Beware of Dhimmi Writers

Beware of Dhimmi Writers

I am sending you out like sheep among wolves.
Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.
(Jesus to the twelve disciples)

What an answer to prayer that the global Christian community is waking up to the unique Islamic identity amongst them. The church must never return to the rather naïve period of, say, 1996, when most journalists in Western nations spoke of Islam in the calming terms of ‘mutual tolerance’ and ‘reciprocal compatibility’ in Western nations. All Christians are so much better informed now. Following 9/11 in 2001, I wrote my supporting constituency from the Islamic interior of French West Africa and asked them to focus on three unusual prayer requests. First, that the Lord would open the eyes of the media as to the agenda of global Muslim leaders; second that the Lord would unplug the world from Islam-sponsoring OPEC oil dependency and cause the age of electric/bio-fuel engines to emerge, and third, that all Christians might learn the art of Christ-centred engaging conversations with the Muslims they know. As I see it, God is answering all three concerns.

Yet, a serious danger awaits us: reporting on Islam can generate profound fear. The emerging engagement of Christian journalism and conversations with Muslims requires the courage to distance ourselves from fearful attitudes to Muslims -which I will refer to as dhimmi attitudes. Dhimmi or dhimmitude, if these terms are new to you, mean a vassal ‘pact’ in Arabic and describe the subjugated and fearful life of the Jewish and Christian community in any conquered nation. Following a successful jihad invasion, historical Muslims invariably forced infidels to convert by the sword while allowing ‘the People of the Book’ to continue their private faith, providing they lived in a posture of humiliation, insecurity, abasement, and fear while following strict vassal rules and excessive taxation. (During and following the Crusades (1096-1291), Christians forced the same humiliation on Jews and Muslims while forcing ‘pagans’ to baptise.) It is of paramount importance that missionaries read about this. The most seminal work on Islam that I would recommend you read in 2006 is Bat Ye’or’s study on dhimmitude called Eurabia, 2005.

The subjugated life of dhimmitude had a disturbing fear-inspiring impact on historical Christian writers. From 635 AD onward, vast Eastern orthodox and Iberian Catholic church communities now lived under dhimmi subjection to Islamic caliphs. Christian writers responded in one of three major ways -and all three styles still prevail worldwide. In order of historical appearance, the first writers were fearful and defensive, a second style of writing was fearful, cautious and submissive, and a third style emerged as fearless and engaging. We do well to define them.

Defensive ‘reconnaissance writers’
Saint John of Damascus (7675-749) was the first to compose the defensive posture of the church in the face of huge Byzantine losses (from 634 onward) to Islamic jihadists and subsequent caliph rule. Defensive writers, whether in Islamic lands or outside it, feel the burden to signal the church and the world of the heretical and/or inherent danger in Islam. Those who sense this profound alarm, do the necessary reconnaissance research, and then express their writings in one of four ways.

1. First, the style of certain reconnaissance writers is to be silent warners, namely, those who alert the Christian flock concerning Islam and the harmful intent of certain Muslims. In this style, they write like spies returning from a reconnaissance mission. This was also the style of Greek Orthodox writer, St John of Damascus, who, having a brilliant grasp of Arabic and Islam, wrote his warnings to the Church in mostly Greek concerning what he called the ‘Ishmaelite heresy’. His latter works were in Arabic, as required by the caliph of Damascus.

2. A second writing style to emerge during the more tolerant open (ijtihad) period of the Abbasid Empire (750-1258 AD) was that of the apologetic debaters, who countered the accusations of Muslims with Scripture, philosophical logic and ethics. The Nestorian Christians in the Abbasid era enjoyed limited success with this style and often attempted to score jousting points as literary contestants against Muslim philosophers. A modern day example is the American Mennonite missionary in London, England, Jay Smith, who believes open and visible debates with Muslims on Speaker’s Corner, are the necessary prelude to quietly coffee-shop follow-up conversations.

3. The third group of the reconnaissance writing style follows from the above. They are the vocal polemicists whose style is to expose and condemn the heretical doctrine, the violent teaching and evil deeds within Islam. These writers do not shy away from attacking the morality of Muhammad or demonising Islam. Even the Byzantine Emperor Basil I (811-886), for example, ordered the philosopher Nicetas to write a book to refute the Islamic errors in order to win over Muslim enemies. He failed to win anyone yet a lot of Westerners continued to write polemics works read chiefly by Christians. There are many Americans writing in this style, especially since 9/11, as well as Muslim background believers (MBB) such as Abd El Schafi, who wrote Behind the Veil in 1996 but without using Western philosophical arguments, Schafi instead relied on the Qur'an, the Hadiths and Islamic commentators. While the academic content changed, the polemic approach and the use of an exposing tone did not.

4. The fourth type of reconnaissance writing style emerged after the European Enlightenment. Those who write in this tradition are often the academic critics, who cite the litany of struggles and tensions within Islam and the widespread ‘copying’ from other religions that is found in the Qur'an. Their warnings are entirely based on source criticism and history, not philosophy, theology or morality. The German Semitist scholar, Julius Wellhausen (1844-1918) pioneered research in textual history and philological backgrounds, first in Hebrew for the Old Testament and then in Arabic for the Qur’an. Great interest was taken in collecting old Islamic manuscripts for research and trying to construct a Sitz im Leben background to explain why Muhammad might have produced the Qur'an we have. A modern but more secular example comes from the apostate scholar, Ibn Warraq who, in 2003, wrote: Why I am not a Muslim. The book is entirely academic, critical and cynical.

The value of the defensive writing style is mostly ‘in-house’. Of course it is of paramount importance to warn ‘fellow Christians’ of all types of heresies, hypocrisies and harm: our own as well as those of Muslims. And frankly, if courageous Christians and Jews do not thoroughly examine Islam, very few besides will do so in today’s world. Most secular writers are becoming too ‘tolerant’ (read, frightened) to seriously criticise Muslims or Islam.

Most Muslims share this hyper-caution. Islam, as a religious force, does not welcome critical self-examination and Muslim intellectuals might risk their lives by seriously critiquing their own faith and practices. The exception is a Muslim and open-lesbian TV commentator in Toronto, Irshad Manji who wrote The Trouble with Islam in 2004 and is treated as such. For this reason as well, Jewish and Christian defensive writers critique Islam ‘on Muslims’ behalf’, hoping it will stir debate towards theological openness (ijtihad) but knowing it could also seriously threaten them.

The chief weakness of defensive reconnaissance writers is that they augment the fear of Muslims, rather than abetting it. And fear, left untreated will turn to hatred, and hatred is the worst possible –hopefully unintentional- by-product of defensive writers. Notwithstanding, we should esteem such courageous writing and accept it in the same way aviation organisations document all accidents and crashes of air vessels, knowing that the conclusion of ‘pilot error’ will bring shame to some but wisdom to all.

Dhimmi Writers
A second style of writers is that of extreme caution. These writers feel it is reckless and unChristlike to offend Muslims or to awaken latent hostilities. As they see it, words of kindness, affection, respect and admissions of guilt define Christianity far better than any self-defensive critique. For them, ‘a kind word turns away wrath’. Therefore, cautious and/or fearful writers limit their words and conclusions in order to win the admiration of Muslims. They are honoured to have Muslims praise their work. Most Christian leaders expressed this posture during the Danish cartoon clashes. As these Christian leaders see it, to provoke Muslims only increases violent responses, if not terrorism, and such writing is viewed as dangerous, irresponsible, foolish and destructive. All such cautious writers address the very real problem of fear from an angle of ‘sympathetic scholarship’, which, being framed in hyper-caution, means they are dhimmi writers writing from a ‘cringe culture’. They fall into five groups.

1. The writing style of the academic dhimmis tries to reconstruct history from a Muslim perspective and supply generous social scientific data in Islam’s favour. For such writers it is critical that Christians see Islam through Muslims’ eyes –which they assume is possible. These writers hope the fears of all parties involved will be dedramatised. The ‘father’ of this perspective was the German Enlightenment scholar, Hermann Samuel Reimarus (1694-1768) who presented Muhammad positively, if not nobly, by using only the Qur'an. It opened an era of romantic recasting of Muhammad and the discarding of former demonised Islamic images. To this category belong the current popular writers, Karen Armstrong and John Esposito, as well as most of the modern films of Islam, such as The Kingdom of Heaven. They do indeed seek to make us feel good about the majority tolerant, moderate, peace-loving Muslims. Since 9-11 many university professors have written what deserves to be called ‘lullaby literature’ in that it tries to calm the readers with selective and romantic pro-Islam insights and soothing quotes that help readers realise that ‘there is nothing seriously wrong with Islam except your attitude towards it’. That very few Evangelical missionaries working among Muslims hold this view is, I believe, sufficient commentary.

2. Other cautious writers promote the dialogue dhimmi style in that they organise interfaith meetings and interfaith journals to promote mutual admiration between Muslims, Christians and Jews through spiritual exchanges and sharing doctrinal similarities. Such writers hope shared admiration will lead to improved understanding and peace among ‘all of Abraham’s offspring’. The founders of the dialogue approach were the Nestorian patriarch Timothy (d.824) and St Francis of Assisi’ (1181-1226) who joined the 5th Crusade (1218-1221) in the Middle East and attempted to dialogue with the Egyptian sultan, Malek al-Kamil (d.1228). Both cases bore mutual admiration but no conversion on either side. Polite cautious dialogue is now the overwhelming position of both the post-Vatican II (1963-65) Roman Catholic writers and most Eastern orthodox churches. The concern here is whether in being so gracious that the dialogue will only amount to apologies and whispers. This is already the conclusion of American Jewish commentator Daniel Pipes, who writes: “even the pope "must whisper" when discussing Islam. It's a sign of the times.” (17-01-06)

3. Marketing dhimmis are those cautious writers who vigorously promote Muslims’ own self-portrait. Only what Muslims say about themselves is treated as legitimate. Islam is what Muslims say it is, even if Muslims say many different if not conflicting things about Islam. All non-Muslim voices or ‘Occidental’ interpretations of the ‘Oriental’ Islam are entirely suspected. The most formidable writer in this stream is the Anglican-born Palestinian Edward Said (1935-2003). The Muslim disclaimers, causes and biases are the only legitimate voice of Muslims. Writes Ilan Pappé in his introduction to A History of Modern Palestine: One Land, Two Peoples (2004):
My bias is apparent despite the desire of my peers that I stick to facts and the "truth" when reconstructing past realities. I view any such construction as vain and presumptuous. This book is written by one who admits compassion for the colonized not the colonizer; who sympathizes with the occupied not the occupiers.
As Pappé would have us see the Palestinians and global Muslims, any historical view that is not favourable towards ‘Muslim victims’ is totally suspect. The Aramco World bimonthly magazine also follows this style but in a less polemic way; while entirely financed by the Saudi Aramco Oil enterprise, it uses mostly western academic writers to market the Islamic world in the style and fashion of the National Geographic. It is even offered free!

4. In many Islamic countries, there are also the cautious (both Roman Catholic and Protestant mission) workers of compassion who constitute the ‘complimentary dhimmis’, in that they seek to win the admiration of Muslims through as many cautious expressions of compassion and kindness as permitted of foreign workers. If they publish anything, they are usually overly cautious in their style, as are also ‘Christian’ academic courses being offered in Islamic countries. They will only say, write or teach things that honour, respect and please their host nation, although they might write entirely secret and different accounts in their ‘confidential’ prayer letters sent home or in their home magazines for their supporters.

5. According to Bat Ye’or, appeasement dhimmis are those fearful writers who seek to do just that: please their Muslim superiors. As they see it, Christians living in Muslim lands, must make gains in common-cause submission to the greater Islamic causes. As go the Arabs, so go the dhimmis, hence, seek the best for them both. It is felt that Christians only gain when they defer to the Muslim agenda. Ye’or calls this “theological self-mutilation” and sees it as the final stage of dhimmitude before conversion to Islam.

