Our image of God influences our actions

The pen is mightier than the sword

Last week in Paris the sword was temporarily mightier than the pen when militant Islamists attacked the offices of the satirical French magazine Charlie Hebdo, and killed twelve people.  This was not the first time that radical Muslims targeted the publication; in 2011, its offices were fire bombed in retaliation for printing irreverent depictions of the prophet Mohammed.

The cold-blooded murder at Charlie Hebdo ignited the determined support of Parisians for the ideals of democracy. Even the deaths of three more people at a hostage taking at a kosher grocery store a few days later could not deter the French from gathering en masse.

“Je suis Charlie” (I am Charlie) quickly became the rallying cry, and lights projected onto the Arc de Triomphe proclaimed “Paris est Charlie.” Across France, an estimated 3.6 million people gathered to honor the victims and to show their commitment to freedom of expression and the ideals of democracy. Forty world leaders attended the rally in Paris, linking arms in a show of unity and friendship.

In a symbolic gesture of solidarity with the slain cartoonists, many stood in silent witness holding pens and pencils aloft. It was a living cartoon conveying the message, “The pen is mightier than the sword”.  And, as if to drive this message home, a political cartoonist for the Huffington Post drew a cartoon featuring a masked gunman standing in a pool of blood. The gunman is looking up at the end of a pencil as it erases the muzzle of his automatic weapon. The caption reads, “Ideas are bulletproof”.

Ideals of democracy promote the flourishing of human society

While it is relatively easy to kill individuals for expressing their views, as the massacre at Charlie Hebdo tragically illustrates, it is much more difficult to kill the ideals that promote the flourishing of human society.

Following the atrocities of the Second World War, the international community agreed upon the principles that are the foundation of freedom, justice and peace. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights articulates these principles that arise from the inherent dignity and the “equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family.”  Freedom of speech and belief are specifically mentioned in the preamble to the Declaration.

Religious extremism gives religion a bad name

There have always been, and there will always be, individuals and groups who are intolerant of differences and who want to silence freedoms.  While Muslim extremists are not the only people guilty of intolerance, the post 9-11 world has become all to familiar with terrorist style attacks perpetrated in the name of Islam. 

Religious extremists of any stripe give religion a bad name and their actions sometimes fuel anti-religious sentiment, which in itself is a form of intolerance. An intolerant view of religion, and particularly of Islam post 9-11, needs to be balanced with the acknowledgement that the majority of people of faith do no harm to others; on the contrary, many of those people are actively doing good for others.  The principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights find a natural home in them because those principles accord with their view of God and of God’s desire for peace among people.

The way a person views God will determine how he acts. An individual who believes in a compassionate, merciful God of love will respond to life in a different way than someone who sees God as a harsh task master requiring strict obedience and exacting punishment for infractions.  An individual’s understanding of the character of God impacts his understanding of the sacred texts and traditions of his religion, and this influences his level of tolerance for others and their views.

Contrasting views of Islam

Last week in Paris, one of the gunmen was heard to shout “Allahu Akbar”  (“God is greater”) and “The prophet is avenged”.   He had a particular view of the character of God and the dictates of Islam. That view stands in stark contrast to this one, expressed in a January 9, 2015 letter published on the website of the Montreal Gazette.  Shafik Bhalloo wrote, “My Islam is a religion of peace, tolerance and forgiveness. My Islam teaches love, concord, sympathy and tenderness to one’s fellow men – not killing people for practicing their freedom of expression or speech.”

The actions of radical Muslims who feel it necessary to battle the west, wipe out Jews, Christians or other Muslim groups perpetrate crimes against the dignity of their religion, and against the compassionate God (however one names it) who wills the well-being of all people, including irreverent cartoonists.

Office of Religious Freedom (Canada)

Opponents Criticize the Office 

The swirl of criticism around the creation of the Office of Religious Freedom (ORF) distracts from the more important issue of the role of religion in world affairs.

The ORF will be a branch of the Foreign Affairs Department. Foreign Affairs Minister, John Baird has said the office will promote religious freedom; he has not said how the office will accomplish this. The Canadian government's evasiveness on just how an ORF would promote religious freedom calls into question the authenticity of the government regarding this challenging task. 

The ORF is being criticized for other reasons. Some see it is a ploy to curry favor with Evangelical Christian voters, further a right wing Christian agenda, and promote Judeo-Christian traditions. Others argue that the office will violate the separation of Church and State.

Religious Freedom is a basic and inalienable human right

There is no argument that the state needs to be concerned with violations of human rights. Article 18 of the Universal Charter of Rights and Freedoms recognizes religious freedom as a basic and inalienable human right. When human rights are under attack, the nation state has a moral obligation to intervene. When a nation state orchestrates, participates in, or countenances human rights abuses, that moral obligation shifts to the international community. We are our brothers and sisters keepers.

The promotion and protection of religious freedom is within the purview of secular, liberal democracies. The equality and dignity of people are at stake when nations restrict religious freedom, or tacitly approve of religiously motivated hostilities. Secular democracies tend to ignore the importance of religious freedom at the peril of global stability.

Loss of religious freedom increasing

Religious minorities around the globe are experiencing a loss of religious freedom. In 

its report, “Restrictions on Religious Freedom,” the Pew Forum notes that government restrictions on religious beliefs and practices, and religiously motivated social hostilities are on the rise. (The Pew Forum is a non-partisan organization that explores the role of religion in world affairs.)

