Image courtesy of imagerymajestic / FreeDigitalPhotos.net
But then I read the following Avaaz article reacting to the response of Newsweek (link). It seems much coverage lacks a sense of perspective and assumes all Muslims think in the same way. The report highlighted that:
1. Participation in anti-film protests at between 0.001 and 0.007% of the world's 1.5 billion Muslims – a tiny fraction of those who marched for democracy in the Arab spring.
2. The vast majority of protesters have been peaceful. The breaches of foreign embassies were almost all organised or fuelled by elements of the Salafist movement, a radical Islamist group that is most concerned with undermining more popular moderate Islamist groups.
3. Top Libyan and US officials are divided over whether the killing of the US ambassador to Libya was likely pre-planned to coincide with 9/11, and therefore not connected to the film.
4. Apart from attacks by radical militant groups in Libya and Afghanistan, a survey of news reports on 20 September suggested that actual protesters had killed a total of zero people. The deaths cited by media were largely protesters killed by police.
5. Pretty much every major leader, Muslim and western, has condemned the film, and pretty much every leader, Muslim and western, has condemned any violence that might be committed in response.
6. The pope visited Lebanon at the height of the tension, and Hezbollah leaders attended his sermon, refrained from protesting the film until he left, and called for religious tolerance.
7. After the attack in Benghazi, ordinary people turned out on the streets in Benghazi and Tripoli with signs, many of them in English, apologising and saying the violence did not represent them or their religion.We will all experience strong feelings when things we hold dear are treated by others in ways that are at varience with the reverence in which we traditionally hold them.
I was at the musical drama "Tam O Shanter" last night on its tour of Scotland after its run at the Edinburgh Festival Fringe. The play, about Burns and his poetry, showed the drunken, bawdy life of the society in which he lived. Also several scenes parodied the strict authoritarian attitudes of the church at the time. These scenes served to highlight the hypocrisy of the parishioners who said amen to the preacher reading out comminations whilst at the same time acting in a debauched manner. A section of the bible was read out and a psalm sung as part of the performance.
But rather than wanting to burn the theatre down at such a use of the bible and church tradition I was challenged to think about the way that faith is portrayed. How different are the churches today compared to the strict Calvinism of the seventeenth century? I was challenged to think of how the church relates today to people on the fringe of society who are living lives fuelled and dominated by alcohol. And I started to wonder how the church can make its message for the world clear as a positive message about life and all its fullness.
From the statistics above it would seem that the majority of Muslims in the world are trying to do exactly the same.
We saw it last night - amazing performance and no problem with the church being parodied in that it deserves to be when the message was all about power and control - and the bible passage read out would mean our current safeguarding procedures would have to swing into action ! Lois
ReplyDelete