Dhimmi writers promote themselves as peace-makers but in so doing hoist the white flag. They are so cautious, that they fail to be reliable ‘watchmen on the walls’ to the church. They write of Islam so romantically that it begins to resemble the three famous monkeys sculpture of the Japanese Toshogu Shrine: ‘hear no evil, speak no evil, see no evil’ –and that was once thought to protect as well. But of the West, they write with such guilt concerning the Crusades, the colonial period, the modern globalised ‘sins’ coming from the West, that they leave the regrettable impression that apologising is the highest form of Christian apologetics and hyper-caution the wisest guide in communication. Yet by following fear, they fall short of how Jesus or Paul would have engaged both hostile Jews and Gentiles of their generation. As the title says, we do well to ‘beware of dhimmi writers’ because a fearful writer causes Christians to both fear Islam and to doubt the most critical activity of the church: courageous and confident engagement with Muslims.

Engagement Writers
The third writing style refers to the ‘engagement writers’ who seek to engage and encounter Muslims in a variety of ways. They believe it is critical for Christians to be neither hyper-cautious nor defensive but to be courageous. As they see it, we must affectionately encounter, engage and convict Muslims of the truth of Christ Jesus and –only in time- the errors in their Islamic perceptions. There are three writing styles of engagement.

1. The first style for engaging Muslims is that of sharing Jesus, by launching into direct witnessing of Jesus Christ to Muslims, in print, radio or conversation, sometimes without a prior understanding of the Islamic faith. These Christians also hope to lead curious Muslims to follow their Bible studies with other seeking Muslims. As they see it, what people really need is just to hear about Jesus Christ and what better means than sharing the story of your spiritual conversion and life victories? Many radio and television programs to the Arab world wisely share ‘witness’ material and most of it is ‘all about Jesus’ and very little about Islam or Muhammad. This writing approach avoids any negative focus on Islam or Muhammad but also avoids shedding any light on the struggles that the Muslim mind has in coming to Christ.

2. A second style promotes diplomatic interaction. A large number of missionary writers have produced such literature, inviting Muslims to examine both the Bible and the Qur'an in an interactive but peaceful approach. Others write to fellow Christians to equip them with new improved interactive questions and answers. Patrick O. Cate, among many others, has written to this subject. They avoid controversial polemic charges but try to use confident diplomacy to win a hearing among Muslims –and that constitutes a debate of sorts. To this group belong Kevin Greeson’s Camel Training Manual (2004), the Roman Catholic writer Robert Spencer, Samy Tanagho’s Glad News! God Loves You my Muslim Friend (2002), Abd al-Masih’s many ‘Light of Life’ booklets, the works of Charles Marsh, and many others. They call a spade a spade but as diplomatically as possible.

3. The third engagement style is that of being conversational fishers of men. Most missionaries working among Muslims esteem this as the finest of approaches but it suffers from one significant liability: it takes years –often the legendary 1001 Arabian Night conversations- and it often it bears humble fruit if numbers are important. Using this style, one’s affection and respect for the Muslim keeps the conversation vibrant, but so does our occasional protest and correction of the Muslim friend for disrespecting our Christian faith or our sacred Bible.

The literary counterpart to this is the ‘conversational dialogue literature’ written in which a Muslim and a Christian have a theological discussion. This style of literature dates to the 8th century AD writings of Abu Qurra, bishop in Mesopotamia, and after centuries of disuse, was revived by the German Pietist missionary, Karl Pfander (1803-1865) in India. In his writings, he had a Christian and a Muslim compare the Bible and the Qur'an and discuss theology accordingly. TV and radio talk shows continue this format today often between MBBs and Muslims around a political debate.

The value of engagement writers is that they steer readers between the often-fearful dhimmi writers and the fear-inspiring reconnaissance writers. Fear left untreated turns to hatred and both defensive writers and dhimmi writers leave the reader’s fear intact. Please continue to read all sides, but as you do, beware of fear-mongering, especially from the dhimmi writers. Yes, we are to be as innocent as doves (perhaps like dhimmi writers) and as shrewd as snakes (as are the reconnaissance writers) but we must dare to enter like sheep among wolves (like engagement writers) because the sheep of Jesus, while walking into the midst of hostile ‘wolves’ do so only in the shadow of the Lion of the tribe of Judah who shepherds them from behind.