Between 2006-2009, restrictions rose in 23 countries. There was social or government harassment of Christians in 130 countries, Muslims in 117, Jews in 75, Hindus in 27, Buddhists in 16, and Other in 84 countries. 

Government restriction of some religious practices is not necessarily a bad thing. When a religious belief or practice infringes on another individual’s basic human rights, governments should intervene. Canada ranks low on religious restrictions but Canadian law restricts polygamy because it harms children and women. Constitutional rights or laws that protect religious freedom must never allow those freedoms to cause harm to others.

Restrictions become a cause for concern when a government violates the spirit of Article 18. If a government favors one religious group, officially recognizes one religion, defers to religious authorities in matters of policy or law, interferes with the independent operation of religion, and either encourages or permits social hostilities against religious minorities, it violates the inalienable right to freedom of religion.

One third of the world’s population lives in the 23 countries with rising religious restrictions. Civil conflict in some of these regions of the world, notably the Middle East, North Africa, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, has significantly impacted the foreign policy of Western nations. Given the sheer number of people in the regions most affected with religious restrictions, there is the potential for escalating conflict. Western nations would be prudent to consider religious freedom in foreign policy development.

Canada has a proud tradition of championing human rights, of which religious freedom is one. On its website, the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade does not even list the promotion of human rights as a priority for 2012, despite the creation of the ORF. This raises the question, “How important can the ORF be?” 

The Canadian government appears disingenuous. The office looks like optics, rather than a genuine attempt to promote religious freedom, thereby helping to create a more stable world community.

Relevant Links:

Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Freedoms

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/

Article 18.

• Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

The Pew Forum http://www.pewforum.org/

For the Forum's report,  "Rising Restrictions on Religion," visit:

http://www.pewforum.org/Government/Rising-Restrictions-on-Religion.aspx

Reflections for Remembrance Day

Tyne Cot Cemetery by Marc Aert

Courtesy of Freedigitalphotos
http://www.freedigitalphotos.net/images/view_photog.php?photogid=65

Since its original inception as Armistice Day in 1919, people in countries around the world gather on November 11 to commemorate the thousands of men and women who died in armed conflicts.

Over time, the international community has developed a set of traditions to mark the day, and to set it apart from other days. We wear poppies on our coats. We lay wreaths. We observe a period of silence. We listen to the roll call of those who died. We express our collective desire for peace. 

Peace - the absence of war or hostilities

Peace is defined as the absence of war or hostilities. The definition of peace suggests the reality that Remembrance Day draws to our attention; the world struggles with peace. The world defines peace by what it is not. Peace in this definition is a political reality; a nation or nations are not at war.

Growing up in Canada, I can relate quite easily to this definition of peace because my experiences of war are vicarious. I know about war not because I have lived through one fought on Canadian soil. I know about war because I have seen images of it on television, read about it, studied it, and listened to the wartime stories of others.

Family stories of growing up during World War II

My father has some fascinating stories about growing up on a farm in northern Italy during the Second World War. He and his family were no strangers to the insecurity that war creates. They lived with hunger, poverty, and a sense of an ever-present danger that accompanies living in a war zone.

Some of his stories are humorous, like the story of the bridge. The German soldiers repeatedly attempted to blow up a nearby bridge to cut off the transportation route. Instead, they repeatedly blew up ground around the bridge, always missing the bridge itself. This was a source of amusement to the villagers, and provided them with lighthearted moments of relief while living with the tension of war. After a time, the villagers began to suspect that the failure to destroy the bridge was a sort of mutiny. Everyone needed the bridge; it was a symbol of the common good.

One of my favorite stories speaks of the persuasive power of conviction. Towards the end of the war, as discipline in the German army broke down, my grandparents routinely assisted German soldiers who were deserting their posts. They did this although they were putting themselves in grave danger.

One day, members of the Black Shirts, a paramilitary Fascist group of armed thugs, descended on the farm. With guns pointed, they demanded that my grandmother hand over the two soldiers the family was hiding. My grandmother calmly told the men to leave. When they refused, looking the leader steadily in the eyes, she revealed the handgun under her apron, and repeated her request. Remarkably, the men backed away. They never returned.

They shared a common humanity

What was it about my grandmother that made such a profound impression on these thugs that they obeyed her? I think it was the strength of her conviction that she, the German soldiers, and the Black Shirts shared a common humanity. Her quiet but strong demeanor unearthed the goodness buried deep beneath the exterior cruelty of this particular group of men. She was the bridge of common decency that rehabilitated these men, at least temporarily.

My grandmother’s actions speak of an unshakeable belief in the inherent dignity of the human person. The German soldiers that she helped were not the enemy, the hated ‘other.’ They were simply young men, not much older than her sons. Like her sons, they too bore the image of a good God, and deserved respect. To hand them over would have been contrary to her belief.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

In 1948, as a direct result of the atrocities of World War II, the United Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The members of the drafting committee came from a broad spectrum of political, cultural and religious beliefs. Despite their differences, Hernan Santa Cruz of Chile, a member of the committee, said they came to this consensus: the supreme value of the human person comes from the very fact of existing, not from belonging to a particular nation or group.
Read Santa Cruz's remarks: http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/history.shtml

Remembrance Day is a fitting moment to recall the preamble to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.  The foundation of freedom, justice, and peace depends on recognizing and honoring the innate dignity, and the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family.

Read the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml