes.
