Myths about religion in the Middle East
LeAnn at Ramblings of a Teacher, has a series of related "mythconceptions" that she's posted about, and she justifiably asks why, on her blog, do these myths persist.
It's a good question. Indeed, it's one I pondered without really
having a good answer to, but this week I was given a partial one. In
this case, some teachers (not LeAnn) fail to do their homework, and then
teach their charges myths or errors.
The
reason that I can say that, and I am, is that my daughter was studying
for a test on the Middle East last night, and she had with her the
supposed answers to the questions she will be tested on. Some of those
answers were flat out wrong. I discussed this as part of the family
conversation, but quite frankly, as its her grade, she's learned the
wrong answers to the questions.
This
teacher is a popular one, and the kids like the teacher. But at least
on this subject, the teacher is pretty badly misinformed.
For
example, one of the questions was what three countries in the Middle
East are theocracies. As we know, a theocracy is a state ruled by a
religion. There are darned few of them, actually, in history at any one
point, and there aren't really any in the Middle East today. The
official answer, however, was "Iran, Israel, and Saudi Arabia.
Hmmmm.
Israel
is a parliamentary democracy and always has been. It's a "Jewish
state", but that doesn't make it a theocracy any more than Germany's
status as a German state (like Israel, Germany has a "law of return)
makes it a racial state of some sort. Israel may have a law of return,
extending citizenship by option to Jewish people who seek it, but it
also grants full voting rights to its Moslem and Christian citizens,
both of which it has and has always had.
Indeed,
even its status as a "Jewish state" doesn't quite mean what people
might suppose. At its founding, the state of Israel had a fair number
of influential secular Jewish people whom others might term as
"culturally Jewish." To be Jewish does not necessarily mean that a
person is an observant person religiously, any more than to be Greek
automatically makes a person a devout member of the Greek Orthodox
Church.
Anyhow, Israel certainly isn't a theocracy.
But that wasn't the only error.
Okay, well what else?
Well what about Saudi Arabia and Iran? He was right there, wasn't he?
No, neither of those nations are "theocracies", although a person can make the case that Iran is a semi theocracy.
Starting
with Iran, Iran calls itself an "Islamic Republic", but names do not
necessarily mean all that much. China, for example, calls itself a
"People's Republic", whatever that is supposed to mean, and it isn't a
liberal democracy by any means. East Germany called itself the German
Democratic Republic, with the only part of that name that was accurate
being the German part. To add to the problem, it isn't entirely clear
what an Islamic Republic is even supposed to mean.
What
it seems to mean is a government incorporating Sharia law, which Iran
does. And Sharia law does originate in the Koran. Beyond that, Iran
has a semi functional electoral system, which falls short of what we'd
regard as a functioning democracy, but it does have some electoral
process.
The
country isn't actually run by mullahs, as some would assert, but its
very clear that Shia mullahs have a huge, perhaps determinative, role in
the governance of the country, together with the descendants of the
1970s Shia fundamentalist revolutionaries. So what we have there is a
heavily Shia influenced, less than fully democratic, quasi revolutionary
state. A person might compare it loosely with early post Mexican
Revolution Mexico which had some sort of functioning deliberative body,
but which only the PRI really mattered. Or, a person might badly
compare it with Imperial Germany, which had a democratically elected
parliament, but the country was really governed and controlled by
traditional forces outside of parliament.
Either way you look at it, it isn't truly a "theocracy", although perhaps it comes close.
Well, what about Saudi Arabia? Not so much.
Saudi
Arabia is truly one of the worlds sole surviving examples of a true
monarchy. It's a country basically owned by a single family. Now, that
family did rise to prominence in part through supporting a certain
extreme Sunni group of Arabian mullahs, whose thinking is reflected in
the state. But the mullahs themselves never actually governed the
country. Indeed, as the branch of Sunni thought the Sauds espoused was
so radical that it was questioned as heretical before their adoption of
it and ascension to the crown (or rather creation of the crown), a
person might argue that group is in debt to the Sauds.
Now,
it is certainly the case that Saudi Arabia is unquestionably Sunni
Moslem, and that it also applies Koranic principles to its law. A
person can criticize it, but it doesn't depart in this fashion hugely
from other primitive monarchies, most of which have been associated with
a religion their respective crowns adopted. Queen Elizabeth I, for
example, wasn't exactly tolerant of Catholics. That didn't make
Elizabethan England a theocracy, however.
And to be continued.
Syrian
Archbishop. Syrian Catholics and Orthodox represent the second largest
religion in the Middle East and the second oldest of the major
religions in the Middle East.
Okay, well what else?
Another
question asked the students to rank the three largest religions in the
Middle East, with the provided answer, in order if number of followers,
being Islam, Judaism, and Christianity.
Right? Nope, that's wrong.
The second largest religion in the Middle East is Christianity.
I
guess I might give a person a bit of a pass on this one, as Middle
Easter Christians are so ignored by the outside world, but they are the
second oldest religion in the Middle East and they are spread throughout
the Middle East. There isn't a country in the Middle East that doesn't
have some native Christians, save perhaps for the very small ones like
Dubai or Kuwait.
That's right, some native Christians.
Christian
populations in the Middle East range up to as many as 18,000,000 but
may be as few as 16,000,000. More than any other major faith,
Christians have been targets of violence in the Middle East and they
have accordingly opted for decades for emigration, if they could. But
they still outnumber adherents of Judaism by at least 10,000,000 people,
if not more, and it probably is more.Some Middle Eastern countries
have, or would have, extremely significant Christian populations but for
their being the targets of increasing violence in recent years, making
them a population that is essentially undergoing "ethnic cleansing" as
we speak, with hardly anyone doing anything about it. Populations of
Catholics, Orthodox and Coptic Christians are under stress everywhere in
the Middle East.
If
immigrant populations in the form of temporary workers are included,
some Middle Eastern countries, such as Dubai, would be regarded as
having huge, mostly Catholic, populations.
Indeed,
one of the myths of the Middle East, related to this story, is that
Islam took the region by storm. It didn't. Islam didn't become the
power in the region it became until Sulemon, but even at that the
"Islamic" principalities he conquered often had Christian majorities.
It wasn't until tremendous force was brought upon these communities that
conversions to Islam really began. Islam wasn't even able to sweep the
Arabian Peninsula without the help, ironically, of a tribe on the
peninsula that was Catholic. Christian populations hung on everywhere,
in isolation, for a very long time, and in some ways what we're seeing
now in regards to them has been a story that's been ongoing for over
1,000 years.
No comments:
Post a Comment